Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Kyle Stubbs

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Help and Advice / Re: Ceti photographed in Genoa
« on: January 12, 2022, 08:21:29 PM »
This is an Integrated Tug and Barge unit, so it probably shows up in most sources under the name of the tug, CORONA BOREALE.

See here:

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=2127402&sort_comments=2

Kind Regards,
Kyle

2
Shipping News and information / Re: Mystery Fishing Vessel
« on: May 10, 2021, 05:22:31 AM »
TING HSING seems to have been the vessel renamed as SHENG JI CYUN No.3, as both show up with the same Taiwan Official Number, and the Western & Central Pacific Fisheries Commission lists both names on the same entry:

https://www.wcpfc.int/node/15127

I tried translating the Chinese Characters on the bow railing in Google, getting "DING" for the first, and not finding a good match for the second. However, since there traditionally has been some overlap between words starting with "D" and "T" when translating Chinese and Japanese to English, that does lean towards corroborating the TING HSING identity.

3
Shipping News and information / Re: Mystery Fishing Vessel
« on: May 09, 2021, 04:58:03 AM »
I came across a document from a Taiwan government site which suggests that BJ4140 was a call sign registered to the Taiwanese fishing vessel SHENG JI CYUN No.3, Official Number CT4-2240. Other images of SHENG JI CYUN No.3 show a very similar vessel, but with a different bow structure (Not outside of possible modification), but list the call sign as BJ4240, so it may just have been a typo on that one document.

At least it seems to indicate that "BJ####" is a format used for call signs on Taiwan-flag fishing vessels.

4
Shipping News and information / Re: ships sold for scrap
« on: April 02, 2021, 05:53:04 AM »
LIHUE was not scrapped at Tacoma. The vessel departed Seattle on February 18th, 2021 under tow of the tugboat RACHEL (IMO 7600378). Tug and tow are currently projected to arrive at Brownsville, Texas on April 14th.

5
Shipping News and information / Re: ships sold for scrap
« on: February 19, 2021, 09:14:57 PM »
On 18 FEB 2021, container vessel (ex-barge carrier) LIHUE (IMO 7105471) departed under tow of the tugboat RACHEL (IMO 7600378). Current AIS destination is Balboa, Panama, presumably with a final destination of Brownsville, Texas for scrapping.

6
Site related news, functions and modules / Re: AIS Database Error
« on: January 28, 2021, 02:35:46 PM »
The same error is happening for me again today, along with a general slowness to the entire site.

7
Shipping News and information / Re: ships sold for scrap
« on: January 06, 2021, 07:12:51 PM »
ATLANTIC EMPEROR (ex-HISPANIA GRAECA), IMO 9221619, sold for scrap last July, but laid-up at Durban afterwards, was beached at Gadani on 25 December 2020.

8
Dirk, the "Photographer" subject on each photo is nothing but a username,  and likely has no legal binding.  Copyright law should only be concerned about whether the individual "owner" of the account attached to said username has permission to publish the photo, regardless of what username they use.

If photos were stripped of a username, which is essentially what I believe you are proposing, then it would be assumed that the copyright belongs to the owner of the site. I am sure the owner does not want to assume that liability.

9
Thanks Chas, a short answer, if I understand this correctly and literally. the download function on Shipspotting should have to be discontinued as it is soliciting a crime/infringement of copy right rules.

I believe that downloading of copyrighted photos is protected under various laws, depending on the country. In the British Commonwealth, "Fair Dealing" permits research and private study in a non-commercial capacity, which I believe would be the umbrella terms we are looking for. In the United States, "Fair Use" doctrine permits the same sort of use.

10
his name is entered as being the photographer, which he is/was not;

here as photographer should be entered "unknown."

Considering the the identity of photographer is a user name as opposed to any kind of verified identity, I don't think we should get too worked up over that qualification. If someone dubbed their account as "Donald Duck," I think we're all reasonable enough to assume that the photos posted by that account belong to the owner of the account, and not to the cartoon character.

12
Shipping News and information / Re: Ships Damaged in Beirut Blast
« on: August 18, 2020, 04:45:51 AM »
I am particularly interested in what looks like a small white passenger ship or large yacht:

Looking at back imagery in Google Earth, the vessel seems to have arrived in Beirut sometime in 2010, and shortly after had some modifications done to the superstructure amidships.

A likely candidate that's been photographed in Beirut, and has a matching profile and hull shape is BLUE DAWN (IMO 5364073): http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1520414

13
Shipping News and information / Re: Fred Olsen Cruises disposals
« on: July 29, 2020, 01:05:55 AM »
Fred Olsen's parent company Bonheur ASA put out a press release on July 15th regarding the purchase of the two vessels from HAL in conjunction with the coming "divestment of two vessels within the current fleet."

https://www.bonheur.no/latest-news1?SelectedRelease=http://publish.ne.cision.com/Release/GetDetail/7CDB812CA7F9D5C5

That in itself doesn't specify which vessels will be divested of, but I suppose some have seen the writing on the wall.

14
Pieter,

However, the original poster inquired about vessels with IMO numbers. "Ships" is such a loosely defined term that I don't even want to get into that debate.

The fact is, fishing vessels, tugboats and yachts over 100 gross tons make up a massive portion of the vessels allotted identification numbers by the IMO, and are often overlooked by the Miramar database. Even if they do not match your personal opinion on what is, or is not, important, they are a major player in the "tens of thousands" of vessels described in the initial post.

Do not get me wrong, I consider Miramar to be an invaluable resource for historical research. However, when it come to the topic brought up by the original poster, all vessels with IMO numbers, my experience shows me it would be better off used as one of many supporting sources.

The issue with databases is that they all have holes. As such, relying on a single database is folly, and the only way to be truly comprehensive is to unite multiple sources of data. Unfortunately, like any solution we're pondering, that takes time, work and money.

15
Unfortunately, Miramar is nowhere near a comprehensive database of IMO-registered vessels, especially in certain fields. Fishing vessels are a particular area that is improving, but still lacks a massive amount of information in their database.

I checked my 10 most recently photographed, IMO-registered fishing vessels against the Miramar database, and found 3 of them listed. Of those, one did not have the vessel's IMO number connected to the entry, and one of the others was not up-to-date on name history, by over 10 years.

These are all US-built vessels, and I believe fishing vessels from other nations are covered more comprehensively, but it's a sign of some of the major gaps that even the best resources can have when it comes to this subject.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9