Source of sea conditions:
so much for “non-stop”.
Probably just pulled in to Val for some social experiences so they could comment on the shore leave thread.
If you check the Straits of Magellan’s website, it clearly outlines Chile’s requirements prior to entering the Straits with a tow. (ie board pilots and inspect vessel and tow). In other words their stop was compulsory.
Was on a rig tow late '70s with 2 7000hp ahts and the rig had 3000 hp if I remember. The pilots required more HP. They brought in a big Jap tug of 20K hp or so. We tailed the rig in calm seas for the transit. 5 to 6 ft max.
The Dino is a Anchor Handling Towing Supply Vessel. They fall under the OSV regs since that have a mud tank and a dry bulk tank. All bridge crew have to have Master/Mate of Towing on their licenses.
I still talk to people at ECO and they are a few boats min manned sitting in fourchon not on contract right now.
I’m pretty sure they can’t do this job and stay under subchapter L since it’s not involved in oil and gas exploration in any aspect while towing an aircraft carrier. That means the whole bridge crew needs to have appropriate unlimited tonnage licenses along with a towing endorsement.
They are not an OSV on this job. They are manned appropriately for an unlimited vessel. They are not engaged in the exploitation or exploration of gas or minerals and so on. Just because a vessel has a “mud” tank does not make them an OSV. Also there are official OSVs without mud tanks just like there are other vessel with mud tanks and are not OSVs.
Also, that statement is unbelievably ignorant.
Par for the course, 80% of the posts on this thread are unbelievably ignorant.
PIck 10 posts, 8 of them are unbelievably ignorant.
You’re not really any good at starting a conversation…
I apologize for that, but directly pointing out posts and users would most likely instigate a flaming war the likes of which have kept me from posting often on this forum any more.
I could maybe engage the conversation by pointing out some of the mistaken beliefs put forth on this thread.
-“ECO having no meaningful Ocean Towing Experience”: ECO has a longstanding history of successful service to the US Navy via MSC Contracts which include Ocean Towing. The Carolyn Chouest towed and tendered the NR1 all over the North Atlantic for many years. The Dove towed and serviced the SBX from Seattle to Hawaii and as far as Korea. While some may discount the “towing some Rig” experience, ECO vessels and crews have towed countless rigs throughout the world not just the US GOM. Frankly, Rigs are far more challenging and demanding than barge or ship hull forms, and stress the Tow Gear to a greater degree. By all accounts the conical shaped Kulluk was the worst of the worst in that regard.
While not Ocean Towing, per se, ship assist work for the USN in San Diego, Mayport, and Kingsbay have been handled by ECO Tugs for quite some time, that in addition to the Chenaire LNG Terminal in Sabine, Tx
- It has been wondered aloud in this thread about how, ECO’s bid could compete with a “real” towing company:
While I have no idea about what constitutes a “real” towing company, and having no idea of what the competing contract prices might have been, I believe an unbiased look at the facts will shed some light.
-In the previous tows the contractors at least at times resorted to 2 Tug tandem tows and took approximately 150 days to complete the job.
-The Dino is already heading north with the tow and is on pace for 75 days.
It doesn’t take a cast member from “The Big Bang Theory” to discern that the Dino with her greater: Horsepower, Speed, Range, Heavier Wire, Sea Keeping Ability, and Younger Relative Age would be the obvious choice.
I took that mostly to be a dig on the Aiviq fiasco than literal truth.
[quote=“Diesel, post:103, topic:43359”]ECO has a longstanding history of successful service to the US Navy via MSC Contracts which include Ocean Towing. The Carolyn Chouest towed and tendered the NR1 all over the North Atlantic for many years. The Dove towed and serviced the SBX from Seattle to Hawaii and as far as Korea. While some may discount the “towing some Rig experience” ECO vessels and crews have towed countless rigs throughout the world not just the US GOM.
They don’t seem to be using many (any?) of those experienced people for this job and they didn’t use them on their super-tug which allowed it to lose the Kulluk.
[quote=“Diesel, post:104, topic:43359”]It doesn’t take a cast member from “The Big Bang Theory” to discern that the Dino with her greater: Horsepower, Speed, Range, Heavier Wire, Sea Keeping Ability, and Younger Relative Age would be the obvious choice.
Obviously it will tow better and faster than normal tugs, what I have a hard time grasping is the idea that those paying for it are willing to pay extra for a scrap ship to get to the breaker sooner. There is no way the Dino can operate for the same cost as a Crosby tug.
It most likely isn’t cheaper than 1 Crosby Tug, but it could be cheaper than 2 Crosby Tugs for twice as long.
I’m not sure how you or anyone else on the forum would know the experience level of the crew of the Dino, but I am sure it is normal to mix lesser experienced, but never-the-less qualified individuals, with more experienced ones. It is how the next generation comes into being.