[QUOTE=Kraken;128603]Just to rain on your parade.
This is a ship: http://www.skipsfarts-forum.net/read.php?TID=10823 
A flat bottom is not that bad if the ship has installed antiroll tank in the superstructure.[/QUOTE]
Rolling isnāt the problem for a flat bottom vessel.
[QUOTE=Traitor Yankee;128606]According to your profile you are an ab, is that correct?[/QUOTE]
According to the papers I possess for the moment, then yes
[QUOTE=z-drive;128607]Rolling isnāt the problem for a flat bottom vessel.[/QUOTE]
Iāve been aboard a flat bottom OSV and a flat bottom OSV equipped with a antiroll tank in the superstructure, i can promise you that the difference is like night and day in bad weather
So, these two vessels you have been on were IDENTICAL vessels in every way, shape, and form? Meaning that the ONLY variable that has changed was an anti roll tank?
Maybe itās the language barrier but I donāt think this guy gets the point. Flat bottom boats vs round or high dead rise (at least FWD) have different characteristics. Flume tanks are another whole variable.
But yeah identical, Iām sure!!! Identically ballasted and bunkered too.
[QUOTE=Flyer69;128643]So, these two vessels you have been on were IDENTICAL vessels in every way, shape, and form? Meaning that the ONLY variable that has changed was an anti roll tank?[/QUOTE]
Yes two UT 755 LN, one had a anti roll tank in the superstructure. And the characteristics in bad weather is different between the boats.
But itās possible that the language barrier is in the way like z-drive is saying and Iām just looks like a fool
The location of the tank has no effect on the virtual rise of CG due to free surface. The design and operation have an effect too. The one boat I was on that had an anti-roll tank, we kept pressed-up since it made things worse when it was slack. Apparently the obstruction between the sides was about as porous as a chain link fence.
Then just to rain on your parade, find some paint to chip while you read us a book on naval architecture.
[QUOTE=wmoser;128657]The location of the tank has no effect on the virtual rise of CG due to free surface. The design and operation have an effect too. The one boat I was on that had an anti-roll tank, we kept pressed-up since it made things worse when it was slack. Apparently the obstruction between the sides was about as porous as a chain link fence.[/QUOTE]
A poorly designed anti roll tank is worse to have than no anti roll tank because the point behind the anti roll tank is to counteract the free surface effect.
The point Iām trying to convey (very poorly) is that the fast rolling period on a flat bottom vessel can be countered by a anti roll tank in the superstructure, by lowering the stability and counteract the free surface effect.
[QUOTE=SouthboundSailor;127995]Also they might realize that they need Logistical support on the ground in Barrow provided by Ak Veterans Instead of Academy/ GoM pencil pushers in Anchorage. The real challenge here is mob/DE-MOB a large Arctic fleet in 3 months . Here we go againā¦crunch time. Perhaps they will hire some local knowledge, wishful thinking?[/QUOTE]
Have you applied? , Have you submitted your resume? Be careful how you throw the comments. Southbound.
If you have something to bring to the venture then apply and be part of the solution - Not part of the problem.
to be Clear Iām moving my family to Alaska from Maine to work this project and Im and Academy grad. But rarely worked the GOM.
[QUOTE=SouthboundSailor;127994]Solid design and far more versatile market being able to take weather resembling North Sea Cond. Do Yāall think these things mah be able to work in thr Harsh Env of the NW and NE where they will probably end up one day? My prayer for 2014ā¦āMay Shell succeed in its endeavor to safely accomplish its plan to drill wells in the Chukchi sea during the 2014 seasonā . Most mariners down here seem to overlook the importance of this monumental campaign and its effect on the Gulf Market. My co workers look at the Nanuq and Siduaq and think they are just another boat. How wrong they are. Maybe Chouest will not put the fuel vents on the deck this time haha .[/QUOTE]
Hard to say but Iām know from personal Exp they are super touchy about Fuel Spec. looking at 2014 ( iām sure they will continue to be- and mod the boats inside the 17 day annual maint window. ) Keep an eye out, saw some rough plans on Icebreaker OSV from Pumpkin fleet- Iām guessing they are doing to move ahead on it soon for 2017/18 delviery, I think you ment Sisuaq not Siduaq (no such vessel in service up here)
[QUOTE=mainecheng;129055]Keep an eye out, saw some rough plans on Icebreaker OSV from Pumpkin fleet- Iām guessing they are doing to move ahead on it soon for 2017/18 delviery.[/QUOTE]
I just hope they go for a modern design this timeā¦
[QUOTE=Tups;129066]I just hope they go for a modern design this timeā¦[/QUOTE]
If they think it might have to tow something at some point perhaps theyāll take that into consideration this time.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;129068]If they think it might have to tow something at some point perhaps theyāll take that into consideration this time.[/QUOTE]
I was thinking it more from icebreaking point of view. Conventional twin-shaft/twin-rudder propulsion arrangement with mechanical powertrain and ducted propellers is probably okay for open water towing, but for operations in ice Iād go for diesel-electric azimuth thrusters.
What was wrong with the design for towing?
[QUOTE=mainecheng;129054]Have you applied? , Have you submitted your resume? Be careful how you throw the comments. Southbound.
If you have something to bring to the venture then apply and be part of the solution - Not part of the problem.
to be Clear Iām moving my family to Alaska from Maine to work this project and Im and Academy grad. But rarely worked the GOM.[/QUOTE]
Where do those of us with Alaska experience who want to help Shell make a big success of 2014 submit our resumes?
[QUOTE=coldduck;129077]What was wrong with the design for towing?[/QUOTE]
Iām not an expert on the subject, and probably didnāt read up on the topic as well as I should have when it was being discussed, but I thought that the inadequate towing abilities of the Aiviq played into the whole Kulluk debacle. Maybe Iām wrong, if so I apologize for not informing myself better, but that was my vague understanding of the incident.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;129079]Iām not an expert on the subject, and probably didnāt read up on the topic as well as I should have when it was being discussed, but I thought that the inadequate towing abilities of the Aiviq played into the whole Kulluk debacle. Maybe Iām wrong, if so I apologize for not informing myself better, but that was my vague understanding of the incident.[/QUOTE]
The problems were a lack of local knowledge, weather routing, and towing skills on the part of the master, and poor shoreside tow planning. The people involved were not up to the task. Other than the water in the fuel problem, there was nothing wrong with AIVIQās towing abilities.
Just asking because I havenāt been following it:
Has the uscg issued a final report on the incident?
Would like to read it if one is available.
LOL unless your last name is Chouest, theres no report to read. Never happenedā¦