Especially fun to watch is the poor AB who climbs up the lashings through the smoke, fumes, and flames with the slings and shackles on his back. That job is only slightly more miserable than the poor guy who has to disconnect the rigging while being dipped in the sea on top of a sinking container.
4 Likes
I have found in my experience quite the opposite. It is not rocket science.
X-Press Shipping Spore issued several press releases about the incident from being informed of detecting the leaking container at Jebel Ali, trying to off-load it at two ports, the container catching fire weeks later at Colombo, trying to extinguish the fire in various ways, etc, etc. But the solution is easy! Just blame the Master for everything as usual. He should have patched up the container at once.
I am specifically referring to container handling. Unless you have a fully automatic spreader, which I guess is not available on board, moving container with a crane and especially a shipâs crane is a challenging job. The only occasions I witnessed shipâs crew operating ships crane fast was on the âoldâ Maersk C type vessels built in the early nineties and equipped with gantry crane. In addition, there were two dedicated Danish crew members fully trained to operate the equipment and being able to move up to 40 boxes an hour (discharged from deck) providing shore side was clearing quay apron fast enough. In Africa I also witnessed dedicated Ukrainian crane drivers operating fast some Delmas vessels. Again with automatic spreader. It may not look like rocket science but it requires a very good level of skill, handling containers with a shore gantry crane is much easier, all the mobile crane operators we switched to STS cranes were top ones in term of performance from my own experience as a terminal operator. Needless to say that the best ships crane operators that were later trained for gantries were also top gun folks.
So the owner/managing company did not tell YOU, they told the whole world.
PS> Still waiting for your explanation re: crew accessing containers in the hold at sea.
I spent a fair amount of time on LASH ships. When the run was between the US and Mideast. The crew operated the crane in ALL foreign ports for loading and discharge. It is not that the crew canât do it, it is just that it isnât something they (we) typically do. With experience comes speed. If you were ever in Hong Kong working cargo in the anchorage, none of those barges that came alongside had automated spreaders. They were wicked fast nonetheless.
Not sure if it was the crew or ILA that operated the Lash cranes while in USA. In the early to mid 70âs I worked on tugs waiting at the stern for them to be dropped in the water, using the not so great winches/wires to butt them together for pushing upriver. The crane dudes were rather efficient, by the time we got the poorly maintained winches/wires freed up, another lash unit dropped down. We did that until we got 5-7 units, then departed. Reloading empties on return trip was easier, as most of the winches worked by then.
The longshoreman operated the cranes while in the US. We (the crew) ran them while foreign.
1 Like
Understand, but I may be wrong, that LASH ships were fitted with gantries. This is not the kind of equipment most of the geared container ships are fitted with. Regarding Hong Kong anchorage operations, guess the barges were operated by trained / experienced people. Agree with you that speed comes with time, but in most of the case crew on board geared container ships seldom get the chance to start learning since in ports which are not equipped with shore gantries it is common practice that stevedores handle the shipâs cranes.
I could be wrong, but arentât gantryâs are a type of lifting device, perhaps similar to cranes?
1 Like
According to an early press release by the owner the fire started in hold #2. The hold was fitted with a CO2 system (!) which was used, etc. On my ships the crew can access the holds via a weather tight hatch and stairs/ladders.
Please advice the crew on YOUR ships not to enter the hold after CC2 has been released.
The question was; how were they going to lift the containers out of the hold and drop them overboard, as you suggested???
In any case, they couldnât carry the containers out via the ladders and entry hatch.
1 Like
And what exactly do you propose they do in that burning CO2 infused hold ⌠besides dying rather quickly that is?
Good grief man, are you really in a decision making position? If so, that is very very scary.
1 Like
Although this whole incident is/was maybe preventable, am glad the mariners got off safely. What happens aterwards is a giant mess. The lawyers again, make more money than the shippers or the country affected. Crazy how this stuff works. This is a bad one. That abandoned FSBO off of Yemen deserves much more attention than it is given. Another nasty one.
Actually my ships are ropax vessels where the âholdâ is the garage in the superstructure, on top of which is a deck house for crew and pax. The hold and the deck house float on the hull, that is partly submerged in sea water. The hold is fire protected by a manual sprinkler system in sections. I have experienced fires onboard resulting in CTLs and loss of life. The origins of fire I have always suspected criminal sabotage but the authorities always blame the Master/crew and negligence. Luckily H&M and P&I insurances have always paid 100% of the losses.
Fact remains that the Master of the brand new mv X-Press Pearl reported that a container in the hold leaked nitric acid and that twice it was attempted to off-load the container in port but âŚ
It is now the SW Monsoon season so that will not be before late Aug.
⌠an explosion occurred on the vessel on May 25, said people in the know. âŚ
Sounds like sabotage and insurance fraud ⌠Anyway, the wreck is aground in shallow waters and could actually be raised âŚ
From a more serious source: