Shell Drill ship Runs Aground

Maritime News Marine Incidents
41

“A vessel slipping anchor at an anchorage, while not a common event, is not rare, either,” said Coast Guard Cmdr. Chris O’Neil, the Washington, D.C.-based head spokesman. He is in Alaska for a month to monitor and learn more about expanding Arctic operations.

What’s all this landlubber talk (especially from a USCG Cmdr. assigned to monitor arctic drilling) about the DISCO “slipping anchor” or the “anchor slipping”? The anchor was “dragging,” not “slipping.” We are all familiar with “dragging anchor,” a very common event about which mariners must be constantly vigilant. However, to “slip” an anchor means to cast it off. “Slipping” an anchor would be a very rare event that hopefully most of us will never experience.

27 to 35 knots of wind is a gentle breeze by Dutch Harbor standards. The way the wind funnels through the mountains into Dutch Harbor its is often blowing twice as hard inside Dutch than it is a few miles offshore. Why didn’t they take the simple precaution of keeping the pilot onboard in an unfamiliar harbor that is famous for its often violent local conditions?

It will be interesting to see how this situation unfolds and how what additional information is reported. Within a few minutes of this unfortunate mishap, the master undoubtedly tested the steering gear (and perhaps rolled over the prop). If the ship grounded (and it appears to be very highly unlikely that it wasn’t aground), and there was damage to the rudder or prop, the master (and presumably Noble and Shell) knew this before Shell made its first comments to the press.

I find it hard to believe that the entire fleet of Shell vessels in Dutch Harbor (between them all) did not have a “dive team” onboard. If they don’t, they are not properly equipped to be operating in remote Alaska. They certainly didn’t need to wait until Monday to fly in a dive team for the initial inspection, Magone Marine — www.magonemarine.com — probably could have provided a competent dive team to inspect the ship within an hour, and I find it hard to believe that the DISCO failed to immediately avail itself of Dan Magone’s services to inspect the rudder. A master needs to know whether or not he can use the ship’s rudder and propulsion.

The way this incident is handled going forward will be even more of a window into Shell’s competence and trustworthiness.

42

tugsailor sir…your post is simply perfectly stated and I thank you for it. You know what you speak of with true direct knowledge of Dutch Harbor and with clear logical thought. You seem to be rare here in this thread.

The only thing that should be clarified is that the competence of Noble seems to be more in question than Shell’s. Shell should be able to trust Noble to operate professionally and provide the best masters they can for the DISCO. Whether one person feels that is not something that is questionable, I think the record is showing that to be very much something worthy of doubt. I know Noble’s marine manager and I don’t feel good that he has this to contend with now. I like the man and respect him. I hope that he and Noble reflect on the continued failings aboard the DISCO and realize the stakes that still lay ahead after they depart Dutch Harbor for the Chukchi Sea.

.

43

You sound like a disgruntled ex crew member. Instead of name calling why don’t you actually use facts? C.captain does actually use facts in with his name calling, you can too…

44

[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;74827]You sound like a disgruntled ex crew member. Instead of name calling why don’t you actually use facts? C.captain does actually use facts in with his name calling, you can too…[/QUOTE]

I am former master of the BULLY I which was quite well known here and yes, I am disgruntled…so what? You’ve never been treated badly by an employer before?

I feel everything I have posting in this thread is factually based on visual evidence, local knowledge, past history of the ship. There should be no question of the location of where the DISCO grounded, that she grounded on her rudder, that the masters both have have several significant “incidents” to their credit, that there was a failure in how the anchor watch was maintained and any forethought to a dragging anchor in a sudden wind which DH is famous for at any time of the year. Dragging anchor is itself prima facia evidence of a failure on both the part of the man on anchor watch and the master since he is the ultimate responsible PIC. That it happened in the mid afternoon is even greater proof of failure (not that there isn’t failure to drag anchor at night but is just more common to happen then). Where is there reason for dispute?

.

45

Sorry to hear of yur bad experience at Noble. It is not pleasant to be treated poorly I imagine.

It seems it remains important not to speculate on things. We all see some photos and some reports, but no one here is privy to all the facts at this time. It seems the situation will be well looked into by the Company Man’s Boss’s Boss and his goon squad and the USCG and class and it is pretty clear to this audience they will get to the bottom of it. This near-miss is one that got everyone’s attention. I for one would not testify the ship grounded unless I saw impact damage or visually apparent evidence of contact on the ship and / or the harbour bottom. The other evidence is by eyewitness or third party reports and can be in error. Don’t know. Can’t tell. End.

After spending a lot of time investigating incidents and the resulting damage, it all never fails to amaze. I’ve seen many situations where the cause and result was so evident at the outset, only to find out at the end it was absolutely not what it seemed at the start.

So in that, let’s ease up a bit and wait. Maybe this forum will actually never know the real official truth, as it was only that “near miss” - we think - but you can bet someone will get to the bottom of it. That introspection and ability to learn and train others using our valuable experience - is what we each get paid so well to do.

How about telling us a short list of likely lessons learned (I see them spread out among the posts) and what could be done to prevent this type of incident again anywhere.

For another topic, see the Dutch Harbor Telegraph link, there was another ship accident reported with injuries - with its own likely lessons learned.

46

[QUOTE=+A465B;74838]It seems it remains important not to speculate on things. We all see some photos and some reports, but no one here is privy to all the facts at this time. It seems the situation will be well looked into by the Company Man’s Boss’s Boss and his goon squad and the USCG and class and it is pretty clear to this audience they will get to the bottom of it. This near-miss is one that got everyone’s attention. I for one would not testify the ship grounded unless I saw impact damage or visually apparent evidence of contact on the ship and / or the harbour bottom. The other evidence is by eyewitness or third party reports and can be in error. Don’t know. Can’t tell. End.
[/QUOTE]

If you read the reports of witnesses sir, you will clearly note that the ship was seen to be dragging anchor until it stopped which just so happened to be at the exact spot where the water depth equaled the after draft of the vessel. There is no reason by any sensible maritime professional to believe that the anchor miraculously took hold mere feet before the stern came to ground. That is the only thing that would have stopped the ship from its drift astern. Also note that it took a tug to pull the vessel off. If not aground aft the master should have been quite able to just come ahead and recover the ground tackle.

No sale sir…this one does not scour and the USCG is complicit with Shell on this claiming of no grounding. Now it is possible that the speed when drifting astern was slow enough that the skeg under the rudder did not get bent upward or to the side and that the rudder is free. If so then Noble dodged a bullet. Notice that I don’t say Shell because it is not a Shell master on the vessel but a Noble one and they are the party with responsibility here which then is placed upon their master aboard.

I too have stated, let’s see what comes back on the rudder? If we see the DISCO being towed up north without her engines then I think it will be pretty clear that the rudder is fucked up. Shell cannot hide this even if the USCG is part of the coverup.

47

I cant say much about this but i cant not say something.

  1. there’s alot of conjecture from people with “local knowledge” that didnt see the start of the incident. There were other vessels around when it started to unfold. If you’re basing that she ran aground becasue she stopped coming back… wonder if maybe someone else was pulling long enough to arrest her backward momentum.

  2. There’s alot of guessing about the appropriateness of the achorage and available depth of water by the shore. Certainly we all know how to read a chart. There’s is 40+’ of water within 150 feet of the MLW curve on the chart there.

This is a professional mariners forum and i think it’s important to discuss issues, but many of the comments i’ve seen here are no better than i’ve seen on Yahoo news or facebook posts… I expect more from us at gcaptain and think we should keep it factual instead of guessing and using poorly framed photos or iphone screen shots of charts instead of actual ones.

IMHO

48

sorry but I still say “no sale”…plenty of local witnesses who aren’t neophytes to matters of the sea and ships say she grounded. There are also more than enough photos also showing the ship there with no tug at all made up. The pictures tell the whole story. I know that exact spot, have driven the road going by it hundreds of times. I know how steep the beach is there. It is also luckily shingle there and not the rocks you see in the foreground.

I offer this photo with an albeit unscientific rendering but one I believe to be reasonable enough to pass a smell test by others here

7585074994_7c74e5643a_c.jpg800×370

you can each decide if her stern is or isn’t aground?

.

49

There are two likely explanations for the ship running aground. Error on the crew’s part, or propulsion malfunction. Why they didn’t just use their thrusters to stay in location like the do while drilling is a big question. But when the beach approaches, you should probably hit the throttle.

I firmly believe that ALL deep water dynamically positioned rigs that are conducting drilling operations in the US and in US licensed plots, need to be US FLAG!

50

[QUOTE=rshrew;74709]Wonder what took the tug so long to get to them they were the ones who towed the thing up there.[/QUOTE]

I was there on the beach and overheard the conversation on the VHF radios. They couldn’t raise the Lauren Foss, the big tug they needed. No explanation there. Maybe they also were busy with Facebook. So they pulled two tugs off the towing of the Kulluk, the drilling rig which was in a tough spot at the time…but the Lauren Foss arrived before the two tugs. The Noble Discoverer travels under her own power, no need for a tow normally. But it’s not cool to fire up the engines when the prop is buried in mud.

51

I really wish this incident had not happened, but unfortunately it did. Shell now needs to show that they have actually learned from it and that they are redoubling their efforts to avoid any further incidents.

If there is a serious incident in the Arctic, the world will blame the United States first, Shell second, and Noble a very distant third, if at all.

If there is a serious incident in the Arctic, the people of the US will blame our government first (for failure to run an effective offshore leasing program with adequate safeguards, or allowing it at all), Shell second, and Noble a very distant third.

If there is a serious incident in the Arctic, our government will blame Shell first, and Noble second.

If there is a serious incident in the Arctic, Shell will blame Noble first (and every other vendor) and then the government for allowing their drilling program without adequate safeguards.

If there is a serious incident in the Arctic, it will instantly become a Fukushima like event that results in a permanent ban on US Arctic drilling.

This is Shell’s long planned $5 Billion Arctic drilling program. It Shell’s responsibility to design and implement the program with an abundance of caution. Just as it is the master’s responsibility for the failure of the mate on watch to notice the anchor dragging, or to have adequate safeguards in place, or to be able to react quickly enough with a backup plan in case the anchor started dragging in close quarters — it is Shell’s responsibility to properly vet their contractors, and specify the safeguards that the contractors shall have in place.

Seamanship is that unholy compromise between safety and economics.

In the context of a relatively high risk, remote, never-been-done-before, $5 Billion arctic drilling program would it be too expensive or unreasonable to expect that Shell should: insist that all vessels working in their $5 Billion Arctic drilling program have an adviser onboard with years of actual seagoing experience in Alaska? (There are many such people available. Obvious sources are Southwest Alaska Pilots, Crowley, and Foss, not to mention others). If they are going to work in or near ice flows, shouldn’t they have advisers onboard with substantial experience working in the ice? (those may be harder to find, but they are available somewhere).

Shouldn’t they already have these people lined up after years of planning a $5 Billion Arctic drilling program.

Shouldn’t Shell be using this arctic drilling season to train up a cadre of extra professionals, including vessel masters and mates, for expanded future arctic drilling programs? How else are they going to get experienced people next time, if they don’t provide the experience this time?

The master of the NOBLE DISCOVERER is probably a good seaman and the unfortunate victim of circumstances, but he is the master. Probably, the master deserves a lot of credit for taking prompt and effective action to prevent a much worse incident from happening. With the benefit of hindsight, and experience around Dutch Harbor, some of us can think of things that might have been done differently to reduce the likelihood of this incident in the first place. Such are the advantages of being a Monday morning quarterback. Hopefully, we will eventually learn more about what actually happened, so that we can all learn from it.

This is Shell’s $5 Billion Arctic drilling program; the first of its kind. Shell chose and vetted their contractors. If anything goes seriously awry, its Shell’s responsibility.

52

Yes - we’ve seen all that and are thinking on it.

My opinions are:

(1) none of us here have all the facts, and
(2) it ain’t likely wer’re gonna get 'em anytime soon, either.

Thank goodness the ship caught a more or less lucky break.

That’s enough for me.

53

Tugsailor,

My reply was to ccaptain prior post. Should have used that “quote” thing to be clear who I was responding to.

I think your points are spot on.

54

[QUOTE=tugsailor;74864]In the context of a relatively high risk, remote, never-been-done-before, $5 Billion arctic drilling program would it be too expensive or unreasonable to expect that Shell should: insist that all vessels working in their $5 Billion Arctic drilling program have an adviser onboard with years of actual seagoing experience in Alaska? (There are many such people available. Obvious sources are Southwest Alaska Pilots, Crowley, and Foss, not to mention others). If they are going to work in or near ice flows, shouldn’t they have advisers onboard with substantial experience working in the ice? (those may be harder to find, but they are available somewhere).

Shouldn’t they already have these people lined up after years of planning a $5 Billion Arctic drilling program.

Shouldn’t Shell be using this arctic drilling season to train up a cadre of extra professionals, including vessel masters and mates, for expanded future arctic drilling programs? How else are they going to get experienced people next time, if they don’t provide the experience this time?[/QUOTE]

Again sir, I commend you for your clear understanding of the situation in Alaska and Shell’s ambitious program. It is just far too sad with such high stakes that certain persons in positions to learn these lessons seem utterly unable to.

just quite pathetic actually…

55

A Coast Guard report Saturday saying that the ship only came within 175 yards of shore when witnesses said it got much closer was incorrect, Francis acknowledged. The ship, which Shell said has a 26-foot draft, had been anchored 175 yards out when it began to drag anchor, she said.

I cut this from one of c.captain’s posts. I am surprised that no one caught where the Coast Guard said that she never came with in 175 yards but then said that she was anchored 175 yards offshore. So, I guess she could not have grounded as she never moved. Makes sense to me and also makes it clear as mud. LOL

56

[QUOTE=Tugs;74882]I cut this from one of c.captain’s posts. I am surprised that no one caught where the Coast Guard said that she never came with in 175 yards but then said that she was anchored 175 yards offshore. So, I guess she could not have grounded as she never moved. Makes sense to me and also makes it clear as mud. LOL[/QUOTE]

The Coast Guard’s patent obfuscations and backpeddling throughout this tawdry affair is most unsettling yet then again, when was the Coast Guard not in the pocket of the ship owners and big business?

They’ll buy off that nothing happened and allow Shell to go on their merry way unless the rudder in the DISCO is jammed and can’t be freed. Then everybody is fucked!

57

Where is the Commodore ?

I need some comic relief fast

58

[QUOTE=+A465B;74885]Where is the Commodore ?

I need some comic relief fast[/QUOTE]

No need to fear good citizen…

May I present Commodore Wayne Spivak of the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary! Ten hut…hand salute! Blow trumpets and flurishes!

I wonder what the medals are for? I mean honestly, medals for the Coastie Guard Auxiliary? For meritorious medal wearing? For funniest party jokes? For snazziest lavender cummerbund? What for Christ’s sake!

59

[QUOTE=+A465B;74885]Where is the Commodore ?

I need some comic relief fast[/QUOTE]

Why, you don’t need to call for the Commodore when you can be your very own Commodore yourself at commodoreuniform.com Yes, you too can become that “Flag Officer” you always grew hard thinking you could be!

just think…someday you can look like this!

Oh my dream date, but I still will need my Viagra* and a cloth sack for this one!

*WARNINGS

Don’t take Viagra if you are dead or about to become dead as this will lead you to being dead but maybe better to be dead with a stiff one than just one dead stiff!

Don’t take Viagra if your dick has atrophied and shriveled so small that it cannot be found with two hands as this may cause something unmentionable to happen inside of you.

Don’t take Viagra is you are a woman or about to become a woman (note photo above showing the hideous results)

Don’t take Viagra if you are a member of the Corps of Cadets at Texas A&M Galveston as this might cause a horrible regimental reaction to occur which might lead to joining gCaptain with the username TMAcadet1

.

60

Which facts need clarification…the fact that C.captain was run off the Disco after being there 24hrs or so or the fact his tirades here cost him his job at Noble (among other issues). These are the facts. He has an axe to grind with the crew of the Disco and it shows.

Much to your dismay C.captain, I often agree with you and your posts but just as you refuse to give ground in your stance on things, I have a hard time often with the bully tactics you employ.