Stena Immaculate on fire off UK

[spowiednick]

@Kennebec_Captain

Using time rather than distance makes more sense given how time can now be read directly off the ARPA.

If there was a requirement based on TCPA it would be best to have it in written orders to the watchstander.

Yours noted.
However in hypothetical situation as described I am asking a very simple question : what would You do? Calling the master is one of the thinngs one can do .The question is when.

I prefer to use the term OOW as it leaves no ambiquity as to whom I expect to be a watchstander.

Everybody is entitled to have an opinion regarding my input but I am not asking for such and do not invite for debate what is making more sense and what not. I am asking , what I considered as simple and even banal question : what would You do ?? .

So far I see no answer in a place saturated with navigators.

Lot of things can be read from Radar/ARPA. In the lower right hand corner one may see CPA , TCPA. One may see if calculated values are ARPA values or may be the user selected AIS values.

In the upper right hand corner one can see SOG value or may be STW value. This data alone may or may be not cause, his cognitive functions to warm up a little if present and available.

One may figure or decide : forget the ARPA & forget the AIS and lets use one of the multiple EBLs available nowadays and check using this simple antediluvian tool to check how the bearing on the target is changing .

I tried to describe the scenario using the KISS principle, thinking wrongly as it appears , it would be easy as pie to answer. Never expected conversion of distance to time given constant V from the banal formula D= VxT would be considered as challenge.

I am willing to help and i will do it w/o aid of Chat Gpt and/or calculator. It is a reflex action caused by four semesters of being forbiden to use calculators for solving astronavigation and navigation calculations , allowed only by means of logarithmic tables. Interpolation, extrapolation at the end of such rigorous training one does with a lightning speed and it is etched forever.

What would You do then ?

1. at 8 Nm CPA =0 8/16=> 1/2 x 60= 30min
2. at 6 Nm CPA =0 6/16=> 3/8 x 60= 45/2= 22.5 min
3. at 4 Nm CPA =0 4/16=> 1/4 x 60= 15 min
4. at 2 Nm CPA =0 2/16=> 1/8 x 60 = 7.5 min
5. at 1 Nm CPA=0 1/16=> 60/16 => 7.5/2= 3.75 min
6. at 0.5 Nm CPA=0 go figure
7. at kaboom

Do You remember Commander Marko Aleksandrovich Ramius dead reckoning in the movie ??? It is not total but partial BS.

Such skills are acquired by rigorous , incessant and repetetive training .No talents required. Good to have them as ChatGpt may not be available when shit happens.

Regarding written orders to call the master . Well, one most frequently used is " call me " when visibility is <= 3 Nm but one may consider " call me when in doubt " as doubt may be a symptom of thinking or " call me before shit happens" .

But since You have mentioned the orders, then lets rise the ante and add to "what would you do? " , "what the example of well written order left by master to OOW would be? " in the particular scenario above.
Those shy or unwiling to make public statement may opt to send me a PM and after 4 -6 days I will post all, without revealing aliases . That is my solemn promise.

Lets rise the ante again. There was a westerly current of 3 kts at Stena anchor position ( current is hypothetical as I do not know yet ) . Would this change anything??

Edited:
Have edited my original post after consultation with member of the forum whose opinion and advise i do keep in very high regard let alone respect.
Apologies for confusion and inconvenience thus created.

xxxxx

[New3M]

@spowiednick

Would this change anything??

No.

[Kennebec_Captain]

@spowiednick

There was a westerly current of 3 kts at Stena anchor position

Are you hinting at the possibility of opening the anchor windlass brake?

Why not rewrite the instructions the day before? Or anchor in a different position? With the benefit of hindsight anything is possible.

[spowiednick]

Negative Sir.

I am not thinking/hinting at anything as the purpose of my post was to cut the ifs , coulds, shoulds and speculations , wise after the event theorising etc etc and ask instead viewers: what would you do under such circumstances. ?

Call it : picking an American nautical brain if You wish. I am just curious dude and it is never too late to learn sth even in my 12ve month of retirement.

I Think it is more fair to say what I would do , then passing vague judgements on individuals who acted under dures in life and death situation.

Some viewers may ignore it , some may answer. It is pure voluntary. But having some answers could be great for educational purposes.

See what happened in NUC thread that exploded with fantastic ideas and interpretations.

Trust above explains .

[ombugge]

Don’t know if this video has been posted before. (No it is NOT one of Sal’s regular programs):

Shipping expert reveals what could have caused North Sea collision

[Hogsnort]

IMHO any thought of a conspiracy is nuts. The autopilot was supposedly in track mode onboard the Solong but the Stena Immaculate was at anchor in an area of quite significant tidal streams stemming to the current. That a vessel say 200 miles away could line up a collision is laughable. There would have to be targeting information from a third actor.

[spowiednick]

Interesting Dr. Bugge

Dive into archives. For example here:

Should a tanker drifting be considered NUC?

This is something that I feel should be updated under international regulation. I’ve been on a 300m LNG carrier that’s needed to wait for a few days to unload of the coast of Korea whilst the port is readying for us to offload the cargo. Whilst drifting, the captain took the technically wrong decision to make us NUC for the several days were drifting off the coast, as being under normal navigational status would mean that we would have to give way to literally thousands of fishing boats. I do …

There are many other past/historical themes . Just read the comments.

They know very well what their boys possibly screwed.

Have You ever seen the face of the dog who stole 800 gr beef steak you just prepared for yourself?

Do they know the term "objectivity”

This is becoming a clown show.

And there is one genius here proving to You Dr. Bugge !!! how much THOUGHT and REASON and effing planning and exceptionality went into Stena navigation while approaching anchorage.

And this clown concluded all this by analyising BBC picture. showing erratic movement of Stena.

And now you hear she was a Victim!!! led by some unknown British bastard into lat/lon. spot where she could be T’boned by sleeping ruskie cpt or relaying solely on AIS for collision avoidance in milk shake fog and strong currents environment.

Sometimes I think the place is filled with pencil pushers with 27 years past experience in crewing Dpt or crab and shrimboat captain’s or simply jingoistic impostors

The clip is a typical propaganda piece filled with white washing ingredients.

DO not ask me what " I would do?" . It is pointless but read carefully what HERO pilot did o/b m/v Dali by alarming OTHERS and with what effect.
And surely He got less the 30 or 15 minutes or even 5 minutes.

How much one needs to start shouting on uhf ch 16 or on uhf DSC or sending the AIS msg?
It beats me.

[Kennebec_Captain]

@spowiednick

DO not ask me what " I would do?" .

There’s no way of knowing the answer.

If the Stena Immaculate is found partly liable some possible reasons are: failure to maintain a proper anchor watch (lookout), anchored in an improper position, failure to communicate to or otherwise warn the other vessel (Solong) and failure to take mitigating action (for example use of bow thruster, use of the main engine or to veer more chain)

[spowiednick]

Today I will search my library of pdfs hoping I will find some similar case( anchored/hampered vessel v/s underway vsl using engine) and what judgement was announced in aportioning the blame and of course waiting impatiently for MAIB report regarding the root causes.
Gut filling is it woud be a very interesting case.

[Meme.Lord]

I ran a search with my AI friend, and turned up some collisions, though no direct parity to the Stena Immaculate. Full report here: ChatGPT - Anchored Vessel Allisions Report

Loire Estuary, France (August 9, 2024): Bulker Olga Strikes Anchored Tanker Iver Blessing

Fault & Outcomes

Fault & Outcomes: While the formal investigation is ongoing, the circumstances (a moving ship hitting a stationary anchored ship) strongly indicate the bulk carrier Olga was at fault for failing to navigate safely. French police and port state authorities are determining if negligence was involved. Given the relatively minor damage, this incident is viewed as a “near-miss” lesson. It has prompted French authorities to review procedures for vessels leaving anchorage in low visibility. Both ships were cleared to continue voyages after inspections, and any further legal action will depend on the investigation’s conclusions (likely focusing on Olga’s liability for the damages and crew injuries)​

Lower Mississippi River, Louisiana (May 8, 2020): Nomadic Milde (Cargo) Drags Anchor into Atlantic Venus (Bulk Carrier)

Fault & Outcomes

Fault & Outcomes: Fault was assigned to the Nomadic Milde. The Atlantic Venus was a victim of the allision and was not blamed. The NTSB’s report explicitly cited Nomadic Milde’s bridge team for “not effectively monitoring the vessel’s position” and failing to realize the vessel was dragging anchor in proximity to other ships​. No crew were injured, and the incident did not result in criminal charges, but it did lead to civil litigation: the dock owners and involved parties sought compensation for the $16.9 million in damages. The case underscored the importance of maintaining an effective anchor watch and using all available tools (GPS drift alarms, visual/radar references, and readiness of engines) when anchoring in strong currents. Industry-wide, this incident became a case study in ensuring adequate anchoring practices and crew training. Company safety bulletins and P&I clubs circulated lessons learned, emphasizing that “a vessel at anchor must still be actively managed and monitored” to prevent dragging allisions​.

Vancouver Harbour, Canada (March 17, 2019): Bulker Caravos Harmony Hits Anchored Bulker Pan Acacia in Fog?** (No, Clear Weather but Strong Currents)**

Fault & Outcomes

Fault & Outcomes: Fault in this allision was attributed to Caravos Harmony’s operation – effectively, the pilot and the ship’s bridge team. The anchored Pan Acacia was not blamed (it was correctly anchored in an approved location). While the TSB does not assign legal liability, the investigation highlighted safety issues. One outcome was a recommendation for the port and pilotage authority: to evaluate tug escort requirements for large vessels in this challenging waterway​. (Notably, at the time, bulk carriers under 250 m length were not required to have tug assistance through First Narrows; Caravos Harmony was 229 m​. Following the incident, the Vancouver Port Authority reviewed its policies. (The TSB report notes that the port amended some rules, such as those regarding refueling at anchor, and it encouraged re-examining escort tug policies​. The shipping company involved also improved its bridge team training and familiarization procedures. This case became a textbook example in Canada of how strong currents plus human factors can lead to an allision, even in clear weather, and it underscored the importance of bridge resource management and preparedness.

Humber Estuary, UK (March 1, 2018): Celtic Spirit Drags Anchor into Atlantic Explorer and Celtic Warrior (Multiple Allision)

Fault & Outcomes

Fault & Outcomes: The Celtic Spirit was found fully at fault for this multi-vessel collision​. As an anchored vessel, Atlantic Explorer bore no fault; it sounded the warning and tried to help. Celtic Warrior also was not blamed, as it was properly anchored and had its engine on standby as a precaution. The MAIB’s report (Safety Bulletin 1/2018 and Report 18/2018) led to several outcomes: the vessel’s operator refreshed its procedures on anchor handling and bridge watch duties during anchorages. Associated British Ports (ABP) Humber conducted an anchorage safety review and implemented measures to ensure ships use sufficient scope and perhaps designate extra precautionary measures in forecast storm conditions​. This case has been cited in industry bulletins as a classic example that anchored ships must use adequate scope and maintain vigilance, especially in heavy weather, and that even large vessels can drag surprisingly fast if these precautions falter​.

New York Harbor (June 2, 1973): Container Ship Sea Witch Allides with Anchored Tanker Esso Brussels in Fog.

Fault & Outcomes

Fault & Outcomes: Legal fault lay predominantly with the Sea Witch (and its owner, American Export-Isbrandtsen Lines). An old maritime rule (“The Pennsylvania Rule”) holds that a moving vessel that allides with a stationary object is presumed at fault unless proven otherwise – here Sea Witch’s mechanical failure did not exonerate it, especially since the failure was traced to inadequate maintenance/design. The Esso Brussels and her owners were essentially blameless, though tragically on the receiving end of the disaster. This allision had significant safety repercussions. The NTSB and Coast Guard issued recommendations for improved redundancy in steering systems on ships​. In the U.S., regulations for steering gear on new ships were tightened to require true independent redundancy (so a single-point failure would be less likely to disable steering). Internationally, the incident added momentum to requirements for inert gas systems on oil tankers. Had Esso Brussels’s cargo tanks been inerted (filled with non-flammable gas), the spilled oil might not have ignited so explosively. Within a few years, IMO regulations mandated inert gas for large tankers carrying crude. The legal cases from this collision (such as Complaint of American Export Lines, Inc.) also helped clarify liability in collisions caused by sudden mechanical failures. In sum, the Sea Witch–Esso Brussels tragedy stands as a grim example of how a momentary lapse in vessel control can lead to catastrophic consequences. The lessons learned have driven improvements in ship design (steering and bow construction), emergency training, and tanker safety to prevent a recurrence​

There are so many people on this forum who are doing an Olympic level mental gymnastic routine to find a way the Stena Immaculate could be at fault. Blaming a theoretical 3rd mate for not firing up the engines and swinging the ship, and accusing him of rubbing one out in the chart room rather than watching the radar and plotting every vessel approaching. A couple things here. If I fired up the engines every time a vessel had 0 nm CPA the chief would throw me off the bridge wing. I’ve called the Captain because we were dragging anchor, only to be chewed out because we haven’t left the watch circle yet. How popular would a mate - at any level - be if they were taking “evasive actions” at anchor? What about when you are navigating in an anchorage? do you expect the vessels you are approaching to take evasive actions? or are you navigating around anchored ships?

It would be interesting to see where this is tried, or if whatever court hears the case applies the Pennsylvania rule, which is referenced in the Sea Witch case, where in a allision, the stationary vessels is automatically not at fault unless proven otherwise. Under the same rule there would be a burden where, even if the Stenna Immaculate was not sounding fog signals, if the sounding of fog signals would have prevented the Collison. If they find the container ship was unmanned, or if that mate was in fact rubbing one out or not maintaining proper lookout, I could see how they would still not find the Stena ship at fault even if she wasn’t sounding proper signals.

[spowiednick]

Thank You !!!

Chat Gpt I still treat like a porcupine but seeing the benefits I will have to pluck up my waning courage and look the beast in the eye . Have been through so many “disturbing technologies” through my life starting with my 1st encounter with Texas Instruments scientific calculator in 1973 I believe , so the chances to have friendly and beneficial relation with the Chat Gpt look promising.
Cheers

Ps. I know the meaning of hyperbole in conversations .

Look up what is contained in # 39 link ( all contents including links) . They have written it before this particular incident and there is no gimnastics or stretching . It is not important what You , me or others think abt it. It would be important, what the guys in black robes and wigs supported by gang of elder brethren think and adjudicate. ( you despise old fucs - I know ) .

And those guys irrespective if You like it or not will leave not a single stone uncovered.

[Sirk]

@Hogsnort

The autopilot was supposedly in track mode onboard the Solong

Honestly, I’m at a loss for words here.
While we don’t yet have confirmation of what mode the autopilot was set to on the Solong, it’s highly unlikely that it was operating in Track Mode. Looking at their previous track records and common practice, the vessel was most likely navigating in Course Mode or just Heading Mode.

And let’s be real—this detail is the least important factor in the whole discussion. I don’t understand why people keep repeating nonsense about Track Mode as if it were some critical issue here.

@ombugge

Don’t know if this video has been posted before. (No it is NOT one of Sal’s regular programs):

I’m really curious why do you posting links to such “profesional” news? Do you think they contribute anything? Notice that people who really know something tend to say the least, in this material as well. Ever wonder why?

[ombugge]

@spowiednick

Bet You used abacus in primary school. I did

Yes we did use abacus in the early grades of primary school.
In Singapore it was usual to see abacus being used by small traders and hawkers, at least up to the 1990s. (Some may still do?)

@Sirk

I’m really curious why do you posting links to such “profesional” news?

Because I trust that most here are able to decide for themself if the post is relevant or not. If you find my posts irrelevant, feel free to jump to next post. I’m sure you will find something, somewhere that suites your taste.

@Sirk

Notice that people who really know something tend to say the least, in this material as well. Ever wonder why?

I have noticed that you have been a pretty regular poster here. I wonder why?

[spowiednick]

Ok folks. Stop arguing , be nice to each other , make love , promote friedship and cooperation and stick your egos where the sun does not shine. Such and interesting & exciting thread .

Got you something for your kind and professional perusal.
Extract from a good book

Collisions at Sea Volume 1 Liability and the Collision Regulations-271-285.pdf (207.5 KB)

@Sirk

Notice that people who really know something tend to say the least, in this material as well.

Thank You for the compliment . You are such a cute and charning chemist .Love your wit and sarcasm.

Have a wonderful rest of your day and weekend.

Added:
T’bone collision investigation report French/English

BEAMER-CSL-Virginia-Ulysse-Collision-October-2018.pdf

Hebei Spirit report:

Hong-Kong-Hebei-Spirit-Crane-Barge-Samsung-No-1-Collision-December-2007.pdf

bbbb

[yacht_sailor]

@spowiednick

jet gasoline

Just to be accurate, no one likes to put gasoline in a jet airplane when they can find kerosene for sale. If the ship was carrying jet fuel, it was probably kerosene (in American English).
(there is a mix of kerosene and gasoline fuel used in arctic areas sometimes, so I guess there is an off chance the ship had this)

[Hogsnort]

@Sirk

While we don’t yet have confirmation of what mode the autopilot was set to on the Solong, it’s highly unlikely that it was operating in Track Mode. Looking at their previous track records and common practice, the vessel was most likely navigating in Course Mode or just Heading Mode.

You may have a different interpretation to “supposedly” than I do but it seems strange that the Solong stayed exactly on a track through various changes in the tidal streams. It would imply that if the autopilot was in anything other than track mode some one was paying close attention to the navigation of the vessel so why did it happen?

[Steamer]

@yacht_sailor

(there is a mix of kerosene and gasoline fuel used in arctic areas sometimes, so I guess there is an off chance the ship had this)

Only in some farmer’s tractor.

Arctic diesel fuel is a blend of kerosene or #1 diesel and the more common #2 diesel. Jet A is good for -40 and the old Jet B was good for another 7 or 8 degrees lower but had flash point issues that pretty much ended its use. Prist is one of the products used to prevent ice crystal formation in civilian jet fuels. The military uses JP-8 which is good down to -47C. There are legitimate fuel additives approved for lowering the temperature at which wax forms to cause diesel fuel gelling.
Newer aircraft turbines can handle lower temperatures but we often had issues after a cold RON in the inland Northwest where -40 was not uncommon.

[Sirk]

@ombugge

Because I trust that most here are able to decide for themself if the post is relevant or not. If you find my posts irrelevant, feel free to jump to next post. I’m sure you will find something, somewhere that suites your taste.

It looks like there has been a small misunderstanding. Actually, more than one, so I’d like to apologize. It was never my intention to offend anyone, so let me clarify.

First, I wasn’t asking why you share your opinions on this forum. My question was why you posted a link to news that not only add nothing to the discussion but actually distort the picture by fueling unnecessary sensationalism. Keep in mind that when you share a piece of information without adding your own commentary, you are, in a way, assuming some responsibility for the content it presents.

Second, when I mentioned restraint in speaking out and making unhelpful comments, I was referring to the individuals featured in the news piece you recommended. Out of the four guests who spoke in the program, only two had anything of real substance to say and, not surprisingly, they were the ones who spoke the least.

@Hogsnort

You may have a different interpretation to “supposedly” than I do but it seems strange that the Solong stayed exactly on a track through various changes in the tidal streams. It would imply that if the autopilot was in anything other than track mode some one was paying close attention to the navigation of the vessel so why did it happen?

This isn’t about interpreting the word “supposedly”, it’s about understanding the operating modes of a modern autopilot, as well as applying practical knowledge, professional terms, logical thinking, and correctly interpreting the historical track records of vessel Solong.

For those interested, here’s a link to a reputable manufacturer of high-end navigation equipment. It provides a clear and accessible explanation of the three different autopilot modes, using universally accepted terminology:

Wärtsilä NACOS TRACKPILOT Platinum

Ignoring the fact that Track Mode is not commonly used, especially in high-traffic areas, a closer look at the historical track records clearly shows that the tracks do not align. And surely, you’re not assuming that Passage Planning and/or waypoints were being changed every single route.

[yacht_sailor]

The military used to have a kerosene/gasoline mix for jets, but I am about 99% sure they quit using it ages ago.