PDA

View Full Version : Is the captain an ex BMW driver?


RedhillPhil
2nd Jun 2014, 17:53
Bulk Carrier and Cargo Ship Collide in the Straits of Singapore - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDybTIxrJc&feature=player_detailpage#t=3)

500N
2nd Jun 2014, 18:02
A bit more to it than just a collision ??????

sitigeltfel
2nd Jun 2014, 18:10
Bend it like BEKS!

rotornut
2nd Jun 2014, 18:39
Why did he turn to port?

Capot
2nd Jun 2014, 18:53
The BEKS vessel pushed the smaller vessel's stern to starboard, which caused his bow to swing to port, is how I see it; perhaps the BEKS vessel was trying to turn to starboard, but I cannot see why he would do that, unless it was a deliberate manoeuvre for some nefarious purpose.To avoid the collision all the BEKS vessel needed to do was go full astern.

500N
2nd Jun 2014, 18:55
Also, the ship to the rear didn't seem to go into reverse but powered on regardless, thereby causing the smaller ship to get stuck.

What are your thoughts ?

pigboat
2nd Jun 2014, 19:06
What are your thoughts ?
Keelhaul the feckin' moron driving the BEKS ship.

Super VC-10
2nd Jun 2014, 20:00
It is the responsibility of the overtaking vessel to keep clear of the vessel being overtaken. :=

500N
2nd Jun 2014, 20:04
I liked this comment.

"this is what happens when two captains get into a pissing contest
....my dick is bigger than yours..."



Super
Who was overtaking who ?

It isn't exactly clear !

nonsense
2nd Jun 2014, 20:10
Video of the AIS data for the two ships and surrounding vessels plotted on a chart shows there is more to this than meets the eye - look out for the oncoming ship they both narrowly miss.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv_opV6TTRU

500N
2nd Jun 2014, 20:17
They should both have their tickets taken away.

That is just bloody stupid and to endanger a 3rd ship, well, it says it all really.

John Hill
2nd Jun 2014, 21:43
Yeah, the stern of the smaller ship was pushed aside by the pressure of the bow wave from the BEKS ship.

500N
2nd Jun 2014, 21:46
I think the smaller ship might have also lost it's ability to power itself as the stern might have come far enough out of the water for the propeller to be useless.

G-CPTN
2nd Jun 2014, 21:49
But was the smaller vessel attempting to cut across the path of the larger vessel? It would be interesting to determine what their destinations were.

500N
2nd Jun 2014, 21:53
At the rate they were going, the bottom of the sea !

Stupidity of the highest order, in a very busy location that has
far too many other ships, currents and islands to run into.

John Hill
2nd Jun 2014, 21:57
The BEKS ship put the small ship into a position from which he could not escape.

Hydromet
2nd Jun 2014, 23:33
At the marine court of inquiry, the first question asked of each captain will be "What action did you take to avoid a collision?"

"I maintained my right of way." is not the correct answer.

Caboclo
2nd Jun 2014, 23:45
I expect neither captain was on the bridge at the time. Set the A/P, assign some junior schmuck to the watch with strict orders not to wake up the brass...? I wonder, does anyone here have first hand experience with both the maritime and airline worlds? Is there much similarity in cultures?

On a side note, I seem do be under-informed: what do BMW drivers have to do with it?

G-CPTN
2nd Jun 2014, 23:45
Do they have TCAS?

Nervous SLF
2nd Jun 2014, 23:52
On a side note, I seem do be under-informed: what do BMW drivers have to do with it?


Several people claim that BMW drivers are nowhere as good as the BMW drivers think that they are. I suspect some think
the same of this ship's Captain. ;)

Caboclo
3rd Jun 2014, 00:55
Only Beemer drivers? What's everyone elses excuse?

onetrack
3rd Jun 2014, 01:19
To avoid the collision all the BEKS vessel needed to do was go full astern.A 57,000 tonne bulk carrier travelling at around 15 or 18 kts would take more than half a NM to even slow down, let alone reverse.

The master of the Vietnamese bulk carrier is guilty of gross negligence (failing to keep a proper lookout) by keeping on with an intersecting course, when the BEKA HALIL was already too close, and closing, on the Vietnamese ship.

5. Look-out
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

parabellum
3rd Jun 2014, 02:01
Where is Tony Draper when you need him! ;)


Think *DC10 once earned his living at sea too? Also Basil.


(* or should that be 1DC?)

500N
3rd Jun 2014, 02:05
OneTrack

Agree re how fast they go and howlong it takes them to slow down, I've been told to stop and not cut across one but I still don't think he went into reverse when he could have.

Two dicks fighting it out !

parabellum
3rd Jun 2014, 02:52
Given how busy that particular piece of water is, I would have expected both captains to be on their respective bridges and judging by the way the BEKS ship deliberately maintained course I think only the skipper would have done that, a more junior officer would possibly have tried avoiding action?

onetrack
3rd Jun 2014, 03:04
Parabellum - One gets the impression there wasn't a proper lookout being kept on the BEKS HALIL, as well - but the smaller Vietnamese ship has the ability to change course/speed much more rapidly, than the larger bulk carrier.

500N
3rd Jun 2014, 03:12
I would have thought at least the bigger ship had Mapping GPS that showed other ships positions.

Look at the video in nonsense post below, they might have the same on the bridge.

birrddog
3rd Jun 2014, 04:31
As the saying goes - on the right, in the right...

I think the Beks Helmsman must have watched too much Captain Ron...

TWT
3rd Jun 2014, 06:11
So,this happened in March,2013.Must be a report somewhere by now,even if only a preliminary.

500N
3rd Jun 2014, 06:17
I have looked but can't find it.

acbus1
3rd Jun 2014, 06:47
Captain Crashtor Maldonado is currently being interviewed by the authorities.

AtomKraft
3rd Jun 2014, 07:24
To me, this looks like a bit of, 'fcuk u, I'm holding my course- itis'.

Followed by a touch of red mist...

I can't understand why the big ship altered course to the left during the collision.
It looks like a bad case of lost temper, but perhaps there's a more rational explanation....

cattletruck
3rd Jun 2014, 11:21
It looks to me like the BEKA ship put the other ship in a position where it could no longer steer out of the way. If the lead ship tried to turn to starboard then its stern would have hit the BEKA ship's bow. Once they get too close then Mr Bournoulli takes over.

Maybe the insurance pays more than the job....

Did you know that on the F1 Abert Park street track BMW hold the record for the model most driven into the lake.

nonsense
3rd Jun 2014, 12:34
Having grown up sailing on Albert Park Lake, watched them install the trackside barriers each summer since the early 1990s, and lived here throughout the modern history of the Albert Grand Prix, I struggle to see how anyone could put a car in the lake and I don't remember it ever happening.

Now when you've all finished condemning professional captains and crews of vessels utterly different to your own, can I ask what your reaction to a ship's captain condemning one of you for, say, a cocked up landing or wing contact with airport infrastructure (BA at Joburg or Singapore at Sydney for example), on the basis of a two minute video which doesn't even show how you got into difficulties in the first place?

cattletruck
3rd Jun 2014, 12:47
I struggle to see how anyone could put a car in the lake

The refurbished road surface is illegal for normal use in a built up area as it has no camber and no curbs - an exemption was made for it. Later the speed limit was lowered, a chain was erected as a barrier, and islands and speed control devices were planted in the middle of the road. But that has not been 100% effective.

onetrack
3rd Jun 2014, 12:59
More, on rules of the sea ...

7. Risk of Collision:
Vessels must use all available means to determine the risk of a collision, including the use of radar (if available) to get early warning of the risk of collision by radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects. (e.g. ARPA, AIS).
If the distance of any vessel is reducing and her compass bearing is not changing much or it is a large vessel or towing vessel at close distance, or if there is any doubt, then a risk of collision shall be deemed to exist.

8. Action to avoid collision:
Actions taken to avoid collision should be:
positive
obvious
made in good time

13. Overtaking:
An overtaking vessel must keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken. "Overtaking" means approaching another vessel at more than 22.5 degrees abaft her beam, i.e., so that at night, the overtaking vessel would see only the stern light and neither of the sidelights of the vessel being overtaken.

Mariner9
3rd Jun 2014, 13:16
Rule 17a(ii) and b are also applicable in this case which simplistically say that the stand-on vessel (that not required by any other rule to give way) should alter course +/or speed if the other bu88er isn't taking suitable action (or where it gets to the stage where manoeuvring of the other bu88er alone can't prevent risk of collision)

Ancient Mariner
3rd Jun 2014, 13:30
There's also traffic separation schemes and other close traffic to consider.
Those boats responds to inputs slightly slower than your average BMW. And of course there's the Canal Effect, as mentioned by cattletruck.
All in all a bad hair-day for those two buggers on the bridge.
I'm happy that I only provided the power for the deck monkey's cock ups. :E
Per

Edit.
I seem to remember that Singapore has a very advanced Sea Traffic Control Tower, don't know their mandate, or if they were involved.

AtomKraft
3rd Jun 2014, 13:37
One of these guys needs to be reminded why they pay him the wages of a Captain.

Ancient Mariner
3rd Jun 2014, 13:59
Contrary to popular beliefs, and unlike in aeroplanes, a seagoing Captain is not on the bridge 24x7. That can be a bit boring while crossing the Pacific. There will be qualified mates on duty on the bridge and probably a seaman. Even Captains needs to eat and sleep occasionally.
Per

Pappa Smurf
4th Jun 2014, 00:00
I know ships take for ever to stop,but once you stop the prop turning they start slowing down.
The Becks ship looks to me like its "bugger you jack".
It was so close for so long it could have steered left or stopped prop allowing it to drop enough speed to miss.

rh200
4th Jun 2014, 00:06
All in all a bad hair-day for those two buggers on the bridge

I don't know about bad hair day, but I'm guessing the bridge of the smaller ship smelt bad after words, quick trip to the room and a shower with a change of pants.

I was wondering how close to "rolling" or splitting the smaller ship came, if that was even possible. It looks like it got it just right to swing it around.

500N
4th Jun 2014, 00:10
Big ship cuts power, small ship still going.
Ships will separate.

crippen
4th Jun 2014, 04:42
and still not a word from Admiral Draper!



From my limited knowledge of nautical matters,if big ships get anywhere near each other when under way,they 'suck' each other towards themselves.

onetrack
4th Jun 2014, 08:18
The big question is, of course; who was overtaking who? To me, in the video it appears the ships are about dead even for speed.
The simple fact is, they should never have been allowed to get that close together.

IMO, the onus is on the THUAN MY to keep clear of the larger BEKS HALIL.
That doesn't appear to have been done - and I'll wager it was because the helmsman wasn't keeping a proper lookout.

Then again, if the BEKS HALIL was actually overtaking the THUAN MY - then it would be up to the helmsman of the BEKS HALIL to reduce speed and alter course, to avoid a completely foreseeable collision.

Emre, the helmsman (on the THUAN MY, I presume), has posted his comment on this site below .. and he doesn't seem to be admitting any error on his part. :hmm:

Real Accident Video: Bulk Carrier And Cargo Ship Collision in the Straits Of Singapore (http://www.marineinsight.com/marine/marine-news/videos/real-accident-video-bulk-carrier-and-cargo-ship-collision-in-the-straits-of-singapore/)

The journalists comment of, "The smaller bulk carrier was hit on the port side in the aft after it was unable to stop or alter course for the larger ship", sounds like the journalist is stating there was a mechanical or steering problem on the THUAN MY. I can't see how a ship is both unable to stop, or steer.
Perhaps the journo was pointing out the obvious - it's pretty hard to stop or steer when you've left it too late to do anything, and you have 57,000 tonnes nudging you on your port rear. :)

tony draper
4th Jun 2014, 08:31
Hmmm, well one is a tad puzzled,the bible of seamanship Tates Seamanship 1899 edition 2/- is a bit ambiguous re one steamship overtaking another steamship on the same course and heading.

To ships meeting?
When both side lights you see ahead.
Port your helm and show you red.

Two ships passing.
Green to Green or Red to Red.
perfect safety ,go ahead.

Two ships crossing.
If to you starboard Red appear
It is your duty to keep clear
To act as judgement says it proper,
to port or starboard-back or stop her.

So I would say the faster vessel coming up on the vessel ahead should have turned to Starboard.
:confused:

Ancient Mariner
4th Jun 2014, 08:36
The problem was that the "Pacific Worker" and the "Cosgrand Lake" already inhibited that piece of water. Can be a bit crowded down there during rush hour.
Per

Mariner9
4th Jun 2014, 09:36
The fact is, there's not enough information on the video to pronounce judgement - the vessels should never have got as close as they were at the start of the video.

A proper accident investigation would look at the causes of the vessels being so close in the first place. Suspect other traffic had a role to play in the usual swiss cheese.

M9 (Master Mariner, Marine Surveyor, BMW driver, and married to a BMW driver so am apparently qualified to comment on this thread :ok:)

MagnusP
4th Jun 2014, 13:20
and married to a BMW driver

If she's German, called Nikki, and drives a Z3 naked, then I'm in love. Google is your friend if you're not at work. :E

rotornut
7th Jun 2014, 06:31
This was a little more blatant:BBC News - China Vietnam dispute: Fishing boat rammed at sea (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27728683)

lomapaseo
7th Jun 2014, 13:06
But was the smaller vessel attempting to cut across the path of the larger vessel? It would be interesting to determine what their destinations were.

or the other way around they appear to be both moving in a straight line

There probably is some well founded guidelines for how such a crossing should be made even without radios.

500N
7th Jun 2014, 13:11
" There probably is some well founded guidelines for how such a crossing should be made even without radios."


Yes, it's called a horn ! :O

lomapaseo
7th Jun 2014, 15:24
" There probably is some well founded guidelines for how such a crossing should be made even without radios."


Yes, it's called a horn !

It works about as well as how to get through traffic in NYC

It only confirms both drivers intent, not prevent it.

1DC
7th Jun 2014, 16:55
Could be a lot more to this. It seems that their were a lot more ships around than it appears.Both ships involved where on the edge of the traffic separation , the Cosgrand Lake coming the other way was also on the edge of it's traffic separation area. The ship that was filming the incident was close by and pretty big considering that it was looking down on them. A container ship was not far behind(Rio Chicago) and would probably be going faster than the others. Both ships involved in the collision were going at about the same speed.If one was going faster and overtaking if the rules were being followed then it would have to be the Vietnamese, because the Vietnamese was on the overtaking side.(the overtaking ship has to keep out of the way) All in all a very busy time in the Straits and quite intimidating for the smallest ship. Why the bulk carrier didn't move or slow down much earlier i don't know, maybe the Cosgrand Lake would have been in the way, if the Vietnamese went to port on purpose and wasn't pushed that was stupid. It all goes to show that if you leave decisions too late then you can be well up the creek without a paddle.
The watch keeper on the Cosgrand Lake was on the ball, if he hadn't gone hard to starboard when he did then he would have had both ships hung on his bow..The radar plot shows how close it was..

India Four Two
7th Jun 2014, 17:53
Emre, the helmsman (on the THUAN MY, I presume),

That seems highly unlikely. Emre is a Turkish name and BEKS is a Turkish company. Thuan My is a Vietnamese vessel.

I agree with 1DC. Full marks to the watch keeper on the Cosgrand Lake for reacting to the situation and avoiding what could have been a major disaster.

radeng
9th Jun 2014, 17:48
Reading the maritime CHIRP reports, the idea of auto pilot in use and nobody paying attention doesn't seem that uncommon.

Caboclo
10th Jun 2014, 22:53
Seems good help is hard to find throughout the maritime industry. Good grief, how hard is it to tie down a boat properly? Ok, so there was a bit of a breeze; these things happen, can't you plan for it?

Cruise Ship breaks moorings - YouTube

onetrack
11th Jun 2014, 02:59
Ever since the Chinese got into the rope-making business, ropes ain't what they used to be. You ought to see what happens with Chinese lifting equipment, such as shackles and slings. :suspect:

500N
11th Jun 2014, 03:22
onetrack

I was thinking about Ropes the other day, particularly kernmantle type rope used for climbing.

I'd hate to think that people would use Chinese kernmantle rope for climbing, you only get one shot at stopping if you fall.

I can just imagine corners being cut in the making of it, a few less fibres in the middle ............ :rolleyes:


Carabiners are another one. If ever I took up climbing or rapelling again, I think I'd buy my own gear
just to be safe.

llondel
11th Jun 2014, 04:34
I am reminded of the alleged encounter between the US Carrier group and the lighthouse.