Anyone Interested in Ships

[Night Train]

On 13/05/2019 at 23:34, lightengine said:

Pride of Bruges in Chatham naval dockyard

Blimey, that brings back memories. Worked a good few crossings on her.

[Night Train]

On 08/05/2019 at 20:28, lightengine said:

Another of my old tubs.  MV European Trader a freight ferry used predominantly on the Dover to Zeebrugge service.  Berthed on the Eastern Arm of Eastern Docks, Dover astern of the European Endeavour.

 The Trader was the first Dover ferry I worked on. The Endeavour behind her was the last. Good times.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Night Train

[NorthBrit]

I missed seeing her last year.
A six star luxury cruise ship
Regent Seven Seas Cruises ship, 'Seven Seas Navigator' at the Port of Tyne 20th June 2019. 
She is on a 11 day Southampton to Dublin 'Round Britain' cruise.
The cheapest fare (and still very luxurious) for the 11 nights is £ 5789 per person.

 

 

Roll on to our next cruise.

[Kingzance]

6 hours ago, NorthBrit said:

I missed seeing her last year.
A six star luxury cruise ship
Regent Seven Seas Cruises ship, 'Seven Seas Navigator' at the Port of Tyne 20th June 2019. 
She is on a 11 day Southampton to Dublin 'Round Britain' cruise.
The cheapest fare (and still very luxurious) for the 11 nights is £ 5789 per person.

 

 

Roll on to our next cruise.

That's pretty top heavy, I hope the stabilisers don't pack up in The Minches!

[NorthBrit]

18 hours ago, Kingzance said:

That's pretty top heavy, I hope the stabilisers don't pack up in The Minches!

 

The Seven Seas Navigator is okay. 

 

Now  when you talk 'top heavy',  look at Norwegian Epic  and the like.

[Kingzance]

1 hour ago, NorthBrit said:

 

The Seven Seas Navigator is okay. 

 

Now  when you talk 'top heavy',  look at Norwegian Epic  and the like.

Years ago when I was a Marine Engineer, we had to study Naval Architecture and I cannot be convinced that such constructions as these ships can survive in rough seas if the stabilisers fail. In the event of a black-out, you lose control of them. Would I go on one, definitely not.

[peach james]

20 hours ago, Kingzance said:

Years ago when I was a Marine Engineer, we had to study Naval Architecture and I cannot be convinced that such constructions as these ships can survive in rough seas if the stabilisers fail. In the event of a black-out, you lose control of them. Would I go on one, definitely not.

 

jjb will probably be along too, but the design of the ship is not allowed to be reliant on active roll management to be stable.  The stability has to come from the design basis, with the roll management system (stabilisers) failed in the "worst" position.  The ride would be uncomfortable if it failed in that manor, but not unsafe.  

 

I've been to 35% or more before on a ship at sea.  HMCS Algonquin, off the coast here.  Allegedly the worst seen on a 280 was about 47% roll.  Angle of downflooding was, I think, 93%.  They were very lively ships with regards to roll, due to excessive top weight.  We were paid by the 100 lb of top weight we could find to remove, payment being in short leave days.  Alg. was limited to 1 helo due to top weight, even with the pig iron in the AMR and gland space.  There were downflooding ports cut in the internal subdivisions to ensure that in the event of flooding at the 2 deck level or higher, it would flow down low enough to maintain positive stability.  (1 deck was about heavy displacement waterline)  They got heavier as we burned fuel, with the compensated fuel system being an important part of the post TRUMP design.

 

James

 

 

[cunningduck]

On 22/06/2019 at 16:03, NorthBrit said:

I missed seeing her last year.
A six star luxury cruise ship
Regent Seven Seas Cruises ship, 'Seven Seas Navigator' at the Port of Tyne 20th June 2019. 
She is on a 11 day Southampton to Dublin 'Round Britain' cruise.
The cheapest fare (and still very luxurious) for the 11 nights is £ 5789 per person.

 

 

Roll on to our next cruise.

 

It’s made it to Greenock, £6k to go to Greenock???

[The Stationmaster]

On 23/06/2019 at 19:06, Kingzance said:

Years ago when I was a Marine Engineer, we had to study Naval Architecture and I cannot be convinced that such constructions as these ships can survive in rough seas if the stabilisers fail. In the event of a black-out, you lose control of them. Would I go on one, definitely not.

A tv documentary a while back had a lot to say about the active stabiliser system on one of the really big 'cruise' ships.  i'm sure it made the point that the system was essential to maintaining a stable platform for the comfort of passengers - in other words it reduces the roll rate (and possibly pitching as well?).  So there is clearly an influence on stability but I got the impression - rightly or wrongly - that its main aim is all about passenger comfort rather than anything else.

 

But that does seem to me to be rather odd when you consider the size of some of these ships which would suggest to me that might have a greater tendency to roll than many smaller vessels.  Presumably, and hopefully they are stable in sea keeping terms without the stabilisers but I to wonder what happens in really severe weather (thinking in particular of one of the Cunard branded vessels which suffered quite a bit of damage of various sorts in a really heavy sea in the North Atlantic a couple of years back).

 

The machinery situation is interesting because in theory, and to meet SOLAS requirements, these vessels have to have completely separate duplicated power systems to ensure they remain manœuvrable at all times.  Yet there was the incident not long back off the Norwegian coast when one lost all propulsion power and the recent allision in Venice involving a cruise ship was also blamed on some sort of loss of power and/or control (but it apparently had tugs as well so I do wonder about that story?).

 

Some of it is no doubt a matter of taste but I very definitely don't fancy going on one - they strike me as far too big for comfort and in many cases a lot of their sea time seems to be overnight.  I suppose it boils down to why you want to go on a ship for your holiday and my main interest is simply the joy of being at sea and getting away from crowded shoreside places to get plenty of sea air.  And a 'bit of weather' only adds to the enjoyment of the voyage for me, on an unstabilised ship which rolls beautifully and helps me get off to sleep

[Kingzance]

9 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

A tv documentary a while back had a lot to say about the active stabiliser system on one of the really big 'cruise' ships.  i'm sure it made the point that the system was essential to maintaining a stable platform for the comfort of passengers - in other words it reduces the roll rate (and possibly pitching as well?).  So there is clearly an influence on stability but I got the impression - rightly or wrongly - that its main aim is all about passenger comfort rather than anything else.

 

But that does seem to me to be rather odd when you consider the size of some of these ships which would suggest to me that might have a greater tendency to roll than many smaller vessels.  Presumably, and hopefully they are stable in sea keeping terms without the stabilisers but I to wonder what happens in really severe weather (thinking in particular of one of the Cunard branded vessels which suffered quite a bit of damage of various sorts in a really heavy sea in the North Atlantic a couple of years back).

 

The machinery situation is interesting because in theory, and to meet SOLAS requirements, these vessels have to have completely separate duplicated power systems to ensure they remain manœuvrable at all times.  Yet there was the incident not long back off the Norwegian coast when one lost all propulsion power and the recent allision in Venice involving a cruise ship was also blamed on some sort of loss of power and/or control (but it apparently had tugs as well so I do wonder about that story?).

 

Some of it is no doubt a matter of taste but I very definitely don't fancy going on one - they strike me as far too big for comfort and in many cases a lot of their sea time seems to be overnight.  I suppose it boils down to why you want to go on a ship for your holiday and my main interest is simply the joy of being at sea and getting away from crowded shoreside places to get plenty of sea air.  And a 'bit of weather' only adds to the enjoyment of the voyage for me, on an unstabilised ship which rolls beautifully and helps me get off to sleep

Mike, I am of a certain age where my sea time predated these exotic oversized cattle ships luxurious purveyors of everything in your dreams. Even container ships had stabilisers in the 1970's, not for passenger comfort but for operational reasons. I accept that machinery spaces have moved lower and lower in the ships through distributed power trains and that has compensated for /  allowed some of the growth in top hamper. Luckily (to date) there have been few incidents on these ships but I fear for when the next serious one happens, be that fire (the worst scenario) or power failure. Even a bit of norovirus is almost impossible to contain in such a closed environment!

These days I enjoy the odd trip on coastal voyages as a passenger, not in any professional manner and I still love the sea. I certainly would not go on such vessels, even though SWMBO is very keen. In my mind, she can go if she wants to (and her sister in leaning towards them) but they will be spared my grumpy company!

[Fat Controller]

24 minutes ago, Kingzance said:

Mike, I am of a certain age where my sea time predated these exotic oversized cattle ships luxurious purveyors of everything in your dreams. Even container ships had stabilisers in the 1970's, not for passenger comfort but for operational reasons. I accept that machinery spaces have moved lower and lower in the ships through distributed power trains and that has compensated for /  allowed some of the growth in top hamper. Luckily (to date) there have been few incidents on these ships but I fear for when the next serious one happens, be that fire (the worst scenario) or power failure. Even a bit of norovirus is almost impossible to contain in such a closed environment!

These days I enjoy the odd trip on coastal voyages as a passenger, not in any professional manner and I still love the sea. I certainly would not go on such vessels, even though SWMBO is very keen. In my mind, she can go if she wants to (and her sister in leaning towards them) but they will be spared my grumpy company!

If you'd like something smaller, then there's this:-

https://www.sthildaseaadventures.co.uk/

They run cruises around Western Scotland in the summer, and research trips at other times.

[TheQ]

16 minutes ago, Fat Controller said:

If you'd like something smaller, then there's this:-

https://www.sthildaseaadventures.co.uk/

They run cruises around Western Scotland in the summer, and research trips at other times.

One advantage of those tiny cruisers is you can duck into a small loch and hide from the storms. Something I've done myself while sailing up there.  it's better than being in one of the ferries in a storm... that was not nice..

Edited June 25, 2019 by TheQ

[Kingzance]

Thanks for all the suggestions guys, I haven’t got the energy to haul up my anchor right now . Isles of Scilly do appeal but I am being dragged to Croatia in the autumn when I would have liked to go to the southwest.

[steve W]

2 hours ago, Kingzance said:

......... I am being dragged to Croatia in the autumn when I would have liked to go to the southwest. 

Lucky you.  There are some lovely off shore island hopping boats in the Adriatic to have a trip on  - take the slow ones to enjoy the trip.

Steve W

[Kingzance]

1 hour ago, steve W said:

Lucky you.  There are some lovely off shore island hopping boats in the Adriatic to have a trip on  - take the slow ones to enjoy the trip.

Steve W

I can't even do that Steve as SWMBO has booked a Titan trip, the 15 stops in 10 days type grrrrr.

 

[MarkC]

I suffered a 52 degree roll on a ship in the North Sea - very scary at the time  . But, she came back up and kept going - no alarms, trips or other issues. Well, apart from a very bruised cadet, who flew the whole length of the Control Room, ending up in a heap against the bulkhead...

Edited June 25, 2019 by MarkC

[Kingzance]

1 hour ago, MarkC said:

I suffered a 52 degree roll on a ship in the North Sea - very scary at the time  . But, she came back up and kept going - no alarms, trips or other issues. Well, apart from a very bruised cadet, who flew the whole length of the Control Room, ending up in a heap against the bulkhead...

I don't know what angle we achieved but I was 2/E on a small gas carrier crossing the Bay of Biscay through a bad storm and I stayed down below for two watches whilst others remained up top - the ER ladders weren't a particularly safe place to be!

[New Haven Neil]

52 degrees - eek!

 

Didn't experience anything like that in my brief salty sea days, but about 35 on a large bulkie carrying iron ore was enough for me, very 'stiff' roll and uncomfortable. You could slide UP the engineroom ladders if you got your timing right!

[burgundy]

8 hours ago, Kingzance said:

Thanks for all the suggestions guys, I haven’t got the energy to haul up my anchor right now . Isles of Scilly do appeal but I am being dragged to Croatia in the autumn when I would have liked to go to the southwest.

I can recommend the Katarina Lines. Our boat was a converted fishing boat and we travelled through the islands from Split to Dubrovnik and back. When it got too warm, we stopped and threw ourselves over the side. Not luxurious, but great fun and a lovely way to see the islands and small towns

Best wishes

Eric  

[SHMD]

In '73 I was on the SS Australis bound for Blighty. We had left Panama and was heading for the next port of call at Fort Laudadale but through the tail-end of a hurricane!

 

Well she pitched, and rolled, and when the screws came out of the water she screamed until slamming them back into the sea again with a shuddering bang. The stairwells became some kind of human timing game where, if you were lucky, you walked horizontal to the next level and held on – get it wrong and you went at speed to the next bulkhead either one level (straight) up or one level (straight) down from where you were heading. All the deck chairs “disappeared” overnight and the lamp posts on deck were all bent horizontal! Every corridor had “sick-bags” wedged in the handrails every few feet, and you just shouldn't visit the heads – especially on that ship!

 

It wasn't all bad though, we had the dining hall to our selves where we grinned at the passing waiters! And the (indoor) swimming pool was a real education!!

 

My position?

I was promoted to number 1 plasticine moulder and second mate to the chief Lego builder – I was 9 and loved every minute of the 5 week voyage, and have loved the sea ever since.

Kev.

[The Stationmaster]

When we did the Hurtigruten trip coming back through the Barents Sea it got distinctly on the choppy side - about Sea State 5 judging by the height of the waves, biggest I've ever seen.  But loads of empty seats in the dining room (for once) and extra helpings of a very nice reindeer stew, such weather definitely had its plus points.

[jjb1970]

Active fin stabilisers are quite different to adjusting ship stability. The term stability is one of those interesting words that can mean very different things. In naval architectural terms it is basically about the righting lever, hopefully a positive one. The greater the righting lever the more stable a ship is, which is a dynamic function, however as the righting lever increases so the ship returns to upright more quickly (violently) which is generally interpreted by passengers and lay people as being "unstable". Actually, far from unstable, violent rolling tends to indicate excess stability. A ship with a lower righting lever will have a slower, easier roll which is more comfortable and tends to be interpreted by passengers as a "stable" ship. A very stable ship is said to be stiff, a less stable one tender. The righting levers are the result of the centres of gravity and buoyancy and metacentric height. Some ships actually reduce stability purposefully to improve comfort or for operational reasons. For example warships are often configured to be tender to provide "stable" fighting platforms. 

With respect to actual stability, modern cruise ships (ugly as they are) are stable (in the naval architecture sense) and satisfy the IMO requirements for intact and damaged stability. There is some info here:

 

http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/StabilityAndSubdivision/Pages/Default.aspx

[Bon Accord]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

Active fin stabilisers are quite different to adjusting ship stability. The term stability is one of those interesting words that can mean very different things. In naval architectural terms it is basically about the righting lever, hopefully a positive one. The greater the righting lever the more stable a ship is, which is a dynamic function, however as the righting lever increases so the ship returns to upright more quickly (violently) which is generally interpreted by passengers and lay people as being "unstable". Actually, far from unstable, violent rolling tends to indicate excess stability. A ship with a lower righting lever will have a slower, easier roll which is more comfortable and tends to be interpreted by passengers as a "stable" ship. A very stable ship is said to be stiff, a less stable one tender. The righting levers are the result of the centres of gravity and buoyancy and metacentric height. Some ships actually reduce stability purposefully to improve comfort or for operational reasons. For example warships are often configured to be tender to provide "stable" fighting platforms. 

With respect to actual stability, modern cruise ships (ugly as they are) are stable (in the naval architecture sense) and satisfy the IMO requirements for intact and damaged stability. There is some info here:

 

http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/StabilityAndSubdivision/Pages/Default.aspx

 

The first time I sailed in a freight Ro-Ro was also the first time I'd ever come across a ship with FLUME tanks or indeed even heard of them. Whilst the explanation of their purpose and operation made sense, for a while it did still feel as if we were going against the grain by purposely reducing the GM/increasing the roll period, e.g. 'deliberately making her less stable, are you mad?!'.

If memory serves both FLUME tanks were the largest ballast tanks on the ship and could hold something of the order of 500 odd cubes. A series of graphs/instructions were provided as to the conditions as to when we were supposed to use them and the levels within, but in practice they were ignored and the tanks never emptied due to the absolutely awful seakeeping qualities of that ship and her sisters - they were very stiff.

[Bon Accord]

Not one of the more usual 'from the bridge' pictures, the background is testament to that.

The good ship BOULARIBANK (ex TEIGNBANK) not far from her final resting place and making the last full ahead run up the beach in Chittagong, September 2009. 

Two of her sisters were already beached and the I think the third was already gone. A strange and rather eerie place.

[Kingzance]

8 minutes ago, Bon Accord said:

Not one of the more usual 'from the bridge' pictures, the background is testament to that.

The good ship BOULARIBANK (ex TEIGNBANK) not far from her final resting place and making the last full ahead run up the beach in Chittagong, September 2009. 

Two of her sisters were already beached and the I think the third was already gone. A strange and rather eerie place.

I was on one boat we drove up the beach in Taiwan. It was a case of “warp factor nine Scottie” but all rather eerie when I finally shut all the power down.