Anyone Interested in Ships

[jjb1970]

9 hours ago, WessexEclectic said:

 

Anyone have any info on how the energy will be recovered to be stored in the batteries?

 

Anything to do with those doors?...

 

No idea about these ships, but most hybrid ships are designed to use a combination of shore charging and running diesel alternators at constant, optimum load. At low speed they charge the batteries, at maximum speed or in rough weather they are supplemented by the batteries. And they're often designed so that if battery chemistry improves conversion to fully battery electric is possible.

[jjb1970]

A positive development, hopefully everything goes to plan:

 

https://www.marinelog.com/news/un-buys-vlcc-to-avert-fso-safer-pollution-catastrophe/#:~:text=The FSO Safer%2C a decaying tanker holding four,the purchase of a Very Large Crude Carrier.

[duncan]

One thing I don't understand is whether the oil will still be useable.  If it is, then it must be worth quite a lot.

[The Johnster]

If it isn't it'll be a major pita to dispose of, but at least the prospect of an explosion or major leak is being dealt with.  One must hope that the improving spring weather (I read about this somewhere but haven't seen any actual evidence of it yet) will mean that nothing catastrophic happens before the newly-acquired UN tanker is out of dry dock and arrives on the scene.  Even then we won't be out of the woods, as some very unpleasant fumes need to be got rid of safely in order to start pumping the oil out; it is a tricky situation. 

[MarkC]

7 hours ago, duncan said:

One thing I don't understand is whether the oil will still be useable.  If it is, then it must be worth quite a lot.

No reason why it won't be. OK, the very volatile fractions will likely as not have evaporated over the years, but the bulk of it will be just fine. Given how little, by comparison with today's prices, that it will have cost when first purchased, whoever takes possession stands to be well rewarded financially, even after the recovery costs are taken into account.

 

Mark

[jjb1970]

I'm guessing the quantity on oil is a lot less than capacity, otherwise it would have gone years ago. A full load on a ship that size would probably pay for the transfer plan and leave change.

 

Something to keep in mind is that as hinted at already, partially loaded crude tanks are more hazardous than full tanks because of the accumulation of flammable vapours. Usually that risk is controlled using inert gas (or in the old days, keeping things too rich), but if the Safer has been dead in the water for 8 years the IG systems will be U/S. However, probably dooable to hook up an off-board IG supply.

 

I hope whoever gets the job is well paid, rather them than me.

[MarkC]

2 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

I'm guessing the quantity on oil is a lot less than capacity, otherwise it would have gone years ago. A full load on a ship that size would probably pay for the transfer plan and leave change.

 

Something to keep in mind is that as hinted at already, partially loaded crude tanks are more hazardous than full tanks because of the accumulation of flammable vapours. Usually that risk is controlled using inert gas (or in the old days, keeping things too rich), but if the Safer has been dead in the water for 8 years the IG systems will be U/S. However, probably dooable to hook up an off-board IG supply.

 

I hope whoever gets the job is well paid, rather them than me.

As things stand, even with no IG available, the atmosphere in those tanks will be safe, as it'll be too rich. (Rich as in outside the flammable envelope by having too high percentage of hydrocarbons measured against oxygen levels).

 

So yes, IG will be supplied as the oil is pumped out; probably from the receiving tanker, although portable IG or nitrogen plants can also be used. Salvors use that technique regularly.

 

The really tricky part might be getting the ship gas free after discharging, even for the scrapping run, which is almost certainly what will happen to her.

 

Mark

[Stubby47]

A view from HMS Somerset. 

 

[ColinK]

Had a walk at Heysham earlier today.

 

 

 

 

 

[jjb1970]

For those interested, current ranking of top ten container lines is (figures are fleet capacity in million TEU):

 

MSC (4.63)

Maersk (4.23)

CMA-CGM (3.40)

COSCO (2.87)

Hapag Lloyd (1.8)

Evergreen (1.66)

ONE (1.53)

HMM (Hyundai) (0.82)

Yang Ming (0.71)

Zim (0.53)

 

MSC now noticeably ahead of Maersk.

[62613]

How many 400k ton ULCCs were built? I can only think of Shell's Batillus and Bellamya (?) and the Knock Nevis/Seawise Giant. Were there any others?

 

Edit: just thought of a fourth; Pierre Guillaumat

 

Edited March 13, 2023 by 62613
Additional information

[New Haven Neil]

17 hours ago, ColinK said:

Had a walk at Heysham earlier today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ah, the Ben soon to be demoted to second-level support role after delivery of the Manxman - provided they fix the gearbox of course!

 

The Ben has been a good vessel for the Steam Packet, despite what the local moaning minnes say, IRC she has been the most reliable ever.  But on my are those seats uncomfortable now!  If you take a shot on Thursday I'll be on there.....

[johnofwessex]

Now if this was the new fleet...........

 

[jjb1970]

1 hour ago, 62613 said:

How many 400k ton ULCCs were built? I can only think of Shell's Batillus and Bellamya (?) and the Knock Nevis/Seawise Giant. Were there any others?

 

Edit: just thought of a fourth; Pierre Guillaumat

 

 

The four most recent AFAIK were the four Hellespont ships built in the early 00's, eventually becoming FSOs. There's an amusing and in its own way very informative book you can find online free called the tankship tromedy which was largely about them. It's a bit of a polemical rant, but worth reading.

[62613]

4 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

 

The four most recent AFAIK were the four Hellespont ships built in the early 00's, eventually becoming FSOs. There's an amusing and in its own way very informative book you can find online free called the tankship tromedy which was largely about them. It's a bit of a polemical rant, but worth reading.

I can remember a book in the 1970s called "Supership", which wasn't very nice about VLCCs

[johnofwessex]

27 minutes ago, 62613 said:

I can remember a book in the 1970s called "Supership", which wasn't very nice about VLCCs

 

By Noel Monsert, I have a copy, fascinating read

[62613]

5 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

 

By Noel Monsert, I have a copy, fascinating read

That's the one! I've lost my copy. The general feeling among tanker personnel was that it wasn't very good! Noel Mostert, a South African

[MarkC]

13 minutes ago, johnofwessex said:

 

By Noel Monsert, I have a copy, fascinating read

Indeed so. I read it in my first year at college as a Cadet (1979). Never been on a VLCC in my career 😎

 

Mark

[Bon Accord]

1 hour ago, 62613 said:

I can remember a book in the 1970s called "Supership", which wasn't very nice about VLCCs

 

I think the author allegedly did a trip in a P&O VLCC for research purposes, probably the Ardlui or one of that class?

Edited March 13, 2023 by Bon Accord

[MarkC]

35 minutes ago, Bon Accord said:

 

I think the author allegedly did a trip in a P&O VLCC for research purposes, probably the Ardlui or one of that class?

From memory, that's spot on. He did indeed.

 

Mark

[New Haven Neil]

I only sailed on a FLCC - fairly large......113,000dwt.....LOL  the one I always moan about!  Motorship but with 2 watertube boilers (Kawasaki-Wallsend!!) and steam turbine cargo pumps and one steam turbine ballast pump.  The only thing that didn't fall apart were the alternators, a variation on the Mirlees-Blackstones.  So I don't much like tankers either, but not from a position of great experience, just one-trip bias!

 

[jjb1970]

Free download here:

 

https://pdf4pro.com/view/the-tankship-tromedy-the-impending-disasters-in-2a8326.html

[KeithMacdonald]

Ferguson Marine, accounts overdue.

Is this just an accounting cockup, or a worrying sign of something more significant?

 

[MarkC]

1 hour ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Ferguson Marine, accounts overdue.

Is this just an accounting cockup, or a worrying sign of something more significant?

 

Given the adverse publicity over the last couple of years, one is VERY tempted to suspect that a large number of chickens may be inbound to park up...

 

Mark

[MarkC]

16 hours ago, New Haven Neil said:

I only sailed on a FLCC - fairly large......113,000dwt.....LOL  the one I always moan about!  Motorship but with 2 watertube boilers (Kawasaki-Wallsend!!) and steam turbine cargo pumps and one steam turbine ballast pump.  The only thing that didn't fall apart were the alternators, a variation on the Mirlees-Blackstones.  So I don't much like tankers either, but not from a position of great experience, just one-trip bias!

 

The two oil tankers I sailed on, the StaT55 Panamax product tankers Scottish Lion and Scottish Eagle, also had steam plant for the cargo pumps - a Babcock M11 watertube boiler & 4x Stal-Laval turbines. The steam plant was more powerful than quite a few steamships, but it didn't count for steam time, as it wasn't for propulsion.

 

Oh, the memories of playing the Bailey Board, especially whilst the Mate was winding up the turbines for discharging...

 

Mark