Ship stuck across (blocking) the Suez Canal

[adb968008]

21 hours ago, eastglosmog said:

I see a shortage of Garden Gnomes is being blamed on the blockage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-56748561

so the blockage wasnt all bad then.

[adb968008]

17 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

What benefit would Egypt derive from improving the Suez Canal? Would it attract more tonnage? How would the dramatic costs be recouped, other than by fleecing the mercantile marine even more? Not sure this is an investment proposal that works.  

Ships keep getting bigger...

 

If the canal doesn't, then sooner or later ships will have to go a different way, as the Manchester Ship Canal discovered.

Edited April 17, 2021 by adb968008

[MarkC]

6 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 

 

‘Putting his foot down’ was not an option as the speed of ships in the canal has to be limited in order to minimise the bow wave’s erosive action on the sandy banks.  It is true that the lower the speed of a ship, the more difficult she is to keep on a straight course, and the massive inertia and momentum of a ship this size means that once things start to go wrong (in this case strong crosswinds and a possible power loss at the critical moment, perhaps the result of the sandstorm affecting the engine’s air intake filters as well as reducing visibility) there is no time in such confined space for much in the way of recovery. 
 

Speed in the canal is thus a compromise between limiting erosion of the banks and maintaining reasonable control of the vessel.  Waiting for the tide to turn so as to provide better control because more power can be used to combat the tidal current running in the opposite direction would work, but the transit time would increase, as would fuel consumption, and thus the capacity of the canal would be decreased. 
 

The canal is 200 metres wide at the stranding point and the ship 60, but the cross section of the canal is a shallow vee as the sand settles to a natural stable slope, so the central channel available to ships of this size is not very much wider than they are. 
 

The position of shallow areas is well known but the knowledge is of little help if  control over the vessel’s heading has been lost.  The SCA is responsible for dredging and there is no suggestion TTBOMK that laxity in this regard had any bearing on the grounding.  She went off course and ran into the African bank.  

All good points here; however whilst the canal shape does indeed tend to become a vee, dredgers are continuously attempting to keep the dredged area as deep and wide as possible. There is definitely no room for laxity on this point.

 

It should also be noted that there are strict rules on the size of ships' rudders, and this is carefully checked; however, from personal knowledge, even with this being followed, occasionally this still isn't enough. I was entering the Maracaibo Channel once on a ship that had done the passage on many previous occasions. There is a strong cross-current as you enter the channel from the Caribbean, which is well known. This requires close monitoring by the helmsman & bridge team, and corrective helm needs to be applied promptly as the effect of the cross-current suddenly ceases. Despite best efforts, a combination of current & wind caused us to swing; the helmsman did well to correct it, but we did feel the bilge keel just touch ground. The pilot wasn't overly concerned at that; we subsequently discovered that when the ship was under a previous owner's management she had, in fact, gone aground at the same point, and required 4 tugs to get her off.

 

The rudder was the minimum required by Class - a bigger one would have given more control, but cost more at the building stage. Any ships that my Company built had bigger rudders and more powerful engines than legally required, simply because the Company recognised that by doing so the ships were more manoeuvrable.

 

Mark

Edited April 17, 2021 by MarkC
To add something

[eastglosmog]

6 hours ago, The Johnster said:

 

 

snip..

 

The position of shallow areas is well known but the knowledge is of little help if  control over the vessel’s heading has been lost.  The SCA is responsible for dredging and there is no suggestion TTBOMK that laxity in this regard had any bearing on the grounding.  She went off course and ran into the African bank.  

Thought it was going north and nosed into the Asian bank?

[Mol_PMB]

In the Manchester Ship Canal, large ships have tugs fore and aft, for guidance rather than forward propulsion. Indeed the stern tug may be pulling backwards, so that the ship itself can apply more forward power and get a better flow over the rudder without going faster through the water. In the early days, paddle tugs were preferred for the stern tugs as they were better at pulling backwards.

Passage through the Eastham locks to/from the Mersey is done in the opposite direction to the tide. Again, when 'fighting' the water flow direction you can apply more thrust for a given speed relative to the bank, and that means the ship is more manouverable. At least on the MSC, good control of the ship's position is more important than the energy savings of 'going with the flow'.

I appreciate the conditions at Suez are somewhat different!

[The Stationmaster]

According to a press report in yesterday's DT the 'Ever Given's' (UK) insurers have stated that she is insured for £170 million.  another source has reportedly estimated the cargo value at $1 billion.   In addition Evergreen are reportedly trying to get the value of the cargo excluded from any negotiation with the Egyptian authorities in respect of any claims against them and the ship.  the legal trade are continuing to rub their hands in glee.

[62613]

Given the relative dimensions of the ship and the canal, would increasing its speed have exacerbated the effects of 'squat'?

 

Edited April 17, 2021 by 62613

[MarkC]

12 hours ago, 62613 said:

Given the relative dimensions of the ship and the canal, would increasing its speed have exacerbated the effects of 'squat'?

 

That's a good point - but I suspect that at even 8 or 9 knots the biggest concern for the authorities is canal bank erosion due to wash.

 

Mark

[Michael Hodgson]

Good idea to have a wash after you squat in that part of the world.

Or anywhere, really.

[MarkC]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Good idea to have a wash after you squat in that part of the world.

Or anywhere, really.

Ah, the joys of the hole in the ground... 

[The Johnster]

Glastonbury!

[Fat Controller]

55 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Glastonbury!

At least there's no scorpions at Glastonbury....

[The Johnster]

But there are (perhaps fortunately) undefined things that move about in the half light down there, ‘orrible, ‘ungry things, eldritch things wot man is not wont to wot of...  ‘I didn’t see nuffin, an’ I don’t want to never ever see it again’!

 

You know where you are with a scorpion, even if it’s not where you want to be.  

Edited April 18, 2021 by The Johnster

[boxbrownie]

25 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

But there are (perhaps fortunately) undefined things that move about in the half light down there, ‘orrible, ‘ungry things, eldritch things wot man is not wont to wot of...  ‘I didn’t see nuffin, an’ I don’t want to never ever see it again’!

 

You know where you are with a scorpion, even if it’s not where you want to be.  

Camel Spiders.......munch munch your feet while watching outdoor films at night.....a good circle of Piff-Paff helps but not a guarantee! 

[adb968008]

The guy with a digger has been paid

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/suez-canal-authority-says-ever-given-digger-driver-overtime-pay-2021-4

though its unclear, he thinks has hasnt.

 

He also claims he risked his life, i’m not sure if that was as a result of his futile actions digging out, or coming from under the covers to make the interview.

[Chewy750]

On 17/04/2021 at 07:08, adb968008 said:

Ships keep getting bigger...

 

If the canal doesn't, then sooner or later ships will have to go a different way, as the Manchester Ship Canal discovered.

Before the work on the canal, there used to be a more severe restriction on the number of vessels in each of the convoys as they used to have to cross in the Bitter Lakes. The new channels allow more ships to cross and therefore more ships = more money.....

[Chewy750]

On 16/04/2021 at 23:46, Tankerman said:

 

To give some idea of how much momentum large ships have the following might be of interest. In 1968 I did my first trip, as Junior Electrical Officer, on the Ottawa of Trident Tankers. As we had just come out of drydock and the ship's hull was very clean, the Captain was instructed to carry out a test to calculate how long and what distance the ship would take to come to a complete stop. 

 

The test was carried out when we were in the doldrums to minimise any external wave action, the ship was ballasted down to her summer full load draft, which equated to 93,000 deadweight tons, to maximise the level of kinetic energy and worked up to her maximum speed of 16 knots. The main engine steam supply was then cut off by tripping the ahead main steam valve to simulate a blackout (complete loss of the electrical supply) and the rudder kept in the dead ahead position. 

 

If I remember correctly she travelled just over seven miles and the elapsed time was around one hour. The Ever Given is over twice that tonnage and the hull shape is much finer as the service speed of container ships is in the range of 20 to 25 knots and the figures would be much higher.

I was Chief engineer on this beast in the very early 90’s we did a similar test, she was around 359,000 DWT think, it took us 15 NM to come to a halt from full speed whilst fully loaded.

 

Same trip we went through the canal in ballast to Yanbu, with a small electronic issue that meant going astern was a bit of an issue ( big MAN B&W S80 MC diesel). Anchoring in the Bitter Lakes was a little hairy to say the least..... but that is another story.

[Welly]

Interesting video about how the Ever Given got stuck - basically the boat is so large compared to the channel that the displacement flow was strong enough to pull the boat to the side and how the bow stuck in the sandy bank.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty-m4pm8oog

[adb968008]

3 months on and time is becoming money Egypt.

 

The ask has reduced to $500mn, inc a $200mn deposit to release.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/amid-dispute-suez-canal-blames-ships-grounding-speed-rudder-2021-05-27/

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/ship-owner-says-suez-canal-was-fault-over-ever-given-grounding-lawyer-2021-05-22/
 

 

I think were still in the burning down time phase, where lawyers squabble over the technicalities of “what should” vs “what actually” happened, but ultimately, as with all things in life the “should haves” and “actuals” vary as its the actuals that make life work... but each technicality is a bargaining chip. I doubt either party will land a slam dunk for blame.

At the end of that I suspect an offer above the $150mn originally offered will go the otherway, but my guess looks like the landing zone will be in range of ($300-400mn)  to bring this drama to an end.

 

i’d imagine palms are getting swetty in Egypt looking for cash, and the ships owners will be wanting to get on with it..maybe by July it might be on its way, unless it all goes south and everyone gets entrenched... that Komatsu digger needs fuel afterall.

 

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by adb968008

[Darius43]

Settlement agreed.

 

Ship to be released by the Egyptian authorities on 7th July.

 

Cheers

 

Darius

[eastglosmog]

Watch out for a glut of Garden Gnomes!

Edited July 5, 2021 by eastglosmog

[Hroth]

11 minutes ago, eastglosmog said:

Watch out for a glut of Garden Gnomes!

 

A lot of things can happen between now and Wednesday, when the ransom agreement is to be signed at an "event"  and the ship allowed to leave.  There's always the possibility that a faction will have a snit and want more from the agreement.

 

If it goes as planned, I wouldn't expect the glut of gnomes, garden furniture and gas BBQ equipment for a couple of weeks yet!

 

[Talltim]

Why is the (plimsole) line different on each side of the ship?

[Reorte]

2 minutes ago, Talltim said:

Why is the (plimsole) line different on each side of the ship?

Is it? I can't actually see it on either side - the red paint doesn't necessarily coincide with it (AFAIK); that looks different just due to the angle of the picture, the sharp bow there hiding it a little right at the front on the starboard side.

 

Either that or the digger's actually painting it

[Fat Controller]

4 minutes ago, Talltim said:

Why is the (plimsole) line different on each side of the ship?

I'm not sure whether it is, or if it's either an optical illusion, or the front end of the bow bent when it head-butted Egypt.