MarkC

After yesterday, I am more convinced than ever that as far as Ferrari is concerned - "The King is dead; long live the King". Good luck to LeClerc. Unlucky yesterday, but his day will come.

Not on this occasion, it seems...

QUOTE IF YOU BUY THIS ITEM YOU WILL BE PAYING FOR IT AND WE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTING EXCUSES YOUR CHILD WAS LOOSE ON YOUR COMPUTER! WE HAVE NOW SET UP DEBT RECOVERY ARRANGEMENTS TO CHASE DOWN ALL NON PAYERS WHO WILL ALSO FACE POSSIBLE SUSPENSION OF ACCOUNTS ON EBAY! THE FOLLOWING TERMS ARE FINAL! THE WINNING BUYER FINAL PAYMENT IS REQUIRED WITHIN 3 DAYS AND NO EXCUSES! SORRY TO BE LIKE THIS BUT WITH OVER 10K IN SALES IN THE PAST 4 MONTHS BEING WELCHED ON OVER WAYWARD CHILDREN ENOUGH IS ENOUGH NO EXCUSES SO PLEASE HAVE YOUR FINANCES IN ORDER BEFORE PURCHASING. UNQUOTE Perhaps this should be in the "For those who fear coming to Australia" thread...

Mwhahaha.....

You always know that objectors are getting desperate when they resort to pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo. Male bovine solid waste baffles brains, eh?

I think that a properly done NER based model would have more emphasis on the mineral traffic which, let's be honest, was the cornerstone of the NER's profitability. Then there were the local services and through workings such as the Newcastle-Liverpool traffic. Although there is a tendency to focus on the 'glamour services', the reality was that they were well outnumbered by the other workings in the area, many of which were powered by Darlington designed/built locomotives right up until the bitter end for steam in September 1967. Just a thought. Mark

Morning, John I know that they worked to Whitby (so did Q6s), but I think that axle loadings might have been an issue along both coastal routes. Having said that, there is proof of a J39 on the Scarborough-Whitby in 1947, but it was paired with a J24, sandwiched between 2 snowploughs during that terrible winter... By happy coincidence, I'm presently some 6 miles off Scarborough on the way up to the Tees, and can see the sun reflecting off the buildings at Ravenscar. It gives you a real perspective on how much climbing is/was needed to get up there! Cheers Mark

Ah, good old Furness Withy - we had a few ex FW men in Gibsons - from the stories they had, FW seem to have had a history of building/owning/operating ships that would have done well at Crufts, as it were... Cavendish, Joule, Clark Maxwell spring to mind. (The last can be seen in some of the riverside shots in the original "Get Carter", by the way). Mind you, we had one like that ourselves - the mighty Traquair, aka the 'Black Traq', built1982. On joining her for the first time in late 1990, as a very young Ch.Eng, my oppo's parting words were "Well Mark, this ship will either make you or break you". Inspiring, eh? She did try to kill me twice - the rudder falling off in 1998, and a very bad Engine Room fire in 2003, but I'm still here, and she lasted until 2017...

That's coming along nicely, John. I had a NuCast J27, which I sold on to another member of this parish a couple of years ago. I picked up a collection of J27 bits from EvilBay a few months ago, so by using them as 'scratch aids' I may well see another one rise like a phoenix in the future. However, I don't know if one ever ventured along the Scarborough-Whitby line?

As I understand it, the local council is broadly supportive, looking on the proposed level crossing on the A21 as helping with 'traffic calming'

Ah yes - the name escapes me, but I have heard the stories...

All good points. In fairness, the ships we run do very little in the way of venting off - it's only really in the case of Emergency Trips activating that lines are directly vented; normally the engines consume pretty much everything in the feed lines. However, I appreciate that not all installations are the same. One does have to wonder if there are <ahem> 'considerations' being passed about - oh rats, there's my cynicism kicking in again...

What could possibly go wrong, indeed. At least your outfit has been a little proactive - shame the MCA backed down, but I suspect that there will have been some 'commercial pressure' brought to bear there. Cynical, moi? Heaven forfend... Tanker firefighting is one thing, but there is a specific gases add-on which some training centres can offer. Trickle down training? Hmm - that depends on the mindset of both parties...

The problem I have with LNG propulsion on <regular> ships is that there is, incredibly, no formal training or qualification required to use it as yet. Yes, the automation is very good, but it can be overridden, and in the hands of someone who doesn't fully appreciate the dangers of mishandling, that could be fatal. Then, of course, as I inferred above, there is the 'human factor' of nicotine addicts 'sparking up' where or when they shouldn't. Will it take a serious incident before something is done? Sadly, that's probably what it will take :(

I fancy that if someone approached the NRM/SMG with both ready cash AND a properly presented Business Plan, things would change.

Great post - and that sums it up nicely. As an aside, yes, you got a Liquefied Gases DCE, but could you have stepped onto an LPG/Ethylene job and known what you were doing? There really was serious money to be made back then in the bulk LNG trade, but that is not the case now. My Company has recently got into the small LNG trade, operating feeder services in the likes of Norway and the Caribbean to take cargo to areas unlikely to ever be connected to a gas grid. We are also now in the LNG bunkering business; there's another growing market, but one which is bringing its own challenges. One of our recently converted ships, of some 6000 cubic metres capacity, did the first LNG bunkering of an Aida SLF job earlier this month. (SLF - self loading freight - a passenger ship...). Now there is a risky operation - it would only take one idiot having a crafty smoke at the wrong moment to...well, I don't need to expand on that, do I? They did have one 'near miss' tbough - all pax were asked to keep off their balconies and open decks on the side that the bunkering vessel was on whilst she came alongside, did the job and sailed. Imagine the horror one of my colleagues felt when he looked up to see a child touching a mooring rope and preparing to climb on it...

We ethylene men (and women) have been amused for years at the claims of the LNG mob that they were the creme de la creme - all their ships really did, cargo-wise, was 'pour it in and pump it out'. OK, there was some magic done by the Engineers in burning boil-off, but there was no reliquefaction done or changing grades. Hell, some companies would put Supercargoes on board for gas freeing before drydockings and gassing up/cooling down after the docking. Fair play to them - they managed to convince Owners to pay them more, but did they actually deserve it?

My sympathies. Not everyone is honest

This could have been MUCH worse... https://gcaptain.com/lng-carrier-collides-with-vlcc-off-fujairah-uae-ais-animation/ Look at the links at the bottom of the article too - it's not the first time that such ships have had 'comings together' in that area...

My good lady's laptop was displaying similar issues. I eventually discovered that it was an add-on to Firefox that was not wholly compatible with the latest Firefox update that was causing the problem. Disabled the add-on and all was well. Worth looking at your browser of choice & what's on that?

Always nice when that happens - unless you're the seller...

Definitely Dry Sump engines. They are MAN 32/44CR beasties - a quick search finds this https://marine.man-es.com/four-stroke/engines/32-44cr/profile I really do wonder if 'low oil levels" is merely a smokescreen for a deeper problem...

That last sentence could potentially open a huge can of worms, were the deviation allowed found to be less, but I can't see the Norwegians, even the NIS, doing so, tbh. I suspect that there may well be more to come out in due course, presuming, of course, that investigations are continuing.

Hmph. I sailed on one ship, built in 1982, that didn't have adequate baffles in the Auxiliary Engine sumps to stop the oil surging and uncovering the suction pipes in certain sea conditions. Not rolling, per se, but that 'orrible feeling of sliding sideways in a heavy quartering sea. This could occur even with the sumps filled to their design maximum. You can imagine how 'interesting' that was, the first time it happened - and the second, and third, until we worked out what was happening... One would hope that 35 years on, things would have improved, of course.

Lode Star won't ever be considered for a return to steam because to do so would mean the loss of much Swindon craftsmanship during her initial restoration, if memory serves. Also, isn't she missing some steam pipes? Other than the steam pipe comment, isn't the same true for Caerphilly Castle? There are plenty of other Castles in operation too. KGV - there are 2 other Kings operational, and both have required surgery to make them 'fit' inside the modern loading gauge envelope. The 28xx has gone elsewhere City of Truro? Again, modern loading gauge restrictions are a problem with the outside cranks, I think? Also she's not powerful enough for main line work, but never say never for preserved line operation, I fancy - just not yet. Panniers - there are plenty in operation elsewhere.