Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length.

[BarryM]

Martin,

DP systems are common on some other types e.g. Diving Support Vessels, Drill Ships etc. and are usually set in 'Auto' for routine operations (although always under the direct scrutiny of a couple of DP operators). A vessel discharging or backloading to a rig might also be in auto (again never left unattended).  However, for A/H operations when conditions are not steady state, I would expect the system to be in manual joystick control. 

The BD had a forward retractable azimuth thruster which many skippers would use during A/H ops because of its flexibility of thrust vectoring. I have some thoughts on the effect which a loss/restart/loss of this unit would have. Also, the effect of external forces such as a sudden pull from the rig anchor winch.

I know Alesund and Fosnavaag in the Heroy district; the latter particularly is a small, close-knit community where everyone will know someone who was involved. Surnames such as Remoy are common and, as I know several of that name wery well, I scanned the crew list particularly closely.  Good men all.

[Bunkerbarge]

There are a couple of interesting points here regarding joysticks.  There are a lot of vessels, including large cruise liners, that use joysticks for manoeuvring nowadays however even the most sophisticated have significant shortcomings.

Ours controls two main shafts, two high lift flap rudders and five side thrusters all at the same time but each component of this control is dependant on the feed back signals from the individual items.  It is very dramatic to see the difference from the control room during manoeuvring when the Master is using the joystick as opposed to doing it manually himself.  When an experienced ship handler is manoeuvring manually the plant is less stressed, uses less load (and therefore less fuel) and everything appears to be in far better control.  This all stems from one very significant point that cannot be incorporated into a control system and that is the lack of ability to predict.  No control system can respond until it sees a deviation from a set point whereas a human can respond before a deviation has occurred.

There was an incident only recently with a brand new cruise liner that had just left Port Canaveral, dropped the pilot, and was starting to speed up for her passage.  She suddenly heeled over so dramatically that the contents of the pools were ejected over the top decks, with the majority of the water going down passenger staircases and washing furniture and passengers with it.  It was eventually discovered that the officer of the watch had changed over to the automatic pilot without setting it up correctly first and so the wheel was put hard over at almost full sea speed.  My point here is that human error can still cause many issues even with the most sophisticated bridge equipment which is basically flawed in the first place.

Unfortunately the way the shipping industry is going nowadays we are getting less and less properly trained officers manning the vessels that ply our waters and things like this are likely to become more frequent.  Legislation will be brought in to add more training courses to officers career paths but this will do nothing to stop companies employing officers from backgrounds that is not conducive to making competent officers and with a command of basic english that is dramatically short of a safe requirement.  I'm not saying that this is the case here but it is a trend that we are now starting to follow and incidents such as this are potential results. 

I agree pre-empting the results of an enquiry is not constructive and everyone should remain open minded and non acusational as regards potential causes but certainly an officers nationality is no proof of competence and the most competent ship handler I have ever come across in my thirty years at sea was a Swedish master and the worst was a Norwegian but that reflects on individuals and not nationalities.

[Daryl]

See the link below, the enquiry has been postponned until Wednesday.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/6570673.stm


Daryl

[Martin (Admin)]

Also - http://bourbon-online.com/Bourbon-dolphin-En

[tonyH]

Hi Martin,

Many thanks for the info.

My reason for asking, and I'm not being a Luddite, is that we seem to be fast approaching a technology threshold, in all forms of transport, where the 'control challenge' for the ship/plane/car is going out of the window.
Some of the subsequent posts implied the same feeling.

We drive cars that, generally, are 'easy', travel thousands of miles on auto-pilot and even set the speed of the mouse on the computer to what we feel comfortable with.

This creates the scenario where, even if the Master/Pilot or driver reacts immediately, the 'comfort settings' of the system block or slow down the move.

S**t happens in real life but it can't be pre-programmed.

May they Rest in Peace.

Tony H

[martno1fan]

the lol wasnt about the situation ,dont give me all the holyer than though bulcrap either.lets hope the company gets whats coming to them and the families get propper compensation for the loss they suffered,i doubt it but we,ll see.

I think you have just shown us where your knowledge of North Sea ops starts and ends. Time to keep quiet I think.

it matters not my experience in north sea operations but computers have no place in any vessell as a way to cotroll anything in my opinion wether it be ships, planes ,trains or whatever,by the way my father was a ships pilot for some 30 yrs and my cousin is an airline pilot .i think martin hit the nail on the head computers dont react to certain situations and we see more and more accidents happening with auto pilots and such like.

[Daryl]

If you look on www.maib.org.uk I think you will find most marine accidents are caused by human error and not by the electronic safty systems.

Daryl

[Colin Bishop]

computers have no place in any vessell as a way to cotroll anything in my opinion

So you are proposing scrapping all those specialist vessels such as drilling rigs and deep sea exploration ships which depend on GPS/thruster links to maintain position because human reactions are too slow? What are you suggesting - that all ships be steered by a man at the back with a tiller in his hands?

And closing down all airports as soon as it gets a bit misty and instrumentation is needed to control the landings and takeoffs?

Martno1fan - you are coming across as a Luddite! With you in charge we'd still be crossing the Irish sea in coracles! 

[martno1fan]

no id say use a steering wheel or levers but not use a computer to do a job a man can do,of course they say human error is to blame for most accidents at sea its the easy way out for the companies responsible .and if you believe any investigation is ever going to be impartial where multi million pound companies are involved versus one man in the wheel house you are the Luddite not me get real.

[Daryl]

How many MAIB accident reports have you read? or even been involved in. I speak from experience and I have read most that has been published in the last 3 years. The guys at MAIB do a fantastic job, their counterparts at the air and rail dept are also very diligent and impartial.

Daryl

[martno1fan]

yes I'm sure they are ,if thats what you wish to believe or have us believe fine but thats your opinion not mine !!.far too often the little man gets **** on from a great height to save the big companies hides and it has to stop!!.

[Daryl]

you sound as though you have a chip on your shoulder. You no doupt cn enlighten us as to how you have come to form your opinions. Do you have any experiance/ qualifications of accident investigation?

Daryl

[martno1fan]

no chip just don't trust or believe any of these so called investigations where large amounts of money are concerned,call me sceptical.

[Colin Bishop]

I don't think that putting prejudice before facts constitutes "sceptical". I just hope you never get called for jury service.

[Bunkerbarge]

yes I'm sure they are ,if thats what you wish to believe or have us believe fine but thats your opinion not mine !!.far too often the little man gets **** on from a great height to save the big companies hides and it has to stop!!.

I think we have come a long way since the days of the little man being the one who cops the blame and I also think we are very lucky to have in this country a very effective, efficient and impartial organisation in the MAIB.   I think to elude otherwise is unreasonable without the support of specific proven situations and if you read MAIB reports as I have done throughout my career at sea and compare them with reports from foreign countries I think you will see how well off we are.

I believe this thinking took a significant turn when Townsend Thorensen was openly criticised in the Herald Of free Enterprise enquiry which identified a "disease of sloppiness" and negligence at every level of the corporation's hierarchy.

I also think that todays litigation happy society constantly looks for the blame at a higher level where there are higher rewards available rather than the old fashioned "give me a name" culture.  Big companies are nowhere near the safe haven they used to be and shipping companies in particular are under constant scrutiny from their Classification Societies, Coast Guards, IMO legislation, Public Health, etc...etc...etc.

Unfortunately, as with most things nowadays, it is the ones who wish to bend the rules that continue to get away with it and those who wish to abide by them that find themselves with ever more stringent legislation to deal with.

[Martin (Admin)]

Spellings corrected......

Men have actually died here.
Lets not argue over spellings and the use of the English language just once.

[MikeK]

Spellings corrected......

Men have actually died here.
Lets not argue over spellings and the use of the English language just once.

Sorry Martin, at one point I was about to say the same thing ie never mind the spouting of theories, just be sad for the poor people involved, then this petty thing about spelling struck me amongst all the rising indignation. I should have kept quiet and zipped it  ::)
Again - sorry

MikeK

[martno1fan]

apology accepted (my names martin too ),seriously though i apologise if ive offended anyone don,t get me wrong i as much as anyone feel for the families of the dead and maybe i should have zipped it instead of voicing my opinions on certain things.wrong time wrong place so i also apologise ,lets hope the truth comes out .

[tonyH]

Since part of the thread seems to be getting into 'why accidents happen' in general, it's always seemed strange to me that collisions can occur in open water, albeit rarely, when a constant bearing should be one of the simpler things to notice or incorporate in a system.

It's probably obvious that I've got no seafaring background, being frustrated by hay-fever when applying for the RN, but that rule was even part of the maths 'O' level in my day.

As far as computers are concerned, surely they're an aid and not a substitute?

Tony H

[BarryM]

Computers are everywhere these days from washing machines to cars to medical scanners to aircraft and probably 'civilisation as we know it' would grind to a halt without them. They take over the activity that we cannot do or cannot be bothered to do (not always the same thing) and generally make life less complicated.

As far as collisions in open water are concerned, "radar assisted collisions" are certainly not unknown - often not because the radar was malfunctioning but because the operator was ill-trained or misusing the set. I have investigated a number of marine incidents including those involving fire, collision, injuries and fatalities. There have been times when you are left scratching your head and asking yourself, "How could anybody be that daft?" - but they were....

The archives of the MAIB and Classification Societies are highly revealing. One of my (true) favourites appeared in an American Bureau of Shipping report of some years ago. It concerned a ship on which the Engine Room telegraph went U/S shortly before entering port. It was hastily arranged that a Junior Engineer would stand by the ER telephone and pass the engine movements from the Bridge to the 2/Eng on the throttles. Because of the usual ER noise, it was agreed that a pat on the 2/E's head would indicate an ahead movement with one pat meaning Dead Slow Ahead, two pats meaning Slow Ahead up to four pats meaning Full Ahead. Astern movements were indicated by a similar system of taps but this time on the 2/E's backside. It all worked very well until the first-trip Apprentice took over on the telephone. "Full Astern" came the order on the 'phone and the Apprentice moved to give the 2/E four pats. Unfortunately, he was in awe of the 2/E and too embarrassed to pat him on the backside - thus he compromised by patting the 2/E on the back of the head.......   I imagine that Apprentice is still in hiding somewhere with a vengeance-bent 2/E still looking for him.

Barry M

[Daryl]

Brilliant! geat laugh. I too get an interest from reading the reports. It is amazing how daft people can be. My son has seen some amazing near misses in the Solent by small pleasure craft trying to dodge or make the big stuff move out of the way.

Daryl

[tonyH]

Superb!,

Thanks Barry for bringing a touch of 'lightness' to the thread.

Tony H

[Colin Bishop]

First reports from the enquiry here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/6590249.stm


Added by Forum admin...



"Capsize inquiry hears of problems 
 
The inquiry was hearing from the ship's survivors
The moments before an oil rig support vessel capsized off Shetland, with the loss of eight lives, have been described at an inquiry in Norway.
Witness told of problems in the run-up to the Bourbon Dolphin capsizing.

First mate Geir Syversen said an anchor handling operation with another ship eventually saw the anchor chain drag over the side of the Bourbon Dolphin.

The boat soon started to capsize and the boat turned over. Only three bodies were found afterwards.

The Bourbon Dolphin capsized 85 miles west of the Shetland coast on 12 April and sank three days later.

Five attempts

The three crew members confirmed dead are chief officer Bjarte Grimstad, 37, second officer Kjetil Rune Våge, 31, and 44-year-old captain Oddne Arve Remøy.

His son David Remøy, 14, is still missing, along with chief engineer Frank Nygård, 42, second engineer Ronny Emblem, 25, electrician Søren Kroer, 27, and 54-year-old bosun Tor Karl Sandø.

The inquiry in Alesund, Norway, heard the Bourbon Dolphin had been involved in an anchor handling operation with another ship, the Highland Valour, at the time of the incident.

 David Remøy and his father Oddne Arve Remøy both died

Mr Syversen, the only survivor who was on the bridge during the accident, told the inquiry it took the Highland Valour five attempts to move the anchor.

On the final attempt the anchor chain, he said, dragged over the side of the Bourbon Dolphin.

The Highland Valour was told to go more north west.

The captain then came on the bridge and took a VHF radio and called on the Highland Valour: "Do you know the difference between north west and south east?"

Lost connection

A call from the chief engineer said the vessel had to reduce its thruster, because it was overheating.

Below deck, work started on filling tanks on the starboard side of the boat to keep it more steady.

The Highland Valour then lost the connection again.

The Bourbon Dolphin then tried to release the inner pin. This saw the chain run free and catch the outer tow pin.

The first mate said the boat then started to capsize. The cargo deck started to disappear below the water. The two main engines also stopped.

The hearing was told that the emergency release system was triggered but did not seem to work as intended. The boat then turned over.

The inquiry continues. "

 

[Shipmate60]

I have read this with great interest.
We are changing from Mooring and salvage vessels to Anchor Handlers in the next few years.
We too work heavy moorings and chain.
As to the enquiries, those that read the MAIB Reports are quite satisfied that they do a good impartial job and do fully investigate the causes.
The first reaction to this enquiry is just what we were expecting, the chain and anchor had to have a "Girding" action to pull her over, but didn't know there was another tug involved or any mechanical malfunction, but we did suspect it.
Anyone that goes to sea will have the greatest sympathy for the families of the crew members and know just what consternation this tragic accident has had on the industry where these vessels had a good safety record, especially around our shores.

Bob

[Daryl]

I to have read this report with interest, I found nothing about the proceeding on the Norwegian Maritime Directorate web site. I hope more of the enquiry is realeased as well as an English version of the report.

Daryl