Last check.......it has budged a little

Corsair - that is a really interesting report. Not much analysis or conclusions drawn. If the wind was SW, seems strange to overcompensate to the west, then suddenly to veer east. Strange also that no other ships seemed to have course deviations and even the following ship was able to keep the ship off the shallows even while making a difficult stop and while not underway.

Don't know if there is any reason to suspect this was either negligence or intentional, but if negligence, it would seem the veering to port would be more erratic. I'll hazard it intentional, and the veering to left was for the purpose to get as much angle when hitting the east bank, to block the canal.

I’m leaning towards intentional grounding as well

What do we know about the captain and the pilot that was onboard?

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:

quote:

Originally posted by Cookster:
Here is time-lapse capture of the course plot that resulted in a you-know-the thing getting depicted as shown in several posts up-thread -

Controversial Track (yootoob)

I am guessing that this is not a typical ‘holding pattern’ of a 1,300 foot vessel in relatively tight and busy areas.

Airplane and Ship pilots/etc have been doing the occasional dick-shaped paths for a while now.

Freighters take a lot of space to turn. The Maneuver you are talking about is a Williamson maneuver so that the ship turns around and ends up in the same place it started, Used in Man Overboard manuevers. Obviously the turn on a 1000' freighter is going to be a lot longer circle.

The grounding is most likely going to be a career ender for the Captain and First officer, both very highly paid positions. I doubt it was intentional, but could be a strange under current, or the ship sucked bottom which made it turn abruptly and they weren't paying attention to reduce throttle and counter steer quick enough or something mechanical.

https://www.bing.com/images/se...erlayview&ajaxhist=0

That is a very clear dick shaped path, so I suspect intentional grounding. Saying F-U, then the grounding. Sounds like he may have been drunk as much as anything, but now this is the end of his lucrative job.

^^^As drawn, the tug on the right is pushing a rope.

^^^^

Yeah that violates the fifth law of thermodynamics

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
^^^^
Yeah that violates the fifth law of thermodynamics

Common Core math

So the biggest ship ever in the Suez canal, just happens to burrow it in sideways in the narrowest part of the canal due to a wind gust?

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
^^^As drawn, the tug on the right is pushing a rope.

Is that a country song?

Blancolirio



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLFmojnXtk0

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
^^^As drawn, the tug on the right is pushing a rope.

The tug pushes directly on the hull of the ships many times, it doesn't need the rope to push the bow to port. The rope is in case the bow breaks free and starts moving too fast to port and the tug then needs to stop it by reversing and pulling on the rope. Also once the bow breaks free the tug can get in front of the bow and pull the ship. Pushing with the tug, should suck some of the sand from underneath the bow of the ship. The tugs have Azipods that rotate the props in any direction, so they can pull or push 360 degrees of the tug.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
The tug pushes directly on the hull of the ships many times, it doesn't need the rope to push the bow to port. The rope is in case the bow breaks free and starts moving too fast to port and the tug then needs to stop it by reversing and pulling on the rope. Also once the bow breaks free the tug can get in front of the bow and pull the ship. Pushing with the tug, should suck some of the sand from underneath the bow of the ship. The tugs have Azipods that rotate the props in any direction, so they can pull or push 360 degrees of the tug.

It's just a poor drawing. Did you even look at it? I ask because the tug in question is at the STERN of the ship. The artist made the decision to put the tug acting on the stern in front of the ship where it can be seen. It really is as simple as that.

In terms of the actual salvage efforts, they will not be using tugs to push the bow or the stern. Do you know why? I'll give you a hint. There are two reasons, the first of which should be obivious to a man of your experience and licensure, while the second requires a 4th or 5th grade background in science.

At least you didn't chastise me for calling it a rope and not a line.

quote:

Originally posted by bigeinkcmo:
I was kind of wondering why I keep hearing more about who owns the ship rather than who operates it. Evergreen is a Taiwanese company but I keep hearing of a Japanese ship owner who's involved with the removal operation. I was just curious if this is typical maritime protocol where the owner of the ship would take on the responsibility for this situation? Just seems a little counterintuitive since they didn't run the Ever Given into the canal.

Pretty normal in the global commerce game, one company owns the ship but, the company that leases the ship for their business is on the hook. No different than the commercial airlines industry, the airplane is owned by a leasing company but, the principal operating company and leasee's logo is what's on the tail.

Japanese-owned ship (Shoei Kisen Kaisha Ltd)
Taiwanese-owned company (Evergreen Marine Corp)
German technical operators (Bernhard Schulte Shipmanagement)
East Indian crewed
Panamanian-flagged
UK Insured (UK P&I Club)

quote:

Originally posted by bigeinkcmo:
I was kind of wondering why I keep hearing more about who owns the ship rather than who operates it. Evergreen is a Taiwanese company but I keep hearing of a Japanese ship owner who's involved with the removal operation. I was just curious if this is typical maritime protocol where the owner of the ship would take on the responsibility for this situation? Just seems a little counterintuitive since they didn't run the Ever Given into the canal.

From Wikipaedia:

"Ever Given is owned by Shoei Kisen Kaisha (a shipowning and leasing subsidiary of the large Japanese shipbuilding company Imabari Shipbuilding)"

"time chartered and operated by container transportation and shipping company Evergreen Marine" (Taiwanese)

"Ever Given is registered in Panama"

"its technical management is the responsibility of the German ship management company Bernhard Schulte Shipmanagement"

Dangit!

Must be some legit reason why the containers haven't been offloaded by cargo copter yet right? This is taking place in the part of the world where police cars are sometimes Lamborghinis so it can't really be a money issue can it?

Seems like they could at least get SOMETHING moving in the meantime.