quote:

Originally posted by petr:
I had heard that hazardous material containers are at the top of the stacks. Is this true? Something about that if the shit hits the fan, they let them go to prevent losing the whole ship.

I went on one boarding that involved conex boxes. And they were not sorted by anything other than weight. They had the heavy ones at the bottom rows and lighter ones higher.

And frankly, I’ve not seen too many ships that could handle firefighting effectively. Hell, we drilled every day for fire,flooding,battle etc and when it really happens it is still managed chaos.

quote:

Originally posted by Twist18:
I’ve seen pics and videos of those containers stacked 5 high, or more, and it amazes me that they stay on the ships at all in anything other than fairly calm seas. I guess whatever they use to lock the containers together, and also to the deck of the ships, must be quite strong!

There are two parts to this...

Each container gets a "cone" at each corner that locks the can to the one below it. If it goes on the deck, there are castings on the lids that accept those cones as well. Once the can is lowered onto the can below it or on the deck lid, it locks into place. To unlock these cones, usually they have pigtails that need to be pulled and locked into place to free the container. Some ships do have automatic locking cones now a days where that is not needed.

After cans are loaded into each bay, each "stack" gets lashing bars that are connected to turn buckles that are locked to the ship via a pin to a casting on the lid. Usually in a X position that locks the stack to the ship. These bars can consist of 2,3,4, and 5 high. That means they can go from the ship's lid casting to the bottom of the 2 high, 3 high, 4 high, or 5 high can. Just imagine how heavy a 5 high bar is and having to lift it vertical to get it into a corner casting on a 5 high can.

Over the years, catwalks have been getting higher and higher which have allowed these stacks to get higher and higher because now the lashing is attached to these catwalks, not the lids of the ship.

I've seen stacks up to 9+ high on a ship. There may be higher ones out there I'm sure especially with those Maersk ships. They are truly mega ships. Also, these mega ships can go 20+ containers wide in each bay. Let that sink in for a minute. The video only shows containers 4 wide.

There are very different variations of this, but it gives you and idea of how containers get locked to the ship.

Here is a video of it. Of course they don't show the catwalks.

https://youtu.be/dVBpx7urQe0

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:

I went on one boarding that involved conex boxes. And they were not sorted by anything other than weight. They had the heavy ones at the bottom rows and lighter ones higher.

And frankly, I’ve not seen too many ships that could handle firefighting effectively. Hell, we drilled every day for fire,flooding,battle etc and when it really happens it is still managed chaos.

Containers that store hazardous, flammable, explosive material, etc are supposed to be stacked in a location more easily accessible by the crew in case of fire, etc. Absolutely.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:

quote:

Originally posted by petr:
I had heard that hazardous material containers are at the top of the stacks. Is this true? Something about that if the shit hits the fan, they let them go to prevent losing the whole ship.

I went on one boarding that involved conex boxes. And they were not sorted by anything other than weight. They had the heavy ones at the bottom rows and lighter ones higher.

And frankly, I’ve not seen too many ships that could handle firefighting effectively. Hell, we drilled every day for fire,flooding,battle etc and when it really happens it is still managed chaos.

They are sorted by goods inside if they're hazardous materials. Each type of hazardous material has a different requirement. Some are required to go in the hold, some are required to be on deck and monitored, some cannot be surrounded by certain types of other goods. I saw just last night on this and what happens when the wrong goods are surrounded by the wrong hazardous materials. There is an excellent show on the Smithsonian channel called: Disasters At Sea. Watch Season 3, Episode 3 called "Fire in the Hold". It's an MSC ship where hazardous chemicals were put deep in the hold next to the wrong kind of other hazardous materials and an entire cargo hold exploded and blew containers in the water, ship stayed floating and on fire for 2.5 months after it was abandoned. They changed the requirements on that hazardous material due to this disaster and now needs to be stored on deck where crew can easily monitor it's temperature. It's a really good series on Maritime disasters and goes through a great re-enactment of what happened, then how whatever shipping board investigates it and figures out the cause.

https://www.smithsonianchannel...ters-at-sea/season-3

I load a lot of yachts on freighters (on the deck usually) running them to and from the freighter. Many times the freighter has a base cargo in the hold and the yachts are put on deck. Loaded a new 59' Sportfish in Port Everglades last Sunday and am flying to Panama tomorrow to unload it in Cristobal on Tuesday or Wednesday and run it through the Panama Canal to Panama City for my customer.

quote:

here is an excellent show on the Smithsonian channel called: Disasters At Sea. Watch Season 3, Episode 3 called "Fire in the Hold". It's an MSC ship where hazardous chemicals were put deep in the hold next to the wrong kind of other hazardous materials and an entire cargo hold exploded and blew containers in the water, ship stayed floating and on fire for 2.5 months after it was abandoned. It's a really good series on Maritime disasters and goes through a great re-enactment of what happened, then how whatever shipping board investigates it and figures out the cause

^^^^^^^^^^^
I saw that! Glad to hear you think it is worthwhile.

quote:

Originally posted by Twist18:
I’ve seen pics and videos of those containers stacked 5 high, or more, and it amazes me that they stay on the ships at all in anything other than fairly calm seas. I guess whatever they use to lock the containers together, and also to the deck of the ships, must be quite strong!

Umm, try 10x high...and thats part of the stack that's exposed and not in the hold of the ship, which goes another 10-deep.

My father's career was in container shipping, saw the entire development of the industry, from the last days of cruise/freight cargo vessels, all the way up to the introduction of the Panamax-size ships. Having worked for a number of shipping companies and leasing companies, he'd periodically visit the Ports of Oakland, LA/Long Beach and Tacoma and tie them to family trips, along with having co-workers over for dinner. I always enjoyed the ship captains who came over, most were either Danish or, Norwegian; lots of sea stories and pictures.

Containers going overboard is not uncommon, insurance exits for a reason thus the hazards of ocean going freight, usually 1-2, maybe 10-20 if a rogue wave hit or, the ship was having stability issues. The loss of cargo on ONE and Maersk vessels highlights the number of containers these ships carry and the frequency of ships in the transit lanes. My understanding container positioning on the ships is determined by when that container is due to get off-loaded: 1st stop is all the containers on top or, everything in specific holds, 2nd stop the next group of holds or, the next level and so on... Its a massive Tetris game, meshed with the efficiency of the transit schedule: 1st stop LA, then Oakland, then Tacoma, etc. Not unusual for ships coming from China-to-US are at capacity, and ships returning to China are filled with empties or, materials: saw dust, wood chips, recycled material, garbage, etc...

Thanks for your insight Balze. I was waiting for your input. Stay safe dude.

Is there any way this could be a similar to ______________ lightning ?

Mr. X-ray fills a container with stuff that is heavier than water, most likely garbage.

Puts Valuble computers on the manifest, insures it for $744,000.00

Then an "atrocious accident" happens at sea,

Badda Bing, the insurance pays off and Mr. X-ray is putting an addition on his summer home in Lang ling

Is Lang ling in Iowa or Illinois?? On the serious side, I am certain there is screening and checking prior to the container being sealed and loaded. I suppose there is room for bribery. You should speak with private detectives that investigate insurance fraud. They have some interesting stories to tell.

quote:

Originally posted by bigeinkcmo: Now we have no major intl carriers and foreign carriers haul the vast majority of our goods. Matson navigation is about it. All in less than three decades. It's actually quite sad.

The only reason Matson exists is to satisfy Jones Act requirements for Hawaii and the rest of the Pacific territories.
This also speaks to the larger issue of a collapsed domestic ship building industry, a reduced Merchant Marine and an overall complete outsourcing of US maritime economy to companies outside of the US.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

quote:

Originally posted by bigeinkcmo: Now we have no major intl carriers and foreign carriers haul the vast majority of our goods. Matson navigation is about it. All in less than three decades. It's actually quite sad.

The only reason Matson exists is to satisfy Jones Act requirements for Hawaii and the rest of the Pacific territories.
This also speaks to the larger issue of a collapsed domestic ship building industry, a reduced Merchant Marine and an overall complete outsourcing of US maritime economy to companies outside of the US.

The Jones act is the sole thing crippling the U.S. shipping industry. U.S. carriers have to use U.S. built freighters. Problem is, it's 4-5x as expensive to buy/build a new U.S. built freighter compared to the ones built in China or elsewhere. I deal with one of the largest shipping companies in the world, they build new Chinese freighters and run them for 10-20 years and scrap them. So the U.S. carriers are instead milking freighters from the 1950's and 1960's that should've been retired decades ago and are behind the curve as far as fuel efficiency and capability go. Such as the Tote freighter "El Faro" that sank a few years ago in that Hurricane. Other's such as Crowley (who services PR a lot) are going to a lot of tug and barges instead, which have their own big limitations (not as seaworthy). The Jones act is an 1880's law that needs to be modified in some aspects.

^^^^^^^
Jimmy a related question. I live in a coastal area and many of the personal injury attorneys advertise that they deal with Jones Act issues. They do it so much it makes me think this is very lucrative for them. Does it have to do with workers compensation suits against shippers and the like? Are the limits of liability much higher, like those if you are struck by an 18 wheeler?

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

The Jones act is the sole thing crippling the U.S. shipping industry.

Complete horseshit.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
^^^^^^^
Jimmy a related question. I live in a coastal area and many of the personal injury attorneys advertise that they deal with Jones Act issues. They do it so much it makes me think this is very lucrative for them. Does it have to do with workers compensation suits against shippers and the like? Are the limits of liability much higher, like those if you are struck by an 18 wheeler?

To be honest I don't know all of the details of the Jones act. But it applies to any U.S. flagged vessel over 65' (I think it is) that's navigable. Jones act Insurance is very expensive. But anyone working on a vessel over that size falls under the Jones act, even in boat yards and things of that nature and even if they're working on yachts. But like anything, I'm sure it's very lucrative if there are so many attorneys advertising it.

The biggest aspect of the Jones act that I know. Is a foreign registered ship can only drop off cargo in 1 U.S. port, without going to a foreign country in between the next U.S. port.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

The Jones act is the sole thing crippling the U.S. shipping industry.

Complete horseshit.

In what aspect, exactly? I am asking this because I would like to know, am I missing something? I'm not trying to start an argument, but am curious as to what other aspects are crippling the U.S. shipping industry as I know you work in the industry.

Is it not true, that a U.S. flagged ship needs to employ U.S. crew and the ship has to have been built in the United States at a much costlier build cost (for something like a freighter). U.S flagged ships need to hire U.S. crew? Both of those are much costlier than foreign built ships and foreign crew.

I know a Captain that runs a 550-600' freighter for one of the top 5 shipping companies in the world, freighter built in China in 2006, foreign flagged. He is from an Eastern European country and makes approximately $6,000 USD per month, has no paid time off at all. That salary is a pittance of what a U.S. Captain would make running the same sized U.S. flagged freighter. In comparison one friend of mine works on a U.S. flagged crew boat around 220' as 2nd Captain and makes around 3 times that much money with a lot less experience and smaller license.

I am all FOR U.S. flagged commercial vessels needing to employ U.S. crew. But do feel that needing to run a U.S. built ship on the larger vessels is a real or the largest hindrance to U.S. freighters being dominate world wide.

Thanks Jimmy.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:


In what aspect, exactly?

In every aspect it's BS to say that the Jones act is the sole reason for the decline in US Shipping. I'll go in more depth a bit later, but I am home alone with my two girls doing baths for both, making dinner, cleaning the kitchen before the wife gets home for work, mixing my own cocktails...you understand. I will respond though to be sure.

So, if your plan is to really decimate the US Shipping industry, then by all means, get rid of the Jones Act. Other countries that have rid themselves of their nation's Cabotage laws have experienced very negative consequences. Australia is a perfect example of this. Their merchant marine is now almost non-existent as a result which is quite catastrophic to a nation whose entire border is coastline.

The main gist of the Jones Act is that it prohibits foreign flagged vessels from engaging in coastwise trade within the United States, though the other elements mentioned are a big part of it too, but they also have legitimate purposes. But having said that, I'm not completely against certain aspects of the Act being revisited, the building of ships in foreign shipyards being one of them. That'll certainly force our domestic shipyards to get more competitive. Right now, it is government regulations and unions that are frankly destroying the US Shipping industry, not the Jones Act. Still, it is imperative as a nation to continue to maintain the skill and ability to build and repair our own ships. Imagine in a time of war or crisis being completely dependent on foreign nations to supply our shipping needs. That will happen most assuredly with the repeal of the Jones Act. National security is a very real issue to be considered. Assholes like John McCain who took every opportunity he could to try and repeal the Jones Act never seemed to grasp this concept.

If the Jones Act were repealed today, the US merchant marine would disappear almost overnight. Why is that a bad thing? Because every powerful nation needs a strong merchant marine. In a time of war, do you think the Navy will be able to supply and equip our military alone? Not a chance. And when it comes to ship handling, experience, and professionalism at sea, there really is no comparison between the professional mariner and the Navy sailor. That's not meant to be a knock on the Navy, they war very well, but when it comes to all around seamanship, the US Merchant Marine are second to none in the world.

I really could go on (don't even get me started on the Environmental and safety concerns associated with mostly foreign crews operating in US waters), but I finally got all the girls to bed and the house squared away, and I really need a moment to sit with my book and a bourbon before the missus returns for my own peace of mind and well-being. With that, goodnight.

I saw this a few days ago and was amazed.

It's HUUUUGE!
LINK
I hope this link works

Back in the Fall wife, dogs and I were staying at a house on the Beach just south of Charleston S.C. and one of the past times was to watch the container ships going in and out.... I looked up one of them and could not believe how many of those big steel boxes some of these can carry...

as for the original post... I think some sink and some float but not high just under the surface.... not good if you are in a sail boat or I'd say especially a motor boat going at any speed.

Edit: OKCGene's link above was worth the watch.