Case study - 1. Non-contact damage

       Whilst proceeding inbound through a river approach to a major European port a 32,000 dwt container vessel passed a small chemical tanker which was alongside a riverside berth discharging her cargo.

The container vessel was proceeding at manoeuvring full ahead up until a position approximately one quarter of a mile from the moored tanker when the pilot ordered the engine to be slowed to half ahead. The tide was ebbing at about 1 ½ knots. It was daylight and the visibility was good.

        As the container vessel started to get closer to the tanker the third mate, who was the OOW of the bridge, reported to the pilot that the mooring lines on the tanker seemed to be hanging loose. On verifying this through binoculars the pilot ordered the engine to be put to dead slow ahead. The estimated speed on passing the tanker was 5 knots through the water at a distance of about 150 metres. The 3^rd   mate and master of the container vessel continued to observe the tanker after it had been passed and saw the tanker surge along the berth, metallic noises were heard and a lot of activity could be seen on board.  

       The pilot was advised who called up theVTS station and reported the incident to them. An entry was made in the deck log book which was countersigned by the pilot. The following morning a lawyer presented himself on board with an arrest order against the ship. He claimed to be acting for the tanker who was alleging that the container vessel was proceeding at excessive speed, without taking due care and attention and, as a consequence, the wake of the vessel caused the tanker to surge along the quayside, breaking the mooring ropes, causing serious damage to the ship gangway, fracturing a discharging pipeline and causing a spillage of chemical cargo.

 

Answer the questions.

1. What was the position of the small chemical tanker?

2. What was the course of the container vessel?

3. What were the weather conditions?

4. Why did the pilot order the engine to be slowed to half ahead?

5. Did the container vessel proceed at a safe speed?

6. What were the actions of the pilot?

7. What did the 3^rd mate see on the tanker?

8. What was the reason for an arrest order against the ship?

9. What was the subject of the claim?

10. What were the consequences of the container’s passage?

11. Was the lawyer’s claim justified? What did he accuse the vessel of?

 

2. Explain the following terms.

1. To surge along the berth ______________________________________________________

2. Ebbing tide________________________________________________________________

3. To be hanging loose_________________________________________________________

4. Mooring line_______________________________________________________________

5. Excessive speed____________________________________________________________

6. The wake of the vessel_______________________________________________________

 

Compose a claim on behalf of the master of the tanker. Describe:

The situation and actions of both vessels; 2) the causes of the damage.

Impose responsibility on the container vessel.

Complete an incident report (see annex) including the following items.

1. Description of the situation;

2. Direct causes, root causes of the incident;

3. Remedial actions and recommendations.

4. Grounding, Stranding and Foundering;

“Grounding” is a deliberate contact by a ship with the bottom while the ship is moored ar anchored as a result of the water level dropping;

“Stranding” is a contact by a ship with the bottom which prevents her from moving. Stranding is normally an involuntary act but it also occurs when a ship is intentionally run ashore to avoid a greater peril

“Foundering” is the sinking of a vessel – possibly following the striking of an object

CASE STUDY

Case study -1. Grounding

A 12,500 gt general cargo ship was proceeding fully loaded through the Aegean Sea toward the Suez Canal. Full sea speed was 15 knots. A passage plan had been prepared and approved, the master’s standing orders had been read and signed by all deck officers and the master had written up his night order book on the evening in question which had also been signed by the third officer and the second officer. In his night orders the master had reminded his navigating officers to: “Maintain the courses and follow the passage plan and to call him if in doubt or if required”.

During the midnight to 0400 hrs watch the vessel was to pass between two groups of islands with a channel some 8 miles wide. At about 0200 hrs the second officer – who was the officer of the watch and who was accompanied by a look out – became aware of a significant number of lights on the starboard bow. His radar was detecting a number of small echoes at a distance of 7 miles. By 0210 hrs the lights were starting to become clearer and the second officer determined that they were small sailing vessels and appeared to be crossing very slowly from starboard to port. He thought they were probably a flotilla of yachts or maybe a yacht race sailing between the two islands. At 0215 hrs the second officer altered course 30 degrees to starboard which put all of the sailing vessels on his port bow. He continued to monitor the sailing vessels and was satisfied that they were passing clear.

At 0235 hrs he was just about to start bring the vessel back around to her original course line when he heard the echo sounder alarm. On checking the echo sounder it was showing ten metres below the keel and reducing. The ship started to vibrate and shudder. He immediately put the lookout onto hand steering and ordered hard to port at the same time putting the engines on dead slow and then stop. At this time the vessel was felt to be bumping along the bottom. The master arrived on the bridge, having been awakened by the vibrations — he noticed that the speed according to the GPS was zero. The vessel had run aground on an off-lying shoal.

General Emergency stations were called and the chief officer led a party to sound around the tanks and bilges on deck and the chief engineer to check the engine room. It was confirmed that the hull appeared to be intact.

Upon investigation it transpired that the second officer had put a position on the navigation chart at 0200 hrs but had neither put a position on the chart nor consulted the chart during the period he was altering course to pass the sailing vessels – up to the grounding shortly after 0235 hrs. He confirmed that he was monitoring his distance off the island on his starboard side using the radar and didn’t intend getting any closer than 1V2 miles. However, he had not appreciated or rather he had forgotten about the off-lying shoal area. Indeed it was the same second officer who had prepared the passage plan and had actually highlighted the shoal area in order to draw the attention of the officer of the watch to its existence.

A salvage tug and lightering barges were engaged. A little over 2000 tons of cargo were offloaded onto barges before the ship refloated and was safely pulled clear of the shoal area. Following an inspection it was confirmed that there was no serious damage to the ships hull, propeller, rudder or machinery.

The salvage / general average expenses to lighten and refloat the vessel came to US$2,000,000 of which cargo interests’ contribution was to be US$1,200,000.

Cargo interests refused to make their contribution alleging that there had been a breach of the contract of carriage by the ship owner / carrier. Specifically cargo interests alleged that the ship was not seaworthy and the carrier had failed to exercise due diligence at the commencement of the voyage to make the vessel seaworthy in that they did not have an adequate safety management system in place in respect of the navigation of the vessel and that the master and second officer were both negligent and incompetent.

 

Answer the questions.

1. What was the course of the general cargo ship?

2. What was her speed?

3. Was the passage plan prepared?

4. Who was the Master’s night order book signed by?

5. What was the Master’s order to his navigating officers?

6. What happened at midnight?

7. What did the second officer see?

8. What was the action of the second officer when he saw a flotilla of yachts?

9. What did he do when he heard the echo sounder alarm?

10. Where was the Master when the vessel ran aground?

11. What was the second officer’s mistake?

12. What were the bridgeteam’s actions to divert the vessel from the shoal?

 

1. Read the text and find a word or phrase which means the following .

2. _________is a procedure to develop a complete description of a vessel's voyage from start to finish.

3. _________a direction or route taken or to be taken.

4. _________as slow as possible without losing steerageway.

5. _________remaining sound, entire, or uninjured; not impaired in any way.

6. _________in a fit condition or ready for a sea voyage

 

⇐ Предыдущая10111213141516171819Следующая ⇒

Поделиться: