Cruise ship Viking Sky sends out a mayday call,

[hpeer]

Can’t recall the ship name that sank on the PR tun in anhurricane a few years back. Post Morton suggests that sufficient heel on one tack was enough to get air in lubrication system oil pick up. This caused an automatic engine shut down. Loss of power, loss of steerage, loss of ship.

No idea if that applies here. Doesn’t explain second cruise ship incident.

[Franziska]

El Faro was the misfortunate ship you refer to, no?

[hpeer]

Yes, El Faro. Thanks.

[Franziska]

Here is the harrowing story.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/n...uin/100367564/

May they rest in peace.

[Uricanejack]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

So, other than fuel, what could bring down 3 out of 4 apparently almost new, but well run in engines? Ship built 2 yrs ago. Any bugs should have been well shaken out by now, but motors still new enough to be at their best.
Software?

MAK

ME Shut down
Lube oil pressure low engine, manual override possible
Lube oil pressure low gear box, manual override possible
Cooling water pressure, manual override possible

Main engine shut down override not possible.
Crank case oil mist
Major govener
Over speed, if I was betting worth betting on this one having played a role.

Auto slow down.
Lube oil temp engine override possible
Lube oil tem gear box override possible
Cooling water temp override possible
Exhaust temp override possible.

Other than this some kind of major failiure.

Loosing 4 prime movers? Takes some kind of special screw up.

Heavy weather loads fluctuate considerably. Generators don’t like fluctuating loads.
As screw comes out of water “load”rapidly comes off as screw speeds up cavitation is very high.
When screw goes back under load increases quickly

With direct drive over speed is possible. Options to avoid include reduce speed, rpm and altering course.

This ship is not direct drive it’s diesel electric. Not sure if it’s shaft or azipod or some other drive. Load fluctuations in 6 or 8 m seas would be large.

Sudden increase in load can cause generators to overload and trip.
Sudden decrease in load can cause generator to over speed and trip.

Shouldn’t happen to 4 though.

Prefererential trips to non essential house load should trip first giving warning to engineers generator having a problem. So load can be reduced avoiding shut down. Or additional generator started.
Most systems have a generator on auto start. To take extra load if required.

There are some unusual situations which can cause a cascade effect.
Not suggesting this is what happened I don’t know what happened.
Just it can happen.
If one fails it is possible the remains generator tries to drive the failed generator causing it to trip. Systems are protected to prevent this.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by boat driver

a number of large commercial vessels are having fuel difficulty with the new Ultra low surfer fuels required, particularly within the coasts when they change over from heavy bunkers. Quite often blends are developed on a custom or engine type- and if not exact engines shut down or misbehave. Once the shut down begins- tanks might be changed and the lines must be purged and everything bled till fuel is correct.

Originally Posted by GordMay

Does this remind us of anything - like, perhaps the Boeing 737 MAX?
The new 737 series performed its first flight on January 29, 2016, and gained FAA certification on March 8, 2017. The first delivery was a MAX 8 on May 6, 2017, to Malindo Air, which placed the aircraft into service on May 22, 2017. The 737 MAX is based on earlier 737 designs. It is re-engined with more efficient CFM International LEAP-1B engines, aerodynamic improvements (including distinctive split-tip winglets), and airframe modifications.

You read my mind.

I'd say they are at least analogous and their causes may turn out to be rooted in the same 'overly specialized or complicated syndrome' that is seemingly near-ubiquitous in the modern world.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

You read my mind.



I'd say they are at least analogous and their causes may turn out to be rooted in the same 'overly specialized or complicated syndrome' that is seemingly near-ubiquitous in the modern world.

What little reading I have done one the subject has me amazed at how poorly trained some pilots are.
The anti stall can take control of the airplane and drop the nose if a stall is sensed or conditions are good for one occurring.
Apparently many pilots didn’t even know of the existence of the system, nor how to disengage it.

However aircraft automation and poorly trained pilots are becoming the norm, the day of the retired Military pilot are pretty much gone, now we send pilots through puppy mill flight schools where they have very little actual experience and move them up as soon as minimums are met.
The Air France crash off the coast of Brazil where they stalled that Airbus all the way down from the flight levels and never figured out what was going on is more of that.


I am going to bet that in truth it’s going to come down to pilot training, that won’t satisfy everyone, there will be a warning system installed to indicate when this system activates, but if you don’t even know of the existence 0f a system that can take control of the airplane away from you, what are the odds that you know how to disengage it?

[NSboatman]

I read a blog where the fellow mentioned that he’d heard from ‘his sources’ that the shut-downs on the Viking sky were due to a loss of continuous cooling water from heavy rolling; which triggered ME auto-shut down. By the time the engineers manually over-rode the shut down, they were broadside to the swell and rolling even more heavily; causing all kinds of chaos above and below deck. Apparently that ship has two engine rooms with two engines each, specifically designed to be redundant... but something didn’t quite go as planned this time!

[hpeer]

Back to the El Faro loss. The root cause, loss of suction on the lube oil sump, was unknown to the Engineers. It was only discovered during the investigation when looking at cross sections that there was an asymmetry that would effect one tack more than the other.

A previous Engineer said he routinely kept the sump topped up because why not.

It’s another case where lack of information was fatal. Yet surely it should have been known at time of design?

[a64pilot]

There were no survivors from El Faro?
How do they know what happened, black box?

[hpeer]

There is a long report from the investigation. Basically they knew, or had strong clues, as to what was happening, which included a fire line through hull being damaged and spewing water. They could hear half of the conversation between the captain and the engineer. Then they went back to the ship design and sought something in the design that could explain the sequence of events, “Why did the engine shut down?”

In reviewing the crossections they saw the sump was asymmetrical, it would suck air faster on one tack than another. Once suction is lost it takes some work to reestablish. IIRC the engine died shortly after they changed course to combat excess heeling, to use the wind to stand her up. Interesting reading.

There were a lot of other factors contributing to the loss, including the Captains actions and various failures. My read was that, had they not lost the engine they stood a fighting chance. But without steerage they were toast.

See page 185.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/...ts/mar1701.pdf

[Gruz]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

There were no survivors from El Faro?
How do they know what happened, black box?

Conversations was recorded by the Vessel's Voyage Data Recorder (VDR).

[Franziska]

@a64

You can read a very detailed story on El Faro in one of my postings a bit earlier in this thread.
Also in the posting above there is the actual report.
Quite horrific story.

[Go Wildcats]

You list what happens with new aircraft. In the case of 737Max8, it doesn't fall under the same scrutiny as a new craft and little oversight is required.

Originally Posted by a64pilot

No, because what agency certified cruise ship design? Are there many, many cruise ships, all exactly identical to each other?

FAA is a bureaucracy, as such it’s very heavily staffed with Administrators, very heavily. But few Engineers. I’ve certified several small airplanes, in theory you can have the FAA certify an airplane, in reality that takes years, if it’s ever done, so what is done is Engineers that have their FAA DER are hired to certify designs and flight tests.
DER is designated engineering representative, that operate under FAA oversight. Unfortunately the overseer, often is not at all capable of the job, they were hired for reasons other than job proficiency.
Larger manufacturers self certify with FAA oversight, in theory, in reality the overseers have no real idea of what they are doing, they quote FAR’s and that is about the extent of it.

Then politics gets involved, this Senator or that Representative applies pressure, cause I want this aircraft approved by this date, my constituency needs it done.

The case of that that I am very familiar with was the Gulfstream G650.
Atlanta ACO was afraid after that one for a long time.
ACO is aircraft certification office.

Unfortunately the FAA has fallen victim of being a Government agency, as I’m sure NASA has, so therefore it has other agendas that must be met, that out prioritize the purpose of the agency.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by Go Wildcats

You list what happens with new aircraft. In the case of 737Max8, it doesn't fall under the same scrutiny as a new craft and little oversight is required.

All the aircraft that I have Certified, were all variations of an existing design, nothing was a clean sheet new design.
I’ve Certified 6 different aircraft, all single engine, one which the FAA considered a new design, although it wasn’t, in their opinion it was due to the expansion of the flight envelope.
However, you still have to check all of the boxes, some, many boxes are checked through analytical methods, but often it’s easier and faster to just do the flight.

However Boeing and any other major manufacturers like for instance Gulfstream essentially self certify, with FAA oversight. Same for the engine and propellor manufacturers.
The aircraft are too complex and the FAA simply doesn’t have near enough Engineers to do the job, in fact the FAA Engineers most often don’t get very involved in the process, and are sort of a dying breed, the FAA has become over the years extremely heavy with Administrators.

It’s actually more like an IRS audit, the FAA audits the paperwork, never even really inspects the aircraft, and the test flight only will check a very few test points, to validate the Company test flights.


However while I know absolutely nothing at all about any 737, that is orders of magnitude larger than anything I have flown, or ever will fly. I am absolutely certain that there is an emergency procedure for elevator trim runaway, and if I understand what happened, it was essentially an elevator trim runaway.

Of course it’s gone Political way back, but I’m certain in truth it’s going to come down to a lack of Pilot training, there will be a “fix” applied, but in truth it will come down to training or lack of.

I’m astonished that Commercial pilots are flying aircraft that they don’t know every single input in their flight controls and can’t diagram every component and talk about what it’s function is.

Look up the accident record of the 727, which was in truth a real hot rod, there were I believe three fatal accidents as it was first released, and all it was, was the pilots got in over their heads with an aircraft that had capabilities that they couldn’t handle.

This was simply an “oops” a safety system had more authority than realized, pilots didn’t even know of its existence, much less how to diagnose and handle a failure, and a whole lot of people died.