Another 40 containers!

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by chrisr

for the 21 years before i retired recently i was a director of a shipping company, and during that time i use to get quite worked up about people who know nothing of the industry pontificating about all it's problems and how they should be solved.

however since retirement, i just laugh

cheers,

Yeah? You think it is funny? if you're so smart then what is your solution?

AND,

It cannot be something that is not possible to do(like get everyone to do better)

It cannot be, Oh,htat is just a cost of our globalism economy.

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Presumably you are laughing at the proposed solutions rather than laughing at the problem of containers going overboard.

With your past experience in the industry, what do you recommend as a solution (genuine question)?

well, it's no good for my blood pressure but here goes

the basic problem is that ocean freight is way too cheap. a few hundred dollars to ship a container half way around the world ! really ?!...ridiculous...

however cartels of shippers have driven rates well below poverty levels for years, and people (ie freight people at walmart & general motors etc etc) won't pay extra for quality ships. they want the cheapest possible...and then cut rates each year

99% of owners want to look after their ships properly, but we can't do it on fresh air. if you want better quality ships, then ocean freights need to be higher by many multiples, even if this causes an enormous drag on the world economy. most folk will say 'ok' to this...but then squeal if their hairdryer costs more...or if they lose their job

the other point that people (many of whom should know better) tend to forget, is that 'ACCIDENTS HAPPEN'. there is no point sitting ashore criticising when sh1t happens at sea, because it always has and it always will. despite this, shipping remains much safer and less polluting than any other form of transport and you all need to recognise that

i know there is a small percentage of cowboys out there, and they deserve to get crucified...but it sickens people in the industry to see hard working, honest professionals who are doing their best getting hung out to dry by people who have absolutely no idea

anyway, it's time for me to self-medicate. if further info is needed, my standard consultation fee is $1500 per day + expenses.

cheers,

[ilenart]

Originally Posted by chrisr

well, it's no good for my blood pressure but here goes

the basic problem is that ocean freight is way too cheap. a few hundred dollars to ship a container half way around the world ! really ?!...ridiculous...

however cartels of shippers have driven rates well below poverty levels for years, and people (ie freight people at walmart & general motors etc etc) won't pay extra for quality ships. they want the cheapest possible...and then cut rates each year

99% of owners want to look after their ships properly, but we can't do it on fresh air. if you want better quality ships, then ocean freights need to be higher by many multiples, even if this causes an enormous drag on the world economy. most folk will say 'ok' to this...but then squeal if their hairdryer costs more...or if they lose their job

the other point that people (many of whom should know better) tend to forget, is that 'ACCIDENTS HAPPEN'. there is no point sitting ashore criticising when sh1t happens at sea, because it always has and it always will. despite this, shipping remains much safer and less polluting than any other form of transport and you all need to recognise that

i know there is a small percentage of cowboys out there, and they deserve to get crucified...but it sickens people in the industry to see hard working, honest professionals who are doing their best getting hung out to dry by people who have absolutely no idea

anyway, it's time for me to self-medicate. if further info is needed, my standard consultation fee is $1500 per day + expenses.

cheers,

So basically the industry should do nothing, its everyone else’s fault and accidents happen. Plus the industry needs a payrise.

[RaymondR]

If one cares to study the images critically it is obvious that not all the transverse rows of containers were able to come loose and fall off the ship. Why, heavy containers on the outside or improperly or inadequately transverse fastening? I mean they all had to experience the same accelerations and decelerations otherwise the ship would be twisted like a licorice.

[skipperpete]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Ping, thanks for those posts. Found them quite interesting, and in some contrast to my naive imagination as to the cause!

So, with your experience, what should the master of that vessel done to mitigate the problem? At some point, safety overcomes schedule pressures I'd think, but knowing that the P rolling could occur, could he have done better?

Being in charge ain't for sissies!

Jim

Hi Jim
I know this reply should have been made a few pages back but here’s at least a partial answer to your question. Yes the APL England master definitely had options to counter whatever roll the ship encountered, the ship has a seastate management program (called “Octopus”) that predicts both parametric and rythmic rolling and provides advice regarding heading, speed and ballasting to counter or pre empt severe rolling. After the APL China lost 400 containers and damaged another 400 many years ago it was deemed wise to study and plan for these 2 phenomena. (The full report is an interesting read, especially Guards testimony). Losing all way is part of the strategy and often requires shutting down the main engine because the machinery is direct coupled and lowest rpm( manoeuvering ) is around 15 depending on the specific engine which still maintains headway.
If the master chose to ignore the computer data he would have some difficult questions to answer from ATSB and AMSA
Both these ships are CMA-CGM owned.
Pete.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by chrisr

well, it's no good for my blood pressure but here goes

the basic problem is that ocean freight is way too cheap. a few hundred dollars to ship a container half way around the world ! really ?!...ridiculous...

however cartels of shippers have driven rates well below poverty levels for years, and people (ie freight people at walmart & general motors etc etc) won't pay extra for quality ships. they want the cheapest possible...and then cut rates each year

99% of owners want to look after their ships properly, but we can't do it on fresh air. if you want better quality ships, then ocean freights need to be higher by many multiples, even if this causes an enormous drag on the world economy. most folk will say 'ok' to this...but then squeal if their hairdryer costs more...or if they lose their job

the other point that people (many of whom should know better) tend to forget, is that 'ACCIDENTS HAPPEN'. there is no point sitting ashore criticising when sh1t happens at sea, because it always has and it always will. despite this, shipping remains much safer and less polluting than any other form of transport and you all need to recognise that

i know there is a small percentage of cowboys out there, and they deserve to get crucified...but it sickens people in the industry to see hard working, honest professionals who are doing their best getting hung out to dry by people who have absolutely no idea

anyway, it's time for me to self-medicate. if further info is needed, my standard consultation fee is $1500 per day + expenses.

cheers,

Certainly I have no wish to raise your BP any further and I'm happy to self medicate with you if circumstances permit

And while you have given us a good description of the problem and the whys and wherefores, I don't see any mention of a solution. You could get a job in Canberra

It seems to me there is no solution because there is no political will to fix it. That is, no universal political will anywhere because the cartels of shippers own the politicians - always have and likely always will. Clearly the problem of losing containers at sea can be fixed but most are not willing to pay the price.

[StoneCrab]

Is anyone tasked with collecting these containers?

I guess what I am asking is whether the shipping company is obligated to recover these containers? Are there container salvage companies tracking and going after containers, or is it really just a danger that lurks until the container sinks?

Living in America, our reputation is litigious. If you hit a container, can you go after the shipping company that lost it for damages?

[Montanan]

https://gcaptain.com/apl-england-mas...eid=5626ef2c30

The Master of the APL England appeared in a Queensland court on Monday to face two charges related to the loss of about 50 containers overboard during heavy weather.

Mohamad Zulkhaili Bin Alias, 43, is charged with two offenses related to discharging garbage into the sea and failure to ensure his vessel was operated in a safe manner. Specifics of the charges are laid out below.
Reference link above for the details.

The charges carry maximum penalties in excess of $300,000.

The Singapore-flagged APL England lost about 50 containers overboard and dozens more were damaged after the ship lost propulsion in heavy weather off the coast of Sydney on Sunday, May 24.
The ship was able to restore power and arrived at the Port of Brisbane where it remains under detention.
A spokesperson for the Australian Maritime Safety Authority said previously that the authority’s inspection of the ship had revealed that lashing arrangements for cargo were inadequate and securing points for containers on the deck of the ship were heavily corroded.

[CassidyNZ]

I don’t really know the exact details of container design other than that which I’ve encountered in my transport career. My probably limited understanding of container twist locks is that the bottom container locks the the ship, the next one locks to the one below and so on. Happy to learn if my understanding is incorrect.

Looking at how the containers hang off the side of these ships sort of supports my thinking.

My uninformed question is: Why are these containers not turned into large blocks by fitting a “strap” for want of a better description, that locks into the twist lock apertures across the top of the top layer and laterally binds all the containers from port to starboard into a huge “solid” block?

If a stack of 6 containers have lateral inertia, the moment of leverage on the bottom set of twist locks must be absolutely enormous. But if each stack of boxes is connected to the stack alongside, the combined strength would be massively enhanced.

Just idly musing - how wrong am I in my thinking?

[Dsanduril]

Containers are connected to the ship by lashing. Sometimes to the deck, sometimes to a lashing bridge. But usually only the bottom deck level container across the entire ship (the lashing is usually connected to the bottom of the second container in the stack), and then the next one(s) up on the outer columns, but that all depends on the ship and the crew.

More than you wanted to know about container lashings.

A pretty typical outboard lashing:



You can see that the lashing actually goes to the bottom of the blue container at the aft end (so the top of that particular stack). Further forward you can see the lashings at the corners of the third level containers, but not further up in the fourth level.

Here's another:

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by chrisr

the other point that people (many of whom should know better) tend to forget, is that 'ACCIDENTS HAPPEN'. there is no point sitting ashore criticising when sh1t happens at sea, because it always has and it always will. despite this, shipping remains much safer and less polluting than any other form of transport and you all need to recognise that

Hi Chris,

I hope the medication works. *grin*

From my perspective things look a little different. I get to the same place you do.

Absent extraordinary events ships and their rigging as designed will hold. Designs are pretty cookie cutter for rigging and it's hard to mess that up. Builders are variable but again the rigging bits are bought from purpose vendors and pretty consistent. The variables I see are twofold: installation and maintenance. Good deck crew and longshoreman cost money. So does training. So does inspection. Maintenance also costs money. As Chris has said, competitive pressures are a race to the bottom on cost.

Why do you think your Apple earbuds ship from China so fast at such low cost? Shipping fairies? Why do you think you can get avocados year round? Why is NZ surplus lamb so cheap in the Bahamas? Those Gilroy CA garlic bulbs in Hawai'i? Electronics and appliances for Asia in the US and South Pacific?

The shipping industry (everything, not just containers) has a pretty good safety record even as things stand. I get the angst. I feel it also. The numbers are pretty good. If they aren't at 6σ they are close. Accidents happen.

If you want zero accidents the world economy will stop.

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by CassidyNZ

I don’t really know the exact details of container design other than that which I’ve encountered in my transport career. My probably limited understanding of container twist locks is that the bottom container locks the the ship, the next one locks to the one below and so on. Happy to learn if my understanding is incorrect.

Looking at how the containers hang off the side of these ships sort of supports my thinking.

My uninformed question is: Why are these containers not turned into large blocks by fitting a “strap” for want of a better description, that locks into the twist lock apertures across the top of the top layer and laterally binds all the containers from port to starboard into a huge “solid” block?

If a stack of 6 containers have lateral inertia, the moment of leverage on the bottom set of twist locks must be absolutely enormous. But if each stack of boxes is connected to the stack alongside, the combined strength would be massively enhanced.

Just idly musing - how wrong am I in my thinking?

i promised myself i would not get sucked into this, but here i go again...groan

all container ships have a detailed lashing plan, prepared by naval architects and approved by class.

containers are lashed in accordance with this plan - not ad hoc

container lashings includes a myriad of different items - stacking cones, double cones, twist locks, double twist locks, bridging pieces, lashing bars, turnbuckles and penguins to name a few

go to somewhere like https://www.teccontainer.com.au/cont...ing-equipment/ to see what they all look like and do.

onboard lashing equipment is a consumable and is constantly being replaced as it gets lost or damaged

containers are carefully positioned onboard relative to their weight etc, and proper cargo planning, with multiple load and discharge ports, is a real art form - if you want to minimise re-stows.

i do not have any first hand knowledge however my impression is that the problem on APL England is due to hard lashing points on deck failing (due to rust ?)...but i may be wrong.

cheers,

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by skipperpete

Hi Jim
I know this reply should have been made a few pages back but here’s at least a partial answer to your question. Yes the APL England master definitely had options to counter whatever roll the ship encountered, the ship has a seastate management program (called “Octopus”) that predicts both parametric and rythmic rolling and provides advice regarding heading, speed and ballasting to counter or pre empt severe rolling. After the APL China lost 400 containers and damaged another 400 many years ago it was deemed wise to study and plan for these 2 phenomena. (The full report is an interesting read, especially Guards testimony). Losing all way is part of the strategy and often requires shutting down the main engine because the machinery is direct coupled and lowest rpm( manoeuvering ) is around 15 depending on the specific engine which still maintains headway.
If the master chose to ignore the computer data he would have some difficult questions to answer from ATSB and AMSA
Both these ships are CMA-CGM owned.
Pete.

not wanting to be picky, but i believe the correct pandi club name spelling is GARD

norwegain club we used for years...nice guys

cheers,

[CassidyNZ]

So right there is the naïveté of my suggestion. I always lived under the misconception that there was an ISO standard for container sizes and that they were all the same. Duh.

Seems like manufacturers make containers almost randomly and perhaps if they’re running out of material, they just make them smaller. There are probably a dozen different sizes right there in the picture. No wonder they can’t keep these thing stable.

What does the term “ISO container” actually mean?

If the container size was actually demonstrably standard, it would be like assembling LEGO bricks and anyone who has assembled a block of interlocking LEGO bricks will attest the the strength of the structure. If containers were loaded and secured like that, they would never lose any over the side. (IMHO )

[Bill Seal]

ISO hell, I believe the standards were set de-facto bu SeaLand back in the late '50s and everybody else had to follow in order to have them fit the ships. Just like all semi trailers have the same 5th wheel configuration or they would just sit in the yard waiting for the right tractor to show up.
Our boat slip is in LA harbor, so we see lots of container ships, and we've noticed some new ones with a rigid framework above deck to reinforce the lashing.
Some also have bow thrusters to cut down on tugboat charges - and to piss off the unions.