Cargo Ship on Fire

[Tupaia]

A car carrier has caught fire in the Atlantic. All aboard are safe but some unhappy customers.


Cargo of 4,000 vehicles, which includes 1,100 Porsches, 189 Bentleys and an unknown number of Audis is adrift on fire and unattended. In the USA Today article one gentleman was quoted as saying he got a call from the dealer telling him his $123,000 Boxster Spyder, that he's been waiting for since August, was possibly on fire drifting in the ocean. OMG!


https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/17/t...ars/index.html

[psk125]

Surprised they weren't able to get a fire suppression system going. Perhaps Panama doesn't require them on board.

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by psk125

Surprised they weren't able to get a fire suppression system going. Perhaps Panama doesn't require them on board.

Never be 'surprised' about the lack of safety on flag of convienience ships.What is surprising is that the insurance companies continue to insure them.

[slipaway]

I read there may be electric vehicles on board. If so, the lithium batteries present additional firefighting challenges. It is even possible an existing suppression system may not be as effective. Generally fire suppression systems will not extinguish lithium-ion battery fires, just contain them for a period of time. In the open bay of a car carrier that is probably even less likely. It looks like there needs to be new standards for transporting e-vehicles.

[Checkswrecks]

Originally Posted by slipaway

I read there may be electric vehicles on board. If so, the lithium batteries present additional firefighting challenges. It is even possible an existing suppression system may not be as effective. Generally fire suppression systems will not extinguish lithium-ion battery fires, just contain them for a period of time. In the open bay of a car carrier that is probably even less likely. It looks like there needs to be new standards for transporting e-vehicles.

Read the same.

There was a major fire that burned down a parking structure in Stavanger Norway and at first they thought it was started by an EV, but they now believe it was started at a diesel vehicle. Once started, it doesn't really matter, as the leaking fuel runs beneath other cars to open ICE fuel systems and overheat EV batteries.

Suppression systems generally use foam which smothers a fuel fire but doesn't work well with EV cars. The foam comes down from above, but the batteries are mounted to the bottoms of the cars. The car bodies shed the suppressant and the foam can insulate the overheating battery to keep it hot.

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by slipaway

I read there may be electric vehicles on board. If so, the lithium batteries present additional firefighting challenges. It is even possible an existing suppression system may not be as effective. Generally fire suppression systems will not extinguish lithium-ion battery fires, just contain them for a period of time. In the open bay of a car carrier that is probably even less likely. It looks like there needs to be new standards for transporting e-vehicles.

That car carrier disaster in Brunswick Georgia also claimed it went aground and wrecked due to a fire amongst the cars aboard.. There are no "standards and yes fire risk will skyrocket the more EV s are shipped.

[Midnight Son]

Originally Posted by geoleo

That car carrier disaster in Brunswick Georgia also claimed it went aground and wrecked due to a fire amongst the cars aboard.. There are no "standards and yes fire risk will skyrocket the more EV s are shipped.

I believe the Brunswick one, was due to improper ballasting of the ship. Last I saw from Coast Guard, as reported on gCaptain.
Fire happened when ship went over, cars tore loose, and caught fire. This is after grounding/foundering.

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by Midnight Son

I believe the Brunswick one, was due to improper ballasting of the ship. Last I saw from Coast Guard, as reported on gCaptain.
Fire happened when ship went over, cars tore loose, and caught fire. This is after grounding/foundering.

Not initially- The Pilot said a fire report made him deliberately run ship aground to save it(actually to save himself )... However he was going thru a very sharp turn in a very restricted waterway at over 20mph. in a huge top heavy ship. I followed the entire salvage and never heard of any fire evidence DUH

[geoleo]

US port rules only allow less than a quart of fuel in the cars while being shipped--however when they arrive they just start them up and drive them off!!! maybe send some midjets aboard with fuel cans??lol

[boat driver]

Originally Posted by geoleo

Not initially- The Pilot said a fire report made him deliberately run ship aground to save it(actually to save himself )... However he was going thru a very sharp turn in a very restricted waterway at over 20mph. in a huge top heavy ship. I followed the entire salvage and never heard of any fire evidence DUH

To bad you quote knowledge by ignorance and without reading the final investigation. Perfect example of why social media is so persuasive yet incorrect.

[captmikem]

Originally Posted by psk125

Surprised they weren't able to get a fire suppression system going. Perhaps Panama doesn't require them on board.

Panama ships are IMO SOLAS compliant. Ships non IMO compliant ships can not enter ports in just about any city in the world.

Chapter II-2 - Fire protection, fire detection and fire extinction
Includes detailed fire safety provisions for all ships and specific measures for passenger ships, cargo ships and tankers.

They include the following principles: division of the ship into main and vertical zones by thermal and structural boundaries; separation of accommodation spaces from the remainder of the ship by thermal and structural boundaries; restricted use of combustible materials; detection of any fire in the zone of origin; containment and extinction of any fire in the space of origin; protection of the means of escape or of access for fire-fighting purposes; ready availability of fire-extinguishing appliances; minimization of the possibility of ignition of flammable cargo vapour.

[Midnight Son]

geoleo, is correct in one. A fire really started going, during cutting operations. The salvors had to recheck the welded lifting brackets, after the fire was put out.

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by boat driver

To bad you quote knowledge by ignorance and without reading the final investigation. Perfect example of why social media is so persuasive yet incorrect.

To bad you are you.lol Why was a huge top heavy ship going over 20mph in a inside dredged channel thru a sharp curve?? Could it be pilot error? Maybe he was trying to outrun the non existent fire. Improperly ballasted? Oh sure-if he was fully ballasted to max draft in this inside dredged channel be would be aground and would not be able to go over 20mph! lol

[Cheechako]

Must have been a Tesla aboard!

Those poor millionaires! How embarassing, now they'll have to drive the Rolls or Land Rover another year!

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by Midnight Son

geoleo, is correct in one. A fire really started going, during cutting operations. The salvors had to recheck the welded lifting brackets, after the fire was put out.

Yeah- I knew about that one . The chain threw off lotsa sparks.