Forum Home
PC World Chat
 
Thread ID: 121000 2011-10-07 04:24:00 Ship at the Mount - need to reconvene PC World Rescue group Digby (677) PC World Chat
Post ID Timestamp Content User
1236039 2011-10-18 20:17:00 Purely as a matter of interest, does anyone have an explanation why Britain, with all its resources made the same mess as us, with the Napoli in 2007??


en.wikipedia.org

Winston, Procrastination and Hand Wringing seemed to feature in that disaster too but here’s one for you.

In 1986 New Zealand became the only country outside of wartime to sink a Russian Ship, the Mikhail Lennontov. Yes, our very own Don Jamieson who was Piloting the vessel at the time thought it was a fishing boat and took it to pick up Craypots in the Marlborough Sounds. Or something like that. ;)

Anyway, I’ve been told that the ship was carrying about 3000 tonnes of fuel oil at the time, which was pumped out cold from a depth of 38m and without any fuss or bother or major environmental impact. Just imagine if 3000 tonnes of fuel oil had dispersed itself around the Marlborough Sounds. :eek:

Which begs the question of “how could they do it then and not now”?

So I remain unrepentant. I still believe that within the first four days of beautiful weather the fuel oil should have been unloaded as well as many of the containers.

Much has been made of the fact that the Rena had no cranes of its own, but given that there were two empty Logging Ships sitting in the Roadstead, with cranes, and the fact they could raft right up to the stern, I fail to see why they weren’t used. Yes I know they were Logging Ships and not designed for containers, so had no Twistlocks to hold them, but, it was flat calm and only 20km from a Container Port with perfectly adequate cranes to unload with. Sure it may have taken more than one trip but so what. 		B.M. (505)
1236040 2011-10-18 20:50:00 Anyway, I’ve been told that the ship was carrying about 3000 tonnes of fuel oil at the time, which was pumped out cold from a depth of 38m and without any fuss or bother or major environmental impact . Just imagine if 3000 tonnes of fuel oil had dispersed itself around the Marlborough Sounds . :eek:

Which begs the question of “how could they do it then and not now”?


Yes indeed . Here's a clip from one detailed report:



"Immediately after she sank divers were at work ensuring that any oil leaks were stopped and were then employed to recover the ship's safes and the Gold content of the duty free store for the owners . Shortly thereafter a second crew moved in to remove the environmental threat posed by the oil still on board the wreck and sixteen hundred tonnes of fuel and lubricants were removed . "




Link: Mikhail Lermontov ( . nzmaritime . co . nz/lermontov . htm" target="_blank">www . nzmaritime . co . nz)



I don't want to hijack the thread, but a little more background on the sinking of the Mikhail Lermontov:



"Passengers reported that the ship had gone between the Light-house and the end of Cape Jackson instead of clearing the rocky reef which extended past Walker Rock and was clearly shown on the charts . The vessel was drawing about 27 feet and Captain Jamison claimed his understanding of the depth in the channel to be 35 to 40 feet . It can be seen from the above chart that there was ample room for the Mikhail Lermontov to have passed through the channel had she missed the major rock pinnacles . However it would have been a very foolhardy course to take for anyone aware of the presence of the rocks . "


That a local Harbour Board's pilot is on board does not ensure the safety of any vessel . (Capt Jamison was the Marlborough Harbour Boards's pilot) . 		WalOne (4202)
1236041 2011-10-18 22:17:00 Thanks for the link Wal, very interesting.

Yes whether the Mikhail Lermontov was carrying 1600 tonnes or 3000 tonnes of fuel oil is fairly irrelevant in terms of the outcome, given that it was all recovered. Seeing what 300 tonnes did along the Mount Maunganui coastline makes me shudder thinking of the outcome if it happened in the Marlborough Sounds. At least we have predominately West/Norwest winds and not a lot between here and Chile. We’ll consider this payback for the Volcanic Ash they sent us, ;) although if the rest is spilt and the wind changes to the East it won’t be a pretty sight. :groan: 		B.M. (505)
1236042 2011-10-18 22:31:00 Thanks for the link Wal, very interesting.

Yes whether the Mikhail Lermontov was carrying 1600 tonnes or 3000 tonnes of fuel oil is fairly irrelevant in terms of the outcome, given that it was all recovered. Seeing what 300 tonnes did along the Mount Maunganui coastline makes me shudder thinking of the outcome if it happened in the Marlborough Sounds. At least we have predominately West/Norwest winds and not a lot between here and Chile. We’ll consider this payback for the Volcanic Ash they sent us, ;) although if the rest is spilt and the wind changes to the East it won’t be a pretty sight. :groan:

Apologies if you saw that as a correction. I was seeking to highlight the fact that there was a significant amount of fuel oil recovered, and speedily.

Apples with apples, though, the Mikhail Lermontov was in relatively shallow but protected waters when she sank, and in very calm conditions. 4 - 5 metre swells, a reef, and high winds are all against the vessel at Tauranga.

PS: Interesting that Capt Jamison's evidence was embargoed, I guess we'll never definitively know what happened. 		WalOne (4202)
1236043 2011-10-18 23:46:00 Fair questions BM. The major difference was that the Lermontov sank inshore rather than out at sea.

If emptying a laden container ship and/or towing it somewhere safe is so simple, I have to ask yet again - why didn't the British do exactly that? Only 100km away was the Royal Navy at Portsmouth with more tugs, fuel tenders, heavy lift cranes, and nuclear submarines than you could shake a stick at. 		Winston001 (3612)
1236044 2011-10-19 00:38:00 Apples with apples, though, the Mikhail Lermontov was in relatively shallow but protected waters when she sank, and in very calm conditions . 4 - 5 metre swells, a reef, and high winds are all against the vessel at Tauranga .

PS: Interesting that Capt Jamison's evidence was embargoed, I guess we'll never definitively know what happened .

Wal, I like the idea of comparing Apples with Apples . ;)

The Mikhail Lermontov sank in 37m of water which meant decompression for Divers working on it . The Rena is above water at the moment (but the back will be in about the same depth when it falls off) . ;)

The Rena HAD all Power and Auxiliaries still working days after its grounding, as opposed to the Mikhail Lermontov’s state .

In the case of the Rena the seas were flat calm for the first four days, which were wasted with meetings and Media Conferences .

That was the window of opportunity .

Now knowing the Reef as I do, I wouldn’t want to be anywhere near it in a decent blow, so I don’t blame the crew, including the Salvage Crew, getting out . My ***** is, and has always been, the waste of time and lack of action in perfect weather .

In the case of the Mikhail Lermontov, we had immediate action and despite it lying on the bottom, an environmental disaster was avoided .

In Rena’s case it sat perched on a rock for four beautiful days whilst numerous meetings were held, along with Media Conferences, with no attempt being made to salvage the ship or any of its fuel or cargo .

Plus, even though it was flat calm, no attempt was made to Corral up the oil seen leaking from the ship with a Boom of any sort . Here’s (http://www . gunderboom . com/) one designed for the job . (by Cicerio) ;)
I know Booms are not much use in rough conditions, but you wouldn’t get it any calmer than it was in the first few days and for quite a few days between storms .

Let's face it, all oil corralled and bunkered at sea doesn’t have to be dealt with on land .

Fourteen days on and what has been achieved?? Sweet FA .

And yes, Jamison's evidence being embargoed is another example of the worth of these enquiries . Add that to Erebus, Cave Creek, Pike River, the list goes on . Basically they are just cover-up’s . 		B.M. (505)
1236045 2011-10-19 01:14:00 Fair questions BM . The major difference was that the Lermontov sank inshore rather than out at sea .

If emptying a laden container ship and/or towing it somewhere safe is so simple, I have to ask yet again - why didn't the British do exactly that? Only 100km away was the Royal Navy at Portsmouth with more tugs, fuel tenders, heavy lift cranes, and nuclear submarines than you could shake a stick at .

Well, I don’t think you can compare the two events other than the shiny asses not being able to make up their mind just what they were doing .

In one case you have the Napoli splitting open in a howling gale flooding the engine room and the crew having to be rescued .

On the other hand you have the Rena with its bow perched on a rock in beautiful conditions . (initially) . :D

I know which one I’d prefer to deal with . :D 		B.M. (505)
1236046 2011-10-22 23:12:00 Here you go Cicero a Boom at last. :clap

Clearly Maritime NZ read PF1 :lol:

But I wonder why one wouldn’t work two weeks ago but all of a sudden will? :rolleyes:

Here (www.sunlive.co.nz)

“MNZ says four vessels were being prepared to go to the site as part of an on-water recovery operation. Heavy-duty booms would be used to "corral" the oil and skimmers would then remove it from the water”.

And isn't it odd how if you spill 10 tonne of oil it's hardly significant, but if you pump the same amount it's a huge achievement. :confused: 		B.M. (505)
1236047 2011-10-22 23:32:00 Here you go Cicero a Boom at last. :clap

Clearly Maritime NZ read PF1 :lol:

But I wonder why one wouldn’t work two weeks ago but all of a sudden will? :rolleyes:

Here (www.sunlive.co.nz)

“MNZ says four vessels were being prepared to go to the site as part of an on-water recovery operation. Heavy-duty booms would be used to "corral" the oil and skimmers would then remove it from the water”.

And isn't it odd how if you spill 10 tonne of oil it's hardly significant, but if you pump the same amount it's a huge achievement. :confused:
Why they haven't got a direct line is beyond me! 		Cicero (40)
1236048 2011-10-22 23:50:00 Why they haven't got a direct line is beyond me!

But wait, we can be of further help. :thumbs:

From the link in my previous post.

“MNZ says planning teams are now doing trajectory modelling to assess where the oil is likely to head.”

Answer: Chile.

Now I wonder how much time and cost has that bit of info has saved them? :banana 		B.M. (505)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25