There may be a delay in some deliveries ...

Ooops !!

**LINK**

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/24/suez-canal-blocked-ship-unable-turn-around/

MichaelG.

It's probably full of lathes...

EVERGREEN along the ship's side.

EVER GIVEN all through the text.

E VER STUCK... Fortunately , no!

I wonder how they managed to go aground in the first place. Too deep a draught for the canal?

I hate to think of the cost of:

a) removing that sand

b) the cost of delay to all the other ships

Matt

It is reported to have been swung around by a gust of wind.

It appears Evergreen Marine is the operator and the ships name is Ever Given, that’s always going to be confusing, what were they thinking?

Mike

It was pretty tight n both canals in the 1980s

We were swinging from the trees in some parts of the Panama Canal

Nowadays the margin for error will be even smaller as companies squeeze every dollar out of the system and they go after continuous each way traffic

Driving a monster like that in a cross wind at slow speed is just asking for trouble

EDIT

The boat sales guys will be having a field day trading for booze and ciggies alongside the stranded convoy

Edited By Ady1 on 24/03/2021 13:27:36

Just heard on the BBC so it must be true that the price of oil has gone up on 'fears' of supply shortage due to this incident, they don't miss a bloody trick do they?

Tony

If that ship breaks its back, then there would be a really big problem.

Apparently they have already moved it.

Link

Mr Philips must have been the navigation officer.

Mark P.

> Evergreen Marine is the operator and the ships name is Ever Given, that’s always going to be confusing, what were they thinking?

Well, how often do people not in the trade need to worry about the names of Suezmax vessels?

>I wonder how they managed to go aground in the first place.

Very good question, and I wouldn't believe any of the explanations proposed so far. Basically, big ships are incredibly tricky to steer in narrow channels - Suez is tidal, there are weird hydrodynamic effects at play, there is wind, and the guy steering is some underpaid, undertrained dude who may not speak the boss's language very well. Once something goes wrong, 160,000 tons of boat takes a while to arrive wherever it's going.

Winds and breakdown are very plausible explanations, but the thing is: the owners are right now looking at an extraordinary set of liabilities that will keep lawyers in fine wine for years. They will not be admitting that someone was asleep at the wheel any time soon, whatever the truth.

.

Valid comment when you posted it ... but the detail has since been updated.

MichaelG

The BBC asked Suez-experienced mariners about this, and one said that ships are piloted through the canal, in fact have to take on a "canal crew" whose actual tasks apart from that of the pilot on the bridge, appear rather vague.

So I can't imagine this was a case of "someone falling asleep at the wheel" (or whatever is used now - it's not usually any sort of wheel) despite as they said, it being a very monotonous journey.

Nor would I believe the helmsman was untrained, inexperienced and unlikely to understand the captain's language, having helped bring the vessel right round from Holland on this voyage at least.

The thought has just occurred to me though, is using the side-thrusters banned in the canal, for obvious reasons?

'

The Suez Canal is stated as the giving the shortest distance between SE Asia and Europe. If as projected, the Arctic becomes navigable for much of the year, would that be shorter still? There is a shipping-lane right along the Siberian coast, but it has to be kept open by ice-breakers. A "plan" map in my atlas, of the Arctic, set me wondering if any near-Great Circle might open through the Bering Strait, joining NW Europe with SE Asia and the Antipodes.

Apparently it's carrying over 22 million badgers

Like most industrial accidents, it was probably a combination of things. There were 30mph winds. All it would take would be a main engine failure or steering gear failure and the combination would be catastrophic.

Although, another report says there was a 40 knot sandstorm obscuring visibility at the time. No idea if that would affect radar and GPS etc or whatever they use these days?

Edited By Hopper on 25/03/2021 01:51:56

Well if it takes a gale in this country to blow over an artic lorry, then a ship of that size becomes a wonderful "sail" to a mere breeze of 30mph.

If the ships hull has been damaged by the simple analogy of a simply supported beam at both ends, the weight of the unsupported midship could be catastrophic to this vessel.

Regards to all

Derek

a ship of that size becomes a wonderful "sail" to a mere breeze of 30mph.

It has been reported that there was a sandstorm at the time of the incident & apparently it was the wind that caused the ship too deviate from it's course more quickly than they could correct it.

Also being reported by the salvage company appointed to refloat the vessel that it could take several days to sort things out.

Nigel B.

No doubt the Dutch will be there, smit, or weismuller. If the helmsman was not using the bow thrusters, or could not bring them in very quickly, in a wind this vessel would be uncontrolable in a narrow seaway. I know what it's like when everything goes wrong at the wrong moment - Those awfully nice chaps from the RAF gave me a ride in their helicopter !!!!!! Check out the LAGIK at port sutton bridge, Lincolnshire on one of the rivers to see what happens ! Noel

Edited By noel shelley on 25/03/2021 09:51:01

From the reports anyone wpuld think that the canal is totally blocked. This is not so. The ship is stuck in one of the 2 parallel navigation channels. The old route is still open for navigation. There are also a couple of crossover channels between the 2 canals to allow for such incidents. I think that only the biggest of the new super freighters will be held up. As they make up less than 10% of the freighter fleet, the situation is not as bad as portrayed by the sensationalist media.

regards