http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...KER.xml&rpc=22

I thought double hulls would end all spills.

Bob,

I don't know why you would believe that. I am not saying that I think
that they are not a good feature.

As a follower of such things, I have noted that in some of the losses by
grounding, the double hull will possibly prevent a tank from breaching
and maybe allow a savage crew time to unload the ship before it breaks
up. Please take not of the conditional phrases.

In the reference article, there is no mention of plating damage (they
don't say water came into the voids), so there is no certainty that the
double hull was any factor here.

Since there have been three recent losses where ships broke up at sea,
there is no reason to expect that the situation will inprove any where
but Prince William Sound.

The real failure of the Exxon Valdez event was the failure of the oil
shipper to fulfill their promise to stage spill control equipment in
fast striking distance to the oil port. It is there now.

The double hull tankers may have a shorter life due to the higher
maintenance requirement. This means they will end up in the hands of
less capable shipping companies sooner than the others.

What I am waiting to see the impact of is the Double-Double tankers.
These are double hull tankers with twin power plants and even including
twin sterring engines - complete redundency. No single device failure
can leave the ship without manuerving capability.

Matt Colie - Licensed Marine and ex-tankerman

Bob Crantz wrote:

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...KER.xml&rpc=22

I thought double hulls would end all spills.

I wonder what caused that cruise ship to sink in the Med. Any
ideas?

Scotty



"Matt Colie" wrote in message
...
Bob,

I don't know why you would believe that. I am not saying that
I think
that they are not a good feature.

As a follower of such things, I have noted that in some of the
losses by
grounding, the double hull will possibly prevent a tank from
breaching
and maybe allow a savage crew time to unload the ship before it
breaks
up. Please take not of the conditional phrases.

In the reference article, there is no mention of plating damage
(they
don't say water came into the voids), so there is no certainty
that the
double hull was any factor here.

Since there have been three recent losses where ships broke up
at sea,
there is no reason to expect that the situation will inprove
any where
but Prince William Sound.

The real failure of the Exxon Valdez event was the failure of
the oil
shipper to fulfill their promise to stage spill control
equipment in
fast striking distance to the oil port. It is there now.

The double hull tankers may have a shorter life due to the
higher
maintenance requirement. This means they will end up in the
hands of
less capable shipping companies sooner than the others.

What I am waiting to see the impact of is the Double-Double
tankers.
These are double hull tankers with twin power plants and even
including
twin sterring engines - complete redundency. No single device
failure
can leave the ship without manuerving capability.

Matt Colie - Licensed Marine and ex-tankerman

Bob Crantz wrote:


http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...=scienceNews&s
toryid=2006-02-02T191116Z_01_N02299301_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENVIRONMENT-T
ANKER.xml&rpc=22

I thought double hulls would end all spills.

"Matt Colie" wrote in message
news:

What I am waiting to see the impact of is the Double-Double
tankers.
These are double hull tankers with twin power plants and even
including
twin sterring engines - complete redundency. No single device
failure
can leave the ship without manuerving capability.

Matt Colie - Licensed Marine and ex-tankerman

Bob Crantz wrote:

I thought double hulls would end all spills.



No way that "double hulls" will guarantee no spill a la Exxon
Valdez...... there's a good chance that even with a double hull, she
would have breached some tanks, considering how far up into the hull the
rocks went, though hopefully the cargo tank breaches will be greatly
limited versus single hull vessels.
One big question still remains and hopefully won't be answered..... a
1,000' container ship doing 25k slams into the side of a tanker. How far
will she penetrate if she hits between webframes?
BTW all ships have multiple steering motors.... it's the rudders that
are generally singular.

Keep in mind "otn's law"
Anything designed by man, built by man, operated by man, maintained by
man is subject to catastrophic failure due to any one or combination of,
the above factors.

otn

otnmbrd wrote:
"Matt Colie" wrote in message
news:
What I am waiting to see the impact of is the Double-Double
tankers.
These are double hull tankers with twin power plants and even
including
twin sterring engines - complete redundency. No single device
failure
can leave the ship without manuerving capability.
Matt Colie - Licensed Marine and ex-tankerman

Bob Crantz wrote:

I thought double hulls would end all spills.




No way that "double hulls" will guarantee no spill a la Exxon
Valdez...... there's a good chance that even with a double hull, she
would have breached some tanks, considering how far up into the hull the
rocks went, though hopefully the cargo tank breaches will be greatly
limited versus single hull vessels.
One big question still remains and hopefully won't be answered..... a
1,000' container ship doing 25k slams into the side of a tanker. How far
will she penetrate if she hits between webframes?
BTW all ships have multiple steering motors.... it's the rudders that
are generally singular.

Keep in mind "otn's law"
Anything designed by man, built by man, operated by man, maintained by
man is subject to catastrophic failure due to any one or combination of,
the above factors.

otn
otnmbrd
I did not say multiple motors, I said steering engines (admittedly
misspelled). The vast majority of ships out there have ONE Steering
engine. That is one single hydraulic unit that may have twin circuits
(most do not) but most do have two motors for two hydraulic pumps. This
even goes for the rare twin shaft/twin rudder ship. Those that I have
run have that do have twin rudders still have a single steering engine
with the requisit two pumps. This new class of Double-Doubles actually
have two steering engines - one per rudder. What I have not confirmed
is if this class still has the redundent hydraulic pumps on each
steering engine.
Matt Colie

Matt Colie wrote in
news:

otnmbrd
I did not say multiple motors, I said steering engines (admittedly
misspelled). The vast majority of ships out there have ONE Steering
engine. That is one single hydraulic unit that may have twin circuits
(most do not) but most do have two motors for two hydraulic pumps.
This even goes for the rare twin shaft/twin rudder ship. Those that I
have run have that do have twin rudders still have a single steering
engine with the requisit two pumps. This new class of Double-Doubles
actually have two steering engines - one per rudder. What I have not
confirmed is if this class still has the redundent hydraulic pumps on
each steering engine.
Matt Colie


Possible question of semantics as well as aging memory.
I think I see what you are talking about, but I need to check something, as
I think the required redundancy runs further down the system than you are
saying.

otn

"Scotty" wrote in message

I wonder what caused that cruise ship to sink in the Med. Any
ideas?

It would be so cool if it was an American Suicide Bomber...... showing the
Ragheads how it's done!

CM

Bwahahahahahahaha, most likey one of Iran's Naval mines. Time to
invade.

Joe

Nothing worse than maintaining a double hull, sweats, and impossiable
angles to needle gun. We use to suitup in coveralls, go in the voids
with a wash down gun and spray the voids with pure fish oil. What a fun
summer job.

Joe

Joe,
Yes, that was part of the additional maintenance I was refering to early
in the thread and it is a a lot of what drove me to get a License
instead of working a card the rest of my life.
What did you work on?
Matt Colie


Joe wrote:
Nothing worse than maintaining a double hull, sweats, and impossiable
angles to needle gun. We use to suitup in coveralls, go in the voids
with a wash down gun and spray the voids with pure fish oil. What a fun
summer job.

Joe