Man, all this work and in the end they praise god !

I’m sure there will be changes to how big ships like this transit the canal, I wouldn’t mind betting that in the future escort tugs will be tethered to the stern of larger vessels during transit.

Kent350787 wrote:

Ever Given has finally been freed!

Sorry for paywalled reporting https://www.smh.com.au/world/middle-eas ... 57ezh.html

Sorry to be the party pooper, but no it hasn't. Just the stern of the ship has been freed. The bow still is stuck in the mud. According to Boskalis - Peter Berdowski - the hardest part has yet to come.

Dutchy wrote:

Kent350787 wrote:

Ever Given has finally been freed!

Sorry for paywalled reporting https://www.smh.com.au/world/middle-eas ... 57ezh.html

Sorry to be the party pooper, but no it hasn't. Just the stern of the ship has been freed. The bow still is stuck in the mud. According to Boskalis - Peter Berdowski - the hardest part has yet to come.

The reporting is difficult to keep up with - the rudder had been freed yesterday, and today's reporitng had been more positive.

Looks like the stern has been extracted from the embankment.
Bow still stuck. (Mon Mar 29 07:03:00 UTC 2021)
ref: https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/ho ... 38/zoom:14
no idea if they will start to pass traffic behind the stern.

They said she is now "partially afloat". I thought that has always been the situation (i.e. not sunk)

cskok8 wrote:

They said she is now "partially afloat". I thought that has always been the situation (i.e. not sunk)

Afloat = there is water below the ship
Sunk = there is water above the ship
Beached/stranded = there is no water below the ship, neither above the ship. The ship is resting on the bottom of the canal.

The ship was beached. Now it seems part of the ship has water running below it again meaning it is partially afloat.

Can't they run it in reverse now ?

The captain who refloated the Concordia was worried that since it was beached at the extremities, it could break in the middle !

petertenthije wrote:

cskok8 wrote:

They said she is now "partially afloat". I thought that has always been the situation (i.e. not sunk)

Afloat = there is water below the ship
Sunk = there is water above the ship
Beached/stranded = there is no water below the ship, neither above the ship. The ship is resting on the bottom of the canal.

The ship was beached. Now it seems part of the ship has water running below it again meaning it is partially afloat.

Canal:
depth is 24m but only over a width of 195/215m
"Ever Given" current draft is 15.7 m ( AIS info )
Length 400m, beam 59m

so the ship was always afloat beyond the grounded bow and stern.

As it happens the "Ever Given" had a run in ( run out of the deep water way with a harbor ferry placed as "fender" against its pier while leaving the port of Hamburg ( ferry line station "Blankenese" :: https://www.mopo.de/hamburg/frachter-ra ... i-32016794 DE only but pictures are polyglot
ferry boat was ruined and the pier (floating pontoon, we have a tide! ) had cracks. closed.

Kiwirob wrote:

I’m sure there will be changes to how big ships like this transit the canal, I wouldn’t mind betting that in the future escort tugs will be tethered to the stern of larger vessels during transit.

Could very well be some changes with these mega vessels. The size of vessels has grown so much in such a relatively short period of time that infrastructure really hasn't been able to change to meet challenges presented by them.

As for this specific situation, they'll definitely have to do emergency dredging after this because who the heck knows how much the channel in the middle of the canal has been mucked up because of all of this.

Some how the rags always get some nice pictures up early.
Cynic says just tie the vessel to the shore and let smaller ships pass by while containers and offloaded on shore....clear some backlog. While the smaller boys are passing and delivering the makers of the big boys get to review their deicsions.....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -tide.html

One additional thing, why drag her up the channel when she was so close to the exit, I would imagine that if she sinks in the canal that would be a much bigger headache that if she sunk outside....

par13del wrote:

One additional thing, why drag her up the channel when she was so close to the exit, I would imagine that if she sinks in the canal that would be a much bigger headache that if she sunk outside....

They need to inspect her, and i expect the facilities at "Great Bitter Lake" are a tad bit better.

The ship is now sailing away

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMyErD7Vf74

And now, time to dredge.

cjg225 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

I’m sure there will be changes to how big ships like this transit the canal, I wouldn’t mind betting that in the future escort tugs will be tethered to the stern of larger vessels during transit.

Could very well be some changes with these mega vessels. The size of vessels has grown so much in such a relatively short period of time that infrastructure really hasn't been able to change to meet challenges presented by them.

As for this specific situation, they'll definitely have to do emergency dredging after this because who the heck knows how much the channel in the middle of the canal has been mucked up because of all of this.

The need bridge cams. The few ship captains I know all complain how unprofessional the canal is run. Voice recorders and bridge cams would help.

The insurance carriers will demand changes. Perhaps not my proposal, but considering how quickly they will make canal transit expensive...

Vessels on Asia to Europe will continue to grow. If they must sail around Africa, so be it. The question is why have ships this size and larger (tankers) safely traversed the canal for years, but not this time?

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Vessels on Asia to Europe will continue to grow. If they must sail around Africa, so be it. The question is why have ships this size and larger (tankers) safely traversed the canal for years, but not this time?

Lightsaber

You may need to define "size", container carriers are basically just platforms where thousands of containers are loaded up on deck, they are much more affected by wind. One would like to hope that we can get more details on how many containers are usually washed overboard when these type ships encounter bad weather.
One thing with such larger ships, the greater their speed the more control, lower speeds and most bets are off.
Perhaps they should dredge more so that the transit speed in certain sections of the canal can be increased, place more concrete at the walls to minimize silt intrusion?

lightsaber wrote:

The need bridge cams. The few ship captains I know all complain how unprofessional the canal is run. Voice recorders and bridge cams would help.

They have that ( no life bridge video though, air transport doesn't have cockpit video either.)

VDRs (Voyage Data Recorder) are mandatory for commercial shipping.)
sample ref: https://www.furuno.com/en/merchant/vdr/

Like a combined FDR and CVR :
* NAV, engine, fire detection and a bunch of misc data
* couple of bridge voice chanels.
* Radar1, Radar2, ECDIS (chart display ) video is/can be stored.

They have one integrated storage device and one "havoc proof" usually in an armored enclosure up on the compass deck.
( pretty much like the designs on aircraft.)

At the time the Ever Given ran aground, the Suez canal pilot was giving steering and course orders, correct??

Suez ship will be repositioned to the Great Bitter Lake for inspection

https://www.cnn.com/africa/live-news/su ... index.html

The ship was refloated at 9 a.m. ET – 3 p.m. Egypt Standard Time – according to Evergreen.

“Evergreen will coordinate with the shipowner to deal with subsequent matters after the shipowner and other concerned parties complete investigation reports into the incident,” the statement added.

cjg225 wrote:

And now, time to dredge.

Would a ship like "magical island-maker" Tian Kun Hao have helped Evergreen afloat by vacuuming where bow got stuck?

The Egyptians are saying that it will take around seven days to clear the backlog if there are no other problems. The other ships that have gone around the Cape of Africa will probably arrive at the same time as the tail enders.

On another note, the Law of Salvage, what sort of a pay day is the salvage firm looking at?

A Funny Ever Given Meme





And this Flight Radar meme is a hoot!!

https://twitter.com/MarineTraffic/statu ... 01122?s=20

lightsaber wrote:

cjg225 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

I’m sure there will be changes to how big ships like this transit the canal, I wouldn’t mind betting that in the future escort tugs will be tethered to the stern of larger vessels during transit.

Could very well be some changes with these mega vessels. The size of vessels has grown so much in such a relatively short period of time that infrastructure really hasn't been able to change to meet challenges presented by them.

As for this specific situation, they'll definitely have to do emergency dredging after this because who the heck knows how much the channel in the middle of the canal has been mucked up because of all of this.

The need bridge cams. The few ship captains I know all complain how unprofessional the canal is run. Voice recorders and bridge cams would help.

The insurance carriers will demand changes. Perhaps not my proposal, but considering how quickly they will make canal transit expensive...

Vessels on Asia to Europe will continue to grow. If they must sail around Africa, so be it. The question is why have ships this size and larger (tankers) safely traversed the canal for years, but not this time?

Lightsaber

Ships already have Voice Data Recorders. My company makes navigation light controllers, they are linked to the VDR.

I don’t think container ships will grow bigger than the current 400m x 61m they are at right now. These ships only run between Europe and Asia, they are too big for Panama and there aren’t any ports in North America that can handle them.

lightsaber wrote:

The need bridge cams. The few ship captains I know all complain how unprofessional the canal is run. Voice recorders and bridge cams would help.

The insurance carriers will demand changes. Perhaps not my proposal, but considering how quickly they will make canal transit expensive...

Vessels on Asia to Europe will continue to grow. If they must sail around Africa, so be it. The question is why have ships this size and larger (tankers) safely traversed the canal for years, but not this time?

Lightsaber

Actually, they probably won't, not for a while. Even the carriers have realized the last few years that bigger is not necessarily better. Sure, vessels could grow in size, but 20k TEU hasn't been challenged in a few years because even the carriers realize that's stupid with current landside processes.

In the pictures, she appears to be listing to port. I wonder if that was intentional to get her off the bank or if there is another issue.

cjg225 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

The need bridge cams. The few ship captains I know all complain how unprofessional the canal is run. Voice recorders and bridge cams would help.

The insurance carriers will demand changes. Perhaps not my proposal, but considering how quickly they will make canal transit expensive...

Vessels on Asia to Europe will continue to grow. If they must sail around Africa, so be it. The question is why have ships this size and larger (tankers) safely traversed the canal for years, but not this time?

Lightsaber

Actually, they probably won't, not for a while. Even the carriers have realized the last few years that bigger is not necessarily better. Sure, vessels could grow in size, but 20k TEU hasn't been challenged in a few years because even the carriers realize that's stupid with current landside processes.

The latest container ships are up to 24k teu. Still the same hull size, just stacking more.

Kiwirob wrote:

The latest container ships are up to 24k teu. Still the same hull size, just stacking more.

Er, yeah, I typed 20k because I was thinking of the Ever Given's size.

Point still stands, though. Even carriers are realizing this is not anywhere near as helpful as they imagined.

WIederling wrote:

As it happens the "Ever Given" had a run in ( run out of the deep water way with a harbor ferry placed as "fender" against its pier while leaving the port of Hamburg ( ferry line station "Blankenese" :: https://www.mopo.de/hamburg/frachter-ra ... i-32016794 DE only but pictures are polyglot
ferry boat was ruined and the pier (floating pontoon, we have a tide! ) had cracks. closed.

That's very interesting indeed. So it is not the first time this particular ship has had issues during times of 'high winds'.

cjg225 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

I’m sure there will be changes to how big ships like this transit the canal, I wouldn’t mind betting that in the future escort tugs will be tethered to the stern of larger vessels during transit.

Could very well be some changes with these mega vessels. The size of vessels has grown so much in such a relatively short period of time that infrastructure really hasn't been able to change to meet challenges presented by them.

As for this specific situation, they'll definitely have to do emergency dredging after this because who the heck knows how much the channel in the middle of the canal has been mucked up because of all of this.

I am pretty sure the most common limiting factor to vessel size nowadays is the canal size, and recent growth in ship size is a result of expansion in canal size?

par13del wrote:

Some how the rags always get some nice pictures up early.
Cynic says just tie the vessel to the shore and let smaller ships pass by while containers and offloaded on shore....clear some backlog. While the smaller boys are passing and delivering the makers of the big boys get to review their deicsions.....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -tide.html

The decision has now been made :

The shipping lines called Egypt and said : enlarge your canal now, plan for twice bigger ships than this one !

Ports in North America are all dredging to allow bigger ships, BTW.

c933103 wrote:

I am pretty sure the most common limiting factor to vessel size nowadays is the canal size, and recent growth in ship size is a result of expansion in canal size?

The Suez Canal's channel width and depth hasn't been an issue for many years. I believe it's been like 15 years or so since they were last changed, long before the most recent run of increase in vessel size.

Now, the Panama Canal has been a limiting factor for a long time, and the most recent modernization of that Canal had a significant impact on vessel sizes on Panama service loops.

Aesma wrote:

The decision has now been made :

The shipping lines called Egypt and said : enlarge your canal now, plan for twice bigger ships than this one !

Ports in North America are all dredging to allow bigger ships, BTW.

Ehhhhh....... Some of that is nature. Eastern North American harbors, very roughly speaking, run shallower than North European and East Asian harbors. Western North American harbors, by contrast, have more naturally deep harbors.

But it's also a function of business. While the US is the single biggest importing country in the world, it by itself is not as big as the EU. The Asia/North Europe tradelane theoretically supports these 18k+ TEU vessels with "ease," but the US has sort of not made as much sense. Vessel operators have been much slower to test the waters with 18k+ TEU vessels in the US because there are structural differences with the US that make them not as viable. They'll become more commonplace, but for now, harbor depth is not the primary reason 18k+ TEU vessels aren't more commonplace in Western NA ports (or Eastern NA ports that have draught limits that support 18k+ TEU vessels).

WIederling wrote:

aeromoe wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Ok, but technically the big ball is rotating quite rapidly

Which big ball and how rapidly?

THAT big ball. .... and at quite the clip: better than a thousand miles an hour.
( earth surface velocity at the equator is ~40.000 km / 24h = ~1666km/h )

Rotation speed = ~15 degrees per hour (15x24=360.) Tangential speed of a point on the surface is what you correctly state.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

At the time the Ever Given ran aground, the Suez canal pilot was giving steering and course orders, correct??

The vessel's Captain/Master is still responsible for the safe navigation of the vessel regardless of whether he's delegated the pilotage to a maritime pilot.

The only place in the world a maritime pilot takes full authority of a vessel is in the Panama Canal.

889091 wrote:

That's very interesting indeed. So it is not the first time this particular ship has had issues during times of 'high winds'.

Unsurprising.
It is the "SuperSize Me" culmination of "Big as a Barndoor".

Aesma wrote:

The shipping lines called Egypt and said : enlarge your canal now, plan for twice bigger ships than this one !
Ports in North America are all dredging to allow bigger ships, BTW.

Suez Canal.
Current draft is 24m over 195m/215m width.
( More than the Malacca Strait @ 21m )

North American ports are served by smaller units ( 10k .. 15k TEU ).
( higher number of destinations but sporting size limits.)

The 20+kTEU (can only) connect China and Europe.
( and port of Hamburg usually takes the largest only after they've lightened at Amsterdam/Rotterdam .. )

ChrisKen wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

At the time the Ever Given ran aground, the Suez canal pilot was giving steering and course orders, correct??

The vessel's Captain/Master is still responsible for the safe navigation of the vessel regardless of whether he's delegated the pilotage to a maritime pilot.

The only place in the world a maritime pilot takes full authority of a vessel is in the Panama Canal.

Slightly incorrect. On the Great Lakes "boats", the pilot takes full control in locks and canals but all the captains are licensed pilots, so it's the same person wearing two hats.

As with any other incident there will be investigations on what happened and how to reduce the risks in the future. Apparently the key issue was due to high 'sandstorm' wind speed slamming the huge wall sides of the ship, shoving the it around. Perhaps if similar high wind or sandstorm conditions are forecast on the Suez Canal in the future, ships will be limited in their movement in it, even a shut down until conditions improve.

Or only allow oil tankers and small ships.

They could put in wind deflectors. Something similar was done at the Caland canal that leads into the port of Rotterdam.

Tom Scott made a short video out this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkdwK_74eEs
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Rozen ... 4d4.180278

It would be a costly operation to do so for the full length of the Suez canal. if this remains an isolated incident not much will change. But if this is going to happen more often due to the increased ship sizes, steps may have to be taken.

petertenthije wrote:

They could put in wind deflectors. Something similar was done at the Caland canal that leads into the port of Rotterdam.

Tom Scott made a short video out this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkdwK_74eEs
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Rozen ... 4d4.180278

It would be a costly operation to do so for the full length of the Suez canal. if this remains an isolated incident not much will change. But if this is going to happen more often due to the increased ship sizes, steps may have to be taken.

I think better to build a second channel like they did in the north part of the Suez.

Backlog of waiting vessels at 61 ships, down from peak of 422. The canal is getting back to normal soon:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... NewsSearch

This is faster than I expected.

Lightsaber

A deal has been made to release the ship Evergiven from it hold by the Egyptian government canal authority and allowed to go to its intended port stops with the first at Rotterdam. An estimated $600 Million in goods have been held back from delivery as the ship was being held for damages claimed of $900 Million. https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/23/business ... index.html