turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Plusnet Community
- :
- Forum
- :
- Other forums
- :
- General Chat
- :
- Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negl...
Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
17-03-2016 1:31 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-35823182
Quote Hoegh Osaka's actual cargo weight and stowage were significantly different to the final cargo tally supplied to the ship
Hoegh Osaka's chief officer believed he knew with sufficient accuracy the quantity of ballast water in each tank. To comply with the Wallem SMS [safety management system] requirement for ballast tank soundings to be recorded daily, the chief officer falsified the sounding records
Witness and anecdotal evidence suggests that the practice of not calculating the actual stability condition on completion of cargo operations but before the ship sails extends to the PCC/PCTC [pure car carrier/pure car and truck carrier] sector in general
Land Rovers were estimated to be two tonnes each but actually weighed significantly more, which accounted for almost 350 extra tonnes.
The report said: "Cargo distribution was such that the upper vehicle decks were full while the lower vehicle decks were lightly loaded.
"The ship's inadequate stability had not been identified as no accurate stability calculation had been carried out before the ship sailed."
It also said no stability estimation had been completed after all the cargo had been loaded, which had "become the norm" in the car carrier sector in general.
3 REPLIES
Re: Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
Re: Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
17-03-2016 2:15 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
It was a JCB what did it.
Now Zen, but a +Net residue.
Re: Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
Re: Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
17-03-2016 6:02 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
The actual report highlights the fact that some of the ballast tank gauges were non-operational (page 41)
It also points out that the top-heaviness was only apparent at higher speeds
The fist turn was negotiated at a lower speed so the ship did not go over then - but on the second turn at the higher speed.
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/56e9a7afe5274a14d9000000/MAIBInvReport6_2016.pdf
It also points out that the top-heaviness was only apparent at higher speeds
The fist turn was negotiated at a lower speed so the ship did not go over then - but on the second turn at the higher speed.
https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/56e9a7afe5274a14d9000000/MAIBInvReport6_2016.pdf
Re: Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
Re: Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negligence
17-03-2016 6:14 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
You wouldn't get away with it on an aircraft!
I wonder if the insurance will pay out under these circumstances?
I wonder if the insurance will pay out under these circumstances?
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Plusnet Community
- :
- Forum
- :
- Other forums
- :
- General Chat
- :
- Hoegh Osaka - it wasn't an error it was gross negl...