6 ms·

The problem is with steering. The rudder on a ship this big is going to be wall of steel several stories tall with gears as big as car. Warships have several i

The problem is with steering. The rudder on a ship this big is going to be wall of steel several stories tall with gears as big as car. Warships have several independent backup steering options reducing finally to a worm gear at the top of the shaft with a winch handle big enough to put a gang of men on it. But ships like this will have none of that. They will have a small wheel or joystick on the bridge and if power goes out the rudder will definitely stay in the last commanded position until power is restored. Even if they had auxiliary steering they would not have the crew to man those positions. This ship would have alternate diesel power plants called "mules" (think APUs on aircraft). It's possible that when the lights came back on that was because they got a mule started. But really if we don't want accidents like this to happen the ship should have redundancy. A 10,000 TEU container ship is one of the largest and heaviest moving structures ever created by man. Why is it acceptable that it is driven by exactly one engine powering one screw in front of one rudder? By the way a ship this big with only one screw is very difficult to maneuver at slow speeds. They pretty much have to be going at least 14-15knots to have any rudder authority.

ViewTrick1002 3y ago
Emergency steering gear is required on every commercial vessel and is regularly tested. We will have to wait for the investigation to see what actually happened.
mlyle 3y ago
> But really if we don't want accidents like this to happen the ship should have redundancy. A 10,000 TEU container ship is one of the largest and heaviest moving structures ever created by man. Why is it acceptable that it is driven by exactly one engine powering one screw in front of one rudder? Perhaps because we have a whole lot of them going and a very low frequency of events like this. Maybe there's some lighter weight interventions we could do that would further halve the risk of something like this happening that are less costly than fully redundant engine and drive. They're supposed to have emergency steering gear. Why didn't it work? Maybe ships should have an auxiliary genset running while near land.
- jordanb 3y ago
  > Perhaps because we have a whole lot of them going and a very low frequency of events like this. This is literally the second major loss of control/allision incident this month. https://www.tradewindsnews.com/casualties/out-of-control-container-ship-crashes-into-three-cranes/2-1-1613625 https://www.tradewindsnews.com/casualties/out-of-control-con...
  - pests 3y ago
    Seems pretty low to me. How many is too many?
    - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
      Do we need kindergartens to be safe? How many dead kids is too many? /s Seriously, in England it is a legal requirement to have redundant brakes on a freaking bicycle. A dude that hit a grandma with a bicycle due to 1 non-functional brake went to prison. But a giant container ship needs nothing? What is the cost of fixing this bridge and + lost lifetime earning of all the people who dies + compensation to their families? Is that really cheaper than installing batteries plus electric motor? Now imagine this ship would hit a bridge in daytime, when it’s clogged with traffic?
      - whats_a_quasar 3y ago
        Cost/benefit analyses are just a fact of life. I see your point, but without really considering the question we don't know what the proper response is. It is not obvious to me that we need to mandate backup power systems, there are an awful lot of ships entering ports around the world each day and very few bridge collapses.
        pests 3y ago
        Its not obvious to me either. Let alone the opportunity cost.
        3y ago
supportengineer 3y ago
>> worm gear at the top of the shaft with a winch handle big enough to put a gang of men on it They showed us one such station, on the USS Hornet in Alameda, it it in the officers' dining room.
trilbyglens 3y ago
Wouldn't a ship like this have bow thrusters? Seems like otherwise it would be impossible to get into port without a tug.
- wiml 3y ago
  My understanding is that they simply use a tug when they're maneuvering by the dock. That's what a lot of tugs do all day.
- ifwinterco 3y ago
  Bow thrusters are only effective at very low speeds due to the Coandǎ effect

ViewTrick1002 3y ago

Emergency steering gear is required on every commercial vessel and is regularly tested. We will have to wait for the investigation to see what actually happened.

mlyle 3y ago

> But really if we don't want accidents like this to happen the ship should have redundancy. A 10,000 TEU container ship is one of the largest and heaviest moving structures ever created by man. Why is it acceptable that it is driven by exactly one engine powering one screw in front of one rudder? Perhaps because we have a whole lot of them going and a very low frequency of events like this. Maybe there's some lighter weight interventions we could do that would further halve the risk of something like this happening that are less costly than fully redundant engine and drive. They're supposed to have emergency steering gear. Why didn't it work? Maybe ships should have an auxiliary genset running while near land.

jordanb 3y ago
> Perhaps because we have a whole lot of them going and a very low frequency of events like this. This is literally the second major loss of control/allision incident this month. https://www.tradewindsnews.com/casualties/out-of-control-container-ship-crashes-into-three-cranes/2-1-1613625 https://www.tradewindsnews.com/casualties/out-of-control-con...
- pests 3y ago
  Seems pretty low to me. How many is too many?
  - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
    Do we need kindergartens to be safe? How many dead kids is too many? /s Seriously, in England it is a legal requirement to have redundant brakes on a freaking bicycle. A dude that hit a grandma with a bicycle due to 1 non-functional brake went to prison. But a giant container ship needs nothing? What is the cost of fixing this bridge and + lost lifetime earning of all the people who dies + compensation to their families? Is that really cheaper than installing batteries plus electric motor? Now imagine this ship would hit a bridge in daytime, when it’s clogged with traffic?
    - whats_a_quasar 3y ago
      Cost/benefit analyses are just a fact of life. I see your point, but without really considering the question we don't know what the proper response is. It is not obvious to me that we need to mandate backup power systems, there are an awful lot of ships entering ports around the world each day and very few bridge collapses.
      - pests 3y ago
        Its not obvious to me either. Let alone the opportunity cost.
      - 3y ago

supportengineer 3y ago

>> worm gear at the top of the shaft with a winch handle big enough to put a gang of men on it They showed us one such station, on the USS Hornet in Alameda, it it in the officers' dining room.

trilbyglens 3y ago

Wouldn't a ship like this have bow thrusters? Seems like otherwise it would be impossible to get into port without a tug.

wiml 3y ago
My understanding is that they simply use a tug when they're maneuvering by the dock. That's what a lot of tugs do all day.
ifwinterco 3y ago
Bow thrusters are only effective at very low speeds due to the Coandǎ effect