Slashdot Mirror

You are absolutely correct! Visit a maritime website like gcaptain.com and you'll see that the process is well understood. Wet bulk cargo, people who make the decision to load it anyway and don't have to deal with the consequences... There's no mystery. Just greed and the wrong people paying for it with their lives.

Efficiency is pretty meaningless for a nuclear power. The only thing it affects is the ratio of power generated to the amount of fuel used. Since the fuel used is minuscule, it doesn't make much difference to the reactor's operation. (The spent fuel generated by all its nuclear plants in the U.S. in a year would about fill a single tractor trailer; although you don't want to pack it that densely since it would start fissioning again. That's why they're still operating fine without a long-term waste storage solution. The amount of waste is small enough they're just storing decades worth of waste on-site.) The nuclear cargo ship NS Savannah saved an estimated 29 million gallons of fuel oil, while generating a little less than 2 gallons of nuclear waste. So we're talking 7.2 orders of magnitude less waste than fossil fuels by volume. Doesn't really matter if poor efficiency drops that to 7.0 orders of magnitude.

The reason we favor large nuclear plants is because they're very slow to ramp down in power generation. Many of the uranium fission byproducts take hours to weeks to go through their short-term decay chains and settle on materials with half lives on the order of decades or longer (low heat generation). So even if you completely shut a reactor off (halt uranium fissioning completely), it will still continue to generate substantial amounts of heat for weeks as the fission byproducts go through their decay chains. So you want to guarantee demand for power is consistent, which requires a population on the order of 1 million people, thus warranting gigawatt-capacity nuclear plants.

But these larger reactors generate an enormous amount of heat in a small volume. So the amount of cooling necessary is a lot higher. If the cooling fails, you end up with what happened at Fukushima. These mini nuclear reactors are small enough that their surface area-to-volume ratio is a lot higher, and they can simply shed excess energy as heat to the environment (usually the ground).

First off, do you have any clue how to properly quote? It doesn't look like it. Your message is very hard to read. Anyway...

Because if you had been, you would realize that every single ship in the world, operates their ships the same way the Navy does.

This Canadian Navy officer disagrees:
https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

I would say that the Merchant ships are less structured than the US Navy is. I would also say that the Merchant ships have less training than the US Navy does.

These guys both disagree:
http://gcaptain.com/us-navy-lo...
http://gcaptain.com/separate-e...

Navy officers are generalists rather than specialists, so all that extra training doesn't help much with basic seamanship.

Finally, here's that article I was looking for, written by an actual captain:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...
plus his follow-up article:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...

I thought this quote from the last link was quite important:

The over 100 Facebook and forum comments from 100% civilian mariners, however, most agreed that they have a low degree of confidence predicting the response and/or communicating with US Navy warships in busy shipping lanes.

First off, do you have any clue how to properly quote? It doesn't look like it. Your message is very hard to read. Anyway...

Because if you had been, you would realize that every single ship in the world, operates their ships the same way the Navy does.

This Canadian Navy officer disagrees:
https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

I would say that the Merchant ships are less structured than the US Navy is. I would also say that the Merchant ships have less training than the US Navy does.

These guys both disagree:
http://gcaptain.com/us-navy-lo...
http://gcaptain.com/separate-e...

Navy officers are generalists rather than specialists, so all that extra training doesn't help much with basic seamanship.

Finally, here's that article I was looking for, written by an actual captain:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...
plus his follow-up article:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...

I thought this quote from the last link was quite important:

The over 100 Facebook and forum comments from 100% civilian mariners, however, most agreed that they have a low degree of confidence predicting the response and/or communicating with US Navy warships in busy shipping lanes.

First off, do you have any clue how to properly quote? It doesn't look like it. Your message is very hard to read. Anyway...

Because if you had been, you would realize that every single ship in the world, operates their ships the same way the Navy does.

This Canadian Navy officer disagrees:
https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

I would say that the Merchant ships are less structured than the US Navy is. I would also say that the Merchant ships have less training than the US Navy does.

These guys both disagree:
http://gcaptain.com/us-navy-lo...
http://gcaptain.com/separate-e...

Navy officers are generalists rather than specialists, so all that extra training doesn't help much with basic seamanship.

Finally, here's that article I was looking for, written by an actual captain:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...
plus his follow-up article:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...

I thought this quote from the last link was quite important:

The over 100 Facebook and forum comments from 100% civilian mariners, however, most agreed that they have a low degree of confidence predicting the response and/or communicating with US Navy warships in busy shipping lanes.

First off, do you have any clue how to properly quote? It doesn't look like it. Your message is very hard to read. Anyway...

Because if you had been, you would realize that every single ship in the world, operates their ships the same way the Navy does.

This Canadian Navy officer disagrees:
https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

I would say that the Merchant ships are less structured than the US Navy is. I would also say that the Merchant ships have less training than the US Navy does.

These guys both disagree:
http://gcaptain.com/us-navy-lo...
http://gcaptain.com/separate-e...

Navy officers are generalists rather than specialists, so all that extra training doesn't help much with basic seamanship.

Finally, here's that article I was looking for, written by an actual captain:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...
plus his follow-up article:
http://gcaptain.com/uss-fitzge...

I thought this quote from the last link was quite important:

The over 100 Facebook and forum comments from 100% civilian mariners, however, most agreed that they have a low degree of confidence predicting the response and/or communicating with US Navy warships in busy shipping lanes.

Excelsia above (a Royal Canadian Navy officer) says you're a bunch of amateurs, and considering that you've wrecked 4 ships now just this year alone seems to prove it.

Also, why would you give distances in nm when you're close enough to be using yards or meters?

And why don't you use AIS?? You didn't address that point did you?

I'd love to see you refute the gCaptain article.

Here's another good article from gCaptain that discusses some of the ways the US Navy fails to produce decent captains, and here's yet another that discusses how basic seamanship simply isn't a focus in the US Navy training programs (instead, officers brag about their lack of sleep!! WTF!). It sure looks to me like the US Navy has no business piloting their own ships, and should instead outsource that job to *real* captains who are actually competent to do the job. You've proven now, over and over, that you aren't.

Excelsia above (a Royal Canadian Navy officer) says you're a bunch of amateurs, and considering that you've wrecked 4 ships now just this year alone seems to prove it.

Also, why would you give distances in nm when you're close enough to be using yards or meters?

And why don't you use AIS?? You didn't address that point did you?

I'd love to see you refute the gCaptain article.

Here's another good article from gCaptain that discusses some of the ways the US Navy fails to produce decent captains, and here's yet another that discusses how basic seamanship simply isn't a focus in the US Navy training programs (instead, officers brag about their lack of sleep!! WTF!). It sure looks to me like the US Navy has no business piloting their own ships, and should instead outsource that job to *real* captains who are actually competent to do the job. You've proven now, over and over, that you aren't.

Ship transferred to Asia > Europe route from the west coast of the USA due to:

1) Insufficient demand
2) Suboptimal cargo port facilities

Ship transferred to different route

If one reads Gcaptian, this and other maritime news is old hat. Here is a real ship (travels under it's own power) that is quite large. http://gcaptain.com/giant-piet...

They're already cutting steel on one that will handle 1000 more containers than the triple-E's.

6. Repeat untill valueables found.
7. Sell valueables.
Wait, I forgot the ...

Yes you did. It's in between 6 and 7. You skipped the part where you explain how they get the luxury cars (in the GP's example) off of a container ship and onto their tiny little open boats and back to shore.

In other words, how do you move it from one of those on to one of these?

Ditto that. The whole story is increadibly compelling, and then the voyage of the James Caird blows your mind, and then the hike accross elephant island blows your mind again.

I also suggest gCaptain as a site for martime news http://gcaptain.com/social-media-erupts-as-chinese-icebreaker-now-stuck-in-ice-in-antarctica/

Although there are requirements in SOLAS (SOLAS Regulation VI/2) for a declaration of the gross weight of the container, there is no requirement for the actual weighing of the container. The sole exception to this actual weighing requirement is for export from the United States. Recently, a broad spectrum of industry organizations and countries, Denmark, The Netherlands, the United States, BIMCO, the International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH), the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), and the World Shipping Council (WSC) submitted a formal proposal to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to require all containers to be weighed in order to determine their actual weight.

What’s the Weight? Why Weighing of Cargo Containers is Critical/

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Full Bounty Hearings Coverage on gCaptain.com:

• Day 8: The Whole Truth
• Day 7: The 17th Passenger
• Day 6: The Cost of Waiting
• Day 5: Sins of Omission
• Day 4: The Illusion of Experience
• Day 3: Testimony Highlights the Complexity
• Day 2: Rotted Frames on Bounty
• Day 1: Chief Mate Testifies

Walbridge had decades at sea. Svendsen had worked tall ships prior to Bounty. The rest of the crew- so far it seems â" had an experience base of one:

The third mate, Dan Cleveland (25), came aboard from a career in landscaping. Bounty was his first wooden tall ship.
The Bosun, Laura Groves (28), had experience on smaller boats in the Keys. Bounty was her first wooden tall ship.
Joshua Scornavacchi (25), was on his first wooden tall ship.
Second mate Matt Sanders (37) had worked on a series of ships, including the schooner Margaret Todd, but Bounty was (wait for it) his first wooden tall ship.
Testifying Wednesday morning was Anna Sprague (20); of course it was her first wooden tall ship.
Claudene Christian (42) , was on her first wooden tall ship.

When the new cook, Jessica Black (34), put on her immersion suit to abandon ship on the 29th of October, she had been aboard Bounty - her first wooden tall ship - for a grand total of 45 hours.

-- Bounty hearings.

"The summary makes it sound like they were exploiting a loophole in the regulations or something. "

There's more...including

The witness, Todd Kosakowski, looked at Coast Guard's evidence... Mr. Kosakowski - the lead shipwright and project manager for Boothbay Harbor Shipyards - was in charge of the last maintenance project ever to be done on Bounty...

The pictures were of rotted frames and fasteners (trunnels) he found under the planking during repairs. Kosakowski told NTSB investigator Captain Rob Jones that he believes 75% of the framing above the waterline on Bounty may have been rotten, but that the ship's representative in the yard, Captain Robin Walbridge, declined any further search for rotted wood...

Bounty was in a sort of regulatory no-man's-land. She was a recreational vessel, a well-crewed yacht, and it was none of big brother's business how she was maintained. Two things were making that true: 1. She wasn't nearly configured to pass inspection as a Coast Guard certificated passenger vessel, and 2: She was measured at under 300 regulatory tons - and that meant she didn't need an international load line certificate.

the rest of it is an interesting read, with more detail than the CNN article. No, they weren't an experienced crew, and yes, they were playing loose with the rules.

Yes she was

A live summary of the sinking can be found at http://blog.halifaxshippingnews.ca/2012/10/tall-ship-bounty-in-trouble.html

Mario Vittone also gave a good summary of the hearings http://gcaptain.com/bounty-hearings-chief-mates-testifies

It's not economically sensible to ship regular, lower-grade coal for producing electricity all around the world.

This is factually incorrect. Coal used for power generation is called `steam coal' and the recent growth of US coal exports is due to steam coal.

You may expect all of this to accelerate rapidly. As the story points out, met coal is going to China from the East coast the hard way; via the Atlantic, Cape of Good Hope, etc. Our pollution outsourcing and de-industrialization needs are so great that the Panama Canal is being expanded to accommodate much larger ships. Simultaneously we're waving environmental regs right and left to dredge up East coast bays for those ships.

This will all be up and running in 2015.

Once "Super-Post-Panamax" shipping can haul coal from the East Coast to China via the Pacific we'll see huge growth in coal exports and more de-industrialization. Coal going that way and finished goods coming back.

Last year, the Navy spent $424 per gallon to buy 20,055 gallons of algae-based biofuel — a world record price for fuel

See the article here

For those really interested in this sort of issue, read the document accessible via the following link. There was a near miss when BP was drilling the Thunder Horse well, and this paper documents how it was handled. We're not talking about a bunch of amateurs here, on the BP side or the Transocean side. That's why this incident needs to be understood - it caught a bunch of very good people by surprise:
NOAA Report

Google cache

Second - OSHA's website has some of the best diagrams:
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/oilandgas/well_completion/well_completion.html

Third - the specs from this platform/ship:
http://www.deepwater.com/fw/main/Deepwater-Horizon-56C17.html?LayoutID=17 -- check out "Thrusters: 8 x Kamewa rated 7375 hp each, fixed propeller, full 360 deg azimuth"

JGG

I was obsessed with the NS Savannah recently because she is such a beautiful ship - I love ships and this cargo ship looks like a yacht. Whilst I am not a fan of the Nuclear Industry in it's current form her reactor appeared to be reasonably well constructed and whilst designed to cruise at 21 knots, she outperformed her design spec by steadily cruising at 24 knots - pretty fast for a cargo ship. Check page 16 of the MARAD documentation (warning - pdf).

There is significant historical information about her operation. Until 9/11 she was part of the National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF) but her reactor was permanently disabled due to concerns she could be used as quite a convenient weapon of terror. Sadly, her hybrid design condemned her to a short operational life (10 years) and she is now a ghost ship. There are plans to make her a museum ship whilst waiting for her decommissioned reactor to cool down for eventual disassembly, but no one seems interested in the project. Despite that the seafarers Union have been working to maintain the ship by improving her general appearance.

NS Savannah's crew dispute was because the executive officers traditionally got paid more than the engineering crew on board the ship, this dispute, high running costs, low oil costs all contributed to her eventual demise. An interest group (with mailing list) is looking for photos and artefacts whist she was in operation.

lots more photos, her community organisation, glory days, historical landmark program, service history and specifications, floorplan and schematics, current status, passenger lounge, reactor control room, dry docked , and finally a flickr photo stream and a rather excellent photo essay of the NS Savannah. A little bit of history for you to enjoy.

See the demo's, they use the buttons on a Blackberry and use the headphone plug on the iphone.
http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/tag/video/

not sure where the $1000 came from http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/gcaptain-exclusive-shellbacked-ipod-touch-video/ at about 1:50 says $50-$75 depending on the size of the item...

Water is no longer a problem for electronics, a company called Shellback puts a thin clear waterproof coating on them.
http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/gcaptain-exclusive-shellbacked-ipod-touch-video/