Sistership EVER FORWARD Run Aground in the Chesapeake

[Jamme]

https://homeport.uscg.mil/Lists/Cont...20Bay%20MD.pdf

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by Montanan

So far there has been no effort to lighten the ship of fuel, gas or ballast water.

https://gcaptain.com/salvors-to-remo...eid=5626ef2c30

A full ship isn't going to have much if any ballast water. And seriously, one would have to think everyone involved to be an absolute moron not to think about discharging ballast. Pretty sure they aren't waiting for a brilliant armchair strategist to come up with that idea because literally no-one on scene was capable of thinking of it themselves!

As for "fuel and gas", if a ship like that has any gasoline onboard it would be a few gallons at most for a pump or outboard. More likely none at all, ships hate gasoline because of its explosive nature and the resulting high cost to make spaces safe to store and use it. Transferring bunker fuel in large quantities at sea from a cargo ship is not something the ship would be equipped for or the crew trained in. And the consequences of screwing it up in the Chesapeake Bay are huge. On the other hand, lightering cargo happens all the time and a spilled container is far easier to clean up than even a few gallons of spilled oil. Not to mention there is a whole lot more weight in cargo than oil on the ship. This is why the professionals being paid to do this are in charge rather than a democracy of armchair warriors on message boards.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

A full ship isn't going to have much if any ballast water.

I believe that the Ever Forward might be carrying 30% or more empty containers, so there's probably some ballast water to play with... which they've probably already dumped if they could.

[JPA Cate]

I wonder why they tried to pull her off at low water? I know the tidal range is small, but it just seems like stacking the deck against oneself. So, what am I missing?

Ann

[jeanathon]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

I wonder why they tried to pull her off at low water? I know the tidal range is small, but it just seems like stacking the deck against oneself. So, what am I missing?

Ann

The wind was pushing water from the top of the bay down to the everfast which was probably equivalent to the small tide.

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

I wonder why they tried to pull her off at low water? I know the tidal range is small, but it just seems like stacking the deck against oneself. So, what am I missing?

Ann

It turns out that moon driven tides in the Chesapeake are often completely overcome by wind driven water. Here in the north end of the Chesapeake a south wind will cause the water to go up and stay up significantly above predicted high tide no matter where you are in the tide cycle. And on the day in question, we had one of those events and at least at my house, which isn't far from the incident, the tide was well above normal high tide all day. It actually was a great opportunity to try what they did because they didn't have to worry about timing a complex operation with lots of things you may have to adjust to the short period of time that comprised high tide.

[Montanan]

Containers Start Coming Off the Ever Forward, erhhh the Ever Stuck.

See photos: https://gcaptain.com/photos-containe...eid=5626ef2c30

Containers started coming off the Ever Forward over the weekend amid the ongoing effort to lighten and refloat the ship in Chesapeake Bay.

The operation commenced on Saturday, almost four weeks after the Ever Forward grounded and following two unsuccessful attempts to refloat the ship late last month.

Approximately 500 of the total 4,964 containers on board are expected to be offloaded prior to the next refloating attempt, according to the Coast Guard.

The 1,095-foot, Hong Kong-registered Ever Forward went aground on the east of the Craighill shipping channel on Sunday, March 13, as it departed the Port of Baltimore for its next port call in Norfolk, Virginia. Ship traffic in and out of the Port of Baltimore has not been impacted and remains open to one-way traffic in the vicinity of the wreck.

The painstaking operation to remove boxes involves crews scaling the container stacks to manually unlatch the twist locks. The containers are then lifted one-by-one by two crane barges, DonJon Marine’s Columbia New York and Farrell 256, and placed onto barges. Once the barges are full, they are then shuttled back to the Seagirt Marine Terminal in Baltimore to be offloaded by shore-based cranes.

Once enough containers are removed, tugs and pulling barges located at the stern will attempt another refloat.

Despite the unusual process, crews are actually making good progress having delivered 43 containers to the Seagirt terminal as of Sunday, according to Port of Baltimore Executive Director William Doyle. Weather on Monday slowed the operation, but as of Tuesday about 100 containers had been removed, a Coast Guard spokeperson told us.

Mr. Doyle also reports that approximately ~210,000 cubic yards had been dredged from around the vessel and deposited at Poplar Island as of April 11.

The next refloating attempt was tentatively scheduled for mid-month, but the Coast Guard spokesperson tells us the next attempt will likely be early next week—coinciding with the next full moon.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Containers Start Coming Off the Ever Forward, erhhh the Ever Stuck.

See photos: https://gcaptain.com/photos-containe...eid=5626ef2c30

Containers started coming off the Ever Forward over the weekend amid the ongoing effort to lighten and refloat the ship in Chesapeake Bay.

The operation commenced on Saturday, almost four weeks after the Ever Forward grounded and following two unsuccessful attempts to refloat the ship late last month.

Approximately 500 of the total 4,964 containers on board are expected to be offloaded prior to the next refloating attempt, according to the Coast Guard.

The 1,095-foot, Hong Kong-registered Ever Forward went aground on the east of the Craighill shipping channel on Sunday, March 13, as it departed the Port of Baltimore for its next port call in Norfolk, Virginia. Ship traffic in and out of the Port of Baltimore has not been impacted and remains open to one-way traffic in the vicinity of the wreck.

The painstaking operation to remove boxes involves crews scaling the container stacks to manually unlatch the twist locks. The containers are then lifted one-by-one by two crane barges, DonJon Marine’s Columbia New York and Farrell 256, and placed onto barges. Once the barges are full, they are then shuttled back to the Seagirt Marine Terminal in Baltimore to be offloaded by shore-based cranes.

Once enough containers are removed, tugs and pulling barges located at the stern will attempt another refloat.

Despite the unusual process, crews are actually making good progress having delivered 43 containers to the Seagirt terminal as of Sunday, according to Port of Baltimore Executive Director William Doyle. Weather on Monday slowed the operation, but as of Tuesday about 100 containers had been removed, a Coast Guard spokeperson told us.

Mr. Doyle also reports that approximately ~210,000 cubic yards had been dredged from around the vessel and deposited at Poplar Island as of April 11.

The next refloating attempt was tentatively scheduled for mid-month, but the Coast Guard spokesperson tells us the next attempt will likely be early next week—coinciding with the next full moon.

Wouldn't it be easier for the crew to just step down off the bridge or an accomodation deck rather than climbing all the way up?

Or maybe just land a helicopter on top of the stack?

If you can land a Harrier on top of a stack I am sure you can land a helicopter.

https://worldofaviation.net/emergenc...y-sea-harrier/


This operation may take quite a while as boxes above the main deck are typically full of soft toys, ping pong balls, and the like.

And also ' in the vicinity of the wreck' I don't think it has reached 'wreck' status yet, simply 'stranded ship'.

[psk125]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Wouldn't it be easier for the crew to just step down off the bridge or an accomodation deck rather than climbing all the way up?
.

The administration is obviously putting the health and fitness of the crew in first place here. Having them climb up the stacks provides excellent cardio and multiple muscle exercise that they would not get otherwise. Strolling across the tops of the containers from the bridge would not be as effective, and accessing the bridge might give them airs.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Wouldn't it be easier for the crew to just step down off the bridge or an accomodation deck rather than climbing all the way up?

Those container locks are on the vertical anyway.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

A full ship isn't going to have much if any ballast water. And seriously, one would have to think everyone involved to be an absolute moron not to think about discharging ballast. Pretty sure they aren't waiting for a brilliant armchair strategist to come up with that idea because literally no-one on scene was capable of thinking of it themselves!

As for "fuel and gas", if a ship like that has any gasoline onboard it would be a few gallons at most for a pump or outboard. More likely none at all, ships hate gasoline because of its explosive nature and the resulting high cost to make spaces safe to store and use it. Transferring bunker fuel in large quantities at sea from a cargo ship is not something the ship would be equipped for or the crew trained in. And the consequences of screwing it up in the Chesapeake Bay are huge. On the other hand, lightering cargo happens all the time and a spilled container is far easier to clean up than even a few gallons of spilled oil. Not to mention there is a whole lot more weight in cargo than oil on the ship. This is why the professionals being paid to do this are in charge rather than a democracy of armchair warriors on message boards.

Redneck you can take up your rant with Mike Schuler, the editor of gCaptain.com of which the article and quote was referenced.

It was just a statement of fact, not a opinion by the author.

gCaptain being one of the leading maritime and offshore news websites.

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Redneck you can take up your rant with Mike Schuler, the editor of gCaptain.com of which the article and quote was referenced.

It was just a statement of fact, not a opinion by the author.

gCaptain being one of the leading maritime and offshore news websites.

Yeah, there is a lot of crap put out by the "leading news sites" in many fields by journalists who have no experience in the field they're writing about and are too lazy to have anyone with experience check their articles. If Mike Schuler or you disagree with any of the very specific points I made, I'm happy to hear the specific items you disagree with and why. Otherwise, calling my carefully listed points a "rant" without actually addressing any of those points is rather pointless.

[Montanan]

They are hoping that the third time is the charm

Reference link to excellent pictures of the crane and barges, and of the on-board rappelers arranging the cables to lift the containers to lighten the ship.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/th...a82ffaf296bcc0

Following weeks of salvage operations, authorities turned to a last resort April 9: removing containers from the ship. Two cranes and a crew, repelling up and down the stacks of containers, have worked from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. each day for the past week to slowly transport 505 of the large boxes from the ship and onto barges, which have returned them to the Port of Baltimore. As of Thursday evening, 323 containers had been moved.

. . .

Sunday, buoyed by a high tide and a lighter load, five tugboats and two pulling barges, with 500 metric tons of pulling force each, will try to refloat the big ship that has nearly become a mainstay of the bay.

Should Sunday’s refloat attempt be unsuccessful, authorities would remove more containers and try again, but they don’t expect that to happen.

“This time, we believe the numbers will be in our favor. We’re much more hopeful this time around,” O’Connell said.

If the refloating attempt is successful, the ship will travel to Annapolis for a hull survey. If no issues are discovered, Ever Forward will return to the Port of Baltimore to reload the removed containers.

There was 18 feet of mud piled up around the ship.

The salvage plan, approved by the Maryland Board of Public Works on March 19, called for a minimum of 110,000 cubic yards of dredged material to be deposited on Poplar Island. To date, about 210,000 cubic yards have been moved, the equivalent of 64 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by Montanan

They are hoping that the third time is the charm

If the refloating attempt is successful, the ship will travel to Annapolis for a hull survey. If no issues are discovered, Ever Forward will return to the Port of Baltimore to reload the removed containers.

.

I don't know where you get your news, but even Mike Schuyler should know that the deepest channel into Annapolis is less than 25 feet.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

I don't know where you get your news, but even Mike Schuyler should know that the deepest channel into Annapolis is less than 25 feet.

I am sure he means the open water ship anchorage outside of Annapolis. Of course no ships ever enter Annapolis harbor.
Divers can survey the hull there when it’s floating- no different than being in port. That explains my question when they originally said the ship would return to Baltimore after refloat- but it’s pointed south and I can’t imagine they would try to turn it around in the channel, even the wider portion just north of where it is.