[Post Reply] [*]  Page 7 of 12  [ 116 posts ]  Go to page « 15 6 7 8 912 »
Author Message
Rhade
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: November 30th, 2018, 3:06 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2687
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
So in short... this early reports indicate that sinking was part of fault in shaft water protection that lead to flooding engine room. But the reason ship was ramed was all on bridge crew?

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: November 30th, 2018, 4:28 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8328
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Rhade wrote: *
So in short... this early reports indicate that sinking was part of fault in shaft water protection that lead to flooding engine room. But the reason ship was ramed was all on bridge crew?

miscommunication, thinking that "Sola TS":

- when they entered the fjord/area, "Sola TS" was still docked
- tagged/plotted 3 fishing vessel on there radar
- When "Sola TS" was docked and due to it size, locked like it was part of the terminal
- when "Sola TS" come out, it had all deck light on and the Oil terminal lights was also on, and might have made the ship look as a part of the land mass.
- We do here in the Norwegian VHF-communication, early on, when "Helge Ingstad" is told to go Starboard, complains it will get to close to land (...it was 900 meter to land!), so they was already thinking that "Sola TS" was land.... the area is basically the Navy's backyard!!! :roll: :shock:


Only the final report can answer that


The sinking:

I did find it odd that she sank like that, and quit fast. Nansen class are build to survive and be operational to a decree, even if a torpedo explode under the keel... or a directly hit. But if the report is true, it's explain why. We have seen British ships get hit by missiles during the "Falklands war" with firee and everything.

animation of the flooding:
https://static.vg.no/spesial/2018/frega ... asje.mp4?2

translation to text in video/gif:

Voksen mann i skala = Adult man in scale
Lager og lugar = Storage and cabin
Akter generator rom = Aft generator room
Aktre maskin rom = Aft Engine room
Gir rom = Gear room
Forre maskin rom = forward engine room
Skade = Damage
Ca. 45 meter lang revne = About. 45 meters long rupture

But Spanish expert, says that they think it's the propeller shaft have been pushed out of position and thus damaged the bulkheads and causing flooding... but that would only apply to 2-3 bulkheads, not 5-6...


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
BB1987
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: November 30th, 2018, 5:16 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2661
Joined: May 23rd, 2012, 1:01 pm
Location: Rome - Italy
heuhen wrote: *
But Spanish expert, says that they think it's the propeller shaft have been pushed out of position and thus damaged the bulkheads and causing flooding... but that would only apply to 2-3 bulkheads, not 5-6...
Might be possible that those damaged bulkheads allowed for that extra flooding that put a larger part of the side gash underwater, thus causing flooding into compartments that had no damaged bulkheads?

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: November 30th, 2018, 5:39 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8328
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
BB1987 wrote: *
heuhen wrote: *
But Spanish expert, says that they think it's the propeller shaft have been pushed out of position and thus damaged the bulkheads and causing flooding... but that would only apply to 2-3 bulkheads, not 5-6...
Might be possible that those damaged bulkheads allowed for that extra flooding that put a larger part of the side gash underwater, thus causing flooding into compartments that had no damaged bulkheads?
yes it will be interesting to see the final report for a frigate with 13 watertight-bulkheads


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 1st, 2018, 10:34 am
Offline
Posts: 6318
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Damage to the propeller shafts is deadly, that is one reason why HMS Prince of Wales sank so quickly. And the force of the impact with a laden tanker is probably something no designer can mitigate against.

I'm rather surprised to read they were designed to withstand a torpedo impact, having seen a heavyweight torpedo cut a Type 12 in half I would think any direct torpedo impact would be the end.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 1st, 2018, 11:20 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8328
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Hood wrote: *
Damage to the propeller shafts is deadly, that is one reason why HMS Prince of Wales sank so quickly. And the force of the impact with a laden tanker is probably something no designer can mitigate against.

I'm rather surprised to read they were designed to withstand a torpedo impact, having seen a heavyweight torpedo cut a Type 12 in half I would think any direct torpedo impact would be the end.
the design of the Nansen class is as the Norwegian Navy says, unique and never tested out before, so how it work in the real world, is always a question.

The design/construction:

- Twin "strengthened" keel that are protected with rubber to reduce shock.
- if you study the black hull paint, it have two type of black color, one of the color is a special rubber paint to reduce shock.
- most if not all compartment under water line are lined with rubber to reduce shock even more. (at least major compartment)
- the ship was also build extra strong, lightweight hull, but strengthened and more than usual frames.
- all compartment:
- are watertight (according to Navanti).
- airtight with separate filtration system.
- filter-protection against chemical and radiation.

it's also might explain a little about where all the weight of the ship goes, since it's look light weight in the armament department and can carry a heavy radar without problem.
Nansen class was originally designed to hunt submarine, before it was redesigned to a multirole capability.



A short update from Helge Ingstad:

- there have been a small storm in the area.
- no new damage to hull, due to storm.
- underwater drone will inspect the Torpedo magazine (30+ torpedo on board, in here two magazine) (she is part of NATO force and thus are fully loaded)


[ img ]

[ img ]

[ img ]

[ img ]

[ img ]

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
reytuerto
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 5th, 2018, 11:11 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1164
Joined: February 21st, 2015, 12:03 am
Good evening, Heuhen. May I ask if the double keel is in relation to the double bottom? If no, what is it? Thanks and cheers.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Shipright
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 6th, 2018, 6:43 am
Offline
Posts: 397
Joined: February 15th, 2013, 2:16 pm
Some quick thoughts on communications and rules of the road, having had the deck in busy coastal waters myself:

1.) Vessels getting underway are required to announce this via a security call on standard VHF channels. Example: "Security, Security, Security. This is vessel XXX getting underway from terminal XXX, Berth XXX, entering the channel in vicinity of XXX light/buoy/marker/etc. Vessel XXX is monitoring VHF channels XX/XX," or something equivalent. If the tanker did this and the warship ignored it or failed to ascertain the tankers position relative to itself then the warship is at fault. Such a call would have instanlty told the warship everything it needed to know about where this tanker was, where it was coming from, and where it was going. If the tanker didn't make that announcement, especially when entering a crowed traffic scheme, they are at fault and also grossly negligent.

2.) It is the responsibility of every underway vessel to display the correct navigation lights and day shapes. Having your working deck lights on in such a fashion that you are not distinguishable in form or relative movement while underway is a violation of law and given the crowded nature of the traffic scheme gross negligence. I also see no indication that the warship was not displaying the correct lights, so I question the wisdom of the tanker getting underway at all without establishing contact with vessels it was about to maneuver into and around.

I don't know any of the details so I am not passing judgement, but I am reading two things from what I have heard thus far. Firstly, the warship lost situational awareness and despite the non-standard lighting of the tanker, they had more than enough tools at their disposal to accurately access and react to the situation. Secondly, the tanker displayed gross incompetence in the handling of its lighting and communicating to underway ships in a traffic scheme it was entering.

It was frustrating for me to listen to the bridge communications traffic between the tanker/terminal/warship. None of them seem to be very insistent on accurately communicating where they are in relation to each other, and neither vessel seems to have done anything substantial to maneuver away from a collision (including just stopping). The warship especially is very tight lipped. Its just mind blowing to hear how nonchalant everyone is. And to be perfectly honest the vessels were not really that constrained by draft or traffic. This situation was peanuts compared to entering or exiting the Suez or major ports like Rotterdam or Jebel Ali.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 6th, 2018, 11:58 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8328
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
reytuerto wrote: *
Good evening, Heuhen. May I ask if the double keel is in relation to the double bottom? If no, what is it? Thanks and cheers.
no double bottom, but double keel. how they designed and placed that solution, I don't know. but reason behind it, is to make the frigate withstand a underwater explosion that normally would break the ship, but instead hold both ends together, but they would most likely bend in the process .


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: HNoMS Helge Ingstad have collidedPosted: December 6th, 2018, 12:07 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8328
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
Shipright wrote: *
Some quick thoughts on communications and rules of the road, having had the deck in busy coastal waters myself:

1.) Vessels getting underway are required to announce this via a security call on standard VHF channels. Example: "Security, Security, Security. This is vessel XXX getting underway from terminal XXX, Berth XXX, entering the channel in vicinity of XXX light/buoy/marker/etc. Vessel XXX is monitoring VHF channels XX/XX," or something equivalent. If the tanker did this and the warship ignored it or failed to ascertain the tankers position relative to itself then the warship is at fault. Such a call would have instanlty told the warship everything it needed to know about where this tanker was, where it was coming from, and where it was going. If the tanker didn't make that announcement, especially when entering a crowed traffic scheme, they are at fault and also grossly negligent.

2.) It is the responsibility of every underway vessel to display the correct navigation lights and day shapes. Having your working deck lights on in such a fashion that you are not distinguishable in form or relative movement while underway is a violation of law and given the crowded nature of the traffic scheme gross negligence. I also see no indication that the warship was not displaying the correct lights, so I question the wisdom of the tanker getting underway at all without establishing contact with vessels it was about to maneuver into and around.

I don't know any of the details so I am not passing judgement, but I am reading two things from what I have heard thus far. Firstly, the warship lost situational awareness and despite the non-standard lighting of the tanker, they had more than enough tools at their disposal to accurately access and react to the situation. Secondly, the tanker displayed gross incompetence in the handling of its lighting and communicating to underway ships in a traffic scheme it was entering.

It was frustrating for me to listen to the bridge communications traffic between the tanker/terminal/warship. None of them seem to be very insistent on accurately communicating where they are in relation to each other, and neither vessel seems to have done anything substantial to maneuver away from a collision (including just stopping). The warship especially is very tight lipped. Its just mind blowing to hear how nonchalant everyone is. And to be perfectly honest the vessels were not really that constrained by draft or traffic. This situation was peanuts compared to entering or exiting the Suez or major ports like Rotterdam or Jebel Ali.
the entire communication was messy. what happend will come in the final report.

some points I have gathered from media:

- Helge Ingstad had change of crew just 2-5 minutes before the collision, did the previous bridge crew not inform the nev bridge crew?
- all communication in Norwegian.
- Bridge crew on Sola TS is english speaking, except the LOS
- all three fishing boats, that was coming up the same route as Sola TS, had english speaking helms men, they was moving thos fishing vessel to new work location, while the crew was sleeping.
- cargo ship in the same are had also a english speaking helms man
- bridge crew on Helge Ingstad consist of 5 crew members (all Norwegian), and 1 american officer that was under training.

All VHF traffic is in Norwegian, but bridge crew on almost all vessels are english speaking


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 7 of 12  [ 116 posts ]  Return to “Off Topic” | Go to page « 15 6 7 8 912 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]