SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
[Updated 2021-03-29 19:40:51 UTC] Ed. note: At the time of originally writing this story, the only information I could find on the ship's freeing was from directly watching it happen in real time. As originally reported here, that was on VesselFinder.com. There had been some reports last night of Ever Given having been freed, but those were later retracted. News reports were, therefore, suspect. The ship was still stuck. But then I was able to see it underway! I was also monitoring our news feeds and failed to find any reports concurrent with the apparent time of the ship's freeing. Again, the only certain information I had was watching it unfold online. In the interest of getting this breaking news to the community, accurately, and as quickly as possible, I could only refer the information I had at hand.
I'd read discussions elsewhere suggesting various approaches for freeing the ship, none of which held up to closer scrutiny. It's not just a matter of "pull harder!" The structural integrity of the ship was in question. A ship of that size undergoing an abrupt stop due to impact had the distinct possibility of breaking open and sinking. That would make the situation much, much worse. That it did no happen immediately was fortuitous. It was very much possible that a hasty attempt to free it could break it apart and sink it. That would make things much worse. Careful planning was required. Hence, the inclusion of a memorable example of Smit Salvage's successful raising of the Kursk. They knew what they were doing. Anything we could come up with was certainly already considered.
[Update 2] It's a few hours later and I'm finally seeing reports in the regular media that contains more detail. Take a look at Ship stuck in Suez Canal is freed: Everything you need to know. Sadly, even that lacks the details that I want to see. Just how did they get it free? How much and what kinds of equipment did they use? What process did they follow? What ideas did they consider and then reject, and why? If you come upon these kinds of details, please post them to the comments! --martyb
The original story appears below.
According to real-time updates, the container ship "Ever Given" has now been freed and is under way:
You can follow its progress at VesselFinder.com. (The web site seems to be struggling under the load.) At the moment of this writing, it is heading on a Course of 349.2° (nearly due north) at a speed of 2.3 knots.
It is headed to Great Bitter Lake. Once there and out of the path of other shipping, it will undergo technical inspections.
According to various reports, the Suez Canal carries anywhere from 10-15% of the world's shipping. The effort to dislodge the ship is led by Smit Salvage who is renowned in the ship salvage industry. They successfully took on the task of raising the Russian nuclear submarine Kursk. Powered by two nuclear reactors, it sank August 14, 2000 while a full complement of torpedoes and missiles.
What Next?
How will the backlog of hundreds of ships be prioritized for passage? That backlog is clearly visible from space. The canal's capacity is on the order of 55 ships per day. Will they take each ship first-come first-served? What about perishable and time-sensitive cargo? Take advantage of supply and demand to set up a bidding war? With the whole world watching and second guessing every decision, what should they do?
Previously:
Grounded 'Mega Ship' Blocking Suez Canal in Both Directions -- How Would You Get It Free?
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 29 2021, @05:10PM (13 children)
It's a sea level canal with no locks imposing mechanical limits, so what exactly determines the capacity limit?
Sounds like the speed limit is 9 knots (16.7km/h), or about 12 hours to fully traverse the 193km canal. 55 ships per day, assuming a 50-50 split each direction, means an average distance of 7km between ships going the same direction. Presumably that low density is mostly to reduce the risks when passing ships going the other direction - assuming equal spacing you'd be squeezing past a ship going the other way every 13 minutes... so lets eliminate that problem.
Open the canal in one direction only, and lower the average distance between ships to 1 km. 12 hours for the first ship to get through, followed by another ship every 3.6 minutes. In 24 hours you can get 200 ships through, with another 200 every 12 additional hours. Once the backlog is cleared up, open the canal in the other direction only for a similar period. In just a few days the backlog is virtually eliminated in both directions, maybe things are unusually busy for a few more days as the "new backlog" works its way through, and then things return to normal.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 29 2021, @05:49PM (6 children)
I don't know the details how they plan things, but you don't have ships meeting in the canal. The south and the north channels open, allowing inbound ships to come as far as Great Bitter Lake. At the lake, ships anchor, awaiting permission to proceed. No southbound traffic leaves the lake until the southern stretch is cleared of shipping, and likewise or the northern stretch. Everyone sits peacefully at anchor, until the canal authority grants permission to resume movement.
Your idea of opening the canal to only north or only south bound traffic for 24 hours sounds good to me. There would be no need to stop and anchor, so traffic would flow smoothly for a whole day. There may be a couple devils hidden in the details, and those devils probably call themselves "managers".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @05:57PM (4 children)
The main issue with that is that they may not have enough pilots to do that. It's like shipping containers, they could send a bunch of ships one way, but then you'd have a bunch of containers on one side and no way of loading all the ships.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 29 2021, @08:09PM (3 children)
I think it's a safe bet that all the ships have their own pilots. Probably at least two in fact, since even pilots need to sleep, and somebody still needs to steer. The canal is just a short stretch in a long journey, and all the ships are traveling pretty continuously with just brief stops to load and unload. at the stops.
(Score: 4, Informative) by drussell on Monday March 29 2021, @10:11PM (2 children)
No...
When you enter some congested waterways, ports, etc. you take on board a local pilot that guides the ship in the local specialized area.
This has nothing to do with the regular crew of the vessel.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday March 30 2021, @01:21AM
Ah, okay
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 30 2021, @04:17PM
Pilots. You're correct, in all restricted waterways, ships are required to take one or more pilots onboard. The duties and responsibilities of pilots is somewhat different from on place to another, but they never assume any liability. Nor do the various port authorities, canal authorities, their governments, nor the companies/corporations supplying pilots ever take on any liability. They've all got ironclad legal networks and contracts that avoid liability.
Always, the ship's captain or master is liable for everything, no matter what. If he sits like an attentive little dog, and echoes every suggestion that a pilot makes, he is still responsible. The pilot can only make suggestions, it is the captain who orders his own crew to speed up, slow down, hold a course, or whatever.
https://cultofsea.com/navigation/master-pilot-exchange-duties-responsibilities-and-elements-of-effective-relationship/ [cultofsea.com]
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 29 2021, @08:05PM
I wondered about that, I figured they were either going both ways or piling up in the lake. It's not a very big lake, all things considered, and a long way from the optimal point at the center of the canal, but if you're only dealing with a few dozen ships a day I guess it's good enough.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @05:53PM
Presumably the number of available pilots and spacing concerns are the biggest factors. They presumably have a relatively fixed number of pilots to handle the ships going through and they have to reposition back and forth to have ones available for incoming ships.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @06:13PM
For ships that big 1km is too close. If there had been another ship that size 1km behind it, it would have hit the EG when it ran aground. They are 400m long. It would be like maintaining 2 car length separation on icy roads. One hiccup and it's a pile-up.
Even 2 or 3 would be too close, any speed variation and you'll get traffic bunching up. The basic idea is ok, but give them 3km and increase the speed to exactly 12 knots for everyone.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by VLM on Monday March 29 2021, @06:29PM (2 children)
Best case you could double the speed. Remember its a long canal with long stretches between passing zones so you can't go faster than the slowest ship. Which has an interesting sorting solution where the guy most excited to move his frozen yak meat the fastest will simply go first and floor it. But "lots of" cargo ships can't get much above 25 knots regardless how much they floor it.
I have no experience with this canal. Typical freshwater canals might have freeboard like half a meter. So you should not make a habit of making a bow wave over half a meter tall. Bow wave height generally goes up around square of boat speed at low speeds until a max is reached. Is ten knots max bow wave height for a containership? Not sure... You shouldn't slush seawater over the walls every day, but once in awhile must be OK?
"About ten knots" is about 5 m/s because you get about two m/s per knot. I know for a fact the canal can't be dirt or grass lined because drainage ditches can't sustain over a m/s water flow permanently and they're running over four times that speed on a regular basis. So its lined with "something".
I found some army corps of engineers theoretical papers claiming erosion depends mostly on bow wave power which would depend roughly on square of speed. So doubling ship speed would long term quadruple erosion. So its fine for a "once in a lifetime accident" but given the enormous cost of maintenance the long term speed should probably remain about ten knots.
Note that the faster the ships go the more shit will be stirred up from the bottom and into the cooling systems so your next problem is you got a train of ten ships going 25 knots and the engine in ship 3 clogs up and burns out and now you got two ships home free and seven ships stuck behind the dude with the burned out engine...
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday March 29 2021, @08:14PM (1 child)
I didn't suggest changing the speed at all, just the traffic density. And apparently the canal speed limit is 9 knots, so I suspect pretty much everyone will be able to manage that without problems.
You could go faster - I initially suggested it (but did not actually post) before dancing that just one-way would do the job a lot more safely.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 30 2021, @06:34AM
You need forward speed to maintain steering. That seems to be part of what got it so stuck, they had increased speed to over 13 knots to counteract the wind and it wasn't enough, so when they hit the wall they dug right in.
(Score: 3, Informative) by sjames on Tuesday March 30 2021, @12:51AM
They can't decrease the spacing safely. If you think a stuck cargo ship was a problem, wait till you see a 7 ship pile-up.