Ore Bulk Oil Carriers - Page 2 - Ships Nostalgia
15:53

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

Ore Bulk Oil Carriers

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #26  
Old 6th May 2012, 16:28
Erimus's Avatar
Erimus Erimus is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Maritime Enthusiast
Department: Office / Administration
Active: 1958 - 2010
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,867
You're not sitting on the fence then Andrew!

rgds

geoff
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 6th May 2012, 17:45
Andrew Craig-Bennett's Avatar
Andrew Craig-Bennett Andrew Craig-Bennett is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Office / Administration
Active: 1974 - Present
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,249
Been there, done that thing, got the boilersuit wore it out crawling down the duct keel and got holes in it from caustic soda not retained by the oversize nitrile hatch seals. And did I mention No-Control? And why we had to fit the world's biggest Becker rudders because the brutes steered like a car with horrendous oversteer on a skid pan? And when we had fixed all those little issues, it was amazing how many things those ships could do - and all of them badly!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 6th May 2012, 18:22
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
How can you get caustic soda in a duct keel caused by hatch seals ?.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 6th May 2012, 19:11
Malky Glaister Malky Glaister is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 854
John,

You got lots of strange things down duct keels and from Lord knows where.
Dangerous places, I doubt I will ever go down and along one ever again.
A 7 OBO vet
regards |Malky
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 6th May 2012, 22:26
randcmackenzie randcmackenzie is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
My location
Posts: 1,380
Me neither Malky, and I'm not one bit sorry. I'm a veteran of 8, but I was brave enough to do some of them several times.

Burmah Garnet (O/O) (In oil only)
Nordic Chieftain/Cast Heron/Helm (OBO) Oil/ore/coal/mobile homes!
Scandia Team (OBO) oil/ore/coal
London Team (OBO) coal/oil/ore
Friendly Ranger (OBO) Coal/oil
Friendly Carrier (OBO) Coal/ore/oil/animal feed
Stride (OBO) clean oil/black oil/ore/coal/fertiliser
Muirfield (OBO) in ore only - mercifully.

The mobile homes was a one off, but most of the other cargoes were more than once.

Last edited by randcmackenzie; 6th May 2012 at 22:29.. Reason: update
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 7th May 2012, 00:47
Malky Glaister Malky Glaister is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 854
I was on Cast Heron when she became Helm. We loaded tapioca in Thailand for Rotterdam. That was some cargo, weeks to load, covered in dust (everywhere and every thing) Last ship with Denholms, redundant Jun Chief Engineer. Well peed off, I binned all my Denholm News mags (regrettably)

oh well

regards

Malky
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 9th May 2012, 12:17
oldman 80 oldman 80 is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1962 - 1993
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,168
I was what you would classify as a definite OBO man. My first experience of them was standing by the building of Norvegia team and Anglia Team in Gothenburg in the early 1970's. It was the perfect learn about OBO's experience. I sailed in Anglia Team as 2/0 on her maiden voyage. From that time forward I seldom got away from them sailing in several as Chief Mate then Master.
They were demanding on personnel - to say the least. They could almost drive you to the point of insanity due to persistent structural fracturing and the resultant inevitable contamination of ballast water. Very hard working ships, and contrary to what most people might think, it was the change over from coal back to oil which created most headaches especially if the cleaning of the holds after the last oil cargo had been not as good as desired.
On iron ore, (a high density cargo) they were subjected to extremely high stresses (particularly sheer forces) due to the practise of alternate hold loading. ie cargo in holds 1, 3, 5, 7 & 9 with 2, 4, 6, and 8 empty.
eg 10,000 tonnes in #1 Nil in #2 and 10000 tonnes in No 3. The sheer forces at the bulkheads between 1 and 2, and between 2 and 3 were always cause for concern, especially in heavy weather. Same story with the other holds.
The bulkhead at the aft end of No.9 separating the cargo spaces from machinery spaces was always the one which caused the greatest concern - for some reason the maximum permissable stresses at that point were generally a good bit less than elsewhere along the vessels length.
If an OBO was going to snap- that's most likely where it would happen, and I would suggest the consequences would have been extremely severe and quite sudden. The accomodation, bridge and machinery spaces would probably just roll over, and go straight to the bottom.
Free surface was also something which had to be watched like a hawk, - no more than 3 slack holds at one time. Break that rule and she'd loll very badly, - and very quickly. (Maybe worse, if action was not taken immediately)
Nobody was ever paid enough on those ships - long, long hours involved there.
The ones I served on continually alternated between wet and dry cargo pretty well every voyage, - which was just as well, as when that did not happen then the gear would play up terribly if it wasn't used regularly. e.g. do two or three consecutive voyages on oil, and oh boy, would you have trouble with the hatches after that, - they wouldn't want to open at all.
In the case of the reciprocal ie two or three voyages on dry cargo, then you could be sure the cargo valves would give heaps of problems when going back to oil, - mostly down the duct keel, a terrible place to work even under the best of circumstances.
Heating Coils for liquid cargoes were kept under the hatch covers,( being lowered to the bottom of the holds and connected up when required, then raised again afterwards,) on the 1st generation of OBO, but by the time of the second Generation they were built into the bulkhead stools and under the tank tops within the double bottoms.
Grab damages when discharging dry cargo created enormous problems as well, puncturing the hopper sides and tank tops on far too many occasions. Not desireable at all when you were going to load oil a few days later.
You definately required good welders on those ships - they'd soon grind to a halt if not.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 9th May 2012, 19:01
John Cassels John Cassels is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 2,931
But , nobody forced you to load alternate holds !.
__________________
JC ; same initials-but the other guy did the miracles.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 9th May 2012, 22:33
oldman 80 oldman 80 is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1962 - 1993
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,168
Well I suppose you could say that, but with iron ore, alternate hold loading was recommended,or imposed on the vessel, in the builders operations manuals.
The reason of course was to minimise metacentric height/maximise KG which would have been incredibly excessive if iron ore/high density cargo was loaded in all compartments. ie small amounts in each hold. Better larger amounts in alternate holds.

Last edited by oldman 80; 9th May 2012 at 22:36.. Reason: spelling error.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 9th May 2012, 23:26
oldman 80 oldman 80 is offline  
member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1962 - 1993
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,168
alternate hold loading

Oh, I nearly forgot :-
Holds 1,3, 5, 7 & 9 were strengthened for high density cargoes whilst 2, 4, 6 & 8 were not.
Ref:- tank top loadings.
I'd almost forgotten, but on ore, in the case of most OBO's I served on - Alternate hold loading was actually a condition of class, so we were forced to do it that way after all.

Last edited by oldman 80; 10th May 2012 at 05:05.. Reason: memory recall - alternate holds and class.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 17th October 2017, 12:00
RLD RLD is offline  
Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1960 - 2012
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 28
It's a good job OBO's are finished. No more crawling in the pipe tunnel, virtually swimming in crude oil. At least we had a change from oil when we got a coal cargo, or even a grain cargo. It meant a lot of tank washing though.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 18th October 2017, 23:04
LTS LTS is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 69
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malky Glaister View Post
I was on Cast Heron when she became Helm. We loaded tapioca in Thailand for Rotterdam. That was some cargo, weeks to load, covered in dust (everywhere and every thing) Last ship with Denholms, redundant Jun Chief Engineer. Well peed off, I binned all my Denholm News mags (regrettably)

oh well

regards

Malky
Loaded tapioca in Kohsichang on the Nordic Sky.
Thankfully the wife wasn't onboard.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 19th October 2017, 09:33
RLD RLD is offline  
Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1960 - 2012
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 28
Unhappy Cast Petrel aka Helm aka Inci-S

I was Mate on the Helm a couple of times. The worst ship I was ever on in Denholms. I spent most of my time in the pipe tunnel operating the valves from there during discharge because that was the only way they would work - manually! In fact, that's when I threatened to walk off if they didn't send a team to work on the valve system. Luckily (or unluckily) they did, so I stayed on. Several years later, when the Turks bought her, she was renamed Inci-S, and I was sent to her as a consultant because the Turks couldn't manage her. She's a ship I'll never forget. Bob Dewick:
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 19th October 2017, 13:50
Ian Lawson Ian Lawson is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1954 - 1993
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 283
Loaded Tapioca in Ko Sichang a couple of times with Amsterdam as the disport. This cargo is liable to spontaneous combustion.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 19th October 2017, 14:39
RLD RLD is offline  
Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1960 - 2012
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 28
Most of the cargoes we loaded on the Helm were either crude oil or iron ore. I remember having to get the crew to remove about half a ton of fine iron ore from the pipe tunnel after there was a massive leak from the hold through a tank valve. It wasn't only oil that leaked into the tunnel! I reckon OBO's produced many more problems than straight tankers did.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A list of Bulk Carriers that have suffered structural failure alastairrussell Bulk Carriers 639 13th July 2015 05:52
Bulk Carriers - Continuing Safety Concerns Lemschout Bulk Carriers 44 25th February 2013 02:30
Associated Bulk Carriers L&N Other Companies/Ships 0 13th January 2008 18:37
Alternate Hold Loading in Bulk Carriers Hague Bulk Carriers 14 5th May 2007 10:15



Support SN


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.