Derbyshire - Page 3 - Ships Nostalgia
05:38

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

Derbyshire

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #51  
Old 14th August 2007, 01:09
Stubbsy5050 Stubbsy5050 is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by M29 View Post
Steviej, can you name all six sisters for me? I was on English Bridge, brand new in 1973, was she a true sister to Derbyshire?
I assume English Bridge also changed her name later
Best Wishes
Alan

This is a list of the ill-fated Bibby Bridge Class OBO's, including the foreign-built variants;

Pacific Bridge:
44,842gt. built Japan 1967. Sold 1974, renamed Petingo. Suffered damage to No.3 hatch in heavy seas off South Africa. Denied assistance, she drifted ashore, broke up and sank 1990.

Atlantic Bridge:
44,842gt. Japan 1968. Renamed Dorsetshire 1977. Sold 1982, renamed Perinthos, then Deniz S, then Miss Vicky, then Ivy V. No current records.

Westminster Bridge:
44,842gt. Lithgows 1968. Sold 1973, renamed Proteus, then President Roxas. Broken up 1990.

Ocean Bridge:
66,057gt. Japan 1970. March 1971, suffered an explosion which burnt out the bridge section and blew a hole the size of a tennis court right through the ship, killing the master. After repairs costing 2.5m, renamed Gloucestershire 1977. Sold 1978, renamed Oceanic Victory, later Ocean Victory, then China Victory. Broken up 1986.

English Bridge
78,527gt. Swan Hunters Haverton Hill, Teesside 1973. Renamed Worcestershire 1977. Sold 1979, renamed Sunshine, then Murcurio, then Crystal Transporter, then Kowloon Bridge. Lost November 1986 when cracks appeared forward of the bridge, she lost her rudder, was blown onto the Irish coast and broke her back.

Australian Bridge:
78,527gt. Japan 1973. Renamed Somersetshire 1977. Sold 1978, renamed Enterprise Transporter, then Cast Puffin, then Chili, then Danmark, then Norman Hunter, then Leon. No current records.

Canadian Bridge:
65,135gt. Harland & Wolf 1974. Renamed Bedfordshire 1977. Sold 1978, renamed Tectus, then Bocita, then Shou An Hai. No current records.

Yorkshire:
60,814gt. Swan Hunters Tyneside 1975. Chartered out as the York Marine. Used as oil storage hulk. 1988 attacked and burnt by Iranian warships at Sharjah. Sold 1988, renamed Martontree. Broken up 1993.

Liverpool Bridge:
91,655gt. Swan Hunters Haverton Hill, Teesside 1976. Suffered a serious engine room explosion. Renamed Derbyshire 1978. September 1980 sank in the Pacific during Typhoon Orchid with 44 on board. No survivors.

Mersey Bridge:
39,427gt. Sunderland Shipbuilders 1976. Renamed Cambridgeshire 1977. Sold 1983, renamed Festival, then Eastray, then Anemos. No current records.


The rest of the non-Bibby bulkers built at Swan Hunters Haverton Hill were;

Furness Bridge:
1971, 77,316gt.later renamedLake Arrowhead, then Marcona Pathfinder, then World Pathfinder, then Ocean Sovereign.Was the only one of the six built to the original design. Broken up 1992.

Tyne Bridge:
1972, later renamed East Bridge. 1982 in the North Sea, suffered cracks across her deck and had to be repaired.

Sir John Hunter:
1974, later renamed Cast Kittiwake, then Kona. Needed deck cracks repaired.

Sir Alexander Glen:
1975. Deck cracks repaired. 1989 renamed Ocean Monarch, then Ocean Mandarin. Broken up 1995.


Bibby's Captain Henry (Harry) Wilson Pyle collected the Japanese built Pacific Bridge, Atlantic Bridge and Ocean Bridge new from the yards. He was my father-in-law. He captained all three ships and was the master killed in the Ocean Bridge explosion in 1971.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 14th August 2007, 09:14
Chouan Chouan is offline  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,579
"Sir John Hunter:
1974, later renamed Cast Kittiwake, then Kona. Needed deck cracks repaired."
Whilst not criticising the above, the repair work on the above vessel was far more extensive.
Certainly by 1986-7 when I sailed on her she also had extensive doubling plates, extra repair work, extensive large brackets etc etc in pump room along bulkhead. Much, MUCH, more than deck cracks repaired. The repairs, especially the cracks, were inspected every three days, according to the ship's standing orders, in case of the cracks re-appearing, or new ones making an appearance.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 14th August 2007, 10:28
Stubbsy5050 Stubbsy5050 is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 14
I fully accept your correction. My list is in no way comprehensive but perhaps it can be seen as a starting point to catalogue the errors and tragic mishaps that accompanied this class of ships.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 14th August 2007, 22:04
tim frary tim frary is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 74
i saild on sir jonh hunter in 1974 -75 we had two cracks on deck between 8 and 9 hatcher .then we got to japan we took on 20 japanese welders how stayed with us all the way to oz and thay left in cape town....... tim
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 15th August 2007, 08:10
Chouan Chouan is offline  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,579
Terrible isn't it though, and a damning indictment of British shipbuilding in general, and Haverton Hill in particular, that a ship has to have significant repairs within a year of delivery.
"Unfortunate" wasn't it that the modified design drawings were all "lost".
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 15th August 2007, 10:59
marinero's Avatar
marinero marinero is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chouan View Post
My brother knew a bloke who was a welder at Haverton Hill at the time. There was considerable industrial unrest at the time and he told my brother that, unless they were closely supervised, they welded by stuffing the area to be joined with welding rods, then welding a skin over the top so that it looked like a sound weld. As they were paid piece work, in effect, it meant that they got more work 'done' in a given time. Obviously welds were inspected, but, how realistic is it to expect that every inch of a weld is tested.
It doesn't argue against the cause of the sinking, but it does speak volumes for the quality of the build.
I was told by one of Hadleys Shipping Co. Eng. Supts. that the welders were not all of a high quality whilst building these ships at Haverton Hill. The North Sea oil boom was taking off at the time and the wages paid there were a lot more lucrative. Consequently, he said the quality of workmanship was low. Mind you though guys, I doubt if we will ever get agreement on all aspects of this affair.
I tend to go with David Byrne as a reasonably structured chain of events.
Regards
PS Whilst Hadleys had no ships involved, their association with Houlders(Furness Bridge) being in the same office was very close.
__________________
British Born. English by the Grace of God.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 20th August 2007, 14:26
M29's Avatar
M29 M29 is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Radio Officer
Active: 1966 - 1977
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 504
Stubbsy, thanks for the information.
Sorry about your father in law. I was about 80 miles away when Ocean Bridge exploded. There is a thread about that in the BP forum.

Regards Alan
__________________
BEST BENT WIRE
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 8th September 2007, 19:35
Bill Davies Bill Davies is offline  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 181
Much has been written in previous threads about sub standard build of ships but less about the manner in which these vessels were loaded. We have all heard about the practice of infilling welds with a welding rod and other stories but, I would be more interested in the practice of alternative hold loading which would aggravate an already bad condition.
I can't remember being on an Ore Carrier, OBO or Ore/Oil Carrier that did not suffer from cracking iwo of hatch corners however, loading in alternate holds at the behest of the commercial department /loading terminal was not an option as I would simply not do it.
All these theories about the loss of the 'Derbyshire' are exactly that. It was in my opinion quite simply Human Error from the loading to the 'dogging' of the foc'sle hatch.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 17th September 2007, 00:39
David Byrne David Byrne is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 60
Bill, I agree with your comments on alternate hold loading - it needs to be very carefully managed on ships that have been specifically designed and Classed for it.

As for the DERBYSHIRE: we no longer need to guess what caused the loss, there is an abundance of evidence, probably as good as a normal visual survey, from the seabed video footage. It can be shown that the loss was not caused by human error on the part of the crew; it was not alternate hold loading; it was not the focsle hatch being inadequately dogged; it was not poor welding. The primary failure points were Inadequate hatch cover strength on the forward two hatch covers; no focsle; weak foredeck vent pipes.

David Byrne
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 19th September 2007, 12:56
Bill Davies Bill Davies is offline  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 181
David,

I would disagree. Forgive me but I am always suspicious about people who 'definitely' discount certain events as you have done here and in your previous thread on this matter. I believe that it was 'human error' and the 'root cause' was ingress through the foc'sle hatch through insufficient 'dogging'. This initial flooding changed the 'trim' sufficiently for other elements (vents, etc) to be subjected to 'green water' which they would otherwise not have been. The above was exascerbated by the lack of a traditional foc'sle.
With respect to the Hatch covers. When the subject vessel was built the criteria regulating Hatchcover strength was ILLC 66 which has since, I believe , been revised by IACS under URS 21.
However, the subject vessl satisfied this new criteria and without getting into a debate about the Safety factors and Yield Strenth of these criteria sufficient to say that the Event tree would have followed the path I have suggested. I think the scenario given by your goodself satisfied certain parties and was was an attempt to bring 'closure' on this terrible accident.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 19th September 2007, 15:10
muldonaich muldonaich is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1960 - 1990
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Davies View Post
David,

I would disagree. Forgive me but I am always suspicious about people who 'definitely' discount certain events as you have done here and in your previous thread on this matter. I believe that it was 'human error' and the 'root cause' was ingress through the foc'sle hatch through insufficient 'dogging'. This initial flooding changed the 'trim' sufficiently for other elements (vents, etc) to be subjected to 'green water' which they would otherwise not have been. The above was exascerbated by the lack of a traditional foc'sle.
With respect to the Hatch covers. When the subject vessel was built the criteria regulating Hatchcover strength was ILLC 66 which has since, I believe , been revised by IACS under URS 21.
However, the subject vessl satisfied this new criteria and without getting into a debate about the Safety factors and Yield Strenth of these criteria sufficient to say that the Event tree would have followed the path I have suggested. I think the scenario given by your goodself satisfied certain parties and was was an attempt to bring 'closure' on this terrible accident.
hi there i have an old shipping magazine with the report and photos if you want it a lot of information on it ill send it to you if you want bill regards kev.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 19th September 2007, 16:15
Bill Davies Bill Davies is offline  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 181
Kev,

Many thanks. I have many downloads from various websites.

Brgds

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 8th December 2007, 00:08
graymay graymay is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 161
I sailed on the Cast Petrel, was she not an ex 'shire boat' of the same design? (she may have been the Eden bridge)

Graham
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 8th December 2007, 17:03
Gulpers's Avatar
Gulpers Gulpers is offline   SN Supporter
ex-Denholm Moderator
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1972 - 1981
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
My location
Posts: 11,591
Graham,

Cast Petrel was originally Eden Bridge which was indeed an OBO however, she was built in Sumitomo's Uraga yard.
__________________
Ray
. . . . A closed mouth gathers no feet!
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 8th December 2007, 18:53
Pat Thompson's Avatar
Pat Thompson Pat Thompson is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
My location
Posts: 3,265
Greetings,

The now defunct Radio satirical programme "Weekending" had a poem about the Derbyshire after one of the failed attempts to get a full enquiry. I just remember this bit but it was very appropriate,:-

"When the Derbyshire went missing there was silence on the Tees,
Where the ship had once been launched amid the cheers."
There was silence from the owners there was silence from MPs,
There was silence for another seven years".

It went on a good bit longer but the last line was the most telling :-

"It they have this enquiry (blah blah blah),
There's a danger they might still find something out".

Aye

Pat Thompson

You can't get enough photos of "O'Boats"
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 8th December 2007, 18:58
Bill Davies Bill Davies is offline  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 181
Pat,

I believe the outcome of the 'Final Enquiry' was merely to give closure to the subject.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 10th January 2008, 15:17
M29's Avatar
M29 M29 is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Radio Officer
Active: 1966 - 1977
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 504
Hi All
At one time, you could view the complete high court report including pages of evidence by all the witnesses on the web but I have been unable to find it recently. I am sorry I didn't download it at the time.
Can anyone say if there was any conclusions in the final enquiry as to why Derbyshire found herself so close to the centre of the Typhoon?
Regards
Alan
__________________
BEST BENT WIRE
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 20th January 2008, 12:48
Bill Davies Bill Davies is offline  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 181
M29,
The conclusions of the 'Final Enquiry' are in the public arena. However, accepting them is another matter. The Human Factor element was not addressed as robustly as many would have liked.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 21st January 2008, 19:53
M29's Avatar
M29 M29 is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Radio Officer
Active: 1966 - 1977
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
My location
Posts: 504
Thanks for reply Bill. I was asking about the position of the ship, as a colleague of mine said there was some possibility of poor reporting by the Weather Routing service, so I would like to have read the report but as I said, I don't seem to be able to find it.
Cheers
Alan
__________________
BEST BENT WIRE
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 21st January 2008, 20:05
tacho tacho is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 203
There seems to be a quite comprehensive report here
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 25th January 2008, 10:30
Bill Davies Bill Davies is offline  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by tacho View Post
There seems to be a quite comprehensive report here
This report summarises my post #60 in this thread. Throughout this enquiry, Human Error, to my mind the root cause of this dreadfull disaster was not addressed and treated as a 'no go area'. This incident was close to me as I was Master of several OBOs and O/O carriers before and after the incident.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 25th January 2008, 11:04
blobbybluey's Avatar
blobbybluey blobbybluey is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 350
you really do get off on abusing facts dont you bill read the reports view the videos bill .human error was never a factor poor design ,sunk the derbyshire ,but you seem intent on blaming personnel of whatever form,find the photos of the sister ships,where the chief officer who had sailed on this and sister ships ,where they had to put a " cats cradle" over the hatch for gods sake this ship was built in the late 20th century.practices used on sailing ships 200 yrs previously should never ever come in to it ,so quit trying to besmirch the names and memories of those that died ,who i know personally,and who by the way forced all authorities to come up with final proof of the derbyshires fate,instead of nods and winks about failings of personnel onboard and ashore. and mystery losses of bermuda triangle proportions get a grip bill.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 25th January 2008, 11:13
Chouan Chouan is offline  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,579
"The primary failure points were Inadequate hatch cover strength on the forward two hatch covers; no focsle; weak foredeck vent pipes."

The only human error here is design error and perhaps build error, so why the constant focus on the crews' human error?
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 25th January 2008, 11:31
blobbybluey's Avatar
blobbybluey blobbybluey is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 350
because in bills univerese,all funnels would be blue and every ship would be accident free,and would sail forever without the need for "poolies" to muck up and kill themselves and every captain would have his superior knowledge ,although the only skippers who sailed f.o.c in the 60s + 70s ,couldnt get a job on red flag ships because of dodgy certificates and past aberrations
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 25th January 2008, 14:43
LEEJ's Avatar
LEEJ LEEJ is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
My location
Posts: 566
YeeHaa!!
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
Derbyshire trotterdotpom Wrecks 4 27th August 2013 01:44
Huntfield Pat McCardle Tankers 8 24th September 2005 12:41



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.