The Night Mail

[jjb1970]

10 hours ago, Chris Snowdon said:

Was that the happy accident, or was it the other way around: (No Keel + No Backbone) * (Sagging + Hogging) = Snap, which was one of the two predominant theories about Derbyshire.  It's not a world away from using wooden pit-props in a mine, so that you can see and hear changes.  Would it be far too cynical to say that side-tunnels were a relatively cheap way to get crew from one end to the other without the inconvenient risk of a MOB incident, and they just happened to provide extra strength and a simple means of monitoring?

For a similar effect in large aircraft, in the memoir "Skyfaring" the author describes watching similar flexing of the empty fuselage of a B747 in almost mystical terms, although I was once able to see it from one of the "boring seats", 'tween aisles and above the wings, on an A330...

To recall us to railways, the longitudinal strengths of tubes came up in the RAIB report on the Carmont crash, which involved Mk.IIIs (designed with experience gained from aviation).  I can't remember the Greyrigg report, but there must have been similarities.

 

regards

cs

 

No, the box girders are the critical component for hull safety of box boats. They are what allows them to withstand torsional stress and racking. The hull construction is very different from most ships as it is essentially an open box with a series of transverse bulk heads dividing the holds, the ability of the hull to contain twisting and racking is pretty much entirely determined by the box girders. The side passages go along the box girders as it's the most convenient arrangement given the box girders are there, if they weren't critical structural members they'd just be long corridors between the tops of the wing tanks and the upper deck.

 

Ship hulls are designed to flex as otherwise trying to manage the multiple hogging, sagging, twisting, racking etc stresses would require biblical levels of hull strength and would be impractical.

 

What might be counter intuitive to some is the shafting. Marine engineers designing the shaft arrangement love box boats as their very long flexible shafts greatly ease alignment and make the sterntube a lot easier. Polymeric water lubricated sterntube bearings are very popular because they eliminate all the issues around oil loss to sea, the downside is high wear down and high clearances.  For a containership a stern tube wear of 10-15mm between dry docking isn't a big deal, for a short stiff shaft it could result in shaft failure or even more expensive engine crankshaft failure. In LR part of my job was torsional vibration analysis (engine, flywheel, gearbox and/or clutch if fitted, power take off/in, shaft and propeller or generator) and every now and again I'd get a bulk carrier with a five cylinder engine, five blade prop and very short, extremely stiff shaft, I hated those jobs.

[jjb1970]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

I dont think government even knows that stuff leaves the country, let alone cares 

 

Looking at control of containers provides an interesting perspective on attitudes of governments to regulation.

 

At IMO almost all focus is on the ship. That's not unreasonable,  but to regulate ships safely demands at least some regulation of other elements. Things like fuel quality, navigation lights, communication etc. Container lines have massive problems with misdeclared cargo and have been trying to get IMO and Port States to do something for decades, with limited success.

 

This may sound crazy, but from the ship operator perspective they get a declaration of container weight and contents and basically have to take it on trust. Most cargo declarations are accurate and made in good faith but there is a problem with boxes much heavier than declared weight and filled with hazardous cargo but declared as children's toys or something. Container fires aren't that uncommon and can result in very severe consequences.

 

IMO did introduce container weighing requirements a few years ago (verified gross mass) but the rules have holes big enough to drive a bus through and are a bit of a joke. On cargo declaration few states take it seriously. 

 

If I was a cynic, which of course I am not, I might think they're happy to pile rule upon rule on ships as it tends to be someone else's problem and it's for shipowners/operators and Recognised Organization's (such as LR, ABS, DNV, ClassNK etc) who do everything for Flag States to worry about but they're loathe to do anything which would require any effort on their part.

 

They're quite shameless, they openly use the 'administrative burden' excuse to fend off demands for governments to do anything they don't want, while denying that 'administrative burden' is a reason not to dream up another rule for ships. Personally I don't have much sympathy for the administrative burden argument when it comes to safety (there are already multiple techniques to assess cost-benefit) but either way the argument should be applied consistently.

[polybear]

11 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

This may sound crazy, but from the ship operator perspective they get a declaration of container weight and contents and basically have to take it on trust. Most cargo declarations are accurate and made in good faith but there is a problem with boxes much heavier than declared weight and filled with hazardous cargo but declared as children's toys or something.

 

Don't Ports have Weighbridges?  Weigh the truck in & out of the port....

[jjb1970]

1 minute ago, polybear said:

 

Don't Ports have Weighbridges?  Weigh the truck in & out of the port....

 

You'd think so..... Some do, but many still rely on the declaration. 

[Happy Hippo]

All this talk of ship design has convinced me that I need to make some  'pop-pop' boats with the grandchildren the next time they are up here, and sail them on the new pond.

 

 

 

 

Or anywhere on the ground floor if the rain in Shropshire continues at the present rate🤣

[TheQ]

I suspect container cranes already have load sensors for safety reasons. It would be quite easy to pass that info onto the declarations department.

[rockershovel]

1 hour ago, TheQ said:

I suspect container cranes already have load sensors for safety reasons. It would be quite easy to pass that info onto the declarations department.

Good luck to the Load Master or Crane Operator who delayed the loading to faff about with a couple of dubious containers....

[jjb1970]

2 hours ago, TheQ said:

I suspect container cranes already have load sensors for safety reasons. It would be quite easy to pass that info onto the declarations department.

 

They have overload protection, but even with load indication there are issues with telemetry and time. The crane instrumentation is to protect the crane, it doesn't communicate with the ship cargo planning software. A box could be much higher than declared weight but still be well within maximum allowable weight. And because of speed of loading the terminals do not want to take a hit of having to offload boxes.

 

There are loads of solutions such as weighbridge at point of loading or entry into terminal, crane load sensors etc. The problem is forcing port states to regulate the matter and force compliance. Because they don't want to do that they just allow loads of loopholes. When incidents occur issues around misdeclaration are a recurring theme, even though there are multiple relatively cheap solutions most regulators are uninterested.  It's shocking really.

[New Haven Neil]

I don't think I had fully realised how slapdash the whole container weight thing was - scary.

 

@Chris Snowdon It's OK to mention trains on The Night Mail (although there is some risk of culture, ie red/green, clash. It is ER's that is meant to be train-free.

 

Just to stir the pot.....

 

[Hroth]

33 minutes ago, New Haven Neil said:

I don't think I had fully realised how slapdash the whole container weight thing was - scary.

 

@Chris Snowdon It's OK to mention trains on The Night Mail (although there is some risk of culture, ie red/green, clash. It is ER's that is meant to be train-free.

 

Just to stir the pot.....

 

 

Green, with loads of copper and brass is preferable!

Thats the ticket!!!

 

Mind you, I saw a blue one at Chester General last week. That was quite acceptable...

 

Edited Monday at 12:25 by Hroth

[Happy Hippo]

1 hour ago, Hroth said:

 

Green, with loads of copper and brass is preferable!

 

 

Just for you:

[jamie92208]

4 hours ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

 

 

3 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

 

They have overload protection, but even with load indication there are issues with telemetry and time. The crane instrumentation is to protect the crane, it doesn't communicate with the ship cargo planning software. A box could be much higher than declared weight but still be well within maximum allowable weight. And because of speed of loading the terminals do not want to take a hit of having to offload boxes.

 

There are loads of solutions such as weighbridge at point of loading or entry into terminal, crane load sensors etc. The problem is forcing port states to regulate the matter and force compliance. Because they don't want to do that they just allow loads of loopholes. When incidents occur issues around misdeclaration are a recurring theme, even though there are multiple relatively cheap solutions most regulators are uninterested.  It's shocking really.

I believe that several stolen cars were found in the boxes unloaded from the Dali. 

 

Jamie

[Hroth]

2 hours ago, Hroth said:

 

Green, with loads of copper and brass is preferable!

Thats the ticket!!!

 

Mind you, I saw a blue one at Chester General last week. That was quite acceptable...

 

 

54 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said:

Just for you:

 

Well here's the blue one I saw at Chester General last Wednesday.

I'll admit its not GWR, but then neither are the TfW grotheaps* that infest Chester and keep breaking down....

 

* Their Class 230 units are particularly awful.  One failed at Bidston** that Wednesday and caused severe delays to Liverpool - West Kirby services.

** It was supposed to be going to Wrexham. I think it got towed back to the depot at Birkenhead North. Eventually...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_230

 

Edited Monday at 14:54 by Hroth

[Dave Hunt]

3 hours ago, New Haven Neil said:

I don't think I had fully realised how slapdash the whole container weight thing was - scary.

 

@Chris Snowdon It's OK to mention trains on The Night Mail (although there is some risk of culture, ie red/green, clash. It is ER's that is meant to be train-free.

 

Just to stir the pot.....

 

 

Ah, now those I approve of.

 

Dave

[Dave Hunt]

2 hours ago, Hroth said:

 

Green, with loads of copper and brass is preferable!

Thats the ticket!!!

 

There are, however, some that are beyond the pale.

 

Dave

[Dave Hunt]

1 hour ago, Happy Hippo said:

Just for you:

 

Like that for instance.

 

Dave

[Hroth]

4 minutes ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

There are, however, some that are beyond the pale.

 

Dave

 

3 minutes ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

Like that for instance.

 

Dave

 

Thought it was the "panniers" that fell into that category, though I'd tend to disagree....  🙃

 

 

[Northmoor]

41 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

I believe that several stolen cars were found in the boxes unloaded from the Dali. 

I believe there is also a link to those "Abandoned supercars in garages in the Middle East" clickbait stories that circulate.  It is rightly pointed out that there are often unpaid taxes involved so the owner goes "missing" to avoid payment but it has also been suggested that some "owners" may also not want to have to explain how their cars came to be in the Middle East in the first place......

[Dave Hunt]

3 minutes ago, Hroth said:

Thought it was the "panniers" that fell into that category, though I'd tend to disagree....  🙃

 

Oh, Panniers would be even worse, especially green Panniers, which in some places are actually banned from being portrayed in all but 'top shelf' publications only read by those of a seriously disturbed nature. 

 

Dave

[jjb1970]

I was going to take this home by arranging a bomb threat and having a transit van ready to have off with it in the chaos. Take a chainsaw to the lower hull to make it a waterline model and it'd be an acceptable model of a ship for my N gauge layout. Imagine my shock, horror and disgust when I noticed the fools had made it to the wrong scale at 1/150, clearly as a serious modeller I could never accept such a flagrant disregard for accuracy, it would ruin the painstakingly researched super accurate generic 4-6-0 kettles and coaches on the layout.

 

[Oldddudders]

A shipping line called "Hmm" sounds a bit dubious. 

[jjb1970]

37 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

A shipping line called "Hmm" sounds a bit dubious. 

 

Too much buldak and soju has addled their minds, let it be a lesson to all....

[Happy Hippo]

1 hour ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

Oh, Panniers would be even worse, especially green Panniers, which in some places are actually banned from being portrayed in all but 'top shelf' publications only read by those of a seriously disturbed nature. 

 

Dave

The 41xx is the only ex GWR loco I own in green livery.  The rest of the steam fleet are all black, and will remain so until the end of the year when the two Minerva 56/66xx (1 x B, 1 x G) arrive.

[Flying Fox 34F]

2 hours ago, Hroth said:

 

 

Well here's the blue one I saw at Chester General last Wednesday.

I'll admit its not GWR, but then neither are the TfW grotheaps* that infest Chester and keep breaking down....

 

* Their Class 230 units are particularly awful.  One failed at Bidston** that Wednesday and caused severe delays to Liverpool - West Kirby services.

** It was supposed to be going to Wrexham. I think it got towed back to the depot at Birkenhead North. Eventually...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_230

 

Nice to SNG out and about.

 

Are the issues with the 230 class units, mainly problems with the Ford Transit engines?  Or have they been swapped out for something else?

 

Paul

[SM42]

We that was a busy shift, but thankfully not as busy as I was expecting. 

 

Just enough to make 12 hours fly by. 

 

Andy