LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Bulk loading lore earns stern rebuke Dear Sir,
Recently in Athens I presented to the 2009 RINA conference on the Design and Operation of Bulk Carriers a paper entitled ‘Naval Architects - are they out of touch with bulk carrier operations?’ I did so to bring attention to what I
believed were the failures of classifi cation societies, ship designers and builders to provide mariners with some of the information and tools required to operate bulk carriers safely and effi ciently. Some years ago, when it was first
noticed that many bulk carriers had been provided, in their stability booklets, with unworkable ‘Typical Loading Sequences’, the International Association of Classifi - cation Societies (IACS) was persuaded to issue Recommendation 83 ‘Guidance for Loading/Unloading Sequences for Bulk Carriers’, but, despite this, some stability booklets still include cases with loading sequences that put the ship 3m by the head, (ie with the bows 3m deeper in the water than the stern), that only require deballasting to start when half the cargo has been loaded or which leaves one of two loaders sitting idle for hours. I realise that most experienced bulk carrier officers never need to use the typical loading sequences, but for those that do this dodgy guidance is a disaster. T e carrying of cargoes of steel coils
is, from the accounts I have received from various parts of the world, riddled with confusion for many bulk carriers,
particularly those built before 2006, as to the tonnage they can carry, with P&I clubs, classifi cation societies and Arthur Sparks, in ‘Steel Carriage by Sea’, all giving diff erent advice. T e industry seems very reluctant to grasp this nettle; meanwhile those who know, and play by, the rules continue to be penalised. My presentation questioned the
effectiveness of ventilators set in the hatch covers of bulk carriers for ventilat- ing the ends of holds and deplored that ships were given no information about the acceptability of 50tonne loaded fork liſt trucks working on the tanktop. Also proposed was a clearer rendering of the contents of the IMO Circular, which provides guidelines to the master for avoiding dangerous situations in adverse weather and sea conditions. Finally I drew attention to the way in
which the Australians, Americans and Canadians, for valid safety reasons, require grain stability calculations which diff er from those required by the International Grain Code and accepted by most other countries, thus creating confusion for mariners whose calculations must meet diff erent requirements in diff erent places. My reason for raising these matters in
T e Naval Architect is that I believe that naval architects - both those in positions of authority and young entrants to the profession - should be aware of a possible problem for which at least two remedies are available. More consultation with users of the ships designed and approved
SCHOLARSHIP SCHOLARSHIP BENEFITS: 1570001) Tuition fees are exempted.
NUMBER TO BE ADMITTED: Three APPLICATION DEADLINE: December, 2010 PROGRAM START DATE: October 1, 2011
More information and contact
http://www.naoe.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp/eng/ e-mail:
int-admin@naoe.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp
1) 1 USD = 92 JPY, 1 Euro = 112 JPY as of June 2010 72 The Naval Architect July/August 2010
by naval architects is possible, and more time spent aboard ships in service to observe problems can surely be arranged with shipowners. A copy of my presentation to RINA can
be obtained by applying to me at JackIs-
bester@aol.com and I would welcome any interest shown by naval architects in what seems to me to be an important issue.
Captain Jack Isbester, ExC, FNI Tiptree, Essex, England
Dear Sir,
In his letter entitled “Overstating the green’s case for emission control?”, published in the June 2010 issue of T e Naval Architect, Capt Amos Cohen queries if ship emissions can be compared with a state’s emissions. He goes on to suggest that this compari-
son can be likened to that of comparing a tomato with a potato, inferring diff erence. However, as any gardener will confi rm, these two are members of the same family and consequently should not be grown in close proximity, lest blight be transferred from one to the other. In order to maintain the lack of
comparability of emissions, perhaps “chalk and cheese” might have been a better comparator,
Yours sincerely, Brian J. Russell,
MRINA and erstwhile gardener. Osaka University, Japan
International Graduate Course of NAVAL ARCHITECTURE and OCEAN ENGINEERING Master and Doctor Degrees for October 2011 Sponsored by Japanese Government All lectures and research supervision are provided in English
JPY per month + Air ticket (to and from Japan).
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80