TRANSPORT MALTA DRAWS ATTENTION TO THE DANGERS OF SHEATHED STEEL WIRES
Following three incident investigations, Transport Malta has issued a safety notice to draw attention to the dangers of sheathed steel wires onboard ships. Their concern surrounds the restricted access to the wire rope for a thorough inspection and the possibility that corrosion might exist.
It is recommended that all concerned must check the condition of all lashings, lifting slings/strops and other loose gear as specified in the manufacturer’s instructions for the use, size and construction of the wire. This advice is in addition to a recent warning by Tokyo MoU, highlighting the dangers of sheathed steel wires on board ships.
The Transport Malta notice also highlights that all Flexible Steel Wire Ropes (FSWR) and Extra Flexible Steel Wire Ropes (EFSWR) should conform to the design requirements recognised by a relevant International Standard.
Companies should consider means to ensure that the inspection of lifting slings or the FPD encased in plastic sheathing and the associated risks due to sheathing, are addressed in the Company’s Safety Management System (SMS). All the relevant lifting equipment and loose gear should be thoroughly examined, operational tested, repaired and overhauled during the Annual Inspection in accordance with the requirements of the IMO adopted Resolution MSC.402(96).
Wire failure has been the critical factor these accidents says Transport Malta. This highlights the importance of: – Ships’ crews to follow established maintenance procedures, being observant during all maintenance tasks and being vigilant at all times.
– Assessing the current maintenance procedures to ensure their continued effectiveness. – Effective crew familiarization and training, to enhance the competency of the crew while conducting test procedures and training drills.
– That ferrules should be compressed at an adequate pressure in order to securely fix the strands without the risk of spreading and that the wires inside the ferrule have to remain without sheathing.
– Specific inspections concentrated on signs of deterioration and damage. – Time intervals between subsequent inspections may be reduced by the competent person depending on the condition of the FSWR / EFSWR.
PRELIMINARY ATSB INVESTIGATION REPORT SUGGESTS HEAVY CORROSION LED TO APL ENGLAND LOSS OF CONTAINERS
The 5,780 TEU APL England was rolling and pitching heavily in rough seas and high winds when it lost 50 containers overboard about 46 nautical miles south-east of Sydney on 24 May 2020, Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) said in its preliminary investigation report. While investigation is ongoing, the initial findings suggest heavy corrosion in many of the ship fittings, including lashing eyes, lashing bridges and deck structures.
Generally, the ship’s lashing equipment appeared in good condition. However, many of the ship fittings including lashing eyes, lashing bridges and deck structures were found to be heavily corroded and wasted, noted Mr Hood.
In addition, the ATSB examination of the container stowage arrangement showed that the use of ‘high cube’ (2.9m/9ft 6in high) as opposed to standard height (2.6m/8ft 6in) containers in the ship’s aft- most container bay, bay 62, affected the security of the stow above the container cell guides. However, the loading computer’s lashing and forces checks did not show any conflicts for this arrangement.
Download the preliminary investigation report at
https://bit.ly/3mNWlnW.
The Report • December 2020 • Issue 94 | 19
Safety Briefings
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 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116
