Suez canal: Ever Given container ship freed from shoreline

BBC ^ | 3-29-2021 | Someone at BBC

[DannyTN]

I’m watching Agenda Free TV on youtube.

The stern is free, but the bow is not.

[tired&retired]

Thanks for the link. Really good explanation.

[EEGator]

Nice “Seven” reference.

[C210N]

with reports of high winds as the cause...

See the link elsewhere in this thread for Juan Brown's Blancolirio channel.

He cites the Evergiven was screaming at 13 knots.

The rudder must of been turned hard to the side to embed the ship for maximum stuckness.

Seek out maps of the track just prior to entering the canal.

A message was sent. And received by the intended target.

[libh8er]

Crap from China.

[1_Rain_Drop]

duh!
Why didn’t I think of that? lol

[1_Rain_Drop]

Absolutely fascinating and informative video.
I learned something today
Now I can go to bed.

Thanks for posting the video!

[Cajun Sunset]

https://babylonbee.com/news/blockage-cleared-ships-moving-at-record-speed-as-chick-fil-a-workers-put-in-charge-of-suez-canal

[Adder]

Sounds like its not even close...did they just bend the ship? The bow is stuck fast, supposedly.

[Jim Noble]

I wanted to know what was in the containers.

Six month supply of PlayStation 5 consoles.

[Hot Tabasco]

Excellent video, thanks for posting

[Elsie]

In case you are curious as to WHERE this occurred...

30° 0' 56" N

32° 34' 46" E (It took a LOT of searching!)

[logi_cal869]

Yeah, shipping agents are like that. /s

https://www.businessinsider.com/ship-stuck-in-suez-canal-due-winds-sandstorms-possible-blackout-2021-3

[rlmorel]

Whenever I see things like this, I am reminded of the famous grounding of the USS Missouri on January 17, 1950.

Granted, these waters in the Suez Canal are tighter and shallower (but navigation through the canal is far more highly ritualized and overseen) and the Ever Given is far bigger, but the grounding of the USS Missouri was epic in aspects of dysfunction, embarrassment, and the fastness of the grounding.

The grounding of the Ever Given can be attributed to perhaps inattention coupled with an untimely gust of wind, but the grounding of the Missouri is juicy with...hubris.

On the morning of January 17, 1950, the USS Missouri left Norfolk for only the second time under her new captain, CAPT William Brown, and on her way out, was to conduct an exercise where she would steam past some experimental acoustic devices that would record her screws which they were trying to use to identify ships.

Captain Brown ordered the speed increased to 15 knots, which for this area of water was considered quite fast for a ship of that size, and when one of the officers made his opinion known, the Captain ignored him and overrode him.

Down in the chart room, the officers in charge of navigation were puzzled both by the speed and the trajectory of the ship which was (to them) taking them into shoal water. One of the navigation officers looked out the port hole and saw a navigation buoy and knew they were going on the wrong side of the buoy, basically cutting the corner ACROSS the shoals.

Multiple people with more experience in the area realized what was going on and tried to tell Captain Brown, who repeatedly ignored them or that they had no idea where they were.

When the ship hit the mud in the shoals, the angle of the bottom was so shallow, and the mud so slick that nobody even felt the ship going aground. Something amiss was noted when men on the stern saw muddy water being churned up by the screws, and almost simultaneously, the salt water intakes for cooling water for the engines clogged and temperatures began to rise. It all happened so softly and gradually that the ship had gone aground 2500 feet before finally stopping that most of the crew did not even realize they had run aground!

It was that slick mud that served as a "lubricant", and raised the entire ship several feet out of the water, after which it began to settle back, and the sticky mud encased the entire hull, grasping it tightly.

Worse (if possible) she had run aground at an unusually high tide, which as anyone knows, is very bad. To make things even worse, she was fully loaded with both fuel and ammunition which brought her displacement up to 57,000 tons.

She wasn't aground, she was...ashore, by more than two ship lengths worth! Just as bad from a publicity perspective, she was aground in full view of a major heavily travelled roadway. There she would stay for two weeks.

They brought Admiral Homer Wallin in who had been instrumental in the salvage efforts at Pearl Harbor, and his straightforward plan involved the obvious steps:

• Remove as much weight as possible from the battleship

• Lift the ship

• Remove as much sand as possible from around the battleship

• Use the combined power of the area's tugboats to pull the battleship

• Dredge the channel to provide deep water for Missouri to reenter the shipping lane

But after offloading all her fuel, ammunition, food, water, anchors, and even her anchor chains, they were unsuccessful.

They added even more pontoons, and had divers all along both sides of the hull with pressure water hoses trying to dislodge mud adhering to the hull like cement, as tugboats above on port and starboard sides alternately applied pressure to rock the hull from side to side, as tugs fore and aft pushed and pulled at the same time.

I cannot imagine how dangerous that must have been for those divers.

Politically, it became intolerable for the Navy.

An Army helicopter darted in (under full view of the Press and civilians on the side of the highway, watching) and lowered a line with a sign saying something like "Need a hook?" and even the Soviet Union piled on from afar.

Heads rolled. As they should have.

[rlmorel]

Hahahahahaha!

[rlmorel]

Great video, thanks for posting.

I admit, the background, and the toy models he was using were odd, but I get the impression that is his Schlick...

He did a nice job of explaining. For laypersons, like most of us are, it is very difficult or impossible to grasp the magnitude of the forces involved.

[rlmorel]

That was one of my thoughts too, but the track (Shown in BwanaNedge’s post above) that showed all the ships (both ahead and behind) showed them moving somewhat in unison, all at those speeds (IIRC) so I don’t think she was going faster than expected.

[C210N]

Juan cited the speed at the time of the scuttling, not necessarily its entire voyage.

And, the “message” drawn on the track happened much earlier than Juan’s track video. That “message” was given and I’m sure received.

[ThePatriotsFlag]

If BBC can’t get Evergreen’s name right, how can we believe anything below the headline?

[C210N]

Speed limit is 8 knots, EverGiven was clocked (radar? LOL) at 13.5 knots.

The Ever Given container ship was reportedly travelling faster than Suez Canal speed limit before running aground