I enjoy listening to your reports. It is very thorough and precise. No where else would we get such detailed information. Thank you, keep up the good work.
Hi I happened on your channel by accident recently and watched a video about the Dali collision. I found it very interesting and very well presented. I’ve watched a couple more of your videos and found them equally as interesting. I was amazed at how many standards and the level of certification that’s required to operate these ships. You are clearly very knowledgeable on all the legislation and understand it very well. It’s great to know the high standards of staff that work onboard these massive ships and I sure this has helped to avoid many other collisions happening in the past. Thanks for taking the time to make your videos.
Additional time needed for the internal reviews and double-checking within the investigation itself, including arranging and preparing for scheduled intermediate-review meetings, to make sure the final report is as complete and accurate as possible.
Capt Zehhaf -a very good job as usual and very clear! BTW only a small point, you missed the Visitor's Book I think - but it is not important here maybe! Also, I have already recommended some of your videos to my Master friends who are sailing to show them to all officers both senior and junior as a lesson in the terrible consequences which are possible if procedures are not followed!
Captain Mustapha, I would like to express my gratitude for sharing this informative video. Your videos always prove to be helpful. However, I noticed that you didn't mention some essential certificates like BWMP, Maritime Pollution Insurances, and PANDI certificates. I understand that there are so many certificates, but they are crucial for the maritime industry. Moreover, I would like to point out that the STCW-2010 convention only focuses on competency levels, not Manning Levels. Finally worth the trouble to watch this type of information. Regards, captain Antonio TL
Yes indeed, that's why I mentioned that there are many certificates on board ships and it depends on her type. And important is to discern this, The maritime industry commonly uses the terms “certificates” and “documents” interchangeably. Technically, however, certificates validate a fact, and documents provide evidence or proof of meeting a standard. You also pointed out that. Rgds
Thank you for pointing out that there are a lot of areas for the investigation to cover. I watch airplane disaster videos and those investigations also take a long time and this is much more data to collect. Don't know why folks are so impatient, I'd rather the investigation be thorough. Another fantastic video with presenting such complicated information in an easy to understand method. And it somehow was comforting to know that all these rules are in place for so many different aspects. It made me feel that shipping and it's possible dangers is taken seriously internationally, I wasn't aware of that. As a follow up video, what is your + chief engineer disaster training?
Very good detailed analysis of vessel operation. What bothers me is NTSB said they found no video. I have a dashboard cam of my driving that costs less then $100. Why don't ships have this too ?
I believe the reason we have not heard much preliminary information from the NTSB is because there is an ongoing criminal investigation. A criminal investigation by State or Federal authorities would cause the a tighter control of the information.
Important to the person in Baltimore.... The PLAN that the ship owner had with incentives to have larger vessels coming to world ports. Larger vessels would have required additional clearance that the Key Bridge did not allow for. Of all ships to take down the bridge - it would be the one with the plan to improve the ports.
Interesting video concerning the burdens of documenting the operation of the vessel. However, you did not achieve the headline of the video as to why there is no report or even a preliminary report. Of note thru all this accident I noted that even with all the sophistication of the ship, it's navigation and other infrastructure the propulsion plant is inherently weak and subject to occasional failure. Yes the full investigation will take time. And investigation during disaster recovery can hamper the recovery. But sufficient help is on scene for the recovery that an informative investigation can proceed. The public has a right to know why billions of damage and infrastructure repair is now necessary and has been placed upon them even in a preliminary manner.
Excellent big picture but WHY is still unanswered. The answer is it is a very complex subject. The crew did not understand the ships electrical system and the general public is bored with a detailed electric failure disertation. At the expense of being unpopular here goes. The ship operates 3 or more generators in parallel, at least part of the time to meet load requirements. These multiple generators must share the load in a reasonable manner. If too much of the load drifts to only one generator that generator will trip off. When that happens the load on the rmaining generators may be too high and they trip off If a generator does not trip off when overloaded it may become a motor and try to drive the diesel engine. This motorization can be prevented with reverse power relays. Generators supplying the grid are always protected with reverse power relays. normally not used on ships. keeping the load stable between multiple parallell generators is fairly complex becaus the are two loads on each generator. The real load and the reactive load. Two generators in parallel is the simpliest by using the droop method which involves slowing down the generators speed as the load increases and reducing the generators voltage as the load increases. The droop method is hard to apply with 3 or more generators as it is based on the droop curves crossing at the stable share point. The simplist method for 3 or more generators is two on the droop mode with #3 and #4 controlled by an operator with his hand on the knob. If you do not understand all of this do not feel bad. Most engine room crews do not understand this either!
If you go through my earlier comments on the truth of the crash you will know why , especially when the fault is with the pilot/officials, when faced with an emergency situations , changing the focus from the contracted safe passage to saving the bridge, only to crash the bridge, , A bad worker blames his tools,
Yeah, I browsed some of your comment and I realized you don't know nothing about seagoing ships. You never sailed and you never managed a ship engine room. Propeller effect is unknown to you, turning effect of a "dead" ship also, power management onboard ship also is far from being your area of expertise. Why black smoke on ship funnel? Also unknown to you. To really understand what happened there, you need experience onboard that kinda ship. You need to know the power management of that ship. You need to know how a "dead" ship react under wind, current, you need to know the maneuvrability of that ship at low and very low speed, the propeller effect for each speed of the engine. Do you know what's the difference between a fixed propeller and a pitch propeller? Do you know what are the pilot responsability onboard seagoing vessels? DID YOU EVER SAILED AS AN OFFICER ONBOARD COMERCIAL VESSELS? If you know all of the above, than we can discuss, otherwise it'll be a sterile conversation.
Why? Because it'll shatter the hornet nest, that's why. Becausd nobody need a deep introspective into nowadays COC of seafarers. Look at what happened with EU Audit regarding seafarers training and education in Philippines. That's why. Because the truth it'll impact worldwide shipping industry. Why we stil have Flag of Convenience when we have so many incidents and law breach involving these vessels.
Million dollar equipment and cargo at the mercy of 22 crew members who are ready to cut corners and save every dollar to please and satisfy their unscrupulous owners. This leads to these billion dollar losses once every few years and repeat the 1989 Exxon, captain hazelnut disaster.
