Bourbon Dolphin capsizes

I've been reading all the previous posts and in the evidence of the Mate the vessel turned 90 degrees before they climbed out of the starboard door. This would be impossible so I think that he maybe meant that the vessel swung through (rolled) 90 degrees. Another witness said the ship went one way and then the other. The translation of the evidence into English may be misleading. I would like to see the position of the vessel, at the moment of capsize, plotted with the rig and the #3 anchor chain. If the BD had crossed the #3 chain the drifting #2 chain would have snagged over the tensioned #3 at a point closer to the rig. This could have caused the excessive pull to port. When two boats are required on a long heavy chain in strong wind and current conditions, I think it should be mandatory to have two ring type chasers on the chain, the second could be added either at the start of the payout from the rig or when the extension chain is being linked on.

 

Capsize vessel in previous escape

Capsize vessel in previous escape

The Bourbon Dolphin capsized in the Chevron field
A vessel which capsized off Shetland with the loss of eight lives in April had almost tipped over last December, it has emerged.
The disclosure was made in an inquiry in Alesund, Norway, set up to examine what led to the Bourbon Dolphin overturning during a routine operation.

Seven crew survived but three were confirmed dead and five others were lost at sea.

The oil vessel capsized during a towing operation in the Chevron field.

On Monday the commission heard evidence from Trond Myklebust, managing director of Bourbon Offshore in Norway.

He said the decision on whether or not a vessel was suitable for a job rested with the contractor, not with his company.

Chief officer

Mr Myklebust admitted that he had since been told the Bourbon Dolphin was "marginal" for the job at the Chevron oil platform and that he now knew it was not the first or even second choice of vessel.

The Bourbon Dolphin capsized 85 miles west of the Shetland coast on 12 April and sank three days later.

The three crew members confirmed dead were chief officer Bjarte Grimstad, 37, second officer Kjetil Rune Våge, 31, and 44-year-old captain Oddne Arve Remøy.

Search teams were unable to recover the bodies of his son David Remøy, 14, chief engineer Frank Nygård, 42, second engineer Ronny Emblem, 25, electrician Søren Kroer, 27, and 54-year-old bosun Tor Karl Sandø.

The inquiry continues.

 

What......? :?: :?: :?:

 

One of the survivors at the earlier court hearing mentioned a ballast problem in January. See closing evidence of witness #3.

http://bourbon-online.com/media/corporate/xs_9376_bourbon_offshore.pdf

 

This statement is from a BBC News story yesterday. Here is the link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/north_east/6765307.stm

I'm a little skeptical of this report; it hasn't shown up anywhere else. Maybe a not-precise translation from Norsk to English?

 

BBC Story Details

I'm a News Junkie (See http://terryking.us/news ) and I consistently see story details on BBC that do not appear elsewhere. This is especially true for follow-up of older stories like this. Google Advanced News Search shows only one story on the Dolphin in the last week; it's this BBC one.

BBC carried a story about one of the owners of the Boston Red Sox (That's a 'Baseball' team) being called to testify in Italy that his private jet was used by the CIA to spirit a terrorism suspect out of Italy. The story never appeared in the Boston Globe! I emailed an editor asking them why. No reply....

I always start with BBC then hit the rest of the world...

 

I'm not able to open the document. It's password protected...

 

It works OK for me, let me try and attach it as a file,

 

I see. Thanks Murdomack.
What could that been...? Porthole open when shifting ballast or fuel? What that means......? Excessive heeling and flooding through a porthole?
But portholes under freeboard deck cannot open....

 

I'm sure it will be investigated again. Capt. Chuck suspected ballast being transferred in the wrong direction in his initial reactions. I would not be surprised if he is not onto something here although it may not be as simple as a mistake by the bridge.
Since the introduction of Autocad, people seem to accept drawings as infalible and I personally have witnessed pipework that was designed and installed different to the system diagrams. One case I can think of was on the firefighting system of a new oil platform. This mistake got picked up at the commisioning stage but it was too late to rectify as the deck (22000 Tonnes) was already on the barge for sailaway. After a Safety Assessment of the affected area it was decided to leave it as it was and revise the system diagrams. Some things will obviously slip through the net if the commisioning is not rigourous.
These problems can also occur with valve control systems being mixed up.
If there have been previous ballast problems with this new ship, it could be something like that but we will probably never find out.

 

Has this been mentioned before?

Last Updated: Monday, 18 June 2007, 17:52 GMT 18:52 UK

E-mail this to a friend Printable version

Capsize vessel in previous escape

The Bourbon Dolphin capsized in the Chevron field
A vessel which capsized off Shetland with the loss of eight lives in April had almost tipped over last December, it has emerged.
The disclosure was made in an inquiry in Alesund, Norway, set up to examine what led to the Bourbon Dolphin overturning during a routine operation.

Seven crew survived but three were confirmed dead and five others were lost at sea.

The oil vessel capsized during a towing operation in the Chevron field.

On Monday the commission heard evidence from Trond Myklebust, managing director of Bourbon Offshore in Norway.

He said the decision on whether or not a vessel was suitable for a job rested with the contractor, not with his company.

Chief officer

Mr Myklebust admitted that he had since been told the Bourbon Dolphin was "marginal" for the job at the Chevron oil platform and that he now knew it was not the first or even second choice of vessel.

The Bourbon Dolphin capsized 85 miles west of the Shetland coast on 12 April and sank three days later.

The three crew members confirmed dead were chief officer Bjarte Grimstad, 37, second officer Kjetil Rune Våge, 31, and 44-year-old captain Oddne Arve Remøy.

Search teams were unable to recover the bodies of his son David Remøy, 14, chief engineer Frank Nygård, 42, second engineer Ronny Emblem, 25, electrician Søren Kroer, 27, and 54-year-old bosun Tor Karl Sandø.

The inquiry continues.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/6765307.stm

Pericles

 

Yes, Perry. Post 335 and next ones. We are just discussing it. See previous posts.
Cheers.

 

Too little information, and some of it sounding like hearsay, to draw any conclusions yet, I think. The other captain said the boat was excellent in all respects, never any problems. This seaman sounds not certain of the incident details.

Very confusing, I agree. I read that the deadline for the final report is February, 2008. Let us all hope that the board is as rigorous as possible.

 

Porthole? problems in technical terms more like! Could it have been an inspection hatch? normally bolted in position but not fully bolted up? during transfer of ballast? not a normal activity but there again it was in port and we are not notified of the actual activities at the time! so an inspection could have been carried out/ nuts slacked off ready for a tank inspection - possible problem with communication - probably absolutely nothing to do with the situation being discussed here but.......

Just a thought but in the UK some differences in termanoligy (?) are found between Royal Naval and Merchant Naval Seamen! A "porthole" in the Merchant Service is called a "scuttle" in the Naval Service, which is something different to your civilian sailor! an other one is the word "ullage", in the Merchant Service it is the air space above a liquid in a container, in the Naval Service it is the actual liquid remaining after the majority is removed. so you can see the problems, and that is within one language! what chance has your lowly seaman got between languages (tho' your average Norwegian speaks better English than your average Englishman!) going on what is only heresay and afterthought anyway? I think that little bit of information can be discounted (other than the fact that, just maybe, this crew wasn't as good as may be expected -but hell we all make mistakes at time - luckily most of 'em are not fatal!) [that was hard to say and I do not think it was the case, but again, but....]

 

Yeap! It looks rather like a language problem.
Cheers.