Random Picture Thread

What about this one...?
A sensible captain ready to perform safe sex with whales...?

 

http://www.tholt.com/odd.html

 

A classic.

 

Happy surfer:

From www.shipspotting.com

Yes, it's real!

 

This boat was designed to be a passagemaker, an explorer vessel.

 

That's how they think the Edmund Fitzgerald went down with all hands on board in November of 1975.

 

Storm, heavy load.

Edmund Fitzgerald sank after a storm with a heavy load, both are not present in this picture.

 

This seabird was tired and take a rest on M/V ALRAIGO, mid 80's.
Thanks for the wonderful link, SeaSpark!

 

Action = Reaction

Again from www.shipspotting.com

 

Thats no bird of paradise..from Islas Malvinas / Falkland..

 

The Edmund Fitzgerald sank during a storm, it had a heavy load, water came in through faulty or improperly secured deck cargo hatches. Theory has it that the ship became suspended between two wave crests making it split in half like a twig. A combination of deadly factors and forces.

 

Some intersting pictures and facts of ocean disasters

http://www.geocities.com/uksteve.geo/mbang.html

 

I've found this:

"....An analysis of the wreckage itself did not give any conclusive evidence as to the cause of the sinking of the FITZGERALD. However, an analysis of the final events in conjunction with the wreckage indicated that the FITZGERALD experienced massive flooding of the cargo hold just before she sank.

When the master of the FITZGERALD first reported topside damage to the vessel at 1530 on November 10, he stated he had a fence rail down, had lost two vents, and had "both" pumps going. Flooding was occurring in one or more ballast tanks, the tunnel or a combination of ballast tanks and the tunnel. At the same time, because of the severe sea conditions, water was entering the vessel’s cargo hold through nonweathertight hatch covers. Between 1530 and the sinking, the FITZGERALD’s deck was awash with green water. Since the sheer strake extended 15 3/8 inches above the weather deck for the entire length of the vessel at side, water would have been trapped on deck. The combined effect of the water in the ballast tanks, the tunnel, the cargo hold, and on deck would have decreased the vessel’s freeboard, permitted more water to enter the cargo hold, and increased any trim or list initiated by the ballast tank or tunnel flooding....."

If this is so, I think it's not the same situation you pointed out for the "surfing ship" photo. In that one we may ask about the loss of stability due to the crest of the wave amidships for a ship in lightship condition, not loss of stability due to downflooding through hatches (or whatever) in a full loaded ship, as it seems to be the case of the Edmund Fitzgerald.

Full report at: http://www.uscg.mil/HQ/G-CP/HISTORY/WEBSHIPWRECKS/EdmundFitzgeraldNTSBReport.html

 

I said that!

All they have is theories, the last one I heard said the weight of the water getting into the hold made possible for the ship to split in two. This happened either as a swale in the middle or peak wave surges bow and stern. In either case the middle was left unsupported with excessive weight and snaped.

The wreakage shows two just about equal pieces of the ship on the lake bottom.

I have seen TV specials since then which explained that any large ship going down is prone to snapping into two. The Titantic is the one which gets most of the attention and 3D computer video graphics.

 

Sorry. Didn't understand you properly.

From the mentioned Report:
"First, the increased weight of the flooding water could have caused a massive structural failure while the FITZGERALD was still on the surface, which caused the vessel to break into two sections. However, an analysis of various flooding conditions indicated that the stress levels from longitudinal bending moments were well below that which would cause a structural failure on the surface. The proximity of the bow and stern sections on the bottom of Lake Superior indicated that the vessel sank in one piece and broke apart either when it hit bottom or as it descended. Therefore, the FITZGERALD did not sustain a massive structural failure of the hull while on the surface."
Cheers.