# 266 KDWT VLOC Reported Sunk In S.Atlantic



## callpor

There are reports this morning that the South Korean VLOC "STELLAR DAISY" on a voyage from Brazil to China has sunk in the S. Atlantic. More details can be obtained from many websites with the Reuters report here at http://gcaptain.com/very-large-ore-carrier-stellar-daisy-believed-sunk-in-south-atlantic/ .


----------



## hawkey01

Another link to info. Amazingly nothing on the news. I did wonder if it was April fool until searched web and endless links to the vessel and this below.

https://www.fleetmon.com/maritime-n...arge-ore-carrier-stellar-daisy-missing-after/

Hawkey01


----------



## Chris Isaac

It's on the BBC site:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-39467269


----------



## G0SLP

Some reports suggest that two members of the crew have been saved, so we might get to know exactly what failed. However, she was built in 1993 - that's a long life in a hard trade.

My thoughts are with the families, colleagues and friends of those missing, presumed lost.


----------



## callpor

Just scrolled thru all the latest news. The Fleetmon report probably has more news than anywhere. Doesn't sound very hopeful for the remaining crew. I echo Mark Coultas, my thoughts are also with the families, colleagues and friends of those missing, presumed lost.
Ship's last PSC inspection was on 7 Feb in China with 6 modest deficiencies identified. Past history was Ok. Polaris shipping operates 24 VLOC's, the worlds largest fleet of this size vessels.


----------



## stehogg

Very sad news especially for families of missing crew,did that run without the return iron ore cargo ,RIP.


----------



## Kaiser Bill

*Stella Daisy*

Another Derbyshire off South America ? RIP you poor souls.


----------



## chadburn

R.I.P. Indeed to those who did not survive, fortunately unlike the Derbyshire there are two survivors I understand who hopefully will be able to shed light on what happened if they are in a position to do so.
Having been involved in an incident when the Ore Carrier I sailed on took on a sudden list to Port due to a structural failure all I can say was that the initial failure was not progressive but very sudden and fortunately the vessel did not go any further only to the Scuppers and then gradually settled back a little when the water reached the parts of the vessel it was not meant to be.
We were also not coping with the South Atlantic weather either, the incident I am referring to happened in the North Sea whilst we were in Ballast.


----------



## Binnacle

"The ship, a Very Large Ore Carrier (VLOC), was operated by Polaris but was flagged to the Marshall Islands, and had 16 Filipinos and eight South Koreans on board.
It was transporting 260,000 tonnes of iron ore from Brazil to China.
It was last heard from on Friday when a crew member sent a text message to the South Korean owner of the ship, Polaris Shipping, saying the freighter was taking on water.
Mr Jaunsolo told reporters that the ship split in two and sank."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-39475836


----------



## duquesa

Thread already running chaps.


----------



## Kaiser Bill

Latest report.http://gcaptain.us11.list-manage.co...3fba611f84640a8337&id=0ab60650aa&e=ce45db01a8


----------



## Ron Stringer

Seems that their communications systems were good enough to email the owners in the Far East were unable (or not use) to alert the appropriate emergency services.


----------



## BillH

*latest*

From Sea Web casualty report

STELLAR DAISY
Guaibo with 260,000 tons iron ore for Qingdao

TOOK WATER AND SANK WHILST UNDERWAY IN THE SOUTH ATLANTIC OCEAN 460 MILES NW OF TRISTAN DA CUNHA, UK IN LAT. 34 04’ 00”S, LONG. 018 32’ 00”W AT 1530 HOURS LT (UTC+1) ON 31/03/17.

URUGUAYAN NAVY AND NEARBY MV ‘ELPIDA’, MV ‘SPITHA’, MV ‘THE ETERNAL’, MV ‘CK ANGIE’ ATTENDED THE SCENE TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE. 2 CREW ON A LIFE RAFT NEAR THE INCIDENT SITE WERE SAFELY RESCUED BY URUGUAYAN NAVY. SAR OPERATIONS FOR THE 22 MISSING CREW EFFECTED URUGUAYAN NAVY, ARGENTINA NAVY AND BRAZIL NAVY AND NEARBY INVOLVING HELICOPTERS, AIRCRAFTS AND LIFEBOATS. SOME OIL POLLUTION AND SHIP DEBRIS REPORTED AROUND INCIDENT SITE.


----------



## callpor

Fleetmon today has more news and discussion on this loss at https://www.fleetmon.com/vessels/stellar-daisy_9038725_27132/

Chris


----------



## Geoff Gower

*Ship Missing in South Atlantic*

By MarEx 2017-04-01 19:00:33 

A South Korean-operated very large ore carrier Stellar Daisy has gone missing in the South Atlantic off Uruguay.

One of the ship’s 24 crewmembers sent a text message on Friday saying the vessel was taking on water. 

Two Filipino sailors have been picked up in a life raft by a commercial ship, the South Korean government said Sunday. Another raft and two powered lifeboats that can carry up to 30 people each were also discovered, but no one was on board, reports Yonhap news agency.

The Uruguay Navy has said that the first ships to reach the scene had detected a strong smell of fuel and spotted debris, indicating the ship had probably sunk. The 312-meter (1,024-foot) vessel was last reported to be around 3,700 kilometers (2,300 miles) miles from shore."The more hours pass, the less the chances are of finding them," Gaston Jaunsolo, a spokesman for the Uruguayan navy told Reuters news agency. Jaunsolo told reporters that the ship split in two and sank.The Marshall Islands-flagged vessel had departed Brazil for China with eight Filipinos and 16 Koreans on board. It was carrying 260,000 tonnes of iron ore.The ore carrier is operated by Polaris Shipping of South Korea. She was built in 1993, and, according to Wikipedia, was originally constructed as a very large crude carrier and then converted to an ore carrier.


----------



## duquesa

See thread running for some time: 266 KDWT VLOC Reported Sunk In S.Atlantic


----------



## callpor

There is a further report about this tragedy today from Splash 247 at http://splash247.com/polaris-fire-slow-response-vlocs-disappearance/ . The Owners are being criticised for their slow response, but I doubt whether that would have saved more of the 22 crew-members who appear to have been lost. If, as appears to be the case, the ship broke in half, then this was totally preventable and for that the Owners deserve criticism.


----------



## woodend

Anywhere on that southern ocean great circle track is a lonely place to die. My condolences go out to the families and friends of those lost. RIP.


----------



## callpor

I echo the the following comment made in Lloyd's List today:-"After the loss of Stellar Daisy with 22 seafarers, we might hope there will be an eagle eye cast over similar conversions and a tightening-up of structural inspection"Michael Grey.


----------



## callpor

In the Splash 247 newsletter today at http://splash247.com/polaris-suffers-another-vloc-mishap/ there is more information about the vain search for survivors and comments from the Owners. Also reported is that another Polaris converted VLOC built in 1993 is in difficulties off Cape Town?


----------



## Varley

I don't know the naval architecture involved in such a conversion but I imagine the entire maindeck would have been renewed rather than just hatches 'cut and pasted' however IACS gives the specific example of a tanker converted to a bulk carrier as being a "Modification of a major character" and so the modifications should have included any necessary changes/rebuilding for her to comply with the latest IMO rules applicable at the time of conversion (8 years ago).

I am not quite sure how a 15 year old 'normally' fatigued vessel (which many would have expected to be at the Pakistani end of the bathtub curve) can be made 'new' without actually rebuilding from scratch and certainly not more economically than doing so.

Some of us suspect the US couldn't (El Faro). Have the Chinese become so much more proficient in shipbuilding that they are?


----------



## chadburn

It would be interesting to know where she apparently split before sinking, Deck cracking around No 5 Hold was quite common in the late 1960's when the then large Ore Carriers put to sea.


----------



## callpor

Further on the subject can be read in Andrew Craig-Bennetts latest Splash 247 OpEd at http://splash247.com/unsafe-draft-part-two/ .

chris


----------



## chadburn

callpor said:


> Further on the subject can be read in Andrew Craig-Bennetts latest Splash 247 OpEd at http://splash247.com/unsafe-draft-part-two/ .
> 
> chris


Interesting reading and having had the experience of the speed of a structural failure and the vessel rolling on to her Beam Ends in calm weather it is no surprise to me that the vessel rolled completely over, fortunately we were in Ballast rather than carrying cargo.
I don't want to get into a discussion in regards to the Derbyshire but there are aspects of that sinking that leave me a bit puzzled if the Official Report is anything to go by.


----------



## Lurch

Stellar Queen still at anchor.

Given the size of these cracks will she ever move?


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

I'd like to thank "Lemshout" for his contributions to the discussion of that article in "Splash", which he draws attention to "The Tankship Tromedy" and the discussion there on hull condition surveys.

My comments on scantling optimisation and the use of higher tensile steel at MHI in the early 1990's were based on asking them to quote for a Capesize; their offering was 8,000 tons lighter than the ship that we eventually built.

I'd like to pass on a comment from my ( Swires)deck cadet son: "Cargo in centre holds, wing tanks used for ballast, therefore empty with the ship down to her marks... how many wing tanks were there and how big were they?" Breach one and where's your deck edge?" 

We need to keep in mind that this was a "Marpol" (protectively located ballast tanks) VLCC...


----------



## callpor

Captain Manjit Handa has added some reflections today from his own experience on bulkers:- see http://splash247.com/stellar-daisy-back-square-one/ .
Has attracted a number of interesting comments already?
Chris


----------



## Ian Lawson

Andrew Craig-Bennett said:


> I'd like to thank "Lemshout" for his contributions to the discussion of that article in "Splash", which he draws attention to "The Tankship Tromedy" and the discussion there on hull condition surveys.
> 
> My comments on scantling optimisation and the use of higher tensile steel at MHI in the early 1990's were based on asking them to quote for a Capesize; their offering was 8,000 tons lighter than the ship that we eventually built.
> 
> I'd like to pass on a comment from my ( Swires)deck cadet son: "Cargo in centre holds, wing tanks used for ballast, therefore empty with the ship down to her marks... how many wing tanks were there and how big were they?" Breach one and where's your deck edge?"
> 
> We need to keep in mind that this was a "Marpol" (protectively located ballast tanks) VLCC...


Someone from admin quoting his son a deck cadet? Sounds like the blind leading the blind.


----------



## David Campbell

Ian Lawson said:


> Someone from admin quoting his son a deck cadet? Sounds like the blind leading the blind.


Very rude comment from a first tripper!!!


----------



## Varley

Perhaps if a cadet had suggested speeding in ice was not what his mummy would have wanted Capt. Smith would have been equally dismissive.

I don't know. However there is an old saying "Out of the mouths of Babes and sucklings..."


----------



## Varley

I wonder if we should not have critical proverb for those of us who always try and draw a parallel with the Titanic's demise. Something from Godwin's legal chambers - Argumentum Titanium?


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

Ian Lawson said:


> Someone from admin quoting his son a deck cadet? Sounds like the blind leading the blind.


It is thirty years since a deck side colleague (Neil Sandes) said, in the Galley pub in Hong Kong, "What is a bean counter doing crawling through double bottom tanks?" I never got, not do I get, that reaction from any other colleagues, deck or engine, in CNCo or SPO or where I am now. In forty years in the business I have made many friends at sea, and I have tended to think that our experiences, if exchanged, are useful in building up a rounded picture of what happens and why. If my comments here are not wanted I can very easily stop making them. 

I thought my son made a good point, one which I haven't seen elsewhere, which is why I quoted it. 

The ship was a VLOC converted from a "Marpol" VLCC. That's not quite the same thing as a VLOO or a VLOC built as such. Let's assume that her permanent ballast tanks were fully coated from new. Would you expect them to have their coatings intact at age 23? I do know ships whose construction I was responsible for with intact coatings in their ballast tanks at the age of 26 and 27, but I also know what it cost to achieve that and I have experience of buying former "Japanese domestic" VLCCs. 

If we assume (as seems likely from the survivors' accounts - and having interviewed Filipinos after serious casualties the statements as published do look to me very likely to be genuine) that there was a list to port which increased rapidly, in fair weather, then side shell failure leading to water ingress into a ballast tank seems very likely to be a cause of such a list - cargo shifts are both less likely and less catastrophic in their effects in an ore carrier than in a bulk carrier.

That side shell failure need not have been in way of a dedicated ballast tank, of course. The cargo tanks are most unlikely to have been coated, other than deckhead and bottom, because the oil cargo and the IG would inhibit corrosion in them. The IG will as I said in my article almost certainly have been disabled when she was converted to dry cargo. I I were to speculate, based on experience with other big ships carrying ore in the South Atlantic, I would suspect the ballast tank (ex cargo tank) roughly halfway down the deck - on this ship, iwo hold no.3... 

It would be nice to know that KR checked the damaged stability condition in approving the conversion but I know of a case in which a better regarded Class Society approved the conversion of a tanker into a container crane delivery vessel without reviewing the Equipment Numeral - the consequences were expensive. 

And let's not go into tank stagger tests...


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

Varley said:


> I wonder if we should not have critical proverb for those of us who always try and draw a parallel with the Titanic's demise. Something from Godwin's legal chambers - Argumentum Titanium?


I like that. I have been guilty of it myself. An Argumentum Titanium* rose to my lips this morning, when a colleague said "Is there an IMO requirement to carry armed guards?"

(This was in the context of Port Sudan suddenly announcing that they were sending two tugs to check the arms on board a ship of ours calling there, at the usual outrageous fee, and when we replied that the arms had been landed at 19 North they said they were going to check the guards anyway! All of whom hold UK section 5 approvals, as the ship is British. We have carried armed guards into and out of Jeddah, Aquaba and Ain Sokhna for years... anyone for Marlboro Country?)

* ..." but we put more lifeboats on her than the Board of Trade requires..."


----------



## chadburn

Andrew Craig-Bennett said:


> I like that. I have been guilty of it myself. An Argumentum Titanium* rose to my lips this morning, when a colleague said "Is there an IMO requirement to carry armed guards?"
> 
> (This was in the context of Port Sudan suddenly announcing that they were sending two tugs to check the arms on board a ship of ours calling there, at the usual outrageous fee, and when we replied that the arms had been landed at 19 North they said they were going to check the guards anyway! All of whom hold UK section 5 approvals, as the ship is British. We have carried armed guards into and out of Jeddah, Aquaba and Ain Sokhna for years... anyone for Marlboro Country?)
> 
> * ..." but we put more lifeboats on her than the Board of Trade requires..."


It's good to see that common sense has prevailed and that the carrying of Armed Guards (in certain world hot spots) on a British vessel is the practice of your Company and has been for sometime(Thumb)
On the vessels I sailed on 'Black September' and their actions were of concern and we made sure that the vessel was well prepared.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

meanwhile:

http://splash247.com/police-raid-polaris-shipping-headquarters/


----------



## John Cassels

Andrew , what is your view on the "bulkhead correction factor " used to permit alternate hold loading for heavy cargoes ?.


----------



## Ian Lawson

David Campbell said:


> Very rude comment from a first tripper!!!


Please explain?


----------



## David Campbell

Ian Lawson said:


> Please explain?


In your profile you only joined SN 1st May this year. A FIRST Tripper.


----------



## Ian Lawson

David Campbell said:


> In your profile you only joined SN 1st May this year. A FIRST Tripper.


*What a load of effing nonsense.* What you are putting out means that length of time on the site entitles you to be more expressive or even 'more rude'. There is a flip side to this coin my friend and that would be people appraising posts based on profile. There are many on the site, I am sure, whose sea time could be described as minimal, say 5 or six years. Further, are people who have sailed as ratings only allowed to comment on soogying or washing down or other tasks who people like you would think them worthy? What I posted I stand by as a valid comment.


----------



## Varley

What a splendid idea Ian, keep the chancers and oiks battened down where they belong, lets not ignore the galley staff either confine them to talk of tab nabs.

On second thoughts, that may mean only those who have the stiffness of their gait enhanced with hearthside prostheses are allowed to pontificate on how they may best be removed.


----------



## John Cassels

Or David being only allowed to tell us how to change the batteries in the night lamp.


----------



## Varley

My boy, you forget I used to do the Morse thing, too. Not only the torch battery but also how tight to haul up my aerials. In all else I would be gagged, like any other oike or chancer.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

John Cassels said:


> Andrew , what is your view on the "bulkhead correction factor " used to permit alternate hold loading for heavy cargoes ?.


Mathematically and theoretically, it is "above my pay grade"; it appears to me to be correct at that level, insofar as I understand the maths. 

However, something niggles me about it. 

A silly answer would be "much depends upon the bulkhead" and indeed can recall bending down on the tank top of the number three hold of a sixteen year old 'tweendecker, and seeing all the way to the forepeak bulkhead, but that isn't my only concern. I just don't like the idea of alternate hold loading, because I just think it is unseamanlike to go putting bigger stresses into things than we need to, because the sea is going to do that anyway..

Not much of an answer, I'm afraid.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

Ian Lawson said:


> Someone from admin quoting his son a deck cadet? Sounds like the blind leading the blind.
> ...
> What a load of effing nonsense. What you are putting out means that length of time on the site entitles you to be more expressive or even 'more rude'. There is a flip side to this coin my friend and that would be people appraising posts based on profile. There are many on the site, I am sure, whose sea time could be described as minimal, say 5 or six years. Further, are people who have sailed as ratings only allowed to comment on soogying or washing down or other tasks who people like you would think them worthy? What I posted I stand by as a valid comment.


I thought it was a rather patronising comment from someone who had wholly missed the point that I was making - that "out of the mouths of babes and sucklings" we can all see there is an issue with stability following a breach of the side shell of an empty ballast tank in an ore carrier or an ore oiler because the corresponding tank on the other side is intact and bouyant. In order to avoid Varley's "Argumentum Titanium" I shall say "Lusitania" instead... 

Anyway, appraise away...


About Andrew Craig-Bennett
Profile
Constant and Constant, acting for Smit, Bugsier, Doeksens, Malayan Towage and Salvage, Nippon Salvage, Tsavliris, 1975-80
Standard P&I Club 1980-85, dealing with CP Ships, PanOcean Anco, Swires and various interesting Greek owners
Swire Pacific Offshore, 1985-7
The China Navigation Co, 1987, Director, 1990-1995)
Senior Foreign Adviser, COSCO, Beijing, 1995-2001
Group Marketing Director, Wallem, 2001-3
Deputy General Manager Cosco UK 2003-current. 
Deputy General Manager, COSCO UK
Occupation
manager in a large shipowning company
Location
Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK, and Subic Bay, Philippines
Background
Work Department
Office / Administration
Organisation
Merchant Navy
Active From...
1974
Active Until...
Present

About Ian Lawson
Profile
Deck Department
Occupation
Master Mariner
Location
Wrexham
Background
Work Department
Deck
Organisation
Merchant Navy
Active From...
1957
Active Until...
1993


----------



## jmcg

You keep on posting Andrew. I would venture to suggest that almost all here on S/N value and enjoy your postings.

Don't allow any Bill Davies type of a/h deter you from doing so.

BW

J(Gleam)(Gleam)


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

jmcg said:


> You keep on posting Andrew. I would venture to suggest that almost all here on S/N value and enjoy your postings.
> 
> Don't allow any Bill Davies type of a/h deter you from doing so.
> 
> BW
> 
> J(Gleam)(Gleam)


Thank you! I have always thought that with almost anything involving merchant ships, the more people from different disciplines can comment, the more chance we have of a good all round view of the problem.


----------



## Ian Lawson

Varley said:


> What a splendid idea Ian, keep the chancers and oiks battened down where they belong, lets not ignore the galley staff either confine them to talk of tab nabs.
> 
> On second thoughts, that may mean only those who have the stiffness of their gait enhanced with hearthside prostheses are allowed to pontificate on how they may best be removed.


I do not think it is a splendid idea at all Varley, but if we follow Cambells lead that appears to be where we are going. I am well aware of all disciplines entering into shore based management and some were good. Even "Sparkies" [=P]


----------



## Ian Lawson

Andrew Craig-Bennett said:


> "much depends upon the bulkhead" and indeed can recall bending down on the tank top of the number three hold of a sixteen year old 'tweendecker, and seeing all the way to the forepeak bulkhead, but that isn't my only concern. I just don't like the idea of alternate hold loading, because I just think it is unseamanlike to go putting bigger stresses into things than we need to, because the sea is going to do that anyway..
> 
> Not much of an answer, I'm afraid.


At least you now have my attention.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

Ian Lawson said:


> At least you now have my attention.


Just what I always wanted!

This was the ship; I see that my memory was at fault and I got the age wrong; she was finishing discharge of soya bean meal in Bremen and it was 1981, so she was 19 not 16:

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/data/510/link_love_b_.jpg


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

some news:

http://splash247.com/polaris-sends-elderly-vlocs-cold-layup/


----------



## Winmar

Andrew Craig-Bennett said:


> Thank you! I have always thought that with almost anything involving merchant ships, the more people from different disciplines can comment, the more chance we have of a good all round view of the problem.


Please keep delivering your valued insight on these matters sir. As someone who leads or forms part of teams charged with Marine Accident Investigation from information gathering to Root Cause Analysis, I have often found that information received onboard from the so called lower ranks such as cadets, galley staff or ordinary seamen has been invaluable as there is " no agenda" and they just say it as it is! Also, in getting to the Root Cause of such incidents. I have also found that had so called senior officers accepted challenges from junior personnel on various matters, quite often, particularly in past times, there would have been nothing to investigate. I say, in past times, because in my current role, I note that the current culture is for senior officers, master included, to encourage and promote challenge from further down the batting order in all matters, perhaps learning from the mistakes of the likes of Smith of the Titanic fame!!! We shouldn't be too harsh on some of our members for their comments because it wasn't always the case and if one, for instance, stopped sailing in 1973 they would definitely be from an era when Some Master's and Chief Engineers regarded themselves as Demi - Gods and beyond challenge!(Sad)


----------



## Winmar

A small correction on my last post, it should have read " stopped sailing in 1993". My apologies, finger trouble I am afraid.(Thumb)


----------



## seaman38

Glad to hear that senior officers are consulting with junior officers and ratings on certain aspects of onboard matters. In my days (1950's) as a cadet, if you questioned anything you were told 'just bloody get on with it, it's always been done that way' I resolved once I'd finished my time and moved up the ladder I would never say that to any youngster. I had a 60 year working life in the marine industry afloat and ashore and I lived by that mantra. Young brains are agile and see things in a new light and I listened, but if something had to be done in a certain way, I explained why, as it may have been just stage one of a programme and not just a one-off job.

I do hope I have been on site long enough not to be considered a first tripper and am now considered time served.


----------

