# Emergency Proceedures?



## blamour (Feb 11, 2016)

Thanks everyone for creating and participating in this great forum. This is my first post but I have been learning a great deal reading many of the others.

I am a writer in the midst of resurrecting or reconstructing the, so far unpublished, first novel of Louis L'Amour (usually known for his westerns). The story is set on a tanker a year or two prior to WWII. 

As I have delved deeper into this project I have discovered that while Louis worked as an Able Seaman for a year or so on freighters, he was never an expert and his knowledge came from more than a decade earlier and from rather more old and decrepit ships than the one he chose to write about. The tanker that appears in this story is referred to as "almost new" ... I'm guessing he intended it to be a ship built between 1935 and 1938. It is carrying a load of naphtha from San Pedro to Manila.

Toward the end of the novel, vapor from a leaking and poorly ventilated tank gathers under the deck and this eventually leads to an explosion set off when someone tosses a match into the sea off the stern of the ship. Here's my question:

In the immediate aftermath of a critically damaging explosion (engine spaces are still intact) and spreading fire, what would: 
1) the immediate actions taken by the crew be? What would be a basic checklist be even as they were learning the extent of the problem?
2) Which officers were in charge of what and what sort of fire fighting equipment and procedures would be used? I'm not sure if they had protean foam yet and if they had to mix it up the story doesn't give them time for that. Before this scene gets very far along I suspect "fire fighting" would been more to try and evacuate personnel safely than in any belief they could actually put out the fire.

The two most important characters at this point in the story are the 2nd Asst. Engineer and the 2nd Mate. I need to verify that what they are doing has some logic and then revisit, for just a moment, several other members of the crew as they try to respond. 

Thanks in advance for any help any of you may offer. If there is a better place to post this please let me know.

BL


----------



## david freeman (Jan 26, 2006)

*a story fact or fiction*

Interesting points. I respectfully suggest that this remains a novel, story fact or fiction, in the 30's 40's.
What you as the writer/historian wish to consider, is:
1/ the construction of the vessel/tanker-such as dwt, design 3 island-
2/ Is the tanker a crude oil tanker or one designed and built for refined products?
3/ Did the tanker have a stern discharge/loading pipework - this was a common feature?
4/ Was the cargo carried a mixture of products- what is the isolation tank to tank-line to line and in the pumproom, or where discharge cargo pumps installed individually in each tank and at open deck level.
Cargo separation is important and some cargos for safety as well as economic reasons may have required double isolation.

One serious bit of research you may undertake is historical, such as 
issued by a flag state, is official investigations- and their findings especially for the flag state of the vessel quoted. Then you may if you know somebody, request from the ship classification societies at the time if they have any technical data with respect to this type of tanker, such as where built , design, and a layout plan, and power plant and propulsion details, and dwt dead weight tonnage, and flag state where registered.
With regards to crew/officers rank and rating positions: maybe you consider your state marine shipping organisations for typical manning/crew agreements arrangements of the time, so you may make a judgement as to the relavence of the story, with respect to accuracy of who is responsible, in charge and the drills and training that ships crews (All hands) underwent to combat any unforeseen emergency.
Good luck, good reading.


----------



## blamour (Feb 11, 2016)

*The Story is Fiction*

Working from the original, fragmentary, manuscript (which it is my job to complete) the following is what we know:

1) it is a three island design, the seaman's and fireman's fo'c's'le is aft.
It is carrying 80,000 barrels worth (not in barrels) of naphtha as it's only cargo and this is considered nearly a full load, so it's not as big a ship as, say, a T2. So far I've been using the basic lay out of a T2 as a guideline since they were based on a late 1930s design.

2) I have no actual idea if it's a crude oil tanker or one designed for refined products, though given that it's carrying naphtha and it is noted that it has before I'm going to assume it's a refined product tanker ... this is the sort of great question, hopefully along with answers, that I've been looking for. There is little room in the narrative to discuss the issue of refined products or not except because the story is only tangentially about running a tanker. If it's an issue relation to the response to the explosion and fire situation then that would be the place to do it.

3) I know very little about the various loading and discharge mechanisms though I suspect (this is writer's intuition talking I have no real reason as of yet) I'm better off if it is not stern loading.

4) the cargo carried is not a mixture of products.

Other answers and information: 

a) It is a US flagged vessel. 

b) No investigation is discussed ... the fire and subsequent explosion sinks the ship thus ending the story. It's not a true story nor is it a fictionalization of one so there is no way to specifically dig into an actual account. If I could find one that matched the specifics of this story life would be good, however!

c) The powerplant is steam turbine driving a shaft, not turbine/electric.

The story follows certain crew members, the most important ones are mentioned above 2nd Mate and 2nd Engineer but the basic activities of the crew is a factor.

The existing manuscript contains the following reasons for the accident: 

One of the aft-most wing tanks is not completely filled and contains some uncaulked rivets. The vent line has been bent in some sort of accident and the bend has filled with water in a storm. Fumes escape the tank and pool in the an area in the stern aft of the cold storage lockers. Flame from lighting a cigarette in the stern ignites the pooled fumes and then the partly filled tank. The situation quickly gets worse from there.

Basic questions:

What were the basic procedures for the different officers and sections of the crew upon the discovery of any emergency? Does anyone have any personal experiences or stories that illustrate this?

Are there any procedures in the engine room that would relate to this sort of emergency? What would the engineer on duty do to prepare for the cascade of disasters that could occur?

Upon recognizing the nature of the emergency, how would that change the typical response? Does anyone know what sort of fire fighting gear was used pre WWII? So far, the only scene that deals with fire fighting has been with hose and water. The hose is more used to create an evacuation route for crew members than in a vain attempt to deal with the actual fire.

I've seen lists of different crew members responsibilities but few have shed much light on what they would be required to do in detail. If there is anyone having had any experience of fire or significant emergency or having gone through the appropriate drills and would care to detail them I would be most appreciative!


----------



## david freeman (Jan 26, 2006)

*its a story, shall i begin, please sit comfortably.*

The vessel as it is 1930's fits into the conception of the American T2 design tanker (assumed). AS the alleged story is based on American experience, there is difficulty, in identifying, whether this version of the T2 design had turbines/gear propulsion ( 6 were built for the US Navy- Presumably oilers), or one of the multitude that were steam turbine electric motor propulsion, as allegedly used in the US merchant fleet? 
Note not liberty ships these were not tankers but general cargo vessels, and were steam turbine or steam reciprocating engine driven.
As for crew I would suspect some 18 officers-deck engine and catering, and some maybe 8-10 petty officers deck/engine/catering, and crew some 24-30 ratings deck/engine/catering, giving some 55 all hands or there abouts.
The actual facts are hard to establish, as the web continually refers one to book titles and other privileged information.
I have gleaned as much as possible for wikapedia site! I cannot verify one fact other that a T2 Tanker of Liberty Ship may have been built for the US government requirements after 1930!
The tonnage of naptha I have tried to interpret 80,000 us barrels at a density of0.665 for naptha gives a volume 12719cubic metres-(metric tonne), so it will fit into a T2 designed to carry 15,000 tons -long.
Actual conversions 12518-Long tons against 14,020 Short tons.
As for riveted construction, that's for you,the early T2 (6 Off built for the US navy were of riveted construction?).
In my days at sea in the 60's coming alongside a concrete jetty sparks and ignition would eminate from rivet damage when the vessel was pushed hard against the jetty, or dragged along during mooring: And one had to go over the side with bronze non spark chisel and hammer (caulking tools?) and rectify the seepage.
The problem with the tank vent system is a possibilty, but requires detailed drawings of the vent system.
All T2 tankers I worked on as an apprentice during my drydock time I believe had a stern discharge system, and an after pumproom with steam turbine driven- from the engineroom, pumps. The after pumproom was the centre of loading and discharging for all operations with respect to the cargo, operations, including tank cleaning and gas freeing. 
Please note the T2 I witness were all built after 1939-40


----------



## howardws (Aug 15, 2009)

The T2 I served on had electric cargo pumps driven from the main generator that supplied power to the motor on the main shaft at sea. Motors in the engine room and pumps in the pump room. Could only be started from the engine room but stopped from the ER or the pump room.


----------



## david freeman (Jan 26, 2006)

howardws said:


> The T2 I served on had electric cargo pumps driven from the main generator that supplied power to the motor on the main shaft at sea. Motors in the engine room and pumps in the pump room. Could only be started from the engine room but stopped from the ER or the pump room.


What a balls up- you are correct, vertical pumps. As you correct me, I note it is dangerous to be too precise, memory is a dangerous colleague!!!
Hence my attempts to try and verify facts via a reputable web site.
Apologies all around, I am sorry if I have lead you to believe some incorrect facts.
For the purposes of the 'Western' and the cowboy sailor John Doe, research is going to be the Key? for the originator of this blog!!!
With respect to the 2nd mate,2 Asistant engineer, the writer or someone sailing with the American merchant fleet, may be of more value when your are researching the responsibilities of each crew member in a or at a time of emergency.
I note in the earlier blogs the power plant for propulsion was by steam turbine, and gears? driving the main propulsion shaft: From the wikapedia site these 6 T2' were built for and managed manned and run maybe by the US Navy?- (As Oilers?- 'RAS' Refuel at sea Tankers-), Maybe. Good luck with ones further research.


----------



## david freeman (Jan 26, 2006)

david freeman said:


> What a balls up- you are correct, vertical pumps. As you correct me, I note it is dangerous to be too precise, memory is a dangerous colleague!!!
> Hence my attempts to try and verify facts via a reputable web site.
> Apologies all around, I am sorry if I have lead you to believe some incorrect facts.
> For the purposes of the 'Western' and the cowboy sailor John Doe, research is going to be the Key? for the originator of this blog!!!
> ...


Why this maybe important, is that the rank and ratings in or under US Naval control may be and could be completely different to the US Merchant Marine, and the vessel, Tankers so concerned, my have carried more staff/crew for outlying naval duties, such as (RAS) and naval or other naval procedures, and damage control- One can go on and on, and on? Cannot one!! Bye Bye Now!


----------



## howardws (Aug 15, 2009)

david freeman said:


> What a balls up- you are correct, vertical pumps. As you correct me, I note it is dangerous to be too precise, memory is a dangerous colleague


There you go - I'd forgotten that they were vertical! Mind you it was the jumboized Texaco Saigon 1n 1968 which is a while ago.


----------



## blamour (Feb 11, 2016)

So how do the issues of possible stern load/discharge, electric cargo pumps and whether they were 'vertical pumps' play into an explosion and fire emergency at sea?

The ship is supposed to be a merchant marine vessel. It predates the T2 but seems to be like it in many respects (no way of knowing its exact design if there even was one ... this is a work of fiction after all). The original writer, Louis L'Amour, was my father and very unfortunately cannot be quizzed about the details because he's been dead for 28 years.

Any other details about standard procedures in a fire or the fire fighting techniques that would be deployed in the first moments are appreciated!


----------



## howardws (Aug 15, 2009)

blamour said:


> So how do the issues of possible stern load/discharge, electric cargo pumps and whether they were 'vertical pumps' play into an explosion and fire emergency at sea?


As you will know, they don't! I doubt that anyone meant to hijack your first thread on this forum but if you hang around you will notice that it happens - I'll leave you to it.


----------



## blamour (Feb 11, 2016)

Ha! No problem. I do it myself occasionally!


----------

