# Dutch Freighter ‘Flinterstar’ Sinks After Collision With LNG Carrier



## Geoff Gower

Dutch freighter Flinterstar is seen sinking after colliding with Marshall Island-flagged tanker Al-Oraiq, which also suffered damage in the collision, in the North Sea off the Belgian coast October 6, 2015. Proot
A Dutch freighter has sank after colliding nearly head on with the Marshall Islands-flagged LNG carrier Al-Oraiq in the North Sea off Belgium on Tuesday morning.All 12 crew members from the freighter, named Flinterstar, have been rescued. The crew members were rescued from the cold North Sea, including one person who was reportedly suffering from hypothermia, according to a Coast Guard spokesperson.Photos of the Flinterstar show partially sunk, resting on a sandbank in calm seas and clear visibility. Dutch ship owner Flinter has confirmed that the ship sank, the crew is safe and the vessel is ‘stable’. A small oil sheen has been reported. An AIS replay of the collision (video below) shows the ships collided nearly head on. 
“At this time, we are talking to salvage companies together with insurance to decide how the vessel will be salvaged,” Flinter said in a statement.The 122,000 DWT Al-Oraiq was also damaged, but was able to continue to its destination of Zeebrugge, Belgium with the help of a tug.The 129 meter Flinterstar was built in 2002 and is flagged in the Netherlands. The vessel had just departed Antwerp bound for Bilbao, Spain when it collided with the Al Oraiq about 16 miles (10 km) from the coast.Flinter’s fleet consists of more than 50 vessels under its ownership or control. Most are multi-purpose ships ranging in sizes up to 11,000 DWT. Dutch freighter Flinterstar is seen sinking after colliding with Marshall Island-flagged tanker Al-Oraiq, which also suffered damage in the collision, in the North Sea off the Belgian coast October 6.


----------



## AlbieR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IknycXF_lSI

Sad to watch but no doubt the navigators on our site will have comments. The Flinterstar called into Campbeltown with Windfarm gear often.


----------



## China hand

Do the gas ships not have a priority in Zeebrugge approaches? Zeebie VTS used to keep us well informed.


----------



## John Cassels

Good example of a radar assisted collision ?.


----------



## Barrie Youde

#4

Hi, John,

The expression "radar assisted collision" was of high significance fifty years ago. But today? When all navigators should be proficient, at the very least, in the use of radar?

There must be more to it than that.

No doubt we shall learn in due course.


----------



## chadburn

I have an awful feeling that tiredness/paperwork may again be the possible reason on the smaller vessel regarding the Bridge Watch.


----------



## Ron Stringer

From my limited understanding of the ColRegs it seems to me that *Flinterstar*, the smaller vessel, took proper action by making a significant (about 30°) to starboard in an attempt to avoid a close situation. The other vessel just seems to have followed a gradually curving course to port until the final moments when a hard-a-starboard turn brought the two finally into collision.

You might argue that the *Flinterstar *should have decided to pass green-to-green at an early stage and gone under the stern of the tanker but that too would be risky.


----------



## Mad Landsman

Are there any defined 'lanes' or buoyed area at this point? 

Both vessels alter course in a manner which appears to this Landsman that they are seeking to follow a route rather than making any attempt to recognise the presence of the other.


----------



## Stephen J. Card

What is wrong with people? Afraid to wake the OM during the night? Is everyone afraid to use the telegraph? Is there a reason why engines should not be slowed? 

In one night in Dover making 23 knots I had to 'STOP' because on some idiot crossing my head. Ships both sides and could not make any turn, Saved my backside... and probably my ticket!


----------



## Stephen J. Card

Ron, Looking at the track almost looks as if the AL ORAIQ did not even see the FLINTERSTAR. She was making 15 kts then approaching to make a s'ly course then down at about 13 knots. I wonder if they went so far off the port (7miles) just to slow down the engine for picking pilot? 

The ship AL ORAIQ is one of the rather modern-built ship for Korea.


----------



## pilot

Another forum states that both ships had pilots on-board. Same forum states that there's a rumor concerning a VHF conversation and that a green to green passing was initially "agreed". Could even have been a Pilot,VHF assisted collision.


----------



## John Cassels

Barrie Youde said:


> #4
> 
> Hi, John,
> 
> The expression "radar assisted collision" was of high significance fifty years ago. But today? When all navigators should be proficient, at the very least, in the use of radar?
> 
> There must be more to it than that.
> 
> No doubt we shall learn in due course.


Very true Barry but refer back to the Venoil collision , the tracks are very similar. I don't know what the visibility was at the time of course.


----------



## Barrie Youde

#12

Many thanks, John.

Plainly there is still much more to be learned. Pilot tells us a little more, by #11 - and it sounds as though things are getting worse by the minute.


I recall more than one similar collision in Crosby Channel at the entrance to the Mersey, when a vessel on her own, starboard, side of the channel was faced with the option of either colliding with a vessel in default or else turning to starboard and running aground at virtually full speed; knowing that to turn to port would be the worst action that he could possibly take (for reasons which most of us understand very well).

Precisely what did happen in this case remains very much to be revealed.


----------



## NZSCOTTY

Would be nice to get some facts before making all the "expert" opinions from an armchair.


----------



## Varley

Come on! This is a forum where speculation is the seed under many interesting threads. How are you going to poke fun at those who get it wrong if you don't let them post with their "voyage data".

Might I suggest there are, anyway, significant facts. Do we have to wait until the accident investigation report before we believe that there was a collision, a ship has been sunk, an AIS snailshot was captured and posted and that all hands are safe.

I would be interested to know if the radar displays would have shown the situation as clearly as the AIS plot - I am sure there would have been an enormous number of additional targets edited from the AIS plot. ARPA must be able to plot 20 targets and typically (JRC) can do 100. Unless the 100 are truly safely watched automatically this must surely be too many to present to the observer? And, I guess, there could easily be as many targets in this vicinity? (DATA swamp - not from office computer administration but from the navigational aids?)


----------



## Stephen J. Card

John Cassels said:


> Very true Barry but refer back to the Venoil collision , the tracks are very similar. I don't know what the visibility was at the time of course.



A bit of YouTube film.... showing the rescue boats ... and seems to be quiet calm and clear. I don't think we can blame the fog this time.

Perhaps the gas tanker had intended to turn earlier to make the straight course to Zeebrugge. 

Pilot on board? North Sea Pilot on board? I can't imagining a relatively cargo ship wanting the need a pilot for that part of that passage.


----------



## Barrie Youde

#15

Well said, David!

There are numerous clear facts already, as you rightly point out. We await the remainder with baited breath!

ps

To agree to pass green to green in the cir***stances as they are understood (Gasman bound for Zeebrugge and the Dutchman from Antwerp bound down-channel to sea) would appear to make little sense. Sometimes, of course, green to green is the sensible thing to do; and it might conceivably have been right and proper in this case. We just don't know, yet.


----------



## stewart4866

from an engineer's perspective maybe the engines were going to fast.


----------



## Stephen J. Card

A bit from a Maas pilot..... 

Looking at location of Wandaalar.... west of Zeebrugge and both in buoyed channel. Met at the wrong spot and too fast.



"The Filnterstar needed to drop her pilot at the Wandelaar pilot station, which is West of Zeebrugge, while the Al Oraiq was approaching Zeebrugge. All sailing through buoyed channels between sandbanks.

The Gasman changes course at the last moment to make sure that thet would hit as much as possible bow to bow. If you hit one of those things in a tank, you can make Oppenheimer jaleous. (4 x Hiroshima)."


----------



## pilot

To the east of the Wandelaar Pilot station's within Port Radar coverage?


----------



## Barrie Youde

#20

The significance being?


----------



## Stephen J. Card

Yes, VTS throughout the Westerschelde.


----------



## Ian Brown

Having some experience on these large LNG/C, I expect there will be relevant data record of their bridge/er systems including a radar feed and voice recordings from multiple mics inside (and outside) the wheelhouse. So it should be easy to asses exactly what and when happened.
Before I retired recently I was increasingly worried by the number of ships that 'negotiated' how they would pass each other. The Col. Regs. are very clear and cover all situations and following them will ensure no problems. Ignore them and inventing your own Rules is asking for trouble and is going to be hard to justify in Court.


----------



## Varley

I am happy to quote a Denholm Master on the newer car carriers (new in my day anyway). To a VHF enquiry "as to his vessel's intentions" his standing orders were to reply "Obeying the rules of the road. What are yours?".

I am only sorry I cannot remember to whom it should be honourably attributed.


----------



## Barrie Youde

#24

To add to the list of facts which you have identified, David, the following are also clear:

1. If there was a green-to-green agreement by VHF, which is entirely possible even if unlikely, then the agreement was not carried out.

2. Compliance with the rule of the road was not carried out, either by one vessel or possibly by both.

Anything more than that remains a mystery. My thoughts are with those aboard both ships.


----------



## pilot

#21. B.Y.
When the British Trent and Western Winner were involved in an incident at the Pilot Station. VTS had radar tracks and VHF records available. So assume this will also be the case.
(Witness statements were available at the inquiry although the actual witnesses were not available for questioning, including pilots and the Pilot Cutter Master.)
Source MAIB report.


----------



## Barrie Youde

#26

Many thanks, Pilot.

BY


----------

