# Tanker Incident Raises Concerns About Oil Transit Through Persian Gulf - merged



## shamrock

> Mystery surrounds an incident in which a laden oil tanker was damaged in the Strait of Hormuz Wednesday. Maritime and shipping officials are at odds over whether the cause was an intentional explosion or a freak wave caused by seismic activity.....


More details here...

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/70166


----------



## Billieboy

The last time I saw damage like that shown in the Photo, (Starboard side aft probably a slop tank), was when a P/V valve jammed shut and the cargo/ballast pump put a vaccuum on the tank. I don't know the age of the ship, but if it is a double hull, it would be fairly easy to pull a vaccuum in the double hull with a stripping pump, if the vents were shut off of course. 

As the scantlings failed between the main brackets, the noise would sound like an explosion.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

Well, that would be two of us. 

(Seen it done on a bulk carrier, where deck vent on a saddle tank was crudded up, and, no names no pack drill, a passenger ship...)


----------



## Satanic Mechanic

ooh that looks very suspiciously like vacuum damage - assuming fairly standard construction that is around the aftermost wing ballast tank. 

Could be something else of course but nothing i have seen.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

I have, in a spirit of devilment, circulated that photo to my Superintendents, one of whom is a tanker man, offering a reward in beer to anyone who comes to the same conclusion...;-)


----------



## chadburn

Judging by the condition of her paintwork she looks as though she has just come out of drydocking/overhaul, I wonder if that has anything to do with what appears to be a vacuum caused damaged.


----------



## Billieboy

chadburn said:


> Judging by the condition of her paintwork she looks as though she has just come out of drydocking/overhaul, I wonder if that has anything to do with what appears to be a vacuum caused damaged.


A very good chance that the P/V valves were chocked, and or, the ballast(?) vents were closed after a stagger test following docking, which could account for the need to pump out the space. Or someone forgot that there was ballast in the tank for docking trim.


----------



## randcmackenzie

It certainly looks like vacuum damage, but it looks too far aft to be a slop tank - abaft the bridge wing support.

More likely a fuel tank or a wing ballast tank.

The corrugations are visible above the larger collapse, and the tank has collapsed between frames and below a horizontal girder.

Release of the innocent and search for the guilty begins ........

B/R


----------



## Billieboy

On that basis Roddy, I'd have to go for a wing ballast tank, as a bunker tank wouldn't corrode and weaken the scantlings, also there's usually not enough, "suck", on a fuel transfer punp, as there is on a main ballast pump. 

Steel damage looks like about 40-50 tonnes. Althouigh there could be a lot more cracking, above the main damage.


----------



## Orbitaman

The location of the damage is too far aft for a wing ballast tank and too far forward for the aft peak. This is somewhere in the vicinity of the engine room and is more than likely to be a fresh water, fuel settling/service or lube oil tank.
My technical colleagues reckon that this has been caused by vacuum and would be possible on any tank providing you pull a suction long enough.
Steelwork in tanks is designed for the stress and pressure to be exerted outwards on the tank skin, so the vacuum required to cause distortion is much less than the pressure to cause the tank skin to distort outwards.
The noise made by an implosion is very similar to that of an explosion.


----------



## shamrock

According to Equasis information, she was built 2 years ago...

IMO number :	9515436
Name of ship :	M. STAR	(since 01-12-2008)
Call Sign :	V7QT7
MMSI :	538003436	
Gross tonnage :	160292	(since 01-12-2008)
DWT :	314016
Type of ship :	Crude Oil Tanker	(since 01-12-2008)
Year of build :	2008
Flag :	Marshall Islands	(since 01-12-2008)
Status of ship :	In Casualty Or Repairing	(since 28-07-2010)
Last update :	30-07-2010


----------



## BOB GARROCH

According to my son, 2nd engineer on the EXXON tanker Alrehab, which is tied up along side MV Star, the explosion caused the bridge windows to blow inwards, injuring the second mate.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

Bob, that's very useful - your son is certainly the best source of information we are going to get.

Lloyd's List today mentions damage to the starboard lifeboat as well. 

Any further comments from your son very welcome!


----------



## BOB GARROCH

I have asked him to try and get some photographs


----------



## Billieboy

Well, a two year old ship, is not going to have weaked/corroded scantlings. so that tosses out a corrosion problem. Could be an airburst bomb or mine, which could account for the bridge windows. Or even a large explosive charge thrown off the vessel which exploded when hitting the water, a bit far fetched perhaps but cannot see any other explanation.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic

Orbitaman said:


> The location of the damage is too far aft for a wing ballast tank and too far forward for the aft peak. This is somewhere in the vicinity of the engine room and is more than likely to be a fresh water, fuel settling/service or lube oil tank.
> My technical colleagues reckon that this has been caused by vacuum and would be possible on any tank providing you pull a suction long enough.
> Steelwork in tanks is designed for the stress and pressure to be exerted outwards on the tank skin, so the vacuum required to cause distortion is much less than the pressure to cause the tank skin to distort outwards.
> The noise made by an implosion is very similar to that of an explosion.


It is actually right in the normal position for the aftermost wing ballast tank in most modern tankers - fresh water tanks are usually aft and big bulk lub and fuel tanks are inboard of these tanks - in effect making them double skinned. Its not so much the type of pressure its any pressure - there is a lot of square inches there so a little pressure either way is an enormous amount of force.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic

Billieboy said:


> Well, a two year old ship, is not going to have weaked/corroded scantlings. so that tosses out a corrosion problem. Could be an airburst bomb or mine, which could account for the bridge windows. Or even a large explosive charge thrown off the vessel which exploded when hitting the water, a bit far fetched perhaps but cannot see any other explanation.


Might just be me but it looks like the damage stops at the water line - so i would guess it was not a water borne explosion - which would ba much more devastating


I suppose the mate realising he had vaccuumed the tank could have gone up to the bridge smashed a couple of windows and kicked the 2/O in the nuts


----------



## chadburn

Now we have the further information it does seem a bit strange that an air burst has only confined the damage to a particular area of the Hull. Although I suppose they could have been dumping some Pyrotechnics off her.


----------



## Billieboy

It would be a large lump of pyrotechnics geordie.


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

Just a thought:

The ship will no doubt have been built with automatic double penetration welding of the side shell and stiffeners on a panel line/block line, with hand welding of the ring frames iwo the intercostals and subdecks.

Now, if I were to speculate that the hand welding of two of the ring frames to the intercostals just above the waterline may have failed, but the machine welding has stood up...

...I would think we might get the shape of damage that we see from a vaccuum problem. 

Please correct me if I am astray here.


----------



## Billieboy

It would be on a, "non-cargo block", too which could slip inspection. It still doesn't explain the Bridge windows though, unless a sudden movement of the accomodation block compressed the glass.


----------



## John Campbell

*MOL inspects damaged VLCC
(July 30 2010) *Mitsui OSK Lines (MOL) started to inspect the damaged VLCC ‘M Star’ last Thursday, while the vessel was at anchor off Fujairah.


The vessel suffered an explosion while outbound near the Strait of Hormuz, early last Wednesday.


Masahiko Hibino, the company’s tanker safety head, told Bloomberg in Tokyo that the vessel was anchored off Fujairah.


He declined to comment on the cause of the blast on board the VLCC, which was initially thought to be as a result on an ‘attack’. 


However, the vessel may have been involved in a collision, Moosa Murad, general manager at the Port of Fujairah, said. 


Hibino said that 10 people were working on the investigation, which was being aided by the US Navy and the UK authorities.

It was unclear how long it will take, he said on Thursday.


The explosion, which “may have been caused by an external attack,” occurred at 5:30 am Tokyo time Wednesday, injuring one of the crew, MOL said in a statement.


The tanker, anchored about 10 miles off Fujairah, will likely remain there for three to four days, Murad said.


‘M Star’ was heading to Chiba from the UAE, where it had loaded the crude. 


Earlier, Junto Endoh, general manager in MOL’s Doha liaison office, speculated that the damage was caused by “maybe an attack, not a spontaneous accident; it may be a terrorist attack.”


The vessel — crewed by 16 Filipinos and 15 Indians — was carrying 270,000 tonnes of crude but did not suffer any spillage.


Initial assessments from MOL found that one lifeboat was blown off the ship and there was some damage to the starboard tanks.


At the time of the incident, the tanker was delivering a cargo to Cosmo Oil, a Japanese refiner partly owned by Abu Dhabi interests, according to Katsuhisa Maeda, a spokesman for Cosmo. 


She was scheduled to arrive at Cosmo’s Chiba refinery, near Tokyo, on 17th August, he said. 

Free subscription 
to TANKEROperator magazine - pdf 
Visit Tanker Operator's online social network site
Download our June 2010 issue
Download our 2010 review of the year - top 30 tanker operators


Contact details:
Tanker Operator is published by Tanker Operator Magazine Ltd

2nd Floor, 8 Baltic Street East 
London, EC1Y 0UP
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel (+44 207) 701 73403 
Fax (+44 207) 251 9179
[email protected]


----------



## shamrock

There is a larger & clearer photo of the dent on the BBC News website...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-10803239


----------



## randcmackenzie

I still say vacuum damage, and have been on older tankers where there was a ballast tank abreast of the engine room.

They were separate from the SBT system and ER GS pumps were used to fill and empty them.
In fact I never saw one used in anger, they were always empty.

The usual progression from forward in a single skin ship was cargo wing, slop tank, pumproom or cofferdam, bunker tank, ballast tank, then ER and Steering Gear.

Loss of the lifeboat could be due to the deck being pulled down below the davit, though you can't see that in the photo.

An implosion like that would certainly be quite violent.

Let's see what they come up with, or choose to keep quiet.

B/R


----------



## Billieboy

My main reason for sticking to vaccuum, is that even if there was an airburst explosion, the paintwork would be damaged! 
As Roddy says the deck being pulled down could explain the loss of the life boat and, as I said earlier, the damage to the bridge windows.


----------



## chadburn

Billieboy said:


> It would be a large lump of pyrotechnics geordie.


I am with you on this one Billieboy, It all seems a bit odd for it to be as the result of an explosion which has been previously indicated although I am sure the source is reliable and only passing on what he was told by the Ships Crew. It is very localised and you would expect more upperwork damage possibly to her Funnel bearing in mind it was supposed to have blown some of the Bridge windows in, unless it's from a hand held rocket launcher that has not exploded on contact. So lets say possibly a vacuum problem which will have "jarred " the ship causing other damage, although I like S.M.'s "theory" on how the other damage was caused(Thumb). However in writing the above a block of Carbide smaller than the size of an OXO cube in a Cocoa tin (with a hole drilled in) makes a one hell of a bang to the point of the old Chief dashing out of his cabin thinking one of the Boiler's had gone.(Jester)


----------



## Andrew Craig-Bennett

I see that MOL are not discounting an on board cause; also that Intertanko has weighed in, a bit prematurely I think.


----------



## woodend

Has there been any further information been released on the M. STAR incident? I enjoyed reading all the 'posts' on what could have happened. Very informative, thanks.


----------



## Billieboy

woodend said:


> Has there been any further information been released on the M. STAR incident? I enjoyed reading all the 'posts' on what could have happened. Very informative, thanks.


Thank you woodend, I'm glad that someone appreciates the deductive process, it's not the sort of minor casualty that would occur on a banana or fruit boat. I have to admit that I've only run into three vacuumed tanks, although one of them was an over pressured membrane gas tank!,(that was expensive!).


----------



## djw1

We need a photo of the deck. In the two implosions I was involved in,
the deck failed before the shell but both were in the cargo area,
It's conceivable the deck was pulled down, and when the side shell failed
and released the vacuum the deck sprung back and produced
the pressure pulse that blew in the window. If so (and its a long short),
the deck should be deformed upward.

KTF


----------



## John Campbell

Safety at Sea International - Dedicated to Safety at Sea | 05 Aug 2010


M. Star: suicide bomber said to be responsible Terrorists claim VLCC attack 
A TERRORIST group linked with Al Qaeda has reportedly released a statement saying it attacked the Mitsui OSK Lines VLCC M. Star last week.

"Last Wednesday, after midnight, the martyrdom-seeking hero Ayyub al-Taishan … blew himself up in the Japanese tanker M. Star in the Strait of Hormuz between the United Arab Emirates and Oman," the Brigades of Abdullah Azzam group said in a posting on a militant website, Reuters reported. The group has been based in southern Lebanon. 

The statement could not be immediately verified, the news agency said, but it was consistent with the conclusions of explosives experts interviewed by Fairplay that the dent had probably been caused by a small craft with a bomb aboard.

Several investigations have been taking place since the tanker’s crew reported an explosion on 27 July. The vessel has a large square-shaped dent in its hull just above the waterline. The possible explosion of a rogue sea mine is also still being investigated. 

An MOL spokeswoman told Fairplay that the company has only just received reports of the militants’ statement and is seeking to “find out if it’s true or not”.

Suggestions that the damage had been caused by a rogue wave or a rocket-propelled grenade have been ruled out by investigators.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic

maybe he forget to blow up and just ran into the side of the ship at high speed - something I would actually pay money to witness.

suicide bomber "What happened"

Allah "you forgot to set the fuse Numpty boy - sorry but you only get a half a virgin"

SB "Half a virgin"

A " Yeah you need to share with the Glasgow airport bomber, or wait for Anne Widdecombe"

SB(quickly) "Halfs fine - no problem at all"


----------



## Billieboy

Well that's a new one, no bits of bomber found stuck to the hull, or anywhere else!


----------



## BOB GARROCH

*Tanker attack Persian gulf M STAR*

Received this email from my son this morning

Exactly what we feared, try and sink a ship in the Straits will cause mayhem.
I'm still in the gulf loading will probably set sail for Singapore early next
week.


PRO-TALIBAN GROUP CLAIMS STRIKE ON TANKER

Dubai: Jihadists linked to Pakistani Taliban have claimed that a suicide bomber had blown himself up on a Japanese super tanker carrying a crew of 31, including 15 Indians, in the strategic straits of Hormuz, as a warning to West to stop plundering resources from the Islamic land.

A radical group branding itself 'Brigades of Abdullah Azaam' claimed responsibility for the July 28 bombing of the Japanese oil tanker 'M Star' in the straits of Hormuz located between Iran and Oman, the US monitoring group SITE reported.

The little known group is named after Palestinian origin Islamic preacher Abdullah Azzam who was a prominent Mujahideen commander against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. He was killed in a blast in Pakistan in 1989 and buried in Peshawar.


----------



## Peter B

There is an article here, obviously written before it became clear (publically, that is) that it was a terrorist attack:
http://www.tradewinds.no/andalso/article564259.ece

There is a picture of the dented hull here:
http://www.maritimedanmark.dk/?Id=8453

More articles on the subject to be found on www.tradewinds.no


----------



## Satanic Mechanic

I am happy to stand corrected - but I am still not convinced


----------



## Peter B

Satanic Mechanic said:


> I am happy to stand corrected - but I am still not convinced


About what?


----------



## Satanic Mechanic

Peter B said:


> About what?


About it being a terrorist attack, it just looks wrong. Don't get me wrong here I am more than happy to accept the findings of any investigation and if it was an attack I'll happily accept that and put it away for future reference. It just looks so much like vacuum damage its almost text book - fully appreciate that it may not be the case though.


----------



## bobw

Go to first new post in Thread "Tanker Incident Raises Concerns About Oil Transit Through Persian Gulf" and you will see what has been talked about regarding the M Star.


----------



## callpor

Andrew Craig-Bennett said:


> I see that MOL are not discounting an on board cause; also that Intertanko has weighed in, a bit prematurely I think.


Andrew,
I've been reading all the reports whilst travelling this week and fully agree with your comments. I find it difficult to believe the current reports and am still scepticle of the latest MOL story. Chris


----------



## Peter B

*Traces of explosives...*

According to an anonymous source in the UAE Coast Guard, traces of "homemade explosives" have been found on the hull.
http://www.maritimedanmark.dk/?Id=8460

I have read the thread with interest. Not a tanker man myself, but I have extensive experience from the oil industry on-shore. Been working with service and calibration of P/V relief valves for years, so I know how little vacuum it takes to cause severe structural damage to a storage tank. A typical fixed-roof storage tank will suffer roof collapse at a vacuum of just a few hundred mmWG. I used to tell my staff that all it took to bring down a 100,000 m³ tank was a kid with a straw (the vacuum needed to drink a Coke with a straw could easily kill a tank). No explosives needed for a terrorist action; just unscrew the vacuum-side lid of the P/V valve, add a little more weight (a handful of stone will do the job), replace lid and get out. Next major transfer from the tank will do the rest!


----------



## borderreiver

See the price of crude has shot up with this so called attack.I go along with the tank vacuum . Believe this is a bunker tank or a coffer-dam against a bunker tank.
Possible vessel taken hot bunkers cooled down on transit and PV not set correctly.


----------



## Supergoods

I've been watching this one with interest
I, too am more inclined to the vacuum induced collapse, however with experience in incident investigations the owners usually prefer the incident to have been caused by one of the following in order of preference.

1. Act of God: Suggestions of freak wave or earthquake induced tsaumi.
2. Damage caused by a third party such as a collision with clear responsibility.
3. Act of War or Terrorism
4. If none of the above fit, hope that nobody can prove gross negligence.
Ian


----------



## John Campbell

Here is the latest from
Latest Tanker Operator news

VLCC explosion - terrorists blamed
(Aug 6 2010) 

Investigators probing a possible blast on a Japanese VLCC near the Strait of Hormuz last week have blamed the incident on terrorists.


"An examination carried out by specialised teams had confirmed that the tanker had been the subject of a terrorist attack," according to the UAE state news agency on Friday, quoting an unidentified coastguard source.


"UAE explosives experts who collected and examined samples found a dent on the starboard side above the water line and remains of home-made explosives on the hull," it said.


The statement came two days after a militant group linked to al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the incident.


In a statement posted to a militant website, the Abdullah Azzam Brigade said they targeted the tanker ‘M Star’ in what they hoped would be a dramatic blow to the global economy and oil markets.


"After midnight last Wednesday (week), the martyr hero Ayyub Al Tayshan blew himself up in the Japanese oil tanker ‘M Star’ in the Strait of Hormuz between the UAE and Oman," according to the statement, referring to an apparent suicide attack against the ship.


The statement didn't give any precise details about how the group attacked the VLCC, or chose that specific ship. 


However, the statement said that the group deliberately chose the location of the attack, as it wanted to "weaken the global infidel order that has assumed authority over Muslim lands, looting their resources, and to lift the oppression of Muslims."


The tanker’s operator, Japan's Mitsui OSK, claimed last week that its vessel had come under attack and that it was conducting an investigation into the incident, which put a huge dent in the tanker's hull, but didn't cause any casualties among its crew.


----------



## Billieboy

Satanic Mechanic said:


> About it being a terrorist attack, it just looks wrong. Don't get me wrong here I am more than happy to accept the findings of any investigation and if it was an attack I'll happily accept that and put it away for future reference. It just looks so much like vacuum damage its almost text book - fully appreciate that it may not be the case though.


Thinking back over the last four or five days, vacuum looks the only answer for me. A large explosion at an altitude almost central to the damage could only occur at sea if the vessel had a good roll on her, which is most unlikely for the size of ship and the position at the time of the damage. Of course the terror aspect for the claim is an almost certain winner, and will get the heat off the ship's staff. A glance through the ER rough log book would probably be most enlightening.


----------



## djw1

Tank is either a BFO tank, ballast tank, or void space
none of which are fitted with P/V valve.

MOL/class/flag state silence on this one
is reprehensible. If it was a terrorist attack,
we need to know for all the other ships transiting
the strait. If not, ditto.

I have a hard time imagining an explosive
that doesnt damage the paint.


----------



## pilot

"MOL/class/flag state silence on this one
is reprehensible. If it was a terrorist attack,
we need to know for all the other ships transiting
the strait. If not, ditto."

Assume the silence is whilst investigations are carried out. Enough rumours being fed by our own SN experts.


----------



## BOB GARROCH

Received this email from my son this morning from the ExxonTanker aArehab in the Gulf 

JAPANESE OIL TANKER WAS HIT BY TERRORIST ATTACK IN THE GULF OF HORMUZ

A "terrorist act" caused damage to a Japanese oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz
last week, the coastguard in the United Arab Emirates, where the ship docked fo
r repairs, said on Friday.

The crew of the 333-metre-long M.Star reported an explosion shortly after midnig
ht last Wednesday, injuring one seaman but causing no oil spill or disruption to
shipping in the strategic waterway.

"An examination carried out by specialised teams had confirmed that the tanker h
ad been the subject of a terrorist attack," the news agency WAM said, quoting an
unidentified coastguard source.

"UAE explosives experts who collected and examined samples found a dent on the s
tarboard side above the water line and remains of home-made explosives on the hu
ll", the source said.


----------



## chadburn

"An examination carried out by specialised teams had confirmed that the tanker h
ad been the subject of a terrorist attack," the news agency WAM said, quoting an
unidentified coastguard source.

"UAE explosives experts who collected and examined samples found a dent on the s
tarboard side above the water line and remains of home-made explosives on the hu
ll", the source said.[/QUOTE]

Sounding more like our experiment of "Carbide in a Tin/box" every day, we were all took by suprise at the power/noise of the explosion from such a small piece of Carbide and as far as I remember there was no flash damage to the Hull, mind you we disappeared in a flash as soon as we heard the Chief was on his way.


----------



## Billieboy

Similar to a banger in a milk churn Geordie? the lid used to go a hell of a way up in the air!


----------



## John Campbell

SafetyAtSea Internationbal reports today:-



State terror ruled out in blast 
AN MOL VLCC was attacked last week not by state-sponsored commandos but by a rogue terrorist group, a US intelligence source close to the investigation told Fairplay today.

Confusion had surrounded what caused damage to the Mitsui OSK Lines tanker M. Star in the Strait of Hormuz, with early reports divided as to whether a collision, explosion, freak wave or floating container dented its hull directly above the waterline.

A United Arab Emirates coastguards spokesman also confirmed to the government-run WAM news agency today that the blast had been a “terrorist attack” using a bomb boat, IHS Global Insight reported today. 

“The investigation and examination conducted by special teams have shown the tanker was attacked with explosives, which were loaded on a boat that approached the ship,” the spokesman said.

“UAE explosives experts … found a dent on the starboard side above the water line and remains of homemade explosives on the hull," he said. 

Fairplay's US intelligence source would not specify what evidence had ruled out a government role in the attack. The ship reportedly sailed from the UAE today after repairs. 

IHS Global Insight commented: “The attack was claimed on 3 August by the Abdullah Azzam Brigades, which said a suicide bomber identified as Ayyub al-Tayshan attacked the tanker.

“It also said that it delayed claiming the attack ‘until our heroes returned safely to their bases’, a statement that would apparently appear to undermine its claim that a suicide bomber was involved – although it may indicate that Tayshan (if involved) had help in preparing the attack.”


----------



## John Campbell

Here is an update on this sorry saga:-

The world's leading magazine for Tanker Operations
TANKER OPERATOR HOME

Latest Taker Operator news


Japan analyses damaged tanker
(Aug 20 2010) 

Checks on the damaged VLCC ‘M Star’ revealed a soot-like substance in a large dent in its hull, the Japanese Transport Ministry said on Wednesday.


However, it was still unclear as to what caused the blackish substance, which was spread in a radial pattern. It will be analysed further, a ministry official told Reuters.


Checks of the tanker's radar showed six ships around it just before it suffered the damage near the Strait of Hormuz, but no evidence had been found to link the incident to those ships, the ministry said.


Public broadcaster NHK said on Tuesday the tanker's radar detected a small ship that made suspicious movements near it at the time of the incident and that the Transport Ministry believed there was a possibility that ship launched an attack.


"More than 80% of oil tankers coming to Japan go through that area. An incident like this in such a region is a grave concern for us," Transport Minister Seiji Maehara told the opening session of a committee set up to investigate the cause of the damage on Wednesday, Reuters reported. 


The incident, which occurred shortly after midnight on 28th July, injured one seaman but did not cause an oil spill or disrupt shipping in the strategic waterway, through which around 40% of the world's seaborne oil passes.


The dent in its hull was 22 m high, of which 16 m was below the waterline, the ministry said. It was up to 23 m wide and caved in the hull to a depth of 1 m.


‘M Star’, operated by Mitsui OSK Lines, was able to resume its voyage to Japan after checks at Fujairah.


The VLCC’s radar showed three large ships and three small ships near it just before the incident. The large ships were identified. 


Of the small ships, one was 6 km ahead of the tanker and heading in the same direction, another was 7 km ahead and almost stationary and the third 4.5 km to port and sailing away.


An MOSK spokesman said "We are aware of various news reports. But there has been no specific evidence so far that connects the incident to these ships." 


He said the tanker's data recorder caught a sound believed to have been caused by the incident. The nature of the sound, which lasted about three seconds, was also being analysed.


----------

