Jump to content
Andy

Incident involving Pont-Aven 29 April 2019

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Jack N said:

Only repeating what our reason for delays have been given in the past. However I think you'd find plenty of adverse currents around the Fromveur Passage!

Oh, absolutely!  But (a) that’s not “Biscay”, and (b) that only takes about 30 minutes to transit in total (so in no way can account for a 3 hour delay).

The sorts of currents that will be encountered around Ushant will reach 6 knots, maybe 8 knots at most.  Nothing for a ship that cruises at 24 knots.

Ed is right, “adverse currents” will have been a convenient excuse for something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gareth said:

Oh, absolutely!  But (a) that’s not “Biscay”, and (b) that only takes about 30 minutes to transit in total (so in no way can account for a 3 hour delay).

The sorts of currents that will be ancountered around Ushant will reach 6 knots, maybe 8 knots at most.  Nothing for a ship that cruises at 24 knots.

Ed is right, “adverse currents” will have been a convenient excuse for something else.

Thanks for clearing that up, always did suspect it was a fairly lame standard excuse! We're just happy to have the extra time enjoying the crossing,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Williams said:

Back to timetables, if PA is running with one less engine, it will be interesting to see whether it can cope with this years timetable or whether it will need modification.

 

Last summer I seem to remember discussion on here about PA being delayed, often by diversions to give assistance to other vessels, and having difficulty in catching back up with her schedule between Sundays and Thursdays (i.e. while sailing to/from Santander).  That seemed to occur quite a few weeks in mid summer.  Wouldn't lack of one engine compound the difficulties, or was she holding off from full power and just taking a measured approach to making up the lost time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, the significant currents (as far as impact on passage time is concerned) on the voyage between Portsmouth and Spain are really the ones to be found in the English Channel.  The tide runs up and down the Channel at about 3-4 knots, though of course usually (in the 10 hour run between Portsmouth and Ushant) the adverse and favourable elements of that will roughly cancel.  The route to Plymouth is more cross-tide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Choucan said:

Last summer I seem to remember discussion on here about PA being delayed, often by diversions to give assistance to other vessels, and having difficulty in catching back up with her schedule between Sundays and Thursdays (i.e. while sailing to/from Santander).  That seemed to occur quite a few weeks in mid summer.  Wouldn't lack of one engine compound the difficulties, or was she holding off from full power and just taking a measured approach to making up the lost time?

Yes, last summer Pont Aven was having real problems keeping to schedule.  It was engine problems back then too.  Who knows - may even have been the early stages of the problem that came to a head last week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gareth said:

Yes, last summer Pont Aven was having real problems keeping to schedule.  It was engine problems back then too.  Who knows - may even have been the early stages of the problem that came to a head last week.

I experienced last June, drifting with no engine power for about 20 plus minutes on board the Pont Aven whilst within the Bay of Biscay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, merc said:

I experienced last June, drifting with no engine power for about 20 plus minutes on board the Pont Aven whilst within the Bay of Biscay.

I assume there was still power for lighting and other services in the passenger-spaces. From what you described, perhaps it was a case where the ship was running on a single engine (with an auxiliary generator also working) which then failed and the twenty minutes without propulsion was the time required to bring a second engine online. Ed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The final decision, I suspect, as to what she can do, at what speed etc will be less the final say so of BF board as the opinion of the Marine Surveyor. They will be in at the beginning and have an overview on any work commenced or proposed and will give the ok thereafter. Certainly the marine insurers will have been informed and generally satisfy themselves with the recommendations of the surveyor..In short if they aint happy...she dont sail..New timetables will be drawn up after this.

Edited by Paully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Cabin-boy said:

Correct. It'll take 8 weeks to remove and replace the engine but the time to get one made and delivered is quite long so it will be done sometime in 2020. They don't, as yet, know which shipyard will do the work. In the meantime she can run quite safely on just three engines, as had already been pointed out. Ed. 

Is your figure of 8 weeks to remove and replace the defective engine, assuming the inspection confirms this is the most cost effective action, via a dedicated shipping route ie up through the decks by removal of portable plates or suitable size hole in her side with all the issues of removing cables and services as necessary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, George A'Court said:

Is your figure of 8 weeks to remove and replace the defective engine, assuming the inspection confirms this is the most cost effective action, via a dedicated shipping route ie up through the decks by removal of portable plates or suitable size hole in her side with all the issues of removing cables and services as necessary. 

If you look two posts above mine you will see a link to an article in Ouest France. That was where the information originally came from. i was simply confirming that the translation of the details was correct and adding a small further point about the shipyard at the end. How correct all that information is, I don't know, but I assume they have taken other previous cases into account. Here is the link if you are interested:

https://www.ouest-france.fr/bretagne/brest-29200/brest-le-paquebot-pont-aven-reprendra-son-service-le-12-mai-6334479

As to getting the engines in and out, it might be via deck plates, as in the video I also linked to at lunchtime, or via a side door if she was originally designed with such a job in mind. Given there are 4 engines that would mean 4 doors (two on each side) if they are aligned correctly. On photos of PA I can't see any such doors so assume the only way in and out is via the car deck plating. I aslo don't know if the 8 weeks suggested includes transit time to a yard and back or just the technical aspects of the operation. Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cabin-boy said:

If you look two posts above mine you will see a link to an article in Ouest France. That was where the information originally came from. i was simply confirming that the translation of the details was correct and adding a small further point about the shipyard at the end. How correct all that information is, I don't know, but I assume they have taken other previous cases into account. Here is the link if you are interested:

https://www.ouest-france.fr/bretagne/brest-29200/brest-le-paquebot-pont-aven-reprendra-son-service-le-12-mai-6334479

As to getting the engines in and out, it might be via deck plates, as in the video I also linked to at lunchtime, or via a side door if she was originally designed with such a job in mind. Given there are 4 engines that would mean 4 doors (two on each side) if they are aligned correctly. On photos of PA I can't see any such doors so assume the only way in and out is via the car deck plating. I aslo don't know if the 8 weeks suggested includes transit time to a yard and back or just the technical aspects of the operation. Ed

Sorry I failed miserably in that I did not look at the posts you referred to. I was thinking back to when I was in the Design office in Pompey Dockyard and we had to remove defective machinery form Grey Line Cruises (Naval Ships), some had designated shipping routes whilst others required large holes in the ships's side. I think as time progresses it will certainly be interesting to find out the method used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the BF ship guide profile it would seem that the engines are directly below the aft end of deck 3 so it would have been logical to facilitate future access by removable panels in that deck after which the components could simply be moved out of the stern door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, George A'Court said:

Sorry I failed miserably in that I did not look at the posts you referred to. I was thinking back to when I was in the Design office in Pompey Dockyard and we had to remove defective machinery form Grey Line Cruises (Naval Ships), some had designated shipping routes whilst others required large holes in the ships's side. I think as time progresses it will certainly be interesting to find out the method used.

No need to apologise. Paully got a post in just before mine which meant that the relevance may not have been immediately obvious. Ed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve no doubt PA will be able to operate, in the interim, perfectly well on 3 engines rather than 4.

The bigger issue might be around what was the cause of what happened.  From what Jonno has said, it might be scrubber-related.....in which case.....

Jonno, do you happen to know, can any engine be configured to run either propellor, or are two engines dedicated to each propellor?  If the latter then the “other” engine connected to the same propellor as the engine that blew will end up (a) with a lot of work to do and (b) assuming a much more critical role in the operation of the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few years back on the Pont we had arrived in Roscoff from Cork but disembarkation was delayed due to a bow door problem , we were parked main deck aft ( dog owners )  with lots of empty area around us and had noticed large plates in the deck that were bolted flush to the deck . . My immediate thought was that they were to allow access to the machinery spaces for the removal of large items .

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/05/2019 at 15:30, Cabin-boy said:

I assume there was still power for lighting and other services in the passenger-spaces. From what you described, perhaps it was a case where the ship was running on a single engine (with an auxiliary generator also working) which then failed and the twenty minutes without propulsion was the time required to bring a second engine online. Ed. 

Quite the contrary, no electric lighting, no clean water (I was having a shower at the time and ended up with brown water coming out of the shower wand) and obviously no propulsion.   And no safety announcement which I questioned but got the Gallic shrug!

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks merc. I've found your original report on the incident last year. 

I'm intrigued as to why the water would suddenly change colour. And more importantly what was in the water to give it that dirty look. 

Jonno, just a quick question. You explained how the small mini propellers that PA had installed during her refit help save fuel and reduce vibration. Is there any way they could be linked to this engine failure? Ed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cabin-boy said:

Thanks merc. I've found your original report on the incident last year. 

I'm intrigued as to why the water would suddenly change colour. And more importantly what was in the water to give it that dirty look. 

Jonno, just a quick question. You explained how the small mini propellers that PA had installed during her refit help save fuel and reduce vibration. Is there any way they could be linked to this engine failure? Ed.

I doubt it Ed, I'm  more inclined to think that it occurred as they switched fuels and disengaged the scrubbers. I'm also inclined to think that the bottom end of the engine will remain getting a full top end rebuild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, jonno said:

I doubt it Ed, I'm  more inclined to think that it occurred as they switched fuels and disengaged the scrubbers. I'm also inclined to think that the bottom end of the engine will remain getting a full top end rebuild.

OK, thanks. How does such a switch affect an engine? Is it a dramatic temperature or pressure change that leads to such a failure? And if so, are they likely to be carefully checking the other three engines for signs of similar problems? Ed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies if this is not the right thread, but related none the less.... - Has Armorique ever undergone berthing trials at Ringaskiddy before, and if so does anyone remember why, or for what reason?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, hf_uk said:

Apologies if this is not the right thread, but related none the less.... - Has Armorique ever undergone berthing trials at Ringaskiddy before, and if so does anyone remember why, or for what reason?

I wasn’t aware that she had, but Ed seems to think she did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, David Williams said:

Well that answers it!  And the article very helpfully explains the purpose of the visit as “for the purpose of visiting the harbour”!  I guess that must be code for berthing trials! 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...