NYT Article on the PC Expansion

[tropicbird]

Interesting article in the New York Times on the Canal amplification project. There are several neat graphics embedded in the piece showing the operation on the locks, etc.

 

Warning: the article raises a number of concerns about the project, usability, safety, etc.

 

Those of us who love the PC hope none of these come to pass! (but it will be interesting to see... are the new tugs safe enough... is there enough room??)

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/06/22/world/americas/100000004484514.app.html?_r=0

 

or

 

http://nyti.ms/28Quz9g

[BillB48]

Indeed a very interesting article. Even though I think there is some crepe hanging and labor/management posturing going on... there are a lot of genuine issues that will need to be sorted out and procedures developed for handling them.

 

All the remedial actions that were taken to take care of the leaks that popped up certainly don't help the long term viability of the structure, but whether or not it is a serious detriment... we probably won't find out for a good while. There was a lot of speculation that the consortium of companies that tendered the winning bid by under bidding the project, there was concern that was the case almost from the beginning. The then vice president of Panama (in Panama the vice president is not normally of the same political party as the president) warned at the time the project was seriously under bid and would come back to haunt them. That vice president is now the president, Ricardo Varela. I am sure he will now be emphasizing the positive side of things when the expansion opens on Sunday.

 

I am sure the new tugs are safe, the operating the "backwards" is not that big of a deal breaker, as they are tractor tugs and made to operate in either direction fairly easily. Although they are intended to maneuver stern first when working ships, when running light they handle a little better going "stern" first.

 

There is "enough" room in the lock for the ship and two tugs, there will always be the desire for "more" room however. I think they short changed themselves a little with the dimensions they ended up with considering the use of tugs plus the length of the ship eats up a lot of potential room you could have used for a longer ship. When the third locks project was started in the late 30s, the chambers were going to be 1200' long back then. While the chambers are 1400' long now... 200' are used by a tug at the bow and one on the stern. The original third locks project was to use the "mules" to get the ships through.

 

I know there are a bunch of other issues of concern, however with some time, they will work out... eventually... at least we hope!

 

As always the folks in the field will have to make it work with what they are given. Meanwhile I am sure it is going to be a very festive weekend in Panama.

[chengkp75]

I agree with you, Bill. I won't comment on the construction techniques or quality, as I'm not a civil engineer.

 

I will chime in on what appears to be a major topic of the article, the tugs. First off, handling a tractor tug is a whole different thing to a conventional tug, and requires quite a bit of experience to do effectively. What I think you're seeing with the tug captains' association is a "push back" against learning a new skill set. I've seen many a skilled tractor tug skipper handling his boat "up close and personal" in places I didn't think he could fit, and handling a large ship at the same time.

 

The article seems to imply that because the tugs crossed the Atlantic going astern (and we don't know who were operating them, Panama captains not familiar with the new boats, or experienced operators from Europe who have handled these boats for decades), that this is a "design flaw". This is not the case, when you consider that these are "harbor" tugs designed to handle ships in harbor, and crossing an ocean is as unsuitable for them as trying to land a 747 on a grass runway. These are not ocean-going towing or salvage tugs, which are designed far differently, from the hull to the machinery. The more rounded bows of tractor tugs are designed to provide an efficient pushing surface at any angle to the ship's side, not to track effectively through 6' seas.

 

Unlike the original locks, the new locks are equipped with rubber fenders to protect both the ships and the locks, so lateral stability of the ship in the lock is not a crucial as the old locks where it was steel on concrete if you hit. The tugs will be in the locks to provide longitudinal stability, since the lock doors are less forgiving of damage than the lock walls.

 

I believe that there is a bit of Latin machismo involved here, with long time tug captains resisting the thought that they need to be retrained, and therefore lots of the miniature and simulator training might not have "stuck" as well as it should. There may be a need for "advisors" from Europe where these tugs and locks have been used for years to train the Panamanian captains using on the job training.

 

I believe the first months will not be perfect, but will be accomplished safely, and I hope that the Canal Authority has sufficient protocols and procedures in place to cover nearly every contingency to mitigate against unsafe practices and keep the traffic moving safely, placing safety above revenue.

[BillB48]

Even before I left there the Canal was investing heavily in the Omni directional propulsion system for their tugs using Schottel and Voith Schneider systems. As time marched on they were using both almost exclusively for any of the new tugs that were acquired, they all were used as stern drives... ASDs (azimuthing stern drive) I think they are called. So now out of 40 plus tugs in the regular fleet only two are left with shafted screws and they are of the "Towmaster" Propulsion system... in fact the first tug with that system to be built in the US was for the Panama Canal. (Even then the Canal was always ready to be on the bleeding edge... I mean cutting edge of things!)

 

I still have one source of non official unfiltered info from the Canal and he is a long time tug skipper. When he calls it quits I'll just have depend on the agreed upon script that will be provided!! He basically said that the new Spanish tugs were sold to the Canal as tractor tugs, but if you are not running them as a stern drive either with a ship or light they just are a PITA. His words, not the best tug for the job.

 

From what I have been given to understand, Canal people did not bring the tugs over... that was provided by the yard that built them. Those captains from the get go brought them over stern first and so it continues.

 

There is still a bunch of back and forth about the problems caused by the Dry Season winds which at times can exceed 20 knots, particularly on the Atlantic side, no approach wall on the lake end of Agua Clara, what size ships will be allowed to meet head on in the Cut. Right now the goal is to get to 12 neo Panamax vessels a day and the test lockages have been running 3 hours. No doubt that will improve as skill sets rise... but it is still a tall order. Add all the uncertainties together and the fact there is not one pilot that has taken a neo Panamax ship through the Canal with a 50' draft. Just all adds to the hand ringing! Right now the draft for the new locks in at 43'... the lake is still pretty low, but recovering.