Viking Sky position, adrift off Norway Coast and evacuating Passengers & Crew

[chengkp75]

9 minutes ago, Hanoj said:

So I can imagine the class society Lloyd's Register can be none too pleased by this. Are they on the hook for the costs of repairs and other claims?

Are the ships under Lloyds?  I kind of figured as Norwegian flag they would be DNV.  But, whatever class society is involved, they have no liability for damages or insurance claims.  They will look at it the same way the Norwegian Maritime Authority will, as "how do we adjust the system (the ISM document) to prevent, or at least mitigate this from happening again.  I believe you may be confusing Lloyd's Register (the class society) with Lloyds of London (the maritime insurer).  Most all shipowners have their P&I (property and indemnity, or claims by third parties) written by mutual "P&I Clubs".  A group of shipowners get together, determine how much they pay annually for P&I claims, and set a premium for members according to their share of the club (how many ships).  So, the cruise lines, and all shipowners, are essentially self-insured.  Hull insurance, for claims of damages to the ship, are through places like Lloyds of London, and are fixed based on the build cost of the ship.

[just_dont]

Cheng, I responded to one of your previous posts with a question about the multiple engine shutdown, probably at the same time you were posting, so you may have missed it. I believe it was #1264. I'm interested in your thoughts on that, if you have a chance.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[philw1776]

11 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Believe I answered your question about restarting in a post about a half hour ago.  Timeline?  Depends on whether you're dealing with just one engine shutdown or a blackout, and what happened to cause the shutdown.  Bypassing an automatic safety shutdown kind of defeats the purpose of a safety shutdown, don't you think?  The whole idea is that loss of oil pressure can destroy an engine in less than a minute, and even a momentary loss of flow can result in permanently damaged bearings or pistons and rings, so there are certain shutdown alarms that cannot be bypassed or overridden, by law.  Typically, the engine has two motor driven lube oil pumps allocated to it, and the "standby" pump will start on receiving a low pressure alarm, but these "standby start" signals always have a time delay built in to prevent nuisance starts to the pump, and a slug of air in the engine will shut it down before the standby can start, and then if you've gone black, the standby cannot start anyway.  Some systems, like turbochargers, that continue to spin even after the engine stops, will have small reservoirs that feed the oil to the bearings at all times, and that it refilled by the engine oil pumps, and if the oil pump stops and the engine stops, this reservoir will supply oil until the turbo stops spinning (in theory).  Having pumps start based on ship roll would be a little overkill, as there is no guarantee that a standby oil supply would be needed in all rolling conditions.  Also complicating the scenario is the fact that the ship was pitching as well, and there is no requirement for operation at a certain amount of pitch (mainly because it is far more transitory than listing can be), so if the ship rolled to port and pitched bow up at the same time, and the pump suction was on the starboard side and forward, the oil level could possibly go very low (don't know the actual design or shape of the Sky's sump tanks).

I'm no maritime expert but as a now retired engineer who designed fault tolerant communications systems, dealt with crescendos of computer alarms, etc. I find these posts absolutely fascinating.  Thank you.
It's always some obscure corner case that's either unanticipated or we engineers feel not worth addressing because of unlikelihood that gets ya. On some few occasions adding extra hardware for low, low probability occurrences can actually decrease system reliability.

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by philw1776

[LMaxwell]

9 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Believe I answered your question about restarting in a post about a half hour ago.  Timeline?  Depends on whether you're dealing with just one engine shutdown or a blackout, and what happened to cause the shutdown.  Bypassing an automatic safety shutdown kind of defeats the purpose of a safety shutdown, don't you think?  The whole idea is that loss of oil pressure can destroy an engine in less than a minute, and even a momentary loss of flow can result in permanently damaged bearings or pistons and rings, so there are certain shutdown alarms that cannot be bypassed or overridden, by law.  Typically, the engine has two motor driven lube oil pumps allocated to it, and the "standby" pump will start on receiving a low pressure alarm, but these "standby start" signals always have a time delay built in to prevent nuisance starts to the pump, and a slug of air in the engine will shut it down before the standby can start, and then if you've gone black, the standby cannot start anyway.  Some systems, like turbochargers, that continue to spin even after the engine stops, will have small reservoirs that feed the oil to the bearings at all times, and that it refilled by the engine oil pumps, and if the oil pump stops and the engine stops, this reservoir will supply oil until the turbo stops spinning (in theory).  Having pumps start based on ship roll would be a little overkill, as there is no guarantee that a standby oil supply would be needed in all rolling conditions.  Also complicating the scenario is the fact that the ship was pitching as well, and there is no requirement for operation at a certain amount of pitch (mainly because it is far more transitory than listing can be), so if the ship rolled to port and pitched bow up at the same time, and the pump suction was on the starboard side and forward, the oil level could possibly go very low (don't know the actual design or shape of the Sky's sump tanks).

Awesome, thank you for the explanation.  

[chengkp75]

15 minutes ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

To get an idea of this "Swiss Cheese", how often does it happen that just one engine decides to stop because of oil levels & inclement weather? 

 

12 minutes ago, Pratique said:

I bet that the ship builders have statistically modeled this. Hate to say it but good info for the lawyers to obtain.

This is something that the class societies look at.  Hard to say how often it happens, and depends on your sample size:  one line's fleet, all cruise ships, all ships worldwide, ocean-going ships, coastal ships, river ships, what have you.  I can't think of a time off hand, but I can't say it hasn't happened once in my 43 years.

[chengkp75]

46 minutes ago, just_dont said:

 

 

Did they say that the oil level issue occurred on all 4 (or 3) engines?
Could it have been a situation where they may have been running 3 engines, and one of the engines experienced the low-oil shutdown, which then caused the electrical system overload/shutdown you'd theorized? Or if that had happened, would the preliminary statement have said that?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

 

Since we are relying on journalists paraphrasing and cherry picking the board's statements, I really don't know whether all the engines had this failure of oil pressure, or whether it caused a waterfall failure as I had posited before.  Until I can read the report myself, and not rely on the media to "interpret" it for me, I can't say.  I have a personal library of the official reports of every major cruise ship (and some cargo ship) marine incidents over the last decade or so, that I use as reference (Splendor, Triumph, Concordia, Star Princess, and others).

[Pushka]

6 hours ago, gatour said:

How is a ship or airplane a "security" area that is different than a department store?  If they were, then there would be signs posted much like they are posted in certain areas of ship/airport terminals.  Unless otherwise posted if you are in a public or quasi public space you must assume that their is the potential to be photographed.

 

Would I have take a photo of the one couple, probably not, but that is just me.  However it does tell part of the story of what was happening on the ship.

 

Try just walking into a plane or ship without a ticket and security clearance and get back to me. 

[chengkp75]

8 minutes ago, philw1776 said:

I'm no maritime expert but as a now retired engineer who designed fault tolerant communications systems, dealt with crescendos of computer alarms, etc. I find these posts absolutely fascinating.  Thank you.
It's always some obscure corner case that's either unanticipated or we engineers feel not worth addressing because of unlikelihood that gets ya. On some few occasions adding extra hardware for low, low probability occurrences can actually decrease system reliability.

 

Yes, the regulatory bodies will look at the chance of something happening to determine whether an alarm point is needed, or what kind of alarm it is, again all based on risk/reward analysis.  And just like the space shuttle Challenger, there is always the case where something no one thought of, like o-ring shrinkage on a cold morning before launch, that creeps in with that one in ten million chance and ruins your whole day.  And, yes, too many sensors, giving too much data, or giving extraneous alarms or nuisance alarms, can either bog down an electronic multiplex system, or give the human on the other end of the human/machine interface a sensory overload and lead to ignoring alarms.

[Grandma Cruising]

3 minutes ago, Pushka said:

 

Try just walking into a plane or ship without a ticket and security clearance and get back to me. 

You’re assuming she didn’t ask people’s permission. She may have done - has anyone complained that their photo was published without permission?

[arielmatey]

another account from a passenger

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2019/03/27/tennessee-woman-rescued-viking-sky-cruise-ship/3285975002/

[Pratique]

^ FWIW The USA Today story suggests that the ship ducked into a fjord in the early morning "for a respite" before heading back out to sea. Can someone who was on board confirm? If true it sounds like they were bobbing around for quite awhile beforehand. Rough seas can be exhausting on your body over a long period of time.

[just_dont]

Since we are relying on journalists paraphrasing and cherry picking the board's statements, I really don't know whether all the engines had this failure of oil pressure, or whether it caused a waterfall failure as I had posited before.  Until I can read the report myself, and not rely on the media to "interpret" it for me, I can't say.  I have a personal library of the official reports of every major cruise ship (and some cargo ship) marine incidents over the last decade or so, that I use as reference (Splendor, Triumph, Concordia, Star Princess, and others).

Thank you. I hadn't realized the report was by a journalist. I thought it was an official statement. I didn't actually attempt to find and read the statement.

I really appreciate your expertise.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Hanoj]

4 minutes ago, just_dont said:

Thank you. I hadn't realized the report was by a journalist. I thought it was an official statement. I didn't actually attempt to find and read the statement.

I really appreciate your expertise.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

Here's the official press release from the Norwegian Maritime Authority:

 

https://www.sdir.no/en/news/news-from-the-nma/press-release-viking-sky/

[Haworth]

51 minutes ago, Host Grandma Cruising said:

You’re assuming she didn’t ask people’s permission. She may have done - has anyone complained that their photo was published without permission?

Are you seriously suggesting that in that situation the conversation was, can I post your photo on line, she is very lucky that I am not in those posts as it was a very private matter, including 2 people sleeping in a small gap between the theatre and technicians room.

 

You should be removed as a host 

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, Hanoj said:

Here's the official press release from the Norwegian Maritime Authority:

 

https://www.sdir.no/en/news/news-from-the-nma/press-release-viking-sky/

And the quote from this press release:

 

"The NMA has drawn up a general safety notice about ensuring a continuous supply of lubricating oil to engines and other critical systems in poor weather conditions. This should be done in cooperation with the engine supplier and, moreover, be included in the ship’s risk assessments in the safety management system."

 

will likely be the only outcome of this investigation.  Since no mention was made of the decision to sail, that is obviously not a causative factor to the NMA, and so the ISM system will be revised, and all Norwegian flag and Lloyd's classed ships will have to include language regarding oil levels and heavy weather in their documents.

[just_dont]

Here's the official press release from the Norwegian Maritime Authority:
 

That's what I recall someone posting that I felt read as if it was an official statement. Turns out it was.
Thanks.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[zitsky]

3 minutes ago, Haworth said:

Are you seriously suggesting that in that situation the conversation was, can I post your photo on line, she is very lucky that I am not in those posts as it was a very private matter, including 2 people sleeping in a small gap between the theatre and technicians room.

 

You should be removed as a host 

 

Why?  Because she has a different opinion than you?

[Haworth]

3 minutes ago, zitsky said:

 

Why?  Because she has a different opinion than you?

No, how about respecting privacy, not trying to profit from it

[Bubbalikesme]

So what does this all of this mean for those of us on the next sailing. On Viking Sky We are scheduled for April 6 Copenhagen to Amsterdam. Is it safe to be on the Viking sky.

i am still concern d about repairs done it the right way. How do they know there was not an oil leak that caused the low oil.

Any comments on whether you would be on the next sailing.

thank you

[chengkp75]

Just now, Bubbalikesme said:

So what does this all of this mean for those of us on the next sailing. On Viking Sky We are scheduled for April 6 Copenhagen to Amsterdam. Is it safe to be on the Viking sky.

i am still concern d about repairs done it the right way. How do they know there was not an oil leak that caused the low oil.

Any comments on whether you would be on the next sailing.

thank you

Personally, I would not think twice about sailing on the Sky.  There are no repairs to the engines or machinery systems, and the only repairs will be to windows and cosmetic repairs to the hotel side (and a new anchor and chain).  How do they know it wasn't an oil leak that caused the low oil?  Because there wasn't a large area of oil residue in the bilges around the engines.  Each engine sump tank holds about 3 cubic meters of oil (about 800 gallons) and the difference between the normal operating level and the low level alarm would be 200-300 gallons, which would make quite the mess.

[Hanoj]

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Personally, I would not think twice about sailing on the Sky.  There are no repairs to the engines or machinery systems, and the only repairs will be to windows and cosmetic repairs to the hotel side (and a new anchor and chain).  How do they know it wasn't an oil leak that caused the low oil?  Because there wasn't a large area of oil residue in the bilges around the engines.  Each engine sump tank holds about 3 cubic meters of oil (about 800 gallons) and the difference between the normal operating level and the low level alarm would be 200-300 gallons, which would make quite the mess.

Thank you @chengkp75 for your great patience answering questions such as these for us novices. I have learned a lot.

[old biddy]

4 minutes ago, Bubbalikesme said:

So what does this all of this mean for those of us on the next sailing. On Viking Sky We are scheduled for April 6 Copenhagen to Amsterdam. Is it safe to be on the Viking sky.

i am still concern d about repairs done it the right way. How do they know there was not an oil leak that caused the low oil.

Any comments on whether you would be on the next sailing.

thank you

In a heart beat I'd be there. I've been following this thread since it first started on Saturday. Viking have too much to lose in not doing the repairs correctly. I'm sure they will be checking with a magnifying glass for oil leaks.  We have 3 viking cruises booked for this year, a river cruise starting next week, Alaska in July and the Ukraine on the Dneiper in September. 

Life is to short to think with a glass half full. Believe me I am of a cautious nature- drives my OH mad at times, but hey ho that's how I am. But categorically I'd be off to Copenhagen. We've previously done 3 Viking Oceans and loved every minute.

 

 

 

[Grandma Cruising]

33 minutes ago, Haworth said:

Are you seriously suggesting that in that situation the conversation was, can I post your photo on line, she is very lucky that I am not in those posts as it was a very private matter, including 2 people sleeping in a small gap between the theatre and technicians room.

 

You should be removed as a host 

I was suggesting that we don’t know and that I am not aware of anyone making a complaint.

[OnTheJourney]

1 hour ago, arielmatey said:

another account from a passenger

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2019/03/27/tennessee-woman-rescued-viking-sky-cruise-ship/3285975002/

 

Amazing pictures.  Heard from one of the passengers before we left the Oslo hotel yesterday morning that the lounge piano unbolted from the floor? Can't see the piano in any of the pictures.....

[Cyber Kat]

On 3/24/2019 at 6:08 PM, just_dont said:

OMG.
You must be an attorney.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

 

Or perhaps an insurance claims adjuster gathering “evidence” or someone with an axe to grind.