It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Frigate And Oil Tanker Collided In Norway

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Norwegian frigate KNM Helge Ingstad has collided with a tanker (Sola TS) in Norway. The tanker is ok, but the frigate may have capsized. Five oil fields in the North Sea (Grane, Oseberg, Troll A, Ivar Aasen and Edvard Grieg) have been shut down. The frigate had participated in the NATO exercise Trident Juncture.


Norwegian frigate takes on water after collision


The crew of 137 are all evacuated from “KNM Helge Ingstad” the Joint Rescue Coordination Center of Southern Norway informs.

The frigate is taking on lots of water, nearly capsizing, and the danger of sinking is acute.

Weather in the area is good and the frigate is on ground just by the shore. Like other naval vessels, the frigate carry weapons, like missiles, torpedoes and depth charges.


Vessel details for: SOLA TS (Crude Oil Tanker) - IMO 9724350, MMSI 248020000, Call Sign 9HA4480 Registered in Malta | AIS Marine Traffic

Live video and updates (Norwegian)


The cause of the collision is not yet known. The weather was good.




posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 05:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Hellmutt

Glad all sailors got off the frigate and it is that which is taking on water and not the tanker , expensive loss for Norway if she goes down.
I wonder what role the tug had in the incident.

Happening just outside Sture oil terminal, the accident raises a lot of questions.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 05:48 AM
link   
Videos



Evacuation



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Hellmutt

That was deeply unfortunate!

One has to wonder what led to this calamity. You would have thought that rule one of operating a large ocean going vessel, is "Don't bump into cargo vessels. They are probably bigger and heavier than your vessel, and of the two, yours is most likely to sink as a result!"



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Sture oil terminal has been shut down. That's the reason why they shut down the oil fields too. The tug was involved somehow. I'm watching the live video and it doesn't look good for the frigate. They're also worried about oil spill.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 06:07 AM
link   
They've just said that the tug was not involved in the incident. The frigate was run aground to keep it from sinking.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 06:11 AM
link   
CRASH !
tanker captain : frigging frigate !



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Hellmutt

Like so many state of the art frigates it is probably jam packed with high tech hardware but built like a paper toy using aluminium instead of tougher composites, most modern naval warship's are a compromise and built in the hope that they will never actually see war and at most a police action were there more up to date weapon's grant them a stand off ability so are more intended as show pieces and political tool's than anything else.

At least non of the lad's and lasses on board were harmed but when a merchant ship is better built than a so called warship you have to ask?.

She will most likely be re-floated and repaired in dry dock then put back into service but sailors are a superstitious lot so given a choice most would choose then not to serve on her after such a misfortune since it usually bodes ill for the vessel in the future.

edit on 8-11-2018 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 06:48 AM
link   
Must have been a serious collision. Good there was no serious injuries.

It brings to mind the sinking of the British light cruiser HMS Curacao, who was run over by Queen Mary in 1942, and sunk with significant loss of life.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Click photo to enlarge. Even bigger version can be found here.


Photo: Kystverket


AIS on the frigate seems to have been switched off at the time of the incident. It was later switched on. This is normal procedure on a warship. It may have been a factor in the incident, but at the moment we can only speculate what happened. The frigate was not insured!



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Hellmutt

Wait... what?

How was ANY vessel of significant displacement, at sea without insurance? That seems utterly, completely insane to me, given the risks associated with sea travel, and the cost of investing time, physical resource and money into creating such a seagoing vessel. I can understand someone with a thirteen foot, oar driven boat deciding that perhaps insurance might be a little bit over the top, given the relatively small cost of replacing or repairing a small wooden craft. But this is a large, naval vessel, not a dingy or a small pleasure boat made of kindling wood, held together with chewing gum and gorilla tape!



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

My instinct tells me insurance documents and an auditable trail existed but perhaps a technicality in the insurance product/documentation meant the insurance was void.

Could be wrong, but like you say, a boat at sea without insurance? How did it access/egress port?



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:18 AM
link   
The frigate was not insured. There's a live link at the top, and also a dramatic 22 second video further down.


Milliardskipet var ikke forsikret (Norwegian)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Hellmutt

I can not see any obvious or severe damage to port so divers will have to assess just how much damage there is to starboard and except for the diesil slick in the water aft of the vessel she still look's salvable as well as thankfully being more or less upright with a severe list to starboard in relatively shallow water which assuming there is no severe weather may enable a rapid recover operation to be enacted, if severe weather does happen though before such an operation can be completed it may also be far worse than if the vessel had sunk in deeper water so they will have to attach sea anchors and keep some tugs on site in case she is washed against the rock's but so long as the keel is intact the refloating and righting of the vessel should not be too much of an issue.

Good look to Norwegian's with this issue and hopefully help with the operation will be forthcoming and political wrangling will not get in the way of it.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

A big problem is that the ship is actually not floating at all. It may slide off the rocks and sink.



Edit to add: Nearby, the water is 30 meters deep, and the ship is not stable. They're worried about the tide too.


edit on Thu 8 Nov 2018 by Hellmutt because: Edit to add



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Probably being a government vessel it would have been covered by the Norwegian government accepting liability, naval vessel's are regarded as extensions of there nation's territory so a Russian navel vessel in an American port is still classed as being Russian territory etc so long as both country's abide by international treatise, so really speaking this mean's that a navel vessel really does not need the same level of private liability insurance as a merchant vessel since costs of damage related to such vessel are then taken up and cover is provided by the state it is representative of while a merchant vessel is not so covered and so must be insured or most international port's will not allow it to dock.

Though some poorer nation's do insure there ship's with the likes of Lloyds of London and a few other big maritime insurance company's.
(I would imagine there are a lot of stipulations and loopholes to get out of paying that insurance in case of military action etc)
edit on 8-11-2018 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Reminds me of those Arleigh Burke class destroyer accidents and other misadventures. The Norwegian ship is a Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate. Just like the A.B. class destroyers they are equipped with the Aegis combat system.

Report: US Navy Destroyer Accidents to Temporarily Reduce Aegis Missile Defense Capacity

Aside from "accidents happen": cui bono?



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Insuring warships is an interesting question. Certainly, the British government doesn't insure warships or military equipment, as they consider accidents and such like to be normal attrition and "wear and tear". Basically, the government pays out, so holds the full liability.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Many if not most oil tankers have what's known as a "bulbous nose" (I think that's the correct term) below the waterline to stabilize the ship. This bulbous nose protrudes out in front of the ship. If the tanker hit the frigate it may well have gored a large hole in the frigate below the waterline. Given the large diameter of these stabilization devices it may well have holed more than one watertight compartment.

Just a thought.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: TrueBrit

My instinct tells me insurance documents and an auditable trail existed but perhaps a technicality in the insurance product/documentation meant the insurance was void.

Could be wrong, but like you say, a boat at sea without insurance? How did it access/egress port?


Liability insurance but not collision maybe?



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join