Vista power loss

[NebraskaSatellite]

14 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Not really.  I'm assuming they have the materials arriving in Freeport in time, but a complete swap of an azipod, or even just motor windings, should not take more than the 3 weeks (I think is what is blocked out), and its only about 2 days from Freeport to Galveston.

chengkp75 - I really appreciate your posts in this forum as I like learning about all the "under the hood" stuff that goes into operating a cruise ship........

 

If they hold to the current schedule, Vista gets back to Galveston on the 9th, so that would put them in Freeport on the 11th or 12th.  Given a two-day transit back to Galveston, it looks like they'd have to depart Freeport on the 25th to make the 27th's sailing.  Is 13-14 days for this repair realistic?  The reason I ask is that we're booked for the 27th's sailing and am wondering about the chances of having a shortened or cancelled cruise.  

(tbh, I'd almost prefer the credit and not take this one for work reasons)

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, NebraskaSatellite said:

chengkp75 - I really appreciate your posts in this forum as I like learning about all the "under the hood" stuff that goes into operating a cruise ship........

 

If they hold to the current schedule, Vista gets back to Galveston on the 9th, so that would put them in Freeport on the 11th or 12th.  Given a two-day transit back to Galveston, it looks like they'd have to depart Freeport on the 25th to make the 27th's sailing.  Is 13-14 days for this repair realistic?  The reason I ask is that we're booked for the 27th's sailing and am wondering about the chances of having a shortened or cancelled cruise.  

(tbh, I'd almost prefer the credit and not take this one for work reasons)

For one pod, this should be doable.  I get a kick out of this being touted as "first of its kind" operation, when the heavy lift ships like Boka Vanguard are really nothing different from the floating drydocks at Grand Bahamas, except the ship doesn't have full wing walls and cranes.

[gatour]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

For one pod, this should be doable.  I get a kick out of this being touted as "first of its kind" operation, when the heavy lift ships like Boka Vanguard are really nothing different from the floating drydocks at Grand Bahamas, except the ship doesn't have full wing walls and cranes.

I had been thinking the same thing.  The head lines are a bit off the mark about it being "first of its kind floating dry dock".   What is new is what you said, and the dry dock is self propelled.

 

One thing I am curious about is how are these dry dock ships normally utilized.  They reference them being "transport" dry docks, so I imagine they transport things between point A point B.  I vaguely recall an article/photograph on some website, where boats, kayaks, etc were loaded onto a similiar transport, and the transport would take them through the Panama Canal, en masse. 

 

This ship/drydock transport looks to be a vastly larger "thing", so just curious what it does on a day to day basis.

[Tucker in Texas]

On 7/2/2019 at 10:39 PM, Essiesmom said:

She was in Montego Bay today, Grand Cayman tomorrow then back to Galveston.  EM

That is not true.  Due to the propulsion problems, the itinerary was changed to Cozumel and Costa Maya.  The cruise was a day late leaving Galveston and an extra day added so won't return until Monday, July 8.  Don't get me started on what chaos this has caused for those people who had booked it to have it all change ten days or so before embarkation.

[shof515]

According to the vista AIS tracking data, ship is doing about 8 knots and is schedule to arrive at Costa Maya tomorrow morning

[scpirate]

On 7/3/2019 at 6:17 AM, bury me at sea said:

I'm glad all passengers and crew are safe and sound.  I have long admired the capability exhibited by Carnival's crew in responding to emergencies and unusual situations.

They have been getting lots of practice over the years.

[jbethel11]

2 minutes ago, scpirate said:

They have been getting lots of practice over the years.

Maybe it is the Gulf of Mexico that is the problem? First the Carnival Triumph now the Carnival Vista!

[shof515]

Just now, jbethel11 said:

Maybe it is the Gulf of Mexico that is the problem? First the Carnival Triumph now the Carnival Vista!

 

do not forgot the carnival splendor and what happen to that ship

[jbethel11]

2 minutes ago, shof515 said:

 

do not forgot the carnival splendor and what happen to that ship

That was in the Pacific Ocean, approximately 200 miles south San Diego, not in the Gulf of Mexico. 

[chengkp75]

15 hours ago, gatour said:

I had been thinking the same thing.  The head lines are a bit off the mark about it being "first of its kind floating dry dock".   What is new is what you said, and the dry dock is self propelled.

 

One thing I am curious about is how are these dry dock ships normally utilized.  They reference them being "transport" dry docks, so I imagine they transport things between point A point B.  I vaguely recall an article/photograph on some website, where boats, kayaks, etc were loaded onto a similiar transport, and the transport would take them through the Panama Canal, en masse. 

 

This ship/drydock transport looks to be a vastly larger "thing", so just curious what it does on a day to day basis.

I answered this yesterday, but our wonky internet apparently dropped it.  They move oil rigs and offshore platforms as their bread and butter, but also transport damaged vessels like the USS Cole and USS Fitzgerald.  Here's an article with photos of a lot of lifts these ships have made:

 

https://www.amusingplanet.com/2012/05/heavy-lift-ships-and-their-impossibly.html

[chengkp75]

8 hours ago, jbethel11 said:

Maybe it is the Gulf of Mexico that is the problem? First the Carnival Triumph now the Carnival Vista!

The Triumph was a fire, and a poor design for redundancy of ship's systems.  Vista is now built to stricter standards for redundancy under the IMO's Safe Return to Port requirements.

[GregD]

On 7/4/2019 at 5:06 AM, chengkp75 said:

As for the AIS indication of NUC, it would be normal for the engineers to reduce remaining power to the azipods before trying to reclose the "tie" breaker, as this would create an instantaneous huge power draw as the half power to the pods was restored, unless you slowed down to reduce this load.  I can't remember if the AIS defaults to NUC when at sea and drifting, or whether the bridge officer may have input this into the system.  There is no power interruption to navigational equipment during power losses, as the battery banks are always connected and charging.

 

I just looked up in our AIS manual and there's no mention of status automatically changing or anything like that. 

 

Here's how we define NUC:

"Vessel not under command means a vessel which through some exceptional circumstance is unable to maneuver as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel."

 

I would think during one of these 'outtages' they perhaps didn't have maneuverability as they were trying to either get another engine online or switching power supplies (but I think that's instantaneous.)

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, GregD said:

I just looked up in our AIS manual and there's no mention of status automatically changing or anything like that. 

 

Here's how we define NUC:

"Vessel not under command means a vessel which through some exceptional circumstance is unable to maneuver as required by these Rules and is therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel."

 

I would think during one of these 'outtages' they perhaps didn't have maneuverability as they were trying to either get another engine online or switching power supplies (but I think that's instantaneous.)

I was going to suggest the "fat finger" error, but didn't want to cast stones, but I looked at our Furuno AIS, and the selection for NUC is right below "At anchor" and above "restricted maneuverability", so this definitely could have been an error on the watch officer in entering data, in the heat of the moment.

[GregD]

23 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I was going to suggest the "fat finger" error, but didn't want to cast stones, but I looked at our Furuno AIS, and the selection for NUC is right below "At anchor" and above "restricted maneuverability", so this definitely could have been an error on the watch officer in entering data, in the heat of the moment.

I didn't even think of that.

Being a deckie I guess I always give the benefit of the doubt, but now in this job, there's some mind boggling things I've seen done on bridge's we've worked on.