Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Ship porn

12467…39

Comments

  • #152
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    The term 'ugliest ship' gets bandied about quite a bit, from boxy car carriers to gargantuan cruise ships (aka fanny tankers :pac:)

    But these seismic survey ships get my vote, they're vile looking.



    Ehhmmmmmmm is it not missing about 200 feet of hull?????


  • #153
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Its like a ScFi starship. Also reminds me of Nelson and Rodney truncated design.

    http://wonderduck.mu.nu/the_misfit_battleships


  • #154
    murphym7
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭murphym7


    That is one ugly ship. How the hell do you put her along side? Is it stern to the quay?


  • #155
    Poor Uncle Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,546 ✭✭✭✭Poor Uncle Tom


    Am I the only one that actually likes that ship, but I think they missed a serious design opportunity.


  • #156
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »
    Am I the only one that actually likes that ship, but I think they missed a serious design opportunity.

    Yes. Yes you are. :D


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    Whatever about the seismic ship, the late Steve Job's yacht is one of the ugkiest for me here.


  • #158
    Poor Uncle Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,546 ✭✭✭✭Poor Uncle Tom


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    ...one of the ugkiest...

    I don't know that word, but I agree......

    It would make a nice house on dry land though.......


  • #159
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    947353_491255497596508_1029267155_n.jpg

    More Maersk propaganda for their new triple E ships. Bigger ships, fewer crews is what they don't tell you!


  • #160
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Emerald Princess in Cobh

    Bow:
    20130506_134503_zpsff08464c.jpg
    Name:
    20130506_133741_zps1626441c.jpg
    Slick lifeboats:
    20130506_133437_zps04100d31.jpg
    Stern:
    20130506_132851_zps38a6f6af.jpg
    Front:
    20130506_131935_zpsa72ebe8d.jpg
    Rear:
    20130506_131939_zpsdf8b13a5.jpg
    Panorama:
    20130506_131928_zps815a43f7.jpg


    And a model rather than ship but hey...
    SS Servia - Details:
    20130506_133918_zps05c10c27.jpg
    Bow on:
    20130506_133935_zps74dd5e1b.jpg
    Poor Panorama
    20130506_133956_zps1b62a103.jpg


  • #161
    fergal.b
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,337 Mod ✭✭✭✭fergal.b


    946925_614603085216522_1863575670_n.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    HeidiHeidi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,524 ✭✭✭✭HeidiHeidi


    What/where is that??
    fergal.b wrote: »
    946925_614603085216522_1863575670_n.jpg


  • #163
    323
    Registered Users Posts: 1,137 ✭✭✭323


    Enough of the shiney box shaped gin palaces.

    A proper working ship seen in Donegal a month or so back. The Normand Ranger.
    Anchor Tug rigged as a plow vessel, was to be plowing pipe on the corrib field.

    NormandRangerKillybegs.jpg

    “Follow the trend lines, not the headlines,”



  • #164
    Rocky Bay
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 276 ✭✭Rocky Bay


    Tabnabs, I saw the Maersk advertisement in a magazine about two weeks ago. As usual, I could not figure out how to put in on the internet...


  • #165
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    That Greek ferry again, this time a shore perspective

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsnH00fzASg


  • #166
    Yawlboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Yawlboy


    fergal.b wrote: »
    946925_614603085216522_1863575670_n.jpg

    Is this the former LE Deirdre?


  • #167
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Yawlboy wrote: »
    Is this the former LE Deirdre?

    Not quite

    http://www.my-cakewalk.com/


  • #168
    murphym7
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭murphym7


    Here is the Deirdre: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7218/7339749628_5f22dd58cb_z.jpg

    Link taken from http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/archive/index.php/t-2067.html


  • #169
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    A post further down the IMO page suggests the link above is for Tosca III

    Is this the Deirdre? http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=19503


  • #170
    murphym7
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭murphym7


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    A post further down the IMO page suggests the link above is for Tosca III

    Is this the Deirdre? http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=19503

    That photo was her after decommissioning traveling through the Kiel. My understanding is that she was originally was going to refitted as the super yacht “Tosca IV” in Brazil. She was then moved to Florida to be finished as the super yacht Santa Rita 1. Not sure is she finished.


  • #171
    vicwatson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,404 ✭✭✭✭vicwatson


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    That Greek ferry again, this time a shore perspective

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsnH00fzASg


    Bloody brilliant video.

    No wonder the Greek ecomony is the way it is - pure chaos altogether when she docked.

    Fair play to the captain 1. For managing to dock (even for a minute or so) and 2. For bothering to dock to let a car and truck off and a car on and a couple passengers.

    Mental !


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    pedroeibar1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    murphym7 wrote: »
    That photo was her after decommissioning traveling through the Kiel. My understanding is that she was originally was going to refitted as the super yacht “Tosca IV” in Brazil. She was then moved to Florida to be finished as the super yacht Santa Rita 1. Not sure is she finished.

    It seems that she is now in the US being finished. According to a May 2013 newsletter :
    The tow of the mega-yacht “Santa Rita I” from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil to Jacksonville, Florida has been just successfully completed. The 212’ yacht will have additional outfitting and finishing work completed at BAE Shipyard in Jacksonville, Florida after her conversion in Brazil from a former Irish Naval Frigate to a luxury mega-yacht. The tow was concluded by 4,080HP tug “Ocean Tower” (ex-Gulf Falcon) covering about 4,700nm in about 25 days. from www.marcon.com/library/sales_reports/tug-sales.pdf


    An article with a few photos here www.gogobrazil.com/santarita.pdf


  • #173
    Yawlboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Yawlboy


    pedroeibar1 wrote: »
    It seems that she is now in the US being finished. According to a May 2013 newsletter :
    The tow of the mega-yacht “Santa Rita I” from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil to Jacksonville, Florida has been just successfully completed. The 212’ yacht will have additional outfitting and finishing work completed at BAE Shipyard in Jacksonville, Florida after her conversion in Brazil from a former Irish Naval Frigate to a luxury mega-yacht. The tow was concluded by 4,080HP tug “Ocean Tower” (ex-Gulf Falcon) covering about 4,700nm in about 25 days. from www.marcon.com/library/sales_reports/tug-sales.pdf


    An article with a few photos here www.gogobrazil.com/santarita.pdf

    The work in Florida was completed last year - there are a bunch of photos on the Irish Navy Photo Section on Facebook - 523316_10151203831575944_1468763664_n.jpg

    303773_10151203830865944_1270140847_n.jpg

    558751_10151203831210944_1889463481_n.jpg


  • #174
    DownBeaten
    Registered Users Posts: 82 ✭✭DownBeaten


    Forgive the noobie, non-sailor question, wouldn't it have been cheaper to build a new boat from scratch rather than modifying a 40(?) year old, pretty clapped out hulk? Obviously not, these people have done their sums, but does it come down somehow to smart financial engineering?


  • #175
    Yawlboy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 748 ✭✭✭Yawlboy


    I believe she was bought for what the steel in her was worth, however even though she was old the engines and hull were ok


  • #176
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    DownBeaten wrote: »
    Forgive the noobie, non-sailor question, wouldn't it have been cheaper to build a new boat from scratch rather than modifying a 40(?) year old, pretty clapped out hulk? Obviously not, these people have done their sums, but does it come down somehow to smart financial engineering?

    The original buyer was a bit "out there". He had the means to buy off the shelf if he wanted, but he wanted something different, and the Tosca IV plan was born. However the buyer was killed soon after conversion started, in a Helicopter crash, and the semi converted ship lay in limbo.

    The hull is fine. It didn't seem to suffer the plate thinning problems of her successors, her only flaw being the bathtub bow without sufficient scuppers.

    When Deirdre went to auction, the scrap value was the reserve. It made more, but still far less than what the ship was worth.


  • #177
    murphym7
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭murphym7


    DownBeaten wrote: »
    Forgive the noobie, non-sailor question, wouldn't it have been cheaper to build a new boat from scratch rather than modifying a 40(?) year old, pretty clapped out hulk? Obviously not, these people have done their sums, but does it come down somehow to smart financial engineering?

    It's a good question, in most situations it is cheaper to start from scratch. However, it is pretty cool having a ex naval vessel as your yacht though!:)


  • #178
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    ULSTEIN_SX148_Seven_Viking_PES0306_red_Media_CR_PerEide_UlsteinGroup.jpg

    Seven Viking voted "Ship of The Year” award at the 2013 Nor-Shipping show in Oslo.


  • #179
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jspEovlEK-w

    This is the explosive moment the Norwegian navy blew up one of its own ships to test out their latest long-range missile.
    The KNM Trondheim, a 300ft long decommissioned frigate, was transported out into the sea off the coast of Andoy to be used as target practice.
    Dramatic footage released by military bosses captures the countdown before the new 'Naval Strike Missile' - a four-metre long, 880lb weapon - is fired in the direction of the vessel.


  • #180
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    ...

    video is gone


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Conmaicne Mara
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,543 ✭✭✭Conmaicne Mara


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    video is gone

    Sneaky feckers had a second missile to test, nailed that account.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jspEovlEK-w


  • #182
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    1812722.jpg

    Even from the photo with nothing to compare in terms of scale, you can just tell the new M/V Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller is enormous (biggest in the world!)


  • #183
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    1812722.jpg

    Even from the photo with nothing to compare in terms of scale, you can just tell the new M/V Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller is enormous (biggest in the world!)


    they really are ugly ships though aren't they!!


  • #184
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    Meh, no better or worse than most modern ships.


  • #185
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    they really are ugly ships though aren't they!!

    Totally functional. They look slightly better with a full load. All empty boxboats are ugly.


  • #186
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    goldie fish wrote: »
    Totally functional. They look slightly better with a full load. All empty boxboats are ugly.


    Yep, they look more 'normal' with a load all right

    As for functional, look at the big car carriers, they're the same.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    323
    Registered Users Posts: 1,137 ✭✭✭323


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    they really are ugly ships though aren't they!!

    Sound like my father every time the present Irish Lights, Graunaile is mentioned, though he's starting to half accept she is way more practical and functional than the old ones.

    Here is one an ugly one, HLV Saipem 3000,
    Dynamic positioned, 2200 Tonne Lift capability, vertical flexible pipe/cable lay system, 2x work class ROV's and at present a saturation dive system.

    Brute ugly but very functional for many offshore construction tasks.

    IMG_5086_Reduced.jpg

    “Follow the trend lines, not the headlines,”



  • #188
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    The 97 meter long freighter Cyprus Cement collided with floating piers and pleasure craft at Levanger, Norway. The Cyprus Cement was proceeding out the port when it suffered a failure with its bow thruster and backed into the marina destroying the docks and boats. No reports of injuries. Reports state damage is to be over 1 million Norwegian Crowns. The Cyprus Cement was detained a short time later by the Norwegian Coast Guard. An investigation into the incident is being conducted.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCqjZXp7TQA


  • #189
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Another take on the above:
    While attempting to leave port on Saturday, the bulk carrier Cyprus Cement encountered some sort of propulsion issue and ends up tearing through a Norwegian marina, causing serious damage.

    The incident occurred at Levanger Marina in Trondheimsfjorden.

    It seems more than likely that it was the tugboat that suffered the propulsion problem that led to this incident. Note that tugboat’s lines were slack during the entire ordeal.

    http://gcaptain.com/bulk-carrier-cyprus-cement/


  • #190
    goldie fish
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,195 ✭✭✭goldie fish


    That's a sickening , career ending crunch...


  • #191
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    why was the prop not shut down? Or is it in forward attempting to slow the backwards move?


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    why was the prop not shut down? Or is it in forward attempting to slow the backwards move?

    judging by the wash they were trying to arrest the backwards movement.

    Not a sailor or anything but looking at the force of water hitting the largest boat at the end of the dock there was a fair degree of power being applied.


  • #193
    Tabnabs
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,750 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tabnabs


    My thinking on it was, he was committed to the manoeuvre. There were no tugs available, he had to get the ship out of there and to allow it to drift could have been even more devastating (including grounding the ship and all that entails). Dropping the starboard anchor and trying to get the pivot point much further forward may have been an option, but without some more context, it's hard to call.


  • #194
    hytrogen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 952 ✭✭✭hytrogen


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    they really are ugly ships though aren't they!!
    No ENIRAM there.. :D


  • #195
    hytrogen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 952 ✭✭✭hytrogen


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    800px-Norwegian_Breakaway_14.JPG
    Norwegian Breakaway



    The largest ever ship built in Germany, apparently.
    Until Quantum of the Seas comes out next year!


  • #196
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    Tabnabs wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCqjZXp7TQA

    If they have problems with the bow thruster,why are they still going astern:rolleyes:


  • #197
    murphym7
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭murphym7


    long range shooter wrote: »
    If they have problems with the bow thruster,why are they still going astern:rolleyes:

    Bow thruster has nothing to do with it. In fact using it wound not have helped or had any major affect on what occurred. While the ship was moving astern the engine was engaged forward.


  • #198
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    murphym7 wrote: »
    Bow thruster has nothing to do with it. In fact using it wound not have helped or had any major affect on what occurred. While the ship was moving astern the engine was engaged forward.

    Using the bowthruster have one purpose,to keep the bow steady while going astern or ahead at lower speed,usually below 5 knots,and it would have helped much keeping it on the right heading.


  • #199
    murphym7
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭murphym7


    long range shooter wrote: »
    Using the bowthruster have one purpose,to keep the bow steady while going astern or ahead at lower speed,usually below 5 knots,and it would have helped much keeping it on the right heading.

    One purpose?? what about turning the bow port or starboard in berthing operations?

    Look at the video again and tell me what affect port thruster would have on the stern or what affect starboard truster would have on the stern?

    Application of either port or starboard thruster would have had the same result, the port quarter hitting the marina as it did. Port thruster would have pivoted the ships port quarter into the marina. Starboard thruster would have pushed the area of impact a little further towards midships, but impact would not have been avoided. Use of bow thruster in this instance would have not helped. The ship wasn't going directly astern, the entire ship was sliding to port also.


  • #200
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    murphym7 wrote: »
    One purpose?? what about turning the bow port or starboard in berthing operations?

    Look at the video again and tell me what affect port thruster would have on the stern or what affect starboard truster would have on the stern?

    Application of either port or starboard thruster would have had the same result, the port quarter hitting the marina as it did. Port thruster would have pivoted the ships port quarter into the marina. Starboard thruster would have pushed the area of impact a little further towards midships, but impact would not have been avoided. Use of bow thruster in this instance would have not helped. The ship wasn't going directly astern, the entire ship was sliding to port also.

    Ok you speak from experience obvioisusly,and what do you think happened before it even got so close to the marina?if you go astern and the bow thruster fails,you are going the way the props are rotating.in this case to he port,and with the help of the current that was in the area also pushing the same way,cause there's nothing to keep the bow steady.And that was probably why the tug wasn't connected to the stern.
    And instead of going astern they could have gone ahead used slight port rudder and used the bow thruster to the port.
    But I think you misunderstand my hole question,so let me repeat it for you,
    Why are they STILL going astern if they have problems with the bow thruster,as you probably are aware of there is Ahead and astern on a ship.


  • #201
    zagmund
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,501 ✭✭✭zagmund


    What I don't get is why there isn't a little more urgency on the ground. Even though they seemed to have little choice but to plough through the marina like that, they would want to be *really* *really* sure there was nobody on the marina or in any of the boats while they were doing it. I know (hope) the Cyprus Cement was doing this because as outlined above the alternatives involved potentially worse things, but still and all I would like to think that they were 100% sure there was nobody at risk. It's possible that the marina was well and truly cleared before the video started, but I wonder . . .

    z


  • Advertisement
Advertisement