Traveling Sailor Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the word "sink" mean to disappear completely under the surface of the water?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggt Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 As with most things one buys that is Chinese...they do not last very long...you get what you pay for... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klauskunkel Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 There must be some sublime strategy behind all this in waiting over a year for an abandoned ship to rot away and sink..., and then start worrying about the environment, as opposed to moving the ship while it was infinitely easier... maybe they want to use it for target practice, once the Navy receives their new Chinese subs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozyjon Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 They drive their ships the same way they drive their cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Mega Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 As with most things one buys that is Chinese...they do not last very long...you get what you pay for... The boat aint chinese made. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigermonkey Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the word "sink" mean to disappear completely under the surface of the water?? Yes, she has merely capsized at this point, and can still be moved, provided she is not resting on the bottom. I am very intrigued by the ending to the article: " she may simply capsize in fresh weather, judging from photos". Now, I gave no idea how far it is to "fresh weather". So, what is this plan ? BTW, I was particularly impressed with the attention to environmental concerns. with the boom coiled up at one side of the wreck -- ready to be placed around the wreck at a moment's notice, after the oil starts to leak out Edited February 28, 2016 by tigermonkey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwisailor Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Perhaps the person to whom he passed his "parking fees" has been moved along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowisee Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Abandoning or abandoned "conveyances" are rarely dealt with here. I see cars and motorcycles left, clearly abandoned, for what looks like a very long time... blocking a street or taking up valuable parking space.No one takes ownership and no one take responsibility to move it. Not sure why. Cost, repercussions... maybe ghosts...5555 This is just another abandoned conveyance. Hey, someone parked 3 Boeing 747's at Kuala Lumpur airport and walked away... "Honey, have you seen the 747?" 5555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Mega Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Hey, someone parked 3 Boeing 747's at Kuala Lumpur airport and walked away... "Honey, have you seen the 747?" 5555 That'd be the ones owned by Swift Air and are not actually abandoned ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KhunMat Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 It would be great if they could float it enough to get it into deeper water out near Sameasan, then it would be a great tourist attraction for diving and fishing. Shame they did not strip it and pump any fuel oil out first but..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingdoc Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Why was it allowed to anchor and rust for a year so close to shore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gemguy Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Could be the handy work of those Thai pirates...maybe?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwisailor Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 It would be great if they could float it enough to get it into deeper water out near Sameasan, then it would be a great tourist attraction for diving and fishing. Shame they did not strip it and pump any fuel oil out first but..... Be interesting to check and see if the loading door near sea level saw any action prior to the sinking. Very handy to offload any unsecured equipment onto small boats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reigntax Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the word "sink" mean to disappear completely under the surface of the water?? Probably but this is the perfect reflection of the Chinese economy, up, down, on its side, going nowhere and both more and less will be exposed in the next 24 hours depending on the tide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post khun custard Posted February 28, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) I wonder if this one and the other one which is painted out a bit like the Britannica (which has been moored at the Sattahip naval/oil rig construction base for more than a year) were just biding time for a floating casino deal to come thru?? Edited February 28, 2016 by khun custard 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mango66 Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 This would have made an epic wreck dive if it had been sunk in the right place. Now it will cost a truly huge amount to refloat and move, and good luck to the Thais on getting any money out of the Chinese owners. they will not see any satang from this Chinese super tourist and businessman, Who was the officer who give permit to moor the boat there ? How many satangs in million he received for permit ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalf12 Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Only in Thailand would the port and maritime authorities will allow an abandoned ship to just rust away not far for shipping and commercial lines... why? because this is Thailand, 'will cross the bridge when we get to it they say', 'why do today what we can do next month?' plan a head? forward thinking? preventive maintenance? don't make me laugh, this is Thailand, we don't do this things here.... Another Thailand-bashing post ... There are abandoned ships and aeroplanes all around the World. Shipping companies, cruise operators and holding companies gone bust or without funds to operate and maintain. It is not a simple (nor inexpensive) matter to remove a ship (or aeroplane) without owners consent. This ship is now a 'wreck' and appropriate Maritime law of salvage may be applied. You are thinking of moving a ship without owners consent in most of the world and you are correct. However, Thailand seems to make laws as it feels fit so I would assume that the authorities would have given n ultimatum to the owners to move it or they would dispose of it. Apparently nothing along these lines ever occurred to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BkkLifeA Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) found a small video clip.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAAkdLHLCrg&ebc=ANyPxKqkTYM0O-0oxHj4cUNBT_2sKIB9Urxjb291imDPCBbsLkMXzvHA4VD-zwq22aGI49a1ea1O-SCQW8lWtKpAD_Mo5-a1WQ Seems they wanted to make a Pattaya to Koh Kong cruise sort a thing..... http://www.oceandreamcruise.com/ Thailand registered company behind it.... Edited February 28, 2016 by BkkLifeA 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyHanscomb Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) Only in Thailand would the port and maritime authorities will allow an abandoned ship to just rust away not far for shipping and commercial lines... why? because this is Thailand, 'will cross the bridge when we get to it they say', 'why do today what we can do next month?' plan a head? forward thinking? preventive maintenance? don't make me laugh, this is Thailand, we don't do this things here.... You have obviously not spent any time or took any interest in any other countries. Its not only Thailand that would do this. I would say most countries in the world would do the same when presented with an difficult problem when an owner just dumps his ship.. Edited February 28, 2016 by Rimmer Troll text removed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connda Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 The Thai navy should have hauled it out to Internation waters, contacted the owner. No reply? Claim it under salvage rights, haul it back to port for sale. But instead, they now have to take care of the environmental problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allanos Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 All ships take on water, that is the reason they have bilge pumps. If it has been unattended by engine-room staff for so long, then, by now, it will have taken on a lot of water, thus reducing its buoyancy. As it has collapsed on its port side, it would then appear to have taken on a lot of sea water through the loading bay door, which is shown open on the same port side, and which has then capsized the vessel. The cost of righting this vessel will be prohibitive, in my opinion. A bill which neither the Thai authorities or the Chinese owner will want to meet. Perhaps the most cost-effective solution will be to tow it out to deep water and sink it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgordo38 Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 And of course neither the Thai authorities nor the Chinese owners will take responsibility. Could it be (perish the thought)this watery grave was no accident? Cruise ship disasters of one sort or another seem to happen almost monthly regardless of the flag under which they sail. There are attorneys who specialize almost exclusively in suing on behalf of people injured, killed, gone missing or taken ill aboard cruise ships. Greed and disavowing resposibility are hardly unique to China or Thailand. About a year ago the Thai government should have stated you have 30 days to move it or we will scrap it instead they did the usual and turned their back on the problem hoping it would disappear on its own and now they want to save face with a bluster shot over the bow. Thainess at its best. Just ignore the situation 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soc Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 All ships take on water, that is the reason they have bilge pumps. If it has been unattended by engine-room staff for so long, then, by now, it will have taken on a lot of water, thus reducing its buoyancy. As it has collapsed on its port side, it would then appear to have taken on a lot of sea water through the loading bay door, which is shown open on the same port side, and which has then capsized the vessel. The cost of righting this vessel will be prohibitive, in my opinion. A bill which neither the Thai authorities or the Chinese owner will want to meet. Perhaps the most cost-effective solution will be to tow it out to deep water and sink it. lf its resting on the bottom it won't be able to be towed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie61 Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Let's get these guys to build railways intsead. Trains don't sink! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupatria Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 A master piece of Thai-Chinese cooperation. An open door just above the waterline, no crew, no maintenance and probably no lights. Such a situation is screaming for disaster. How could the Thai authorities watch this for a year with no action? if I remember right, according to international maritime law anyone who throws the first line to a ship in distress at sea (which is obviously the case) and given up by the captain (certainly) has the right to claim ownership of the vessel. Hence, the Thai authorities could have claimed the wreck a long time ago, tow it to a shipyard and sell it as scrap metal. Now I'm looking forward to the fruit,- and successful cooperation between these two great nations building a high speed railway. I'm pretty sure international maritime law only applies outside of waters under national jurisdiction. You maybe right. However, they confiscate cars at the airport left there for long time without paying the parking fee... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melvinmelvin Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Only in Thailand would the port and maritime authorities will allow an abandoned ship to just rust away not far for shipping and commercial lines... why? because this is Thailand, 'will cross the bridge when we get to it they say', 'why do today what we can do next month?' plan a head? forward thinking? preventive maintenance? don't make me laugh, this is Thailand, we don't do this things here.... Disagree strongly with your ONLY IN THAILAND. Same same would easily happen many many many places around the world, and not only in backwards banana republics. Not really uncommon what happened here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melvinmelvin Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 All ships take on water, that is the reason they have bilge pumps. If it has been unattended by engine-room staff for so long, then, by now, it will have taken on a lot of water, thus reducing its buoyancy. As it has collapsed on its port side, it would then appear to have taken on a lot of sea water through the loading bay door, which is shown open on the same port side, and which has then capsized the vessel. The cost of righting this vessel will be prohibitive, in my opinion. A bill which neither the Thai authorities or the Chinese owner will want to meet. Perhaps the most cost-effective solution will be to tow it out to deep water and sink it. all ships take on water, right taking on water means buoyancy is reduced, wrong water taken in, ship floats lower in the water, buoancy is increased Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balo Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Great, It will just add more pollution into this area , only Russians seem to enjoy our dirty beaches anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mango66 Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 A master piece of Thai-Chinese cooperation. An open door just above the waterline, no crew, no maintenance and probably no lights. Such a situation is screaming for disaster. How could the Thai authorities watch this for a year with no action? if I remember right, according to international maritime law anyone who throws the first line to a ship in distress at sea (which is obviously the case) and given up by the captain (certainly) has the right to claim ownership of the vessel. Hence, the Thai authorities could have claimed the wreck a long time ago, tow it to a shipyard and sell it as scrap metal. Now I'm looking forward to the fruit,- and successful cooperation between these two great nations building a high speed railway. if brown envelopes BIG enough, it can be also 2 years !! And Ch Business are the new No 1 friends here now in LOS !! No documents - na traces !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edkhalil Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Was it made out of plastic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts