http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/05/us/el-faro-missing-ship-hurricane-joaquin/
This cargo ship was lost in the Atlantic after hurricane Joaquin passed through. I'm kind of curious as to how this happened. Also, maritime general.
>>885893
How did it happen?
Ship enters cat 4 storm
Ship looses power
ship is taking on water and has a 15 degree list
Waves get worse
Ship rolls on side and sinks
>>885904
It's hurricane season and I'd like to think they would know how to avoid this.
>>885909
You can prepare all you want, but the sea is a cruel mistress
>>885904
Even worse.
>Ship loses power in Cat 4 storm
>can't keep her bow into the waves
>at the mercy at the sea
>ship is literally torn apart and sinks
I really hope that the body they found was because they were able to abandon ship. I don't want to think very hard about them donning their survival suits while the ship was drifting without power and just waiting for the end because the seas were too rough to launch the boats in.
>>885909
If she had power, she could have made it through. This was literally the absolute worst time to have a breakdown, and if she was in as good a condition as Tote said she was, they shouldn't have lost the plant unless they had a wave go down the stack. I think it's going to come out that the ABS inspection was faked just like the Marine Electric's was.
OC
>>885985
MOAR
Can one of you anons tell me what kinds of positions a crew of about 30 people have?
OC, sulzer main engine
>>886050
The 5 Poles were all Steward's Department, as were probably 2 more of the American crew (First Cook and Chief Steward). For the Deck department, you've got the Bosun and at least two daymen, plus 2 more ABs for each watch, plus the three Mates and the Captain. Same thing with the Engine department; 3 dudes who do day work primarily, 2 more unlicensed per engine watch, the 3 Assistant Engineers, and the Chief Engineer.
All of this assumes a 4-hour watch rotation, obviously. But I don't know any real reason a ship on a milk run would be on 6-and-6.
>>886063
>bosun
>>886068
Boatswain then. Only time I've ever seen people take the time to write it that way aboard ship is on the freaking station bill.
>googling around
>find the tape of the Marine Electric's distress call
>https://archive.org/details/SsMarineElectricWoohSos
Haunting.
Oh Christ they've done this before in the same fucking month.
>>886094
You think that's bad?
Try black box messages from planes going down, even the transcripts are morbid enough.
>>886130
The worst one I've heard: that Flying Tiger 747 that crashed into a hill trying to land at Kuala Lumpur in the middle of the night
>>885986
>>886185
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7TxqwtfPgk
>>886207
you fucked up that link, nigga
>>886211
https://youtu.be/Xfh9-ogUgSQ
>mfw the URL in my history was wrong
>>885893
My grandfather was the Chief Engineer on this for a couple of cruises before it sank. He actually quit the day before she made her last cruise.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Marine_Sulphur_Queen
He was fired because he refused to sail on her until the owners fixed her. Of course, the ship was fucked beyond redemption. His logs were instrumental in the Coast Guard inquest and the lawsuits after that.
>>885918
Losing the plant isn't that rare, obviously she wasn't in the best condition anyway, but as far as losing the plant, shit happens.
>>886063
The five Poles were a riding gang. Not crew members. They were doing engine room repairs most likely.
1 Captain (Master)
1 Chief Mate (First Officer) (watchstander)
1 Second Mate (2nd Officer) (watchstander)
1 Third Mate (3rd Officer) (watchstander)
0-2 Deck Cadet
1 Boatswain
2-3 Able Seaman (Day workers)
0-2 Ordinary Seaman
3 Able Seaman (watchstander)
1 Chief Engineer
1 First Assistant Engineer
1 Second Assistant Engineer
1 Third Assistant Engineer
0-2 Engine Cadet
1 Electrician
0-3 Unlicensed Junior Engineer
2-4 DEMAC / QMED
1-3 Wiper
1 Chief Steward
1 Cook
1-2 Steward Utility
That's pretty close to what you'll find out there, different kinds of ships might have different ratings, like Pumpman on a tanker, but whatever, it's pretty close.
>>886235
Depends on the port. Yes, giant forklift type things are used, but that lift using twistlocks at the corner casting.
More professional operations will use straddle carriers, which are just big motorized frames that wheel around, and use basically a built in crane to lift the container and put it on our take it off a stack.
They also use small trucks and trailers to move boxes around on the ground, then they pass them to straddle carriers etc.
Really big wide straddle carriers have their cranes on gantries, so they don't have to move much.
>>886256
Why are you trying to reply like youre the one he was asking?
This is the largest port complex in north america and you wont find a single straddle carrier here. Its all top handlers and transtainers and bombcarts.
>>886235
The crane takes it off the ship and puts it on a trailer called a bombcart being pulled by a yard tractor. The driver takes the can out to the yard where a top handler puts it in a pile.
This is a top handler about to pit a can on a bare bombcart. The tractor driver then take it to the ship so the crane can load it on the vessel. Thats how its done most of the time.
Sometimes a can is on a highway legal chassis and you gotta find it in the yard, hook up, bring it to the crane, and then dump the bare chassis in the designayed area. Usually refrigerated cans are on chassis cause they have to be plugged in.
>>886264
Also, what's the turn around time between when a container reaches the port and when it is shipped elsewhere? I'm guessing it varies based on cargo but what's the longest a full container waits around in that kind of facility?
>>886264
There hasnt been a strike on the west coast since the 70s.
Im going to sleep but ill reply to your question about automation tomorrow
>>886268
So what would you call what happened back in February? A contract dispute? It certainly resulted in gridlock and congestion either way.
And thanks for the info.
OP here, thanks for the pics related and replies. Hope this thread keeps going.
>>886237
Yeah. It's probably more likely than not that they took a wave over the stack and quenched her boilers. At least, that's the easiest explanation sailing through a Cat 4.
Some guy on gCaptain was saying how he expected the Navy to find her wreck in two pieces because "my own personal knowledge about the ship and the company", but he didn't elaborate.
>>886264
>Do you think those tasks will be fully automated anytime soon?
It'll happen in my lifetime. I reckon 30 from now, most of LA/LB will be automated to the point where most equipment operators have been phased out. Right now, there is automated berth in LA, and one about to open in Long Beach. Thats two out of about 30 container ship berths.
> Especially in light of the big West Coast port strike back in February.
Like I said in another comment, ILWU longshoremen havent gone on strike since the 70s. But we have been LOCKED OUT. A lock out is where the employer shuts down operations in an effort to squeeze the worker. In February, the companies decided to stop working vessels on nights and weekends. That created a backlog of vessels. As usual, the media painted the workers as the bad guys, and people fell for it.
>>886266
>Also, what's the turn around time between when a container reaches the port and when it is shipped elsewhere?
The time a container spends sitting in the terminal is called the dwell time. 24 hours is good. 2 is ok. 3 is pretty bad.
>>886372
30 years* from now
2 days* is ok
>>886372
But you are the bad guys.
Thank God for right to work, right?
>>886431
Please die.
I'm so sick and tired of the plebs being played like puppets into thinking unionized labor is bad. Fuck that. We work with a contract. We joined together and collectively bargained a document that governs how we will work and how or employer will treat us. You all love your celebrities and athletes that do the exact same thing, but god forbid the common man should do it with his coworkers to earn a better living.
>>886432
I think he was being sarcastic, bruh
>>886372
>>886373
Thanks for the great info. So there are fully automated berths operating right now at LA/LB? What is involved in making that happen? Has it shown to be more efficient than manual labor is it still too early to tell? Any operating glitches encountered with that? How has your union responded to that and have they attempted to halt further automation as part of their contract bargaining?
Also, where can I read more about the lockout from the Union's side? It was certainly represented in the press as a contract dispute/strike/work slowdown instigated by the union. If you have any relevant links I'd enjoy reading more into this.
Keep up the good fight, brother.
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/10/05/daughters-last-message-from-el-faro-there-is-a-hurricane-out-here-and-we-are-heading-straight-into-it/
>“Not sure if you’ve been following the weather at all,” wrote her daughter, Danielle Randolph, from aboard the American container ship El Faro, “but there is a hurricane out here and we are heading straight into it.”
It's starting to look like the captain of the El Faro chose his dangerous route of his own volition.
>>886452
Better map. Congrats, Captain. You just got your company limited liability unless ABS rubberstamped a massively unsafe ship again.
>>886443
>So there are fully automated berths operating right now at LA/LB?
Yes. Trapac LA 136 has three automated cranes and a fully automated yard. However there are still a hdanful of people involved. Each ship crane has an operator who takes over when its to time to land the can. The cans have stacking cones that need to be removed/put on as they go off/on the ship, so there are swingmen to do that. The can gets set down under the backreach of the crane and then an autostrad picks it up and takes it to the piles where another robot will deliver it to an outside trucker. Here's a video of the autostrads:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpmqllKyBSQ
>What is involved in making that happen?
Well they had to ask for it and then give something up in order for us to let them have it. In this instance, they agreed to keep using hatch clerks on the non automated berth at the same terminal. There were some other concessions, but I dont know the details on all that. But its a three party talk between the union, the port, and the company. The Trapac deal was actaully a pretty big boondoggle that the local taxpayer got fucked on.
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/nov/18/local/la-me-port-terminal-overruns-20131119
On the long beach side, LBCT is almost done with their automated berth. It's pretty much the same deal. Their existing berth will use hatch clerks instead of computers.
>Has it shown to be more efficient than manual labor is it still too early to tell?
Its not more efficient, its just cheaper. The cargo still moves at the same speed. If anything its slower cause these machines are prone to software glitches. Plus, in Trapac's instance, they can only work the ship with three cranes at a time when they could normal have four going.
>How has your union responded to that and have they attempted to halt further automation as part of their contract bargaining?
It comes up in every talk. We understand that our port has to remain competitive.
>>886467
(cont)
The other thing is right now, the technology is still so expensive to implement, that a lot of companies are fine with keeping things as is.
>Also, where can I read more about the lockout from the Union's side?
longshoreshippingnews.com is pro-ILWU and reports on waterfront happenings.
http://www.longshoreshippingnews.com/2015/09/long-beach-port-ceo-acknowledges-ilwu-labor-had-very-little-to-do-with-cargo-disruptions/
http://www.longshoreshippingnews.com/2015/02/aerial-photos-of-ports-show-what-the-pma-doesnt-want-the-public-to-see/
http://www.longshoreshippingnews.com/2014/11/dishonest-media-offensive-by-pma-jeopardizes-contract-negotiations-and-deflects-from-a-growing-congestion-problem/
Also, the ILWU puts out bulletins regularly. This is one of my all-time favorites
http://www.ilwu13.com/index.php/bulletins-main-menu/bulletins/4235-bulletin-36-14
Coast Guard is calling off the search in a few minutes. They've released a list of the dead.
http://d7.uscgnews.com/go/doc/4007/2608214/
Anyone we know?
>>886212
Oh god, JAL 123 ruins my day every time.
>>886467
>>886468
Thanks for the info and links. It's rather insane that the most profitable ports in the world, making billions in profits annually, are so greedy they want to automate the workforce just to get a few million dollars extra per year. Who do they think will be buying all the goods being unloaded when all the jobs have been automated and no one can afford to buy stupid shit they don't need (aka most of the goods being unloaded in those containers)?
Also, are there many ships there that are loaded with containers to be shipped/exported elsewhere? Or is it pretty much a unidirectional flow of goods coming from Asia?
>>886570
>It's rather insane that the most profitable ports in the world, making billions in profits annually, are so greedy they want to automate the workforce just to get a few million dollars extra per year.
Wanna go smash some looms with me?
>>886570
>are so greedy they want to automate the workforce just to get a few million dollars extra per year.
It's not to save a "few million dollars" you communist twat. It's to increase speed and efficiency. Compare the efficiency between an American container port and one in Europe. Rotterdam handles cargo so much faster that literally every American port it's embarrassing. When you take into consideration how Longshoreman unions looooooove to commit work slowdowns as a bargaining tactic (the ILWU got caught doing it in Tacoma last year even if they never proved anything in the Port of LA/Long Beach), and you can see why port operators in the US want to automate as much as possible.
>>886753
>Compare the efficiency between an American container port and one in Europe. Rotterdam handles cargo so much faster that literally every American port it's embarrassing.
[citation needed]
>(the ILWU got caught doing it in Tacoma last year even if they never proved anything in the Port of LA/Long Beach
[citation needed]
>>886754
>[citation needed]
Does the JOC Port Productivity Report provide enough of a citation for you?
>http://www.joc.com/port-news/port-productivity/asian-mideast-ports-maintain-port-productivity-lead_20150609.html
Yeah, you need to create an account, find an impartial source in the same tier as the JOC that doesn't.
>[citation needed]
>http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article26256649.html
>Normal cargo handling volume dropped beginning Oct. 31 at the two ports and has continued unabated since then.
>I-it's PWA incompetence, I swear!
Don't act dumb. Slowdowns and strikes are a union's main negotiating tactic. It's the only leverage the workers have.
>>886758
Since the cite is there, here's the important charts.
>>886760
>>886768
Pic related.
>>886082
that ain't the Emma
>>886437
I wasn't. :^)
Down with unions.
>>886432
Unionized labor takes advantage of the system to the disadvantage of others.
-Example: I worked at an engine test facility (as an engineer; I designed the engines). All the technicians that ran the test cells were unionized and there were specific rules in place which stated that I couldn't touch the engine, I couldn't take pictures of the engine, I couldn't carry spare parts for the engine. If something broke the technician would 'have to' walk across the building to get a screw driver (taking 15 minutes) and 90% of the time he came back with the wrong screw driver so he'd have to go get another one in 15 minutes. This led to overtime of course which screwed our engine development budget for both time and money.
Unions are for lazy, corrupt socialist/communists. Fuck you and fuck unions. You want a better living? Stop being a 'common man' and get a fucking education. You call others plebs but that is exactly what you are
>>886467
>Its not more efficient, its just cheaper
If it's cheaper then it's monetarily more efficient. Not realizing this is why you're so retarded that you need to be in a union.
>>886722
Luddite scum detected
>>886785
>Hurp durp I'm such a management shill that I think that I'm better than a union man.
It's okay little working man. Keep running and chasing that carrot thinking you'll rise above.
Protip: you won't.
>>886801
It's comparable to US ports. I'd like to know more about how Asian ports work, but I suspect they might actually have less automation considering how cheap the labor force is there.
>>886785
>Complaining about unions
>Not joining a professional engineers union instead.
Your loss, really.
>>886811
Check out the various Chinese and Korean ports. They use cheap labor to build them, but they rely on machinery to handle cargo. Human bodies might be cheap, but they simply cannot handle containers as fast as machines do.
Now, unloading bulkers is all by hand, mind you, and that's not something we can really change. That's a constant in the US, in Rotterdam, and even in India and Sub-Saharan Africa. There's a reason it only takes 2 days to load a grain ship but 2-3 weeks to unload it. The bucket crane can only grab so much without sending somebody down into the hold to push the cargo into a place the crane can grab it.
>>886811
Not management and no desire to do so. My desire is to get my job done which is hindered by the union.
Let's give an analogy: you operate a machine yet you're not allowed to press one of the buttons critical to the operation of the machine and hence getting your job done; only a special unicorn can press that button. Not because they're super smart or qualified but because they belong to the special unicorn club called the union. You can't get your job done because they're constantly fucking around, on a smoke break or finding a tool that doesn't exist. They know that they can fuck around because they can't get fired and therefore they have no motivation to actually to their job quickly or correctly. They are selfish because that being lazy, at the expense of others who actually care about their jobs and are held accountable, gets them more money.
thankfully we became a right to work state 2 years ago and the smarter ones that were previously forced to join the union have stopped paying dues. your lazy asses are going to have to pull your thumbs out of your asses and start earning a paycheck
>>886826
>your lazy asses are going to have to pull your thumbs out of your asses and start earning a paycheck
But I already do work hard and I am a proud member of my local. I'm not going to do someone else's work, though. I'm not going to go over and start bleeding off tracks. That's a carman's job. I'm not going to change brakeshoes on an engine. That's a mechanical worker's job.
You need to start getting out of such a deluded mindset and thinking it's the union vs. the company. Believe it or not, most union workers don't want the company to go under. They want it to make a profit, otherwise they won't have a job. In the same breath, we don't want to be taken advantage of, and we don't want to steal someone else's job. Make the company eliminate positions, don't take it upon yourself.
>>886832
>I'm not going to do someone else's work, though.
No one is asking you to do someone else's work. You're missing a huge part of the argument: I can't get my work done because union people won't do their own work. If you were held accountable for unloading a ship in a certain amount of time and the tracks needed bled off or the brake shoes needed changed on an engine then you better have the right to do it. Things like this are not rocket science yet you're not allowed to do them and you get fucked over because 'thats a carmans job'. You're not held accountable and you have no problem screwing those that are because 'muh union'.
Yes it is the union vs the company. By your logic ('we don't want to be taken advantage of') unions wouldn't exist for any other reason. If you have the skills and intelligence then you should be able to negotiate for your self. Otherwise you're just a little boy who needs his paid friends (union) to stick up for him
>>886835
>He thinks one man can stand up against a multi billion dollar company
>He's so worried about getting things done quickly.
I'm not worried about bad brake shoes or cars being bled off, brah. It's not my craft of service. Just like they don't care about switching cars. It's not what they are paid to do. You need to stop being such a hurry up man. Remember, no job is so important, no task so urgent that we cannot take the time to do it safely and correctly.
>>886841
'Its' not my job' is an attitude that would get you fired in any professional field. I suppose since you're not in the certified safety inspector union your job isn't safety.
My argument is that keeping things on schedule keeps a company alive and keeps the people responsible for those schedules employed. Union people don't have schedules so they don't care about those that do. They will purposefully delay tasks in order to gain overtime pay at the determent of the entire project. If a job done correctly is what is strived for then there is a lot of work to be desired. I can't tell you how many times I had to stop an engine mid-test to find that a shop rag had clogged the oil pump. Clearly because they were taking the time to do the job correctly. Unions members care about nothing but themselves; not the success of the project or the company
>>886861
>I'm just going to make gross generalizations about the entire work force.
Let me guess, you just graduated and are working your first or second big boy job?
I've noticed no significant difference in work ethic between unionized labor and non-unionized. Anyone that has ever claimed otherwise is either a liar or doesn't have much work experience. And I don't think you're a liar, brah.
>>886864
Been in this job coming on 8 years, brah. I've held a job since I was 13 and I know what both sides of the work force are.
There is a difference since the non-union guys actually make a higher hourly wage they don't mess around in order to get OT; they do their job timely so they can get home. The managers recognized this and we exclusively request non-union technicians for the cells. Since you've made me think about this too much the non-union guys we request generally have at least an associates degree and sometimes a bachelors degree in mech tech rather than some fly-by-night trade school certificate as all the union guys have. There is a distinct work ethic, pay difference and education level between the two. The non-union guys have the balls to take their job security in their own hands and they work for it and are rewarded for it with higher pay
>>886871
>Non-unionized make more per hour
Hahaha dude, you don't need to lie to me.
>reading all this union/anti-union fighting
>mfw remembering how Occupy shut down the Port of Oakland for a day because of how they were "taking advantage of the working man"
The Occupy idiots had no fucking clue how powerful the ILWU was, did they.
>>886872
I don't have to lie. Union apprentices started at ~$17/hr, non-union got $19+ . Corporate HR has no interest in dealing with union fags since they legally and contractually no longer have to. They recognize that the union is a drain on company and provides an incentive (better wage) to avoid them. I don't know why labor market economics is such a struggle for you; there are people that can do your marginally-skilled job just as well and they're willing to compete for it. I bet you hate Uber and AirBnB, too
>>886891
The occupy movement was a bunch of jobless liberal anarchists. It doesn't take a 'powerful' union to kill a cockroach
>>886570
>Also, are there many ships there that are loaded with containers to be shipped/exported elsewhere? Or is it pretty much a unidirectional flow of goods coming from Asia?
Most are from China, some are from Singapore, some are from Europe, some just go to hawaii, some just go to Alaska.
>>886673
>>886753
^ this faggot doesnt know what the fuck he's talking about. Rotterdam is puny compared to LA/LB and they move less cans per year than us.
>>886784
Oh well then fuck you. Have fun being poor and getting pimped :)
>>886792
lol he's going all out
>>886913
I hate when my pics rotate like that. So annoying.
>>886898
"Guys theres nothing wrong with cutting each others' throats in a race to the bottom"
>>886915
1000% this.
I'm so tired of morons arguing that a race to the bottom is a good thing. The only people it benefits is upper management that is now lining its pockets while you struggle to pay your mortgage.
>>886913
>less cans per year than us
Nigger your throughput is public knowledge. Rotterdam moves half a million TEUs (12.1 million) more than LA/LB (6.1/5.5 million) combined, and that's on top of of the hundreds of millions of tons of drybulk and oil cargos they handle
You might be the biggest container port on the West Coast, but don't go talking shit about the biggest port period in fucking Europe.
>>886925
>muh rotterdam
Fuck off, little bitch.
>>886925
You sound like a little reddit bitch. You dont work in this industry. You watched Season 2 of the Wire and and looked up some shit on wikipedia and think you're an expert.
>>886928
Aw, what's the matter? Didn't like your "facts" being proven wrong so quickly?
>>886931
Try M.M.&P., asshole. You aren't the only union member on /n/. Don't lie to inflate your self-importance.
>>886933
>Try M.M.&P
I had to look that up. Looks like it has something to do with shipmates. Thats what you do? Youre a merchant marine?
>>886934
Yes, I'm a merchant marine, and I had to learn shit about port ops before I could sail. I'll probably have to relearn it when I sit for C/M.
Point is LA/LB is big on the West Coast, but it's not the most efficient in the world. At least it's not as bad as Savannah, though. Or New York. Aside from Baltimore and Hampton Roads, the East Coast is shit.
>>886935
Weird. I see Long Beach on this JOC list of most productive ports. But I dont see Rotterdam
How bout that.
>>886939
lol under "top european ports"
What line do you work for anyway? Must be a shit line. I bet your pay is shit compared to mine. Wanna compare paystubs so you can see what a real man earns, little bitch?
>>886940
Compare the productivity numbers, dumbass. In what world does 74>84? And this is ignoring all the ports in Asia with numbers over 100.
Goddamn, why are you so defensive over your port's productivity? It's fucking objective fact.
>>886942
I'm defensive cause you came up in here shittalking unions and saying shit like
>Rotterdam handles cargo so much faster that literally every American port it's embarrassing.
all while using faggoty cartoon avatars.
This was a cool thread before you came along and shitted it up with your naive politics.
>>886940
Let's whip 'em out boys!
I'm betting little management boy doesn't pull in half of what I make.
>>886943
Gee I dunno, maybe it its a tiny terminal with only 5 cranes. Smaller terminals service smaller ships and can turn around cargo faster. You didnt know that?
APM's terminal in LA has like 14 cranes.
>>886946
>naive politics
All I was saying was that port operators have a much more valid reason to push automation than "saving a few million dollars": increasing vessel turnaround and increasing the amount of cargo they can move in single timeframe. The anti-union faggot is someone else; I'm well aware of how eager the Company is to fuck their crew if they got even an inch to do so. But don't bring shit up if you don't want to discuss it.
>>886947
I brought it up so I guess I'd better play.
>>886948
>5 cranes
>186 moves per hour
>14 cranes
>92 moves per hour
It's not just the size of the ship playing a part here.
>>886957
Get the fuck out of this thread, you bikeriding namefag.
>>886957
I'm single and the RRB takes out more than SS.
If I retired today I'd collect a over $3,000 a month as a pension and my wife would collect half of that... if I had one.
>>886969
>>886971
What's the deal with the cranes having the names of shipping companies on them? Are all the cranes/infrastructure privately owned and the port is just a landlord that the shipping companies pay money to for the privilege of operating in the port? When a ship from another company uses one of those cranes do they pay that other shipping company or the Port authority? Are you employed by a shipping company or is all labor contracted/paid by the the Port of LA/Long Beach? I would have thought the Port itself would control all of the port's infrastructure like cranes etc.
>>886974
> Are all the cranes/infrastructure privately owned and the port is just a landlord that the shipping companies pay money to for the privilege of operating in the port?
100% Correct. The cranes and all machines are owned by the company, they lease the dock space from the local port that operates under the jurisdiction of the local city government.
>When a ship from another company uses one of those cranes do they pay that other shipping company or the Port authority?
Its way different now than it used to be. It used to be Evergreen ships only went to the Evergreen terminal at LA 230. Now all the companies have alliances and deals, you'll see an OOCL ship discharging NYK cans at an APL terminal (pic related). But yeah, the companies do business with each other. The Port just maintains roads and lights and provides a law enforcement agency.
>Are you employed by a shipping company or is all labor contracted/paid by the the Port of LA/Long Beach?
I am employed by a conglomerate of shipping lines and terminal operators known as the Pacific Maritime Association.
>I would have thought the Port itself would control all of the port's infrastructure like cranes etc.
Nah. Cranes arent permanent. Unless it's attached to the ground, the companies own it. Gantry cranes sit on rails. Thats how they travel forward/aft on the ship.
>>886990
They're right though, you know. Historically corporations would hire scabs at attractive wages and some benefits to undermine and destroy unions at their plants and when the threat from the unions was eliminated they reduced the wages and benefits that they had previously given to the scabs. Just because you can't see past your own cubicle and look at the bigger picture doesn't mean everyone else is as stupid.
>>887053
>threat from the unions
Do you understand what a right to work state is. But hey keep filling your union boss' troughs, their piggy faces love to keep eating.
>>887060
>Do you understand what a right to work state is?
Do you?
It stops most industries from being a union shop. You know, how people voted to establish a union there and went through a big process to obtain collective bargaining. Then, the state says, "Oh, but you can't make joining the union that negotiated the contract for labor at this work place be a condition of employment."
So now you have people that will show up to work, enjoy some of the benefits of union negotiations, but don't contribute to maintaining it. Then after a few years the company has forced the now weak union out, and starts cutting wages and dropping benefits for everyone.
Non-unionized workers, and workers in right to work states really truly make less than union workers on average. Right to work is really code word for right to work for less. Don't be a sucker.
>>887060
Same general principle applies. The only reason the non-union scabs are making as much as they do is that Union workers had such a high wage to begin with, thus the company has to offer even higher wages (nominally) to make non-union work attractive and prevent new workers from wanting to join with the union. It's classic divide and conquer. When the union is no longer present do you really think the company would keep paying those scabs $19? The only person who fails to understand labor market economics is you.
>>887063
You weren't responding to the same person, but we'll go another round. I'm glad that you've changed your argument to accept the fact that non-union workers make more than union workers. This is despite the fact that you believe that anyone who thinks otherwise is a liar and essentially shows that you and your 'muh union' logic are full of shit.
A good organization appreciates the quality of it's worker and evaluates them individually through annual or semi-annual performance reviews. Someone starting at $19 isn't going to be suddenly dropped to $16 when the union is inevitably dissolved just because 'muh union' is gone. Good work is rewarded with good pay. Unfortunately, union people have no motivation to produce good work since they know it's very difficult to get fired. As I said before, non-union people have the balls to look out for themselves; you don't.
It's interesting that you call non-union works scabs since a scab is meant to heal a wound. You union people are the wound that bleeds out a company and a scab is there to fix it.
>>886928
>>886931
Fine rebuttals there guys
>>887070
>I'm glad that you've changed your argument to accept the fact that non-union workers make more than union workers.
You act like that's the case everywhere 100% of the time.
We get it dude. You dont make good money. You live paycheck to paycheck, hand to mouth. But your whining would be better suited for /pol/. This is a thread about cargo ships.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0xjAgD8igg
Ship loaded with cattle sinks off the Lebanese coast.
bikes are for faggots, btw
>>887186
RIP raw hamburgers ;_;
maximum autism: the thread
you should all commit sudoku
>>887170
Looks to me like a thread about a butthurt ILA slug.
Anyone here in the ILWU? I've been thinking of heading down to Oakland to work the docks and try to get in but I hear it's impossible and that there are rarely any jobs open for non-regulars because of how many people show up.
Despite the fact that the Malaysian flight that went missing and this ship are different vehicles many of the same rules apply. A ship has GPS, DGPS, AIS and electronic position indicating radio beacons EPIRB. not to mention any number of cellular phones these guys had on board.
Storm or not. There are so many redundancies built in to a ship of this size with a manifest and a complement of approximately 40.
I call bullshit..... There is more to this story just like there was with the flight
>>887517
They're hanging out with Ken Lay in Bermuda.
>>887497
I'm an ILWU causal in LA/LB. Its not the kind of job where you just walk in and sign up. You have to wait to till they hire casuals, and then you have to either get an interest card from an ILWU member, or win a public lottery.
>>887517
>Storm or not. There are so many redundancies built in to a ship of this size with a manifest and a complement of approximately 40.
You're a fucking moron.
>GPS, DGPS
Receivers, not broadcasters.
>AIS
Only broadcasts home every few hours and doesn't do it after the ship fucking sinks.
>EPIRB
They GOT an EPIRB signal Friday night, but it was in the middle of the fucking hurricane so they couldn't do shit about it. It was gone after about an hour.
>Cell phones
And how the fuck do those help in the middle of the ocean? Especially when they're fucking waterlogged because the crew would have had to abandon ship in the middle of Sea State 9?
Take your conspiracy bullshit and shove it. The ship sailed into the middle of a Cat 4 hurricane and lost power at the worst possible time, and sank because of it. You do the dead no favors by trying to twist them up in some anti-governmental shit.
A donation page has been set up for the families of the El Faro crew. Any help would be appreciated.
https://donate.seamenschurch.org/el-faro
>>887685
SEamen church?
No fucking way I am clicking on that.
>>887937
The episcopalians have a strange sense of humor
By the way, bikes are for pussies.
Can anyone put in layman's terms why the Jones Act is such a disaster? I've been seeing this article making the rounds
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425396/el-faro-tragedy-caused-by-bad-regulation-jones-act
>>888545
It's not the Jones Act by itself; it's just a standard protectionist set of laws. It's that requirement for cabotage be done with US-built ships AND the fact that US shipyards are fucking incompetent at building non-warships that's made this shitheap. It's simply too costly and too much hassle to build a new ship than it is to keep an old one running.
However, it's not *usually* a problem since most cabotage routes are milk runs. All coastwise instead of ocean-going. It's only when the captain does something stupid like sailing right into a hurricane that stuff goes wrong.
The article is just more anti-Jones Act drivel anyways. It's not the 80s anymore; the Marine Electric disaster made the Coast Guard start giving a shit about COIs even if ABS rubberstamps them still.
>>888545
At first I was like
>The tragic truth is that in most of the world’s developed countries, vessels such as El Faro would never pass inspection.
But then
>So let’s finally be done with it: Let’s kill the Jones Act. We even have the perfect name for the legislation to do it: the El Faro Act, in honor of the sailors who may have perished because of this 100-year-old protectionist folly.
My level of mad is beyond comprehension of this universe.
>>888581
Cabotage is essentially domestic water traffic. Shipping goods between two US ports.
>>888545
That article makes it seem like every US flagged ship is a shitpile. I worked a US flagged ship last night, the Matson Maunawili, that was built in 2004.
pic related
This happened two nights ago. The operator was taking the lid off the ship. He got it up and was trolleying towards the dock when the lid separated from one side of the spreader. The lid swung and caused the spreader to separate from the block.
No one was hurt.
>>889096
>>889101
>>888587
Ah, fair enough.
>>886861
>'Its' not my job' is an attitude that would get you fired in any professional field.
When the stuff that IS your job is keeping you super-busy all day long, you really don't want to take on someone else's job as well. Especially if that other job needs a lot of extra training too.
>>889101
Oh my fucking god. #REKT
>>889102
So the falls broke and the entire hatch flipped? That's great.
>>889096
How did it separate?
Did the castings on the hatch fail, or the locks on the spreader?
Were the falls just removed after the fact?
>>889134
Yup. Theres a video of it on facebook but i dont know how to save facebook videos and repost them.
dan.baskin.7/videos/10203634971434858/?pnref=story
>>889135
I don't know. This was the ever elite. It was just built last year, so I'm guessing it wasnt the pockets on the hatch. I think the locks on the spreader failed.
>>889165
oops Ever Liberal, not the Ever Elite.
NTSB released a preliminary report today
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20151020.aspx
Sending a Navy fleet tug, with search equipment, out to look for the hull.
>>889366
What are those trailers holding? Looks like produce crates.
>>890763
>In a recorded satellite phone call to the company’s emergency call center at 7:00 am EDT, the captain told the call center operator that he had a marine emergency. He reported that there was a hull breach, a scuttle had blown open, and that there was water in hold number 3. He also said that the ship had lost its main propulsion unit and the engineers could not get it going. The operator then connected the captain with the Designated Person Ashore (DPA). The DPA told investigators that the captain had communicated similar information to him that was provided to the call center operator, and also that the captain had estimated the height of the seas that El Faro was encountering to be 10 to 12 feet.
>The USCG received electronic distress alerts from three separate sources on El Faro: the Ship’s Security Alert System (SSAS), the Inmarsat-C Alert, and the Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon (EPIRB).
>According to electronic alert system data sent by the vessel at 7:17 am EDT on Oct. 1, its last reported position was about 20 miles from the edge of the eye of the hurricane.
>last reported position was about 20 miles from the edge of the eye of the hurricane 17 minutes after the first distress call
Jesus Christ, think of the mounting dread and terror on board that ship.
>>890767
Cone baskets. Metal boxes for holding the stacking cones that are used to stack cans.
Do you think we'll ever see any sort of return to sail power in our lifetimes?
Sometimes, when I'm sitting cozy at home, I have dreams about a post-petroleum future. A hundred years ago it was the old men who remembered the wide and mysterious world that cost you years of your life to travel while their children and grandchildren had never known anything but a world that was shrinking and growing faster - first steam, then petroleum and then airplanes. Safe, fast, cheap. But in the future, the old men will have memories of oil-fueled titans of commerce, who accounted for more cargo at once than a dozen square-riggers, and the children and grandchildren of those men will experience a world that's shrinking, slowing and growing as the driving force behind the last several centuries of massive human growth finally reached its end for all intents and purposes and all of mankind drew in upon itself in poverty. Modernity experienced as a pinprick of light in the human experience.
I should probably write a book or a screenplay or something to get this out of my system.
![Olduvai[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/sWpoUvm.gif "Olduvai[1].gif")
>>891536
Sounds like you would enjoy the works of Jay Hanson and John Michael Greer.
Also the Olduvai Theory.
http://dieoff.org/page125.htm
>>891553
I'll look into them.
Also, I'm pretty sure that I stumbled upon that page ten years ago and that it hasn't changed since.
>>891576
Same tbh. The front page is different now though, but somehow the old index is easier to navigate.
>>891536
Unlikely, unfortunately. The ability to sail in defiance of the wind has been too much of a boon to the world. While there have been attempts to build a modern sailing ship, with computer-controlled "sails", they weren't very successful.
Besides, we've had the technology for nuclear-powered ships for over half a century. The only reason we don't have more civilian nuke ships is because people are scared of them just like they are of nuclear power. If oil really does start running out, we'd see more big atomic ships before we see a return to small sailing ships.
>>891634
>The only reason we don't have more civilian nuke ships is because people are scared of them just like they are of nuclear power.
Having a healthy respect for the handling and disposal of nuclear waste is neither irrational nor technophobic, you professional turd burglar.
The only reason we have so many military ships with nuclear reactors is that not having to fill up on fossil fuels is a huge benefit in war conditions. That kind of shit doesn't matter for routine commercial shipping because the entire purpose of the vehicle is to go from port to port, not hanging out offshore for months blocking a port or launching missiles or whatever.
When fossil fuels get more expensive again, we'll go back to slow steaming. When it gets even more expensive, we'll look more closely at other propulsion technologies. I wouldn't discount sails in the future for some applications, it's a question of economic conditions.
>>891634
They did try sail power again in the 70's, using rigid sails IIRC. Oil prices came down and stakeholders quickly lost interest, though.
>>891647
Modern sailing ships, you say?
>>891651
So basically sail power is going to take the same trajectory as the electric car.
>>891690
Possibly. Though it could manifest itself as something wind powered that doesn't have much in common with sails at all, like >>891679.
If plain economics don't cause that to happen, then the EU will as soon as they're done regulating their land vehicles into electric propulsion with internal combustion engines saved for edge cases where electric can't cut it.
>>885904
loses*
>>885985
How powerful are those little tug things?
>>891679
Fuck is this shit
>>891647
>Having a healthy respect for the handling and disposal of nuclear waste is neither irrational nor technophobic, you professional turd burglar.
No, I meant that literally. When the N/S Savannah was sailing in the 50s and 60s it was denied entry into multiple ports because they were afraid it would explode. It's why the ship was never a commercial success and why it was the only nuclear merchantman built.
>>891647
>That kind of shit doesn't matter for routine commercial shipping because the entire purpose of the vehicle is to go from port to port, not hanging out offshore for months blocking a port or launching missiles or whatever.
Also, that IS a massive economic benefit. Not having to take on bunkers cuts a large part out of ship chartering and operating costs. It also doesn't leave you at the mercy of third-world fuel quality. It also saves you the day it takes to take on bunkers.
It also allows for steam-powered high speeds without steam-powered fuel usage. A nuke container ship would easily be the fastest on its run.
>>891884
>Also, that IS a massive economic benefit. Not having to take on bunkers cuts a large part out of ship chartering and operating costs.
Because nuclear waste management is free, of course. And nuclear engineers are much cheaper than some greasy filipino with a wrench.
>>891887
You still need engineers to direct the filip greasemonkey, though. And if oil starts getting scarce, waste management very well might be cheaper than trying to load 1000 tons of bunkers.
>>891749
You've never heard of Flettner rotors?
They're giant rotating tubes that use the Magnus Effect to generate lift. Some experiments in the 1930s led people to conclude that it's a terrible way to make a plane fly, but they took the concept and quite literally turned it sideways to attach it on some cargo ships, resulting in a rotating mechanical "sail" that increases the fuel efficiency of the vessel
>>891894
Especially if and when MSRs become viable as power plants.
>>891647
Yeah, if by "healthy respect" means "run in circles and scream."
It's incredibly difficult to fuck up nuclear waste handling. Especially so in the sea. In the absolute worst case, you're sinking with or jettisoning the fuel store to the ocean floor, where it is inert and safe until someone cares enough to recover it.
Even if you do so in a port, the underwater waste container is not going to do anything. The water insulates it from its radiation perfectly at a meter's depth or so. The only risk you're taking is that if a diver dives down there and goes to touch the container.
You're taking far, far more liability accepting a fossil fueled ship into port than you do with a nuclear ship. Oil spills are a real, actual threat. Atmospheric emissions are a real, actual threat. There is no such thing as a nuclear spill, as the nuclear material simply sinks to the bottom and stays there.
Does anyone know what was in the 685 containers onboard.
Seems like an awfully convenient way to have things go missing wouldn't ya say...
http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/10/03/fate-of-cargo-ship-caught-in-hurricane-joaquin-unknown
>>892303
>>892303
It was sex robots .
Feminists had the ship scuttled :(
>>892303
aliens
>>886269
Every year around Christmas longshoremen do "slow-downs" to get better pay. They are bitching and moaning their way into being obsolete.
>>891912
That's really interesting. First time on this board thanks.
>>892303
The port of departure should have a cargo manifest , but dude cmon really? These people fucking died.
>>892776
Welcome! It's a domain of some pilots, some mariners, some train conducters, a number of maintainers, train, aircraft and boat enthusiasts, and a whole metric fuckton of smug cyclists
the front fell off,
because a wave hit it.
out there? chance in a million!
perfectly save.
thoses where the front didn`t fall off.
>>892303
Yeah, there's nothing like the Coast Guard looking for you 24/7 to ensure a clean getaway.
>>886819
When I was a cadet, I was on a 305,000 DWT Iron Ore Carrier. 24 hrs to load, under 48 hrs to discharge usually about 280,000 T of cargo
![maxresdefault[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/qkMFlYL.jpg "maxresdefault[1].jpg")
>>893161
Iron is easier to unload than grain. Grain requires you to manually go down into the holds with a bobcat and shovels to move it where the bucket can get it.
>>893269
>Not forgetting the constant threat of it blowing the fuck up.
Grain is the worst shit ever. The rotting smell of it can overwhelm the senses and the rats everywhere doesn't help either.
>>893269
Is that a food-grade bobcat?
>>893372
It doesn't matter since rats will be crawling all over that grain anyways.
>>893283
>the rats everywhere
That's still a problem. I thought that would be fixed by now.
>>893397
There's not a lot you can do about it at grain elevators.
Also, they don't throw out rotten grain. They just mix it with good grain and put it in your shit
>>891912
>Flettner_Rotor_Aircraft
NASA experimented with it in the 1970s on an OV-10 Bronco. They got a decent reduction in approach speed.
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-3300/ch8.htm
>>893397
Life, uh, finds a way.
>>893397
Fun Fact: The FDA clearly defines the maximum amount of rat shit allowed in your wheat: "Average of 9 mg or more rodent excreta pellets and/or pellet fragments per kilogram"
So a ship carrying 50,000 tons of wheat could be stowing about half a ton of rat shit mixed in with the cargo.
>>893615
Next time I'm spotting a grain elevator I'll bring my phone and take a video so you can see all the rats scurrying everywhere.
>>892773
You don't know what youre talking about. Your spouting nonsense with zero facts or evidence.
>>886467
>Its not more efficient, its just cheaper.
Fucking accountants and their precious bottom line. They're doing the same crap in the railroad business. Some of the Class 1s have started 'automating' yard work with remote controlled locomotives but they suffer from similar problems.
It sometimes takes hours for the machines to do simple tasks that could be accomplished in minutes with a few competent workers.
Lots of lake freighters where I am, I'll try to get a picture of one not in the dark.
>>893971
Duluth?
>>893972
Lake Ontario, near Hamilton
A fair bit more at this time of year it seems, maybe rushing before winter?
>>893973
Have things gotten slow in Hamilton with the heavy industries shutting down?
>>893977
Yeah it's definitely not as it once was. Always talk about putting money into the steel mills but the truth is that the industry has moved
Most freighters are oil I think, they stop at piers owned by Shell? (maybe, not 100% sure)
>>893970
Corporations aren't a charity, they owe more to their shareholders than their workers tbh. Don't like it then leave.
>>893980
>Corporations aren't a charity, they owe more to their shareholders than their workers tbh
No shit. It doesn't make the situation any less ridiculous though. It doesn't change the fact that automated classification yards are horrendously inefficient compared to manned yards.
I'm sure the numbers make sense on paper but it doesn't make any sense that car moves that should take ten minutes take upwards of an hour because someone at accounting prioritized the bottom line of the company over the efficiency of the railroad.
>>893985
It's almost as though the marginal value of slightly decreased shipping times for time-insensitive goods is exceeded by the cost of extensive manual labour.
>>893991
Do you think railroads shouldn't be upgrading the mainlines in Chicago because they only create delays for "time-insensitive goods" then?
You have never worked on the railroads now have you?
They've found her. She's upright and in one piece.
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/pr20151031.aspx
>>889096
>No one was hurt
Except the young girls in those containers being sold to sex traffickers
>>893979
National Steel Car is still in Hamilton, right?
Or is that London? Somebody makes shit for the railroad in Hamilton.
>>886207
Fuck man, just fuck.
>>893441
I think the big problem with Flettner rotor aircraft isn't the speed, it's the stability and control. Manipulating a control surface is a lot easier than trying to change the airflow over a rotating tube.
>Recently talked to Deck & Engine Officers who sailed the "lengthened" Northern Lights for years - and they all told me that there was NO provision for any SW Ballast Tanks on the ship - the "listed" Ballast Capacity was for loading SW Ballast into empty BUNKER Double Bottom Tanks only - and this is from a number of reputable & experienced Officers with firsthand knowledge
>ballast capacity of only 347 tons according to ABS
WHAT THE FUCK
>>894413
I'm pretty sure every railroad supplier in Southern Ontario died when CAT decided to close their London plant.
>>894342
>Wreckage of Cargo Ship Believed to be El Faro Located
Wow, awesome!
>…in More Than 15,000 Feet of Water
You didn't mention that bit. What's a 'foot of water' anyway?
>>894490
It's 15,000 feet below the surface.
>>894492
That's a peculiar way to measure it. What size feet?
>>894497
Size 15.5 feet, or size 50 for EU.
>>894497
King George III's right foot, obviously.
>>894497
Well, my feet are 10 inches, so
>>894571
What's an inch? I can't find it in the SI Brochure.
>>894582
Inches are mentioned in the SI Brochure. Read it again. The conversion factors are in appendix B9.
>>894582
An inch is about the size of my thumb.
Pretty simple m8
>>893616
Nah, I'm good. Ignorance is bliss.
>>894584
>Asserting the existence of non-existent parts of the SI
Please re-read the SI Brochure.
>>894626
Could you be more precise? Exactly how large is your thumb and to what degree of precision is it the same size as an inch?
>>894718
What type of meters?
>>894828
>chapter 4
I assure you, it is in fact in appendix B9.
>>894831
>I assure you
You're going to have to do more than that to have me disregard what my own eyes reveal to me.
6 cranes going on this whore.
>>894828
>Exactly how large is your thumb
Exactly medium size for a thumb
>to what degree of precision is it the same size as an inch?
Probably good, likely
http://gcaptain.com/ntsb-el-faro-navigation-bridge-missing-no-vdr-found/#.VjnExrerSM8
>the navigation bridge and the deck below are missing
>ship is upright on the ocean floor
Okay, NOW this is getting weird.
>>894582
Can you find where it says you're a fucking faggot?
>>895104
>Expecting the SI Brochure to make comment on the personal qualities of any individual
Please read the SI Brochure.
whelp
http://gcaptain.com/maersk-line-to-cut-4000-jobs-scale-back-vessel-orders/#.VjqTTa6rTVp
>>895059
>Okay, NOW this is getting weird.
Why, exactly?
>Rough seas snap the cargo; cargo sinks
>Ship turtles: bridge is torn off
>Ship founders; with no cargo, it sinks engine-first and comes to rest looking like a benis :D
>>886249
What's a wiper?
>>898297
Entry level engine department rating. They end up doing a lot of cleanup.
>>886233
Why is there a giant hand in the sky?
>>898407
How do you think the Free Market works?
>>898555
It's supposed to be invisible, not translucent!
>>898555
checked and keked
I love working these small American flagged vessels. I worked this whore today. "Start/finish" which means we dont go home til the cargo is discharged and loaded.
>>899661
>American flag
>MSC VIDISHA R.
>Stern says "MONROVIA" (Liberia)
Well done.
>>900554
lol I'm an idiot. I saw the flag and usually when it's a start/finish its an american ship going to another port on the coast. From what I understand, a ship can only go to multiple US ports if its a US flagged ship.
Turns out the monrovian flag looks a lot like the stars and stripes.
>>900741
>monrovian flag
The ride never ends
Is there any realistic chance of LA/LB losing its position as the largest container port on the West Coast to any other city?
>>903297
On the West Coast, not likely. But, when they eventually finish the Panama Canal expansion, that a potential game changer and will likely have a very negative impact on West Coast ports.
