Maximum Quantity in Weight and Volume that the Ship Can Carry along the Cape Town Route - Case Study Example

MV LOTUS DAWN VOYAGE Name Tutor Date Ship operation management: voyage planning The previous paper recommended the use of the route which is via the Cape of Good Hope. This was due to the cost factor and the time factor both of which it proved efficient in. the basic structure of the route is the stretch southwest through Sunda Strait and then crossing through the Southern end of the Indian Ocean up to Cape Town in South Africa a total distance of 6,822 nautical miles from Manila City. The stretch then runs from Cape Town straight to New York, a distance of 6,773 nautical miles making the whole voyage to be totaling 13,595 nautical miles. The journey costs a total of $829,570. This cost includes the fuel cost for the whole voyage and the additional charges at the port of Cape Town (Makkar, 2005). This paper will determine the maximum quantity in weight and volume that the ship can carry along the Cape Town route stating the assumptions that will come along. The paper will then consider the security that the given cargo entails. This will be in terms of associated hazards in handling and ways that can reduce accidents in cargo handling. The last bit of the paper will focus on possible claims of shortfalls in the cargo which might result from claims from people and plans which can be laid up to mitigate the claims. MV Lotus Dawn Dawn has been assumed to be an average Panamax carrier of 65,000 deadweight tones, 230 meters long, a beam of 25 meters, and a 9 meters draft. The dwt figure results from a gross weight of 39,000 tones and a net weight of 26,000 tones. Another assumption on the cargo being carried is that it is dry bulk. This paper will consider that the Lotus Dawn carries coal in its voyage. In calculating the maximum weight that MV Lotus Dawn Dawn can carry along the Cape of Good Hope route, we should first get the displacement of the ship. In this case, the displacement will mean the real actual weight of the ship which will hereby be expressed in metric tones. To get the displacement, one should multiply the hull volume below the water surface by the gravity (specific) of the water. Specific gravity of the water is determined by the actual location of the ship that is, if it is in sea waters, fresh waters or in the tropics. Tropics have less dense waters due to the waters being warm. Considering the lack of the block coefficient for the hull, the paper will assume the formula for calculating the net tonnage (Gjenvick-Gjønvik Group, 2010). The assumption in this calculation will be that the ship is ¼ filled. The net tonnage of a ship is the weight of that particular vessel without fuel. This factor is based on the cargo hold volume of the vessel in question. At times this calculation relies on the relationship between the different types of tonnages and the volumes. If the stowage factor is given, the calculation ten becomes easier. The stowage factor of a ship is the volume of space occupied per ton of the cargo in carriage. If the net tonnage of the MV Lotus Dawn is known, then the maximum cargo hold volume (v) will be gotten by: - NT= (0.2+0.02*logV) *V where: - V is the cargo hold volume. The net tonnage for the ship is 26,000 tons. Therefore: - 26,000= (0.2+0.02*logV) * V The size of V in this case is divided by 4 due to the previous assumption that the vessel assumes the ¼ full rule. The only assumption that has been adhered to in this calculation is that the ship follows the argument that it should only carry ¼ of its capacity. It is then clear that from this function as written above, one calculate the volume of iron core that the ship is allowed to carry along the route via the Cape of Good Hope. Considering that the stowage factor for iron ore is 0.35 m3/ton, the cargo carrying capacity can be gotten from the factors here below: Take it that the stowage factor is the volume of space carried per ton. Then: - Stowage factor=volume/tonnage Volume= stowage factor*tonnage = 0.35*26000 Volume= 9100 cubic meters The weight in this factor can depend on the density of the ore which ranges from 2100 kg/m3 to 2100kg/m3. If the right density is multiplied by this figure, one gets the weight of the ore. Part B In common shipping practices, there are mechanisms which grossly bring about hazards which are associated with the loading, unloading and carriage of the iron ore and other types of cargo. At the same time, there are counter mechanisms and operational practices which are specially designed to reduce the risk of the accidents. When dealing with carriage and transport of iron ore, there is a lot of danger which is posed by possible liquefaction of certain cargoes of iron ore in the holds of the vessel. According to most research, this has been due to the instability which is prevalent in the commodity more so when it is not stored in the right manner and also when the nature of loading at the ports is questionable. An example of such an incident is when a bulk carrier called Black rose had a terrible accident as it transferred iron ore from Paradip towards China. When the vessel was about 6 miles from the loading port, the ore was reported to have some excess content of moisture which as a result caused flooding and thereby led to a loss of a life. This incident also happed when another bulky carrier developed almost similar problems on its way to India though this time no crew was hurt as they were rescued from the faulty vessel on time. It is thus evident that carriage of iron ore has its own degree of risk which according to King (2010), “which can only be mitigated through a fully transparent and completely independent professional survey of the cargo before carriage”. When iron fines are loaded from any destination, the cargo is always and should also be treated as always liable to liquefaction. This can be escaped when the cargo is subjected to constant ran like in India during the monsoon season. The reason why liquefaction has significant consequences to the vessel is the cargo shifting which leads to a loss of stability for the vessel. When the cargo leads to instability, the angle of list so produced is so dangerous such that it can compromise the lives of the crew and the vessel altogether. Mitigation of accidents The “IMO Blu Code Rules” should be strictly adhered to such that the terminal and the master concur to a 100% agreement on the vessels safety conditions the cargo which is destined for a particular vessel is accepted and finally loaded. Such agreements can be exemplified by not accepting the loading of such substance as iron ore during the India monsoon periods. Terminals and masters at any level should adhere to SOLAS which is the “International Convention or the Safety of Life at Sea”, requirements for carriage of cargo, and the “Blu Code Guidelines for safe loading and unloading”. The masters should always be the ones who are finally responsible for the safety measures and precautions. Masters should resist pressure from those representatives of the terminals who might urge them to start loading their respective vessels even when the shipper has not issued his cargo declaration (King, 2010). According to King (2010), “Terminal representatives bringing commercial pressure on masters to load their vessels before receiving the shipper’s cargo declaration are acting in contravention of the BLU Code and therefore SOLAS”. Some code has addressed the loading of iron like the “International Maritime Safety Bulk Cargo (IMSBC) Code”. This code which was adopted from IMO is a kind of a forceful regulation. It has addressed some of the hazards that are related to stowage and also to loading and unloading. The code has also gone ahead to classify “Direct Reduce Iron (DRI)” into three classes which have resulted from the nature of hazards that they can handle. This code is divided into DRI (A), DRI (B) and DRI (C). DRI (A) consists of briquettes which are hot molded and thus it is the class which has the last danger. The second class, DRI (B) consists of lumps, pellets and briquettes which are cold molded and are thus considered to be very aggressively moisture reactive. The most dangerous of the iron ore divisions is DRI (C) which has exactly the same properties as DRI (B) though it is more reactive to moisture considering that it is a bit ore finely divided as compared to the latter. The code does however cover less information on iron ore fines. If this code was to accept the inclusion of iron ore per se into the code, there could be more secure measures in the loading, carriage and unloading of the ore unlike it is currently. The situation as it is with ore fines should not be left at application to inclusion in to the IMO only. The justification lies in the part that the respective authority at the loading port has the power to apply for the inclusion of the cargo into the code before anything else takes place. For vessels under the classification of Dry Bulk carriers like the study case MV Lotus Dawn, the biggest priority on arrival at any port or terminal is the monitoring of cargo’s moisture content as it is the factor that brings in most accidents. This is due to the fact that liquefaction has been constantly happening in the country. Most of the losses that have taken place in India according to George (2010) have as a result of the bulk carriers and mostly the old carriers with over 20 years of age. A good case where mitigation has been effectively put in place is India. The government has put in place means where there is improvement in the management of the supply chain of the iron ore being transported into the major terminals. Some ports like the New Mangaloe and the Murgamano port have circulars that instruct carriers of “iron ore fines” and “blended lumpsum fines” to always cover their trucks and use barges and always store them in permanent sheds which are covered such that the ingress of moisture is kept at bay t the end of the day. This was due to the number of vessels which have been lost as a result of the two mentioned products. The details continue asserting for an independent moisture content analysis by an independent sampler together with an independent assessor. There should not be any loading in case of heavy rains to avoid the implication of wrong figures. If the sampling and the assessment which as mentioned is independent is accepted by the P&I club of the ship, the circular states that that information should then be taken to the MMD “Surveyor of the Mercantile Marine Department” for “further necessary action”. The vessel can then be allowed to sail to its destination once the MMD has cleared it. Part C There are possible claims that may arise due to damage/shortfall/loss of the cargo though there are ways in which this can be avoided. In some cases, the owner of the cargo may claim that he/she has undergone some economic loss due to a delay in the delivery of the cargo. This may require determining the liability of the carrier. The argument gets deep hen the said delay is due to ocean carriage. As this might lead to heavy fines towards the carriers, they should avoid it by changing their operational services in such a way that they minimize their exposure to delays. This can be by entering into volume contracts. It is not wise for the carrier to protect themselves by the virtue that they have the right to use any route at any given speed. Some other losses are unavoidable. Like discussed in some earlier parts of this paper, cases of some containers falling at sea have been reported. This arises mostly when there is a stormy weather. This can only be reduced by making sure that the containers which are high above the deck are properly stacked to avoid such losses which can result to over 100% returns due to losses and delays to the cargo owners. Some other technical claims that may arise are payment issues with the charterers. If there happens to be a breach in payment between the ship owner and the charterer, then there arises a serious case where the owner has the right to withdraw the ship from service. Even though this is after a notice, there follows serious losses to the charterer so the best way to reduce such ugly instances is by making the payments duly as required (Nearne, 2010). Works cited Gjenvick-Gjønvik Group. “Ship Tonnage Explained - Deadweight, Cargo, Gross, Net, Displacement”. Gjenvick-Gjønvik Archives. Available from: http://www.gjenvick.com/SteamshipArticles/ShipTonnage/1932-06-28-ShipTonnageExplained.html 2010. King, M. “Awed by ore: port strategy 02 April 2010”. Available from http://www.portstrategy.com/features101/port-operations/cargo-handling/iron-ore/awed- by-ore.2010. Makkar, Jagmeet. “Commercial Aspects of Shipping – Voyage Estimation”. Marine Engineers’ Review (India), December 2005, pp. 41-43. Available from: http://www.ics.org.hk/doc%5CMER0512.pdf.2005. Nearne, C. “United Kingdom: What Impact will the Rotterdam Rules have on Ship Owners?” PSF Journal. Avilable from http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=107610. 2010. Read More