|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jul 11, 2007 5:29:36 GMT -8
In an unrelated conversation with someone about a polution problem in a lake, an idea popped into my head. The conversation centred around laying a thick layer of rubber sheeting over the affected area, weighing it down with concrete blocks at the edges and installing a hose in the middle to siphon off the unwanted leakage. Picture a tent on the bottom with a hose coming out of the peak if you like. This was cheaper in their mind to actually removing the materials from the lake bed and risk further problems by disturbing and stirring up materials in the buried in the sand.
I wonder if anything similar exists for larger scale use. I wonder what the currents are at depth where the QoftN lies. Some of those narrow fjords and channels can be sources of real strong currents at the changing of the tides. If such a structure could be installed over the QoftN it would contain leakage. Since diesel and oils float, they would easily rise or could be pumped out.
Anyways just wondering if such a thing exists or if it would be too impractical because of currents and/or the need for submursibles to install it.
|
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Jul 11, 2007 10:19:10 GMT -8
This simply appears to be a situation where a little up-front communication could help to solve the problem. It seems awfully reasonable that a 3rd party (someone other than BC Ferries management) should be involved in helping to decide what the best course of action should be for mitigating possible environmental problems. It would be interesting to see what the Coast Guard report had to say about it.
On the other hand, I can put my environmentalist tendencies aside long enough to realize that there may be some small amount of leakage that could occur without too badly hurting the food supply of local residents (the "quart a day" scenario). I just don't know how much is too much. Anyone?
Actually, a relatively small amount of oil can make a pretty impressive looking oil sheen on top of water, just because it spreads out so thin over the water. Whatever the residents of the village is seeing may or may not be a significant amount of oil. But without the answers to these things, it is difficult to have an intelligent public conversation about the issue.
If there is a potential for a problem, though, it would seem prudent for BC Ferries (or SOMEBODY) to get a containment boom out there to keep anything that does come up under control. I think it's likely that raising the ship could cause more leakage all at once than just leaving it there. So leave it there. But whether they leave it or pull it up, the environmental impact will need to be addresses one way or the other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2007 12:57:18 GMT -8
Unlike the Queen of the North, the USA Navy did try to salvage the Arizona. After the attack, the navy concentrated on getting the ships that could be repaired and put back into service. This included ships that were blocking the harbor. It was about 18 months before they looked at the Arizona. The Arizona inside is a real mess with twisted metal all over the place---as a result of salvage attempts, two or more divers died. The Navy did not want to put any more lives in danger and made a decision to stop salvage operations. It wasn't until Elvis Presley and others
fundraisied to build a fitting memorial, that the white Memorial was dedicated on Memorial Day 1962.
I was in Hawaii about 20 years ago, and I did two different tours that took me close to the Memorial.
The first tour was a Boat tour of Pearl Harbor, aboard the Adventure IV. It was an awesome tour. The people operating the tour, also told us what was in the harbor that day. We saw a Nuclear Submarine leaving the harbor. We passed the Utah, she is still in the Harbor, and on her side. One can still see parts of her above the water. Utah was actually towed closer to Ford Island. (The other side of the island from the Arizona) We stopped at the Arizona for a few minutes. The harbor is only about 40 feet deep, and the Arizona is under 10 feet of water.
The second tour, took us to the Arizona Memorial Center that is operated by the Park Service, and then on to the Polynesian Culture Center. The Park Service operates this site on a ticket basis, only so many people are allowed on the Memorial at the time. There is also a height restriction, so I had to stay on shore with my two year old, while my hubby and the video camera went on the Memorial. You can actually stand on the Memorial and see the oil coming out of the shafts that are still sticking above the water. At the onshore center there was a small museum, gift shop and a film that you can watch.
In 1987---The Most Popular Tourist destination ion Oahu, was
the Punch Bowl----Military Cemetery. #2 was the Arizona Memorial.(only because of the ticket system)
I did have a chat with the tour guide about the importance of the Memorial to the American Public. He said that because so many men are still entombed on the Arizona, there is a lot on connections across the United States. He told me the story of the older Lady who saved up all her money to travel to Hawaii to Visit her son's final resting place, and spent time looking through all the names on the memorial and couldn't find it until she had asked for his(the tour guides help) He found it for her, she was very grateful. Many people come and look for family members that were on the Arizona and for some it takes years to get there.
|
|
|
|
Post by gary c on Jul 12, 2007 17:21:11 GMT -8
on NDP web site there is a press release with the CG report, BCFS follow-up and CG response to BCFS. Jun 28, 2007 Hartley Bay residents waiting for B.C. Ferries to fulfill Coast Guard recommendations Subject: significant upwelling of fuel from Q of N Importance: High Note… todays press release (July 6) and last Thursdays (June 28) Thx gary Hi …as of late Friday afternoon July 6th…I was informed from that a significant upwelling of fuel happened from the Q of N occurred. “Rumoured” to be 8-15m by 5- 8 km. The onus is on BCFS to ensure that there is the pollution response equipment in HB and that the villagers are trained in the use of it. BCFS is responsible for cleanup…they must be held responsible …. “according to the Marine Liability Act, BC Ferries is solely responsible for this incident and is liable for any damage that could occur.” ALL Coast Guard recs must be followed, CEO Hahn indicated that “the company and its insurer will stand behind the recommendation ..specifically CG called for 1)“a cache of pollution response equipment in the area of Hartley Bay as a contingency should any recoverable fuel be released from the Queen of the North.” They also note that “establishment of such an equipment cache would necessitate training for a portion of the Hartley Bay community.” 2) The recommendation to “Design and implement a long-term environmental monitoring program, to examine the effects of further contamination by fuel oil from the ferry” needs to be acted upon immediately! 3) “a technical briefing for the media, FN and community at large in order to present all the facts” was recommended and NOT followed through upon by CEO Hahn! We need ALL the information including the London Offshore Consultants Report! The insurance money $20 mill dedicated to salvage must go to ensuring all recs of CG are followed thru! …“B.C. Ferries president David Hahn says the company and its insurer will stand behind the recommendation.” For immediate release Friday, July 06, 2007 B.C. FERRIES MUST PROTECT TRADITIONAL HARVESTING BEDS FROM UPWELLING FUEL PRINCE RUPERT— North Coast MLA Gary Coons is calling on BC Ferries to abide by the Coast Guard’s recommendations for mitigation of environmental damage from the lost ship, the Queen of the North. “The company is not moving quick enough to ensure that an upwelling of fuel can be dealt with as quickly as possible,” said Coons. “The residents of Hartley Bay still haven’t been given all the equipment and training they need to alleviate environmental damage that would be caused by a large upwelling of fuel.” The Coast Guard made several recommendations to BC Ferries on how to deal with the sinking in the absence of fuel recovery. One of those recommendations was for the company to establish “a cache of pollution response equipment in the area of Hartley Bay as a contingency should any recoverable fuel be released from the Queen of the North.” They also note that “establishment of such an equipment cache would necessitate training for a portion of the Hartley Bay community.” “The people of Hartley Bay are the ones who have the most to lose from potential fuel leaks,” said Coons. “They are also better situated than anyone else to handle upwelling fuel. BC Ferries must follow the Coast Guard’s recommendations and give the people of Hartley Bay all the equipment and the training they need to provide emergency containment of future fuel leaks.” BC Ferries so far has maintained that “Since professional pollution response capability already exists in British Columbia, the benefit of training and maintaining a local response capability beyond the equipment already established at Hartley Bay is unclear, making it unlikely that this option will be pursued.” “What’s unclear to me is how BC Ferries can justify their decision to neglect the first response capability of the people of Hartley Bay,” asked Coons. “Maybe the company can’t see the benefit of maintaining local response capability, but the people of Hartley Bay, who depend on a clean marine environment for their livelihoods, certainly understand that in the event of a major upwelling having the ability to contain it immediately will make a major difference. BC Ferries cannot remain with their “heads in the sand”….they are solely responsible for this incident and they are liable for any damage that could occur!” Subject: June 28 …..HARTLEY BAY RESIDENTS WAITING FOR BC FERRIES TO FULFILL COAST GUARD RECOMMENDATIONS Importance: High …fyi ..need to see the last letter from CG. Take care… gary Attached 3 letters…..1) comments by Coast Guard on the LOC(London Offshore Consultants) report (not available to public or to HB!!!) note: previous media (below)only referred to the Q of N Envir Monitoring Review which BCFS couriered to me ASAP on request …request for the LOC …no response after a month! 2) BCFS response and indications that the recs will not be followed upon 3) CG response to BCFS to “refrain from making certain statements”. Thx gary bcndpcaucus.ca MEDIA RELEASE For Immediate Release June 28, 2007 HARTLEY BAY RESIDENTS WAITING FOR BC FERRIES TO FULFILL COAST GUARD RECOMMENDATIONS PRINCE RUPERT – The residents of Hartley Bay are still waiting for B.C. Ferries to take action on the Coast Guard’s recommendations to address the environmental impacts of the Queen of the North sinking. New Democrat MLA Gary Coons says the waiting has gone on long enough. “The Canadian Coast Guard made a number of important recommendations which would help mitigate the environmental impacts of the sinking, but B.C. Ferries continues to drag their feet on implementing them,” said Coons, the MLA for North Coast. “The people of Hartley Bay depend on a clean environment, and it’s the responsibility of B.C. Ferries to look after the effects of the sinking,” said Coons. “The only tangible thing they’ve done thus far is to put in a small park.” In a letter to B.C. Ferries earlier this year, the Canadian Coast Guard made five recommendations, including the following: - Design and implement a long-term environmental monitoring program, to examine the effects of further contamination by fuel oil from the ferry - Investigate the possibility of relocating aquaculture sites - Establish a cache of pollution response equipment at Hartley Bay “The first choice of the people of Hartley Bay is to have all the fuel removed from the Queen of the North; unfortunately B.C. Ferries has already ruled that out. “But they should take some steps to ensure there will be no long-term environmental damage as a result of the sinking.” Coons noted that B.C. Ferries has been using the Coast Guard’s letter as rationale for their decision to not pump the remaining fuel from the Queen of the North. The Coast Guard has asked them to stop doing so. “B.C. Ferries is responsible for the environmental impacts of the sinking. They shouldn’t be hiding behind the Coast Guard.” B.C. Ferries received $67.9 million in insurance compensation for the sinking of the Queen of the North. Of that compensation $20 million was earmarked for salvage and clean-up operations. |
|
|
|
Post by shipchandler on Mar 4, 2008 18:30:42 GMT -8
I would be interested to know which way the wreck is pointed in her resting place???
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Nov 27, 2007 17:13:57 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by markkarj on Mar 4, 2008 19:58:30 GMT -8
So after nearly two years, the TSB report will come out. Here are the details: Source: www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=828555Media Advisory: The Transportation Safety Board of Canada Releases its Final Investigation Report Into the Sinking of the Queen of the North GATINEAU, QUEBEC--(Marketwire - March 4, 2008) - The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) will hold a news conference on March 12, 2008 to make public the final TSB investigation report into the sinking of the Queen of the North which occurred on March 22, 2006 at Gil Island, Wright Sound, British Columbia. Media representatives are invited to attend and members of the panel will be available for one-on-one interviews after the news conference. Event Details: WHEN: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 at 1 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (10 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time) WHERE: Pan Pacific Hotel Crystal Pavilion B & C Suite 300-999 Canada Place Vancouver, British Columbia WHO: - Mrs. Wendy Tadros, TSB Chair - Captain Yvette Myers, TSB Director of Marine Investigations - Captain Pierre Murray, TSB Senior Marine Investigator The news conference will also be webcasted live from Vancouver. You can register for the webcast at the following address webcast.streamlogics.com/audience/index.asp?eventid equals 13294. We encourage you to register and test your computer at least 15 minutes prior to the start of the news conference. To view the materials previously released about this occurrence, please visit:http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/media/Major_Investigation/Marine/M06W0052/MI-M06W0052.asp The final report will be posted, at the same time, on the TSB website at www.tsb.gc.ca. |
|
Mill Bay
Voyager 
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886 
|
Post by Mill Bay on Mar 6, 2008 10:39:17 GMT -8
Safety Board, RCMP to release findings on ferry sinking
JUSTINE HUNTER
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
March 5, 2008 at 5:24 AM EST
VICTORIA — As the Transportation Safety Board prepares to release its final report next week on the sinking of the Queen of the North, the RCMP major crimes unit confirmed yesterday it is nearing the end of its two-year-long criminal investigation into the affair.
The TSB will try to explain what went wrong in the early hours of March 22, 2006, when the BC Ferries vessel struck Gil Island after the bridge crew failed to make a routine but crucial course correction.
The ferry crash killed a couple, Gerard Foisy and Shirley Rosette, who each left two children behind.
The TSB report is expected to reveal why the course alteration was not made in the 14 minutes before the ferry slammed into the side of Gil Island at full speed.
But the board isn't tasked with finding fault in the accident. That may fall to the RCMP.
Last month, the RCMP turned over a report to the B.C. Criminal Justice Branch, which will decide whether anyone should be charged in the sinking. But Crown lawyers from the special prosecution section came back to police with questions that are still being reviewed, RCMP spokesman Sergeant Pierre Lemaitre said yesterday.
Last fall, the RCMP said that some witnesses had still not provided statements to police. They would not identify the unco-operative witnesses, but confirmed they were union members who served on the ship and include members of the bridge crew.
Sgt. Lemaitre would not say if those individuals have since co-operated with the police investigators.
"If and when this matter goes before the courts, a lot of that will be of interest to the public, the challenges to the investigators," he predicted.
Stan Lowe, a spokesman for the Criminal Justice Branch, described the RCMP report as "abbreviated" and said the Crown has "a number of areas where we have requested further information. ... Once we receive that information, then we will start assessing charges."
The TSB report will be the culmination of one of the largest investigations in the organization's history. A final report was approved in January, and the principal players, including BC Ferries and the union representing the crew, have received copies.
The document is at the printers and is scheduled to be released on March 12.
The board sparked a controversy last October when it issued a "safety concern" about drug use among BC Ferries crew members that was brought to light by its investigation.
The TSB called on BC Ferries to review its drug policies when its investigation into the sinking found senior crew members failed to rein in regular marijuana use by workers on the ship.
But that was a side issue to the main TSB report, which had been expected last October. That report was derailed when BC Ferries released statements from crew members that suggested a deckhand was alone at the helm at the time of the crash.
BC Ferries has already released a report on the sinking that pointed to human error, but the company could not explain what happened in the 14 minutes before the crash because it did not get co-operation from all the bridge crew.
It lost a court battle with the TSB to release data from the sunken ferry's computer hard drive that would contain information on the course, but that information may come to light next week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Dec 12, 2007 21:29:53 GMT -8
Hi folks: Quite a few of BC Ferries newer single-ended ships (and the V-class) have bulbous bows. I'm pretty sure the Queen of the North had one too. Indeed the ' North has one (and still does despite being below over 400m of water  )  www.ferrypicsbygraham.fotopic.net/p28421104.html |
|
|
|
Post by markkarj on Dec 17, 2007 22:09:55 GMT -8
Hi folks: Quite a few of BC Ferries newer single-ended ships (and the V-class) have bulbous bows. I'm pretty sure the Queen of the North had one too. Indeed the ' North has one (and still does despite being below over 400m of water ) www.ferrypicsbygraham.fotopic.net/p28421104.htmlTrue, although I wonder how badly it may have been torn apart when the QoTN hit the rocks. |
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Dec 17, 2007 22:36:14 GMT -8
True, although I wonder how badly it may have been torn apart when the QoTN hit the rocks. Good point and question, though I do seem to remember - correct me if I'm wrong, folks - that she now rests upright in mud upto about her waterline, not that she couldn't have had a rough tumble on the way down. |
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Dec 17, 2007 22:55:47 GMT -8
Good point and question, though I do seem to remember - correct me if I'm wrong, folks - that she now rests upright in mud upto about her waterline, not that she couldn't have had a rough tumble on the way down. It's possible she mave hit the bottom bow first, and then the bow acted as a fulcrum as the rest of the keel came to rest, in much the same fashion they believe the Titanic did when it came to rest on the ocean floor. In this case, you might find the bow-bulb pretty mangled, and the forward parts of the hull structure may have bent and crumpled as the lateral forces of the rest ship 'turning' around this fulcrum could have exerted enormous stress on these areas, almost as if the straight lines of the ships structure were trying to bend or fold in relation to the point of greatest stress. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 18, 2007 7:18:05 GMT -8
True, although I wonder how badly it may have been torn apart when the QoTN hit the rocks. Good point and question, though I do seem to remember - correct me if I'm wrong, folks - that she now rests upright in mud upto about her waterline, not that she couldn't have had a rough tumble on the way down. I think that the damage to the Q-North is from following parts of the incident: - rock impacts on Gill Island - internal damage from shifting cargo as she listed sideways & length ways - internal damage from internal pressure as she sank. The "cushioned" muddy landing makes sense, and it's plausible that most of the damage occurred because she touched bottom. |
|
|
|
Post by Mac Write on Mar 22, 2006 2:35:34 GMT -8
Was in bed heard the "Just In" on News 1130. Queen of the North has sunk near Prince Rupert at 1AM. No one was injured.
Update
The Queen of the North called in a mayday at 0140 73 notical miles north/west(?) off of Prince Rupert. People monitoring the Coast Guard channel 16 rushed out of bed and ran for there boats to help. Prelimenary says rough weather. 100 passengers(/crew?) were onboard.
Source: News1130
It is not clear if she took on water and is filled with water but semi above water or truly sank to the oceans floor. This is Breaking News and more updates should be coming out over the next hour or so.
I am going to bed and will pick up on it at the noon news hour.
|
|
|
|
Post by pete on Mar 22, 2006 3:44:37 GMT -8
That is nuts. I hope everyone is rescued. I guess there will be some cars on the bottom now.
|
|
|
|
Post by GI on Mar 22, 2006 5:02:27 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick Logged Off on Mar 22, 2006 5:32:36 GMT -8
That's too bad to hear. Does anyone have a weather report for Prince Rupert last night?
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 22, 2006 5:51:28 GMT -8
From Canoe.ca:
VANCOUVER (CP) - Rescuers plucked dozens of people from lifeboats off B.C.'s Queen Charlotte Islands early Wednesday after a large ferry hit a rock and sank in choppy seas and high winds.
All of the 101 people aboard were rescued and accounted for, B.C. Ferries said in a statement released several hours after the incident.
Most of them were taken to a community centre in Hartley Bay where workers there had given them blankets and coffee; others were aboard a Coast Guard vessel. None were immediately available to speak to the media.
The Queen of the North was sailing south to Port Hardy from Prince Rupert, a 450-kilometre trip along what's known as B.C.'s Inside Passage, a series of islands just off the north coast of the province.
The 125-metre-long vessel was reported to be completely submerged about 135 kilometres from Prince Rupert after hitting the rock, listing to one side and then sinking.
Nicole Robinson, a receptionist at the nursing station in Hartley Bay, said she talked to several members of the ferry's crew who were sleeping when the ship began to take on water.
"They heard a loud bang like it grinded a bit and they said the cabin started filling with water," she said.
Some people were hurt, but not seriously, said Robinson. Many were "stunned."
"We've just had a few patients come and go, minor injuries. The community all got together with blankets; everybody's pretty cold but they're all down at a community hall," Robinson said.
Rescuers were on the scene soon after the 12:43 a.m. incident, said Capt. Leah Byrne of the Search and Rescue Centre in Victoria.
"The joint rescue co-ordination centre dispatched a large number of assets to the scene, including a cormorant helicopter and buffalo aircraft," she said.
Unconfirmed reports said fishing trawlers responded to the initial call and helped in the rescue. Seas were reported to be choppy and winds were blowing at about 75 kilometres per hour.
"From what we hear, it took about an hour for the ship to sink so most of the people did manage to get onto lifeboats," Byrne said. "There was an orderly evacuation of personnel from the vessel, including passengers and crew."
According to the B.C. Ferries website, the ship was built in Germany in 1969 and refitted in 2001. It can hold up to 700 people and 115 cars.
The book The Ships of British Columbia says B.C. Ferries bought the boat for $13.8 million in 1974 and named it the Queen of Surrey. The ferry was retired in 1976 until it was decided to put her on the Queen Charlotte run in 1980. More than $10 million was spent to prepare her for her days as The Queen of the North.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Mar 22, 2006 6:43:02 GMT -8
Wow you guys! I didn't think this was going to happen! I am stunned, and I can't even picture any of this. The Queen of the North is GONE! This is wayyyyyyy bigger than the Oak Bay incedent ever got to be. I'm actually not supposed to wake up for another hour, but the second I heard about it on the radio (I listen to the radio for an hour and then get up) which was on for not even 2 minutes, and I was wide awake. This will be such a sad day!
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Mar 22, 2006 6:49:16 GMT -8
gonna be hard for us to do the QON tour now eh?
|
|
|
|
Post by Shane on Mar 22, 2006 6:58:49 GMT -8
I can't believe something like that would happen though.
You watch other ferries in Europe sinking all the time on the news and you never think it will happen here cause a BC Ferry hasn't sunk since the Quillayute was in the fleet.
It's hard to believe a ship that big could go right to the bottom.
Today will be a sad day for the passengers, the crew, and the members of our forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by QSaanich on Mar 22, 2006 7:14:35 GMT -8
This is a first for BCF eh and i have herd that the the ship is half way underwater with the funnel still on top of the water and ship hit a rock think.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Mar 22, 2006 7:18:38 GMT -8
gonna be hard for us to do the QON tour now eh? Unless we're all certified divers..... I'm having a hard time pictureing what the passenger deck looks like right now. Everything onboard is ruined, the ferry is ruined. The Flagship of the Fleet (Former) is dead. I sure hope they pull it out of the water, and assess the damage. community.webshots.com/photo/468217306/1469079567067916589GosBSyBut an hour to sink?? That was alot longer than I had thought any ferry would sink in. But then again, the North was pretty water tight. That would of been soo scary for all of the passengers, hoping they'll get off ok, and replaying the Titanic movie playing over and over through their head. The News has been interviewing people on the phone, and one of them were so upset, that they hung up the phone in mid conversation. I feel so bad for the people that were onboard. I just heard on the news from someone who was being interviewed on the phone, the Funnel is still visible apparently. So at least its still possible to pull out of the water. |
|
|
|
Post by ferrytraveller on Mar 22, 2006 7:20:12 GMT -8
i wonder, anyone know how deep the water is where she sank??
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Mar 22, 2006 7:20:32 GMT -8
they probably left some door open to allow crew and pax to get out. i think the best way to salvage her would be to patch the hole, and then pump air into some watertight compartments. she'd pop to the surface like a cork
|
|
)
