Why don't they consult the skippers of 42-foot sailboats on these matters? We've done all this before.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The maximum depth of the Suez Canal is 79ft. A Suezmax ship has a draught of 66 feet. There’s only 13ft of clearance, which is about the depth of an Olympic-sized swimming pool.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That's a lot of inertia plus a non-cooperating current.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Pretty sure that's not right. The channel is only dredged on the *other* sidehttps://twitter.com/JonJennings/status/1375153985342992389 …
-
It must have been going at incredible speed if it really managed to wedge itself that far.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
“the canal drops to massive depth almost instantly at the edge” (and it was said with such authority)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
I own a similar vessel. Hulls like these are designed to be pushed forward and not experience stress laterally or diagonally. That approach would be a significant hull fracture risk -- especially with the stuck bow bulb acting as a lever. (1/)
-
This is definitely not covered in the refloating section of Chapman's, but I'd expect to try to loosen the bow bulb before refloating and maybe shed some weight before tugging (2/3)
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
For a ship that size and loaded to capacity with cargo, too much force on just one side could tear apart the bulkheads. A few engineers have already noted as much. These ships are build to withstand opposing forces (wind, waves) not a singular force. It’s why tugs surround & pull
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

