Investigators will probably concentrate on three elements: the fouling of the cable, the radio communications problem, and the over-riding of the hydrostatic release. Inadequate training and drills is likely to surface as a root cause.

Cosco Busan, every San Franciscan’s favourite hate-object, is very much in the news. Setting aside the issue of the pilot’s medication, there are lots of lessons worth learning or re-learning. The latest Maritime Accident Casebook podcast, The Case of the Foggy Pilot, looks at bridge team management, how to get information out of a cranky pilot and how to ask and answer questions. After all, if you don’t ask a question right, you’re not asking the right question.

It’s when we think we’re safe that bad things often happen. A master and crewmember drowned when a boat ferrying them ashore capsized in Vietnam around 700 metres from their ship. Did anyone mention lifejackets?

Typhoon season is setting in around the western Pacific so we expect the usual heavy-weather casualties, as the discovery of more than 400 bodies in the Princess of the Stars in the Philippines reminds us. Two vessels were lost recently in the Arabian sea, fortunately without loss of life.

Time to look at anchoring, when to stay put and when to go, and keep an eye on speed, reminders of Pacific Commerce, Pasha Bulker and MSC Napoli respectively.

Take an overloaded ship with negligible freeboard, heavy weather and a steering failure and you end up with the Cap Blanc, which capsized off Canada’s Burin Peninsula last year. A photograph of the vessel taken the previous February tells the story, and the overloading was habitual, but also raises the question: Where was Port State Control?

Also there has been the explosion aboard the tanker Nhat Thuan,with three seafarers missing, the sinking of a trawler off of Thailand following a collision with an unnamed cargo vessel with one dead and five missing, a thankfully lossless collision between Marti Princess and Renate Schulte off the Turkish island of Bozcaada and the fire aboard Royal Princess of Princess Cruise Lines.

It’s been a bad time for piers, with the 653-foot Otello thumping a pier at the Port of Hueneme, the Staten Island Ferry doing ditto with 15 hurt, and bad news for lovers of paddle-steamers as the last of the ocean-going variety hit a landing pier on the Clyde.

Finally, a different sort of casualty from long ago. Today, July 1, sees the inauguration of a plaque to the Australian victims of the Japanese hellship Montevideo Maru at the only memorial to hellship victims, located at Subic Bay Freeport. Many hellship victims were merchant mariners, including in this case 31 Norwegian seafarers. Remember them.

This week’s topics include;

• Listener Comments
  • Antarctic Cruise Ship Sinking
  • Sinking of the Texas Clipper
• Pasha Bulker Incident Report – Photos HERE
• 9 Days on raft after losing keel

Subscribe via iTunes or right click.. saves as -> direct link

The ship that made gCaptain famous is back in the headlines. The M/V Pasha Bulker, a 76,741 deadweight ton Panamax bulk carrier launched in 2006, is the subject of a new report from NSW Maritime of Australia. The enormous vessel first made world headlines after running aground on a popular Australian beach in June of this year and since that time rumors to the cause of here dramatic grounding have been circling the media. Today the official report has been issued. Our friend and deputy gCaptain reporter Ian points us to NSW Maritime’s Press Release;

The Pasha Bulker ran aground during the once-in-thirty year storm that struck the Central Coast and Newcastle on June 8.

The same storm took nine lives and caused damage estimated to cost $1.35 billion.

Ports Minister Joe Tripodi said the investigation found the grounding of the Pasha Bulker was caused by a combination of horrendous weather conditions and poor seamanship by the Master of the vessel.

The poor seamanship involved his actions leading up to and on the morning of June 8. Continue Reading…

We will be working with veteran maritime incident reporter Bob Couttie to keep you updated on this important news item. For those new to this site, be sure to look back at the amazing photos and some of our previous posts on this amazing story.

PASHA BULKER INVESTIGATION REPORT – FACT SHEET

What did the report investigate?

NSW Maritime investigated two marine accidents under the Marine Safety Act 1998 – the Pasha Bulker grounding and difficulties encountered by the Sea Confidence. The Betis, which also encountered difficulties, was outside state waters.

What happened to cause the grounding?

The investigation found the grounding was caused by a series of poor judgments and decisions made by the vessel’s Master, notably:

• A failure to realise the potential impact on the Pasha Bulker of the weather forecast in the anchorage on 8 June;

• An initial decision to ride out the gale at anchor and not to heed the caution within the Sailing Directions regarding suitability of the anchorage in the forecast weather conditions; and

• A decision not to ballast the ship for heavy weather.

Why not prosecute the Master of the Pasha Bulker?

The investigation found there is some evidence the Master may have committed the offense of negligent navigation under the Water Traffic Regulations (NSW).

On examining the evidence and the elements of the offense that must be proven to the criminal standard, that is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, the likelihood of a successful prosecution is low.

Given this conclusion, and after applying the Prosecution Guidelines of the Office of the Director of the Public Prosecutions for NSW, NSW Maritime will not proceed to a prosecution.

What about weather warnings?

All ships received weather forecasts as early as 3 June, with at least 10 wind warnings issued, as well as routine weather forecasts via radio.

47 vessels left the Newcastle anchorage between 2200 on 7 June and 0700 on 8 June. By 7am on 8 June, nine ships remained including the Pasha Bulker, the Sea Confidence and the Betis.

The Master of the Pasha Bulker stated he was aware of the gale warning as early as 3 June, reviewed the forecast on June 7 and assessed the gale incorrectly as “very far away.”

While eventually attempting to head to sea at 7am on 8 June, he crucially left the bridge for breakfast at 8am.

What about the issue of ballast?

The report notes all three ships discussed were properly ballasted for fair weather and normal anchorage conditions. In terms of ballast, the issue was the failure by the Masters to take on sufficient extra ballast to deal with the weather conditions forecast for the anchorage.

What are the recommendations in the Report?

The Report makes a number of recommendations to help prevent similar incidents – all of which will be adopted:

• For the Government to bring concerns over the Master’s performance to the authority that issued his qualifications seeking they be reviewed;

• For NSW Maritime to investigate standard operating procedures for towing vessels in bad weather;

• For NSW Maritime to review the Port Safety Operating Licence;

• For the Marine Safety Act 1998 to be amended for higher penalties for negligent navigation offences involving seagoing vessels;

• For NSW Maritime and the three NSW Port Corporations to review port limits and the management of anchorages;

• That the Marine Pollution Act 1987 be amended to allow a direction to be made by transmitting it to a ship by any means and receiving acknowledgement by a person on the ship; and

• That Newcastle Port Corporation introduces a procedure to check all communications recording devices are checked every shift.

How will the Government respond?

In implementing the recommendations, the NSW Government will bring forward legislation to:

• Increase the penalty for negligent navigation of a Seagoing Vessel to $110,000;

• Provide jail terms for negligent, reckless or dangerous navigation that causes death or grievous bodily harm; and

• Provide the NSW Marine Pollution Controller with power to give verbal directions to ships.

(Source: NSW Maritime)

In a post unusually harsh for gCaptain standards I asked some tough questions about actions taken by the captain of the doomed ship, Pasha Bulker. Here’s a recap;

…did the crew used their satellite comms to discuss the weather patterns with meteorologists or did they simply ignore the port authority’s warnings? Did the captain use his AIS to identify the surrounding ships and call fellow captains via GMDSS to discuss the situation? Did they have access to and use real-time weather data or wait for a 2-dimensional weather fax?

(read the full article HERE)

Today in a leaked version of the incident report the answer is clearly no.

In a candid interview with investigators the vessel’s captain disclosed his actions in the critical moments between weighing anchor and the ship’s grounding. Take a deep breath as you may find this hard to believe. He was eating breakfast! In the galley!!

Here’s a rundown of events as report by The Sydney Morning Herald (full article located HERE)

The trail of mistakes and incompetence began on the evening of June 7 when warnings about an approaching storm were issued to 56 ships anchored off Newcastle. The Pasha Bulker, waiting to load 58,000 tonnes of coal, was one of 10 ships whose captains chose to stay at anchor about 200 metres off Stockton Beach to assess the situation overnight.

At 5.30 the next morning authorities tried again, but the Pasha Bulker stayed at anchor. It was not until 7am, in a sea whipped up by 100kmh winds, that the captain realised he had to move, and move quickly.

46 ships decide to leave port to avoid dragging anchor in an unprotected harbor and the Pasha Bulker stays, while this action is questionable the decision is not necessarily breaking the rule of prudent seamanship. The next morning Port Authorities “try again” to evict the remaining ships. I do not have details on the warning but it’s normal procedure to give the availability of tug boats that could help a ship in danger. Either way rescue tugs never showed and were apparently not requested by the captain.

At this point the captain became a danger to the vessel and crew. A master’s disagreement with port authority suggestions is understandable and the choice to ignore the warnings are his prerogative but one necessary step was not taken; vigilance. This is the time for a captain to ask himself the questions mentioned above, this is the moment to question your own decision, this is your chance to solidify a bridge team management plan and put the crew on high alert.

The story continues;

As the Sea Confidence, a nearby vessel facing the same predicament began moving out to sea with its anchors still dragging, the Pasha Bulker stayed and attempted to weigh anchor before moving. Mariners say it is standard practice for a boat (sic) to be moved forward slowly to help raise the heavy chain from the seabed while it is being hauled in. It meant the ship would have already moved through the surf in the 10 minutes it would have taken to get the anchor aboard.

In an emergency, such as the one brewing by the 30-year storm, the anchors should be cut and left behind.

Instead, the captain ordered the engines to remain idle while the chain, up to 200 metres long with links each weighing 100 kilograms, was winched aboard. As a consequence, the ship was still in the danger zone an hour later when the anchor was finally shipped.

Here I take exception to the article. While the Chief Mate might have been able to release the anchor brake and allow the chain to fully pay out (the more appropriate action), there is no quick and simple way to cut an anchor chain the size of the Pasha Bulker’s. The decision made aboard Sea Confidence would have been more appropriate to the situation. While some shiphadling ability is lost if the anchor is left down (due to a movement of the vessel’s pivot point forward) the Pasha Bulker has plenty of reserve power and steerage to overcome any serious problem.

It was now just after 8am. With the winds and seas continuing to rise and the engine only just beginning to move the ship, the captain called the chief engineer and invited him to breakfast. Both were Korean in a 22-man crew otherwise made up of Filipinos. They met in the dining room while others were left in charge of moving the vessel through the dangerous conditions.

The Pasha Bulker, now in the hands of less experienced crew, was shunted north along the coast toward Port Stephens, unable to make much headway against the waves. It had traveled about three kilometres before the captain reappeared on the bridge and took command of his ship, which was now out of control.

Was the captain called by the mate on watch when his inability to make positive headway was identified? If the mate on watch was exceptional and the answer to the question is no… the captain might not have been reckless in making this bad decision.

At 8.30am the ship had been looped in almost a full circle by the power of 18-metre waves and was now headed toward Nobbys Beach on the outside of the southern entrance to the port.

The captain, in a panic as he told investigators in the offices of a Newcastle law firm, made one last desperate attempt to save his ship, but again made an error. Instead of swinging it hard to starboard, he ordered it go full astern, literally backing up into the pounding waves that were breaking over its decks. The stern was lifted above the waves, its rudder useless and the propeller spinning madly in the air. The 225-metre vessel then virtually surfed to the beach and hit a rock shelf called Big Ben Reef.

Ships are designed for forward motion. For example, the rudder is placed aft of the ship’s screws in order to benefit from the propeller wash pushing against it. When a ship backs down, however, the propeller wash is pushing against nothing and the rudder must rely on the vessel’s motion through the water to grab hold of water and turn the ship. When the ship transitions from froward to “reverse” motion there is a period of time the rudder is totally ineffective. This is why ships need tugboats when departing a dock… until they reach the minimum speed needed for the rudders to be effective (know as bare steerage) the tug must hold the bow on course.

More importantly an unladen ship with forward momentum and an engine working on an order of full ahead can turn quickly. It is important to note this rate of rotation is a critical factor. If a ship turns slowly (as happens during a reverse maneuver) the ship will have difficulty turning through the wind and can get stuck at a heading beam to (perpendicular from) the wind.

The collision broke the back of the ship – hogging, as it is called. It bent the ship into an inverted U-shape that could be seen by onlookers from the beach as ripples in the hull. The captain panicked again and ordered the ship to be abandoned even though there was no chance of it sinking, having already run aground, and needed at least a skeleton crew to minimize damage and monitor the hull to avoid an environmental disaster. They were taken off by helicopter.

Panic is enemy number one in an emergency situation. While some have more difficulty than others avoiding it a captain should never panic. This is a primary reason it takes 10 years of sailing experience and school to obtain a master’s license. I these 10 years you will be exposed to situations at sea that test your panic trigger, if you are unacceptable to panic or indecision at the time if crisis you should not take command of a ship. Many mariners face difficulty getting promoted to second mate for this very reason as this officer position is the highest pay grade obtainable without the need for making life threatening decisions in the face of danger. I have met few captains to which the Peter Principal applies.

For these reasons I find the report nearly unbelievable.

John Konrad is a USCG licensed Master Mariner of Unlimited Tonnage currently working as Chief Mate aboard a 835′ship in the Gulf of Mexico. Since graduating from SUNY Maritime College he has sailed 4 of the world’s oceans and reports from his ship via satellite.

Our top commenter from down under, Ian, has sent me a wrap-up of the Pasha Bulker story:

“PB left our shores several weeks ago under tow to an Asian shipyard. She was minus her rudder that apparently came off during re-floating attempts. It has been retrieved and presently sits in a local scrap yard. Given the surge in tourism generated by the grounding there has been considerable debate about erecting a permanent memorial to the events. The present difficulty is one of cultural difference with the Japanese owners wishing the embarrassing reminder of the grounding into the melting pot just as locals see the rudder as a very appropriate reminder of their affection for the Pasha Bulker. Negotiations are continuing!

Meanwhile, a report has surfaced suggesting that the Pasha Bulker was one of 50 ships advised two weeks before the grounding that they would no longer be able to use port facilities because of the time it was taking for them to de-ballast. Hence another airing of the allegation that ships were de-ballasting prior to entering port and the possibility of subsequent handling difficulties. Still no sighting of conclusions from several inquiries that have taken place. Meanwhile at any given time there will be up to 80 carriers waiting off-shore from Newcastle and that will certainly not be the last that we will see of similar weather that nearly brought us an ecological catastrophe.”

Of particular interest to me is the rudder. I agree with Newcastle in thinking it will serve as a good reminder and give the tourists something to look at. I also wonder if the ship will suffer the same penalty as the Exxon Valdez; banishment to foreign service through no fault of her own.

If you are new to this story check out our photo slideshow of the incident.

Say goodbye to the Pasha Bulker. The ill fated ship that ran up on an Australian beach last month is finally under tow on her way to an unkown shipyard. Towing her is Nippon Slavage’s “Koyo Maru“, a powerful 86 meter salvage tug with a 132.5 ton bollard pull capability.

Many thanks to the local Newcastle photographers, pilots, salvage experts and the 5,819 individual Australian readers who helped us take the lead in reporting this remarkable story!

As a final run down memory lane visit gCaptain’s all time most popular post: Pasha Bulker – A Photo Slideshow

It’s officially we’ve had reports from our resident reporters Ian & MarkL, fellow bloggers and the “real” media all confirming that the coal ship Pasha Bulker has been freed from Nobby’s Beach.

If anyone has any video of the final salvage effort please send them to tips {at} gcaptain.com otherwise check out the webcam footage from the beach and keep an eye out for updates to our Pasha Bulker Slideshow.

The Australian tells us:

It began its journey within seconds of NSW Ports Minister Joe Tripodi saying that it was uncertain whether it would move tonight, although good progress had been made to that point.

The ship appeared to be about 500 metres offshore by about 2141 AEST and was still moving.

The ship moved off silently, with no noise as it came off the reef. The first sound that could be heard from the ship was a “yahoo” from one of the members of the salvage team.

Mr Tripodi was happy to see the Pasha Bulker finally move off.

“We’re happy to see it off,” he told Sky News.

Mr Tripodi praised the work of the salvage team and the Newcastle Ports Corporation.

“It’s the result of a team working together to achieve a result for the environment, for Newcastle and for everyone involved,” he said.

“It’s just great to see this ship moving out to sea peacefully, quietly and most importantly we hope without leaving any oil behind.”

Authorities had remained on high alert for oil spills, after two leaks were detected during last night’s salvage effort.

Conditions tonight were perfect for what was the third attempt to refloat the ship, with calm seas and a high tide. READ MORE…

All I can say is congratulations for a job well done by the crew of Svitzer Salvage.

For more on this incident be sure to check out our previous coverage of the event: LINK

UDATES:

Here are some updates to this story:

Pasha Bulker report expected next month
ABC Online, Australia - Jul 4, 2007
The New South Wales Ports Minister says the Government’s investigation into the grounding of the Pasha Bulker is progressing well, with a report expected to …
Pasha Bulker recovery hampered by winds NEWS.com.au
Japanese managers vow to pay Pasha Bulker bill ABC Online
Taxpayers will not foot Pasha bill The Australian

The Sydney Morning Herald brings us this update:

THE Pasha Bulker has budged but is still stuck fast on the reef at Nobbys Beach, Newcastle. Damage to the environment from oil spilling from the ship remained unknown early today.

Critical response teams swung into action late last night as joy again turned to despair during the attempt to refloat the Pasha, stranded since June 8.

With three powerful tugs straining, the giant red hull was swung around and pointed seawards last night. The ship now sits with its stern still stuck fast on the reef but her bow pointed out to sea.

The Ports Minister, Joe Tripodi, had said earlier that oil had leaked from the vessel but it was unknown how severe the spill was. He said the ship was only a couple of degrees off the point where it could be towed out to sea.

Mr Tripodi said grinding noises had been reported from the ship during last night’s salvage attempt. He said these might be rock grinding on the ship’s bottom.

About 1pm yesterday a response team was deployed after a minor oil leak was detected. Mr Tripodi said a sheen of oil a micron (0.001 of a millimetre) thick was seen on the water surface at the stern of the carrier, but dissipated within an hour of being discovered.

Industry sources have estimated that the Pasha Bulker salvage operation has cost between $200,000 and $300,000 per day.

Read the Full Story: Pasha swings round then gets stuck again, spilling oil

For more on this story check out our previous Pasha Bulker coverage. For the latest pictures of her go to our Pasha Bulker Slideshow.

We have been receiving a lot of comments and interaction regarding our coverage of the Pasha Bulker story. There are many stories to cover on the seven seas and we hate to dwell on one topic but it’s hard for us to ignore ay story that gets the amount of positive response this story has received. So keep the questions, comments and tips coming on the stories you enjoy and we’ll keep the coverage rolling.

To recap; the coal vessel Pasha Bulker ran aground last month on a popular Australian beach during an impressive storm. We have been covering the event with photos, videos and commentary much of which has been either suggested or provided directly from our readers. One such reader is Ian of Seaham who has been giving us near daily updates on one of our early posts (LINK). He has some interesting questions about the salvage attempt so I’m going to provide some equally interesting answers… at least that’s my plan.

If your on our homepage click “read more” for his questions, if your on the story page simply scroll down.

John, curiosity prompts me to make contact. Thanks for your encouraging comments re my comments to the site. The whole thing raises lots of interesting questions particularly for those of us with little knowledge of such events.

As you may gather, we are being starved of details regarding the salvage attempt or maybe it’s just that there are no certainties at this point so everyone plays it close to the chest?

I think you hit on the answer to the question; with no certainties it’s impossible to predict the outcome or even the next step. I would also say there are many interests involved. The ship is owned by one company, chartered to a second and likely managed by a third. To increase the complexity of the situation you have local and national interests. Hotel owners might want the vessel to stay longer, stevedores likely want the potential hazards of shipping coal out of the media’s eye and environmentalist aren’t concerned at all about a timeline only that it is removed in the most ecologically sound manner possible. Throw on top of this local, regional, national and international bureaucracy and the problem compounds exponentially.

There is no easy or 100% safe way to remove a vessel of this size. If the salvage company divulged the details of their plan the interests that are most negatively affected would protest and likely win. Every conceivable plan to remove the ship has potential problems so it would not be difficult for these interests to expose the risk publicly and call for changes.

New York is infamous for its bureaucracy and special interests but one man was able to get things built for the city; Robert Moses the long standing head of transit, parks, ports and housing. While his plans were often ill conceived and many have done considerable lasting harm to the area he was able to build an enormous amount of the city’s infrastructure during a time when other departments couldn’t complete the simplest of projects. His trick was absolute secrecy until the plans were finalized then the building started with swift demolition often without approval. People would often wake up to huge swaths of a neighborhood destroyed the same morning an announcement for a new bridge would be published in the newspaper. Their representatives would then demand a halt of the project until they received a call from Moses who would say; “We can’t rebuild the houses, we can stop the project but then your going to have to answer the question ‘was my neighborhood destroyed for nothing, where are the results?’” These very representatives would then push for more project funding in order to have the bridge completed quickly with the least amount of further disturbance to their constituents.

I can’t say for certain but if they exposed their plans you might have the ship on Nobby’s beach for a long time to come. If you woke up tomorrow and the ship was gone any problems that occurred might be overlooked by people who are just glad to see it gone.

What if the bottom is seriously damaged – I guess they immediately stop the refloat effort?

I am certainly not a Naval Architect (actually I failed out of that course of study a long time ago) but it depends where and how. If the problem significantly effects longitudinal (forward to aft) stability and the ship might break in two, then yes they would have to stop. Otherwise the answer is, not necessarily. If the ship is taking on water they could use massive dewatering pumps, if machinery is damaged they could tow her, if the inner layer of her double bottom is intact she might be allowed to sail to the nearest dry dock.

They talk about deballasting the water they had pumped in for stabilization and using air pumps to add buoyancy – I imagine that will only be successful if damage below waterline is relatively minor.

Again this is a naval architecture problem but much of the bottom is not structural especially in double-bottom design. A ship is built much like a building in that it has steel girders with and exterior shell. If the girders are in tact and the amount of ballast needed (or water remaining) is within the design limitations of the ship then they could, theoretically, sail her. Ships of this type are also compartmentalized for this very reason. If one or even a few sections are damaged the ship will still float. If she floats then they might be able to tow her in a damaged condition provided that the weather is favorable.
Also remember that she has a double-hull, meaning that she is basically two ships, one inside another. If the outer layer is destroyed but the inner layer is intact she should be able to float.

Should the refloat be successful, I wonder where they would take the ship for any required temporary repairs – does Australia have dry docking facilities big enough?

It’s interesting I’m an American mariner who has never been to Australia but since this incident over half of our readers are logging in from down under. I’ve worked with many Australian’s, have a great desire to visit and even count “The Castle” as one of my all time favorite comedies but as far as local knowledge I can’t help answer the question.

Someone suggested that the ship will be towed to Japan for repairs?

That is possible. Other options are South Korea, Singapore and possible China. These countries are the leaders in shipyard repair and new builds. I assume the insurance company, who likely holds or soon will hold the title to the ship, will choose the most economical solution that doesn’t create a total loss. By this I mean that if the experts think the ship can make the transit they will probably bring her to a location that has the capacity and available space for repair if not then they will go for a geographically closer solution. My guess would be they perform temporary repairs locally to make her seaworthy for a trip to the shipyard that’s the lowest bidder.

You’d have to smile – the Minister for Ports has advised that everyone should stay away and watch the refloat attempt on TV! Newcastle and surrounds have a population of about 500,000 – you can bank on it, there’ll be some thousands there when it goes ahead.

I know that I sure would be their if I lived within a 1000 miles of Newcastle I just hope a few of the people who ignore this advisory have a video camera and our email address ;) It’s tips {at} gcaptian.com by the way.

Regards
Ian of Seaham

Answers provided by John Konrad, Master Mariner and founder of gCaptain.com. John can be reached at tips {at} gcaptain.com or by adding him as a facebook or linked-in contact.

Have a question you would like to ask gCaptain? Add it as a comment below and we’ll do our best to provide and answer.

In an interesting turn of events the salvage team working to remove the Coal Ship that ran aground on a popular Australian beach believe Pasha Bulker is damaged worse than predicted. The Herald Sun tells us:

A salvage expert and marine engineer said the cost of refloating the ship and fixing its damaged hull was so close to the vessel’s $41million replacement price it was financially unviable.

If the Pasha is labeled a “total constructive loss”, the ship could be dismantled on site – a task that would take six months, plus time for planning and approval.

If this plan to scrap the vessel happens a new team of experts will arrive to build a pier out to the ship and pump out all remaining fuel oil. Then “big thermal lances and other heavy hi-tech cutting equipment to cut it to pieces, crane it away on trucks and dispose of it.” This process will need to get various environmental and safety approvals before the shipwrecking teams can begin.

Update:

Our readers have been providing quality “Pasha Bulker” updates on this post. The latest (24 July 2007) post from our number one local reporter Ian states:

Local radio this morning, interviewed ‘one of Australia’s leading salvage experts’, Brett Divine who believes that the vessel has sustained serious damage below water and may not hold up to the stresses involved in hauling her off. It appears that his company is one of several already discussing plans to dismantle the vessel should the refloating effort fail.

Read our past “Pasha Bulker” posts.
View our Pasha Bulker Slide-Show.