huge bomb ship in the Yemen

[Martin_B]

Presumably tankers are designed to allow offload of the oil with standardised kits available at many docks around the world.

The standardisation is with the connection equipment, and it's not as 'standard' as you might think - there are a few different international standards, and they don't all work with each other. Fortunately, there are adapter kits, or tankers have multiple connection types to work with most dock equipment.

Tankers have their own pumps to offload at docks. The dock doesn't usually vacuum siphon oil out of a tanker as vacuums are something you try and avoid (both the risk of vaporisation of the oil and potential for oxygen to enter). You always try and move flammable hydrocarbons at above atmospheric pressure if you can.

FSO (Floating Storage and Offtake) vessels, like the Safer also have their own pumps to offload to a tanker for the same reason. But the Safer has not been maintained and I doubt that the Safer's pumps will be operational after this time. They may be capable of being repaired, but if I were the owner of the offtake tanker in this case, I'd probably want to use my own equipment rather than rely on repairing pumps which may not have been used for several years.

I suspect the engineering is exactly as standardised as I think! Can’t even get a screw right without specifying which standard and size and thread count

You want a left-hand thread with that?

[plodder]

Presumably tankers are designed to allow offload of the oil with standardised kits available at many docks around the world.

The article in the OP suggests that a spark could ignite the cargo due to a failure of onboard systems to pump inert gas, and I'd assumed this means that it'll be a very non-standard method of unloading the cargo.

[noggins]

No you can pump inert gas in from the loading ship.

The challenge of this job is the sheer decrepitude of the ship, and the danger of just one f.cker with a gun or RPG.

[plodder]

No you can pump inert gas in from the loading ship.

The challenge of this job is the sheer decrepitude of the ship, and the danger of just one f.cker with a gun or RPG.

without making a spark. but yeah, guns and mines too...

[Martin_B]

Presumably tankers are designed to allow offload of the oil with standardised kits available at many docks around the world.

The article in the OP suggests that a spark could ignite the cargo due to a failure of onboard systems to pump inert gas, and I'd assumed this means that it'll be a very non-standard method of unloading the cargo.

It is a non-standard method of unloading the cargo, but not a particularly difficult one.

And if they've got the OK from the Houthis to do the unloading, then you'd hope that the guns and mines wouldn't also be a problem.

[EACLucifer]

Presumably tankers are designed to allow offload of the oil with standardised kits available at many docks around the world.

The article in the OP suggests that a spark could ignite the cargo due to a failure of onboard systems to pump inert gas, and I'd assumed this means that it'll be a very non-standard method of unloading the cargo.

It is a non-standard method of unloading the cargo, but not a particularly difficult one.

And if they've got the OK from the Houthis to do the unloading, then you'd hope that the guns and mines wouldn't also be a problem.

The problem here of course is that the Houthis routinely violate ceasefires, so there word isn't good for much. You'd need some fairly effective countermeasures should they, say, try to take people for ransom.

[Martin_B]

The article in the OP suggests that a spark could ignite the cargo due to a failure of onboard systems to pump inert gas, and I'd assumed this means that it'll be a very non-standard method of unloading the cargo.

It is a non-standard method of unloading the cargo, but not a particularly difficult one.

And if they've got the OK from the Houthis to do the unloading, then you'd hope that the guns and mines wouldn't also be a problem.

The problem here of course is that the Houthis routinely violate ceasefires, so there word isn't good for much. You'd need some fairly effective countermeasures should they, say, try to take people for ransom.

Yes, which is why I previously suggested that the recovery tanker should come with a protective warship of some kind!

[Woodchopper]

The UN has purchased a huge ship that it hopes will prevent an environmental catastrophe off the coast of Yemen.

For years, more than a million barrels of crude oil have been sitting on a decaying supertanker in the Red Sea.

There are fears the vessel could soon break apart or explode, risking one of the worst oil spills in recent memory.

But on Thursday, the UN said it had purchased a crude carrier that would head to Yemen and remove the oil from the stricken ship.

"The purchase of this suitable vessel... marks the beginning of the operational phase of the plan to safely remove the oil and avoid the risk of an environmental and humanitarian disaster," Achim Steiner from the UN Development Programme (UNDP) said, adding that it was a "major breakthrough".

A UNDP statement said the ship - which it purchased from major tanker company Euronav - was undergoing routine maintenance in China and would arrive for the operation in early May.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-64904985

[Al Capone Junior]

I first read about the safer about a year ago. Nothing has changed, other than the chance of catastrophe going up. Color me not surprised at all