What's Happened To The Seacat

[John Wright]

The photo perspective makes it difficult to be accurate. My best estimate is 20% and it is confirmed by a post.

 

Chains and chocks are only used when it is anticipated to be rough. Flat and foggy yesterday, no need.

 

We all park on one in 10 or 8 (10% or 12%) from time to time but on tarmac not metal and on a still surface not one which moves with every wave. There are very few places where it is one in 5 or three (20% or 30%)

 

As for sinking they are pumping her out continuously, either its a big hole or some weight has shifted, or both. I suspect the engines are bolted down.

 

I can't even speculate the maths but she was swung through 180 degrees after being hit, that is the sort of centrifugal force in a lateral direction that brakes and tyres are not designed to resist, some cars will have turned as well, through a small turn, they will not then be at optimum hold as they will no longer be facing straight up or down the slope.

 

I hope I am wrong

[Cheese]

Just looked at Manx Radio News, first story says there was 218 passengers and 20 crew. That makes 238 people on board.

Every other report is saying there were 294 people.

 

So they don't know exactly how many people there were on board?

 

I'm hoping its just a mistake.

[The Old Git]

that is the sort of centrifugal force in a lateral direction that brakes and tyres are not designed to resist,

 

Tyres seem to cope well enough with conering at high speed. I suspect it would be more slower slew that spinning around like a top, none of the passengers seem to have mentioned anything about being flung around by the spinning ship.

 

Why is facing straight up or down a slope the optimum hold? I'd have thought the opposite, parked side on to a slope would require less braking effect to hold the car. Look at skiers for example.

[John Wright]

you need to look where the centre of gravity is. cars are longer, generally, than they are wider. In those circumstances sideways on a slope can end up with the centre of gravity outside the floor area of the car causing a roll and the degree of slope required is much less much less sideways on than in line ie arse over tip. Second as the centre of gravity moves there is less and less weigtht on the upper wheel and thus less friction and more weight on the lower wheel bringing it and the surface closer to their limits.

 

The not skidding whilst driving has all sorts of other forces, such as the forwrad motion to take into account. Brakes and tyres have maximum effect in strauight line not at angles, corners or at 90 degrees.

 

The reports say the vessel slewed and that it was hit hard twice.

 

Even on a calm day the landiung stage and a seacat move due to waves, tide etc

[Amadeus]

I thought that they put chains around the wheels of the cars to keep them in place and these are then locked into the car deck. That was only my thought because I had noticed the slots in the car deck and thought that's why they kept trying to get you to drive so cloese to the side of the ship and right up against the next car. I feel like a contortionist trying to get out of the car once it's been parked. (I worry about things like that, Idon't want the paint on my little Rover Metro to be scratched!)

 

Stav.

The slots are also there for the bikes during TT - them barrier thingies the bikes get tied to fit in there. AFAIR (it's been a while sinced I worked on it), during calm days there were no extra measures to secure cars, apart from the ones parked closest to the bow door (on the slope). You'd be surprised how little cars move on there, even with the metal deck - as long as the actual deck surface is dry, I think there's a good chance the cars won't move around too much.

 

I'm just glad to see that nobody was injured and that all the safety training has worked. You can accuse the racket of a lot of things, but not of neglegting on-board safety, and it is great to see that this has now paid dividends. Some of the reports mention that the crew was calm and in control and that's just great to hear - how people can criticise them, and how the media can publish such rubbish I don't quite understand, but maybe it's got something to do with the fact that many people simply don't know the procedures that kick into action once an incident occurs.

 

Now then, any bets Geoff Corkish is already writing down some punchy one-liners? "See what happens when I leave.."

[Albert Tatlock]

you need to look where the centre of gravity is. cars are longer, generally, than they are wider. In those circumstances sideways on a slope can end up with the centre of gravity outside the floor area of the car causing a roll and the degree of slope required is much less much less sideways on than in line ie arse over tip. Second as the centre of gravity moves there is less and less weigtht on the upper wheel and thus less friction and more weight on the lower wheel bringing it and the surface closer to their limits.

 

The not skidding whilst driving has all sorts of other forces, such as the forwrad motion to take into account. Brakes and tyres have maximum effect in strauight line not at angles, corners or at 90 degrees.

 

The reports say the vessel slewed and that it was hit hard twice.

 

Even on a calm day the landiung stage and a seacat move due to waves, tide etc

I can't see it being that bad. If people didn't fall down with the impact then cars won't have shifted dramatically either. I would guess that probably less than 20% of the cars on board would be affected, and mostly those near the back obviously. Cars are also not loaded all the way to the back doors, so even those that did get wet, most are only likely to have got their wheels wet at most, with perhaps with only a few getting part of their engine covereds. I would be very suprised if any cars got completely submerged.

[Doric]

I somewhat concur with the various hypothesises that have been proferred to the forum by the various experts and extremely erudite and knowledgeable engineers of this forum.

 

I believe the coefficient of the vulcanisation activators and accelerators are, to a certain degrea, not factored in to the effect of the decelerated compound whence contacted not intrinsically with the hitherto inconsiderable force of the various associated elements of Sodium Chloride et al - but not of course limited thus - when the Hydrogen=Oxygen molecules are in mass abundance. But we must have regard on the lateral force exerted as an extrinsic fulcram effect not formally an integral consideration of the executive design process. Thus we enter a just about totally fucken irrelevant area of the matter - good news if you're in a court of law on a few £hundred and hour but pretty tedious for anyone else.

 

I would generally agrea that car tyres go pretty slippy when wet on a metal slope.

 

 

 

edited to amend spelling of degrea

[The Old Git]

you need to look where the centre of gravity is. cars are longer, generally, than they are wider. In those circumstances sideways on a slope can end up with the centre of gravity outside the floor area of the car causing a roll and the degree of slope required is much less much less sideways on than in line ie arse over tip. Second as the centre of gravity moves there is less and less weigtht on the upper wheel and thus less friction and more weight on the lower wheel bringing it and the surface closer to their limits.

 

I spent a number of years competing in 4x4 trials and I only rolled once. That was on a slope very much steeper that the seacat is at. It would have to be a damn sight steeper than Crellins Hill for a car to roll sideways

[issues99]

you need to look where the centre of gravity is. cars are longer, generally, than they are wider. In those circumstances sideways on a slope can end up with the centre of gravity outside the floor area of the car causing a roll and the degree of slope required is much less much less sideways on than in line ie arse over tip. Second as the centre of gravity moves there is less and less weigtht on the upper wheel and thus less friction and more weight on the lower wheel bringing it and the surface closer to their limits.

 

The not skidding whilst driving has all sorts of other forces, such as the forwrad motion to take into account. Brakes and tyres have maximum effect in strauight line not at angles, corners or at 90 degrees.

 

The reports say the vessel slewed and that it was hit hard twice.

 

Even on a calm day the landiung stage and a seacat move due to waves, tide etc

I can't see it being that bad. If people didn't fall down with the impact then cars won't have shifted dramatically either. I would guess that probably less than 20% of the cars on board would be affected, and mostly those near the back obviously. Cars are also not loaded all the way to the back doors, so even those that did get wet, most are only likely to have got their wheels wet at most, with perhaps with only a few getting part of their engine covereds. I would be very suprised if any cars got completely submerged.

 

Some passanger were knocked off their feet and the cars moved during the collision. One news site says that some of the cars have sustained damage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england...ide/6329059.stm

[Albert Tatlock]

Some passanger were knocked off their feet and the cars moved during the collision. One news site says that some of the cars have sustained damage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england...ide/6329059.stm

Your link says: "the owners have been warned some of the vehicles may have been damaged." And it doesn't say anything about people being knoocked off their feet.

 

I heard a guy who had been onboard on MR yesterday saying he saw no one get knocked off their feet.

[copycat]

will no-one think of the investors? think of the return on investment? think of the extra costs the company is going to be faced with and how its going to affect the cash-flow to the parent. Have Macquarie yet said they will provide cash to bring in a replacement craft?

[modey]

Some passanger were knocked off their feet and the cars moved during the collision. One news site says that some of the cars have sustained damage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england...ide/6329059.stm

Your link says: "the owners have been warned some of the vehicles may have been damaged." And it doesn't say anything about people being knoocked off their feet.

 

I heard a guy who had been onboard on MR yesterday saying he saw no one get knocked off their feet.

 

well i spoke to my mum who was on it yeserday and she was knocked off her feet when it happened.

 

Just because one guy didn't see it happen, doesn't mean it didn't.

[John Wright]

will no-one think of the investors? think of the return on investment? think of the extra costs the company is going to be faced with and how its going to affect the cash-flow to the parent. Have Macquarie yet said they will provide cash to bring in a replacement craft?

 

Presumably thay have insurance including loss of user and a spare Seacat in dock

[copycat]

will no-one think of the investors? think of the return on investment? think of the extra costs the company is going to be faced with and how its going to affect the cash-flow to the parent. Have Macquarie yet said they will provide cash to bring in a replacement craft?

 

Presumably thay have insurance including loss of user and a spare Seacat in dock

 

but which don't forget has a shagged gearbox and isn't going anywhere!

[issues99]

Some passanger were knocked off their feet and the cars moved during the collision. One news site says that some of the cars have sustained damage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england...ide/6329059.stm

Your link says: "the owners have been warned some of the vehicles may have been damaged." And it doesn't say anything about people being knoocked off their feet.

 

I heard a guy who had been onboard on MR yesterday saying he saw no one get knocked off their feet.

 

passengers were knocked off thier feet

 

http://www.iomonline.co.uk/ViewArticle2.as...ticleID=2022366