 |
|
|
|
local
news
Kristal tragedy brings back memories
By
David Lindsay
A Maltese-registered ship could very well serve as a catalyst for
further focus on the Malta Maritime Authority's implementation of
regular inspections of ships carrying the Malta flag.
On Tuesday, a Maltese registered ship, the Kristal, split in two
approximately 74 nautical miles off the coast of Spain en route
from Karachi to Amsterdam. The incident caused the death of at least
four crewmembers, while seven are reportedly still missing at sea.
Strangely, the infamous Erika had, likewise, sank after breaking
in half only a few hundred miles from the locality.
According to the Malta Maritime Authority, salvage works are currently
underway on the Kristal while both halves of the floundered tanker
are reportedly still afloat and at least one half of the ship has
been secured.
Meanwhile, the MMA has rushed two experts to the scene to investigate
the crisis, in order to establish the determining factors in the
catastrophe. The MMA, the ships operators – IC Shipping –
and the Spanish Authorities are in regular contact and are following
developments at the accident's scene very closely.
While, thankfully, the tanker was carrying a relatively innocuous
28,000-ton load of treacle, the incident conjures up nasty memories
of the infamous Erika incident, in which the Maltese registered
ship sank after, similarly breaking in half. In the process the
Erika released its cargo of 15,000 tons of crude oil just off the
north west coast of France.
According to the report issued by the MMA, the Erika's sinking was
mainly attributable to corrosion, it was also found that the tanker's
original design had increased the tanker's susceptibility to corrosion
– a fact that had raised speculation that more frequent and
more thorough inspections should have been carried out on the tanker
in light of the circumstances.
The report released by the MMA had established that the tanker's
lightweight to displacement ration was on the lower end of the scale
in relation the vessel's size – which could have reduced the
Erika's built-in redundancy while increasing the tanker's susceptibility
to corrosion. Documentation and survey reports on the Erika's sister
ships also revealed an overall tendency toward corrosion.
Furthermore, despite the fact that the Erika's class and statutory
certificates were deemed valid at the time of her sinking, according
to an inspection carried out in November 1999 - about one month
prior to the tanker's sinking – general corrosion was found
on different parts of the tanker.
The surveyor had recommended further inspections coupled by thickness
measurements and necessary repairs for not later than January 2000
– within two months of the inspection. It is also thought that,
at the time of the tanker's sinking, the tanker should have been
undergoing the actions recommended by the inspector and should not
have been at sea carrying a cargo of crude oil.
|
|
|
