MOL Comfort: Difference between revisions

|Ship name=* ''MOL Comfort'' (2012–2013){{br}}
* ''APL Russia'' (2008–2012)

|Ship owner=* Ural Container Carriers SA (2011–2013)<ref name="classnk">{{csr|register=CLASSNK|id=305153|shipname=MOL Comfort|accessdate=2013-06-18}}</ref><ref name="equasis">{{csr|register=E|id=9358761|shipname=MOL Comfort|accessdate=2013-06-18}}</ref>{{br}}
* MOL Euro-Orient Shipping SA (2008–2011)<ref name="equasis"/>

|Ship typeclass=[[Container{{sclass2|MOL C|container ship]]}}

|Ship tonnage=* {{GT|86,692}}{{br}}
* {{NetT|48,825}}{{br}}
* {{DWT|90,613}}

|Ship power=Mitsubishi-[[Sulzer (manufacturer)|Sulzer]] [[Wärtsilä-Sulzer RTA96-C|11RT-flex96C]], ({{cvt|62,920{{nbsp|kW|lk=on}}kW)

'''''MOL Comfort''''' was a 2008-built [[Bahamas|Bahamian-flagged]] [[post-Panamax]] [[container ship]] chartered by [[Mitsui O.S.K. Lines]]. The vessel was [[Ceremonial ship launching|launched]] in 2008 as '''''APL Russia''''' and sailed under that name until 2012, when the ship was renamed to ''MOL Comfort''. On 17 June 2013, she broke in two about {{convert|200|nmi}} off the coast of [[Yemen]]. The aft section sank on 27 June and the bow section, after having been destroyed by fire, on 11 July.

With an [[length overall|overall length]] of {{convert|316|m|ftin}} long, moulded [[Beam (nautical)|beam]] of {{convert|45.6|m|ftin}} and fully laden [[Draft (hull)|draught]] of {{convert|14.5|m|ftin}}, ''MOL Comfort'' was too large to transit the [[Panama Canal]] and was thus referred to as a [[Panamax#Post-Panamax and Post-Neopanamax ships|post-Panamax]] [[container ship]]. She measured 86,692 in [[gross tonnage]] and 48,825 in [[net tonnage]], and had a [[deadweight tonnage]] of 90,613 tonnes. The container capacity of the ship, measured in [[twenty-foot equivalent unit]]s (TEU), was 8,110 of which 4,616 TEU is stored on the deck and 3,494 TEU in the [[Cargo hold|holds]].<ref name="classnk" />

Like most large container ships, ''MOL Comfort'' was propelled by a single low-speed two-stroke [[crosshead]] [[diesel engine]] coupled to a fixed-pitch propeller. Her main engine, a [[straight-11 engine|11-cylinder]] licencelicense-manufactured Mitsubishi-[[Sulzer (manufacturer)|Sulzer]] 11RT-flex96C, was rated at {{convert|62920|kW|hp|lk=on|abbr=on}} at 102 rpm and was capable of propelling the ship at {{convert|25.25|kn|lk=in}}. She also had six auxiliary diesel generators with a combined output of 14,625{{nbsp}}kVA.<ref name="classnk" />

The hatch side [[coaming]]s in modern container ships are subjected to the highest stress of all structural members in the ship. This is due to the large openings in the strength deck needed for loading and unloading containers in the cargo holds. Plate thicknesses up to {{convert|90|mm|in}} are used to keep the stress levels acceptable. ''MOL Comfort''{{'}}s [[sister ship]], 2007-built {{ship||MOL Creation}}, was the first container ship classified by [[Nippon Kaiji Kyokai]] to use ultra-high-strength steel with a [[yield strength]] of 470{{nbsp}}MPa in these structures to reduce the steel weight by avoiding extreme plate thicknesses.<ref>YP47.{{cite [magazine |url=http://www.classnk.or.jp/hp/pdf/publications/Publications_image/classnk_magazine_no60.pdf |title=YP47 |magazine=ClassNk Magazine, 60th |edition].=60 |date=2008. {{retrieved|accessdatepages=20135–9 |access-06-18date=14 March 2021 }}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Hirota, K.|first1=Kazuhiro et|last2=Takeda al.|first2=Shingen (|last3=Nakagawa |first3=Takashi |last4=Hashi |first4=Yohimi |last5=Tada |first5=Masuo |date=2007): [|url=http://www.mhi.co.jp/technology/review/pdf/e443/e443028.pdf |title=World's first development and application of HTSS (high tensile strength steel) with yield stress of 47 kgf/mm 2 to actual ship hull structure]. |magazine=Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Technical Review Vol. |volume=44 No. |number=3. |access-date=14 March 2021 }}</ref>

On 17 June 2013, ''MOL Comfort'' suffered a crack amidships in bad weather about {{convert|200|nmi|lk=in}} off the coast of Yemen and eventually broke into two after [[Hogging and sagging|hogging]]. The vessel was underway from [[Singapore]] to [[Jeddah]], [[Saudi Arabia]], with a cargo of 4,382 containers equivalent to 7,041 TEU. The crew of 26—1126—14 RussiansFilipinos, one Ukrainian, and 1411 Filipinos—abandonedRussians—abandoned the ship and were rescued from two life[[Lifeboat rafts(shipboard)|liferaft]]s and a lifeboat by thethree other container vessels, [[Germany|German-flagged]] container ship {{ship||Yantian Express}} of [[Hapag-Lloyd]], one[[Panama|Panamaian-flagged]] Hanjin Beijing of threenow-defunct [[Hanjin Shipping]] and [[ZIM (shipping company)|ZIM]]'s ZIM India, sailed under [[United Kingdom|British flag]]. These vessels were diverted to the site of incident by [[Indian Coast Guard|ICG]] Mumbai.<ref name="mitsui_news">[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13032.html |title=Incident with Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=17 June 2013. {{retrieved|accessdate=2013access-06-18date=14 March 2021 }}</ref><ref name="sailorsclub">[{{cite web |url=http://www.sailors-club.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=25957:qyantian-expressq-rescued-the-crew-of-sunken-mol-comfort-from-two-life-rafts-and-one-lifeboat&catid=7:news&Itemid=131 |title="Yantian Express" rescued the crew of sunken MOL Comfort from two life rafts and one lifeboat]. |website=Sailors Club, |date=18 June 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-06-18 |url-status=dead |archive-date=2017-03-30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170330000835/https://www.sailors-club.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=25957:qyantian-expressq-rescued-the-crew-of-sunken-mol-comfort-from-two-life-rafts-and-one-lifeboat&catid=7:news&Itemid=131 }}</ref><ref name="indianexpress">[{{cite web |url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/merchant-vessel-mol-comfort-splits-into-two-off-mumbai-coast-crew-rescued/1130174/ |title=Merchant vessel 'Mol Comfort' splits into two off Mumbai coast, crew rescued]. |work=The Indian Express, |date=17 June 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-06-18 |url-status=dead |archive-date=2020-02-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200224132835/http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/merchant-vessel-mol-comfort-splits-into-two-off-mumbai-coast-crew-rescued/1130174/ }}</ref> After the structural failure, both sections remained afloat with the majority of the cargo intact and began drifting in an east-northeast direction. [[Smit International|Smit Salvage Singapore]] was contracted to tow the sections to safety.<ref name="lloyds3july" />

On 24 June, four oceangoing [[tugboat]]s arrived at the scene and began towing the bow section to safety.<ref name="mitsui10">[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13042.html |title=Update (No.10): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=26 June 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-06-2714 March 2021}}</ref> However, before anyBefore salvage operations of the stern section could commencebegin, water ingress was reported on 26 June.<ref>[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13043.html |title=Update (No.11): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=27 June 2013. {{retrieved|accessdate=2013access-06-27date=14 March 2021 }}</ref> On the following day, the stern sank at {{coord|14|26|N|66|26|E}} to a depth of {{convert|4000|m|ft}}. Some of the approximately 1,700 containers on board were later confirmed floating near the site. While no major oil leak was reported, the stern section was said to contain about 1,500 tons of fuel.<ref>[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13045.html |title=Urgent Update (No.12): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=27 June 2013. {{retrieved|accessdate=2013access-06-27date=14 March 2021 }}</ref>

On 2 July, the tow of the bow section broke free in bad weather,<ref>[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13050.html |title=Update (No. 17): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=2 July 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-07-0214 March 2021 }}</ref> but the towing line was reattached the next day.<ref name="lloyds3july">[{{cite web |url=http://www.lloydslist.com/ll/sector/containers/article425491.ece |title=Salvors reattach MOL Comfort tow wire]. |work=Lloyd's List, |date=3 July 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-07-07 |url-status=dead |archive-date=2013-07-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130705143545/http://www.lloydslist.com/ll/sector/containers/article425491.ece }}</ref> On 6 July, a fire broke out in the rear part of the bow section. Unable to getcontrol the blaze under control in bad weather, the salvage vessels asked forrequested help from anthe [[Indian Coast Guard]] patrol boat ''Samudra Prahari'' with external fire fighting[[firefighting]] equipment.<ref>[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13056.html |title=Update (No. 20): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=7 July 2013. {{retrieved|accessdate=2013access-07-07date=14 March 2021 }}</ref> By 10 July, most of the 2,400 containers on board had been destroyed by fire.<ref>[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13061.html |title=Update (No.23): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=10 July 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-07-0914 March 2021 }}</ref> The damaged bow section sank the next night at {{coord|19|56|N|65|25|E}} to a depth of {{convert|3000|m|ft}} with what remained of the cargo and 1,600 metric tons of fuel oil in the tanks. No spill apart from a thin oil film on the surface has beenwas reported, but some containers were spotted floating around the sinking site.<ref>[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13063.html |title=Urgent Update (No.25): Incident Involving the Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=11 July 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-07-1114 March 2021 }}</ref> The cause of the fire remainsis unknown.

The exact cause of the accident is not known. On 4 July, Mitsui O.S.K. Lines appointed [[Lloyd's Register]] to support investigations into the cause of the incident.<ref>[{{cite press release |url=http://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2013/13051.html |title=MOL Appoints Lloyd's Register to support investigations to Determine the Cause of the Incident Involving Containership MOL Comfort]. |publisher=Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, |date=4 July 2013. {{retrieved|accessdate=2013access-07-07date=14 March 2021 }}</ref> As a precaution, the sister ships of ''MOL Comfort'' were withdrawn from the same route and their hull structures will be upgraded to increase the longitudinal strength. In addition, operational changes will be carried outimplemented to reduce the stressesstress on the vessels' hulls.<ref>[{{cite web |url=http://www.supplychainasia.org/index.php/news/company/item/6160-mol-comfort-sister-vessels-withdrawn-from-g6-as-precautionary-measures |title=MOL Comfort sister vessels withdrawn from G6 as precautionary measures] {{webarchive|url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141213054950/http://www.supplychainasia.org/index.php/news/company/item/6160-mol-comfort-sister-vessels-withdrawn-from-g6-as-precautionary-measures |archive-date=2014-12-13 }}. |work=Supply Chain Asia, |date=28 June 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=2013-07-07}}</ref>

The sinking of ''MOL Comfort'' cost the insurers between 300 and 400 million dollars in claims. The hull and machinery of the vessel were insured for $66 million.<ref>[{{cite web |url=http://maritime-connector.com/maritime-economy/mol-comfort-cost-insurers-$400m/ |title=MOL COMFORT Cost Insurers $400M]. |website=Maritime Connector, |date=20 September 2013. {{retrieved|accessdateaccess-date=201314 March 2021 |url-09status=dead |archive-20date=5 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201205142633/http://maritime-connector.com/maritime-economy/mol-comfort-cost-insurers-$400m/ }}</ref> By December 2014, the insurers ([[Tokio Marine Nichido|Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Co.]]) were among 100 companies, including Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd., who had launched lawsuits against MHI, reportedly on the grounds that the accident and consequent loss of ship and cargo was caused by a design flaw in the freighter.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0001770288 | title = Mitsubishi Heavy sued for ¥60 bil. over sunken freighter | work = The Japan News | publisher = The Yomiuri Shimbun | author = Jiji Press | date = 7 December 2014 | access-date = 6 December 2014 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20141210003543/http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0001770288 | archive-date = 10 December 2014}}</ref>

{{As of {{CURRENTYEAR|2017}}, the loss of all 4,293 containers on board is the largest number of containers lost in a single event.<ref name=MAIBEverSmart>{{cite web |url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f15a2993a6f405c0f80ac37/2020-14-EverSmart-withAnnexes.pdf |title=Report on the investigation of the loss of 42 containers from the container ship ''Ever Smart'' 700 miles east of Japan, North Pacific Ocean 30 October 2017 |publisher=Marine Accident Investigation Board |accessdate=22 July 2020 |at=Annex B }}</ref>

[[Category:Ships built inby JapanMitsubishi Heavy Industries]]