The Ship Model Forum

It took a while, but here are some pics of my last trip. I went from Japan, to Oman (loading) and I disembarked in Singapore (again the ship went to Japan).
The ship was LNGc Excel, 277mx43.6mx11.4m. She'll also form my first large scratch building attempt (1/200), although it will be pretty hard as you'll see on the deck pictures!
Again we were far from the largest ship around on the oceans and here are some guys we met.

VLCC Xin Ning Yang


Maersk Welkin, a RoRo ship, which are generally nicknamed "the shoe box".


Another Maersk (which is the biggest shipping company in the world), this time a container vessel called Maersk Itea. She has something strange and I only noticed later on what it was... Maybe you guys can find it too???



The Ivory Ace with a clear trim. One of the smaller guys we met, I guess she was a general cargo vessel.


And another VLCC, this time called New Victory, we were quite fast so sometimes we passed not too far from them and hence I could make nice pics from several angles.



And here's some onboard views of our boat, she doesn't look that big, but that's mainly because the bridge was rather low (one floor was taken out of the design to be able to go under some bridge in Houston, the mast also folded down for that purpose) and because the "main deck" you see, is actually the cargo deck, the maindeck is below the sloped part. The front, where you can see the foremast, is not the real front as there is about 50-60m in front of that mast!
These ships are nicknamed the "iron" because of the sloped part resembling an iron (and because they are so low).


From the bridge wing.


And here is what she looked like outside. This ship is Excalibur (she was the first of this type of LNG tankers and has some deficiencies compared to Excel), a sister vessel that was heading to the same port that we came from. A long shot with moderate visibility though... I don't have good external pics of Excel herself as I boarded in port and disembarked at night.

_________________
The merchant shipyard

SO, This is what you want to build, last p

_________________
Simple but effective.

Nice pictures, Neptune! I wonder if you know a source for pictures/drawings of the more 'classic' LNG tankers, with four large spheres in front of the bridge. I saw the movie Syriana yesterday and after seeing it I would like to add an LNG tanker to my 'to scratchbuild' list.

Pieter, I sure hope you won't replay the movie with your model, would be a waste!!
Roel showed me a site some months ago, with lots of pics, of al kinds of ships: http://www.shipspotting.com/
I think you can find some nice pics of 'old-style' LNG-carriers here.


Greetz Johan

PS Nice pics Roel, and good luck with your build(s)!!!!

_________________
VENTIS SECUNDIS

253 269 863 261 471 958 220 370 4 21 19 24

OK, let me see, the container stacking looks different, the ship is streamlined. What else am I missing?

_________________
Timothy Dike
Owner & Administrator
ModelWarships.com

Hello Pieter, I have some pics of such ships, and also detailed pics of the globe tanks under construction. They are actually placed on wooden blocks inside the ship, not fixed. You can see those pics on pg1 of this topic. The tanks are on average a good 30m in diameter.

They are not really "old style" LNGs as they are still being built. Now they have up to 6 tanks and have lengths of over 300m. Back in the days, the Excalibur type of LNG already existed too, the Belgian built Methania is one of those, still in service now! I think recently they have become cheaper as now South Korea starts building them too, so by becoming cheaper, such tankers are being built more. The "ice cream cars" as the "old style" LNGs are called, are not the best of designs although it has its own advantages, they were just preferred due to cost and lower vaporization of the cargo.

Haven't seen the movie, maybe a pitty if I hear this! (btw, if the thing exploded in the movie, don't believe it, it doesn't work!)

http://www.ch-iv.com/int/tanker.htm

This one's cool:


At shipspotting you will find a category with LNG tankers. Otherwise the best way is just to pick one out, and go to the company's site to get more information about sizes. Shipspotting mostly gives just a picture with nearly no information.

_________________
The merchant shipyard

The movie ends with the suggestion of a suicide attack on an LNG tanker in the process of being loaded, which seems to be the only way to get a serious explosion out of an LNG tanker (or an oil tanker for that matter). There are some very nice shots of tanker + terminal but they do not show the explosion itself. I have mixed impressions about the movie. They did their research on most issues, there are some absolutely brilliant scenes (like a US senator defending his right to be corrupt), and the action scenes are good. On the other hand the plot is rather complicated, there is only one character which shows some development (George Clooney as a CIA agent) and I wonder if I would have liked the movie if I wouldn't have a lot of background knowledge on the issue involved -oil. I give it a 7 out of 10 , which means you should check it out if it runs in Belgium.

I'll give you another hint Timothy, she's missing something...

Pieter, even during loading, I doubt there is a chance of such an explosion.
What I think is the most stupid move they are doing with LNG, is making such things as that movie... In America they have now imposed a safety zone of 2miles ahead of an LNG, 1000 yards on each side and 1mile aft of it.
By making such "publicity" and bringing people on the idea, they are just causing a danger (sometimes it's better to stay quiet about certain things, certainly in shipping, but US govt doesn't seem to understand that). By constantly tantalising and pointing people at this "danger", even suggesting the best way to do it, they are nearly making sure that at least someone will try this! (and the funny thing is that if it really blows up, those safety zones are by far inadequate to guaranty more or less "no-damage")

_________________
The merchant shipyard

Neptune: She's missing cranes!

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Ahhhhh no funnel. The logos on the bridge wings fooled me.

_________________
Timothy Dike
Owner & Administrator
ModelWarships.com

Timmy, good try, but container vessels without cranes are just a different type of the ones with cranes.
Cadman, indeed, that is what I figured out too. A funnel is about the most common element on a ship and even on the most primitive drawing people put a funnel with a plume of smoke on it! But this one doesn't have it! I'm not sure, but I think she's one of those new electric driven vessels. All in all they do need generators to make electricity and those generators do need a funnel... Don't know how they're doing it!

Ron, indeed this is what I want to build, have you already read the mail I sent you?

_________________
The merchant shipyard

Ron, indeed this is what I want to build, have you already read the mail I sent you?


Yes , and stored the pictures and ribs, studying them at the moment, The CIC gave me her Flue, so im under the weather at the moment, but I will survive,

_________________
Simple but effective.

Roel, I think she does have a funnel, if you look at the second picture, it's placed central, just aft of th e bridge, an outward angled square white funnel, with small black pipes on top.
Maybe that's for the generator?

Greetz, Johan

_________________
VENTIS SECUNDIS

253 269 863 261 471 958 220 370 4 21 19 24

I checked it on the real 100% sized picture and indeed that is a funnel. And yes I think that's just for generators as normal diesels require a much bigger funnel than this...

Ron, what material would you recommend for the superstructure? I guess I'll start with that pretty soon, the safety plan has 1/200 plans of each deck and the height can be found on the safety plan too. This way I'm kind of putting myself stuck to this, otherwise I might abandon it (as I practically did with Ti Europe model). It won't be too much work to do just the superstructure either, no major works that have to be done during summer holidays! So what material would you choose? Wood? Styrene?
Too bad for that flue though, first the CiC makes you do all kinds of things to keep you from modelling and after succeeding in that, she tries to keep you from helping other people with modelling! I think she doesn't like modelbuilding anymore, that Iron Duke must occupy too much space in the house, I think you better bring it to me

Regards and thanks for the support!
Roel

_________________
The merchant shipyard

Well Roel, I would go for the styrene, its easy to cut and glue , and the sections are not to large, just break it down into sections like I do and you will not have any trouble, the thing with scratch building, take small steps, dont look at the whole picture, this can put you off, look at a side, draw it out in your mind, and then add a front or rear, then the other side, you have to remember everything is a box really. ARH

_________________
Simple but effective.

Plan's finished now Ron, I'm going to show it to Johan tomorrow.
I'll start as soon as I have the styrene!!! Would be great and some time saved too!
Another question I have, is the propellor shaft! If I use the same technique as you and Geoff, then the "keel" running all the way aft, will be in the way of the prop shaft, as the prop shaft s mounted central! Any idea how to solve that?

_________________
The merchant shipyard

Build the keel , and put in all your frames, and then your braces between the ribs to stiffen everything up, when thats done you can line up the prop shaft and mark out and cut out the slot. ARH

_________________
Simple but effective.

LIKE THIS.

_________________
Simple but effective.

Roel, I don't think a 2005 movie has anything to do with many years old decisions on safety limits etc.
The movie treats public anxiety about LNG tankers as a given fact, and it is not a major part of the story line. The very strict LNG rules (which may even have created their own public fears BTW - if it is so safe whye protect it like that?) were caused by the maritime industries' very bad track record on crude oil tanker safety in the 1960's and early '70s. The industry simply could not afford another learning curve like that in a new trade.
Still I wonder what would have happened if the S11 attackers had gone for key points in the US energy infrastructure instead of the classic symbols of american power.

qoute="Neptune"]I'll give you another hint Timothy, she's missing something...

Pieter, even during loading, I doubt there is a chance of such an explosion.
What I think is the most stupid move they are doing with LNG, is making such things as that movie... In America they have now imposed a safety zone of 2miles ahead of an LNG, 1000 yards on each side and 1mile aft of it.
By making such "publicity" and bringing people on the idea, they are just causing a danger (sometimes it's better to stay quiet about certain things, certainly in shipping, but US govt doesn't seem to understand that). By constantly tantalising and pointing people at this "danger", even suggesting the best way to do it, they are nearly making sure that at least someone will try this! (and the funny thing is that if it really blows up, those safety zones are by far inadequate to guaranty more or less "no-damage")[/quote]

I had a look around and this is what I found!
I don't know if our sister vessel Excalibur had a spare propellor, but I do know she has green decks, so possibly it is her.
This is the Qalhat port where I went for loading with Excel. As you can see, it's just a desert... The other pier in front of the ship is a pier specially made for the three tugboats, otherwise there is NOTHING in the entire area except for a "city" called Sur (which is a village in our standards).

_________________
The merchant shipyard