Cargo Hatch Clamp Discipline

[Guest]

It was a happy friendly ship where everyone got along lol!

[Guest]

Remember one ship deckhands would bug the mate to let them only do every second clamp or whatever mate eventually gave in but told them if weather changes your putting the rest on and your doing it on your time!

Not much of a mate if he gave in to a deckhand.

[Guest]

Remember one ship deckhands would bug the mate to let them only do every second clamp or whatever mate eventually gave in but told them if weather changes your putting the rest on and your doing it on your time!

[garbear]

I wasn't trying draw a direct comparison between the different forces exerted on a wheel compared to a cargo hold hatch. I apologize for comparing apples to oranges. Perhaps it would have been better for me to make the comparison as to if a piece of equipment is designed to be equipped with an x number of fasteners wouldn't it always be better to use all of them rather than selectively? Over the years I have heard that many believe that the weight of the hatch itself will keep it in place over the opening and watertight. I think this assumption was disproven scientifically during the Fitzgerald investigation. I don't mean to bring the Fitzgerald into this as the Coast Guard findings have resulted in a controversial issue in the Great Lakes shipping community with many taking sides on either side of the argument with little tolerance for opposing views. Rather I'm trying to discuss the actual practice of hatch clamp usage.

Does anyone have any information on the Montrealais losing 5 hatches in Lake Michigan in late 1993? Since they were stacked at the time, the hatch clamps would have played no role in the incident but it seems like this could have turned out much worse and there is little out there on this.

Ships of the former Upper Lakes Group Facebook has photos of the Montrealais after her hatch issue. And the Fitzgerald wasn't out in that storm without hatches clamped. Just didn't happen.

[garbear]

Hatch clamps are usually ship to ship. On the Burns Harbor we did every clamp every run no matter weather or season, on the Roger Blough we did all the "short side" clamps (facing the P/S sides) and every other clamp on the long side (fore and aft) in the summer in all weather. On the Munson they had some odd configuration for the summer, I've only seen on her (Stonies have their own rules :) ) It was something like every 3rd or 4th clamp and all on the short sides. I swear it changed every load, then again I wasn't from RC and was transfered from the Blough so "I didn't know how to steamboat". On the Earl W. Oglebay it was every other clamp for the summer all in the fall/winter.

Do these various methods stem from practices on each ship or is this something that needs approval from the head office. In my opinion, and its is just that, I would prefer to have all of the clamps fastened at all times on the basis that having the maximum level of closure would be better than operating at a somewhat lower level. I'm assuming that some of these practices are related to labor requirements and with reduced numbers it could put a strain on the deck crew. I guess I cannot help associating this with driving a vehicle with only 4 of the 5 lugnuts tightened but that may be a bad comparison. Does the use of only certain hatch clamps create the potential of damaging or distortion of the hatch or gasket due to uneven pressure?

As Brian so well put each boat has its own rules and the Captain is ultimately responsible for the boats safety and generally has the Mates enforce those.
Quite honestly I think concern over how many clamps are used during the better weather months is unfounded. A case in point. On the White we had unloaded at Trenton and one the unloading bridges had cut a pretty good slice into one of the side tanks in cargo hold #1. When we hit buoys 11&12 in Lake Hron Cut upbound the next morning they had pumped the ballast tank in question empty in hold #1 in hopes of getting the engineer who did maintenence into the hold to weld the damage. The deck crew started hosing the deck down. The unloading bridges not only caused occasional tank damage but the buckets didn't close well and there were always lots if pellets on deck and plenty of grease spots. It was my watch as AB Watchman and the first mate told me to check #1 cargo hold to see if it was dry enough to work in and get the welding crew down in it ASAP. As per the custom we had minimal clamps on the hatches it being summer and even with the deck crew right above me shooting water on the hatches with the high pressure hose there were minimal drips here and there when I check the hold.
Once they were past hold #1 we popped the clamps and pulled the cover on the hatch directly above the damaged tank and dropped the welding equipment down on lines.
In other instances where we were taking considerable spray on deck during summer squalls like we had yesterday (9/3) comparable to the Ryerson photo, the holds were checked and rarely was there more than a trickle here and there.
The weight if the hatch cover itself seals the hatch fairly well unless the cover is sprung and clamped even minimally keeps it from moving any if the boat is working somewhat in a moderate sea.
Obviously during the stormy seasons all clamps should be on and tightened along with hatch cover gaskets periodically checked. Boarding seas and blue water over the deck along with the hull twisting and flexing make that a no
brainer.
Taking the Fitz out of the equation for obvious reasons, to my knowledge no ship
With the one piece hatch covers has ever sank due to hatch cover failure. When one considers the hundreds of ships that have sailed in all kinds of inclement whether for decades with them, that speaks for it self.[/qu

Reading the first couple paragraphs of your post you could substitute South Chicago for Trenton. Spent all the next day after we departed there cleaning the deck and getting rid of grease spots.

[Guest]

I wasn't trying draw a direct comparison between the different forces exerted on a wheel compared to a cargo hold hatch. I apologize for comparing apples to oranges. Perhaps it would have been better for me to make the comparison as to if a piece of equipment is designed to be equipped with an x number of fasteners wouldn't it always be better to use all of them rather than selectively? Over the years I have heard that many believe that the weight of the hatch itself will keep it in place over the opening and watertight. I think this assumption was disproven scientifically during the Fitzgerald investigation. I don't mean to bring the Fitzgerald into this as the Coast Guard findings have resulted in a controversial issue in the Great Lakes shipping community with many taking sides on either side of the argument with little tolerance for opposing views. Rather I'm trying to discuss the actual practice of hatch clamp usage.

Does anyone have any information on the Montrealais losing 5 hatches in Lake Michigan in late 1993? Since they were stacked at the time, the hatch clamps would have played no role in the incident but it seems like this could have turned out much worse and there is little out there on this.

[GuestfromEU]

Hatch clamps are usually ship to ship. On the Burns Harbor we did every clamp every run no matter weather or season, on the Roger Blough we did all the "short side" clamps (facing the P/S sides) and every other clamp on the long side (fore and aft) in the summer in all weather. On the Munson they had some odd configuration for the summer, I've only seen on her (Stonies have their own rules :) ) It was something like every 3rd or 4th clamp and all on the short sides. I swear it changed every load, then again I wasn't from RC and was transfered from the Blough so "I didn't know how to steamboat". On the Earl W. Oglebay it was every other clamp for the summer all in the fall/winter.

Do these various methods stem from practices on each ship or is this something that needs approval from the head office. In my opinion, and its is just that, I would prefer to have all of the clamps fastened at all times on the basis that having the maximum level of closure would be better than operating at a somewhat lower level. I'm assuming that some of these practices are related to labor requirements and with reduced numbers it could put a strain on the deck crew. I guess I cannot help associating this with driving a vehicle with only 4 of the 5 lugnuts tightened but that may be a bad comparison. Does the use of only certain hatch clamps create the potential of damaging or distortion of the hatch or gasket due to uneven pressure?

The difference is your auto tyres are always in motion when driving, subject to forces. Hatch covers provide little structural strength to lakers. The transverse beams and hatch coamings provide the necessary support, and hatch covers only seal the cargo holds. This is necessary when taking seas over the deck, which is not generally a concern in summer months.

The office of each company may have policies in place, but often is not the case and is left to the ship to manage. As you stated, the more clamps on means longer working hours for the crew. The foremost concern is overtime, or even regular hours. If the deck crew takes 30 minutes extra to put on clamps, that is 30 minutes lost which could be used for deck washing, maintenance, or other tasks, and also time lost when arriving at the next dock as more time is taken to remove those clamps. On a footer with long runs, this is manageable but becomes much more of a factor when making a dock in 12-18 hours time.

[Brian Ferguson]

Do these various methods stem from practices on each ship or is this something that needs approval from the head office. In my opinion, and its is just that, I would prefer to have all of the clamps fastened at all times on the basis that having the maximum level of closure would be better than operating at a somewhat lower level. I'm assuming that some of these practices are related to labor requirements and with reduced numbers it could put a strain on the deck crew. I guess I cannot help associating this with driving a vehicle with only 4 of the 5 lugnuts tightened but that may be a bad comparison. Does the use of only certain hatch clamps create the potential of damaging or distortion of the hatch or gasket due to uneven pressure?

Pretty sure it goes by the 1st mate/captain (at least that was my view I was a lowly deckhand). I know it seems like it'd make a difference how many clamps are on (and I blame the Fitz report for that) and to an extent you're right, but it's not a perfect analogy (car wheel, hatch cover). A 7 ton single piece steel hatch cover even with no clamps has more force (through gravity) holding it to the ship then a 22lbs cast alloy car wheel would, there's also no centrifugal force trying to spin it off. You would have to take one heck of a roll to dislodge a cover (where in that sea state you'd have more issues than the covers moving). I'd like to also dispel the rumor that single piece covers are "water tight" nothing on a ship is truly watertight. The covers and coamings get banged around, shape gets distorted, I've been on ships where you could see some daylight between the cover and coaming but you'd never get enough water through it that would be a threat to buoyancy. Another take is you can have all the clamps on but the eye bolts aren't tightened. I've seen some loose eye bolts rattle off on a trip, in that situation are half the clamps properly tightened better than all the clamps snapped down but the eye bolts not tightened? I've never worked a ship where we addressed an eye bolt unless the clamp wouldn't snap in place. Either way there's plenty of redundancy in the clamps where not having them all on wouldn't cause any real issues.

[Jon Paul]

Hatch clamps are usually ship to ship. On the Burns Harbor we did every clamp every run no matter weather or season, on the Roger Blough we did all the "short side" clamps (facing the P/S sides) and every other clamp on the long side (fore and aft) in the summer in all weather. On the Munson they had some odd configuration for the summer, I've only seen on her (Stonies have their own rules :) ) It was something like every 3rd or 4th clamp and all on the short sides. I swear it changed every load, then again I wasn't from RC and was transfered from the Blough so "I didn't know how to steamboat". On the Earl W. Oglebay it was every other clamp for the summer all in the fall/winter.

Do these various methods stem from practices on each ship or is this something that needs approval from the head office. In my opinion, and its is just that, I would prefer to have all of the clamps fastened at all times on the basis that having the maximum level of closure would be better than operating at a somewhat lower level. I'm assuming that some of these practices are related to labor requirements and with reduced numbers it could put a strain on the deck crew. I guess I cannot help associating this with driving a vehicle with only 4 of the 5 lugnuts tightened but that may be a bad comparison. Does the use of only certain hatch clamps create the potential of damaging or distortion of the hatch or gasket due to uneven pressure?

As Brian so well put each boat has its own rules and the Captain is ultimately responsible for the boats safety and generally has the Mates enforce those.
Quite honestly I think concern over how many clamps are used during the better weather months is unfounded. A case in point. On the White we had unloaded at Trenton and one the unloading bridges had cut a pretty good slice into one of the side tanks in cargo hold #1. When we hit buoys 11&12 in Lake Hron Cut upbound the next morning they had pumped the ballast tank in question empty in hold #1 in hopes of getting the engineer who did maintenence into the hold to weld the damage. The deck crew started hosing the deck down. The unloading bridges not only caused occasional tank damage but the buckets didn't close well and there were always lots if pellets on deck and plenty of grease spots. It was my watch as AB Watchman and the first mate told me to check #1 cargo hold to see if it was dry enough to work in and get the welding crew down in it ASAP. As per the custom we had minimal clamps on the hatches it being summer and even with the deck crew right above me shooting water on the hatches with the high pressure hose there were minimal drips here and there when I check the hold.
Once they were past hold #1 we popped the clamps and pulled the cover on the hatch directly above the damaged tank and dropped the welding equipment down on lines.
In other instances where we were taking considerable spray on deck during summer squalls like we had yesterday (9/3) comparable to the Ryerson photo, the holds were checked and rarely was there more than a trickle here and there.
The weight if the hatch cover itself seals the hatch fairly well unless the cover is sprung and clamped even minimally keeps it from moving any if the boat is working somewhat in a moderate sea.
Obviously during the stormy seasons all clamps should be on and tightened along with hatch cover gaskets periodically checked. Boarding seas and blue water over the deck along with the hull twisting and flexing make that a no
brainer.
Taking the Fitz out of the equation for obvious reasons, to my knowledge no ship
With the one piece hatch covers has ever sank due to hatch cover failure. When one considers the hundreds of ships that have sailed in all kinds of inclement whether for decades with them, that speaks for it self.

[Guest]

Hatch clamps are usually ship to ship. On the Burns Harbor we did every clamp every run no matter weather or season, on the Roger Blough we did all the "short side" clamps (facing the P/S sides) and every other clamp on the long side (fore and aft) in the summer in all weather. On the Munson they had some odd configuration for the summer, I've only seen on her (Stonies have their own rules :) ) It was something like every 3rd or 4th clamp and all on the short sides. I swear it changed every load, then again I wasn't from RC and was transfered from the Blough so "I didn't know how to steamboat". On the Earl W. Oglebay it was every other clamp for the summer all in the fall/winter.

Do these various methods stem from practices on each ship or is this something that needs approval from the head office. In my opinion, and its is just that, I would prefer to have all of the clamps fastened at all times on the basis that having the maximum level of closure would be better than operating at a somewhat lower level. I'm assuming that some of these practices are related to labor requirements and with reduced numbers it could put a strain on the deck crew. I guess I cannot help associating this with driving a vehicle with only 4 of the 5 lugnuts tightened but that may be a bad comparison. Does the use of only certain hatch clamps create the potential of damaging or distortion of the hatch or gasket due to uneven pressure?

[Brian Ferguson]

Hatch clamps are usually ship to ship. On the Burns Harbor we did every clamp every run no matter weather or season, on the Roger Blough we did all the "short side" clamps (facing the P/S sides) and every other clamp on the long side (fore and aft) in the summer in all weather. On the Munson they had some odd configuration for the summer, I've only seen on her (Stonies have their own rules :) ) It was something like every 3rd or 4th clamp and all on the short sides. I swear it changed every load, then again I wasn't from RC and was transfered from the Blough so "I didn't know how to steamboat". On the Earl W. Oglebay it was every other clamp for the summer all in the fall/winter.

[hugh3]

Has to be a light boat. Inland only carried ore to their own mills and no other cargo such as grain or coal.

[Guest]

Here is an image I found online of the Edward L. Ryerson taking some spray with what appears to be every other hatch clamp fastened. It looks like it was taken during the early 2000s there is a blue ring on the stack. Hard to tell what time of year it was taken but the cloud shadowing and lighting looks like the sun is at a low angle of either spring or fall. No photo credit information was attached to the image where I found it.

[Guest]

[quote Any sailors or family members that don't agree?][/quote]

Maybe I worded what I was trying to say improperly.

Is there any sailors or family members that think another look at the investigation of the Fitzgerald should be done using modern technology.

[Wheelsman]

Right on, hugh3. Accidents will happen, no technology in the world will prevent that. I guess what really bugs me about this whole thing is how will the aftermath be handled after the next fatal disaster. The track record ain't good.

[hugh3]

[*I entirely agree we should let the crew rest in peace. ]

I don't know of any sailor who would not want any information withheld or not revealed that would prevent another accident from happening again. I also believe that they would want information gleamed by todays advanced methods to be reveled by taking another closer look at the whole incident.

Any sailors or family members that don't agree?

[Guest]

The outage was first reported to the USCG a few days before. They, in turn, due to mutual agreement, should have reported it to the CCG. CCG initially reported they received no communication regarding the light.

How is the interaction between the USCG and CCG regulated? Is this by some type of treaty or agreement between the two countries? It would be interesting to see how such a document is worded in terms of this type of situation. This would, of course, require a copy of any agreement in force in 1975.

[Wheelsman]

The outage was first reported to the USCG a few days before. They, in turn, due to mutual agreement, should have reported it to the CCG. CCG initially reported they received no communication regarding the light.

[Guest]

Dang it, I'm tired of hearing about hatch clamps and covers regarding the Fitz's sinking. Cooper said McSorley told him early on that he was taking in water from below so as far as I'm concerned there was a hull fracture below the waterline. Period. The impacts the two sections of the broken ship took after hitting bottom would have knocked the covers and clamps askew to the point of being worthless as investigative theories as to the cause of her sinking. With the Caribou Island light out I still lean toward hitting bottom sometime during the storm.
The CG did try to shift blame and only ended up with egg on their face, covering up for that light being out and for the retired CG admirals that supposedly sat on Northwestern Mutual's board.

Caribou Island is in Canadian waters, not US, so why would the USCG have "egg on their face"?

[Wheelsman]

I entirely agree we should let the crew rest in peace. However, the CG, Oglebay and Northwestern should not. Their actions following the disaster flew in the face of responsibility. For example, Hudson's mother even said it was days if not weeks before she heard anything from Oglebay, and only after reaching out.
I have a story similar to Steamboat's: I returned home from overseas in late Oct 75 and was on my way going to the lakes with Oglebay in early Nov 75. The timing was a wake-up call thinking I could very well have ended up on the Fitz. I had dealt with a couple ship disasters in the Navy but nothing on the scale of the Fitz.