After DNV GL blast, ClassNK to tell class societies how MOL Comfort sank
JAPANESE classification society, ClassNK plans to respond to a rival classification society's criticism and unflattering diagnosis of why the 8,110-TEU MOL Comfort split and sank last summer in the Gulf of Aden.
In response, Japan's ClassNK said it would meet fellow members of the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) next month to share its findings about the sinking.
The loss of one of the biggest ships lost at sea, prompted an investigation into the sinking which rival Danish-German classification society DNV GL said was caused by a non-robust ship design.
Speaking at the International Union of Marine Insurance conference in Hong Kong, DNV GL vice president Knut Dohlie said the girders and scantlings were not strong enough.
The investigators issued an interim report which said that the cause of the ship splitting in two, then sinking could not be determined. The final report has been repeatedly delayed and is to be released before October 1.
DNV GL, which subjected the Comfort to computer modelling, said the delays in the report were "unacceptable" as was the closed-shop, all-Japanese approach to the inquiry, which prevented input of wider technical expertise.
DNV GL attributed the ship splitting in two, first in two parts, then one part pitching and rolling in heavy seas in the Gulf of Aden until it finally sank while under tow, to the collapse of a single longitudinal hull girder.
Speaking at the International Union of Marine Insurance conference in Hong Kong, DNV GL vice president Knut Dohlie said the girders and rib-like scantlings were not strong enough.
In April MOL launched a suit against shipbuilder Mitsubishi Heavy Industries for US$132 million because of alleged defects in building the ship.
"The double-bottom structure contained defects in design, rendering it incapable of enduring the foreseeable working loads a vessel of this size and type should be capable of safely withstanding," said MOL lawyers from Yoshida & Partners.
"The defects should have been foreseeable and avoidable at the design and construction stage. It was strongly suspected that this breach was caused by insufficient buckling strength of the double-bottom hull," they said.
JAPANESE classification society, ClassNK plans to respond to a rival classification society's criticism and unflattering diagnosis of why the 8,110-TEU MOL Comfort split and sank last summer in the Gulf of Aden.
In response, Japan's ClassNK said it would meet fellow members of the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) next month to share its findings about the sinking.
The loss of one of the biggest ships lost at sea, prompted an investigation into the sinking which rival Danish-German classification society DNV GL said was caused by a non-robust ship design.
Speaking at the International Union of Marine Insurance conference in Hong Kong, DNV GL vice president Knut Dohlie said the girders and scantlings were not strong enough.
The investigators issued an interim report which said that the cause of the ship splitting in two, then sinking could not be determined. The final report has been repeatedly delayed and is to be released before October 1.
DNV GL, which subjected the Comfort to computer modelling, said the delays in the report were "unacceptable" as was the closed-shop, all-Japanese approach to the inquiry, which prevented input of wider technical expertise.
DNV GL attributed the ship splitting in two, first in two parts, then one part pitching and rolling in heavy seas in the Gulf of Aden until it finally sank while under tow, to the collapse of a single longitudinal hull girder.
Speaking at the International Union of Marine Insurance conference in Hong Kong, DNV GL vice president Knut Dohlie said the girders and rib-like scantlings were not strong enough.
In April MOL launched a suit against shipbuilder Mitsubishi Heavy Industries for US$132 million because of alleged defects in building the ship.
"The double-bottom structure contained defects in design, rendering it incapable of enduring the foreseeable working loads a vessel of this size and type should be capable of safely withstanding," said MOL lawyers from Yoshida & Partners.
"The defects should have been foreseeable and avoidable at the design and construction stage. It was strongly suspected that this breach was caused by insufficient buckling strength of the double-bottom hull," they said.