Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
News

Burning Cargo Ship is Adrift in Mid-Atlantic Without Crew (apnews.com) 82

A burning car transport ship drifted in the mid-Atlantic on Thursday after the huge vessel's 22 crew members were evacuated due to the blaze, the Portuguese navy said. From a report: Shipping in the area was warned that the 200-meter-long (650-feet-long) Felicity Ace was adrift near Portugal's Azores Islands after the crew were taken off on Wednesday, Portuguese navy spokesman Cmdr. Jose Sousa Luis said. The Felicity Ace can carry more than 17,000 metric tons (18,700 tons) of cargo. Typically, car transport ships fit thousands of vehicles on multiple decks in their hold.

Volkswagen Group said in a brief statement the Felicity Ace was transporting to the U.S. vehicles that the German automaker produced. The company declined to comment on what consequences the incident might have for U.S. customers or the VW Group. The ship's operator, Japan's Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, said in an email to the AP it could not provide information about the cargo.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Burning Cargo Ship is Adrift in Mid-Atlantic Without Crew

Comments Filter:
  • by Lije Baley ( 88936 ) on Friday February 18, 2022 @11:47AM (#62280403)

    ID4 battery fire?

    • No, the fire started in the shops motor compartment... Also, the ship is carrying a bunch of high end cars like Bentleys and BMWs too. (so not just Volkswagen). So I'm sure they'll want to try and recover this ship asap before it gets hit by rough weather.
    • Why would you suspect the electric cars more than the gas ones?
      • by Ă…ke Malmgren ( 3402337 ) on Friday February 18, 2022 @12:10PM (#62280489)
        Because bias and sensationalism.
        • Because lithium ion batteries are not allowed in cargo hold of airplanes.
          • by Viol8 ( 599362 ) on Friday February 18, 2022 @03:31PM (#62281357) Homepage

            Neither is petrol or diesel last time I checked.

            • Lithium ion is a chemical fire that burns even with no oxygen. Gas and diesel need oxygen to burn as well as an ignition source. If there is a manufacturer defect in the battery it can short and ignite on its own.
              • by mjwx ( 966435 )

                Lithium ion is a chemical fire that burns even with no oxygen. Gas and diesel need oxygen to burn as well as an ignition source. If there is a manufacturer defect in the battery it can short and ignite on its own.

                Petrol and diesel fires are also easier to put out, due to Li-ion fires burning without O2.

                Also petrol and diesel fires are much harder to start. They only burn easily when in aerosol form and exposed directly to a spark or naked flame (OK, and extreme pressure). That's why your car mixes air and petrol before injecting it into the cylinder. Petrol and diesel can sit on an Australian bitumen road in 45 C (or more) heat and not ignite. Police/Fire will generally put some sand over it which reduces the ris

      • Sorry, my humor is a bit too subtle or obscure sometimes.

        • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

          by jellomizer ( 103300 )

          Humor in comment sections is generally a bad idea, especially sarcasm or subtle humor.

          Being that a few months ago a bunch of people went to Texas in hope that President Kennedy would appoint President Trump for a second term. And people took this seriously. Despite Kennedy is Dead, Kennedy Dead or Alive wouldn't have the authority to appoint Trump, if were alive probably would go back to Massachusetts vs staying in Texas, and he is a model of the liberal Democrat who probably wouldn't want Trump in office

          • "Humor in comment sections is generally a bad idea, especially sarcasm or subtle humor."

            Despite your UID, you must be new here.
          • I can't wait to see the Edison fans lining up to kill elephants by hooking them up to a Tesla.

        • I'd see it being humor If the fire wasn't in the ships engine room. :)
        • Sorry, my humor is a bit too subtle or obscure sometimes.

          Same here. I think its "clever", others think its too obscure. I think they're just dumbshits, but Its probably more like I'm less clever than I think I am. Its a cross I bear.

      • Because the OP is ignorant of the real facts about vehicle fires.

      • They really shouldn't suspect either one.

        For shipping, cars leave the factory with only enough gas to go through testing and to be loaded onto trains/trucks for transport. Domestically VW will provide ~3 gallons of gasoline; for a car shipping internationally, they'll go up as high as ~3.5 gallons. With some variations based on model.

        With their ID.4 the main battery isn't supposed to have more than 30% charge when it leaves the line.

        • That's bad for the battery... It should be shipped with a 50% charge or so.

          • by RedShoeRider ( 658314 ) on Friday February 18, 2022 @01:19PM (#62280851)

            30% State of Charge is preferable to de-risk it as much as reasonable during transport.

            I just went though a 1st Responder / FireFighter info course given by Tesla. Say what you will about their cars and the company; their remote training for rescue personnel is top notch, full of info, is free, and is given by an engineer who seriously knows what he's talking about. One of the demo's (not live, sadly) is the how State of Charge affects the battery when the case integrity is violated in Lithium ion batteries.
            In short: 30% charge is completely boring. Smack the battery with a sledgehammer and you get a flattened battery and a whiff of smoke. That's it. Do the same test at 50%, and things get much more dramatic. Do it at 100% and you get a show. I'm sure this is on YouTube somewhere, but the difference even between 30 and 50% was surprising.

            • They aren't going to be at 30% by the time they ship, either. Road testing etc. will eat into that total.

        • by stooo ( 2202012 )

          >> VW will provide ~3 gallons of gasoline
          Nope. VW does not put any "gallons". VW uses liters.

      • by slazzy ( 864185 )
        Probably more likely since it's newer technology.
      • If one is really looking for a serious answer - my guess - ICE cars are shipped with empty gas tanks, but electric ones need to have some charge, otherwise it is bad for the batteries?
        I really don't know much about actual cargo shipping.
      • by Lehk228 ( 705449 )
        because cars being shipped by a manufacturer don't have gasoline in them,
  • by nucrash ( 549705 ) on Friday February 18, 2022 @11:50AM (#62280419)

    Go Pirates, go! Grab yourselves a slightly burnt car at discount prices. All you need to do is unload it while it's abandoned.

    • Its fair game according to maritime law since there is nobody onboard.
    • A cargo helicopter with 3 ton capacity rents for about $4k per hour. If such a helicopter is available on the Azores, and there are luxury models parked on the open top deck, it might be a very profitable endeavor. Particularly, if you could arrange a barge nearby and offload several cars per flight. But, not quite free, and definitely a very limited time offer...
    • I recall seeing a picture form long ago (60s?) of a handful of bugs bobbing in the ocean after a cargo ship accident.

      I think it was turned into ad by VW.

      I couldn't find it just now, although I did see a couple of ads with individual floating bugs from the 70s.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 18, 2022 @11:54AM (#62280439)
    If that ship is carrying any Audi SUVs with Nazi Space Laser headlights, destined to be driven by the fucking jerks that buy these things, do humanity a favor and scuttle it. I am glad that the mariners were rescued.
    • It's a shame it's not a ship-load of white pavement princess F-150s destined to tailgate me on a curvy bi-way when they can plainly see there's a slower car in front of me which I'm following at a reasonable distance, only to dangerously pass us both when a 2nd lane opens up, then swerve over for their exit nearly causing a 3-way wreck.

  • by Ecuador ( 740021 ) on Friday February 18, 2022 @12:02PM (#62280459) Homepage

    There was an even greater ship fire today on a Greece-Italy ferry [euronews.com]. I say "greater" because it spread fast enough that not everybody is accounted for, 2 were still trapped on board and 11 missing as to the latest news. It's the Patras-Brindisi line that carries trucks and cars that want to go from Greece to Italy faster than crossing the Balkans. Another one of those burned about 5 years ago with casualties - just a couple of days after I did the crossing myself (i.e. on the next crossing). I remember I wrote a scathing review on their FB page as there was smoke coming out of ventilation in the middle of the night and we were 8 hours late, which was quite suspicious, like they were dealing with a fire without telling passengers anything, and then a couple of days later it turned out they tried to do the same thing with much less success...

    • How is either this article or you tale relevant to Slashdot though? sure, it's for mainstream news site. But ships sink, burn, get attacked by pirates, get cargo water-logged if bad storm, etc.

      Just the history of shipping since the dawn of man using boats for goods at least 8 thousand if not more years ago... not tech site worthy.

      • by TWX ( 665546 )

        I was wondering the same thing, what does this have to do with tech/science/IT/fandom or any of a multitude of other geeky/nerdy subjects?

        It's not even globally significant enough to justify breaking the usual mold tell us something of world-affecting events.

        • by tragedy ( 27079 )

          It's a car fire story. Since electric cars started to become a thing (or re-emerge as a thing or whatever) we've been getting electric car stories, which is pretty legit for Slashdot. Trouble is, that also meant that we kept on getting stories about electric cars catching fire. Somewhere along the line, the editors just decided that the readers are interested in car fires in general.

          • by TWX ( 665546 )

            I've still not seen any well-researched study that demonstrates that electrics burn at any higher rate or more intensely than vehicles powered by petroleum products.

            Any time that energy is stored in especially high density there's a risk that the energy will be released in a manner other than by design. I've actually dealt with the ramifications of a vehicle fire where it managed to be put out before the whole vehicle burned, and I'm paintfully aware of just how rare it is that a vehicle fire of of any kin

            • by tragedy ( 27079 )

              I've still not seen any well-researched study that demonstrates that electrics burn at any higher rate or more intensely than vehicles powered by petroleum products.

              They almost certainly don't burn at a higher rate. The intensity of the fires is another question. I mean, there's definitely a lot more energy in a tank of gas than in the batteries, but maybe the batteries are harder to put out? You might be able to stop a small fire in an ICE with a fire-extinguisher before it turns into a big blaze if you were very quick and had access to the right area. Whereas if an ICE battery pack is starting to catch fire, it's probably unstoppable with anything that would actually

      • by spun ( 1352 )

        I heard they used block chains to secure the cars to the ship's deck.

      • Yeah, if it had been a ship full of say SSDs and a SSD shortage was looming because of it.. sure.. but cars, why on slashdot.

        • a single ship can't carry enough of anything to contribute to a shortage though. Sure Taiwan puts all the chips the USA will use in a year on a single ship, and we have weeks of prayer here as it crosses the ocean, LOLZ

      • by Ecuador ( 740021 )

        It was part of my point really, but I forgot to clarify by the end of my post :) Why have this here, when even in the subject of "ship fires" it's not the biggest news? And if it's about the "cars" (which is still not geeky), the Italian ferry was also mainly a car transport. They were just not new.

      • How is either this article or you tale relevant to Slashdot though?

        Relevant?!? You must be new here! :)
        And, when did /. become a tech site? I thought it was just "news for nerds."

        • yes nerdy stuff, but a ship fire doesn't qualify. Nerd fodder would be how ship fires have always been around since ancient times, either from warfare or from cooking accidents. Yes, some ancient ships had areas with fire bricks for cooking, a few Roman ships had them. Others had sand covered area.

    • and then a couple of days later it turned out they tried to do the same thing with much less success...

      Maybe it was the same fire?

      • by Ecuador ( 740021 )

        No, it was days later and the fire was in the cargo level where the trucks were held, started by either a truck or similar, it was not a fire in some hidden part of the ship.
        If the same thing had happened on my trip, i.e. either a truck caught fire, or drivers who were spending the night possibly cooking food were the cause, it was eventually put out and when we arrived to Italy everybody disembarked none the wiser (just very late). The ship reloaded, went back to Greece, unloaded, then reloaded again and s

        • it was not a fire in some hidden part of the ship

          Well, the fact that you added in assumptions to what I said, and ascribed them to me, completely destroys your value as an information source. It shows you don't understand the world around you, and the parts you miss, you can't perceive because you colored them in yourself.

          Therefore, ignoring completely everything subjective that you said, which is almost everything, from the apparent facts it seems obvious that it was most likely the same fire. But also obvious that you won't comprehend what those words m

          • by Ecuador ( 740021 )

            Well, the fact that you added in assumptions to what I said, and ascribed them to me, completely destroys your value as an information source. It shows you don't understand the world around you, and the parts you miss, you can't perceive because you colored them in yourself.

            Therefore, ignoring completely everything subjective that you said, which is almost everything, from the apparent facts it seems obvious that it was most likely the same fire. But also obvious that you won't comprehend what those words mean, simple as they are. They're too simple, really; there is no narrative, and they leave open numerous narratives, probably encompassing the 10 most likely sets of events.

            Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about. You were saying it could be the "same fire" some days later. I said that the fire days later that consumed the ship started in the vehicles it was carrying that day, which were different from the vehicles it was carrying days earlier when I travelled. I did not add any assumptions, to what you said, unless I did not understand what you meant, which is a different thing, and you could have explained further.
            I did add my own subjective suspicions about my trip

            • Surely the cargo holds can be sealed and filled with CO2 or similar. Or at least water.

              Fires happen. And the cost is huge.

              I do not think that cars are driven onto ships with full tanks of fuel.

              Sounds like gross incompetence.

          • And what exactly is the difference between his assumptions and your assumptions?

            Your repeated posts here on this site completely bare of logic is kind of amusing - in a very bad way ofc.

            • Got you're a fucking idiot.

              You can't apply any critical thinking at all.

              I said, "Maybe it was the same fire." That's a very broad idea. There is no assumptions there at all, either. He replied with a bunch of assumptions about the details that could lead to it being the same fire; and assumed that I meant one of those scenarios. What I actually meant was a more likely scenario, that should also be more obvious and I suspect it is to most readers.

              What assumption did I make? That you say stupid things because

              • And you are not realizing that you are making the same unfounded assumptions he does.

                He at least was on the ship when there was the "first fire". Your assumptions are as a couch potato.

                I pointed out that his assumptions means I heavily discounted his ideas. That's not an assumption.
                Yes it is. Perhaps you want to check a dictionary? Your assumption is that the same ship had two fires in a short row - where the second fire sank the ship, dismissing the idea it is the same fire. So? What is the difference bet

    • And why exactly is this modded of topic?
      Can't hardly be more on topic.

      Mods dumb as shit here.

  • It reminded me of an old Wired article from 2008 about another ship containing cars. https://www.wired.com/2008/02/... [wired.com]
  • Finally, VW products being put to their best use as artificial reefs.

    • I was hoping Portugal would take advantage of the opportunity and scuttle it "for safety," but no such luck; they're preparing to tow it somewhere.

  • by Cryptimus ( 243846 ) on Friday February 18, 2022 @01:16PM (#62280837) Homepage

    This is no doubt because the front fell off: https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm_JqM [youtu.be]

  • Man, I wish I was in the geographical position to go rent a huge barge and go out there. Under maritime law, it's free salvage. Unfortunately, I suspect many other people have the same idea and it might turn into a pirate shooting war in the Azores.
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS4hC0B48G0
    Car Carrier Felicity Ace, Volkswagens and Porsches on Fire in the Atlantic Ocean off the Azores
    What is Going on With Shipping? w/Sal Mercogliano

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Working...