Shipping industry says ships, cargoes should be safe from the Y2k bug ("the nightmare scenario goes like this:..."

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

http://www.billingsgazette.com/business/991116_bus03.html

Link

Shipping industry says ships, cargoes should be safe from Y2K bug

LONDON (AP) - For companies in the shipping industry, the nightmare Y2K scenario goes something like this:

A 130,000-ton tanker laden with crude oil is wending its way through the narrowest part of the English Channel during the early hours of Jan. 1, 2000.

Suddenly, a computer controlling the ship's steering system fails, having misinterpreted the date of the new year. The vessel veers into the path of an oncoming freighter and, despite the tanker captain's effort to override the error, the two ships collide.

Oil gushes from the tanker's ruptured hull, forming a slick that paralyzes traffic and blackens the shores of one of the world's busiest waterways.

To try to avert such catastrophic equipment failures, ship operators and port managers have spent hundreds of millions of dollars and countless man-hours upgrading computers and replacing microchips vulnerable to the Y2K millennium bug.

"It doesn't matter how well you test your systems, there's always the chance that something can go wrong," says Stephen Clinch, marine director for Associated Bulk Carriers, a British shipping company.

As with any other highly computerized business, the shipping industry is worried about what might happen in the crucial first second after midnight Dec. 31, when computers register a new date ending in the digits "00."

The risk is that some systems might misread the date as 1900 and shut down, causing some of the world's 86,000 merchant ships to lose their ability to navigate, communicate or even control their engines. Computerized port equipment is also a concern.

A modern oceangoing ship relies on dozens of computers for the most basic of tasks. Automated systems control steering, navigation, propulsion, communications, even fire alarms.

And as ships have become more computerized, the number of sailors aboard the typical ship has dropped, leaving less people to deal with an emergency. Crew members needed to run a big oil tanker, for example, have shrunk from 40 in 1970 to about 22 today.

Many ship-operating companies and maritime officials say fears of a possible Y2K-related shipping disaster have been exaggerated. They maintain that the bulk of the world's merchant fleet is now protected against the millennium bug.

Yet there is a scarcity of hard data to back up their claims, and no international body exists to oversee the industry's Y2K remediation efforts. The International Maritime Organization, a United Nations agency, has issued recommendations but neither certifies nor enforces readiness. That task is up to individual countries, and enforcement varies.

Besides collisions, fires at waterside fuel terminals are among the worst disaster scenarios.

Royal Dutch Shell Group began three years ago to upgrade the computers at its oil storage facilities and onboard its 50 tankers and natural gas carriers. The effort has cost it $400 million so far, says Shell spokeswoman Cerris Tavinor.

To minimize the risk of an accident, Shell has ordered its ships to steer clear of waters with strong tides, narrow channels and dense traffic during the hours before and after midnight Dec. 31.

Such areas include the Strait of Malacca in Southeast Asia, the Strait of Dover in the English Channel, the Suez Canal, the Strait of Gibraltar and Turkey's Bosphorus.

"Basically you've got no margin of error in those places. If something goes wrong, you could be up on rocks or into another ship," says Clinch, the Associated Bulk Carriers executive.

Ports, like crowded parking lots, are also tricky places to maneuver ships - even under the best of conditions. One of the world's largest ports, Rotterdam in the Netherlands, has a much-copied plan for dealing with Y2K complications.

The Port of Rotterdam Authority has tested all its equipment and plans to add a fire brigade and other "special teams" by year's end, says Menco Van Heezen, an authority spokesman.

A holiday tradition also should help: Rotterdam port employees typically don't work from around 2 p.m. on Dec. 31 until late the following afternoon.

"In the really crucial phase, they're not operating," Van Heezen says. "You don't have the danger that a container is hanging by a crane and at zero-zero hours it suddenly stops."

Making ships and ports Y2K-resistant doesn't come cheap. But just as no single organization oversees the efforts, there is no readily available estimate of the amount of money the shipping industry has spent so far.

Perhaps the most compelling reason for ship operators to upgrade their computers is that most insurers are refusing to honor or sell policies for vessels that aren't Y2K-compliant - and most operators appear to be complying, says Adrian Beeby of Lloyd's of London, the world's largest marine insurer.

The overwhelming majority of the world's ships are insured, including tourist liners.

"We're pretty confident," says Mike Marshall, a systems manager for Carnival Cruise Lines.

Like many other fleet operators, Carnival says it has inspected and adjusted its seaborne and land-based computer systems, spending $16 million to guard against Y2K problems.

It has developed contingency plans to protect communications links with its 14 cruise ships - and has even set up a "war room" in Miami to handle emergencies.

In the United States, the Coast Guard has told ship operators to file information about each vessel likely to call at a U.S. port at any time on Dec. 31 or Jan. 1.

It has developed a "risk-assessment matrix" for each vessel, including its history of mechanical failures, the type of cargo it will be carrying and its travel plans.

The Coast Guard aims to weed out the riskiest ships and order them to stay anchored offshore from a port or let tugboats guide them safely to a berth, says Capt. Richard Tinsman, the Coast Guard's Y2K program director.

Britain, Australia, the Netherlands and Canada are taking similar precautions, while Japan, China, Malaysia and Indonesia have "a high degree of readiness," he says.

However, some countries lack the money or expertise to manage potentially dangerous ships or troubleshoot computers at their own ports. One American fleet owner is even prepared to light bonfires as navigational aids at a particular Third World port in case of a power outage, Tinsman says. He refused to identify the company or the port.

Some developing country ports still use analog-based equipment, which won't be as vulnerable to Y2K-related computer problems.

Pete Arnold of Litton Marine Industries has inspected hundreds of ships for potential Y2K weaknesses. He offers this overall assessment:

"I tried to book a four-day cruise for New Year's, but it was all sold out. That shows how much people are worried," he says from his office in Charlottesville, Va. "I think the problem is overblown."

Updated: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 Copyright ) The Billings Gazette, a division of Lee Enterprises.



-- Homer Beanfang (Bats@inbellfry.com), November 16, 1999

Answers

I wasn't real worried about the steering system, anyhow.

I AM a little concerned about embeddeds onboard, that might fail and shut engines down completely. Or embeddeds that fail in port, and make it impossible to load or unload, like hoisting gear and the like. Or the programs that figure out how to unload a thousand containers and stack them on the wharves, waiting for the trucks. Or programs that schedule the trucks to pick up the containers, and where they go. Or programs that handle the fuel flow, open and shut valves, and fuel the ships. Or programs that handle the diesel for the trucks and other goods-handling gear. Or programs that schedule the trains that have to carry the containers across the country. Or programs and embeddeds that handle switching and stuff like that for the trains. Or programs that handle traffic in waterways, and help ships navigate. Or programs that are used to screen imports and exports, and issue necessary licenses. Or embeddeds that run in-container equipment like air conditioning or freezers. Or programs that handle paychecks for sailors, who might not work if they don't get paid. Or the programs at insurance companies, who won't insure boats they can't find on their computers, or boats that don't seem to have all their computer systems working. Gosh, there might be a couple other things having to do with shipping, that I've missed.

But steering systems? Hadn't really thought about that.

-- bw (home@puget.sound), November 16, 1999.


Oceangoing vessels are highly automated, with a crew of o around 35 being all that's needed to run a supertanker on a 24/7 basis. Not many people on duty at any one time these days. Steering systems use computerized systems to monitor the position of the rudder, to send position change commands and to measure and control feedback of changes.

The old system of having the helmsman spin the wheel to change an indicator watched by a steering crew who actuated the hysdraulic cylinders moving the rudder are as gone as the idea of using pulleys and cables attached directly to the helm.

A good example of what can go wrong is to recall the Chinese freighter which had a steering system failure and crashed into the riverside wharf along the Mississippi in New Orleans. Reports said that such failures are common and that episodes of failure requires up to fifteen minutes to reboot or re-initialize the steering system.

Sound collision alarm. Brace for impact!

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), November 16, 1999.


bw-- It truly is like an onion, the more you peel the more layers there are

-- onionsmakemecry (karlacalif@aol.com), November 17, 1999.

BW,

Or, what about the computer system that lists the contents of each container? Can you imagine what would happen if you couldn't tell a container carrying diapers from one loaded with medicine, autoparts or rotting fruit? And I won't even mention hazmats.

-- Midas (midas_mulligan_2000@yahoo.com), November 17, 1999.


Hey, That's MY paper you're reading!!!!

Give it back!!!!!!

(And drop me line if you live in this part of the world...we'll "chat".)

The addy is real.

-- DavePrime (the_tv_guy@hotmail.com), November 17, 1999.



Wasn't it just a month or so ago that the Coast Guard decided to check 150 ships to see if they were Y2K ready. They weren't, and the Coast Guard turned them away from port, or made them wait, or fined them or something. Now the "shipping industry says ships, cargoes should be safe from Y2K bug."

Well... DUH!!! We know they SHOULD be safe.

Question is WILL they be safe from the Y2K bug?

Interesting quote:

"While most public attention has been focused on commercial airline Y2K readiness, ships handle about 95 percent of cargo entering or leaving the United States. Most of the massive cargo or container ships and oil tankers are run by a dozen or fewer crew members because they rely so heavily on electronic communications and equipment."

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), November 18, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ