• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Loss of Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad

Underway said:
Everyone on the bridge is a lookout.  Report it no matter what, and report it again if something changes.  And then report it if you were dismissed to easily!

Always made sure my lookouts were praised for reports and counseled/trained up for being too shy.  Didn't care who was on the bridge or talking I want those reports.  I wasn't the best watchkeeper so I needed all the help I could get!

That being said "Helmsman... mind your helm" situation there makes me concerned in a different way.

Big lesson as young sailor, I reported a vessel and the mate sarcastically commented that he had eyes as well. The Captain reamed in out on the spot and told me to always report everything I saw. I took that lesson to heart and always thank a lookout for a report when I became a Master, even my kids in the car are told to pass on reports of things they think are a concern.
 
Frigate sank after rules were broken
https://www.newsinenglish.no/2020/08/12/frigate-sank-after-rules-were-broken/

Fully 53 of 88 applicable safety rules and “barriers” were broken before one of Norway’s five frigates collided with an oil tanker near its home port nearly two years ago. The Norwegian defense department’s own report also noted that the crew on the bridge of the KNM Helge Ingstad had little experience.

“Even though all technical navigational assistance was in working order and functioned, and all mandatory posts on the bridge were staffed,” reads the report released Tuesday, the tanker Sola TS was not identified in time as a vessel moving towards the frigate as it left a local refinery fully laden and bound for the UK.

Defense officials went through all 88 regulations meant to hinder such a collision, and concluded that 53 were broken. Details weren’t revealed, reportedly to shield those responsible. As in earlier investigations of the collision in the busy waters of the Hjeltefjorden northwest of Bergen, right near a large oil refinery, no single error was found that set off the collision but rather a long string of them.

There was also “too little experience and competence among the crew and weak coordination among them.” Even though the crew on the tanker sent out repeated warnings and frantically asked the frigate to turn, communication between the two vessels was described as “imprecise” and the frigate’s crew simply didn’t grasp the looming danger. The captain of the frigate was not on the bridge in the early morning hours when the collision occurred on November 8, 2018. The frigate later sank slowly after all crew and officers on board had to abandon ship.

Naval officials vowed to learn from their mistakes, which have proven very costly for Norwegian taxpayers. The vessel was valued at around NOK 5 billion, would cost much more than that to replace, and is now being scrapped.

newsinenglish.no staff
 
Norway is suing the Class Society over the sinking of the Frigate. The fallout and how it effects other naval ships being considered for this sort of classification should be interesting. The translation is not the best.

https://sputniknews.com/europe/202011051081014016-norway-sues-consultancy-for-16-billion-over-sunken-frigate/
 
Colin P said:
Norway is suing the Class Society over the sinking of the Frigate. The fallout and how it effects other naval ships being considered for this sort of classification should be interesting. The translation is not the best.

https://sputniknews.com/europe/202011051081014016-norway-sues-consultancy-for-16-billion-over-sunken-frigate/

Lol, that's pretty funny. I'm sure the hollow propeller shafts were the real reason the ship sank, not the fact that the crew somehow missed a giant tanker and ran into it.

Classification society rules can result in some really poor design choices if you look in the weeds, but this isn't one of them. Worth a try I guess if you already have lawyers on retainer, but kind of embarrassing if it lets DNV-GL bring the full details out into court and conduct some independent investigations.

I don't think this will change anything really, the best designs in the world won't save you from incompetence.

 
The Forsvarsmateriell (FMA), the Norwegian Defence Materiel Agency, signed a contract with Norscrap West on 11 January to scrap the Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate KNM Helge Ingstad. The company will scrap the frigate at its facility at Hanøytangen by the end of the year, according to the FMA website. The agency valued the contract at approximately NOK60 million (nearly USD7 million), with sales of the metal recovered expected to reduce the cost by several million kroner.

 
The Forsvarsmateriell (FMA), the Norwegian Defence Materiel Agency, signed a contract with Norscrap West on 11 January to scrap the Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate KNM Helge Ingstad. The company will scrap the frigate at its facility at Hanøytangen by the end of the year, according to the FMA website. The agency valued the contract at approximately NOK60 million (nearly USD7 million), with sales of the metal recovered expected to reduce the cost by several million kroner.

They could have just towed it to India and had the job done here in exchange for the metal.

Ship-recycling-yard-Alang-e1505730970613-1280x640.jpg


But I guess that wouldn't have been very Scandinavian of them, would it?

🍻
 
Maybe Norway will want to send some of their crews to take the USN Damage control courses?
 
This just reinforces my Anglosphere bias' when it comes to damage control. From how the ships are built, the number of crew, doctrine, and traditions.

I'm likely wrong but that's why its called a bias... lol
 

There's a good warning for any Navy:

"The Norwegian Navy (Sjøforsvaret) was short of qualified navigation officers and the officer of the watch (OOW) in charge of navigating the ship was young and relatively inexperienced. The frigate had a crew of 137 on board, the majority were asleep at the time of the incident. 7 personnel were standing on watch on the bridge, including the OOW, an officer and a rating under training and 4 other ratings."
 
Not sure why the tanker is paying 27 million for what appears to be almost all the fault of the navy, perhaps politically it was the best route forward?



The owner of the tanker that collided with the Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad in 2018 has agreed to pay about $27 million in compensation to the Norwegian government for the loss of the warship.

Also in the article, their problems are not just with the training.

The Norwegian Navy has also had difficulty with its new fleet replenishment oiler, KNM Maud, which was delivered by DSME in 2018. One year after her delivery, classification society DNV banned her from sailing after finding several safety hazards on board. These were repaired, but Maud has had persistent problems with an integrated electronic control system for her pumps and valves, among other shipboard systems. She was forced to depart a major NATO exercise for repairs in late 2021.

"KNM Maud has experienced that the [Integrated Platform Management System] freezes or stops working. The risk of continuing to operate is that if the system goes down, you can lose track of key components in the vessel and these must then be followed up manually. So because of the safety of the crew and the ship, the captain chose not to leave the quay," said Flag Commander Trond Gimmingsrud, speaking to Soldatnytt.
 
Is there a case to be made that because the tanker had numerous high-intensity deck lights illuminated that it’s navigation lights were potentially obscured? It looked like a massive terminal in the video I saw.
 
A valid point, however crews need working lights to stow the mooring gear, were they on for an excessive time?
 
A valid point, however crews need working lights to stow the mooring gear, were they on for an excessive time?
How many lights do they need, and are there rules for lighting once you’re in a sea lane?
 
IIRC, after a night RAS, we'd stowe the gear under red light conditions and the lights are shaded to point directly down so that there is no leaking of the light abeam of the ship.
 
Workers safety rules likley apply and likely conflict with the Collision Regs. Keep in mind the tanker crew is doing something routine and it's a long way from the bow to the accommodations. So likley they took their time.
 
Not sure why the tanker is paying 27 million for what appears to be almost all the fault of the navy, perhaps politically it was the best route forward?



The owner of the tanker that collided with the Norwegian frigate Helge Ingstad in 2018 has agreed to pay about $27 million in compensation to the Norwegian government for the loss of the warship.

Also in the article, their problems are not just with the training.

The Norwegian Navy has also had difficulty with its new fleet replenishment oiler, KNM Maud, which was delivered by DSME in 2018. One year after her delivery, classification society DNV banned her from sailing after finding several safety hazards on board. These were repaired, but Maud has had persistent problems with an integrated electronic control system for her pumps and valves, among other shipboard systems. She was forced to depart a major NATO exercise for repairs in late 2021.

"KNM Maud has experienced that the [Integrated Platform Management System] freezes or stops working. The risk of continuing to operate is that if the system goes down, you can lose track of key components in the vessel and these must then be followed up manually. So because of the safety of the crew and the ship, the captain chose not to leave the quay," said Flag Commander Trond Gimmingsrud, speaking to Soldatnytt.
Admiralty Courts are weird places. When WIN got hit (while minding it’s own business while tied up alongside) in Esquimalt harbour by an American fishing trawler that lost control on it’s way to the Graving Dock, the Admiralty Court still assessed a small part of the blame to her.
 
Admiralty Courts are weird places. When WIN got hit (while minding it’s own business while tied up alongside) in Esquimalt harbour by an American fishing trawler that lost control on it’s way to the Graving Dock, the Admiralty Court still assessed a small part of the blame to her.

Seriously? I am unable to wrap my head around that.
 
Back
Top