Idiots trying to save money. Part of my job is shipping and receiving and I am instructed by my boss to err on the side of over estimating weight of shipments if there is any doubt. The last thing we want is for a trucker hauling skids of our product to get screwed over with fines at the highway scales due to an error on our part. Boss figures the extra cost to us is the price of honesty.

@@murraystewartj Thats the thing though, your bosses know the trucks are going to get weighed and that there are fines in place. If there is no regularly enforced law about declaring the weight of a container and it's cheaper to declare less weight, then nearly everyone would do it, knowing there is no consequence.

What an idiot. I mean, I can get lying for like 50 kgs, to stay under a certain price bracket or some such. But we're talking more than three times difference. How the hell did the client expect that to pass?

@@murraystewartj I've been on the flip side of that as a truck driver - and realistically you don't actually *care* about the exact weight of the load. That's not how the laws are written. What you care about is how the load is distributed over your axles, and that no axle is overloaded. Given a normal truck that adds up to a specific maximum weight, but the only reason you care about that is that if you see a number close to that in the bill of lading, you make sure to plan a stop at scale to make sure you've distributed the load correctly. (And if the load is well under it, you reconfigure your truck to best suit the type of route you'll be hauling: Axles closer together is more maneuverable, further apart is more stable on long highway stretches.)

@@ouzoloves If a truck is constantly loaded over above it's limits it also don't lasts long. I think the additional maintenance costs and costs of a shorter live time of the truck realy outweigh the profit earned from the additional load. Trucks are so expensive.

Big badda boom.

Is that a Penguins reference???

@@shannons1886 You bet your sweet life it is! (Skipper) So was this comment.

No boom today. Boom tomorrow. Always boom tomorrow.

Major flashbacks with your face.

they're big and I can't see anything bigger. good name. :D

*"Hey did your mom ever visit any dockside baaaaaaaars"*

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed.

Must be “ZPMC”

Lol, I just noticed it

I would have thought so too, I know cranes have an alarm that sounds if their max capacity for differing extensions is exceeded so it should be possible to obtain an accurate weight of a lift. It's not as if someone has to do any calculations these days, computer programmers programme computers to do it.

I wonder if that technology is available? My _guess_ is that the crane operators are timed on how many TEUs they can do per hour, so _other concerns_ don't rate as high. I work for a company that loves the bean counter method and _how fast we go_ has much more importance to the higher ups than _did we get the customer everything they ordered?_ I once got in trouble for taking one hour to give customers 100% of what they ordered, when it was timed for 30 minutes. When questioned about it, I pointed out how half the items I were looking for were incorrectly located in the computer system and that they were on the opposite side of the warehouse from where they were stated, or they weren't located in the system at all. They didn't care to correct the problem (it would 'correct itself' over the course of a few weeks or a month), but told me to work faster. When asked what percentage of items were acceptable to _not_ look for in order to meet their 30 minute goals, they wouldn't answer, just saying that the 30 minute goal was "as important," even though we rarely got called out for a high percentage of incomplete finds. This teaches the employees that their paycheck is determined by one thing, even though the customer's satisfaction is determined by another. I would _suspect_ that the shipyard isn't held accountable for incorrect weights, therefore there's no incentive to slow down. :/

@@grondhero The buck stops with the ships Master, it is his/her responsibility to ensure the ship is safe to sail, having accurate weights of the cargo should be part of International Maritime Law. It took many losses at sea before the Plimsol Line was painted on hulls of ships transiting different oceans and seas, surely this should be high on the list of tighter regulations. Like most things the bottom line of the accounts always wins. I have no problem with profit but the cost of that profit in possible loss of life, assets and pollution should be at the top of the agenda.

The cranes do have scales. The loading authority chose not to record the weight. The weight of each container is critical. You wouldn't want to put the heaviest containers at the top of the stack nor in the outer rows. 4500 containers were lost in the North Pacific due to loading irregularities and heavy weather.

@@grondhero it shouldn’t slow things down: everything is computerized already, the weight can be determined between ‚pick up’ and ‚set down‘ and logged in the system by the same computer that tells the crane driver which container he just picked up and where to set it down. Also: When the containers are loaded on the ship is not the first time they get moved across the harbor. Every time they get moved is an opportunity to check the weight against shipping papers and the last time a container got moved.

Ofc It's Expensive to move 56.000 Tons ship loaded with hundreds of containers with each of it weight 20 tons and 3.5 thousand gallons of fuel

Every time I learn about stuff like this I'm reminded how much thought and purpose goes into stuff that seems unimportant

Its expensive in Britain because of demolition overkill and safety precautions/unions other bs like that. If they would have shipped it whole to Bangladesh they'd literally get paid 100 million in scrap metal

I live twenty miles away from the beach where they ran the Napoli aground. There was shit everywhere, absolutely astonishing.

You will like this: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bp99qpl9m5_GZo0.html

Actually it's the ships master who is responsible for ensuring a vessel is safe to sail. By letting the discrepancy go the captain became responsible.

@@WmSrite-pi8ck The failing in his calculation lies in the assumption that the weight discrepancy was spread evenly across the cargo. Presumably, those overloading cargo did it across their shipment, if these were placed together then zones of high weight would be created. Regardless, the assumption was false which is what caused the disaster. The skipper can only be responsible for decisions based on the information available to him and the individual weight of the containers was not known to him and he had no possible way of finding out. At no stage did he breach the safety code and the decisions he took were sensible given the circumstances. If you want to blame someone other than the people who overloaded the containers then look to the port for not weighing them individually or at least carrying out random weight inspections and issuing fines.

@@davidmurphy563 Is it standard practice to just believe the recorded weight? Or are they supposed to re-weigh before loading?

Before anyone gets outraged at me, may I remind you that you (hopefully) live in a democracy and you have MEPs or equivalent. If you actually care, write to them.

It's not overloaded containers. It's liars declaring false weights, it's not just "rounding up" 20 tons on a container... that's like twice, if I'm not mistaken 40 tons is a limit to be transferred by trucks, so their declared container being half empty while being full. And a bunch of other less noticeable but still crucial overweights. Even 3 tons is nothing close to "rounding up"

"No, no no! I bought a first class ticket and I demand a first class seat!" "I already told you, Sir. We made a mistake, we overbooked first class, we'll refund you." "I don't care! I want first class with the lounge!" "But sir... the first 5 rows aren't flying to Heathrow anyway." "Ohhh... I didn't know! Apologies, my bad! "

yeah true, i like happy endings

Massive cracks = abandon ship should be obvious, but from this channel and others, I've heard that captains can be really stupid sometimes. I'm glad they made the right decision and that there was enough time for everyone to get off

Probably a shipment of kitchen paper rolls that fell into the sea.

I wonder if when unloading and weighing the containers they fined whoever lied about the weight

​@@ml9849 They don't ship kitchen paper all over the ocean, lol. It is usually produced Somewhere in the same region it is used. Plus, i think they only weighed the containers that weren't swept overboard.

For anyone confused the term 'kitchen paper' is referring to paper towel (manufactured locally), not parchment paper (Costco brand is made in France and shipped).

"how much does this container weigh, sir?" "I'd say 10 pounds. On the nose."

Yes, and this was an issue not just for transport. Problems with hogging also produced limits on how many guns warships could have.

I once read an article in Wooden Boat magazine about the issue of hogging. USS Constitution has had severe issues with hogging for sometime and it was only realized a little before her last major rebuild that some of the issue stemmed from having the diagonal bracing that her builder devised removed at some point in her life. With that key structural element reintroduced into her hull she has experienced much less hogging then she used to (to be clear she still hogs just not as much).

They used to deliberately load ships at the ends on their first voyage to introduce a permanent hog, why?, because that way the loadline (plimsoll as some call it) took longer to reach the level and you carried more cargo, went out of practice with longitudinal framing to an extent. This, although they didn't realise it then was of course deliberately deforming the metal structure (Hookes Law) but in those days there was plenty of metal, not so now.

@@davidoldboy5425 Sounds more or less like "breaking in" the ship, then so to speak you bend it fast into the "final" shape. "breaking in" is funny in this context, when the hogging gets excessive, you talk of a "broken keel". The aspect that with a "soft" keel and a load waterline mark in a middle you can overload the ship at the ends and in the middle still maintain the load mark - interesting.

@@feedingravens Get something flexible and put on an imaginary loadline. then hog it (bend either end down), the loadline rises, so to bring it to the mark you have to put in more cargo. PS the loadmark is at the top of the line not the bottom, even professionals get this wrong sometimes.

wrong? Assumed

@@Strawhalo they are right, cranes have a measuring device, but its used as a guide for safety, not as a scale.

I'd imagine the crane manufacturer doesn't want liability for potentially losing a ship if the weight measurement is wrong.

@@MatthijsvanDuin Tough

@@chatteyj Yeah no I don't think that's how it works. If a crane integrates a load cell as a safety net against overloading the crane that doesn't mean you can just use that to weigh your cargo and have your ship's safety rely on that. The suitability for that purpose would have to be separately analyzed and certified.

They also pointed out that the ships structural design was partly to blame.

It's not just the weights these unscrupulous people lie about: Look at all the fires that have spontaneously started in containers: They are not declaring dangerous goods either, with disastrous consequences. But of course., according to "Wm Srite"....it's all the captain's fault; He should have checked each and every container to ensure; 1) It was not overweight & 2) It did not contain any potentially hazardous materials. So, let's just blame the Captain}, eh. Simple.

Honestly If I was running a shipping company like that and got anything with more than a 10% discrepancy in weight, I would ship it back on their dollar and charge them a fee for wasting my time and potentially endangering my personnel. Even more confusing to me is its likely worth the shippers time to have them scaled prior and charged adequately if its such a "money saver" to lie. If that takes too long, weigh like 1/5 of them and if they are more than 10% off, charge them to current weight plus the percentage of weight over as the fee for failure to declare the correct volume. That would likely scare them into providing the correct amount

Need more corporate heads going to prison for these kinds of actions, not just fraud. Like, if a container is more than 5% over declarer weight, the boss in charge gets a year in prison for fraud and endangering the ship’s crew.

Wait, what that's so weird

Declaring "General Average" would be the more standard and usually cheaper option for the owner.

@@TrabberShir I get that. But after the beaching each container was weighed. Those containers can be traced back via the manifest. The video didn't mention anyone being responsible. I assume part of the blame is the captain and bad weather, also I wonder who paid for the breakup before scrappers got their hands on the wreck? The salvagers of the BMW bikes are an isolated incident, and I'm curious to know how many were reported and kept their bikes, and how many weren't that were prosecuted, and how many still remain unaccounted for, if any.

It probably wouldn't be the shipping company that pursued that but the insurance companies. As long as the shipping company operated in good faith, it would get compensated.

Actually it's the ships master who is responsible for ensuring a vessel is safe to sail. By letting the discrepancy go the captain became responsible.

@@WmSrite-pi8ck Responsible , yes. BUT can he afford $100 million pounds. However, since we apportioning blame, what about the "big Crane" operator who loadeded them since he has a weight indicator when he lifts each container.

You should see the car carrier they are busy cutting up in place in Georgia, USA....

May she rest in peace.

TV documentaries can be decidedly dodgy. There was one about the truck fire in the Gotthard road tunnel in Switzerland (either by Discovery Channel or Nat Geo) in which viewers were told that significant safety upgrades were made after the fire. In truth, the safety upgrades had been made to half of the tunnel but unfortunately the truck fire occurred in a section that had yet to be upgraded. After the fire, repairs were made and the remaining upgrade work was completed. There are also thoroughly dishonest documentaries about the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse. That was the suspension bridge that rapidly disintegrated shortly after its opening in the 1930s. That bridge collapsed due to engineering negligence. John Roebling, designer of the Brooklyn Bridge, had set out the design rules for that type of suspension bridge, decades earlier. The roadway was too light and the subsequent enquiry was a ‘whitewash’, designed to keep the responsible parties out of prison.

This is a never ending battle that lovers of Titanic lore are well aware of. When Great Eastern was constructed by Brunel she had not only a double bottom, water tight bulkheads and watertight compartments but also watertight decks on each level and a double skin as well. Brunel spared no expense and several companies went bankrupt trying to make Great Eastern a profitable vessel. By the time Titanic was launched the double skin had been done away with as well as watertight decks at each level. The only real innovation in safety she offered over Great Eastern is that SOME of her watertight doors could be closed automatically by electricity. But it was only those doors on the very bottom deck directly above the double skin that this could be achieved with. All the watertight doors higher up still had to be closed manually. It is an open question as to whether this was even done the night she hit the berg. SOLAS regulations were an outgrowth of the Titanic disaster and have grown ever more strict over the following decades. Of course the ships they impact the most are passenger ships because people simply take a lot more notice when thousands of lives(the majority of whom are paying passengers) are put in danger at once instead of just 25 or 30 lives that are company employees anyway. I remember seeing the hydraulic watertight doors on the lowest passenger deck of SS Norway back in the 80s, they were impressive to say the least. In the end it's not the naval architects I blame for this kind of mess it's the ship owners and the transportation companies that continually put pressure on everybody to cut costs, stay on schedule and under budget. If you want to see how company directors would behave if they were forced to be in peril on the ships they commission and operate you can look no further than J Bruce Ismay, managing director of the White Star Line on the night she went down. He certainly found a seat for himself on a lifeboat that many of his customers and the majority of his crew did not get.

@@ashleighelizabeth5916 Disagree, putting pressure on is a natural trait, resisting it is a professional necessity. Unfortunately Naval Architects and Class (mostly NA's) are reactive and of course work for private companies not the Government. This leads to them buckling to pressure from their customers (shipowners), seen it many times. Governments (i.e. MCA) have no such worries and are far far more effective than class in enforcing and making regulations. The biggest joke is the ruling body the IMO, not a seafarer to be seen. Interesting point about passenger ships is those who know see another Titanic happening. Due to the current numbers of passengers on board getting them off on lifesaving equipment safely and quickly is impossible. Especially true with a list or on fire in rough seas, it will happen. Then everyone will fling their arms up in horror, the 'experts' will be on tv, and the regulators will react. I do not go on cruises, and I make sure my family don't either.

@@davidoldboy5425 I get what you mean about the cruise ships. We had a taste of that with Costa Concordia but of course the seas were very calm that night, she was very close to shore, and it took her long enough to sink that most of the people were able to get off. And of course she is nowhere near the largest of those ships. Now with Covid they are no longer doing muster drills like they used to. THAT is a HUGE HUGE HUGE mistake IMO. They were already assembling people in lounges and public rooms in some ships instead of under their actual lifeboats (ANOTHER HUGE MISTAKE). I would still go on a cruise but the first thing I always do is check for my lifejacket in the cabin and figure out which lifeboat I am assigned to and how to get to it using stairs. I still don't blame naval architects. When ship owners say do it like this or look for work elsewhere what is the poor schmo supposed to do?

@@ashleighelizabeth5916 Absolutely, but we never learn do we? 100 years on and similar mistakes being made. My advice is do your own drills. When it is quiet learn the quickest exit route from your cabin, if you can with eyes closed. Locate the allocated lifeboat and where the spare lifejackets are stored. If the lifeboats are not enclosed opt for a liferaft, far safer than most lifeboats short term. Naval architects should professionally and morally never put profit before safety, by ensuring regulations prevent it.

@@ezicarus8216 Oh I realise that (I've been to see her, she looks tiny). She sank due to ingress of water when the lower cannon ports were open when turning. I was referring to the time period following the Titanic.

"I love to see her crack..." Wrong website, sir.

Yep, and of course the port is too cheap to install scales which could be used to weigh each container as it was logged in to the port. Pretty much every truck stop in the US has a scale which costs $10 per weigh, I can almost promise you that once economy of scale was factored the cost per weigh would be less than a dollar per container. Might even turn a profit since shippers could no longer fudge the numbers

@@mrspeigle1 You could probably just read the force on the cranes and forklifts.

@@mrspeigle1 Where I work they have the scales on their Crane and Loaders, if the weight is off this will be reported to the Checkers and the Offices.

My wife has a small export business. It's cheaper for her to round up the boxes weights than to pay the penalties if any of the boxes are over their declared weight.

Man, I guess freight forwarders are scummy just like package forwarders. Package forwarders facilitate soooooo many eBay scams.

ON WHAT

@@MegaTroubleII onwards

Not really the shipping company that it cost that extra money, more like Loyd's of London or whomever they chose to insure their ship and cargo. But yes it is rather odd that they wouldn't weight their cargo to ensure that they aren't under billing for their services. My only explanation is that the money they are losing on containers that are overweight isn't a larger amount than the money they would lose if they took the time to weight all those containers and attempted to collect what they were owed for incorrectly calculated weight. It seems like a logical supposition if not a reasonable one.

@@ashleighelizabeth5916 However, one can always charge a fine for incorrectly weighed containers. If it differs beyond reasonable means that is. (Like 1-5%) Ie about 1.5 tons for a fully loaded container. So all the 20% of the containers onboard that were weighing 3 tons more would have to pay a fine for the incorrect weight in their forms. Since lost containers isn't just a downside to the one shipping the container, but also the shipping company and other customers pulled along for the ride, not to mention the insurance company.

I'd like to know that too.

Yes they introduced a new rule to prevent shippers from lying about container weight

It would be good if they'd show actual pictures and video of the incident, though. There must be a huge amount out there. Using the cartoons exclusively is a bit limiting.

Even if you could enforce that in European ports... South Africa...

Having a law is one thing - enforcing that law, for thousands of containers, on every ship, all over the world is another.

It would add costs so I actually don't, much like I don't expect companies to get fined for unloading untreated sewer into rivers.

I served on the USS Alameda County in the early 60s. It was a converted LST, AVB-1. We were home ported in Naples, Italy. During a storm in the Adriatic Sea the ship developed cracks, the water in my sleeping compartment was a little over ankle deep. The ship was decommissioned in 1963 and sold to the Italian navy for around $60,000. It was home ported in Naples because it couldn’t make the return trip safely.

@@bobcourtier4674Our main cracks were above the berthing compartment "above" the main engine room, yeah, water everywhere but more like a inch because we worked hard to toss it down the escape trunk to the engine room...I served on AF58 during 68/69 out of Norfolk, 5 cruises to the Med, Naples was our home port over there, been there 11 times...Wish I knew then what I know now about things to see...Cheers

@@markmark2080 A 19 yr old kid, fresh off the farm, in Naples. I thought I was in heaven.

I was a 18 YO on the USS Sutter County LST-1150 and we were homeported in Guam and made 90 day deployments to VietNam to supply munitions up and down the coast and up the rivers. We many times ran into very heavy weather between the Philippines and Guam. I have been on the main deck and watched both ends of the ship wave up and down every time the blunt end plowed into the next big wave. Cracks in the decks, firemains broken, etc. I was too young and didn't fear this, I guess because I knew no better. Rolls at 35 degrees constantly and occasionally 40+. Used to tie ourselves in the rack to sleep. Now it seems pretty scary.

@@seniorrider9337 We’d beach in Souda Bay Crete and set up a beer tent. Bud was a nickel, Heinekens was a dime.

That's why you have container securing, big corten steel bottles with bars and you lock containers with the frame of the ship so this kind of things is diminished.

There's a KZfaq video somewhere that shows how much a big, long ship flexes from an interior corridor perspective. The door openings in the corridor, which should have all been lined up, were all moving around wildly out of synch. It was disturbing.

The Napoli was a grandstand event - not far from where I live in Wareham, near Swanage.

I was laughing at that.

There is a day time BBC drama "The Coroner" which had a story very similar to this, flotsam falls under their jurisdiction the same as anything found by a detectorist if it has any value. The foreshore below the high water line is Crown Property so is anything found on it.

Having moved back and forth across the ocean more than once, that's a heartbreaking scenario for me.

It was a good video

by the time the crates are being moved its far, far too late. The whole layout of the ship's cargo has already been planned.

@@tsm688 no it isn't. One, you fine the shit out of the companies that load more then declared. Two, by adding everything up you will know if the ship is overloaded and can take appropriate actions to remedy the situation before it leaves. Every time you get a weight you just hit a save button. This allows a program to compare the registered weight to the actual weight and the computer then adds everything up in real time for a total tare weight. Three, any boxes that can't be loaded due to other companies overloading can have those expenses added to their fines. When you start getting hit by tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands worth of fines you learn real quick that what you would have made in profit by overloading is greatly outweighed by the money you lose due to the fines.

@@erikd2256 They already knew the ship was overloaded and took "appropriate actions". It cracked in half anyway. You just have to weigh them on the way in, not the way out.

More than scary for the crew. If I remember correctly, most of them didn't make it to a life boat. That boat sunk in around 5 minutes

They can and alot of cranes have the ability to do so.

But, if you assume most of the cranes are old as fuck, and are in 3rd world countries, operated, built and manufactured by 3rd world countries, then you see the problem.

@@ADogNamedStay Aaaahhh. That does make more sense now. Thanks for the insight!

Way, way too late once the box is on the hook. Containers are delivered to the ship in order set by the loading plan.

And the distinction between flotsam, the objects that come loose during a wreck, and jetsam, things thrown overboard for some reason or another.

Even if something is due to be destroyed, that doesn't mean you are allowed to take it. There have been quite a few cases ending up in court over that matter. Remember that sometimes a company really /wants/ something to be destroyed - perhaps because they have a legal obligation to ensure it is disposed of in an environmentally safe manner, or have been contracted to ship it to a disposal location. Or because it is excess stock, and to put it on to the open market might depress prices. Think of designer fashion labels: The value of their goods depends entirely on circularity. People want it only because it's expensive, and owning something expensive gives prestige. So if they end up with some excess stock by over-producing clothing, they can't just sell it off cheap or give it away: It has to be burned to preserve the value of the brand.

@@vylbird8014 Are you going to do the video?

Don't be 😆

You should be, btw the way I'm stealing that line😂😂😂

yeah. use like 30% of the TNT and blow it up into much larger chunks which can be spread out.