A major incident was declared after the US Navy-owned RV Petrel became dislodged from its holdings in Leith last month, injuring 35 people.

Recent drone footage shows cranes on the scene to help right the vessel.

The below images were captured legally by Dave Cullen, a well-known and well-respected photographer operating in the area. He can be found online here. We really recommend you follow him.

In the recent imagery above, workers can be observed operating two large Mammoet cranes in an ongoing effort to address the situation involving the stricken 3,371-tonne ship. Police officers remain at the scene as investigations into the incident continue.

The incident, which took place on March 22, is currently being investigated by both the Health and Safety Executive and Police Scotland. Their inquiries aim to determine the cause of the event and ensure proper measures are taken to prevent future occurrences.

A Health and Safety Executive spokesman said:

“Specialist inspectors from HSE are assessing the technical aspects of the structural collapse and continue to work with Police Scotland on the investigation into this incident.”

The RV Petrel is a research vessel that was formerly owned by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen. The ship is equipped with advanced technology and equipment, allowing it to explore and survey the deep ocean. The vessel is designed for marine research and has been instrumental in locating several shipwrecks, including the USS Indianapolis and the USS Lexington, among others.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

57 COMMENTS

  1. I think the yanks are going to be very unhappy with that one, wonder if it can be repurposed as a ferry once righted?

    • Bloody fortunate! I won’t take that bet. 3,000 tonnes moving when it isn’t supposed to? I’d have defo needed a change of underwear!! 😆

  3. That’s a bit embarrassing. Should never have happened. When in dry dock- make sure vessel firmly propped up and secured. Lesson 1 of shipyard maintenance. If the vessel is watertight they could try flooding the dry dock- let her right herself which she surely would and then try again?

    • I asked just that question on another forum the other day and was told that while that would be the logical approach, there’s a huge amount to be considered. The main concerns are around any stores/fuel etc. that might have shifted the centre of gravity potentially to the point where the ship is beyond it’s ability to self-right even with crane support, apparently they’re very concerned about the possibility that the ship could drag a crane down with it if it all goes wrong.

      It’ll be interesting to see the final plan for righting the ship.

      • You’d have a load sensor in the linkage and a releasable link.

        I’m surprised they are using cranes TBH. I’d have thought that hydraulic jacking was a better solution. Maybe HSE wouldn’t allow access under the ship?

        Crazy that this happened at all.

        Must have been an awful moment when she shifted. Bit like doing damage control training!

        • I have looked at these very carefully and I have to say I am scratching my head a bit.
          I am not well versed in Drydocking but the photos look like they are using some sort of Red Hydraulic jacks under the hull.
          Could they be trying to move the blocks under the hull using those ?

          • I suspect that either the keel blocks have moved or they are preventing them from moving.

            But I don’t know – the last time I was in a dry dock was 25 years ago and I’ve never personally done anything like this!

          • they use side supports instead of the other block support way. I know nearly nothing about it but from what I gather the ship sits on blocks down the centre long only and big poles go from the dock wall to the ship.
            I think if the side supports fail the ships more likely to fall over.
            It was windy in Edinburgh the Morning it fell over.

    • There was also an article that said the other ship in the same drydock is not able to be floated at present – which is why flooding the Dock was discounted as the first option

    • The other vessel in the dry dock is mid refit and has a large hole in her side so they can’t flood the dock until her refit is done.

    • The list of shipwrecks discovered by Petrel while under Paul Allens’ ownership is huge and includes some really recognisable wrecks including USS Indianapolis, USS Lexington and USS Hornet. She recovered the ships’ bell from HMS Hood (At the request of the HMS Hood association).

      The wiki page is worth a read.

    • The U.K. is a banana republic? I didn’t even think bananas could grow in a U.K. climate.
      Every days a school day

  10. I’m surprised it hasn’t come to the attention of this site earlier. I hope Dales Marine has decent insurance!!

    They may need to the team who salvaged the Costa Concordia 🙂

    • That’s what liability insurance is for….I’m sure there is a very harnessed loss adjuster in there somewhere.

  12. It would not surprise me one bit if the HSE are not getting a bit prosecuty over this one……I had to host a full HSE investigation team once…it’s a bit unpleasant even when you provide them with sandwich’s.

    • You should have invited them Friday late morning – at about 14:00 they start loosing interest.

      Vital thing is to have an old time H&S guy around to start swapping stories. The younger team members get super bored.

      Then it’s Friday!

  13. I was wondering how something that was doing nothing could just crash. Then I read this ship used to be owned by a Microsoft executive.

  14. Keel blocks only and breast shores are OK. They work. However in this case the slab side of the vessel acted as a sail, the forces snapped the breast shores and over she went.

    A more stable and forgiving keel block arrangement is to have the blocks laid out in a herringbone pattern with breast shores. However you need a lot of keel blocks and that costs.

    You wont want to just flood to refloat due to
    a. Shifting of internal stores
    b. The metacentric height (self righting moment)

    Its very likely that the metacentric height is now such that it would be below the waterline if you flooded. In that case she wont self right but capsize making the situation even worse.

    Hydraulic jacks are probably holding the keel blocks in place to stop them slipping along the dock floor. The only thing that normally stops them moving is there weight ( Huffing big steel or concrete, wood topped blocks) and the weight of the vessel on them.

    Ideal situation would be I guess to put some water in allow the hull to displace some load, winches/crane on the hull to pull upright. Get the metacentric height up above the water line. More water, more pull, rinse and repeat.

    Then survey the vessel for damage once its upright. main engine mounts wont like being at that angle so they will be knackered , hull damage, internal equipment damage…big insurance claim for someone. Dont forget the fishing boat fwd. That cannot move until the righting operation is completed so that owner needs compo as well as he is missing income generation.

    • Perfect. I was thinking where’s someone who knows what they are talking about when we need it.
      After what you said it sounds a costly fix. Forth ports insurance company won’t be happy.
      Does ships falling over happen often? Last one I heard of was in Iran.

      • Never seen one happen here which is nice!
        Nearly had a tanker capsize when the new and inexperienced crew operated the ballast system without knowing what they where doing.
        Some quick work by 4 of our tugs pushing to keep her up right, extra lines and all the portable pumps we had in the yard to pump out ( And that is a lot!) saved the day.
        We kicked her out and said dont come back!

    • I saw HMS Montrose has been retired now.
      Do u think she will be sold as a complete ship, stripped of spares and scrapped?

      • They are looking for a buyer I have heard. However that would need a big refit. Selling the ship would be at min cost.. The UK may also stump up the refit costs. You would make the money back 10 fold on equipment support contracts when a new owner has it.

  16. This ship is the kind of ship NATO countries need to get into service given Russian activity in the North Sea. There is a report on the in BBC NEWS website highlighting Russian spy ships surveying infrastructure and preparing for an escalation with NATO…

    Big fixed infrastructure is always going to be vulnerable but off-shore installations are particularly out on a limb and the global moves into off-shore energy, including oil rigs, still hasn’t really been taken on-board by world navies. These installations cover huge areas and a lone destroyer isn’t going to cut it a shooting war, especially if explosives have been prepositioned.

    The fact that the USN owns the Petral and that the UK is busily commisioning a similar vessel into the RFA suggests that NATO is finally waking up to the threat, but much more will need to be done I think.

    Ordinary folk just have nooooo idea what is going on around them.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65309687

    Cheers CR

    • It does sound like a good fit for a shared capability, rather than / to augment national capabilities- like the current AEW and tanker capabilities.

      • That would make a lot of sense.

        NATO countries, especially in Europe, but I suspect in the Americas as well need to cooperate as an attack on cables in UK water, for example will have a big impact North America as well as in the UK and Europe.

        Hits on the power infrastructure will probably cause problems right across Europe given the integration of power grids, including the UK grid which does buy power from France..!

        Cheers CR

  17. In other news.

    UK’s NATO commitments threatened by ‘broken’ military procurement programme

    “The committee’s deputy chair says the UK may “struggle” to maintain its essential contribution to NATO if the MoD does not swiftly address “fragility” of its supply chain, replenish its stocks, and modernise its capabilities.”

    “Equipment arrives into service many years late and significantly over-budget, with depressing regularity,” the MPs said.”

    Link

    • “Agile” is taking advantage of the screw up in the USA JVLT program and seeing if Oshkosh can churn out 1000 cheap vehicles for our MRV-P requirement. We could have the requirement sorted by the end of this year.

      DE&S is “Impossible! We made a decision to delay it. We have to run a two-year competition. Where would we find the money?”

  18. Here’s a fun read, Public affairs committee report on the defence equipment plan. What a poop show.

    The Ministry of Defence’s (the Department’s) approach to its Equipment Plan has failed to adapt to a more volatile world. The invasion of Ukraine has challenged strategic
    assumptions and necessitated a refresh of the 2021 Integrated Review. However, we have serious doubts about whether the Department’s Equipment Plan process is agile
    and responsive enough to react to this more dangerous international situation.

    We are concerned that the Department lacks the urgency required to develop and deliver promptly the enhanced capabilities that the Armed Forces need. The Department acknowledges that its land forces must catch up to fulfil our NATO commitments, but programmes to achieve this, such as Ajax and Morpheus, have been beset by problems and delays for many years. The Department has also not focussed sufficiently on developing the enabling and supporting capabilities required in operational environments. If the Department does not act swiftly to address the fragility of its supply chain, replenish its stocks, and modernise its capabilities, there is a risk that the UK might struggle to maintain its essential contribution to NATO. This is compounded as the 2022–2023 Equipment Plan is already somewhat out of date, as it does not yet reflect the emerging lessons from Ukraine.

    The Department assesses its Equipment Plan as affordable over the next ten years, but this assessment is still characterised by optimism bias. It relies on the Equipment Plan budget exceeding forecast costs by £5.2 billion in the Plan’s final three years, to rectify a forecast deficit of £2.6 billion in the first seven years. The Department’s assessment of the Plan’s affordability also assumes it will reduce project costs by £30.4 billion during the next ten years. This includes the Department achieving all planned efficiencies and savings, although it does not yet have plans for £1.6 billion cost reductions and £3.4 billion efficiency savings, of which it needs more than £2 billion in the next three years.

    We are also concerned that the Department has not yet secured the skills it needs to deliver the Plan, particularly given the impact of rising inflation on staff recruitment and retention.

    The Committee examines the Equipment Plan every year and sees the same problems recurring with major, often multi billion pound, defence procurement programmes.
    Equipment arrives into service many years late and significantly over-budget, with depressing regularity. Neither taxpayers nor our Armed Forces are being served well.
    There needs to be meaningful change of this broken system. The Department needs to break from this cycle of costly delay and failure and deliver a fundamental, root and
    branch reform of defence procurement once and for all.
    https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/38988/documents/191700/default/

    • A total 💩 Show as you say.

      But some other interesting news!

      “RAF develops unmanned mini-helicopter ‘Jackal’ drone which can fire laser-guided missiles
      “The Thales lightweight multirole missile (LMM) has been fired from a JACKAL aerial drone for the first time.

      Sponsored by the UK Royal Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, the test was part of an initiative to explore unmanned air combat advancements.”

      LINK

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here