M/S "Viking Sky" Looses Propulsion Off Norway In Bad Weather

It could be as simple as a third engineer forgetting to transfer fuel to the day tank...….that or electrical would be my guess.

I would hope there were checks and balances on said engineer...... And ONE day tank feeding everything?

And electrical should have redundancy.... nowhere should it all meet in one place.... But what do I know.

For the record folks, we've already been discussing the MAX incidents over at JF: https://www.jetforums.net/threads/jet-aviation-casualties.685/page-18

I hope the Viking passengers don't expect huge restitution for the disaster. Friends of mine took a Viking riverboat cruise on the Rhine -- the ship lost all power for three days -- no A/C, toilets stopped flushing, the boat sat in the same port, utterly horrible -- Viking's offer -- 30% discount if you booked another cruise within 6 months. Unbelievably bad customer treatment.

I am catching some of that arrogance in the CEO’s messages.

Looks like El Faro all over again. Preliminary investigation shows all four gens shut down to low lube level


Duh

All 4 engines shut down due to low lube oil levels in tank causing low main engine oil pressure:
https://www.sdir.no/en/news/news-from-the-nma/press-release-viking-sky/

Very similar sotry...... Friend of mine was on the HAL "Rotterdam" off Casablanca in the 70's..... Too rough to go in, riding it out just outside. At one point it rolled 45º and all but one motor shut down due low oil. The one that didn't the low oil cutout system was broken. Suspicions are this was not a susprise and it was known ot be malfunctioning and it was bypassed........ Either way it saved them.

Sooooo..... "When anticipating rough sea state ensure oil tanks XX% or more"..... Roger.

Like all procedures.... written in blood. Well, almost in this case.

Still sounds like the engineers have some answering to do....

The oil level was within acceptable range, but they kept it somewhat on the low side to avoid high level warnings when the rocking and rolling started.
Unfortunately it went the other way, the low level made the stand pipes suck air and shortly thereafter auto shutdown X 4.
I am sure it got awfully quiet on the ship, and also pretty sure the engine control room phone kept ringing.
The Chief Engineer was Norwegian, lots of officers and crew from other nations, would be interesting to find out who the engineer on duty was and what his fate will be, but the Chief is still responsible, perhaps his head will roll..

Concur!!! Automation will be the bane of us. AI cannot cover all eventualities, primarily because we humans haven't experienced them all. And, conveniently, we fail to remember lessons from the past.

Y'know, when I was a lowly squid on a WW2 era destroyer [modernized under the FRAM program], blowing up stuff in Viet Nam and chasing bird-farms, we ran into several storms that caused the top-heavy ship to roll 45 degrees much too often. The ship never lost propulsion. Yeah, I know it was a steam plant, but the machinery still needed lube oil!!

It really is time for the naval architects designing ships to really consider raising the operating standards. Yeah, I'm pretty sure they will argue that the ships will roll over if they have a 45 deg list - but in reality, we are talking about 45 degree rolls. It shouldn't be too difficult to design a lube system that won't lose suction in deep rolls.

There are numerous engine installations on commercial and naval ships that specify safe engine operational capabilities capabilities to 45 degrees of roll. Usually with the engines orientated fore / aft. Transverse orientations can pose there own challenges at these levels of inclination.

The Lube Oil System on the ship side will be "owned" by the shipyard. The amount of Lube Oil onboard will be "owned" by the crew/operating company. I would imagine they are all reviewing their documentation right now.