PALUBA
June 24, 2024, 05:33:33 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Važno - Na forumu Paluba.Info novoregistrovane članove odobravamo ručno, to može potrajati do 24 h, ali je neophodno da novoregistrovani korisnik aktivira svoj nalog koji će dobiti putem e-pošte u navedenom vremenu
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Del.icio.us Digg FURL FaceBook Stumble Upon Reddit SlashDot

Pages:  1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 101   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Trgovačka mornarica  (Read 600852 times)
 
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
pukovnik
mornar
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 24



« Reply #270 on: March 19, 2010, 07:32:04 pm »

Ljudi evo jedno pitanje zasto na ovom forumu ne pise o brodu "DRAVA" koji netragom nestao prvih dana 1981 na putu iz Los Angelesa u kinesku luku Shangai. Po informacijama koje ja posjedujem taj brod je potunuo nekih 150 km od japanske luke Yokohame u oluji jacine 12 bofora sada pitanje zasto se o tom brodu sutilo u tadasnjoj Jugoliniji i sto je tako vazno prevozio taj brod kada se nikada ulozilo u njegovo trazenje toliko zasada od mene pozdrav od Pukovnika......
Logged
brodarski
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12 259



« Reply #271 on: March 19, 2010, 07:39:46 pm »

Pa Pukovniče piši o brodu '' Drava ''. Odlično si načeo ovu temu. Hrvatska javnost desetljećima čeka osobu koja bi im rasvijetlila misterij potonuća. Hvala Bogu da se našao čovjek koji će nam otkriti tajne oceana. Sigurno imaš relevantnih spoznaja o sudbini tog broda. Nikada u životu nisam čuo o potonuću broda Drava na toj poziciji.  Što brodovi prevoze? Terete Pukovniče.
Logged
galeb
zastavnik I klase
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1 695



« Reply #272 on: March 19, 2010, 10:09:00 pm »

Ljudi evo jedno pitanje zasto na ovom forumu ne pise o brodu "DRAVA" koji netragom nestao prvih dana 1981 na putu iz Los Angelesa u kinesku luku Shangai. Po informacijama koje ja posjedujem taj brod je potunuo nekih 150 km od japanske luke Yokohame u oluji jacine 12 bofora sada pitanje zasto se o tom brodu sutilo u tadasnjoj Jugoliniji i sto je tako vazno prevozio taj brod kada se nikada ulozilo u njegovo trazenje toliko zasada od mene pozdrav od Pukovnika......

Jel Drava bila bivsi brod od Splosne plovbe Piran ? Naime, vidio sam sliku broda i jednak je kao 2 broda SPP (Kidrič B.  i Kraigher B.), koja je ta prodala, koliko mi je poznato drugoj YU kompaniji.

LP,
Logged
pukovnik
mornar
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 24



« Reply #273 on: March 19, 2010, 10:49:31 pm »

Nije Galebe taj brod je tadasnja riječka "JUGOLINIJA" kupila u italiji zajedno sa bratom blizancem " DRAVOM" znam da su bili slicni moram potraziti slike negdje sam ih stavio sa strane pa ču ti reči sve o njima zasada toliko od mene pozzzz od Pukovnika....  marinero
Logged
barba
Prijatelj foruma
stariji vodnik
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 819



« Reply #274 on: March 20, 2010, 09:35:49 am »

Ljudi evo jedno pitanje zasto na ovom forumu ne pise o brodu "DRAVA" koji netragom nestao prvih dana 1981 na putu iz Los Angelesa u kinesku luku Shangai. Po informacijama koje ja posjedujem taj brod je potunuo nekih 150 km od japanske luke Yokohame u oluji jacine 12 bofora sada pitanje zasto se o tom brodu sutilo u tadasnjoj Jugoliniji i sto je tako vazno prevozio taj brod kada se nikada ulozilo u njegovo trazenje toliko zasada od mene pozdrav od Pukovnika......

Jel Drava bila bivsi brod od Splosne plovbe Piran ? Naime, vidio sam sliku broda i jednak je kao 2 broda SPP (Kidrič B.  i Kraigher B.), koja je ta prodala, koliko mi je poznato drugoj YU kompaniji.

LP,
Ispravak netocnih navoda:
1. Nije rijec o brodu Drava nego brodu blizancu Dunav.
2. Drava, Dunav, Kidrič i Kraigher su gradjeni u Italiji na osnovu preostalih dugova iz ratnih repacija Italije.
Bili su korisni ali za posadu izuzetno teski brodovi. Narocito se to odrazavalo u spartanskom uredjenju nadgradja. Sve je bilo u zeljezu, sa malo izolacijskog materijala i ukratko jeftino. Talijani su brodove morali dati, ali su ih zato opremili nikako.
Glavni stroj Fiat Grandi Motori je za zve nas pomorce "motor non grata".
Teretni uredjaj, tj. samarice su se koristile za manipulacijom teretom, ali i za otvaranje i zatvaranje stiva (skladista). Bile su i za to vrijeme zastarjele.
Splosna je Kidriča i Kraighera prodala Dalmatinskoj plovidbi Vela Luka, a po raspadu te plovidbe su zavrsili u grckim rukama (kao i obicno).

Brod "Dunav" je klasicni bulk carrier, tj. brod za prjevoz rasutih tereta.
Na svom posljednjem putovanju je imao teret zeljeza. Najvjerojatnije rotule i ploce.
O razlozima potonuca ce se uvijek spekulirati dok se ne pronadje olupina broda. E, to ce biti malo tesko.
Nismo mi Englezi pa da se pokrene cijela kampanja i uloze silni novci da se brod poronadje i rekonstruira njegova posljednja drama.
Sto se moze predpostaviti je da se u nevremenu (tropski ciklon, 12 Bofora, valovi 15 + metara), otvorila ili bokaporta stive 1 ili 2 ili pak neki od malih otvora na kastelu. Brod je dobio dodatne tezine i doslo je do puknuca broda.
Mnogi brodovi istog tipa su na taj nacin potonuli. Razlozi potonuca su godinama istrazivani.
Kada se Englezi pronasli olupinu njihovog OBO "DERBYSHIRE” detalno su izanalizirali razloge potonuca. Rezultata toga su nova pravila za gradnju bulk carrier-a i rekonstrukciju postojecih koji posebnu paznju posvecuju sigurnosi i sprecavanju naplavljivanja prednih djelova broda koji ukljucuje prostor ispod kastela, stive 1 i 2.
Od 2004. godine svi postojeci bulk carrier-i na svijetu morali su proci rekonstrukciju da bi uopce mogli biti dalje registrirani i ploviti.
Tzv. Common Structural Rules obuhvacaju:
- Novi ojacani dizajn bocnih rebara
- Globalno ojacanje svih cimbenika koji bi sprecili pucanje broda u slucaju naplavljivanja prenjih prostora broda.
- Novi ojacani dizajn strukture dvostrukog dna
- Novi ojacani dizajn strukture poprecnih pregrada
- Novi ojacani dizajn sistema za zabravljivanje poklopaca skladista
-  Novi ojacani dizajn malih otvora na provi ukljucujuci sve odusnike koji se nalaze na palubi
- Ugradnja sistema za dojavu u slucaju naplavljivanja (tzv. Water Ingress System)
- Stari bulk carrier-i su u vecini slucajeva dobili ogranicenje u krcanju tereta u slucaju da krcaju alternativno, tj. svaku drugu stivu. Taj princip krcanja se primjenjuje za teske terete (zeljezna ruda). Tim restrikcijama nije im dozvoljene krcati vise od 90% punog kapaciteta.

Eto za sada toliko od mene.

Logged
barba
Prijatelj foruma
stariji vodnik
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 819



« Reply #275 on: March 20, 2010, 05:27:13 pm »


[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ] OBO carrier Derbyshire
Searching for the Derbyshire

Marine Investigation into Britain's Biggest Single Shipping Casualty

By David Mearns     Search Director

Oceaneering Techno1ogies,    Upper Marlboro.      Maryland

When the 169,000 deadweight-ton combination carrier Derbyshire (originally the Liverpool Bridge) sank on September 10, 1980. some 230 miles off the coast of Okinawa, no one would have predicted beforehand that this great ship—the largest of her type in the world at the time could have ever suffered the sudden and violently tragic ending that now appears to have befallen her.

Despite the fact that she was being overtaken by a typhoon that may have subjected her to maximum winds of 85 knots and seas of 60 feet or more. The Derbyshire was an immense vessel 965 feet long and 145 feet wide operated by an experienced captain and crew. She was capable of withstanding the most appalling weather.

Moreover the Derbyshire was only four years old, built by Swan  Hunter's of the river Tyne a well-regarded British shipbuilding company was launched in 1976 at their Haverton Hill yard on the river Tees, being the last in the class of six sister ore/bulk/oil (OBO) ships.

The earliest indication that Derbyshire’s death was extremely sudden was the puzzling absence of a "Mayday" call or any sort of distress signal. By September 13, four days after their last radio communication, the owners Bibby Brothers & Co were sufficiently concerned by the absence of contact to request a search by the Japanese Maritime Safety Agency (MSA). MSA regulations on missing ships dictated that the search could not begin until September 15, 24 hours after Derbyshire was expected to arrive in Kawasaki.

On the 15th, with two patrol boats and two reconnaissance aircraft combing the seas, one of the aircraft spotted an oil slick that was about a kilometer wide by 2 kilometers long.

The following day, a patrol boat directed to the slick confirmed that oil was bubbling up from the ocean in a location approximately 40 miles from Derbyshire‘s last reported position. Although the search was temporarily suspended for a day because another tropical storm was threatening the area, a third observation of "upwelling" fuel oil was made by an MSA aircraft on the !9th. No other sign of the ship or her crew was made and, on September 20th, the search was terminated. Any remaining hope of saving the 42 British officers and crew and two wives on board Derbyshire was extinguished.

Six weeks after the sinking, one of Derbyshire's life boats was sighted by a Japanese tanker nearly 700 miles to the west-southwest of the search area. The empty life boat showed clear evidence of having been wrenched with great force from its davits on the ship, further suggesting that the sinking was rapid.

Questions and Speculations

Reaction to Derbyshire's loss was immediate and intense. In the public and in the shipping industry, the same questions were asked: How could such a large and seemingly invincible ship be lost almost without a trace?

Derbyshire had been equipped with the latest electronic equipment capable of transmitting a May Day call at the push of a button. What possible catastrophe would leave the crew on the bridge with so little time to react in saving the ship and their own lives?

Eighteen months after the loss, one of Derbyshire's sister ships, the Tune Bridge, was forced to return to port because of cracking of the deck plate in an area just forward of the superstructure known as Frame 65. In port, the severity of the cracks was alarmingly apparent. On the starboard side there was a 19 foot crack: on the port side an I 11 foot crack (Ramwell and Madge. 1992).

Prompted by LIoyds Register two sister ships Casi Kittiwake Casi Kittiwake and Sir Alexander Glen —were inspected in the summer of 1982 and were both found to have identical problems with the design and workmanship of critical structural members around Frame 65. The common defect in all three ships invoked a pair of longitudinal bulkheads (girders) that nearly run the length of the ship and serve as main strength members. Contrary to the originally intended design, the two longitudinals were terminated at Frame 65 and butt-welded to the transverse bulkhead that marks the end of the line of cargo holds. Furthermore, the longitudinal bulkheads forward and aft of Frame 65, which should be precisely aligned to preserve continuity and maximum hull strength, were misaligned by 25 to 45 millimeters.

A research study commissioned by the U.K. Department of Transport (Bishop, eta!., 1991) concluded that overall "field stresses" along DerbyDerbyshire's hull would be at a peak near Frame 65. such that the combination of field stresses and high local stresses resulting from probable termination and misalignment of longitudinal members is likely to have resulted in rapid crack propagation and catastrophic structural failure of Derbyshire's hull.

A formal investigation (F!) into Derbyshire's loss was finally conducted in 1987. Unfortunately. the Bishop study was excluded from consideration by the wreck commissioner and the authors were never called to testify. Even more surprising, evidence from the Knowloon Bridge another sister ship whose sinking and subsequent fracture all around Frame 65 was the incident that initiated the inquiry—was essentially ignored Ironically citing the lack of factual evidence the Fl report published in 1989 concluded that Derbyshire was probably overcome by the forces of nature in Typhoon Orchid (Anon.. 1989).

The impact of Derbyshire mysterious sinking on the shipping industry was great, but nowhere was it more personal than in Liverpool where the ship made her home port and where 17 members of Derbyshire's crew lived. For many of the surviving wives, children, and parents, the grief has been prolonged b the lack of a body to bury and distrust in the 1987 formal investigation. Ultimately. the common loss shared by the family members led them to form Derbyshire Families Association (DFA) and to persistently campaign for a true accounting of Derbyshire's loss.

Bulk Carrier Losses Continue

Against this backdrop of increasing controversy over the structural design of the Bridge-cIass of OBO ships, the world’s bulk-carrier fleet was experiencing casualties at an abnormally high rate throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. In the years 1990-91, the pace of losses increased dramatically as 25 bulk carriers were lost under circumstances where structural failure may have been a factor as reported by Lloyds Register.

At least 273 crew died in these sinkings. Including the 99 crew that have perished in the worst three of this year’s bulk carrier losses, it is estimated that 750 seafarers have lost their lives since 1988. In response to proposals by the DFA and two U.K. transport unions—the RMT and NUMAST the International Transport-workers’ Federation (ITF) ambitiously decided to fund a search for Derbyshire and to produce the first factual evidence of her sinking. Among its objectives, ITF wanted to focus attention on maritime safety and the plight of seafarers and to expose the practice of attributing mysterious sinkings force majeure.

The ITF’s selection of Oceaneering Technologies to perform the search was based largely upon the firm’s reputation, unique experience, and capabilities in the conduct of deep ocean searches and marine accident investigations. In addition to its well-known track record in major air crash inquiries (Air India 747, Challenger, SAS 747, United Airlines cargo door, Itavia DC9). the company was developing a further specialty in the location and photo/video investigation of sunken ships. In 1990, Oceaneering Technologies made a major investment in this specialty by fielding the first state-of-the-art "teamed system" that combined a dual-frequency side-scan sonar with a work-class ROV system for the deep ocean up to 6000 meters.

The system was first used in solving the mystery of the freighter Lucona for an Austrian court that was hearing a famous insurance fraud and murder case. Since this introduction, Oceaneering Technologies has used the teamed systems frequently on a variety of shipwreck insurance investigations and special salvage projects.

The Search Begins

Like all searches. Derbyshire search began with a very thorough collection and analysis of the known loss data, of six reported sightings of oil slicks and debris, only three were felt to be reliable and accurate. The major uncertainty in these positions was the lateral displacement the oil bubbles would experience during their 4.210 meter rise to the surface. Although some studies suggested that displacement could be as great as 10 nautical miles away from the wreckage. our analysis indicated a worst case displacement of 3 miles.

Another vital clue came from the Japanese Hydrographic Office who provided current doppler data that showed a prevailing southerly current, refuting the conventional wisdom of a north westerly Kuroshio Current.

Using the principles of modern probability analysis (Discenza and Greer. 1994), an overall search area of 75 square nautical miles was estimated with a high probability zone of roughly 90 square miles. The search plan to cover this area relied on seven 14-mile lines running 1000 280~ where the ocean floor slopes off the Daito Ridge at 70 towards a basin more than 5.200 meters deep (Davies. 1994).

Following mobilization of Oceaneering Technologies’ teamed Ocean Explorer 6000 side-scan sonar and Magellan 725 ROV systems on board the survey vessel Shin Kai Mart,, and transit to the search area, the sonar was launched at 1405 hours on May 29 to begin the search. By 2152, Ocean Explorer’s wide swath sonar (33 36 kH,) was on-line and sweeping a 4.8-kilometer swath of ocean floor in search of Derbyshire's wreckage.

On the third line, less than 23 hours from the start of the search pattern, the sonar detected a large and dense area of high backscattcr. Although promising and a definite candidate for a high-resolution pass. this sonar contact did not match the expected large single target of the presumed intact hull.

As the search progressed, other contacts were found on overlapping lines in the area of the earlier promising contact, increasing the crew’s hope. With no other likely contacts found, the search plan was ultimately modified to run over the promising contact on a high-resolution puss (simultaneous 33/36 kHz and !20 kHz) of 1.2 kilometers.

At 0123 hours on June 3, the color monitor displaying Ocean Explorer’s sonar imagery began revealing a scene of immense destruction and fragmentation that could not be attributed to anything other than the obliterated remains of the bulk carrier Derbyshire.

For detailed photo/video documentation work, the Magellan is typically outfitted with a 35mm still camera (stereo and 750 frame options) and strobe lights; a wide-angle black & white SIT camera; a color camera with zoom capabilities; and a bank of variably controlled flood lights. Video options include a three-chip camera for the highest broadcast quality and a boom deployed small-diameter camera for internal penetrations. This range of high quality photo/video configurations as available to ensure that Magellan’s visual evidence is clear to lay people and is defensible in a court of law.

Due to time limitations, Magellan was deployed in the wreckage field for just six hours. The initial scene that greeted her was one of thousands of bright, sparkling reflections from the tons of iron ore particles that had escaped the cargo holds and settled on the seabed. It wasn’t long before the first piece of fractured shell plating was found. Thereafter. large pieces of wreckage were videotaped in unusual contorted angles lying next to lengths of bent piping and other small debris. Finally, a very large section of the ship sitting upright but deeply buried within an impact crater was recognized as the bow. Maneuvering high above to visualize the widest view of wreckage possible, the bow appeared to be fractured straight across at Frame 339. Moving past the large spare anchor that was still lashed to the deck, Magellan closed in to observe the last five letters on the name on the port side: SHIRE," which had not been seen for nearly 14 years.

Before leaving the wreck, Magellan performed one final act, gently placing a bronze plaque bearing words of remembrance for Derbyshire families on the bow as a final memorial to the 44 who died.

Post-Cruise Developments

Further detailed analysis of the sonar imagery following the search mission has yielded another significant finding: the identification of a sonar target believed to be the stern section just forward of the superstructure in the suspected weak section around Frame 65. This location of the stern, in addition to the confirmed fracture of the bow and the presence of hundreds of relatively small pieces of wreckage. indicates an extremely violent breakup that must have occurred over a very short period of time, perhaps only seconds or minutes. The extensive shattering of the hull clearly visible in the high resolution sonar image has raised new questions about what forces came to bear on the Derbyshire in the moments just before, and after, her sinking.

In the view of the ITF and many other supporters, this spectacular scene of destruction is new and important evidence that invalidates the conclusion of the 1987 formal inquiry that Derbyshire was probably overcome by the forces of nature in Typhoon Orchid." As calls for a fresh public inquiry and a new expedition to gather more information from the wreckage field mounts, the U.K. Marine Accident Investigation Branch has been asked by the minister of transport to assess this new evidence and report to him MAIB’s recommendations.
[ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]

I za kraj slika M/B Drava, broda blizanca Dunava


* derbyshire.jpg (52.39 KB, 300x300 - viewed 578 times.)

* Derbyshire 1.jpg (66.07 KB, 975x563 - viewed 315 times.)

* Drava.jpg (55.4 KB, 640x327 - viewed 313 times.)
Logged
galeb
zastavnik I klase
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1 695



« Reply #276 on: March 20, 2010, 08:35:54 pm »

Kraigher Boris, brod SPP iz iste serije kao Dunav i Drava: [ Attachment: You are not allowed to view attachments ]


* KraigherB.jpg (75.62 KB, 800x497 - viewed 592 times.)
Logged
brodarski
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12 259



« Reply #277 on: March 21, 2010, 12:16:55 am »

Pukovniče ajde siti se još nečega. Ja se ne mogu sititi šta san danas ruča.
Logged
brodarski
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12 259



« Reply #278 on: March 21, 2010, 03:21:17 pm »

Prije 48 godina trgovačka mornarica je obogaćena i ojačana novim prinovama. O nekima se već pisalo i to iscrpno pa nema smisla  ponavljati temu. Pojedine prinove male obalne plovidbe spadaju u antologiju brodarstva. Te 1952. godine primljeni su brodovi klase '' Potok '' i prvi brod klase '' pjesnik ''. Obnovljeni su Vojvodina, Partizanka i Novica. Službeno je upisan i Palagruž na ime reparacija. Mada je preuzet ranije.
Novogradnje: Avala, Njegoš, Potok, Slap, Susak, Zevan, Sutomore, Zvončac, Mrčara, Vrgada, Vladimir Nazor,Vrelo, Ušće i Izvor.
Obnovljeni: Vojvodina, Partizanka, Novica,
Reparacije: Palagruž
Otpisani ( rashod, brisani ): Radnik, Prozor, Davorin, Lubišna
Havarija: Borovnik
Prvi put zaplovio je projekt naparavljen u splitskom brodogradilištu. Bio je to Zvončac.  Taj tip broda prihvatiti će i JRM kao pomoćni brod, a široku primjenu naći će kod svih poduzeća obalne plovidbe. Velik broj tih brodova plovi i danas, a odlikuje ih solidna gradnja trupa. 
Logged
pukovnik
mornar
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 24



« Reply #279 on: March 21, 2010, 04:44:38 pm »

Brodarski kažeš da se sitim još nečeg evo još jednog broda ime mu je " DAKSA" i smatra se hrvatskim Titanicom, naime što se desilo taj brod je krenuo 26.01.1930 iz tunisa put rotterdama ali tamo nikada nije doša naime potonjia je je u biskajskom zaljevu. Evo kako je to bilo 26.01,1930 u 13:07 telegrafist Anđelko Seidl po nalogu kapetana broda Vlaha Baletina poslao sos u kojem javlja da je golemi val probio skladište broj 1 i da se ono puni morem da bih u 13:58 Seidl opozvao traženje pomoči jer za brod više nema problema. Nažalost toga dana kao da je smrt htjela " DAKSU" i njene mornare u 15:19 britanski paraprod " ANDALUSIAN" i portugalska obalna postaja primili su drugi sos sa broda a tada se nalazio 11 nautickih milja od španjolske luke Vigo to je bio posljednji glas sa tog nesretnog broda, jer več sutradan su na obali nadjeni kolut za spašavanje i pomočni brod s natpisom "DAKSA Dubrovnik" ali isti nađena su 2 tjela ali kako nikada nisu identificirati ali sve navodi da su to nesretni mornari sa "DAKSE" tako da su pokopani na groblju u Vigu.Izgrađena je 1911. u uglednome brodogradilištu John Readhead & Sons u South Shieldsu, bila je duga 112,4 i široka 15 metara, mogla je ukrcati 7500 tona tereta, a stapni parni stroj od 2400 KS pokretao ju je brzinom od solidnih 11 čvorova. Svakako je to 1930. godine bio brod kojim se Dubrovačka plovidba mogla ponositi. Brodarski nadam se da si zadovoljan sa brodom koji sam izabra jer brodovi su ka i judi uvik ih se treba sičat i odavat im počast i zato pozdrav svim mornarima ma gdje bili od Pukovnika......
Logged
brodarski
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12 259



« Reply #280 on: March 21, 2010, 04:53:14 pm »

Pukovniče izabra si tešku temu i teški brod. Ta tema pripada razdoblju Kraljevine Jugoslavije. kako nitko nije otvarao taj topic možda se ukazala potreba da se napokon aktivira. Previše sam zauzet da bih osobno to učinio. Daksa pak se može staviti u zasebnu temu '' Havarije izvan teritorijalnog mora '' ili pak '' Najteže pomorske nesreće brodova pod jugoslavenskom zastavom ''. Pročitao sam brdo materijala o Daksi, a ništa novog nije napisano niti se saznalo od tragedije. U literaturi ograničio bih se na period kraljevine kad je tragedija i nastala. Tad su pomorci poznavali nastradale, a bilo je puno ljudi koji su navigavali na Daksi prije tragedije. Ti su ljudi imali što reći, napisati, upozoriti i objasniti. Sve što se pisalo u zadnjih tridesetak godina je crpljenje već poznatih podataka. Toliko o Daksi.
Logged
brodarski
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12 259



« Reply #281 on: March 21, 2010, 09:30:07 pm »

Serija vodonosaca izašla  s riječkog navoza nosila je simbolična imena u svezi s vodom. Bili su to brodovi čelične gradnje dugi 41.87 i široki 7.52 metara. Tipični predstavnik Vrelo imao je 328 BRT i 418 tona nosivosti. Dizel motor od 300 KS pogonio ga je brzinom od 9.5 čvorova. Pozivni znak YTWV. Brod je isporučen Jadroslobodnoj iz Rijeke za prijevoz vode. Kasnije su neki od tih  brodova pregrađeni za prijevoz općeg tereta.
Ovaj tip broda ima dosta sličnosti s pomoćnim brodovima tipa PN i PV JRM.


* VRELO.jpg (34.97 KB, 520x241 - viewed 337 times.)
Logged
ML
kapetan korvete
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6 798



« Reply #282 on: March 21, 2010, 09:43:40 pm »

Pa Vrelo nikako ne liči na vodonosca ima štive s bokaportama i deriće, jedino je mogo prevozit vodu u flašama ili u buradima.
Logged
brodarski
Stručni saradnik - istorija RM
kapetan bojnog broda
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12 259



« Reply #283 on: March 21, 2010, 09:49:00 pm »

ML lijepo sam napisao da su neki od tih brodova kasnije pregrađeni za prijevoz općeg tereta.
Logged
ML
kapetan korvete
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6 798



« Reply #284 on: March 21, 2010, 09:56:34 pm »

ML lijepo sam napisao da su neki od tih brodova kasnije pregrađeni za prijevoz općeg tereta.
Jeste brodarski i sad kad bolje pogledam sliku vidim da ima jako nisko nadvođe što je karakteristika vodonosaca, petroljera i  pravih cementaša. Ako te mogu zamolit,imaš koju sliku MB JADRO.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2010, 10:06:01 pm by ML » Logged
Pages:  1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 101   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder

SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.032 seconds with 23 queries.