NOW HEAR THIS

Common sense and experience are not enough, even when combined, to justify not taking the time to consider hull stress when loading a tank vessel. Seriously, they've computerized and cross-referenced cargo loading programs to measure stress, strain and the acceptable bending modulus- why in the name of Rock Hudson's stained mattress cover would you not completely and utterly master your stability program if your name is signed on the goddamed DOI and load plan?

 A former co-worker's chief mate broke his ship's back last week. This is in the third world, where they're just going to sister the broken stringers and reflag the little tanker through Belize, who doesn't worry about such things, but even so, this just cut the service life of this ancient vessel by a good 5 years.

 I've tried and failed to model a load plan where I cracked my own hull, but to do so I need to do insanely stupid things and then get holed in the bow and fill up my forepeak (the empty compartment behind the bow of a tank vessel)... and even then it would have to be a real shit sea state. Here at HAWSEPIPER's Afloat GLobal HQ/house of style, we're not quite riding on the proverbial Brick Shithouse, but it's still pretty good.

 But, all the same, let's see some examples of what I'm talking about.

This last one was a heartbreaker. The "Prestige" wasn't horribly misloaded, just old and poorly cared for. When she got her balls stove in in a storm, the resulting hull fracture was very fixable, but Europeans being Europeans, and always ready to endanger or outright kill people though both action and inaction in the name of sacred Gaia, wouldn't allow her safe harbor to make repairs, and, as a result, this.