URGENT: Japanese tanker explodes near Strait of Hormuz

A friend of my working for some naval seismologic company, (US) explained that the roque wave indeed is very plausible.

"My opinion: Damage was waterborn. (because of the lack of burn marks and the location/type of damage.) Possible rogue wave or seismic generated tsunami is most *likely* scenario"

There is speculation on Lloyds List about the tanker suffering a grenade attack.

Link provided below

lloydslist.com/ll/sector/tankers/article341144.ece

The only folks making a big deal about this are on ATS. Is everyone mad that Iran, the US and others are downplaying this incident? Its not even on the front page of the news anymore today. Soa wave hit the boat or an old mine that underperformed or something. BFG.

No false flag here.

reply to post by Chakotay


mabey it did hit a sub and the bouy that pops out when one gets destroyed poped out into the hull and made that dammage? they come out pretty fast but dont have explosive

Fales flags always get big press
natural incidents or real terrorists get down played
So I agree the false flag is unlikely or we wouldn't get away from it.
we just like to have fun and get answers at ATS.

Who says we want it to be a false flag ? We want to know what happened.
Front news is not a measurement of the importance of events.

Again, drawing an analogy to the Artic Sea last year, it quickly disappeared from front news the first days because the press didn't know how to handle it and it came back when it got weirder. And we're still unsure what happened.
The M. Star saga is not over.

Maybe they really dont know what happened???

I see 2 camps on this board. The folks who take any news like this and are ready and hoping it leads to WW3.

And folks who take news like this and hope to blame the US or Israel because they dont like them. God forbid if anyone got hurt in the process...that doesnt matter. As long as they can blame the US for it then its all good.

People on here actually want bad events to happen so they can blame the US or Israel.

Pathetic.

Originally posted by VonDutch
A friend of my working for some naval seismologic company, (US) explained that the roque wave indeed is very plausible.

"My opinion: Damage was waterborn. (because of the lack of burn marks and the location/type of damage.) Possible rogue wave or seismic generated tsunami is most *likely* scenario"

shouldnt wave do damage in a lot wider area?,ships damage look like something focused on that point? and i dont think waves can do that

edit: and i have seen my share of ship damage of all kinds since i was building/fixing em at one point of time never seen a wave do that kind of damage.... so to me that looks like something "blunt" hit that part of the ship ,if it would of been another ship with sharp bow etc, something would of ripped open.... or then some shockwave which focused on that point for some reason and when talking about shockwave i aint talking about water
anyways we are talkinkg about something with great energy since if i see correctly the inner structures have given in,not ruptured, and in ships those structures arent made out of paper....


damn typos


[edit on 7/29/2010 by zoomer72]

[edit on 7/29/2010 by zoomer72]

[edit on 7/29/2010 by zoomer72]

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Maybe they really dont know what happened???

Yes maybe... But they are not lacking explanations then. Without the bizarre explanations, it wouldn't have gained so much attention.

There's not much of what you are moaning about in this thread.

There is a mystery in a critical location and the news reports are erratic. It's fairly interesting for some.

Besides, I am not ready for WWIII, I have tons of things to do in August.

After all the things USreal has done and been caught lying about someone is worried about what might get said about them on ATS...?

Gee, I thought this discusion was earthquake vs wave vs bouy vs old mine....
vs GODZILLA FARTS...
oh wait, the TANKER CAPTAIN said explosion...
I thought we were doing pretty good at keeping this imaginary.


[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Maybe they really dont know what happened???

Then they need to find out - or perhaps we will be able to tell them!!!

2 camps. The folks who take any news like this and are ready and hoping it leads to WW3.

And folks who take news like this and hope to blame the US or Israel because they dont like them.

Myopia rools KO! Has anybody said they hope it leads to WW3? Nope. Has anyone blamed the US? Well, yes maybe. Has anyone blamed Israel? Nope.

People on here actually want bad events to happen so they can blame the US or Israel. Pathetic.

No, people on here are curious. If you are not curious may I enquire just what you think you might get out of a site like ATS? Whilst we run the risk of being knee deep in felines we have fun and in addition provide the PTB with information as to how we will react to things.

Nobody seriously wants war in any shape or form and frankly if you really think people here are like that then you are definitely playing in the wrong cabbage patch.

Originally posted by Manouche

Besides, I am not ready for WWIII, I have tons of things to do in August.

I will see if I can have it put off until September specially for you.

[edit on 29/7/2010 by PuterMan]

reply to post by Danbones

The study group that established policies for the NAO was jointly funded by the ODNI and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), one of only two domestic U.S. agencies that is currently allowed, under rules set in the 1970s, to use classified intelligence from spy satellites. (The other is NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.)

WHAT!!!!

Um . And WHY???

And OMG!!!!

Actually in this instance it was EMSC not USGS that was missing the data but never the less that is a VERY interesting bit of information.

Somehow I don't think that EMSC would be quite in the same club.

This happens when you don't properly vent a storage tank.

My guess they had a faulty vent.
Heres a picture that shows how a tanker is seperated into comparments.

reply to post by PuterMan

damn I was going to ductape your coffee to the wheel well of a bomber
so when the bomber puts its gear down to land it would fall out over your house...I was going to rig it with a flare on a trip string so the thread would show up here on the UFO section at ats so I would know you got it...If we wait till September it might be cold by the time it gets there...
a tim hortons coffee would set the flare off straight away, they are hot when they are poured...but timmies are a taste of Canada..
.........................................................................................
I think the pic shows indents around the frame work that a solid impact would have pushed in equally to the skin...so I am sticking with water..

Like I have said the wave in the ship pic earlier is the exact right shape to do what is described as the damage...
What made the wave ?
it wasn't weather
I will admit a near miss with an explosive is a good bet...
a smart mine?
I say siesmic for the sake of arguement, because it was reported by more then one source...
Puterman has made a good case for not siesmic...

still Godzilla farts...thats close to space goat farts ala webbots...
I have a door hinge that sounds just like godzilla

the faulty valve causing cooling suction is cool but the superstructure was damaged....


[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

Originally posted by JBA2848
This happens when you don't properly vent a storage tank.

My guess they had a faulty vent.
Heres a picture that shows how a tanker is seperated into comparments.

ermm... on that point where the damage is they said that they had nothing that could blow ,which rules out tanks etc......if happened like in a clip it should of sucked in that part of the deck in too + inner parts of the ship, hatches etc and as far as i know thats called implosion not explosion which the ships crew said that happened, so i think thats not the case ,anyways railway cars arent made out quite the same way as ships,especially tankers.....so you really cant compare

[edit on 7/29/2010 by zoomer72]

reply to post by zoomer72

good one, and it would have made a pretty good BONG too...
but...what about the life boat?
actually it might have bounced it around pretty good....

dang where do I have to start a war to get the bomber to fly over your house so I can drop you a coffee...or do you drink beer...?



[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

reply to post by JBA2848


OK, I am assuming looking at that video that the tank was being emptied, by pump. The failure to vent led to the collapse once the pump created enough vacuum to overcome the structural integrity. There seems to be a tube going from under the tank so I guess that is what it is.

This tanker had recently loaded in UAE so what might have caused the collapse since obviously it was not being unloaded - or was it?? We have brought that up but have no answers.

So thinking out loud, was the oil that was loaded stored in tanks on the dock? We already know that it has been very hot in the area. If you refer back to the temperature chart you will note that the temperature was 94 deg F (max) the previous and was 89 deg F at 00:30 when the incident occurred.

The tanker is a large body of steel, and therefore presumably a heat sink. I know nothing about temperatures on ships but I would image that ships hulls do not heat up much since such a large area is in contact with the sea.

So can someone more knowledgeable about ships/tankers answer this question.

"Would contraction of the oil in a compartment take place after loading due to loss of temperature if it was stored in 'hot' outside tanks prior to despatch, and would such contraction be sufficient to do this type of damage if there was faulty vent valve?"

--------------------------------------------------------
@Danbones

the faulty valve causing cooling suction is cool but the superstructure was damaged....

Yes that's the bit I can't fit into the theory either.

PS Put the coffee in a Thermos flask!


[edit on 29/7/2010 by PuterMan]

On barges the deck can get too hot to walk bare foot on in the sun
and at night they cool down, we do have to keep the fuel tanks un vented or they won't feed out the fuel...

What if that was where the fuel bunker was being pumped out and /or cooled....

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by zoomer72

 

good one, and it would have made a pretty good BONG too...
but...what about the life boat?

well, no lifeboat can do that.... maybe if we start imaging :heavy steel constructed lifeboat on a ship without double hulls dropping out by itself, and then rogue wave hits the lifeboat and after that it hits the hull but even then the damage wouldnt look anything like that,there would have to be scrapemarks etc....and the shape of the damage would look something quite different....

and the lifeboat in that imaginary case would have to have some serious mass and not ship/boat like form so... and that would make hellowa clangin noise ... not explosion ...unless loaded with tnt

and then again tankers have doublle hulls so... i say lifeboat nawh

[edit on 7/29/2010 by zoomer72]

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by zoomer72

 

good one, and it would have made a pretty good BONG too...
but...what about the life boat?
actually it might have bounced it around pretty good....

dang where do I have to start a war to get the bomber to fly over your house so I can drop you a coffee...or do you drink beer...?




[edit on 29-7-2010 by Danbones]

coffee in the morning and beer tastes in the evening thank you

no need for a bomber,get me a pint when i get to Canada to see my GF:s relatives

[edit on 7/29/2010 by zoomer72]