35 Years, the Legend Lives On

[Big Fitz]

Last night was the 35th anniversary of the Edmund Fitzgerald sinking on Lake Superior.

SS Edmund Fitzgerald - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3xX1Hzmiik[/ame]

And of course...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0DqPSF2fyo[/ame]

 

[daveman]

Such a haunting song...

 

[Big Fitz]

They say the storm that hit about 2-3 weeks ago was like a blizzard without the snow. The barometric pressures on the lakes were the lowest in recorded history over lake Michigan, Huron and Erie. I checked the storm data, and they were projecting surf (which I haven't heard results from) of over 20 feet.

That storm was a mean mamajama, but sunk no ships. And yet the one that sunk the Fitz probably was not in the top 5 of the great lakes storms.

 

[loosecannon]

They say the storm that hit about 2-3 weeks ago was like a blizzard without the snow. The barometric pressures on the lakes were the lowest in recorded history over lake Michigan, Huron and Erie. I checked the storm data, and they were projecting surf (which I haven't heard results from) of over 20 feet.

That storm was a mean mamajama, but sunk no ships. And yet the one that sunk the Fitz probably was not in the top 5 of the great lakes storms.

20 foot seas in a 700 foot freighter is really not much more than froth. We routinely operated 100 foot fishing vessels in 20 foot seas in AK. And we wouldn't hesitate to get underway in 40 foot seas in a ship 300 feet long.

10 foot seas are a fairly calm day on the open ocean.

 

[Big Fitz]

The night the Fitz went down there were reported seas of 40-70 feet in the middle of the lake. Today's the 70th anniversary of Lake Michigan's Armistice Day storm in 1940.

Armistice Day Blizzard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is only a halfassed discussion on how bad the storm was on lake Michigan, considered one of the top storms of all time.

For the biggest badass storm IMHO, this is the one.

Great Lakes Storm of 1913 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh but check this out for what is now being called "The Chiclone of 2010"

The storm also produced some of the highest officially recorded waves by weather buoys stationed in Lakes Superior and Michigan. Specifically, on Wednesday, October 27, 2010, buoy no. 45136, operated by Environment Canada, in northern Lake Superior recorded a significant wave height of 26.6 feet (this is average height of 1/3 of the highest waves over an hour), and buoy no. 45002, operated by the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC), recorded a significant wave height of 21.7 feet in northern Lake Michigan. The NDBC and many models indicate that multiplying significant wave height by a factor of approximately 1.3 will equal the approximate average height of the highest 1/10 of waves recorded -here that would translate into such average wave heights of approximately 34.5 feet and 28.2 feet on Lakes Superior and Michigan respectively [please verify]. This would appear consistent with the NOAA forecast for northern Lake Michigan calling for 21-26 foot waves that day.

It's amazing no ships sank.

 

[Big Fitz]

And don't forget, freshwater is more destructive than salt water because it is less dense and can build up higher. A statistic proved by stress gauges on the Edward L. Ryerson in the mid 70s when it sailed through the same blow that sank the Fitz. Higher stress levels were recorded than were ever possible during a cat 5 hurricane in the ocean on the hull.

 

[loosecannon]

And don't forget, freshwater is more destructive than salt water because it is less dense and can build up higher. A statistic proved by stress gauges on the Edward L. Ryerson in the mid 70s when it sailed through the same blow that sank the Fitz. Higher stress levels were recorded than were ever possible during a cat 5 hurricane in the ocean on the hull.

salt water is only 3% more dense than freshwater, and your point would still be false even if it were 30% denser.

Density of Ocean Water

But more on point reports of the storm that sank the EF seem to support swells of 35 max, just a mild storm for the North Pacific. The EF was built for flat water. Even the 1913 storm was weenie compared to what happens routinely in the ocean.

The EF may have broken up merely because she was riding in the trough with the direction of the wind, something that every open ocean captain on Earth would know to avoid in very heavy weather. In fact in the open ocean ships (built for the ocean) are safest in deep water, and will ordinarily change course and reduce speeds to only a few knots during extreme weather. Unless of course they are large enough craft to be unaffected by the weather. The EF appears to have done neither. Those lake captains just don't know how to deal with what is ordinary across 2/3 of the earth's surface.

I have done wheel watches in 300 foot ships in 40 foot seas and we rode in the trough and didn't bother to slow down. 40 foot seas are just not that threatening to a ship of that size made for that kind of stress. The EF was about 5-7 times as massive a craft. But was built for flat water.

 

[Old Rocks]

Last night was the 35th anniversary of the Edmund Fitzgerald sinking on Lake Superior.

SS Edmund Fitzgerald - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3xX1Hzmiik

And of course...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0DqPSF2fyo

Thank you. One of my favorite ballads.

 

[Big Fitz]

And don't forget, freshwater is more destructive than salt water because it is less dense and can build up higher. A statistic proved by stress gauges on the Edward L. Ryerson in the mid 70s when it sailed through the same blow that sank the Fitz. Higher stress levels were recorded than were ever possible during a cat 5 hurricane in the ocean on the hull.

salt water is only 3% more dense than freshwater, and your point would still be false even if it were 30% denser.

Density of Ocean Water

But more on point reports of the storm that sank the EF seem to support swells of 35 max, just a mild storm for the North Pacific. The EF was built for flat water. Even the 1913 storm was weenie compared to what happens routinely in the ocean.

The EF may have broken up merely because she was riding in the trough with the direction of the wind, something that every open ocean captain on Earth would know to avoid in very heavy weather. In fact in the open ocean ships (built for the ocean) are safest in deep water, and will ordinarily change course and reduce speeds to only a few knots during extreme weather. Unless of course they are large enough craft to be unaffected by the weather. The EF appears to have done neither. Those lake captains just don't know how to deal with what is ordinary across 2/3 of the earth's surface.

I have done wheel watches in 300 foot ships in 40 foot seas and we rode in the trough and didn't bother to slow down. 40 foot seas are just not that threatening to a ship of that size made for that kind of stress. The EF was about 5-7 times as massive a craft. But was built for flat water.

Tell that to the sailors and companies who sail them. I'm just passing on stuff I've read in books on Great Lakes Storms, shipping and disasters. No they're not online as they're old.

The three theories regarding the sinking of the Fitz was that She had taken damage possibly by scraping the nearby shoals which caused enough weakening in the hull that the storm action broke her apart. The power cut from the engine to the forecastle bridge in the Hackett style freighter would instantly render her radio inoperative, just like the Daniel J. Morell which went down in similar circumstances in 1967 IIRC.

The Arthur M. Anderson which was in radar and radio contact with the Fitz, experienced a phenomenon known to the lakes called "The Three Sisters". These are a series of three massive waves, often rogue that can usually by themselves smash a ship. It is possible that two of the 'sisters' were close enough together that they literally lifted the Fitz out of the water at both ends and the weight of the load snapped the ship in twain instantly.

The last theory is that because the Fitz was such a long ship, and the seas were pushing such heights that with a critical loss of buoyancy due to previous damage at the shoals, and the loss of two hatch covers, combined with the three sisters, she was pushed down on her bow, and her own engine on the wave front drove her into the bottom of the lake snapping her and instantly sending her under.

If you are familiar with the great lakes, you're right, generally they are far less touched by wave action, having no tides and a much smaller bowl of soup to sail in. But what you are not taking into account is that they are much shallower, with lighter water (3% seems to be just enough, regardless to what your numbers come back with) can be driven into a bigger fuss faster through wind. So the squalls are often far more violent and punishing to crafts. It is a known quotient that when salties get caught in storms on the great lakes, there are always more than a couple experienced sailors who get sea sick where they never do even during the strongest hurricane. This is due to the fact that the wave action does not roll or foam, cushioning the blow on the ship like the ocean does. That foaming action causes the wave to roll, and the trapped air acts like an airbag to a certain extent, extending and slowing down the transfer of energy. So instead of getting slapped with a high impulse, it is slower and gentler to the ship.

Also, as has been the tradition of Lake built ships, they are just as strong and ready for ocean storms as any vessel built for trans oceanic work. Many oceangoing ships are built in the Great Lakes, and many great lake vessels are sold off to trans ocean work after doing a few years on the lakes. The Mesabi Miner for instance was built in Scotland, or at least it's fore and aft sections, the middle was built in a Canadian yard at Collingwood. So don't be poo-pooing our 1000 footers.

And as for our captains here, they operate with tighter clearances and more unstable conditions with more traffic than most areas of the globe. Remember, the Soo canal is the busiest ditch in the world, doing up to double the traffic of the Suez and Panama Canals. Duluth and Detroit are two of the busiest ports in the world behind Long Beach, NYC and Seattle, that's all.

So, please, this is meant to be a fun thread, not a pissing contest. Start your own pissing contest if you wanna brag about your sea going splendor. I shan't be joining you there.

 

[zzzz]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFvkhzkS4bw[/ame]

 

[loosecannon]

And don't forget, freshwater is more destructive than salt water because it is less dense and can build up higher. A statistic proved by stress gauges on the Edward L. Ryerson in the mid 70s when it sailed through the same blow that sank the Fitz. Higher stress levels were recorded than were ever possible during a cat 5 hurricane in the ocean on the hull.

salt water is only 3% more dense than freshwater, and your point would still be false even if it were 30% denser.

Density of Ocean Water

But more on point reports of the storm that sank the EF seem to support swells of 35 max, just a mild storm for the North Pacific. The EF was built for flat water. Even the 1913 storm was weenie compared to what happens routinely in the ocean.

The EF may have broken up merely because she was riding in the trough with the direction of the wind, something that every open ocean captain on Earth would know to avoid in very heavy weather. In fact in the open ocean ships (built for the ocean) are safest in deep water, and will ordinarily change course and reduce speeds to only a few knots during extreme weather. Unless of course they are large enough craft to be unaffected by the weather. The EF appears to have done neither. Those lake captains just don't know how to deal with what is ordinary across 2/3 of the earth's surface.

I have done wheel watches in 300 foot ships in 40 foot seas and we rode in the trough and didn't bother to slow down. 40 foot seas are just not that threatening to a ship of that size made for that kind of stress. The EF was about 5-7 times as massive a craft. But was built for flat water.

Tell that to the sailors and companies who sail them. I'm just passing on stuff I've read in books on Great Lakes Storms, shipping and disasters. No they're not online as they're old.

The three theories regarding the sinking of the Fitz was that She had taken damage possibly by scraping the nearby shoals which caused enough weakening in the hull that the storm action broke her apart. The power cut from the engine to the forecastle bridge in the Hackett style freighter would instantly render her radio inoperative, just like the Daniel J. Morell which went down in similar circumstances in 1967 IIRC.

The Arthur M. Anderson which was in radar and radio contact with the Fitz, experienced a phenomenon known to the lakes called "The Three Sisters". These are a series of three massive waves, often rogue that can usually by themselves smash a ship. It is possible that two of the 'sisters' were close enough together that they literally lifted the Fitz out of the water at both ends and the weight of the load snapped the ship in twain instantly.

The last theory is that because the Fitz was such a long ship, and the seas were pushing such heights that with a critical loss of buoyancy due to previous damage at the shoals, and the loss of two hatch covers, combined with the three sisters, she was pushed down on her bow, and her own engine on the wave front drove her into the bottom of the lake snapping her and instantly sending her under.

If you are familiar with the great lakes, you're right, generally they are far less touched by wave action, having no tides and a much smaller bowl of soup to sail in. But what you are not taking into account is that they are much shallower, with lighter water (3% seems to be just enough, regardless to what your numbers come back with) can be driven into a bigger fuss faster through wind. So the squalls are often far more violent and punishing to crafts. It is a known quotient that when salties get caught in storms on the great lakes, there are always more than a couple experienced sailors who get sea sick where they never do even during the strongest hurricane. This is due to the fact that the wave action does not roll or foam, cushioning the blow on the ship like the ocean does. That foaming action causes the wave to roll, and the trapped air acts like an airbag to a certain extent, extending and slowing down the transfer of energy. So instead of getting slapped with a high impulse, it is slower and gentler to the ship.

Also, as has been the tradition of Lake built ships, they are just as strong and ready for ocean storms as any vessel built for trans oceanic work. Many oceangoing ships are built in the Great Lakes, and many great lake vessels are sold off to trans ocean work after doing a few years on the lakes. The Mesabi Miner for instance was built in Scotland, or at least it's fore and aft sections, the middle was built in a Canadian yard at Collingwood. So don't be poo-pooing our 1000 footers.

And as for our captains here, they operate with tighter clearances and more unstable conditions with more traffic than most areas of the globe. Remember, the Soo canal is the busiest ditch in the world, doing up to double the traffic of the Suez and Panama Canals. Duluth and Detroit are two of the busiest ports in the world behind Long Beach, NYC and Seattle, that's all.

So, please, this is meant to be a fun thread, not a pissing contest. Start your own pissing contest if you wanna brag about your sea going splendor. I shan't be joining you there.

Like I said, neither the ship or the seamen were built for rough weather. And salt water is every bit as rough on a vessel as fresh. For one thing it is 50 times as corrosive to steel ships. And the waves are considerably larger and more powerful. Fresh water still foams if the waves actually break, you simply have no idea what you are talking about.

But enjoy pissing into the wind. You still lose. Even when you compete against yourself.

It is possible that two of the 'sisters' were close enough together that they literally lifted the Fitz out of the water at both ends and the weight of the load snapped the ship in twain instantly.

You do realize that a ship actually made for big seas wouldn't break under these circumstances? This effect occurs with each and every swell, and I mentioned this earlier in reference to orientation to the swell. Riding in the trough maximizes the stress on the midsection of the ship at both extremes of the cycle. The two ends of the vessel are lifted , then when the cycle reverses the midpoint of the vessel is lifted. Ocean going ships are made for this. Or they would ALL sink.

 

[Luissa]

I saw the story on Deadliest Catch or something. It is a crazy one.

 

[Revere]

It was a little infamy in an otherwise uninteresting existence in a Great Lakes state, I'll say.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And don't forget, freshwater is more destructive than salt water because it is less dense and can build up higher. A statistic proved by stress gauges on the Edward L. Ryerson in the mid 70s when it sailed through the same blow that sank the Fitz. Higher stress levels were recorded than were ever possible during a cat 5 hurricane in the ocean on the hull.

I have seen the bullnose of a carrier buried in surf off the coast of Mexico, and rode out a storm in the South Pacific that we estimated had 60 foot swells. Neither of these storms were considered particularly severe for the area, or the season. I find it hard to believe that waves in a lake, that do not have thousands of miles of momentum behind them, can be worse than the ones in an ocean.

 

[Big Black Dog]

If you're ever in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin, go to the Maritime Museum there. They have some neat stuff there about the Edmund Fitzgerald. Lots of other cool maritime stuff too - mostly concerning local ship building. Nice place.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So, please, this is meant to be a fun thread, not a pissing contest. Start your own pissing contest if you wanna brag about your sea going splendor. I shan't be joining you there.

In this spirit, please feel free to ignore my previous comment.

The rest of the post was informative, and I did learn a little. I would like to point out that the only time I got seasick, during that storm I mentioned earlier, has nothing to do with the height, or the severity, of the waves. We were under tight time constraints, and had to take the waves at an angle, instead of bow on the way we normally would. This resulted in motion that managed to totally disorient me while inside the ship.

 

[loosecannon]

Fitz I happened to find this animation online.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=713Jq1AGLgk[/ame]

This is opilio crabbing which I have never done but it is quite similar to King crabbing which I have. They are working on deck in a schooner style crab boat about 120 feet in length with a 50+ foot beam in seas about 15 feet.

They are also riding in the trough at about a 30 degree angle at about 7-8 knots following a line of crab pots.

Notice how the ship pitches as it crosses the midpoint of each swell.

If the seas were twice as tall this boat would be forced to change course and ride into or away from the swells, regardless of where they wanted to go. And they would slow down to about 5 knots.

Most crab boats avoid this scenario because it really kills a lot of crabs in the holds.

Notice the left side of the deck has a large breakwall that allows them to ride the trough only at angles to the left but not the right.

The EF had no break walls. It was a freighter. It was riding in the trough. If you ride exactly in the trough it gets much worse. You can sink almost anything in big water if you try to straddle the trough.

 

[loosecannon]

the only time I got seasick, during that storm I mentioned earlier, has nothing to do with the height, or the severity, of the waves. We were under tight time constraints, and had to take the waves at an angle, instead of bow on the way we normally would. This resulted in motion that managed to totally disorient me while inside the ship.

riding in the trough. Nuf sed.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

the only time I got seasick, during that storm I mentioned earlier, has nothing to do with the height, or the severity, of the waves. We were under tight time constraints, and had to take the waves at an angle, instead of bow on the way we normally would. This resulted in motion that managed to totally disorient me while inside the ship.

riding in the trough. Nuf sed.

Amen.

I still shudder thinking about it.

 

[loosecannon]

The only time I ever got sea sick was after a 30 hour shift preparing to get underway followed by 4 hours of sleep and then a 4 hour wheel watch.

We were in the trough and no matter how many saltines I ate I just couldn't feel right in the gut. Everytime we crested a swell the whole ship shuddered. it was completely destabalizing.

I didn't throw up, but I wished I could have.