uscg case id 42286, coast guard says 538KG.
This was a very high profile spill
with commentator after commentator decrying the fact
that the ship was single hull.
CTX has not been able to find one press report
that noted that the ship was single screw,
and that it was the loss of the main engine
that caused the spill.
The IMO analysis is remarkably weird.
The cause is the bridge being unaware of a potential engine problems??????
IMO goes out of its way to blame everything on some "human factor".
According to the experts at IMO, it's always the crew's fault.
And if only we had more procedures,
these operational errors would be eliminated.
The cause of course of the Westchester spill
is the loss of power due to a crankcase explosion.
Crankcase fires are a problem to which all big two-stroke diesels are prone.
What happens is that lube oil builds up in
the space surrounding the crankshaft below the piston,
usually due to a leak or a control problem in the lube oil system.
Once that occurs all that is required is a source of ignition,
and with all the rotating machinery in the space,
there are lots of possible sources.
This is such a common problem,
that the engines are fitted with blow-out panels
to minimize the damage to the engine in the event of a crankcase explosion.
It is probable that many tanker casualties
that merely list Fire/Explosion as their cause
are crankcase explosions.
The engines are also equipped with an oil mist detector
which attempts to sense the lube oil build up in the crankcase.
In this case, it sounds like the oil mist detector sounded an alarm
shortly -- the report does not say how shortly -- before the fire.
Since there is always lube oil in the crankcase,
oil mist detectors are notoriously unreliable,
prone to false positives.
So its not clear what the bridge would have done,
or could have done, even if it knew about the alarm immediately.
The obvious solution is propulsion redundancy.
Need location and depth of damage.