Thread: HTMS Sukhothai reported sunk in Gulf of Thailand

^ I know this is a very serious thread but is that your boat in your avatar?

If so I approve with your deck hands!

What size MTU engine does a new submarine need? HTMS Sukhothai had 2 x 16,000 HP MTU engines.

Originally Posted by Mendip

I can't imagine much worse than being trapped below decks in a sinking ship. It must be the worst nightmare of anyone who works at sea.

Indeed. Being on a stricken iron-coffin u-boat mustn't have been a barrel of sich lustig machen.

Originally Posted by qwerty

Even if an engine shut down, the captain should have deployed a sea anchor to keep the ship's head into the wind and waves. Instead he let the bow fall off so that the ship started to roll in a beam sea. From there it would just be a cascade of failures.

As with many mishaps here, you're just left wonder 'How the fudge did they manage to do that?'

Originally Posted by Edmond

'How the fudge did they manage to do that?'

leaving the screen doors open ?

Thai welding?

Originally Posted by malmomike77

Thai welding?

Made in Tacoma Washington. Commissioned in 1987.

^ In know, based on a Saudi class the yanks built but then 35 years of Thai maintenance

Originally Posted by prawnograph

There's some video clips here on ThaiRath from yesterday, daylight, showing conditions earlier in the day. My maritime exp is limited to kayaking so I offer no comment, over to the seafarers, where's Captain Pugwash?

I've seen the video taken from the bow of the ship as the vessel cut through the sea and waves washing over the bows is entirely normal. It doesn't take big seas for this to happen although of course slowing down a bit would reduce the amount of water washing over.

Every vessel I have ever worked on has doors on the main deck with big signs saying they must be kept closed at sea. On higher decks many door may be left open depending on weather. If these doors are left open and water floods through a vessel may lose stability very quickly.

Looking at the video, with the wooden bench washing around over the bows until someone grabs it, suggests poor seafastening which may also suggest more endemic poor practices. That would lead to a reported incident on vessels I work on. The first thing we do before a transit is ensure everything is seafastened.

But all said and done, it wasn't big seas... choppy at worst. Maybe a sharp turn at speed, poor trim and ballast, open doors/hatches... a combination of factors. I've been on a vessel that lost power off Angola... no wind but a rolling 3m swell across the Atlantic from the west. We soon went beam on and started rolling but nowhere near capsizing and that was a piece of shit flat-bottomed river boat from the southern states of the US, not a seagoing naval vessel.

My experience is with much smaller boats - both sail and power - and like Mendip said, those conditions should not have come anywhere near sinking that ship. I suspect that the officers were simply not trained to do their jobs properly. When the ship started to take on water, did the XO, Captain and Engineer know exactly where all of the potential leaks could be? In addition to doors, had they ever crawled though the bilges to inspect the through-hulls? Did they check the exhaust hoses? There are many potential failure points and the officers should have been familiar with all of them.

seriously , of course they left the bulkheads open - how many thias do you know that close doors and gates ?

Originally Posted by qwerty

did the XO, Captain and Engineer know exactly where all of the potential leaks could be?

Navy drill almost without fail on any sailing is an emergency reaction drill, fire, abandon etc - check reaction times, crew know what to do, where to go you name it - i strongly suspect in this emergency case they were headless chickens. Once the alarm was raised all non essentials should have made their way topside - seems they had plenty of time to do so and it should have been the MEO below decks reporting back to the Capt/XO for them to call the shots on what to do

Originally Posted by Mendip

I have no idea what the regime on a Thai naval vessel would be like

you'd hope the same the world over, that is when the shit hits the fan on a boat there's no where to run to - thus drills

^ The Captain will never alpologise. He will pay a junior officer to applogise, who in turn will become a Monk for 3 months, probably synchronised with his leave period.

Why didn't they send the famous Thai aircraft carrier to the rescue? Oh.....
The Thai Navy is a sick joke. There is no way this could have happened except poor seamanship and sloppy standards.

Originally Posted by Mendip

I still have a go at my 'gardener' for wearing his seat belt behind him to stop the dashboard alarm flashing. Why not just wear it properly?

Due to superstitious belief within the echelons of... would we say, the rural gardener class, whereby putting on a seatbelt does two things.

1. Actually causes an accident to happen, due to putting the thought of it out there by taking a precaution against it.
2. Publicly declares that they believe the driver of the vehicle is unfit to drive, and a danger.

Neither of which are good.


Hence why the gardener's less-sighted brother has either tied-up or completely removed the seatbelts from his leased Bangkok taxi.

Speculating upon the foolishness of Thai is akin to wondering why horses are horses and mules are mules. In the end, they are congenital fuckups and there it is.

Originally Posted by sabang

There is no way this could have happened except poor seamanship and sloppy standards.

Freak waves smacking into the side could do it, couldn't it? It isn't a large ship.

Still, very odd

Not unless the ship wasn't properly secured PH- hatches and covers left open, stuff like that. The RAN operates in probably the worlds roughest ocean, the Southern Ocean. The swell there regularly exceeds a ships freeboard. No problem- but we do make sure the hatches are tight, and secured. And competent people are at the helm.

Originally Posted by prawnograph

And just to confuse things, Bangkok Post reports that the patrol boat Pattaravarin 88 rescued nine sailors plus one deceased in the search area but they were from another ship (initially reported in error as being Thai navy crew) which sank yesterday, reported as the freighter Anuphum.

Appears that's been cleared up now:

Several vessels, including HTMS Sukhothai capsized on Sunday.

According to Thai-MECC [Thai Maritime Enforcement Command Centre] Region 1, the Anuphum encountered heavy seas about 5.7 nautical miles from Chumphon, which caused the ship to list. The cargo ship's ten crew were rescued by another vessel, the Pataravarin 88.

The merchant ship Santhat Samut 2, which was carrying nine crew members and a cargo of timber, sent a distress signal before the ship sank about 35 nautical miles from Samui. All of the ship's nine crew members were safely rescued, and some 30 containers were spotted near the shore in Surat Thani's Chaiya district, the office said.

The trawler Sor Nopparat 4 capsized about 30 nautical miles southwest of Koh Samae Sarn, although fortunately, all of its crew were rescued safely.

The oil tanker Pattarapun was swept towards the shore by strong winds, causing it to run aground in the mouth of Songkhla Lake. The company which operates the ship will tow the tanker back out to sea whne conditions permit.