The quantity of explosives was not that big and the hazard from fragments minimal. I’m sure it was loud but safe off the deck.
Is there a reason the whole crew had to remain on board this whole time? Sounds dreadful to spend 2 months in one spot like that.
Edit: sounds like it’s nothing having to do with the ship, but rather the issues that surround on-shoring (if that’s a word?) of foreign nationals:
I’m not sure but I think there was some weird maritime stuff about abandoning the ship and cargo plus somebody needed to be there in case of fire or whatever. I hope they at least have internet. 
Yeah, my understanding is that once ships get over a certain size they always have to have a crew onboard, not that it also isn’t a pita to let foreigners off the boat legally either.
1 Like
Idk how long they were planning on staying on the ship if things had gone to plan but I’m petty sure it’s in the same ballpark.
Yeah, I thought about that, but at least you presumably have daily work responsibilities to keep you engaged when you’re moving the cargo. This feels more like 2 months of nothing. But I could be wrong. Also, once the ship is freed, then what, another 2 months of travel at sea? I’m guessing they don’t just come ashore and fly home. So now their overall time at sea has increased significantly. The article mentions mental health services being offered to the crew; I assume there’s some reason for that.
I can’t image there is much to do when held against your will on a ship in Baltimore harbor. I suppose it’s a good time to reflect and write about what’s going on around you.
Because of the complexity of disembarking foreign nationals on container ships, the crew will likely continue to work and stay on the ship for some time.
As an example of how badly this is regulated all over the world
I forget details but growing up seem to remember hearing about some crew stuck like 6 months anchored up so recreational fisherman started dropping off coolers of booze and pizzas on their way out to fish in the mornings
Can’t they put them up in a fucking hotel? Jfc
You know how many Republicans (Dems too) have created additional and needless immigration laws stacked on top of each other since September 2001 to make it nearly impossible for these crewman to come ashore?
All in the name of national security to help them get (re)elected
Could be wrong but I think a lot of maritime stuff is just super weird everywhere. Like this one
Stranded sailor allowed to leave abandoned ship after four years
It began in July 2017, when the MV Aman was detained at the Egyptian port of Adabiya. The cargo ship was held because it had expired safety equipment and classification certificates.
It should have been easy enough to resolve, but the ship’s Lebanese contractors failed to pay for fuel and the MV Aman’s owners in Bahrain were in financial difficulty.
With the ship’s Egyptian captain ashore, a local court declared Mohammed, the ship’s chief officer, the MV Aman’s legal guardian.
This is an edge case for standard laws where the crew would probably be in the same situation if this happened in another country. I assume these sailors are being fed and being paid and their lives aren’t that different from if the accident hadn’t happened.
Kinda hard to find exact analogs, but every ship I see that got stuck in Swedish, Danish, or Norwegian waters for more than a day or two had the crew evacuated. Egypt and the USA might just not be the best countries to be stranded near.
1 Like
There a massive database of these strandings, I assume Nordic some of the best places but still looked like people stranded for months which obviously better than years
1 Like
Cool resource. There’s more specific info about crews getting paid or not than whether/when they got to leave, but I did find a crew in Denmark and another in the Netherlands that were stranded perhaps for months, though the wording is a little vague.
Some of the crews in some places look like they were repatriated, perhaps immediately. Some of the crews in some countries seem to have been stuck for long periods with comments like “inconsistent supply of water”.
I don’t think there’s any international law preventing any country from just letting the crew go ashore though.
Bizarre. Countries suck.
1 Like
Yeah seems super bizarre to me that the outcomes seems so variable. I have to wonder if it’s a purely immigration type concern or if countries don’t want to be the dumping ground for whatever causes these ships to get abandoned in first place.
1 Like
I certainly suspect immigration and the crews are almost entirely made up of people they don’t want/afraid they’ll stick around and evade repatriation.
1 Like
It’s a rule that ships not tied up at the dock must have adequate crew aboard for obvious safety reasons. When we had the supply chain crisis and 50 ships would be anchored off LA, every one of those ships had crew, and not because of immigration. During COVID, dozens of cruise ships were anchored in the Bahamas. Some of the crew got to go home, but some just chilled for several months.
In most circumstances, including the US, if a crew needed to get off the ship they could, they would just be expected to fly home.
1 Like