Grace 1
 

I'm clearly out of touch with shipping routes from the Gulf. On the news they described the route of the tanker fully loaded from Iran as 'taking the long route around the Cape of Good Hope instead of going through the Suez Canal.'

I'm just curious because I did that route a number of times, because a tanker of that size fully loaded was just too big for Suez. Have they improved the canal that much since my day ? … if so … fair enough.

Appreciate any info about what Suez can take these days. :supercool:

Bob, I transited Suez Northbound a few years ago on a cruise and I asked a similar question. From memory I think the max draft is in the region of 65 feet and the max beam about 165 feet, there is no restriction on length as far as I can remember. I sailed on a VLCC with very similar dimensions in the early 70s and she was 215,000 dwt so that might give you a clue.

Was that fully loaded ? I knew VLCC's could go through unloaded, but the draft was too much fully loaded. I'd say at 65 feet you'd be pushing your luck.

If I remember correctly my first VLCC, the Hudson Friendship was pulling 64 feet, and the Old Man chose to go to Japan from the Gulf via the Lombok Strait rather than chance the Malacca.

She went the long way round taking weeks which is why there was suspicion.
Geoff

So you're saying she could have gone through Suez fully loaded, but didn't ?

OK that would make the News statement sensible.

Suez has changed a bit since I last went through it … (close to 40 years ago.) :eek:

http://maritime-connector.com/wiki/suezmax/


May be of help.

Thanks Ron. I'm still a bit confused because it that ship is fully loaded, she can't get through Suez, and would have to go around the Cape.

My reading is she has a 22m draft and goes over 300,000 dwt. She looks fully loaded in what pix I can see.

Clearly there's some politics going on here, but the news report as far as I can see was misleading.

I suspect it would take rather more cartons and bottles to get through Suez than is customary were she to be on a sanctions black-list.

Bob, see if you can download the Financial Times article of yesterday...tells you a lot.

geoff

I have read that. I'm not particularly bothered by the politics or reasons of this event, I just wanted to understand the report that the ship raised suspicions and was tracked after it took the long way round instead of going through the Suez Canal. That's how they stated it on TV News.

At first I thought: 'Has that canal been modified so much it can take a tanker of that size fully loaded ?' I now realise it hasn't.

That's a larger ship than any VLCC I sailed on, and I sailed on a few.

I'll put it down to journalism. Perhaps they look at the map and don't understand why a ship would take the long way round. (And it is a long long way when you consider how far Syria is from Iran.) I still don't think they fully understand the sheer size of these vessels.

She's still being plotted on the Marine Traffic Site.