Classification
- Incident Type: Allision
- Severity: High
Vessel Details
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Vessel Name | Milano Bridge |
| Vessel Names | Milano Bridge / Seaspan Ganges |
| Vessel Type | Container |
| Flag State | |
| IMO Number | 9757187 |
| Gross Tonnage | 150706 |
| LOA (m) | 365.94 |
Incident Details
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-04-06 |
| Location | Busan New Port |
| Region | South Korea |
| Fatalities | |
| Injuries | |
| Missing | |
| Investigation Body | Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal |
| Direct Damage | Gantry Cranes Nos. 85 and 81 were total losses; Nos. 84 and 83 sustained partial damage. Milano Bridge also made slight contact with Seaspan Ganges. |
| Economic Damage |
Key facts
- The ship entered Busan New Port with a pilot and two tugs, at 9.5 knots, and began a starboard turn to berth at about 14:36 local time.
- KMST attributed the accident to the vessel making its berthing turn at excessive speed, alongside route deviation and inadequate consideration and planning of the maneuvering risks.
- The KMST overview says three gantry cranes were contacted. Its damage listing records Nos. 85 and 81 as total losses, Nos. 84 and 83 as partially damaged, and No. 82 as undamaged.
- Milano Bridge made slight contact with the berthed containership Seaspan Ganges.
- The report identifies the master and 22 crew members as onboard but provides no casualty count in the reviewed account.
Narrative
On 6 April 2020, Milano Bridge approached Busan New Port after completing repairs and inspections in China. A pilot boarded at about 13:54. Two tugs were made fast, one forward and one aft. The containership was scheduled to berth at Berth No. 8, but other ships occupied the adjacent berths. It was carrying no cargo and had 4,233 tonnes of ballast water; its drafts were 4.5 m forward and 6.9 m aft, leaving about 3.2 m, or 32% of the propeller diameter, above the waterline. The Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal (KMST) found that this propeller exposure reduced propulsion and turning ability. (Report, pp. 2–3.)
At about 14:34, Milano Bridge passed Busan New Port’s west breakwater at 9.5 knots. It began a 90-degree turn to starboard near To Islet at about 14:36. The report says previous vessels had reduced speed to 6.5–8 knots in that area before making a large course alteration. Milano Bridge turned more slowly than the pilot expected. At about 14:39, the pilot ordered the aft tug to push the vessel toward the port side. At about 14:41, concerned about closing on a berthed vessel, the pilot ordered full ahead in an effort to improve turning. The vessel did not turn as intended and moved closer to Pier No. 3. (Report, p. 3.)
At about 14:43, after completing the 90-degree change of heading, the pilot abandoned the berthing attempt and tried to turn the vessel to starboard. Milano Bridge narrowly avoided three vessels berthed at Pier No. 3 and contacted three gantry cranes standing beside its intended berth. It also made slight contact with Seaspan Ganges at Berth No. 7. The report's damage listing records Gantry Cranes Nos. 85 and 81 as total losses, Nos. 84 and 83 as partially damaged, and No. 82 as undamaged. This lists four cranes with damage outcomes despite the overview's statement that three cranes were contacted; the report does not reconcile the difference. It does not quantify damage to Seaspan Ganges in the reviewed sections. (Report, pp. 3 and 29–30.)
KMST concluded that Milano Bridge deviated from the planned route and made its berthing turn at excessive speed. It found that the master and pilot had not fully considered navigation risks, including the ship’s restricted maneuverability in its lightly loaded condition, and that they had not agreed a proper maneuvering or pilotage plan in advance. The Tribunal also noted insufficient communication. Its analysis cautioned that the simulation could not reproduce the urgent maneuver exactly and supported qualitative rather than quantitative conclusions. The report overview identifies the master and 22 crew members as onboard but does not give a casualty count in the reviewed account. A contemporaneous gCaptain article reported no injuries; the KMST report does not independently establish that outcome in the reviewed sections. (Report, pp. 3, 61–64; gCaptain.)
Sequence of events
| Date/time | Event |
|---|---|
| 2020-04-06 13:54 local | A pilot boarded Milano Bridge at the entrance to Gadeok Channel. |
| 2020-04-06 14:34 local | The vessel passed the west breakwater at about 9.5 knots with two tugs fast. |
| 2020-04-06 14:36 local | The vessel began its 90-degree turn to starboard near To Islet. |
| 2020-04-06 14:39 local | The pilot ordered the aft tug to push the vessel toward the port side as it turned more slowly than expected. |
| 2020-04-06 14:41 local | The pilot ordered full ahead to increase turning ability; the vessel continued toward Pier No. 3. |
| 2020-04-06 14:43 local | The pilot abandoned berthing; Milano Bridge contacted three gantry cranes and slightly contacted Seaspan Ganges. |
Contributing factors
| Factor | Evidence status | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Excessive speed during the berthing turn | Confirmed finding | KMST concluded the vessel made the turn at excessive speed. At speeds above five knots, the bow barely turned despite full starboard bow thruster; at six knots or more, the aft tug order was presumed to have little effect on speed. (Report, pp. 3, 39 and 47.) |
| Limited maneuverability in the vessel’s arrival condition | Confirmed finding | With no cargo and 4,233 tonnes of ballast, the ship had substantial propeller exposure. KMST found that the resulting reduction in propulsion and turning ability was not adequately considered. (Report, pp. 2–3.) |
| Inadequate passage and maneuvering preparation | Confirmed finding | KMST found route deviation, insufficient communication, and no proper maneuvering or pilotage plan agreed between the master and pilot before berthing. (Report, pp. 2–3.) |
Investigation
The Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal published Marine Safety Investigation Report on M/V MILANO BRIDGE - Contact with gantry cranes - (MSI Report 2021-001) on 12 January 2021. The Tribunal concluded that the vessel deviated from its planned route and attempted the berthing turn at excessive speed, with the master and pilot failing to fully consider maneuverability and other navigation risks or agree a proper maneuvering plan. The report’s simulations were qualitative and could not exactly reproduce the urgent final maneuver. (Report, pp. 1, 3 and 61–64.)
References
- Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal, Marine Safety Investigation Report on M/V MILANO BRIDGE - Contact with gantry cranes - (MSI Report 2021-001)
- gCaptain: Caught on Camera: Containership Takes Out Crane in Busan, South Korea