Member Info for adoubleuk

grippa,

Good to see you back here. You must have balls of iron (or deep pockets) to have held on since back then.

The 22 day-ish figure was published in Energyvoice in IANAA has pointed out. It's not 'official', though EV does seem to have some pretty close lines of communication with Dr T.

I have no doubt that if 23 days go by after hookup, and there's no FoiL RNS, this board will be awash with people posting and saying there's been a 'delay'.

Personally I'm just thinking in terms of about a month, give or take, plus or minus, but am not going to hazard a guess on the margin of error.

Of course I'm hoping that FoiL is announced on March 31st because that's my entry in Reverandy's sweepstake, and Mendip Cave Rescue could do with the money. And now my guess seems at least within the ballpark. Except I've just looked at my calendar and realised March the 31st is a Sunday! Nevertheless, if there's an April 1st RNS (wouldn't that be grand?) announcing that FoiL was the preceding day, I'll stand my ground...

Although 'Ecosselibre' was posting on the wrong BB, others here might have interests in the company he was referring to.

And although I have no holdings there, and never have done (though I still kick myself for having missed a great trading opportunity two or three years ago!), I sometimes look at that BB and RNS's, out of curiousity.

The latest RNS mentions 'mechanical stimulation' of the 10-meter 'payzone' discovered. For 'mechanical stimulation', read fraccing.

I offer this observation for information only, and of course leave it to any interested parties to draw their own conclusions...

SG2,

"think you an me are in a corner by ourselves, fitguy - maybe we should 'get a room', lol. "

I don't think so. This BB is known for being dead serious (most of the time) during the working week, and for letting its hair down over the weekend. And anyway, given the CEO's affinity for WWII bombers, some of the O/T isn't COMPLETELY O/T.

If people don't like the 'chat' they aren't OBLIGED to read it.

fitguy5,

"I was not directly comparing the rope incident to Macondo! "

I didn't mention names in my post, and in fact didn't particularly have you in mind when I wrote it.

Don't get me wrong, though. I consider the entire 'rope incident' to be bloomin' annoying. And I suspect Hurricane and Bluewater both consider it a bit more than that! But there's nowt to be done about it now except wait for the equipment to be delivered and the next attempt made. Except when it happens, I hope it won't be considered an 'attempt', but instead just getting the job done and moving on to the next stage.

Oh blast. When is LSE going to put an edit function onto this BB? Forgive bad grammar, please. Delete the 'if' in lest post.

Wulbert,

"1) Have you ever owned a motorcycle?

2) Have you given up riding motorcycles?

If the answer to both questions was "yes", the applicant was moved onto the next stage."

Hmm. Interesting to know that if had I been alive back then, I might have been admitted to train as an RAF fighter pilot!

I like motorcycles, but for some reason motorcycles don't like me...

SG2,

" Might have to buy yer book - again, ffs!"

Please do! Though yet again I must once again underline that I'm not one of the two co-authors. Even if our email exchanges during its creation probably ran to more words than the book itself contains! And although a modest sum was offered to me for my 'contributions' I declined it, because there was a lot of teamwork involved, and I preferred not to be singled out for that.

Being mentioned in the 'acknowledgements' was reward enough for me, especially as I came top of the list, even before the editor!

snaggletooth,

"Adub ...DWH film was truly dire ..."

Yes, essentially it was. Because the 'first half' gave a completely wrong impression about how oilwell drilling is done, conducted, and so on. The second half was just 'bang-bang', loud noises and flames, of course.

I was glad to see that as a potential Hollywood 'blockbuster' it turned out to be a flop.

One of the co-authors of the book I was involved with had to leave the cinema when the explosion sequences started, because as a Vietnam Vet with severe PTSD still, it disturbed him.

Weird, to be posting stuff like this on a BB like this. (Or no! this is possibly the only BB on the LSE site where such O/T stuff raises its head!)

But equally, it's relevant. Because some rarely-heard of (or newcomer) posters during the week have been refering to the 'rope-failure' incident on Lancaster as though it were some sort of Macondo.

Which it isn't. And that's why the SP hasn't reacted in the same way BP's did after that unfortunate event.

SG2,

"[btw; i haven't a naffing clue about poker, all that stuff is way overhead of me.]"

Oilwell-drilling and the game of poker are quite similar. And I'm not talking about movie-like images of hard-faced people in stetsons chewing cigars and shooting each other.

In both cases (drilling an oilwell and playing poker), it's a matter of dealing with 'incomplete information'. You haven't drilled the hole 'til you've drilled that footage. In the same way one can use intuition to figure out what the other player's holding at the card-game, quickly work out the odds involved and whether to call, check, raise, or fold, but the result is only known at the end of the hand.

Unlike chess, where all the information is open.

I like playing chess, as well. But what I dislike about it as a game is that one is obliged to move, each time. Whereas in poker, one can always check or fold.

It's also why I fool around with things like AIM shares. I'm under no obligation to make any moves if I don't want to. Which is why I'm just holding tight here with HUR!

Oh, I missed one. The valve blowing out of the choke-manifold. Pure baloney, even if the returns after diverter shut-in were routed (for some totally absurd reason) via the choke to the poor-boy degasser, instead of straight overboard.

Wulbert,

"The obvious answer (that is staring us all in the face, if only we would stare back) is to use a giant submarine for the hook up."

Nice try, but no cigar, I'm afraid. What makes you think the defence budget can stretch to diverting a submarine to Lancaster?

But yes, politics might have a part in it.

It's all about this 'transgender' thing which seems to be occupying so many peoples' minds at the moment.

You see, Cephalopods seem to sometimes evidence traits which are related to being unsure about what sex they are.

I have it on good information that one of those anonymous 'tugs and special vessels' (aptly labelled) we see on the AIS has been trying to train the Giant Squid (a Cephalopod) which has become amourous of its lover-buoy as to its rôle in the hook-up operation.

Unfortunately, at the last moment, it forgot whether to shove or suck, with the results we've seen.

Give 'em time and they'll get the choreography right, though...

...Of course, the second half was Hollywood bang-bang. I found the ending rather touching, though, because during the couple of years I was actually researching the event, the loss of life involved struck me as unimportant.

'Deepwater Horizon': a Systems analysis of the Macondo Disaster. Pub Harvard University Press. Auth. E.Boebert & James Blossom. You'll find my name in the acknowlegements on page 283, and in the footnote quote references, though anonymously. Still the 'definitive layman's guide' to what happened. It sounds conspiracy-theorist, but subsequent to publication, and despite the credentials of Harvard, the publisher, BP and others 'stomped on it' hard, exerting sponsorship-pressure on various institutions, universities, etc., causing cancellation of author's speaking-tours, and so on.

Such is life. My signature's on thousands of drilling-reports, service-company tickets for work done, and so on. But participating in putting that book together remains something of which I'm proud and happy. Even if the time I put into it might possibly have been instrumental in a divorce after 32 years of marriage.

SG2,

"Watched the Deepwater movie t'other night. Any chance of a brief on the discrepancies?"

OK, you asked for it! The list is not exhaustive. Nevertheless a good bit of oilfield-related weekend O/T about a thing which was 'systems failure' at multiple levels. 'Wrong stuff' in the movie...

1 Gas bubbles from seabed: nonsense; never happened.
2 Post home regarding 'bad feelings about the well': maybe partially true, but not sent by that person.
3 Standby boat captain discussing downhole test ops: would never happen, and didn't.
4 Bird strike on chopper: dramatic, though none reported during the entire period.
5 Mech (on arrival) going to rigfloor and asking a roughneck about Schlumberger's operations? Would never happen, none of his business, neither of them would understand subject anyway.
6 'Whiteboard presentation', OIM / Co-Man, plus others. (Mech wouldn't have been present.) The cement which wasn't CBL (Cement Bond Log) tested wasn't just below the BOP as shown. It was around the production casing, 15,000 metres deeper.
7 The Transocean OIM wants a 'negative test'. Wrong. It was one of the BP Co-Men who said this had been ommitted from the plan.
8 Rotting the rig for the test? Pure Star-Trek. Didn't happen, no reason to do so, impossible, anyway.
9 Footage of external 'piston-like' movement on the subsea BOP? Pure imagination. Doesn't resmble a BOP at all.
10 Downhole gauges relating to the drilling rig and the well on the 'bridge'? Nope. Not there. The 'maritime' crew wouldn't understand what they were indicating, anyway.
11 Supply-boat watching the test? Same as above. No way.
12 Rigfloor footage of the test setup pipework. Just wrong.
13 'Automated voice' announcing pressures during ongoing test: more Star Trek. Doesn't happen. 'Need to know' only.
14 Turning on the lights for nighttime! That made me laugh! ALL drilling-rig (land or marine) illumination is left running, be it day or night. (Sure, in the desert I sometimes turned off my office desk lamp in daytime, but that's different.)
15 Overflow of mud over the shale-shakers. No. Not yet...
16 Mud coming up through the rotary-table. Idem.
17 The sequence of closing the annular BOP and seeing that had failed is completely wrong.
18 After power-blackout, assorted screens are shown as operating. Wrong. Many had no battery backup. The instruments were down.
19 The crane sequence / collapse of the derrick is wrong.
20 Attempt to start emergency generator (which should have been automatic, (but failed because the DWH was a rustbucket) is also wrong, by all witness / participant accounts.

Plus also, the overriding thing in that 'first half' was the undisguised animosity portrayed between BP and TO staff. Things would never have got to that level. Or at least not on any of the rigs I've been on, which are many. Someone would have got a one-way chopper ride home before things came to that.

Of course, the second half was Hollywood bang-bang. I foungd the endi

SG2,

"Apologies for disrupting the poker-face last night."

None necessary, you didn't disturb me at all. What was I to do? Mildly short-stack five places before the 'bubble', I get jacks someone (far bigger stack than mine) raises me all in, I'm committed, so call. He's got nines. Hits a further nine on the flop, my jacks don't improve, so I'm out. Typical internet stuff. Causes no worries nor lost sleep whatsoever.

Dreamt of cats...

" divn mock the afflicted or Esc and Adub might push you in the Seine"

Not much risk of that. Paris is where the afflicted live. I avoid the place like the plague.

SG2,

" But: (i) the op should have been assessed by FMEA/FMECA longwhiles prior to implentation, and (ii) due to the nature of the interface (between Hur's buoy and BW's fpso), a Hur engineer should have been (presume was) embedded in the BW Ops team. Either or both of these could - and should - have identified flaws in the operation early in its implementation on both occasions. "

In many ways I agree with you. However, it's your last phrase I'm doubtful about.

" Either or both of these could - and should - have identified flaws in the operation early in its implementation on both occasions. "

Maybe HUR had someone there. In fact I'd be surprised if they didn't. But it wouldn't have been Neil Platt, and anyway, what does NP know first-hand and hands-on about turret-buoy winching operations? Other than the theory, not much, I expect. Or the specific machinery involved? Sure, a decent 'offshore engineer' can understand any machine pretty dam quick, even if he's never seen it before, but picking up on an operational 'snag'? Not always.

Plus I'm willing to bet a pound to a pinch of sh*t that someone stationed on the FPSO's latch-deck can't be watching the winch (whatever it is: maybe it's a capstan-winch arrangement) from where they are.

Also, from the 'second attempt' RNS, it's obvious that the rope failure DIDN'T occur 'early in the implementation'. Coupled to which, a lot of attention was probably being focussed on checking that the rope didn't 'snag' again, anyway!

We're going round in circles here, for no meaningful reason. Maybe the dam rope (a 'spare') had outlived its shelf-life, nobody noticed, and for sure nobody's going to admit to that. Not publicly, at least.

Are Camels anything like bees? Because puffing smoke on bees makes them calm, and easy to manipulate.

I've just got knocked out of my online poker game without making the pay because someone's pair of nines beat my pair of jacks. Sh*t happens. So I'm going to smoke a camel (hopefully to ensure it doesn't chase me round a car) and go to bed. Perchance to dream. And it won't be of buoys, my Hurricane shares, nor anything like that....

fitguy5,

"Any major incident that impacts safety/operations and hence lives/cash flow/reputation should always be subject to a root cause investigation to make sure it never happens again!"

Who has classified this as a 'major incident', pray? Other than yourself, of course.

Sure, it's possible that there was the 'potential' for the things you've mentioned having been impacted. (Though I don't agree with the 'delayed cash-flow' bit, which I've never seen in any risk-assessment chart. 'Lost production' is different, but given we're not in production yet, it doesn't apply.)

According to all the HSE analysis cross-reference charts I have, this was maybe a ' potentially serious incident', requiring reporting and in-depth investigation, but not a 'major' one.

Keep yer hair on.

SG2,

" (Probably get a response from every man and his dog, now, lol)."

Might make for some good weekend O/T banter!

Equally, one that I'll participate in, because Macondo was a prime example of 'systemic failure' at multiple levels.

HSE isn't all about making sure people wear their safety-glasses or hold the handrail while going down some stairs.

It's why the 'buoy-drop' involving no injuries, damage, nor environmental impacts enters, in my mind, into the 'incident' category. Maybe a 'near miss' from which lessons can be learned, but not much more. Sure, it's been expensive and bl**dy annoying for all concerned, including we shareholders, but not the end of the world by any means. If there had been injury, damage, or adverse environmental effects, that would have been different. But seemingly none of that happened. Which indicates to me that 'big-picture', there's no cause for criticism when one doesn't know the facts in detail.

fitguy5

" IF it is/was brushed off as just one of those things that happen...twice....then there really is a total lack of professionalism, and that would be worrying!!"

Once again, you're one of those posters taking the high ground, when really we don't know in any sort of detail exactly what happened during the two hook-up attempts.

It seems to me that there is a big difference between a 'snagged rope' and a 'rope failure'. The fact that they both had a negative impact on the operation being 'attempted' is almost immaterial, for the simple reson that it's the only operation ongoing for now.

If on both occasions it had been a 'snagged rope', or a 'rope failure', I feel there would be very justified reasons for eyebrows to be raised. But that's not what happened, seemingly.

Obviously in situations such as these, one cannot 'count on luck'. But bad luck can happen at the oddest of times. Ever been on a 'fishing job' or workover where you're trying to free stuck pipe and you find the well has 'kicked' on you? Fun an' games.

All I'm keeping my fingers crossed for is that misfortunes this time don't happen in threes, as the old proverb might have us believe...

SG2,

" Any chance of a brief on the diecrepancies?"

Tomorrow. I've dug out the notebook I took with me to the cinema, to refresh my memory. But no time to make a list tonight. An online poker game awaits.

I stopped taking notes after the thing got into the 'destruction' phase, though. Lots of loud noise, flames, confusion, and very frightened people. Never been in quite such a situation as that, but it seemed as a Hollywood representation goes to be not too wide of the mark.