Member Info for adoubleuk

JayKay,

"To me it suggests they're currently planning a trip up north for a try at hook up on the 18th, unless the weather (or should we be saying 'sea state'?) takes a turn for the worse... Or there's still lots of 'big' squid/s about ;o)"

It's an early hour of the morning, I've just been knocked out of an online poker tournament (which always makes me completative), but your posts' just made me think of something.

What if on the last attempt, they didn't actually hook the buoy, but instead the amorous squid itself? It might explain the subsequent boat movements seen on the AIS, with them trying to shake the thing off their winch-line, and then trading it to some Spanish fishermen.

Let's see what happens this time round!

yuyus,

Just a follow-up.

"Pretty scary stuff , made a drill line slip and cut look easy "

Yeah, for the guys down on the deck of a semi, 'slip an' cut' is easy, because they've got to do is pay out the reel and then make sure they're out of the way when the guys on the floor chucked the cutoff down the veedoor.

Not the same for the people upstairs on the rigfloor actually doing the work.

When I worked (many years) as Driller (admittedly not on semis, where the procedure is slightly longer), if 'slip & cut' took longer (booked in the IADC) than an hour and a half we'd definitely done something wrong.

And cameras? What cameras? Installing equipment to watch people doing their work (and then pay people to watch that, and others to analyse all that?) It's where the oilfield and the N.Sea went all wrong, and run by beancounters instead.

Cynically yrs, etc...

"Destination has changed, even though she's still not pulled anchor yet, but as no indication of ETD in e-mail from MT, it could still be good info...."

Jaykay!

You're being cynical ! The very fact that a 'new' thing has been posted to MT, plus the chopper flights to the boat (which implies personnel), implies SOMETHING HAPPENING.

But that's all. Fingers crossed, everything's weather-dependent.

But also, I suspect anchor pre-laying over Lincoln will be less so, relatively speaking. Lots of fun for the Shipwatchers coming up.

yuyus,

"Did a few shifts as an assistant watchstander on a semi years ago"

When did the nomenclature 'roustabout' disappear, please?

Genuine question.

SotB,

"As long as it’s not lavey chains it’s using.'

8.4 cm link, 166 kg per metre. If you've got that to flush your outside bog in Torreygarden, I hope the cistern is heavily bolted to the ceiling, and that the ceiling is firmly bolted to everything else...

Mind you, (as an aside to other newcomers to this BB), it wouldn't surprise me to learn that our friend SonoftheBull actually DOES have anchor-chain attached as a way to flush his lavatory. Although I've never met him (though would like to do so), he sounds like that sort of person...

sssv,

"Sorry needed to add that the chain is a considerable length it changes over via a tri link to wire so it has the same benefits of chain but less weight and problems"

Yes, of course. BUT ONLY ONCE ALL THE CHAIN HAS NEEN RUN OUT! And if the rig's carrying more chain than the waterdepth / anchor-spread requires...

Not wishing to cause nor create an argument with you, as you're a fellow oil-person who knows their stuff judging by your posts here, but learning of anchor 'pre-lay' for the TO Leader tickles me pink, as I said. And I consider it to be Good News. Something which will be completely over the heads of 99% of people (through not being involved in the industry, so it's not their fault at all), but which nevertheless has brought a grin to my face. :-)

Rangers,

" Your suggestion 18 months ago may be reason why they changed from PBLJ, maybe!"

You flatter me! But in my post I DID say I haven't the least delusion that my suggestion was instrumental in anything! But it goes to show I wasn't completely barking mad contacting the company upon such lines. Evidence shows hat greater minds than mine were obviously thinking along the same lines at roughly the same time. Spitzbergen's anchor's weren't pre-laid. Now Transocean seems to be doing that. Which makes eminent good sense, especially WoS.

PS 'sssv': sorry, but you've got the wrong end of the stick. 'Pre-laying' anchors for a drilling semisub is a complete step-change, with a big effect on the operation as a whole, especially if one's talking multiple infield operations. It means you can 'leapfrog' things rather than doing all the anchoring stuff in a short time and at the same time, is a lot safer, probably cheaper (involving less vessels), and so on.

This is the first time I've heard of 'pre-lay' for a semi, but off course I don't know nor get to hear about everything! But it seems utterly logical. Cost-effective for both Operator and Contractor, and safer as well.

I received an email today from someone I consider a good friend attaching the following link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9Im71aNhYA

and with the comment "I wonder if they hold Hurricane shares"?

Check out the geology: a bit what Rona Ridge looked like about a billion years ago before it became 'buried'. But the words are singularly appropriate, too!

(*_*)

MakinHay,

"However, it has already been stated that HUR want the FPSO in position a.s.a.p. which seemed to suggest that they would take an early opportunity to get on location and latch the turret."

Yes, sure.

But asap stands for 'assoonaspossible'

Instead try

'assoonasseemsfeasablewithinallriskassessedparametersandwiththegreatestlikelihoodofgettingitrightfirsttime'

That might make for a rather long and incomprehensible acronym, though.

*system*, not 'stem'!

PS: Please don't confuse my post about the TO Leader's mooring stem with the other thread about the FPSO hook-up, even if they're on similar subjects.

I was tickled pink to learn that the TO Leader's anchors and chains are to be pre-laid, which is a divergence from more normal procedure of carrying 'em onboard and then the anchor-laying taking place once the rig's in place.

For starters, pre-laying makes things considerably safer. (cf the capsize of the Bourbon Dolphin in 2007.) So that's a good thing. Plus it can be 'done at leisure', so to speak, working according to weather windows available, rather than battling against one particular tight one.

But the funny thing is, it more or less exactly corresponds with an idea I sent to Hurricane some 18 months ago, for discussion with the drilling contactors! Because it also reduces considerably some 'deadweight' carried aboard the rig, and correspondingly increases the amount of 'cargo' that can be carried once on location and operational. A thing known as 'variable deck load'.

The thing being, looking at the Leader's tech spec, she'd otherwise carry mooring lines and chains and lines good for at least 1500 m water depth (despite her DP capabilities), whereas Rona Ridge is one tenth of that. So a weight-gain of around 1000 tons could be made. Helpful also during rigmove, carrying the (weighty) anchors, as well: could be economic. Power-to-weight ratios apply, whether it's a racing-car or an oilrig.

My suggestion was that sometime in the future (I was thinking FFD) the rigs used on Rona only carried the amount required, rather than the whole nine yards. But someone's taken the idea a bit further, with the rig no longer carrying the mooring system at all, but having it pre-layed, and then hooking up when everything's in place and the weather's right. Which should be easy (everything's relative) and a heck of a sight less risky.

I'm absolutely not suggesting that my memo to Lower Easham nor conversations on the subject had any bearing on what's happening now, because the whole idea applies to any deepwater semi working anywhere in the (relatively shallow) N. Sea. But it's a step-change since we had the similarly-equipped TO Spitzbergen working for us. So I get this warm feeling that great minds have been thinking alike...

"Is winding them up on angs board he is getting slated there"

So he is! How entertaining.He appears to be a kind of 'specialist' in deramping small oil stocks. Must be a peculiar sort of existence...

scoredagainsteps,

"Hi dont you use french casinos save you a drive to uk"

Well that's certainly off-topic!

Yes, of course. My local casino is at Chatelaillon, just a 50-mile drive. Trouble is, poker's only on Thursdays and Saturdays. But I also sometimes go other days to Royan, La Roche Posay,or Les Sables d'Olonne, each of which are equidistant from my place at about 85 miles.

These days I only visit the UK from necessity, family problems or the like. It's a fair journey, but a fiendishly expensive place to visit.

MrWilks,

" This is my first post so go easy on me." OK, I will!

"I think connecting up to turret buoy is relatively quick, (winch it up and secure the hydraulic dogs) the difficult bit is positioning a massive ship (that is moving in 3 dimensions) in the exact position above the buoy. As mentioned it would make it easier if wind tide and swell were all in the same direction. Good luck to our guys whenever they decide to try."

Getting the boat into position and keeping her there shouldn't be too difficult in the sea states specified. She's DP1 with two stern-azimuthing thrusters and bow thrusters, and also once the winch has taken tension on the buoy during the latch-up process that will tend to keep her yet more 'centred', rather than the opposite.

As I mentioned in a post a couple of days ago, I now strongly suspect that actual latch-up (taking just a few hours) is not the full 'installation on-station' story, but that instead there are several more hours of ballasting (or something like that) involved before the entire FPSO / bouy / mooring system can be considered ready for facing the worst the weather might subsequently throw at it. For me this is the only logical explanation for why the first attempt was aborted.

PS Happy New Year to you too! (In France, where I live, it's normal to send New Year greetings to people right up until the end of January.)

DHC,

"Health and Safety of all staff involved has to be the priority."

Balls. Or rather with the caveat the as in all modern-day oilfield operations, 'safety' is utmost. However I'm sure a latch-up could be attempted in 4 meter seas without endangering any of the personnel. But it won't happen.

The priority here is avoiding any possible damage to the equipment.

DHC,

" Oil rigs rather than FPSO's work through all these types of weathers. Surely one of those would have been much better?"

Congratulations. I would like to nominate your posts as the most absurd on this BB for the year to date. Statements such as the above demonstrate that you simply haven't a clue what Hurricane's doing, and frankly, make you look rather foolish.

luckyman2,

"Gives us $423,000pm which is $5,000,000 net to us."

Are you sure you're not getting the terms 'net' and 'gross' muddled up?

Either way, it looks like W.Brentwood (once VG-4 goes online, which shouldn't take long, once completion and tie-in are done, and given the pad modifications already made in anticipation of success), represents positive cashflow of some sort, so it's a good start.

In these dire times, positive cashflow is always a good thing!

laidback,

"Begining to look risky if you ask me"

Hurricane has always been a 'high risk / high reward' share.

You can always put your money in a bank savings account, you know. Though it'll probably earn you nothing.

DHC,

"Secondly is there not a $220 Million pound bond debt or the like with a coupon of 8.5% that requires paying? There isn't any oil being produced presently sow what are the contingency funds available to cover this."

Now I agree with other posters. You are a fear-mongerer. The details you mention are available to anyone DYOR-ing in (highly advised) regarding the 2017 fundraise and also the financial reports.

Does the word 'escrow' mean anything to you?

At present the company has no debts.