Flat Rack, Wrong Weight, Off-Centre Load at Berth 4

Start from the heavier number. Until the mass is verified, plan on 26,940 kg.

• Capacity: 26.94 t against a 32.0 t chart figure at 38 m is 84% of SWL. Inside the chart - but a chart figure assumes a centred load, still air, level ground and correct reeving. Here none of those assumptions holds, and the margin is only 5.06 t.
• Wind: 12 m/s gusting 16, with a flat rack carrying a bulky machine and a large sail area. The chart is not a wind chart; apply the manufacturer's wind derating and the terminal's stop limit, and measure at the work front.
• Off-centre CoG: 0.55 m off the centreline transfers load onto the port twistlocks and twists the rack; a rotating head makes attachment easier but does not restore capacity. Get the crane and spreader maker's eccentric-load allowance, or work it by load moment.
• The flat rack itself: check its marked rating and CSC plate, and the deformed port-aft corner casting. A distorted casting may not accept the twistlock fully and can distort further under 27 t. That finding alone stops the lift until a competent person assesses it.
• Cargo securing: two 5 t straps give about 10 t of restraint against 26.9 t of machinery. If the unit tilts on the hook, the cargo moves; the rack has a lashing plan for a reason.
• Route: a suspended load over a live truck lane breaches the lift plan and the general duty to keep people out from under loads. The nine minutes saved is irrelevant.

Conclusion: no, not as planned. Re-weigh, verify the rack, obtain the eccentric-load allowance, re-secure the cargo, rig taglines, close the lane, and re-plan the route before any hook-up.

Treat the discrepancy as a red flag, not a clerical correction. An 8.4 t gap on 18.5 t is roughly a 46% under-declaration.

1. Stop the unit. Do not lift or load it on the strength of either number until it is verified.
2. Re-weigh properly. Use the calibrated terminal weighbridge for the packed container, with the tare accounted for, and check the weighbridge calibration certificate is current. Note that weighing a container on a road vehicle introduces the vehicle's own mass and axle effects - control that or use a container weighbridge.
3. Tell the parties. The planner, the shipping line and the shipper must know before the stow plan is fixed; a corrected VGM is required from the shipper under the SOLAS verified-gross-mass requirement, and the terminal should not load without one.
4. Re-check capacity on the true mass - crane chart, spreader rating, the flat rack's rating, and the ground slot or stack the unit will sit in. A stack designed for 18.5 t may not accept 26.9 t.
5. Record and escalate. Keep the weighbridge ticket, the declared VGM and the correspondence; flag a suspected mis-declaration to the line. Under-declared weight is a recurring cause of crane overloads and stack failures, so the finding should go into the terminal's safety data, not just the shipping file.

Reasoning: the declared mass drives the lift plan, the stow plan and the ship's stability. Any one of those being wrong is enough to stop the job; the safety consequence is the reason the paperwork rule exists.

What the offset does

• Unequal twistlock loading. With the CoG 0.55 m to port, the two port twistlocks and their corner castings carry noticeably more than half the load. The crane's SWL assumes a centred load; the spreader and the rack may each need derating.
• Rack distortion. A 20ft flat rack is stiff in the longitudinal direction and weaker against twist. An eccentric 27 t mass increases torsional deflection, which is exactly where the deformed port-aft casting is a concern.
• Hanging attitude. The unit will not hang level: it lists and trims. That makes twistlock engagement in the ground slot harder, increases swing, and lengthens the time the load is suspended over the yard.
• Secondary movement. If the machine is not restrained against sliding and the unit tilts, the CoG moves further out and the load can shift - a self-worsening condition.

Pre-lift requirements

1. Written confirmation from the crane/spreader manufacturer of the permitted eccentricity, or a load-moment calculation by a competent person.
2. The flat rack inspected and cleared, with the port-aft casting assessed and, if suspect, the unit rejected for lifting in that condition.
3. Cargo re-secured to a documented lashing plan with adequate restraint for the real mass.
4. Taglines from outside the fall zone, no personnel beneath, the lane closed.
5. A trial lift of 100–200 mm, hold, and check list and trim against an agreed limit; abort if the unit lists beyond that limit.
6. A nominated banksman with radio, and a stop authority that anyone can use.

Reasoning: the rotating head solves attachment geometry, not load distribution. The correct decision is driven by the two things nobody has yet confirmed - the true mass and the maker's eccentric-load allowance.