Not too small but yes. Typically three to five large auxiliaries. They also provide electrical power when the main engine isn’t running and during manoeuvres, and are always on standby.
Another issue I read about - you have ships sitting there waiting that were not intended to be sitting offshore for this length of time. Some were running out of fresh water and the ports really didn’t have the infrstructure to shuttle large quantities of supplies out to anchored ships, or the facilities for fully loaded tankers to re-dock to take on supplies. Not to mention, the month some have been waiting at anchor is about the length they would have been underway, so they may be reaching the end of food supplies too. So apparently there’s a serious logistics problem over and above starting the engines. Also the Gulf states are not keen to have large numbers of third-world crew wandering their cities on shore leave, even if the crew could afford it, so they’ve been stuck on those ships.
I wonder how many weeks of fuel those have, since we’re mentioning supplies that may be running low. Or would they use the same fuel tanks as the main engines?
… but to (fail to) answer your other question, there is no exact answer. I am more familiar with bulkers than tankers but in my experience very long waits to load or discharge are normal and consequently the vessel would typically be supplied with diesel on the assumption that it may have to wait around for many weeks. Bunkering can be arranged while waiting but load and discharge ports are often not the cheapest place to bunker, so owners will commonly try to avoid needing to bunker at such locations.
Do these ships have watermakers installed? I thought they were common aboard large vessels like these.
When I was working the oil fields, our vessel had a watermaker sufficient to provide drinking water for the crew. We went for about 2 weeks with no resupply (food or water) due to a storm, but could produce enough for drinking and cooking. Showers were forbidden though.
Color me surprised (that this isn’t a standard thing) …
heck, just look what drips out under the hood of florida cars (H2O as A/C condensate) - extracting good amounts of water from 1m^3 of cabin air of a F150 - now multiply that by 10,000 for the space of the bridge/quarters of a tanker. I’d assume there is A/C on those ships …
Also, I understand there are min. crews (<10 people) on board so you don’t need a lot of drinking water…
Some of these ships, you read, get abandoned for months, sometimes many months. And they are unseaworthy buckets of rust where nothing works; you probably want to worry about finding some drinking water before spending time fixing the A/C…
The vessels the subject of this thread are those blockaded by Iran - essentially those serving the US and its allies. They will be well run vessels because you can’t trade to the US or Australia or Western Europe with a rust bucket.
The shadow fleet vessels your article describes are sanction-evading vessels serving Iran’s allies.
Interesting. We had a crew of 340, and the watermakers were huge machines with their own area belowdecks. I don’t know how much they produced daily though. I’m curious how large the aux engines are on a tanker. We had 6 3000hp diesels just for electrical power, so there was plenty for A/C, watermakers, galley, etc. I suspect that tankers might not have a lot of excess electrical capacity for backup devices, but it seems easy enough to supply less than 10 people.