General Cargo🇳🇴 NorwayActive

STAR LIMA

Compare

IMO: 9593866
MMSI: 257844000
Call Sign: LAPE7

Technical Specifications

Key Figures

Gross Tonnage

37,447GT

Deadweight

50,761DWT

Length Overall

204.35m

Beam

32.31m

Draught

12.2m

Year Built

2012

Intelligence

Risk & Sustainability

Risk scoreLow

84/ 100

Safety78

Compliance95

Environment78

Carbon intensity · 2023A

6,743t CO₂

AER (CO₂/capacity·nm): 5.5
Fuel burned: 2,155 t
Technical: EEXI (6.04 gCO₂/t·nm)

Verified reported figure. Band is peer-relative, not official IMO CII.

Compliance

Safety Record

Marine casualties1

TOTAL FAILURE OF ANY MACHINERY OR TECHNICAL SYSTEMMinor
Jul 30, 2015Tofino, BRITISH COLUMBIA (BC)
On 30 July 2015, the cargo vessel "STAR LIMA" reported the loss of No. 3 generator due to turbocharger issues. The vessel is proceeding to Vancouver, BC to effect repairs.

Recorded marine occurrences naming this vessel.

Composite Risk

Risk Score

32/100

Moderate riskLow confidence40% component coverage

Some elevated factors — typically age or a lower-graded flag — but no acute ship-specific flag.

PSC detentionsno data

Sanctions exposureno data

Dark-fleet signalno data

Hull age36

Flag register25

A coverage-weighted blend of the 2 components we could read for this hull — the weights renormalise over only the components present, so a thin read is never inflated and a hull is never credited a “safe 0” for a signal it has no row for. This headline is flagged low-confidence (a thin or structural-only read) and should not be treated as a verdict. Higher means riskier. Derived in-house from government-open port-State-control, flag, sanctions and our own vessel data; weight it by the coverage above.

Estimated

Capacity & Classification

Cargo capacity at draughtHigh confidence

~50,761t at summer draught

Other · summer draught 12.2 m · 61.4 t per cm immersion

Estimated intake by draught

8.54 m~28,291 t

9.15 m~32,036 t

9.76 m~35,781 t

10.37 m~39,526 t

10.98 m~43,271 t

11.59 m~47,016 t

12.2 m~50,761 t

Estimate only — modelled from deadweight (hull geometry) using a first-principles hydrostatic model, not measured hydrostatic tables. The design draught it is anchored to is unreliable across the fleet.

Commercial