FROM May 25--notice how longitude keeps carrying the ship farther from the coast westward as it proceeds North-as last longitude reported was 146 and 140
notice also this site only reports a limited number of major ports on its supposed last known port of Long Beach which is what it showed before ILIA arrived at Esnenada from port Laredo to the South so there could be a dozen ports last visited since visited Long Beach so u see the difficulty of extrapolating info from these sites-
but if proceeding to Portland farthest west longitude along the coast would be ca 125* near Red bluff Northern CA and then coast moves slightly eastward to Columbia river mouth at 124* longitude and Portland port at 123* longitude-
so a ship would NOT proceed westerly progressively to 136 and 140 * longitude in its travels TO Portland-so EITHER not going to Portland or points North of Portland or longitude info on marinetraffic is wrong- wouldnt be surprising-coupled w initial trajectory ca 200 plus miles west of LA and projected port of Ningbo (which I've shown could also be wrong) everything else would indicate a voyage to China etc
PLOTTING THE LAT/LONG GIVEN TO US BY THIS SITE WOULD TAKE US IN A STRAIGHT LINE TO WESTERN ALASKA -no explanation why ship would go 100 plus miles straight west on leaving Ensenada until outside of AIS range, be 200-300 miles west of coast opposite LA, be 136-125 = 11 by 70 = 770miles west of coast at 43*N latitude and 1600 miles west at 46* N latitude-
UNLESS the last Longitude of 146 was AFTER leaving Portland-but still wouldnt explain the degree of westward longitude of 136 shown here and 140 shown later-UNLESS this 136 longitude and the 140 and 146 longitude were ALL AFTER leaving Portland-and the progression would be 140 and then 136 if had left portland---and our timetable doesnt allow for them having left Portland May 22 and ship positions shown on this sites map as of May 22 arent anywhere near Portland
isnt logic fun in an illogical world-latitude readings show ship got at least as far N as Portland -assuming readings are correct-so it wasnt going to Oakland and had exact latitude for portland- but longitude never shows ship near the coast in its journey -which is why the AIS antennas havent picked up the ship position since May 22-has been too far from the coast-and assuredly they would have an antenna at Portland-
is it possible all the readings and map locations since it was 100 miles out in an exact trajectory for Ningbo have been wrong-this would explain why they still show an ETA of june 11 for Ningbo -would be right amount of time to cross pacific direct from Ensenada without unexplainable far off cost wanderings north when Ningbo china is from 28-30* latitude N- slightly S of Ensenada-which is what the track showed exactly until out of range of AIS antennas after leaving Ensenada-have these sites created a ghost voyage N by confusing Ilia-despite the IMO-with another ship while the Ilia has traveling straight to Ningbo China all this time?
tune in tomorrow for another episode of "as the world turns"
Last Position Received
Area: Pacific North
Latitude / Longitude: 43.0703° / -136.3668° (Map)
Speed/Course 6.5 knots / 335?
Last Known Port: LONG BEACH
Info Received: 3d 13h 48min ago (AIS Source: -2)
Not Currently in Range
Itineraries History
Voyage Related Info (Last Received)
Draught: 13.7 m
Destination: NINGBL
ETA: 2013-06-11 21:01
Info Received: 2013-05-25 20:52 (0d, 3h 19min ago)
