MSC SABRINA III

Compare

IMO: 8714205
MMSI: 356101000
Call Sign: 3FMG8

Technical Specifications

Key Figures

Gross Tonnage

35,598GT

Deadweight

7,154DWT

Length Overall

243m

Beam

32m

Draught

9.6m

Year Built

1989

Intelligence

Risk & Sustainability

Risk scoreHigh

58/ 100

Safety38

Compliance95

Environment38

Carbon intensity · 2024E

3,907t CO₂

AER (CO₂/capacity·nm): 52
Fuel burned: 1,245 t
Technical: EEXI (14.09 gCO₂/t·nm)

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

Compliance

Safety Record

Marine casualties3

GroundingSerious
Mar 8, 2008PORT OF TROIS RIVIERES, QC, QUEBEC (QC)
On 8 March 2008, the container vessel "MSC SABRINA" ran aground off section 20 of the Port of Trois-Rivieres, Quebec . Strong winds where present in this area. No ingress of water was observed. No injuries or pollution reported.
Machinery FailureMinor
Dec 20, 2007ST.NICOLAS, ST-LAWRENCE RIVER, QC, QUEBEC (QC)
On 20 December 2007 off St Nicolas Quebec on the St.Lawrence river, the vessel MSC Sabrina sustained sea suction malfunction. Request was made for ice breaker service.
GroundingMinor
Sep 15, 2007ILE MARIE, VERCHERES, QC, QUEBEC (QC)
On 15 September 2007, the down-bound vessel MSC Sabrina reported an engine failure and was drifting. The engine was restored but the vessel had made contact with the side of the channel. No ingress of water was reported.

Recorded marine occurrences naming this vessel.

Composite Risk

Risk Score

91/100

High risk60% component coverage

Strong, corroborated adverse evidence — a detention, sanctions exposure or an AIS-gap / behavioural signal.

PSC detentionsno data

Sanctions exposureno data

AIS-gap & behaviour80

Hull age100

Flag register100

A coverage-weighted blend of the 3 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. 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 draughtMedium confidence

~7,154t at summer draught

Container · summer draught 9.6 m · 17.8 t per cm immersion

Estimated intake by draught

6.72 m~2,016 t

7.2 m~2,873 t

7.68 m~3,729 t

8.16 m~4,585 t

8.64 m~5,441 t

9.12 m~6,298 t

9.6 m~7,154 t

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

Type classificationConflict

Declared

Container

→

Inferred from size

Container

density DWT/GT=0.20 is physically implausible for any cargo ship (declared container) — likely a tonnage data error

DWT/GT 0.2Beam/LOA 0.132Declared type: Container Ship

The declared type conflicts with the class implied by the vessel’s size signals — a possible mis-declaration. Inferred via our shared size-based classifier.

Transparency

Risk signals

Behavioural flags raised against this vessel — each shown with the raw evidence behind it. Derived in-house from data we are entitled to publish; informational, not a determination of wrongdoing.

Type vs. size mismatchhighstrength 0.95

Declared type contradicts the size-implied class

Jun 23, 2026

Audit Confidence: 0.95
Beam Loa Ratio: 0.132
Deadweight: 7,154
Declared Class: CONTAINER
Declared Type: Container Ship
Dwt Gt Ratio: 0.201
Gross Tonnage: 35,598
Reason: density DWT/GT=0.20 is physically implausible for any cargo ship (declared container) — likely a tonnage data error
Size Implied Class: CONTAINER

Method: declared type vs size-implied class (DWT/GT density + beam/LOA fullness). Source: vessel_type_audit (sibling P3#3 job; shared coarse_class classifier).

Signals are a current-state view: a flag clears once the vessel stops tripping its detector. These are screening indicators, not a substitute for your own due diligence.

Full compliance dossier

Commercial