This is an animation of the ship's course superimposed over shipping charts, detailing how close the captain got to the Island on his first pass...
Jeez. They can take that exposed rock off the charts now. (Ok, not something to laugh at with casualties. But what a bonehead.)
And as another poster commented in the previous thread, when you turn something that long, everything behind the pivot point will "swing" outside the axis of the turn...which pretty much matches up exactly with where the rock struck on the ship.
Speed Over Ground (SOG) 13.3 knots, Course Over Ground (COG) 358.3 degrees, Heading 10 degrees. Struck the rock at an angle of 11.7 degrees. If my trig is correct, the speed at which the ship was moving toward the rock at impact was 2.69 knots.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 23091 posts, RR: 60 Reply 5, posted (4 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2809 times:
More video footage coming out of crew telling passengers to return to their cabins and that all is fine ! Other crew were telling other passengers to get into lifeboats .
OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ "Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΨΗΛΑ" "GREECE FLYING HIGH"
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (4 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2737 times:
News are reporting that the hard drive with the security camera recording has been recovered. On board cruise ships there are hundreds of security camera (on some ships also on the navigation bridge). Even though they have no audio, I am sure that they will help the investigation.
Babybus From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 3228 posts, RR: 5 Reply 7, posted (4 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2666 times:
So it seems the ship crashed because the captain was showing off to some blonde lady?
I have got so much respect for the Italians and the way they are handling this. All those divers risking their lives checking cabins under water, the guys in the support ships and helicopters, the harbour masters at Giglio and the people on that island for helping the survivors out. The transparent inquiry.
Everyone has done the right thing in this disaster......except the dishonest captain.
It makes me cringe when I see that video of the crew member asking people to go back to their cabins because everything is alright. When its completely dark and half the ship is moments from being plunged into freezing sea water.
The horror of it all.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 23091 posts, RR: 60 Reply 8, posted (4 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2654 times:
Quoting Babybus (Reply 7): I have got so much respect for the Italians and the way they are handling this. All those divers risking their lives checking cabins under water, the guys in the support ships and helicopters, the harbour masters at Giglio and the people on that island for helping the survivors out. The transparent inquiry.
Indeed they have done everything possible and the openness of the video footage of the divers and other senior officials has to be praised. I think they realise the worlds eyes are on them and they need to share any information they have.
The most recent revelation is the Captain calling his HQ and saying ''He messed up'' after hitting the rocks.
OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ "Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΨΗΛΑ" "GREECE FLYING HIGH"
par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5110 posts, RR: 7 Reply 9, posted (4 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2654 times:
Quoting Babybus (Reply 7): It makes me cringe when I see that video of the crew member asking people to go back to their cabins because everything is alright. When its completely dark and half the ship is moments from being plunged into freezing sea water.
To be a bit fair, we now know what the situation was, at the time some crew may not have been, one of the things in disasters is that free and open access is required for "emergency crews / activities" which can be made difficult with pax not being in designated areas, the initial one being their cabins, next in case of damage is their boat / muster stations. So far, all we have heard is that once the official order was given to abandon ship there was no contradiction of the order, confusion of where to go and how the process was managed, but all working towards the same goal.
garpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2103 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (4 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2569 times:
Quoting Babybus (Reply 7):
It makes me cringe when I see that video of the crew member asking people to go back to their cabins because everything is alright. When its completely dark and half the ship is moments from being plunged into freezing sea water.
The horror of it all.
Sensationalist claptrap. It's stuff like that being spouted off in the media that is muddying the facts of this incident and will likely cause one or two very wrong convictions in courts.
There is no verifiable time refences to the videos we have seen so far. You can get your last penny that the media will defantely be using things completely out of context to gain maximum sensationalism out of their reports.
There are already passengers coming forward telling us they did not see anything of the chaos and misinformation other passengers have claimed. So who's right, who's wrong?
From what I understand, the basic procedure aboard ship is:
Alarm Raised
Go to your Cabin and put on your life vets, wait for call to muster
Muster, wait for call to boats
Go to the life boats.
These videos we see with crew telling passengers to go to their cabins could very well be from the initial stages with the factual information of what's going on not yet filtered down the ranks. With around 1000 crew on board, there will always be some who are slightly behind on the up to the minute information.
Do these video show a complete picture of the events that evening? Definately not. Should we judge the crew on these videos? No. Should we judge the crew from the reports in the media? Definately not.
I read a paper the other day who's headline for its Concordia article was "Captain was drinking wine at time of impact". Another paper had the headline "Captain ate while ship collided and sank".
So the heck what?! It's a cruise ship, the Captain often entertains passengers at meal times personaly at his table. It's a "tradition" of sorts and is repeated on just about ever cruise ship sailing today.
This insignificant tidbit had been made out to be a contributing factor. Utter, utter gutter trash.
Anything the passengers say must be taken with a big helping of sodium chloride. They are now out to vent anger, get compensation and are doubtlessly going to sensationalise everything and go along the same theme as others. They are watching the media and know what the others are saying, so will repeat the same to get maximum exposure to ensure maximum payout.
Do I blame them? No, not realy. It's fair to say, they did not have a good time of it all. They deserve compensation and will get it. It's now a matter of how much. But should we blindly take everything they say as gospel. No, definately not.
Should we blindly believe everything the media are reporting? No.
One thing confuses me. Over 3500 people safely evacuated. Why were these 30 or so people who are missing/dead, still inside the ship? Did they return to the interior? Were they trapped? If the other 99% of the passengers heard the call to abandon ship, why did they not make their way out?
We know the Captain is automatically responsible for everyone on board his ship, and that technicality will have him jailed for a long, long time. But were these people's deaths a result of his actions/innactions, or their own making?
I read one account from one a band member aboard the ship that his friend went back inside to fetch his violin from his cabin. He was found dead.
Did the others ignore instructions and head back in to collect things aswell?
I'm not saying they did, what I am trying to point out here is that there are many, many variables to contend with in this accident. People panic in situations like these, technology fails in strange ways. It's not fair to simply use the Captain and his Crews automatic responsibility to their passengers, crew and ship as a way to incriminate.
Let's no judge untill the entire truth and facts are known.
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 11686 posts, RR: 8 Reply 12, posted (4 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2542 times:
The animation in the previous part of this subject is very interesting and educational. It seems to suggest that the first 'hit' was sufficient to cause the ship to flood and do other damage to in turn cause the ship to lose control and then become dead in the water, then driven by currents to it's resting point.
At least one more body was recovered in the ship today, the death toll is now 14.
In the short term and even long term, some changes as to operations and routing of ships are going to be more watched by their owners/operators. We may also see much more training of crew, even of passenger services staff as to being more of a part of emergency and evacuation staff. I also suspect more cruise liners will do emergency and evacuation procedures prior to departure or shortly afterwards rather than do it the next day.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 1059 posts, RR: 24 Reply 14, posted (4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2502 times:
Quoting garpd (Reply 11): "Captain was drinking wine at time of impact". Another paper had the headline "Captain ate while ship collided and sank".
So the heck what?!
So the heck what?! No alcohol while in command heck what.
Don’t repeat earlier generations’ mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 12568 posts, RR: 68 Reply 15, posted (4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2500 times:
Quoting garpd (Reply 11): Why were these 30 or so people who are missing/dead, still inside the ship? Did they return to the interior? Were they trapped? If the other 99% of the passengers heard the call to abandon ship, why did they not make their way out?
AFAIK, some crewmembers were working in the engine and laundry rooms, which got flooded very fast by the initial collsion.
garpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2103 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2494 times:
Quoting cmf (Reply 14): So the heck what?! No alcohol while in command heck what.
Realy? Is that a rule? Or are you just expressing an opinion?
Can you link me to where it says a Costa Captain may not enjoy a glass or two when off duty?
If we are to believe the papers as gospel, like most here are doing, then the Captain was on the bridge steering the ship manually while showing off to a lady, but at the same time he was several decks below drinking wine at a bar and also at the same time at a table eating dinner.
This man surely does know how to keep busy or he has two twin brothers.
Or, more likely, the papers and media are printing/distributing crap to sell papers, get website traffic and more viewers.
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 1059 posts, RR: 24 Reply 17, posted (4 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2465 times:
Quoting garpd (Reply 16): Realy? Is that a rule? Or are you just expressing an opinion?
Can you link me to where it says a Costa Captain may not enjoy a glass or two when off duty?
Why the need for a rule? It is common sense not to be under influence when operating vessels or you are to operate a safety station if needed.
But since you asked for a rule. I do not know what Italian maritime law says. I know several that says that if you're involved in operating a vessel or may be called to perform safety operations as part of your tasks on board then you can't consume alcohol or other intoxicating substances.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 12568 posts, RR: 68 Reply 18, posted (4 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2436 times:
Quoting cmf (Reply 17): Apparently you do not have problems with a captain drinking alcohol while in charge of the ship. What about heavier drugs, fine with them?
Not every country is the US of A.
From what I know most civilian ships (and several navies) allow reasonable consumption of alcoholic drinks while off duty.
A guy I knew who used to work on a cargo ship as an engineer told me that they were allowed two bottles of beer a day, which had to be drunk on the spot in the mess (handed over opened by the steward) to prevent a sailor from hoarding the drinks to go on a binge later.
It is also a time-honoured tradition that the captain of a cruise ship (or other long distance passenger ship) will entertain selected passengers for dinner. This obviously includes having a glass of wine.
On the other hand I suspect that most shipping lines would frown about an employee getting drunk on duty.
kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11362 posts, RR: 40 Reply 19, posted (4 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2419 times:
Here's the thing that confuses me:
You see the fairly large gash in the ship in EA CO AS's post (No.4, above); this is obviously where the rock hit and I'd have assumed that water flowed in here, causing to list in that direction; going deeper as the weight of water brought it down. So, why it is visible now? Surely this section of torn fuselage should be at the bottom of the boat? Or was there another, deeper gash on the other side?
Bongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 2575 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (4 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2391 times:
Quoting kaitak (Reply 19):
Here's the thing that confuses me:
You see the fairly large gash in the ship in EA CO AS's post (No.4, above); this is obviously where the rock hit and I'd have assumed that water flowed in here, causing to list in that direction; going deeper as the weight of water brought it down. So, why it is visible now? Surely this section of torn fuselage should be at the bottom of the boat? Or was there another, deeper gash on the other side?
However the ship turned to Port after the impact, this would induce it to heel over to Starboard.Once water collected on that side the boat would keep going over.
darksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 189 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (4 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2386 times:
Quoting kaitak (Reply 19):
You see the fairly large gash in the ship in EA CO AS's post (No.4, above); this is obviously where the rock hit and I'd have assumed that water flowed in here, causing to list in that direction; going deeper as the weight of water brought it down. So, why it is visible now? Surely this section of torn fuselage should be at the bottom of the boat? Or was there another, deeper gash on the other side?
I was wondering that too. But I think it's something along the lines of the tear actually relieving volumes of water on that side of the ship, whereas on the other, the compartments continue to flood and accumulate water, without any large hole to flow back out of, especially if a large part of the tear is above the waterline. I think past a certain point, the percentage difference really doesn't have to be much for the ship to list, and as this happens, the effect is only exacerbated, and capsizing becomes inevitable.
Just my theory though. I was wondering same as you earlier.
Quoting garpd (Reply 11): Let's no judge untill the entire truth and facts are known.
I think I feel the same as you. I'll admit the case does not look for the Captain, but again, that's from a very comfortable distance, and of course, a zero liability perspective. To me, the only thing that looks absolutely bad for this man is that he keeps changing his story. But again, that could very well also be the result of being involved in a traumatic incident and getting the very unambiguous message that his employer fully intends to download their liability to him as well. Most people would have a very tough time dealing with that, and few if any would come out looking good.
It is as you say. We shall have to see what the actual facts are and what the Italian equivalent of the NTSB has to say about it. Until then, it's all speculation.
Enmity is equal to Wrath x The Speed of Fright Squared
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, RR: 21 Reply 23, posted (4 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2341 times:
Quoting kaitak (Reply 19): You see the fairly large gash in the ship in EA CO AS's post (No.4, above); this is obviously where the rock hit and I'd have assumed that water flowed in here, causing to list in that direction; going deeper as the weight of water brought it down. So, why it is visible now?
There is a large tear, but I have seen no reports of a list to port - left - the side of the ship with the gash. So far I have to assume the emergency pumps and water tight door closures contained that water.
In the details of the investigation, we might find there was a list to port at some point, and an idea how much water came aboard and how much they were unable to pump out.
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 21): However the ship turned to Port after the impact, this would induce it to heel over to Starboard.Once water collected on that side the boat would keep going over.
No the ship was turning to Starboard at the time of impact and immediately after impact. It never made a sharp turn to Port.
It appears that the ship remained basically stable with minimal to no list until it drifted down and impacted the rocks under water near where it rests today.
When the ship was blown up against the rocks, and unable to go farther, the starboard side of the ship was torn apart. The underwater photos show massive penetration of the ships hull on the starboard side.
Times below are close - within a minute or so - based on the track shown in the link on the second post on this thread.
At 20:45 the ship hit the rock in the middle of a arcing turn to starboard. It looks to me like they started the turn about 15 seconds late. They would have missed the rock had they started earlier, or had they not had to turn so sharply which kicked out the port rear quarter so much.
The ship glanced off the rocks and makes a very shallow turn to port. It immediately slows from over 18 knots to under 10 knots in 3 minutes. It passes its current position coasting north at 20:50/20:51 at about 5 knots forward speed.
The ship appears to be trying to turn to starboard again as the stern kicks out to the left.
At 21:12 - approx 27 minutes after impact the ship is dead in the water. The pods/ rudders are apparently hard over to point the nose to starboard. The stern is pointed toward the shore.
The wind is starting to blow the nose of the ship around, and to the southwest.
At 20:20 - the ship is beam to the wind, moving southwest at between 0.5 and 1.5 knots - apparently not under power.
At 21:49 - one hour and four minutes at least after the impact with the rocks - the ship grounds near the harbor with the starboard side hitting the rocks.
We know from video that the ship had lights at this point and with no noticable list to starboard.
At 21:57 - almost 8 minutes after grounding - the ship comes to a near stop with a 5 to 10 degree list to starboard. We can see from videos that starboard lifeboats are being launched.
The ship continues to pound and grind against the rocks over the few hours before the damage on the starboard side and the increasing flow of water into the hull bring the starboard rail under water.
The final evacuations of people lowering themselves down the now exposed port side hull occur about 3 to 4 am according to the infrared video time stamps I've seen.
This wasn't a 'quick' event. It took several hours to develop.
It took the ship 30 minutes from the impact until the ship stopped forward movement.
It took another 30 minutes before the ship grounded against the shore.
It took another 30-40 minutes before the first rescue boats arrive.
The tape with the Captain talking to the port officials on the mainland was apparently made about 23:45 - three hours after the contact, two hours after the grounding and at least an hour into the evacuation.
At that point - they are still successfully able to launch lifeboats from both the starboard and ports sides of the ship, so the list is not yet critical.
EDIT - the times I listed above are from the animation based on the automated tracking. I do not know if they are UTC or local times. I also do not know if the time of the conversation with the port officials was UTC or local either. Currently and at the time of this incident local time was UTC +1
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (4 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2287 times:
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 15): AFAIK, some crew-members were working in the engine and laundry rooms, which got flooded very fast by the initial collsion.
Luckily, no crew-members from the engine room or laundry are amongst the victims or missing. One of the musician who perished in the accident has been reported returning to his cabin to collect his violin.
Quoting garpd (Reply 16): Can you link me to where it says a Costa Captain may not enjoy a glass or two when off duty?
I believe that the rules for alcohol and drugs are the same within all companies parts of Carnival Corporation. On another Carnival Corporation cruise line the limit for alcohol is 0.8 (0.5 within US waters). Going above these limits (even off duty) is a dismissible offence and on board there are breathalysers to measure it. I know that there are some are companies which are "dry" and no alcohol is allowed at all.
For drugs there is a zero policy. Carnival Corporation employs an external company in charge of testing the crew for drugs. They are flown regularly to the company's vessels throughout the world and the Captain in only notified the day before. If traces of any drugs are found in a crewmember the crewmember is dismissed, no matter if the drug was taken before joining the ship or the company.
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23): The ship continues to pound and grind against the rocks over the few hours before the damage on the starboard side and the increasing flow of water into the hull bring the starboard rail under water.
I believe your explanation is very close to reality.
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (4 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2320 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 24): I believe that the rules for alcohol and drugs are the same within all companies parts of Carnival Corporation. On another Carnival Corporation cruise line the limit for alcohol is 0.8 (0.5 within US waters). Going above these limits (even off duty) is a dismissible offence and on board there are breathalysers to measure it. I know that there are some are companies which are "dry" and no alcohol is allowed at all.
Sorry, I forgot a zero. The limits are 0.08 and 0.05.
garpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2103 posts, RR: 4 Reply 26, posted (4 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2307 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 24): For drugs there is a zero policy. Carnival Corporation employs an external company in charge of testing the crew for drugs. They are flown regularly to the company's vessels throughout the world and the Captain in only notified the day before. If traces of any drugs are found in a crewmember the crewmember is dismissed, no matter if the drug was taken before joining the ship or the company.
Ok, so glass of wine with a meal is not a problem, unlike theb claims from the papers. Which goes to prove my point about not believing everything you read or hear in the media.
OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 23091 posts, RR: 60 Reply 27, posted (4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2335 times:
News reports coming in that another body of a Women believed to be that of an unregistered Hungarian national ! This just gets more and more interesting as time goes on . ''Unregistered'' passengers?
OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ "Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΨΗΛΑ" "GREECE FLYING HIGH"
zanl188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2991 posts, RR: 0 Reply 28, posted (4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2325 times:
What changes might we see in ship design/construction/equipment as a result of this accident?
- Lifeboats that can be launched at hi list angles. Davits could be made that would extend well out from the ships side - powered from the ship or the boats engine. A simpler idea might be to have the boat lowered to the water in a rack. The rack would have wheels on the ship facing side & just roll down the side of the hull
- A marine version of the terrain awareness systems presently in use many aircraft. Should be a fairly simple technology to implement aboard ship, perhaps it could be incorporated into the existing navigation systems.
- Passenger location tracking systems. I foresee a cabin key card with a RFID chip. Everybody required to keep their key card on their person for security purposes. if ship should rollover search and rescue folks could use it to look for suvivors and account for those already rescued, without having to waste time searching empty cabins. Might have privacy concerns to address.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 23091 posts, RR: 60 Reply 29, posted (4 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2299 times:
Costa seem to have upset the passengers who survived offering them 30% off their future cruises with Costa for life only if they promise not to take lawsuits ! Most dont want to set foot on another Costa cruise ship again.
OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ "Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΨΗΛΑ" "GREECE FLYING HIGH"
vc10 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1343 posts, RR: 19 Reply 30, posted (4 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2275 times:
Quoting zanl188 (Reply 28):
- Passenger location tracking systems. I foresee a cabin key card with a RFID chip. Everybody required to keep their key card on their person for security purposes. if ship should rollover search and rescue folks could use it to look for
I cannot see that being too popular with a lot of passengers as many spend the nights in other peoples cabin , and perhaps they would not want it known
zanl188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2991 posts, RR: 0 Reply 31, posted (4 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2237 times:
Quoting vc10 (Reply 30): I cannot see that being too popular with a lot of passengers as many spend the nights in other peoples cabin , and perhaps they would not want it known
Lol, well like I said it has privacy concerns. The location function would have to be kept off except for testing and emergency. Bigger problem would be for the crew I suspect.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 32, posted (4 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1941 times:
Just a quick update on the Costa Concordia:
- the death toll is now standing at 15 (6 bodies still to be identified);
- today the fuel removal operation has officially begun (but the pumping should start this Saturday);
- the ship seems stable (but the weather has been pretty good so far);
- apparently the Captain informed immediately after the accident the office but he didn't explain the gravity of the situation (he said "I touched the sea bottom"). The shipowner apparently tried to organise an underwater inspection for the ship for the following port of call.
garpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2103 posts, RR: 4 Reply 33, posted (4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1919 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 32): apparently the Captain informed immediately after the accident the office but he didn't explain the gravity of the situation (he said "I touched the sea bottom"). The shipowner apparently tried to organise an underwater inspection for the ship for the following port of call.
So he was on the job and doing something (admittedly not the best!)? Unlike the media reports which have him running around like a headless chicken and refusing to tell anyone anything, drinking wine and eating dinner while jumping ship, climbing back aboard whilst also hailing a taxi home, to the mainland, but never leaving Giglio or the pierside.
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 8626 posts, RR: 11 Reply 34, posted (4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1913 times:
Quoting zanl188 (Reply 28): A simpler idea might be to have the boat lowered to the water in a rack. The rack would have wheels on the ship facing side & just roll down the side of the hull
Imho a very good, simple and cheap idea. Maybe already small, rugged all-metal wheels with ca.20 cm diameter directly bolted to the boats could do it (at least on those boats, which dont have the double-function as tenders (Concordia had 6 tender/lifeboats).
Quoting garpd (Reply 33): So he was on the job and doing something (admittedly not the best!)? Unlike the media reports which have him running around like a headless chicken and refusing to tell anyone anything, drinking wine and eating dinner while jumping ship, climbing back aboard whilst also hailing a taxi home, to the mainland, but never leaving Giglio or the pierside.
I guess we can skip the "having dinner after the crash" thing as a media hype. That he ran around like a headless chicken, well, I would suggest thats normal behavior for someone who had just made a deadly mistake, especially if he´s on the phone with his superiors, and the more so if he´s Italian . The moment he crashed his ship, he knew this was a mistake destroying HIS life (which, for him, was apparently worse than destroying the life of others - unacceptable for a captain). He was in panic, confused, close to a blackout. That he first started denying, and then, after receiving news how grave the mistake was, started to run away from it all, are all signs of panic and therefore not being up to the job he was employed to do. I would think that its mandatory for captains to stand severe stress-tests.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, RR: 21 Reply 35, posted (4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1902 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 32): - apparently the Captain informed immediately after the accident the office but he didn't explain the gravity of the situation (he said "I touched the sea bottom"). The shipowner apparently tried to organise an underwater inspection for the ship for the following port of call.
It is pretty clear to me from everything we've heard so far that the Captain was not on the bridge during the planned close pass to the island. That would not be unusual, especially if the maneuver had been done several times before.
As I said above, it looks like turning 10-15 seconds earlier would have cleared the rock.
We have heard of a power loss on the ship, and some reports, but not consistent, of the initial impact. Despite the huge gash on the ship and the embedded multi-ton rock - it appears most of the passengers, and probably most of the non-engineering crew did not realize that the ship had struck bottom.
After a report by the bridge officer with the con that he had 'touched the sea bottom' - the first action would be to inform the Captain, then for the Chief Engineer to inspect the interior of the hull in the area of suspected contact.
That they called Costa HQ to report the incident, and the company was trying to organize divers for an underwater inspection - tells me that there was no immediate major flooding. Surprising based on the pictures of the gash in the hull that we can see. Extremely surprising.
But it indicates the crew did not see the ship as being in danger after the initial hit with the rock.
It appears from what I've been reading that the bigger problem was the apparent shutdown of the engines/ generators.
As I noted above it took about 30 minutes for the ship to coast to a stop - covering about 2 to 2.5 km. At that point the ship appears to have not developed any noticeable list.
During that time the Captain should have been being kept advised of efforts to get the engines back in operation. A prudent Captain would have been in contact about getting tugs to his ship.
During the next 30 minutes, the ship was being blown by wind and waves toward the lee shore of the island. That was the time to declare an emergency call for tugs and prepare for an emergency anchor drop when the ship got into shallow enough water - though that coast line makes it unlikely that would work.
Ships don't anchor in 100+ meter deep water. The very steep rise of the ocean floor from the 100M depths to the 20M line makes it very unlikely the anchor would have had sufficient angle to arrest the ship drifting into the rocky shore. The ship would need at least 300M of chain out, more likely 500M to 700M of chain - to be able to set the anchor properly.
But I sure the heck would have done it on the 1 or 2 % chance it might work. I also have to say should the anchor have set and held - it is still likely that the stern of the ship would have swung around and hit the rocky shore.
It really appears the passengers were not aware, told of the danger of the ship, until after it struck the shoreline rocks and started to tear open the starboard side. We see from the videos that the ship had lights and was able to launch most of the lifeboats before the list got too bad. It appears that the list did not become steep for a couple hours, and that most of the passengers were off long before that happened.
That is where the Captain should have earned his salary - supervising the evacuation. I understand there was never a general announcement about mustering and preparing to abandon ship, etc.
One thing which I noticed from the videos is that it appears most of the lifeboats only went into the port. Very few to none returned to the ship after emptying the passengers - something I surely would have commanded the crew members to do. Get every possible boat to near the ship so that any folks jumping over the side would have a pickup point.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, RR: 21 Reply 36, posted (4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1889 times:
US LAW SUIT TO BE FILED
From CNN (fair use)
Quote: A class-action lawsuit will be filed in Miami against Costa and its parent company, Carnival Corp., the Italian consumer group Codacons said Saturday. The suit, in collaboration with two U.S. law firms, is "aimed specifically at getting compensation for all damages to the boat passengers," Codacons said in a statement. The class-action suit is open to passengers of any nationality, it said.
...
The suit, he said, will request at least 125,000 euros (about $160,000) per passenger.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 6510 posts, RR: 25 Reply 38, posted (4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1890 times:
law suit - for US passengers I suppose. For European passengers European law resp. the laws of the srsiding country apply. Passengers will get their valuables replaced, a refund for the cruise, vouchers for future cruises and compensation for lost vacation days.
If there was no bodily harm that's about it. European insurers don't cover US lawsuits
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 6510 posts, RR: 25 Reply 40, posted (4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1856 times:
well, i think they offered to some passengers already 30% off for life, on ny future cruise. The least you can expect is a free ride plus full compensation. In any case, some of these cruises, especially in the winter season just after the holidays, are very cheap, below e 1K.
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 42, posted (4 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1804 times:
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 35): It is pretty clear to me from everything we've heard so far that the Captain was not on the bridge during the planned close pass to the island. That would not be unusual, especially if the maneuver had been done several times before.
I don't know it this is common on other countries but here the report of the captain's interrogation is available on line word by word. The Captain confirmed that he was on the bridge at the moment of the collision and that he took the con from the officer of the watch.
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 35): After a report by the bridge officer with the con that he had 'touched the sea bottom' - the first action would be to inform the Captain, then for the Chief Engineer to inspect the interior of the hull in the area of suspected contact.
The Captain admitted visually seeing the rocks at the very last moment and when he heard the collision he thought he damaged the very back of the ship. The said that he didn't realised that the black-out was caused by the water flooding the engine room (main switchboard).
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 35): That is where the Captain should have earned his salary - supervising the evacuation. I understand there was never a general announcement about mustering and preparing to abandon ship, etc.
The Captain stated that he delayed the evacuation order because he was assessing the damages. But the general emergency signal (seven short blasts followed by one long blast) has been given and this is confirmed by everybody. This signal means that passengers are required to collect their lifejackets and go to their muster station.
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 35): One thing which I noticed from the videos is that it appears most of the lifeboats only went into the port. Very few to none returned to the ship after emptying the passengers - something I surely would have commanded the crew members to do. Get every possible boat to near the ship so that any folks jumping over the side would have a pickup point.
In the infra-red video filmed when the ship was on her side you can see some of the ship's lifeboats around the ship.
zanl188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2991 posts, RR: 0 Reply 43, posted (4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1718 times:
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 35): That they called Costa HQ to report the incident, and the company was trying to organize divers for an underwater inspection - tells me that there was no immediate major flooding. Surprising based on the pictures of the gash in the hull that we can see. Extremely surprising.
But it indicates the crew did not see the ship as being in danger after the initial hit with the rock.
It appears from what I've been reading that the bigger problem was the apparent shutdown of the engines/ generators.
Is it possible that the ship was so automated that there was simply no one to report the flooding? Or that perhaps the one or two crew immediately available were killed instantly?
With that hole and the electrical failure flooding of occupied spaces seems likely.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 8626 posts, RR: 11 Reply 44, posted (4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1717 times:
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 35): One thing which I noticed from the videos is that it appears most of the lifeboats only went into the port. Very few to none returned to the ship after emptying the passengers - something I surely would have commanded the crew members to do. Get every possible boat to near the ship so that any folks jumping over the side would have a pickup point.
A german woman who left late when the ship had already capsized and had to swim for safety said she wasnt afraid to swim because there were many boats circling around very close.
Quoting zanl188 (Reply 43): Is it possible that the ship was so automated that there was simply no one to report the flooding? Or that perhaps the one or two crew immediately available were killed instantly?
An officer was sent down and he rported water up to shoulder hight in the engine room, all engines shut down but a main generator working. And that was long before the evacuation signal was given.
It appears that when the captain was found to be indecisive and headless some officers mutinied and Captain Basio took over, the off-duty captain of Concordia´s sistership. He led the evacuation and acted as a captain should.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, RR: 21 Reply 45, posted (4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1678 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 42): The Captain confirmed that he was on the bridge at the moment of the collision and that he took the con from the officer of the watch.
Thanks for the information - I assume it was in Italian, because I haven't been able to find that detail in my searches.
However, I'm now very confused.
We see many reports about the Captain being at dinner during the initial problem/ blackout.
Did he leave the bridge and go down to dinner in the approx hour between striking the rock and grounding against the shore?
No matter how badly he was rattled by the loss of his career - I can't conceive of a ship's captain leaving the bridge to go anywhere except to examing the damage in that time period.
Quoting zanl188 (Reply 43): Is it possible that the ship was so automated that there was simply no one to report the flooding?
Maybe my 20 years in the US Navy, not a lot of which was aboard ship, gives me a different perspective - but I cannot believe someone would build a ship without the capability to examine possible damage. I went aboard on one ship which had a collision in Tokyo Bay in the mid-80s to document some damage control work. With the bow half sliced off forward of the bridge, they could still get down to examine the damage, fight and stop the flooding.
Quoting na (Reply 44): An officer was sent down and he rported water up to shoulder hight in the engine room, all engines shut down but a main generator working. And that was long before the evacuation signal was given.
That would put the ship down a bit at the stern, and not necessarily create a list.
That would have helped cause the windblown turn after the ship stopped forward movement where the ship bow did almost all the turning movement.
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 46, posted (4 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1656 times:
Quoting zanl188 (Reply 43): Is it possible that the ship was so automated that there was simply no one to report the flooding? Or that perhaps the one or two crew immediately available were killed instantly?
On large cruise ships like this one there is always an Engine Control Room manned 24 hours a day. There are usually two engineer on watch and one or two motorman. One of the officer must remain in the engine control room at all time while the other goes around where needed. The motorman usually stay all the time in the engine room. However, engine spaces run throughout most of the bottom of the ship (apart from engines, generators, and propulsion motors there are also compressors for cold rooms and air conditioning system, pumps and treatment systems for fresh water and waste water, stabilisers controls, etc) and there are also engine spaces around the ship on the upper decks (incinerator for garbage, electrical substations, air conditioning substations, engine casing) so it's possible that nobody was in the area affected by the collision. No technical crew has been killed or injured in the accident.
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 45): Thanks for the information - I assume it was in Italian, because I haven't been able to find that detail in my searches.
Yes, the full interrogation is in Italian (several hundred pages). Italian police also positioned microphones in the room where the captain was waiting for the interrogation in the tribunal and they also published the phone calls Schettino made without knowing it.
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 45): We see many reports about the Captain being at dinner during the initial problem/ blackout.
He was at dinner just before dinner (with the Moldavian lady) and he was called on the bridge just before reaching the island as agreed earlier.
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 47, posted (4 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1634 times:
Quoting na (Reply 44): It appears that when the captain was found to be indecisive and headless some officers mutinied and Captain Basio took over, the off-duty captain of Concordia´s sistership. He led the evacuation and acted as a captain should.
From the interrogation report of the ship's safety officer Martino Pellegrino:
- on board the Costa Concordia there were two Staff Captain: Roberto Bosio and Dimitrios Christidis. One of the two Staff Captains was due to disembark the following day in Savona and it's normal that the two crewmembers are spending few days together for hand over purposes. Not sure who was the official Staff Captain. However Pellegrino stated that Capt. Schettino was shocked for what happened and that he heard Bosio on the radio giving orders for the evacuation;
- Pellegrino also confirmed that the Captain was on the bridge and conning the ship at the moment of the collision.
This is the link of the document if you can read Italian:
janmnastami From Italy, joined Apr 2008, 823 posts, RR: 0 Reply 51, posted (3 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1413 times:
Consumers' associations and Costa Cruises have reached an agreement. Costa will refund to each passenger 3,000 euro for the cost of the cruise and 11,000 euro as compensation. The agreement obviously excludes people who have had physical damages. A family of four members (two adults and two children) will receive in total more than 50,000 euro.
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 11686 posts, RR: 8 Reply 53, posted (3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1402 times:
Quoting janmnastami (Reply 51): Consumers' associations and Costa Cruises have reached an agreement. Costa will refund to each passenger 3,000 euro for the cost of the cruise and 11,000 euro as compensation. The agreement obviously excludes people who have had physical damages. A family of four members (two adults and two children) will receive in total more than 50,000 euro.
Of course those who were seriously injured and the families of those who died who will still seek much greater compensation in the courts and should do so. Offering this money could curb many lawsuits, but I bet this won't be enough for some who only were scared, especially the attorneys and greedy persons looking for a lottery jackpot, saying they were psychologically 'damaged'.
As to the actions of the crew and especially the captain, there are still too many questions as to their behavior, most importantly their decision to cruise so close to the shoreline of the island and the allegations of abandonment well before many pax were off the ship.
777 From Italy, joined Sep 2005, 444 posts, RR: 0 Reply 55, posted (3 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1352 times:
Huge emphasis today on the Italian press about a shocking article wrote on the German magazine Der Spiegel where the journalist says something like "could you even imagine a similar behaviour from a German or a English captain?" and again "it's not clear in what measure the Italians are a race".
While the Der Spiegel article seems to be the receptacle of the anti Italian cliché at its worst, an Italian newspaper reacted to that writing in large letters in its first page: "we have Schettino, you have Auschwitz"....
Two example of stupidity in just one shot! Congrats to both!
Some recent posters have noted the sensationalist and in some cases the disturbing commentary in the media of this terrible event. Nothing will be helped by using hateful and derogatory terms as to the people alleged to be involved in this disaster and reacting to it. A ship has been lost, at least 16 people dead, scores injured, careers ruined and perhaps $1 Billion in insurance losses as well as possible environmental damage. We need the media to do it's job to cover this event, not use it to hurt people to boost hits and circulation.
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 11 Reply 58, posted (3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1252 times:
Quoting 777 (Reply 55): Huge emphasis today on the Italian press about a shocking article wrote on the German magazine Der Spiegel where the journalist says something like "could you even imagine a similar behaviour from a German or a English captain?" and again "it's not clear in what measure the Italians are a race".
Coming from Der Spiegel that doesn't surprise me. They don't exactly have a great reputation when it comes to reporting aviation incidents either.
zanl188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2991 posts, RR: 0 Reply 59, posted (3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1250 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 46): However, engine spaces run throughout most of the bottom of the ship (apart from engines, generators, and propulsion motors there are also compressors for cold rooms and air conditioning system, pumps and treatment systems for fresh water and waste water, stabilisers controls, etc) and there are also engine spaces around the ship on the upper decks (incinerator for garbage, electrical substations, air conditioning substations, engine casing) so it's possible that nobody was in the area affected by the collision.
Did Costa Concordia have propulsion pods? I understand one of the advantages of the pods is that engines/generators can be placed in non-traditional locations (IIRC some ships have aux. propulsion engines on the upper or weather decks).
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 60, posted (3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1211 times:
Quoting zanl188 (Reply 59): Did Costa Concordia have propulsion pods? I understand one of the advantages of the pods is that engines/generators can be placed in non-traditional locations (IIRC some ships have aux. propulsion engines on the upper or weather decks).
No, Costa Concordia has traditional propulsion. Yes, with pods in theory you could place the generators everywhere on the ship, but for several reasons they are always at the bottom of the ship:
- the weight of the engines and generators: if you locate them on the upper decks you are seriously affecting the stability of the ship:
- shipowners don't want to waste space on the upper decks with engines or generators (also because of the noise);
- if you want to locate the engines away from the pods you'll need to run long electrical cable with up to 6600 volts and this can cause safety issues.
But even with traditional propulsion, you could still place the generators wherever you want as the only connection between the generators and the propulsion motors is electrical cables. For instance the Island/Coral Princess have both diesel generator and a gas turbine to produce power for propulsion. The gas turbine, much smaller than the diesel engines, is located by the funnel.
BilgeRat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 155 posts, RR: 1 Reply 62, posted (3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1070 times:
EY460 - thanks very much for your input in this thread, after reading some pretty wild and uninformed speculation from others about how this all happened it's very good to have a professional seafarer give us the benefit of their knowledge.
I am a marine engineer officer in the UK - I hold a UK Class 2 (Second Engineer) Certificate of Competency and sail on Royal Fleet Auxiliary (naval auxiliary) vessels. My experiece is mainly tankers, but I have sailed on an amphibious landing ship which comes under Class 1 Passenger Vessel regulations. I've sailed on both direct drive and diesel electric propulsion, UMS and watch-keeping vessels. The oldest ship I have sailed on was built in 1974 and the newest in 2006.
Quoting EY460 (Reply 46): On large cruise ships like this one there is always an Engine Control Room manned 24 hours a day. There are usually two engineer on watch and one or two motorman. One of the officer must remain in the engine control room at all time while the other goes around where needed. The motorman usually stay all the time in the engine room. However, engine spaces run throughout most of the bottom of the ship (apart from engines, generators, and propulsion motors there are also compressors for cold rooms and air conditioning system, pumps and treatment systems for fresh water and waste water, stabilisers controls, etc) and there are also engine spaces around the ship on the upper decks (incinerator for garbage, electrical substations, air conditioning substations, engine casing) so it's possible that nobody was in the area affected by the collision. No technical crew has been killed or injured in the accident.
Absolutely correct. I might add that the bilge wells in machinery spaces have an alarm which sounds in the control room as when the well is full. They also have a flood alarm which activates if the well overfills. Any engineer officer worth their salt will immediately investigate a bilge alarm because of the possiblity of a flood.
I think I'm right in saying the Costa Concordia was a diesel electric vessel? Anything we hear at the moment is just speculation as there are simply too many possible permutations of events that could have led to this incident.
If anyone has any questions about the engineering aspects of this then I'd be happy to answer them as best I can.
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 63, posted (3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1047 times:
Quoting BilgeRat (Reply 62): I am a marine engineer officer in the UK - I hold a UK Class 2 (Second Engineer) Certificate of Competency and sail on Royal Fleet Auxiliary (naval auxiliary) vessels. My experience is mainly tankers, but I have sailed on an amphibious landing ship
Hi BilgeRat (nice nick!). That sounds interesting and exciting. I hold a Class 1 (Master Unlimited) Certificate of Equivalence Competency but I only sailed on board cruise ships. The smallest was carrying about 600 pax and the larger 3400.
Quoting BilgeRat (Reply 62): I think I'm right in saying the Costa Concordia was a diesel electric vessel?
Yes, the Costa Concordia was a diesel electric vessel with 6 diesel generators and two propulsion motors driving the propellers. DG (Diesel Generator) 1, 2 and 3 were located in one compartment, DG 4, 5 and 6 in another and the two propulsion motors in another compartments. All these compartments were damaged in the first collision with the rock and since they are the largest and most vital there wasn't much hope left for the ship.
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 8626 posts, RR: 11 Reply 64, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1034 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 60): The gas turbine, much smaller than the diesel engines, is located by the funnel.
Queen Mary 2 has the same configuration as well, the (auxiliary, only for high speed) gas turbine is located in the large with casing below the funnel. The turbine is rarely used.
Quoting EY460 (Reply 63): DG (Diesel Generator) 1, 2 and 3 were located in one compartment, DG 4, 5 and 6 in another and the two propulsion motors in another compartments. All these compartments were damaged in the first collision with the rock and since they are the largest and most vital there wasn't much hope left for the ship.
What do you think, would the Concordia have sunk due to the extension of the leak, or would the dry watertight compartments have kept her afloat if a stranding could have been avoided? Would Schettino have had a chance to keep the ship away from the coast, after loosing the engines, or did he command a helpless wreck with no other choice than stranding?
BilgeRat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 155 posts, RR: 1 Reply 65, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1022 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 63): I hold a Class 1 (Master Unlimited) Certificate of Equivalence Competency but I only sailed on board cruise ships.
I'm doing my Class 1 (Chief Engineer, Motor Unlimited) next year. I'm hoping to move onto short sea, possibly Ro-Ro ferries as I've had enough now of being away from home for months on end
Quoting na (Reply 64): All these compartments were damaged in the first collision with the rock and since they are the largest and most vital there wasn't much hope left for the ship.
Most interesting. The loss of both DG compartments and the motor room(s) would certainly leave the ship dead in the water.
I'd really like to see some drawings or plans of the machinery spaces to get a better idea of what happened. When I first saw the damage to the round of the bilge on the port side and the length of the hole relative to the length of the vessel my feeling was that such a hole shouldn't necessarily be able to sink the ship if the watertight sub divisions have been maintained. If I were a suspicious man I'd start to think the watertight doors in the machinery spaces weren't all closed when the grounding occured meaning the flooding was uncontained and thus causing a cascade failure of the main machinery.
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 66, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 987 times:
Quoting na (Reply 64): What do you think, would the Concordia have sunk due to the extension of the leak, or would the dry watertight compartments have kept her afloat if a stranding could have been avoided? Would Schettino have had a chance to keep the ship away from the coast, after loosing the engines, or did he command a helpless wreck with no other choice than stranding?
It's difficult to say if the ship would have stayed afloat in those conditions. There are too many uncertainty. Costa Concordia had on the navigation bridge a sophisticated computer to calculate stability. The levels of each of the vessel tanks are shown on this computer in real time, so the stability condition of the ship are known at all time. It is then possible to simulate a damage and the computer is giving the results (if the vessel sinks or not). From what I've read from the interrogation report, on the Concordia this computer was plugged on a normal plug and not on a plug connected to the emergency generator. So after the black out, they had to move the computer plug, restart it, wait for the tanks to come on line and they lost precious time. With no engines and propulsion the ship was without any control and there was not much to do.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 12568 posts, RR: 68 Reply 67, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 959 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 66):
It's difficult to say if the ship would have stayed afloat in those conditions. There are too many uncertainty. Costa Concordia had on the navigation bridge a sophisticated computer to calculate stability. The levels of each of the vessel tanks are shown on this computer in real time, so the stability condition of the ship are known at all time. It is then possible to simulate a damage and the computer is giving the results (if the vessel sinks or not). From what I've read from the interrogation report, on the Concordia this computer was plugged on a normal plug and not on a plug connected to the emergency generator. So after the black out, they had to move the computer plug, restart it, wait for the tanks to come on line and they lost precious time. With no engines and propulsion the ship was without any control and there was not much to do.
With all the ship´s main generators being out of action, would the ballast water pumps still have worked anyway? I´m sure that the emergency generator only has a limited power output.
BTW, whatever lead to the accident is up to the investigation, but what I´m a bit upset about is the fact that the ship´s master and several senior officers apparently (as per eyewitness reports) disappeared while the evacuation was still very much in progress.
I´m quite sure that the Costa cruise company has some standard procedures about who is in charge of what during an evacuation of the ship and I´m quite sure that each officer AND the master have a role fullfill until it either becomes too dangerous for them to remain on their station or the danger is over (and those under their care have been brought to safety or it becomes physically impossible to do so).
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 68, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 937 times:
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 67): With all the ship´s main generators being out of action, would the ballast water pumps still have worked anyway? I´m sure that the emergency generator only has a limited power output.
Yes, bilge pumps and fire pumps are supplied by the emergency generator, but some of them could have been located in the flooded spaces, so those would have been out of service.
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 67): BTW, whatever lead to the accident is up to the investigation, but what I´m a bit upset about is the fact that the ship´s master and several senior officers apparently (as per eyewitness reports) disappeared while the evacuation was still very much in progress.
For sure some of the officers didn't behave as they should. But don't forget that one of the officers was rescued 36 hours the accident as he was stuck injured inside the vessel. There is also an interesting interrogation report (of course I have no proof that these statements are true) where an officer describe the situation on the starboard side of the ship (the one under the water). When the water was about to reach the level of the lifeboat deck, several officers were there pushing passengers in the water to be rescued by the ship's lifeboats. Some of these officers even returned on the ship after being washed from the lifeboat deck.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 12568 posts, RR: 68 Reply 69, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 929 times:
Quoting EY460 (Reply 68): But don't forget that one of the officers was rescued 36 hours the accident as he was stuck injured inside the vessel. There is also an interesting interrogation report (of course I have no proof that these statements are true) where an officer describe the situation on the starboard side of the ship (the one under the water). When the water was about to reach the level of the lifeboat deck, several officers were there pushing passengers in the water to be rescued by the ship's lifeboats. Some of these officers even returned on the ship after being washed from the lifeboat deck.
My kudos to these officers and the rest of the crew, which did their best to get everybody off the ship. As for the injured officer, he obviously couldn´t take part in the evacuation and I´m sure that nobody blames him.
EY460 From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, RR: 0 Reply 70, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 930 times:
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 69): My kudos to these officers and the rest of the crew, which did their best to get everybody off the ship. As for the injured officer, he obviously couldn´t take part in the evacuation and I´m sure that nobody blames him.
He took part to the evacuation till the very end and he couldn't get out after the ship tilted (OK, he wasn't very young). He said that while he was trying to get out he fell through an opening and broke his leg. He waited for 36 hours before he was found.
BilgeRat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 155 posts, RR: 1 Reply 71, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 903 times:
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 67): With all the ship´s main generators being out of action, would the ballast water pumps still have worked anyway? I´m sure that the emergency generator only has a limited power output.
The exact details vary from vessel to vessel but as a general rule of thumb the following will be powered from an emergency generator:
- Emergency lighting.
- Radar.
- Radios (GMDSS radios specifically).
- Emergency steering gear.
- Enough pumps to get *one* diesel generator i.e. one fuel oil pump, one lubricating oil pump, one cooling water pump.
- One fuel oil transfer pump.
- One bilge pump.
The emergency generator should start automatically within 20 seconds of the main power supply failing. It should run up and parallel itself with the emergency switchboard which will supply the items listed above. It should supply enough power to run these services which are essential to safe navigation and to allow the engineering staff to start one of the main diesel generators and begin to recover full electrical supplies.
All ships also have an emergency or "first start" air compressor which can be used to fill one air receiver with enough air to start an engine or generator in the event of a total electrical failure. This compressor usually has it's own hand started diesel engine.
Likewise all ships have an emergency fire pump which can pressurise the fire main (although not as well as a main fire pump) in the event of a total electrical failure. Again, it is located remotely from the main machinery spaces and is driven by its own independant hand started diesel engine.
I have sailed on one ship that had no less than SIX main fire pumps, and two of those were submersible types, i.e. they would still operate if the compartment was flooded and they were underwater.
Ballast pumps are typically large pumps which require a lot of power to run - therefore not really suitable to be supplied from an emergency generator and emergency switchboard which are usually far lower capacity than the main generators and switchboards. I have never sailed on a ship which had a ballast pump supplied from the emergency system.
All ships also have an "emergecy bilge injection" system for use in a major flooding emergency. Basically the crew can open a valve in the engine room which allows the main sea water cooling system (by necessity a large capacity pumping system) to take its suction from the engine room bilge. The crew can then shut the main sea water suctions on the ship's side and *hopefully* the main sea water pumps can be used to pump out the flood water. This system however requires command approval to operate and is only used as a last resort.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 12568 posts, RR: 68 Reply 72, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 894 times:
Quoting BilgeRat (Reply 71): I have sailed on one ship that had no less than SIX main fire pumps, and two of those were submersible types, i.e. they would still operate if the compartment was flooded and they were underwater.
Ballast pumps are typically large pumps which require a lot of power to run - therefore not really suitable to be supplied from an emergency generator and emergency switchboard which are usually far lower capacity than the main generators and switchboards. I have never sailed on a ship which had a ballast pump supplied from the emergency system.
All ships also have an "emergecy bilge injection" system for use in a major flooding emergency. Basically the crew can open a valve in the engine room which allows the main sea water cooling system (by necessity a large capacity pumping system) to take its suction from the engine room bilge. The crew can then shut the main sea water suctions on the ship's side and *hopefully* the main sea water pumps can be used to pump out the flood water. This system however requires command approval to operate and is only used as a last resort.
But these systems won´t work if the main engine / generator rooms have been sliced open like a can of food.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, RR: 21 Reply 73, posted (3 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 835 times:
Quoting na (Reply 64): or did he command a helpless wreck with no other choice than stranding?
Looking at the track data, it appears the ship grounded because it had no power. The speeds it traveled after stopping heading north average about 0.75 knots. That is drifting. The wind was out of the north/northeast from the weather reports I've seen.
Acting like a big sail, with the stern down a few feet from flooding, the ship blew up against a lee shore before any tugs to could get to it.
The track data does not support an intentional grounding, nor what I first though was an attempt to get close to the port to off-load/ evacuate the ship.
OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 23091 posts, RR: 60 Reply 74, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 689 times:
A very well made documentary on Channel 4 tonight in the UK/Ireland. It was really well done and not accusing or sensationalist. It had unseen footage of passengers videos taken in the restaurant and galleys.
OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ "Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΨΗΛΑ" "GREECE FLYING HIGH"
LGWflyer From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2011, 2262 posts, RR: 1 Reply 75, posted (3 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 680 times:
Quoting OA260 (Reply 74): A very well made documentary on Channel 4 tonight in the UK/Ireland. It was really well done and not accusing or sensationalist. It had unseen footage of passengers videos taken in the restaurant and galleys.
I am watching the repeat now on C4 +1. It is interesting seeing the footage captured by the passengers, must have been scary.
Sponsor Message: 
From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 2807 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 4871 posts, 
From France, joined Oct 2001, 2766 posts, 
(Ok, not something to laugh at with casualties. But what a bonehead.)
From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 23091 posts, 
From Italy, joined Jan 2012, 175 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 3228 posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5110 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 8626 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2103 posts, 
)
From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined May 2005, 1077 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
