chengkp75

This is known as the "swiss cheese" model of accident causation. While there may be a lot of "holes" (wrong decisions or actions) in the "cheese" (the ship's operations), only if all the holes line up (contribute to one another) do you have a straight path to the disastrous result.

Okay, whole lot to unpack here, so I'll open this thread twice to try to answer things in order. Apologies for not listed answers by username. Lazy. Post #9: Yes, a passage plan must be made, and submitted to corporate showing the ships exact, planned routing, but this is typically done for just a couple of ports ahead of time, as the time from each port to the next is a separate "passage". Not to have found the note on the chart regarding the protection zone (and if it's not on the chart it is in the "notice to mariners" or sailing directions publications) is a failure from the navigating officer (who prepares the passage plan) to the Marine Superintendent ashore who reviews it, though the vast amount of responsibility lies with the onboard staff: Navigating Officer, First Officer, Staff Captain, Captain. #16: I see, from a professional mariner's viewpoint, the very close correlation between the Costa Concordia and this incident. Both were dangerous, and both were "uncalled for" PR stunts. One went horribly bad, one got lucky. #18: I don't know the chart, but it likely was not delineated on the chart, but was noted in fine print in the title corner of the chart, and was likely overlooked. Still no excuse. #24: You are correct. The investigation will almost certainly be of an ISM (International Safety Management Code) type, where the assigning of "blame" is not considered, but the finding of the root cause of the incident is of primary importance, so that policies and procedures can be amended to prevent it from happening again. For all those calling for, or speculating on, the Captain being relieved because of this, again, that is not what an ISM investigation does. Almost regardless of the outcome of any incident, if the Captain, or any officer or crew, are found to have followed the company's SMS (Safety Management System, that is created by the ISM) policies and procedures, however flawed those turn out to be, then no blame is assigned against him. The only time a Captain would come under censure would be if he failed to follow the SMS policies and procedures. Even in the case of the RCI Captain on Anthem (I believe) that is mentioned here, was found to not have violated SMS procedures, and is not an ex-Captain, he was however, relieved for PR reasons, to be reassigned later. #45: This is perhaps the most disturbing part of this thread. If the Captain took this light-hearted approach to this incident, that is indeed worrisome. #52: While the Captain may not have started the cruise, apparently weeks before, it is his responsibility to review the passage plan, prior to each passage (i.e. before the ship left port to sail to the Na Pali coast) with the bridge team. #58: What is the date on the NOAA chart? NOAA has started phasing out printing paper charts, back in 2021, so not sure when that chart was last published. Navigating officers spend most of their days taking the "Notice to Mariners" updates and making corrections to the paper charts, and then noting on the chart the last date it was updated. Various posters: If the depth was as reported in this thread (no confirmation), then there was sufficient under keel clearance, but as others have noted, things change in the ocean. One important note that is always on a chart, is the last date the area was surveyed, meaning the depths could change wildly (I've seen charts that casually mention that the area has not been surveyed (sonar mapping) in over 50 years). #76: No one said they drove the ship at high speed into shallow water. Just the fact they are shown using bow thrusters, shows the ship was stopped, or nearly so, as thrusters lose effectiveness above 3-5 knots. Depths do change over time, and even when charted, the bottom profile is not a continuous map, but a series of data points that is extrapolated (educated guess) between. As for depth sounder alarms, typically these are set for the minimum under keel clearance set forth by the company's SMS (for a ship this size, likely 2 meters) #99: By "rare and expensive" equipment that sees the depth ahead of the ship, I'm assuming you mean side scan sonar? Because that is the only technology that does this, and I can assure you that even your highly regarded Edge does not have this. I'm bothered that this happened in the first place, as the damage that can be done by a ship in shallow water to delicate underwater ecosystems is great (though this instance is probably less destructive than anchoring), but hope that this leads to changes in Celebrity's SMS to prevent it happening again. I am also bothered by the Captain's lack of contriteness in discussing the incident, and apparent lack of concern for the why of the violation. That may, in the end, get him into more trouble with Celebrity than the actual violation.

From your lips to the IMO's ear. 🤞

The operative word is was. But because of his actions that night, he has had his license revoked, and because of those actions, I have no professional respect for him, and will not refer to him as a Captain in any reference from the time of the accident onwards.

No, if you read the report, you find that the investigators found that the crew in general, did very well, with the information and direction they were given. You will note that all of the "should haves" you quote are attributable to one person, the Captain. Crew cannot go willy nilly making decisions about sending passengers to muster, getting boats ready to launch, loading boats, etc. That is chaos. Like it or not, a ship is a hierarchical operation, and things have to come from the top down, but this didn't happen on the Concordia that night.

As I said, it was a violation, but MSC and the various commands that the cargo belonged to insisted that we could transport it. Some of the MSC operated ships are US built so they are coastwise compliant, but many are not, and they don't understand the difference.

Andy would know better than I, but I don't see anything in these links that suggests that the foreign seafarers are allowed in cabotage trade. I know that US flag ships are not necessarily compliant for Jones Act/PVSA trade, as many of even the US government owned and operated US flag ships are not Jones Act compliant. I served on one foreign built, US flag ship that was under charter to Military Sealift Command, and that was constantly being asked to carry military cargo from one US port to another, and we had to repeatedly deny this use, as we had been fined once for doing so. I believe there are Canadian flag vessels, as well, that are not coastwise compliant.

Just shy of $4 million to eliminate a competitor, about what I expected. Wonder if the Empress will follow.

I'm not sure what union represents the unlicensed crew on the Staten Island ferry, but the licensed officers are represented by MEBA, one of two maritime officer unions. I would be surprised if the unlicense crew are not represented by the SIU (Seafarers International Union, as these two unions typically require the company to contract with both unions), but you can be an employee of a company (or city) and a member of a different union than other government employees (like government employees union and teachers union). But, this is far afield from the OP's question.

Yes, but it is possible for someone in a supervisory position, especially on a ship, to have never faced a true at sea emergency. Many mariners go their entire career without an emergency, just as many law enforcement officers go their entire career without drawing their firearm. Is it the norm? No, but not unheard of either.

All licensed officers have to be US citizens. Unlicensed crew have to be 75% citizens, and 25% green card (resident alien, so taxpaying) holders. Only NCL has an exemption to allow NRAC (non-resident alien crew) to serve on US flag ships, and those have to be part of the 25% of unlicensed crew. The NRAC's have to be paid US wages, pay US Social Security tax, US income tax, and have other requirements, like having worked for NCL for 10 years prior, and NCL obtaining a work visa for them.

And, none of the ship's crews on the Staten Island ferry are government employees. They are members of the maritime unions. And, yes, the Staten Island ferry is free, so that can be an outlier. How many government run entities have been privatized in the last couple of decades?

I've known firefighters and EMT's that fold up at the first actual emergency, but let's face it, their careers are typically very short then. I don't recall whether or not Schettino was found to be drinking, but I don't believe he was breathalyzed. Merely incredibly poor judgement, but then again, the actual allision would not have proved fatal (to the ship, yes, to the passengers and crew, no) had he acted accordingly afterwards. Even his claims of "steering" the ship back to ground on Giglio are false. You don't "steer" a ship with no propulsion, let alone power. And the forensic engineering shows that had the ship not drifted back to Giglio and grounded, it would have taken significantly longer to sink, and would have done so upright, if down by the stern. What caused the ship to roll over was the second grounding at Giglio, where, as the ship continued to fill with water, the port side was grounded and could not sink any further, so the water filled the starboard side, causing the ship to roll over. You'll note that Concordia was laying on her starboard side, while the tear in the hull was on the port side, and eventually up in the air, above water level.

And, how have the maritime unions done with maintaining a US flag foreign-going fleet? Why are the vast majority of USNS ships (Marad owned and operated for logistical support of the DOD) foreign built? Maritime labor has very little clout in the US. And the bad optics would be offset by the optics of saying "we cut the cost to operate these ferries by 75%, there will be fare decreases or no fare increases for the foreseeable future" And, if the competitors, like Circle Line, and all the water taxis in NYC were to go foreign flag, and then offer services competing with the Staten Island ferry, demand would drop, revenue would drop, subsidy would increase, and the politicians would say "let's privatize it", and let it go..

No idea. Lots of the muslim crew would not want to partake. The tips are usually very good on these cruises, so I don't think there would be a shortage.