Question regarding abandoning ship

Let me say first that I hope no one has to abandon ship!

However, with the recent fire on Carnival and with the Concordia a year ago, I was wondering about the following:

If you have to abandon ship, do you really think there are enough spots in lifeboats for everyone?

I know that in theory, the answer is "YES".

But then there is reality. On the Concordia, the ship was leaning on one side, so the life boats on the other side couldn't be used anymore.

We have all been on tenders: if you look at the "seats" painted on the benches, and then look at the actual behinds of people, including mine :rolleyes: (who are not even wearing life vests when tendering!) I wonder how in an actual abandon-ship situation, they will put so many people in there.

Do you feel confident that if you were ever in such a situation, you would find "your guaranteed" spot in a life boat?

(and let's not even think about the risk of the life boat falling down, like what also happened not too long ago :eek: )

Yes I would feel confident.

Let me say first that I hope no one has to abandon ship!

However, with the recent fire on Carnival and with the Concordia a year ago, I was wondering about the following:

 

If you have to abandon ship, do you really think there are enough spots in lifeboats for everyone?

 

I know that in theory, the answer is "YES".

But then there is reality. On the Concordia, the ship was leaning on one side, so the life boats on the other side couldn't be used anymore.

 

We have all been on tenders: if you look at the "seats" painted on the benches, and then look at the actual behinds of people, including mine :rolleyes: (who are not even wearing life vests when tendering!) I wonder how in an actual abandon-ship situation, they will put so many people in there.

 

Do you feel confident that if you were ever in such a situation, you would find "your guaranteed" spot in a life boat?

 

(and let's not even think about the risk of the life boat falling down, like what also happened not too long ago :eek: )

There is no certainty in life even with all precaution measures put in place but as for places on lifeboats I think you will find that the majority of civilized people have been condition through life to "give up the bus seat for the elderly" The same would apply with a ship "Women and Children first" This has been put into practice on many near air disasters and the reason single men are chosen at check in for a free extra leg room seat next to an airline exit door:)

Each life boat holds at least 150 people (Oasis and Allure i believe its 300), there are also numerous life rafts (they look like 55 gallon drums) on each side of the ship. I want to say that each side of the ship can safely get the entire ship off if necessary. It wasn't long ago and someone posted the exact number of people a raft is rated for.

To answer your question...I have no issues with my safety on any of the 8 cruises I have taken. If I did, I wouldn't cruise.

There is plenty of room for everyone either in a life boat or a life raft.

What nobody considers is what happens after everyone is in the life boats.

- No bathrooms, food, or bar service (except for limited emergency rations)

- No ship nearby capable of picking up 4,000 to 6,000 or more people. It could be a day or two before enough ships arrived to pick up everyone.

- All nearby ships would head for the stranded ship and the life boats at full speed. But no ship could accommodate everyone. People would be scattered among different ships.

- Any ship that picked up people from life boats is not going to have enough beds for them to sleep in or food for them to eat.

- You can't take your luggage or lap tops on the lifeboats.

- Don't forget your meds

Each life boat holds at least 150 people (Oasis and Allure i believe its 300), there are also numerous life rafts (they look like 55 gallon drums) on each side of the ship. I want to say that each side of the ship can safely get the entire ship off if necessary. It wasn't long ago and someone posted the exact number of people a raft is rated for.

 

To answer your question...I have no issues with my safety on any of the 8 cruises I have taken. If I did, I wouldn't cruise.

What were all those passengers doing when climbing down ladders towards the sea with no 'ships" life rafts in sight on the Concordia disaster lol Wrong turn?

What were all those passengers doing when climbing down ladders towards the sea with no 'ships" life rafts in sight on the Concordia disaster lol Wrong turn?

No time due to arrogance of a Captain?

People don't act rationally during an emergency. Getting off a ship in as practiced during muster is the dream, in reality it will be pandemonium, chaos, and a free for all. We have all seen what Hollywood depicts with Titanic, I could see it ending the same way in today's day and age....which is unfortunate to say!

I can swim. I'm cool.

I don't know how much you have seen regarding the Concordia, but on this side of the ocean, we have seen many of the eye witness videos and in most cases, there was no "women and children first" when they had to get into the life boats. It was "every (wo)man for themselves". In many cases, crew didn't know what to exactly do.

There were maritime specialists saying that ships up to 4000 people can evacuate, but huge ships like Oasis/ Allure, it is doubtful in case of emergency they could evacuate in time.

It's not that I am losing sleep over this or so, I will certainly continue cruising, but sometimes I'd like to think in a "what if" way.

Now, I am pretty sure my laptop will be the least of my worries in case I'd ever have to abandon ship. I don't have to take life-saving meds, so even if I don't have my meds (BCP, antidepressiva, migraine-prevention) with me, for me that wouldn't be a big issue (just don't let me jump off the life boat in a suicide attempt because of no antidepressiva!)

Doing muster drill, where you know it's just a drill and you know exactly when it will be and the whole family is together, is one thing.

Now, if whole family is spread over the ship and you are scared because of whatever is going on and you don't have your kids near you and who knows what is going on and what will happen, I think (no, I'm sure) there will be panick.

And then, you are there, in your life boat, in the water. Concordia was so close to land, I think only 50 yards to that rock formation and not that far from port either. What if in open sea?

A bed to sleep in on a rescue ship would also be least of my worries. Having a rescue-ing ship nearby would already be great.

There is plenty of room for everyone either in a life boat or a life raft.

 

What nobody considers is what happens after everyone is in the life boats.

 

- No bathrooms, food, or bar service (except for limited emergency rations)

 

- No ship nearby capable of picking up 4,000 to 6,000 or more people. It could be a day or two before enough ships arrived to pick up everyone.

 

- All nearby ships would head for the stranded ship and the life boats at full speed. But no ship could accommodate everyone. People would be scattered among different ships.

 

- Any ship that picked up people from life boats is not going to have enough beds for them to sleep in or food for them to eat.

 

- You can't take your luggage or lap tops on the lifeboats.

 

- Don't forget your meds

All true. But the alternative is better than going down with the ship :)

Teddie

The Concordia problem with lifeboats had more to do with the Captain not doing an abandon ship earlier. He waited til it was too late to lower them. Also, that was an issue of hitting land (albeit underwater) that ripped a hole in the side. The people who died, did not die from lack of lifeboats, but from where they were or where they went after the ship hit. The reality is most would have lived had they not gone back to their cabins or to lower muster areas. Concordia was entirely the actions of the Captain. He was completely responsible for everything that happened. Yet, to this day, he denies culpability. :confused:

What some this week forgot is that lifeboats are only to be used when there is NO alternative, when the ship is going down. It's not something you want to do otherwise.

I can swim. I'm cool.

My thoughts also.

Since I only do Caribbean, I will do the backstroke to the nearest island.:rolleyes:

i like to think in the worst case scenario the way these ship are made it would take a major hull breach (explosion, hitting something real big) to make them sink really quick or capsize. most of these cruises along the east coast are not too far from land at any given time so theoretically that should be enough time to get everyone safely to lifeboats and get help to the area. no worries, im still liking my chances.

-Roger

There is no certainty in life even with all precaution measures put in place but as for places on lifeboats I think you will find that the majority of civilized people have been condition through life to "give up the bus seat for the elderly" The same would apply with a ship "Women and Children first" This has been put into practice on many near air disasters and the reason single men are chosen at check in for a free extra leg room seat next to an airline exit door:)

Women are free to sit in the exit rows as well... I have many times.

The Concordia problem with lifeboats had more to do with the Captain not doing an abandon ship earlier. He waited til it was too late to lower them. Also, that was an issue of hitting land (albeit underwater) that ripped a hole in the side. The people who died, did not die from lack of lifeboats, but from where they were or where they went after the ship hit. The reality is most would have lived had they not gone back to their cabins or to lower muster areas. Concordia was entirely the actions of the Captain. He was completely responsible for everything that happened. Yet, to this day, he denies culpability. :confused:

 

What some this week forgot is that lifeboats are only to be used when there is NO alternative, when the ship is going down. It's not something you want to do otherwise.

This is correct. If the captain had followed proper procedure and stopped the ship while out at sea to lower the liferafts there probably would have been fewer issues. However, he apparently figured he could save the ship and his a** by bringing it back in to shore and grounding it. Would there have been fewer lives lost if he had done what he was supposed to? I don't know. But by delaying the abandon ship he unnecessarily complicated things.

By the way, I recently talked to somebody that was on the Costa Concordia and her story is harrowing. When they finally made it to a lifeboat the crew members there did not know how to lower the boat and to detach it from the cables. Luckily this woman's brother is in the merchant marine and was able to assist and get them away from the ship. :eek:

Bathroom:D

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=going%20to%20the%20bathroom%20on%20a%20lifeboat&source=web&cd=18&ved=0CFcQFjAHOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftravel.usatoday.com%2Fcruises%2Fpost%2F2009%2F11%2Feven-the-lifeboats-are-giant-on-royal-caribbeans-oasis-of-the-seas%2F620002693%2F1&ei=JkQeUfvQJOWE0QG0uIDIBg&usg=AFQjCNF0tZM3EEUZ1amq_5l6JDb16Dc9HA&bvm=bv.42553238,d.dmQ

This is correct. If the captain had followed proper procedure and stopped the ship while out at sea to lower the liferafts there probably would have been fewer issues. However, he apparently figured he could save the ship and his a** by bringing it back in to shore and grounding it. Would there have been fewer lives lost if he had done what he was supposed to? I don't know. But by delaying the abandon ship he unnecessarily complicated things.

if im not mistaken his biggest mistake besides being a hot dog and running the ship into a rock was waiting to order the abandon ship and callng for help while the ship continued to list. also there was no propulsion moving the ship, if it wasnt for them drifting toward land and grounding they wouldve sank at sea and made it a much bigger catastrophe.

-Roger

if im not mistaken his biggest mistake besides being a hot dog and running the ship into a rock was waiting to order the abandon ship and callng for help while the ship continued to list. also there was no propulsion moving the ship, if it wasnt for them drifting toward land and grounding they wouldve sank at sea and made it a much bigger catastrophe.

-Roger

In my opinion, and I'm no expert, the list wouldn't have been as bad if the call for evacuation had occurred before trying to drive the ship into land. The big reason for the extreme list was the ship settling on the bottom.

If the captain had ordered a halt at the time he knew of the water rushing in then they would have had the time to do an orderly evacuation before the list got too extreme. As it was the captain lied repeatedly about the severity and that just contributed to the sense of panic that the passengers and crew were feeling.

An interesting assessment of the Concordia disaster can be read at: http://emergency-planning.blogspot.com/2012/01/preliminary-lessons-from-costa.html

The telling part is in the end where it says "Moreover, opportunities to abandon ship before it started listing were wasted."

Don't forget, the official investigation showed that the Concordia had lost propulsion and was pushed back to shore by wind and currents. It was not intentionally grounded, as there was no propulsion.

Eric

if im not mistaken his biggest mistake besides being a hot dog and running the ship into a rock was waiting to order the abandon ship and NOT callng for help while the ship continued to list. also there was no propulsion moving the ship, if it wasnt for them drifting toward land and grounding they wouldve sank at sea and made it a much bigger catastrophe.

-Roger

meant to say that. he mishandled his mistake and ignored the severity of the situation. if it hadnt been for the ship drifting toward shore this wouldve easily been another titanic.

-Roger

Don't forget, the official investigation showed that the Concordia had lost propulsion and was pushed back to shore by wind and currents. It was not intentionally grounded, as there was no propulsion.

 

Eric

To me this is one of the biggest indictments of the Captain. Right afterward, he [and some others] were saying his actions after the collision with the rock saved lives. However, it has now become clear that the grounding was just a fluke of the wind and currents.

meant to say that. he mishandled his mistake and ignored the severity of the situation. if it hadnt been for the ship drifting toward shore this wouldve easily been another titanic.

-Roger

You got the right. Luckily the wind pushed the ship toward the shore, toward shallow water or that ship would be at the bottom of the ocean and god only knows how many dead.

Also you are correct that dopey captain 100% to blame for that disaster, He should have put everyone in lifeboats immediately and everyone would have been saved. He waited too long, and the ship listed too far for some of the lifeboats to launch. It is a textbook in what NOT to do in an emergency.

Also I gave him 100% of the blame, but in reality in my opinion the cruise line is also at fault to a degree. There must have been signs this dope could not handle an emergency situation. Psychological tests, and just knowing who the guy really is would have told you that. That is just my opinion though.

if im not mistaken his biggest mistake besides being a hot dog and running the ship into a rock was waiting to order the abandon ship and NOT callng for help while the ship continued to list. also there was no propulsion moving the ship, if it wasnt for them drifting toward land and grounding they wouldve sank at sea and made it a much bigger catastrophe.

-Roger

meant to say that. he mishandled his mistake and ignored the severity of the situation. if it hadnt been for the ship drifting toward shore this wouldve easily been another titanic.

-Roger

Funny thing is I read your post and actually saw it as you intended. I didn't even see the missing "NOT" until you fixed it. :)

Anyways, you are entirely correct in that the Capt mishandled the situation and ignored the severity. The ship was drifting and completely at the will of the seas and weather and he was still telling authorities on Giglio that everything was fine. :eek:

Would it have been another Titanic if it hadn't drifted towards shore? In my opinion, probably not. They had plenty of lifeboat and rafts and time to evacuate. Would it have been worse than it was? Maybe. It's hard to say. Accidents like this require a person with a level head and firm authority directing operations and it appears that there is no way this was going to happen on the Concordia. :(

This is correct. If the captain had followed proper procedure and stopped the ship while out at sea to lower the liferafts there probably would have been fewer issues. However, he apparently figured he could save the ship and his a** by bringing it back in to shore and grounding it.

Despite his claims the Captain had nothing to do with bringing it to shore. The ship lost power almost immediately and drifted to shore. What the Captain did was cause the collision after wining and dining Ms. Cemortan, compound the problem by waiting far too long to abandon ship, and disgracing himself by deserting the ship while passengers and crew were still onboard.

I was only a yacht captain and never had to face a boat going under but I would have never left the boat while passengers and crew were still onboard. Further I would not hesitate to call anyone who did a cowardly POS to their face. Any captain I have known personally would do the same.

I'd be fairly confident in the lifeboat situation, that being said- PLEASE! everybody make sure you know where your pfd's are and for fun just put them on when you get to your cabin. In the case you would have to jump overboard, you'd be glad you had it on. They have strobe lights so you can be found.