Concordia News: Please Post Here

Does anyone have an idea why Russell was inside a passenger cabin? That doesn't make sense to me. Also, how would he have gotten access to a cabin anyway? Unless someone let him in?

[quote name='Carol_Hill']Does anyone have an idea why Russell was inside a passenger cabin? That doesn't make sense to me. Also, how would he have gotten access to a cabin anyway? Unless someone let him in?[/QUOTE]

Maybe he was searching for or assisting passengers in the evacuation.

thanks for this.

The pictures that have been published of the room where he was found suggest it was in one of the sections crushed during the capsize. My guess is that he was looking for people trapped in rooms and he fell into that room when the ship did the final rotation and was unable to get out of the now water filled room.

[SIZE="3"]Carol, anything we suggest would be pure speculation.
We know Russel was at one point on the evacuation deck, which I believe was 3. It is possible that when the ship started rolling he was running up the stairs to get to a higher point in hopes of an escape from up top.
I still can't understand how he ended up in the room unless it was the force of the final tilt and of water rushing in that washed him into the room.

Looking at the deck plans he was close to getting to the top open decks.

[url]http://lh3.ggpht.com/-CG7JUC6cIIE/TxP2xkKhqVI/AAAAAAABr-w/OESrv-5KrY8/costa-concordia-deck-plans-big.png?imgmax=800[/url][/SIZE]

It was certainly important that the search was continued until he was found. Thinking through where he might have been in this tragic night, again, just about ok as well.

But why do we need to speculate to this degree which plank of what furniture actually killed him? What's in it to find out about his final minutes? It is anyway total speculation, there is absolutely no way to find these details out, least of which for us arm chair investigators. Checking out deck plans or discussing how or why he might have been in whatever room. WHY?

Just imagine, you'd be a family member and find the death of a loved one discussed to this morbid degree discussed on some public web forum.

Let's stop this right here. It's not OK.

I agree Mike.
Nobody will never know and I think in this instance it is wrong to speculate.
If Russel deserves anything after two and a half years it is to Rest In Peace.
Thanks everyone.
Clive

[quote name='Mike.Minh']It was certainly important that the search was continued until he was found. Thinking through where he might have been in this tragic night, again, just about ok as well.

But why do we need to speculate to this degree which plank of what furniture actually killed him? What's in it to find out about his final minutes? It is anyway total speculation, there is absolutely no way to find these details out, least of which for us arm chair investigators. Checking out deck plans or discussing how or why he might have been in whatever room. WHY?

Just imagine, you'd be a family member and find the death of a loved one discussed to this morbid degree discussed on some public web forum.

Let's stop this right here. It's not OK.[/quote]

[quote name='clive and anne']I agree Mike.
Nobody will never know and I think in this instance it is wrong to speculate.
If Russel deserves anything after two and a half years it is to Rest In Peace.
Thanks everyone.
Clive[/quote]

While I sympathize with your concern about crossing the line of morbid curiosity, I respectfully disagree that the line has benn crossed.

There are legitimate reasons to discuss and speculate on the possible circumstances. Not the least of these are actions that should be avoided or taken if a person ever finds themselves in such a situation.

I myself have changed my game plan when I've boarded a cruise ship since the Costa Concordia. Edited November 18, 2014 by Uniall

[SIZE="3"]Another lawsuit.

[url]http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/italian-officials-sue-costa-concordia-owner-275m-article-1.2014526[/url] [/SIZE]

[SIZE="3"]Mike and especially Clive, since I read your posts I have taken some time to reply in an attempt to make myself clear. It was not "morbid curiosity" that led to my post. Had the question not been asked I would not have even put my thoughts out. It really comes down to what I have learned from this.

God forbid that such an accident ever happen again but we know they will with either ships or ferries. In this case for more than 2 1/2 years everyone believed that Russel was on or near deck 3 and concentrated on that area. This shows that in the final moment(s) things can change. Maybe the how or why Russel ended up on deck 8 is not important but what is important is that once righted a more thorough search could have been done had anyone thought he was elsewhere. That statement is not being said to be critical of those that searched as I believe they did a remarkable job, putting the hearts into it. It is, however, a lesson learned.

While I respect your opinions I really saw nothing wrong about my "speculation." I am sorry I was not clear in my original post with my thoughts.[/SIZE] Edited November 18, 2014 by SomeBeach

[quote name='Uniall']While I sympathize with your concern about crossing the line of morbid curiosity, I respectfully disagree that the line has been crossed.

There are legitimate reasons to discuss and speculate on the possible circumstances. Not the least of these are actions that should be avoided or taken if a person ever finds themselves in such a situation.

I myself have changed my game plan when I've boarded a cruise ship since the Costa Concordia.[/QUOTE]

Legitimate reasons maybe, but I am quite sure there are ways to discuss improvements in safety at sea without crossing the line of morbid curiosity. Every major incident has lessons to learn, no doubt. Not on the back of this (or any) particular person, not in this forum of all forums. I'll stay with that opinion and I know I'm not alone with this view.

Having said this, I am actually interested, what is your changed game plan?

Regarding your original commentary, reinforced by this post, it appears you still wish to "end any speculation" as to the reasons Russel died in a cabin on deck 8 based upon your earlier position that it was founded in "morbid curiosity."
I restate my opinion that there are legitimate reasons for posters to continue this line of discussion. In my opinion, stiffling such discussion is censorship based upon personal touchy feely political correctness.
If I had any views or opinions on the subject of how, why and when Russel was in a deck 8 cabin, I would post them in the name of freedom of speech.
Since I don't have any such views or opinions, I encourage any one who does, to post them without fear of censorship. Edited November 19, 2014 by Uniall

[quote name='Mike.Minh']Legitimate reasons maybe, but I am quite sure there are ways to discuss improvements in safety at sea without crossing the line of morbid curiosity. Every major incident has lessons to learn, no doubt. Not on the back of this (or any) particular person, not in this forum of all forums. I'll stay with that opinion and I know I'm not alone with this view.

Having said this, I am actually interested, what is your changed game plan?[/quote]

Without divulging my methodolgy, suffice to say, I'm one 6'4" 260 lbs senior citizen who will not allow 20 somethings prevent my wife and I from boarding the life boat.

Uniall
I shall treat your latest post with the contempt it deserves

[quote name='clive and anne']Uniall
I shall treat your latest post with the contempt it deserves[/quote]

Pray tell, why is the defense (or as you'd say "defence") of freedom of speech against censorship, based upon the personal views of another, deserving of contempt? Edited November 19, 2014 by Uniall

[quote name='clive and anne']Hi Micki

Thank you for your clarification, however it was not your previous comment that concerned me but the original question posed by Carol.

Knowing how these things can get a life of their own I wanted to end any speculation as to the reasons Russel was in a cabin on Deck 8 that might tarnish the memory of Russel.

I have looked for the messages you and I sent his brother in order to send you a private message via facebook to explain myself better but I couldn't find it. If you would like to email me my address is [email]anne_cliveuk@yahoo.co.uk[/email][/QUOTE]


Wouldn't a cabin on Deck 8 give the possibility of escape from a balcony.
At least that was my immediate thought and it never entered my mind to think anything else.... I think most people would think the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I don't think any of the questions are of morbid curiosity. Rather trying to piece together in one's own mind of how something could happen. Being on Deck 8, unsure of which cabin he was found in, raises the possibility he was almost to a point of safety. Had he made one deck further he would have been able to swim to the outside as this deck was not submerged and had many exits to the outside.

As to why he was in a cabin, if the door was open, possibly got caught in water flow, or was possibly trying to get out as the ship was rolling and started flooding the corridor he was in, that is one thing we will never know.

Naming the underwater platforms assuming they aren't removed, seems a little odd to me.

[url]http://www.giglionews.it/2014/11/17/ipotesi-di-nomi-per-le-6-piattaforme/[/url]

[quote name='Ken711']Naming the underwater platforms assuming they aren't removed, seems a little odd to me.

[url]http://www.giglionews.it/2014/11/17/ipotesi-di-nomi-per-le-6-piattaforme/[/url][/QUOTE]

They should name the platforms: Francessco, Domnica, and Maurice

[quote name='Uniall']Without divulging my methodolgy, suffice to say, I'm one 6'4" 260 lbs senior citizen who will not allow 20 somethings prevent my wife and I from boarding the life boat.[/QUOTE]

How about in a few years, when you are not as abled bodied and are relying on the help of the others. I am sure you will be relying on your so-called "20 somethings" to assist you into a lifeboat if so needed.

[quote name='gatour']How about in a few years, when you are not as abled bodied and are relying on the help of the others. I am sure you will be relying on your so-called "20 somethings" to assist you into a lifeboat if so needed.[/QUOTE]

I plan ahead Edited November 22, 2014 by Uniall

[quote name='gatour']How about in a few years, when you are not as abled bodied and are relying on the help of the others. I am sure you will be relying on your so-called "20 somethings" to assist you into a lifeboat if so needed.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Uniall']I plan ahead[/QUOTE]

I plan way ahead and start practicing early LOL

[quote name='Ken711']Naming the underwater platforms assuming they aren't removed, seems a little odd to me.

[url]http://www.giglionews.it/2014/11/17/ipotesi-di-nomi-per-le-6-piattaforme/[/url][/QUOTE]

[SIZE="3"]I agree Ken. They haven't even decided if they will remain.
That said, I could think of a few names and none of them involve those that were on the Bridge.[/SIZE]

[SIZE="1"]Not really sure what else may have been in the article as my translator wouldn't translate. :rolleyes:[/SIZE]

Conference discussing the advantages of keeping the platforms in place.

[url]http://www.giglionews.it/2014/11/28/piattaforme-resoconto-del-convegno-genovese/[/url]

[IMG]http://www.giglionews.it/wp-content/uploads/piattaforme_convegno281114.jpg[/IMG]

From Giglio News:

[QUOTE]Costa Cruises has signed the contract on Friday evening with the company Micoperi, thus allowing the ' official start of the restoration activities of the seabed of the site affected by the removal of the Concordia Giglio Island, with a budget of over $ 85 million . The mobilization of equipment and personnel will begin as early as next week and the work will start within a very short time for a total estimated duration of approximately 15 months. The staff employed, consisting of engineers, divers and crews of vessels, will increase from a minimum of 50 to a maximum of about 150 people. As was done for the removal project, the Observatory will monitor set up within the Region of Tuscany to track and monitor the progress of work and authorize all phases of work.

The project is divided into four consecutive phases that include the following activities: you will start with the removal of debris left on the seabed of the site area, and then continue with the anchor block served installation of towers used for restraints wreck, the removal of bags of cement used to make the false bottom support of the wreck during rotation and until the phase of rigalleggiamento and, thereafter, of the six steel platforms on which rested the wreck after its rotation, for finally end with the removal of sediments deposited on the seabed.

A detailed environmental monitoring plan, shared with the authorities, will be launched in parallel operations to minimize the environmental impact. The Monitoring Plan, coordinated by the University La Sapienza of Rome provides constant checks on processes and water quality, biological and ecotoxicological tests on fish with even the placement of monitoring stations "mussel watch", periodical analyzes of the sediments, monitoring protected habitats and coral reefs and sea grass in particular a monitoring of cetaceans in the case of activities that may generate noise.[/QUOTE]