The Quantum class and the CRW25 Mega lifeboat

HOW THE BIG NEW MEGA LINERS ARE GETTING AWAY WITH FEWER LIFEBOATS

Looking at the Quantum and Ovation of the Seas, you would be wondering why there are so few lifeboats.

In a way there isn’t [see my summing up below] for these ships are now fitted with the new CRW25 Mega Life boat that holds 370 people each.

Total potential survivors in boats for the Quantum class [Ovation of the Seas] with 18 boats would be 6660.

Read about the superseded 150 rule.

http://www.rina.org.uk/mega-lifeboat.html

Having sailed on many liners, I believe that the problem will be in loading 370 panicking passengers into each boat, probably in the dark, on a sloping deck and in rough weather.

To make matters worse the passengers are supposed to congregate on deck 4 virtually below the water line, to be issued with a life jacket from a cupboard. [None are in cabins any more.]

They then are expected to climb up three flights of steps to the boat deck on deck 7. [ lifts won’t be working]. Most are elderly with many wheel chairs, push chairs and even gophers.

Many times on today's long haul cruises we have been hundreds of miles at sea and help in the form of a warship doing 30 knots would take ten or twelve hours to reach us.

There is one hell of a tragedy brewing and Concordia aside, I find it hard to believe that it hasn’t already happened in the open sea.

Think about 6200 people on board. The loss of life could potentially be in the thousands.

HOW THE BIG NEW MEGA LINERS ARE GETTING AWAY WITH FEWER LIFEBOATS

 

Looking at the Quantum and Ovation of the Seas, you would be wondering why there are so few lifeboats.

In a way there isn’t [see my summing up below] for these ships are now fitted with the new CRW25 Mega Life boat that holds 370 people each.

Total potential survivors in boats for the Quantum class [Ovation of the Seas] with 18 boats would be 6660.

Read about the superseded 150 rule.

 

http://www.rina.org.uk/mega-lifeboat.html

 

Having sailed on many liners, I believe that the problem will be in loading 370 panicking passengers into each boat, probably in the dark, on a sloping deck and in rough weather.

To make matters worse the passengers are supposed to congregate on deck 4 virtually below the water line, to be issued with a life jacket from a cupboard. [None are in cabins any more.]

They then are expected to climb up three flights of steps to the boat deck on deck 7. [ lifts won’t be working]. Most are elderly with many wheel chairs, push chairs and even gophers.

 

Many times on today's long haul cruises we have been hundreds of miles at sea and help in the form of a warship doing 30 knots would take ten or twelve hours to reach us.

 

There is one hell of a tragedy brewing and Concordia aside, I find it hard to believe that it hasn’t already happened in the open sea.

Think about 6200 people on board. The loss of life could potentially be in the thousands.

Hmm, few things here I'll question. First off, deck 4 is not "virtually below the waterline". Deck 3 is below this, and these are ocean view cabins, so they are above the waterline, and I don't know of any ship that has passenger spaces below the waterline, as all of these decks need to be partitioned with sliding watertight doors into watertight compartments, and which must be kept closed at sea.

As to muster station locations, these are chosen after testing using crowd and crisis management software paradigms to determine if access and egress is sufficient in times of emergency. The purpose of the passenger muster station has nothing to do with the boats, it has to do with accountability and getting the passengers into a controlled area. If the muster is called in sufficient time, the passengers can be accounted for, the lifejackets handed out, and then they wait, maybe for hours, before the Captain determines it is in their best interests to get into the boats, and makes this determination knowing how long it takes to load and lower the boats. This is the one and only cause of fatalities on the Concordia, the inaction of Schettino to sound the passenger muster at the appropriate time. Had the muster been sounded as soon as he knew the ship was flooding (about 7 minutes after striking the rock), there would not have been confusion and the boats and all passengers could have been gotten off. Even with the tragically late decision to abandon, 23 of 26 boats were successfully launched.

Not sure why you think you get on the boats on deck 7. Deck 7, and even deck 6 are all passenger cabin decks, so do you think you have to go through cabins onto balconies to board the boats? The boats are stored above deck 5, and lowered to that deck for passenger embarkation. So, only up one deck. Crew are assigned to assist those with mogility issues getting from the muster station to the boat, just as they are assigned to assist those same folks getting to the muster station.

As to the mega-boats. Unlike the older 150 man lifeboats, that had an assigned crew of 3-4, these boats have 16 crew assigned to each, to assist passengers boarding. So, taking these 16 out of capacity, each boat has a passenger capacity of 354. Now, Quantum class ships only have 16, not 18 boats, for a passenger capacity of 5664. Since the maximum capacity of 4905, that represents quite an overcapacity for boats. You do realize that the crew, aside from the assigned boat crew, do not have lifeboats? There are liferafts for the crew, to the extent that there is 125% capacity of the total number of souls onboard between boats and rafts.

As to the "150 rule", no naval architectural society or marine safety society has raised concerns to the IMO about these lifeboats, not even RINA, whose article you quote. This is why the amendment to SOLAS was included, and all IMO regulations are based on discussion of all member nations' maritime agencies. Even the classification societies (the maritime industry's insurance underwriters) have not found fault with the mega-boats, and they have a fiscal stake in this.

Actually, in the middle of the ocean is probably a safer location for a ship than elsewhere. Aside from striking an iceberg, which today's cruise ships tend to stay away from their areas, the chances of a ship sinking are far greater the closer to shore, as the Concordia you cite is a prime example. Where would a ship in the middle of the ocean find a rock to open 4 watertight compartments?

While I do feel that evacuating 5-6000 passengers will be problematic, and will require more training and planning than doing the same evolution for 2-3000 pax, I don't feel that the mega-boats add any complexity over having more numerous, smaller boats.

Hmm, few things here I'll question. First off, deck 4 is not "virtually below the waterline". Deck 3 is below this, and these are ocean view cabins, so they are above the waterline, and I don't know of any ship that has passenger spaces below the waterline, as all of these decks need to be partitioned with sliding watertight doors into watertight compartments, and which must be kept closed at sea.

 

As to muster station locations, these are chosen after testing using crowd and crisis management software paradigms to determine if access and egress is sufficient in times of emergency. The purpose of the passenger muster station has nothing to do with the boats, it has to do with accountability and getting the passengers into a controlled area. If the muster is called in sufficient time, the passengers can be accounted for, the lifejackets handed out, and then they wait, maybe for hours, before the Captain determines it is in their best interests to get into the boats, and makes this determination knowing how long it takes to load and lower the boats. This is the one and only cause of fatalities on the Concordia, the inaction of Schettino to sound the passenger muster at the appropriate time. Had the muster been sounded as soon as he knew the ship was flooding (about 7 minutes after striking the rock), there would not have been confusion and the boats and all passengers could have been gotten off. Even with the tragically late decision to abandon, 23 of 26 boats were successfully launched.

 

Not sure why you think you get on the boats on deck 7. Deck 7, and even deck 6 are all passenger cabin decks, so do you think you have to go through cabins onto balconies to board the boats? The boats are stored above deck 5, and lowered to that deck for passenger embarkation. So, only up one deck. Crew are assigned to assist those with mogility issues getting from the muster station to the boat, just as they are assigned to assist those same folks getting to the muster station.

 

As to the mega-boats. Unlike the older 150 man lifeboats, that had an assigned crew of 3-4, these boats have 16 crew assigned to each, to assist passengers boarding. So, taking these 16 out of capacity, each boat has a passenger capacity of 354. Now, Quantum class ships only have 16, not 18 boats, for a passenger capacity of 5664. Since the maximum capacity of 4905, that represents quite an overcapacity for boats. You do realize that the crew, aside from the assigned boat crew, do not have lifeboats? There are liferafts for the crew, to the extent that there is 125% capacity of the total number of souls onboard between boats and rafts.

 

As to the "150 rule", no naval architectural society or marine safety society has raised concerns to the IMO about these lifeboats, not even RINA, whose article you quote. This is why the amendment to SOLAS was included, and all IMO regulations are based on discussion of all member nations' maritime agencies. Even the classification societies (the maritime industry's insurance underwriters) have not found fault with the mega-boats, and they have a fiscal stake in this.

 

Actually, in the middle of the ocean is probably a safer location for a ship than elsewhere. Aside from striking an iceberg, which today's cruise ships tend to stay away from their areas, the chances of a ship sinking are far greater the closer to shore, as the Concordia you cite is a prime example. Where would a ship in the middle of the ocean find a rock to open 4 watertight compartments?

 

While I do feel that evacuating 5-6000 passengers will be problematic, and will require more training and planning than doing the same evolution for 2-3000 pax, I don't feel that the mega-boats add any complexity over having more numerous, smaller boats.

No one mentioned rocks to be struck. No one mentioned fire at sea, terrorist attacks or the risk of collision either but they are the real three hazards in your "middle of the ocean".

I have sailed on the Quantum and Ovation and it was obvious to me that trading lockers on the promenade with the life jackets stowed handily or the life jackets in your cabin to be grabbed on the way out are both far superior to thousands making their way below to be to be issued whilst gathered calmly around life jacket cupboards .

You might find this hard to believe whilst you pontificate from your arm chair, but when we have a crisis I won't be heading down stairs, be it to deck 3, 4 or any other that could soon, obviously and potentially become below the water line. I will be taking my wife upstairs as far as I think is necessary.

I will leave it to theorists like you to keep the stairs above clear by going below.

Now I am off to bed here in OZ, but I will look forward to reading other gems in the morning.

 

You might find this hard to believe whilst you pontificate from your arm chair, but when we have a crisis I won't be heading down stairs, be it to deck 3, 4 or any other that could soon, obviously and potentially become below the water line. I will be taking my wife upstairs as far as I think is necessary.

The person you're responding to is in the industry and knows what he's talking about.

While you blithely discuss putting yourselves and the crew responsible for you into terrible danger by not following instructions in an emergency.

I wonder what you're planning on doing once you're high enough to feel safe? If the lifeboats are loading on 5 and you're higher than that...what's the plan there?

No one mentioned rocks to be struck. No one mentioned fire at sea, terrorist attacks or the risk of collision either but they are the real three hazards in your "middle of the ocean".

 

I have sailed on the Quantum and Ovation and it was obvious to me that trading lockers on the promenade with the life jackets stowed handily or the life jackets in your cabin to be grabbed on the way out are both far superior to thousands making their way below to be to be issued whilst gathered calmly around life jacket cupboards .

 

You might find this hard to believe whilst you pontificate from your arm chair, but when we have a crisis I won't be heading down stairs, be it to deck 3, 4 or any other that could soon, obviously and potentially become below the water line. I will be taking my wife upstairs as far as I think is necessary.

 

I will leave it to theorists like you to keep the stairs above clear by going below.

 

Now I am off to bed here in OZ, but I will look forward to reading other gems in the morning.

He isn't a theorist he is a chief engineer, responding from sea not his home.

If the Quantum doesn't live up to your muster standards then why did you continue on to sail on Ovation? That's crazy that you would do anything so dangerous. Obviously you are taking your own life in your hands especially after your thorough first post, where as the rest of the guests and crew on board are lost sheep or lemmings not knowing any better.

Maybe next time you should bring your own life jacket from home if you don't like the standards of RCI and SOLAS. It never hurts to be extra safe. FYI, the RINA link that you linked is over 3 years old as the last line in that article states "You may also be interested in the next Design & Operation of Passenger Ships Conference, which is taking place in London on 20 - 21 November 2013". Perhaps RINA has changed their opinion since this was written and posted.

Your trolling for responses theory is right though, you will get a lot of responses to read tomorrow whilst you sit on your "chair of pontification". Hopefully you have a great sleep as I suspect you will have a lot to read tomorrow. The responders can't wait to read the Gems that you come up with. ;)

I wonder what you're planning on doing once you're high enough to feel safe? If the lifeboats are loading on 5 and you're higher than that...what's the plan there?

Maybe their is their plan is based upon this type of thought.[emoji33]

Edit: my sympathies go to those that lost their lives at sea. Many lessons were learned from this this and other nautical disasters and were instilled for greater safety. Why would the OP feel they are not for him to follow.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Make sure to pack these.:D:D:D

If the lifeboats were on deck seven everyone would be bitch'n about their obstructed view balconies.

He isn't a theorist he is a chief engineer, responding from sea not his home.

 

 

 

If the Quantum doesn't live up to your muster standards then why did you continue on to sail on Ovation? That's crazy that you would do anything so dangerous. Obviously you are taking your own life in your hands especially after your thorough first post, where as the rest of the guests and crew on board are lost sheep or lemmings not knowing any better.

 

 

 

Maybe next time you should bring your own life jacket from home if you don't like the standards of RCI and SOLAS. It never hurts to be extra safe. FYI, the RINA link that you linked is over 3 years old as the last line in that article states "You may also be interested in the next Design & Operation of Passenger Ships Conference, which is taking place in London on 20 - 21 November 2013". Perhaps RINA has changed their opinion since this was written and posted.

 

 

 

Your trolling for responses theory is right though, you will get a lot of responses to read tomorrow whilst you sit on your "chair of pontification". Hopefully you have a great sleep as I suspect you will have a lot to read tomorrow. The responders can't wait to read the Gems that you come up with.

I was going to post exactly the above.

Also IMHO having the life jackets near the lifeboat is preferable as most passengers spend far less time in their cabin than elsewhere onboard.

As mentioned above the simple solution to eliminate your concerns re the safety aspect of mega lifeboats is not to sail on ships with these.

I have no concerns with these and will be on Anthem for our third 12 night cruise on that ship in a few weeks.

PS- If you have been on Quantum and Ovation you should be aware that the lifeboats are located in between decks 5 and 6, the latter is where most of the Category DO (Obstructed View) balconies are located and as mentioned previously these are lowered to deck 5 for boarding. ;)

Hmm, few things here I'll question. First off, deck 4 is not "virtually below the waterline". Deck 3 is below this, and these are ocean view cabins, so they are above the waterline, and I don't know of any ship that has passenger spaces below the waterline, as all of these decks need to be partitioned with sliding watertight doors into watertight compartments, and which must be kept closed at sea.

 

As to muster station locations, these are chosen after testing using crowd and crisis management software paradigms to determine if access and egress is sufficient in times of emergency. The purpose of the passenger muster station has nothing to do with the boats, it has to do with accountability and getting the passengers into a controlled area. If the muster is called in sufficient time, the passengers can be accounted for, the lifejackets handed out, and then they wait, maybe for hours, before the Captain determines it is in their best interests to get into the boats, and makes this determination knowing how long it takes to load and lower the boats. This is the one and only cause of fatalities on the Concordia, the inaction of Schettino to sound the passenger muster at the appropriate time. Had the muster been sounded as soon as he knew the ship was flooding (about 7 minutes after striking the rock), there would not have been confusion and the boats and all passengers could have been gotten off. Even with the tragically late decision to abandon, 23 of 26 boats were successfully launched.

 

Not sure why you think you get on the boats on deck 7. Deck 7, and even deck 6 are all passenger cabin decks, so do you think you have to go through cabins onto balconies to board the boats? The boats are stored above deck 5, and lowered to that deck for passenger embarkation. So, only up one deck. Crew are assigned to assist those with mogility issues getting from the muster station to the boat, just as they are assigned to assist those same folks getting to the muster station.

 

As to the mega-boats. Unlike the older 150 man lifeboats, that had an assigned crew of 3-4, these boats have 16 crew assigned to each, to assist passengers boarding. So, taking these 16 out of capacity, each boat has a passenger capacity of 354. Now, Quantum class ships only have 16, not 18 boats, for a passenger capacity of 5664. Since the maximum capacity of 4905, that represents quite an overcapacity for boats. You do realize that the crew, aside from the assigned boat crew, do not have lifeboats? There are liferafts for the crew, to the extent that there is 125% capacity of the total number of souls onboard between boats and rafts.

 

As to the "150 rule", no naval architectural society or marine safety society has raised concerns to the IMO about these lifeboats, not even RINA, whose article you quote. This is why the amendment to SOLAS was included, and all IMO regulations are based on discussion of all member nations' maritime agencies. Even the classification societies (the maritime industry's insurance underwriters) have not found fault with the mega-boats, and they have a fiscal stake in this.

 

Actually, in the middle of the ocean is probably a safer location for a ship than elsewhere. Aside from striking an iceberg, which today's cruise ships tend to stay away from their areas, the chances of a ship sinking are far greater the closer to shore, as the Concordia you cite is a prime example. Where would a ship in the middle of the ocean find a rock to open 4 watertight compartments?

 

While I do feel that evacuating 5-6000 passengers will be problematic, and will require more training and planning than doing the same evolution for 2-3000 pax, I don't feel that the mega-boats add any complexity over having more numerous, smaller boats.

I think I´ll rather trust this one.;):)

http://www.rina.org.uk/mega-lifeboat.html

as a past Captain of two different Coast Guard Cutters, larger ocean going ones, virtually every cruise ship out there today scares me. An 'incident' IS going to happen. response time is going to be measured in days. FIRE .... that's the one that's gonna happen. There have already been close calls.

Carnival fire, Port of Miami, 97?

I was called to respond to this incident. SMALL by today's standards this cruiser exceeded my towing capacity by 10 times. I can safely put approx. 250 people on deck without stability issues. If I need to use the helo this number goes down to 50 ... the helo can evacuate 6 people at a time .... FORTUNATELY the incident happened 'in the port' and a slew of tugs were immediately available ....

PRINCESS in the southern Windward Pass, between Haiti, Cuba and Jamacia

Luckily the fire was mostly on the exterior of the ship, power and propulsion remained intact. Significant assistance was at least a day away. The ship made Jamaica under its own power. How many life boats would have been inaccessible had the fire not been brought under control????

The more recent incidents where ships "simply" lost all power .... SIMPLY. Even in the relatively small area of the Gulf of Mexico assistance took how many days???

I still cruise, but I know there are huge risks at play ....

If you've never read about the fire on PRINCENDAM in the Gulf of Alaska in 80, it is an interesting story of a bad thing that happened in a lucky place ... lucky in that way above average assistance resources were handy .... taking to the boats in the waters of Alaska in October is a sobering thought. Having a super tanker happen by was fortunate ....

http://www.explorenorth.com/library/ships/prinsendam-1980.html (many other stories about this out there if you google it)

No one mentioned rocks to be struck. No one mentioned fire at sea, terrorist attacks or the risk of collision either but they are the real three hazards in your "middle of the ocean".

 

I have sailed on the Quantum and Ovation and it was obvious to me that trading lockers on the promenade with the life jackets stowed handily or the life jackets in your cabin to be grabbed on the way out are both far superior to thousands making their way below to be to be issued whilst gathered calmly around life jacket cupboards .

 

You might find this hard to believe whilst you pontificate from your arm chair, but when we have a crisis I won't be heading down stairs, be it to deck 3, 4 or any other that could soon, obviously and potentially become below the water line. I will be taking my wife upstairs as far as I think is necessary.

 

I will leave it to theorists like you to keep the stairs above clear by going below.

 

Now I am off to bed here in OZ, but I will look forward to reading other gems in the morning.

Okay. While fire at sea is always a grave concern, in 90% of fires at sea, abandoning ship is always the last resort. Look at the Star Princess fire, probably one of the worst in recent times for a cruise ship, and the Master never had the passengers get in the boats, even though they were mustered for hours.

Terrorist attack. While the amount of explosive required to take down an airliner can be contained in a man's underwear, the amount required to sink a cruise ship would be in the hundreds of pounds, spread throughout the ship in multiple locations, and even then, as witnessed by the Concordia, a two compartment ship (complete flooding of two adjacent watertight compartments does not result in sinking) that breached 4 compartments, took several hours before she actually capsized due to grounding. So, even an attempt to sink the ship would give time for orderly mustering and evacuation.

Collision at sea. In the middle of the ocean, as you state "hundreds of miles at sea", when was the last collision recorded? I can't think of one since the Andrea Doria, but maybe you can find one that fits the "hundreds of miles at sea" criteria.

And as you head to wherever you feel is safe, you will be delaying the completion of muster, and requiring crew, in some cases, crew responding directly to the emergency, to divert their attention to finding you and herding you back to the muster location. As fire onboard is the most common emergency, if my fire teams know that there are passengers unaccounted for, they have to divert some of their time and attention to searching the "hot zone" for potential victims, away from their primary objective of fighting the fire.

And my "armchair" is currently my office chair aboard my tanker, currently fog bound on the Mississippi River, looking forward to the final years of my 40 years at sea, having served on virtually every type of commercial vessel out there, including cruise ships.

I have fought shipboard fires. I have been on ships taking on water. I have been in a liferaft in 6 foot seas (don't think that's much, come try it in a raft), 30 miles offshore Halifax, N.S., in March. I'm not a theorist, I've been there, done that, and gotten more T-shirts than I care to think about. Come back and tell me I'm pontificating when you've done this.

Thanks, it's refreshing to have someone post that knows the facts.

I think I´ll rather trust this one.;):)

Agreed.

Cheng, what is the maximum list that a boat could still be loaded or launched? That is what has always concerned me; what if the ship is listing too far to be able to launch boats on one or both sides? Can they free drop?

And my "armchair" is currently my office chair aboard my tanker, currently fog bound on the Mississippi River, looking forward to the final years of my 40 years at sea, having served on virtually every type of commercial vessel out there, including cruise ships.

 

 

 

I have fought shipboard fires. I have been on ships taking on water. I have been in a liferaft in 6 foot seas (don't think that's much, come try it in a raft), 30 miles offshore Halifax, N.S., in March. I'm not a theorist, I've been there, done that, and gotten more T-shirts than I care to think about. Come back and tell me I'm pontificating when you've done this.

And that is why he is the Chief.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Since the OP appeared to have missed this when onboard Quantum class ships even deck 1 is above the water line as shown in the shot below of Anthem with two lifeboats beside deck 5 in their boarding position.

Since the OP appeared to have missed this when onboard Quantum class ships even deck 1 is above the water line as shown in the shot below of Anthem with its lifeboats at the deck 5 boarding position.

 

Never let facts get in the way of a good rant.

Cheng, what is the maximum list that a boat could still be loaded or launched? That is what has always concerned me; what if the ship is listing too far to be able to launch boats on one or both sides? Can they free drop?

The boats are required to be able to be launched with a 20* list, and 10* trim. No, they cannot free drop. Most cruise ship lifeboats are of the "off load release" type, meaning that the boat cannot be separated from the wire "falls" until the weight of the boat comes off (boat is floating), and then the release mechanism can be manually operated.

Gotta run, fog has lifted, we are getting underway. Can answer more in a couple of hours.

?..

 

 

 

Gotta run, fog has lifted, we are getting underway. Can answer more in a couple of hours.

Have a save voyage, sir.

Since the OP appeared to have missed this when onboard Quantum class ships even deck 1 is above the water line as shown in the shot below of Anthem with two lifeboats beside deck 5 in their boarding position.

 

Thank you, excellent picture to share. OP just doesn't get it...

I honestly think that rather than being concerned about the size of the lifeboats you should be MORE concerned about all those people you sat next to at the safety drill who were yukking it up with their neighbors. fiddling with their cellphones despite being told not to, and totally not paying attention and how interesting THEY will be if there actually is an emergency.

"They never told us" will undoubtedly be the four most-repeated words in the English language after it's over.

I honestly think that rather than being concerned about the size of the lifeboats you should be MORE concerned about all those people you sat next to at the safety drill who were yukking it up with their neighbors. fiddling with their cellphones despite being told not to, and totally not paying attention and how interesting THEY will be if there actually is an emergency.

 

"They never told us" will undoubtedly be the four most-repeated words in the English language after it's over.

But you forget, the OP is planning on doing his own thing anyway so what difference does what they had to say at muster make? He is heading to the highest point on the ship. I'm just wondering what he is going to do when the mast goes under.

It never fails to amaze me how the ninety percent will seek immediate shelter from any ridicule that their utterances might collect. Most wallowing in being able to grasp at nothing more than what incorrect deck I said the boats were on. Don't worry about the bigger picture. Potentially the life of your wife whilst cruising, not to mention all the thousands on board who have put their trust in 'those that know'.

Few want to be seen as wrong or even fools in front of the majority and history is packed with this lemming mentality that has lost lives in war and peace.

Thank you for your courage to speak up CAPT BJ. You are correct when you say it is only a matter of time before an incident occurs.

Bigger and bigger ships now holding over six thousand. Designs and projections obviously have ten thousand in their sights. The quest for the holy dollar where virtually every part of cruise ships now have cabins rammed into any available space. Remember things like fan tails on the old liners that we enjoyed for sail aways? Today on the Quantum class for instance, there is hardly a place to go to take a photo any more.

And here lies the reason where it becomes convenient to discard the old 150 rule. There is no longer anywhere to put all those boats and so called knowledgeable theorists have been able to convince the world maritime authorities that the answer is bigger and fewer life boats.

When I sailed as a mere passenger on those two Quantum class ships and went to the mandatory life boat drills below, I summed up the situation firstly in broad daylight, calm sea, no panic, everyone hoping it would be over soon to get back to have an iced tea or the bumper cars.

Secondly I summed it up with the sea rough and the lights out, people screaming in panic, audio alarms blaring, the noise of rushing water, the breathing in of toxic smoke from all the plastic fittings and furniture, the deck listing and oldies being trampled under foot from the rabble.

The controlled hordes moving in an orderly fashion down the stairs to the locked cupboards won't obstruct me. I'll be OK. I'm unselfishly making for the top with my wife to give you all more room.

So when the ship actually goes down, what are you going to do on the top of the ship?

Honestly.

If the ship goes down, even the high points meet the water. You do know that, right?

I'd rather take my chances with one of the high volume life boats than nothing. And nothing is what greets you on the top of the ship.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums