Concordia News: Please Post Here

[sidari]

Just release him into the custody of the deceadents' families on some remote island for 24 hours.

 

Uni ... When did that become part of American law?

 

CT ... The UK has CM laws and i know the former head of where i worked had them put against him on the death of a worker who died in a lake during the rescue of two teenagers.

 

The result was that the CFO was not found guilty despite the organisation at that time not having a written process or training in place for rescues from water.

 

Michelle .... If the proceeds from the interviews will go to the families or a charity set up on their behalf then i see no reason not to let him do them though i find it strange that he is being allowed to do them.

[Uniall]

Just release him into the custody of the deceadents' families on some remote island for 24 hours.

 

Uni ... When did that become part of American law?

 

CT ... The UK has CM laws and i know the former head of where i worked had them put against him on the death of a worker who died in a lake during the rescue of two teenagers.

 

The result was that the CFO was not found guilty despite the organisation at that time not having a written process or training in place for rescues from water.

 

Michelle .... If the proceeds from the interviews will go to the families or a charity set up on their behalf then i see no reason not to let him do them though i find it strange that he is being allowed to do them.

 

Your use of acronyms with few details and unclear syntax creates gibberish for thoseof us who don't text because we have too much respect for the American and English languages.

[Tonka's Skipper]

The Half mile track that was plotted and previously used by concordia and no doubt other costa ships would have been no problem that night had the ship not gone beyond it,

 

 

This is my point, even at 1 /2 NM it was NOT safe. If everything went the way it was supposed to...........yes.............the vessel could have safely passed!.. However things did not go right and the vessel was so close to shore she could not be maneuvered away from the dangers and she sank! A real seaman never (if at all possible) puts his vessel in the position where if something goes wrong he has no way to maneuver away from the danger...........especially for something so silly and useless as a sail-bye!

 

There was at least, a major mistake in navigation(and maybe vessel equipment failures).......not only by the Captain but based on what we know at this time, a major error in not turning in time by a Deck Officer or Officers.

 

As previously discussed and admitted to by the Captain, he was not in command and was busy being a *social captain* and not the vessels Captain.

 

He should have been on the bridge and in direct and manual command of the vessel when she was 4 NM away from that turn.

 

Costa operations had permitted these unsafe sail-byes in the past and that makes them responsible as well!

 

There are a lot more questions it be answered in time............

 

AKK

Edited July 16, 2012 by Tonka's Skipper

[Ratt]

The Half mile track that was plotted and previously used by concordia and no doubt other costa ships would have been no problem that night had the ship not gone beyond it' date='[/color']

 

 

This is my point, even at 1 /2 NM it was NOT safe. If everything went the way it was supposed to...........yes.............the vessel could have safely passed!.. However things did not go right and the vessel was so close to shore she could not be maneuvered away from the dangers and she sank! A real seaman never (if at all possible) puts his vessel in the position where if something goes wrong he has no way to maneuver away from the danger...........especially for something so silly and useless as a sail-bye!

 

There was at least, a major mistake in navigation(and maybe vessel equipment failures).......not only by the Captain but based on what we know at this time, a major error in not turning in time by a Deck Officer or Officers.

 

As previously discussed and admitted to by the Captain, he was not in command and was busy being a *social captain* and not the vessels Captain.

 

He should have been on the bridge and in direct and manual command of the vessel when she was 4 NM away from that turn.

 

Costa operations had permitted these unsafe sail-byes in the past and that makes them responsible as well!

 

There are a lot more questions it be answered in time............

 

AKK

 

With all the comments about the sail by not being safe, as a seaman what to you considered a safe passage?

 

Would you say that this type of navigating is not done in other places?

[cruiserfanfromct]

You have to admit, the Captain did do your 4th point... "attract publicity."

I'll say... he managed to attract a boatload (pun intended) of publicity albeit the wrong kind. It'll be hard for him to omit this on his resume! :eek:

[cruiserfanfromct]

http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/video/watch/29978975/coming-up-on-today-tonight/

 

 

Hi Guys,

 

This supposedly is the first of the English speaking interviews with Captain Coward, they rang me last wednesday and asked me to jump on a plane Wednesday night to go to Rome to be there, unfortunately I couldnt manage it, and don't even know if I would have wanted to. They did Interview myself and katharine at home not sure if any of that is in there or if thats on the cutting room floor.

 

Schettino is set to make a fortune from these interviews whilst we are still negotiating for a fair settlement it is so unfair. Doesnt Italy have proceeds of crimes legislation.

Thanks Michelle. The video is no longer available on that link. Could it be this interview?

 

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/48194196/ns/today-today_news/t/costa-concordia-captain-i-am-clear-my-conscience/

[Uniall]

I'll say... he managed to attract a boatload (pun intended) of publicity albeit the wrong kind. It'll be hard for him to omit this on his resume! :eek:

 

I'd say he just kind of "fell into it".....;)

[Tonka's Skipper]

With all the comments about the sail by not being safe, as a seaman what to you considered a safe passage?

 

Would you say that this type of navigating is not done in other places?

 

 

Good morning Ratt!

 

I sailed out of Port Arthur and Houston, Texas for years with Texaco and Sabine Transportation.

 

My opinion, you would have to be a minimum of 1 to 1 1/2 NM off the shore line, further if water shallowed up away form the shore. Speed about 5 knots. This way if anything went wrong :eek:you have a choice to try and steer yourself away form the shore, reverse engines or at least have the time to free the anchors( I would have the crew on standby at the anchors) and drop them before your hard aground.

 

AKK

Edited July 16, 2012 by Tonka's Skipper

[cruiserfanfromct]

Michelle,

 

Found this on the interview you posted earlier. It quotes you in the article - we can't see the videos in the US (says they are not available in our area).

 

http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/lifestyle/article/-/14243519/captain-breaks-his-silence

 

While searching for this video I found other news - this of course has not be substantiated but there are rumors that the reason Schettino took so long to give the abandon ship order was that he was negotiating with Costa on the phone the official reason for the accident - he wanted it to be an electrical failure instead of running aground. :eek: Unbelievable if true!

 

Good luck with your ordeal. Hope you get everything resolved.

[Ratt]

Good morning Ratt!

 

I sailed out of Port Arthur and Houston' date=' Texas for years with Texaco and Sabine Transportation.

 

My opinion, you would have to be a minimum of 1 to 1 1/2 NM off the shore line, further if water shallowed up away form the shore. Speed about 5 knots. This way if anything went wrong :eek:you have a choice to try and steer yourself away form the shore, reverse engines or at least have the time to free the anchors( I would have the crew on standby at the anchors) and drop them before your hard aground.

 

AKK[/quote']

 

That is very interesting to know. Would you consider your opinion to be in line with the majority of people commanding and operating large vessels? If so, that makes me wonder why Costa (executives and command officers) would consider something like the sail by.

 

What is your opinion on the Alaska cruises? They do get pretty close to the land / glaciers.

 

We sail out of Galveston most of the time and I'm always fascinated with the ships that are sitting just outside of the entrance to the Houston ship channel. I've noticed that the ships are flagged in many different countries and that got me thinking about the requirements to command a large ship. Are there standards throughout the world or is it up to each country / port? Are there different standards for those that command cruise ships?

[Ratt]

Michelle,

 

Found this on the interview you posted earlier. It quotes you in the article - we can't see the videos in the US (says they are not available in our area).

 

http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/lifestyle/article/-/14243519/captain-breaks-his-silence

 

While searching for this video I found other news - this of course has not be substantiated but there are rumors that the reason Schettino took so long to give the abandon ship order was that he was negotiating with Costa on the phone the official reason for the accident - he wanted it to be an electrical failure instead of running aground. :eek: Unbelievable if true!

 

Good luck with your ordeal. Hope you get everything resolved.

 

Thanks for the link.

 

I'm not saying I do or don't believe it but I do believe that the captain knew that his career was over and at some point he was trying to limit the amount of time he would spend in jail.

 

I'm NOT defending anyone but I do think that most people that found themselves in a situation as serious as this one would be deflecting as much responsibility as possible. The captain and Costa are in a no win situation and they are doing everything they can to lesser the damage to themselves.

[cruiserfanfromct]

Thanks for the link.

 

I'm not saying I do or don't believe it but I do believe that the captain knew that his career was over and at some point he was trying to limit the amount of time he would spend in jail.

 

I'm NOT defending anyone but I do think that most people that found themselves in a situation as serious as this one would be deflecting as much responsibility as possible. The captain and Costa are in a no win situation and they are doing everything they can to lesser the damage to themselves.

Yes, I do believe the captain knew his career was over when he hit the rocks. From the interviews I've seen of him, I wouldn't be surprised if he was on the phone trying to negotiate his exit package while the passengers were left to sink or swim!

[SomeBeach]

Another interview.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/48194196/ns/today-today_news/

[SomeBeach]

Michelle,

 

Found this on the interview you posted earlier. It quotes you in the article - we can't see the videos in the US (says they are not available in our area).

 

http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/lifestyle/article/-/14243519/captain-breaks-his-silence

 

 

Did he abandon his ship?

“No, I didn't abandon the ship. This is completely wrong. The ship was flipping over on its side and you had no other option than to go on the boat or to die at sea,” he said.

“It is a grounded ship and the reason why that's there is that they have the feeling that I left the ship and abandoned the people there because I have created the grounding condition of the ship. If I would not have done that the ship would have sunk completely and in that case I would have been the last one to leave.”

So does that mean that had he not grounded the ship, many more people would have died?

“Of course. Of course. And this was my plan - to ground the ship. So I knew in advance it would not have sunk. Otherwise if you want to be the hero to remain on board - to me it was easier to go on the left side and remain there. It was the easiest thing to do,” he said.

The ‘captain’s code’ says he should have been the last man standing on the boat. Clearly he was not.

“I was willing to do that, but I was on the wrong side of the ship. You know if you have an earthquake and the soil collapses under your feet may I say you abandoned your building? The concept is clear, and I don't understand why they're so stubborn that they cannot understand this,”

 

 

This is the part I found interesting. No mention of accidently falling. If the ship hadn't capsized, he would have stayed to the end. (yeah, right :rolleyes:) When it capsized, he just got the heck off.

[Tonka's Skipper]

That is very interesting to know. Would you consider your opinion to be in line with the majority of people commanding and operating large vessels? If so, that makes me wonder why Costa (executives and command officers) would consider something like the sail by.

 

What is your opinion on the Alaska cruises? They do get pretty close to the land / glaciers.

 

We sail out of Galveston most of the time and I'm always fascinated with the ships that are sitting just outside of the entrance to the Houston ship channel. I've noticed that the ships are flagged in many different countries and that got me thinking about the requirements to command a large ship. Are there standards throughout the world or is it up to each country / port? Are there different standards for those that command cruise ships?

 

 

 

 

 

I would think my opinion is a general one...When I was still sailing I tended to be a more careful Officer. I was mostly on Tankers and you learn fast not to take to many unnecessary risks!

 

Like so many things/industries.....the office wants you to showboat by doing a sail-by..........many just say Yes Sir!..........and most times it's not a problem, but when things start going wrong..they tend to go very wrong, very fast!

 

Alaska is a different area and navigation issue. Those waters, are very deep, right up to the glaciers and shoreline. Going into Valdas there is a section of the waterway only a 1 mile or so wide and the bottom goes down hundreds of feet deep and the mountains raise on each side, very steep, a mile high!

 

Also if you ever watched the cruise ship bridge, they are being fully navigated by many bridge personnel and the Master, going very very slow, which makes the use of side thrusters possible. Is it a form of showboating?.....yes....but it is being done very carefully.

 

 

Ho, I have sat at anchor in that anchorage off Galveston many times!

 

 

Each country that has ship registered program for their own ports have a license program for the Officers and crew. The testing and education requirement are governed by international groups and the individual countries. Some countries accept licenses from other countries. There was back in the middle of the 20th century a old, but sadly true joke about Panama and Liberia. If you wanted a Masters license for those 2 countries flags,you sent a letter and a check for $500.00......you got a license. These type of things have happily been stopped years ago!

 

Each port usually requires a pilot for ship to enter and leave with. The pilot usually has a merchant Marine license and has to make a certain number of trips as a *cub* with a full pilot, and then takes a local knowledge test, which includes drawing, from memory, a full chart of the waterway he is testing for.

 

 

In the USA for a Merchant Marine license, you need to pass many different tests and have years of sea time to move up at each level. I went to SUNY Maritime College, in New York. a full 4 year program where I graduated in 73', with a ocean, unlimited tonnage, 3 rd Mates license, a BS degree in Transportation management and a commission in the USNR.

 

IMHO the best Mariners are from the USA, Canada, Norway and Britain (no special order) and then most of the rest of Europe. To my knowledge there is no specail reqiurements to be a cruise ship Master........except those from the line.

 

AKK

[loubetti]

Another interview.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/48194196/ns/today-today_news/

 

This above should be watched.

 

Frankly, and the cute blond aside, I have not tried and convicted him in my mind. I want to know the facts. As a pilot, I have read hundreds of accident reports, and every accident is a chain of events, as Schettino essentially stated. Indeed, human error may also come into play in that chain and usually does.

 

I once again refer to Andrea Doria / Stockholm collision. Did we send those captains to jail? Heck, they saw themselves on radar in the fog yet still hit and killed even MORE people.

[Tonka's Skipper]

This above should be watched.

 

Frankly, and the cute blond aside, I have not tried and convicted him in my mind. I want to know the facts. As a pilot, I have read hundreds of accident reports, and every accident is a chain of events, as Schettino essentially stated. Indeed, human error may also come into play in that chain and usually does.

 

I once again refer to Andrea Doria / Stockholm collision. Did we send those captains to jail? Heck, they saw themselves on radar in the fog yet still hit and killed even MORE people.

 

 

Hey there Lou!

 

I know just what your saying and I have tried to do the same thing and keep a open mind...but every time he opens his mouth, he seems to just love digging that hole deeper and deeper.

 

The Stockholm and Andrea Doria was a navigational error......this guy admits to many things, that in my mind his actions are now in the criminal category............just MHO.

 

There are still a lot of questions that need answers and the trail (not just the Captains but some other Deck Officers and Costa operations office staff) will do that........

 

AKK

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

Did he abandon his ship?

“No, I didn't abandon the ship. This is completely wrong. The ship was flipping over on its side and you had no other option than to go on the boat or to die at sea,” he said.

“It is a grounded ship and the reason why that's there is that they have the feeling that I left the ship and abandoned the people there because I have created the grounding condition of the ship. If I would not have done that the ship would have sunk completely and in that case I would have been the last one to leave.”

So does that mean that had he not grounded the ship, many more people would have died?

“Of course. Of course. And this was my plan - to ground the ship. So I knew in advance it would not have sunk. Otherwise if you want to be the hero to remain on board - to me it was easier to go on the left side and remain there. It was the easiest thing to do,” he said.

The ‘captain’s code’ says he should have been the last man standing on the boat. Clearly he was not.

“I was willing to do that, but I was on the wrong side of the ship. You know if you have an earthquake and the soil collapses under your feet may I say you abandoned your building? The concept is clear, and I don't understand why they're so stubborn that they cannot understand this,”

 

 

This is the part I found interesting. No mention of accidently falling. If the ship hadn't capsized, he would have stayed to the end. (yeah, right :rolleyes:) When it capsized, he just got the heck off.

 

That was fascinating, because he seems to be saying that he would have, of course (OF COURSE!!!) been the last one off the ship had the ship not fortuitously deposited him into a lifeboat not far from shore. In fact, for him, he is just like a person who was in a building that collapsed in an earthquake and who was deposited onto the ground floor. (Shaking my head at that analogy which seems to completely lose sight of the fact that he was the Captain of this particular ship, and not a random person with no ethical obligations....)

 

What I got from this was that he didn't abandon ship -- the ship abandoned him.....and that he's at a loss as to why people aren't more cognizant of the fact that he was gonna DIE AT SEA if he stayed onboard (He's forgetting somehow that 32 people did just that.)

 

There's either a complete disconnect on his part from it means to 'abandon ship' or else **I** don't have any idea what it means to abandon a ship. Because, for me, it means 'save the ship or die trying' as opposed to 'I totally would have been the last one out if we'd have had the misfortune to sink completely,'

[Uniall]

That was fascinating, because he seems to be saying that he would have, of course (OF COURSE!!!) been the last one off the ship had the ship not fortuitously deposited him into a lifeboat not far from shore. In fact, for him, he is just like a person who was in a building that collapsed in an earthquake and who was deposited onto the ground floor. (Shaking my head at that analogy which seems to completely lose sight of the fact that he was the Captain of this particular ship, and not a random person with no ethical obligations....)

 

What I got from this was that he didn't abandon ship -- the ship abandoned him.....and that he's at a loss as to why people aren't more cognizant of the fact that he was gonna DIE AT SEA if he stayed onboard (He's forgetting somehow that 32 people did just that.)

 

There's either a complete disconnect on his part from it means to 'abandon ship' or else **I** don't have any idea what it means to abandon a ship. Because, for me, it means 'save the ship or die trying' as opposed to 'I totally would have been the last one out if we'd have had the misfortune to sink completely,'

 

I think the psychiatric term is "Sociopath".

[sidari]

Uni .. My apologies for your lack of understanding of the intials CM previously posted as Corporate Manslaughter in my question to you on it, or the one CFO which is Chief Fire Officer.

Edited July 16, 2012 by sidari

[cruiserfanfromct]

Did he abandon his ship?

This is the part I found interesting. No mention of accidently falling. If the ship hadn't capsized, he would have stayed to the end. (yeah, right :rolleyes:) When it capsized, he just got the heck off.

Not to mention the fact that he caused the accident in the first place.

 

Dunno....think it's going to be hard for him to pin this one on the other officers or on Costa.

 

Granted, Costa may have been lenient with its "sail-by" policy but it is hard to fathom that the company would have ordered this maneuver on a dark winter night with absolutely nothing impressive to see by the passengers just to impress a couple of employees and ex-employees. Makes not a lick of sense!

 

As for blaming the other officers - here's what the mayor of Giglio is quoted as saying which BTW seems to be the major consensus of the Itlalian people:

 

"Schettino's remarks infuriated relatives of the dead as well as Giglio's mayor, Sergio Ortelli.

 

"A captain cannot shift blame onto his officers," he said. "And a ship with more than 4,000 people on board cannot be put under the command of such an amateur."

[Tonka's Skipper]

Not to mention the fact that he caused the accident in the first place.

 

Dunno....think it's going to be hard for him to pin this one on the other officers or on Costa.

 

Granted, Costa may have been lenient with its "sail-by" policy but it is hard to fathom that the company would have ordered this maneuver on a dark winter night with absolutely nothing impressive to see by the passengers just to impress a couple of employees and ex-employees. Makes not a lick of sense!

 

As for blaming the other officers - here's what the mayor of Giglio is quoted as saying which BTW seems to be the major consensus of the Itlalian people:

 

"Schettino's remarks infuriated relatives of the dead as well as Giglio's mayor, Sergio Ortelli.

 

"A captain cannot shift blame onto his officers," he said. "And a ship with more than 4,000 people on board cannot be put under the command of such an amateur."

 

 

I agree.the Captain has the lion share and ultimate responsibility.....but the Duty Officer or Officers here made a navigation and speed error as well, the vessel was off her track and did not tell the captain or take action to correct it .........they indeed do have some responsibility here.

 

In this Maritime casualties, there is never just one person 100%to blame........Costa line will be examined with a microscope.and based on what I have read,they will have a lot to answer for as well.

 

AKK

Edited July 16, 2012 by Tonka's Skipper

[cruiserfanfromct]

I agree.the Captain has the ultimate responsibility.....but the Duty Officer or Officers here made a navigation and speed error as well' date=' the vessel was off her track and did not tell the captain or take action to correct it .........they indeed do have some responsibility here.

 

AKK[/quote']

Wouldn't a captain, knowing that there was a delicate navigational maneuver being made, want to be at the bridge overseeing the operation? Where was he right before this happened that was way more important than the safety of his passengers and crew? The evidence shows he took command a few minutes before the incident. Where the heck was he before? Don't understand how anything else could be more important.

 

IMHO this was a captain who was promoted way above his capabilities. He had charisma and knew how to charm but he was way in over his head. Not only did he take the ship into very dangerous waters for the sake of vanity, he failed to ensure he was safely passing through an area known for danger. He then failed to follow all safety protocols and lost control of his crew, his passengers, his ship and his senses. Witnesses have said he sat frozen for hours on a rock staring at the ship as it was going down! :eek:

 

Hopefully this will serve as a lesson for all cruise lines to choose their captains carefully. They need to screen out the risk-takers and those who are not willing to take responsibility.

[Tonka's Skipper]

Wouldn't a captain, knowing that there was a delicate navigational maneuver being made, want to be at the bridge overseeing the operation? Where was he right before this happened that was way more important than the safety of his passengers and crew? The evidence shows he took command a few minutes before the incident. Where the heck was he before? Don't understand how anything else could be more important.

 

I totally agree...and have stated this in earlier posts..but that doesn't let the Duty Officer/Officers off the hook!

 

IMHO this was a captain who was promoted way above his capabilities. He had charisma and knew how to charm but he was way in over his head. Not only did he take the ship into very dangerous waters for the sake of vanity, he failed to ensure he was safely passing through an area known for danger. He then failed to follow all safety protocols and lost control of his crew, his passengers, his ship and his senses. Witnesses have said he sat frozen for hours on a rock staring at the ship as it was going down! :eek:

 

I call it *social Captain*and again we mostly agree, however in fairness,I do not know his professional background so I cant say he beyond his abilities, but he did seem to have lost his ability to command the situation and instead let the situation run wild.To me the worse part was abandoning his vessel.passengers and crew. IMHO that is criminal

Hopefully this will serve as a lesson for all cruise lines to choose their captains carefully. They need to screen out the risk-takers and those who are not willing to take responsibility.

 

Good Point

[Uniall]

Wouldn't a captain, knowing that there was a delicate navigational maneuver being made, want to be at the bridge overseeing the operation? Where was he right before this happened that was way more important than the safety of his passengers and crew? The evidence shows he took command a few minutes before the incident. Where the heck was he before? Don't understand how anything else could be more important.

 

IMHO this was a captain who was promoted way above his capabilities. He had charisma and knew how to charm but he was way in over his head. Not only did he take the ship into very dangerous waters for the sake of vanity, he failed to ensure he was safely passing through an area known for danger. He then failed to follow all safety protocols and lost control of his crew, his passengers, his ship and his senses. Witnesses have said he sat frozen for hours on a rock staring at the ship as it was going down! :eek:

 

Hopefully this will serve as a lesson for all cruise lines to choose their captains carefully. They need to screen out the risk-takers and those who are not willing to take responsibility.

 

Captain Schitino seems to have a priority adjustment problem. Given a choice between the saftey of the ship, passengers and crew versus a stolen evening with his inamorta, he quickley chose the latter.