Concordia News: Please Post Here

[CostaSmurfette]

From the UK MCA (Marine and Coastguard Agency) website:

 

Operation of watertight doors

6. The ship's watertight doors should be operated (opened and closed) as follows -

 

1. in potentially hazardous situations every watertight door must be closed except when a person is passing through it;
   
2. in normal conditions -
   
   • a Type A door may be kept open;
     
   • a Type B door must be closed. It may be open but only whilst someone is working in the compartment adjacent to it;
     
   • a Type C door must be closed. It may be opened but only for sufficient time to permit someone to pass through it.
     

 

 

Other maritime agencies have similar regulations.

 

 

Some ships have other watertight doors that must remain closed at all times once at sea.

 

 

I do not know the Type of the doors that were kept open on Concordia before she ran aground.

 

VP

 

VP...many thanks for that clarification, it's a pity that we cannot get the specifications of the doors in use, but at least your discovery does answer whether or not watertight doors can be, should be open and for what purpose they can be left open, if only for ease of access during routine maintenance etc.

 

Corcordia's water tight doors were Type "S" (for Schittino) :p

 

Uniall...your constant vitriole is becoming very tiresome.

 

There are far more issues at hand than your own personal attacks on one individual. You are fixated and it really doesn't do you or your professionalism any justice whatsoever.

[cruiserfanfromct]

Maybe this was already posted, but here is a video showing a recreation of the status of the watertight doors based on the VDR data... and a brief article that accompanied it (in English through Google translator).

 

Thanks for reposting the video -- yes, I had posted it previously and only CS commented on it. CS, ehrm, SM, your link doesn't work due to the **** s.

 

Here is the awful Google translation (It is Professor Neri not Blacks)

 

Grosseto, August 7, 2012 - According to the reconstruction video made ​​by Professor Bruno Neri of the Faculty of Engineering of Pisa, which coordinates the work of Codacons , the tragic night of January 13 some of the Costa Concordia watertight doors were open when at sea must remain strictly closed . Means to keep them open so that water spreads in other compartments: just that, according to the reconstruction of Codacons, it happened the night of the sinking. The water, according to the reconstruction of the Codacons experts, may have spread to the hall of stopping the engine generators. The movie, which was rebuilt on the data contained in the black box on the left side shows 25 squares . These are the watertight compartments. When the square turns from green to red means that the door is open. And the video can be seen at least two ports become red. The main screen instead of showing the ship's course as that tragic night appeared on the display of the dashboard.

[cruiserfanfromct]

From the Italy magazine OGGI -- publishes new exclusive photos of the speed boat escapade:

 

http://www.oggi.it/focus/attualita/2012/08/08/francesco-schettino-torna-al-timone-di-una-barca-foto-esclusive/

 

They also report there might be trouble in paradise.......:eek:

Edited August 8, 2012 by cruiserfanfromct

[cruiserfanfromct]

More management changes at Costa -- New communications and marketing position created.

 

http://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/7679-frederik-penot-named-vp-corporate-marketing-at-costa.html

[CtheW0rld]

From the Italy magazine OGGI -- publishes new exclusive photos of the speed boat escapade:

 

http://www.oggi.it/focus/attualita/2012/08/08/francesco-schettino-torna-al-timone-di-una-barca-foto-esclusive/

 

They also report there might be trouble in paradise.......:eek:

 

he really shouldn't be wearing a speedo swimsuit :eek:

[Uniall]

VP...many thanks for that clarification, it's a pity that we cannot get the specifications of the doors in use, but at least your discovery does answer whether or not watertight doors can be, should be open and for what purpose they can be left open, if only for ease of access during routine maintenance etc.

 

 

 

Uniall...your constant vitriole is becoming very tiresome.

 

There are far more issues at hand than your own personal attacks on one individual. You are fixated and it really doesn't do you or your professionalism any justice whatsoever.

 

I refuse to let apologists for Costa Cruise Lines or Captain Coward try to rewrite history and claim that 32 people died because of a mechical failure. It was not mechanical failure, it was a dangerous manvuever of the Concordia ordered by a egotistical Captain who did not care a damn about the safety of his passengers as long as he appeared as "Macho Man" to his girlfriends and colleagues.

 

The only open question is whether it was known to and condoned by Costa Cruise Executives. If that turns out to be true, which I as a trained criminal investigaor suspect, they should share adjoining prison cells with the captain.

 

I'm sure that Costa Cruise Lines has probably spent millions trying to put a lid on bad publicity about the killing of 32 human beings aboard the Concordia. Such publicity campaign would certainly have a component to silence those who demand the perps spend many years in prison and the removal of all "Evel Knevel" type captains from command in the future.

 

By your own admission, you're a long time passenger with Costa Cruise Lines, you've sailed with Captain Coward, and would do so again. That mind set demonstrates a bias that brings into question your candor and true purpose of your posts. Further, you joined CruiseCritic.com 2 days ago for the sole purpose of defending Costa and Schittino.

 

Your posts were obviously intended to defend Costa and Coward and attack anyone who argues otherwise. I seriously question whether you are acting independently or at the behest of Costa and or Schittino. Either way, you won't silence me or others who have been posting on this or prior threads presenting uncontravertible facts that have emerged. Captain Schittino ordered the Concordia too close to shore at too high a speed for his own ego and adulation which caused the deaths of 32 people and then he left the passengers and crew to fend for themselves as he abandoned his post and duty.

 

Every time, I see a post by you or others talking about mechanical failure or bad charts, human fraility or any suggestion that something else sent 32 people to their doom, I will once again post the truth: Captain Schittino killed those people and Costa may well have been complicit by condoning sail by salutes.

 

Just as I did as a prosecutor, I speak as the voice of the dead victims and demand justice for them.

[CostaSmurfette]

There is a much wider picture...with much wider implications...that should be the focus of discussion in the aftermath of what occurred on January 13, 2012.

 

Time to take off the blinkers and blindfolds, time to consider the more uncomfortable issues surrounding the accident. By that I mean that we are all kidding ourselves if we think for one moment that just one ship, belonging to one cruise line with one individual Captain is all that the story involves.

 

The industry as a whole had a massive wake-up call...most have taken it seriously, others...well..a tweet interupting a basketball match seems to be the most that could be expected from one quarter of the industry.

 

This accident had highlighted issues that we as passengers never really knew about...and in many cases, probably did not care about. For many on cruises its a case of a bit of R&R by the bar or in the pool, the biggest worry being what will be for dinner, chairhogs and stuff of nonsense that pales into insignificance when compared to that night's events on Concordia.

 

The muster drill.....everyone knows about them, alot of people find them boring..."done it once, need not do it again".

 

The IMO stipulates that a drill must be carried out within 48 hours of leaving port AND every 7 days.

 

So-called bus stop cruises...embarkation/disembarkation in several ports on a single route...make muster drilling slightly more complicated but not impossible. Concordia collected 647 in Civitavecchia and were due to muster the following day in Savona after dropping off and collecting approxiamtely 1700 (the other port that drops/collects being Barcelona).

 

Concordia was acting within the stipulated rules by delaying muster til Savona...no written rules were broken by not carrying out a drill before leaving Civitavecchia.

 

Post Concordia the IMO and the cruise & ferry lines woke up...shrieked...stamped feet and wagged accusatory fingers.

 

Muster has now been changed....on a voluntary basis since the IMO rules will take a good 2 years to be approved and written up. So effectively the cruise lines are going it alone.

 

More cruise lines have started doing bus stop cruises....MSC, RCI, NCL to name but a few.

 

Standard procedure is now in place aboard Costa Crociere and other lines have followed their lead. Each bus stop pick up, those passengers are taken to a lounge, they are given one to one instruction on what to do in the event of an emergency, they are also shown how to wear their lifejacket correctly and given a walking tour of their respective muster and/or lifeboat stations.

 

Passengers on normal closed loop cruises are given standard muster drills, NO photography, NO talking tween passengers, EXTRA crew for individual instruction where required.

 

Costa Crociere...who I personally have cruised with since June 2008 also carry out full muster drills on their longer cruises every 7 days...on my longest cruise with the line in 2010 I attended a total of 7 full drills...yes there were moans and groans from people, but they are mandatory, so get over it.

 

Disabled passengers & muster drills.....this is one area where I personally feel things could be stepped up a notch. Disabled passengers are allocated crew to assist them in the event of an emergency, the crew will carry you to your lifeboat and ensure that you are safely placed on board for evacuation. I feel it might be time for muster drills to include this procedure so that those with disabilities not only feel reassured but they also know what to expect should the worst happen. Currently at muster drill, no such procedure is followed and those with disabilities are using elevators etc to reach their muster stations...

 

Which brings me to the crux of this problem.

 

At least 4 victims were found inside elevators on Concordia...this was despite the drill telling people not to use the elevators for evacuation purposes.

 

Now...maybe it is time that cruise lines instructed the crew to shutdown the elevators during a drill. Afterall, not having them to use in an emergency is something that currently could cause confusion since you can use them in the drill....it's not realistic and where disabled passengers are concerned, they do not get a true representation of what an evacuation is really going to be like.

 

Now I uderstand that some might find the loss of elevators frighting and too realistic, but I feel that the drill needs to take off the frilly bits and make itself raw...that way both crew and passengers alike will take it more seriously and they will be able to experience a truer recreation, thus they will be more aware should the worst happen. Those with mobility issues would need to make themselves known so that crew could be allocated to them for the drill, it gives both the crew and passengers the opportunity to get to know each other's ability levels and it would add some much needed reassurance and lose some of the fear/confusion too.

 

Other areas that were a wake up call to the industry that will require deeper investigation either in-house or by the authorities are the performance levels of the senior crew, the training of the senior crew, the work ethics of the senior crew alongside the junior ratings/below stairs crew such as stewards etc. The ship designs...powerplant, emergency procedures & equipment, redundancy levels in the equipment, ease of movement and general safety issues need addressing.

 

In relation to the senior crew, there should be tougher scanning of individuals to ensure that they are not just qualified but that they are physically & mentally fit for the job...maybe even extending the time taken rising through the ranks...ie no more fast tracking. Evaluations and resitting of examinations should be every so many years, to ensure that senior crew are fully up to date with current legislation, technology, safety aspects and maybe less importance placed on the public side..ie more official, less cosy....I feel that captains and senior crew would garner more respect from passengers and crew if they maybe didn't cosy up to the passengers quite so much. Not saying they all do, but some seem to treat it as a photo opportunity rather than a serious vocation.

[CostaSmurfette]

I imagine that the thought of shutting down the elevators during the muster drill will fill many with abject horror...

 

Well....and this is not a reflection on passengers with disabilities as I am one myself....the drill is currently too easy....the alarms go off, off you toddle to the muster station frequently using the elevators to get there...abled bodied and not so abled bodied alike...cos its easier, quicker and many feel that the quicker they get to the drill, the quicker it will be over with and they can return to the bar....

 

A couple were recently disembarked for refusing to do a repeat drill on Seabourn...elderly couple, many cruises under their belts....this is what cruise lines need to do, they need to crack down harder in respect to mustering. They also need to make the drill tougher too...it is meant to save your life.

 

OK...this might hurt....those who use the elevators cos they are there to be used, or they are lazy and those without a real requirement to use them or require crew assistance during a real evacuation...well maybe its time you looked for another type of vacation.

 

The cruise lines have made life way too easy...and that is part and parcel of the complacency issue..."oh, we don't have to go to muster, the ship won't sink"....unsinkable ships...hmmmm...they said that 100 years ago aswell.

 

To get passengers to a mindset that a muster drill is vitally important, the cruise lines must make it realistic....otherwise there is a proportion of passengers who will never take it seriously and everyone will lapse into that deadly sense of complacency again....til the next time...and next time we might not have 32 funerals, we could be looking at anything upto 6000 funerals.

 

Shut the elevators down during drill....make it as reaslistic as possible, have the disabled passengers get to know their allocated crew who will take care of their welfare and if people cannot manage without assistance, they shouldn't be on the ship...its that plain and simple really.

[Emilija]

Corcordia's water tight doors were Type "S" (for Schittino) :p

 

 

Dear Mr. Uniall

 

How can you be taken seriously when at every turn you just ooze sarcasm.

 

I like many am waiting for the REAL truth. You are a professional man, yet have great difficulty in spelling a name.

 

Emi

[cruiserfanfromct]

I imagine that the thought of shutting down the elevators during the muster drill will fill many with abject horror...

 

Well....and this is not a reflection on passengers with disabilities as I am one myself....the drill is currently too easy....the alarms go off, off you toddle to the muster station frequently using the elevators to get there...abled bodied and not so abled bodied alike...cos its easier, quicker and many feel that the quicker they get to the drill, the quicker it will be over with and they can return to the bar....

 

A couple were recently disembarked for refusing to do a repeat drill on Seabourn...elderly couple, many cruises under their belts....this is what cruise lines need to do, they need to crack down harder in respect to mustering. They also need to make the drill tougher too...it is meant to save your life.

 

OK...this might hurt....those who use the elevators cos they are there to be used, or they are lazy and those without a real requirement to use them or require crew assistance during a real evacuation...well maybe its time you looked for another type of vacation.

 

The cruise lines have made life way too easy...and that is part and parcel of the complacency issue..."oh, we don't have to go to muster, the ship won't sink"....unsinkable ships...hmmmm...they said that 100 years ago aswell.

 

To get passengers to a mindset that a muster drill is vitally important, the cruise lines must make it realistic....otherwise there is a proportion of passengers who will never take it seriously and everyone will lapse into that deadly sense of complacency again....til the next time...and next time we might not have 32 funerals, we could be looking at anything upto 6000 funerals.

 

Shut the elevators down during drill....make it as reaslistic as possible, have the disabled passengers get to know their allocated crew who will take care of their welfare and if people cannot manage without assistance, they shouldn't be on the ship...its that plain and simple really.

All the safety regulations in the world, if not properly folllowed, aren't worth the paper they are written on.

 

In this case it is cut and dried: NO FLY-BYE -- NO WRECK

 

Eliminate Fly-Byes and you eliminate future Concordia-style disasters.

 

This said, fortunately, there have been NEW safety regulations put into place and more to come:

 

The sinking of the Italian cruise ship, the Costa Concordia, has lead to new regulations being adopted jointly by two major cruise ship associations. The European Cruise Council and the Cruise Lines International Assoc. passed three new safety rules.

 

Manfredi Lefebvre, Chairman of the European Cruise Council (ECC) and a member of the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) executive committee, made the announcement in Brussels. The deaths of 32 people when the Costa Concordia ran into rocks after passing too close to the Italian island of Giglio in the Tuscan Bay was the motivator for the newly-adopted regulations. Each new regulation speaks to a circumstance thought to have contributed to the tragedy.

3 New Cruise Ship Regulations

 

One new regulation states "additional adult lifejackets (must be) onboard each cruise ship...the number of additional adult lifejackets to be provided must not be less than the total number of persons berthed within the ship’s most populated main vertical fire zone." Thus ruling means ships must now carry more lifejackets than actual persons on board.

 

Another regulation states "to minimize unnecessary disruptions and distractions on the bridge...access (to the bridge) is to be limited to those with operational functions during any period of restricted maneuvering, or when increased vigilance is required."

 

And finally another regulation states that when 'passage planning,' the planning of a ship's movement throughout its journey, each bridge team member will be "thoroughly" briefed on that plan "well in advance of its implementation" and that the passage plan must be drafted by a "designated officer and approved by the master."

 

Cruise Ship Safety Regulations adopted

The belief is that the captain of the Costa Concordia made the decision to pass too close to the island in order to impress someone and that the decision was not known by all on the bridge. Further, a woman thought to be his mistress was on the bridge at the time, and that may have inspired one of the new regulations.

 

Further, some passengers went back to their cabins to get their lifejackets and then had trouble finding their way back to ship departure areas in the listing, darkened ship and it is thought that having more lifejackets in muster areas will work to prevent such occurrences.

 

"As the Concordia incident demonstrates, there is no such thing as perfect safety (but) we do strive for a perfect commitment to safety," Lefebvre said in his press statement. “By bringing forward voluntary initiatives such as these, we significantly and immediately improve safety standards."

 

 

Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/article/323985#ixzz22xstEz9X

 

[CostaSmurfette]

All the safety regulations in the world, if not properly folllowed, aren't worth the paper they are written on.

 

In this case it is cut and dried: NO FLY-BYE -- NO WRECK

 

Eliminate Fly-Byes and you eliminate future Concordia-style disasters.

 

This said, fortunately, there have been NEW safety regulations put into place and more to come:

 

Every cruise line carries out fly by sailings...you cannot place a rule for one and not for the rest. ALL cruise lines have played Russian Roulette with quaysides, rocks, volcanoes, islands, other ships and other hard/immovable objects for decades....some even smacked their ships too (HAL Westerdam did a spot of ice kissing in Alaska last year, P&O's Oriana took a chunk out of a quayside, a few RCI's have taken lumps out of themelves and quaysides over the years too...they were all at it), but it wasn't til this accident that the industry woke up and realised that maybe it ain't such a good idea afterall...

 

As usual...it takes a fatal accident for people to wake from their corporate complacent comatose state and decide to change their ways...

 

It was an accident waiting to happen....to A cruise ship, belonging to A cruise line.....they were all as complacent as each other....no winners for the top prat award, they are all equally guilty of turning a blind eye.

[cruiserfanfromct]

Every cruise line carries out fly by sailings...you cannot place a rule for one and not for the rest. ALL cruise lines have played Russian Roulette with quaysides, rocks, volcanoes, islands, other ships and other hard/immovable objects for decades....some even smacked their ships too (HAL Westerdam did a spot of ice kissing in Alaska last year, P&O's Oriana took a chunk out of a quayside, a few RCI's have taken lumps out of themelves and quaysides over the years too...they were all at it), but it wasn't til this accident that the industry woke up and realised that maybe it ain't such a good idea afterall...

 

As usual...it takes a fatal accident for people to wake from their corporate complacent comatose state and decide to change their ways...

 

It was an accident waiting to happen....to A cruise ship, belonging to A cruise line.....they were all as complacent as each other....no winners for the top prat award, they are all equally guilty of turning a blind eye.

 

OTOH, Cruise Critic did contact other Cruise Lines after the "accident" and asked about their sail-by policies, those that responded said the practice was extremely rare or non-existent.

Sail-bys are strictly against Princess Cruises' policy, a company spokeswoman told Cruise Critic. "There is a voyage plan that is briefed to Deck and Technical Officers several days before the transit," said media relations manager Karen Candy in an e-mail. "It is not deviated from to get closer to land or to greet residents."

 

At Crystal Cruises, passage-planning meetings are held prior to departure, the company said in an e-mail. The meetings cover the navigational risks on the route, the safest and closest approaches to land, and weather, current and fuel issues. "With little exception, no deviations from that planned course, including opportunities to show guests a coastline, may take place without making an amendment to the passage plan," the company said. If changes are made, they must be reviewed with the entire navigation team and approved by the captain well in advance, Crystal said.

 

For its part, Costa has admitted to at least one previous salute of Giglio. On the Monday after the disaster, Foschi revealed that a pre-authorized sail-by in August was timed to coincide with the island's patron saint day. The Costa chief said that route was planned with the local maritime authority.

 

Indeed, having a navigation plan is mandated in the International Safety Management Code, regulations that all shipping vessels must follow, according to the United Nations' International Marine Organization (IMO). In order to sail, every cruise ship has to have what's called a Safety Management System, or SMS, explained CLIA spokesman Bud Darr. The purpose of the SMS is simple, Darr said: "Each ship will have one and it will reflect the company's safety management and ship-specific policies." Even at the same company, the SMS will vary between different ships, because of vessel sizes and routes, he added.

 

Part of that SMS is having that aforementioned navigation plan, said Brad Schoenwald, senior marine inspector for the U.S. Coast Guard's Cruise Ship National Center of Expertise. Paraphrasing the IMO guidelines, Schoenwald noted: "Before getting underway, a voyage plan should be charted to make sure weather conditions are OK, that there's sufficient sea room, that maritime and environmental regulations are followed, and that charts are accurate and up to date."

 

Edited August 8, 2012 by cruiserfanfromct

[CostaSmurfette]

OTOH, Cruise Critic did contact other Cruise Lines after the "accident" and asked about their sail-by policies, those that responded said the practice was extremely rare or non-existent.

 

That is the official line....just like the captain on Ruby Princess telling Sidari that all watertight doors were closed....

 

There is documented proof that ships have gone too close to places on so-called strafe runs...RSSC, RCI, MSC, Carnival, HAL, Costa...they are all guilty of doing this...just cos their head offices choose to deny or distance themselves from it does not mean they do not know about it...and they probably have a "go ahead but on your head be it" agreement.

 

The lines know it is dangerous and until Concordia, they all got away scott free....

[cruiserfanfromct]

That is the official line....just like the captain on Ruby Princess telling Sidari that all watertight doors were closed....

 

There is documented proof that ships have gone too close to places on so-called strafe runs...RSSC, RCI, MSC, Carnival, HAL, Costa...they are all guilty of doing this...just cos their head offices choose to deny or distance themselves from it does not mean they do not know about it...and they probably have a "go ahead but on your head be it" agreement.

 

The lines know it is dangerous and until Concordia, they all got away scott free....

 

Since this case is under Italian jurisdiction and law, then wondering if Italian law 231 applies according to this article:

 

"Italian law 231, enacted in 2001, introduced the principle that corporations can receive administrative sanctions for crimes committed by employees within the scope of their employment.

 

If an employee is found guilty of manslaughter, the company could be fined and would potentially also be subject to certain industry bans.

But much would depend on whether the employee broke the company’s rules. “[in order for the company to also be convicted], the prosecutor would have to show that the company didn’t have adequate internal controls in place to avoid a negligent violation of the rules by the employees,” explains Antonio Golino, partner at Clifford Chance in Milan.

 

Under certain circumstances, the burden of proof may rest with the company, so that it would have to prove that the internal controls were adequate.

 

“Fines could be up to €1.5m for this offence,” Mr Golino said.

In 2011 a Turin court convicted a ThyssenKrupp executive of manslaughter. The company was heavily sanctioned, in a case that centred around a fire at an Italian factory which led to the deaths of seven workers. The company was ordered to pay a hefty fine and compensation and was barred from receiving public subsidies for six months.

 

Unlike the UK’s Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, the Italian law does not mention corporate manslaughter explicitly and was not enacted with that specific purpose in mind.

 

“The Costa Concordia might well become a ‘bench test’ of law 231,” says Attilio Costabel, an Italian lawyer and professor of maritime law in Florida.

Pier Luigi Foschi, chairman and chief executive of Costa Cruises, said the company was preparing for the possibility of criminal action and that it had employed criminal lawyers. However, he stressed that the company had adhered to all safety standards and believed it was as “good as others” in terms of security.

 

Jim Walker, a maritime lawyer based in Miami, said: “I don’t believe that Costa or Carnival face any criminal accountability in the United States, certainly not in the state of Florida. There is no corporate manslaughter law in the US.”

 

In the UK, sentencing guidelines introduced in early 2010 stipulate that companies convicted of corporate manslaughter face “punitive” fines. In February 2011, Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings was the first UK company to be convicted of corporate manslaughter and fined £385,000.

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b7d2687c-4374-11e1-9f28-00144feab49a.html#axzz22y2frjVl

Edited August 8, 2012 by cruiserfanfromct

[CostaSmurfette]

Footage of an MSC ship running too close to Sorrento, filmed by a resident...

 

http://www.oggi.it/video/notizie/2012/01/27/non-solo-costa-anche-la-msc-sfiora-la-costa-video-esclusivo/

 

And a couple of photo's...genuine, not photoshopped...of Seven Seas Mariner playing chicken with the Faraglioni rocks off Capri a couple years ago.

[cruiserfanfromct]

Footage of an MSC ship running too close to Sorrento, filmed by a resident....

 

Ah MSC... you mean the MSC of Mayhem, Surliness and Confusion or Most Stops Cancelled or Many Sad Cruisers? Doesn't Surprise me!

 

And a couple of photo's...genuine, not photoshopped...of Seven Seas Mariner playing chicken with the Faraglioni rocks off Capri a couple years ago.

uhm...Not photoshopped? Do you have proof? ;) Edited August 8, 2012 by cruiserfanfromct

[SomeBeach]

Footage of an MSC ship running too close to Sorrento, filmed by a resident...

 

http://www.oggi.it/video/notizie/2012/01/27/non-solo-costa-anche-la-msc-sfiora-la-costa-video-esclusivo/

 

And a couple of photo's...genuine, not photoshopped...of Seven Seas Mariner playing chicken with the Faraglioni rocks off Capri a couple years ago.

 

You have made some valid points in some of your posts here. This to me seems like you are grabbing to justify what Schettino did. All things are not equal here; ie: time of day, speed of vessel, and possibly what the Captain may have been doing at this time.

To go one step further, you say with what seems to be certainty, that this photo was not photo shopped. I question that as I don't see any type of wake behind the ship. Even at a slow speed, wouldn't there be some distrubance in the water. :confused:

[CostaSmurfette]

Ah MSC... you mean the MSC of Mayhem, Surliness and Confusion or Most Stops Cancelled or Many Sad Cruisers? Doesn't Surprise me!

 

uhm...Not photoshopped? Do you have proof? ;)

 

You have made some valid points in some of your posts here. This to me seems like you are grabbing to justify what Schettino did. All things are not equal here; ie: time of day, speed of vessel, and possibly what the Captain may have been doing at this time.

To go one step further, you say with what seems to be certainty, that this photo was not photo shopped. I question that as I don't see any type of wake behind the ship. Even at a slow speed, wouldn't there be some distrubance in the water. :confused:

 

You've obviously never been aboard a cruise ship that has approached anywhere and then stopped dead in the water to allow passengers to see where they are.

 

It is a very common practice, done by many hundreds of ships...especially in areas that have natural or historical beauty or significance.....HAL Westerdam ran into the glacier that the captain wanted to show his passengers...Antarctic Dream went a step further and actually stuck the bow into an iceberg to see what would happen....

 

Whether condoned or not by head office, makes bugger all difference...it is being done every day, somewhere in the world and has been for over 50 years...

 

It has always been wrong....just as leaving watertight doors open is wrong....just as driving a red light is wrong.....just like driving over railway lines when a train is bearing down on you is wrong...doesn't mean that people do not do it though....

 

It's thanks to Concordia that the practice has all but stopped...which is a good thing...as it was only a matter of time before this behaviour came back at hit them where it hurts the most.

 

Carnival Magic mage a big thing of strafing Stromboli last year....this year Stromboli has a 4 mile exclusion zone around it....about bloody time too, there are too many foolhardy people out there with our lives in their hands playing fast and loose where they shouldn't be.

 

Ironically Schettino did everyone a favour...he woke the industry up to a highly dangerous practice that the cruise lines always knew about but did nothing to stop...now their hands have been forced, and rightly so.

[CostaSmurfette]

People need to realise that this accident was NOT all about Schettino or what he did/didn't do that night.

 

It is a combination of many factors...you guys need to stop focussing on the individual and see the bigger (and frankly more scary) picture.

 

The ship, the senior officers...all had a part to play in that night's events....not just the ringmaster, but the whole cast.

 

The implications run much wider and deeper than the actions one one man...much deeper...and the sooner people wake up and realise it, the better it will be for everyone.

 

I have not defended anyone on that ship except the crew who got people off it, the stewards, barstaff, waitstaff, animators, guest services and the others who work "below stairs".

 

The relationship on the bridge and the chain of command is faulty...whether due to ego's clashing, inability or intimidation...that is for the investigators to sort out...but bottom line is that the bridge crew as a whole did not perform in the correct manner that night...there was no chain of command.

 

The ship herself played a large part in what happened...her design is questionable, her reliability and suitability is questionable, her layout is questionable...

 

All these things need scrutiny, not only one man's actions or inactions...but the whole package.

 

Otherwise there will be another accident and next time we might not be so fortunate on the number's off the ship. 32 is too many caskets, but compared to what could happen if lessons are not learnt and procedures not changed, is beyond a nightmare that doesn't bear thinking about.

[SomeBeach]

You've obviously never been aboard a cruise ship that has approached anywhere and then stopped dead in the water to allow passengers to see where they are.

 

It is a very common practice, done by many hundreds of ships...especially in areas that have natural or historical beauty or significance.....HAL Westerdam ran into the glacier that the captain wanted to show his passengers...Antarctic Dream went a step further and actually stuck the bow into an iceberg to see what would happen....

 

Whether condoned or not by head office, makes bugger all difference...it is being done every day, somewhere in the world and has been for over 50 years...

 

It has always been wrong....just as leaving watertight doors open is wrong....just as driving a red light is wrong.....just like driving over railway lines when a train is bearing down on you is wrong...doesn't mean that people do not do it though....

 

It's thanks to Concordia that the practice has all but stopped...which is a good thing...as it was only a matter of time before this behaviour came back at hit them where it hurts the most.

 

Carnival Magic mage a big thing of strafing Stromboli last year....this year Stromboli has a 4 mile exclusion zone around it....about bloody time too, there are too many foolhardy people out there with our lives in their hands playing fast and loose where they shouldn't be.

 

Ironically Schettino did everyone a favour...he woke the industry up to a highly dangerous practice that the cruise lines always knew about but did nothing to stop...now their hands have been forced, and rightly so.

 

Yes, I have been on a ship that has stopped in the water. Was actually in an aft suite and I did look down.

Now as to this "favour" Schettino did. He didn't pay the price of that "favour" but 32 innocent people did.

[cruiserfanfromct]

You've obviously never been aboard a cruise ship that has approached anywhere and then stopped dead in the water to allow passengers to see where they are.

Oh but I have -- through Alaska's Inside Passage and Glacier Bay. Luckily our Captain did not crash into any icebergs or glaciers! :p

 

...Ironically Schettino did everyone a favour...he woke the industry up to a highly dangerous practice that the cruise lines always knew about but did nothing to stop...now their hands have been forced, and rightly so.

"Schettino did everyone a favour...??????" PLEEEEAAAASSEE! Go tell that to the families of the 32 people who paid with their lives for Schettino's recklessness. Edited August 8, 2012 by cruiserfanfromct

[CostaSmurfette]

I'll spell it out in simple terms....

 

 

Had Concordia reached Savona on January 14 as planned, despite the strafing of Giglio...NO-ONE would have been any the wiser about this dangerous practice that had been exercised daily by a multitude of cruise ship captain without so much as a question "why?"

 

Schettino did do us a favour, cos his accident brought the highly dangerous practice of island strafing to the world's attention...and by doing so, all cruise lines could no longer tug the official line of denial....they all knew their captain did this, they all allowed them to continue without reprimand.

 

So yes...32 people paid the ultimate price for something that the industry turned a blind eye to for decades...thanks to Schettino, we ALL know about what goes on and the cruise lines have been forced to change their ways!

 

Irony in the highest order...

[cruiserfanfromct]

I'll spell it out in simple terms....

 

 

Had Concordia reached Savona on January 14 as planned, despite the strafing of Giglio...NO-ONE would have been any the wiser about this dangerous practice that had been exercised daily by a multitude of cruise ship captain without so much as a question "why?"

 

Schettino did do us a favour, cos his accident brought the highly dangerous practice of island strafing to the world's attention...and by doing so, all cruise lines could no longer tug the official line of denial....they all knew their captain did this, they all allowed them to continue without reprimand.

 

So yes...32 people paid the ultimate price for something that the industry turned a blind eye to for decades...thanks to Schettino, we ALL know about what goes on and the cruise lines have been forced to change their ways!

 

Irony in the highest order...

 

I get what you are saying but I wouldn't call it irony -- it's more like the 32 people were unfortunate sacrificial lambs for SOME cruise lines, i.e. Costa, MSC and perhaps a few others. After doing extensive research on this subject, I'm not convinced that ALL cruise lines adhered to this dangerous practice nor had captains and crew that intentionally bypassed company emergency procedures and protocol.

Edited August 8, 2012 by cruiserfanfromct

[CostaSmurfette]

I get what you are saying but I wouldn't call it irony -- it's more like the 32 people were unfortunate sacrificial lambs for SOME cruise lines, i.e. Costa, MSC and perhaps a few others. After doing extensive research on this subject, I'm not convinced that ALL cruise lines adhered to this dangerous practice nor had captains that intentionally bypassed company emergency procedures and protocol.

 

Cruise ship/ocean liner groundings...casualties or not is immaterial...its just to show it happens to the majority of captains, just cos they don't get the headlines, doesn't mean its a non existant event...

 

Royal Caribbean Monarch of the Seas, 1998...Louis Lines Sea Diamond, 2007.....MSC Poesia, 2012....

 

There have been close calls in the past...but again it takes deaths like Sea Diamond and Concordia for the world to notice.

 

Always the same...dead = wake up call = industry tries to distance themselves from sharp practices whilst hurrying to their lawyers to cover their corporate sterns...

 

All corporations are "deny, deny, deny"...until something like this happens and they go red in the face, suddenly develope a frog in their throat and change the subject as quick as possible (or go back to watching the basketball match)...

 

Distasteful as it is to say that ironically Schettino did the world a favour by bring this behaviour to our attention in the most tragic way possible...that is EXACTLY what he did....

 

Afterall...had it not been noticed, the authorities and cruise lines wouldn't have been scrambling to change their procedures and rules, would they?

 

If Schettino hadn't clumped it on January 13 and he had sailed as planned to Savona on January 14...we wouldn't even be discussing it here, would we?

 

No...we would all be looking forward to our cruises, ships would be carrying out sail by's just as they have done for years and no-one would be any the wiser...

[cruiserfanfromct]

This article, just published a few minutes ago in Italy, states that if the watertight doors, (doesn't specify the numbers or letters of the exact watertight doors) but if the 2 doors that were SUPPOSED TO BE CLOSED HAD BEEN CLOSED LIKE THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN, the vessel would have remained afloat longer, maybe 2 hours more and perhaps would have avoided any loss of life. So much for following emergency protocol.

 

http://www.blitzquotidiano.it/cronaca-italia/costa-concordia-francesco-schettino-paratie-aperte-1319722/