Concordia Special

[CruisersNC]

We've established that a ship must transmit its course in rwal time. To whom do they transmit?

 

The same people who are responsible for the shop, of course. That would be Costa/Carnival.

 

The ship is worthe somewhere in the neighborhood of $600MM-$700MM. You better believe CostaCarnival knows exactly where those expensive assetts are at all times.

 

 

Everyone can go to a websight and see where each ship is in real time. Again...that doesn't mean that cruise lines have personnel watching every ships course at every minute. If you have valid information to the contrary then please post it or provide us with a link so we can study that information ourselves. Opinions really aren't worth a hill of beans from laymen like ourselves. And then you first state that Costa puts "WOW" in a higher priority then their ship and passengers....then you state what is highlighted in red above....you need to make up your mind!

[Rochesterboatingdotcom]

The Discovery Channel special indicated that "every ship must automatically transmit it's direction, speed and position by law, and in real time".

 

The reason for this is collision avoidance, not so the home office can keep track of it's babies. In addition to an AIS transmitter, each ship has an AIS reciever which shows the direction, speed and position of every other ship near it so that they can avoid running into each other. In certian high traffic areas, there are Port Authorities that do monitor AIS transmissions and provide direction to ships similar to an aircraft controller.

[CruisersNC]

The reason for this is collision avoidance, not so the home office can keep track of it's babies. In addition to an AIS transmitter, each ship has an AIS reciever which shows the direction, speed and position of every other ship near it so that they can avoid running into each other. In certian high traffic areas, there are Port Authorities that do monitor AIS transmissions and provide direction to ships similar to an aircraft controller.

 

But this is not the argument that the other poster was making....he stated that Costa WAS monitoring the Concordia's course and KNEW the ship was offcourse and did nothing. Whether or not this area was a "high traffic area" and was being monitored by a "Port Authority" that night has not been stated in any of the shows or postings that I have seen thus far. Do you have any official information that a Port Authority was watching the Concordia that night? If so....then I'm sure there are people that would throw part of the blame onto them.

[Rochesterboatingdotcom]

Do you have any official information that a Port Authority was watching the Concordia that night? If so....then I'm sure there are people that would throw part of the blame onto them.

 

Nope, none whatsoever. I am agreeing with you.

[graphicguy]

If that truly is the case, that Costa didn't track their ship, then their liability will be much greater than it already is.

 

It's unfathomable to me that Costa/Carnival could act so negligently if this is true. I can't believe that they care that little about one of their $600MM ships to not track it....especially since the ship is required to send its course at all times, in real time.

[shootingstar07]

From the Discovery Channel report, the Concordia's life boats looked small, narrow, dark and cramped. That was a first for me. I usually think of "life boats" being similar to the tenders - big, airy and lots of lighting. Have never seen the inside of one of the life boats hanging from the side of deck 8.

 

Those poor pax looked and sounded frightened to death in those cramped quarters.

 

Can anyone shed any light of differences in cruise line life boats? I cruise on Princess, so would have thought there would be a company wide uniformity to the life boats.

 

Thanks.

[MDSue]

If that truly is the case, that Costa didn't track their ship, then their liability will be much greater than it already is.

 

It's unfathomable to me that Costa/Carnival could act so negligently if this is true. I can't believe that they care that little about one of their $600MM ships to not track it....especially since the ship is required to send its course at all times, in real time.

I have to comment on all the posts about how Costa (or any other cruise lines) track the ships and know here they are at all times. I have to believe there is no basis in fact for these statements. I believe the captain is responsible for steering the ship on the right course, not some distant corporate office.

I personally have been on a ship (not Costa) that did a very close sail by an island as a special treat for the passengers on the ship. We sailed extremely close to shore and did a complete 360 degree turn in front of the island between two mountain peaks. The captain announced the sail-by beforehand. The last time I sailed on the same ship by the same island, we were miles offshore.

I have no idea if the corporate headquarters had any idea of this sailby. As close as we were, if the captain had made any mistakes in judgment, there would have been nothing the corporate office could have done.

The truth is that this sailby was one of the highkights of my trip. I was surprised at how close we were to shore, but the thought of running aground never crossed my mind. I trusted that the captain knew what he was doing.

I don't think it is reasonable for a corporate office to be able to predict when a captain is about to make a navigational error that will cause a ship to run aground. If the captain had turned a minute or two earlier, the whole collision may have never occured. How can a corporate office be expected to gather data and respond so quickly.

I'm sure that captains will have much less flexibility and freedom to alter their course after this incident. I believe that the main improvement that needs to come from this tragedy is that more than one person on the ship needs to know where the ship is heading and should be able to speak up and correct the captain if he is heading on a dnagerous course; like a co-pilot on a plane.

[CruisersNC]

If that truly is the case, that Costa didn't track their ship, then their liability will be much greater than it already is.

 

It's unfathomable to me that Costa/Carnival could act so negligently if this is true. I can't believe that they care that little about one of their $600MM ships to not track it....especially since the ship is required to send its course at all times, in real time.

 

 

What if none of the cruise industry companies track their ships minute by minute? I haven't seen or heard any evidence that any of them do! You certainly haven't given us any. Would that be even more unfathomable to you? Earlier you stated as a fact that Costa thought it was worth risking their $600MM ship as well as the lives of the entire crew and all the passengers to steer the ship closer to shore for the "WOW" factor....now you think its unfathomable that they didn't!!! Really????????

[Vampire Parrot]

I have to comment on all the posts about how Costa (or any other cruise lines) track the ships and know here they are at all times. I have to believe there is no basis in fact for these statements. I believe the captain is responsible for steering the ship on the right course, not some distant corporate office.

I personally have been on a ship (not Costa) that did a very close sail by an island as a special treat for the passengers on the ship. We sailed extremely close to shore and did a complete 360 degree turn in front of the island between two mountain peaks. The captain announced the sail-by beforehand. The last time I sailed on the same ship by the same island, we were miles offshore.

I have no idea if the corporate headquarters had any idea of this sailby. As close as we were, if the captain had made any mistakes in judgment, there would have been nothing the corporate office could have done.

The truth is that this sailby was one of the highkights of my trip. I was surprised at how close we were to shore, but the thought of running aground never crossed my mind. I trusted that the captain knew what he was doing.

I don't think it is reasonable for a corporate office to be able to predict when a captain is about to make a navigational error that will cause a ship to run aground. If the captain had turned a minute or two earlier, the whole collision may have never occured. How can a corporate office be expected to gather data and respond so quickly.

I'm sure that captains will have much less flexibility and freedom to alter their course after this incident. I believe that the main improvement that needs to come from this tragedy is that more than one person on the ship needs to know where the ship is heading and should be able to speak up and correct the captain if he is heading on a dnagerous course; like a co-pilot on a plane.

An excellent post. Well thought out.

 

The law is clear. The Master (to give her/him the formal title) has the responsibility for safe navigation of the ship. Where the ship goes is the Master's responsibility. They are highly trained; good Masters are extremely risk-averse; and they are paid to keep me, you, and the ship safe.

 

The Master and his designates will always -and should, nay, must have- the flexibility and ability to alter the coures of their ship as they see fit. And they must be able to justify if asked why the ship did alter course.

 

e.g. Some years ago, off Malaga in the Med. I was on the helm of a boat with about 100 passengers, I altered course 30 degrees port over a few minutes when I was driving and informed the boss. The Captain asked why. I pointed to the traffic, indicated I was going to go behind him (We had right of way but better safe.... plus the other ship's watch were asleep... ), he nodded and went back to his paperwork. (Captains and Chiefs do a lot of paperwork)

 

I've been on a ship which did not take the fuel-optimum course so that we could pass by Bear Island; the Captain, DC, Safety Officer and Naviation Officer took the decision to skirt by Bear Island at no closer than 3 Nautical Miles; perfectly safe, still very fuel-efficient and wonderful for the passengers. My photographs and video footage are pretty damn good. The Captain and Nav had plotted a superb course; even if we'd missed our turn to starboard we'd still have stayed in deep water.

 

I've been on a ship where the GPS log showed we took a 30-NM detour to nowhere (a few years ago); it was because the Captain and his team decided it was where we should conduct a speed trial which was required sometime on the cruise after coming out of refit. What we did was totally safe, it met the requirements of the company and we had a nice clear bit of sea with no wind or traffic so we could go balls-out. We did a constant 24.7 knots on a ship that was required to maintain 23 knots. The course had been discussed with the relevant officers; i.e. the Deputy Captain, Safety Officer (Senior 1st), Navigator, Deck Officers who were on watch, etc.

 

Do I know if the company knew about this? No, and I don't care. During the speed trial, the Senior First Officer (aka Safety Officer) was in command on the bridge, aided by his certified, experienced team. Even the most junior officer on the bridge was a qualified watch officer - which is always the case. He was 22 years old and still had the qualification, experience and maturity to keep the ship safe - unlike some blokes over 50 I could mention. (Yes, I'm still bloody angry that 30+ people died and a beautiful ship was wrecked)

 

In the ECR were the Chief and his team. The Captain was fairly relaxed; I had dinner with him. He knew the nearest land was over a hundred nm miles away, the sea was deep, the traffic was non-existent, and if there was the slighest problem he would have been contacted. Because he trusted his bridge crew.

 

VP

[Lucy Jane]

Seat belts in a tender? I saw the show on Discoveru chsnnel - I've never seen seatbelts on a tender as shown on the American maitime vessel. Also the seating arrangement was one on each side facing each other. Wonder if theve ever seen a cruise boat tender?

[nybumpkin]

Seat belts in a tender? I saw the show on Discoveru chsnnel - I've never seen seatbelts on a tender as shown on the American maitime vessel. Also the seating arrangement was one on each side facing each other. Wonder if theve ever seen a cruise boat tender?

As I posted elsewhere, the lifeboat used in the demonstration in this program appears to be a training lifeboat from Massachusetts Maritime Academy. It is closer to a cargo ship's lifeboat than a cruise ship lifeboat. I think they used the training lifeboat mostly to show the cramped quarters (which would be similar on cruise ship lifeboats). My son (student at the US Merchant Marine Academy) watched the program with me and talked about launching lifeboats. The cargo ship he was assigned to last year had a launching system in which the lifeboat dropped fairly quickly into the water, and you needed the seat belts. He said it wasn't a fun experience.:eek:

 

BTW, for those who asked about the mariners in the Discovery show, the Massachusetts Maritime Academy is a very well regarded school for merchant marine training. My son considered applying there until he realized that the State University of New York's Maritime Academy would be much less expensive since he would receive state resident tuition, and if he received an appointment to USMMA (he did:D) his only expenses would be student fees. He has sailed with several officers who attended Mass Maritime. If you remember Captain Phillips from the Maersk Alabama hijacking, he graduated from Mass Maritime. There are also a number of other maritime academies in addition to USMMA, SUNY Maritime and Mass Maritime - there's the Maine Maritime Academy, Great Lakes, California Maritime, and Texas A&M in Galveston. I may be missing one....

[MDSue]

(Yes, I'm still bloody angry that 30+ people died and a beautiful ship was wrecked)

 

 

VP

 

Thanks for your insightful post. I enjoyed reading it!

I think we are all "bloody angry" that over 30 people died and a beautiful ship was ruined. When I saw videos of the interior of the ship, I thought it was the most beautiful ship I've ever seen. I can't help but wonder if the captain had just called an abandon ship as soon as it was clear the ship was going to sink, if everyone could have been saved. My only reasonable conclusion is that the captain went into shock and was unable to take control of the situation. His officers should have intervened and demanded action. Others had to know he was on the phone with the coast guard lying about the severity of the situation.

One question that hasn't been answered yet is if there was any reason that the lifeboats couldn't have been lowered sooner. I know it will probably be years before a full-review of this accident will be published and in the meantime, we'll all have to speculate and wonder why the captain delayed the evacuation, and why no one else on the bridge spoke up about the impending collision course. Was no one on the bridge paying attention?

On one of the original threads about the Concordia sinking (that sadly went poof), someone posted a link to the official Coast Guard review of another cruise ship (the Monarch of the Seas off St. Maarten) that ran aground. I read the entire review and it was very interesting. In that incident, the captain made a mistake that caused the ship to hit a reef and breach the bottom of the ship, but instead of denying the situation, he did everything possible to ensure the safety of the passengers and crew and everyone was safely evacuated safely.

One of the recommendations made by the coast guard was that each ship should have a system of checks and balances where at least three people on the bridge review the charted course. Most importantly, they suggested that the second and third in command should be comfortable in bringing any problems to the attention of the captain. It seems like that this policy was never implemented, at least on this cruiseline. The captains should not be so powerful and so full of themselves that the other officers feel powerless to speak up.

Hopefully, this accident will spur the entire industry to make required changes that prevent another repeat of this tragedy.

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

From the Discovery Channel report, the Concordia's life boats looked small, narrow, dark and cramped. That was a first for me. I usually think of "life boats" being similar to the tenders - big, airy and lots of lighting. Have never seen the inside of one of the life boats hanging from the side of deck 8.

 

Those poor pax looked and sounded frightened to death in those cramped quarters.

 

Can anyone shed any light of differences in cruise line life boats? I cruise on Princess, so would have thought there would be a company wide uniformity to the life boats.

 

Thanks.

 

I believe Princess ships and Costa Concordia have three types of boats - three tenders on each side, two skiffs you usually see creating the security perimeter, and the rest are the 'regular' life boats. It looked like they were all in use for the Concordia evacuation.

 

You may not ever want to read/see Steinbeck's/Hitchcock's "Lifeboat." :eek:

[Davyjonesrugrat]

As I posted elsewhere, the lifeboat used in the demonstration in this program appears to be a training lifeboat from Massachusetts Maritime Academy. It is closer to a cargo ship's lifeboat than a cruise ship lifeboat. I think they used the training lifeboat mostly to show the cramped quarters (which would be similar on cruise ship lifeboats). My son (student at the US Merchant Marine Academy) watched the program with me and talked about launching lifeboats. The cargo ship he was assigned to last year had a launching system in which the lifeboat dropped fairly quickly into the water, and you needed the seat belts. He said it wasn't a fun experience.:eek:...

The type of lifeboat you might be referring to is called a free fall lifeboat

 

http://www.vanguardlifeboat.com/FreefallLifeboats.html

 

These are being introduced on such places as oil rigs etc. Some cargo vessels are also using them. Their use on Cruise ships is highly unlikely due to their 'jerk' when they hit the water. With the elderly and the infirm this could cause serious injuries.

 

RGDS

:)

[Vampire Parrot]

The type of lifeboat you might be referring to is called a free fall lifeboat

 

http://www.vanguardlifeboat.com/FreefallLifeboats.html

 

Thanks for the link. Be sure to watch the commisioning video on that website!

 

VP

[tomculb]

I find myself wondering about a number of things after watching the Discovery show.

 

First, there has been on these boards some discussion about the ship's anchor, but I don't recall anything mentioned about it on the show. When was it (they?) dropped, and why?

 

And maybe an answer to that -- if the ship was without power, why did it turn to starboard (away from the island) as it lost headway. One would think that listing to port, with a jagged hole on the port side, and the wind from starboard, it would turn to port. Were the rudders still operable (can they be operated on emergency power?), and was the ship intentionally turned away from the island? Perhaps in an effort to turn it around? Or did it turn because its starboard anchor was dropped?

 

Lots of unanswered questions . . .

[Davyjonesrugrat]

Everyone can go to a websight and see where each ship is in real time. Again...that doesn't mean that cruise lines have personnel watching every ships course at every minute. If you have valid information to the contrary then please post it or provide us with a link so we can study that information ourselves. Opinions really aren't worth a hill of beans from laymen like ourselves. And then you first state that Costa puts "WOW" in a higher priority then their ship and passengers....then you state what is highlighted in red above....you need to make up your mind!

Part of the AIS system allows the vessels track to be monitored, this allows anyone with the appropriate system to look back on the track that the vessel has taken over a set period of time. I am unsure of the length of time since I have never had the necessity over 24 hrs to check further back..

 

I use this system in my work on a daily basis

 

rgds

:):)

[kruzgal]

"On one of the original threads about the Concordia sinking (that sadly went poof), someone posted a link to the official Coast Guard review of another cruise ship ..."

 

 

Anyone know what happened about those threads - have they started up elsewhere?

[QM1]

The type of lifeboat you might be referring to is called a free fall lifeboat

 

http://www.vanguardlifeboat.com/FreefallLifeboats.html

 

These are being introduced on such places as oil rigs etc. Some cargo vessels are also using them. Their use on Cruise ships is highly unlikely due to their 'jerk' when they hit the water. With the elderly and the infirm this could cause serious injuries.

 

RGDS

:)

 

This lifeboat concept is unsuitable for cruiseships. Not only because its not suited for elderly people, but also because cruiseship lifeboats are about ten times as big, or even larger. No one wants to experience such a rollercoaster/airplane crash combination.

[CruisersNC]

Part of the AIS system allows the vessels track to be monitored, this allows anyone with the appropriate system to look back on the track that the vessel has taken over a set period of time. I am unsure of the length of time since I have never had the necessity over 24 hrs to check further back..

 

I use this system in my work on a daily basis

 

rgds

:):)

 

I would guess that that is where the information was obtained to make that video on youtube that was posted on the "sinking" thread showing the concordia's path that night...with a man narrating....is that right?

[sparks247]

See following site for the AIS track of the CC:

http://www.qps.nl/display/qastor/2012/01/17/20120117_stranding

 

Some-one commented that the vessel turned around using the bow thrusters, which is highly unlikely. At that time the engine room was flooded and only power available was from the emergency generator for emergency lighting, Nav equipment, internal and external communication etc. It would not have sufficient capacity to drive the thrusters.

It appears that they dropped one or both anchors which made the ship turn around. There was a stiff ENE breeze (20-23 mph) at the time of the incident which pushed this giant vessel towards it's current resting place, just North of the port and possibly punched some additional holes in her bottom. (Strictly my opinion).

 

Freefall lifeboats are ok for cargo ships and offshore platforms but not for cruise line passengers. All seats (extra high) are facing forward, every-one is strapped in a harness and the lifeboat drops nose first into the water.

[CruisersNC]

See following site for the AIS track of the CC:

http://www.qps.nl/display/qastor/2012/01/17/20120117_stranding

 

Some-one commented that the vessel turned around using the bow thrusters, which is highly unlikely. At that time the engine room was flooded and only power available was from the emergency generator for emergency lighting, Nav equipment, internal and external communication etc. It would not have sufficient capacity to drive the thrusters.

It appears that they dropped one or both anchors which made the ship turn around. There was a stiff ENE breeze (20-23 mph) at the time of the incident which pushed this giant vessel towards it's current resting place, just North of the port and possibly punched some additional holes in her bottom. (Strictly my opinion).

 

Amazing video. Trying to look at the ships movement from a physics point of view....it doesn't seem as though thrusters on the front of the ship could make the entire ship move sideways through the water like that (it would take thrusters all along that side of the ship?)....same goes for dropping an anchor.....but it amazes me that the winds could push that behemoth sideways through the water like that. What do you think?

[Davyjonesrugrat]

This lifeboat concept is unsuitable for cruiseships. Not only because its not suited for elderly people, but also because cruiseship lifeboats are about ten times as big, or even larger. No one wants to experience such a rollercoaster/airplane crash combination.

In my view, it is not the size of the vessel but the style of passengers, i.e. elderly, young and the infants.

 

When these types of lifeboats are launched from height, the occupants are strapped into their seats, after an initial fall senstation, they suddenly hit the seat with a traffic jolt then move forward under power.

 

It would mean a different style of design for the ship/lifeboat but overall its the 'impact' barrier that holds it back from cruise ships

 

rgds

:)

[Davyjonesrugrat]

I would guess that that is where the information was obtained to make that video on youtube that was posted on the "sinking" thread showing the concordia's path that night...with a man narrating....is that right?

I am not aware of where this information origininated from so cant confirm that. No doubt it would be stored on the relevant servers for the websit confirmed, but each site is different. Some indicated that its up to a week but this is 'dodgey' to confirm

 

Companies have the facilities to store this information but prior to the Costa Concordia this has not been needed. Hopefully with the correct legislation in the future it might be necessary for Cruise companies to provide proof that their vessels have not particpated in 'Dodgey manoeuvres through the provision of this information

 

rgds

:)

manoeuvres

 

'

[MorganMars]

It is perfectly normal for the wind to have that kind of impact on the ship.

Someone on the poofed thread had done the surface area calculation and, if I remember correctly, it was equivalent to roughly three football fields. I am a sailor and have no doubt that the wind played a major role in pushing the ship to shore. Even if you don't sail, just think about what it would be like to try hanging a metal sign the size of three football fields in that kind of wind.

 

MorganMars

 

.....but it amazes me that the winds could push that behemoth sideways through the water like that. What do you think?