Splendor fire

[chengkp75]

I'm not sure what systemic failure in training has occured. Seems like any recent incident that we have heard about has resulted in little to no issues with cruise operation.

 

The fact that an engine room fire caused sprinklers to discharge in the theater, leads to either equipment failure or an operator failure. The fact that a sprinkler was observed still flowing water the next morning is another factor in my analysis. This shows that the maintenance system may be flawed in that inspections and tests of emergency systems did not find the faulty equipment, or that training in proper operation of the system resulted in releasing water to the incorrect area, if it was a manual release. Either case, there is a failure of the International Safety Management (ISM) system which mandates how all aspects of vessel operation, maintenance, training, and safety are to be managed in order to operate the vessel in the safest manner for the passengers, crew, ship, and environment.

 

The fact that in this instance there was apparently little damage and little disruption to the cruise operation is fortuitous. If you read the report of the previous Splendor fire, while poor design led in large part to the severity of the incident, there were serious flaws in training and equipment maintenance of safety equipment and fire fighting skills, that acerbated the situation and led to the total power failure of the ship.

 

I am certainly not a Carnival hater, and defended their handling of the Triumph fire, and the accusations of negligence in the cause of the fire, but where blame needs to be placed, I've hit on any line that is involved. I'm not going to completely condemn Carnival over this, certainly since there will never be a public investigation report as there was for the previous fire, but the similarities concern me, professionally.

Edited November 23, 2015 by chengkp75

[jh2360]

The fact that an engine room fire caused sprinklers to discharge in the theater, leads to either equipment failure or an operator failure. The fact that a sprinkler was observed still flowing water the next morning is another factor in my analysis. This shows that the maintenance system may be flawed in that inspections and tests of emergency systems did not find the faulty equipment, or that training in proper operation of the system resulted in releasing water to the incorrect area, if it was a manual release. Either case, there is a failure of the International Safety Management (ISM) system which mandates how all aspects of vessel operation, maintenance, training, and safety are to be managed in order to operate the vessel in the safest manner for the passengers, crew, ship, and environment.

 

The fact that in this instance there was apparently little damage and little disruption to the cruise operation is fortuitous. If you read the report of the previous Splendor fire, while poor design led in large part to the severity of the incident, there were serious flaws in training and equipment maintenance of safety equipment and fire fighting skills, that acerbated the situation and led to the total power failure of the ship.

 

I am certainly not a Carnival hater, and defended their handling of the Triumph fire, and the accusations of negligence in the cause of the fire, but where blame needs to be placed, I've hit on any line that is involved. I'm not going to completely condemn Carnival over this, certainly since there will never be a public investigation report as there was for the previous fire, but the similarities concern me, professionally.

 

Okay

[joellebridgers]

Just a little information about this ship. It was in the mist of being built by Costa when they got into financial trouble. Carnival bought the ship from them, hence why it is not designed like other Carnival ships. Then Carnival purchased Costa altogether.

[chengkp75]

Just a little information about this ship. It was in the mist of being built by Costa when they got into financial trouble. Carnival bought the ship from them, hence why it is not designed like other Carnival ships. Then Carnival purchased Costa altogether.

 

The Norwegian Sky was similarly built for Costa, and taken over by NCL when partially finished.

 

However, the Splendor suffered from the same Fincantieri design flaw as later CCL brand ships, having the cabling from the forward generators run over the aft engines, which led to the power failures in both the Splendor and Triumph.

[falkcor]

Just a little information about this ship. It was in the mist of being built by Costa when they got into financial trouble. Carnival bought the ship from them, hence why it is not designed like other Carnival ships. Then Carnival purchased Costa altogether.

 

 

That is sequentially out of order and a few years from being accurate.

 

Carnival acquired Costa in 2000. Splendor's first cruise was in 2008.

 

It is true that splendor was to be built for Costa, as a Concordia class ship, which itself is a direct derivative of the conquest class. It was redirected from Costa to carnival given capacity demand.

 

However, it's not as if carnival bought one laid up ship then the whole line. They bought the line first and accordingly built several ships for Costa, based on their pre-existing designs for the destiny, triumph, conquest and spirit class, and tweaked the conquest class to yield the Concordia class as they did the others to better suit the market.

[joellebridgers]

That is sequentially out of order and a few years from being accurate.

 

Carnival acquired Costa in 2000. Splendor's first cruise was in 2008.

 

It is true that splendor was to be built for Costa, as a Concordia class ship, which itself is a direct derivative of the conquest class. It was redirected from Costa to carnival given capacity demand.

 

However, it's not as if carnival bought one laid up ship then the whole line. They bought the line first and accordingly built several ships for Costa, based on their pre-existing designs for the destiny, triumph, conquest and spirit class, and tweaked the conquest class to yield the Concordia class as they did the others to better suit the market.

 

 

I was just going off of the what was told to us by the future cruise presenter two weeks ago. He did say that Costa was building Splendor when they ran Into financial trouble, so they bought it outright. Considering Carnival doesn't really own, just controls the leading stock in Costa, this may still stand to be correct.

Reading further into this, I see that Carnival actually bought stock in Costa in 1997, and in 2000 purchased more stock, which then lead them to be the controlling stock holder. Interesting stuff....... Thanks for your input, it led me to read more about the history of their accomplishments.