Senator calls for investagation into RC Anthem

[Bonnie J.]

Senator Bill Nelson has called the National Transportation Safety Board to look into RCCL's Anthem cruising into the storm that the National Weather Board said four days in advance that this would be a very strong storm.

I just saw this on our local WITN TV station news. We are in NC and ship turned around off Cape Hatteras,NC. I will let you know if/when I learn anything else about this.

[klfrodo]

Is this dude up for re-election?

Need to get his name out there?

[LHT28]

Maybe he or his family members were on the ship

[TC1957]

Given all the other carp they investigate, why not? I doubt an investigation will uncover any wrong doing but shouldn't we want to ensure that every cruise line has the most recent information upon which to make their operational decisions? Wouldn't it be good (for the public AND the corporation) to know that their procedures do not provide current information and/or that one of their Captain's had a lapse in judgement?

[DocF]

Is this dude up for re-election?

Need to get his name out there?

 

 

No he is not up for re-election. Nelson is a fairly consistent critic of the way cruise line operate out of his home territory. He is especially critical of RCI as they contribute to his opponents.

 

Doc

[Bankshot]

Today's ships have access to the very latest weather instrumentation available. This storm should have been avoided. The ship could have easily navigated around it by taking an Easterly course. The captain's poor judgment needs to be investigated.

[Keith1010]

Thanks for sharing this.

 

Keith

[kontraxed]

Right - RCI should be looking at their procedures related to severe storms. That being said, a few years ago I was on Royal Caribbean and we approached a severe storm in the same (Carolinas) region. The captain did his best to move the ship around the storm but we still went through some pretty heavy seas and the delay resulted in us missing a port of call (San Juan). I think RCI generally does do a good job of avoiding storms.

 

Wrong - A United States Senator should have something better to do than worrying about this. How about handling immigration, balancing the budget or destroying ISIS!

[Clarea]

Interesting, thanks for the report.

[navybankerteacher]

No he is not up for re-election. Nelson is a fairly consistent critic of the way cruise line operate out of his home territory. He is especially critical of RCI as they contribute to his opponents.

 

Doc

 

Another hack politician - wasting our Congress' time and our tax dollars while trying to get his name in the papers. The ship has not yet returned to port, there are no reports of serious injuries, the line has apparently made very generous compensation offers.

 

It is up to the company to initially determine if the captain handled his responsibilities properly: it is their ship and their customers --- and ONLY after there appears to be some valid need for Congressional inquiry should the matter be taken up.

[Texas Tillie]

Right - RCI should be looking at their procedures related to severe storms. That being said, a few years ago I was on Royal Caribbean and we approached a severe storm in the same (Carolinas) region. The captain did his best to move the ship around the storm but we still went through some pretty heavy seas and the delay resulted in us missing a port of call (San Juan). I think RCI generally does do a good job of avoiding storms.

 

Wrong - A United States Senator should have something better to do than worrying about this. How about handling immigration, balancing the budget or destroying ISIS!

 

And if any passengers had been injured or worse killed because the captain was negligent, people would be shouting for the government to investigate. I don't see why finding out if all decisions made were the best given the information available.

[chengkp75]

Today's ships have access to the very latest weather instrumentation available. This storm should have been avoided. The ship could have easily navigated around it by taking an Easterly course. The captain's poor judgment needs to be investigated.

 

Okay, here goes on another Anthem thread. Taking an easterly route would have put the ship in the north east quadrant of the storm, which is always the worst area to be (in the Northern hemisphere). The northwest quadrant is always preferable, given sufficient seaway, to the northeast.

 

As for the NTSB, it has no jurisdiction over a foreign flag ship operating in international waters. Sometimes, the NTSB or the USCG are asked by the flag state (Bahamas in this case) to take lead in investigation, but then these two US agencies can only make recommendations to IMO or the flag state. And since there was no loss of life, or serious injury caused by the storm, there is nothing for the NTSB, or even the flag state to investigate. The USCG will probably make a Port State inspection when the ship returns to NJ, but again, they cannot enforce USCG regulations, they can only ensure that SOLAS regulations are met.

[chengkp75]

As for any investigation at all, first the company will investigate to determine if all measures outlined in the company's International Safety Management (ISM) system were followed. If this is the case, that is where the investigation of this incident may end. The company may feel that additional measures need to be implemented, but that is not required. Further investigation would not be by any US agency, but by the ship's classification society, which issues the ISM certificate to determine if the RCI ISM meets industry best practices, and make any additional requirements known to both the company and the flag state.

 

I know on the other, locked thread, that many were predicting or calling for the Captain's firing or disciplining. As long as he followed the ISM requirements, and used his best judgement (and no one who was not there can judge that call), there will be no censure whatsoever.

[Krazy Kruizers]

Thank you for the information.

[Clarea]

As for any investigation at all, first the company will investigate to determine if all measures outlined in the company's International Safety Management (ISM) system were followed. If this is the case, that is where the investigation of this incident may end. The company may feel that additional measures need to be implemented, but that is not required. Further investigation would not be by any US agency, but by the ship's classification society, which issues the ISM certificate to determine if the RCI ISM meets industry best practices, and make any additional requirements known to both the company and the flag state.

 

I know on the other, locked thread, that many were predicting or calling for the Captain's firing or disciplining. As long as he followed the ISM requirements, and used his best judgement (and no one who was not there can judge that call), there will be no censure whatsoever.

Thanks for the interesting info.

[zqvol]

Today's ships have access to the very latest weather instrumentation available. This storm should have been avoided. The ship could have easily navigated around it by taking an Easterly course. The captain's poor judgment needs to be investigated.

 

 

They would still be sailing toward Great Britain if they had done as you suggested and still running from the storm. The only thing that could have been done differently was to leave the passengers at home.

 

The captain exercised exceptional judgement and did a great job!

 

There is nothing to be investigated and no US agency has jurisdiction to investigate anyway.

[njhorseman]

Hindsight is always 20/20, but there is something that could have been done differently. My intent isn't to point a finger at the Anthem's captain, but just to bring up a situation we actually experienced.

 

I may have missed it, but I don't recall anyone mentioning this possibility in any of the threads about this incident: The ship could have stayed in Cape Liberty for 8 -12 hours past scheduled departure time, which would have given the storm time to move further east, and further from the Anthem's planned route.

 

We were passengers on a Norwegian Breakaway cruise in October that was supposed to sail from NY for Bermuda at 4 pm on a Sunday afternoon. There was a hurricane or tropical storm affecting our route. When we checked in for the cruise we were handed a letter from the captain stating that the ship would remain at the pier in NY until about 2 am Monday morning...10 hours past scheduled sail away, in order to allow the storm to move further out to sea.

 

After departing NY, the ship sailed closer to the coast than normal in attempt to stay as far away from the storm as possible. Although we still had a rough day at sea on Monday, conditions were not nearly as bad as they would have been had the ship departed NY on time.

[TC1957]

This is going to be a tough topic and a hard time for many on this site.

[sail7seas]

I thought ships were safer at sea than tied up during a storm?

[Beachdude]

I thought ships were safer at sea than tied up during a storm?

 

There was something today on the internet news that said the same thing. They also said a full ship is safer as well.

 

Burt

[OfTheSeasCruiser]

I may have missed it, but I don't recall anyone mentioning this possibility in any of the threads about this incident: The ship could have stayed in Cape Liberty for 8 -12 hours past scheduled departure time, which would have given the storm time to move further east, and further from the Anthem's planned route.

 

 

I am no meteorologist, not was I onboard. This is what information I've gained from reading.

 

I guess staying in Cape Liberty was an option; however, the weather in Anthem's projected course was not supposed to be as bad as what happened. The weather was supposed to be somewhat bad, but nothing that the Anthem couldn't handle. Things obviously changed for the worse.

 

Things like this happen when at sea. It's not always avoidable. Yes, they could've stayed in Cape Liberty, but I really don't know whether they could've completed avoided the storm. Their choice to continue was probably based upon the forecasted whether in the area that Anthem was traveling, which was not supposed to be terrible.

 

Also, seems like the senator is just looking for attention.

Edited February 9, 2016 by OfTheSeasCruiser

[chengkp75]

Hindsight is always 20/20, but there is something that could have been done differently. My intent isn't to point a finger at the Anthem's captain, but just to bring up a situation we actually experienced.

 

I may have missed it, but I don't recall anyone mentioning this possibility in any of the threads about this incident: The ship could have stayed in Cape Liberty for 8 -12 hours past scheduled departure time, which would have given the storm time to move further east, and further from the Anthem's planned route.

 

We were passengers on a Norwegian Breakaway cruise in October that was supposed to sail from NY for Bermuda at 4 pm on a Sunday afternoon. There was a hurricane or tropical storm affecting our route. When we checked in for the cruise we were handed a letter from the captain stating that the ship would remain at the pier in NY until about 2 am Monday morning...10 hours past scheduled sail away, in order to allow the storm to move further out to sea.

 

After departing NY, the ship sailed closer to the coast than normal in attempt to stay as far away from the storm as possible. Although we still had a rough day at sea on Monday, conditions were not nearly as bad as they would have been had the ship departed NY on time.

 

Being just as fair, staying in port is not always the best answer. It all depends on the individual storm, its depression, the seas and swells, and wind direction, especially in relation to the port and the berth.

 

An extreme example is the Pride of America, which was tied to the dock in Bremerhaven being completed. A "100 year" storm blew over Bremerhaven, and because the ship was tied up broadside to the wind, she heeled over to the point where openings in the hull went below the water, and she sank at the dock.

 

Mooring lines pop and break all the time, in conditions far less than what that storm produced, and when they do, there is very little time to correct things before the ship can do serious damage to itself, other ships, or buildings.

 

I don't know what the actual track was, or what the forecast track was (and I doubt the two are identical, to the contrary of most meteorologists here on CC), and I don't know what the forecast winds and waves were for Cape Liberty, so I can't say whether it would have been better to stay in port or not. You also don't want to get into the position where the storm changes track, and the port is going to take a direct hit, and you either can't leave or if you do, you will be caught in restricted (shallow) waters.

 

For the poster who said a "full ship is safer", this is true of cargo ships, but the "cargo" on cruise ships is such a small percentage of the weight of the ship that it is inconsequential.

[njhorseman]

I thought ships were safer at sea than tied up during a storm?

 

Yes, but my recollection of the forecast was that the storm was headed northeast, and was not projected to significantly affect the NY City area. Again, hindsight is 20/20, but that forecast proved to be accurate, and the ship could have safely stayed at Cape Liberty.

[navybankerteacher]

I thought ships were safer at sea than tied up during a storm?

 

In most cases, yes. Ships in port are at risk from other vessels/objects which come adrift; and, while at sea they can maneuver to take high seas from the safest angle. Additionally, seas tend to rise higher as they hit shallow water. Ships are also generally safer and more stable when loaded than when riding high. The US Navy destroyers lost in the 1945 typhoon were riding high because they had not taken on sea water as ballast in their empty fuel tanks

[njhorseman]

Being just as fair, staying in port is not always the best answer. It all depends on the individual storm, its depression, the seas and swells, and wind direction, especially in relation to the port and the berth.

 

An extreme example is the Pride of America, which was tied to the dock in Bremerhaven being completed. A "100 year" storm blew over Bremerhaven, and because the ship was tied up broadside to the wind, she heeled over to the point where openings in the hull went below the water, and she sank at the dock.

 

Mooring lines pop and break all the time, in conditions far less than what that storm produced, and when they do, there is very little time to correct things before the ship can do serious damage to itself, other ships, or buildings.

 

I don't know what the actual track was, or what the forecast track was (and I doubt the two are identical, to the contrary of most meteorologists here on CC), and I don't know what the forecast winds and waves were for Cape Liberty, so I can't say whether it would have been better to stay in port or not. You also don't want to get into the position where the storm changes track, and the port is going to take a direct hit, and you either can't leave or if you do, you will be caught in restricted (shallow) waters.

 

For the poster who said a "full ship is safer", this is true of cargo ships, but the "cargo" on cruise ships is such a small percentage of the weight of the ship that it is inconsequential.

 

Please see my reply in post 23.

 

Also, while the strength of the storm may not have been accurately forecast, its track was. I'm a bit of a weather geek and follow storms that may impact the NY/NJ area very closely. In my admittedly amateur opinion, the storm never appeared to be a big threat to NY harbor.

Edited February 9, 2016 by njhorseman