Statement from USCG on Antehm

[FIRELT5]

Statement from USCG on Anthem

[Clarea]

Thanks, but having trouble reading it.

[A&L_Ont]

Me too.

Edited February 12, 2016 by A&L_Ont

[garnetpalmetto]

And this needed to be its own topic rather than added to your extant thread...why? You don't get extra credit for starting 50 different topics on the matter. Oh and NEVER attach an image as a thumbnail. Nobody can read those. :rolleyes:

[ryano]

Its already been posted in several different articles. The OP must think he gets OBC or something for every new Anthem thread he starts.

 

Edited February 12, 2016 by ryano

[ryano]

Oh and NEVER attach an image as a thumbnail. Nobody can read those. :rolleyes:

 

Not even sure why that function is enabled here. They have the resolution set so small you cant tell anything about a pic thats been posted :rolleyes:

[A&L_Ont]

Not even sure why that function is enabled here. They have the resolution set so small you cant tell anything about a pic thats been posted :rolleyes:

 

Thanks for posting a readable version of the letter.

 

It appears as the USCG and NTSB are investigating the event. The Bahamas Maratimes Authoritie is also involved with USCG in seeing that the repairs are handled properly. Hopefully all will be satisifed so the ship can leave on Saturday.

Edited February 12, 2016 by A&L_Ont

[Ocean Boy]

I was just on a roll call thread. It was nice for a little while to get away from all the snippiness that has been going on here the past couple of days.:rolleyes:

[oldguysandgalls]

I was just on a roll call thread. It was nice for a little while to get away from all the snippiness that has been going on here the past couple of days.:rolleyes:

 

Thank you "Ocean Boy", especially for your last paragraph. We learned the hard way about "snippiness" when we commented on "inconsiderate" able bodied passengers ignoring the ' reserved for handicapped/wheelchair passengers" in the theater section of another RCL ship ( Vision of the Seas Jan. 11-Jan 21/2016). Some CC members said we ( wheelchair users) should get there earlier.... ( I guess they use the same logic when they see an unoccupied disabled parking spot).

Sorry, we don't mean to hijack your post.

Edited February 12, 2016 by oldguysandgalls

[voyager70]

Its already been posted in several different articles. The OP must think he gets OBC or something for every new Anthem thread he starts.

 

You may be onto something :)

[The_Big_M]

So much for the claims that a) there was only superficial damage and b) the USCG had no call

[Aus ATC]

Guessing the Bahamas Maritime Authority will be doing a bit of work for their "nominal" registration charges after this one.......

[RuthlessBoss]

Its already been posted in several different articles. The OP must think he gets OBC or something for every new Anthem thread he starts.

 

 

I for one appreciated the post as a separate thing. As for starting new threads, his count is just 4. For whatever reason, I missed it amongst so many fast paced posts within posts. And thanks for the readable size.

[chengkp75]

Thanks for posting a readable version of the letter.

 

It appears as the USCG and NTSB are investigating the event. The Bahamas Maratimes Authoritie is also involved with USCG in seeing that the repairs are handled properly. Hopefully all will be satisifed so the ship can leave on Saturday.

 

Actually, the USCG and NTSB are assisting the Bahamas Maritime Authority at their request. And this is in regards to the decision making process. The NTSB was not onboard to inspect the azipods or any other SOLAS equipment, since there was no "accident" to investigate. This is the USCG's jurisdiction solely, but they could ask the NTSB for technical assistance.

 

So much for the claims that a) there was only superficial damage and b) the USCG had no call

 

The USCG was onboard to conduct a Port State Control inspection, which they do regularly on the cruise ships, and which is covered under international and US law. This is to ensure that SOLAS regulations, not USCG regulations are met. Never said they couldn't or wouldn't. It is also the BMA's authority to inspect the vessel as the flag state.

 

Please note that the USCG does not use the word "damage" with regards to the azipod clutches, but that they "burned out". These are wear items, and they wore out prematurely. They did not cause the pod to be unusable, and the pod was only shut down "as a precaution" after the Captain no longer needed it after the storm. It is also unfortunate that the USCG statement does not include a statement of what these clutches are for, and how their premature failure affected the use of the pod, since everyone seems to miss the statement "as a precaution".

 

What I have always disputed was the call for the NTSB, and the USCG to investigate the Captain's decision to sail. This they could not do unless requested to by the BMA, and they will only be assisting the BMA. Further, any conclusions the USCG (the NTSB is only helping the USCG which is the US lead agency for maritime incidents) comes to based on the BMA investigation into the process of passage planning, will only be recommendations to the company, flag state, and IMO.

Edited February 15, 2016 by chengkp75

[Phoenix1949]

I have no doubt that the captain's actions will be vigorously investigated by the cruise company and its stakeholders. Beside the passengers safety they have a huge financial interest to protect.

[chengkp75]

I have no doubt that the captain's actions will be vigorously investigated by the cruise company and its stakeholders. Beside the passengers safety they have a huge financial interest to protect.

 

And the company protects both by their ISM system, which outlines the procedures for virtually every action taken within the company, from passage planning for ships to how payroll does its accounting. The mantra for developing an ISM system to meet the IMO's standards is "write what you do, and do what you write". Provided the Captain did not deviate from any of the passage planning procedures, in place at that time, I doubt he will be under any censure from the company, but may unfortunately be a victim of PR. What the BMA (with USCG assistance) is investigating is the sections of the company's ISM code that pertain to passage planning, not whether the Captain's decision was correct or not. They will decide whether the company policy should be changed or not, and may recommend to the IMO that best industry practices be changed, and the IMO's ISM standards change to reflect this. That still is not a condemnation of the Captain, but a requirement to change the company's guidelines.

[Phoenix1949]

You lost me with the acronyms ISM and IMO. I have no idea what they mean.

Must be some secret code to cover up the conspiracy to cover up the whole thing and whitewash the investigation. (just kidding, never sure how sarcasm will be received on the interwebs)

Thanks for your contributions here we're getting a masters in marine engineering from your posts.

[garnetpalmetto]

The IMO is the International Maritime Organization, an agency of the UN headquartered in London and responsible for creating a regulatory framework for shipping through mechanisms like SOLAS (International Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea) and Port State Control authority (giving national coast guards the ability to inspect foreign-flagged ships).

 

ISM is the International Safety Management Code which is an international standard for safe operation and management of ships created, in part, by the IMO and is incorporated into SOLAS.

 

OMG, the UN! Black helicopters! Conspiracy! ;)

Edited February 15, 2016 by garnetpalmetto

[loubetti]

You lost me with the acronyms ISM and IMO. I have no idea what they mean.

Must be some secret code to cover up the conspiracy to cover up the whole thing and whitewash the investigation. (just kidding, never sure how sarcasm will be received on the interwebs)

Thanks for your contributions here we're getting a masters in marine engineering from your posts.

 

IMO= International Maritime Organization. ISM= International Safety Management.

 

I suggest to chief Cheng that at times he should spell these out.

 

Imagine me talking about aviation, and I said: After the critical engine failed, the pilot did not achieve Vyse, and then fell below Vmc, and that is why the plane rolled and crashed. Even "critical engine" would not be understood by most, as I would then need to talk about torque, P-factor, spiraling slip stream, etc. In order to describe the critical engine! That is, of course, if you did not have counter rotating propellers!

 

We have to remember that not everyone knows our lingo. Thankfully, it appears that ships have far less of it than aviation does!

 

Cheng, I still want to talk to you about the pod props. Sadly, with how these threads get merged and edited by the mods, I'm not sure where this will take place.

[Phoenix1949]

Thanks for the explanation.

 

Ha! I knew there was a conspiracy......

[bouhunter]

Woohoo! Another Anthem thread!!!!

[CPT Trips]

I for one appreciated the post as a separate thing. As for starting new threads, his count is just 4. For whatever reason, I missed it amongst so many fast paced posts within posts. And thanks for the readable size.

 

Me too. I stopped reading some threads due to the bickering.

[chengkp75]

IMO= International Maritime Organization. ISM= International Safety Management.

 

I suggest to chief Cheng that at times he should spell these out.

 

Imagine me talking about aviation, and I said: After the critical engine failed, the pilot did not achieve Vyse, and then fell below Vmc, and that is why the plane rolled and crashed. Even "critical engine" would not be understood by most, as I would then need to talk about torque, P-factor, spiraling slip stream, etc. In order to describe the critical engine! That is, of course, if you did not have counter rotating propellers!

 

We have to remember that not everyone knows our lingo. Thankfully, it appears that ships have far less of it than aviation does!

 

Cheng, I still want to talk to you about the pod props. Sadly, with how these threads get merged and edited by the mods, I'm not sure where this will take place.

 

Sometimes I spell them out, sometimes I hope that Google will help me. Depends on how many times I've posted on the same thread. The only other one I'm probably frequently guilty about is the ISPS code (International Ship and Port Security System). Oh, then there's MARPOL (Marine Pollution Prevention Convention). Catching up to you, Lou?

 

You can probably start an azipod thread on the Ask a Question forum, without it getting moved.

[loubetti]

Sometimes I spell them out, sometimes I hope that Google will help me. Depends on how many times I've posted on the same thread. The only other one I'm probably frequently guilty about is the ISPS code (International Ship and Port Security System). Oh, then there's MARPOL (Marine Pollution Prevention Convention). Catching up to you, Lou?

 

You can probably start an azipod thread on the Ask a Question forum, without it getting moved.

 

Yes, Cheng. Look for it at the Ask a Cruise Question forum, my good man.

Edited February 15, 2016 by loubetti

[John&LaLa]

Thank you "Ocean Boy", especially for your last paragraph. We learned the hard way about "snippiness" when we commented on "inconsiderate" able bodied passengers ignoring the ' reserved for handicapped/wheelchair passengers" in the theater section of another RCL ship ( Vision of the Seas Jan. 11-Jan 21/2016). Some CC members said we ( wheelchair users) should get there earlier.... ( I guess they use the same logic when they see an unoccupied disabled parking spot).

Sorry, we don't mean to hijack your post.

 

That was me :D, thanks for the plug.

It is prudent advice to arrive early

I even had a wheelchair user agree with me

I do not park in HC parking spaces, usually ;)

Edited February 16, 2016 by John&LaLa