Norweign Ship Evacuation

[chengkp75]

20 minutes ago, Hawaiidan said:

In light of this.... what  would you guess would cause almost new engines to loose power    I do not know how many of her power plants went down.... I suspect more than 2

The ship suffered a complete blackout, with all 4 diesel engines, which were likely all on line providing as much propulsion power as possible to counter the storm, tripping off line.

 

Here is my scenario from the Viking thread:  https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2647818-viking-sky-position-adrift-off-norway-coast-and-evacuating-passengers-crew/?do=findComment&comment=57108213

 

 

And various posts on that thread after this one.

 

I don't believe there was an equipment failure at all, I believe that the ship's safety functions performed as they were supposed to, but that environmental aspects led to a massive change in electrical load which tripped the entire plant off line.  

[kazu]

OMG - reason for the engine failure....

 

Someone wasn't watching the oil light.  The low oil light was on. 

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, kazu said:

OMG - reason for the engine failure....

 

Someone wasn't watching the oil light.  The low oil light was on. 

Not quite correct.  As the NMA stated in their press release, the oil level in the sumps was within normal operating range, so there was no alarm.  With the rolling, the oil pump sucked a momentary slug of air, and the engine shut down within seconds of this air pocket reaching the sensor, even if the oil pressure had been restored within seconds.

[kazu]

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Not quite correct.  As the NMA stated in their press release, the oil level in the sumps was within normal operating range, so there was no alarm.  With the rolling, the oil pump sucked a momentary slug of air, and the engine shut down within seconds of this air pocket reaching the sensor, even if the oil pressure had been restored within seconds.

 

Thanks 🙂  Looks like the news was too abbreviated.  

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, kazu said:

 

Thanks 🙂  Looks like the news was too abbreviated.  

Yes, most of the "reports" I've seen from the media tend to gloss over this point, "editorialize" and cherry-pick their facts to make a story.  If you look on the admittedly rather long thread on the Viking forum, around the last couple of pages, there is a link to the actual press release from the Norwegian Maritime Authority.

[Copper10-8]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Yes, most of the "reports" I've seen from the media tend to gloss over this point, "editorialize" and cherry-pick their facts to make a story.  If you look on the admittedly rather long thread on the Viking forum, around the last couple of pages, there is a link to the actual press release from the Norwegian Maritime Authority.

 

But the media is always right and never jumps to conclusions.....🤣

[DocJohnB]

5 minutes ago, Copper10-8 said:

But the media is always right and never jumps to conclusions.....🤣

But, of course.

[3rdGenCunarder]

15 minutes ago, Copper10-8 said:

 

But the media is always right and never jumps to conclusions.....🤣

 

Right, like the news report from the night when they were doing the evacuations. It began with "A doomed cruise ship..." Just a bit OTT.

 

[RuthC]

This explanation for the incident makes it even scarier to me. It makes it seem that there wasn't anything wrong with the ship, but an automatic response to very rough seas. That means it could happen to any ship in rough seas. True, this was not usual sea heights, but they aren't uncommon, either. I've been in seas that rough ---and worse---more than once.

I had been toying with the idea of taking this cruise next January, and came up with several reasons why it might not be a good idea for me. Much as I want to see the Northern Lights, this incident cements my decision not to do this cruise.

[Hawaiidan]

Any time you set foot outside your door your betting on getting home alive.   In a car,  walking, flying or in a ship.

Nothing is sure bet except dying.        What you do between now and then is your decision.    If you play the safety what if plan then you will maybe, maybe  live longer than sitting at home in front of the TV, ,unless fire flood,criminals,earthquake, lightning, tornado,dust storm, snow, sleet, Ice,falling tree, rats, stray dogs, mountain lions,  happen in your  front yard, a electrical short toxic food...and disease.?   The risks are there it is just  that we mainly assume nothing will happen to us....at home.   Thus it is probably far  more risky to stay at home.    When traveling you have layers upon layers looking out for you.

 

I understand  Ruth, in feeling cautious.    I get it,.    But would she drive the the store today or tomorrow?    Statistics show that where the majority of serious accidents happen...   

  On the other hand, Walter Bonatti, a storied climber said " Live life dangerously, its the only time you live at all."     

 

 Everyone dies, not everyone lives !       

 

Bottom line the passengers got a free cruise, some great stories and adventure.   No one died..  They dropped anchor,  nothing broke,  safety systems worked.     Its not like Titanic or the Lusitania   with icebergs and torpedoes

 

  In fact next to air travel,  ship travel is one of the safest ways to  travel.......  Cars among the worst.......will you still pull out of the garage today?????

[Despegue]

The last couple of days, I have purpously kept out of the discussion as there are more qualified posters contributing, and I do not wish to voice my own personal opinion regarding this incident on a public forum.

 

However, I see once again that on some forums, and in the media, one is quick to attribute blame.

let me once again explain that in Modern Safety culture,  simple Blame does not exist.

One of the Safety Management System (SMS Part of IMS) core principles is a No blame and Just Culture  policy where one focusses on causes, how to solve and how to implement improvements to avoid these causes.

There are nearly always more causes involved in any incident or accident, and from what I have seen regarding Viking Sky, the holes in the Swiss Cheese  (google Swiss Cheese concept) lined-up and she sailed almost right through.

 

Publicly Blaming crew/ Captain ( declaring he should be fired etc..., blaming design of the vessel and propulsion systems is simply uncalled for and proof of a lack of understanding what Safety entails.

 

 

 

[cruisemom42]

On 3/28/2019 at 2:09 PM, Hawaiidan said:

 

I understand  Ruth, in feeling cautious.    I get it,.    But would she drive the the store today or tomorrow?    Statistics show that where the majority of serious accidents happen...   

  On the other hand, Walter Bonatti, a storied climber said " Live life dangerously, its the only time you live at all."     

 

 Everyone dies, not everyone lives !       

 

Bottom line the passengers got a free cruise, some great stories and adventure.   No one died..  They dropped anchor,  nothing broke,  safety systems worked.     Its not like Titanic or the Lusitania   with icebergs and torpedoes

 

  In fact next to air travel,  ship travel is one of the safest ways to  travel.......  Cars among the worst.......will you still pull out of the garage today?????

 

You have no idea what Ruth's situation is. I find it very presumptuous to make such statements. Better to let others judge what type of travel is best for them. I'm quite sure Ruth has had her fair share of adventures and her share of stories to tell.

 

[kazu]

On 3/28/2019 at 3:09 PM, Hawaiidan said:

Any time you set foot outside your door your betting on getting home alive.   In a car,  walking, flying or in a ship.

Nothing is sure bet except dying.        What you do between now and then is your decision.    If you play the safety what if plan then you will maybe, maybe  live longer than sitting at home in front of the TV, ,unless fire flood,criminals,earthquake, lightning, tornado,dust storm, snow, sleet, Ice,falling tree, rats, stray dogs, mountain lions,  happen in your  front yard, a electrical short toxic food...and disease.?   The risks are there it is just  that we mainly assume nothing will happen to us....at home.   Thus it is probably far  more risky to stay at home.    When traveling you have layers upon layers looking out for you.

 

I understand  Ruth, in feeling cautious.    I get it,.    But would she drive the the store today or tomorrow?    Statistics show that where the majority of serious accidents happen...   

  On the other hand, Walter Bonatti, a storied climber said " Live life dangerously, its the only time you live at all."     

 

 Everyone dies, not everyone lives !       

 

Bottom line the passengers got a free cruise, some great stories and adventure.   No one died..  They dropped anchor,  nothing broke,  safety systems worked.     Its not like Titanic or the Lusitania   with icebergs and torpedoes

 

 

 

 

Seriously?  A free cruise?  Seriously?

 

Did you see the people in life jackets with water swirling under their feet who were stuck there for a long time? Each to their own

You don’t know if anyone was killed yet as there were a ton of injuries on board and no one knows who may have a heart attack or other stress related occurrence because of this.

 

I wonder if you had faced this if you would  be singing the same tune.  

 

 

4 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

You have no idea what Ruth's situation is. I find it very presumptuous to make such statements. Better to let others judge what type of travel is best for them. I'm quite sure Ruth has had her fair share of adventures and her share of stories to tell.

 

 

I know, I can just hit the like button but I am SO glad you said this.

 

I so agree. 

 

[AncientWanderer]

On 3/28/2019 at 8:42 AM, RuthC said:

This explanation for the incident makes it even scarier to me. It makes it seem that there wasn't anything wrong with the ship, but an automatic response to very rough seas. That means it could happen to any ship in rough seas. True, this was not usual sea heights, but they aren't uncommon, either. I've been in seas that rough ---and worse---more than once.

I had been toying with the idea of taking this cruise next January, and came up with several reasons why it might not be a good idea for me. Much as I want to see the Northern Lights, this incident cements my decision not to do this cruise.

 

I bet a lot of seasoned travelers will feel this way.

I wanted to do this so badly, but DH said to hold off a year to see how the reviews come in for this cruise.  He also was concerned about just logistics of meeting a ship in Norway in the winter.  Most of the cruise lines doing this route are more local, like Fred Olsen or Hurtigruten.  With Viking's "included airfare," people are coming from far away.  It just seems risky to have so much money sunk in a cruise, and then they could have one of those wild storms like they've been having lately and it would all go pfffft.  

 

Anyhow, I'm not giving up on the Northern Lights, but I'm looking at other ways to see them.

 

[Alberta Quilter]

12 hours ago, AncientWanderer said:

 

Anyhow, I'm not giving up on the Northern Lights, but I'm looking at other ways to see them.

 

 

Come to northern Canada to see them!  In the west, come to the Yukon, Yellowknife or even Fort McMurray.  

[Copper10-8]

18 minutes ago, Alberta Quilter said:

 

Come to northern Canada to see them!  In the west, come to the Yukon, Yellowknife or even Fort McMurray.  

 

Or fly Icelandair's "Northern Lights" 757