Man Overboard on Wonder of the Seas

[not-enough-cruising]

3 hours ago, Iwilder said:

I think it is always a possibility in spite of careful design. I once saw a woman walk around the bow of a ship sailing into a rather stiff wind. As she rounded the bow the reverse wind hit her and knocked her to the deck and she started to roll. At that point, in the particular ship we were on, the lower portion of the railings were solid metal, but a little further on they were open at the bottom. She rolled awfully close to the open area. So very scary and quick, I have never forgotten.

No, it is not a possibility. 
Someone losing their balance and falling down doesn’t go over the railing, and it’s impossible for an adult  to go under the railing or in between the “slats”

everyone need to stop promoting this narrative that these thing can possibly happen by pure accident; they can NOT; pure and simple. 

[broberts]

34 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

One can't simply lose balance while standing on the balcony.

 

 

Sure one can. It would be tough to go over the railing, but people can lose their balance anywhere.

[smokeybandit]

24 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

Sure one can. It would be tough to go over the railing, but people can lose their balance anywhere.

Sorry, I meant one can't fall overboard simply from losing one's balance.

[LobsterStalker]

1 hour ago, molly361 said:

I WAS AT the Capt's corner and that is what he said - Jeez!!

cool , never said you weren't , only that it wasn't clear

 

Cheers

[Boatdrill]

5 hours ago, molly361 said:

I WAS AT the Capt's corner and that is what he said - Jeez!!

I'm not questioning your recollection of what you heard. 

 

I'm astounded that an experienced cruise ship captain would share the details, in public, of how a guest was killed during cruise for which he is responsible.   

 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2023 by Boatdrill

[RD64]

Not to discredit anyone’s perception of the situation, but in terms of overall liability, I do find it difficult to believe that the Captain - or anyone in authority - would disclose any specific details. This just opens them up to a whole range of legal issues.

[BND]

There's a story in People magazine online where his family is pushing for the search to continue.  They really think he can be found.  That just doesn't happen and at this point, the cost far outweighs any benefit.  

[Tree_skier]

20 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

One can't simply lose balance while standing on the balcony.

 

I simply lost balance in a hallway while coming back to the cabin from the Casino at 2am one night.  I didn't fall overboard though.

[BND]

15 hours ago, Boatdrill said:

I'm not questioning your recollection of what you heard. 

 

I'm astounded that an experienced cruise ship captain would share the details, in public, of how a guest was killed during cruise for which he is responsible.   

 

 

 

While the Captain has ultimate responsibility for the ship and the people, he doesn't  have responsibility for this situation.  Yes, he has responsibility for the safety of everyone onboard, but that doesn't apply to someone doing something they shouldn't be.  If someone jumps, climbs on a railing or gets pushed, none of that is the Captain's responsibility.  

[chengkp75]

4 minutes ago, BND said:

While the Captain has ultimate responsibility for the ship and the people, he doesn't  have responsibility for this situation.  Yes, he has responsibility for the safety of everyone onboard, but that doesn't apply to someone doing something they shouldn't be.  If someone jumps, climbs on a railing or gets pushed, none of that is the Captain's responsibility.  

Well, in a way he does.  Even if it is acknowledged that the person purposely jumped overboard, both the Captain, personally, and the cruise line can be sued under the Death on the High Seas Act, for failing to provide the necessary "quality of care" to prevent this instance.  The Captain is the cruise line's personal representative onboard, as well as the legal representative of the flag state.

 

Even in a situation where someone is "doing something they shouldn't be", if a "reasonable person" would consider doing the action, and the ship did not provide any means to prevent the action, or remediate the result, then they can be held liable.

[BND]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Well, in a way he does.  Even if it is acknowledged that the person purposely jumped overboard, both the Captain, personally, and the cruise line can be sued under the Death on the High Seas Act, for failing to provide the necessary "quality of care" to prevent this instance.  The Captain is the cruise line's personal representative onboard, as well as the legal representative of the flag state.

 

Even in a situation where someone is "doing something they shouldn't be", if a "reasonable person" would consider doing the action, and the ship did not provide any means to prevent the action, or remediate the result, then they can be held liable.

"Quality of care" for someone who does something they shouldn't.  The only way to prevent what he did would be to enclose everything.   The expectations are a bit crazy.  Personal responsibility seems to be something that many can't understand.  In this case, falling by doing something dangerous could have only been prevented by not having any open space outside.  Let's just fence in the entire ship for all those that can't follow directions.   Nothing the Captain or the cruise line did caused this.  I feel for his family, but he made a stupid choice in some way.

[torpeedo]

1 hour ago, Tree_skier said:

I simply lost balance in a hallway while coming back to the cabin from the Casino at 2am one night.  I didn't fall overboard though.

That's because of all that cash you won!!!🤣

[chengkp75]

59 minutes ago, BND said:

"Quality of care" for someone who does something they shouldn't.  The only way to prevent what he did would be to enclose everything.   The expectations are a bit crazy.  Personal responsibility seems to be something that many can't understand.  In this case, falling by doing something dangerous could have only been prevented by not having any open space outside.  Let's just fence in the entire ship for all those that can't follow directions.   Nothing the Captain or the cruise line did caused this.  I feel for his family, but he made a stupid choice in some way.

As I said, the standard to meet is whether a "reasonable person" would do what the victim did.  Not easy to sue under the DOHSA, as you have to prove negligence or misconduct. Never said the Captain or cruise line "caused" this, nor am I saying that the Captain, or the cruise line. will be held accountable for this person's death, but the Captain is responsible for the person's life.

 

Hey, if my midnight to 8am motorman, woking in the engine room, while I am blissfully asleep, does something he shouldn't have (like close the wrong valve), causes an accident, and hurts himself, who do you think gets drug and alcohol tested along with him and the watch engineer who was in the Control Room, not the engine room?  Me.  I am personally responsible for all my subordinates' actions, no matter how stupid, at all times they are working on the ship.  That is what my mariner's license is all about.  If the accident was caused by the person not being trained according to the company's SMS (safety management system), then I would be held responsible.  If, however, all specified training was accomplished, and the crew member still acted wrongly, then the SMS is likely at fault, and needs an update for further, more specific training.

[Ourusualbeach]

1 hour ago, BND said:

Personal responsibility seems to be something that many can't understand. 

Welcome to the 21st century.

[HicksRA]

4 hours ago, BND said:

There's a story in People magazine online where his family is pushing for the search to continue.  They really think he can be found.  That just doesn't happen and at this point, the cost far outweighs any benefit.  

I think I read somewhere that it happened in Cuban waters and they chose not to even search for him. 

[Jasukkie]

The wind tunnel effect on the front of Anthem has lifted me off my feet enough that I have wondered if it were possible to be blown overboard. 

[chengkp75]

9 minutes ago, HicksRA said:

I think I read somewhere that it happened in Cuban waters and they chose not to even search for him. 

They searched for him until released by the Cuban Coast Guard.

[broberts]

42 minutes ago, HicksRA said:

I think I read somewhere that it happened in Cuban waters and they chose not to even search for him. 

 

That information seems to be contradicted by the several videos of the search and first hand contemporaneous passenger reports.

[Seville2Cabo]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

They searched for him until released by the Cuban Coast Guard.

So do cruise ships need permission to go thru Cuban waters?  

[chengkp75]

10 hours ago, Seville2Cabo said:

So do cruise ships need permission to go thru Cuban waters?  

No.  So long as a ship does not engage in certain activities (fishing, cargo operations, anchoring) in a country's territorial waters, they are considered to be undertaking "innocent passage", which is free to any ship.  Also, it is not known whether the ship was in Cuban "territorial waters" (out to 12 miles from land), or within the Cuban EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone), which extends to 200 miles offshore.

 

The release by Cuban CG is similar to what happens when the USCG takes over a search and rescue from a ship.  The ship involved in the overboard incident is required to continue a search effort until the cognizant government authority (whose waters the ship is in) releases them (either because the CG has deployed better assets to continue the search, or it is deemed a lost cause).  If the search happens in international waters, certain nations have agreed to take over SAR for those areas (the USCG does most of the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico outside of other countries' territorial waters, and a lot of the North Atlantic and North Pacific), and the ship will be released by that nation's agency.

[Boatdrill]

On 9/4/2023 at 2:33 PM, HicksRA said:

 

 

Edited September 7, 2023 by Boatdrill

[Big_G]

On 9/4/2023 at 12:56 PM, BND said:

While the Captain has ultimate responsibility for the ship and the people, he doesn't  have responsibility for this situation.  Yes, he has responsibility for the safety of everyone onboard, but that doesn't apply to someone doing something they shouldn't be.  If someone jumps, climbs on a railing or gets pushed, none of that is the Captain's responsibility.  

I think @Boatdrill was suggesting maybe a little too much details coming from the Captain to the guests and not that he was anyway responsible. Having been a public information officer for my old job I see the point.

[Despegue]

On 9/3/2023 at 11:37 AM, chengkp75 said:

A "Williamson" turn (actually more teardrop shaped than figure eight), if done at anything over about 6-8 knots will cause a cruise ship to heel over from the turn to the point where loose items like glasses and dishware will go flying, and passengers will be thrown off their feet, and likely result in injuries.  So, first the ship needs to slow, and then turn.  This will take a few miles to accomplish, but does, if properly executed, get the ship back on the exact opposite course line, retracing it's "footsteps".

Well actually, the PRIMARY reason to perform a Williamson Turn (or Boutakov manoeuvre)  is actually to get the screw(s) or pods as far away from the man overboard, and should be done asap, while indeed reducing the speed. Secondary, the manoeuvre will ,at completion , put the vessel on a virtually reciprocal track and theoretically close to the position of the “man overboard “. Mind you, it is extremely difficult to find someone back, especially at night.
This is something that I absolutely insist on during the training of this manoeuvre. In a real-life event, The initial turn must be immediate and without delay . Screw the glasses, sorry.

 

 

[Despegue]

I need to clarify though that when performing this manoeuvre correctly, one can turn, reduce speed and limit the list so that injury onboard can be avoided, as Safety of all onboard is at all times the number one priority.

also, there are procedural differences between conventional and azipod ( or RR Mermaid , like the Millennium Class, ) equipped vessels .

[chengkp75]

6 hours ago, Despegue said:

I need to clarify though that when performing this manoeuvre correctly, one can turn, reduce speed and limit the list so that injury onboard can be avoided, as Safety of all onboard is at all times the number one priority.

also, there are procedural differences between conventional and azipod ( or RR Mermaid , like the Millennium Class, ) equipped vessels .

I will respectfully disagree.  The Williamson turn, states that the initial turn is to be "hard over", or full helm toward the side the person is on.  Any cruise ship that is traveling at better than 12 knots, when subjected to a "hard over" helm command will list in the 15-25* range, which will not only "toss the glasses", but toss the passengers.  The Norwegian Sky, in 2001 did a hard over turn at sea speed, and injured 78 people, one person was seriously injured when a video game fell on him, and another had a broken pelvis from being washed out of the pool.  Crown Princess also had a hard over turn at sea speed, with 284 injured.  There is no way to turn hard over without first reducing speed that doesn't induce extreme turn induced heeling on a cruise ship.  And, while you can be slowing the vessel during the Williamson maneuver, if the initial turn is "asap", then there will have been no reduction of speed.