ShipSpotting.com
Login: Lost Password? SIGN UP
Ship Photo Search
Advanced Search
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8
  Print  
Author Topic: Six Dead After COSTA CONCORDIA Runs Aground  (Read 57414 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,972



View Profile WWW
« Reply #45 on: January 15, 2012, 03:12:30 pm »

NOT ANYONE REALLY WONDERING ABOUT THIS,,RIGHT ?

For me is just a chain of things going to happen. There is no way of evacuating 1000,s of passengers in a normal manner when disaster strikes. Even in calm situation a competent and
good crew will have a problem to evacuate them. A bad crew, i.e. all perfect on paper but nothing else works, and panic sets in, things like this are the norm. I had a incident a/b in 2009, and all crew performed good, (smoke out of the engine room, but not a fire) and all were calm,,the only one paniked was the CHIEF OFFICER !!!
What you thing will happen on a passenger ship,,1000s of untrained passengers and only a few
crew which may panik and CHAOS in SQUAE will set in !!!!
On top of that in this case, seemingly STUPIDITY in SQUARE by the Master and Chief officer
most probably under intense pressure giving paxe a show for commercial gain.
I bet, nobody from COSTA LINES top managers will step up and say,,we wanted the Master to get close to such matters to give the passengers something special.
The result is more regulations and rules,,but those don,t eliminate stupidity !!

Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
Marcelo Rovida
Just popping in

Offline Offline

Posts: 11


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 15, 2012, 04:41:44 pm »

Friends, i believe there are a lot of members in this site that are expert in ships and could help us and specially me to understand some simple but very important issues;

First...Why in hell a ship with this much tech on board would hit a submerged reef (rock) that it was said to be not in the charts ?? As far as i understand..these ships should have several security systems that take over if one malfunctions. Like in planes that have all double..i heard modern ships have even triple !! If even my modest gps unit in a rubber zodiac can tell me precisely the situation under..i cannot understand what happened here !!!

Second ....100 years after Titanic's tragedy, it seems our Naval Engineers should be taken back to school if their projects cannot maintain such a monster perfectly leveled when water comes in. The modern ship projects are said to contain the water in the damaged compartment perfectly leveled in order to prevent the tilting to one of the sides...Can anyone help me to understand if this is not true ? In a ship that is 290m in length, 60m opening is too much for the structure to stay leveled ? I wondered if that opening would have been done by an Iceberg like in the titanic case in deep waters or by a hit from a tanker or other huge vessel. It would mean that the 112.000t liner would be now resting in the bottom of the ocean somewhere and a tragedy with more casualties would have happened for sure. The only way she is still there and recoverable (maybe) is that it is touching the bottom in shallow waters, otherwise........ I think these issues should be taken very seriously after this tragedy and people should be more responsible when launching these giants to sea.
Report to moderator   Logged
Michael Brinkmann
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 204



View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 15, 2012, 04:58:18 pm »

Any safety system is as good as the crew which has to work with it. You can disable almost every of this systems for several reasons (for maintenance or even if you approach to narrow ports, where it makes no sense to get alerted almost every second due to the close shore or ground). I can't believe, that the whole crew were set into panic, otherwise it would be impossible to slip a number of life rafts and boats. There is almost none of the passenger competent to do so. And in contrast to the "Titanic" desaster, the overwhelming majority of passengers and crew got rescued, that even counts for the crew or at least for the majority of them.

At the other hand we should keep in mind, that a tragedy allways can happen and even the best trained crew couldn't forecast every possible situation. Now, every death is far too much, but as reported from ShipPax Information, within the last 25 years more than 300 Million people did a cruise, which equals almost 2,1 Billion passengerdays on board - and 13 (in words: thirteen) passengers died for damage reasons in that period. To cruise is still the safest way of travelling.

Guess all cruise operators have to do their homework now, but there is no reason for any panic at all.

Michael
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,972



View Profile WWW
« Reply #48 on: January 15, 2012, 06:00:14 pm »

Good day Michael

I absolutely agree there is no reason to panic. The main problem is actually very simple,,why in the hell a ship like that is in a place like that !!!!
Any Master should have said,,no way,,going that close,,does not matter how big the ship. But then, he has to show the passengers and the owners that he is the "Master" who can perform as needed.
Safety systems can be overrided,,de-activated,,but the worst case actually is when people think they know and in reality they don,t know where they are. that,s called simply "safety awardness"  . I noticed it very often that officers standing in front of ECDIS (Eletronic Charts) and when you ask them look out of the window,,they have no clue where they are !!!
The main reason for that is,,that nowadays naut officers are teached by people who never sailed. In Germany for example is to my knowledge not one teacher left in the nautical academies who sailed as Master  by himself. 30 years ago when I made my license all of our teachers were ex-captains. Nowadays they are professors in their line of teachings, mathematics for example, but if you ask them what is a ship,,they look at you like you are from another planet.
Secondly, all are teached first nowadays how to operate electronic systems and how to push this and that buttom, but almost nothing about that why this or that buttom is pushed and what the results, then viewable, are good for.  Nautical schools have 8 semester generally, 6 for theoretical and 2 for praxis, Now the push is on for 7 in schools. More praxis is needed not more school.
Youg nautical officers nowadays have programs to determine from where the wind comes. The wind comes from 271.9 degrees,,not from WEST !!!!!!!
Ever since ECDIS was invented and "forced" onto the ships accidents increased, now is the talk to send all back to school to understand ECDIS,, First one has to understand how a ship is functioning and how it gets from A to B and then I can get the gadgets which may make life easier,,not the other way around.
But then I guess, I am an old guy who does not know what he is talking about


Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
Mats
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 785


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 15, 2012, 07:01:13 pm »

If (... if! ...)the information and AIS plot on the following web page is correct, the whole bridge crew is going to have a LOT of questions to answer.
If (if!) the plot is correct, the vessel has passed through a narrow sound between a small rock and the island og Giglio. According to my Google Earth measuring tool, the sound is merely 80 meters wide! From the translation from Turkish, it would seem there is no shallow water between Civitaveccia and the narrow sound, and as we all see from the damage to the hull, the vessel must have been in really shallow waters, with the damage stretching almost to the waterline and the big rock wedged in the hull.
See the purported AIS plot here (Google Translate from Turkish):
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=tr&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denizhaber.com%2FHABER%2F27951%2F1%2Fcosta-concordia-kaza-giglio-toskana.html

See also the following video, which I believe shows the Costa Concordia doing a close "sail-by" (as in "fly-by") on Giglio Island in august 2011. Obviously, she is showing off and seems to be passing dangerously close to the island:
http://video.corriere.it/nave-concordia-al-giglio-/9dfa5ea6-3e9b-11e1-8b52-5f77182bc574

The story also seems to be supported by the following Italian web page (via Google Translate):
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=no&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.savonanews.it%2F2012%2F01%2F14%2Fleggi-notizia%2Fargomenti%2Fcronaca-2%2Farticolo%2Fcosta-concordia-si-incaglia-allisola-del-giglio-3-morti-e-14-feriti.html

Here's a picture of the island, with the rock and the narrow sound in the background (via hotlink):
« Last Edit: January 15, 2012, 07:45:18 pm by Mats » Report to moderator   Logged
djvdschoot
Just popping in

Offline Offline

Posts: 3


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: January 15, 2012, 09:23:58 pm »


Second ....100 years after Titanic's tragedy, it seems our Naval Engineers should be taken back to school if their projects cannot maintain such a monster perfectly leveled when water comes in. The modern ship projects are said to contain the water in the damaged compartment perfectly leveled in order to prevent the tilting to one of the sides...Can anyone help me to understand if this is not true ? In a ship that is 290m in length, 60m opening is too much for the structure to stay leveled ? I wondered if that opening would have been done by an Iceberg like in the titanic case in deep waters or by a hit from a tanker or other huge vessel. It would mean that the 112.000t liner would be now resting in the bottom of the ocean somewhere and a tragedy with more casualties would have happened for sure.

The comparison with Titanic is apt in that the length is similar (269 m versus 290 m for Concordia) while the rupture in the hull also has a similar length (90 m).
That is more than 30% of the ships hull, damaging more than 3 adjacent compartments.

In damage stability calculations the maximum damage length is much smaller. All compartments are so designed that when damaged, water automatically distributes over the width of the ship (normally U shaped compartments), so no pumps are involved in this.
The remaining intact part of the ship provides sufficient stability to keep the ship upright.

Should however more than 3 compartments become flooded to such an extent that the bilge pumps would not be able to keep up then that is the equivalent of wings falling of an aeroplane, it's the end of the line.

So a gash of 90 metres is simply too much, for Titanic as well as for Concordia.
 
Report to moderator   Logged
Fergal Clohessy
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 331


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: January 15, 2012, 10:15:39 pm »

the AIS shows the vessel navigating through the narrow sound yet the captain claims he was 300m away from any rocks. it will be interesting to hear the official outcome
Report to moderator   Logged
Lysfoss
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 271


View Profile WWW
« Reply #52 on: January 15, 2012, 10:24:09 pm »

Cruise captain 'committed errors'

The company operating a cruise ship that capsized after hitting rocks off western Italy on Friday says the captain may have "committed errors".

He appears to have ignored the firm's emergency procedures "which are in line with international standards", Costa Crociere said in a statement.

Capt Francesco Schettino is suspected of manslaughter, but denies wrongdoing.

At least five people have died but about 15 remain unaccounted for. Divers are trying to find more survivors.

"It seems that the commander made errors of judgement that had serious consequences," the statement by Costa Crociere said.

The Costa Concordia is lying on its side just off the Tuscan island of Giglio, where it ran aground.

Capt Schettino has been detained on suspicion of manslaughter. The chief prosecutor said the vessel had "very ineptly got close to Giglio".

But Capt Schettino has said that the rock it hit was not marked on his nautical chart.

"We should have had deep water beneath us... We were about 300 metres (1,000ft) from the rocks more or less. We shouldn't have hit anything."

He also also denied claims by prosecutors that he left the Costa Concordia before evacuation was complete. "We were the last to leave the ship," he told Italian TV.

Capt Schettino, 52, has worked for Costa Cruises for 11 years. First officer Ciro Ambrosio has also been detained.
Report to moderator   Logged
Transit

Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: January 15, 2012, 11:10:45 pm »

.........
If (if!) the plot is correct, the vessel has passed through a narrow sound between a small rock and the island og Giglio. According to my Google Earth measuring tool, the sound is merely 80 meters wide! ........
Here's a picture of the island, with the rock and the narrow sound in the background (via hotlink):


here is the view going in... narrow sound seems an optimistic description ?



Pete
Report to moderator   Logged
Fergal Clohessy
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 331


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: January 15, 2012, 11:44:37 pm »

the guardian newspaper reports a different course:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2012/jan/15/costa-concordia-italian-cruise-ship-interactive?newsfeed=true
Report to moderator   Logged
Fergal Clohessy
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 331


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: January 15, 2012, 11:46:20 pm »

but they say the ship hit rocks as it tried to turn back towards the port. yet the damage is on port side..
Report to moderator   Logged
victor radio74
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 172


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: January 16, 2012, 12:12:14 am »

That so called information from the Guardian is absurd. No power and course to Giglio island at 15,3 knots.See the real track in Marinetraffic,15.3 knots at 20,37 hours
Report to moderator   Logged
António Camilo
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 246


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: January 16, 2012, 12:20:45 am »

Hi,

The marinetraffic plot explains wants happened!
Tks victor radio74.

After 2037, at 15kts, they turned NW and hit the NE corner of the island. The VDR will explain how the autopilot (what settings) and the offset from the planned course took the ship to run aground. That's my guess...

AC
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,972



View Profile WWW
« Reply #58 on: January 16, 2012, 01:40:52 am »

If they really had it in autopilot then the Capt is really "dumb in square"
Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
Michal-S
Not too shy to talk
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



View Profile
« Reply #59 on: January 16, 2012, 06:33:05 am »

The captain has been dumb as he is. Complacency is the least what can be said about his attitude. There is no way of planning a track 300 metres off the rocks.
Even allowing for cruise-vessels' way of giving a thrill to passengers, by showing them landscapes at close distance-there was nothing to display there after 2100 hours and with most passengers seated for welcome-dinner.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.053 seconds with 19 queries.
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved