Costa Concordia SINKING

[tntornadox]

It's one thing to have a "Captain's word is law" philosophy if you are out to sea with no ability to communicate outside the ship. But those days are long past. If you can ring up the office in Miami for a few pointers on how to cover your fanny (and theirs) after slamming your ship into an island, there's no reason your senior Officers can't speak freely to you about how you might avoid the mess altogether.

 

He contacted Costa in Genoa, not Miami.

[Palm Trees]

The initial reports (true or not) were that he emptied the safe of cash and took off. It could be that they want to verify this by looking to see if the safe is open and empty. That might lend some clues as to his state of mind which was more than likely in the flee mode.

 

 

Is there a master list of times safes are opened/closed, i.e. he last opened the safe at 10:45 PM? That would help with the time he knew he should get his "things."

[UMDCruiseProf]

Unless the passengers were doing the laundry does'nt look like the crew was down there. Here's the list of the missing - there are only three crew members missing so far:

 

I think it says... well... something... that only three crew members are missing (thankfully not more!). I would think, given the HUGE hole in the ship that a lot more crew would have been killed during the initial flooding. Maybe the initial flooding wasn't as torrential? But that seems implausible. Could have just been a relatively unpopulated area... a lot of machines but not a lot of support. In any case... I'm amazed that there weren't more lost crew (and passengers).

[Milaandra]

Here is a 20 degree list simulator link. Those people in the Concordia video are standing nearly upright.

 

Wow! That's quite an angle.

 

What do you think about the interview with the deputy mayor, who said that the list wasn't bad when he got on board. The first lifeboat is reported to have made it to the dock at 11:15, give time to offload passengers, then he said he took it back to the ship. So...what? 11:30-ish?

[King of Cool]

Original posting by deckofficer to King of Cool. Your scenario would be perfectly accepted by the captain, the way you say the 1st would approach the subject. A complete change where the 1st felt free to challenge the old man at any time isn't going to happen. Our academy training really drills home the hierarchy of our duties and responsibilities. I entered the academy in my mid 40's and as such were reminded by our licensed instructors that my age would have no bearing on how I was to be subservient to my 20 year old upperclassmen, that they, along with me, are in training to command a ship at some time in the future and I was to obey the orders of these young men. I even received demerits for my belt buckle not being shiny enough from a upperclassmen young enough to be my son.

 

The Exxon Valdez, had it responded to the 20 year old female midshipmen that was on board for her cruise semester from CMA, that the ship was on the wrong side of the navigation lights, they would not have run aground.

deckofficer, The days of the lash and keel hauling are well gone although I am sure that at sea, old traditions die hard.

 

There is a difference to being "subservient" and respecting authority or rank.

 

I think that we are in agreement in that there should be only one captain on board. But there is also a difference between “challenging” the captain as you describe it and not saying ONE SINGLE WORD and "subserviently" watch your ship crash into the rocks and sink.

 

Crew resource management is not about treating every captain like he is Captain Queeg - it is about how to make an input without rocking the boat. And if done in the right way it may save the boat.

 

I have no idea what happened on the Exxon Valdez, I am sure there were multiple causes. But I can guarantee one thing and that is as a result of this accident there will be massive changes over the entire shipping industry and that will include crew training.

[cruiserfanfromct]

I think it says... well... something... that only three crew members are missing (thankfully not more!). I would think, given the HUGE hole in the ship that a lot more crew would have been killed during the initial flooding. Maybe the initial flooding wasn't as torrential? But that seems implausible. Could have just been a relatively unpopulated area... a lot of machines but not a lot of support. In any case... I'm amazed that there weren't more lost crew (and passengers).

Good observation. I wonder if any crew in the engine room or nearby died instantly - it doesn't appear so. This just reinforces the fact that a quicker evacuation would have probably saved more lives. Just saying.

[Aus Traveller]

I appreciate the posts by a lot of people, but in particular Deck Officer (Bob) and King of Cool (John). Thank you.:)

[cruiserfanfromct]

Is there a master list of times safes are opened/closed, i.e. he last opened the safe at 10:45 PM? That would help with the time he knew he should get his "things."

That would be great if there were some sort of time stamp on the safe. There seems to be some impropriety associated with the safe. I guess we will find out soon enough.

[UMDCruiseProf]

On a newer ship, from the bridge, watertight door controls on a newer ship. All can be controlled individually, or all at once with the flick of 1 switch.

 

In the spirit of your post... maybe folks would like to see a shot I took of one of the navigation displays on the bridge of the Freedom of the Seas (which, BTW, seemed to be a tightly run ship!). Note the blue areas around the land masses and how the course stays away from them. Seems like it's darn clear where NOT to be, right?

 

[Ozcruiser1]

Oz's idea of the lifeboat modifications still sound like the best idea!

 

Besides, from what we have heard and seen in amateur video, the ship was almost immediately at that problematic 20 degree list...sooner than it took to check the engine room and determine the extent of the damage.

 

Thanks for your support of this idea first posted way back at post #3010 page 151 on this forum, also your sensible moderation of some posts regarding the "other women".

The picture posted #3887 shows a number of people on the forward decks, port side waiting. If the port side life boats were unable to be launched what were these people to do?

 

Post #3821 Cruize2 shows photos of muster stations on various ships. As I see it having to pass, be it infront or behind other passengers to get to the next muster station ( such as shown in the photo of NCL star... trying to get to station Y2 or Y3 you have to get past Y1)is a recipe for disaster/ chaos.

[Milaandra]

I was checking other threads, and I just have to comment.

 

What is with this intense hatred toward Domnica Cemortan???

 

Not only is there no evidence she was anything more than she claims to be, but really...even if she was doing every senior officer (including the female officers) and half the passengers...what does that have to do with anything?

 

Others have described their stories of how they helped out in the crisis are are praised as heroes. She describes how she helped out in the crisis and the reaction is virulent!

 

I just don't get it!

[Thoie]

Back to ON TOPIC here - I found this comment in one of the recent articles. IMHO it is spot on - thought I'd share:

 

To be fair, that's not entirely fair :)

 

I know of one incident in the 70's where a container ship hit something unexpected out at sea, and breached the hull to a similar degree (but without a giant rock being embedded). That ship continued on for another hour aiming for a particular beach to deliberately run aground on. There was no loss of life, the crew were not in danger, and while obviously the ship was badly damaged, it was the best way to deal with the situation - humans and cargo were all saved.

 

That's one I happen to know about. As these were pre-internet days and it was a cargo ship, I can't find any links for people to look at. The initial breach was not down to human error in that case, there was an uncharted hazard.

 

I would be surprised if that was the only accident of its kind ever - I presume this sort of thing happens from time to time.

 

Regardless of how the initial hit took place, I can't join in with the general vilification of the crew without knowing the full details. In the past similar actions (aiming close to a port to run her aground) worked well. In this instance, as we know, it went horribly wrong for ~30 of the 4,000 souls on board.

 

Given that Giglio is a volcanic island, a lot of the shore is steep and rocky. If you look at the area where the crash happened, abandoning ship at that point would have left the lifeboats trying to navigate amongst reefs and shoals, potentially landing passengers at the base of cliffs or on rocky shores with no land access.

 

Under different circumstances, had the damage had been less significant, beaching closer to the port may have been the right thing to do.

[cls711]

Maybe even a lighthouse!! :cool:

 

Using Google Earth, I've had a decent look at the island

and didn't notice any lighthouses along its coastline..

 

Hope I'm wrong..

.

.

 

Um....

 

like this one? ;-)

[Aus Traveller]

Wow - fascinating story. Thanks for sharing. Not sure I would let my 14 year old sail around the world but that's just me.

Sixteen year old Jessica Watson from Australia completed her solo unassisted round-the-world voyage a year or so ago. Around the time she set off and shortly afterwards there was some criticism of her parents that she had been allowed to go, but when she succeeded, there were well-deserved accolades.

[Ozcruiser1]

Hi Oz,

 

Communication would depend on your role onboard. Many offices have mobile phones onboard for the sole purpose of communicating across departments. In an emergency, they would be used to disseminate information to various department heads. Since an evacuation is only possible (really) with the participation of the various hotel departments (we handle everything from searching cabins to make sure everyone is out, to fire crews to muster stations and boarding the life boats/rafts). These department heads in turn get the information to their teams. Once the abandon ship whistles are sounded, the crew have assigned stations to report to. Step one, down to your cabin (if possible) for warm clothes & your life jacket. Step two - to your assigned station. This could be the front office to get a briefing on what to advise passengers, this could be to various points around the ship to direct traffic, this could be direct to your muster station. All information the general crew gets is likely to come from their department head via the bridge or cruise director (who immediately reports to the bridge in any emergency).

 

Another source of info is the PA system below decks. The bridge does not have to send messages to the entire ship. Communication can be (and often is) limited to crew areas only. This would allow them to let the bulk of the crew know what is happening and how to proceed and this information would quickly (given the gossip system onboard) get above decks (and yes, slightly mangled since it's a game of telephone at that point).

 

As for alcohol - the rules allowed for officers and crew to drink as they saw fit. However, you could not ever be intoxicated to the point where you would be ineffective in an emergency (anything above 0.08 rings a bell as problematic) and were always subject to random drug & alcohol screenings. Further, any officer seen or reported drinking in the 2 (might have been 4?) hours prior to a shift on the bridge or engine room was pretty much toast and off in the next port. I never worked on NCL but have several friends who did. NCL does in fact allow drinking onboard for crew/officers, however there is no liquor - only beer/wine. They seem to feel this reduces the likelihood of incapacitating intoxication.

 

Hi GAILIPEMI ( Michelle)

Thanks for your response.

In a time of crisis, I know that I would need to have confidence in what I'm told. I feel for the crew manning the muster stations in this tragic situation, trying to keep not only themselves calm but keep the passengers calm and maintain some sense of order.

 

 

Thanks

[Thoie]

I was checking other threads, and I just have to comment.

 

What is with this intense hatred toward Domnica Cemortan???

 

This entire thread has turned into a witch hunt, fueled by tabloid headlines, and an apparent desire to search out, or invent the most sordid details possible.

 

Regular cruisers are obviously interested to know what happened, fearing for their own future safety, and it's natural that people want to know exactly what happened. It's a control mechanism - people feel if they know exactly what went on, it would help them recognise, and therefore deal with future situations they may find themselves in. Hopefully no-one here will ever find themselves in that kind of predicament.

[cruiserfanfromct]

Thanks Thoie - good thoughts here. I still can not help wonder whether an earlier evacuation and announcements instructing passengers to meet at their muster stations rather than returning to their cabins would have had a better outcome.

 

To be fair, that's not entirely fair :)

 

I know of one incident in the 70's where a container ship hit something unexpected out at sea, and breached the hull to a similar degree (but without a giant rock being embedded). That ship continued on for another hour aiming for a particular beach to deliberately run aground on. There was no loss of life, the crew were not in danger, and while obviously the ship was badly damaged, it was the best way to deal with the situation - humans and cargo were all saved.

 

That's one I happen to know about. As these were pre-internet days and it was a cargo ship, I can't find any links for people to look at. The initial breach was not down to human error in that case, there was an uncharted hazard.

 

I would be surprised if that was the only accident of its kind ever - I presume this sort of thing happens from time to time.

 

Regardless of how the initial hit took place, I can't join in with the general vilification of the crew without knowing the full details. In the past similar actions (aiming close to a port to run her aground) worked well. In this instance, as we know, it went horribly wrong for ~30 of the 4,000 souls on board.

 

Given that Giglio is a volcanic island, a lot of the shore is steep and rocky. If you look at the area where the crash happened, abandoning ship at that point would have left the lifeboats trying to navigate amongst reefs and shoals, potentially landing passengers at the base of cliffs or on rocky shores with no land access.

 

Under different circumstances, had the damage had been less significant, beaching closer to the port may have been the right thing to do.

[tinlizzy]

http://gcaptain.com/gcaptains-john-konrad-narrates-the-final-maneuvers-of-the-costa-concordia-video/?37941

 

Narrative and video based on AIS data. Also the comments offer further insight from other mariners.

[Thoie]

Thanks Thoie - good thoughts here. I still can not help wonder whether an earlier evacuation and announcements instructing passengers to meet at their muster stations rather than returning to their cabins would have had a better outcome.

 

All "officials" everywhere are cautious of inspiring panic (though it's generally thought these days that people are more likely to freeze than to run around like headless chickens). Because of this they don't pass on all the details to civilians. Usually they're trying to avoid panic, but sometimes it may just be that they're busy trying to fix things. While that's no comfort to the passengers, imagine what it's like for you at work. You're desperately busy trying to get something done by a strict deadline, and your boss keeps asking for a status update on the task every 15 minutes. You think to yourself "I could sort this out faster if I didn't have to keep stopping to tell you I'm working on it". ;)

 

If I was a passenger, particularly if there was a severe list, I wouldn't be enthused about going back to my cabin, and would prefer to hang around somewhere near the muster point.

 

At the same time I can appreciate that if you tried to announce exactly what's going on in at least 5 languages (Italian, French, German, English and Russian in that order, and at a bare minimum in this case), you could be there all night. There comes a point when people are stressed (as I'm sure everyone on the bridge was), that it's easier to let the experts get on with their job.

 

Unfortunately this provides no comfort to the 4,000 people who aren't on the bridge, and are worried about what's going on. I'm not sure what the answer is. As a passenger I'd prefer to know what was happening, but I can't (at this minute) think of a sensible way to keep people informed without distracting bridge crew from vital tasks.

[cruiserfanfromct]

REMINDER: Geraldo Rivera reports on the Concordia @ 10:00pm EST tonight "Tragedy at Sea" on Fox News.

[Milaandra]

Some interesting first hand accounts

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/9029866/Costa-Concordia-the-inside-story-of-the-night-of-Friday-January-13.html

[Cuizer2]

It depends. Not in the US. Italy actually has some of the toughest laws about that, but no where are they required to go down with the ship. It's a week later and not everyone has been found yet. He'd still be there.

 

It will be up to the courts to decide, but it isn't quite as cut and dried as you would think.,

 

Okay, perhaps I should have said ...

 

The captain's duty ends when EVERYONE is safe on shore or until the captain is properly relieved of his duties.

 

However, I never claimed that the captain had to go down with the ship.

 

Even when the ship is in dry dock the captain remains on board and is still in command.

[Milaandra]

Most of the bodies found in the ship were in the restaurant? Is that the Deck 3/4 restaurant where they also found the purser with the broken leg?

 

If so, speculative theory #832 - could it be that they fell from the deck 4 level during a list? Many passengers were told to go to the other side of the ship, and that the angle was quite bad at that point. Could they have fallen then?

[Cuizer2]

Like, about 100%.

 

The captain is still controlling the ship even when the pilot is aboard. Only in the Panama Canal does the captain give up control of the ship.

 

The pilot is an expert on the harbor (or river - whatever the case may be) and not an expert on maneuvering any one of the hundreds of different ships that enter and leave the harbor.

 

The captain drives - the pilot navigates.

[Cuizer2]

The rule of Maritime Law is outlined in The Merchant Marines Officer's Handbook that lists the duties of the ship's master are:

1. The last man to leave the vessel;

2. Bound to use all reasonable efforts to save everything possible (ship and cargo)' date=' through aid of salvage, if necessary;

3. Responsible for return of the crew;

4. Responsible for communicating promptly with owners and underwriters; and

5. In charge until lawfully suspended.

 

 

 

 

Every single crew member, from the Captain to the stewards, has a designated role in an emergency on a cruise ship. Regular drills ensure everyone knows what to do.

 

 

 

 

Interesting read ~

 

 

http://www.law.washington.edu/Directory/docs/Allen/Publications/Article_1994_CaptainsDutySinkingShipTake2.pdf

 

Thank you for that link.