Costa Concordia SINKING

[Ozcruiser1]

I would have hoped that society could move past this sort of thing:

Dominica Cemortan was on board as was Roberto Bosio ( 2nd Captain?)

Dominica is portrayed as the villain and thus media reports her as

 

‘She was slim, had blonde hair to her shoulders and was wearing a black dress with her arms uncovered. They were laughing and in high spirits.’

 

( Source) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2089052/Domnica-Cemortan-Was-Costa-Concordia-captain-Francesco-Schettino-trying-impress-ballerina.html#ixzz1kDsYtRXr

 

Roberto the hero is never described…..he may or may not be portly, short, unkempt etc etc.

 

He goes to the bridge when the event occurs and helps… A HERO

She goes to the bridge and helps ( making announcements in Russian to help Russian passengers ) and is the villain.

 

He is an employee, as is she. His passage documents are not brought into question.... her's are.

 

Language used makes a difference….They have variously described as “wineing and dining” ……if it was reported as them sharing a meal doesn’t create the same impression. I’m sure Roberto Bosio had a meal perhaps with someone that evening. If he shared a meal with a fellow male officer, is his sexuality brought into question?

 

Domnica and the captain share a meal …. Scandal ( he must be ‘doing’ her)

Roberto just shares a meal.

Get my drift.

My wife is slim, bolnd, leggy, was/is a dancer and loves loves dancing, wears a black dress with arms uncovered when on a cruise. She laughs and is in high spirits when on a cruise, shares a meal every night with a table of 6 ,8 or 10 others …. But doesn’t mean that she’s ‘doin’ them.

 

Others see the worst in people …… I like to see the best in people.

I hope that I would be a better table companion on a cruise !!

[HelloHelloHola]

Thank you for these photo's some of them were extremely good for sourcing information. One picture I did notice was number 29 of the ships anchor.

 

If you look behind the near anchor chain on the right of the anchor you can see a pile of chain on the seabed. This draws me to the conclusion that the anchor was not used to turn the vessel as I had previously believed as the chain would have been fairly taunt and not piled up like that. That, to me, indicates that the anchor was released when the vessel had already stopped. Any other mariners agree with my call?

 

rgds

:)

 

If the ship is still in motion while the anchor is dropped, wouldn't the drag of the anchor cause the bow to become the "back end" of the ship whatever it is heading. In this case, the bow would be pointing north or northeast instead? Therefore, I support the theory that the anchor was dropped after the ship came to its final resting place. What do you think?

[Milaandra]

You asked earlier about a couple from Kent.

 

Thanks anyway.

 

I do agree it's almost impossible to figure out the cast of characters in this production.

 

I'm not sure it would be much better if we could read Italian.

[Davyjonesrugrat]

If the ship is still in motion while the anchor is dropped, wouldn't the drag of the anchor cause the bow to become the "back end" of the ship whatever it is heading. In this case, the bow would be pointing north or northeast instead? Therefore, I support the theory that the anchor was dropped after the ship came to its final resting place. What do you think?

If the anchor had been used when the ship was heading out of the bay (North) after the bump, the ship would have been turned around it and thus making it point towards the south. This is what I hoped had happened, it now turns out that this was not the case and that the anchor was dropped after the ship had already turned towards the south. After the vessel had stopped the anchor was dropped and hence the reason why there is a pile of anchor chain

 

rgds

:)

[UMDCruiseProf]

This week The Weekly World News has announced that Earth Will Collide with Nibiru on July 12, 2012.

 

Worse yet... the Captain of Nibiru slipped and fell onto an asteroid!

[Feelin' Nauti']

Costa Concordia are offering survivors a 30 per cent discount off future cruises in a bid to stave off lawsuits expected to costs hundreds of million of pounds.

:cool:

 

A spokesman for Costa Cruises, which operated the Concordia and whose parent company is Carnival, said that the company is trying to do everything they can for those passengers directly affected.

 

"The company is not only going to refund everybody but they will offer a 30 per cent discount on future cruises if they want to stay loyal to the company," the spokesman said.

 

According to the paper, in an attempt to help survivors, Carnival has been telephoning passengers daily asking if they are suffering nightmares or sleepless nights.

 

Passengers are also reportedly being sent letters by Costa detailing how to make claims for lost valuables and offering a full refund on the voyage.

[HelloHelloHola]

If the anchor had been used when the ship was heading out of the bay (North) after the bump, the ship would have been turned around it and thus making it point towards the south. This is what I hoped had happened, it now turns out that this was not the case and that the anchor was dropped after the ship had already turned towards the south. After the vessel had stopped the anchor was dropped and hence the reason why there is a pile of anchor chain

 

rgds

:)

 

Exactly, my theory was based on the assumption that the anchor was dropped while the ship was either making that starboard turn or shortly after (heading south), not shortly after the point of impact. So we are thinking more or less of the same thing.

[Milaandra]

I would have hoped that society could move past this sort of thing:

 

Good on you, Oz! If you're ever in Scotland, look us up. (And I promise it won't mean a thing...)

[cruiserfanfromct]

In a few minutes on CNN there will be new video of Captain.

[cruiserfanfromct]

Correcton - new Audio of captain stating to PA that he would be the last to leave ship. :confused: Famous last words!

 

In a few minutes on CNN there will be new video of Captain.

[Dorotheajn]

[quote name='Beachin2']Apparently, there will be no black box data. Boxes had been broken for 2 weeks!

[URL]http://news.yahoo.com/confrontation-grows-between-italy-captain-ship-group-145346862.html[/URL]

Unacceptable.[/quote]

If this is true and if the captain can prove his case that he repeatedly told the head office and asked for them to be repaired for more than 2 weeks then Costa's head office have a lot of explaining to do. And how can BOTH boxes be broke - not only one. Something is NOT right !

[Michigan Cookies]

[quote name='Milaandra']Where did the "falling into the lifeboat" story come from?

According to the court document:

"The circumstance is admitted even by Capt. Schettino, who nevertheless, in his version of the facts at the validation hearing, stated that the abandonment was not wilful and that in light of the condition of the deck that he had reached, it was necessitated."

With the harbour master's timeline, I think the sequence of events is being made more clear. The report at 00:34, that Shettino has told them he is in a lifeboat and can see people in the water, opens up possibilities.

Yes, yes, I know I generally want to believe the best in people. (except for Mr. Obnoxious. I can't see any excuse for him, but I have a touchy spot about domineering people who refuse to listen.) But that aside...

If the sudden 60-70 degree list made it impossible to continue rescue operations from that part of the ship, doesn't Schettino have a responsibility for the people in the water also? (who have about 20 minutes before they die, according to the Costa training cited by Domnica)

The harbour master's report shows that Schettino was seen heading to port at 02:53, so he appears to have been floating around the beached ship for more than two hours...not exactly booking into a hotel and thinking about his feet. At that point there are 50 or more people still to be rescued. Schettino was seen on the dock at 03:17. No further information about his whereabouts, but the court document says he was there until he left by boat.

Again, not quite as cut and dried as the media would have us believe.

So, where did the "falling into the lifeboat and stuck for an hour" story come from? It's been repeated as fact so many times, I can't remember where it originally came from.[/QUOTE]
'Falling into a lifeboat' is reportedly the Captain's testimony when he appeared before the local magistrate. I really on [U]The Christian Science Monitor[/U] for factual reporting -- they are running an informative article on the Captain's '4 deceptions' at this link:
[url]http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2012/0118/Costa-Concordia-Top-4-deceptions-by-ship-s-captain/Schettino-said-on-Italian-TV-that-the-boat-collided-with-unmarked-rocks[/url]

[Milaandra]

[quote name='Dorotheajn']And how can BOTH boxes be broke - not only one. Something is NOT right ![/quote]

According to the Italian paper reporting Schettino's testimony, only one black box was broken. But I think they have slightly different functions.

[cruiserfanfromct]

CNN just played the "New" audio but this was posted somewhere this morning - so it turns out it is not so new:
[QUOTE]In recordings posted by Italian television, Capt. Francesco Schettino tells officials on the mainland, there were "more or less" 200-300 people still on board.
The coast guard asks, "captain, is everyone going to abandon the ship or is someone going to stay?"
Schettino replies: "I'm going to stay here."
[/QUOTE]

[HelloHelloHola]

[quote name='Milaandra']According to the Italian paper reporting Schettino's testimony, only one black box was broken. But I think they have slightly different functions.[/QUOTE]

I am a bit confused with this voice data recorder (black box). Is it bridge voice recorder or ship data recorder, or both?

[scubacindy]

I understand the fact that there are salvage divers on site, but when the media show the rescue divers they also include the others and no mention of anything except those on the resecue and recovery.

I guess I am just being picky about the images being misleading. Most likely those divers were there at the props to check for what damage they may have sustained. That is very understandable to need that information in regards to what they can salvage from this ship.

I am very interested in the divers perspectives of this and want to hear more from them, being a diver myself just peaks my interest. Plus, being that I am also a registered nurse that loves the sea it really has me riveted to the videos and reports.

ScubaCindy

[Charles4515]

[quote name='Davyjonesrugrat']Ooops crystal ball time !!!

So what might be unsafe to you might not be unsafe to them. In my line of work I make life saving decisions, I make decisions that can overrule Captains of ships if I feel the situation requires it, but I still would not consider you suggestion as the way ahead. You are tarring all Captains through the actions of one !

We need a constructive approach not one with more 'command rooms' that could cause mis-information or mixed command decisions


rgds
:)[/QUOTE]

Wrong. We need a command room onshore tracking the ship that can call the ship and order the Captain to stop if he is on a dangerous course. And if he does not take the order then the next in command should take over and stop the ship. This is no different than air traffic control looking at the radar and telling an airline Captain to change course or a Railroad Dispatcher looking at his board and telling a Railroad Enginer or Conductor to stop the train.

Also the second command should on his own overule the Captain if the captain puts the ship on a crash course.

This is not tarring the Captain but saving him from a mistake. Humans make errors and we will never stop that but if we work as a team mistakes can be corrected.

[IRL_Joanie]

[quote name='reallyitsmema']We have no way of knowing if the divers seen by the props were on search and recovery or if they are related to salvage. I doubt all divers are on search and rescue. [FONT=Arial Black][SIZE=3][COLOR=Black][B] There is a company there seeing if they can right the ship and another that will be pumping fuel off the ship so I would guess they have divers in the water also.[/B][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/quote]
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][SIZE=3][COLOR=Blue][B]
First company mentioned is [COLOR=Black]Titan Marine Salvage. We maintain an experienced team of engineers, naval architects and other marine specialists who have undertaken project management roles for numerous high profile emergency response and disaster clean-up operations.[/COLOR]

Second is [COLOR=Black]SMIT Salvage is a Division of SMIT which is involved in [B]Emergency Response[/B], [B]Wreck Removal[/B] operations and [B]Environmental Care[/B] Services.[/COLOR]

You can google both of these companies and read their credentials/expertise.

Joanie[/B][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[bobsig]

[quote name='TLCOhio'][COLOR=Blue][SIZE=3][FONT=Georgia] [I] [B]Arison’s philosophy of letting Carnival’s various fleets, including its flagship Carnival brand, operate with autonomy[/B]. Unlike the top-down approach at Carnival’s hometown rival, Royal Caribbean, Carnival lines have much more leeway to plot their own strategies."[/I][/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR][/quote]

This lack of supervision may be Carnival's undoing in the long run. Failure to supervise Costa's "publicity stunts" : [URL]http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/22/10210202-cruise-ship-captain-says-he-was-told-to-perform-fatal-maneuver[/URL]

[Milaandra]

[quote name='HelloHelloHola']I am a bit confused with this voice data recorder (black box). Is it bridge voice recorder or ship data recorder, or both?[/quote]

It was the google translation of the Italian article, so I'm really not sure. I think it might be the voice recorder.

[IRL_Joanie]

[quote name='Davyjonesrugrat']Ooops crystal ball time !!!

So what might be unsafe to you might not be unsafe to them. In my line of work I make life saving decisions, I make decisions that can overrule Captains of ships if I feel the situation requires it, but I still would not consider you suggestion as the way ahead. You are tarring all Captains through the actions of one !

We need a constructive approach not one with more 'command rooms' that could cause mis-information or mixed command decisions


rgds
:)[/quote]


[FONT=Comic Sans MS][SIZE=3][COLOR=Blue][B]Agreed. Anyone ever hear the old adage that "Too many cooks spoil the broth"?

Joanie[/B][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[blackshirtuk]

[quote name='Princess Patches']Here is a very good English translation of the full transcript of the Court Magistrate's decision:

[URL]http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/284454/20120119/francesco-schettino-costa-concordia-transcript-captain-court.htm[/URL]

I read it, but it is long. Towards the end, beginning with the paragraph "Coming to the danger of tampering with evidence" the magistrate talks about the prosecutor's accusation that Schettino tried to tamper with the voice data recorder, but she apparently does not believe the accusation and feels the prosecutor misunderstood something. She also talks in the same paragraph about how Coast Guard Commander De Falco (who ordered the captain back on board) ultimately decided to send another officer back on board, Deck Officer Martino Pellegrini, because De Falco had concluded Schettino "did not appear to be lucid".

Other interesting points in the Court Magistrate's Decision:

1. Magistrate concludes that Schettino and [COLOR=red][B]First Deck Officer Ciro Ambrosio[/B][/COLOR], who were both charged, acted imprudently, negligently, and incompetently in causing the sinking and in the deaths of the three passengers known dead at the time of the hearing.

2. Concordia was sailing very fast for so close to shore, 15 knots, at time of accident. They were sailing by sight only at time of accident.

3. Captain was informed very swiftly by his engineers that five compartments of the ship's engine room had been breached and were flooded. Magistrate states "captain could not help being aware immediately of the seriousness of the damage produced both due to the ever increasingling more evident tilt of the ship and because advised by the crew of the huge amount of water shipped".

4. She finds that due to incompetence and negligence the captain "failed to notify the coastal authorities of the accident in timely fashion, reporting only that an electrical problem was involved without mentioning the impact that had caused the leak.

5. Captain lost control of the ship which had its engines off and was shifting position only by means of rudders and inertia. The captain alleged that he sent an SOS out 30-40 minutes after impact, but she finds no external alarm signal was given to the coastal authorities to make the gravity of the situation known at that time. Captain alleges he ordered anchors dropped which caused the worsening tilt to starboard side.

6. Magistrate finds that first abandon ship call came at 10:58 p.m., about 1 hour 20 minutes after impact. At this time, it is confirmed that Schettino first informed Coast Guard of the gravity of situation, but captain then abandoned ship himself shortly after the 10:58 p.m. abandon ship call and was not seen by anyone during the evacuation procedure that ensued thereafter. Captain was "accompanied in the debarkation by members of the crew".

7. Captain not found to be a flight risk because he did not try to flee Giglio island and he did not resist when Harbor Patrol boat came to pick him up and take him into custody. Also, not a flight risk due to stable family life and because he expressed some remorse over the accident.[/quote]

Could this be the cause of confusion?

[COLOR=black]First Deck Officer Ciro Ambrosio = 2nd in command[/COLOR]

Roberto Bosio = Captain of Costa Serana

What do you think?
[B][COLOR=#ff0000][/COLOR][/B]

[Dorotheajn]

[quote name='Milaandra']According to the Italian paper reporting Schettino's testimony, only one black box was broken. But I think they have slightly different functions.[/quote]


We'll just have to wait and see what the final verdict is on the boxes. Whether it is one or both. Someone with knowledge of marine laws - Is a passenger ship allowed to continue to operate while one or both black boxes are inoperable ? And have been for 2 weeks while the ship has been to port multiple times ?

[SomeBeach]

[quote name='Milaandra']Burn me up as soon as possible and throw me back in. Looks like a pretty spot.[/quote]

[FONT=Comic Sans MS][SIZE=3][COLOR=blue]That's what I'd want my family to do if it was me. It sure does look pretty.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[bobsig]

[quote name='Charles4515']Wrong. We need a command room onshore tracking the ship that can call the ship and order the Captain to stop if he is on a dangerous course. And if he does not take the order then the next in command should take over and stop the ship. This is no different than air traffic control looking at the radar and telling an airline Captain to change course or a Railroad Dispatcher looking at his board and telling a Railroad Enginer or Conductor to stop the train.

Also the second command should on his own overule the Captain if the captain puts the ship on a crash course.

This is not tarring the Captain but saving him from a mistake. Humans make errors and we will never stop that but if we work as a team mistakes can be corrected.[/quote]

Somehow you have the impression that "controllers" actual control airplanes, trains, etc. They don't. Pilots control their planes and are the ultimate person in charge. If an air "controller" tells me descend to an altitude that results in me flying into a granite cloud, I'm dead and held responsible whereas the "controller" is alive and is maybe out of a job.
BTW- almost every pilot has experienced errors issued by "controllers", those still alive took matters in their own hands.

Trying to "control" thousands of ships worldwide where the "controller" is supposed to have all the information at hand that every onboard Captain has is ridiculous and impossible.