Costa Concordia captain saved some?

[wafflesniffer]

The only reason the lives needed saving were because of the captain's actions.

 

He deserves zero credit for saving anyone. Rather, he has blood on his hands.

 

If a drunk driver hits another vehicle, causing it to burst into flames, are we celebrating him if he manages to drag a passenger out of the burning car? That's what it reminds me of.

 

Your analogy doesn't work. Look at the situation from the standpoint of both the drunk driver and the passenger. If the drunk driver does nothing and the passenger is burned to death, the drunk driver is charged with manslaughter at a minimum, and the passenger is dead. The drunk driver is in deep either way, but has a chance to act (courageously) and lessen the severity.

 

The debate raised by this thread is whether Schettino's actions after his fateful mistake saved more lives than would otherwise have been saved (i.e. 30 something counts of manslaugter vs many more). I have no idea. It's easy to say in hindsight that the abandon ship call should have been made 10 minutes after hitting the rock, but I'm not a maritime engineer or a ship captain so I have no idea.

 

Nobody is giving Schettino a pass for his careless bravado that put lives at risk to begin with, or his cowardly actions after the ship came to rest on the shore. It is a question of interest as to how many lives would have been lost if the ship were in deep water away from land compared to the number lost the with the way it actually played out.

[Keel Haul]

Sniffer my question is what proof has anyone got that Schettino was responsible for said beaching.I think I will save my praise or vitriol till after the trial or the full facts have been leaked.

[captainmcd]

I presume that a formal board of inquiry will investigate the Concordia disaster in much the same way aircraft mishaps investigations are conducted. Here are some questions that seem to need answers:

Concordia Class Ship Stability and Buoyancy (Cruise ships have become overly top-heavy):

· Does this class ship have inherent stability problems?

· Did the grounding on the rock ledge cause the severe list?

· Should all five Concordia class ships be examined for stability and buoyancy issues?

· Should all five Concordia class ships be examined for stability and buoyancy issues?

· Presuming issues exist, should these ships be pulled from service?

· Were built-in damage control systems sufficiently robust to counter the list?

Emergency / Backup Systems:

· Reports seem to indicate that Concordia was blacked-out owing to generator casualties.

Does this ship class have emergency lighting sufficient to support orderly evacuation procedures?

· Does this class ship have emergency ship generators sufficiently robust to allow for restoration critical systems (e.g. de-watering, lighting, general announcing,)?

· Does this class ship have a damage control center equipped to respond emergency situations?

Training and Procedures (Thoughts on Best Practices):

· Does the Carnival owned fleet have formalized emergency procedures and checklists?

· Is there a printed emergency procedure manual?

· Are crewmembers formally tested on their knowledge of emergency procedures? Is a formal record keeping system to support training?

· Does Carnival use shipboard simulators to train and test critical shipboard personnel?

· Does Carnival have a check captains with similar functionality and authority as those by airline check crews.

· Does Costa have formalized-procedures that address needs of passengers with mobility issues, impaired sight/hearing?

Concordia Captain / Crew Response Best Guess Evaluation:

· Were passengers and crew informed of the gravity of the situation?

· Do “best maritime practices” encourage sharing information concerning emergencies?

· Delays seemed to have occurred, which contributed to chaos and loss of life. What factors, other than bad leadership, could have caused the delays?

This terrible mishap will not keep me ashore. Nonetheless, it seems evident that cruise ship industry puts too much emphasis on resorts at sea and, perhaps, too little emphasis on safety. Whatever the case, the industry should look at this as a “wakeup call.” Business as usual is simply not acceptable.

 

These are a lot of questions, and many of them would require access to the ship's plans, stability book, and SMS, and it is hard to speculate without more facts. Some things I can say:

All ships are required to have an emergency generator that is large enough to keep on the emergency lights, which include all disembarkation areas, and keep all communication equipment in operation, as well as all emergency equipment including fire and bilge pumps. They can not provide enough power for propulsion of the vessel.

All construction plans for vessels require an analysis of stability, both for operational and damaged conditions, and they must be approved by the class society which must enforce the IMO construction standards.

For the past 15 years IMO has required that all vessels have a safety management certificate, and the owner a document of compliance. This requires ships to have a Safety Management System that requires written check lists and procedures for almost all normal functions such as starting and stopping a piece of equipment, going aloft, docking or getting underway, etc. Also are requirements for written contingency plans for such things as grounding, power failure, loss of propulsion, fire, mass casualty, and all of these things require periodic drills and inspections of equipment.

Finally, With all of the international conventions signed by every flag state on the ocean I think that there are adequate laws and regulations in place now. We had SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) after the Titanic. Then in 1990 we got STCW (Standards of Training and Watchkeeping) that tried to level the qualifications of the people operating ships. Then the above mentioned ISM (safety management system) which is more about who to blame than accident prevention, and finally the ISPS or ship and port security convention to protect ships and ports from terrorists. Inspite of these regulations terrible things like this can happen. You can not legislate common sense and good judgement. The ISM convention should have been more than adequate to prevent this incident.

[littlesteelo]

I presume that a formal board of inquiry will investigate the Concordia disaster in much the same way aircraft mishaps investigations are conducted. Here are some questions that seem to need answers:

Concordia Class Ship Stability and Buoyancy (Cruise ships have become overly top-heavy):

· Does this class ship have inherent stability problems?

· Did the grounding on the rock ledge cause the severe list?

· Should all five Concordia class ships be examined for stability and buoyancy issues?

· Should all five Concordia class ships be examined for stability and buoyancy issues?

· Presuming issues exist, should these ships be pulled from service?

· Were built-in damage control systems sufficiently robust to counter the list?

Emergency / Backup Systems:

· Reports seem to indicate that Concordia was blacked-out owing to generator casualties.

Does this ship class have emergency lighting sufficient to support orderly evacuation procedures?

· Does this class ship have emergency ship generators sufficiently robust to allow for restoration critical systems (e.g. de-watering, lighting, general announcing,)?

· Does this class ship have a damage control center equipped to respond emergency situations?

Training and Procedures (Thoughts on Best Practices):

· Does the Carnival owned fleet have formalized emergency procedures and checklists?

· Is there a printed emergency procedure manual?

· Are crewmembers formally tested on their knowledge of emergency procedures? Is a formal record keeping system to support training?

· Does Carnival use shipboard simulators to train and test critical shipboard personnel?

· Does Carnival have a check captains with similar functionality and authority as those by airline check crews.

· Does Costa have formalized-procedures that address needs of passengers with mobility issues, impaired sight/hearing?

Concordia Captain / Crew Response Best Guess Evaluation:

· Were passengers and crew informed of the gravity of the situation?

· Do “best maritime practices” encourage sharing information concerning emergencies?

· Delays seemed to have occurred, which contributed to chaos and loss of life. What factors, other than bad leadership, could have caused the delays?

This terrible mishap will not keep me ashore. Nonetheless, it seems evident that cruise ship industry puts too much emphasis on resorts at sea and, perhaps, too little emphasis on safety. Whatever the case, the industry should look at this as a “wakeup call.” Business as usual is simply not acceptable.

 

Regarding stability: Cruise ships are not top heavy!. The center of gravity is right where it should be, near the bottom. All the engines, machinery, tanks etc. are down there, and the upper decks are usually made from lighter aluminium. Stability is not the issue. A cruise ship is designed to be able to turn hard over at cruising speed, and this is tested during sea trials. The sharp turn likely caused a shift in the water which had entered the hull, and combined with the effect of the shallow water, caused it to list severely.

 

About your last point, you said that ''the cruise ship industry puts too much emphasis on resorts at sea and perhaps, too little emphasis on safety''.

I disagree. Whilst they are 'resorts at sea', the safety considerations that go into a newbuild are hugely extensive. A cruise ship by law needs to be evacuated in 30 minutes, something which is completely feasible. The Captain is the issue here. If he would have ordered the evacuation sooner, no lives would have been lost.

 

Where the issue lies is also with the law for muster drills. The type of 'hop-on, hop-off' cruise which the Concordia was on needs to be banned. This, combined with changing the muster drill from being within 24 hours of leaving port to before leaving (as most lines already do) would solve the issue.

[captainmcd]

A quality post, I was on the bridge of a cruise ship departing from one of the smaller Canarian Island,the pilot had been told by the Master that he should stay at his daughters wedding (invalidating the insurance) we were about 20 mtrs from the dock side when three pax strolled into view. No pilot vessel meant he had to re dock her which he did.He is my best friend not my Captain when we got inside his cabin I let him have it.In the officers mess that night he apologized.

 

Yes, that was my observation. As a Chief Officer you have a lot of feedback when you make a mistake or do a good job. Once promoted to Captain you lose that feedback, and if you aren't careful you begin to believe that you are some sort of super hero. I am glad to see someone from management is willing to tell a captain when they make a mistake. Too often I have seen them tolerate stupidity with the attitude that the devil they know is better than the devil they don't know. I am sure that on the Exxon Valdez the shoreside management knew that Capt. Hazelwood drank alcohol, but kept him on anyway.

[burchan]

I have seen many posts debating this accident and I would like to make comment on my observations. The Captain is and was in the state of shock like no one could imagine. He has caused biggest sinking ever. His career is at an end. Does anyone have human feelings toward this man? His actions at a time are not rational because of shock. Even in car accident a driver may leave his car and wonder around in shock. This situation is so much worse. I feel sorry for the Captain.

There are negative posts about Costa Cruises. Lot of people love Costa Cruises and will continue to cruise with them. Costa needs suport at this difficult time.

Lawyers are lining up not to help passangers but to make money for them self. Passangers who were not injured should be compensated for cost of their holiday and the cost of the things lost with the ship. Nothing else.

These who were injured or for family of these who died compensation should be paid. Some government commision should be set up that will decide on the amount of compensation. Lawyer driven actions should not be allowed but if someone think they should get more let them take it to court individually. Staff on the Concordia need to have continuation of their income until they are relocated or their contract comes to an end. They are the real victims as well.

[Boy Blue]

I have seen many posts debating this accident and I would like to make comment on my observations. The Captain is and was in the state of shock like no one could imagine. He has caused biggest sinking ever. His career is at an end. Does anyone have human feelings toward this man? His actions at a time are not rational because of shock. Even in car accident a driver may leave his car and wonder around in shock. This situation is so much worse. I feel sorry for the Captain.

There are negative posts about Costa Cruises. Lot of people love Costa Cruises and will continue to cruise with them. Costa needs suport at this difficult time.

Lawyers are lining up not to help passangers but to make money for them self. Passangers who were not injured should be compensated for cost of their holiday and the cost of the things lost with the ship. Nothing else.

These who were injured or for family of these who died compensation should be paid. Some government commision should be set up that will decide on the amount of compensation. Lawyer driven actions should not be allowed but if someone think they should get more let them take it to court individually. Staff on the Concordia need to have continuation of their income until they are relocated or their contract comes to an end. They are the real victims as well.

 

Very Well Said!

[Enigm@]

Lawyers are lining up not to help passangers but to make money for them self.

 

Totally agree. They have been very quick to jump on the bandwagon, advertising, setting up websites etc etc.

 

Passangers who were not injured should be compensated for cost of their holiday and the cost of the things lost with the ship. Nothing else.

 

I cannot agree here. I have just finished watching a programme on UK TV featuring British survivors, passengers and crew, young & some in their 'golden years' where their rescues involved:-

 

*crawling uphill in order to reach the side of the ship that remained above water level.

 

* clinging to the side of a wet ship & being winched up by helicopter being held by a coast guard rescue service worker to stop them falling into the sea

 

* an older couple having to crawl over the hull of the ship, down a rope ladder & being pulled by their legs into a dinghy

 

* having to swim for it when the water level threatened to submerge them.

 

All the lifeboats had gone leaving over 300 on a ship that was tilting & sinking fast.

Even those who made it onto a lifeboat were very overcrowded and feared for their lives as the lifeboats kept getting stuck on the side of the ship, swinging back onto the side with force.

 

I could go on, even the ones who made it off early were left cold & wet for hours & hours, the minimum done to help & keep them comfortable once back on the mainland, the majority having to fend for themselves to find their way home. The trauma they suffered will live with them for ever. You could see the effect on those that were interviewed for the TV programme. I'm sure it will take a long time for this nightmare to fade for them.

 

You can sympathize with the trauma suffered by the Captain, but what of the victims?

[littlesteelo]

I have seen many posts debating this accident and I would like to make comment on my observations. The Captain is and was in the state of shock like no one could imagine. He has caused biggest sinking ever. His career is at an end. Does anyone have human feelings toward this man? His actions at a time are not rational because of shock. Even in car accident a driver may leave his car and wonder around in shock. This situation is so much worse. I feel sorry for the Captain.

There are negative posts about Costa Cruises. Lot of people love Costa Cruises and will continue to cruise with them. Costa needs suport at this difficult time.

Lawyers are lining up not to help passangers but to make money for them self. Passangers who were not injured should be compensated for cost of their holiday and the cost of the things lost with the ship. Nothing else.

These who were injured or for family of these who died compensation should be paid. Some government commision should be set up that will decide on the amount of compensation. Lawyer driven actions should not be allowed but if someone think they should get more let them take it to court individually. Staff on the Concordia need to have continuation of their income until they are relocated or their contract comes to an end. They are the real victims as well.

 

Everybody loves a scapegoat. I agree with you about the captain. While he made a mistake, a very serious one at that, but he doesn't deserve to have his life ruined. If somebody accidentally causes a pile up with multiple fatalities, people don't hurl abuse at them. I'm sure the fact he has caused the deaths of at least 17 people is on his mind 24/7, but he is human just like anyone else, and as you say, he has ruined his career. Put yourself in his position. How terrible would you feel, having to contemplate your own unforgivable mistake, whilst having constant hateful abuse (and likely some false rumours) thrown at you.

 

Costa themselves on the other hand deserve no support. They are responsible for organizing crew training and management and are probably the ones who gave the go-ahead for the whole 'tourist navigation' thing. By pushing all the blame and media attention onto one man, they are managing to shift it away from their own mistakes. They are a corporation after all. They don't care if they ruin someones life.

[littlesteelo]

Totally agree. They have been very quick to jump on the bandwagon, advertising, setting up websites etc etc.

 

 

 

I cannot agree here. I have just finished watching a programme on UK TV featuring British survivors, passengers and crew, young & some in their 'golden years' where their rescues involved:-

 

*crawling uphill in order to reach the side of the ship that remained above water level.

 

* clinging to the side of a wet ship & being winched up by helicopter being held by a coast guard rescue service worker to stop them falling into the sea

 

* an older couple having to crawl over the hull of the ship, down a rope ladder & being pulled by their legs into a dinghy

 

* having to swim for it when the water level threatened to submerge them.

 

All the lifeboats had gone leaving over 300 on a ship that was tilting & sinking fast.

Even those who made it onto a lifeboat were very overcrowded and feared for their lives as the lifeboats kept getting stuck on the side of the ship, swinging back onto the side with force.

 

I could go on, even the ones who made it off early were left cold & wet for hours & hours, the minimum done to help & keep them comfortable once back on the mainland, the majority having to fend for themselves to find their way home. The trauma they suffered will live with them for ever. You could see the effect on those that were interviewed for the TV programme. I'm sure it will take a long time for this nightmare to fade for them.

 

You can sympathize with the trauma suffered by the Captain, but what of the victims?

 

I agree, however the 11,000 euro compensation for trauma and belongings, along with the full refund is sufficient. Those who decide to try and sue for hundreds of thousands are just as bad as the law firms in it for the cash. Trying to claw as much money as you can while there are those families who have lost loved ones is what I consider to be making money off of this terrible incident.

[TMLAalum]

For Capn mcd-"Love ships and the sea. Graduated from U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in 1965 and have been sailing since then, currently hold an Unlimited Master's License with the U.S.C.G. with STCW-95 endorsements, also endorsed by Panama, Malta, St.Vincent who now have larger merchant fleets than the United States. I am now semi-retired but work as a relief for Mercy Ships."

 

DH class of '64. Still holds 3rd Mates license, although only sailed 12 months after graduating. He is very active in the local Alumni Association and serves on the federal academies interview committee for NE Ohio.

[gedam]

Whilst maybe not being the best analogy I accept.. but would a trained surgeon who made a fatal mistake on an operating table walk away? Yes also suffering the trauma of his mistake, knowing his career is finished and living with the fact he caused a life to be lost.

 

One life not 17

[Enigm@]

I agree, however the 11,000 euro compensation for trauma and belongings, along with the full refund is sufficient. Those who decide to try and sue for hundreds of thousands are just as bad as the law firms in it for the cash. Trying to claw as much money as you can while there are those families who have lost loved ones is what I consider to be making money off of this terrible incident.

 

Yes, I do agree in principle. It was the "Nothing else" I disagreed with.

 

Some may face extra medical expenses, some may be unable to work for quite some time with all the extra hardship that entails. In actual fact I think each case should be considered individually if necessary, perhaps with a base amount for all and the option of putting in a further claim if additional expenses have been incurred as 4200+ pax is somewhat overwhelming. I really don't know how plausible that is however.

 

 

One life not 17

 

17 confimed remember. There are another 15 lost souls who may never be found, so the likely total is 32.

[gedam]

17 confimed remember. There are another 15 lost souls who may never be found, so the likely total is 32.

 

Exactly - an afterthought my part

[Cuizer2]

I have seen many posts debating this accident and I would like to make comment on my observations. The Captain is and was in the state of shock like no one could imagine. He has caused biggest sinking ever. His career is at an end. Does anyone have human feelings toward this man? His actions at a time are not rational because of shock. Even in car accident a driver may leave his car and wonder around in shock. This situation is so much worse. I feel sorry for the Captain.

There are negative posts about Costa Cruises. Lot of people love Costa Cruises and will continue to cruise with them. Costa needs suport at this difficult time.

Lawyers are lining up not to help passangers but to make money for them self. Passangers who were not injured should be compensated for cost of their holiday and the cost of the things lost with the ship. Nothing else.

These who were injured or for family of these who died compensation should be paid. Some government commision should be set up that will decide on the amount of compensation. Lawyer driven actions should not be allowed but if someone think they should get more let them take it to court individually. Staff on the Concordia need to have continuation of their income until they are relocated or their contract comes to an end. They are the real victims as well.

 

All very nice - but not real world.

[MeridianSkipper]

Thank you for the thoughtful responses to my questions. Though your inputs have allayed some of my concerns about the industry, I still feel resort activity remains preeminent, and that emphasis sometimes detracts from safety (e.g. hop-on hop-off cruises cited in one of the responses).

My concerns arose last September during a cruise to Alaska. An emergency drill was conducted before sailing (good practice). For the most part, passengers hastened to their abandon ship stations, and good order and discipline was maintained (again good). Floatation equipment was then demonstrated by a seemingly well-trained crewmember. Silence then ensued because the ship’s general announcing system failed. Just aft of our muster station, another passenger group began to shout and clap. No muster was taken, and we were released from the drill. Consequently, we only completed a portion of the exercise.

While my military mind tells me the entire drill should have been repeated before getting underway, a can understand but don’t appreciated much the customer care issues that might have ensued. At a minimum though, it seems that the Captain or his “number two” should have made direct mention of the drill’s shortcomings and directed his comments to all shipboard spaces.

[captainmcd]

Thank you for the thoughtful responses to my questions. Though your inputs have allayed some of my concerns about the industry, I still feel resort activity remains preeminent, and that emphasis sometimes detracts from safety (e.g. hop-on hop-off cruises cited in one of the responses).

My concerns arose last September during a cruise to Alaska. An emergency drill was conducted before sailing (good practice). For the most part, passengers hastened to their abandon ship stations, and good order and discipline was maintained (again good). Floatation equipment was then demonstrated by a seemingly well-trained crewmember. Silence then ensued because the ship’s general announcing system failed. Just aft of our muster station, another passenger group began to shout and clap. No muster was taken, and we were released from the drill. Consequently, we only completed a portion of the exercise.

While my military mind tells me the entire drill should have been repeated before getting underway, a can understand but don’t appreciated much the customer care issues that might have ensued. At a minimum though, it seems that the Captain or his “number two” should have made direct mention of the drill’s shortcomings and directed his comments to all shipboard spaces.

 

I, too have been on a number of cruises where no muster was taken at the abandon ship drill, and on freighters and even one passenger vessel I commanded we needed to account for every passenger and crew member on board. However this is not the industry standard, and perhaps it should be. In addition to itineraries that permit more than one port of embarkation, that may too be an issue. A number of posters have expressed sympathy for the Captain stating that he was in shock, but I don't think that is an acceptable excuse. During my career I have been involved with a number of incidents that could have made the six o'clock news, but did not thanks to training and drills. You should expect more from a Captain. Finally I have seen that there are some companies that shop around for a class society. Most will enforce IMO standards, but some are more compliant than others in their audits and enforcement of standards.

[Host Mick]

I'm not familiar with the electrical system of Costa Concordia, but given that the engine room had flooded and that the only electrical power available came from the emergency generator, I doubt that the bow (or stern) thrusters could be used. I'll explain why I believe this. If someone else has more information then please say so.

 

To start with, the pictures of Costa Concordia when she was listing slightly shows that none of her cabins are lit, her promenade/lifeboat deck *is* lit, and that she's showing lights that indicate she's not under command. From this, and from the bloody great hole in the hull which flooded the engine room, all evidence points to the only electrical power available comes from the emergency generator.

 

The bow thrusters (and on Costa Concordia, stern thrusters) will require around 1.5 to 2 MW each and so will be connected to the main electrical bus (11kv on Vista ships) which is powered by the main diesel generator sets in the engine room. The emergency generator on Vista class ships (Zuiderdam, Arcadia, etc) can only power the 690V emergency bus and can produce around 1.2MW, and I would place a bet that the same is true on the Costa Concordia. Even if it could be rigged up to power the 11kv bus, it would probably trip if any of the bow thrusters were turned on. So I don't believe the thrusters were used to bring Costa Concordia to the island - I think it was the wind and current that drove her onto the rocks.

 

VP

 

I've been thinking about this since I saw speculation that the thrusters were used and the captain put out the stabilizers.

I agree with your assessment. They can launch the lifeboats with no power and drop the anchors but there's no way that they're going to wire thrusters to the emergency generator. As for the stabilizers, they're useless without engines so that's out as are the rudders.

It was wind and current that moved the ship ashore. The captain can't control those.

[Keel Haul]

Yes, that was my observation. As a Chief Officer you have a lot of feedback when you make a mistake or do a good job. Once promoted to Captain you lose that feedback, and if you aren't careful you begin to believe that you are some sort of super hero. I am glad to see someone from management is willing to tell a captain when they make a mistake. Too often I have seen them tolerate stupidity with the attitude that the devil they know is better than the devil they don't know. I am sure that on the Exxon Valdez the shoreside management knew that Capt. Hazelwood drank alcohol, but kept him on anyway.

Capt I concur, my history with the sea is different my contact with cruise ships was with regard to security.My wife from the late 80s sailed for 10yrs with various lines was certified by Miami C/G as a fire fighter she also took additional training in her own country when off contract.This training was provided by her father who in your terms was a Chief Warrant Officer on board submarines.My wife used her training twice at sea.

Miami Coastguard in the view of my wife and our two friends who were cruise ship Master are well known to be the most vigorous inspector.

My wife would like to know which ports coastguard carried out the last drill inspection and how many of the crew failed.

She would like to know if as in her time the rule for missing 3 drills and you are off the ship still applies.

She also was perturbed that on the doc on Channel 4 last night a dancer stated they had a crew drill every two weeks, our friends would do a min of 2 crew drill a week, the third was a life boat race between muster station crews and officers using oars.This drill welded the muster crew together and gave the watching pax confidence.

[captainmcd]

Capt I concur, my history with the sea is different my contact with cruise ships was with regard to security.My wife from the late 80s sailed for 10yrs with various lines was certified by Miami C/G as a fire fighter she also took additional training in her own country when off contract.This training was provided by her father who in your terms was a Chief Warrant Officer on board submarines.My wife used her training twice at sea.

Miami Coastguard in the view of my wife and our two friends who were cruise ship Master are well known to be the most vigorous inspector.

My wife would like to know which ports coastguard carried out the last drill inspection and how many of the crew failed.

She would like to know if as in her time the rule for missing 3 drills and you are off the ship still applies.

She also was perturbed that on the doc on Channel 4 last night a dancer stated they had a crew drill every two weeks, our friends would do a min of 2 crew drill a week, the third was a life boat race between muster station crews and officers using oars.This drill welded the muster crew together and gave the watching pax confidence.

 

I did not see the documentary you mention, but do know that there is a difference in how drills are carried out on different ships. On U.S. flagged ships, we have an abandon ship and fire drill weekly, as well as an annex drill which may be one of a number of contingencies such as man-overboard, loss of propulsion, etc. We have no cruise ships in international service that I know of today. On foreign flagged ships the IMO requirement is every two weeks, but on passenger vessels within 24 hours of sailing a muster should be held. That muster varies. In my experience mustering a group of passengers and crew of 500 is difficult if done properly. You must get everyone to their abandon ship station in life jackets properly worn. Then you must find out from each lifeboat how many people are missing, and announce their names and locate them. That is difficult since it is hard to pronounce many foreign names in a way that they recognize. There are always a few who will refuse to participate. The drill can easily take the better part of an hour, which paying passengers find annoying. On a troop ship back in 1965 we could muster 7000 people in a few minutes, but those were English speaking soldiers who were used to mustering, and cruise passengers do not want to be treated like soldiers.

 

We keep training records on all of the crew, which includes participation in drills. If you participate, that's good, there is no pass-fail grade given in my experience. Keep in mind that we conduct drills also during audits and inspections from our class society, our flag state, and our port state. A few times the U.S. Coast Guard will ask us to repeat a drill if they are not satisfied, but that is not a common event.

[captainmcd]

I've been thinking about this since I saw speculation that the thrusters were used and the captain put out the stabilizers.

I agree with your assessment. They can launch the lifeboats with no power and drop the anchors but there's no way that they're going to wire thrusters to the emergency generator. As for the stabilizers, they're useless without engines so that's out as are the rudders.

It was wind and current that moved the ship ashore. The captain can't control those.

 

Host Mick, I agree that it seems to me like the ship was only under emergency generator power after the initial damage. Without the ship's drawings it would be difficult to say for sure, but with the size and location of the damage I think that it would have been difficult to keep any of the ship's service generators on line. The only question I have is how did the ship get turned around 180 degrees from its initial heading? The AIS data seems to show a rapid turn to starboard when at a speed of around 2 knots before her final grounding.

[MeridianSkipper]

I’ve learned a lot from the inputs made by maritime professional who have made contributions to this forum. Where do we go from here? While it’s too early to make precise judgments, what lessons-learned (re-learned) might we take from this tragedy?

The obvious might not be obvious to those of us who cruise frequently or spent a military career at sea flying off ships. A well informed cruising public benefits both the industry and safety. This incident will become “old news” quickly.

· What questions should we ask,

· What demands, if any, should we make of the industry,

· Should we insist on change especially concerning ships, which embark passengers in our homeports,

· How do we move forward in a positive way, or

· Should we just consider this incident an aberration and forget about it?

[Keel Haul]

A start would be no booze served before Pax L/B drill, that will ensure the drill is completed before departure.

[sidari]

Keel Haul ... I have to agree with you on that one.

[cruiselover57]

Disagree completely.

There was plenty time to get everyone off the ship safely, had he taken immediate action. At least he should have sent people to their muster stations as soon as he knew the ship was flooding. And he knew that within minutes due to loss of power from engine room flooding. Instead people were told to return to their cabins. There was no reason for lost lives except the poor decisions made by the person in charge..the Captain.

 

I agree with you 100%!