Concordia News: Please Post Here

[SomeBeach]

It would be interesting to hear Michelles experience with the Australian Embassy.

 

I asked Michelle on her survivor thread. This is her response.

The Australian embassy were incredible they came to see us by 8pm on Saturday gave us money organised a car to collect us sunday morning to get our emergency passports and organised for him to take us shopping for essentials, even drove us around some tourist spots and took us for coffee. They also made sure our travel insurance organised our flights home. They had issuee with Katharines passport as an Australian minor emergency passport application needs to be signed by both parents and her dad was homein Melbourne so they had to organise to send someone there for him to sign the application. When we returned they organised replacement passports in a couple of weeks and even extended mine and Katharines by another 2 years. They were incredible, they didnt even charge us for the emergency or replacement passports.

[Uniall]

watertheodds .... while i agree with what you say it is wrong to also ignore the other facts in any case! to ignore contributing factors and focus on just one person will not stop this happening again, the tv programme a few nights ago made mention that the Chief Engineer who you would believe has a good knowledge of the layout of his ship told Schettino the water was coming in from the Starboard side of the ship!! anyone who has watched enough programmes about any given disaster where humans are involved also knows as the Experts like to say .. when a given number of factors come together Disaster happens.

 

Those factors came together on that night and sadly a Disaster happened.

 

And I agree with you as well, don't dispute contributing factors and find the discovery of problems aboard ships interesting and informative, Sidari. But, if you read what I said I never placed the blame on the Captain. My point was - if the Concordia had stayed in the shipping lanes where it belonged and was determined safe for ships to be, we would not be discussing this terrible tragedy. I don't know who or why a sail by was ordered but that decision is what caused the series of events that ultimately became the result of an unnecessary tragedy. That fateful decision, whomever made it, set the ball rolling to introduce human error, incompetence and possibly ship malfunctons to come together causing injury and loss of life.....agreed! But when posters go on and on about other problems with the ship and personnel no matter how knowledgable, valid and informing, when the implication that these reasons are why the accident initially happened is, at least for me, irritating.

 

Let's just take away the fact that the ship hit the rocks and caused the gash. Sailing that close to land at night with limited or no port support nearby, if the ship has a mechanical problem and goes dead in the water, its a good possibility she may be grounded from the wind or sea conditions. A ship and it's passengers should never be put in that situation but stay in safe waters.

 

By all means, continue the news and discussions of contributing factors and how to improve communications and design and all the other things that have been brought forth on this thread...but don't for a minute think those are the reasons this event happened.

 

Watertheodds, Tonka Skipper et. al. understand what Sid, CS and others do not.

 

Western law has adopted the Aristotillian/Thomistic logic concept of "the efficient cause" as its underpinnings of attributing a causal relationship to determine the person or entity responsible for a given result.

 

The efficient cause{s} is the activity(ies) or force(s) that acts on preexisting conditions resulting in change. Sometimes the law has referred to the efficient cause as the "but for" test.

 

All the preexisting conditions would not have resulted in the capsizing and loss of life of the Concordia BUT FOR the intervening actions of Captain Coward. The Captain's decisions, authority and actions were the efficient causes of the result and places the responsibility at his doorstep.

 

Any argument attempting to raise preexisting conditions as "causes" of the of the capsizing and deaths clouds the truth and real cause and responsibility of the results both in Western logic and Western Law.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Uniall

[SomeBeach]

This link has a couple of interesting paragraphs in it. Carnival claims the letter concerning injuries was taken out of context.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/12/16469608-a-year-after-costa-concordia-disaster-emotions-resurface?lite

[clive and anne]

The web cam from Casello Square on Giglio this morning is showing a large number of people around and in addition to the marquee I mentioned yesterday has what looks like a large mobile TV screen which is pointed at the camera and may give some pictures later when it switched on.

[Cruising Ken]

It almost looks like they've replaced part of the funnel this morning:confused:

[sidari]

Good morning Sid.

And more worrying was that any attempt the Smiths made to highlight the shortcomings of Embassy staff were ignored or edited out by the "fearless" American news channels and newspapers.

 

Clive and Anne ... Just goes to show that despite where you come from there are always those who think they are better than others! the staff involved should have been looking for other employment shortly after this happened.

[SomeBeach]

It almost looks like they've replaced part of the funnel this morning:confused:

 

Ken, that funnel business has had me questioning what's going on too. One day it looks very short and the next it's tall again.

Now I admit I don't know a darn thing about ship funnels but maybe someone else does. Little help here would be nice.

I have my own thoughts but fear saying it. Some of ya can get a bit upset when a guess is wrong. ;)

Sidari, our media doesn't report the news as it is. They report (or not) what they want people to know depending on their agenda.

Totally agree that these workers should not be working at any Embassy.

Been watching scenes from Giglio.

[SomeBeach]

This link has some pictures/videos from ceremonies today.

http://www.itv.com/news/2013-01-13/survivors-of-costa-concordia-cruise-ship-disaster-remember-the-dead/

[Vampire Parrot]

There have been several statements made in the last few days whch are factually incorrect, and implications made that are also misleading.

 

One of the incorrect statemnents is:

 

Schettino who was on public duties and who was called to the bridge when things went pearshaped.

Ambrosio who was on duty and thus effectively in charge of the vessel, albeit as bridge officer (notwithstanding he was one pip below Schettino who is in overall command but Schettino (as all Captains) should be able to leave his or her first officer in charge without fear of them getting into a dangerous position. Ambrosio obviously called Schettino to the bridge when the initial mistake was discovered.

Ambrosio was the senior watch officer, that is true. But he did not call Schettino to the bridge "when the initial mistake was discovered." No mistake had been made at that point; the ship was in open water and there was plenty of time to turn the ship before it was in dangerously shallow water.

 

In other words, the situation was under control and quite normal when Schettino took command. Being that distance to land when Schettino was on the con (1.8 nautical miles) is not a problem.

 

It was stated by the Italian Maritime Investigative Body on Marine Accidents during their presentation in London on May 18th that it was prior to or at 2137 when Schettion took the con, ordered helm to manual, and ordered the helmsman to keep the course unchanged. So we know at 2137, Schettino had the con and the ship was in manual steering.

 

It was at 2145, seven minutes later, when the ship hit the rocks.

 

As I posted earlier, Concordia met IMO standards for ship maneuverability and would have easily been able to miss the rocks if a moderate amount of starboard rudder had constantly been applied, even several minutes after he had the con.

 

---

 

A series of misleading comments have been made concerning the autopilot that imply that the autopilot would have put Costa Concordia on the rocks, and that Schettino did his best to prevent that happening. For example:

 

Who programmed the auto-pilot....?

 

Routinely on several cruise lines it is the First Officer, which would have been Ambrosio in Concordia's case.

 

All it takes is a distraction or a fat finger hitting the wrong digit for the wrong track to be entered...Concordia was not that far off the usual course...so potentially a miskeyed entry on the auto-pilot could have sent her where she was not meant to go...and then you have the realisation, the return to the bridge by Schettino, the barked orders by Schettino and Ambrosio and the confused Indonesian at the helm....chain reaction that probably started before Concordia even left Civitavecchia during charting and auto-pilot setup.

The information I have is that the autopilot had been correctly programmed for the ship to pass the island at a safe distance of approximately 800 metres. If Schettino had not taken manual control, the ship would have safely saluted the island.

 

Of course it is not good practice to have the ship controlled by autopilot at such a close distance, and putting the helm into manual is good practice..... so long as the Officer who has the con then keeps the ship at least as far away from the island as the autopilot would have. Schettino, for reasons I do not understand, then brought the ship closer to the island than the autopilot would have. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

VP

Edited January 13, 2013 by Vampire Parrot

[sidari]

VP ... Though i have not yet had time to go back through the programme from a few nights ago i clearly remember that the commentary said that the Autopilot was programmed to turn the ship at 1 kilometre from Giglio, hopefully tomorrow i will sit and re watch it and add the timeline from the programme here.

[CostaSmurfette]

Seatrade has some interesting reading regarding the aftermath...

 

Now, one would naturally assume that those who lost loved ones would go for all out lawsuits...totally understandable in the circumstances, but in Concordia's case it seem's that NONE of the surviving family members of the 32 deceased have pursued legal action against anyone...not Costa Crociere and not Carnival Corp.

 

Also, 70% of the pax aboard that night have accepted the original compensation package as offered, 20% are still contemplating and only 10% are going for lawsuits....which again is surprising when you read the tabloids that appear to indicate a poor uptake of the compensation package :

 

http://www.seatrade-insider.com/News/News-Headlines/Concordia-one-year-on-salvage-compensation-criminal-proceedings.html

 

What I find quite incredible is that the relatives of those lost have declined legal action despite the potential of any human error being proven.....many times on this and other board there have been "how much is a life worth" type of comment, well whatever the package was that Costa Crociere/Carnival Corp offered the families, must have been sufficient.

 

Now whether it was sufficient in the wider public view or not is immaterial, suffice it to say, the families are satisfied enough not to take it further and fair play to them for not taking it further and wanting to get on with their lives as best they can.

 

It remains to be seen if the 10% get their lawsuits off the ground since there is still the jurisdiction problem and that will inevitably lengthen the process of settlement, which in turn is likely to force a few to drop out and accept the original offer...again to get lives back on track as best they can and put the entire incident behind them.

[Tonka's Skipper]

The bottom line here is that the Captian was not on the bridge when approaching the island to do the fly bye(I still think the whole fly by thing was unsafe and unessasary) This is not open waters it is restricted waters...........I would be on the bridge at least 5 miles off, with the auto pilot off, speed down to 5 to 8 knots and having the con.

 

This would be safe and prudent navigation of the vessel.

 

When navigating is restricted waters you need the helmmans on the wheel to make any course change needed instantly. There could be a mechcanical failure of ships power systems, engines or even small boats interfearing with the vessels course.

 

I would love to see the Concordia Masters bridge order book(his standard practice orders in emergencies when he was not on the bridge) and night order book!

 

There are just so many things that were done poorly, incorrectly and with a total lack of proper seamanship.

 

AKK

Edited January 14, 2013 by Tonka's Skipper

[SomeBeach]

Tonka, NatGeo Channel is running a special right now. (I just found it.) Just showed the course Concordia took based on recordings and charts.

The show will also be rerun later on this channel in case you want to record it.

Discovery Channel also has a program later tonight.

Not sure if they are the same program.

[SomeBeach]

The NatGeo channel had a much better program. Discovery Channel offered not much in new info as compared to NG. They took an older version and threw in some info on the recovery part which is the only thing that made this show worth watching again

I would suggest that if you didn't see NatGeo, check listings for the coming week as they sometimes rerun a program.

Edited January 14, 2013 by SomeBeach

[SomeBeach]

Pictures & video

http://www.giglionews.it/2013011459378/news/isola-del-giglio/una-giornata-intensa-e-ricca-di-emozioni.html#addcomments

Edited January 14, 2013 by SomeBeach

[Vampire Parrot]

VP ... Though i have not yet had time to go back through the programme from a few nights ago i clearly remember that the commentary said that the Autopilot was programmed to turn the ship at 1 kilometre from Giglio, hopefully tomorrow i will sit and re watch it and add the timeline from the programme here.

 

You are probably right.... I've just checked the 1:5000 chart and a route one kilometre from the shore of Giglio would have kept Costa Concordia between 700m and 800m away from le Scole in waters over 300 feet deep.

 

VP

Edited January 14, 2013 by Vampire Parrot

[Tonka's Skipper]

Tonka, NatGeo Channel is running a special right now. (I just found it.) Just showed the course Concordia took based on recordings and charts.

The show will also be rerun later on this channel in case you want to record it.

Discovery Channel also has a program later tonight.

Not sure if they are the same program.

 

Thanks SB,

 

I was working on some work reports and only got to see the last 15 minutes...I'll keep a eye out for it !

 

AKK

[Tonka's Skipper]

The saga seems to continue. I do not have details, but is seems the famous Carnival Spendour, sister to the Concordia, has had another major engine/ mechanical breakdown, but is under way and a day or 2 late getting into Long Beach.:confused:

 

AKK

[CostaSmurfette]

The saga seems to continue. I do not have details' date=' but is seems the famous Carnival Spendour, sister to the Concordia, has had another major engine/ mechanical breakdown, but is under way and a day or 2 late getting into Long Beach.:confused:

 

AKK[/quote']

 

Splendor got herself badly snagged in fishing nets a while ago and it messed up the bearings and its that which requires replacement.

 

That can happen to any ship and if memory serves, Seven Seas Navigator or Voyager got it bad a few years ago and ended up cancelling a couple of cruises due to damage received after running into fishing nets.

 

So as much as it is correct to say that Concordia's sister Splendor is in the doghouse again, just as her other sister Pacifica was when I was aboard last month, both incidents are common...as you indeed said so yourself Tonka ;)

[littlesteelo]

The saga seems to continue. I do not have details' date=' but is seems the famous Carnival Spendour, sister to the Concordia, has had another major engine/ mechanical breakdown, but is under way and a day or 2 late getting into Long Beach.:confused:

 

AKK[/quote']

 

The official word from Carnival is that it is that the shaft seals (does not specify which one) needed repairs due to damage from fishing nets, and the repairs have taken longer to do. Nothing to be concerned about.

[Tonka's Skipper]

I agree, the fishing line can work into the seal.(which keeps the seawater from entering the vessel) and cause gouging, heat damage and of course leaks. I can remember having issues with those fishing boats!

 

However I keep finding it interesting ..accident after accident...problem after problem....over and over again.

 

Nope.......... I would never let my friends and family sail on Carnival Line vessels.

 

AKK

Edited January 14, 2013 by Tonka's Skipper

[sidari]

VP, Tonka ..... Rewatched the Nat Geo prog today and here is what i copied from the Narration.

 

6.27pm ... Captain on the Bridge ... Narration .. He relecutantly decides to change the planned route (no reason given)

 

Ships Audio Recording ..

 

Captain Ok just check what speed we need to get out of here and we`ll go by Giglio, let` go and salute Giglio.

 

Officer ... Yes 30 miles from here.

 

Captain ... We need to go by this Bloody Giglio (!)

 

Narration ... Captain agreed to the salute for a colleague onboard. Italian Military police recovered the ship charts .. small charts used .. rocks not marked. Larger charts show rocks .. not required to have Large charts onboard as Giglio is not on the Itinery.

 

7.00pm... Concordia sets sail

 

9.04pm ... (Ships Condition Report) Auto Pilot turns the ship towards Giglio

 

9.34pm ... Captain arrives on the Bridge with Guests including the Hotel Director, others include the Lookout/Helmsman, 1st Officer in charge.

Records show the ship at 7.5 Kilometres from Giglio and heading towards the island, AutoPilot programmed to turn the ship at 1 Kilometre from the coast.

 

9.35pm ... AutoPilot is turned off and sailing by Manual control,

1st Officer ... Rudder Hand ... Helmsman leaves lookout position and takes ships wheel.

 

9.39pm ... Captain takes command,

Ships Audio ..

captain is taking the Con, 1st Officer .. Captain has the Con,

Narration

ship is now 2.5 Kilometres from the coast, the ships GPS Data shows a very gradual turn to the Right (Starboard) over the next 3 minutes the Captain makes several returns to the ships course.

The ships data Recorder shows that the Helmsman does not always understand the Captains orders.

 

Helmsman 340 ...

Captain ...350 otherwise we go on the rocks.

 

9.44 .. Narration .. ship is 450 metres from Le Scole reef, it is 20 seconds before the Danger is noticed, when the Captain

see`s the rock and takes immidiate evasive action.

 

Actual Recording from Ships Data ... Captain ... Hard to Starboard .. you can hear the command being repeated,

Captain ... Midships .. again you here the command repeated,

Captain ... Port 20 .. order repeated but it takes the Helmsman almost 13 seconds to respond to the second order.

 

Captain ... Hard to Port

 

9.45 ... Concordia hits Le Scole reef, Alarms sound for the rudder, Pumps and main Engines.

 

9.46 ... Captain .. Close the watertight doors in the Engine room.

 

Bridge to Engine room ... how`s it doing in the Engine room ?

 

Engine room to Bridge ... How is it? we`ve crashed mates, we`ve crashed.

Engine room .... emergency switch panel .. activate the pumps.

 

Narration ... The bridge team begin to work out if the ship will stay afloat, 3 watertight compartments are breached.

 

9.49pm ... Captain speaks to the Chief Engineer (ships Audio) ... Acitvate emergency pumps, has the water come in ?

Engineer ... Yeah on the Starboard side in the Engine room.

 

Captain ... is there a lot of water?

Engineer ... There`s water you can`t go down there, we`ll have to go down another way.

 

10.44pm ... Ship comes to rest listing to Starboard.

Edited January 14, 2013 by sidari

[Vampire Parrot]

Thanks sidari. Very useful.

 

I've been trying to make sense of the "Technical report of the consultants appointed by the investigating judge of the court of Grosseto" which is in Italian (which alas, I don't speak). It was at 21:39:17 that Schettino started saying "I take the conn" and Ambrosio responded "Master has the conn."

 

The following table from the report show the time at which if the rudder had been put to the specified angle, the ship would have missed the rocks.

5 degrees 21:42:09

15 degrees 21:43:00

25 degrees 21:43:30

35 degrees (hard over) 21:43:37

 

Thus Schettino had plenty of time to avoid the rocks.

 

At 20.8 knots, (faster than she was travelling) hard over would give the Concordia an advance of 686 metres. i.e. she'd travel 686 metres in the initial direction of travel before she was perpendicular to her original course. That's only just over twice the length of the ship. At 16 knots the advance would have been less.

 

 

VP

Edited January 14, 2013 by Vampire Parrot

[CostaSmurfette]

Over the year since the accident happened a few things have peaked the curiosity...and the transcript above posted by sidari only heightens that curiosity.

 

Firstly...Schettino was thrown under the bus within 24 hours and has been villified by media who have been given him on a silver platter...personally I have always felt that his position has been one of sacrificial lamb to a small degree but to the greater degree nothing more than a diversion away from the procedural and training problems industry wide that the accident has exposed.

 

Here we have a captain who was involved in a fatal accident...notwithstanding the fact that as captain, the buck stops with him...he has had a target placed onto his back by his employers...fair enough...BUT....if he was such a terrible employee, why then did the company/corporation NOT fire him IMMEDIATELY...why wait a further 6 months before doing so, thus he remained on the payroll whilst at the same time being crucified by all and sundry?

 

Is it any wonder that he is attempting to claim wrongful dismissal...afterall, as scapegoats go, he is not immune from blame but he is also not the only protaganist in this tragedy.

 

You cannot throw an employee under the bus and still have them on the payroll for 6 months and then sack them....you either throw them under the bus and sack them immediately or you suspend the employee but remain at his shoulder until such time as investigations prove without a shadow of doubt that he was the only one to make an error.

 

Yes he made errors...but so did others that night...and that transcript blows so much of the theorising and accusations right out of the water.

 

Right from the get go I knew, from my experience with studying aircrashes for over 30 years, that there was alot more to this accident that met the eye...alot more implications to consider, alot more people involved and alot more procedures/training flaws involved...along with known faults with the ship and her technology (which does come from the Splendor fire, which could be seen as a precursor to problems involving equipment installations and design issues specifically attributable to the Concordia class).

 

I totally understand Tonka's comments about not wanting to go aboard a Carnival Corp ship...afterall, we are not just talking Splendor and Concordia here...we have known problems with Grand, Crown & Emerald Princesses and their infamous "uncommanded turns" that the corporation blamed the bridge crew when industry insiders preferred to cast doubt over the autopilot equipment/computers...then you have the recent incident with Ventura with her deck cracking from side to side duing a Bay of Biscay crossing a couple weeks before Christmas last year...

 

It seems odd that ships being belted out on the conveyor belt at Fincantieri are seeminly having more problems than those built at other yards...could it be "just one of those things"...or is it that the corporation want ships belted out quickly, cheaply and maybe the amounts paid mean that certain equipment and build standards are shaved?

 

Fincantieri CAN build amazing ships....you only have to look at the original Disney pair to see that...yet Disney have shifted to a German yard for their larger variants.

 

The French, German and Finnish yards take alot longer to build ships than Fincantieri do...despite using the same "lego brick" prefabricated system...and it is the French, German and Finnish yards that are taking the latest newbuild orders, along with Japanese yards.

 

Which begs the question...is there a problem with Fincantieri...lets not forget that in the last 18 months or so they have had workforce issues, financial issues, delivered ships late, delivered refurbished ships in an unfit condition (Saga Sapphire, Thomson Dream to name a couple that have left Palermo's Fincantieri yard only to suffer breakdown after breakdown within weeks of delivery).

 

The latest programmes about Concordia have shifted the spotlight off Schettino and have included the wider picture (not before time)....and Schettino could use these findings to pursue and potentially win a wrongful dismissal case...NOT cos he had no part in what happened that night but cos he was effectively used to divert the coverage away from the wider implications...the greatest and most expensive being the ship herself and any extremely costly rectifications that may be required to be made to her sisters Splendor, Serena & Pacifica and her cousins Favalosa & Fascinosa...not to mention the Conquest class too...it is also strange that the original footprint ship, Destiny, will be at Fincantieri this year for a complete rebuild - adding more cabins, adding more decks etc.

 

But going back to the transcript, those 13 seconds of indecision and confusion from the helmsman could damage the case against Schettino...no officer should need to repeat orders time after time, but from that transcript he DID have to, so we are not looking at 13 seconds delay, but perhaps a total of several minutes throughout the entire procedure....and it keeps coming back to the helmsman and his limited English which was exacerbated by the variety of Italian accents from the captain and other officers on the bridge that night.

[clive and anne]

I have been looking today at the appearing/ diappearing funnel. Is it possible that the funnel was laid on a barge and it is the barge that keeps approaching and pulling back from the wreck.

Just a thought.