Monarch of the seas

[DebsterW]

The Monarch is still in port. It was supposed to leave at 4:30

[MaiTaiQueen]

hmm strange an hour late....i wonder whats up...:confused:

[Capt_BJ]

she came in late this morning too ..... hit the webcam around 8 and she was just turning around in the basin to approach the pier. She's usually in b4 7 ... often way b4 7.

 

Inquiring minds want to know

 

5:36 and she's still here.

 

I would not think the late arrival would impact departure since she wasn't THAT late .... but maybe....

[MaiTaiQueen]

And shes off!

[bajathree]

Leave the old lady alone:p

[DebsterW]

There she goes

[sns101098]

CD Marc Walker reported that they would be leaving late due to late arriving flights for the Bud Light Party Cruise!

[Capt_BJ]

Leave the old lady alone:p

 

we're not picking on her ... just wondering waz' up

 

if you are a MONARCH fan

 

are you aware she nearly sank once .... was intentionally run aground else she would have sunk according to the official investigation?

 

Dec 1998

 

http://marinecasualty.com/documents/monarch.pdf

 

among the causes mentioned in the report: a Captain who had a reputation for not taking comments from subordinates well . . . . hmmmm. So he did some seat of the pants navigation that no one questioned ...... hmmmmm. Can you say Costa Concordia?

 

Past history .... just interesting to know when you are on the ship. Can make for very interesting table conversation.....

[MaiTaiQueen]

we're not picking on her ... just wondering waz' up

 

if you are a MONARCH fan

 

are you aware she nearly sank once .... was intentionally run aground else she would have sunk according to the official investigation?

 

Dec 1998

 

http://marinecasualty.com/documents/monarch.pdf

 

among the causes mentioned in the report: a Captain who had a reputation for not taking comments from subordinates well . . . . hmmmm. So he did some seat of the pants navigation that no one questioned ...... hmmmmm. Can you say Costa Concordia?

 

Past history .... just interesting to know when you are on the ship. Can make for very interesting table conversation.....

 

Oh dear...you've just given me more amo to procrastinate with!

 

My work can wait! :p

[rubrrick]

we're not picking on her ... just wondering waz' up

 

if you are a MONARCH fan

 

are you aware she nearly sank once .... was intentionally run aground else she would have sunk according to the official investigation?

 

Dec 1998

 

http://marinecasualty.com/documents/monarch.pdf

 

among the causes mentioned in the report: a Captain who had a reputation for not taking comments from subordinates well . . . . hmmmm. So he did some seat of the pants navigation that no one questioned ...... hmmmmm. Can you say Costa Concordia?

 

Past history .... just interesting to know when you are on the ship. Can make for very interesting table conversation.....

 

 

Capt_bj

 

This is very well known information, and the great difference between the Concordia and the Monarch is that the captain of the Concordia was a hotdogger.......has been for sometime, having inflicted damage on other Costa ships before his final disaster.

 

The captain of the Monarch was leaving by its usual course, when a passenger need to be evacuated. The Coast Guard reveals that.

 

Then when the captain is confident that the course is correctly set, and is in his cabin, and feeling the vibration, is immediately back on the bridge, making a brilliant decision to beach the ship.

 

Tell me how many lives were lost??? NONE!

Did the captain stay with the ship till everyone was accounted for?? YES.

 

How does this compute with the sinking of the Concordia??

 

The facts of the Monarch are routinely discussed with captains and other officers around Royal Caribbean and knowing someone that was aboard when the Monarch was grounded (a junior officer at the time), my knowledge of this potential disaster were averted.

 

I'm now trying to understand your point??:rolleyes:

 

Rick

[Mark_K]

we're not picking on her ... just wondering waz' up

 

if you are a MONARCH fan

 

are you aware she nearly sank once .... was intentionally run aground else she would have sunk according to the official investigation?

 

Dec 1998

 

http://marinecasualty.com/documents/monarch.pdf

 

among the causes mentioned in the report: a Captain who had a reputation for not taking comments from subordinates well . . . . hmmmm. So he did some seat of the pants navigation that no one questioned ...... hmmmmm. Can you say Costa Concordia?

 

Past history .... just interesting to know when you are on the ship. Can make for very interesting table conversation.....

The captain was in his cabin at the time.

[ticktoneer]

Very aggressive and confrontational in your manner and notation rubrrick !!!

[rubrrick]

Very aggressive and confrontational in your manner and notation rubrrick !!!

 

How so? Sorry if you feel that I'm confrontational. I'm simply stating facts, as I know them to be, and not trying to be confrontational at all.

 

Rick

[Capt_BJ]

did you even READ the investigation report?

 

The master possessed the personality traits so historically valued in the maritime community such as confidence, self-reliance and strong leadership. Unfortunately, those qualities served to promote the evolution of this casualty by undermining the principles of good Bridge Resource Management such as open communications, planning and teamwork, which caused ambiguity among the navigational watch standing team members.

 

The investigation revealed that the master's strong personality, confidence and familiarity with the port, combined with traditional maritime customs and values embraced by the ship's crew whereby the master's decisions were seen as unquestionable, established an unsafe condition that significantly contributed to this casualty. While the OOW and staff captain expressed their confidence in the master's abilities and command, they also testified that he was unapproachable and expressed discomfort at making suggestions to him or questioning his decisions.

 

this sounds familiar to one who has conducted invesitigations into incidents at sea, having been assigned to conduct those investigations not because I knew someone....but because I spent years in the Captain's chair.

 

I make NO reference to the MONARCH today, other than to mention the history. Funny, when you walk around Freedom or Alure you see signs hanging of their fame as 'largest' at the time. But none on Monarch about 'sunk' ..... well, not funny or even surprising.

 

p.s. did you notice that AFTER dropping off the sick person he leaves using a path DIFFERENT from his normal departure ... & plots nothing on a chart, couple that with what I quote from the investigation .... I was a ship's Captain for many years. This is a path to .. exactly what happened.

 

p.s.s. a brand spanking new Navy Destroyer ran agound on this very same rock not very long after MONARCH. It raised the importance of keeping your charts up to date . . . damage to the destroyer was so severe that the Navy was not sure they should repair it, altho it was brand new, not yet commissioned.

[rubrrick]

Capt BJ,

 

I want to let you know, that I have known about you for some time, and have always respected you.

 

I know that sometimes we all come off the wall with certain statements, and although we are both very aware of what happened to the Monarch of the Seas, in both of the captains new course, and the grounding, which, I'm told of new procedures being put into place, as a result of the accident, for more teamwork on the bridge, and certainly, as I'm also a master, but of much smaller ships, and in inland waters only, in the pacific northwest, I respect your postitions in most of your posts.

 

I only took notice and when you quoted the Concordia, I felt it out of your normal context, and I actually could not see, and still cannot, where you are coming from.

 

My hat is off to you for your many years as a commander, and captain of a USCG ship.

 

My statements still stand, as do yours.

 

Rick