Help me convince a skeptic that ships are not top heavy and a disaster waiting

[Canadian Tyler]

Just don't look up the top 10 cruise ship accidents video on Youtube, might give him new things to worry about! :)

 

Sent from my Q10 using Tapatalk 2

[Aquahound]

For God's sake, whatever you do . . .

 

DON'T SHOW HIM A PICTURE OF THE NORWEGIAN EPIC!!!!! :eek:

 

Yeah, no kidding....or the Costa Romantica!

 

[chengkp75]

Yeah, no kidding....or the Costa Romantica!

 

 

Aqua;

 

I hadn't seen that one. Those sections over the bridge on the Romantica and the Epic look like they were grafted on from a failed condo project.

[uksimonusa]

Yeah, no kidding....or the Costa Romantica!

 

 

 

Don't see anything Romatic in that photo

[Ocean Boy]

For God's sake, whatever you do . . .

 

DON'T SHOW HIM A PICTURE OF THE NORWEGIAN EPIC!!!!! :eek:

 

This thread is about ships rolling over. It is not about ships growing tumors on their heads.

[Aquahound]

Aqua;

 

I hadn't seen that one. Those sections over the bridge on the Romantica and the Epic look like they were grafted on from a failed condo project.

 

LOL! Good analogy! :D I had never seen the Romantica either until I took that picture in Catania, Sicily. The Epic was the first thing I thought of when I saw it. Sad thing is, that's all an addition. From doing a Google search, the Romantica, originally, did not look like that.

[mo&fran]

Just do not allow them to watch Poseidon Adventure.

[Ocean Boy]

LOL! Good analogy! :D I had never seen the Romantica either until I took that picture in Catania, Sicily. The Epic was the first thing I thought of when I saw it. Sad thing is, that's all an addition. From doing a Google search, the Romantica, originally, did not look like that.

 

NCL seems to have a habit of bolting structures to the tops of ships. Remember what they did to the S.S. France when they bought it and renamed it the S.S. Norway. With the purchase and name change came another forehead tumor.

[DirtyDawg]

:eek:I know that many of my posts tend towards the technical, and sometimes are way over the top as far as presenting facts in answering questions, but I won't be able to explain ship's stability fully in this forum.

 

As others have said, the center of gravity is fairly low, but higher than most cargo ships. The true measure of a ship's stability is the relative distance between the center of gravity and the center of buoyancy. As a ship rolls, the center of gravity swings to the "high" side of the ship's centerline, while the center of buoyancy swings to the "low" side (more empty ship's volume under water on that side). The center of gravity tends to pull downwards, while the center of buoyancy pushes upwards. These two forces, acting over the distance between the two, create a force that rolls the ship upright. When the two centers are close to each other, the ship tends to roll slowly, but when they are far apart, the ship will tend to "snap" roll (very uncomfortable).

 

As the article posted states, most people find walking on a ship at 20* rolling difficult. Most cruisers find 5* "rough". My ship (a cruise ship) was at full sea speed (20 knots) when the rudder was accidentally placed "hard over" (full rudder, maximum turning). This kind of speed and turning effect causes the ship to lean away from the turn. We experienced a 35* list, nearly every piece of glassware and dishware on the ship was broken, many passengers were injured, but the ship righted itself.

 

If you search a thread about "losing propulsion in the middle of the ocean like Triumph" here, you will find a video someone posted of a cruise ship taking 30-35* rolls for quite a while. Actually, the farther over a ship rolls, the more it wants to right itself.

 

When a ship is designed and built, they do "inclining experiments" that used to actually require listing a ship and seeing how it performed, but are now done in computer simulation, and there are internationally mandated minimums for ship's stability.

 

Whoops, went overboard again, sorry!:p

 

Probably shouldn't let him watch the "why ships sink" show being mentioned over on the RCI forum!!

 

OP go ahead and explain this to your friend - word for word. But this is what he'll here;

 

"Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla. A SHIP ROLLS, bla bla bla. Bla bla LEAN. Bla bla LIST bla bla, MANY PASSENGERS INJURED! :eek:, bla bla.

 

OVERBOARD!!!"

 

:D:D

 

Have fun on your train trip.

[chengkp75]

OP go ahead and explain this to your friend - word for word. But this is what he'll here;

 

"Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla. A SHIP ROLLS, bla bla bla. Bla bla LEAN. Bla bla LIST bla bla, MANY PASSENGERS INJURED! :eek:, bla bla.

 

OVERBOARD!!!"

 

:D:D

 

Have fun on your train trip.

 

Kind of like Charlie Brown's teacher "Waa WaaWaa Waa!"

[Gunner22aa]

Your friend has seen way too many re runs of the movie! Lots of good evidence presented here but the real proof in the pudding is that it hasen't happened to any of them yet with the exception of ones that have had a major hull breach like the Concordia. Lets face it, your friend just doesn't want to cruise plain and simple.

[TheOldBear]

We have a close dear friend who says he will never cruise because ships are bound to just topple over from the weight of the top. We have explained that the engines and such are heavy enough to keep it in the water. But he wants engineering proof. Personally I think he is just scared. I was too before my first cruise. He wants me to try train travel instead. No way sounds too boring to me.

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

 

If your friend wants the technical explanation, I would suggest google searches for 'metacentric height' and 'righting moment'.

[navybankerteacher]

the physics behind why a ship remains upright can't be argued with. It sounds like your friend has a phobia (fear of water, losing sight of land, confinement, crowds, etc). I'd move on and enjoy a cruise with another friend and set up something else with him.

 

Train travel through Canada is supposed to be kick azz. DW and I are looking to do something through http://www.canadiantrainvacations.com/?kw=canada%20train%20tour&mt=p&gclid=COHJy-OjprgCFYef4AodcjIApQ

 

but never at the loss of a cruise through the sunny southern Caribbean in February where its hot enough to be looking for shade and the cocktails are ice cold.

 

Well, the Costa Concordia rolled over, but that was after the captain ran her onto some rocks and tore a long gash in her side. Other than that, the only other passenger ship I recall rolling over was the Andrea Doria - but that was after she was rammed by the Stockholm and her bow was almost cur off. I suppose said friend might be right -- those ships did roll over. Do you think he would feel safer flying Asiana?

[abridalmaven]

I assume your friend doesn't fly either.

 

Sent from my AMID-972XS using Tapatalk 2

 

Actually his business requires him to fly all the time.

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[temple1]

Aqua;

 

I hadn't seen that one. Those sections over the bridge on the Romantica and the Epic look like they were grafted on from a failed condo project.

 

That is a good analogy, I was at first with the tumor contingent but I think you described it perfectly. There are a number of older condo projects in our area that are described as - shacks on a stack. That could cover this one.

[Icruzthere4Iam]

It's gonna be tough to convince him if he has his mind made up. You could make it a contest though where you set a date in two weeks and he presents you with any and all evidence, news accounts etc of cruise ships just randomly rolling over and you can present him with the facts about the number of cruise ships and cruises taken in a given year with zero random roll over incidents. The fact it has never happened doesn't mean it can't happen but the fact that these ships are all over the world sailing on a daily basis with millions of people onboard should be evidence that the ships don't just randomly flip over. Good luck!!!

[bus man]

Not doing the train until I run out of things on my bucket list. I will save that for an age where I can't drive much. And even then I would prefer to travel at night and sleep on the train, to whatever destination I am headed for the next day. But that is a long way off hopefully.

 

OP, I do not mean to come off as rude or agumentative, so please don't take it that way. But consider this: while you're trying to convince a reluctant friend to cruise, he is trying to convince his own reluctant friend (i.e. you) to take a train ride. To me, the compromise seems obvious.

 

He is of the opinion that he won't like a cruise, yet he has never been on one. So I would ask you: have you ever been on an overnight train ride? In a sleeping compartment (as opposed to a seat in a passenger coach)? If you have, I'll shut up now. But if you haven't, then how would you know you wouldn't like it? And just in case you're thinking it . . . saying "I don't like riding the Long Island Rail Road, so I wouldn't like an overnight train" is about the same as saying "I don't like riding the Staten Island Ferry, so I wouldn't like a cruise."

 

If you really, truly want your friend to take a cruise with you, I think it will come down to, is it worth you taking an overnight train trip?

 

FWIW, I've done overnight train rides before. They're actually quite pleasant -- as long as you have a berth in a sleeping compartment. (Sleeping in the passenger coach is akin to taking a red-eye airline flight.)

 

Last thought: you could each get what you want if you take a cruise in Alaska and then ride the Alaska Railroad up to Denali or Fairbanks. (It's not an overnight train, but still . . .)

[navybankerteacher]

Somebody tell me whats wrong with the Norwegian Epic

 

Have you seen that big black top hat she wears? Overall, the ugliest thing afloat: looks like a 1950's cheap office building tipped over.

[Hlitner]

We have a close dear friend who says he will never cruise because ships are bound to just topple over from the weight of the top. We have explained that the engines and such are heavy enough to keep it in the water. But he wants engineering proof. Personally I think he is just scared. I was too before my first cruise. He wants me to try train travel instead. No way sounds too boring to me.

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

 

There are some folks who have various phobias (like ships toppling over) and we have learned not to waste our time trying to convince them their concerns are not founded in fact. And you might want to remind him that all trains fall off their tracks :)

 

But seriously, we have seen our share of cruisers who are very unhappy on ships and hate every moment. They are a very small minority of cruisers...but they exist. Many of these folks had preconceived notions....and see their cruise as a self-fulfilled prophecy. Bottom line is that cruising is not for everyone.

 

Hank

[Capt_BJ]

Just show him Chapter 2 of the SOLAS Conventions:

 

Chapter II-1 - Construction - Subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations

 

The subdivision of passenger ships into watertight compartments must be such that after assumed damage to the ship's hull the vessel will remain afloat and stable. Requirements for watertight integrity and bilge pumping arrangements for passenger ships are also laid down as well as stability requirements for both passenger and cargo ships.

 

 

 

The degree of subdivision - measured by the maximum permissible distance between two adjacent bulkheads - varies with ship's length and the service in which it is engaged. The highest degree of subdivision applies to passenger ships.

 

{emphasis added}

 

The SOLAS Convention has been 'rolled into' US Regulations that are enforced by USCG. A pass' ship must comply with SOLAS lest they be denied permission to load pass' in a US port. To Wit .... the Bimini Superfast which had hoped to begin taking folks to/from Bimini for gambling beginning last week, but is still try to attain their necessary OKs & documents from USCG. http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Days-Later-Bimini-SuperFast-Cruise-Ship-Remains-Docked-in-Miami-214098301.html

[Winnigirl]

I guess I'm pretty heartless - but I really have no time for this sort of thing. You're not going to convince him, so just go ahead and make plans without him - in fact, convince his wife to make her plans to go too. Don't beg him. Chances are when he realizes that no one is falling all over themselves to convince him, he might just decide on his own to "take the plunge", so to speak....I guess that's a bad choice of words.:D

[chengkp75]

Just show him Chapter 2 of the SOLAS Conventions:

 

Chapter II-1 - Construction - Subdivision and stability, machinery and electrical installations

 

The subdivision of passenger ships into watertight compartments must be such that after assumed damage to the ship's hull the vessel will remain afloat and stable. Requirements for watertight integrity and bilge pumping arrangements for passenger ships are also laid down as well as stability requirements for both passenger and cargo ships.

 

 

 

The degree of subdivision - measured by the maximum permissible distance between two adjacent bulkheads - varies with ship's length and the service in which it is engaged. The highest degree of subdivision applies to passenger ships.

 

{emphasis added}

 

The SOLAS Convention has been 'rolled into' US Regulations that are enforced by USCG. A pass' ship must comply with SOLAS lest they be denied permission to load pass' in a US port. To Wit .... the Bimini Superfast which had hoped to begin taking folks to/from Bimini for gambling beginning last week, but is still try to attain their necessary OKs & documents from USCG. http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Days-Later-Bimini-SuperFast-Cruise-Ship-Remains-Docked-in-Miami-214098301.html

 

Yes, but that is referencing "damage stability" as opposed to "intact stability". And while I get your point about the Bimini ferry, they were denied based mostly on poor crew performance at emergency drills.

[Eng23]

Leave the skeptic behind and take those who want to go on a cruise. No matter how much convincing you attempt or advice anyone here gives you, your friend will remain a skeptic and not go on a cruise.

[BecciBoo]

I thought 2 cruises would be enough for my SIL, the rest of the family is hooked line and sinker, but he never wants to cruise again....leaving all of them with this:(

It's not for everyone! Puzzling, but true:confused:

[Capt_BJ]

Yes, but that is referencing "damage stability" as opposed to "intact stability".

 

 

Better go back and look into IMO and SOLAS again . .

 

Intact Stability Code

 

IMO has long developed intact stability criteria for various types of ships, culminating in the completion of the Code on Intact Stability for All Types of Ships Covered by IMO Instruments (IS Code) in 1993 (resolution A.749(18)) and later amendments thereto (resolution MSC.75(69)).

 

The starting point for standards of stability in a damaged condition BEGINS with a set of standards in the undamaged condition. IMO then goes on to provide a standardized method of determining damaged condition stability because of past variation of how various bodies performed these evaluations; most recently working to close existing gaps in the process for pass' vs cargo vessel evaluation.... (according to their press releases anyway)

 

And I hope the point while I get your point about the Bimini ferry is ... that a vessel must comply with ALL parts of SOLAS and additional US regulations b4 they are granted clearance: construction, training and passing inspections which include evaluations of crew performance

 

*** but the intended point was sarcastic - if one believes that there are no rules for stability that ensure a ship will not capsize why do they believe the train rails will be a consistent distance apart such that wheels stay on the tracks .... there are VOLUMES and VOLUMES of rules and folks who check them. Having participated in rule making sessions for RTCM (a feeder to IMO) I can assure all, the the folks that do this full time take their role VERY seriously.