Off topic but a RCCL ship is stuck in the massive Atlantic Ocean storm

[Former Goalie]

Thread on RCI board has been locked. And we thought we had the mean posts market cornered over here :D

 

Not just one locked, it's three or four threads.

[Lizzie68]

The thread was pretty quick to start laying blame, which I thought very unfair. All of us sitting at our computers cannot be experienced captains of cruise ships, yet there were many wanna-be experts who, from afar, immediately laid blame. I'm sure one or two heads will roll, but only after a complete investigation.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Lizzie68

[Cruzaholic41]

This may be the story you heard: "U.S. senator calls for investigation of cruise ship in storm"

 

Yeah, from a Carnival Corporation backed Senator. Senator Bill Nelson is the ultimate Carnival and Disney cheerleader because they are on the list of his top contributors. So that explains why he would call for a NTSB investigation in a matter that NTSB has no jurisdiction. Political corruption.

[dakrewser]

Yeah, from a Carnival Corporation backed Senator. Senator Bill Nelson is the ultimate Carnival and Disney cheerleader because they are on the list of his top contributors. So that explains why he would call for a NTSB investigation in a matter that NTSB has no jurisdiction. Political corruption.

 

 

1) The NTSB has jurisdiction over the port of Cape Liberty and it's traffic.

2) Do you really think RCI is blameless in this???

3) I'm sure the senator has lots of corporate contributors. So what? No one can win statewide elections without them.

[Aquahound]

1) The NTSB has jurisdiction over the port of Cape Liberty and it's traffic.

2) Do you really think RCI is blameless in this???

3) I'm sure the senator has lots of corporate contributors. So what? No one can win statewide elections without them.

 

NTSB has no jurisdiction over a incident that occurred on a foreign flagged ship on the high seas. The only loophole would be an assistance request from those who actually have authority in this case...the Bahamas (flag state). Besides, there was no casualty (human or ship), therefore no standing for a governmental investigation.

 

But on your point, you really don't see the conflict in a Carnival-backed Senator from Florida calling for an investigation against a RCCL ship in Jersey, and from an agency with no authority to do so? Really?

[Ferry Beach Kayaker]

One of the problems with cruising from the northeast section of the US is the winter weather. If you fly somewhere, you got to give yourself a cushion of two to three days which means added hotel costs at your embarkation port. You still need to check the weather and the airline website because airlines now cancel flights around a day before a storm is due to hit because they don't want their planes and crews stuck in a snowbound or weather delayed city. Many of times we have flown out even before the cushion we set because once your flight is cancelled because of weather it can take you days to get rescheduled. So cruising from New York and Cape Liberty is attractive. Several years ago, I cruised RCCL out of Cape Liberty as a northeaster was barreling up the coast the captain decided to plow through it. The first night, two people fell with the swaying ship, one broke her hip and another broke her femur. We had over 40 foot waves and high winds. Windows in the higher balcony cabins were broken and rooms flooded, glass got broken all over the ship including all the liquor on shelves. The people in the suites actually slept in lower lounges on the floor. It was 12 hours of hell then about 1 1/2 days of rough waters before we got to calmer watered. The two people with the hip and thigh fractures were offloaded in our first port which was San Juan. I have to admit that since that experience, if we want to cruise to the Carribean in the winter we fly down to Florida.

[Blue Mudshark]

The NTSB and the USCG, under the terms of both US law and international agreement (IMO), have authority to investigate marine incidents "in which the United States is a party of substantial interest". The United States is a party of substantial interest when a ship departs from a US port, and is transporting passengers to another US port. Whether the USCG or NTSB investigates is usually determined by a Memorandum of Understanding between those two organizations.

[Aquahound]

The NTSB and the USCG, under the terms of both US law and international agreement (IMO), have authority to investigate marine incidents "in which the United States is a party of substantial interest". The United States is a party of substantial interest when a ship departs from a US port, and is transporting passengers to another US port. Whether the USCG or NTSB investigates is usually determined by a Memorandum of Understanding between those two organizations.

 

The MOU goes further into identifying the SMTJ (Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction). However, it only applies to criminal cases...granting authority to next port of call on a foreign flagged ship. In those cases, the MOU leans towards USCG and/or FBI.

 

Incidents on the high seas on foreign flagged ships have a certain threshold for government involvement, such as a marine casualty or loss of life and/or serious bodily injury. Since none of that occurred, there was no accident and there are no American casualties, there is no standing for government involvement. The "substantial interest" gets diminished and flag state still has first right.

 

Just FYI...I know this from working the field with just these types of cases. ;)

Edited February 10, 2016 by Aquahound

[Aquahound]

Just a clarification. After re-reading my post, I think I used the wrong word. I shouldn't say they have no jurisdiction. They're not a regulatory agency, so jurisdiction is not the issue. They're simply a safety board that works in the civil arena.

 

That said, my point still stands though. Absent of an accident or any sort of casualty, including marine casualty, this sort of thing just isn't in their wheelhouse.

[dakrewser]

The National Transportation Safety Board noted today that the incident "occurred in international waters and involved a Bahamian-flagged vessel, and we are actively engaged with our U.S. and international partners to determine what would be the best course of action, in accordance with established international protocols."

"In addition, we have received correspondence from Sen. Bill Nelson urging that the NTSB review this incident as part of its investigation into the El Faro accident," the NTSB added. "That investigation includes a weather group that is investigating TOTE Maritime’s decision-making processes regarding vessel operations in hurricanes and other heavy weather occurrences. The Anthem of the Seas incident may provide us an additional opportunity to learn best practices that cruise line operators employ for operating in heavy weather."

[Donny-Joe]

One thing that came up in that huge and contentious thread on the RCI forum is that the captain did a 20-ish minute talk with the cruise director just after they got out of the storm, which was broadcast on the ship. People recorded it and put it on YouTube. I found it fascinating, as they went through the weather maps and talked about how they ended up in the middle of a hurricane-sized storm.

 

[Cruzaholic41]

dakrewser, you are either very confused on the process or as usual, you're just trying to be your typical condescending self. NTSB is not the primary agency on foreign flagged ships outside of US waters, including matters of best practices, hence the note about them working with international partners. They are a safety baord who in this case would need to be dispatched by the Bahamians. The Bahamians will dictate who does what because it is their ship.

[kazu]

One thing that came up in that huge and contentious thread on the RCI forum is that the captain did a 20-ish minute talk with the cruise director just after they got out of the storm, which was broadcast on the ship. People recorded it and put it on YouTube. I found it fascinating, as they went through the weather maps and talked about how they ended up in the middle of a hurricane-sized storm.

 

 

Interesting indeed - totally conflicts with what meteorologists said.

 

Just one of several references...... http://en.mercopress.com/2016/02/10/meteorologists-rebuke-royal-caribbean-s-anthem-of-the-seas-on-weather-report

[Despegue]

On the Youtube video, the Captain did not much talk about how they ended up in their precarious situation, but rather spent 20 minutes explaining why they chose to turn back to NY instead of continuing the cruise.

 

N the beginning of the interview he mentioned that actual conditions faced were far worse then forcast.

If this is true or not, I will refrain from.

Accident investigation will go into that and recommendations will be made, and lessons will be learned.

 

Once again: NO captain will knowingly put his/her ship into harms way. ( except a psychopath like Schettino)

 

I currently do not have weather bulletins and forcasts of the time of the situation, and as a result, I can not and will not give my personal Professional opinion.

 

Please see my previous posts.

 

Regards,

 

Despegue

Captain

[Lizzie68]

Lots of armchair experts on this forum, too.:rolleyes:

[Donny-Joe]

On the Youtube video, the Captain did not much talk about how they ended up in their precarious situation, but rather spent 20 minutes explaining why they chose to turn back to NY instead of continuing the cruise.

 

That's perhaps a slight exaggeration. He doesn't switch to the topic of heading back to Bayonne until the 9 minute mark. But you're right that he doesn't say that much about what led to them being there. He does say that they only expected 40-50 knot winds and 4-5 m seas, and points out that 24 hours before their talk, the entire storm system was a small blot on the screen about as big as his hand.

 

Once again: NO captain will knowingly put his/her ship into harms way.

 

Right; it's clear the captain did not expect the storm to be as big as it was. Whether or not he (or RCI) should have expected it will be examined thoroughly over the next few weeks, I'm sure.

[kazu]

I only know that the storm was forecast for, definitely. We live in the Maritimes and were following as we were going to get hit with a nor 'Easter if the path held. When you live in the Atlantic area, you tend to pay attention to this stuff;)

[sppunk]

The storm was forecast to reach 90 knots, with large ocean swells. That is an indisputable fact. It was forecast to bomb within an eight hour period, which it did.

 

I don't believe the captain knew this necessarily but RCCL's meteorologist should have.

 

The reason given to turn back was not founded in truth IMO, as the wave off the coast was not forecast to become anything substantially close to a major storm. I have no issues with returning to NJ mind you, but the reason given is flimsy at best.

 

It's being reported now RCCL is changing the way it monitors storms. Kudos.

[dogo88]

Lots of armchair experts on this forum, too.:rolleyes:

 

Always is. Cruise Critic requirement;)

[Ferry Beach Kayaker]

We were following the weather, we live about 70 miles south of Cape Liberty. The weatherman were all over the map about this particular northeaster. It was a disorganized storm that was not suppose to intensify until it was off the coast of Massachusetts where it was suppose to bomb snow. I think it intensified over the ocean and off the coast south of us, which is a good 300 miles from Boston. We got less snow than predicted and the Boston area never got hit by a major Northeaster (they got 6 inches) and didn't get the high winds.

[Blue Mudshark]

We were following the weather, we live about 70 miles south of Cape Liberty. The weatherman were all over the map about this particular northeaster. It was a disorganized storm that was not suppose to intensify until it was off the coast of Massachusetts where it was suppose to bomb snow. I think it intensified over the ocean and off the coast south of us, which is a good 300 miles from Boston. We got less snow than predicted and the Boston area never got hit by a major Northeaster (they got 6 inches) and didn't get the high winds.

 

Were you following the weather on TV? Frequently, television weather people are principally there for entertainment purposes, and they focus on their land-based viewing area, not the ocean. Being "all over the map" is par for the course.

 

A cruise ship should be using professional meteorological service, or services, who are not in the entertainment business. A service that has experience in ocean forecasting. The National Weather Service forecasts from twenty-four hours before the incident were quite accurate, although they were not entertaining. I certainly hope that the cruise line and captain weren't relying on The Weather Channel.

[sppunk]

We were following the weather, we live about 70 miles south of Cape Liberty. The weatherman were all over the map about this particular northeaster. It was a disorganized storm that was not suppose to intensify until it was off the coast of Massachusetts where it was suppose to bomb snow. I think it intensified over the ocean and off the coast south of us, which is a good 300 miles from Boston. We got less snow than predicted and the Boston area never got hit by a major Northeaster (they got 6 inches) and didn't get the high winds.

 

That's not totally correct. The three major weather models had it bombing off the coast of South Carolina. TV guys don't mention it because their RPM model isn't worth it's weight in bombing ocean storms. :)

 

The lack of snow was it moving more east once it passed 40N.