Muster Stations outside

[gooch47]

Couldn't sleep last night and got to wondering about the cruise ships where you stand outside, lined up near your prospective life boat.  What would happen in the event of an actual emergency?   I remember reading that during the Star Princess fire, passengers were kept at their INDOOR muster stations for hours.  If you were on one of the ships that had muster stations outside, would you have to stand there for a long time?

Edited December 12, 2018 by gooch47

[mef_57]

2 hours ago, gooch47 said:

Couldn't sleep last night and got to wondering about the cruise ships where you stand outside, lined up near your prospective life boat.  What would happen in the event of an actual emergency?   I remember reading that during the Star Princess fire, passengers were kept at their INDOOR muster stations for hours.  If you were on one of the ships that had muster stations outside, would you have to stand there for a long time?

When reading my emergency instructions on NCL Dawn, they said take lifejacket and something warm to put on. I suspect the answer for your question is 'it depends'.... On weather, sea state, your frailty or ability to stand for hours, whether they can move you to a safe indoor spot. Just remember need for extended musters are few. 

Read the details on the back of your door, but don't lose sleep over it.

[navybankerteacher]

In the event of an actual emergency I would hope the crew would be better prepared than the Costa Concordia’s sorry lot.  And once the muster was taken (hopefully reasonably quickly) the passengers would be advised of where they should stand by until the all clear.  Presumably the nature and location of the emergency would be considered, and the comfort of the passengers taken into account ——— but recognizing that getting  large numbers of cruise passengers to do things is a bit like herding cats, I can understand why the damage control personnel would want to maintain control — which might require kssping everybody at muster stations.

[Shmoo here]

2 hours ago, gooch47 said:

Couldn't sleep last night and got to wondering about the cruise ships where you stand outside, lined up near your prospective life boat.  What would happen in the event of an actual emergency?   I remember reading that during the Star Princess fire, passengers were kept at their INDOOR muster stations for hours.  If you were on one of the ships that had muster stations outside, would you have to stand there for a long time?

As noted, it depends.  If you can't actually reach your assigned muster (as was the case on the Costa) there will be someone directing you elsewhere to wait for instructions as to which "new" lifeboat to go to.

 

I see the sense in doing the muster drill at the actual location your lifeboat is.  But I also see the sense in central muster locations (like inside lounges/dining rooms).  The former means your brain can start putting that information into its "files" for future reference.  The latter means that, if there were a problem in accessing a lifeboat it's easier to redirect people to another.

 

 

[paul929207]

It will be up to the crew to determine wat to do. Is some cases, it could be dangerous to go back into the ship. It others it could be dangerous to go outside. So no definitive answer can be give to this hypothetical question

[chengkp75]

First off, let me defend the crew of the Concordia, as the sole root cause of the disorder and death was Schettino's failure to act properly.  According to the report of the Italian Maritime Authority, the crew as a whole acted correctly and professionally.  And, taking passenger comfort into account is one reason Schettino delayed mustering the passengers, which led to the fatalities.  If the passengers have been sent to muster stations, that means the emergency has progressed to the point where lives are threatened, and comfort becomes the very last concern.

 

Now, to the OP's question.  As others have said, "it depends".  As the old military axiom states "no plan survives contact with the enemy".  Each situation is unique, and responses, while planned in advance, acknowledge that each situation is unique, and revisions may be necessary.  If the weather is okay, yes, you may be required to stay at the outdoor muster station.  If there are medical emergencies caused by this, then additional crew will be dispatched to handle this.  Should weather be seriously inclement, or an outdoor station be rendered unusable due to the emergency, then you would be directed to an alternate station, possibly indoors, possibly outdoors as well.  It all depends on the particular circumstances of the emergency on hand.

 

As to the benefits of outdoor vs. indoor muster locations, remember that if there is a fire in a "vertical fire zone" (the zones of the ship, from top to bottom, that the ship is divided into by those pesky doors in the passageways), that all ventilation for all decks in that zone will be shut down, and likely all power (except emergency lighting) as well, so if your indoor muster station is in the fire zone of the fire, it will be rendered useless, and you will be directed to another location, likely outdoors.  Outdoor locations do not have these limitations.

[Shmoo here]

26 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

First off, let me defend the crew of the Concordia, as the sole root cause of the disorder and death was Schettino's failure to act properly. 

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound as if I were saying the crew did anything wrong on that cruise.  I was only saying, if it's not possible to reach the assigned muster station someone is assigned to, there SHOULD be people (crew/staff) directing them where to go.

 

I agree the Captain in that case didn't act properly.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Shmoo here said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound as if I were saying the crew did anything wrong on that cruise.  I was only saying, if it's not possible to reach the assigned muster station someone is assigned to, there SHOULD be people (crew/staff) directing them where to go.

 

I agree the Captain in that case didn't act properly.

Wasn't really calling you out.  There will be crew to direct you to an alternate muster station whether your primary one is inside or outside (and the outside muster stations on the Concordia did not become unusable until hours after the grounding happened).  On any given ship, there will be a hundred to a couple hundred crew whose emergency duties are "report to muster station (theirs not yours) and assist as directed".  These crew are to be called on by the Hotel Director as the evacuation leader to assist in locating missing passengers, assist passengers having mobility or medical issues, direct passengers as required, gather blankets, water, etc, for distribution to muster stations in case of extended periods, assist emergency teams if required, or any other task not specified in the emergency plans.

[taglovestocruise]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

 

As to the benefits of outdoor vs. indoor muster locations, remember that if there is a fire in a "vertical fire zone" (the zones of the ship, from top to bottom, that the ship is divided into by those pesky doors in the passageways), that all ventilation for all decks in that zone will be shut down, and likely all power (except emergency lighting) as well, so if your indoor muster station is in the fire zone of the fire, it will be rendered useless, and you will be directed to another location, likely outdoors.  Outdoor locations do not have these limitations.

Three times on Oasis class and each time we have been assigned the Aqua Theater for muster. The only way to the life boats would be to go back inside and go down a deck. Would that be the plan or is there another way to get to the life boats. Just curious as to what they would do with 1500 trying to get back inside and down the stairs...

[cb at sea]

Ships don't usually sink in a level position....it's almost certain that one side of the ship, or the other, will be too far out of the water to deploy those lifeboats....

 

In an actual emergency, there will be panic.  You need to remain as calm as possible and listen to the crew...they train all the time for this.  Your 20 min. "muster drill", while important to attend, will not be what saves your life.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, cb at sea said:

Ships don't usually sink in a level position....it's almost certain that one side of the ship, or the other, will be too far out of the water to deploy those lifeboats....

 

In an actual emergency, there will be panic.  You need to remain as calm as possible and listen to the crew...they train all the time for this.  Your 20 min. "muster drill", while important to attend, will not be what saves your life.

And, again, you spout nonsense you know nothing about.  Very few ships will roll over to sink, so guess what?  You're completely wrong again, about not being able to launch boats, as even in the unmitigated disaster of the Concordia, 23 of 26 boats, including 10 of the 13 boats on the high side were launched.  I know you never come back, but please just go away in the first place.

 

Just to point out, if the Concordia had not drifted back and grounded on Giglio a second time, she would have sunk on an even keel, down by the stern.  At no time in the hours between the initial grounding and the final grounding did she heel over more than 10-15*, which is within the envelope for launching boats from the high side.  It was the second grounding that caused Concordia to roll over.

Edited December 13, 2018 by chengkp75

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, taglovestocruise said:

Three times on Oasis class and each time we have been assigned the Aqua Theater for muster. The only way to the life boats would be to go back inside and go down a deck. Would that be the plan or is there another way to get to the life boats. Just curious as to what they would do with 1500 trying to get back inside and down the stairs...

They will not only use the passenger stairwells, they will use the crew stairwells as well.  Also, they will not send the entire group down to the boats at once, it will be boat load by boat load.

 

And, again, the main purpose of passenger muster is not to get you to the boats.  It is to group all passengers in limited, known locations, where accountability can be taken, and instructions and information given.  Knowing that all passengers are in safe locations, accounted for, and out of the emergency teams' way is very important to efficient management of an emergency.

[AmazedByCruising]

59 minutes ago, cb at sea said:

Ships don't usually sink in a level position....it's almost certain that one side of the ship, or the other, will be too far out of the water to deploy those lifeboats....

 

I wish CC had an unlike button as well.

[cruising cockroach]

24 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Very few ships will roll over to sink,

 

Maybe they will if hit with multiple torpedos, mines, and/or armour-piercing bombs (or just plain bombs for armoured ships) triggering uncontrolled fuel and ammunition fires and explosions!  Was just watching WW-I film footage of a large (allied?) ship doing so, possibly at Gallipoli.

[chengkp75]

12 hours ago, cruising cockroach said:

 

Maybe they will if hit with multiple torpedos, mines, and/or armour-piercing bombs (or just plain bombs for armoured ships) triggering uncontrolled fuel and ammunition fires and explosions!  Was just watching WW-I film footage of a large (allied?) ship doing so, possibly at Gallipoli.

In those days, ship design was not as advanced, nor the materials to build ships as good, as today.  In the past, ships had much more longitudinal segregation (separating compartments port and starboard), mainly to add strength to the ship's structure, and less damage control equipment.  Therefore, when a torpedo or bomb struck a ship on one side, that side flooded and caused the ship to roll over.  These days, if that torpedo hits, it either enters a "wing" tank (tankage along the side of the ship), which these days are narrow and segregated fore and aft into smaller compartments, and which may be full already (no flooding), or which even if empty would not effect the stability of the ship to the degree that it rolls over.  Or, the torpedo hits the engine room or a cargo hold/tank, which runs the full width of the ship.  Flooding in these spaces, even though it is coming in only one side, flows across the entire space, and adds weight all the way across the ship.  This is what happened to the Concordia.  Ships like the Concordia are designed to stay afloat with two adjacent (fore and aft) watertight compartments completely flooded, but will sink if more than two are flooded.  Schettino managed to breach 4 adjacent compartments, as big a hole as any torpedo would cause, all on the port side, and the ship still did not roll over, it started to settle stern first.  Even given the wind at the time, the ship would heel to one side, and then to the other when she swung around, drifting, but only to 10-15*, even when taking on fatal amounts of weight.  It wasn't until the ship touched bottom again on Giglio, and this side of the ship became the fulcrum point, could the wind start to heel the ship over, and then the water would rush to the low side and assist in rolling the ship over.  This is "free surface" effect, the desire of a liquid like water to flow to the lowest point.  As long as the compartments were equally supported by the sea, the water wanted to maintain the level in the flooded compartments level, but when the port side of the ship was supported by the ocean bottom, and water continued to flow into the ship, it caused the starboard side to sink lower, causing the water to flow to starboard, and increasing the tendency of the ship to sink lower on the starboard side, until it came to rest on the starboard side.

 

One thing that all ships have when designed, that they did not do in WWI is a "damaged stability" calculation, which explores the possibilities of damage to one side of the ship, or the bottom, or even stresses caused by the ship being aground in one part of the ship and the rest being floating.  This is how naval architects know that a ship is a "two compartment" ship, or a "three compartment" ship, and the crew have mitigation plans for various scenarios of damage, based on these tests.

[yorkshirephil]

If you have concerns about standing for long periods you can ask for assistance. If the weather is bad or deemed unsafe it is unlikely you will muster outside.

[ontheweb]

Thank you Captain Cheng for all the information you provide.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

Thank you Captain Cheng for all the information you provide.

You're welcome, but I'm not a Captain.  Cheng is an acronym for Chief Engineer.

[ontheweb]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

You're welcome, but I'm not a Captain.  Cheng is an acronym for Chief Engineer.

So, you have a problem that I gave you a promotion? LOL

[chengkp75]

Many maritime engineers would consider that a demotion.  We tend to think of the ship belonging to the Chief, who "lets the Captain drive it".  Chiefs more often stay with a ship longer than Captains do.

Edited December 13, 2018 by chengkp75

[cruising cockroach]

Thanks for the naval architecture lesson.   There were also WW-II naval losses (or lots, some of which involved capsizes and some of the losses were ships or WW-I design). I think since WW-II, only one ship (a WW-II veteran at that) has been torpedoed other than for target practice.  As for more-modern warships, the British lost a few warships via missiles (these cause uncontrollable fires more than anything else, unlike older weaponry) and some others by good ol' iron bombs.  I think one U.S. ship was heavily destroyed by a mine.  Not too many losses of "large" military ships through hostile fire in the past ~65 years?

[SmoothFlying]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Many maritime engineers would consider that a demotion.  We tend to think of the ship belonging to the Chief, who "lets the Captain drive it".  Chiefs more often stay with a ship longer than Captains do.

 

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Many maritime engineers would consider that a demotion.  We tend to think of the ship belonging to the Chief, who "lets the Captain drive it".  Chiefs more often stay with a ship longer than Captains do.

My cousin was a Master Chief in the Navy for, I guess, almost forty years and used to say IF you said 'sir' to any chief, as you'd address a officer the Chief would more than likely growl, 'DON'T SIR me, I'm the 'Chief of the boat, I WORK for a living !' I guess it's been that way in ANY branch of any service since organized military existed. The senior NCO's and enlisted do the work, the officers get the credit.

 

Mac

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, cruising cockroach said:

Thanks for the naval architecture lesson.   There were also WW-II naval losses (or lots, some of which involved capsizes and some of the losses were ships or WW-I design). I think since WW-II, only one ship (a WW-II veteran at that) has been torpedoed other than for target practice.  As for more-modern warships, the British lost a few warships via missiles (these cause uncontrollable fires more than anything else, unlike older weaponry) and some others by good ol' iron bombs.  I think one U.S. ship was heavily destroyed by a mine.  Not too many losses of "large" military ships through hostile fire in the past ~65 years?

The example you cite of a ship damaged by mine, that would be the USS Roberts, which suffered a shattered keel, and the ship split so badly that the crew tightened wire cables around the superstructure to keep her together, yet she did not roll over or sink.  She was towed to Bahrain, where they made temporary repairs enough to get her onto a heavy lift ship and she was transported here to Portland, Maine, where they cut the entire engine room out and replaced it as a single module.  Her repair took 13 months and $89 million.  The problems the British faced were caused mostly by their use of aluminum as a superstructure material, which in some cases literally vaporized in the heat of the explosion.  Most countries have gone away from this practice after the Falklands war.  There was little difference between ships of WWI era and WWII era in terms of strength of materials, and naval design.  They just basically got bigger.

 

The losses of ships in WWII is actually the worst ecological disaster to strike the world's oceans.  Nearly all ships went down with oil in their bunker tanks, and many, like the USS Arizona, still have oil in those tanks, and like the Arizona are slowly leaking it into the sea.

56 minutes ago, SmoothFlying said:

 

My cousin was a Master Chief in the Navy for, I guess, almost forty years and used to say IF you said 'sir' to any chief, as you'd address a officer the Chief would more than likely growl, 'DON'T SIR me, I'm the 'Chief of the boat, I WORK for a living !' I guess it's been that way in ANY branch of any service since organized military existed. The senior NCO's and enlisted do the work, the officers get the credit.

 

Mac

While this is quite true of the Navy, as a merchant mariner Chief Engineer, I am an officer.  However, given the smaller crews of merchant ships, the officers do much of the work, along with the crew.  This was always a problem for me during my naval reserve time, as I could not sit back and just watch, as the senior officers wanted me to.

[SmoothFlying]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The example you cite of a ship damaged by mine, that would be the USS Roberts, which suffered a shattered keel, and the ship split so badly that the crew tightened wire cables around the superstructure to keep her together, yet she did not roll over or sink.  She was towed to Bahrain, where they made temporary repairs enough to get her onto a heavy lift ship and she was transported here to Portland, Maine, where they cut the entire engine room out and replaced it as a single module.  Her repair took 13 months and $89 million.  The problems the British faced were caused mostly by their use of aluminum as a superstructure material, which in some cases literally vaporized in the heat of the explosion.  Most countries have gone away from this practice after the Falklands war.  There was little difference between ships of WWI era and WWII era in terms of strength of materials, and naval design.  They just basically got bigger.

 

The losses of ships in WWII is actually the worst ecological disaster to strike the world's oceans.  Nearly all ships went down with oil in their bunker tanks, and many, like the USS Arizona, still have oil in those tanks, and like the Arizona are slowly leaking it into the sea.

While this is quite true of the Navy, as a merchant mariner Chief Engineer, I am an officer.  However, given the smaller crews of merchant ships, the officers do much of the work, along with the crew.  This was always a problem for me during my naval reserve time, as I could not sit back and just watch, as the senior officers wanted me to.

That's definitely the BEST way to treat the ratings under you Chief. It's called 'leading by example' Some officers let their status go to their head. You were an outstanding different category any man serving under you could say they were proud to serve with.

 

Mac

[SRF]

14 hours ago, cruising cockroach said:

Thanks for the naval architecture lesson.   There were also WW-II naval losses (or lots, some of which involved capsizes and some of the losses were ships or WW-I design). I think since WW-II, only one ship (a WW-II veteran at that) has been torpedoed other than for target practice.  As for more-modern warships, the British lost a few warships via missiles (these cause uncontrollable fires more than anything else, unlike older weaponry) and some others by good ol' iron bombs.  I think one U.S. ship was heavily destroyed by a mine.  Not too many losses of "large" military ships through hostile fire in the past ~65 years?

 

Part of the issue with the fires was, someone had the bright idea of using a lot of aluminum for the superstructure to reduce weight up high.

 

Unfortunately, aluminum can catch fire and burn.