Saga Spirit of Discovery

[davecttr]

Sagas modern Spirit of Discovery was caught in a severe storm a few days ago resulting in the injury of about 100 passengers including several hospitalisations. Reports state that the sudden ship movement was the result of the activation of the "automatic propulsion safety system" making the ship veer to the left and come to a sudden halt. What sort of automatic system is this and why would it result in many injuries?

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, davecttr said:

Sagas modern Spirit of Discovery was caught in a severe storm a few days ago resulting in the injury of about 100 passengers including several hospitalisations. Reports state that the sudden ship movement was the result of the activation of the "automatic propulsion safety system" making the ship veer to the left and come to a sudden halt. What sort of automatic system is this and why would it result in many injuries?

I've never heard of such a thing, but I do know about several incidents where a human error in using the autopilot system caused a radical turn at high speed resulting in injuries.  A quick turn at high speed results in the ship heeling over to high angle of heel, with resultant injuries from passengers and things being thrown across the room.  If this happened in a storm, the rolling/heeling would be greatly exaggerated.

[chengkp75]

I saw an article that said that the ship "hove to" for the storm. This involves heading directly into the seas and slowing to just enough to maintain steering. 

[chengkp75]

Okay, a bit more clarification.  It would appear that a safety system (probably overheating) caused the pods to shut down.  This left the ship vulnerable to the seas with neither propulsion or steering, she turned broadside to the seas, and started rolling.

[Hlitner]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Okay, a bit more clarification.  It would appear that a safety system (probably overheating) caused the pods to shut down.  This left the ship vulnerable to the seas with neither propulsion or steering, she turned broadside to the seas, and started rolling.

Both pods at the same time?  You are the mariner (I am not) but cannot help thinking about the Viking Sky incident when a safety system shut down all the power (apparently due to an indication of oil starvation).

 

Hank

[chengkp75]

5 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Both pods at the same time?  You are the mariner (I am not) but cannot help thinking about the Viking Sky incident when a safety system shut down all the power (apparently due to an indication of oil starvation).

 

Hank

The Viking Sky incident had all three engines fail from the same shutdown alarm (low oil pressure), but they were separate safety systems that shut the engines down at the same time due to identical circumstances in all 3 engines (low oil level).  Since the Saga ship did not lose power completely (the lights didn't go out), this isn't what happened here.  It could be that one engine failed, and required "load shedding" (dropping enough electrical demand to match the reduced capacity), which would shed the propulsion load, as this is the largest load on the ship.  This may have happened.

 

I think that after hours of buffeting into the storm, the azipods had started to overheat, operating for hours at a time with a sub-optimal cooling system (cooling systems using sea water as the final cooling agent will always be sub-optimal after a few weeks of operation (marine growth fouling), and will continue to degrade until planned maintenance and schedule allow for cleaning), and they both tripped on high oil temperature.  Given the wording of Saga's statements, I believe this is the "automatic propulsion safety system" that caused the pods to shut down.  Both pods would have been carrying the same amount of load (heat), and both use a common cooling system.

[txjim09]

5 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

The Viking Sky incident had all three engines fail from the same shutdown alarm (low oil pressure), but they were separate safety systems that shut the engines down at the same time due to identical circumstances in all 3 engines (low oil level).  Since the Saga ship did not lose power completely (the lights didn't go out), this isn't what happened here.  It could be that one engine failed, and required "load shedding" (dropping enough electrical demand to match the reduced capacity), which would shed the propulsion load, as this is the largest load on the ship.  This may have happened.

 

I think that after hours of buffeting into the storm, the azipods had started to overheat, operating for hours at a time with a sub-optimal cooling system (cooling systems using sea water as the final cooling agent will always be sub-optimal after a few weeks of operation (marine growth fouling), and will continue to degrade until planned maintenance and schedule allow for cleaning), and they both tripped on high oil temperature.  Given the wording of Saga's statements, I believe this is the "automatic propulsion safety system" that caused the pods to shut down.  Both pods would have been carrying the same amount of load (heat), and both use a common cooling system.

Hi, I'm glad this came up because I've been looking for an opportunity to ask you a question about the Sky, it applies to this as well.

 

In MIL equipment I've helped design, we have what's known as a Battlefield Override.  If essential equipment is overheating or some other safety system is triggered, an operator can override automatic shutdowns if an essential mission is close to completion or continued operation can save lives.

 

Warning:  Uninformed speculation ahead!!!

In the case of the Spirit, one would thing that overriding the shutdown and, perhaps, one azipod would have reduced or eliminated injury and perhaps reduced demand on the cooling system.

 

In the case of the Sky, I seem to remember statements from you and others stating perhaps that, although suboptimal, oiling was still occurring and total starvation was not an issue.  One would think that overriding the shutdown of at least one system would prevent what was reported as drifting to shore.  I admit that my memories of your statements could be way off base but, coming from someone who is more knowledgeable of avionics than marine systems, overriding the shutdown of at least one system would seem warranted if the ship lost control in critical situations.

 

So, how far off base am I?

[chengkp75]

Typically, for diesel engines and propulsion systems you have two levels of safety equipment.  For engines, you will have a "warning" and a "shutdown".  In the case of the Sky, lets say the oil pressure "warning" alarm is set for 2 bar pressure, and the "shutdown" alarm set for 1.5 bar (sorry, the maritime has been metric for so long it is hard to think in Imperial terms).  The "warning" alarm is so that the engine keeps running, to give you time to remedy the situation (like filling the oil sump).  But, when you get to the "shutdown" point, continuing to run the engine will likely result in catastrophic damage to the engine, resulting in a non-repairable engine, especially if the engine is allowed to continue to run for extended time.

 

For propulsion, it is similar, with "slowdown" warning alarms, and "shutdown" alarms, set similarly, and for the same reasons;  the propulsion can run longer at a lower load (slowdown), but at the "shutdown" point, you are going to do irreparable damage to the system.

 

Sometimes the system transits from "warning/slowdown" to "shutdown" very quickly, before remedial methods can be made.

 

The philosophy in the maritime is that you don't want to damage your engine or propulsion (in most cases the same thing, as most ships have the engine directly attached to the propeller shaft) to the point where it cannot run again, because this eliminates any choices.  Even if the engine or propulsion shuts down, there is a chance you can rectify the cause and get the engine/propulsion back on line.  With a melted down engine, that possibility is gone.  And, remember, at sea, the ship is your universe.  In most cases there is no where to "step off" your universe and get away.  Not every ship that blacks out in a storm is close to shore for rescue.  In the seas described for the Saga, and in the Sky incident, I doubt that boats could have been successfully launched, and any that were launched would not have survived long.  "The ship is the best lifeboat".  And, in the case of the Sky, they were able to rectify the problems with the engines and get them back online, whereas if they had overridden the safeties, that would not have been possible.

 

In the Saga's case, the same.  They eventually got the propulsion back on line, but if they had overridden the safeties, they could have damaged them irreparably, and had to ride the rest of the storm out without propulsion, rolling "in the trough".

 

There are some overrides on the safety features, but again, it is a very serious decision to do an override, only allowed by the Chief Engineer in consultation with the Captain, as doing so may give short term relief of the problem, only to lead to the eventual total loss of the ship.

 

The simple fact is that while extremely uncomfortable, and dangerous to be in a ship without power in a storm, for a short period, a ship with intact stability (not taking on water), is very difficult to sink.  But, if you prolong that time without power, by overriding shutdown alarms and permanently damaging the systems, the likelihood of casing damage to the ship to start taking on water, increases exponentially, with potential vastly greater loss of life.

 

In a storm like the Saga was in, even though the ship is moving very slowly, it is using a great deal (maximum?) power just to keep that slow speed up into the wind and seas.  You have to try to keep up speed to keep steering, so if you shut down one azipod, you halve the power you have to maintain steerage, and the ship will turn and lie in the trough, as the Saga did.  Especially with azipods, where steering and propulsion are in the same unit (as opposed to a rudder and propeller being separate), stopping one azipod not only drops your propulsive power, but cuts your steering capability in half.  If the storm reaches the point where even at maximum power, the ship cannot maintain steerage to keep the bow on to the seas, the Captain is then left with the extremely dangerous decision to try to "run with the seas" (but the waves on the stern).  This requires a full 180* turn in heavy seas, with a time rolling "in the trough" anyway, and then running with heavy seas will always run the risk of the ship "broaching" (having the following sea turn the ship broadside to the seas again), with more resultant damage/injury. 

[seasickphil]

I certainly couldn't be classed as an expert in anything but if the Captain of SoD did not enter BoB on that day then surely the outcome could have been different, of course he was under pressure to get the ship back to Portsmouth in time for it's 30 day Caribbean cruise.

[lincslady]

Just looked at cruisemapper, to see the two ships sailing into Lisbon, to dock within 15 minutes of each other.  Would be good to get some photos later.

[FannyLiz]

We’ve spent an excellent day in Lisbon with crew and passengers being actively encouraged to visit and have meals together. That was great but what has been really memorable was SoA’s sailaway at about 5 pm. We are still here on SoD though we were supposed to leave at the same time. Someone was joining here and has not yet arrived. Latest departure time announced was 9.30 pm.

We were moored close together, nose to nose all day. SoA untied, came out very slowly but only just enough to clear us and then slowly and with great dignity, sailed down our entire length port to port, what seemed like close enough to shake hands across balconies. Much loud and rude hooting from ship to ship. They then gracefully turned away from us, pirouetted so they came in with their bows right up to our midships and then backed off and continued up river to the sea. All this was done with a lovely sunset and then both ships lit up overall. A really memorable sight especially for me, a first time cruiser.

 

Hope someone else can put in photos as I can’t get them from Goigle photos to my ipad.

 

 

[Banjo an]

Here is a video.

[JMMKUK]

1 hour ago, FannyLiz said:

We’ve spent an excellent day in Lisbon with crew and passengers being actively encouraged to visit and have meals together. That was great but what has been really memorable was SoA’s sailaway at about 5 pm. We are still here on SoD though we were supposed to leave at the same time. Someone was joining here and has not yet arrived. Latest departure time announced was 9.30 pm.

 

 

 

Lovely to read.

Lisbon seems to be very important for crew & entertainer joining/leaving. We watched them all coming & going last month. Knew there was some important reason we still docked there at 3pm so kept a look out.

[JMMKUK]

Any news on when you will leave Lisbon? CruiseMapper is showing you still there.

[FannyLiz]

Just now, JMMKUK said:

Any news on when you will leave Lisbon? CruiseMapper is showing you still there.

11 am today.

 
A check has been run on something mechanical and this has to be signed off by the relevant body before we leave.

[lincslady]

Thanks - I had noticed that too.  Obviously very important to make sure that everything is running well.

[nosapphire]

Purely an idle thought.. tongue in cheek.

I wonder if modern ships are like modern cars.

You know, when the car starts hectoring you before you've even started the thing (fasten seatbelts, check tyre pressure, check rear seats..) (I'm almost expecting, "did you wash behind your ears?")

So I wonder if up on the bridge the ship is giving a constant stream of reminders and and "have you done thises".

Do you think that the ship computer gets shouted at as much as some cars (or automatic check-outs)

"Yes,yes, I know - wait a minute, do"

 

[rslrhu]

Good to see the MAIB have opened an investigation, confirming it was a loss of propulsion as mentioned by chengkp75 above.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/marine-accident-investigation-branch-current-investigations/marine-accident-investigation-branch-current-investigations

 

 

[babs135]

Government launches probe into nightmare Saga cruise that left 100 passengers injured when storm hit the Bay of Biscay and caused vessel to veer to side (msn.com)

[nosapphire]

It is a legal requirement for the captain or vessel owner (doesn't matter which) to report such incidents to the MAIB, who will then decide whether an investigation needs to be carried out.

It is rather like an inquest: What happened?, what was the cause of it happening?, should there be any recommendations given to prevent it happening again?.

Many reports of past investigations are extremely interesting, and are written in straightforward terms (they must be - I could understand them).

 

It is not a legal inquiry, although if somebody or something was at fault it will be included in the report.

Some of the investigations have uncovered safety defects in manufacture, in maintenance,  or in common procedures, and advice has been issued accordingly to ports, operators,manufacturers etc.

 

Link attached for information - it will be quite some time before the SoD report comes out, but if anyone is interested there are some other cruise lines/ships incidents listed (you'll have to go through a few pages to get there) including the Saga Sapphire.

https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports

 

 

[JMMKUK]

The report on the Saga Rose fatality in 2008 shows how dangerous routine tasks on a ship can be. So tragic.

[chengkp75]

5 hours ago, JMMKUK said:

The report on the Saga Rose fatality in 2008 shows how dangerous routine tasks on a ship can be. So tragic.

What is truly tragic, in addition to being tragic for his family that the crewman lost his life, is that rules for entry into confined spaces were adopted nearly 20 years before this incident happened.  Rules that would have prevented the loss of life, and that specifically cautioned against what the second crewman did, that nearly ended his life as well.

[Banjo an]

We have just been notified by the captain that the ship is now heading directly back to Portsmouth for our safety  and missing out Madeira because of a worsening weather situation in the Atlantic. Looking online at the North Atlantic weather forecast it looks dreadful. 
here we go again!

[FannyLiz]

It's the crew I feel sorry for. Talking to one of the young lasses in the Living Room she says how traumatised they were by the situation last cruise and now this. They can't show their fear but she is worried. At least we passengers can break out more Stugeron and take to our beds if necessary but the crew have to go on working and, if remarks I have heard in the Living room are typical, take the flak from some disgruntled passengers too.

[Glenndale]

We’re on the outgoing cruise on 7th December. Think we’ll probably have to head for a safe harbour.