Erik C
Active member
Smit salvage is already on the scene.
Costa Concordia (Titanic 2012)
- Thread starter RichardTaylor
- Start date
Yacht Breeze
New member
AIS Track of CC
The target ahead of the Costa Concordia is, in fact, an overtaking vessel as this AIS animation shows.
http://www.shipcruise.org/cruise-articles/435-costa-concordia-accident
Therefore it seems unlikely the CC altered course to miss it, besides an overtaking vessel is required to keep clear of the vessel it is overtaking....even in Italy.
It is interesting to see the rescue boats leaving the mainland after the grounding.
Too many theories....which one will turn out to be right?
The target ahead of the Costa Concordia is, in fact, an overtaking vessel as this AIS animation shows.
http://www.shipcruise.org/cruise-articles/435-costa-concordia-accident
Therefore it seems unlikely the CC altered course to miss it, besides an overtaking vessel is required to keep clear of the vessel it is overtaking....even in Italy.
It is interesting to see the rescue boats leaving the mainland after the grounding.
Too many theories....which one will turn out to be right?
haydude
New member
I bet on mine.
ffiill
Active member
Put ship on autopilot-go and dine with guests-leave someone on bridge who is paid peanuts and hasnt a clue-he goes of for a quick smoke!
This is something I recall reading some years ago.
Then there was the story told me by an oil tankers second engineer wher they locked both the captain and chief engineer in their cabins to keep them away from the booze-oh and then there was the time the proplellor dropped off in the South China Seas.
Apart from this there is the problem of selling cruises as though they have nothing to do with the sea.
As a result passengers are not prepared if something goes wrong
This is something I recall reading some years ago.
Then there was the story told me by an oil tankers second engineer wher they locked both the captain and chief engineer in their cabins to keep them away from the booze-oh and then there was the time the proplellor dropped off in the South China Seas.
Apart from this there is the problem of selling cruises as though they have nothing to do with the sea.
As a result passengers are not prepared if something goes wrong
MapisM
Well-known member
Well, I don't think there's anything wrong in offering cruises to elderly people who might not even be able to swim.
After all, even considering this disaster, I would still feel safer on one of these ships than driving my car on a highway full of trucks...
Kukri
Well-known member
Hardly. This is a big cruise ship owned by the biggest and most profitable shipping company in the world. There will certainly have been two officers on the bridge and two quartermasters.
westernman
Well-known member
The captain was on the bridge and in control at the time of the accident according to the TV report I have just seen.
Kukri
Well-known member
For clarity, Costa is part of Carnival Corporation, which is the biggest, in balance sheet terms, and most profitable shipping company in the world in years when the container market is weak; when it is strong, Maersk get top place.
Blueboatman
Well-known member
23 pages of thread from people who sail, access to t'internet and AIS and web cams and passenger interviews and and and no one knows anything. THats my theory for today.
Do cruise ships have a black box?
Do cruise ships have a black box?
Sailfree
Well-known member
To clarify a few points ref Cruise ships.
I only have experience of cunard but as part of the Carnival Group I cannot see any of the individul lines in the group operating any differently from others.
The advantages of cruises is that your holiday starts immediately you are on board (for us 15min from our home).
Immediately on boarding there is a boat drill where everyone has to go to a briefing.
During the cruise there are many safety exercises for the crew.
As an engineer I am suprised at how stable these boats are. I have just crossed to New York in hurrican force winds on the QM2 and was amazed how little the boat moved with 70mph + winds and regular 30ft waves (for 3 days) with the occasional bigger one. Initially the captain deviated further S to keep them on the nose but finally had to head more east and we had them on the beam. Boat is 1200ft long and some 12storeys high but was completely stable. Lets not criticise from our armchairs and until proved otherwise assume Naval Architects know their job wrt stability.
On QM2 I looked with interest at the many bulkheads and watertight doors that were always left open and wondered about how they could clear areas quickly and shut off any damaged areas and concluded it would be difficult with panicking passengers. I also thought about how to escape and decided the metal crew staircases were more practical than the broad carpeted staircases for the passengers if the ship was listing. I remember the Herald of Free Enterprise. Likewise I have spent years living in Hotels (with my job) I always check fire escape routes and ensure the door is not padlocked. One Colleague I worked with was scarred from a hotel fire with padlocked doors - it does happen!!
A number that have not been on cruises will not appreciate the many attractions and how disabled and wheelchair friendly they are. Both the QM2 and QE are so big the apparent vast numbers of passengers have plenty of room inside and you never feel crowded. The worst is say in a large restaurant - but there are alternative options to the main restaurant as well.
I find the speculation interesting and wonder whether unecessary "fly bys" will be permitted in future.
Without wishing to speculate as to the initial cause I do suspect the difficult of quickly isolating the breached hull area will be a factor and with cost a driving force I suspect the crew training and competence at the lower levels may leave a lot to wish for. On QM2 due to its draught we had to anchor off a number of the caribbean islands and be taken ashore by tenders. The boat handling skills of the helms of these tenders was positively painful to watch and had they been on my boat I would have relieved them from the helm.
None would have been allowed to even take a rib out at our club and did not appear to appreciate how to use even an on berthing wind to assist instead relying on driving the tender into the berth and manhandling it alongside.
I am sure causes will be identified and safety improved but at present we are still looking forward to a further cruise this year. While I used to catch a 747 most Mondays I now loath flying now with a vengence especially after having to stay in a villa on top of a hill in Tuscany with 3 young Grandchildren and no luggage - waiting in for it to be delivered over the next 4 days of an 7 day holiday. With the delays, strikes, security checks, any excuse for an extra charge I will avoid flying and whever possible take a ferry, our boat or even a cruise!!
I await further factual info, and the speculation, as to the cause with interest
I only have experience of cunard but as part of the Carnival Group I cannot see any of the individul lines in the group operating any differently from others.
The advantages of cruises is that your holiday starts immediately you are on board (for us 15min from our home).
Immediately on boarding there is a boat drill where everyone has to go to a briefing.
During the cruise there are many safety exercises for the crew.
As an engineer I am suprised at how stable these boats are. I have just crossed to New York in hurrican force winds on the QM2 and was amazed how little the boat moved with 70mph + winds and regular 30ft waves (for 3 days) with the occasional bigger one. Initially the captain deviated further S to keep them on the nose but finally had to head more east and we had them on the beam. Boat is 1200ft long and some 12storeys high but was completely stable. Lets not criticise from our armchairs and until proved otherwise assume Naval Architects know their job wrt stability.
On QM2 I looked with interest at the many bulkheads and watertight doors that were always left open and wondered about how they could clear areas quickly and shut off any damaged areas and concluded it would be difficult with panicking passengers. I also thought about how to escape and decided the metal crew staircases were more practical than the broad carpeted staircases for the passengers if the ship was listing. I remember the Herald of Free Enterprise. Likewise I have spent years living in Hotels (with my job) I always check fire escape routes and ensure the door is not padlocked. One Colleague I worked with was scarred from a hotel fire with padlocked doors - it does happen!!
A number that have not been on cruises will not appreciate the many attractions and how disabled and wheelchair friendly they are. Both the QM2 and QE are so big the apparent vast numbers of passengers have plenty of room inside and you never feel crowded. The worst is say in a large restaurant - but there are alternative options to the main restaurant as well.
I find the speculation interesting and wonder whether unecessary "fly bys" will be permitted in future.
Without wishing to speculate as to the initial cause I do suspect the difficult of quickly isolating the breached hull area will be a factor and with cost a driving force I suspect the crew training and competence at the lower levels may leave a lot to wish for. On QM2 due to its draught we had to anchor off a number of the caribbean islands and be taken ashore by tenders. The boat handling skills of the helms of these tenders was positively painful to watch and had they been on my boat I would have relieved them from the helm.
None would have been allowed to even take a rib out at our club and did not appear to appreciate how to use even an on berthing wind to assist instead relying on driving the tender into the berth and manhandling it alongside.
I am sure causes will be identified and safety improved but at present we are still looking forward to a further cruise this year. While I used to catch a 747 most Mondays I now loath flying now with a vengence especially after having to stay in a villa on top of a hill in Tuscany with 3 young Grandchildren and no luggage - waiting in for it to be delivered over the next 4 days of an 7 day holiday. With the delays, strikes, security checks, any excuse for an extra charge I will avoid flying and whever possible take a ferry, our boat or even a cruise!!
I await further factual info, and the speculation, as to the cause with interest
Last edited:
Sailfree
Well-known member
Yes that was stated on one BBC news report and the bridge conversations are included.
Giblets
Well-known member
There was a picture on one of the many websites covering this item of the "black box" (actually it was orange in colour) being recovered.
pvb
Well-known member
dt4134
New member
I suspect the debate on stability is a bit of a red herring, but I should point out that steadiness is a sign of less stability not more. The classic case is that of the Royal Soverign class battleships designed just before WW1 where they deliberately raised the centre of gravity to reduce the stability in order to get a steadier ship for more accurate gunfire.
The behaviour of QM2 you describe was no doubt mainly down to sheer size and active stabilising systems, but there must be a lot of pressure on the cruise ship designers to reduce stability in order to make the motion of the ship more comfortable for passengers.
petem
Well-known member
I've been in many cruises and lots of the ships have a window where you can view the helm station. In my experience it's rare that once at sea there's anyone at the helm (or watching the radar / plotter). The most you will have is someone on lookout with binoculars watching for yachts and the like. If someone screwed up the way points then it would not surprise me if a ship ran aground.
onesea
Well-known member
Looking at that last AIS track....
Noting that it jumps at 5 - 10 minute intervals..
And adding rumour to the theories..
My present theory is....
She dips the stern of the overtaking vessel once passed and clear.
IMHO she did not go through the islands as it seems earlier.. Lots of reason just do not believe it.
She passes the the town, (my guess is just after 2100) clips some rocks to the NE of the island Secca Della Croce????
Around here you can see the plot turn to the north (deep water) then back to the south (the town)
Realising there is a problem using what they had available remaining speed steerage they turn back to the town (about 2 miles away) so give or take 45 mins later she is grounding...
Given the unknown amount of flooding that would be going on ballasting, free surfaces Centers of gravity. It seems they either choose to or miscalculated the ballasting dropping her to Starboard. Either way I think it may have saved a few lives...
DISCLAIMER:
This is my guess work, just reading and observing.
Giblets
Well-known member
Came back across the southern North Sea in a north-westerly gale in 2010 on the Queen Victoria. She did roll a bit to start with but the captain came on the PA and advised the passengers that he would be transferring 450 tonnes water ballast to the starboard side to ease the motion. Certainly worked.
chrisgee
Member
I`m inclined to that view also, the reef in question is around 1.3mls North of the harbour and not that far in from deep ,safe water. Surely this reef would be charted and if not is that what the Captain was saying that he hit "something that was not on his chart? In any event I cannot see any justification for taking a ship of this size anywhere that tight to a shoreline.
haydude
New member
Looking at the nautical chart there is a steep drop to 28m depth a few meters to the East (port side) where the ship is lying. Had she listed to port it would have been a greater disaster. Initially the authorities were afraid that the ship might slide down the cliff, now that she is wedged on her side it looks less likely.
I speculate that they listed her to starboard intentionally.
Danny_Labrador
Well-known member
It makes sense and it fits the final position of the vessel