Costa Concordia (Titanic 2012)

[nigel1]

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!

I think even the old man is entitled to a meal and a bit of kip at some point of the voyage.

 

[VicS]

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.

Very doubtful I would think

Several of the charts and other images earlier in this thread suggest that the ship passed between the two rocky islets at le Scole

See http://www.seanews.com.tr/article/ACCIDENTS/74284/Costa-Concordia-accident-navigational-error/

Now look at that area extracted from Google earth together with a scale.

That ship is 290 m long and 35.5 m beam ! Did it really go through there. It would explain why it has been holed but why/however on earth did it go there in the first place.

.

 

[[32511]]

I still suspect the rock she hit was the much smaller one to the right of the above photo. While turning hard to starboard.

 

[photodog]

I heard a quote from the skipper were he said the ship was moving sideways when it struck something which was not on his charts......

So that makes a lot of sense.... if you look at the damage... the stabiliser hasnt been touched.

 

[sailorman]

i have just seen the for the first time the ship on the bbc news.
i recon they will refloat her

 

[chrisgee]

I stand by my earlier post. If you look on Gcaptain.com you can see a different AIS track to the ones previously shown and this track takes the ship right over the shoal patch shown on Google earth ie, about 1.55 miles North of the harbour. This track is nowhere near the two islands south of the harbour with the narrow gap between them. Cannot tell the actual depth there but the rocky area shows up quite clearly.Just a theory of course.

 

[maxi77]

For me the most worrying thing about this was the inability of the crew to control the list, which was away from the damage. I also not the stabilisers were deployed and certainly at moderate speed should have been able to force roll the vessel at least 5 degrees, used to be part of the requirement when I sold them.

 

[Boomshanka]

I heard a quote from the skipper were he said the ship was moving sideways when it struck something which was not on his charts......

So that makes a lot of sense.... if you look at the damage... the stabiliser hasnt been touched.

Interview with el Capitano here that mentions the sideways bit:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16568037

 

[Sandy]

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.

This is peanuts, try following some of the aircraft forums when there is a major news story.

Saddened at the loss of life; may they rest in peace.

 

[Nick_H]

Very doubtful I would think

Several of the charts and other images earlier in this thread suggest that the ship passed between the two rocky islets at le Scole

See http://www.seanews.com.tr/article/ACCIDENTS/74284/Costa-Concordia-accident-navigational-error/

Now look at that area extracted from Google earth together with a scale.

That ship is 290 m long and 35.5 m beam ! Did it really go through there. It would explain why it has been holed but why/however on earth did it go there in the first place.

.

I went through that channel a few times in the summer in the tender, as we were anchored in the bay to the south east of it, so used it to tender into the town. I wouldn't even have attempted to get our main boat through it, the rocks slope into the channel and you'd have to turn part way through. It's inconceivable that any large vessel would try to get through, even in emergency. If the "fly past" theory is right, and seems the most likely of many at the moment, the liner more likely struck the outside of the outermost rock, having misjudged the approach or experienced a mechanical failure.

correction - SWMBO informs me that i'm getting mixed up between two locations. We did indeed take the main boat through this channel for fun, but it felt quite tight so I still think its inconceivable that anything much bigger could or would get through

 

[haydude]

The above plotted route is likely to be a speculation. I cannot believe how on the Internet fantasy becomes quickly reality.

 

[sigmasailor]

I don't think it has been confirmed that the ship took that narrow passage; nor can I believe it to be true. No one in his right mind could be that bold to please his passengers; not with a 125 ft (wide) ship.

AIS is updated every so many minutes so there may be an amount of speculation going on.

All accidents are a complex mix of causes (communication or lack thereof, mechanical failures, GPS failures (it is only an aid), boredom or general lack of interest with half a dozen persons on the bridge all thinking the other person will keep a proper lookout, etc.). By keeping shallows at wide berth you should allow for the unexpected (remember Murphy).

Time (or the orange box) will tell.

Evacuation off a ship with 4000 persons will always be chaotic, the average boat drills are not realistic. The Italian crew, or who knows where they all came from (cheap), do not speak their customers language. A recipe for disaster. I agree with Minn that the real disaster was avoided; most people managed to get of the ship safely (rumors say the captain led the way).

Eric

 

[Kukri]

But there was not a disaster.

Whilst the loss of life is deplorable, the fact is that this very big ship, carrying ten 747 loads of people, was sucessfully evacuated by almost all of them.

Great credit id sue to the officers, the crew and the owners, I would suggest.

 

[oldfatgit]

I am desperate to know what went wrong and hope that the enquiry will find out the truth. There are many sources of information available on the internet and elsewhere which may throw some light onto what happened, however, they also can lead to speculation and rumour, neither of which help. I will now stop reading any material about the incident (including here on this forum) until the enquiry results are published. I hope the enquiry will be thorough, fair and objective; but do not know if it will be. My thoughts remain with those who have needlessly lost their lives and with those who love them.

 

[RichardS]

According to the BBC the ship owners have now stated that the Captain was at fault and that he ventured too close to the island.

That has always seemed the most likely explanation but it will bring no comfort to anyone that the stupidity of one man has led to, potentially, so much loss of life.

Richard

 

[Whitelighter]

Nope, actually with the 400 series they increased the wingspan!
Can't remember how much by heart, but I'm sure that the wings were extended and redesigned in the 400 - without counting the winglets, of course.
Minn got that completely wrong, I'm afraid.

747-200 has a wing span of 59.6m
747-400 has a wing span of 64.3m

The new 800 aircraft is 68.5m

 

[prv]

The Italian crew, or who knows where they all came from (cheap), do not speak their customers language.

The report I heard said that most of the passengers were Italian.

Pete

 

[MapisM]

The report I heard said that most of the passengers were Italian.

Correct, but many crew member were not, fwiw.

 

[Conachair]

That turn towards the island looked very wierd - maybe more to it ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/int...sta-concordia-italian-cruise-ship-interactive

 

[MapisM]

But there was not a disaster.

Whilst the loss of life is deplorable, the fact is that this very big ship, carrying ten 747 loads of people, was sucessfully evacuated by almost all of them.

Great credit id sue to the officers, the crew and the owners, I would suggest.

All considered, I must agree. It could have been much worse.
Which doesn't mean a lot to those who lost their life, of course...