Costa Concordia (Titanic 2012)

[pagoda]

It is all very interesting but I would not be quick to condemn the Captain save for the fact that he seems to have left the ship at his earliest opportunity. I do not give any credence to the Italian ship owners immediate rush to blame the Captain. They just want to position them selves with the public and prosecutors (Corporate manslaughter charges might arise if they support their Captain).

It is possible that the charted depths were not correct or that there was indeed an uncharted rock. What followed the accident clearly saved many lives. It is quite wrong for the Italians to have arrested the Captain at this stage they should first find out what actually happened, examine the recordings and data. Then if there is a case bring charges.

300m is not that close, ships enter Portsmouth harbour every day in a narrower channel is that different? We will have to wait and see the report but we should really ignore the media as they really have no idea. Last night on the BBC news an expert told the interviewer that modern electronics are not going to detect uncharted rocks before you hit them and every time she responded with "yes but with all the modern technology..."

I would imagine that with a large complement of divers out at the island, it will not be long before some are asked to match the massive lump of rock in her port side with a severely beaten up ledge somewhere to the South of the two islets to the SW of the harbour. That much underwater damage should be easy to find, given her know draft. That will finish the argumants about where she went. But not why. Did she have forward scanning sonar?
Out of 4000 people on board, the probability of somebody recording the cruise trip on a hand-held GPS for posterity is fairly high. The truth will out in due course.

 

[Whitelighter]

It is quite wrong for the Italians to have arrested the Captain at this stage they should first find out what actually happened, examine the recordings and data. Then if there is a case bring charges.

That's how the I-Ties operate - arrest first and then investigate at leisure.

Its one reason why I would never work in Italy, even if the opportunity arose. One incident and everyone in the tower is nicked. Right now there are ATCO's languishing in Italian jails unjustifiably

 

[Kukri]

Yes indeed; to the waiters & entertainment staff who actually stayed & helped, not the officers & seamen crew who bagged the lifeboats shoving women out of the way, if you believe the first hand accounts in the Mail today.

Agreed...see this bit in the French paper cited by Timshel, above:

« Ceux qui nous ont aidés, ce sont les cuisiniers, les femmes de ménage, tous philippins. Ils se sont encordés pour nous aider à descendre dans les chaloupes. Nous avons pu monter au dernier moment, avant que le bateau ne se couche.."

These people hardly get paid at all - they are expected to live off their tips.

 

[haydude]

I do not give any credence to the Italian ship owners immediate rush to blame the Captain. They just want to position them selves with the public and prosecutors (Corporate manslaughter charges might arise if they support their Captain).

The ship owners are not Italian. It is Carnival which is a UK/USA company listed at both NYSE and LSE. The Italian admin is most likely following orders from UK/US board of directors.

Also their declaration is in contraddiction with previous sail-by(s) that were not sanctioned, on the contrary.

 

[Twister_Ken]

...if you believe the first hand accounts in the Mail today.

You mean there are people who actually believe what they read in the Daily Mail?

 

[stillwaters]

But, as explained above, I think the company may well be in the right, here.



Yes you may well be proved right about the point you make re the captain over-riding the claimed pre-set course. However,there might be other issues as well,such as the suggestions of previous similar detours which,if true,shouldn't the owners have ensured they put an end to it or maybe also the possibility of inadequate evacuation procedures etc?
One thing that does surprise me,though, is that whilst we are all expected to endure repetitive safety briefings every time we fly,even if there are a 100 or so passengers on board,both the equivalent safety requirements as well as their implementation for in excess of 4,000 people per voyage,appear so cavalier.

 

[Boomshanka]

Thanks - an unusually good passenger account. It's a funny thing, but there's nearly always some passengers taking the air on deck, and as eye witnesses they will be valuable.

SWMBO (French mother tongue) just translated this bit: "Et aperçoit un rocher. « Il arrivait à la hauteur du quatrième étage. » Puis un bruit sourd pendant plusieurs secondes. « Nous avons été projetés en arrière », témoigne la jeune femme. « Le bateau s'est penché immédiatement. Nous avons compris que nous l'avions heurté »,"

The passengers say they saw the rock and it came up to the fourth 'floor' of the boat hard to think that a rock of that size would not be on the chart?

 

[Observer]

I would imagine that with a large complement of divers out at the island, it will not be long before some are asked to match the massive lump of rock in her port side with a severely beaten up ledge somewhere to the South of the two islets to the SW of the harbour. That much underwater damage should be easy to find, given her know draft. That will finish the argumants about where she went. But not why. Did she have forward scanning sonar?

Interesting question. Of course a rock pinnacle detected by forward looking sonar may have prompted a starboard turn that swung the port quarter into the rock.

 

[Kukri]

But, as explained above, I think the company may well be in the right, here.



Yes you may well be proved right about the point you make re the captain over-riding the claimed pre-set course. However,there might be other issues as well,such as the suggestions of previous similar detours which,if true,shouldn't the owners have ensured they put an end to it or maybe also the possibility of inadequate evacuation procedures etc?
One thing that does surprise me,though, is that whilst we are all expected to endure repetitive safety briefings every time we fly,even if there are a 100 or so passengers on board,both the equivalent safety requirements as well as their implementation for in excess of 4,000 people per voyage,appear so cavalier.

Agreed, as regards the previous similar detours. The law in England is very clear and was set out by Lord Justice Brandon in 1967 in the Lady Gwendolen case (the case of the Guiness tanker running between Dublin and Liverpool which was in collision in fog; it was clear that the Master habitually maintained full speed in fog and had the company checked the log books they would have known this - they were held at fault for not doing so) I should think every seaman knows this case.

I disagree about the evacuation, though - I think it was very well done - this is ten 747 loads in a far bigger structure than an aircraft and over 99.5% of all on board were evacuated safely - the airline business does not always do so well...

 

[Sailfree]

You mean there are people who actually believe what they read in the Daily Mail?

Yes - reports that sell newspapers first - second the truth - third the conspiracy theorys - obviously this boat was sunk to claim the insurance/ it was sunk by the CIA as it had a number of terrorists aboard/ make your own up.

I recently met someone who while appearing intelligent believes all the conspiracy theorys of 911 - poor old Bin Laden - they shot an innocent man!!

 

[stillwaters]

Agreed, as regards the previous similar detours. The law in England is very clear and was set out by Lord Justice Brandon in 1967 in the Lady Gwendolen case (the case of the Guiness tanker running between Dublin and Liverpool which was in collision in fog; it was clear that the Master habitually maintained full speed in fog and had the company checked the log books they would have known this - they were held at fault for not doing so) I should think every seaman knows this case.

I disagree about the evacuation, though - I think it was very well done - this is ten 747 loads in a far bigger structure than an aircraft and over 99.5% of all on board were evacuated safely - the airline business does not always do so well...

Re the evacuation,again time may well support this ,great if it does. There do,though,seem to be reports of many of the seamen from the top down maybe not exactly covering themselves in glory and much of the evacuation being down to other people or factors.

 

[Sailfree]

I disagree about the evacuation, though - I think it was very well done - this is ten 747 loads in a far bigger structure than an aircraft and over 99.5% of all on board were evacuated safely - the airline business does not always do so well...

At present many media reports are critical of the captain and crew but accepting that if accurate the captain made an error and went too close to the shore and hit the rocks whoever was responsible for slewing the boat round on its anchor and getting the boat to finally rest in shallow waters, then evacuate 400 passengers at night (with many of them being old, infirmed and disabled - with the list and electrical failure I assume the lifts were unusable) with such small loss of life did a good job.

Unlike some I think the statement , so soon , of Costa Lines is good and may be later quoted at business schools along with Perier Water as a good example of business handling a crisis/adverse event.

 

[fergie_mac66]

missing rocks or disappearing rocks?

I realize that the equipment on board ships are somewhat more sophisticated than the small boat equivalents .However there have been several threads in the past about rocks disappearing off plots at certain zoom levels. Doubt that this would have anything to do with this loss but?

 

[Observer]

As I said yesterday in the Lounge.

'There's a 16 minute gap between the second and third last AIS positions during which anything could have happened. The 'track' is simply a line joining these two positions, the ship could have been anywhere between them.'

Yes - and distance between those points is ~2.5 nm, which is only 10 minutes at 15 kts (or average 9 kts speed).

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Interesting question. Of course a rock pinnacle detected by forward looking sonar may have prompted a starboard turn that swung the port quarter into the rock.

I just don't buy the uncharted rock theory. The damage is close to the waterline and clearly a large lump of rock has been detached. It is almost inconceivable that a large rock near to the surface and in the area of a harbour entrance could remain uncharted. Also, the position of the damage suggests that the rock was hit whilst the ship was turning to starboard. If it was an uncharted rock and almost by definition at a significant depth, you would expect the damage to be in the bottom of the hull.
IMHO the damage is consistent with an officer on the bridge realising at the last moment that the ship was too close to the island and initiating a hard turn to starboard at speed but failing to avoid a collision. Of course why the ship was in that position is open to conjecture; it could be GPS error but IMHO more likely simple human misjudgement or inattention. With so much evidence available, I guess it won't be long before the truth will emerge

 

[Mariner69]

Reference the anchor, a merchant vessel 'on passage' between the pilot stations for the ports will almost always have the anchor secured against movement in the stow. This will be the brakes, claws and wire snotters with bottle screws or the modern equivalent.

Anchors have been known to vibrate free in heavy weather and disappear in to the depths with the attached anchor cable to be lost for ever at great expense. A career limiting event.

It takes about 15 minutes to clear the anchors after the men have mustered at the bow.

It is unlikely that any anchor was used; the water is too deep and a vessel moving at any speed over about two knots is likely to rip the whole anchor cable clear of the windlass and part at the bitter end.

The anchor cable length is typically 10 or 12 shackles (the US call them 'shots') each of 15 fathoms so the total length is 900 to 1,080 feet (274 to 329 metres).

The 35.5 metres beam referred to is the 'moulded' beam that is the distance between the inside faces at the heels of the frames at the midships length. The widest area would be extreme breadth.

The action in grounding the vessel in shallow water and the evacuation deserve praise. The rescue is remarkable; if she had remained in deep water the casualties would probably have been immense.

 

[MapisM]

Arrest first and then investigate at leisure?

I'm intrigued by those who think it was OTT to arrest the Captain, and blame the whole Country for being lynch-mob oriented.
If what is being reported is correct - subject to final proof of course - the man has driven a ship with 4k+ souls on the rocks for futile reasons, and on top of that he abandoned the ship.
I already said elsewhere that imho it was almost a miracle that the final outcome wasn't much worse, and someone surely should be praised for that.
But under these circumstances, I'd rather blame the Italian justice if the attitude with the Captain would have been any more liberal.
Nobody made him walk the plank, for crissake!

 

[Boomshanka]

I just don't buy the uncharted rock theory. The damage is close to the waterline and clearly a large lump of rock has been detached. It is almost inconceivable that a large rock near to the surface and in the area of a harbour entrance could remain uncharted. Also, the position of the damage suggests that the rock was hit whilst the ship was turning to starboard. If it was an uncharted rock and almost by definition at a significant depth, you would expect the damage to be in the bottom of the hull.
IMHO the damage is consistent with an officer on the bridge realising at the last moment that the ship was too close to the island and initiating a hard turn to starboard at speed but failing to avoid a collision. Of course why the ship was in that position is open to conjecture; it could be GPS error but IMHO more likely simple human misjudgement or inattention. With so much evidence available, I guess it won't be long before the truth will emerge

Mike, there's a french newspaper report further up ^^^ that quotes passengers out on the deck seeing the rock in question and it came up to the level of the fourth 'floor' of the boat... hardly near to the surface by those accounts!

 

[haydude]

Yes indeed; to the waiters & entertainment staff who actually stayed & helped, not the officers & seamen crew who bagged the lifeboats shoving women out of the way, if you believe the first hand accounts in the Mail today.

I cannot believe you read and even consider to believe a tabloid.

In any case it is too easy to criticize. If nearly everyone of a massive 4700 souls were saved, it cannot have happened without coordination within what was a potentially very cahotic situation with the ship listing and unusable escape ways.

 

[Seajet]

I cannot believe you read and even consider to believe a tabloid.

In any case it is too easy to criticize. If nearly everyone of a massive 4700 souls were saved, it cannot have happened without coordination within what was a potentially very cahotic situation with the ship listing and unusable escape ways.

They were naming and quoting first hand accounts from passengers; I am not a fan of the Daily Mail but sometimes things are so straightforward even they pass on simple truths.

I would suggest passengers with hand GPS will not be called for, even if the AIS was disabled ( pretty damning if true ) the data recorder will be the answer; it may be a way to learn a few new choice words in Italian, too !