Kukri
Well-known member
The crew cabins for the hotel staff are right down below.I heard that they were missing a number of Fillipino kitchen workers...
The crew cabins for the hotel staff are right down below.I heard that they were missing a number of Fillipino kitchen workers...
I noticed that either side of the 16 minute gap the positions were plotted more frequently. I wondered if the AIS transmitter had been deliberately turned off prior to turning towards the island for the sail-by, before the AIS transmitter was turned on again?
A somewhat convenient gap...
What do you reckon the beam dimension includes? The Bridge wings ?
Should be able to make a guesstimate from THIS PICTURE
The text with this picture gives the beam as 38m
A somewhat convenient gap...
Latest from La Reppublica: apparently the captain made several calls to the bosses at Costa after the accident, and was on the phone beforehand to a former captain of Costa, before whom it is assumed he wished to show off. Course was set for 278° but a at certain point, the captain went to manual and took the helm himself. With the result we know. After the accident, he was always on the phone and control of the ship and order for evacuation was taken by the first officer and the captain was effectively sidelined. The ship was on an even keel for 40 minutes before the first officer decided to take over.
In Marseille a few months earlier, he had also effected a manoeuvre which was hazardous, but that time got away with it.
I have been boating around the Med for a few years and whilst I agree that Med digital charts are often less accurate than the UK and certainly not infallible, I have never come across a bloody great sticky out rock so far out of position that it is a hazard to navigation. You would think that if that was the case, it would have been hit many times by other vessels and either corrected on the charts or at least a buoy placed there. Also you mentioned radar. Shouldn't somebody have been keeping a radar watch, if only to identify small boats, and shouldn't they have seen a return from the rock on the screen? Wouldn't the guard alarms be sounding off as well?
IMHO this is not an accident that can be blamed on GPS or charting errors. More likely fatal inattention on the bridge or simply underestimating the sea room needed to turn a ship of this size to starboard to make the 'fly by' past the harbour and maybe aggravated by wind and currents. All conjecture but I think if I was the skipper, I'd be blaming an uncharted rock too!
Dunno, these floating blocks of flats all look the same to me... But the local rag made no mention of CC being a 'local' ship.Metabarca, was the Costa Concordia in Monfalcone a few months ago for refit as I thought I saw her on the way into Hannibal?
I've never seen/heard such complete ignorant rubbish as I have seen on the news sites including the BBC, even from the Lloyds "expert" this morning.
The AIS track was available on www.marinetraffic.com (I have a screen shot) and various charts have been on the web with speculative tracks. Has anyone been able to plot the track on a detailed chart? The last position (some way offshore from its final resting place at Giglio port) is 42.3717N, 10.92602E. It was then travelling at 1.1kt on a heading of 013T. One could project this back to see where it had been.
Surely that would put an end to the speculation about whether the ship tried to pass between the Le Scole islets as some have suggested.
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 thanks,the marine traffic tracking has been done already on this and other forums. However,this doesn't show the actual course a ship steers between fixes so the system just inserts straight lines in between. I'm not sure just how accurate this data is as both charts and equipment can sometimes be inaccurate (I've been overland a few times myself due to electronic chart error) however,following Metabarca's prompt on here earlier,I notice that La Repubblica are giving the time of collision as 21.42,which one assumes is local time,yet the AIS shows the ship a little over 2 miles away from Le Scole,the most likely rock to hit,at 20.37 UTC (or 21.37 local time). And,as the ship was doing just over 15 knots at this point and bearing in mind her top recorded speed ever on marine traffic is given as below 17 knots,just how did the ship get there in 5 minutes?I've never seen/heard such complete ignorant rubbish as I have seen on the news sites including the BBC, even from the Lloyds "expert" this morning.
The AIS track was available on www.marinetraffic.com (I have a screen shot) and various charts have been on the web with speculative tracks. Has anyone been able to plot the track on a detailed chart? The last position (some way offshore from its final resting place at Giglio port) is 42.3717N, 10.92602E. It was then travelling at 1.1kt on a heading of 013T. One could project this back to see where it had been.
Surely that would put an end to the speculation about whether the ship tried to pass between the Le Scole islets as some have suggested.