Costa Concordia (Titanic 2012)

BlueTwo said:
The course change 7 km from the impact was the main puzzle. Collision with a container, avoiding another ship? The reason for that course change will give the answer to the whole accident I think.
Click to expand...

Do you mean the 50-60 degree turn to starboard that put him on the heading between the islets?

Possible sequence? The skipper intended to run up parallel to the east coast of the island, leaving both islets to port. Looks like plenty of deep water there. From the previous course of ~280 that would have needed a starboard turn of approx. 70 degrees (by eye). Somehow that was entered as a 50 degrees turn, heading for the inner islet, then by the time it was noticed it was too late to stop or avoid so he turned a litle more to starboard in hope he could "shoot the gap".
 
Last edited:
Looking at the first picture of WouldbeSailor's post, the ship looks no more than 30m to 40m off the port beacon. Either it has been taken using a humungous telephoto lens which has dramatically flattened the perspective or the ship has completed its 180 degree turn and is going astern to reach its final resting place some 250m to 300m away.
 
Last edited:
Sandyman said:
Actually I'm quite surprised at the small loss of life. Can you imagine what it must be like inside a ship under such conditions and suddenly finding yourself having to walk, scramble over, bulkheads & deckheads ? probably in jimjams & totally confused ?
Click to expand...

And at this time of year a lot of them not too young or sprightly. And from friends experience on cruise ships a lot of people in wheelchairs, must have been terrifiying for them and those caring for them.
 
Last edited:
photodog said:
Thats hilarious... I guess he hasnt seen the picture of the giant rock sticking out of the side....
Click to expand...
Yep, it's pretty obvious that there was more than sand where she ran aground, so the sand bank idea is a nonsense - there's none in that area, anyway.
But they might have a point re. some technical trouble leading to the loss of speed and direction control: I just noticed in the last pic above that the ship has NUC lights on.
Sure, they might have been turned on after the grounding, but maybe she was NUC already since her initial deviation from the normal route...?!?
 
A bloke on Radio 4 has just said that the master of the ship would have "had up-to-date maps". So it can't have been a navigational error then.
 
oldrascal said:
Either it has been taken using a humungous telephoto lens which has dramatically flattened the perspective or the ship has completed its 180 degree turn and is going astern to reach its final resting place some 250m to 300m away.
Click to expand...
My money is on the first, because the pic perspective gives away that it was indeed taken with a pretty long focus lens.
Besides, the latter would have been a weird maneuver indeed...
 
Lakesailor said:
A bloke on Radio 4 has just said that the master of the ship would have "had up-to-date maps". So it can't have been a navigational error then.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I refrain to mention some other equally ridiculous journo's comments I heard from local TV...
Not to mention that Giglio island has been around well before anyone even thought of making nav charts at all!
 
MapisM said:
Yeah, I refrain to mention some other equally ridiculous journo's comments I heard from local TV...
Not to mention that Giglio island has been around well before anyone even thought of making nav charts at all!
Click to expand...

Are you sure it hasnt recently been moved...

You know.. as a response to the cost cutting Euro thing...
 
MapisM said:
Well, sold to some Chinese maybe, but moved...?!?
Click to expand...

Maybe they took the island to China to copy it and one of the Chinese copies of the island was put in place of the original. The new island is just the same as the original island but a bit different around the edges that are under water, where nobody looks. Oh, hang on...
 
MapisM said:
But they might have a point re. some technical trouble leading to the loss of speed and direction control: I just noticed in the last pic above that the ship has NUC lights on.
Sure, they might have been turned on after the grounding, but maybe she was NUC already since her initial deviation from the normal route...?!?
Click to expand...

You should expect to see the double red of NUC. Remember the lights of 'aground' are the normal anchor lights plus the lights of NUC.
 
Electrical failure

There was a lot of talkabout loss of power/electrical failure.... but the ship is ablaze with light so I think that power failure as a cause of the initial accident is unlikely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

MontyMariner
Battery failure
2
Replies
20
Views
815
Refueler
Refueler

Share this page

Top