Cruise liner 'ignored' passenger pleas to help stranded fishing boat

Obviously if true it's a pretty poor show. But I do wonder how often passengers on cruise ships see what they think is a small ship in trouble? I would think it's not unusual for the captain to get reports of something some passengers think they've seen. The passengers are not (usually) sailors and probably have no idea what they're seeing out at sea - if they're really seeing anything at all. It's obviously expensive for a cruise ship to turn around and begin a search and they may not do so unless one of the experienced crew actually sees the "ship" in distress. My guess is that if the captain was told at all, he'd have asked for a visual search with binoculars and when they saw nothing he assumed the passengers were mistaken (again).
 
little_roundtop said:
Obviously if true it's a pretty poor show. But I do wonder how often passengers on cruise ships see what they think is a small ship in trouble? I would think it's not unusual for the captain to get reports of something some passengers think they've seen. The passengers are not (usually) sailors and probably have no idea what they're seeing out at sea - if they're really seeing anything at all. It's obviously expensive for a cruise ship to turn around and begin a search and they may not do so unless one of the experienced crew actually sees the "ship" in distress. My guess is that if the captain was told at all, he'd have asked for a visual search with binoculars and when they saw nothing he assumed the passengers were mistaken (again).
Click to expand...

+1 to all of this.

Given the source, I expect it's a vastly distorted picture of what happened.

If it turns out to be totally true I suspect it will be exactly as you say. They get passenger reports of stuff in the water too often to perform anything more than a cursory visual search as they carry on their way.

What possible motive would a sea captain have to leave three people to die in the water? In contrast saving three lives would make him a hero and give him a good story to tell.

Time may tell.

EDIT:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/17/cruise-company-ship-fishing-boat?newsfeed=true
http://www.cruiselawnews.com/2012/0...e-ship-ignore-mariners-in-distress/index.html
http://www.panama-guide.com/article.php/20120413184536993
http://www.panama-guide.com/article.php/2012041614340810
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that 3 passengers who were twitchers with binoculars identified a chap waving a lifejacket and red t shirt over his head on a small boat.
And later tried to send an email to the US coastguard to this effect once the ships officers declined to 'do anything '.
Presumably cruise ships have radar that can indicate size and stationary or moving vessels.
Otoh, en route somewhere a docking slot and fees will have been arranged. Would significant delays effect these to the detriment of the tourists pleasure?

Me, I would say a wee stationary boat with a chap trying to get attention would be worthy of a tedious yet quick flyby ( no pun Intended there btw).
 
Norman_E said:
I wonder if the message was ever passed on to him?
Click to expand...

As it happens, I was on this ship at the time. The passengers obviously didn't tell the right person, it is quite easy to get an urgent message to the bridge.

Interesting that the Mail make the link from Costa to Princess. They happen to be owned by the same conglomerate, but are totally separate companies otherwise.
 
Blueboatman said:
My understanding is that 3 passengers who were twitchers with binoculars identified a chap waving a lifejacket and red t shirt over his head on a small boat. Me, I would say a wee stationary boat with a chap trying to get attention would be worthy of a tedious yet quick flyby
Click to expand...

Which leads me to think we're not getting the full story.
 
Woodlouse said:
If these passengers were that desperate to get the message through then it wouldn't have been hard.

And who on earth sends an Email to the coastguard to raise the alarm?
Click to expand...

Your post is nonsense.

These ordinary people clearly did what they could do by informing the ship's crew. They wouldn't have easy access to the captain or his senior officer's, but would have assumed that their report would have got through to this level. Beyond that, they were powerless to do anything.

If you were a passenger on a cruise ship and your sighting was being ignored by the officers, then your obvious next step is to inform the coast guard - using the only method of communication to the outside world available on such a ship, ie email.
 
Babylon said:
Your post is nonsense.

These ordinary people clearly did what they could do by informing the ship's crew. They wouldn't have easy access to the captain or his senior officer's, but would have assumed that their report would have got through to this level. Beyond that, they were powerless to do anything.

If you were a passenger on a cruise ship and your sighting was being ignored by the officers, then your obvious next step is to inform the coast guard - using the only method of communication to the outside world available on such a ship, ie email.
Click to expand...

The obvious next step after the first message was not acted upon would be to raise the alert on the ship again. Then continue doing so until you got a response from the bridge as to whether anything or not was being done about it.

If you were going to contact the coastguard yourself then anyone with any sense would phone them. If you have internet then you have phone lines. You wouldn't email the fire brigade if you saw a house burning down would you?

It strikes me that these passengers were themselves not particularly concerned about what they saw. It's only in retrospect that they are making a fuss.
 
Woodlouse said:
It strikes me that these passengers were themselves not particularly concerned about what they saw. It's only in retrospect that they are making a fuss.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that's most likely.

If these three really thought they were seeing three people in trouble they'd have screamed the ship down, hit the fire alarm, anything to get attention & get the ship to turn round. If they had even a suspicion there was a problem on the boat they'd seen, they'd have camped near the bridge and asked the first person who came out if the safety of the three people had been confirmed or not.

Clearly no passenger or crew on the ship felt concerned enough to investigate. It's an horrific situation, but nobody's fault.
 
toad_oftoadhall said:
Yeah, I think that's most likely.

If these three really thought they were seeing three people in trouble they'd have screamed the ship down, hit the fire alarm, anything to get attention & get the ship to turn round. If they had even a suspicion there was a problem on the boat they'd seen, they'd have camped near the bridge and asked the first person who came out if the safety of the three people had been confirmed or not.

Clearly no passenger or crew on the ship felt concerned enough to investigate. It's an horrific situation, but nobody's fault.
Click to expand...

I think its called passing the buck, or cant be bothered.
If the three passangers suspicions were even considered by the crew who they reported it to he/she would then notify the bridge and maybe the two lives could have been saved.
Maybe complaicancy is the proper word.
C_W
 
Links to interesting articles in Toad of Toad Hall's post show a discrepancy between the cruise line's version of events and the bird watchers. The latter say that they had not seen another boat, but the cruise line say that the ship was passing through a fishing fleet! In addition it is claimed that the Ship contacted the boat (how? I doubt that boat had a working VHF, otherwise they would have sought help) and changed course to avoid its nets.

Another point is that the sighting was 130 miles from land. One would like to think that any experienced captain, told of a sighting of a small open boat, possibly in distress, so far from land, would investigate properly. The ship is flag of convenience registered in Bermuda, where little or no attempt appears to be made to regulate shipping or investigate such matters, so we may never learn the truth.
 
Last edited:
toad_oftoadhall said:
Yeah, I think that's most likely.

If these three really thought they were seeing three people in trouble they'd have screamed the ship down, hit the fire alarm, anything to get attention & get the ship to turn round. If they had even a suspicion there was a problem on the boat they'd seen, they'd have camped near the bridge and asked the first person who came out if the safety of the three people had been confirmed or not.

Clearly no passenger or crew on the ship felt concerned enough to investigate. It's an horrific situation, but nobody's fault.
Click to expand...

Agreed with what you said until I got to the bit about nobodies fault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top