Costa Concordia SINKING

[Highlander0108]

Very strange ...

 

 

 

Really? You've got to bring unrelated politics and jokes into this?

 

 

 

I still haven't heard any news about her facing the opposite direction on TV. I wonder if they've noticed yet.

 

Her final location is completely consistent with the AIS tracking and the captain actually turning the ship into port. AIS symbols can be notorously off in direction when the ship is not moving.

[BugsyCruiser]

And now, ENOUGH about politics and back to the subject of this thread. I do hope they find the people unaccounted for and pray that everyone of them is ok

[STLPilot]

Just watched a BBC News report on it, where some 'industry professional' was going on about how the ships were 'purely designed for revenue generation, not for safety', and how they are 'putting safety at risk'. I knew stuff like this would happen. This will not be good for the cruise industry.

Maybe if your a cruise ship company, but not a passenger. I'm paying less for practically the same cruise I'm taking next week, as I did 22 years ago. Even the airfare is less. Sure this won't help them, but will help us!

[Red Mini Stapler]

no more politcs!!!! and besides, everybody knows all the economic problem is manbearpig's fault!

[CastorRanger]

Well not shure if its really the same ship, but this video is supposed to be at Giglio last August as well...

 

 

http://video.corriere.it/nave-concordia-al-giglio-/9dfa5ea6-3e9b-11e1-8b52-5f77182bc574

[BugsyCruiser]

With all the technology and innovation nowadays, cruise ships are safer than ever. This is a tragedy that happened and my heart and prayers go out to all those affected. But it won't stop me from cruising. Just like an airplane crash will not stop me from flying.

[Janman]

Are ship officers involved in an accident required to take a sobriety test?

Years ago while sailing on a Costa ship we were in a location where we could observe the entire bridge area. We observed numerous bottles of liquer in full view! Just pointing out what we saw.

[BugsyCruiser]

no more politcs!!!! and besides, everybody knows all the economic problem is manbearpig's fault!

 

LOL :p

[ddakrt]

If they hit in open waters and started taking on water, alarms would have sounded immediately. You don't wait til you hit a rocky coast before you sound alarms, anyone below water line must be altered.

 

And then hit twice? Woops ... I hit an "uncharted" reef, more than 100' below sea level, head 8 miles towards that island and smash into the coast, let's do it again!

 

I added an edit to my original post given the time on Carnival's press release and the August video. I now think you might have nailed it, which is extremely bad news for the captain.

[Capt_BJ]

my two cents based on sitting in the Captain's chair for a couple of years and investigating officer for a couple of marine 'incidents' but these are just first thoughts

 

- looking at the overall layout of where the ship was due to go and where it went I have to suspect there was a deviation from the normal course.

 

- tracks show a deviation to port, toward the island that makes no navigational sense

 

* my opinion is this was an electronic error. 'Someone' had reprogrammed the GPS tied to the auto-pilot and had fat fingered a course entry (note the one digit error mentioned by another post), This error turned the ship TOWARD the island rather than north leaving the island safely to the west. (maritime cases are loaded with "radar assisted collision" cases, easily expanded to electronic because folks relied TOO hard on the magic of electrons)

 

* OPINION - SADLY the bridge watch noticed this error WAY too late. (In the vernacular of 'Bridge Resource Management', we call this 'loss of situational awareness) Once detected they notified the Captain who knew they were far off track and getting back on track would cost dollars in either a late arrival or consumption of addition fuel to increase speed.

 

* OPINION - The Captain then saw a short cut ..... a pass between two islands that was narrow but 'just enough' and allowed for minimal loss of time and distance

 

* OPINION - He went for it ..... and learned it was not well charted, because no significant vessels sail thru it!!!!! Oops, turned trying to avoid a rock but the stern swing (a ship turns from the back, your car turns from the front) had him catch the rock "full and by" - he's got a SERIOUS problem now.....

 

* OPINION - Once holed he saw he was close to the port and thought if I can dock the ship the risk is FAR FAR less, so he heads north to the port, only a few miles away while trying to manage the flooding. During this time he tells his crew, do NOT abandon, because I'm going to dock......

 

* the port entrance faces north and he approaches from the south so he must do a 180 degree turn about. Doing so allows enough of the water taken on thru the MASSIVE hole to shift (free surface effect) and the ship lists significantly to starboard resulting in a decision (or an uncontrolled event) to ground the ship just outside the port entrance. (ship damage control . . . )

 

My opinion . . . .

[moniquet]

All this stuff about lifeboat drill.....would it have made any difference. How does it educate to deal with mass panic, both Crew and passengers. How does it cover being ready in the lifeboat and then being told to move to the other side of the ship:confused: How would an efficient lifeboat drill made any difference to the outcome. Saw where some had to crawl down dark corridors where the walls were the floor, they had to find whatever lifeboat they could!

 

So much drivel on here, pseudo shipping experts, many whose main interest seems to be if the ship can be salvaged or not:rolleyes: Frankly I don't give a damn about the ship, that is Carnival's problem!

[CruiseAdict218]

This site has been pretty right so I wonder what news this could be about

http://mikeyscruiseblog.com/2012/01/13/costaconcordia/

[BirdmanBilly]

Saints fan's are blowing up message boards thinking they are ESPN analysts.

 

Some Cruisers blowing up message boards thinking they are NTSB.

 

Thoughts and prayers to those missing and those who lost their lives.

[Highlander0108]

That posted video of a Costa ship off the harbor should not be misconstrued as evidence that that ship passed between those islands. That ship could have gone around them and got up close to the port rather easily without endangering the ship and passengers.

[Despegue]

This video from august, reportably from Giglio harbour is very interesting. I will however refrain from further comments.

 

Deckofficer: I will not post anymore on this subject untill accident report has been published I think.

I do sound harch from time to time, it is a known weakness of mine and in no way did I want to insult you Sir. However, I might be a good idea to keep to the facts here on this laymens forum to clarify things to other participants. We should not discuss own personal views on public forums in my opinion.

 

You were absolutely right concerning Cruise ships and Active Stability. The Destiny/Fortuna class vessels have certainly not a hydrodynamical hull design by the way:rolleyes:. I have never worked on ships with a flag of Convenience.

[LaurieHoffman]

According to the post I just saw on the front page of my Yahoo, the Captain was just arrested.

 

Here is the article -

http://news.yahoo.com/cruise-ship-aground-off-italy-4-000-passengers-235744825.html

 

This entire situation is so sad...

[spbflseas]

As a pure rank amateur, this issue is concerning. The ship is navigating waters it clearly should not be in. If you look at this area on google, it shows shipping routes. Those routes are on the west side of Giglio island. Why is the ship on the east side? I fear this may end up being a poor decision, whether it be for time saving, fuel savings or just adventure of some mariners.

[ddakrt]

BTW are we sure the Seanews Turkey site is correct in that the Concordia sailed between the islands? The ATS plots didn't put the ship anywhere close to the 2 islands.

 

Then again ATS also shows the ship pointing north, so theres that.

[STLPilot]

my two cents based on sitting in the Captain's chair for a couple of years and investigating officer for a couple of marine 'incidents' but these are just first thoughts

 

- looking at the overall layout of where the ship was due to go and where it went I have to suspect there was a deviation from the normal course.

 

- tracks show a deviation to port, toward the island that makes no navigational sense

 

* my opinion is this was an electronic error. 'Someone' had reprogrammed the GPS tied to the auto-pilot and had fat fingered a course entry (note the one digit error mentioned by another post), This error turned the ship TOWARD the island rather than north leaving the island safely to the west. (maritime cases are loaded with "radar assisted collision" cases, easily expanded to electronic because folks relied TOO hard on the magic of electrons)

 

* OPINION - SADLY the bridge watch noticed this error WAY too late. (In the vernacular of 'Bridge Resource Management', we call this 'loss of situational awareness) Once detected they notified the Captain who knew they were far off track and getting back on track would cost dollars in either a late arrival or consumption of addition fuel to increase speed.

 

* OPINION - The Captain then saw a short cut ..... a pass between two islands that was narrow but 'just enough' and allowed for minimal loss of time and distance

 

* OPINION - He went for it ..... and learned it was not well charted, because no significant vessels sail thru it!!!!! Oops, turned trying to avoid a rock but the stern swing (a ship turns from the back, your car turns from the front) had him catch the rock "full and by" - he's got a SERIOUS problem now.....

 

* OPINION - Once holed he saw he was close to the port and thought if I can dock the ship the risk is FAR FAR less, so he heads north to the port, only a few miles away while trying to manage the flooding. During this time he tells his crew, do NOT abandon, because I'm going to dock......

 

* the port entrance faces north and he approaches from the south so he must do a 180 degree turn about. Doing so allows enough of the water taken on thru the MASSIVE hole to shift (free surface effect) and the ship lists significantly to starboard resulting in a decision (or an uncontrolled event) to ground the ship just outside the port entrance. (ship damage control . . . )

 

My opinion . . . .

 

Now that's what I call common sense! Yip ... sounds on the money.

[ddakrt]

 

It is not likely that the captain and other senior crew decided to take a totally novel route unintended for their ship. We can look at navigational charts and say 'he was headed right for the island and rocks', but how often do ships of that size take that route?

 

Too little info, and too little training for us to know what happened.

 

I agree that theres too little info to make judgements on, but it doesn't look like the first time the Concordia had sailed close to Giglio. Check out the youtube vid of her in the summer; I don't know if it was the same captain or not, but I can't understand why she was that close to Giglio that time as well. This might not be as noval a route as we think.

[guernseyguy]

Now that's what I call common sense! Yip ... sounds on the money.

I think all we can be reasonably confident of so far (on the available evidence) is that the ship was significantly off course, and this was recognised too late.....the rest we'll find out from the investigation....

[sjn911]

my two cents based on sitting in the Captain's chair for a couple of years and investigating officer for a couple of marine 'incidents' but these are just first thoughts

 

- looking at the overall layout of where the ship was due to go and where it went I have to suspect there was a deviation from the normal course.

 

- tracks show a deviation to port, toward the island that makes no navigational sense

 

* my opinion is this was an electronic error. 'Someone' had reprogrammed the GPS tied to the auto-pilot and had fat fingered a course entry (note the one digit error mentioned by another post), This error turned the ship TOWARD the island rather than north leaving the island safely to the west. (maritime cases are loaded with "radar assisted collision" cases, easily expanded to electronic because folks relied TOO hard on the magic of electrons)

 

* OPINION - SADLY the bridge watch noticed this error WAY too late. (In the vernacular of 'Bridge Resource Management', we call this 'loss of situational awareness) Once detected they notified the Captain who knew they were far off track and getting back on track would cost dollars in either a late arrival or consumption of addition fuel to increase speed.

 

* OPINION - The Captain then saw a short cut ..... a pass between two islands that was narrow but 'just enough' and allowed for minimal loss of time and distance

 

* OPINION - He went for it ..... and learned it was not well charted, because no significant vessels sail thru it!!!!! Oops, turned trying to avoid a rock but the stern swing (a ship turns from the back, your car turns from the front) had him catch the rock "full and by" - he's got a SERIOUS problem now.....

 

* OPINION - Once holed he saw he was close to the port and thought if I can dock the ship the risk is FAR FAR less, so he heads north to the port, only a few miles away while trying to manage the flooding. During this time he tells his crew, do NOT abandon, because I'm going to dock......

 

* the port entrance faces north and he approaches from the south so he must do a 180 degree turn about. Doing so allows enough of the water taken on thru the MASSIVE hole to shift (free surface effect) and the ship lists significantly to starboard resulting in a decision (or an uncontrolled event) to ground the ship just outside the port entrance. (ship damage control . . . )

 

My opinion . . . .

Well it makes alot of sense humbly and thoroughly noted..helps the wait for the facts...to have a plausible scenario that should be copied and pasted on top of each page (IMHO..IN MY HUMBLE OPINION) on the subject... thank you..Sarah

[Capt_BJ]

when in sight of visual aids to navigation (lights and prominent physical entities listed on charts) a prudent navigator USES them.

 

if my bridge watch did not verify our position not less than every 30 minutes visually {when they were available} .... they lost their qualification and went back to mess cook . . . officer or enlisted

 

As a Military sailor I understand I have different standards but

 

Navigation Is Not A Contact Sport

[kruzerci]

I think all we can be reasonably confident of so far (on the available evidence) is that the ship was significantly off course, and this was recognised too late.....the rest we'll find out from the investigation....

 

Hopefully it will be sooner rather than later.

[ddakrt]

That posted video of a Costa ship off the harbor should not be misconstrued as evidence that that ship passed between those islands. That ship could have gone around them and got up close to the port rather easily without endangering the ship and passengers.

 

Of course not, but it raises the question why the ship sailed that close to Giglio, and that the deviation towards the island this time might not be an isolated incident.