Costa Concordia SINKING

[JLC@SD]

Exploring the theory that the ship hit uncharted rocks, which is why it turned 20 degrees to port heading toward the island.

 

I found Nav chart and plotted that position... due east of the southern tip of Gilio and due south of the southern tip of Argentario.

 

The chart shows that as deep water - 80-100 fathoms. But not far to the northwest is a small circle with a depth of only 24 fathoms. Now that is still deep, but it suggests there is some underwater formation there that is narrow and tall from the sea floor. Perhaps there is another one that is uncharted.

 

It will be very interesting to learn if the data recorder confirms the ship's first incident was at that turn. If it does it backs the report that it was an uncharted obstacle. If we learn the turn was made and then the incident was in close to Gilio, then that is real bad as the ship has no business being that close to Gilio.

 

This web story may or may not be true....but, if it is true......and this course was intentional.........the Captain has a lot of explaining to do....

 

http://www.seanews.com.tr/article/ACCIDENTS/74284/Costa-Concordia-accident-navigational-error/

[STLPilot]

It will be very interesting to learn if the data recorder confirms the ship's first incident was at that turn. If it does it backs the report that it was an uncharted obstacle. If we learn the turn was made and then the incident was in close to Gilio, then that is real bad as the ship has no business being that close to Gilio.

If they did hit an object that tens of thousands of other vessels have missed, then why is nobody reporting alarm sounds on the steam towards the island? And even if they did steam towards the island to "save lives", they knew darn well they couldn't make that 250' channel that reserved for rowboats and kayaks.

[maldenmusic]

I was thinking so.

 

Slightly off topic but a bit of input: Last week when we were on the Conquest we had high winds approaching Key West. When we started towards the channel, the captain felt the winds made the channel unsafe. (I'm what my husband calls a "chickensh*t" and I thought the winds didn't seem so bad and the channel looked fairly ok, but then again I'm no captain and should never, ever be in charge of the safety of a vessel!) We were slightly disappointed that we couldn't stop at Key West, but the fact was he was making the call based on safety. Carnival refunded every passenger money and they gave us extra time in Nassau, so it cost Carnival money to do so... But they chose safety over money or pax happiness. Yes, there were people who raised hell for the change in itinerary, but most of us were thankful and grateful to the Catptain and cheered and gave him a standing ovation that night at the Capt's party when he apologized to us because we were all so proud of his decision, even if we all didn't agree with the level of danger. (Again, we being stupid land lovers and armchair navigators who think we know it all and him being a well trained and knowledgeable Captain. Lol!)

 

Later, upon re-entering the Mississippi River there was some Marsh on fire near the passage that blew smoke to the ship. A few passengers grew panicked thinking it was from the ship, but before it could become a full of panic, the crew stepped in and calmed everyone down.

 

 

I felt completely safe in both occasions and feel completely safe for next time, too! :)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree....I have always felt safe on my Carnival cruises and this unfortunate incident will not affect my cruising plans for the future!

[DJan07]

While the loss of life and search for survivors is tragic and my biggest concern, what are folk's opinions about the future of Costa Concordia? Can she be saved?

[sstrong]

Please for the sake of all of us keep this post free of jokes, conjecture and opinions. Thank you fellow posters and cruise critic for posting news from reliable sources. As our thoughts and concerns go out to those involved it is a true service to have one place -- Cruise Critic -- to come to for current available information.

 

This is an internet chat board about cruising. It is, by definition, the place to go for conjecture and opinions. That's why we're here. Please keep the conversation going!

[kruzerci]

While the loss of life and search for survivors :confused:is tragic and my biggest concern, what are folk's opinions about the future of Costa Concordia? Can she be saved?

 

It will all depend on the upcoming assessments of damage. Some say it's possible, others think she will be a total loss. It's all speculation at this point. Based on the pictures, I honestly cant see how it would be salvageable without astronomical costs. I'm leaning towards it being a total loss, but it's not my place to say without having the numbers!

[CruiseAdict218]

While the loss of life and search for survivors :confused:is tragic and my biggest concern, what are folk's opinions about the future of Costa Concordia? Can she be saved?

 

Honestly I think her service is done, between cabin damage, electrical daamge, engine failure, damage to the bridge, etc her costs to rebuild will cost millions, also if her starboard side hit the ground, im sure that damaged her super-structure, like those balconies

 

(This is my personal opinion)

[kruzerci]

Honestly I think her service is done, between cabin damage, electrical damge, engine failure, damage to the bridge, etc her costs to rebuild will cost millions, also if her starboard side hit the ground, im sure that damaged her super-structure, like those balconies

 

Exactly

[cruzegirl]

I was thinking so.

 

Slightly off topic but a bit of input: Last week when we were on the Conquest we had high winds approaching Key West. When we started towards the channel, the captain felt the winds made the channel unsafe. (I'm what my husband calls a "chickensh*t" and I thought the winds didn't seem so bad and the channel looked fairly ok, but then again I'm no captain and should never, ever be in charge of the safety of a vessel!) We were slightly disappointed that we couldn't stop at Key West, but the fact was he was making the call based on safety. Carnival refunded every passenger money and they gave us extra time in Nassau, so it cost Carnival money to do so... But they chose safety over money or pax happiness. Yes, there were people who raised hell for the change in itinerary, but most of us were thankful and grateful to the Catptain and cheered and gave him a standing ovation that night at the Capt's party when he apologized to us because we were all so proud of his decision, even if we all didn't agree with the level of danger. (Again, we being stupid land lovers and armchair navigators who think we know it all and him being a well trained and knowledgeable Captain. Lol!)

 

Later, upon re-entering the Mississippi River there was some Marsh on fire near the passage that blew smoke to the ship. A few passengers grew panicked thinking it was from the ship, but before it could become a full of panic, the crew stepped in and calmed everyone down.

 

 

I felt completely safe in both occasions and feel completely safe for next time, too! :)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We had the same problem on our Cruise Jan. 2011. We missed St. Kitts. I woke up to what seemed "an all out effort/noise" of trying to get to the dock. You could hear the engines working very hard. Got up and was on the balcony with the dock on our side. It didn't seem bad except for engine noise. And our Captain tried hard to get there but alas, no go. We did not make it to St. Kitts. Disappointed, yes. Love it there. But I trust our Captains to make those calls. And will never 2nd guess it. I also, should never, ever be in charge of driving a ship. lol.

[STLPilot]

Honestly I think her service is done, between cabin damage, electrical daamge, engine failure, damage to the bridge, etc her costs to rebuild will cost millions, also if her starboard side hit the ground, im sure that damaged her super-structure, like those balconies

 

(This is my personal opinion)

Cost to salvage and repair would have to be at least 2/3 of cost of new. So "millions" would have to be over $300 million to scrap, that's a lot of millions. If it's under $300 million, they'll put 'er back together.

[SarniaLo]

Has any one been able to find the AIS data from this web site?

http://www.denizhaber.com/

I've only seen the static image supplied with the story. I'd love to be able to see the individual AIS reports close up...

Me too, since it seems so far the only source referencing the ship sailing through those two rocks. The MarineTraffic trace is lacking information during that time and it doesn't confirm (nor disprove) this information.

I have tried to google-translate the above site, and also the FB page one of the trace is supposed to come from (http://www.facebook.com/gemitrafik), and google-translation being what it is, I'm still not sure these traces are from real AIS data or from an imaginary scenario... Because it seems completely crazy to sail such a big ship through such a small passage...

[judybee]

This Italian gentleman posted some photos on his facebook page with close-ups of the huge rock embedded in the side of the ship.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3022776696787.155454.1483816924&type=1

[CruiseAdict218]

Cost to salvage and repair would have to be at least 2/3 of cost of new. So "millions" would have to be over $300 million to scrap, that's a lot of millions. If it's under $300 million, they'll put 'er back together.

 

Good point, again just my personal opinion

[deckofficer]

 

And to be frank, shame on anyone who places blame on anyone in this situation with out knowing the facts, especially you "deck officer." You know nothing of the events and have no authority to lay blame and to racially profile your blame is disgusting!

 

 

 

Sorry to upset you to this degree. If you would have been privy to all the classroom discussions on shipping companies sailing under flags of convenience and instructed to research case studies, I would imagine you would also have an opinion. That is all I offered, an opinion that you good folks have the choice to accept or not. It was not racial profiling. The point, that an accident like this should have never happened. You cruise ship patrons do have to accept that your vessel's positive stability is purposely kept low to ensure a comfortable experience. A vessel with higher positive stability will have a more abrupt righting motion from being heeled for any reason. To ground a vessel designed as a cruise ship is, makes for a very dangerous scenario because the ship does not handle weight shift well being tender already in stability. This kind of weight shift would occur if water is flooding compartments. After a thorough investigation you will know that this event should have never of happened, so there will be blame placed, just stay tuned.

[RZ3]

For all of those with concerns, you shouldn't have them. Cruising is generally safe. This is an anomoly. No doubt that additional safety arrangements will be made as a result of this tragedy, but please don't let this discourage you from a cruise. I have been on a few and enjoyed every one of them. The Concordia event even is not the norm. Most cruises are very safe. Please don't let the rumors and stories from this event discourage you. What people are describing as panic can be attributed to the fear that exists with any unexpected event. The crew could very well have acted with the utmost professionalism, but people will not see that when thier lives are at risk.

 

This is a tragedy, no doubt, but it is not the norm for the cruise industry.

[chrisrotlmacin]

It does seem odd doesn't it, I thought the same thing when speaking with the Staff Captain on NCL Epic and he told us they do not have sonar on the ship.

Maybe it means sonar for detecting submarines. Deep sensors are integrated in to the ship navigation systems .

 

My Opinion is what happened with Concordia it is a clear navigation mistake, they took hard to starboard to change course other wise there is no explanation why the stabilizer is not damaged (pictures also show this).

 

Marine Traffic is showing also the last course of the ship http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/default.aspx?zoom=9&oldmmsi=247158500&olddate=1/13/2012%209:02:00%20PM

 

20.24 course 278 , 15.5 knots speed

20:33 course 276 , 15.4 knots speed

20:37 course 285 , 15.3 knots speed

20.53 course 351 , 2.9 knots speed

20.58 course 7 , 1.4 knots speed

21:02 course 13, 1.1 knots speed

 

Most probably they realize the mistake, they change course, they said that they will make a close passage near the island, the deep alarm sounded that they are i shallow waters and they turned starboard, at 15 knots speed was enough to make the damage shown in the pictures.

 

Add them all together and most probably you will come to the same conclusion. What exactly happened will be found earlier or later , will be for sure on Discovery on "Seconds from Disaster" . RIP for the lost ..

[west coast cruiser]

This is an internet chat board about cruising. It is, by definition, the place to go for conjecture and opinions. That's why we're here. Please keep the conversation going!

 

Amen!!!!

[The Grumpus]

Capt BJ,

 

As a fellow USCG Captain Retired, I see the logic of your scenario. One additional factor that puzzles me, however, is the course change shown on the chart found at http://www.seanews.com.tr/article/ACCIDENTS/74284/Costa-Concordia-accident-navigational-error/ . This chart shows that the course change occurred at 2210 and news reports indicate that passengers were just beginning their meals when the initial event occurred. Since late dining is advertized as beginning at 2100 and early dining is at 1900, there may be some discrepency in the time zones being reported. Do you suppose that reflects the use of Greenwich Mean Time on the charts? If so, and the course change is the result of "fat fingers," then there would be no reports of the disruption during dinner, as such an error would not cause the noise and listing reported by the diners. Either way, I cannot reconcile a collision in the passage between the rocks of Giglio with the dining times.

 

I know that we will need to wait for the official investigative reports to find out if our speculations have any validity. Knowing how difficult it is on the sea when things start going wrong, I'm just thinking that the Captain and crew must have done something right to have managed the safe evacuation of so many of the passengers, though so sorry to hear of the loss of life.

 

Regards,

MorganMars

My guess at this time is there were two incidents. The first when they made the course correction in what seemed to be the channel between the island and the mainland. And the second at the island when the captain attempted to thread the needle so to speak between those rocks. The first incident may have been the sand bar and/or electrical problem (from early reports today) and for whatever reason caused the captain to either voluntary or involuntary head to the island to "beach it" or just get close enough and evacuate the ship. And the second incident happened when the ship was mistakenly sailed too close to the island and picked up the big rock and tear in her port side while attempting to thread those two rocks. That just finished off the ship 'cause she was probably already taking on water from the first incident. Probably the captain did not intend the attempt to sail the ship between those rocks... if you knew they where there, why would you with a ship that size???

 

Of course, this is a complete guess based on what I've read here and on news outlets today.

[DocF]

One of my good friends in my younger days was Capt. John Roen. He was one of the greatest salvage experts on the Great Lakes, ranking with Capt. Alex Cunning and Capt. Tom Reid, and that is excellent company, folks.

 

John would build a patch of wood and concrete to plug the hole. Use ground tackle, and lots of it to right a partial capsize, then pump in air to help float the ship while it was towed to drydock. None of this is revolutionary, but is pretty much standard for this sort of incident. Yes, this wreck can be salvaged as it lies right now. If storms come along, it may be much worse, though.

 

Doc

[kitkat343]

I had a question for people who are experts on nautical safety. The news reports stated that loading into the lifeboats was slowed down because women and children were loaded in first, and families needed to be separated. I cruise with my husband and baby, and I know that my husband would argue with ship personnel about being separated from us during an emergency.

 

I'm not expert on nautical safety, but do people with more expertise in this field have an opinion on this issue? It seems to me that you would want to load people onto lifeboats as quickly as possible, but I'm not sure if a more organized crew would have been able to separate the husbands from their families earlier than at the point of loading people onto the boat.

[ghstudio]

The gash in the port side is consistent with turning to far to port exiting that narrow passage....there is a charted shoal 7' below sea level (or perhaps I should say there was a shoal). On the chart, the passage is wide enough and deep enough to sail the costa ship through, although one would not go through that narrow a passage at 15mph...you would crawl through. The speed may show how much panic there was on the bridge, whatever the reason.

[DocF]

In general, the practice is to keep families together. That is a policy, not a law or rule.

 

With ships having and excess lifeboat capacity and life rafts too, there is room for everyone and that is not an issue.

 

Lifeboats have always been slow loading and the modern covered boat is much more so than the old open, and much less seaworthy boats.

 

A listing ship also makes loading and lowering the lifeboats much more problematic.

 

Like I said elsewhere, Chaos and abandoning ship are synonyms.

 

Doc

[cruiserjinx]

I think he says an indication as to what might be happening. I feel name calling is uncalled for, Maybe you would like to take some time and read the comments about 2 people being rescued on board the ship in stead of debating what may have been,

 

With the youtube title "Costa Concordia inside crash onbard 2012 cruise ship - Friday, 13th !!!" There is no room for the error you say. It's iresponsible to post known false data. With all of the dislike votes to the video @ youtube, I think it is mostly known to be false. I seen this video way before his/her posting. And before today it was not titled as such. Does not issue a right to name calling - agreed. Just do your own homework.

[SarniaLo]

On the chart, the passage is wide enough and deep enough to sail the costa ship through, although one would not go through that narrow a passage at 15mph...you would crawl through. The speed may show how much panic there was on the bridge, whatever the reason.

If you are talking about the passage between the two rocks, it is less than 60 meters wide (http://cjoint.com/12jv/BAosStJlhsq.htm), and the Concordia is 36 meters wide. It is not a passage I would take comfortably in the daylight with a sailboat, so considering taking it with a 300m-long ship that will barely fit between the two rocks, at night, is... adventurous, to say the least (IF that indeed happened).

[tntornadox]

Honestly, it was a maritime tradition from older times when vessels didn't have enough lifeboats aboard for everyone that women and children were loaded first. It would seem that since they had trouble lowering the lifeboats on the other side, the crew may have tried to institute this policy on the Concordia. I say may because it isn't confirmed but I have heard this story in several different news stories.

 

As for possible salvaging, we don't know if this is the only gash in the hull or not. If it is, I would believe they would salvage the vessel... she's only 6 years old. If there is more damage on the other side that would have to be patched up, it becomes a bit more tricky. As was said earlier, it would be cheaper to 'rebuild' Concordia than to build a new ship, I really believe that. The most expensive part of a modern cruise liner's construction is her hull and a majority of it seems to be intact. Cabins are pods that can be easily replaced and interior spaces can be gutted and redone. Electrical wiring can be re-ran.

 

I'm not saying this will absolutely be done, there are too many questions left out there. But I believe to say this ship is a total loss isn't entirely correct based off what we see and know at this point.

 

On this point, I saw this photo earlier and wondered if anyone may have some input, but what pressure could the balcony doors and windows hold to? This image shows the water has pulled balcony glass railing off, but the doors and windows behind it seem to be holding, if that's the case, it could help to keep more water out from passenger areas and could help with the rescue effort.

 

Pic: