Costa Concordia SINKING

[Davyjonesrugrat]

Turn right 30 degrees when we reach 300 meters from the mainland" is not the same as "stay close to the coast". He may have been using the words that are in whatever law states you must be 300 meters from the mainland....

 

It is common to say "turn 20 degrees port 50 meters past the center channel marker". In this case "mainland is not as well defined as "center channel marker" which is where the confusion might have been.

Im sorry but the language use by mariners is nautical speak, foreshore, coastline, starboard, port, alter course, turn starboard etc. there is no way that any real marine would 'confuse' instructions. If the person was unsure of what the command was he would ask immediately. This I have learned after 32 years in the maritime world, 10 in the navy and 22 in the Coastguard.

 

When an order is given it is repeated by the helmsman for confirmation and once the order has been done the OOW (Officer of the watch) is told.

 

i.e. OOW: Starboard 5

helmsman: Starboard 5, when this has been done, 5 of starboard wheel on sir

OOW: Midships

helmsman: Midships

Helmsman: wheels amidships sir

OOW Steer 295

helms aye aye sir 295 - when on course he tells oow

 

That is how the system works - clear cut and dry.

[bazzaw]

I would be interested to know if there are any tests for captains on how they react to extreme stress situations+

 

Well I know that there certainly is for UK Submarine captains. The stress testing that they go under is well known as being EXTREME. If they fail these situations even once, they are off the "Captaincy training course". This training was/still is?? called "Perisher" and everyone knew what it meant!!

 

Barry

[sproonee]

....just read that two of the casualities were a father and his 5 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER. How tragic!

 

According to news, latest victims found were all adults

 

Jamie

[ghstudio]

Im sorry but the language use by mariners is nautical speak, foreshore, coastline, starboard, port, alter course, turn starboard etc. there is no way that any real marine would 'confuse' instructions. If the person was unsure of what the command was he would ask immediately. This I have learned after 32 years in the maritime world, 10 in the navy and 22 in the Coastguard.

 

When an order is given it is repeated by the helmsman for confirmation and once the order has been done the OOW (Officer of the watch) is told.

 

i.e. OOW: Starboard 5

helmsman: Starboard 5, when this has been done, 5 of starboard wheel on sir

OOW: Midships

helmsman: Midships

Helmsman: wheels amidships sir

OOW Steer 295

helms aye aye sir 295 - when on course he tells oow

 

That is how the system works - clear cut and dry.

 

That's the way it's SUPPOSED to work. The captain also should check the paper plot and the waypoint set in the GPS based on his orders on where to turn. Indeed, they may have had just this conversation after turning to port when reaching the 300 meter point. However, there is no similar conversation when giving an order to turn at a point. If both the captain and the helmsman/navigator repeated "turn port at 300 meters from mainland" but they were thinking of different definitions of what "mainland" meant...you have an accident.

[Globetotter]

According to news, latest victims found were all adults

 

Jamie

 

You're right, father and daughter are among the missing people, which are now 23.

[Davyjonesrugrat]

That's the way it's SUPPOSED to work. The captain also should check the paper plot and the waypoint set in the GPS based on his orders on where to turn. Indeed, they may have had just this conversation after turning to port when reaching the 300 meter point. However, there is no similar conversation when giving an order to turn at a point. If both the captain and the helmsman/navigator repeated "turn port at 300 meters from mainland" but they were thinking of different definitions of what "mainland" meant...you have an accident.

I could never think of an order such as that being given, its given from a time (i.e. turn starboard now) How could the helmsman know 300 mts when its total darkness. You have navigation marks (I.E. The lighthouse and poss others) that when a bearing is reached the course is changed....

[Milaandra]

It was a rope ladder, not a rope, and it would have been possible to climb just interrupting the down flow for a few minutes.

 

I saw that video...that's what has me confused. The people on the ladder look like ants on a string of licorice...there's so many climbing down, and a boat at the bottom ready to receive them, with a couple of other boats in the perimeter ready to take its place. Now, if you were one of the passengers, would you hear "hey! stop climbing down to safety, I need to get up" from down at the water level? Would you do it? And is it in the best interest of the passengers to halt the evacuation?

 

It just seems strange to me. Maybe I'm a bit biased because truthfully, I thought the commandant was a total as...em...well not a very nice and polite gentleman, let's say. But I can't see the point in stopping a rescue operation so you can climb up and count the number of people that would probably have been rescued by that time if you had left well enough alone.

 

But the commandant stated early in the conversation that he would make the captain look bad. He seems to have accomplished that admirably.

[ghstudio]

I could never think of an order such as that being given, its given from a time (i.e. turn starboard now) How could the helmsman know 300 mts when its total darkness. You have navigation marks (I.E. The lighthouse and poss others) that when a bearing is reached the course is changed....

 

That's easy...you set it in the GPS by distance (easy to do) and you measure 300 meters on the chart and make a waypoint. It's not done visually. Yes, turn 300 meters before the lighthouse would be a rational order. In this case the order might have been turn 300 meters from the mainland.

[guernseyguy]

I saw that video...that's what has me confused. The people on the ladder look like ants on a string of licorice...there's so many climbing down, and a boat at the bottom ready to receive them, with a couple of other boats in the perimeter ready to take its place. Now, if you were one of the passengers, would you hear "hey! stop climbing down to safety, I need to get up" from down at the water level.

I think what the Coast Guard was telling him to do was "climb up the ladder at the bow" (where the rescue crew was waiting) and walk along the now nearly horizontal hull to where the passengers are gathered and tell me how many there are....

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

I saw that video...that's what has me confused. The people on the ladder look like ants on a string of licorice...there's so many climbing down, and a boat at the bottom ready to receive them, with a couple of other boats in the perimeter ready to take its place. Now, if you were one of the passengers, would you hear "hey! stop climbing down to safety, I need to get up" from down at the water level? Would you do it? And is it in the best interest of the passengers to halt the evacuation?

 

It just seems strange to me. Maybe I'm a bit biased because truthfully, I thought the commandant was a total as...em...well not a very nice and polite gentleman, let's say. But I can't see the point in stopping a rescue operation so you can climb up and count the number of people that would probably have been rescued by that time if you had left well enough alone.

 

But the commandant stated early in the conversation that he would make the captain look bad. He seems to have accomplished that admirably.

 

I assumed the coast guard Captain in Livorno didn't know that the rope ladder was busy being used by passengers to leave the ship. Otherwise, you're right, it's not logical to think the ship's Captain could halt the egress to make his way back up that ladder.

 

Is there a timestamp for that video?

[Hebersgyll]

I am wondering how well the authorities are doing in their treatment of this disaster as a crime scene. Search & rescue is the first priority, also protection of the environment and the possible recovery of the ship.......... However, there will be a criminal trial with manslaughter charges for one or more accused (possibly other trials, too?) and, presumably some kind of public inquiry/marine investigation will take place. It is vital that evidence is collected, not lost and not contaminated. Was the captain, other senior officers tested for alcohol? Were witness statements taken from rescued passengers and crew before they dispersed around the world? There is already a mass of technical information including chart tracks and conversation recordings available on this forum, but some questions also about 'fake' data. Obtaining the correct verdicts at any criminal trials and the ability to learn thorougly from the investigation of the disaster relies upon skilled forensic inestigation of all the evidence available. I hope that this being done well. Only lawyers benefit from arguments and confusions that occur if it is not done well!

[atush]

I listened to it and thought the exact opposite. The commandant was in a desperate situation trying to help, and here he is talking to the captain who has abandoned ship and done the exact opposite. You hear the anger and desperation in his voice, and the captain is just really monotone. I'm not sure if getting back on the ship via rope makes much sense, but ultimately, he should've never left the ship in the first place if still that many passengers were remaining.

 

In the end, he will have to live with himself, plus the shame, of knowing how many deaths were a result of his choices. That alone may be a comforting revenge ;)

 

My interpretation was the same as yours. The Comandant was trying to help, and trying to get the captain to comply.

[Davyjonesrugrat]

That's easy...you set it in the GPS by distance (easy to do) and you measure 300 meters on the chart and make a waypoint. It's not done visually. Yes, turn 300 meters before the lighthouse would be a rational order. In this case the order might have been turn 300 meters from the mainland.

It is pure guesswork and highly unlikley that that command would be given.

[OneOneNiner]

So you don't believe in the US legal system where an accused is innocent until PROVEN guilty. You have already judged the man based on witness accounts, newspaper accounts, statements attributed to someone and so on.

 

The fact is that we don't have all the facts. We have a few, but out of context...e.g. the rock was 92-96 meters off shore...but you can't find the rock he hit because there are no charted rocks there.

 

The rocks are in the charts. They have found them. It matches with the black box data. They obviously turned too late and therefore got too close to the shore.

He IS proven guilty by so many documents and interviews HE has given.

 

That's the way it's SUPPOSED to work. The captain also should check the paper plot and the waypoint set in the GPS based on his orders on where to turn. Indeed, they may have had just this conversation after turning to port when reaching the 300 meter point. However, there is no similar conversation when giving an order to turn at a point. If both the captain and the helmsman/navigator repeated "turn port at 300 meters from mainland" but they were thinking of different definitions of what "mainland" meant...you have an accident.

 

You have an accident simply when for some reason you turn too late! That' when you get too close... and can't do anything about it...

 

That's easy...you set it in the GPS by distance (easy to do) and you measure 300 meters on the chart and make a waypoint. It's not done visually. Yes, turn 300 meters before the lighthouse would be a rational order. In this case the order might have been turn 300 meters from the mainland.

 

300 metres being the legal minimum to shore it already is a severe mistake of going to that limit when Costas rules indicate more than the 300 metres as a minimum...

[EVALUATOR]

What happened to the old saying that the Captain goes down with the ship?

 

Not before all others are off the ship, or most, or some, or first off.

 

Stay on the ship. If it sinks, you go with it.

 

If you don't like those guidelines...

 

A. Don't be a Captain!!!

 

or

 

B. Don't sink the ship!!!

[ghstudio]

It is pure guesswork and highly unlikley that that command would be given.

 

Davy...it's just a theory.....based on the location of the rocks that were hit, the distances to la scola and the mainland and the possiblility of confusion in words even though everyone involved would have clearly understood what "mainland" meant to them so they would not raise a question. It is quite possible that the captain really did think he was 300 meters offshore based on his "very clear" order to turn at 300 feet (actually he would have indicated to turn before that, but we don't know the full course he followed which would help give credence (or not) to my theory.

[umieesa]

Milaandra I think growing up in an Italian family makes my perspective different. He almost sounds like one of my uncles (whom to this day still kind of scares me ;)). I think given the situation he's just trying to take control and frustrated at how the Captain abandoned ship. I think if I was part of the rescue effort and I was dealing with someone like this (the Captain) I'd be very irate (I may not have acted the same way as the commander), but I believe it was more out of his frustration at the situation. Plus, like they say, Italians are very passionate people :p

[Globetotter]

I saw that video...that's what has me confused. The people on the ladder look like ants on a string of licorice...there's so many climbing down, and a boat at the bottom ready to receive them, with a couple of other boats in the perimeter ready to take its place. Now, if you were one of the passengers, would you hear "hey! stop climbing down to safety, I need to get up" from down at the water level? Would you do it? And is it in the best interest of the passengers to halt the evacuation?

 

It just seems strange to me. Maybe I'm a bit biased because truthfully, I thought the commandant was a total as...em...well not a very nice and polite gentleman, let's say. But I can't see the point in stopping a rescue operation so you can climb up and count the number of people that would probably have been rescued by that time if you had left well enough alone.

 

But the commandant stated early in the conversation that he would make the captain look bad. He seems to have accomplished that admirably.

 

I got the same impression: ants!

I understand what you mean, difficult to halt the flow to let an ass...e pass by.... The thing is that it's unconceivable that a captain abandons the ship while the rescue operations are taking place. So it's perfectly normal that the person in charge (the commandant in Livorno, at that point, since the person supposed to be in charge left...) was trying to make him go back. It's against the law for a captain to abandon the ship before passengers. The comandant actually was doing him a favour, making him go back. About making him look bad, well, the captain did a good job all by himself. The commandant in the conversation was referring to legal implications, not to public opinions. :)

[Davyjonesrugrat]

Davy...it's just a theory.....based on the location of the rocks that were hit, the distances to la scola and the mainland and the possiblility of confusion in words even though everyone involved would have clearly understood what "mainland" meant to them so they would not raise a question. It is quite possible that the captain really did think he was 300 meters offshore based on his "very clear" order to turn at 300 feet (actually he would have indicated to turn before that, but we don't know the full course he followed which would help give credence (or not) to my theory.

We work in nautical miles, cables, fathoms etc. not feet, meters or yards. There would be no mistake other than those made by the Officer in command, the Captain.

 

In 32 yrs of marine life I have never ever heard feet or meters given in a command/order

 

Gordon

[TheBestIsYetToCome]

Milaandra I think growing up in an Italian family makes my perspective different. He almost sounds like one of my uncles (whom to this day still kind of scares me ;)). I think given the situation he's just trying to take control and frustrated at how the Captain abandoned ship. I think if I was part of the rescue effort and I was dealing with someone like this (the Captain) I'd be very irate (I may not have acted the same way as the commander), but I believe it was more out of his frustration at the situation. Plus, like they say, Italians are very passionate people :p

 

He has zero context for this situation; he's totally flabbergasted. It's unthinkable that a cruise ship captain has abandoned his ship in the middle of a rescue operation. I thought the coast guard captain held his cool together awfully well given the difficulty he must have been having trying to wrap his head around this conversation he was being forced to have.

[concernedcostaemployee]

This is my (poor) translation Italian-to-English of an article which was published in the Italian newspaper "La Repubblica" today 17.01.12. IF these allegations are true : this indicates a WHOLE new ballgame.....

 

 

 

@font-face { font-family: "Cambria"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; } Grosseto - The shipwreck of the "Concordia" reveals more secrets. And the words of the chief prosecutor of Grosseto, Francesco Ferusio, confirm them. “Regarding the position of the captain, we are evaluating the possible responsibility of the entire chain of command," he says.

 

This statement is deliberately non-commital, but clear enough. It announces new avenues of investigation, at least three, and glosses over the questions around which the investigation has turned thus far. Who is really responsible for the unfortunate decisions taken on the night of Friday 13th? Only Francesco Schettino? What happened on the bridge between 21:42 (the time of impact with the granite rocks of Giglio) and 22:58, the recorded moment when the order to abandon ship was given? What did the owner, "Costa Crociere" know about these events? And what role did Management play in them? Why so late giving the most obvious and logical orders? Why was it decided to "salute" the island with so risky a manoeuvre?

 

In the last twenty-four hours, between Grosseto, Orbetello, Porto Santo Stefano and Livorno, a dozen key witnesses were questioned by the investigators. The entire complement of Concordia officers. Amongst them, Salvatore Orsini, Silvia Corona (second and third officer), Deck Officer Martino Pellegrini, Andrea Bongiovanni, Giovanni Iaccarino and Alessandro Di Lena. And in their statements a wealth of new details have emerged which, when added up,

suggest an incredible new hypothesis. On Friday 13, Francesco Schettino was in reality carrying out a dare, an act of bravado. To show "once again" how great he was at sea. Which, as we shall show, he had already done. On the same ship, December 17.

 

ON THE PHONE WITH THE COAST

Let us return to Friday night. In 60 minutes the fate of the "Concordia", its crew, and its 4,200 passengers, was played out. What happened on the Bridge, after the impact? Officer Alessandro Di Lena explained: "The Captain was glued to his cellphone. He made many calls. We asked him "Captain,what are you doing ? " But he did not reply - always on the phone.” On the phone with whom? At least three officers on the bridge confirm this crucial detail. "Schettino called Ferrarini at least three times, maybe four, they spoke for a long time." Roberto Ferrarini is the "Director of Marine Operations", in charge of crisis control for the whole Costa fleet .

 

What decisions were these two making? La Repubblica’s sources, from within the shipping company, explained : "It is true, Schettino contacted Ferrarini for the first time at 22.05 and after that communication the emergency procedures were activated." All right. Ferrarini perhaps gave the Captain orders to abandon ship? Or to alert the Coast Guard? If that is true, then why did Schettino ignore these orders (the evacuation was ordered only at 22:58 after direct orders from the Coast Guard)? And if in fact Schettino actually “did his own thing”, why, on the morning of the 14th, did the shipping company pubicly (in a press conference) defend the correctness of the behavior of their Captain?

 

“Costa” officially stated "we can not violate confidentiality at this stage of investigation,” and therefore they could not give answers to the content of those three phone calls. But unofficially sources inside the company report that, indeed, communications were handled that night with Schettino. The Captain indeed admitted to having "a serious problem on board," but, according to our sources, minimized it, saying it was under control. It is a fact – corroborated by two officers on the bridge - the third and final phone call with Ferrarini, before evacuating the ship, ended with the words of the Captain. Distraught. "My career ends here. I am fired."

 

ON CELLPHONE WITH PALOMBO

Ferrarini is not the only one with whom Schettino spent this crucial hour on the phone. There was also the retired Captain Terence Mario Palombo, the man who, for four years, was Schettino’s commander on the "Serena", the sister ship of the "Concordia". The recipient of the island “salute”. Questioned by investigators, Palombo confirmed that he had spoken that night with Schettino. He called Schettino, after being warned by the mayor of Giglio that the Concordia was in trouble. Indeed? Other intelligence sources, explain that in fact, "Schettino was already on the phone with Palombo at the moment of impact with the rocks." In a sort of "direct mail" of his gamble (the Court has asked for printouts of the Captain’s cellphone). Palombo, after speaking with Schettino, contacted Costa Crociere, as confirmed by the company: "Indeed, Palombo, who is a highly respected Captain, with a long career in Costa, appears to have contacted Gianni Onorato, Director-General. By then the Company was already aware of the emergency. "

 

IN THE BELLY OF THE FLOODED SHIP

Let us imagine the scene, between 21:42 and 22:58. Schettino stunned on the bridge and glued to the phone. Passengers with life-jackets on, awaiting orders. The picture becomes dramatic, in the words of Giovanni Iaccarino, First Officer. "At 21:42, after the impact the captain orders me – verbally - to go down in the engine room. I ran down and the scene was terrifying. Everything flooded. I was literally up to my neck in water. Engine compartment flooded. Generators flooded. Electrical control console flooded." Via intercom Iaccarino shouts to the Bridge what he sees. "Flooded engine compartment", "Flooded Generators." On the Bridge, they shout out aloud what they hear. Pumps dead, engines stopped. Everyone is waiting for the obvious answer: Evacuate. Also because, on the ship, only one source of energy now works. A small " Isotta Franschini " diesel generator. The "Donald Duck", as the emergency generator on the top deck of the "Concordia" is nicknamed , which can only supply the emergency lighting on board. Iaccarino yells into the intercom what he sees every ten minutes. But there is no answer. Schettino is on the phone.

 

THE ORDER TO LOWER LIFEBOATS

At about 22.30, on the Bridge, it is clear that waiting for a response from the Captain is useless. Backing Schettino was only Dimitri Christidis, the Greek senior officer (who was later discovered with Schettino in the lifeboat taking them to safety in the night). Other officers discuss whether to pass command of the ship to Roberto Bosio, the second in command, a Ligurian with whom Schettino was known to have had deep distrust and maritime rivalry. Bosio was all for immediate evacuation and, in fact, began operations even without the official order. Bosio must not have been too wrong if it is true that, according to Di Lena, "For the first forty minutes from the impact, the ship was drifting. We could easily have dropped the lifeboats, with passengers loaded, on both sides. We could have all arrived on land without even getting our feet wet. "

 

THE FOLLY OF MARSEILLE

Concordia is sinking and for the first time its officers have the guts to rebel against their Captain. They didn’t have the same guts on December 17 last year when - another shocking truth that emerges from the statements - Schettino jeopardizes the ship for first time, laden with passengers. That day, the Concordia was docked in the port of Marseilles. The wind blew between 50 and 60 knots. A storm. According to Deck Officer Martino Pellegrini: "He gathered us on the wharf and informed us that we would go out anyway, despite the wind. There was a chilling silence. We looked between us, but we did not have the strength to speak. Then, he ordered us to inspect the bumpers of the dock, making sure that they held. " That day, in fact, the maneuver was reckless. The "Concordia" left the dock with the "engines full steam ahead" off those bumpers by bouncing off them, like a spring.

 

THE “DARE” OF GIGLIO

Marseille on the 17th , Giglio on the 13th. It seems like a diabolical witches brew. But perhaps – according to the testimony of those questioned – it was a terrible “seaman’s dare”. Schettino wanted to prove to himself and to the other officers of Costa how great he was. On the night of the 13th - as confirmed by the onboard cartographic records – he ordered the navigation officer to to plot a new course to approach Giglio. Into the autopilot electronic control system - says Pellegrino - the course was entered "278 ° north-west" to pass 0.5 miles from land (900 meters). But when the "Concordia" saw the lights of Giglio, Schettino took the helm. "Switch to manual" he ordered. "I take control (Commando io)." And this dare of a “fly-by” salute became a game of Russian roulette.

[Globetotter]

What happened to the old saying that the Captain goes down with the ship?

 

Not before all others are off the ship, or most, or some, or first off.

 

Stay on the ship. If it sinks, you go with it.

 

If you don't like those guidelines...

 

A. Don't be a Captain!!!

 

or

 

B. Don't sink the ship!!!

 

I TOTALLY agree!!!!

[BalconyBumz]

Okay, so what if he would have stayed on the ship and helped? Would the outcome of his penalty be any different for him if he is found to have caused this in the first place? I highly doubt it, and people would just be on a rampage about something else regarding him and the situation.

[moniquet]

Jeeezuz! How crazy is this thread, everyone want to try to put their own slant on it. Loads of internet experts (so they say:rolleyes:) Many assumptions, it is troll city...beam me up:D

[Milaandra]

It matches with the black box data.

 

Have they released the black box data? Where did you find that?

 

I'm so surprised...I didn't think they would release that information until the trial (or an official release of the captain, but it seems more likely he'll be tried).