Are Mega-Cruise-liners Safe?

[netgear2020]

The recent sinking and capsizing of the MS. Costa Concordia raises a question that all of the found cruise-lines must consider and answer. Are these enormous cruise-ships safe?[/B]

 

 

 

The cruise-lines have found that the Mega-ships are more profitable than the smaller (below 100,000 tons) cruise-ships. Because of this over the past several years all of the major cruise-lines have been designing ships which are increasing in both the size and the number of passengers that are on board. Princess launched the first 100,000+ boat which was followed by even bigger ships built by Carnival and RCL. These were, in turn, followed by RCL Mega-Liners of over 200,000 tons (Oasis of the Seas etc).

 

Older cruise boats like the original SS Queen Elizabeth and Mary, SS France and SS United States were built with deep hulls which would preclude them from docking at many of the Caribbean Islands but made them extremely stable. The newer cruise-ships are flat-bottomed, and they can sail in relatively shallow waters, making them more suitable for visiting the islands in the Caribbean. To increase passengers loads the shipbuilders are building them with hugh superstructures. Unfortunately this will upset/raise their centers of gravity and increase risk of these ships capsizing. It is like compared the stability of a sports car to an SUV.

 

When you factor in the increasing number of passengers which would have to be evacuated and at times the inexperience of the ships crews, the possibility of a major catastrophe should be considered.

 

What I expect is that we will begin to see new ship-builds being smaller in size with the boats carrying less passengers. The ratio of crew to passengers will be increase and their will be a new emphasis on ship safety. This may increase the price of a cruise, but would add to the safety of cruise experience.

stevenr597

[north29]

I'm not a Nautical engineer, or I did not sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but hopefully all your concerns were taken in consideration when the Mega ships were built. After the Freedoms[big high ship] encounter with 100 MPH winds that were unexpected and she only listed, if I remember 8 degrees, and then was hit with the same winds from the opposite directions and unable to turn into the wind, she performed well as far as stability from capsizing view point.

Yes, accidents both natural and human error, as in the case of the Costa liner can and most likely will occur again, no matter what size the ship. Strange natural weather or geological events on this planet may take place beyond control of mortal men putting anything/everything in harms way. Do I worry about it NO.

The cruise lines may very well build some new smaller ships in the future, to replace existing ships, and build exotic itineraries around them, for all the people who have done the western Caribbean 40 times, they would be popular, LOL, but as you said probably much more expensive.

[wl2cruise]

Yes they are safe. The ships are certified by SOLA's. The Costa accident was a human error by a showboating captain.

[dz9yvr]

I'm not sure that I would want to be part of an evacution on the Oasis or Allure. There are only a few muster stations and they are away for the lifeboats. For example the Studio B muster station. There are several hundred people in Studio B and only a couple of doors. It looks like a testboook situation for a stampede.

[happicruzer]

I believe there will be more crew training as a result of this accident (caused by human error according to the news).

 

However, I've been on board twice where fires occurred (once after docking and another at sea). One fire was in the laundry and the other in the kitchen. Both times the ships response was immediate and the crew and the passengers were kept informed.

 

I've also seen some of the practice sessions (held at sea or on turn-around days when we did a back-to-back). The crews took this training seriously.

 

The responsibility for passenger safety lies with the cruise lines and the crew - the passengers need to know where to go and what to do in case of emergency; however, when the captain leaves the ship before the passengers .....

 

Should we go back to wearing life vests to the safety drill - I sincerely hope not. I saw lots of accidents when folks dragged those vests causing tripping and falls by other passengers - despite the warnings not to remove the vests prior to returning to cabins.

 

You should, as a passenger, ensure you have a vest in your cabin and know how to put it on.

[Tyron]

I guess I'm somewhat confused. :confused: It has already been stated the cause of this unfortunate incident was due to "human error." Why do people want to continue to explore scenarios that are irrelevant.:rolleyes: The ship itself has been sailing week after week since it's debut without incident. The captain's error in judgement was the cause of the accident and not a design flaw or the ship itself.

[Dave85]

Yes.

[Langley Cruisers]

I guess I'm somewhat confused. :confused: It has already been stated the cause of this unfortunate incident was due to "human error." Why do people want to continue to explore scenarios that are irrelevant.:rolleyes: The ship itself has been sailing week after week since it's debut without incident.

 

Absolutely agree but I think in situations like this, people often play the "blame game". Even as it was reported, the media put a spin on it as expected. Stories followed about the safety of cruising, will we continue to cruise, etc. There is even a poll here started by one of the moderators about will we continue to cruise. I just find it all so bizarre.

 

OP, yes, the mega liners are safe. If you feel otherwise, please feel free not to cruise on them, but any ship of any size is susceptible to accidents/damage/sinking/name your unfortunate scenario here. :(

[Lancer1568]

What is safe? No ship (or plane or train or car or etc) is 100% safe from all accidents. People die in bed daily...do we quit sleeping? Captain navigating the ship into a rock that cuts a gouge through the hull and lets the sea in would cause a pretty serious accident regardless of the size of the ship.

[elvnga]

Cruising on these ships are safer than getting in and out of your garden tub at home. In fact, it safer to use the showers on the Oasis because there is not room to slip and fall over.

 

The only forms of transportation that are safer than commercial aircraft are elevators and escalators. But people are afraid of flying because of the perception of risk. People do not understand how airplanes fly and they don't have control. For the purposes of their fear, it does not matter that the control rests in the much safer hands of a highly trained professional. Most importantly, the horror of a plane crash is a great tragedy with many potential fatalities.

 

Cruising is much the same. Many people can not swim well or at all. They tend to be very afraid of cruising. The number of lives at stake is staggering. Moreover, the images of passengers ending up in the North Atlantic from the Titanic is one almost everyone who does or would cruise can easily bring to mind.

 

All of this leads to a misperception of the actual risk involved in cruising.

[tahqa]

The captains of the Oasis class ships have stated on record that the ships are "snappy" and want to return to their normal upright orientation as quickly as possible. This is a result of their flat bottom and their low center of gravity. Yes, their low center of gravity. Modern cruise ships use steel for the lower portions and aluminum for the uppers. Also, the diesel engines and fuel bunkers and other stores are all below the waterline. This helps to keep the center of gravity low.

 

The early ocean liners did not have deep V hulls to increase stability -- they had deep V hulls to increase their speed. Those ships were designed to cross the Atlantic Ocean quickly.

 

Modern cruise ships are designed for stability. I would suggest you not second guess the marine engineers.

[pspercy]

Older cruise boats like the original SS Queen Elizabeth and Mary, SS France and SS United States were built with deep hulls

 

Actually these were built specifically for the north atlantic "bus route" before aviation took over, they ran a scheduled service in fair weather or foul. The SS United States was IIRC the last holder of the coveted "Blue Riband" for the fastest crossing.

[travelin_nat]

I'm not a Nautical engineer, or I did not sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but hopefully all your concerns were taken in consideration when the Mega ships were built. After the Freedoms[big high ship] encounter with 100 MPH winds that were unexpected and she only listed, if I remember 8 degrees, and then was hit with the same winds from the opposite directions and unable to turn into the wind, she performed well as far as stability from capsizing view point.

Yes, accidents both natural and human error, as in the case of the Costa liner can and most likely will occur again, no matter what size the ship. Strange natural weather or geological events on this planet may take place beyond control of mortal men putting anything/everything in harms way. Do I worry about it NO.

The cruise lines may very well build some new smaller ships in the future, to replace existing ships, and build exotic itineraries around them, for all the people who have done the western Caribbean 40 times, they would be popular, LOL, but as you said probably much more expensive.

 

We were on that sailing - what a wild ride! Last I heard it was 120 knot winds with 12 degree list. I agree with what others have said - there is risk in everything you do, and definitely risk in every mode of transportation. I feel more vulnerable with the drivers in San Antonio than I did on a ship, or in a plane, or......

[kruzerci]

Yes

[Cupcrazy]

I guess I'm somewhat confused. :confused: It has already been stated the cause of this unfortunate incident was due to "human error." Why do people want to continue to explore scenarios that are irrelevant.:rolleyes: The ship itself has been sailing week after week since it's debut without incident. The captain's error in judgement was the cause of the accident and not a design flaw or the ship itself.

 

I agree with you 100%. These ships are safe. End of discussion

[LittleMissMagic]

Big ship or small ship - if you rip a massive hole in the bottom, it's going to start taking on water.

[CoachT]

Not in an emergency they aren't. Human nature being what it is. There will be other incidents and possibly mass casualties. It is arrogant to think not.

[LittleMissMagic]

Not in an emergency they aren't. Human nature being what it is. There will be other incidents and possibly mass casualties. It is arrogant to think not.

 

Arrogant means cocky... haughty... someone who is arrogant believes they have superior importance or rights.

 

I think you intended to say ignorant, which means that one lacks knowledge or information.

 

 

Even so, it doesn't matter the size of the ship, if a ship is sinking or on fire or during any other emergency, I agree - it's not safe. However, I do not believe that mega ships are more prone to accidents than smaller ships.

[NYCRUISR]

I'm not sure that I would want to be part of an evacution on the Oasis or Allure. There are only a few muster stations and they are away for the lifeboats. For example the Studio B muster station. There are several hundred people in Studio B and only a couple of doors. It looks like a testboook situation for a stampede.

 

 

I agree that the way they do the muster is not in my opinion the safest or correct way to do the drill. In case of a real emergency too many people would be blindly looking for someplace they never saw before. Many would run with the mob..... and not where they need to be. I wonder if this recent tragedy will change the Oasis /Allure safety procedures.

[Iluvcruising2]

Definitely safe!

 

As long as you have a competent Captain and crew.

[DarthGrady]

Cruise ships are much "safer" than the car you drive to the airport or cruise terminal in.

 

Here in my county we have had two traffic fatalities already in 2012. A while back we had 120 in one year (in a county of 300,000 people). Those are sorry odds. I'll take my chances on a cruise ship any day.

[bus man]

Statistically speaking, passenger ships are very, very safe. But the only ship that can't be sunk is the one sitting on dry land.

 

I feel that neither paranoia nor complacency is helpful. I will sail on cruise ships without hesitation, fully expecting safe passage -- but I will take what I believe are sensible precautions (attending the muster drill, learning the way to the lifeboats, etc.), "just in case."

[Disneycrazymom]

I agree they are safe and I believe RCCL has a very professional staff however I have been thinking about the number of people on the Oasis/Allure that would need to get off the ship. In the case of the ship this weekend I have read they took people to the island and then returned in the operating life boats to take the rest of the passengers and crew. So that makes me think with some life boats unuseable there were actually not enough. Now it worked out fine (and good thinking/bravery on the part of the crew to return) but in a situation with no land would this have been even worse? I a situation where you have 6000 people instead of 4000 and you have damaged or inoperable life boats there is potential for more panic and more people hurt. I sailed on the Allure in Nov and have the Oasis booked for 2013 and I most likely won't change my plans but it has been bothering me.

[Iluvcruising2]

I agree they are safe and I believe RCCL has a very professional staff however I have been thinking about the number of people on the Oasis/Allure that would need to get off the ship. In the case of the ship this weekend I have read they took people to the island and then returned in the operating life boats to take the rest of the passengers and crew. So that makes me think with some life boats unuseable there were actually not enough. Now it worked out fine (and good thinking/bravery on the part of the crew to return) but in a situation with no land would this have been even worse? I a situation where you have 6000 people instead of 4000 and you have damaged or inoperable life boats there is potential for more panic and more people hurt. I sailed on the Allure in Nov and have the Oasis booked for 2013 and I most likely won't change my plans but it has been bothering me.

 

Look at it this way. There are definitely more than enough lifeboats for all passengers.

 

Problem is whether the passengers can get onboard and whether the lifeboats can be safely launched.

 

Say a massive disaster occurs and within minutes the ship sinks. No time to get to the lifeboats let alone launch the lifeboats.

[Tyron]

I guess people don't realize ships have run aground long before this accident and ship size has nothing to do with anything.

 

Monarch of the Seas (73,000 tons) In 1998 strikes charted reef at St. Maarten – holed. 27,000 sq feet of coral reef damaged. Out for four months.

the former Radisson Diamond (20,000 tons) In 1999 Grounded near Stockholm – Refloated

 

Norwegian Sky (77,000 tons) In 1999 Grounded in St. Lawrence – Out for 8 weeks

the former NCL Leeward - In 1997 Collides with Great Mayan Reef near Cancun – damages 460 sq yard swath of coral

the former NCL Starward - In 1994 Grounded on St. John, VI – oil spill of 100 gallons

 

Carnival Celebration - (48,000 tons) In 2006 One of the ship's propellers struck bottom while approaching the dock at Nassau spilling an estimated 200 liters of lubricating oil and affecting the operation of the engine. The Nassau call was cancelled and the ship is en route back to its homeport, Jacksonville