Concordia News: Please Post Here

[Uniall]

http://abcnews.go.com/International/captain-coward-costa-concordia-shipwreck-prove/story?id=17740221

 

11/16/12

 

'Captain Coward' Vows to Clear His Name in Costa Concordia

 

 

 

Of course he's going to say that. It's the only way he can sleep at night. Also encourages people to buy his book by making claims that there is more to be learned.

 

Look we all know the ship had a few issues and was in need of some repair. I expect him to elaborate on what was wrong with it. The point is, he took the ship off its course. Had the ship stayed its scheduled course, we would not be having this discussion.

 

I noticed now he claims his "little dingy" was taking on water so he had to be on land to direct the operations. The man is nothing but inconsistant.

 

 

Double Ditto

[watertheodds]

Double Ditto

 

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. Just thought it was a "must see to believe".

[CruisersNC]

Of course he's going to say that. It's the only way he can sleep at night. Also encourages people to buy his book by making claims that there is more to be learned.

 

Look we all know the ship had a few issues and was in need of some repair. I expect him to elaborate on what was wrong with it. The point is, he took the ship off its course. Had the ship stayed its scheduled course, we would not be having this discussion.

 

I noticed now he claims his "little dingy" was taking on water so he had to be on land to direct the operations. The man is nothing but inconsistant.

 

I'm thinkin it just means that he had wet his pants! ;)

[CostaSmurfette]

Look we all know the ship had a few issues and was in need of some repair. I expect him to elaborate on what was wrong with it. The point is, he took the ship off its course. Had the ship stayed its scheduled course, we would not be having this discussion.

 

 

The ship had serious issues that people are apathetic towards....just how safe is the cruise ship that YOU will be stepping aboard next?

 

It's all very well focussing on the human element....Carnival Corp handed that to you on a silver platter cos it SUITED them to do so...steering you away from the ship issues (both her design and the vitally important equipment that failed prior to that night that was due to be dealt with in Savona and during the next cruise).

 

Carnival Corp, Royal Caribbean Group and all the rest of the cruise industry WANT people to focus on the human element cos they know full well that ANY design or equipment failures will inevitably lead to changes and those changes will be forced retrofitted onto their existing fleets and incorporated into every newbuild and that costs MONEY!

 

The cruise industry is the same as any other industry, it revolves around MONEY...the more they can get their mitts on, the better for them...the last thing any of the cruise lines want to do is be forced into spending money putting right design flaws and upgrading their equipment.

 

For decades ships have been growing in size and complexity but their basic equipment has largely not grown with them....instead of growing the ship plus the equipment and thus inbuilding more redundancy into the systems they have squeezed every last drop out of the same technology time and time again.

 

Think of it as a rubber band...stretch it, keep stretching it and eventually it will snap. In many ways Concordia was the cruise industry's 9/11...they did not think a ship of her size would or could ever founder, just as those agencies who took care of US security never thought anyone would or could fly aircraft into buildings.

 

New policies were announced within the last week...basic common sense policies that til Concordia had been ignored...

 

Fasten down heavy objects like piano's so that they do not turn into lethal weapons rolling across the lounges when a ship lists over too far.

 

Improve bridge resource management so that bridge crews who routinely swap tween different designs of ship in the same fleet are 100% au fait with those ships.

 

Have larger lifejacket lockers at the muster stations to enable passengers to get them without having to return to their cabins as per the original SOLAS instructions required.

 

These changes are being brought in voluntarily, they will be presented to the IMO and hopefully ratified along with the rest of the passenger ship safety recommendations in May 2013.

 

Bottom line is that no changes EVER come about until there are sufficient numbers of bodybags. Concordia snapped the cruise industry into life and out of their complacent little cocoon and she did it is a tragic and wholly preventable way...not just by the human element involved but by the very design and technology used.

[Uniall]

Aha, talk about a "Eureka" moment. I finally get it. The Captain is not a coward, he is a Hero and his erstwhile mistress is not a feme fatale, she's a Florence Nightingale. :rolleyes:

 

Why if it weren't for their tryst, their tete tete over dinner waiting for the last pour of port, and his ordering the ship on a dangerous course at a dangerous speed, we would never have had a tradgedy which became the cause celebre' for greater maritime safety regulations. :eek:

 

All Hail the Conquering Hero: Captain Coward ! :p

Edited November 18, 2012 by Uniall

[MDSue]

Smurfette, You are heavily defensive of the captain and have brought up some valid points about deficencies in the bridge management, but I have read every single article that has been published about this event, and haven't read one fact that points to a ship problem causing the sinking of this ship.

 

It seems obvious to me that the captain unintentionally steered it directly into the path of the rocks.

 

It seems to me he was repeatedly recorded lying to the Coast Guard about the severity of the issue.

 

It seems to me that he was informed early on that three sections of the ship had been breached and that the ship was unable to stay afloat at that point.

 

I'm sure the captain will plead his case durng his trial and if there is any evidence that exonerates him from responsibility for the sinking of the Concordia and the complete failure to give orders to abandon ship in a timely manner, then we will learn the whole truth then.

 

But for now, I have to believe that as captain of the ship, Schettino made a grievous error in judgment that directly led to the sinking of the ship.

 

That said, I hope he gets a fair trial and the whole story will come out. I'd love to know what he and the Concordia officials were discussing over the phone directly after the rocks were hit.

Edited November 19, 2012 by MDSue

[CostaSmurfette]

Smurfette, You are heavily defensive of the captain and have brought up some valid points about deficencies in the bridge management, but I have read every single article that has been published about this event, and haven't read one fact that points to a ship problem causing the sinking of this ship.

 

It seems obvious to me that the captain unintentionally steered it directly into the path of the rocks.

 

It seems to me he was repeatedly recorded lying to the Coast Guard about the severity of the issue.

 

It seems to me that he was informed early on that three sections of the ship had been breached and that the ship was unable to stay afloat at that point.

 

I'm sure the captain will plead his case durng his trial and if there is any evidence that exonerates him from responsibility for the sinking of the Concordia and the complete failure to give orders to abandon ship in a timely manner, then we will learn the whole truth then.

 

But for now, I have to believe that as captain of the ship, Schettino made a grievous error in judgment that directly led to the sinking of the ship.

 

That said, I hope he gets a fair trial and the whole story will come out. I'd love to know what he and the Concordia officials were discussing over the phone directly after the rocks were hit.

 

I have never exonerated Francesco Shettino, he DID make errors of judgement both on the bridge and during evacuation...

 

However...

 

Accidents do not have a singular causal factor, they happen due to a number of different causal factors that come together to create havoc.

 

All the focus was thrown purposely onto the human behind the controls within 24 hours of the accident...before anyone had a chance to take in what had occurred that night. The media acted, and still acts, in an abominable way by spreading innuendo and incorrect information (such as the water rushing down Carnival Sensation's stairs and alledging it to be Concordia).

 

Carnival Corp have first and final say, they afterall own Costa Crociere.

 

The reaction to blame the human element within that 24 hours was very well orchestrated to take away any doubt about the condition of the ship AND any potential design issues that may or may not have contributed to the accident and the deaths/injuries that occurred.

 

Any and all design flaws will be heavily scrutinised, just as the technological defects that were known about the ship in the weeks and months leading upto the accident that went unrepaired and the actions of the various port authorities that allowed the ship to sail with those technological defects in place.

 

The main reason for Carnival Corp distancing the focus from the ship is the massive cost involved in dealing with the design flaws and defects that are likely to have been repeated across its entire fleet of 100 ships...and the rest of the cruise corporations will also be watching the outcome since many ships across all lines have similar technology and design features to that found on Concordia.

 

One of the new changes announced last week about fastening down heavy items like piano's so that in rough weather or during a listing event they do not turn into missiles frankly is astounding since that rule was introduced to ferries back in 1987 after Herald of Free Enterprise capsized killing over 160 people. The fasten down heavy objects rule came in shortly thereafter and was meant to be for all passenger ships....though now it seems that the cruise industry decided that for reasons best known to themselves that the rule did not apply to them.

 

The full report into Concordia will take months, maybe years to extrapolate, there are so many different angles and causal factors to investigate.

 

Francesco Shettino and his bridge crew are just tiny pieces of a much larger jigsaw and its the larger and wider jigsaw pieces that will have the biggest impact on cruising...both in technology and training used on the ships and in their ultimate design and build. Any retrofitting demanded by the IMO in the wake of what is found that does affect existing ships and those in the process of being built will be passed to the customer by way of raised fares.

 

Tbh, I would rather pay a higher fare and know that the ship and crew are 100% fit for purpose than pay cheap fares and just live in the hope that everyone and everything works and knows what they are doing.

[Max49]

"The reaction to blame the human element within that 24 hours was very well orchestrated to take away any doubt about the condition of the ship AND any potential design issues that may or may not have contributed to the accident and the deaths/injuries that occurred.

 

On the contrare, If Carnival/ Costa was worried about the ship's condition possibly contributing to the disaster, they would have taken good care of Schettino to make sure

he did'nt bad mouth the company. Getting rid of him right away shows me they knew darn well he was responsible for the crash with his arrogant, bragadocio wreckless skills.

He's probably been warned before when he crashed it into the dock and taking off in storms and hot rodding into port.

And even if it had a few flaws, does that make it OK to take the ship and ram it into the rocks?

[gatour]

CostaSmurfette. You do realize that fire it what ultimately caused the WTC buildings to collapse?

 

Interesting how you are concentrating on the glass elevators, but are disregarding the other elevators on-board the ships. If any passengers were in those elevators they would have also been trapped with the exact same escape route, I.E. use the trapdoor exits.

 

Question, how many people were found dead in the glass elevators or as a result of a fall from the glass elevators after exiting from the hatches?

 

Like I said before and you actually re-inforced in you posting, there was ample opportunity for improvement in crises managements and incremental changes in some of the safety features.

 

1. Capt should not have been sailing so close to shoreline. At this point Costa claims he did it on his volition and Costa had no knowledge. If the investigation shows otherwise in regards to Costa knowledge then they should also accept responsibility.

 

2. Capt panicked.

 

a. I could see waiting for about 15 minutes or so before ordering everyone to muster stations. The time interval would be used do damage assessment. But he waited until much longer before ordering to muster stations

 

b. Water containment doors. I can see why they would normally be open. Were they ever closed, if not, why not.

 

4. Deployment of lifeboats was problematic. I read reports that they had trouble lowering the lifeboats. From what I have read,they were supposed to be deployable even with a 20% ship list. In this case, I read they may been trying to deploy before the 20% point. If so why were there issues.

 

As you note, there have already have been changes. Instead of tar and feathering, I like how the NTSB handle investigation. Determine where the gaps are, and suggest/mandate changes.

 

 

 

Elevators on land are built within the strongest part of the building, often the core, where the structures around them are significantly stronger than the outside walls....a classic example of a core that failed was WTC...it took alot to force that core to fail but it showed that the core that encloses the elevators can and will collapse under certain conditions and in certain circumstances.....the designers and architects never imagined having to build into a core the ability to withstand two airliners cutting them in half, it just wasn't considered a possibility.

 

Likewise the use of glass elevators on a ship...the designers and architects had never anticipated a ship to flop over onto its side like Concordia did. The design of the glass elevator pods are identical to those that you can find on buildings but the difference being that a ship can and will drop over given the right set of circumstances. Just as the WTC collapse made architects have a sharp intake of breath when their tried and tested design failed, the same will no doubt have happened at Kone (who provide many of the glass elevators found on cruise ships across several cruise lines).

 

There is no way out of a glass pod elevator....yes, you have a hatch on the roof but once out there, where do you go when the top 5 decks are semi-enclosed in one huge shiny atrium and the lower 5 decks are wide open landings that are often almost the full width of the ship?

 

Eyewitness accounts from passengers escaping Concordia's atrium landings stated that at least three people were in the glass elevators when Concordia commenced her list and they could be heard screaming for help.

 

Those passengers in the elevator(s) would most likely have been in them before the power outtage...since there was no notice that the power was going to fail and the elevators are automatically dropped from the power grid in an emergency situation leading to emergency gensets kicking in.

 

Buildings are designed to stay upright, those built in earthquake zones are built with extra strength in the cores for emergency evacuation via stairs that run around the enclosed elevator shafts...it is basic construction 101. It is only when something like WTC's collapse comes along that all those well rehearsed and well thought out and previously safe design ideas get tossed off the drawingboard.

 

Ships move...they tip over...until Concordia's accident, none had tipped over to and beyond the point of no return...and that event showed that glass elevators have design flaws that could potentially cost lives. At this stage, no-one knows what happened to the three passengers seen and heard inside the glass elevator(s) that night...hopefully they were able to get out before the list became too acute.

[SomeBeach]

USCG and NTSB to join in investigation.

http://marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3228:uscg-and-ntsb-join-costa-concordia-investigation&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=195

[balf]

et

 

Have larger lifejacket lockers at the muster stations to enable passengers to get them without having to return to their cabins as per the original SOLAS instructions required.

 

d.

 

A child could have worked this one out, though it only applies to new builds (why) And why did it take Concordia to decide it wasn't really a good idea to allow boat drill to take place after sailing.

 

An intelligent brain walking round a ship doing basic risk assessment could potentially save lives in the future. Why is the cruise industry so far behind shore based industry?

 

David.

[Uniall]

There's one sure fire way to increase passenger safety on Costa Cruise Lines.

 

Appoint the Sicilian Mafia as the official "Italian Maritime Safety Administration."

 

Las Vegas, NV had the lowest crime rate when the Chicago "Oufit" ran the casinos. Trouble makers and criminals just disappeared in the desert ............ :p

Edited November 21, 2012 by Uniall

[CostaSmurfette]

A child could have worked this one out, though it only applies to new builds (why) And why did it take Concordia to decide it wasn't really a good idea to allow boat drill to take place after sailing.

 

An intelligent brain walking round a ship doing basic risk assessment could potentially save lives in the future. Why is the cruise industry so far behind shore based industry?

 

David.

 

David.....after the Herald of Free Enterprise capsized in Zeebrugge harbour in 1987 killing over 160 people and was blamed on poor crew interaction and not helped by the crewman who should have ensured that the bow doors were closed being asleep in his cabin....various measures were introduced that included the extra large lifejacket boxes with extra lifejackets at the muster stations, the locking down of all heavy objects such as piano's so that they did not go flying across a public area in stormy weather or in a listing event, they also required ships to refrain from using decorative glass partitions/doors within passenger/crew areas since they too can be lethal if someone falls through it, they also brought in stacks of other design changes and crew training changes....

 

BUT....

 

For some unknown reason the cruise lines decided that despite these new rules encompassing PASSENGER ships....almost none of it was ever introduced on cruise ships. The ferry companies, on the other hand, introduced all aspects immediately.

 

So one has to ask what the difference is tween a ferry and a cruise ship....?

 

Both carry passengers but only one complies with design and training rules formulated in 1987 after a similar capsize event to Concordia in 2012.....seems the cruise industry needs to catch up a tiny bit, eh?

 

And answer why the entire cruise industry did not adopt the rules that the ferry companies did when required to do so?

 

I spose that old enemy, COMPLACENCY, reared its ugly head once more, afterall Herald was a ferry...a cruise ship could NEVER capsize, could it?

Edited November 21, 2012 by CostaSmurfette

[CostaSmurfette]

There's one sure fire way to increase passenger safety on Costa Cruise Lines.

 

Appoint the Sicilian Mafia as the official "Italian Maritime Safety Administration."

 

Las Vegas, NV had the lowest crime rate when the Chicago "Oufit" ran the casinos. Trouble makers and criminals just disappeared in the desert ............ :p

 

Uniall....this is not just Costa Crociere...the lack of enforcement of adaptations and rules set out after Herald of Free Enterprise in 1987 is rampant across the ENTIRE cruise industry.

 

Concordia was the accident they all said would not happen, the cruise industry assumed that a cruise ship would never capsize for any reason...how compacent can one industry get?

 

Cruise ships have been living on borrowed time for decades...it was only a matter of time before one of the big ships foundered, it could have happened to ANY of the ships belonging to ANY of the cruise lines....it was bound to happen eventually, just a question of when and not if.

 

And it will happen again unless the entire cruise industry start pulling their corporate acts together and start complying with rules to the fullest of their requirements instead of just the bare minimum requirements.

 

Trouble is...compliance costs money and expenditure means higher fares....but like I already said, I would hazard a guess that most who cruise would prefer sailing on a 100% functioning ship, with a properly trained crew and with ALL safety recommendations in place if not bettered and pay a higher fare for that...rather than take a chance on what has been floating around the oceans since 1987 with scant regard to the rules imposed after 160+ died in shallow water in Zeebrugge harbour when their ferry capsized.

 

What would YOU rather do.....pay more and know that you are safe, or stay as it has been and take a chance?

[Uniall]

Uniall....this is not just Costa Crociere...the lack of enforcement of adaptations and rules set out after Herald of Free Enterprise in 1987 is rampant across the ENTIRE cruise industry.

 

Concordia was the accident they all said would not happen, the cruise industry assumed that a cruise ship would never capsize for any reason...how compacent can one industry get?

 

Cruise ships have been living on borrowed time for decades...it was only a matter of time before one of the big ships foundered, it could have happened to ANY of the ships belonging to ANY of the cruise lines....it was bound to happen eventually, just a question of when and not if.

 

And it will happen again unless the entire cruise industry start pulling their corporate acts together and start complying with rules to the fullest of their requirements instead of just the bare minimum requirements.

 

Trouble is...compliance costs money and expenditure means higher fares....but like I already said, I would hazard a guess that most who cruise would prefer sailing on a 100% functioning ship, with a properly trained crew and with ALL safety recommendations in place if not bettered and pay a higher fare for that...rather than take a chance on what has been floating around the oceans since 1987 with scant regard to the rules imposed after 160+ died in shallow water in Zeebrugge harbour when their ferry capsized.

 

What would YOU rather do.....pay more and know that you are safe, or stay as it has been and take a chance?

 

And that is exactly the wide divergence of opinion between you and me from the beginning. You insist on using "touchy feely", after the fact, intervening factors as the causes of the deaths. Whereas, my use of Aristollian/Thomistic logic proves the efficient causes of the deaths were the decisions of an arrogant egomaniacal Captain. Take him out of the equation and there would have been no collision and no need to abandon ship.

Edited November 21, 2012 by Uniall

[CostaSmurfette]

And that is exactly the wide divergence of opinion between you and me from the beginning. You insist that "after the fact" intervening factors are what caused the deaths. Whereas, my use of Aristollian/Thomistic logic proves the efficient cause of the deaths were the decisions of an arrogant egomaniacal Captain. Take him out of the equation and there would have been no collision and no need to abandon ship.

 

How can you be so certain about that though?

 

Did you behave in the same way when two died aboard Sea Diamond in 2007 when she hit rocks off Thira and sank?

 

I have never said that the captain on Concordia was an innocent party, is was not in any way innocent...HOWEVER...there are many other factors that were involved that night, such as the lack of a working depth sounder, an intermittant radar fault, poor bridge communication tween several officers and crew...ALL of which contributed to what happened.

 

That does not mean, however, that the cruise industry as a whole should be let off the hook. The industry has made errors, they have been complacent by not making sure that changes that were meant for every passenger ship afloat were implemented if not bettered.

 

I totally understand your desire to hang draw and quarter the captain...but by doing that, you should also question the industry as a whole as to why an industry allowed a ship to sail with defects, why the industry as a whole seems to have somewhat questionable crew training standards, why the industry as a whole appeared to think that 160+ lives lost through basic negligence and lack of care in a ferry capsize and the changes thereafter DID NOT apply to them too.

 

Yes, the captain made mistakes but he should not be the only defendent in the dock...the cruise industry should also be held responsible for the failings of that night....that accident was the culmination of decades of make do and mend, the use of minimum standards instead of taking standards to the maximum and it was an inevitable event...and as always, its the innocents who pay the ultimate price of a company/organisation/industry complacency.

 

This was an accident waiting to happen...lessons were not learned after Herald of Free Enterprise and the crew deficiencies that killed 160+ people....now maybe, hopefully...the cruise industry will catch up with the ferry industry and act as a whole in a more responsible manner towards its customers and its crews and provide them with the tools and training that they require UNDER LAW to run a business properly and safely.

 

If they don't.....well...we will have another cruise ship foundering and next time the figures could be a whole lot worse.

[Uniall]

How can you be so certain about that though?

 

Did you behave in the same way when two died aboard Sea Diamond in 2007 when she hit rocks off Thira and sank?

 

I have never said that the captain on Concordia was an innocent party, is was not in any way innocent...HOWEVER...there are many other factors that were involved that night, such as the lack of a working depth sounder, an intermittant radar fault, poor bridge communication tween several officers and crew...ALL of which contributed to what happened.

 

That does not mean, however, that the cruise industry as a whole should be let off the hook. The industry has made errors, they have been complacent by not making sure that changes that were meant for every passenger ship afloat were implemented if not bettered.

 

I totally understand your desire to hang draw and quarter the captain...but by doing that, you should also question the industry as a whole as to why an industry allowed a ship to sail with defects, why the industry as a whole seems to have somewhat questionable crew training standards, why the industry as a whole appeared to think that 160+ lives lost through basic negligence and lack of care in a ferry capsize and the changes thereafter DID NOT apply to them too.

 

Yes, the captain made mistakes but he should not be the only defendent in the dock...the cruise industry should also be held responsible for the failings of that night....that accident was the culmination of decades of make do and mend, the use of minimum standards instead of taking standards to the maximum and it was an inevitable event...and as always, its the innocents who pay the ultimate price of a company/organisation/industry complacency.

 

This was an accident waiting to happen...lessons were not learned after Herald of Free Enterprise and the crew deficiencies that killed 160+ people....now maybe, hopefully...the cruise industry will catch up with the ferry industry and act as a whole in a more responsible manner towards its customers and its crews and provide them with the tools and training that they require UNDER LAW to run a business properly and safely.

 

If they don't.....well...we will have another cruise ship foundering and next time the figures could be a whole lot worse.

 

From the beginning your posts argued the Captain was not the cause of the disaster but it was caused by mechanical problems with the ship, or lack of crew safety training or inaction by junior officers, or ineffective safety procedures, and now lack of enough safety equipment.

 

You persist in denying the simple plain truth: Captain Coward caused the Costa Concordia disaster.

 

I've tried hundreds and hundreds of law suits and know the defense technique of throwing all sorts of garbage (insert euphamism) on the wall, hoping some of it sticks, in order to get the defendant off with a not guilty. I pointed out that fallacious reasoning then and I'm doing it now.

[CostaSmurfette]

Uniall...we really are not so different in what we want to see come out of all this mess.

 

All that is important at this stage is that the truth be found, any and all parties involved (regardless as to how big a part they played) admit and accept responsibility for what happened...and for the entire cruise industry - from the smallest to the biggest operators - all take whatever recommendations and rule changes are brought about as a result of the loss of Concordia and implement them, regardless of financial cost, and do their absolute damnedest to make sure that this never happens again...ever.

 

You cannot guaranatee that accidents will not happen in the future but you can make sure that you do everything possible to prevent it from happening again.

 

The ferry industry have come up in leaps and bounds since 1987....and until Concordia, the cruise industry had it relatively easy, they have existed without too many bodybags being needed.....now is their chance to bring about cruise ships and crews that are as safe as they can possibly be.

 

You say that I am "touchy feely" over this accident...well I have good reason to be.

 

In 1987 I was working as a driver, taking heavy goods vehicles to and from the UK and going to Budapest on a regular route. On March 6, 1987 I was on my way home, the traffic was awful and I arrived in Zeebrugge ferry port just as the ramps and ropes were sorted on the ferry I had been booked to catch, so I had to wait for the next one.

 

The ferry that I missed by minutes was Herald of Free Enterprise...within minutes of the ferry leaving port, she capsized killing over 160 people....2 of them were friends and coworkers of mine.

 

I should have been on that ferry but I wasn't...and I have been passionate about safety on ships ever since and I have always wondered why, when I boarded cruise ships owned by Cunard, P&O, Costa, Olsen, NCL why items like piano's were not attached to the deck, why the lockers containing lifejackets were so small at the muster stations...when after Herald, the ferries were required to make these small but important changes....

 

I have another friend, I shall be meeting her in Barcelona next month, she was due to join Concordia a few days prior to the accident as crew....by (mis)fortune, she missed embarkation due to a tummy bug....

 

This why I am so passionate about how these ships are designed, how they are built, how the crews are trained and how the cruise industry seems to have such a high opinion of itself that it doesn't think that rules that were brought in after Herald doe not apply to them.

 

So I apologise if my passion gets in the way of your bloodlust, Uniall....but to me, the bigger picture is a much more realistic and frightening image than the mistakes one just one man in a very big industry.

[Uniall]

Uniall...we really are not so different in what we want to see come out of all this mess.

 

All that is important at this stage is that the truth be found, any and all parties involved (regardless as to how big a part they played) admit and accept responsibility for what happened...and for the entire cruise industry - from the smallest to the biggest operators - all take whatever recommendations and rule changes are brought about as a result of the loss of Concordia and implement them, regardless of financial cost, and do their absolute damnedest to make sure that this never happens again...ever.

 

You cannot guaranatee that accidents will not happen in the future but you can make sure that you do everything possible to prevent it from happening again.

 

The ferry industry have come up in leaps and bounds since 1987....and until Concordia, the cruise industry had it relatively easy, they have existed without too many bodybags being needed.....now is their chance to bring about cruise ships and crews that are as safe as they can possibly be.

 

You say that I am "touchy feely" over this accident...well I have good reason to be.

 

In 1987 I was working as a driver, taking heavy goods vehicles to and from the UK and going to Budapest on a regular route. On March 6, 1987 I was on my way home, the traffic was awful and I arrived in Zeebrugge ferry port just as the ramps and ropes were sorted on the ferry I had been booked to catch, so I had to wait for the next one.

 

The ferry that I missed by minutes was Herald of Free Enterprise...within minutes of the ferry leaving port, she capsized killing over 160 people....2 of them were friends and coworkers of mine.

 

I should have been on that ferry but I wasn't...and I have been passionate about safety on ships ever since and I have always wondered why, when I boarded cruise ships owned by Cunard, P&O, Costa, Olsen, NCL why items like piano's were not attached to the deck, why the lockers containing lifejackets were so small at the muster stations...when after Herald, the ferries were required to make these small but important changes....

 

I have another friend, I shall be meeting her in Barcelona next month, she was due to join Concordia a few days prior to the accident as crew....by (mis)fortune, she missed embarkation due to a tummy bug....

 

This why I am so passionate about how these ships are designed, how they are built, how the crews are trained and how the cruise industry seems to have such a high opinion of itself that it doesn't think that rules that were brought in after Herald doe not apply to them.

 

So I apologise if my passion gets in the way of your bloodlust, Uniall....but to me, the bigger picture is a much more realistic and frightening image than the mistakes one just one man in a very big industry.

 

Your reasoning is very very sophist. But it belies the simple truth. Your hypothetical, fantasy, imaginary, creative, will of the whisp, etc. theories did NOT cause the Costa Concordia disaster. Captain Coward caused it.

[Ken711]

New overhead photo of the Costa Concordia salvage site.

 

[Max49]

I believe CS thinks one bad apple spoils the whole tree. Remember when Cruising was fun and laid back and relaxing?

Unfortunately because of Capt Schettino and the Concordia disaster we have now instituted new rules.

All passengers must be very strong swimmers and in good health, they must always wear a life jacket with an inflatable life jacket over it at all times. You must carry a min of 3 CO2 bottles to reinflate your life jacket and all passenger must carry their issued 100' of rope so they can lower them selves to the ocean in case the ship lists so much that life boats can not be lowered. It is recommended that all passengers bring their own inflatable raft, the life you save could be your own, but we will not enforce this suggestion at this time. Their will be no frills such as private cabins, or elevators, all must sleep on the floor near their muster stations. It's just too dangerous to let you roam the ship. Remember, when you look in the mirror, you are looking at the one person responsible for your safety. We hope you enjoy the new style cruising experience and you can thank Capt Schettino for getting these new safety rules instated.

[Max49]

A working or non working depth sounder does not come into play at all with the Concordia. A depth sounder tell how the deep the water is under the transducer, usually at the keel of the ship. It's handy when on gradually and evenly sloping and shallowing water . It's does'nt help when you broadside an underwater mountain of rocks.

If the Concordia had other safety defects and the the captain still decided to do a arrogant , braggadocio moonlight sail by, a good safety device to have on board would be a straight, or 'personal restraint" jacket and holding cell for the captain until they could get him the psycological counseling he must need.

I just don't understand why some people think the whole industry must be changed because of one person. All captains are chosen from the human race, but whoever recommended and/or decided that Schettino was qualified to be captain of a cruise should be held responsible also. Of course,once he was made captain, with liberal unions, just because he took off in a storm, he crashed into the dock, and was sanctioned for speeding into the port, of course that is not enough to demote him, heck,that'd be discrimination.

They say "3's a charm " and you're still surprised they got rid of him within 24hrs of smashing the Concordia? You are so naive. They should canned him long before he had another chance to risk more peoples lives

Edited November 22, 2012 by Max49

[balf]

I just don't understand why some people think the whole industry must be changed because of one person. /QUOTE]

 

Forget for the moment the captain. Of course he was the cause, as should be shown eventually when the Itallian legal system gets round to it, though it is likely others will be implicated as well. The fact is the ship capsized and people died. It may be amusing to mock safety changes but those unfortunates who died because they were sent to their cabins to "collect life jacket, put on a hat, warm clothing and collect any medicines they take" are not laughing are they.

 

Really you couldn't make it up, how much safer is it to have all life jackets stored at the muster points so people can go quickly to get off the ship if needed. Even this measure doesn't go far enough: the practice of assembling everyone together in a theatre rather than close to their boats is asking for trouble.

 

A cruise ship sailing on the ocean is sailing in a potentially hazardous environment, how long do you think you would survive swimming in the Atlantic in January? The shambles on the Concordia shows that getting thousands safely off a ship is nothing like the passengers boat drill.

 

The new measures are hardly "the whole industry being changed"and will not impact on passengers in any way. But as we all know ships don't ever capsize, so why bother.

 

David.

[CostaSmurfette]

I just don't understand why some people think the whole industry must be changed because of one person. /QUOTE]

 

Forget for the moment the captain. Of course he was the cause, as should be shown eventually when the Itallian legal system gets round to it, though it is likely others will be implicated as well. The fact is the ship capsized and people died. It may be amusing to mock safety changes but those unfortunates who died because they were sent to their cabins to "collect life jacket, put on a hat, warm clothing and collect any medicines they take" are not laughing are they.

 

Really you couldn't make it up, how much safer is it to have all life jackets stored at the muster points so people can go quickly to get off the ship if needed. Even this measure doesn't go far enough: the practice of assembling everyone together in a theatre rather than close to their boats is asking for trouble.

 

A cruise ship sailing on the ocean is sailing in a potentially hazardous environment, how long do you think you would survive swimming in the Atlantic in January? The shambles on the Concordia shows that getting thousands safely off a ship is nothing like the passengers boat drill.

 

The new measures are hardly "the whole industry being changed"and will not impact on passengers in any way. But as we all know ships don't ever capsize, so why bother.

 

David.

 

When you consider just how outdated the SOLAS rules are in regard to lifejacket storage and evacuation drills actually are....it is even more of a miracle that over 4000 people got off the ship that night.

 

These changes...and there are many of them being voluntarily introduced via the CLIA and ECC....will be formally ratified by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) in May 2013 but even then, it could take another 2 years for those changes to be written rules that all cruise lines will be mandated to comply with.

 

Two years is too long tween presentation, ratification and being made mandatory by law.

 

How many other cruise ships belonging to the huge number of operators will still be using the old rules and not even bothing to use the voluntarily produced rules by virtue of the fact that they are not affiliated with either the CLIA or ECC?

 

How many bodybags does it take for an industry to wake up and get their house in order...ans why does it take bodybags for an industry to even consider itself to be a risk to life?

 

These changes are standard, common sense changes...nothing remotely difficult or expensive...they should have been in place at the last SOLAS update in 2010, if not 1987 or even before that.

 

A full list of the 10 (so far) common sense but upto now ignored cos of the "it'll never happen to us" mindset can be found here....it makes interesting reading and may leave a few scratching heads as to why these things haven't been though of before now...

 

http://www.cruising.org/regulatory/clia-policy-common-elements-musters-and-emergency-instructions

 

http://www.cruising.org/index.php?q=regulatory/bridge-access-policy

 

http://www.cruising.org/index.php?q=regulatory/excess-lifejackets-policy

 

http://www.cruising.org/index.php?q=regulatory/bridge-procedures

 

http://www.cruising.org/regulatory/life-boat-loading-training-purposes-policy

 

http://www.cruising.org/index.php?q=regulatory/lifejacket-stowage

 

http://www.cruising.org/index.php?q=regulatory/cruise-industry-policies/passage-planning-policy

 

http://www.cruising.org/index.php?q=regulatory/cruise-industry-policies/passenger-muster-policy

 

http://www.cruising.org/regulatory/clia-policy-recording-nationality-passengers

 

http://www.cruising.org/index.php?q=regulatory/heavy-objects

 

So...to say that changes made after the event would not change the industry is incorrect. The above have all been taken on board by all cruise lines voluntarily. Although they are all to be presented to the IMO in May, sadly there is no guarantee that they will be accepted in part or completely.

 

A couple of the policies do indeed cover the bridge crew...so they are not left out of this equation.

 

It is frightening that cruise lines have not complied with these common sense policies before Concordia....but as has been said, industries tend not to do everything that they can to make their products and services as safe as possible until bodybags are required and then they play the innocent and/or complacent card.

 

Usually it works but not this time...this time the cruise industry has been caught out...this time there are past fatal accidents that can be shown to have set new levels of policy making which the cruise lines simply ignored.

[Max49]

Someone has to be in charge and be the captain of the ship. Schettino did not make one good decision that night. If he did'nt do the sail by, all would have been a fun vacation for every one. After hit the rocks, he was way too consumed with fear that he ruined his career to be concerned with the passengers. He just wanted to wake up and find that it was a bad dream. When told the passengers were scared and starting to panic he did'nt want to be bothered with trivial stuff and told his crew to tell them it's just a minor electrical problem and please go to bed. When he realized how bad he really screwed up and ship was actually going down his fear went from ruining his career to he needs to save his own life, he was not a qualified ship captain, a leader, certainly not a hero, he abandoned his job, his crew and his passengers without helping to keep the passengers reassured with an organized evacuation, he apparently did not assist a single person; but low and behold, his luck suddenly turned around 180 degrees and he fell into a lifeboat.

This whole situation would have been different if the they only had a competent, qualified captain.

So can they legislate new rules that no egotistical , arrogant, wreckless , selfish, cowardly in competent person can be captain of a ship? If not, I still think that if 2, maybe 3 jr. officers below captain grade agree that the captain is apparently unable to make good decisions they should have the power to relieve him of duty. I hope that we find out, but I would guess some of the junior officers were concerned about the captains actions but because of possible career consequences they were afraid to say too much. The captain should'nt be Lord on ship but it appears that he is.

They may have been with him before when he went on his daring sail bys and even if he missed a collision by an inch, which no one would know for sure, Schettino probably felt those skills were why he was captain and they were not.

Sure, maybe the industry could use a few extra safety standards but you can't legislate stupid. Schettino was criminally incompetent and Costa/ Carnival will be liable because they somewhat incompetent for allowing some one like that to be responsible for the ship, the crew and all the passengers.

Who ever was most responsible for promoting Schettino to captain is staying under the radar now and he should because his career should be over too.

So IMO they need to change the laws that no