Concordia News: Please Post Here

[papcx]

 

Please quote me correctly: "No humans have ever been in space"! I laugh all the time at people believing otherwise.

 

 

 

Have you got a website about this as well?

[Ken711]

 

Please quote me correctly: "No humans have ever been in space"! I laugh all the time at people believing otherwise.

And that a Master of a cruise ship looks after everything incl. cleaning the toilets of all cabins. And that the shipowner is responsible of nothing.

 

 

That's even more hilarious! :D:D:D:D You need to seek help....fast!:eek:

[Heiwaco]

Have you got a website about this as well?

 

Yes, I write about cruise ships and space ships and associated safety matters. Landing a space ship is not possible. Just read the Warning introduction of my web page about the Costa Concordia re-cycling.

 

The poor Costa Concordia Master didn't kill anybody on the ship or didn't sink the ship himself, when he was fooling around with the Moldovan dancer on the night January 13, 2012.

 

The ship sank January 14 due to progressive flooding through open, illegal watertight doors and then people still aboard drowned. Abandon ship was not complete as there was not sufficient crew aboard to launch all lifesaving appliances. Cruise ship safety at sea is very poor because the shipowner ashore is not responsible for anything aboard.:eek:

[papcx]

Right. Yeah. I'll check your websites out.

 

I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next man.

[Uniall]

"Beam the Concordia Up, Scotty"

[Ken711]

Yes, I write about cruise ships and space ships and associated safety matters. Landing a space ship is not possible. Just read the Warning introduction of my web page about the Costa Concordia re-cycling.

 

The poor Costa Concordia Master didn't kill anybody on the ship or didn't sink the ship himself, when he was fooling around with the Moldovan dancer on the night January 13, 2012.

 

The ship sank January 14 due to progressive flooding through open, illegal watertight doors and then people still aboard drowned. Abandon ship was not complete as there was not sufficient crew aboard to launch all lifesaving appliances. Cruise ship safety at sea is very poor because the shipowner ashore is not responsible for anything aboard.:eek:

 

BTW, the earth is round. :D

[chengkp75]

Yes, I write about cruise ships and space ships and associated safety matters. Landing a space ship is not possible. Just read the Warning introduction of my web page about the Costa Concordia re-cycling.

 

The poor Costa Concordia Master didn't kill anybody on the ship or didn't sink the ship himself, when he was fooling around with the Moldovan dancer on the night January 13, 2012.

 

The ship sank January 14 due to progressive flooding through open, illegal watertight doors and then people still aboard drowned. Abandon ship was not complete as there was not sufficient crew aboard to launch all lifesaving appliances. Cruise ship safety at sea is very poor because the shipowner ashore is not responsible for anything aboard.:eek:

 

God, I hate to feed this troll, but I just can't let this insanity go unanswered.

 

First off, a very, very simple root cause analysis of the Concordia sinking shows that if Schettino had not made the deviation from course, the ship would not have struck the rock and started the whole chain. Therefore, his actions are the root cause of the incident, and therefore, he as a licensed Master is responsible.

 

Get your facts straight. The breach in the hull breached 5 watertight compartments. No ship afloat is designed to be a 5 compartment ship. Cruise ships are generally two compartment ships. The only progressive flooding came when the drag of the 5 flooding compartments took the subdivision bulkhead down enough that a 6th compartment downflooded, not through a W/T door. Schettino's own voice can be heard on the bridge cell phone recording acknowledging that if even 3 compartments were flooding the ship would sink.

 

23 of 26 lifeboats were successfully launched. If 1000+ crew are not sufficient to launch all lifesaving equipment, how many are needed? While few liferafts were launched, they were not needed as the ship was close enough to shore to ferry survivors using the returning boats, and other rescue assets. And the reason the abandonment was so delayed, and so chaotic is that Schettino failed to call for passenger muster and preparing the boats early enough.

 

As to no one else being responsible, both the hotel director and the designated person ashore were convicted of crimes.

 

You must be a close personal friend of Schettino, to still believe his BS. But then, I'm basing my statements on the Italian government's report of the incident, and since it is from a government, by your definition it is a cover-up.

Edited January 12, 2016 by chengkp75

[luisrp]

Is there a way to stop this insanity?

[papcx]

Is there a way to stop this insanity?

 

 

Tinfoil hat?

[KandCsailing]

Tinfoil hat?

I like to wear mine matt side out. I find it classier than the shiny foil side.

Edited January 12, 2016 by KandCsailing

[papcx]

I like to wear mine matt side out. I find it classier than the shiny foil side.

 

 

You know, there's an interesting (conspiracy) theory about people who wear their foil hat Matt side out. [emoji3]

[Heiwaco]

God, I hate to feed this troll, but I just can't let this insanity go unanswered.

 

First off, a very, very simple root cause analysis of the Concordia sinking shows that if Schettino had not made the deviation from course, the ship would not have struck the rock and started the whole chain. Therefore, his actions are the root cause of the incident, and therefore, he as a licensed Master is responsible.

 

Get your facts straight. The breach in the hull breached 5 watertight compartments. No ship afloat is designed to be a 5 compartment ship. Cruise ships are generally two compartment ships. The only progressive flooding came when the drag of the 5 flooding compartments took the subdivision bulkhead down enough that a 6th compartment downflooded, not through a W/T door. Schettino's own voice can be heard on the bridge cell phone recording acknowledging that if even 3 compartments were flooding the ship would sink.

 

23 of 26 lifeboats were successfully launched. If 1000+ crew are not sufficient to launch all lifesaving equipment, how many are needed? While few liferafts were launched, they were not needed as the ship was close enough to shore to ferry survivors using the returning boats, and other rescue assets. And the reason the abandonment was so delayed, and so chaotic is that Schettino failed to call for passenger muster and preparing the boats early enough.

 

As to no one else being responsible, both the hotel director and the designated person ashore were convicted of crimes.

 

You must be a close personal friend of Schettino, to still believe his BS. But then, I'm basing my statements on the Italian government's report of the incident, and since it is from a government, by your definition it is a cover-up.

 

Sorry, you are wrong on all points.

 

The leg Portovecchio/Savona (two Italian ports) included a planned turn outside Isola del Giglio - all calculated by the 2/O in charge of navigation. It was company policy to show off like that.

 

Only four compartments were partly breached as the double bottom was intact and the vessel survived the up-flooding of the four compartments. Damage stability calculations confirm this. The Master was happy. It was possible to tow the ship to a port for repairs after the passengers had disembarked.

 

All lifeboats were not lowered to the embarkation deck, when the General Alarm was raised, to be ready for Abandon Ship. And no life rafts were launched in an orderly fashion. And the mustering of passengers was a fiasco. It seems trained crew were lacking to evacuate the ship.

 

Schettino's own #1 starboard lifeboat was launched before he could join it. It should have been the last to be launched.

 

There are three Italian reports about the incidents. None fulfills the IMO standards how to investigate incidents at sea.

 

Nobody died on the ship on 13 January 2012, when the vessel accidentally contacted a submerged rock. Ship's doctors, nurses and officers will confirm it.

 

The ship sank and people drowned on 14 January after the ship had capsized due to progressive flooding through illegal watertight doors kept open.

 

The ship was not seaworthy and unsafe at departure and insurances were not valid. Poor Schettino should have refused to sail and should have stayed in port until all defects were cleared. But safety at sea was of little interest to the shipowner ashore. That's how accidents happen.

[Uniall]

Ha Ha Ha .............

 

Welcome to Cruise Critic Comedy Central.

 

I haven't had such a good time since we discussed Captain Schittino and his Moravian lap dancer.

 

The Captain and his supporters are gifts that just keeps on giving.

 

Ha ha Ha ..................

 

PS

Don't forget Genoa, Italy is only 500 miles from Carcasonne, France.

Carcasonne was the headquarters of the Cathar Heresy, the secrets of the Knights Templar, and the Illuminatti.

Be very careful, they are watching this thread.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Uniall

[KandCsailing]

Maybe Dan Brown's next book could be on the Costa Concordia?

[chengkp75]

Sorry, you are wrong on all points.

 

The leg Portovecchio/Savona (two Italian ports) included a planned turn outside Isola del Giglio - all calculated by the 2/O in charge of navigation. It was company policy to show off like that.

 

Only four compartments were partly breached as the double bottom was intact and the vessel survived the up-flooding of the four compartments. Damage stability calculations confirm this. The Master was happy. It was possible to tow the ship to a port for repairs after the passengers had disembarked.

 

All lifeboats were not lowered to the embarkation deck, when the General Alarm was raised, to be ready for Abandon Ship. And no life rafts were launched in an orderly fashion. And the mustering of passengers was a fiasco. It seems trained crew were lacking to evacuate the ship.

 

Schettino's own #1 starboard lifeboat was launched before he could join it. It should have been the last to be launched.

 

There are three Italian reports about the incidents. None fulfills the IMO standards how to investigate incidents at sea.

 

Nobody died on the ship on 13 January 2012, when the vessel accidentally contacted a submerged rock. Ship's doctors, nurses and officers will confirm it.

 

The ship sank and people drowned on 14 January after the ship had capsized due to progressive flooding through illegal watertight doors kept open.

 

The ship was not seaworthy and unsafe at departure and insurances were not valid. Poor Schettino should have refused to sail and should have stayed in port until all defects were cleared. But safety at sea was of little interest to the shipowner ashore. That's how accidents happen.

 

I won't even touch most of this, but I would be interested to see a link to damage stability calculations that show the Concordia to be a 4 compartment ship (i.e. able to withstand flooding of 4 adjacent compartments, even if the W/T doors were closed). Besides, who sets the policy on whether or not W/T doors will remain open if not the Captain?

[chengkp75]

Oh, heck, I'll ask the obvious.

 

1. Regardless of whether or not it was "company policy" to pass close ashore, or whether or not the navigating officer plotted the course, it was still the Master's responsibility to ensure the maneuver was safe, and he even took the conn, giving him even more responsibility.

 

2. Schettino did not sound the "general alarm" until 50 minutes after the ship struck the rock. It is not until the general alarm sounds that crew assigned to lower the boats go to their stations, and lower the boats. If Schettino was worried, why not make an announcement to have the boat crews report early? Two minutes after sounding the general alarm, Schettino makes the decision to abandon ship, and announces to the passengers to go to their muster stations. They should have been there for the last hour. Within 15 minutes of Schettino's decision to abandon ship, and 15 minutes after the boat crews were ordered to the boats, Schettino ordered 4 boats launched (only 4), and within 5 minutes after that, boats were launching. And Schettino was unable to announce the abandon ship himself, the Staff Captain had to do it.

 

3. Anyone who knows ships knows that the passengers are to evacuate first, taking to the boats, and then the crew moves from their emergency stations to their raft stations and loading and launching rafts commences.

 

4. Who says the W/T doors are "illegal"? If that is the case, then there are a lot of ships out there operating "illegally", and every maritime agency in the world is working in complicity to ignore this. Can you link an IMO or even a class requirement that makes these doors illegal?

 

5. Please provide a link that shows the vessel's insurance was "not valid", or any regulatory body that has stated the Concordia was "not seaworthy".

 

6. And finally, please supply the source of your allegation that "none of the official reports meets IMO requirements".

 

Until I see links to this data, I'm done with you.

Edited January 13, 2016 by chengkp75

[Heiwaco]

Oh, heck, I'll ask the obvious.

 

1. Regardless of whether or not it was "company policy" to pass close ashore, or whether or not the navigating officer plotted the course, it was still the Master's responsibility to ensure the maneuver was safe, and he even took the conn, giving him even more responsibility.

 

2. Schettino did not sound the "general alarm" until 50 minutes after the ship struck the rock. It is not until the general alarm sounds that crew assigned to lower the boats go to their stations, and lower the boats. If Schettino was worried, why not make an announcement to have the boat crews report early? Two minutes after sounding the general alarm, Schettino makes the decision to abandon ship, and announces to the passengers to go to their muster stations. They should have been there for the last hour. Within 15 minutes of Schettino's decision to abandon ship, and 15 minutes after the boat crews were ordered to the boats, Schettino ordered 4 boats launched (only 4), and within 5 minutes after that, boats were launching. And Schettino was unable to announce the abandon ship himself, the Staff Captain had to do it.

 

3. Anyone who knows ships knows that the passengers are to evacuate first, taking to the boats, and then the crew moves from their emergency stations to their raft stations and loading and launching rafts commences.

 

4. Who says the W/T doors are "illegal"? If that is the case, then there are a lot of ships out there operating "illegally", and every maritime agency in the world is working in complicity to ignore this. Can you link an IMO or even a class requirement that makes these doors illegal?

 

5. Please provide a link that shows the vessel's insurance was "not valid", or any regulatory body that has stated the Concordia was "not seaworthy".

 

6. And finally, please supply the source of your allegation that "none of the official reports meets IMO requirements".

 

Until I see links to this data, I'm done with you.

 

1. It seems the turn was not executed as expected. We don't know why? The Master ordered the helmsman to turn the rudders but we don't know what he did. The Voyage Data Recorder was switched off. All very strange.

 

2. After reviews of the situation - ship was stable, etc. - the various alarms were raised but passengers had no idea how to muster.

 

3. The passengers shall muster at their muster stations and be counted, etc, and then be escorted by the responsible crew members to the life boat and counted again. Then the lifeboat is launched and the crew members report this to the Master. It was not done. There was no system to abandon ship.

 

4. I say so and SOLAS says so. Yes, plenty ships are operating illegaly. And nothing is done about it. I wonder why.

 

5. Just study the fine print of any marine insurance contract.

 

6. I have reviewed the three reports at my web site. The English of one of the reports is so bad you wonder who wrote it. None is acceptable.

 

Anyway, the Master has appealed his sentence but we do not know the reasons. Media do not report them. Media do not know anything about safety at sea.

[chengkp75]

1. It seems the turn was not executed as expected. We don't know why? The Master ordered the helmsman to turn the rudders but we don't know what he did. The Voyage Data Recorder was switched off. All very strange.

 

What's very strange is that the Italian Ministry of Transport report has data from the VDR and recordings from the voice recorder. Why don't you?

 

2. After reviews of the situation - ship was stable, etc. - the various alarms were raised but passengers had no idea how to muster.

 

Who says the ship was stable? Certainly not the Chief Engineer, who was there.

 

3. The passengers shall muster at their muster stations and be counted, etc, and then be escorted by the responsible crew members to the life boat and counted again. Then the lifeboat is launched and the crew members report this to the Master. It was not done. There was no system to abandon ship.

 

That's the problem. Until the "general alarm" is sounded, which was 50 minutes after the collision, the passengers do not go to their muster station, nor do crew go to their emergency stations. You obviously have never been on a ship.

 

4. I say so and SOLAS says so. Yes, plenty ships are operating illegaly. And nothing is done about it. I wonder why.

 

What section of SOLAS proscribes them? Very interested to see this section.

 

5. Just study the fine print of any marine insurance contract.

 

I guess this goes to your contention that the ship was "unseaworthy", what specifics do you have?

 

6. I have reviewed the three reports at my web site. The English of one of the reports is so bad you wonder who wrote it. None is acceptable.

 

So, to prove your argument, you refer back to your argument on your website. Can anyone say, "circular reasoning"? I'm asking for independent confirmation of your allegations.

 

Anyway, the Master has appealed his sentence but we do not know the reasons. Media do not report them. Media do not know anything about safety at sea.

 

What gets me, is that you make no mention of the fact that Schettino continued to call for helm orders when the ship had no power whatsoever, given that the main generators were offline, and the emergency generator tripped after 41 seconds. What idiot who has been to see for more than a year doesn't know you need power to turn the rudder. This isn't a sailboat with a tiller.

 

I'm done. Go visit your friend Schettino in jail, he needs a few friends.

[papcx]

I think we all need to take a minute here to collect our thoughts and more importantly

 

 

 

Give me time to make some Popcorn.

 

 

Okay done, continue.

[Mike.Minh]

God, I hate to feed this troll, ....

 

The question gotta to be asked: Why did you do it then? See what feeding did?

 

Never argue with a troll, first they drag you down to their level, then they beat you with experience. :D

Edited January 14, 2016 by Mike.Minh

[Heiwaco]

 

1. It seems the turn was not executed as expected. We don't know why? The Master ordered the helmsman to turn the rudders but we don't know what he did. The Voyage Data Recorder was switched off. All very strange.

 

What's very strange is that the Italian Ministry of Transport report has data from the VDR and recordings from the voice recorder. Why don't you?

 

2. After reviews of the situation - ship was stable, etc. - the various alarms were raised but passengers had no idea how to muster.

 

Who says the ship was stable? Certainly not the Chief Engineer, who was there.

 

3. The passengers shall muster at their muster stations and be counted, etc, and then be escorted by the responsible crew members to the life boat and counted again. Then the lifeboat is launched and the crew members report this to the Master. It was not done. There was no system to abandon ship.

 

That's the problem. Until the "general alarm" is sounded, which was 50 minutes after the collision, the passengers do not go to their muster station, nor do crew go to their emergency stations. You obviously have never been on a ship.

 

4. I say so and SOLAS says so. Yes, plenty ships are operating illegaly. And nothing is done about it. I wonder why.

 

What section of SOLAS proscribes them? Very interested to see this section.

 

5. Just study the fine print of any marine insurance contract.

 

I guess this goes to your contention that the ship was "unseaworthy", what specifics do you have?

 

6. I have reviewed the three reports at my web site. The English of one of the reports is so bad you wonder who wrote it. None is acceptable.

 

So, to prove your argument, you refer back to your argument on your website. Can anyone say, "circular reasoning"? I'm asking for independent confirmation of your allegations.

 

Anyway, the Master has appealed his sentence but we do not know the reasons. Media do not report them. Media do not know anything about safety at sea.

 

What gets me, is that you make no mention of the fact that Schettino continued to call for helm orders when the ship had no power whatsoever, given that the main generators were offline, and the emergency generator tripped after 41 seconds. What idiot who has been to see for more than a year doesn't know you need power to turn the rudder. This isn't a sailboat with a tiller.

 

I'm done. Go visit your friend Schettino in jail, he needs a few friends.

 

1. There are no Voyage Data Recordings available. Voice data is apparently available but they do not record if the rudders moved, etc.

 

2. Well, the ship was floating, upright and all aboard were alive. It seems the ship was stable.

 

3. I have been on ships since 1955 and know what happens there.

 

4. I explain the situation at http://heiwaco.com/news86.htm . Don't you know that the scandal has been discussed at the IMO since ... 1994?

 

5. According to basic insurance rules the ship must be seaworthy for insurances to be valid.

 

6. Study http://heiwaco.com/news810.htm ... and we can discuss.

 

Schettino is not in jail and has appealed his sentence. He is not guilty of anything until any judegment is final.

 

But it is not really my biz ... innocent people in jail. No, my biz is safety at sea so that accidents at sea can be avoided. Don't you like it?

[chengkp75]

1. There are no Voyage Data Recordings available. Voice data is apparently available but they do not record if the rudders moved, etc.

 

2. Well, the ship was floating, upright and all aboard were alive. It seems the ship was stable.

 

3. I have been on ships since 1955 and know what happens there.

 

4. I explain the situation at http://heiwaco.com/news86.htm . Don't you know that the scandal has been discussed at the IMO since ... 1994?

 

5. According to basic insurance rules the ship must be seaworthy for insurances to be valid.

 

6. Study http://heiwaco.com/news810.htm ... and we can discuss.

 

Schettino is not in jail and has appealed his sentence. He is not guilty of anything until any judegment is final.

 

But it is not really my biz ... innocent people in jail. No, my biz is safety at sea so that accidents at sea can be avoided. Don't you like it?

 

So let me see, here is the quote from SOLAS taken from your website:

 

'the number of openings in watertight bulkheads shall be reduced to a minimum depending on the design of the ship ...; satisfactory means to close the openings shall be provided' (SOLAS II-1.15.1).

 

So, SOLAS does allow watertight doors, and it therefore falls on the IMO (who oversees SOLAS) and the class societies to determine what the "minimum" number is. And then you clearly state that the IMO has made allowances where doors may be left open. Since the IMO is the governing body of SOLAS, where does this become "illegal"? Your whole argument is false. It may be imprudent in your opinion, but not illegal.

[luisrp]

Ok so why is this being discussed again four years to the date later? Why you keep beating a dead horse? This is not the forum for this. Go to Italy and bring up your case there. Trolling this forum does nothing because nobody here wants to discuss conspiracy theories and "facts" based on far-fetched assumptions that even you admit may not be correct. Every and I mean EVERY SINGLE failure prediction you have made on the salvage operation has been proven wrong. Why should I believe in anything you say?

Edited January 14, 2016 by luisrp

[Uniall]

Ok so why is this being discussed again four years to the date later? Why you keep beating a dead horse? This is not the forum for this. Go to Italy and bring up your case there. Trolling this forum does nothing because nobody here wants to discuss conspiracy theories and "facts" based on far-fetched assumptions that even you admit may not be correct. Every and I mean EVERY SINGLE failure prediction you have made on the salvage operation has been proven wrong. Why should I believe in anything you say?

 

You, I and 99% of the posters on this thread completely disagree with this guy. But, he is not attempting to hijack this thread and censorship is inapporopritate. If we don't reply or respond, he will eventually disappear into the fog of a mind in need of medication.

[luisrp]

Another big chunk being taken away.