A question about the lifeboats.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, jingle5616 said:

The history of passenger carrying ships in disaster situations that failed getting passengers evacuated from those ships.  It is a long history that runs right up to the Costa Concordia which was fortunate to be run aground saving many lives.  How about this little nugget.  

Sorry, internet onboard doesn't support videos, so unable to view your "nugget".  I can probably find as many cases of where passenger evacuations were conducted well, as you can of disasters.

 

As for the Concordia, it amazes me how many folks cite this without actually knowing the details.  In fact, the Concordia was not "run aground" (since she had no power, she was merely drifting).  And, the grounding on the island of Giglio is what caused the ship to roll on its side, as the grounding point acted as a fulcrum with the wind blowing on the ship's side, and then the free surface effect of the water in the hull, ran to the side that was not aground.  If the ship had not grounded again on Giglio, it would have sunk upright and down by the stern, and it may have been another hour before that happened.  These are the conclusions of the official Italian Maritime Agency investigation of the sinking.  As it was, the ship never listed enough to prevent launching boats or rafts until it grounded the second time, so had the muster been called at the proper time, there would likely have been no loss of life, even had the ship not grounded again on Giglio.  As it was, 23 of 26 lifeboats were successfully deployed.

[PlanoTim]

If the Costa Concordia had not drifted to the island of Giglio but rather sunk about an hour later, would that have greatly changed the loss of life?  Is the estimate that it would have been better or worse?

[chengkp75]

33 minutes ago, PlanoTim said:

If the Costa Concordia had not drifted to the island of Giglio but rather sunk about an hour later, would that have greatly changed the loss of life?  Is the estimate that it would have been better or worse?

It would have been better, as the ship would not have started to roll over, causing panic, and causing problems with launching life saving equipment.  It most likely would have taken longer, so giving time to actually muster passengers and then load the boats in a more controlled way.  However, with Schettino never giving the signal to muster passengers, and then never giving the announcement to evacuate the passengers, but instead announcing "abandon ship" this led to crew abandoning ship at the same time as the passengers, to complete chaos.  In my opinion, there would have been no loss of life, except any that died of stress (heart conditions) due to the evacuation.

[jingle5616]

On 8/25/2020 at 8:26 AM, chengkp75 said:

Sorry, internet onboard doesn't support videos, so unable to view your "nugget".  I can probably find as many cases of where passenger evacuations were conducted well, as you can of disasters.

 

As for the Concordia, it amazes me how many folks cite this without actually knowing the details.  In fact, the Concordia was not "run aground" (since she had no power, she was merely drifting).  And, the grounding on the island of Giglio is what caused the ship to roll on its side, as the grounding point acted as a fulcrum with the wind blowing on the ship's side, and then the free surface effect of the water in the hull, ran to the side that was not aground.  If the ship had not grounded again on Giglio, it would have sunk upright and down by the stern, and it may have been another hour before that happened.  These are the conclusions of the official Italian Maritime Agency investigation of the sinking.  As it was, the ship never listed enough to prevent launching boats or rafts until it grounded the second time, so had the muster been called at the proper time, there would likely have been no loss of life, even had the ship not grounded again on Giglio.  As it was, 23 of 26 lifeboats were successfully deployed.

Had the Concordia not grounded there would have been many more deaths.  23 of 26 life boats deployed yet hundreds scrambling down the side of the listing ship and hundreds more jumping and swimming to shore.  My "nugget" is of video of the MTS Oceanos.  I'm sure you know about the crew abandoning the passengers to fend for themselves.  Disaster on passenger ships have not been a stellar point for the ship companies throughout history.  I can imagine a 5000 passenger ship sinking and wonder how well the crew will perform.  I hope to never see it.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, jingle5616 said:

Had the Concordia not grounded there would have been many more deaths. 

On what do you base this assertion?

 

1 hour ago, jingle5616 said:

23 of 26 life boats deployed yet hundreds scrambling down the side of the listing ship and hundreds more jumping and swimming to shore.

The vast majority of this was caused by the ship listing over once grounded again.  Stability studies done after the incident showed that Concordia, even with as many compartments breached as she had, in the weather conditions present, would not have rolled over while floating.  The list to port did cause difficulties in launching some of the boats, and many of the rafts, but if the muster had been signaled properly and timely, the boats could have been loaded and launched even before the ship grounded again, let alone if she were merely drifting.  The proper signals and instructions from the Command team, would also not have released the crew from their emergency stations (assisting passengers to muster, to boats, into the boats, and launching the boats) to order them to abandon ship.

 

As for the Oceanos, while I cannot find an official investigation report, I'll make a few points about it.  It was a flooding ship, just like the Concordia, but it did not roll over, and did not sink for many hours after it started flooding.  This is what would have happened to the Concordia if it had not grounded again.  With the ship not rolling on its side, the passengers did not panic, nor did the few remaining crew, and rescue of everyone onboard was accomplished.  The reason the Oceanos was found the next morning listing badly was due, I'm sure, to the prevailing winds off of South Africa, which started a heel, and then free surface took over and kept her heeled over.

 

And for every Schettino you can find, I can find a Prinsendam Captain who supervised the rescue of everyone onboard from a burning, sinking ship in the Gulf of Alaska, and his crew, and even the crew of the Concordia, whom the Italian Maritime Agency noted did a good job of handling the emergency, given the lack of direction from the bridge.  Unfortunately, as any first responder or military type will tell you, regardless of the amount of training someone gets, there is no way to know how they will react in an emergency, until they are actually placed in a real emergency situation.  The hope is that sufficient training will override fear and allow the crew member to react correctly.  Maritime disasters are rare enough that most mariners will go their whole career without even a minor incident, so again, the vast majority are never tested.  Those that are tested, some pass and some fail, just like anything in life.  I'm sure your local fire department will have records of the number of potential firefighters who flunked out during training, or who passed training (knowing it was training), and then folded at their first real fire.  Or you get a Captain Sullenberger who does things that no one believed possible to save lives.

 

I, too, hope never to know that a 5000 passenger ship sank, but I have faith that with the proper procedures and practices, with proper training, and with a proper safety culture that learns and reacts from past mistakes and failures, that lives will be saved, and few if any lost.  I do know that nothing is perfect, and that even when a perfect evacuation is made at sea (I was in the vicinity of an oil rig on fire off Nova Scotia that evacuated to the boats, and everyone got away just fine, but one person still lost his life due to a heart attack in the boat.

 

 

[wolfie11]

16 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I, too, hope never to know that a 5000 passenger ship sank, but I have faith that with the proper procedures and practices, with proper training, and with a proper safety culture that learns and reacts from past mistakes and failures, that lives will be saved, and few if any lost.

I wish I shared your optimism, Chief.  Maybe, given enough time, everyone would get off, but on a listing ship in difficult conditions, I'm not so sure.  Look at the Estonia, for example, with most passengers unable to access the lifeboat deck.  Add to that the age and physical condition of many passengers, the effects of an unlimited drinks package on the judgement and capabilities of imbibing passengers, and the logistics of getting 8000 people off a ship, I would be surprised if everyone got off safely.  

[chengkp75]

47 minutes ago, wolfie11 said:

I wish I shared your optimism, Chief.  Maybe, given enough time, everyone would get off, but on a listing ship in difficult conditions, I'm not so sure.  Look at the Estonia, for example, with most passengers unable to access the lifeboat deck.  Add to that the age and physical condition of many passengers, the effects of an unlimited drinks package on the judgement and capabilities of imbibing passengers, and the logistics of getting 8000 people off a ship, I would be surprised if everyone got off safely.  

Again, you need to take naval architecture into consideration.  The Estonia was a RO/RO ferry, and the flooding happened to the car deck.  This deck, that runs the entire length of the ship, and the entire width of the ship, and any area this size that is subjected to free flowing water will experience tremendous free surface effect which resulted in the very quick roll over onto her side.  This, and the Herald of Free Enterprise sinking are why RO/RO passenger vessels now have more strict inspections and surveys, and crew training and procedures are under much more scrutiny than a cruise ship.  As I've said, even with 5 adjacent watertight compartments flooding (on a ship designed to only stay afloat with 2 adjacent compartments flooding), the Concordia did not heel over until it grounded again and free surface effect was helped by the fulcrum point of the grounding.

 

Look at the chronology of the Concordia:

 

21:45:  Ship strikes the rock

21:54:  Bridge notified that the propulsion motor room is flooding At this point, Schettino should have sounded the Fire & General Emergency signal (passenger muster)

22:54:  (one hour after being notified the ship is flooding), the bridge announces "Abandon ship" This releases crew from their emergency stations and orders them to evacuate the ship, at the same time as the passengers.  The ship is still listing less than 15*, well within the limits of launching gear.

23:11:  now the list reaches 25*, the limit for launching boats, but boats continue to be launched.

 

Had Schettino mustered the passengers at 22:00, (and a few minutes later he is informed of the number of compartments that are flooding, and that nothing will save the ship, which even he admits to on the voice recorder), the passengers could have been mustered, accounted for (all those who never did a drill sorted out), and the boats launched while the ship was upright.  And, had the ship not re-grounded, it would have remained upright even longer.

[fstuff1]

11 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Look at the chronology of the Concordia:

 

21:45:  Ship strikes the rock

21:54:  Bridge notified that the propulsion motor room is flooding At this point, Schettino should have sounded the Fire & General Emergency signal (passenger muster)

22:54:  (one hour after being notified the ship is flooding), the bridge announces "Abandon ship" This releases crew from their emergency stations and orders them to evacuate the ship, at the same time as the passengers.  The ship is still listing less than 15*, well within the limits of launching gear.

23:11:  now the list reaches 25*, the limit for launching boats, but boats continue to be launched.

 

Had Schettino mustered the passengers at 22:00, (and a few minutes later he is informed of the number of compartments that are flooding, and that nothing will save the ship, which even he admits to on the voice recorder), the passengers could have been mustered, accounted for (all those who never did a drill sorted out), and the boats launched while the ship was upright.  And, had the ship not re-grounded, it would have remained upright even longer.

 

oh wow.. thought the passenger muster signal was the abandon ship signal.

didnt know when the capt says abandon ship, it's a free for all