Viking Sky position, adrift off Norway Coast and evacuating Passengers & Crew

[VK3DQ]

8 hours ago, larryfry50 said:

We are set to sail on this ship in May.  By then., I hope they have all the necessary repairs completed.  I have just one technical question.  What is the cause of the engine failure?   Does anybody know?  There was a problem with Norwegian Star in 2017 in Australia.  It was dead in the water and had to be towed back to Melbourne. Fortunately,  we were able to cancel that cruise ahead of time.  

 

Here is the report

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5774327/329-mo-2017-003-final.pdf

[AncientWanderer]

Um...there's some posts here about the favorable outcome and what an "adventure" this was for the passengers.   Granted, it could have been much worse, but still, according to news reports, there's at least one passenger in "critical" condition.   Not an exciting adventure for this unlucky person.

Just sayin'....

[Jim Avery]

Andy, your post about using the anchor was great.  When I was running a single screw, single rudder freighter I used to use one anchor for docking.  As you described dragging through the mud but not enough scope to "bite".  Enabled me to have higher speed on the screw which gives better rudder control. Used properly the anchor can help you slowly slide a single screw ship in almost sideways.  A real wizard, right.....   But it doesn't work very well with a rocky bottom....😎

[Heidi13]

20 hours ago, VK3DQ said:

hi Folks

 

Some of you have asked about liferafts

 

There any many systems in use today but here is an example you might like to see

 

 

 

Regards

 

John

With this type of system, you have a tendency to come down hot, hit the bottom platform and bounce - either hitting the raised edge or even into the water. My last company installed something similar many years ago and removed them, after a participant got rather wet.

[Jim Avery]

8 minutes ago, Heidi13 said:

With this type of system, you have a tendency to come down hot, hit the bottom platform and bounce - either hitting the raised edge or even into the water. My last company installed something similar many years ago and removed them, after a participant got rather wet.

But Andy, now that we are retired, think of the money we could make with that rig set up in a big pool in Arizona.  Lots better than a bounce house....🍺

[Heidi13]

2 minutes ago, Jim Avery said:

Andy, your post about using the anchor was great.  When I was running a single screw, single rudder freighter I used to use one anchor for docking.  As you described dragging through the mud but not enough scope to "bite".  Enabled me to have higher speed on the screw which gives better rudder control. Used properly the anchor can help you slowly slide a single screw ship in almost sideways.  A real wizard, right.....   But it doesn't work very well with a rocky bottom....😎

Thanks Jim - will give you the details of my close call over a few beers one night. 🍺

 

Learned very early that the anchor is the Captain's best friend. Every candidate I taught ship handling had to perform at least 1 single engine docking with the anchor. Some came back after a number of years thanking me, after they used it for real.

 

Rocky bottom, totally agree, just bounces.

 

[Capt_BJ]

it is called 'dredging the anchor' and b4 the advent of bow (and stern) thrusters is was a tool for ship drivers .....

 

physics: the drag of the anchor changes the ship's 'pivot point' as well as preventing forward or aft motion up to a point .... it changes how the stern reacts DRAMATICALLY

 

https://www.marineinsight.com/marine-navigation/dredging-anchors/

 

yes, bottom conditions are IMPORTANT (as they were in this case) .... on a rock bottom the anchor will slide over the smooth parts and fetch HARD when it sees a 'bump' ..... procedure is better used when the bottom is mud or sand where if you keep the anchor at 'short stay' the flukes don't dig it but provide the 'brake' being sought.

 

A BIG tool in the day of single screw no bow thruster ships ..... today these that remain SELDOM dock without tugs in the US ... IME.  Older CG buoy tenders still had this set up until not too very long ago  ......

 

[Cruisercl]

6 hours ago, ffnole said:

The bottom line is this will be investigated by the proper authorities, including Viking management and conclusions will be reached as to the factor or factors contributing to this terrible situation which could have been catastrophic. What we know is that the Viking brand took a big hit to its reputation, which is more difficult when you consider they are a new company when it comes to ocean cruising. The tarnish is off the rose of previous glowing accolades. How they respond to crisis management today and in the future will determine whether it is permanent or temporary.

 

The captain of this ship is fully accountable for sailing in forecasted bad weather and being far too close to a rocky shore line....and only averted disaster by a reported 300 feet. Bad things happen when you make poor decisions....like engines failing in extreme weather. I imagine he has sailed his last voyage with Viking...because he didn’t put the customers safety first. You can debate that...give him kudos making the best of a bad situation, whatever....but a company with a new brand can’t afford to have questionable leadership driving their ships. Viking needs a fall guy to demonstrate they are serious with their mission of putting customers first.....and he is not going to survive this. Nor should he in my opinion. Class action lawsuits are just around the corner. How do you measure financial hits to your reputation as an industry leader in safe, luxury cruises?  

 

Will I cruise Viking in the future? Well we have a 93 day cruise scheduled next year and look forward to the journey. Will Viking be a better company as a result of this incident....I certainly expect so. But time will tell how they respond and how the public responds. 

 

Have you read any of this thread? It appears not.

[just_dont]

Thanks so much to [mention=942429]chengkp75[/mention] for the terrific experienced analysis.  Sure seems to align perfectly with the facts and there aren't many other scenarios that make sense since they were able to restart the engines over time.  The biggest thing that amazes me is that the captain chose to sail so close to the shore in those conditions - as soon as we saw the track of the ship drifting toward shore and then escaping it became clear how close they came to a Concordia level disaster - and likely worse.
 

In reality, (based on the track that was available on Marine Traffic at the time, but is no longer available without a subscription) the ship had been sailing much closer to shore an hour or so before the loss of power. It is a scenic cruise after all.
But as the ship was approaching the deteriorating weather, it moved much farther out to sea (around 4x, iirc) and slowed down, before turning back parallel to the shoreline. It had been sailing parallel to the shore for a bit when it lost power and began drifting in a straight line (downwind?) toward the shore.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[SeaDog-46]

Have now found that Viking Sky departed Tromso at 2220Z on 21st March & declared the Mayday at 1400Z on 23rd March.

That is over 39 hours later.  So even if the captain had the latest weather forcast - it was too far off to consider not sailing.

The only time a ship does not sail is if the port closes due to pilots not being able to get off the ship, but they can also be oncarried at owners expense.  The other time with cruise ships is when the operators suggest it may be better to stay for the passengers sake. Or it's been arrested.

Following the normal coastal track 5 miles off promentaries would be normal but cruise ships often go further offshore to make or dump water.  No info is available on Viking Sky's track.

When stopped in a gale cruise ships will drift sideways much faster than a cargo ship, except a vehicle carrier.

The windward anchor would need to be dropped when the depth of water is not too great - in this case without power there is a possibility of not stopping the cable due to speed of drift.  It no doubt strained the cable, anchor, windlass & burnt out the brakes.  As they are saying both will be replaced then likely the second was also dropped when the ships speed was reduced or was still dragging.  Can't see them sailing if they lost one.

In my 15 years as master I never dropped an anchor in an emercency but did have to do a planned anchoring when the chief engineer said we had to stop or the engine would be ruined.  Also NO astern power available. This was southbound in Gulf of Suez lightship in a wide marked channel.   Found a spot in among the reefs & going slow turned across the wind & dropped the anchor feeding out chain fairly slowly.  Strained the gear a bit - but it enabled the engineers to replace a cylinger head.  Australian 150000 dwt Mobil tanker.

 

[Nunagoras]

Many thanks dear Engineer @chengkp75 and resident Captain @Heidi13 for your incredible cooperation and explanation!

 

Let me just to add something from another side of the pound: The Firs Aid Teams (FAT) that are responsible in loco for the actual rescue. Many have post that question. Let me to answer from what I learnt from my experience at a land based venue where I worked for some time as archivist and administrative assistant for my office building First Aid Team facility. Of course bear in mind the legitimate differences between a land building and a cruise ship!... But by and large things might to be more common than different. Obviously that is easier in the paper than in reality... But given the fact that all were successfully rescued, I believe most if not all the basics were exceptionally met in this occasion!

 

First of it all: Almost all the FAT individuals undergoing that position are doing so voluntarily. Only in occasion, if no individual appears to take the position will the business call someone to do that.

 

Each individual assigned FAT role are assigned a specific area of action (in my building it is usually the floor where the said individual usually works most of the time). In his area he is responsible to take note, and if needed to report, all the individuals at his "guard" with special needs of assistance at any level, from pregnant ladies to the blind or the mobility challenged to the ones in special medications.

 

Once the alarm rings it is up to the team to search for all the people in their section and to give special attention to the ones in special needs. Once nearly all are collected it is up to the FAT to give a second look to see if there are injured individuals that were left behind and act in accordance with what might be needed.

 

Finally: Whom are the ones being rescued first by helicopter? Ideally this is the order:

1. Injured individuals.

2. Pregnant ladies and kids (when applicable).

3. Disabled individuals; very elderly; and other showing notorious mobility challenges.

4. Individuals in special medication of some sort.

5. The elderly in general.

6. Individuals resident above or below the affected area (When applicable)

7. General public.

 

Hope to have helped a little bit!.. 🙂

 

 

[Heidi13]

6 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Again, I'll leave that mainly for our resident Captains, but again what I've read doesn't show this to be an unusual storm (someone correct me if I'm wrong), and ships sail in storms all the time.  I don't believe the Norwegians would have told the press anything about their investigation at all, let alone shine a light on one aspect.

The ship's Master is required to file formal incident/accident reports in accordance with Flag State (Norwegian) shipping regulations. Assuming the have similar regs to what I used in UK/Canada, this is a reportable incident.

 

As soon as possible, the Master must submit a verbal report, one could make an argument the Mayday met this objective. Then within 24 hrs, or ASAP, the Master must submit a written report on the Flag State's multiple page form.

 

Upon receipt, the Flag State determines the level of investigation required. In this case, I would expect a formal investigation where the Master and all officers involved will be required to provide evidence, as will all others involved. The investigators will also spend an inordinate amount of time aboard the ship, reviewing log books, testing equipment, etc. The investigation may look at the entire cruise and maintenance records since launch and also the company operational procedures.

 

Many complex investigations normally take at least a year.

 

Regarding the comment in the UK press, I highly doubt the local authorities stated they will investigate whether the ship should have sailed. While this will most likely be one component of the investigation, I would be highly surprised to read that in an official communication from the AI Branch. Normally they confirm an investigation into  xxx incident, but would not provide specific details. Best guess is any details are the very common media liberties, rather than reporting only facts.

 

Regarding the storm, I noted a 961 mB depression with tight isobars. While this would normally have extreme winds, whether the ship should have sailed has many variables - ship routing v's the predicted movement of the Low, predicted wave heights, routing advice received from professional marine routing service, pilot's advice, Captain's knowledge of the ship. The decision to sail was also made 1 or 2 days before the incident, so what were the forecasts at that time.

 

Another consideration - weather forecasts are "Predictions" and we know they are always right - Yes/No??? 

 

 

[SeaDog-46]

There also much mis information in the media on maritime matters - they really do not know what they are talking about.

Media said that VS made her own way into Molde - this is only true for the final part of the way into the port.

Passengers onboard reported the tugs had lines connected.  This was comfirmed by Ocean Response AIS on one of the tracking sites.   The small harbour tug Vivax stayed with VS from the time it arrived on scene until VS berthed at Molde & also had a line up to assist the towing emergency response 7480 gt rig tender Ocean Response.  This says to me that if a 485 gt tug can operate in these conditions they can't be so bad at that time.

Towing a dead ship is usually started by the tug at an angle of 90 degrees to the tows heading.  In this case VS had some power & working rudders that greatly assisted the operation.

[Pratique]

1 hour ago, AncientWanderer said:

Um...there's some posts here about the favorable outcome and what an "adventure" this was for the passengers.   Granted, it could have been much worse, but still, according to news reports, there's at least one passenger in "critical" condition.   Not an exciting adventure for this unlucky person.

Just sayin'....

My wife has already informed me that if she had been through this "adventure" on Sky, she would never set foot on a cruise ship again. Done. Fair enough. I'd probably want to cruise again, but then I would have to cruise without my wife, so I guess I'd be out too. Nevertheless, I've talked her into her first transatlantic next year on Allure (which she is excited about) only because I did the Symphony TA last year without her and lived to tell about it despite some rough seas. lol But if our next TA becomes an "adventure," I'll be in the dog house.

Edited March 26, 2019 by Pratique

[broberts]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

...There is always a risk when using a lifeboat, even when in harbor.

...

 

Cases on point were fatal lifeboat drills on Harmony in 2018 and Thomson Majesty in 2013. An internet search will turn up numerous similar but non-fatal incidents in recent years. Given that these accidents occurred under controlled circumstances with experienced crew, it's not hard to imagine the potential for negative outcomes when less than calm passengers are involved.

[Heidi13]

6 hours ago, ffnole said:

The captain of this ship is fully accountable for sailing in forecasted bad weather and being far too close to a rocky shore line....and only averted disaster by a reported 300 feet. Bad things happen when you make poor decisions....like engines failing in extreme weather. I imagine he has sailed his last voyage with Viking...because he didn’t put the customers safety first. You can debate that...give him kudos making the best of a bad situation, whatever....but a company with a new brand can’t afford to have questionable leadership driving their ships. Viking needs a fall guy to demonstrate they are serious with their mission of putting customers first.....and he is not going to survive this. Nor should he in my opinion. Class action lawsuits are just around the corner. How do you measure financial hits to your reputation as an industry leader in safe, luxury cruises?  

 

Unfortunately, yet another most unfortunate post, where the only truth is that yes, the Captain is fully accountable for all his/her decisions.

 

However, I would be very interested in knowing your marine experience and training where you determined the ship was, "Far too close to a rocky shore." Who made bad decisions and what actual facts do you have to substantiate your statement? What routing information does the Viking Fleet Operations Manual provide the Master. Was it complied with, if not what were the reasons? There will be many questions asked.

 

In addition to the Norwegian AI Branch investigation, the company will hold a similar investigation in accordance with their operations manuals. The Master and all officers inverviewed, if members of NUMAST will be provided legal representation.

 

Speculating on potential disciplinary action is again detrimental, without knowing the facts.

[Heidi13]

6 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

There is a Voyage Data Recorder and a Voice Recorder on the bridge and engine control room.  So, all conversations will be recorded, as will things like heading, speed, weather conditions, GPS location, helm commands, engine commands, etc.  These are overwritten after 30 days, but are supposed to be frozen by stopping overwriting (one button) at the time of any "serious marine incident".

 

The engine room automation will have alarm logs and event logs, and these will be available for typically longer periods (it depends on how many data points are recorded and the file storage size), but over a month.  The big problem when you get a power blackout like this is that the alarms may come in all together (hundreds or thousands of them in a single second), and the system can't differentiate which came first in any given second, so it takes some analysis time to dig out a root cause.  This is due to multiplexing issues, where the central automation goes out and "polls" all the alarm points every second, and routes the data back to the central processor, and the first alarm that comes in may actually be the first point polled, not the first alarm condition to happen in that second.

Our VDR's also collected raw radar data. When used with the playback equipment it provides a very detailed replication of the voyage coupled with audio.

[Maya1234]

Glad to see I wasn’t the only person obsessed with the woman tweeting the whole saga

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/im-obsessed-with-this-woman-who-was-tweeting-abou

 

 

[zitsky]

2 hours ago, AncientWanderer said:

Um...there's some posts here about the favorable outcome and what an "adventure" this was for the passengers.   Granted, it could have been much worse, but still, according to news reports, there's at least one passenger in "critical" condition.   Not an exciting adventure for this unlucky person.

Just sayin'....

 

This forum tends to focus on the positive.  I sit here and think I would enjoy a helicopter ride.  But if I was dealing with constant motion sickness, maybe not.

[GeezerCouple]

Why is the Hustadvika sea area so dangerous?

 

GC

[AL3XCruise]

5 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

And, any ship, even the QM2, if not operated at the proper speed for those exact weather conditions at that exact time will experience seas slapping into the h

 

Given this risk, I'm curious if variable pitch propellers would be valuable in certain situations?  Adjusting blade pitch would provide an additional method to change RPM and torque as required, but I don't know if they are responsive enough to matter in these conditions.

[Hanoj]

Here’s a USA Today article showing the thrashing (my words) the Sky took Saturday, with anonymous crew comments, allegedly: 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/2019/03/25/viking-cruise-ship-inside-look-during-storm-and-rescue/3269597002/?fbclid=IwAR0GDhDHsYvLC8qrFBJTD1SOkKicq9nKhFQ3hElQnBTvVNgCrvywpA9JWq4

Edited March 26, 2019 by Hanoj
Typo

[BearsAhoy]

5 hours ago, Heidi13 said:

Affirmative, the SOBC received a major refit last year and the original DBC system was removed and replaced with the Liferaft System of Australia system. This is currently the most common evacuation system on BC Ferries.

 

Thanks!

 

(While the Spirit were the “new” ferries when I first moved here, we are now somewhat partial to the Coastal class since we were living in Kiel for part of the time when they were were being built there.)

[cgolf1]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

No, I haven't seen anything more than pure speculation that there was a system failure or problem before they lost power.  Bodo was cancelled due to high winds from what I've read, and lack of tugs.  I took a RO/RO ship into Bodo about 20 years ago, and we were longer than the dock, and had to have tugs hold us against the dock the entire time we were there.  It is not a nice place to get to in winds from the east, and there is no suitable anchorage once in the fjord unless you go about 60 miles away, and that was likely already full of ships sheltering.  Using an archipelago to shelter from a storm is pretty standard.  It tends to break up both the wind and the seas.  The islands were to windward of the ship's course, so they posed no threat to the ship.

 

Been reading from the beginning and appreciate your analysis. Seems like the tone has changed a lot now since you joined the discussion. 

 

I am curious though if the tecnology is actually causing more issues than it is solving? We’re older ship designs more reliable? Computers are incredible, but I sometimes wonder if we rely on them too much. For a living I test software and XYZ robots and it sometimes seem the old designs and communication protocols while limited are more robust than the newer designs. Error handling for us can be tricky, can’t even begin to imagine the data load on a ship. 

[hapster85]

Another consideration - weather forecasts are "Predictions" and we know they are always right - Yes/No??? 

People grumble that the weatherman is "never right", yet the first thing they do after something like this, is demand to know why those involved didn't listen to the weatherman. Ironic, huh?