Cruise Ship Costa Concordia - MERGED THREADS

[IslandHopper]

Originally Posted by chala

Once submerged anything buoyant will be contributing in making the ship lighter. The unknown is the amount of soakage, which will make the ship heavier to raise.

The figures supplied are from her specifications as built and posted only to demonstrate the difference between Gross Tonnage, Deadweight and Displacement....

And while what you say is true, i have no doubt that once the salvors get her upright the pumping out will be a slow laborious task to allow her to drain down unlike

Raising The Titanic - YouTube

which i agree is a very emotional scene, but....

Stability calculations anyone.....

[MacG]

On the total weight the amount of soakage might be a few hundred tons.

The making of the underwater support is something so extremely special that I do not trust this in the hands of Titan - Neri.

The support platform must be able to carry the weight of the ship with the added weight of the full volume of the caissons on the port and starboard side, which will add
a substantial volumetric mass of say, 1.5 x the total volumetric mass of Concordia including the submersed part.

They have never carried out a comparable job, so there is plenty of room for failure.

[IslandHopper]

Originally Posted by MacG

On the total weight the amount of soakage might be a few hundred tons.

The making of the underwater support is something so extremely special that I do not trust this in the hands of Titan - Neri.

The support platform must be able to carry the weight of the ship with the added weight of the full volume of the caissons on the port and starboard side, which will add
a substantial volumetric mass of say, 1.5 x the total volumetric mass of Concordia including the submersed part.

They have never carried out a comparable job, so there is plenty of room for failure.

Have a little faith brother.....

$20 says she floats away upright.......any takers...??

[CarinaPDX]

There is always room for failure.

Their plan is fairly simple, and mostly requires a sound grounding in structural engineering. My concern is mostly that they stop her from sliding before she goes under. Once stabilized there isn't much that hasn't been done before. This is not rocket science.

While the comparison with righting the Oklahoma was interesting, it should be remembered that they did that nearly 70 years ago. Before computers and structural analysis programs. When, with rare exception, barges and cranes were small by today's standard (one exception being the crane in Bellingham used to remove the main turrets of the Iowa-class battleships).

I think they'll do it - they certainly thought they could or they wouldn't be betting their companies on it. My 2¢ - $20 is a bit too rich for my blood. Maybe someone should start a poll..

Greg

[MacG]

As I already calculated before (looking at the depth readings at Giglio) the slope is not that steep as has been shown in the animation. Otherwise, the ship had been down already.

The point is that building the underwater support structure plus the reinforcement(s) necessary to fix this massive platform to the seabed is something to think about. Hence my reluctance to believe that two companies alien to the job (one has done medium salvage work whilst the other is working on diving projects) are able to carry out all this.

That the combo of Ballst Nedam / Mammoet has not given the job has everything to do with the money involved.
Titan / Neri must have underbid the Dutch quite heavily although they have all the knowledge required.
Therefore I hesitate to believe that the US/Italy combo will do the job until the very end.
So I take the 20 US and put a bottle of Veuve Cliquot on top IF the winners of the salvage job will succeed as planned.

There plan is simple and indeed no rocket science. But the preparation of the undersea structure and the placing of the caissons is a total different piece of cake.

[hellosailor]

chala-
" The unknown is the amount of soakage," Maybe not. Again, there is a receipt for every yard of carpet and every mattress and towel on that boat. Computerized. I'd bet it was nothing but donkey work to generate a list of every 'soakable' item on board, procure a new one, soak it, and determine weight and volume. Or make it simpler, forget soakage and simply assume the volume is all water, since it will actually be less.
Now you've got the soakage plus a safety factor. "A simple exercise left for the reader" or easily done by hiring a couple of dozen interns who know how to add.

I'm betting the salvors have enough experience to just go by the volume and then use a fudge factor. Big ship? No big deal, this is like "How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time."

[St. Elsewhere]

Does anyone know if the plan is to repair the holes in the hull, or to depend on the addition of the caissons to float it?

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

I'm betting the salvors have enough experience to just go by the volume and then use a fudge factor. Big ship? No big deal, this is like "How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time."

Having spent a few years working for Smit Tak, there was experience, but also a lot of "suck it and see"

Cheers

[chala]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

procure a new one, soak it, and determine weight and volume

I am not sure if they will rebuild a sample of all the furniture to check the absorption rate but yes the soakage can be guessed.

Originally Posted by St. Elsewhere

Does anyone know if the plan is to repair the holes in the hull, or to depend on the addition of the caissons to float it?

The holes may be useful at draining the ship, they may save a lot of pumping.

[St. Elsewhere]

Concordia to be gone by January . . . .


Titan Salvage says Costa Concordia removed by early in New Year

Like this article27
Marcus


By Marcus Hondro Jun 27, 2012 in World
1 comment




+

The American marine salvage company that is working to refloat the Costa Concordia, says work is going well. Initial reports suggested the boat would be gone by the spring of 2013, but Titan Salvage said it will be earlier.
Titan, working with Micoperi of Italy, is refloating the boat and will then tow it away to an as yet undetermined port to be scrapped. Their timeline now says that the boat should be fully removed from the waters off the shore of the Italian island of Giglio early in the New Year. There will be further work at that time to clean debris from the ocean floor. Refloating the Costa Concordia Richard Habib, a vice-president and a managing director of Titan Salvage was in Rome last Friday when he told media work was going well and that the ship should be upright and ready to be towed out as early as the end of January. A Dutch film company, Prorama, has a camera in place on the shore and is filming the entire salvage operation. Company director Bo de Visser, says they will create time-lapse movies of the boat's refloating and removal. They have a website, The Last Salute, where a live feed of the activities around the ship can be viewed during daylight hours. Thirty-two people died in the Jan. 13 tragedy when the ship was taken too close to shore and hit a rock, tearing a 70 meter hole in the hull. She listed,partially sank, and has been there since. Her captain, Francesco Schettino, faces multiple charges in the disaster.

Read more: Titan Salvage says Costa Concordia removed by early in New Year

[St. Elsewhere]

This sounds like a major policy error: "The Captain is allowed to choose the type of charts to be used" . . . .

Questions Raised about Costa Concordia Charts

04/07/2012 The trial that aims to shed some light on the grounding of the cruise vessel Costa Concordia near Isola di Giglio, Italy, on 13 January 2012, has unearthed several errors. The watertight doors that should have prevented water entering the vessel were not closed, the black box was malfunctioning and booked in for maintenance on 14 January, and the charts used are said not to be approved.

It is not clear if the nautical charts used indicate the shoal on which the Costa Concordia ran aground. For ship owner Costa Crociere, the captain is responsible for the charts used for navigation. According to the statement made by the ship’s cartographer, Simone Canessa, the electronic charts “were not of the authorised type”. Costa Crociere stated that the ship was equipped with all the paper-based and electronic charts for the planned route, as will be shown during this stage of the trial. It is however the captain’s duty, on the basis of the voyage plan that he himself draws up, to ensure that the ship is equipped with every nautical chart that is needed. A captain who chooses to sail a route different from the planned itinerary is to ensure that the available charts are suitable in scale and accuracy of detail.

[MacG]

Factualkly is this complete useless information (not on your side St Elesewhere) from the Costa Group.
Use of non approved charts is one unbelievable fact. 2) Shoals do not shift that much: we all know exactly in which trajectory Schettino failed - he went too close to shore, forgetting he mastered a 100.000 tonner and not a rowing boat.

Electronic charts are just an app - and no excuse for this sort of fatal mistakes. Electronic charts are subject to bold miscalculations.

The facts are fogged by this sort of info, probably to save the fat ****s of the Board of directors. It shows again that incapable crew ran the Concordia.

[donradcliffe]

Its all about the money. If the owners can show the captain was negligent, they can limit their liability to the value of the ship after the accident (zero).

[MacG]

No doubt the Cptn is responsible. The whole issue - going too close for comfort - is entirely a Captains folly. However, it's not the Cptn alone, it is the lax culture that is responsible. Company behavior?

[sigmasailor]

The owners qualified the captain to master the ship; they are responsible without a doubt. If accidents like this are to be avoided it is important to look further than the obvious direct cause; only taking away the root cause will avoid it.