Cruise Ship Costa Concordia - MERGED THREADS

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by Astrid

This has an interesting explanation for the circumstances of the sinking--i.e., listing towards the undamaged side:

Understanding the Costa Concordia Disaster

As the ship approached the shore at an angle the keel made contact with underwater terrain first, pushing the top of the ship towards the island. But the gash on the other side of the ship was still low enough to be taking on water. As more water entered it gathered on the side of the ship already listing downwards, so the ship listed even more. People saw the water line getting close and closer, and soon many of them decided to jump, fearing the ship could fill with water and sink.

Read more: Understanding the Costa Concordia Disaster

Had to read all that just for this.................

[MacG]

Which understanding? The SOP has been totally forgotten but please tell me what sort of navigation brings a ship right here?

The picture might self explanatory ......

[PyotrBee]

Yeah thas a serious WTF.. Was it some kind of stupid dare? I mean even if you were way off course and noticed "hey there is a big island ahead!!!".. they could have eased off south and done a "go around" instead of moving north in that game of chicken.

[xymotic]

Originally Posted by MacG

Which understanding? The SOP has been totally forgotten but please tell me what sort of navigation brings a ship right here?

The picture might self explanatory ......

I agree, I'd think twice before taking my 7' draft boat there at all let alone at speed.

OTOH, it had been done once a week for at least a year. And I guess it was sunset so it must have been to 'oooh and ahhhhh' the passengers.

It seems hard to jump to fault the captain, this is starting to look like a stupid company. Much like Exxon Valdez, was that accident the result of an off-duty captain having a few too many? Or of a tired crew that had been cut to half size and the remaining half work much longer hours, and had a broken radar for a year?

The Company has said the ship was not off course, so you gotta ask why the hell would they want to take a ship there?

[PyotrBee]

Originally Posted by xymotic

OTOH, it had been done once a week for at least a year.

Huh??? Between the rocks???

[xymotic]

Originally Posted by PyotrBee

Huh??? Between the rocks???

Italian cruise ship was not off-course: owners, captain - *Latest news around the world and developments close to home - MSN Philippines News

And if you look at the AIS track, the more economical route would be to turn north earlier and make landfall N of the rocks altogether. However it looks like they made a couple of course changes to go right where they did. So you gotta wonder wtf!?

When I first saw the Sat pick, I thought maybe the rocks were a mile apart, not 37 meters.

There's a lot of misinformation, who knows what's actually right or not.

[MacG]

@xymotic

Quote

OTOH, it had been done once a week for at least a year. And I guess it was sunset so it must have been to 'oooh and ahhhhh' the passengers.

unquote

You can' t be serious. Where I put the red line, a bit more north the gap is even smaller. You clearly see the rocks below the waterlevel.
A vessel like Concordia you have to keep it away from dangerous obstacles. If you don't, the result lies there in situ.
This is basic seamanship. And captains of Costa have blundered already before.

The Insurance companies will have a say in the future of Costa, the fact is that Concordia is not salvageable, or, if so, only at tremendous cost.
We did not talk about possible environmental effects in relation of oilspills etc.
What sort of risks do captains take? If Costa need a showboat captain, ok but let them have the real one on the bridge. There are some 5000 people on that floating container, don' t forget that.

[PyotrBee]

I dont think that includes the rock pass... Sure to make it to the island but then turn north and pass outside the rocks... I cant see any reason to go inside the rocks except under emergency to avoid bow planting the island itself.

[David M]

Originally Posted by PyotrBee

I'm not a big boat captain, but I have to wonder... Why don't these big boats have a commercial equivalent of a fish finder that could help spot such items? Seeing the pictures of the gash, it was no small object... the Sea Diamonds puncture was tiny compared to this massive gash.

They do have sounders.

[IslandHopper]

Originally Posted by xymotic

When I first saw the Sat pick, I thought maybe the rocks were a mile apart, not 37 meters.

There's a lot of misinformation, who knows what's actually right or not.

Considering the vessel has a beam reported to be only 38m.....

COSTA CONCORDIA - IMO 9320544 - Callsign IBHD - ShipSpotting.com - Ship Photos and Ship Tracker

COSTA CONCORDIA - Vessel's Details and Current Position - 9320544 - 247158500

[PyotrBee]

Something must have been VERY wrong then to attempt that.....

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by xymotic

Italian cruise ship was not off-course: owners, captain - Latest news around the world and developments close to home - MSN Philippines News

And if you look at the AIS track, the more economical route would be to turn north earlier and make landfall N of the rocks altogether. However it looks like they made a couple of course changes to go right where they did. So you gotta wonder wtf!?

When I first saw the Sat pick, I thought maybe the rocks were a mile apart, not 37 meters.

There's a lot of misinformation, who knows what's actually right or not.

Well there sure is a lot of mis information

Firstly what's being ignored by the media is that the accident didn't take place at the harbour. The AIS track shows someone or something screwed up a long time before that and them someone took a decision to take the ship between those two rocks/ small islands. That ripped the gash on the port side.

The captain then obviously realised that the injury was fatal. Modern cruise ship policy is to avoid at sea rescue ( due to the numbers) the policy is to get the ship near land to utilise shore based rescue assets. So the capitan made for port only then seemingly alerting both the passengers and issuing a mayday. However she had a list by the time he made close to the port ( no doubt travelling at some speed propelled significant quantities of water into the hull. The list must have been to starboard and Costa issued a statement which said the capitan performed a manoeuvre to try to ensure it listed towards land so he must have executed a turn as he approached the grounding. However many reports say that the running of her up on a sandbank actually made things worse as she ran out of water to actually remain upright.

The question remains what caused her to end up near two two rocky outcrops and on realising it did someone on the bridge think the only way out was to chance running between them. The site of the gash near the rear port quarter suggests that's the ship was turning to starboard, a fact that seems consistent with turning and running through the narrow channel. I wonder did the bridge personnel think that the was the only way out rather then attempt a crash stop ( annoy the passengers) or perform a emergency turn to starboard ( really annoy the passengers) I remember the 3rd mate on the voyager of the seas telling me that any sharp turn on the ship caused the top decks to tilt enough to throw people off their feet so that the ships officers knew never to do quick turns.

That's the real mystery, how did the ship get into that situation and who made the decision to run through the rocks. Costa stating the ship was not off course is a very silly thing to say in the era of marinetraffic.com. There's no way large ships would go anywhere near something like that in normal conditions. No way at all..

Dave

[xymotic]

I thought it went between the rocks. but yeah, no way the boat is wider than the pass. I think that's what the AIS log I saw said, and clearly that's wrong.

Yet more proof that AIS is worthless. They should have spent the money on Radar instead.

[MacG]

You may check the proper distance with the help of Google Maps. Otherwise, if you have the proper chart(s) do the same.
What gives you the idea that the rocks were a mile apart? Based on what?

Ever seen a cruiseship in the Minqiers?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by xymotic

I thought it went between the rocks. but yeah, no way the boat is wider than the pass. I think that's what the AIS log I saw said, and clearly that's wrong.

Yet more proof that AIS is worthless. They should have spent the money on Radar instead.

Justify that , how is AIS worthless. The ship wasn't using AIS to navigate. What were seeing is its AIS track.