concordia nat geo now

ex_infantry man · 26-02-2012 9:02pm #1

its crazy to think that for a vessel of its size the speed in which it sank, only for its perched on a ledge it would be underwater fully, how could the captain have made such a mistake in a sail past that he was ordered to do and then hung out to dry by his superiors to take the blame!! what do ye think should happen in this case??

marlin vs · 26-02-2012 9:35pm

ex_infantry man wrote: »

its crazy to think that for a vessel of its size the speed in which it sank, only for its perched on a ledge it would be underwater fully, how could the captain have made such a mistake in a sail past that he was ordered to do and then hung out to dry by his superiors to take the blame!! what do ye think should happen in this case??

The Captain is responsible for his ship! and should be held accountable for his mistake after all he is the Captain.He should be made an example of as he was paid to be the Captain and in charge of the safety of the ship and it's passengers.

ex_infantry man · 26-02-2012 9:57pm

marlin vs wrote: »

The Captain is responsible for his ship! and should be held accountable for his mistake after all he is the Captain.He should be made an example of as he was paid to be the Captain and in charge of the safety of the ship and it's passengers.

true that, but his original course was to sail between giglio and monte argentario, but was instructed to do a sail past of giglio by his superiors in costa cruises when he struck rocks in what turned out to be shallow waters, could his mapping or depth sounders let him down or just human error??

Jesus Shaves · 26-02-2012 9:58pm

Some Captain he was, left his ship before most of the passengers

ex_infantry man · 26-02-2012 10:21pm

darokane wrote: »

Some Captain he was, left his ship before most of the passengers

i,d say he panicked, not defending his actions or anything just wanna get into other peoples heads and see what they think about what happened, from what i saw from the documentary filmed through the eye,s and camera,s of passengers aboard, alot of delays about getting passengers off the ship, relaying the incorrect information to crew twas just maddness

lorcan122 · 26-02-2012 10:57pm

I completely don't understand his actions at all, I mean they delayed deploying the lifeboats and when the ship capsized, they only had half the lifeboats because the rest were underneath the water.

Poor Uncle Tom · 26-02-2012 11:46pm

Captain is responsible, there were no muster drills carried out, a health & safety necessity. There was over an hour between hitting the rock and having the boat blow back into the rocks again, more than enough time to have everyone off the boat safely. There,s no excuse that asshole has a lot a blood on his cowardly hands.

ex_infantry man · 27-02-2012 7:21am

has there been a case somewhat like this tried in a court before?

lorcan122 · 27-02-2012 12:17pm

ex_infantry man wrote: »

has there been a case somewhat like this tried in a court before?

Not that I am aware of, this is the first time this kind of thing has happened.

ebbsy · 27-02-2012 5:40pm

Another of their ships on fire.................

ex_infantry man · 27-02-2012 5:53pm

ebbsy wrote: »

Another of their ships on fire.................

seems like the company is poorly managed thats for sure

Rovi · 27-02-2012 6:01pm

Here's the BBC report on the current Costa Allegra incident:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17183134

Cruise ship Costa Allegra adrift off Seychelles

An Italian cruise ship with more than 1,000 people on board is without power in the Indian Ocean following a fire.

The Costa Allegra is adrift in the dark more than 200 miles southwest of the Seychelles, near Alphonse Island.

The ship is from the same fleet as the Costa Concordia, which capsized off the Italian coast in January, killing 32.

Costa Cruises said in a statement that the fire broke out in the electric generators' room. It did not spread and there were no injuries or casualties.

Inspections of the state of the engine room are on-going, the company says.

Ship immobilised
Tugs and "other naval and aerial units" will reach the ship, which has sent out a distress signal, Costa Cruises says.

Commander Cosimo Nicastro of the Italian coast guard told the BBC that it took the crew a few hours to extinguish the fire.

Although the ship is in the middle of the Indian Ocean, there are "no problems for the passengers".

However the ship probably needs to be towed to a Seychelles port, he said.

There are no electric lights on board the ship as the batteries are being used to keep essential machinery going.

The Italian authorities have directed three merchant ships and two fishing vessels towards the stricken liner.

The authorities in the Seychelles say they have sent two tug boats, a coastguard ship and an aircraft to the scene.

There are 636 passengers and 413 crew on board the Costa Allegra, which left Madagascar on Saturday.

It was due to arrive in the Seychelles on Tuesday.

The Costa Concordia ran aground off the Italian island of Giglio on 13 January.

The Concordia's captain, Francesco Schettino, has been accused of manslaughter, causing a shipwreck and abandoning ship before all those aboard were evacuated. He denies any wrongdoing

lorcan122 · 27-02-2012 7:12pm

I could not believe this when I head about it on the news, I think the company is going to go under, no way can it survive after another incident.

Atlantic Dawn · 27-02-2012 8:25pm

Interesting story behind the Costa Allegra, it was originally built in 1969 as the container ship Annie Johnson and later converted in 1992 to the Costa Alegra

Costa%20Allegra7.jpg

http://members.chello.nl/~h.brink01/costa%20allegra.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Allegra

Poor Uncle Tom · 27-02-2012 8:30pm

Where was the second picture taken? Just curious.

ex_infantry man · 27-02-2012 8:47pm

thats absolutely mad!! a container ship it was no doubt, ooooh there defo goin to go under after this people will lose faith in safety aboard there vessels unless they come up with something drastic, i remember watching a documentary series it was on over few weeks on nat geo of the costa serena and was impressed by it that i would have booked a cruise on it, but don,t think i would now

Atlantic Dawn · 27-02-2012 9:51pm

ex_infantry man wrote: »

thats absolutely mad!! a container ship it was no doubt, ooooh there defo goin to go under after this people will lose faith in safety aboard there vessels unless they come up with something drastic, i remember watching a documentary series it was on over few weeks on nat geo of the costa serena and was impressed by it that i would have booked a cruise on it, but don,t think i would now

Yes and on Costa Cruises website the information for the ship gives a build date of 1992 which is a tad deceiving. The stern looks very out of place on a cruise ship.

http://www.costacruise.com/usa/costa_allegra.html

lorcan122 · 27-02-2012 10:23pm

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Interesting story behind the Costa Allegra, it was originally built in 1969 as the container ship Annie Johnson and later converted in 1992 to the Costa Alegra

http://members.chello.nl/~h.brink01/costa%20allegra.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Allegra

Wow that is amazing, must have taken some work to transform that into a cruise liner, I actually can't believe that.

Cardinal Richelieu · 27-02-2012 10:24pm

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Where was the second picture taken? Just curious.

Doesn't say actually but the Costa Allegra seems to have operated on the South East Asia route so China, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan.

Atlantic Dawn · 27-02-2012 11:28pm

1 Irish person aboard

http://www.costacruises.co.uk/B2C/GB/Info/allegra_statement.htm

lorcan122 · 27-02-2012 11:50pm

The cruise industry is going to suffer quite a bit with all these incidents, not just this company.

Poor Uncle Tom · 28-02-2012 8:57am

The cruise industry doesn't exactly have a clean record for losing people overboard anyway.

ex_infantry man · 28-02-2012 4:37pm

i went on and priced a cruise on the costa website last night, the prices have been slashed to half priced on most cabins

cyrusdvirus · 01-03-2012 2:51pm

landlubber question re the Concordia.

The visible damage is on her port side, yet she rolled to her starboard. I would have thought there would be sub divisions running lengthways along the hull for watertight integrity, so how did she roll to starboard?

Did they try counter flooding to keep her on an even keel in order to get the lifeboats launched? And did it all go wrong?

OR am i completely wrong with the watertight integrity thinking and the watertight divisions only run perpendicular to the keel?

Oh, and Yaaay for the forum.

Poor Uncle Tom · 01-03-2012 2:58pm

gatecrash wrote: »

The visible damage is on her port side, yet she rolled to her starboard. I would have thought there would be sub divisions running lengthways along the hull for watertight integrity, so how did she roll to starboard?

Apparently there are no devisions running lengthwise, the compartments are devided across the width along the ship.

When the engines eventually stopped working due to flooding the ship was a mile or so out to sea and was listing to the side the damage was on, but it was broad side to the open sea and dead in the water so it was vulnerable to the wind.

The wind caught it like a sail and pushed it back towards land. In the process it pushed the ship over to list towards the opposite side, the side it eventually rested on when it came back in contact with land.

cyrusdvirus · 01-03-2012 3:30pm

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Apparently there are no devisions running lengthwise, the compartments are devided across the width along the ship.

When the engines eventually stopped working due to flooding the ship was a mile or so out to sea and was listing to the side the damage was on, but it was broad side to the open sea and dead in the water so it was vulnerable to the wind.

The wind caught it like a sail and pushed it back towards land. In the process it pushed the ship over to list towards the opposite side, the side it eventually rested on when it came back in contact with land.

So even though she was flooding the starboard section of the keel hit the rock shelf while she was still flooding to port, in the deeper water. And she STILL managed to pivot on the starboard keel?

How strong were the winds?

Not that i'm doubting you, it certainly is plausible,

Poor Uncle Tom · 01-03-2012 5:40pm

You got it in a nutshell, as I understand it.

The winds were 24mph which wasn't great on it's own but the ship was sitting just 26ft deep in the water and 100ft above the waves x 1,000ft long to catch the wind.

What I find extrordinary is that the 100,000 tonnes+ weight was pushed over in the opposite direction by those winds. The water already flooded in must have helped with this by flooding new areas as the ship was being righted by the winds.

The really frightening thing is that if there were no winds, the ship would have sank when the engines failed at a mile or so out to sea in much deeper water. With the ineptitude shown by the overall leadership on the ship in this case that would certainly have lead to hundreds if not thousands of lives being lost.

Nature came to the rescue, and to better effect than the captain of the liner did.

cyrusdvirus · 01-03-2012 5:48pm

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

You got it in a nutshell, as I understand it.

The winds were 24mph which wasn't great on it's own but the ship was sitting just 26ft deep in the water and 100ft above the waves x 1,000ft long to catch the wind.

What I find extrordinary is that the 100,000 tonnes+ weight was pushed over in the opposite direction by those winds. The water already flooded in must have helped with this by flooding new areas as the ship was being righted by the winds.

The really frightening thing is that if there were no winds, the ship would have sank when the engines failed at a mile or so out to sea in much deeper water. With the ineptitude shown by the overall leadership on the ship in this case that would certainly have lead to hundreds if not thousands of lives being lost.

Nature came to the rescue, and to better effect than the captain of the liner did.

THAT'S the bit that is making my jaw bounce along the ground....

it really does go to show that even something as massive and seemingly sturdy as this ship is just a plaything when nature gets mildly annoyed.

ex_infantry man · 01-03-2012 9:33pm

gatecrash wrote: »

THAT'S the bit that is making my jaw bounce along the ground....

it really does go to show that even something as massive and seemingly sturdy as this ship is just a plaything when nature gets mildly annoyed.

now ya said it, and as they say " the bigger ya are the harder you fall "

roundymac · 05-03-2012 3:55pm

Saw a report on yesterdays Sunday Independent that the captain had left his glass's in his cabin and was having difficulty reading his radar. Also there were quotes from another captain whose was a mentor to the Concordia captain, he stated that he would rarely admit to making a mistake, hence the delay in issueing a distress call.
Mmm, the part about the glass's sounds dodgy to me, surly there was another officer on the bridge who was qualified to navigate if the captain's eyesight was giving trouble.

lorcan122 · 05-03-2012 6:11pm

roundymac wrote: »

Saw a report on yesterdays Sunday Independent that the captain had left his glass's in his cabin and was having difficulty reading his radar. Also there were quotes from another captain whose was a mentor to the Concordia captain, he stated that he would rarely admit to making a mistake, hence the delay in issueing a distress call.
Mmm, the part about the glass's sounds dodgy to me, surly there was another officer on the bridge who was qualified to navigate if the captain's eyesight was giving trouble.

Heard that as well, he was meant to be a very arrogant man as well, so maybe he was micro managing and just wanted to do all the work. He didn't go to the trial, just his lawyer as he did not want to face the crowds.

concordia nat geo now

Comments