Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All large ships have ballast tanks. These tanks are located at the very bottom of the ship. These tanks are filled with sea water to provide stability or filled with air for various reasons. The fuel tanks also act as ballast. Haven't been on a cruise ship, but if their life boats are anything like Navy life boats, then they could easily have enough on hand for everyone with room to spare. I question how often they are inspected and proper maintenance performed.
The US Navy has ships capable of taking onboard all passengers. I served on the first USS Iwo Jimp LPH-2, a helicopter carrier. When not on deployment, we had enough berthing space for roughly 2,000 people. On deployment, these spaces are filled with Marines. This ship also had operating rooms, dentist, medical ward, emergency supplies, clean drinking water, and every sailor trained in emergency first aid and stretcher bearer. Though they wouldn't have private staterooms, they would have a dry place to sleep with sheets and blanket, a place to shower, food to eat, and medical care if needed. Today's large amphib ships could handle even more people. Rescue ships aren't a problem. Only one Navy ship would be needed.
This reminds me of the BP oil rig disaster.
It's simply a case of gross, criminal negligence.
Both industries are essentially safe, barring
a stupid disregard for safety. Let's shut down the cruise ship industry for six months while we study the situation.
For goodness sakes, do not give them any ideas - their people do read these boards.
The important thing is getting everyone off the ship safely which is apparently where the failure was here. I was reading in the paper well into this accident they were still telling people to go back to their cabins a half hour before the abandon ship signal was given. As it's looking now this wasn't a failure of the safety measures but failure of the captain to implement them. You can have all the safety measures in the world but if the leadership fails they aren't going to work.
I'd imagine there is no food and some water. You're not going to be in the water that long if you're in a lifeboat.
I think my point was if the cruise ship were AT SEA, I mean, stuck in the ocean and not near shore as was this one. It would take a long time for another cruise ship to reach them, I would think, wouldn't it? I don't think all those life boats could make it to shore. They certainly could not helicopter four to six thousand people.
My concern is what emergency measures are in place if these ships happen to go down at sea? What efforts would it take to rescue everyone and get them all on land? What are the plans?
No ships are capsizing on their own. How many of these accidents have there been? What is everyone referencing - the Titanic - 100 years ago?
This is not a ship design error - this is human error.
As many cruises that take place - this is a rarity.
Relax.
I think it would not feel like a rarity if you were personally involved. There must be some plans somewhere for on sea evacuations and I think such safety measures could be a selling point.
Yeah, I would relax if they were forthcoming with safety information. Right now it is troubling that these things are not available.
All large ships have ballast tanks. These tanks are located at the very bottom of the ship. These tanks are filled with sea water to provide stability or filled with air for various reasons. The fuel tanks also act as ballast. Haven't been on a cruise ship, but if their life boats are anything like Navy life boats, then they could easily have enough on hand for everyone with room to spare. I question how often they are inspected and proper maintenance performed.
The US Navy has ships capable of taking onboard all passengers. I served on the first USS Iwo Jimp LPH-2, a helicopter carrier. When not on deployment, we had enough berthing space for roughly 2,000 people. On deployment, these spaces are filled with Marines. This ship also had operating rooms, dentist, medical ward, emergency supplies, clean drinking water, and every sailor trained in emergency first aid and stretcher bearer. Though they wouldn't have private staterooms, they would have a dry place to sleep with sheets and blanket, a place to shower, food to eat, and medical care if needed. Today's large amphib ships could handle even more people. Rescue ships aren't a problem. Only one Navy ship would be needed.
We are talking 4000 to 6000 people here, plus the question if there are such rescue ships positioned around the globe ready to respond to such a mishap, plus the question of how long it would take to reach the life boats.
I think my point was if the cruise ship were AT SEA, I mean, stuck in the ocean and not near shore as was this one. It would take a long time for another cruise ship to reach them, I would think, wouldn't it? I don't think all those life boats could make it to shore. They certainly could not helicopter four to six thousand people.
My concern is what emergency measures are in place if these ships happen to go down at sea? What efforts would it take to rescue everyone and get them all on land? What are the plans?
No one seems to discuss this logistically.
I'm going to guess that cruise ships use shipping lanes so if one does go down, then another cargo/oil/whatever ship is only a few hours behind
I think my point was if the cruise ship were AT SEA, I mean, stuck in the ocean and not near shore as was this one. It would take a long time for another cruise ship to reach them, I would think, wouldn't it?
Generally these ships are going to be in or near heavily used shipping lanes with other ships very close by. When a ship is in trouble the others will respond.
Having said that the chances of something like this happening in the open ocean are pretty slim.
Generally these ships are going to be in or near heavily used shipping lanes with other ships very close by. When a ship is in trouble the others will respond.
Having said that the chances of something like this happening in the open ocean are pretty slim.
Is this 'the plan' - hoping some other ship is nearby that has the spare capacity for maybe 6000 additional people?
Part of the reason why these kinds of ships can float with such a mass above the water line is oil. Their tanks are full of diesel and jet fuels. Even Nuclear air craft carriers do this with all of the jet fuel they carry.
As others have said, it was the sheer mass of the ship, the potential energy it was carrying with the speed it was moving, running into a granite land mass. Bad things are going to happen.
Consider what you're looking at with the pic of the rock.
The cruise ship actually went between the rock and the shoreline. The rock cut into the port/left side of the hull with the starboard/right side of the hull now being suspended in more open water between the rock and the shoreline. As the thing took on water and got heavier it naturally keeled over towards the shoreline BECAUSE the rock had the outer seeward side suspended or held up so it couldn't sink in a keel down, evenly flat, stable position.
ALL larger cruise ships today have as many as 15 decks above the water line and sometimes more. The ballast they maintain below decks is limited in the amount of tankage space allowed along with machinery and crew quarters also down there. They rely disproportionately on the stabilization computers to continue active and more passive control over the movements of the ship in reaction to sea, or prevailing wind influence on the ship.
In other words the active stabilization methods the ship uses are performing a very major role in keeping the thing upright. Ballast now performs a secondary role in that regard in modern ships.
The lifeboat design and equippage is now factored with things such as lean angle of the ship along with surplus cable added to winches and davits extending to allow for lifeboats to be lowered, sliding down the sides of a ship and still have enough cable to allow for some tilt of the ship and still have enough cable for them to reach the water.
Lifeboats can also be deployed in this manner empty and then simply allowed to drop to the water to to be boarded after by swimmers if calm seas are present at time of evacuation.
Life vests are patterned to be attached firmly in such a way that if you were to debark the ship through jumping from one of the lower dockside boarding openings into the water the resultant landing in the water would not result in your neck breaking due to the life vest. Jumping from 15 decks up . . . all bets are off on that one! I believe I'd prefer to throw the vest over then jump and hope to find it later.
The very tragic thing about this event was the fact the ship came to rest on the side of that rock shelf being supported by the rock itself and ALL of the passengers could have simply climbed over the port rail and stood relatively safely on the exposed port side of the ship to be evacuated by the arriving coast guard ships and helicopters.
The MANDATORY charts available on the bridge along with the depth reading and bottom profile instruments in the collage of electronics still working on the bridge would have readily told any of the bridge officers the depth of the water beneath the keel AFTER grounding and if ANY of them had taken a moment to glance at either the charts or the instruments they would have known instantly the ship would have lain exposed even if capsized.
Poor bridge discipline and absolutely non-existant leadership on the part of all three of those bridge officers simply allowed chaos to reign with the prime motivation to cover the bridges (all officers) stupidity in this tragic event.
No lives should have been lost if they'd only devoted the relatively considerable "stable-prior-to-capsizing" time they had to thinking it through instead of lying to the passengers in a vain attempt to cover their asses.
The inquiry is going to reveal things like bridge contact with machinery spaces was non-existant to ascertain the nature and severity of the breach in the hull. Second and third officer did not register a formal resistance to taking that ship off course and into harms way. The laxadaisical approach to the lifeboat drills on that ship and perhaps others in the inventory. This event is going to shake up the cruise industry in the same maner as all other catastrophic marine events of the past such as the Andrea Doria in the Med did with radar and avoidance protocols being established.
I'll throw another at you; much has been said about the Coast Guard Captain reading the riot act to Captain Shettino, but, had this happened in a different part of the world, a very real possibility would have been the first basket/harness lowered to the ship via helicopter would have had a coast guard officer in it, with a sat/phone/radio to perform that desperately needed co-ordination of evacuation. Wasting time screaming ineffective invective at a recalcitrant miscreant does nothing for those in harms way. His actions will also come under review I would hope.
No one in Italy should think anyone maritime related performed admirably in this event. THEY ALL screwed the pooch, except for the citizens of the island throwing open their doors for the evacuees.
Last edited by BruSan; 01-22-2012 at 09:25 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
