Italian Cruise Ship Disaster and Crew - Page 2




 
--
Italian Cruise Ship Disaster and Crew
 
January 19th, 2012  
Trooper1854
 
 
Italian Cruise Ship Disaster and Crew
Quote:
Originally Posted by perseus
Sorry to stereotype here, but the 'show-off', disorganised and cowardy nature of the Captain and perhaps some of the officers hasn't exactly helped the image of Italian officials has it?

Please don't think that this reflects on Italy and Italians.
I have cousins serving in the Italian armed forces and they have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and have served with as much distinction and bravery as any of the other nations who have had the Lion's share of the publicity.
Also, remember that Italy's reputation as a fighting force during WWII was tarnished by propaganda.
I had an Uncle who fought in Russia, and another in North Africa and they and their fellow soldiers were not inept cowards as protayed by the allies.
Italians did surrender in large numbers in North Africa, but only after being abbandoned by their allies and running out of food, water and ammunition.
The British surrender at Singapore was no less an event and there are numerous other instances of Allied mass surrenders.
The issue of the cruise ship involves the bad management of the situation by one man. What about the Italian Coast Guard, Fire Service, and other members of the rescue services that aquitted them selves so well in rescuing the survivors?
Also I have listened to the tape of the Coast Guard captain having a right go at the ship's captain to get back on and do his duty.
January 19th, 2012  
perseus
 
 
Trooper

the Deputy Mayor of the island put in a good account of himself!

Quote:
As the Costa Concordia was sinking, the deputy mayor of the Tuscan island of Giglio, Mario Pellegrini, went on board to join the rescue effort. He told Outlook on the BBC World Service how he reacted when he realised the ship was in trouble.

"I met the mayor and immediately we devised a plan to co-ordinate the evacuation of the people, so I decided to go on a tender and to go on board. My first duty was to look for an officer on the boat in order to co-ordinate the evacuation.

I took the first tender that arrived at the port with the first evacuated passengers. I took this tender all by myself and went on board. I went up and I started looking for an officer.

After 20 minutes I couldn't find anybody. I even went on the higher bridges of the ship and even then I couldn't see anybody...........
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16638399
January 19th, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 
This ecos images of the Sea Diamond diaster , she also ran aground on a shallow reef off the Greek Coast in 2007 I believe.

Problem now is the nearby village where she sank, is in threat of the fuel rupturing from her tanks and damaging the local economy there by coating all the beatiful Mediterranean coast with fuel and oil that the village depends on for tourism.

Although the wreck is surrounded by a skimming barrier, the Sea Diamond was badly damaged as it tumbled against the rocky underwater mountian side on it's way down, leaving it very battered on the side of the volcanic caldera she sank in now inverted about 60 to 180 meters down.

Some speculate she may slip further down the side of the caldera either rupturing her tanks or causing her to disentigrate.

The reason I bring this up is I don't really know what the ocean floor is like under the Concordia , Although she may be partially submerged, the problem comes with trying to mover her, it's hard to tell if she is implanted on the rocks, or just barely balanced. Let alone what will happen if salvage crews start mucking with her.

I suppose there is only one way to find out. With a post card like port city there and cruise lines going by on a regular basis, having a wrecked cruise ship as an eye sore won't be good for business.

There is good news for now as it seems, the weather seems to be working in the rescuer's favor, hopefully it stays that way. The last thing needed would be a bad storm to weaken the structure of the Concordia causing her to either become un salvagable, or for her to end up like the ill fated American Star incident ( look it up for a good cross reference)

For her to break apart under the stress of being on her side exposed to sea water for so long. (inside and out). Ships don't generally fair as well on there sides, that's a lot of weight going to a lot of places where the designers did not intend for it to be placed... I am surpised from the aerial views that no signs of stress and structual warping has occured yet and is visible amidships of the wrecked cruise liner. Of course I don't really know the entire condition of her starboard side, how badly the rocks on that side have damaged her from her laying there, or how totally entrenched upon them she is.

Lastly , what's all this about Italian's at sea nonsense? These diasters happen, both in commerical and cruising industries.

The failure of duty of some of the ships officers and Captian should not be mistaken for the quality of all sea going Italians.

Look at the fires that Carnival experianced a few years back at sea in the Caribean , or the minor collisions in port around the same time. Stuff like this happens more often than not in this industry, although rarely on such a devestaing scale as the Concordia's case.

For I am sure if the crew and captain was from the U.S., or the UK, or Norway or whatever people would be ignorantly blaming whatever country in mind for their all of a sudden " bad maritime history"...
--
Italian Cruise Ship Disaster and Crew
January 20th, 2012  
alessandro.pirisinu
 
 
Dear Friends,
here in Italy, everyone is sorry for this terrible incident and mad with that coward captain...
BUT
everyone in Italy is so proud of Commander Gregorio De Falco, head of operations of the Port of Livorno. He immediately sent the Coast Guard to rescue the castaways and IMHO behaved like a true military: De Falco said the Ship's captain to get his ass back on the ship, ok... but, first of all, he made every effort to rescue as many people as possible.

I can't translate for you the tone of the conversation, but every italian understood what
Commander De Falco really meant: first, we are men and you cannot let other men down, abandon them to their destiny and run away. And he said that with the right tone of voice...
I am proud of this great Italian and I will remember his words when I'll have to explain to someone what a military should be doing his duty.
January 21st, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 


A closer look at the immense amount of damage and the culprit behind it...
January 22nd, 2012  
perseus
 
 
Yossarian (I was also expecting a picture of the Captain when I saw the text of your last post on my Email)

Yes that looks bad, but the sinking or toppling of the ship is still something of a mystery to me and remains an area of interest. Modern ships (unlike the Titanic) are constructed using multiple sealed compartments on the underside, so even if many of these are breached water shoudn't be able to enter the main living areas. They also can flood further compartments to rebalance the weight. However, this is based on the assumption that water tight doors are closed and modifications (pipes, holes for cables etc) are installed properly. Ships can also Topple if they are grounded since the righting moment is diminished and the ship is at the mercy of ledges and ground subsidence. Of course if the ship really is in danger of sinking completely then grounding is the only option, and that is what the Captain claims.

In other words ships are designed to withstand one serious mistake (such as a collision) but not two of three seperate mistakes, so you have to be incompetent to the extreme. On top of this we have the botched evacuation. It should have been possible to evacuate everyone in time before the ship toppled to an angle such that the port lifeboats couldn't be used.

The designers and cruise companies must be nervous since modern ships, although not unsinkable, should have been able to survive this sort of accident especially in calm waters.
January 22nd, 2012  
perseus
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
This ecos images of the Sea Diamond diaster , she also ran aground on a shallow reef off the Greek Coast in 2007 I believe.

Problem now is the nearby village where she sank, is in threat of the fuel rupturing from her tanks and damaging the local economy there by coating all the beatiful Mediterranean coast with fuel and oil that the village depends on for tourism.

Although the wreck is surrounded by a skimming barrier, the Sea Diamond was badly damaged as it tumbled against the rocky underwater mountian side on it's way down, leaving it very battered on the side of the volcanic caldera she sank in now inverted about 60 to 180 meters down.

Some speculate she may slip further down the side of the caldera either rupturing her tanks or causing her to disentigrate.

The reason I bring this up is I don't really know what the ocean floor is like under the Concordia , Although she may be partially submerged, the problem comes with trying to mover her, it's hard to tell if she is implanted on the rocks, or just barely balanced. Let alone what will happen if salvage crews start mucking with her.
I'm not sure how accurate this is, but this looks more realistic than some of the earlier drawings. Where exactly are the fuel tanks, sure it is near to that breach below the waterline a third of the way from the stern, however there has been no leak reported so far.




Some proposals

January 22nd, 2012  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by perseus
I'm not sure how accurate this is, but this looks more realistic than some of the earlier drawings. Where exactly are the fuel tanks, sure it is near to that breach below the waterline a third of the way from the stern, however there has been no leak reported so far.
The hole is in a highly suspect area, typically used for fuel tanks, or sometimes Ballast. If it is in a ballast tank it won't do a lot of harm as far as things getting out.

If you can imagine a space usually no more than about 1.5m deep, above the bottom of the outer hull and also tanks of a similar width along the sides of the ship along the greater part of it's length short of the curved bow and stern setions and maybe 6m high, that is roughly where you will find most tanks, either Ballast, Fresh Water and Fuel.

These are some old drawings I did when we salvaged an old Singaporean vessel that had almost no drawings, I'm afraid that they don't reproduce very well from AutoCad to Windows Paint, but it will give you an idea,... even though this is a cargo vessel and the ship in question is a passo, the hull doesn't change a lot, just how it's fitted out inside. One's full of rubbish the other has valuable scrap iron and timber an' stuff.



Dark Blue is Ballast, Brown Heavy Fuel oil, Gold is Diesel and light blue is Fresh water. There are a squillion other small tanks for daily service etc, but they are of little concern.

January 25th, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
The hole is in a highly suspect area, typically used for fuel tanks, or sometimes Ballast. If it is in a ballast tank it won't do a lot of harm as far as things getting out.

If you can imagine a space usually no more than about 1.5m deep, above the bottom of the outer hull and also tanks of a similar width along the sides of the ship along the greater part of it's length short of the curved bow and stern setions and maybe 6m high, that is roughly where you will find most tanks, either Ballast, Fresh Water and Fuel.

These are some old drawings I did when we salvaged an old Singaporean vessel that had almost no drawings, I'm afraid that they don't reproduce very well from AutoCad to Windows Paint, but it will give you an idea,... even though this is a cargo vessel and the ship in question is a passo, the hull doesn't change a lot, just how it's fitted out inside. One's full of rubbish the other has valuable scrap iron and timber an' stuff.



Dark Blue is Ballast, Brown Heavy Fuel oil, Gold is Diesel and light blue is Fresh water. There are a squillion other small tanks for daily service etc, but they are of little concern.



I appreciate the information for it better helps me understand the basic layout of a sea going vessel when looking at this situation, I can better understand now why authorities are so concerned, aparently the Concorida is run aground to a major nearby marine sanctuary and concerns also are now drifting to the large amounts of cleaning chemicals spread through out the ship.

I cannont find any information, and although the rescue stage seems to be drawing to a close, and that I completely understand why emphasis was placed on finding trapped survivors, I am not sure if water samples from inside the vessel have been taken to check for a variety of loose chemicals.

Hopefully most are the newer envorimentally freindly cleaners and sanitizers, as well as kitchen chemicals that will dillute easily in the sea water, and disipate harmlessly as designed.

Costa Cruises announced a few years ago that it would strive to become the world's Greenest Cruise lines and in the process won the Green Star Notation, so it would make sense if part of that effort meant switching to more enviromental chemicals and solutions.

They don't clean for anything but they are less impactful in a situation like this.

Also , one last question, I have heard that more modern cruise vessels tend to be top heavy, is this true? Or are the remarkably stable?

And would the 50 m gash comprimise multiple compartments thus the balance of the ship as those compartments flooded? If not then was running the ship aground the best option. For they say the space between the bottom of the Concorida and the sea bed at the point of impact was about 15m, I do not know if this was accurate however.

Although I do not think I would have abandoned the evacuation effort until the last possible moments, I will admit, given If I was in the captian's situation after the impact I don't think I would have made any better of command decision.

So unlike countless conversations I have found on the topic, I can't say I will sit back from a holier than thou standpoint and commend everything he did. I am not a sea captian, and honestly have no clue how to proceed in minimizing the damage and loss of life of a massive sea going vessel under emergancy circumstances, So I cannot really comment on how he proceeded after impact up to the evacuation process.

Although I do agree he should have stayed onboard until the last moment and all passengers were evacuated.
February 11th, 2012  
perseus
 
 
I can't vouch for the accuracy of this from the Daily Mail but it sounds like they couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.

Quote:
In the opening scenes a voice can be heard saying 'There is a gash...I believe...so water is coming in,' and Schettino is then heard saying 'I've spoken to the control room and they say with two compartments flooded we should still float,' however six had been breached by the huge rock reef the ship had struck.

As the minutes tick by and the ship's tilt begins to increase more a sense of panic begins to filter through the crew on the bridge as they seem unsure of how to react - at one point a panicking officer is heard shouting 'What shall we do? What shall we do?'

A voice replies 'General emergency,' but the order to abandon ship is still not given and instead Schettino is heard asking fort 'tug boats' to be sent to the scene before adding 'Send boats please, quickly.'

Later the crew on the bridge are heard shouting 'Let's abandon the ship. Abandon ship,' and they are seen rushing away but crucially the order for the passengers is not given for another ten minutes by which time it is already too late for those trapped below decks unable to move because of the ship's tilt.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1m5RwfDY1



The Independent's version

Quote:
Shortly after a 50-meter hole was torn in the side the giant liner, at 9.42 pm on 13 January, after a dangerous manoeuvre close to the island of Giglio, the video shows the seemingly relaxed, almost lackadaisical, response of officers on the bridge. But within half an hour, when the gravity of the situation has sunk in, and with the ship tilting at a 20-degree angle, the footage suggests the calm has been replace by panic and disarray among senior crew members.

Then at 10.25pm a man identified in the video as Captain Francesco Schettino is seen talking on the phone while senior officers struggle to understand what is happening, with at least one shouting out: "What do we do?"

And then, around 25 minutes before the official "abandon ship" signal is given, one official is heard saying: "Passengers are getting into the life boats", to which a man believed to be Schettino replies: "Vabbuo", which means "Whatever".

Last night, Francesco Verusio, the magistrate leading the investigation into the disaster, said he would urgently seek a copy of the film – the first to show what happened on the liner before it partially capsized with the loss of 32 lives. So far 17 bodies have been recovered and 15 are still missing.

"This is new to us – I've just seen it for the first time," said Mr Verusio last night. "We've heard everything that was happening on the bridge."

Crucially the video appears to show senior officers calling for the ship to be abandoned at 10.32pm. Calls of "We're leaving the ship, abandon ship," are heard. But the official order telling passengers to evacuate the stricken vessel was not made for another 10 minutes.

Senior Italian coastguard officials have stated that had the ship been evacuated immediately after hitting the rocks instead of 76 minutes later, then there would probably have been little or no loss of life.

Last night, Corriere della Sera newspaper speculated that the sounds of heels near the mystery camera man or woman meant that the married captain's presumed lover, Domnica Cemortan, 24, may have taken the video.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...d-6719996.html
 


Similar Topics
Friendly Fire