Last voyage for Costa Concordia cruise ship

[daiquiri]

The anchor maneuver is reported by the first news coverage of the accident and seems to be confirmed by testimonies from passengers who also reported noise from anchors being dropped down and pulled up. Considering how things and facts are changing on a daily basis, I'll rather wait for the official reconstruction (based on black-box data), to see how was the stopping maneuver performed.

I've just stumbled upon this page (in italian) where a detailed reconstruction of the accident is given: http://www.farevela.net/2012/01/14/t...i-navigazione/
Some of the graphics shown are very similar to my first posts in this thread. Perhaps they are boatdesign.net members too?

[Leo Lazauskas]

Originally Posted by daiquiri

Considering how things and facts are changing on a daily basis, I'll rather wait for the official reconstruction (based on black-box data), to see how was the stopping maneuver performed.

Me too.
I was thinking squat might have played a part, and that the critical depth
would be 6m at 15 knots. Given that the ship had a draft of 8.5m I might have
to re-consider at what point of the course it came into play.

[janneke]

I know it's all "water under the bridge" now, but i thought to share some facts about this captain.
We were on an atlantic cruise with the Costa Europa (now sold to Thompson) in july 2009 and, as costa does traditionally, we were offered a drink and cake to celebrate our national holiday (21 july for Belgium). We attended although the timing was wrong (cake just before the late seating dinner?), and we were about 15 people. I remember the captain well, tan faced, looking well and glamorous in his white uniform (nothing wrong with that) and passing by each group and exchanging a few words here and there. We instantly disliked him because he was NOT AT ALL sympathetic! It was obvious that he was not interested in talking to passengers.
A few days later we were cruising and were followed by Pullmantur's Pacific Dream (ex Celebrity ship) on the left (our port side) ever since leaving the Casablanca port. Slowly the P Dream crept up on us and even overtook us. Our ship moved over to the left and was getting behind with the P dream on the right in front now. Then we reached the port entrance of Arrecife in Lanzarote and i wondered who would get in port first. That was soon solved when our ship sharply turned portside (left) to overtake the in front sailing Dream on the inside of the circle in a sharp U-turn. This manoeuver went so fast that the swimming pool overflowed, flooding the whole stern. But we beat the Dream and got in port first, thanks to this quick action from the bridge. I have never before seen this done on a cruise! I have a picture of this
In Feb 2010 the same Costa Europa hit the pier in Sharm el Sheikh, so called after a vicious wind jolt. Duh. And who was at the helm, yeah right, captain Schettino! And who can prove that there was a sudden wind jolt? It would be his word against someone elses.
All a coincidence perhaps. Possible, but when i put all the facts together it looks to me that there is a whole trail of suspicious circumstantial evidence that this captain has left behind.
JP

[Gian Milan]

Ciao Daiquiri.
Dopo 3 ore di siluramenti e bombardamenti la Bismark era a galla e furono i marinai tedeschi ad affondarla per non farsi massacrare tutti.
Se uno scoglio a 15 nodi fa affondare in una ora una nave di 300 metri, la stessa cosa accadrebbe in collisione con un rimorchiatore oceanico; e questo é scandaloso.
La verità é che le barche, da sempre, devono essere strette basse e lunghe. Dove ci sono 4000 persone, la chiglia dovrebbe essere almeno di 30 cm di spessore.
Invece barche come la ocean sono alte 70 metri in opera morta e pescano 9 metri.
Questo é uno scandalo di cui nessuno dice una parola.
Sono dei bidoni ambulanti fatti per stipare il più gente possibile, e fanno schifo.
Se l'incidente fosse avvenuto in mare aperto e col mare grosso, difficilmente si sarebbero salvate 1000 persone.
E questo non solo poiché il capitano é un vile, ma perché quelle cose non sono navi!!!!
Sono dei bidoni che rimangono in equilibrio in qualche modo, con eliche e pinne stabilizzatrici (inutili sotto i 6 nodi) che non hanno neppure la chiglia in grado di resistere ad uno scoglio! Viviamo in mano ai delinquenti.
Questo, almeno, il mio pensiero.

[Yobarnacle]

Sounds like Schettino is consistant.
As far as captain absorbing all of the blame and company escaping, thats the captains job too.
A captain is also by law, a legal AGENT of the company. Defined by law, an AGENT is required to save the company from financial harm if possible. If he doesn't, he's guilty of malfeasance. A white collar crime. Penalty is jail.

[Gian Milan]

Schellino is a cowardly irresponsible; less that an animal.
Nothing has the dignity of his behavior: he made ​​a disastrous mistake, lied to like a fool boy, has abandoned his ship as no one in the history.
only 30 deaths were a miracle, but we must teach that ships designed as Concordia must be immediately dismantled.
You can not make tall ships 79 meters fishing for 9!
and with the keel that opens to a rock!
Shame!

[Yobarnacle]

If he miraculously saves his licence, maybe he'll next be given command of the Costa Ferrari or Costa Lamborghini, since he habitualy drives these large ships as if they were sports cars.

[Gian Milan]

sorry, I translate.

Hello Daiquiri.
After 3 hours of bombing and torpedoing the Bismarck was afloat and were Germans sailors to sink it to avoid being massacred everyone.
If ship of 300 meters sink in an hour becouse of a collision with a reef (15 knots), the same thing would happen in a collision with a tugboat ocean, and this is outrageous.

The truth is that the boats, have to be low,long and narrow. Where there are 4000 people on boat, the keel should be at least 30 cm thick.

Rather like the ocean boats are 70 meters high topsides and fish 9 meters.
This is a scandal that no one says a word.

Thay are Street bins made ​​to cram as many people as possible and to go in all harbor.

If the accident had occurred in open water and rough sea, not 1000 people would be saved.

And this not only because the captain is a coward, but because those things are not ships!!

There are bins that remain in balance in some way, with stabilizer fins and propellers (unnecessary under 6 knots) that have not even the keel can withstand a rock! We live in the hands of criminals.
This, at least, my thoughts.

[Yobarnacle]

Gian Milan
My wife and I already read your post in Italian. She reads and speaks italian very well. I stumble along. But thanks for the english translation.
My wife is descended from italian and spanish imigrants to Mexico. Muy vivaz.

[DCockey]

US charts are published by the NOAA Office of Coast Survey. Their website has a page on the accuracy and precision of charts relative to GPS position. In part it reads:
Before GPS, mariners realized that their geographical positions could be over a nautical mile in error when ship's positions were derived using various electronic instruments such as LORAN and celestial observations. With this error of uncertainty, mariners gave a wide berth to hazards depicted on charts, including shoals and obstructions. There was general acceptance that the available navigational information and cartographic processes used by the chartmaker to position the hazards were more accurate than the navigational means available to the user of the chart.

With GPS providing such an accurate fix, the mariner now needs to pay closer attention to the reliability of the chart because accuracy limitations of charts will be critical to ship safety when GPS is used. For example, to save steaming time, mariners may become more daring and rely on their GPS to pass hazards depicted on charts much closer than prudent. However, the plotted hazards may have been positioned by less accurate navigational means than GPS and, if repositioned using GPS, could be charted in a different position.

The page discusses various reasons for the "inaccuracy" of charts with the general theme of don't read too much into charts. I expect the situation with charts from other sources is very similar.

[noetus]

How many people out there are buying Schettino's defence that since the rock wasn't on his chart, he wasn't responsible for hitting it? Just what kind of a sailor makes a claim like that?

[Yobarnacle]

"mariners may become more daring and rely on their GPS to pass hazards depicted on charts much closer than PRUDENT."David Cockey
Seems to be consensus of Shettino's error, he lacked prudence.

[Yobarnacle]

Originally Posted by noetus

Just what kind of a sailor makes a claim like that?

A LIAR!

[Yobarnacle]

News break. Similarities between public media broadcasts and Design Forunm posts are explained. They are sourcing the Design Forunm while we are quoting them. What goes around comes around.

[noetus]

Well, now before a judge, he's apparently changed his story:

"I was navigating by sight because I knew the depths well and I had done this manoeuvre three or four times. But this time I ordered the turn too late and I ended up in water that was too shallow. I don't know why it happened. I was a victim of my instincts."

But it's obvious he was operating too close to the bounds of error (and not by half) and had no business performing this manoeuvre in the first place. The "I don't know why it happened" excuse is further evidence of his stupidity and the quote shows he knew what had happened as soon as it had, adding impetus to the questions about the delay in raising the alarm. And the fact that Costa approved this manoeuvre, tacitly or not, lays some responsibility at their door (though without mitigating the skipper's).

The quote also seems to confirm what people have been saying on this forum, especially daiquiri, about where and how the impact occurred.

And finally, he's a "victim of his instincts." He still isn't really admitting responsibility, or is somehow trying to convince himself of his innocence.