S/V Concordia

[marshmat]

The 57-metre tall ship S/V Concordia capsized and sank off the coast of Brazil last Wednesday. Reports have indicated that all 64 students and crew survived.

I will shamelessly copy-paste some more detailed accounts of what happened from the news services, as hotlinks to newspapers tend to die after a week.

Canadian Press report:

2010/02/20 10:20:00 The Canadian Press

A teacher who was on board a Canadian sailing ship that sank off Brazil says safety training kicked in for the 64 students and crew as the boat rolled on its side in rough seas.
Ruth McArthur, 23, of Brampton, Ont., says she was teaching a biology class Thursday when it became apparent that the SV Concordia was in trouble.
McArthur says the students quickly dressed in immersion suits and all were able to get into life rafts as the ship was on its side.
She says everyone remained calm and knew “what they had to do and where they needed to be.”
MacArthur says she believes that’s one of the reasons why everyone was able to get off the vessel safely.
Reached aboard the Philippine-flagged Hokuetsu Delight, McArthur says everyone on the rescue ship is excited to see land as the ship sits just outside port in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

From http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/768879

2010/02/20 21:21:00 Robyn Doolittle Staff Reporter



Students, teachers and crew of the doomed S.V. Concordia drifted alone and unseen in mid-Atlantic for 30 hours as they awaited rescue after the vessel sank Wednesday.
Initial reports said the ship went down Thursday and rescue followed soon after, but Saturday Capt. William Curry said the three-mast ship actually sank 24 hours earlier.
But with the radio dead and no way to talk to rescuers summoned by an automatic distress beacon launched at the moment of sinking, the 64 survivors — 48 of them high-school age students, 42 from Canada — could only drift and wait.
The survivors arrived back on shore in Brazil Saturday and are expected to reach Canada sometime Monday.
Curry, speaking for the first time since the sinking, said the Concordia’s crew had prepared the day before for strong winds and rough waters.
Curry said he was below the deck the first time the ship suddenly keeled; when it immediately happened again, he said he knew the vessel was in great danger.
As the entire surface area of the ship’s sails were exposed to the pounding horizontal winds it took a mere 15 seconds for the ship to flip on its side; Curry said it immediately began to sink and slipped beneath the waves 30 minutes later.
Curry blamed the rare occurrence as a microburst of wind – a sudden vertical downdraft that caught the ship’s sails, while the vessel leaned dangerously to one side.
Because the ship’s radio equipment was submerged, it was unusable, but rescue centres on shore were immediately alerted by a signal from an emergency beacon released automatically when the ship sank.
The Brazilian navy, which played a key role in coordinating the rescue, has posted a detailed account (in Portuguese) of the incident on its website.
The Concordia, a floating classroom operated by Nova Scotia-based West Island College International for grade 11, 12 and first-year-old college students and sailing out of Halifax, was on a five-month trip around the world.
Darren Farwell, whose 17-year-old daughter Keaton was on board, said his daughter sounded shaken when she was able to phone him Saturday morning.
Around 11 a.m., Farwell got the call he had been anxiously waiting for. His daughter was among the first group to arrive at a navy base in Rio de Janeiro.
“It sounds like it was much more dramatic than I ever imagined,” said Farwell, who lives in Toronto. “These last few days, I was just trying to picture the least horrific scenario. Something went wrong with the ship. They decided they needed to abandon ship. Then all the children were able to orderly get their (immersion) suits on, line up and get into the life rafts. That’s not how it happened.”
Speaking on a friend’s cell phone, Keaton tearfully told her father they had just sat down in biology class when the ship began to pitch precariously in heavy winds around 2:30 p.m.
“It was like the Titanic,” she said.
The moment the three-mast ship rolled on its side, water spilled over the hull. The classroom began to flood. The windows cracked and broke.
Many of the young students began to panic, then the extensive emergency training kicked in.
Fighting gravity, a friend helped pull Keaton up into the hallway, then onto the deck and side of the ship. Keaton was able to get her emergency survival suit on. Many didn’t have time.
“She had to jump into the water, then she was picked up by a smaller life boat and then a larger one,” said Farwell.
Although none of the injuries have been confirmed, Farwell said his daughter told him some classmates suffered dislocated shoulders, cracked ribs and at least one concussion. The ship’s doctor was also reportedly among the injured.
Keaton told her father she might like to return to the Class Afloat program next year, but she would prefer to finish the semester on land, at the Nova Scotia campus.
Across the country in Vancouver, Dianne Carruthers-Wood spent the morning waiting nervously by the phone. Her daughter, Natasha, who turned 18 two weeks ago, arrived with a later group.
“Her voice was a bit wobbly but she sounded good,” said Carruthers-Wood. “She said: Mom - oh my god! I can not describe what just happened to us.”
Natasha described the moments after the ship flipped as “orderly panic.”
“She was one of the people that were in a lifeboat that got separated. She was mostly with the Polish crew and a few other students. They had no idea what happened to the others,” said Carruthers-Wood.
On board the rafts, the students discussed how lucky they were it hadn’t happened at night.
“Could you imagine if it was dark?” said Carruthers-Wood. “It was the best scenario, for a worst-case scenario.”
Lauren Unsworth, a 16-year-old Dutch-Canadian, spoke to reporters from Rio.
“The boat started keeling a lot,” she said. “It came back up, keeled again, was basically lying on its side and all of the windows began to break. That’s when we knew it was time to flee.”
Ruth McArthur, a 23-year-old teacher from Brampton, said it wasn’t very long before the life rafts moved away from the ship and “we were able to watch it go down.”
“We then organized ourselves and made sure we had watches (lookouts) and water,” she said. “We collected rain water as the rain fell around us and just prepared for a long stay in the life raft.”
Although there were low points during the hours drifting at sea, morale remained high, said McArthur. Everyone remained confident they would be found because of the frequency of shipping traffic in the area.
The survivors spent much of the afternoon at the Rio-area naval base Moncague, where the Canadian ambassador was waiting. The group spent last night in a Rio hotel and are expected to arrive in Toronto Monday.
Carruthers-Wood said she plan to fly to the city to meet her daughter, then the whole family will head back to Vancouver together.
“I’m just so excited to get her home,” said Carruthers-Woods. “Knowing Natasha, after a couple of days, she’ll just be upset her trip is over.”

From http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/arti...ter-ship-sinks

2010/02/23 04:30:00 Katie Daubs Staff Reporter



The rafts were the worst part.
Tattered and torn during the frantic escape from the S.V. Concordia, the inflatable rafts were salt baths, filled with vomit, human waste and people.
"You do what you can. We were together, and alive," 16-year-old Sam Palonek said of the 40 hours she floated in the Atlantic. "We just sang to keep our spirits up, keep us laughing. It was the most important thing."
Journey's "Don't Stop Believing" and Disney medleys. Even "Happy Birthday" was trotted out for a boy in a nearby raft.
"We started singing 'American Pie,' but we got to the line, 'That'll be the day that I die,' " she said. "We axed that."
Palonek was one of 64 people who escaped the sinking tall ship after a strong burst of wind knocked the vessel on its side and sent it to the bottom of the Atlantic, 555 kilometres from the Brazilian coast.
Palonek, originally from Burlington, arrived at Pearson airport Monday morning, along with the other Canadian students and teachers aboard the boat. She brought her only belongings – a life vest and the outfit she was wearing when the boat sank on Wednesday afternoon.
The Class Afloat program she signed up for last March is run by West Island College International out of Lunenburg, N.S. Senior high school students and first-year university students from around the world go to sea for a semester or two, earning credits while participating in the rigours of ship life.
With no experience at the beginning, Palonek soon loved it, and storms were an exciting part of her world.
When a gale approached Wednesday, the sturdy sails went up in the morning. As the boat rocked, Palonek watched The Good Shepherd in the mess hall that doubled as her history class.
"We were really keeled over to begin with," she said, moving her hands to the left at her sister's apartment in Toronto. "I heard the sails rip, and I looked outside. The railing was under water."
As the boat tipped on its port side, water came in through the portholes. A pot of pasta sailed through the air and hit Palonek in the face, painfully.
"I realized it was the least of my problems," she said. "The boat was going under."
Everyone screamed instructions in their native language. Palonek had to climb, grabbing desks and chairs that were bolted to the ground.
"It was a race to get up. We got pulled out," she said.
Palonek said half of the people were still inside the ship.
"A lot of people were having naps. The bunk beds just broke and caved in," she said.
When she faced the rain, thunder and lightning outside, she began hyperventilating.
"We pulled ourselves together," she said. "We started getting life jackets and emergency suits."
Half of the lifeboats were under the boat. Not knowing how much time was left, the students and teachers tried to free the other rafts. When some disappeared underwater to cut the rafts free, Palonek thought they had died.
Palonek started to gather extra food, water and blankets, but had to jump into the water when the boat made a sudden lurch downward. Someone scooped her out.
"I was thrown into the raft, face-down. There was hardly any space. I swallowed all this seawater."
For the next 12 hours, she was seasick.
The best raft was punctured and sagging, with water to the hips. Most people had water to their shoulders.
By Thursday, Palonek had developed a saltwater rash.
"It felt like someone poured gasoline on my back and set it on fire," she said.
On Thursday, she ate a tasteless energy bar.
"People kept passing out, dehydrated, crying and screaming," she said.
Everyone expected to be rescued by Thursday afternoon. Thursday evening arrived.
"When the captain started to look a little worried, we started thinking maybe our distress signal didn't go off," she said. "I still don't know why it took so long."
The Brazilian navy has defended its actions. An investigation is underway.
At 7 p.m., there was a light in the distance, a plane.
"Everyone broke down crying," she said. "It was probably the best moment in my life."
As it got closer, they lit flares. Just after midnight, two cargo ships arrived, but the water was rough, so the rafts bobbed alongside the boat until morning.
Early Friday, ladders were sent down the sides of the ship. "We were all unbelievably weak, and it was a 15-metre climb."
Palonek plans to return to Lunenburg to finish the semester.
"I owe my life to 10 or 15 different people."

Any thoughts?

[Doug Lord]

Lucky everybody made it!

[bistros]

Originally Posted by marshmat

Any thoughts?

Looks like the crew was reasonably well trained, although the rafts did not work as intended. Getting life rafts inspected and reviewing their condition is a pain and expensive, but it really brings things into focus seeing how they partially failed in expected use. Also have to wonder why there wasn't a charged and prepped SatPhone, GPS and spare EPIRB in their Go-bag(s). First thing prepped on leaving offshore should be a Go-bag.

Imagining rough seas and dark would take this from a bad situation to a much worse one.

No one talks about sitting in feces and vomit during safety briefings, perhaps that is a good point to bring up. Got to wonder why the EPIRB response was so slow.

It would be interesting to see a stability curve for the hull in it's actual usage configuration. There can't be much secondary stability there. It also is pretty apparent they left all the companionways open during weather.

It would be interesting to know how bad the weather was up to the microburst (if that is actually what happened). As things go bad, there should be incremental and inflexible preparations for trouble. Microbursts don't generally occur in clear air and sunny skies.

When you are offshore, you can't plan on fast response times from whatever country you are near. Getting upset with Brazil for slow response just doesn't seem warranted.

--
Bill

[marshmat]

It would certainly be interesting to see more information on the ship itself- specifically, stability data as you suggest, Bill.

From what Captain Curry has said on the record so far, it sounds as if the ship's normal procedures to prepare for heavy weather had already been followed. I don't know what this vessel's procedures entailed.

Reports that the windows gave way in the knockdown are worrying. Shouldn't this be well within design conditions for windows on an ocean-going vessel?

Also worth noting is that the ship's radio gear was apparently destroyed in the knockdown. They would have been out of handheld VHF range, for sure, but was there no backup long-range communication equipment other than the EPIRB?

The Brazilian navy is reportedly investigating why there was such a long delay (I heard 19 hours, but this may not be accurate) between the EPIRB signal being received and search/rescue crews being alerted.

The fact that all the crew and passengers apparently had exposure suits, and knew how to use them, is certainly an important point. Also worth noting is that the survivors' accounts seem to agree that abandon-ship procedures were followed in a co-ordinated, reasonably orderly fashion, despite the panic and chaos.

[Autodafe]

The crew and passengers did a good job by all accounts.
Follow up stories seem focused on SAR delay, but I'm more curious about the sinking.

Some sources estimate positive stability of at least 130degrees, but why bother if downflooding from the windows occurs at 70 degrees?
For a vessel of that size I would expect the design wave loading on the ports to be higher than the heeled hydrostatic pressure anyway?
Curious, but I dare say that it will be a long time (if ever) before a conclusion is published.

[idkfa]

It seems like a small volume to sacrifice, to fit buoyancy tanks, bow and stern, sufficiently larger to stop sinking? I know it is not done but why? Why is lost of life so accepted? Wonder what the survivors, even though they all made it, would think of such a retrofit?

[bistros]

Originally Posted by idkfa

It seems like a small volume to sacrifice, to fit buoyancy tanks, bow and stern, sufficiently larger to stop sinking? I know it is not done but why? Why is lost of life so accepted? Wonder what the survivors, even though they all made it, would think of such a retrofit?

Not having drawings in front of me, I'd still assume that there are at least three if not more full bulkheads capable of being sealed on the hull, providing the same effect. With the ports failing under immersion pressure, sealed bulkheads are useless.

Maintenance of older hulls is problematic and expensive. Often, things like ports needing updates are out of production, and original equipment quality replacement parts are not available. At this point the yard usually substitutes parts they think/guess should be suitable. I've seen this done repeatedly. It would be very interesting to see if the failed ports met the original engineering specifications. I bet they don't.

Somewhere in the life of most durable products the intent and design of the original engineers get lost and people start guessing at maintenance instead of researching for the right answers. Often original drawings, specifications and requirements are lost. I've got friends here locally who are maintenance design engineers for military aircraft, and you would not believe the level of documentation and testing necessary to keep parts going on 30 year old Hercules airframes while still meeting current design spec.

In a civilian market like boating, the chance for tolerances and specifications creeping cheaper and weaker is irresistible in light of the staggering costs of staying original equipment. As far as I know, France has some pretty tough standards for recreational craft, and they may be worth other countries looking at. Especially in today's marketplace where people are buying cruise-capable designs on the distressed used market for less than the cost of a new race ready Laser dinghy.

Since the incident happened outside Canadian waters and jurisdiction, I wonder who is going to investigate and how deep the inquiry will dig. Since there was no loss of life and emergency procedures obviously worked, they may not dig deep enough to find out why things failed.

I hope we all can learn from this.

--
Bill

[Hunter25]

Floation compartments on 170' vessels are not practical to say the least. Buoyancy chambers on anything over a trailer sailor are not a practical option, so the hull is divided into compartments, with an expected down flooding requirement. This assumes you have the time to dog down hatches and get her sealed up, which they did not seem to have in this incident. These sort of things happen. Boats can be suddenly knocked on their beam ends and the thoughts of a student crew were to get out, not close water tight doors, so the boat sank. Had this been a well trained naval vessel, she would have survived her knock down and probably been saved. Not all vessels can operate with this level of crew efficiency.

[bistros]

Originally Posted by Hunter25

Floation compartments on 170' vessels are not practical to say the least. Buoyancy chambers on anything over a trailer sailor are not a practical option, so the hull is divided into compartments, with an expected down flooding requirement. This assumes you have the time to dog down hatches and get her sealed up, which they did not seem to have in this incident. These sort of things happen. Boats can be suddenly knocked on their beam ends and the thoughts of a student crew were to get out, not close water tight doors, so the boat sank. Had this been a well trained naval vessel, she would have survived her knock down and probably been saved. Not all vessels can operate with this level of crew efficiency.

From the posted accounts and those I've found online, crew efficiency does not appear to be a problem. There does appear to be problems with policies, procedures and practices. Miserable stuffy humid accommodations are tough school teaching venues, and the temptation to open companionways and ventilation is almost irresistible. Balancing livable below deck conditions in humid tropical areas versus sealing the compartments for inclement weather is where the major weakness lies. Bad choices were made in setting the policies, not in execution of them.

--
Bill

[idkfa]

Lets say sunk displacement is 5 to 8 times (guesstimate) sailing displacement. Then if we had fore and aft bulkheads that extended inwards 10 to 6% of LOA, that could be used for limited storage but not living space. They could only be opened briefly with signed permission of authority.

Short of collision with an iceberg, could we not achieve zero loss at sea? On smaller vessels out of GRP, apart from diagonal breakaway bows, the forward bulkhead compartment could be filled with polyurethane foam so they could survive the GRP splitting, bulkhead detaching, ie. impact with a floating shipping container.

This loss of volume/haulage is an acceptable cost for safety, some of which would be offset by lower insurance premiums. I think owners will accept to prevent loss of crew, if not, then they are heartless businessmen and need regulation.

I really think it is reckless to design boats will sink if flooded; lost keel, holed, knocked down etc.. Short of supertankers and aircraft-carriers.

[Hunter25]

You and Loveofsea would get along just fine. With some internal volume calculations averaged on a handful of vessels all over say 50' you will soon realize how much internal space you have to surrender to buoyancy compartments to keep them from sinking. On sailing vessels with 40%+ of their displacement in ballast, you would have nearly zero internal space for crew and accommodations. BTW super tankers and aircraft carriers can easily take a hole, a big hole and continue cruising along while they make repairs underway. They don't have buoyancy chambers either.

[marshmat]

Compartmentalization has long been the accepted approach to ensuring adequate damaged stability in larger craft. And with good reason- properly done, compartmentalization is very good at containing any damage. (Somebody tell Captain Kirk about this next time the Starship Enterprise loses all of deck nine to a single hull breach.) Buoyancy compartments or foam just aren't feasible in larger sizes, but watertight doors and bulkheads are.

Watertight compartments aren't much good, though, if the doors between them are open or if the ship can easily downflood if knocked down. I don't know about the below-decks situation on the Concordia, but it does appear that she downflooded very quickly in the knockdown.

To quote John & Phyllis of Morgan's Cloud ( http://www.morganscloud.com/index.html ):
Priorities:
- Keep the water out
- Keep the crew on the boat
- Keep the keel side down
- Keep the mast up
- Keep the rudder on

It would appear that the first and third were what failed on the Concordia, thus causing a failure of the second priority.....

I don't readily accept answers like "it was a microburst". Why was there so much sail up that the boat could be knocked down? Multiple times? Not knowing this type of ship... does it possibly require that much sail to maintain a safe course? Is it a stability issue? It seems it wasn't THAT bad if the kids were sitting down in biology class, which leads me to believe that there was simply too much sail. Looking forward to see if there is a right-up in Proceedings (U.S. Coast Guard Journal of Safety and Security at Sea). The portlights suredly had deadlights. Somebody, in this regard, did not do their job and have them dogged. At 2:30 PM, the Master was on watch.

[Hunter25]

It is a simple proposition, put a bunch of lubbers on a boat, have it laid on its beam ends and expect them to have a level enough head to dog hatches and ports? Oh please. Mark have you ever experienced a knock down? You do not have to have much sail up to be laid flat. One of the biggest problems with micro bursts are you you do not get a warning, just hugely increased wind strengths for a minute. There is not anything you can do to prepare for this, it is just luck. Some have it, others not so much. The Pride of Baltimore was sunk in just the same way, so I suppose they where being idiots during the last portion of their umpteenth Atlantic crossing too? Some times you get caught and if you have a boat load of lubbers, your odds are not going to be good.

It is not the students' fault - It is the officers' on watch, ultimately the master's.
What does my having experienced a knockdown have to do with anything? Personally, I don't go to sea dependent upon a rag hanging on a stick for motivation but to each their own. If knockdowns are acceptable on such a craft, then all the more need for dogged hatches and deadlights.
Nothing is luck. Everything is someone's fault. Why were they there with insufficient crew? If you say it was a boatload of lubbers, it needed MORE crew than otherwise - that would be the master's fault, as well (if true). This BS about using weather phenomena as an excuse for every touch of incompetence is disturbing. "Oh well, bad luck today - a knockdown and sinking. Yes, a damned microburst again."