Costa Concordia, 80 deg list, really scary !!

Discussion in 'Stability' started by smartbight, Jan 15, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Heiwa
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 89
    Likes: 4, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 60
    Location: France

    Heiwa Naval architect

    Hm, why interrupt dinner with a nice girl for a routine (stupid) fly bye of a small island ordered by ... whom?:rolleyes:
     
  2. Pascal Warin
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 81
    Likes: 2, Points: 8, Legacy Rep: 38
    Location: Paris

    Pascal Warin Junior Member

    You should not read or listen any media regarding anything which is fare or close to a technical issue.
    Even so-called "specialized" journalists (I now a couple of them) are barely able to distinguish between fore and aft end of a vessel.

    I remember that when Estonia capsized EVERY newspaper shown a drawing where Ro-Ro deck in operational condition was below water line !!!:!:
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. Heiwa
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 89
    Likes: 4, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 60
    Location: France

    Heiwa Naval architect

    Can you remember a link about this ... Ro-Ro deck in operational condition was below water line? :)
     
  4. Pascal Warin
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 81
    Likes: 2, Points: 8, Legacy Rep: 38
    Location: Paris

    Pascal Warin Junior Member

    Sorry I do not understand your question.
     
  5. Heiwa
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 89
    Likes: 4, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 60
    Location: France

    Heiwa Naval architect

    A roro-deck is generally the open bulkhead deck of the hull of the ferry or a deck inside or on top of the superstructure of the ferry not obstructed by bulkheads and thus not below waterline.

    You say you remember that when Estonia capsized EVERY newspaper (has) shown a drawing where Ro-Ro deck in operational condition was below water line !!!

    And I wonder if you can provide links to these newspapers and the drawing.
     
  6. Pascal Warin
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 81
    Likes: 2, Points: 8, Legacy Rep: 38
    Location: Paris

    Pascal Warin Junior Member

    Obviously this is stupid to show Ro-Ro deck (usually the freeboard deck) below operational waterline.
    Unfortunately it was a time where most newspaper were ...on paper. Thus I do not have any link.

    Just to say that reporter are paid to write attractive texts as fast as possible. Accuracy is a secondary issue.
     
  7. CliffordK
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 20
    Location: Oregon, USA

    CliffordK Junior Member

    Google has some good FREE newspaper archives that you could browse through. Just find the dates in question. Or, perhaps even just search for the ship's name.

    Happy Hunting.
     
  8. CliffordK
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 20
    Location: Oregon, USA

    CliffordK Junior Member

    I tried to find some of the original Estonia Newspaper articles.

    None of the articles I'm finding show the bow visor below the waterline. However, many of the articles I'm finding (mainly US newspapers) do not have illustrations.

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...=3204,748425&dq=estonia ferry bow visor&hl=en

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...=1435,478129&dq=estonia ferry bow visor&hl=en

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/2853197.stm
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,527875,00.html

    Do you have a side-view diagram of the deck layout of the Estonia? Is the cargo deck in fact flat?
     
  9. Heiwa
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 89
    Likes: 4, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 60
    Location: France

    Heiwa Naval architect

    Below is side view of M/S Estonia.
    [​IMG]
    Blue is the watertight hull with 11 bulkheads between AP bhd and FP bhd (in which there are 22 w/t doors).
    Red is the weathertight superstructure (between decks #2 and 4) with weathertight ramps fwd and aft and weathertight pilot doors in the side.
    Yellow is the deck house which is neither watertight nor weathertight.
    Pls note that any ship only floats on the hull according the principle of Archimedes.
    Ships do not float on neither superstructures nor deck houses as they are not watertight. ;)
     
  10. nettersheim
    Joined: Sep 2010
    Posts: 47
    Likes: 7, Points: 8, Legacy Rep: 152
    Location: France

    nettersheim Consultant

    Good memo, Heiwa, thanks.

    Very often people doesn't know the limits of watertight, superstructure and deck house areas/zones on ro-pax vessels.
     
  11. Pascal Warin
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 81
    Likes: 2, Points: 8, Legacy Rep: 38
    Location: Paris

    Pascal Warin Junior Member

    Specially journalists.
     
  12. CliffordK
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 24
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 20
    Location: Oregon, USA

    CliffordK Junior Member

    I have to wonder if the water permeability/impermeability of the weathertight superstructure is the key to the stability or instability of both the Concordia and Estonia.

    I presume the Estonia was designed to have a dry car deck. It still would have to have some drainage, but once the bow visor was lost, thousands of tons of water rushed in. Not that it would have naturally been below water, but at a level below the waves in a heavy sea. At 14 knots foward motion, it would tend to have more water coming into the front than exiting the front. Assuming there was water trapped above the watertight hull compartments, it would not be a stable situation.

    According to this sumary, within 1 minute of loosing the visor, it started listing. How long did it take to stop the ship? Within 7 minutes it already had a 30° list.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,grossbild-1064831-527875,00.html

    Did the crew do a port turn to correct a starboard list? Turnining directly into the wind/waves? Why? Wouldn't a starboard turn have been more appropriate, perhaps stopping with the stern to the wind, with centrifugal force shifting the ship and water to the port?

    Was the water level higher inside the ship than outside? If that was the case, then it would need to be able to open some large drains to the outside to let the excess water out.

    Once stopped, one might think the water would run back out the bow, but since the bow was narrower than the rest of the ship, a list might tend to trap the water inside, along the starboard side of the ship, allowing more water to come in the bow and become trapped. Eventually toppling the ship.

    Anyway, I see no problem with the idea that wind and wave action could bring water onto the car ramp. I see no mention if there was any way to get water off of the car deck which, at least initially, should have been above the sea level outside.

    Did the ship turn turtle? It should take a long time for it to actually sink unless changes in pressures actually ruptured part of the watertight hull.

    With the Concordia the opposite was likely true.
    Based on the deck numbering by Costa & smartbight
    http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/at...list-really-scary-profilecconcordia9-rev3.pdf

    The watertight hull devision stopped at the ceiling of Deck A.
    Deck 0 also appeared to be watertight, at least from the outside.
    Deck 1 (Olanda) does not appear to be watertight. Square windows. Opening?

    I presume the way the battleships are built (mentioned by other people) is that the hull is watertight and compartmentalized on the inside and outside all the way up to the main deck. If the hull below the waterline is breached, it should be able to settle down several meters and still retain boyancy with excess watertight freeboard.

    In this case, 2 decks above the waterline, and one hits weathertight superstructure.

    So, what looks sealed up to decks 3/4 with the lifeboats, in fact isn't sealed.

    Shortly after the second grounding, deck 1, Olanda could have been flooded from the outside in, causing the listing to accelerate.

    If the captain had taken actions to prevent the second grounding, then increased watertight freeboard should have given increased reserve boyancy, and helped with the survivability of the ship.

    Are the windows on decks 1 & above exits?
     
  13. Starbuck1
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 30
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 17
    Location: San Francisco

    Starbuck1 Junior Member

    First Duty

    Heiwa,
    The number 1 duty of the Captain is the safe navigation of his ship. No excuses. No whining. The Captain failed to do his primary duty with a badly executed turn in the dark while showing off for his girlfriend, the Maitre'd and his former Captain on shore. Trying to blame this stupidity on a corporate bureaucrat off work and at home 300 miles away is foolish and an embarrassment to any competent responsible captain.

    It simply doesn't work to have the responsibility anywhere else on or off the ship.

    If you want to blame the company, look to the lack of wing tanks, watertight bulkheading, and other construction choices they made to minimize capital costs. They, Costa and Carnival, seem to have a lot of problems with their ships but it may be just because they own so many of them and focus on the lower end of the market.
     
  14. Heiwa
    Joined: Feb 2012
    Posts: 89
    Likes: 4, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 60
    Location: France

    Heiwa Naval architect

    Starbuck1,
    The number 1 duty of the Master (of a cruise ship) is to ensure that the passengers (that pay for everything) are happy during the cruise.
    Why is that? Easy! Because the shipowner that collects the profits of the cruise wants it that way.
    But it is very easy to blame a Master for anything. Take a leaking oil tanker polluting some beautiful beaches anywhere. It is the fault of the Master of the tanker. He didn't inspect the cargo tanks, didn't see the little fracture in the ship's structure that, for whatever reason, developed into a big OIL SPILL! Etc, etc.
    Nobody was killed when Costa Concordia contacted a rocky outcrop close to Giglio island and sheared off a 100 tons boulder that ripped open the vertical side of the ship due to whatever reasons and unclear responsibilites. It was just a stupid contact! So why arrest and accuse the Master for manslaughter? If anybody died, it was much later? Was it the fault of the Master?
     

  15. seewolfbarney
    Joined: Jan 2012
    Posts: 10
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 11
    Location: Lübeck Germany

    seewolfbarney Junior Member

    @Heiwa - YES - it was HIS fault.

    Who else

    - ignored the possibility of any failure of steering or propulsion while running ashore straight forward at almost 16 knots to shallow waters and the towards an island with rocky environment;

    - ignored the well-known fact, that engine-romms became flooded heavily after first impact;

    - ignored safety-measure management instantly by preparing life-boats manning;

    - misinformed to coastguard's question if there were serious problems;

    - failed to direct and organize passenger's leaving-ship-operation twice;

    - left his place on the bridge long before rescue-forces had managed to get on board; etc.

    The company is to be held responsible as well, but the main responsible operator will always be the Captain/master.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.