Last voyage for Costa Concordia cruise ship

Hmmm. Sounds like maritime gooblygook. Good work for lawyers !!!!!!!!!!!

Ill bet whole flocks of them have abandoned their perches high up in the concrete canyons of Manhattan and are presently parachuting into Giglio looking for " whiplash" and other litigation work.


Someone should warn the poor Italians before its too late !!

 

Correction. Carnival US/British owned. but based US

And there are US flag liners again. Wasn't keeping up to date.
see urls



http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4709434

http://www.macgregor-group.com/?id=1184

NEWS
Taxpayer Going Down With Ship Project
December 9, 2001 | MARK FINEMAN, TIMES STAFF WRITER
Taxpayers stand to lose more than $200 million from the recent collapse of a luxury cruise ship company controlled by one of the country's wealthiest men but heavily supported by the federal government. American Classic Voyages Co. and its supporters in the U.S. Senate blame the aftermath of Sept. 11 for forcing it into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. But there is evidence that American Classic, the largest U.S.BUSINESS
Northrop Stops Work on 2 Cruise Ships
October 26, 2001 | Bloomberg News
Northrop Grumman Corp. stopped building two cruise ships for American Classic Voyages Co., which will put about 1,750 employees, or 17% of the staff, at its Pascagoula, Miss., shipyard out of work. The move comes less than a week after Chicago-based American Classic Voyages, controlled by billionaire Sam Zell, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and failed to get a U.S. government loan to complete the 1,900-passenger ships.

 

sail-past wasn’t for the benefit of the passengers, who had nothing to do with it. There were no announcements about Giglio over the tannoys. It was very much a private affair, part of a code of courtesy shared only by the crew.

The captain’s unforgivable irresponsibility, as Grosseto’s chief prosecutor Francesco Varusio called it, was a tribute to Mario Palombo, a legend among Costa Crociere’s commanders, and a favour to the only Giglio native on board, chief steward Antonello Tievoli. “I never thought I’d be landing at home”, he told the fellow islanders who provided assistance on shore. There are good people who become the unwitting victims of other people’s stupidity. Tievoli is the son of Giglio’s old hairdresser. A former restaurateur and manager of a campsite, he went to sea twelve years ago. On Friday, Captain Schettino and his attendants summoned him to the bridge. “Antonello, come and see. We’re right on top of Giglio”, they told him. Perhaps it was a friendly leg-pull since Tievoli was supposed to disembark the week before. However, his replacement failed to show and he had to remain on board. Tievoli duly went and looked. He has no duties in the engine room or on deck but he does have two good eyes. “Watch out. We’re very close to shore”. But it was too late.

Today, the chief steward from Giglio has shut himself up at home – he lives a long way from Giglio – and those who have spoken to him say he torn by guilt over an unsolicited tribute that has turned him into an unwilling protagonist in one of Italy’s worst maritime disasters. Tievoli has been interviewed by coastguard officers on behalf of the prosecutors in charge of the inquiry and will have to repeat his version to the Carabinieri. It is a fate, and an anger, that he must share with Mario Palombo, the man whom every Giglio-born seaman with Costa Crociere looked up to. Sailors call sailing past a place for the benefit of a crew member a “bow”.

Palombo was a specialist. They say he used to take a bow when he was approaching Camogli, even though he knew Ligurians set far less store by these gestures. No one rivals the residents of Giglio, he used to say. “But I always agreed the manoeuvre with the harbour office”, he yells into the phone, categorically refusing to be part of this tragedy. He has retired but he is still a seaman, proud of his professional career.

Palombo had to leave service in 2006. He suffered a heart attack at sea and an ambulance had to rush him from the docks in Naples to a hospital operating theatre. He does not denying knowing Tievoli but that’s as far as it goes. “I don’t understand how it could have happened or what my colleague was thinking. You don’t need permission from the harbour office. The captain decides the route. On board, he reigns supreme. But I won’t be dragged into this for any reason whatsoever. And write this down. My parents were from Giglio but I was born in Savona”. His voice chokes with rage as he speaks from his home in Grosseto, where he spends the colder months.

The recipient of the bow wasn’t even on the island and the chief steward insists that he would have happily done without the salute had he been told about it. But human folly is like the sea. When it gets out of control, it sweeps all before it.

Marco Imarisio
16 gennaio 2012 | 16:03

 

http://www.corriere.it/english/12_g...1e1-a5d2-75a8a88b1277.shtml?fr=box_primopiano

 

There's enough stuff for a good movie here...

 

Sad, but it is a fantastic tale !!! Perhaps they make a hollywood movie ?

 

As L. Lazauskas wrote, squat could be a contributory factor.

The ship was near the coast and squat, as applied to the starboard side, caused the inclination to that side. What else?
{As the ship rolled also, when heeled starboard maybe she received an added squat effect}.

By the way, where do you estimate is (was) ship's VCG?

Regards
APP

 

So many other things, like: http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/op...a-concordia-cruise-ship-41313.html#post518109

 

I'm not sure if "squat" is the correct term to apply for sideways forces and moments induced by banks or nearby rocks.

I am just noting that at 15 knots, the critical depth-based Froude number is reached when the water depth is about 6 metres. Even in 7 metre depth there will be quite a strong downwards force and a bow-up moment.

 

the side suction is "bank" suction. the "squat" we call in US "smelling" the bottom.

when we say "squat" it usually refers to too much power at too low speed, causing props to dig a "hole"

 

An interesting FLIR-camera video of the rescue operations, taken from a helicopter:
http://video.corriere.it/prime-immagini-naufragio/e51f6cfe-406c-11e1-a5d2-75a8a88b1277

 

I would not want to be the Captain of a U.S. Navy ship that ventured to close to an island, and had that damage, so the crew could get a good look see. I remember a Carrier in San francico Bay going between the city and Alcatraze island with a civilian pilot guide in charge ran aground and sat for some many hours waiting for high tide to float off. They (the Navy) were calling for the Captain's head. They probably got it.............

 

I don't know why but was assuming this was going to be a total loss- seems not:

"Costa owner Carnival Corp. estimated that preliminary losses from having the Concordia out of operation for at least through 2012 would be between $85 million and $95 million, though it said there would be other costs as well. The company's share price slumped more than 16 percent Monday."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...ain-crash-disaster-cruise-ship_n_1208791.html

"other costs as well".....

An understatement??

 

The BBC, interviewing the head of the cruise ship association, he stated 100 million in lost revenue from the ship Concordia .... this does not include overall loss to carnival overall booking . Jan is the biggest month in the year for booking cruise ship holidays. A bad month for bad news. The Ship was " self insured " for "certain liabilities ". I don't understand the term .

Pollution could present a huge liability. Italy has declared a national emergency. They may decide to claw back this cash from the Perps.

 

I saw that and thought they were implying that the ship might be back in service by the end of the year. But then I realized it might be a financial impact statement for investors and found the original document here. It looks like Carnival is just saying we know it's going to have an adverse effect on earnings and it will be worse then this.

Carnival Corporation & plc Required Announcement on Financial Impact of Costa Concordia

MIAMI (January 16, 2012) -- Carnival Corporation & plc (NYSE/LSE: CCL; NYSE: CUK) today commented on the financial impact resulting from the grounding of the Costa Concordia.

“At this time, our priority is the safety of our passengers and crew,” said Micky Arison, Carnival Corporation & plc chairman and CEO. “We are deeply saddened by this tragic event and our hearts go out to everyone affected by the grounding of the Costa Concordia and especially to the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives. They will remain in our thoughts and prayers,” Arison said.

In accordance with financial disclosure requirements, the company provides the following information:

The company has insurance coverage for damage to the vessel with a deductible of approximately $30 million as well as insurance for third party personal injury liability subject to an additional deductible of approximately $10 million for this incident. The company self-insures for loss of use of the vessel.
A damage assessment review of the vessel is currently being undertaken to determine how long it will be out of service. The vessel is expected to be out of service for the remainder of our current fiscal year if not longer. For the fiscal year ending November 30, the impact to 2012 earnings for loss of use is expected to be approximately $85-$95 million or $0.11-$0.12 per share. In addition, the company anticipates other costs to the business that are not possible to determine at this time.

Carnival Corporation & plc, which is the parent company of Costa Cruises, is traded on both the New York and London Stock Exchanges.

Cautionary Note Concerning Factors That May Affect Future Results

Some of the statements, estimates or projections contained in this release are “forward-looking statements” that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions with respect to Carnival Corporation & plc, including some statements concerning future results, outlooks, plans, goals and other events which have not yet occurred. These statements are intended to qualify for the safe harbors from liability provided by Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ...........