E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSDivers had to stay out of the water, at risk of getting injured by the beached ship. NBC's Michelle Kosinski reports.
Updated 7:30 p.m. ET
The cruise captain who grounded the Costa Concordia off the Tuscan coast with 4,200 people on board did not relay correct information either to the company or crew after the ship hit rocks, the cruise ship owner's CEO said Friday as the search resumed for 21 missing passengers.
CEO Pierluigi Foschi told Italian state TV that the company spoke to the captain at 10:05 p.m. , some 20 minutes after the ship ran aground on Jan. 13, but could not offer proper assistance because the captain's description "did not correspond to the truth," Reuters reported.
Capt. Francesco Schettino said only that he had "problems" on board but did not mention hitting rocks.
Likewise, Foschi said crew members were not informed of the gravity of the situation.
Passenger video shown on Italian TV indicates crew members telling passengers to go to their cabins as late as 10:25 p.m. (2125 GMT; 4:25 p.m. EST). The abandon ship alarm sounded just before 11 p.m. (2200 GMT; 5:25 p.m. EST).
"That's because they also did not receive correct information on the gravity of the situation," Foschi said.
The $450 million Costa Concordia was carrying more than 4,200 passengers and crew when it slammed into well-charted rocks off the island of Giglio a week ago. Eleven people have been confirmed dead.
Rescue crews working on the cruise ship that capsized off the coast of Italy are running out of time to find any possible survivors. NBC's Michelle Kosinski reports.
Updated at 2:25 p.m. ET
Rescuers have resumed the search for 21 missing people from the Costa Concordia that ran aground off the Tuscan coast a week ago. Rescue work is taking place at surface level, but not underwater.
Coast guard spokesman Cosimo Nicastro said authorities will determine in the morning whether to send divers back to search sections of the partially submerged vessel that are now under water.
Sensors installed Thursday show constant vibrations in the ship structure, NBC News has learned. The ship is resting on two points underwater, keeping it from sinking. The remainder of the vessel is hanging and moves. Officials are worried the Concordia will sink further or suffer a sudden drop.
The search was suspended earlier in the day after the luxury cruise liner shifted.
Updated at 12:55 p.m. ET
GIGLIO, Italy -- The cruise ship grounded off Tuscany shifted again on its rocky perch, forcing the suspension Friday of search and rescue operations for the 21 people still missing.
Firefighters' spokesman Luca Cari said rescue squads would be discussing the next step after the movement made conditions unsafe for divers already hampered by poor visibility, floating objects and underwater debris.
Seven days after the ship ran aground and capsized off the Tuscan coast, hopes of finding anyone alive have all but disappeared and the cold waters around the ship have become rougher, with worse weather expected at the weekend.
"The ship is not in safe enough conditions for rescue operations to continue," Coast Guard spokesman Cmdr. Cosimo Nicastro told The Associated Press.
Attention is now turning to how to remove more than 2,300 tons of fuel aboard the vessel, which lies on its side on a rock shelf in about 20 meters of water off the little island of Giglio and which could slide off its resting place.
Salvage crews are waiting until the search for survivors and bodies is called off before they can begin pumping the half-million gallons of fuel out of the wreck, a process expected to take at least two weeks.
Worries in paradise
The fuel is in danger of leaking out and polluting some of the Mediterranean's most unspoiled sea, where dolphins are known to chase playfully after sailboats and fishermen's catches are so prized that wholesalers come from across Italy to scoop up cod, lobsters, scampi, swordfish and other delicacies.
Concordia lies dangerously close to a drop-off point on the sea bottom. Should strong waves nudge the vessel from its precarious perch, it could plunge some 20-30 meters (65-90 feet), further complicating the pumping operation and possibly rupturing fuel tanks. Italy's environment minister has warned that if those tanks break, globs of fuel would block sunlight vital for marine life at the seabed.
A week after the Concordia struck a reef off the fishing and tourism island of Giglio, flipping on its side, its crippled 114,000-ton hull rests on seabed rich with an underwater prairie of sea grass vital to the ecosystem. The dead weight has likely already damaged a variety of marine life, including endangered sea sponges, and crustaceans and mollusks, even before a drop of any fuel leaks, environmentalists contend.
"The longer it stays there, the longer it impedes light from reaching the vegetation," said Francesco Cinelli, an ecology professor at the University of Pisa, in Tuscany. And the sheer weight of the Concordia will also crush sea life, he said.
The seabed where the Concordia lies is a flourishing home to Poseidon sea grass native to the Mediterranean, Cinelli told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.
"Sea grass ... is to the sea what forests are to terra firma," Cinelli said: They produce oxygen and serve as a refuge for organisms to reproduce or hide from predators.
The Tuscan archipelago's seven islands are at the heart of Europe's largest marine park, extending over some 60,000 hectares (150,000 acres) of sea.
DigitalGlobe
The Costa Concordia ran aground Jan. 13 off the coast of Italy, resulting in the evacuation of thousands of passengers as the ship began heavily listing.
They include Elba, where Napoleon lived in exile, and the legendary island of Montecristo, a setting for Alexandre Dumas' novel "The Count of Monte Cristo" — where rare Mediterranean monk seals have been spotted near the coast.
Montecristo has a two-year waiting list of people hoping to be among the 1,000 people annually escorted ashore by forest rangers to admire the uninhabited island. Navigation, bathing and fishing are strictly prohibited up to 1 kilometer (0.6 miles) from Montecristo's rocky, cove-dotted coast. A monastery, established on Montecristo in the 7th century, was abandoned nine centuries later after repeated pirate raids.
Come spring, Porto Ercole's slips will be full, with yachts dropping anchor just outside the port. It lies at the bottom of a steep hill, whose summit gives a panoramic view of a sprawling seaside villa, once a holiday retreat of Dutch royals, and of the crescent-shaped island of Giannutri, with its ancient Roman ruins.
Alberto Teodori, 49, who said he has been hired as a skipper for the yachts of Rome's VIPs for 30 years, noted that the area thrives on tourism in the spring and summer and survives on fishing in the offseason.
If the Concordia's fuel, "thick as tar," should pollute the sea, "Giglio will be dead for 10, 15 years," Teodori fretted, as workers nearby shellacked the hull of an aging fishing boat.
Questions about safety
Late Thursday, Costa-owner Carnival Corp. announced it was conducting a comprehensive audit of all 10 of its cruise lines to review safety and emergency response procedures in the wake of the Costa disaster. The evacuation was chaotic and the alarm to abandon the ship was sounded after the Concordia had capsized too much to get many life boats down.
The owners of the doomed Italian cruise liner Costa Concordia were not aware of unsafe practices involving ships coming close to shore to give tourists a better view, Costa Cruises chief executive Pier Luigi Foschi told a newspaper on Friday.
Investigators say Schettino, the captain of the Costa Concordia, steered the ship too close to the Tuscan island of Giglio, where the 114,500 ton vessel ran aground and capsized last week, apparently while performing a maneuver known as a "salute" which took it within 150 metres of the shore.
Foschi told the Corriere della Sera that ships sometimes passed near to shore during what he termed "tourist navigation" but he said this was always performed safely and he denied that the company knew the Concordia would be going so close.
He said the Concordia's onboard newspaper had announced that the ship would pass five miles from Giglio.
"I can't rule out that individual captains, without informing us, may have set a course closer to land. However I can rule out ever having known that they may have done it unsafely," he said.
Doubts have already been expressed about whether Costa Cruises, a unit of Carnival Corp, the world's largest cruise operator, can have been unaware of the practice of ships "saluting."
The company had approved a similar maneuver in August and Lloyd's List Intelligence, a leading maritime publication, says its tracking showed that the ship's August route actually took the Concordia slightly closer to Giglio than the course that caused the grounding last week.
The $450 million Costa Concordia was carrying more than 4,200 passengers and crew when it slammed into well-marked rocks off the Tuscan island of Giglio. The ship then keeled over on its side and is still half-submerged nearly a week later.
'He saved over 3,000 lives'
Meanwhile, a young Moldovan woman who translated evacuation instructions from the bridge after the Costa Concordia ran into a reef emerged as a potential new witness in the investigation into the captain's actions on that fateful night.
REUTERS/Zhurnal Tv via Reuters TV
Costa Concordia crew member Dominica Cemortan gestures in this still image from a Jan. 17 television interview. Cemortan defended the captain's actions, saying he helped to save the lives of passengers.
Italian media have said prosecutors want to interview 25-year-old Dominica Cermotan, who had worked for Costa as a hostess fluent in several languages but was not on duty when she boarded the ship Jan. 13 in the Italian port of Civitavecchia.
In interviews with Moldovan media and on her own Facebook page, Cermotan said she was called up to the bridge of the Concordia after it struck the reef to translate evacuation instructions for Russian passengers. She defended Schettino, who has been vilified in the Italian media for leaving his ship before everyone was evacuated safely.
"He did a great thing, he saved over 3,000 lives," she told Moldova's Jurnal TV.
Schettino, who was jailed after he left the ship, is under house arrest, facing possible charges of manslaughter, causing a shipwreck and abandoning his ship.
Costa is owned by Miami-based Carnival Corp.
More from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Will Prince William's tour of duty reignite Falklands dispute?
- Fun in Mogadishu? Yes, it happens
- Malawi women protest stripping attacks over wearing trousers
- Chinese dissident flees to US and describes torture
Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Leave a Comment:
I would hope that they are taking advantage of the "precious time" available while the ship is exposing its gash, to seal up what they can before they have to do it later on underwater and at a greater depth.
Better to refloat by pumping out a sealed ship than putting floatation inside...
Do it now!
Getting the fuel off is a much higher priority while the ship is still in one piece and partially above the waterline.
The gash you see is not the problem. It is the one you don't see on the starboard side that is the problem. Really Bob, have you ever known a vessel to roll AWAY from the most significant leak?
Did you see the picture of that huge bolder inside of the ship? They have their work cut out for them. I know there are ships that can carry other ships but the largest probably cannot carry this one. They are going to have to try to make it sea worthy right where it is.
Condolences to the Families.
What I cannot understand is the design of the ship(s), who in their right mind builds a ship that is top heavy, all that built above the water line. Basic Physics. In order to compensate you would need a very wide ship with a very deep keel and lots of ballast. The only motive that I can figure out in building a top heavy city above the water line is to cram as many on the ship as possible to make more profits.
The other insanity is using explosive charges to blow more holes into the hull, causing the ship to fill with more water and the concussive forces would kill anyone inside the ship (water magnifying the effect like a depth charge) or at the very least knock them out and then they drown. If you do not believe this go blow up a M-80 outdoors, then go into a bathroom and then blow up another M-80 and end up going to the doctor with ruptured ear drums, etc. Disclaimer No Liability nor Responsiblity for me, if you do that (blow up a M-80 in a bathroom).
What happened to the automatic water tight doors or did they build this ship like the RMS Titanic in that the bulkheads did not reach the overheads, you close the watertight doors, but the water continues to pour in each compartment as the air escapes out the area between the bulkheads and the overheads and once that compartment is full the water overflows and fills the next compartment.
Until all the facts are in it is too easy to blame the ship's Captain, just like "Pilot Error", remember we are dealing with the same Italian Court System as Amanda Knox, as guilty until proven innocent. I would rather hear all the Facts first after a full on impartial investigation. This is not to say the Ship's Captain is 100% Responsible for any actions or non actions aboard his Ship, as Captains ARE.
Once again just like the Japanese Fukushima Disaster (US Military Nuclear Accident Incident Response and Assistance Teams and USN Scientific Teams to conduct Emergency Shut downs), now the Italian Government is too embarrassed or too proud to ask for US Military Assistance from USN Naples Italy to help them with Rescue, Recapture, Recovery Operations, also USN Deep Water Salvage Operations (USN Divers). Looking at the videos online what the f**k is with the Italians using SCUBA, and not longer dive times Rebreathers. You can get all the US Military Asymmetric Warfare Forces (US Army Special Forces, USAF STTs, USMC MARSOC, USN SEALs as most trained as Divers) at Italy involved to obtain real world operational experience and the Most Important possibly SAVING LIVES !
Bob,
Please not so loud! These are Italians and you need to be gentle.
Hope is eternal, but in this case, why are we talking about search and rescue" rather than search and recovery.
Engineering basics. No matter how much you dummy-proof something, a bigger dummy will always take the wheel eventually.
Bob - nothing like an armchair quarterback who has never been on the ship, has no clue as to how it is constructed, knows nothing about the placement of the explosives that created holes for the divers to enter to search for more survivors or victims, etc. You have no idea whether the Italians consulted with the US Navy in the area. You know nothing except what the media has publicized, so stop claiming that the Italians are incompetent.
Here's a news flash for you...this happened in Italy, which is a sovereign nation. They are entitled to operate the rescue effort in any way they see fit. They have no obligation to consult with the USA if they don't want to do so. Get over the idea that every country in the world has to ask the USA for permission to do anything.
Interesting array of comments. Since I am a maritime historian at an international ship salvage company, I have a fair amount of knoledge about the operations conducted and intended for vessels in this state. However, I only came to make a minor correction: The use of "capsized" to describe this vessel is incorrect.
It is a shipwreck, exhibiting an extreme list, grounded on the shore of a small island. "Capsized" specifically refers to vessels that have completely turned over, usually but not always still afloat.
I thought the definition was a shipwreck that had listed more than 20 degrees was considered a capsize.
Just blow the damn thing up, the fuel will mostly burn off if you hit it with a strong enough blast to incinerate it. What's left of the ship can be picked up when it washes ashore. Do it now, no it fast and the ecology will start to recover.
That Is Just what I was Thinking!!! Get the boulders out, weld a patch on, pump in air and float that beauty to DryDock for ReHabRepairs.
Franky 669022: NO, Just NO; It will be THE WORST MESS!!! NO, Bad BAD Idea...............
Wouldn't want to be the rescuers.
Gosh Frank66etc , that would be as good as dynamiting a beached whale to get it out to sea. It's been done.
David,
Rebreather's operational depth is somewhere around 40 feet. The ship is sitting in 20 meter depth water so it is possibly to deep to use that equipment. The idea that military divers, including seals, marine recon, EOD and safety swimmers for the USAF being trained for expertise in ship salvage operations is remote. Try to imagine the gist of their duties and training while serving in such units.
Diving on a unstable wreck can't be much fun. Then there is the Captain and buddies saying he saved a bunch of lives, But if he didn't screw up it wouldn't have cost any lives in the first place.
it is dangerous, but get those tanks empty of all the fuel; if they rupture or leak we are in for one hell of a environmental disaster.
They are in for an environmental disaster, not us. For once, it's someone else's shores that are going to be destroyed, not ours...not that it makes it any less tragic.
This is the WORLD WIDE WEB, scales67... How do you know where saxon is located? Typical American comment.
dave 2267; thanks anyway; but i am in the Gulf Coast area of the South.
It really is unfortunate that the captain of this ship accidently "fell" into a life boat during all the confusion and was transported away from this disastor. Kinda reminds me of the time I accidently "fell" into my husband and got pregnant. Strange how blessings can happen accidently. ***sarcasm***
This ship is 110,000 tons, breadex, and there is no salvage vessel that is even close to the size needed to lift it. That the ship is unstable is due to the fact that cruise ships tend to be top heavy as more and more above the main deck passenger areas are being added to their designs. The hull is probably too damaged for it to remain in one piece if it were re-floated. It will probably have to be at least partially dismantled on site.
I suspect you are right about dismantling the ship. Considering the hull damage and the extra holes that have been opened, it would be very difficult to make it watertight for pumping. And with it lying almost flat on the starboard side, all the window area is letting more water into the upper decks. It is impossibly top heavy now.
Whatever they do, this will probably be one of the most widely reported salvage operations in history, complete with daily interviews of the divers and deckhands. They may be able to make more money in interviews (and by passing underwater photos to the media) than they are paid for the salvage work.
Actually I did some reading on this last summer when I saw where the Sea Diamond cruise ship went down in Santorini harbor. It too, hit rocks, was beached by the captain and evacuated. Two lives were lost and it ended up sunk in deep water and is leaking oil because you can't pump all of it out no matter how hard you try.
The Dutch companies that raised the Kursk is the only group that can do it. And the Kursk was only part of a 17,000 ton ship. It takes years of prep work to plan the recovery and is very, very expensive. With the Greek government in ruins and the Sea Diamond's company in bankruptcy, it will probably never happen. I believe the Sea Diamond was only about 22,000 tons and carried 1500 passengers.
If the ship does not slide off its ledge in the next couple of years, the salvage method would be to seal all the holes and then attach chains to the keel attached to land and chains to the superstructure attached to several tugboats. When the boats pull, the ship would be uprighted and would have to be simultaneously pumped with numerous pumps. The problem in pumping the water off is that the ship is filled, not just with water, but a mixture of water, mattresses, carpeting, tables, chairs and bodies --- all things that like to clog pumps. Getting meaningful flows is extremely difficult in a case like this. This is not something that can be put together in weeks or even months. It is a hugely comples and dangerous operation.
The most likely scenario will be that the ship's fuel will be pumped out and everything possible above the water removed and the hull will be towed as far away from the headland as possible and allowed to sink in 300 feet of water it it can be towed that far. The problem is that the area around Giglio Island is one of Europe's permier marine sanctuaries and environmentalists will scream bloody murder at the thought.
Scream bloody murder is what any normal human being should do in this case if it is possible to get that hideously oversized steel turd out of there to the scrap yard.
The most mind boggling thing about this whole incident and the response from the owner is that this accident did not JUST occur. It was a long time in the making. This captain did not become an irresponsible, unaccountable idiot overnight. The real question is who, in their right mind, would allow this skill set to manage all that responsibility? I wouldn't have let this personality drive my car with my kids in it let alone be responsible for a multimillion dollar cruise liner with 4500 lives on board.
We just returned from a Carnival cruise and frankly, I feel irresponsible for not interviewing the Captain and the crew prior to paying more than $5000 to put my family's lives in their hands. I will never give the cruise industry that privilege again.
I am baffled! HOW could he have saved over 3,000 lives? Wasn't it his error that caused this unnecessary wreck of that beautiful Ocean Liner? This is a tad redundant! I am still unclear how he managed to get ashore, then, using his cell to call his mom letting her know he was safe, when someone Else's mom was in distress! Sorta like closing the barn door AFTER all the livestock ran away, then finding one cow......makes that farmer the hero?
I just pray there are no more living people waiting to be rescued, and the missing are found alive! This error was 100% caused by the Captain....who manages to get to safety with a million excuses why he didn't return to the wrecked vessel. I may be old fashioned, but, isn't the Captain of the ship supposed to remain and "go down with his ship" or remain until the last person is safe? Help me here I am confused...
Who is paying her? What was she promised?
His excuse "it was too dark" reminded me of my son when he was 4 yrs old,wouldn't go back to bed in the middle of the night and wanted to be with Mom. Captain, "Mom, it's too dark, I can't go back, but I am safe" is how I imagine that phone call went to his mother.
What an awful situation.. Lost lives, potential for major environmental damage, and a near new half billion dollar ship turned to salvage.. The captain is a complete moron..
I can only hope its a lesson for any other arrogant fools out there. Probably not. Unfortunately there are more than a few numbskulls like this guy around. The good news is, they dont usually get to captain vessels like this one. Which leads me to believe theres another numbskull working above this captain. Because he hired this captain to start with, and didnt fire him the last time he pulled this kind of stunt. Oh yeah, that's right, he's a repeat offender numbskull.
Lets hope they can deal with this before any more damage is done..
The article quotes an agency that says in August the company allowed a similar vessel go closer to the island than this one. The captain said he was on a tourist route, and the company said his tactics were unauthorized. I tend to side with the captain on this, as major companies will do anything to save face value. If they could spin it as a one time occurance of a rogue captain who got complacent with his navigation ability rather than dangerous company practices, it'll show people that the company still operates with safety and customer satisfaction as it's prime priorities. As for the captain abandoning ship, he sounded the alarm, and did what he could, while he could. It's unreasonable to expect him to search every part of the ship to ensure 100% accountability for passengers. It's been an entire week with professional divers trained in search and rescue utilizing top notch equipment designed for this purpose, and there still are almost two dozen people missing. Why most of you think one man, untrained, without equipment, could do this all by himself is beyond me. It's easy to judge, evaluate, and make assertions of what you would have done it you were the captain, but if you were placed in his shoes, I highly doubt your actions would differ from his. I believe if you're going to blame the captain for this wreck (he is in charge of the vessel and should be held accountable) then you should also hold the company accountable for allowing such tactics in the past and putting lives in danger. Don't blindly focus your rage on one person, if you are going to hold one party at fault, hold all parties with a hand in the matter at fault.
A Captain is not suppose to leave the vessel until every last passenger is off. That is expected of a captain. If passengers end up going down with the ship, the captain is also expected to go down with the ship too. That also a tradition. The captain of the Titantic did that, so have many others. Those that havent, have been disgraced like this one has been. And usually charged too. Always they are stripped of their licence.
In this case he should have stayed on board until relieved. No one expected him to search where it wasnt possible for him to do so. But he should have never left while there were people still on board, until he was relieved of duty. And during that time, he should have been doing whatever he could do. Not just cut an run. Hes getting everything he deserves.
There is a duty when you are captain of a vessel, dont take the Job if you dont want the responsibility. It comes with many privledges for a reason. But it also in not a job you can just quit when the going gets rough either. Not if you dont want to be humiliated and imprisoned in disgrace.
Part of the logic behind the idea of captain "going down with his ship" is based in protocol and safety.
First of all, it is recognized around the world, the captain of any vessel: plane or ship...is the authority. They become micro-societies in which the captain has full authority of all actions on his vessel. The reason is that if you don't have someone with authority then chaos will reign. No vessel can function in chaos. That is why on ships they will have weapons for the captain and his officers "just in case". He becomes judge, jury and executioner if need be. He will have to give account of his actions when he reaches shore but as long as he is at sea (or in the air), he is the authority.
The captain also provides guidance and organizes his resources to assure that all or most of the passengers are safely put into lifeboats. He coordinates the efforts. In order for rescue teams to effectively provide support they need an expert who not only knows the situation but also knows the ship. He and his first officer would know every nook and cranny of the ship. They would know who is on the ship, the number of handicap, children, women, men. If he abandons ship then it becomes a guessing game. His subordinates would not know who to follow. Its called a chain of command. If that chain is broken then chaos will ensue. It would the equivalent of the president disappearing and not having a clue where he is...in the midst of a crisis, this is catastrophic for the population.
You need command and control in crisis. You want command and control in a crisis. Otherwise people become irratic and dangerous.
The article states: "when it slammed into well-marked rocks..." "Well-marked rocks"?? Wow. I thought the captain said these rocks didn't appear on his charts. Were his charts made before the rocks were formed? Old, outdated charts on a brand new ship? Hmmmm... If this captain is cleared of negligence, that still won't erase the fact that he's a liar and a coward. Wouldn't go back to the ship in the dark, even when scared little children possibly needed help. Would you trust him with the safety of your family?
"But it is dark!"
I wouldn't even trust him with a rowboat, let alone a boat full of people.
First the pervert Sandusky, now this boat captain, using the "I tripped" defense. What kind of hack lawyer would even suggest their client utter these words? Pathetic.
they say he saved 3000 lives well good thats great but um who caused the ship wreck. the stupid capt. so the point is not how many lives he may or may not have saved but how many he put at risk to begin with after that anything else is just crap.
The ship is sitting on its side mainly because it is grounded. They are not made to sit upright while on the hard. The captain grounded the ship to prevent it from sinking to the bottom. Given the chaos on the ship it it may be the only thing he did correctly. A 165 foot gash in the engine compartment is major damage due to the probability of engines and generators shutting down. Why the bulkheads did not close is a mystery but maybe they did. In any case its an awful incident that did not have to happen. The investigation will determine what happened and you can bet the insurers will make a determination.
What?!?!? The captain grounded the ship because he is an a$$hole!
@Dennis,
The watertight doors were not shut until the ship had already taken on too much water. The crew was reluctant to shut the doors without orders because they interfere with the ability of passengers to move to other places in the ship. Finally, after it was too late to help much, the watertight doors were shut, possibly without orderd from the captain. The reason that it did not just stop the sinking was that too many compartments were breached.
What the captain did do properly was to turn around and sail towards the headland at Giglio Harbor. As ne neared the headland he deployed his stern anchors and paid out cable, letting his momentum carry him along. Then he deployed his bow anchors as he passed the headland. Then he had the winches pull on the stern anchor lines, thightening them and moving the ship back along its path. Then as it heeled over later, it heeled onto the rocks. This was a difficult maneuver and seems to have been expertly done. (That in no way excuses the cause of the accident or the captain's subsequent actions.)
The gash did not seem to intrude into the engine room which is typically more toward the stern. It seems to have hit more in the area of crew country and stores. That it pickled up a huge rock shows how much lateral force there was, so there were likely currents involved as well.
The ship is lying on a very narrow shelf of rock and then the bottom slopes rapidly to a depth of over 300 feet.
So then why the blackout. Is the backup generator in the same compartment as the main electrical system????
A ship like this uses diesel engines to drive electrical generators. The generators drive electric motors which turn the propellers (azipods and thrusters). Considering its size, this ship might have as many as 6 engine/generator sets.They are distributed in pairs from about the center to about 1/4 way from the stern.
I wonder if they attempted to counter-flood the ship to keep it even keeled, or if the act of turning the ship around (it is now point the opposite direction of travel) caused the flooding to go to the other side.
this captain saved no lives, wasted 11+
big jonny,
you should stand corrected. he did save a life - his own. however, let's hope it is for only a short time.
What I don't understand, is where were the other officers during this emergency? The second in command? The third? Did no one step up when the captain failed? What if the captain had been injuried and couldn't command the evacuation? Did command of this entire vessal really fall to this one man?
Really, some people can't handle a distaster in any rational manner, they just panic. And you really don't know who is going to fail until they are tested. I don't think its entirely proper to blame just the captain, I think every single officer on that ship should be brought up on charges. Along with the company for failing to provide proper training to staff.
As long as the captain is aboard, it would be mutiny for any junior officer to disobey or countermand any of his orders. Yes, command really falls on just one person, until that person is unable to command or voluntarily passes command to the next in line.
According to the captain when he was speaking with the Port Authority, the second in command was standing next to him, off the ship.
"He did a great thing, he saved over 3,000 lives,".
Wrong. He decidely put over 3000 lives in danger that cost 11 lives. He's a villian.
we could send some meth heads over there. the meth heads would salvage that thing out for scrap in a couple of days.
for history buffs that show we never learn, look up the story of the ship VASA . In that case it was top heavy for cannon
I hope they still have time to off load the fuel. It will be a deep water salvage job once the hull is on the bottom. Floating the Concordia between two large oil tankers, pontoon style would be interesting to watch.
The Ship looks like our Economy. Right now we both need new Captains
And God help us if it's any of the Republican dopes they put up for election. We might as well slide off into the deep like that ship will.
Your posts are offensive. Your icon is offensive. And you're obsessively off-topic. Other than that, you offer fine contributions to Newsvine.
@ Rick - Why is his icon offensive? It's identical to icons used by thousands of liberals when Bush was in office.
@ Casual - If you really were a taxpayer you'd have a different opinion.
Grow up. Everythiing is not about partypolitics. Only Americans gave a rat's ass about Republican versus Democrat. and frankly I thinnk we need a third party or else get rid of......theGreedy Old Party.
Carl,
Well if your looking for a courageous leader .......Newt had how many deferrments to avoid Vet Nam, and didn't Mr. Mittens go to France to avoid being drafted? He came back to reap the rewards of the country without serving or paying his fair share in taxes...........both of them are the epitome of non-leaders
It seems that the off duty employ who was called to the bridge did the captains job while he was escaping the danger. Did anybody here notice that?
The mechanics of saving Concordia are existing salvage skills. It's not simple but it has been done often. The problem is the same as the fundimental problem with the cruise industry. These ships are too topheavy. They are unsafe and should never have been allowed to be built like this. They are the Pintos of the maritime industry. They will blast the rock out of the hole in the side and clean it out with a crane on a barge. Temporarily sealing the hole is easy; it is out of the water. Then comes the tricky part where they tip it upright without tipping it over on its port side, again because it is so topheavy it is unstable. All the actions are being driven by politics at this point. The fuel needs to be taken out in case weather breaks up the ship for fear of a spill. The bodies need to be removed, out of reverence, before salvage can begin, but those cave divers will never find all those twenty bodies. By the way, those divers are volunteers. Seals could do this but that is not politically acceptable for Italy to ask for help. But the salvage equipment is probably weeks away anyway and the divers make for a story that something is being done. Why not refloat it and then remove the dead?
There will be many, many problems if they in fact want to make this ship sea-worthy again. The longer it sits on it's side, the more stress damage that will be done. I predict they will scrap it, possibly cut it into large chunks and haul it off piecemeal.
My best guess is that when they are soending up to two months offloading the fuel, one or more major winter weather systems wil hit. As they pump off the fuel the bouyancy of the wreck will decrease because the fuel is lighter than water. This will increase the chances that the wreck will slip off the rocky ledge on which it rests. This is why they will not allow divers on the ship once the fuel pumping starts and until it it stabilized, possible as late as early April.
As it sits on its side, more and more stresses will be placed on the hull and superstructure that the ship was never designed to withstand. Twice a day the tides will change these stresses and every little storm or breeze will do even more damage.
It looks like there might be an attempt to upright the ship if iut survives relatively intact for at least a year. This would involve patching all the holes and dealing the underwater part of the superstructure. Chains would be attached to the keel, under the ship and to pilings driven into the rock on land. Other chains would be attached to the superstructure and to a number of tugs. Then the tugs would pull while numerous pumps tried to clear enough water to float the ship. This would be an extremely difficult and dangerous operation with a huge number of unknowns that has never been successfully done on a ship of this size. The basic problem is that these mega-cruise ships are very tender (top heavy) and getting them both upright and stable enough to tow is an engineering nightmare.
While this was being planned, European environmentalists would be raising hell. Giglio Island is a tourist spot and the center of Europe's largest marine reserve. Drilling pilings into the rocks would spoil the scenery for years and years and the leakage of fuel and the disturbance of the work would essenmtially compronmise that p[art of the marine reserve. And then all of this would be happening right at a harbor that the island depends on for its entire economy. Europe is particularly bad for this sort of thing because there are sop many competing national interests. Carnival does not have sufficient reserves, even with insurance, to pay for a refloating operation. And the insurance company, not the cruise line gets to make that call. And then there is Italy. While the US "plays" at being broke, Italy is very, very close to being there. Italy will simply be unable to find much money to put into any salvage operation.
My bottom line guess would be that financing to refloat will never become available and while it is being discussed a winter storm will resolve the problem by further damaging the hull and making any graceful option impossible. The ship will then be stripped above the waterline as much as pussible, and the remains of the hull filled with floatation bags and keel-towed by tugs in an attempt to get it about 600 meters offshore where it will be allowed to sink in over 320 feet of water.
I did a lot of reading about this last fall. I got interested because I went on a Med cruise on Holland American (also owned by Carnival). At Cettavecchia (sp?) the Concordia was tied up immediately in front of our ship, the Statendam. Later when we arrived at Santorini, I noticed a lot of oil in the harbor water and asked a local about it. He told me about the Sea Diamond, a 1500 passenger cruise ship which had been unsafely maneuvered onto the rocks by its inept captain and beached, very similarly to the Concordia. The Sea Diamond sunk just offshore with the loss of two lives and is still leaking fuel into the caldera/harbor. The issue is raising it is very similar in many ways. It is ruinous to one of the beauty spots of the world, but the economy of Greece is in the crapper and the cruise line (Louis Hellinic) is bankrupt. While most of the oil was pumped off, it is impossible to get it all in such a situation. So it is likely to sit on the bottom, leaking oil for decades.
The parallels between the sinking of the Concordia and the Sea Diamond are striking. And it shows that the cruise industry has learned very little from its mistakes, since the same issues with panic, inept crews, issues with lifeboats, inadequate insurance, etc.
Two issues that are particularly prevantable are dirty little secrets of the cruise industry. 1) These ships carry cvompletely inadequate insurance. The value of the hull minus fittings and the liability to passengers is all that they cover. Disposal of the wreck or direct and indirect damages caused are not covered. The insurance is inadequate by at least a factor of 10 and probably more in a case like this. THIS NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. 2) The issue of lifeboats has not substantially improved since the Titanic, but has been swept under the rug. After a ship lists more than 5 or 6 degrees, the lifeboats become extremely difficult or impossible to launch. On one side the davits are too far out and the p[assengers can't get into the boats while on the other side they strike the hull and cannot be launched. The pictures immediately after this wreck illuistrate both problems well. The solution would be something similar to what the airlines use --- a series of slides that terminate in a inflatable platform at the bottom. This would work up to 40 degrees of list and on either side of the ship. The floating platform could be used for the passengers to gather and would also contain a vast number of inflatable boats onto which passengers could embark. If you want to see something similar, albeit on a smaller scale, lookl at the Airbus crash in the Hudson. A number of passengers deplaned via a slide at the front into a large raft very successfully. From the raft they were easily transferred to rescue boats.
In my blue water sailing days (I am too old now) I was always told that "When your eyes, ears, brain, charts and radar all tell you it is okay, proceed with caution." But what do I know?
Carnival is saying ten months and it will be back in operation.
IIRC my history, when the Normandy rolled over in NY harbor, it took 18 months or more to right it and tow it away. It was scrapped.
However, if the fuel is removed the vessel becomes lighter and as such, is more apt to be moved by wave action.
@TB-Texas,
The two biggest myths about sea-going civilian ships are that 1) captains can perform marriages, and 2) that there is a secret stash of weapons for the officers. The truth is that captains can only pretend to perform marriages and never carry weapons. This comes up time and time again because of the growth of piracy. Here is a list of reasons, from a maritime site of why there are no guns on civilian ships, especially cruise ships:
I know that most of this pertains to cargo ships, but the ones that pertain to cruise ships are more than doubled.
The oceans are already past the tipping point. Some more toxic fuel will matter little.
Chris, When will you finish the book you are writing, wish you would do it somewhere else,other than here.
ipouja...you don't have to read Chris' posts. As one comedian put it, "You can't fix stupid". I'm sure that many on here appreciate the information that Chris has provided, unlike dolts like yourself who bring absolutely nothing to the table.
God, the news media make this so dramatic, this ship isnt going anywhere with that gash and tons of water inside. Also, the ship can be secured and anchored in this shallow of water. The fuel tanks are probably designed for this type of situation and should be equipped to offload the fuel.
Because its taking some time. the media has to fill in with hype and suppositions until they learn the facts.
Exactly my thinking. The news media is playing this for all it's worth...and more. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here.
Lots to see, just not from here.
Gee, I didn't realize the loss of lives is 'dramatic.' Sounds pretty tragic to me. Whether the news is being dramatic or not, isn't the issue. The loss of lives is the issue. Putting ALL of the passenger's lives at risk is the issue. The captain who royally screwed up is the issue. The possible ecosystem contamination is the issue. Drama, no. Tragic, yes.
As much time as they've spent searching for survivors and estimating the damages, they could of built a dock to this thing by now
your icon says it all... why don't you go bang your head.