Cruise ship 'Costa Concordia' aground - merged threads - Page 26 - Ships Nostalgia
11:38

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

Cruise ship 'Costa Concordia' aground - merged threads

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #626  
Old 21st January 2012, 01:25
Dickyboy's Avatar
Dickyboy Dickyboy is offline
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1964 - 2009
 
Join Date: May 2009
My location
Posts: 8,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cisco View Post
It also says no anchoring... no fishing.....
Oh? ....... Nothing about running aground then!
Thanks Cisco, didn't see that.
__________________
Good advice is usually ignored, but that's no reason for not giving it. Miss Marple.
Reply With Quote
  #627  
Old 21st January 2012, 01:31
Dickyboy's Avatar
Dickyboy Dickyboy is offline
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1964 - 2009
 
Join Date: May 2009
My location
Posts: 8,579
The BBC was very bad the other day. They had a reporter and camera crew there. The reporter was saying "Just imagine being trapped in there, in the dark and cold and wet, it must be terrifying, De da de da de da". He's supposed to be reporting the news, not telling people to use their imaginations or painting pictures for them. My view of Auntie has gone down hill in its reporting.
__________________
Good advice is usually ignored, but that's no reason for not giving it. Miss Marple.
Reply With Quote
  #628  
Old 21st January 2012, 02:33
Jacktar1 Jacktar1 is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by China hand View Post
Lawdie Lawdie. You folks is all getting very snarly and kintankrus.
When the history of wrecks is written, this one will possibly say something like:
"due to the massive efforts of everyone else, and the useless efforts of the crew, out of 4200 souls on board, only (30 something) perished".

I shall await the real story with anticipation.
Reply With Quote
  #629  
Old 21st January 2012, 04:28
Gollywobbler Gollywobbler is offline  
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 485
According to the BBC, two firms of American Attorneys and an American consumer association have joined forces on behalf of some or all of the 120 American passengers who were aboard the Costa Concordia at the time of the accident.

It appears that the plan is to try to institute proceedings sometime during the coming week in the court in Miami. Seemingly, the Legal Beagles reckon that a court in Florida is likely to decide that it has the necessary jurisdiction to get involved.

The arguments seem to be:-

1. The offers from Costa Cruises so far have been derisory. Allegedly Costa have offered only to refund the prices paid for the cruise and they have asked the pax to submit evidence of the value of their personal possessions left aboard, evidence of out of pocket expenses incurred in Italy after they came ashore, costs incurred in getting themselves home, evidence of medical treatment costs etc,

The lawyers reckon that they can get 2 or 3 times as much as Costa have so far offered on behalf of every passenger and up to $1million USD for any passenger who was seriously injured.

2. According to the Attorneys, it is likely that the Florida court will accept the case because by selling cruises to American pax, Costa has "entered the US market" in some way and is therefore liable to be sued in an American court.

3. Carnival Cruises Inc (or whatever Carnival is called in the USA) is either the sole or at least the majority owner of Costa Cruises. Is Carnival incorporated in Florida, does anyone know?

4. Obviously the lawyers intend to include massive claims for damages for the "pain & suffering" element that their clients endured.

It seems that some of the pax say that their contracts with Costa restrict them to making claims under Italian Law only. The American attorneys reckon that the court in Miami will disregard this purported/attempted restriction.

5. Mitchell Proner, one of the American attorneys, is saying that Coasta/Carnival cannot escape legal liability in the USA by blaming the whole thing on a "rogue employee" because Costa has allegedly authorised - or at least known about - deliberate deviations from normal cruise courses before.

I was wondering whether any litigation would be brought in the USA and if so on what grounds. I believe that the precedent was set by Stephen Mitchell, an English solicitor, in the McDonnell Douglas litigation in the 1970s, following the crash over Paris of an Air France DC3 that had been built by McDonnell Douglas. The idea was that the damages would be much higher in the USA than they would have been in France. The idea succeeded so I would guess that the forthcoming American litigation against Costa (and maybe also Carnival) is based on a similar idea.

Meanwhile, again according to the BBC, Costa has begun civil litigation against Capt Schettino in Italy. (I wonder whether he will have some sort of "right" to ask the European Court of Human Rights to protect him? Most of the ECHR Judges are not lawyers in their own countries and they have a solid track record of producing the most peculiar interpretations of EU Law.)

It amazes me nowadays that everyone is so quick to institute legal proceedings long before any sort of proper Inquiry has determined exactly what happened, how and why.

Cheers

Gill

Last edited by Gollywobbler; 21st January 2012 at 04:32..
Reply With Quote
  #630  
Old 21st January 2012, 04:44
barrinoz barrinoz is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1965 - 1973
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gollywobbler View Post
It amazes me nowadays that everyone..........has determined exactly what happened, how and why.

Cheers

Gill
Me too.
barrinoz.
__________________
Everything will be all right in the end and if it is not all right, then it is not yet the end.
Reply With Quote
  #631  
Old 21st January 2012, 04:53
Alistair Macnab's Avatar
Alistair Macnab Alistair Macnab is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1953 - 1981
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,463
Domicile of Carnival...

I am lead to believe that "Carnival Cruises and plc" are registered in the Republic of Panama and in England (the 'plc' part) Of course, Costa is an Italian company so the USA attorneys will have a big job on their hands to 'create' a USA identity to sue as Carnival in the USA are merely a marketing and management company and not with the deep pockets they are looking for.
Reply With Quote
  #632  
Old 21st January 2012, 04:56
Iangb Iangb is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
My location
Posts: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gollywobbler View Post
It amazes me nowadays that everyone is so quick to institute legal proceedings long before any sort of proper Inquiry has determined exactly what happened, how and why.

Cheers

Gill
Yes.....but I'm finding the ongoing public release of damning evidence (eg. radio/phone calls from the ship) by the Italian authorities a bit...er...irregular.
Reply With Quote
  #633  
Old 21st January 2012, 04:57
Gollywobbler Gollywobbler is offline  
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 485
Emergency Drills

In another article I read yesterday, a BBC journo went aboard Costa Serena for one night the other day. The ship had left Civitaveccia the evening before. The BBC journo and a colleague joined Serena the folloing afternoon/evening in its first port of call and then disembarked the next day.

According to the journo, the BBC had sought permission to film the emergency drlll on Serena but Costa had refused, so the two journos posed as tourists instead.

Seemingly, the passengers on the Serena behaved just like a normal complement of passengers during the emergency drill. Allegedly they did not take it seriously and when asked about what had happened aboard Costa Concordia only a few days before, they blamed that on "human error" and were convinced that a similar disaster would not/could not befall themselves.

Seemingly, this emergency drill took place within 24 hours of Serena's sailing from Civitaveccia but the pax who had boarded in Civitaveccia confirmed that nothing had been said to them about emergency drills until the event attended by the BBC journos the following day.

It does not sound as if the pax went outside for this emergency drill. Where are the muster stations? Are they somewhere inside the superstructure? Presumably they are at least on the same deck as the lifeboats?

Two things interest me about this, being:-

1. The cruise industry doesn't seem to have decided to do the emergency drills before leaving port for the first time - contrary to what a maritime expert said on TV earlier in the week. This expert was telling LLoyds List or someone that the cruise industry would take it upon its own head to change the emergency drill procedures and would not wait for the IMO to legislate about it. Well - not so far, it seems!

2. How much of the witch hunt against Capt Schettino has been orchestrated by Costa Cruises in an attempt to protect the remainder of its business?

Cheers

Gill
Reply With Quote
  #634  
Old 21st January 2012, 05:16
Gollywobbler Gollywobbler is offline  
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alistair Macnab View Post
I am lead to believe that "Carnival Cruises and plc" are registered in the Republic of Panama and in England (the 'plc' part) Of course, Costa is an Italian company so the USA attorneys will have a big job on their hands to 'create' a USA identity to sue as Carnival in the USA are merely a marketing and management company and not with the deep pockets they are looking for.
Hi Alistair Macnab

Thanks for this information.

Part of the argument does seem to be that by "marketing" in the USA, Costa accepts the jurisdiction of the American courts. Presumably if the marketing is being done through/with the assistance of an American corporation (Carnival) then they could be roped in as well, as Costa's Agent. If they both belong to a Parent company registered in Panama, I wonder whether Panamanian Law just keels over and allows litigation in the USA?

I'm wondering, though, whether these American passengers might do better to try to get themselves under the umbrella of EU Law? I've no idea what EU Law might say about what happened and I don't know how generous it is in a damages claim.

Ditto Italian Law but since Italian criminal law can potentially jail the Captain for 12 years, presumably Italian Law will not look kindly on what happened?

However, even with modern communications I very much doubt that it is possible to get proper advice from lawyers in the USA, Panama, Italy and specialist EU litigation lawyers in less than a week.

Maybe the American attorneys have decided that there is no need for international complications? They must be aware that their clients will sue them next if this all goes wrong, so I would guess that the American attorneys must be reasonably sure that they are taking the correct approach? Surely they can't just be winging it on behalf of clients whose central complaint is that they have been traumatised by the alleged acts/omissions of Costa?

My other question is, "Why is there any real need to try to do anything so quickly?"

Cheers

Gill

Last edited by Gollywobbler; 21st January 2012 at 05:20..
Reply With Quote
  #635  
Old 21st January 2012, 05:25
mcotting's Avatar
mcotting mcotting is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Other Merchant Fleets
Department: Deck
Active: 1977 - Present
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 226
Looking at the diagrams in news articles of the Concordia's track after the original grounding, it seems like she made a very sharp turn to starboard with very little headway on, presumably to purposely beach her. Does the vessel have bow and/or stern thrusters? Are they on the emergency circuit? Or did she drop an anchor to swing around on it? And then heave it back up? Is she capable of releasing her ground tackle by remote wheelhouse control? Or did someone have to go forward?
Reply With Quote
  #636  
Old 21st January 2012, 05:30
Gollywobbler Gollywobbler is offline  
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iangb View Post
Yes.....but I'm finding the ongoing public release of damning evidence (eg. radio/phone calls from the ship) by the Italian authorities a bit...er...irregular.
Hi Iangb

Yes - so am I. I'm not sure whether it is just a hysterical reaction, whether Costa Cruises have been orchestrating it deliberately or whether some other, possibly more sinister, purpose is behind the whole thing.

Costa seem to have decided to adopt Trappism in the last couple of days I've noticed! They were fast enough to squeal out and blame the Captain last Monday. Then Lloyds List reminded them that this particular ship had passed very close to Giglio last August, on an almost identical course. Costa said they planned to find out about that. And so? Surely they can find out just as fast as Lloyds List did?

I smell a rat - I'm just not sure where the rat is!

Cheers

Gill
Reply With Quote
  #637  
Old 21st January 2012, 05:33
RHP RHP is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,385
I suggest we take a step back from the bickering and spare a thought for the poor souls still trapped on board whether perished or clinging on to life, scared, cold and hungry, unaware of how long they can last out. God bless them.
Reply With Quote
  #638  
Old 21st January 2012, 07:38
stein stein is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14,752
barrinoz
Quote:
Indeed! DSK is as pure as the driven snow.
barrinoz.
The question is whether he was prejudged by people now opposing prejudgement on this thread, so your counter is just an evasion. Or do you mean it’s merely a matter of not guessing completely wrong: if the Concordia captain is guilty of something, all of his accusers here will then be completely exonerated by barrinoz (and others on that thread)?

https://www.shipsnostalgia.com/showth...e+Strauss-Kahn

Last edited by stein; 21st January 2012 at 07:58..
Reply With Quote
  #639  
Old 21st January 2012, 07:55
Split Split is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Williams 56-65 View Post
Pilot; As someone who has had no connection with anything to do with ships and the sea since leaving it some 47 years ago I find your question as to wether it is possible to drop the anchor from the bridge to be rather intriguing.
The question that comes to my mind is; How is the anchor secured for sea? In my time it had to be fastened securely otherwise the only thing holding it is the brake on the windlass.
Unless of course things are done differently nowadays.
Burlap and cement down the chain pipes (I've forgotten the proper name) too,so that the locker does niot get full of water. Did he not say that there was a power failure?

Anyway, lots of questions.
Reply With Quote
  #640  
Old 21st January 2012, 09:37
Cossack's Avatar
Cossack Cossack is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 125
some pictures

s_c03_11411220.jpg

s_c06_RTR2W9YD.jpg

s_c09_15032498.jpg

s_c14_37049312.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #641  
Old 21st January 2012, 09:47
NoR's Avatar
NoR NoR is offline  
Senior Member
Department: Deck
Active: 1963 - 1979
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Split View Post
Burlap and cement down the chain pipes (I've forgotten the proper name) too.......
Spurling pipes. As i recall chippy used small bits of wood pushed through the links, a burlap 'sausage' and cement. This arrangement may have kept water out of the chain locker but didn't prevent the anchor from dropping.

Last edited by NoR; 21st January 2012 at 09:51..
Reply With Quote
  #642  
Old 21st January 2012, 09:54
WilliamH WilliamH is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 751
I've got another question, are the crew members on passenger ships allowed to consume alcohol?
Reply With Quote
  #643  
Old 21st January 2012, 10:05
Cisco's Avatar
Cisco Cisco is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1963 - 2006
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
My location
Posts: 6,272
Dunno about Costa but I did a few days on a 'Star' something or other out of Port Klang a few years back.... officers 100% dry, crew one can per day....
__________________
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
Reply With Quote
  #644  
Old 21st January 2012, 10:12
audierne audierne is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 161
concordia's oil

I see on the machine that those in charge of recovering the oil are waiting for the search for victims to come to an end before they start.
Why is it not possible to do both at the same time?
And a happy New Year to all.
Reply With Quote
  #645  
Old 21st January 2012, 10:46
ALLAN WILD's Avatar
ALLAN WILD ALLAN WILD is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlynR View Post
Just come across this close-up shot of the hull damage which I had not seen before. Can someone please confirm if this is actually a piece of embedded rock as the white object (what is this ?) appears to be 'inside' it as though it is a piece of 'rolled back' steel. Do tell me if I need a new pair of specs !

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...ock_impact.jpg
Ya .... should go to Specsavers.
__________________
Stay lucky, Allan.
Reply With Quote
  #646  
Old 21st January 2012, 10:48
jmcg's Avatar
jmcg jmcg is online now
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Deck
Active: 1966 - 1983
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,856
Derek #625

It is equally very sad indeed if any crew member (from whatever department) persished in this awful tragedy. However, is there any possibility that no engineers were down below at the time she foundered. In this day of UMERs she may have been under bridge control. Possible but unlikely.

I'm not aware of any bulletins from Costa indicating the fate of Concordia's crew - at least I have not read any.

Yes, spare a thought and say a prayer to your God for all of those lost in this tragedy.

BW

J
Reply With Quote
  #647  
Old 21st January 2012, 10:50
Cossack's Avatar
Cossack Cossack is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 125
Picture I posted above at #640 shows the rock better.
Reply With Quote
  #648  
Old 21st January 2012, 11:13
CAPTAIN JEREMY CAPTAIN JEREMY is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1974 - Present
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 217
[QUOTE=nav;568609]
Quote:
Originally Posted by randcmackenzie View Post
Thank-you randc, I stand corrected. I was trying to keep it simple and explain that the actual tonnage was very different to the grt normally quoted which is more important in understanding the forces involved. I misread the 10000 figure, not a good day on that post.

Agree your comments on Lloyds List, it was a great source of information on both shipping and aircraft losses.
The calculation of gross tonnage nowadays is somewhat more complex than a direct relationship to the enclosed space. I am afraid that cubic feet have been out of the equation for a very long time.

From Wikipedia :

The Gross tonnage calculation is defined in Regulation 3 of Annex 1 of The International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969. It is based on two variables:
V, the ship's total volume in cubic meters (m│), and
K, a multiplier based on the ship volume.

The value of the multiplier K varies in accordance with a ship's total volume (in cubic metres) and is applied as a kind of reduction factor in determining the gross tonnage value - which does not have a unit such as cubic metres or tons. For smaller ships, K is smaller, for larger ships, K is larger. K ranges from 0.22 to 0.32 and is calculated with a formula which uses the common or base-10 logarithm:

K = 0.2 + 0.02 x Log10(V)

Once V and K are known, gross tonnage is calculated using the formula, whereby GT is a function of V:

GT = K x V

As an example, we can calculate the gross tonnage of a ship with 10,000 m│ total volume.

K= 0.2 + 0.02 x log10 (V)
= 0.2 + 0.02 x Log10 (10,000)
= 0.2 + (0.02 x 4)
= 0.2 + (0.08)
= 0.28

Then the gross tonnage is calculated:

GT = K x V
= 0.28 x 10,000
= 2,800

I hope that it is now all as clear as mud.
Reply With Quote
  #649  
Old 21st January 2012, 11:39
Split Split is offline  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamH View Post
I've got another question, are the crew members on passenger ships allowed to consume alcohol?
Depends on the company, the flag and in some compÓnies, the Master. All US ships are dry, but the the Brits are varied. Italian, I don't know.

There is a special thread on this subject. Look it up---it's a good read with some interesting experiences posted !
Reply With Quote
  #650  
Old 21st January 2012, 12:15
5036's Avatar
5036 5036 is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,065
Thanks CJ. I understood that it was used by shippers to estimate what volume of cargo a vessel could take relative to the cargo's specific density eg grain versus iron ore? Is that true? There are variations for use by the Panama Canal for instance which is equally honourous, it must be a nightmare to keep track of.

Seems strange that cruise liners are measured this way as I can't see the cabins being filled with iron ore or grain but I suppose in a level playing field it gives a constant of measurement.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cruise ship Ushuaia leaking in Antarctic - merged threads Santos News and Views from the Shipping World 4 4th December 2008 23:40



Support SN


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.