Cruise Ship Costa Concordia - MERGED THREADS

[David M]

Originally Posted by ChannelIslander

Yeah, I was thinking that the bridge should be more like a navy command with two people having to agree on each action before it is taken.

In economic terms that means hiring and paying three more watch officers to be onboard. One officer for 2 x 4 hour watches per day.

Naval officers work for less money than do merchant marine officers, at least in the US.

It also means slowing down the decision making process, which is one reason why ships are not operated by a committee taking a vote on every decision that has to be made.

[markpierce]

The Concordia has two 21,000 kW azimuthing pods for main propulsion, so the ship has no propeller shafts.

[David M]

It does but they are very short.

[MacG]

Originally Posted by markpierce

The Concordia has two 21,000 kW azimuthing pods for main propulsion, so the ship has no propeller shafts.

Source?

[St. Elsewhere]

Originally Posted by markpierce

The Concordia has two 21,000 kW azimuthing pods for main propulsion, so the ship has no propeller shafts.

The specs listed on Wikipedia show straight shafts & fixed pitch props. That data comes from: ^ RINA (2012). "Costa Concordia". Leonardo Info database. RINA Marine. Retrieved 2012-01-20.


Costa Concordia Career
Name: Costa Concordia Owner: Carnival Corporation & plc Operator: Costa Cruises Port of registry: Genoa, Italy Route: Western Mediterranean Ordered: 19 January 2004 Builder: Fincantieri Sestri Ponente, Italy Cost: €450 million (£372 million, US$570 million)[1] Yard number: 6122 Launched: 2 September 2005 Christened: 7 July 2006[2] Acquired: 30 June 2006 Maiden voyage: 14 July 2006 In service: July 2006 Out of service: 13 January 2012 Identification: Call sign: IBHD

• IMO number: 9320544
• MMSI no.: 247158500

Status: Capsized off Isola del Giglio, Italy Notes: [3][4] General characteristics [5] Class and type: Concordia class cruise ship Tonnage: 114,137 GT Length: LOA 290.20 m (952 ft 1 in)
LBP 247.4 m (811 ft 8 in) Beam: 35.50 m (116 ft 6 in) Draught: 8.20 m (26 ft 11 in) Depth: 14.18 m (46 ft 6 in) Decks: 17 Installed power: 6 × Wärtsilä diesel engines, 75,600 kilowatts (101,400 hp) Propulsion: Diesel-electric; two shafts (2 × 21 MW)
Two fixed pitch propellers Speed: service: 21.5 knots (39.8 km/h; 24.7 mph)
maximum: 23 knots (43 km/h; 26 mph) Capacity: 3780 passengers Crew: 1,100 Notes: [6][7]

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by markpierce

The Concordia has two 21,000 kW azimuthing pods for main propulsion, so the ship has no propeller shafts.

Nope twin screw and conventional rudders, some of her sisters have azipods

Dave

[ChannelIslander]

Originally Posted by David M

In economic terms that means hiring and paying three more watch officers to be onboard. One officer for 2 x 4 hour watches per day.

Naval officers work for less money than do merchant marine officers, at least in the US.

It also means slowing down the decision making process, which is one reason why ships are not operated by a committee taking a vote on every decision that has to be made.

That's nonsense, David. There are already more than one bridge officer on the bridge at any one time. It's a simple call-and-response system. Just like you've seen in the movies, or on Star Trek. "Turn Port 15 degrees" . . . "Port 15 degrees, I concur." or "Do not concur!" which simply causes a second look at it.

Slowing down the decision making process seems like it could have saved some lives in this case.

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by ChannelIslander

That's nonsense, David. There are already more than one bridge officer on the bridge at any one time. It's a simple call-and-response system. Just like you've seen in the movies, or on Star Trek. "Turn Port 15 degrees" . . . "Port 15 degrees, I concur." or "Do not concur!" which simply causes a second look at it.

Slowing down the decision making process seems like it could have saved some lives in this case.

Just splitting hairs, but they are Mates, not Officers, at least here in the UK.
A large cruise ship may well have two mates on each watch, senior and a junior, plus a look out and a helmsman (standing by)
On your joe average cargo boat, one mate on watch, with a look out during the hours of darkness.
The vessels flag state sets the minimum number of mates, engineers and crew which will be stated on the vessels Safe manning Certificate.
One reason why shipping company's will use a certain flag state in which to register their ships

[justwaiting]

Originally Posted by ChannelIslander

That's nonsense, David. There are already more than one bridge officer on the bridge at any one time. It's a simple call-and-response system. Just like you've seen in the movies, or on Star Trek. "Turn Port 15 degrees" . . . "Port 15 degrees, I concur." or "Do not concur!" which simply causes a second look at it.

Slowing down the decision making process seems like it could have saved some lives in this case.

As you said "just like the movies".
In real life there is acknowledgement of orders, delays and debates in decisions can cost lives. In this case the delay in making decisions to advise CG, mustering passengers and deploying life boats are probably the reason why the death toll is as it is.

[St. Elsewhere]

Schettino's lawyer is anticipating using data from the VDR in his case despite earlier reports that Schettino had reported the VDR "broken" 15 days prior to the incident.

"The Costa Concordia cruise liner was beset by structural problems that affected its balance and made it easier to sink, Captain Francesco Schettino's defence lawyer has claimed.

The ship's balancing pump and ballast had inbuilt structural problems, an allegation that will be proven by the Voyage Data Recorder (VDR), the defence lawyers said."


To report problems or to leave feedback about this article, e-mail: g.mezzofiore@ibtimes.co.uk
To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.co.uk

[S/V Alchemy]

Which boils down to "if the ballast pumps had worked, I wouldn't have been distracted by her breasts".

[HappySeagull]

Originally Posted by At sea

Your surmising is at odds with the recollection of the Third Officer, who was on the bridge during the drama and in her statement says (in effect) that: The captain of the Costa Concordia was distracted by guests on the bridge before impact...and then played no role in guiding the holed cruise ship into shallow water, instead panicking and going to his cabin.

More:
Costa Concordia captain 'distracted by guests on bridge' | World news | guardian.co.uk

...yes,thanks.I read that,and further down it says he was pacing back and forth in a panic. Which was it?,or both.Nobody else has said they maneuvered the ship to the beach but Schettino says he did.There were other named people there,the source of the comment isn't attributed to a named person.Other scenarios mention "going astern" after hitting.That would be immediate,I'd guess,and likely Schettino doing it.He may have gone to his cabin and started phoning the owners (as seems fairly definite) but thereafter returned...or as a wilder surmise,crying in his cabin until making a run for the boats when he saw them being lowered,which although it suits the mood of the general reader,I still think is unlikely.

ps-I don't see "3rd officer" as the one who said that-I see "according to a witness"

[David M]

Originally Posted by ChannelIslander

That's nonsense, David. There are already more than one bridge officer on the bridge at any one time. It's a simple call-and-response system. Just like you've seen in the movies, or on Star Trek. "Turn Port 15 degrees" . . . "Port 15 degrees, I concur." or "Do not concur!" which simply causes a second look at it.

Slowing down the decision making process seems like it could have saved some lives in this case.

It is not nonsense. You have just never been on a merchant ship at sea.

On military ships they have a bunch of officers and enlisted people on the bridge but not on a merchant ship where it is common to have only two people on the bridge at sea. Not so much on cruise ships perhaps but tankers and container ships, yes, this is common. It depends on how many people the company wants to pay to stand a watch. At the very least legally you need a Mate and a Lookout.

Acknowledging a command so that the watch officer knows the command was understood is completely different from an agreement to do something. For example, a helmsman who repeats a command is not saying, Yes, I agree that this is a good idea. The helmsman is acknowledging the command back to the watch officer so the watch officer knows the helmsman understood his order.

Only one person has the "con" on a bridge. The management of a bridge should not be decision by committee.

On military ships as well only one person has the con.

Obviously, StarTrek is Hollywood's perception of bridge management.

[Pelagic]

The “Trust and Verify” procedure of following safety procedures and approved company standing orders I recommended was more in line with simplified procedural controls that the passenger airline industry follows.

That also includes voice recorders on the bridge to make sure communications are clear and concise.

Inspections are in the form of expert observers on trips assessing the Bridge team on their performance and making recommendations that will help them improve in weak areas.

I agree with David, you need to be very clear on Chain of Command, so that is the Trust part….. The Verify part is in reinforcing good practices thru pro-active monitoring and training

[sarafina]

Originally Posted by HappySeagull

He may have gone to his cabin and started phoning the owners (as seems fairly definite) but thereafter returned...or as a wilder surmise,crying in his cabin until making a run for the boats when he saw them being lowered,which although it suits the mood of the general reader,I still think is unlikely.

It seems pretty clear at this point that he and his first officer were on the lifeboat because he had been relieved of command by his staff and his ship was under command of the guest Costa Captain sailing with them, Roberto Bosio.

The Heroes of the Concordia : Discovery News