Italy cruise ship Costa Concordia makes landfall?

[danscope]

Pity. Very expensive cruise ship strikes underwater obstruction. Story still unfolding.
Found that on BBC news.

[pzkpfw]

I find it amazing that in this day of sonar mapping of underwater obstacles, digital sharing of information, and computerised navigation (GPS etc) that this kind of thing can still happen.

(Recently, here, we had a big container ship hit a (known) reef coming into a N.Z. port; oil on the beaches, containers in the water, penguins out of the water, years of clean-up...)

In our container-ship case, there are crew being charged in court; it looks like human factors were involved.

[swampyankee]

Not too long ago, one of the British (iirc) cruise ships found one of the many shoals that reside near Cape Cod.

[Moose]

Landfall? I suppose that's one way of putting it.

[danscope]

Yep, landfall. I'll bet they spilled their coffee.
On a serious note, it may be that people have perished in this tragedy. There was a group of passengers missing ...
perhaps 60 or more. Dreadful.

[swampyankee]

According to the BBC's RSS feed, 3 people are confirmed dead and somewhere between 40 and 70 are missing. The ship's captain is also being held for questioning.

[peteshimmon]

Heck! suppose it was a glitch in the SatNav
data? I know...too early to speculate!
But with that much investment, Captains
have to be old women with the charts when
near land. No disrespect to old women.

[Scriitor]

They've rescued a honeymooning couple from inside the wreck.

[danscope]

Doesn't make much sense. The waters are well known, or should be. They know the draft. Any ledge in the viscinity of that port of call should either be leveled out or very well marked.
This doesn't inspire confidence.
We'll know more in time.

Best regards,
Dan

[Trebuchet]

Interesting that she appears to have capsized in the opposite direction from the damage. Apparently this was caused by attempting to turn into the harbor. And perhaps a lack of compartmentalization, allowing the water to shift to the other side. It's hard to tell from the pictures I've found so far, but she appears to be partly blocking the harbor entrance.

The ship appears to be fairly easily salvageable -- weld patches over the hole in the port side, pump out (carefully!) and tow off to dry dock. She'll no doubt re-enter service under a different name.

[danscope]

Yes. "The Mold Maru" 35,000 tons . That's a pretty good sized patch alright, but they will get it done. Can't have a cruise ship blocking the harbor entrance. Bad for business. I think you were right about the boarded water shifting
which surely caused the reverse capsize. has to be.

Dan

[Nicolas]

The ship appears to be fairly easily salvageable -- weld patches over the hole in the port side, pump out (carefully!) and tow off to dry dock. She'll no doubt re-enter service under a different name.

That would be some major patching; the hole is something like 60 meters from what I've read. A friend of mine is in the salvage business, maybe he has to go there if he can be missed in NZ.

[Trebuchet]

That would be some major patching; the hole is something like 60 meters from what I've read. A friend of mine is in the salvage business, maybe he has to go there if he can be missed in NZ.

Oh there's no doubt it'll be a big job, but at least the ship is near shore and not fully submerged. The hole doesn't look quite as large as that to me -- 60m would be about 1/5 the length of the ship. In any case, it's doable. This picture is interesting -- how did they manage to hit a rock that near the stern without damaging that stabilizer first?

Oops, here's another showing the length of the damage -- I'd say it's probably around 60m as you say.

[schlaugh]

I realize that perspective can be misleading based on camera angles, telephoto lens and such, but this photo certainly makes it seem that the ship was astonishingly close to the spit. People on the land said they had never seen the ship that close to shore.

[Trebuchet]

Where they wound up is not quite where they hit the rock. From Wikipedia:

On 15 January La Repubblica reported that the captain did not mention any mechanical problems but had stated that they were 300 metres (330 yd) from the rocks (i.e., about the length of the vessel) and that they hit a rock that was not marked on nautical charts. This reef was about 800 metres (870 yd) south of the entrance to the harbour of Giglio.[citation needed] The vessel continued for approximately another 1,000 metres (1,100 yd) until just north of the harbour entrance.[citation needed] The vessel then turned in an attempt to get close to the harbour.[citation needed] This turn shifted the centre of gravity to the starboard side of the ship[14].[citation needed] and it listed over to that side initially by about 20°, finally coming to rest in about 25 fathoms (150 ft; 46 m) of water at an angle of heel of about 80°.[15][16] According to the local coast guard, the ship has a 50-metre (160 ft) gash on her port side,[13] with a large rock embedded in the ship's hull.

Also from the Wikipedia article, here's a map.

[whimsyfree]

Where they wound up is not quite where they hit the rock.

I assume the Captain ran her aground deliberately to prevent her sinking.

[Perikles]

I thought they were trying to reach the harbour to make disembarking easier. Anyway, the company which owns the ship estimates the cost to be 95 million dollars, and their shares have fallen 23%. Source (in Spanish)

[publius]

It's looking like the captain here may join with ranks of the captain of the Exxon Valdez in infamy. The cruise line has thrown him under the bus, or maybe overboard I should say. There are accusations he was drinking and womanizing, accusations they were showboating and deliberately went too close to shore to put on a show for their buddies on the island. And worst of all, there are accusations the captain abandoned ship before all the passengers and crew were off.

On the showboating charge, a relative of one the crew, on the island at the time, posted something on their Facebook page that the ship was going to come close and put on quite a show.

[NEOWatcher]

On the showboating charge, a relative of one the crew, on the island at the time, posted something on their Facebook page that the ship was going to come close and put on quite a show.

Unfortunately, he succeeded far beyond his wildest expectations.

[Trebuchet]

The ship appears to be fairly easily salvageable...

Or maybe not! I completely overlooked the fact that she's sitting on rocks getting worked by wind, waves, and tide. When the New Carissa grounded on an Oregon beach in 1999, she was essentially undamaged but within a few days had begun to break up. Of course tides in the Med are pretty minimal, but the Costa Concordia is sitting on rocks and the rescue divers have had to be withdrawn due to a storm causing the ship to move. Not a good sign.

[captain swoop]

Back in 2002 HMS Nottingham, a Type 42 Destroyer ran aground off Lord Howe Island (Australia) after making some manouvres in bad weather to allow the helicopter to take off an injured crewman.
She got a 50m gash in the hull and 5 of her compartments were flooded. SHe was saved by heroic work by the crew and several won decorations for their efforts.
She was put on the deck of a barge and towed back to the UK and repaired.
RN Crews are probably better at Damage Control than a cruise ship crew and the ship has better compartmentalisation.

[Skyfire]

This picture is interesting -- how did they manage to hit a rock that near the stern without damaging that stabilizer first?

Yes, as an engineer I looked at that and what is interesting is how and where the ship is damaged. It was obviously moving sideways through the water as the damage starts about midway along the side and gets progressively more intrusive as the ship moved over the lump of rock (a large chunk of which is still embedded in the crumpled metal). Why was the ship moving sideways at an angle like that???

[R.A.F.]

...there are accusations the captain abandoned ship before all the passengers and crew were off.

I wouldn't classify that as a "accusation" since we know for certain that passengers were on that ship when the Captain left.

[schlaugh]

It was obviously moving sideways through the water as the damage starts about midway along the side and gets progressively more intrusive as the ship moved over the lump of rock (a large chunk of which is still embedded in the crumpled metal). Why was the ship moving sideways at an angle like that???

Unusual and / or unusually strong current at that point. Or, if the suspicions are confirmed that he was too close to shore, then perhaps unexpected cross-currents over the too-shallow water.

I would not think that simple leeway would do that kind of damage, but right now who can say? Many ships have been lost while sliding sideways from wind and tide.

[Moose]

I'm not an engineer or anything, but I'm familiar with long-proportioned boats. Motor canoes, but some of the same dynamics and maneuvering apply. What I'm seeing is consistent with a hard turn to starboard initiated shortly before the stabilizer barely missed the rock. This maneuver would have been followed by a hard turn to port shortly after the bow cleared whatever they were evading. They may have been trying to evade the very shoal they ultimately hit.

On a ship, the pivot tends to be pretty close to the bow. The rudder can move the stern quite violently (in relative terms), and could easily have 'scooped' up the boulder while it was ripping through the hull.

(This is the same maneuver with which they tried to save the Titanic. It failed because they'd also reversed the engines.)

[Trebuchet]

Meanwhile, here's an image from an ad that came up on another site I was visiting!

[HenrikOlsen]

I guess the small boat is the pilot shouting at them.

[Jens]

RN Crews are probably better at Damage Control than a cruise ship crew and the ship has better compartmentalisation.

And also very importantly, their owner has essentially unlimited resources (at least until S&P downgrades them!).

[baskerbosse]

I'm not an engineer or anything, but I'm familiar with long-proportioned boats. Motor canoes, but some of the same dynamics and maneuvering apply. What I'm seeing is consistent with a hard turn to starboard initiated shortly before the stabilizer barely missed the rock. This maneuver would have been followed by a hard turn to port shortly after the bow cleared whatever they were evading. They may have been trying to evade the very shoal they ultimately hit.

On a ship, the pivot tends to be pretty close to the bow. The rudder can move the stern quite violently (in relative terms), and could easily have 'scooped' up the boulder while it was ripping through the hull.

Would be interesting to see a course plot from the black box.

Seems like she was passing too close to the shore on the port side.
Panic-turned to starboard and then hit the rocks. Realised the extent of the damage, and then started a port turn in an attempt to reach the harbour, which caused the list and ultimately the sinking at the entrance of the harbour..

I wonder how the were steering when she started listing? I see the large cruise ships here in Sydney harbour all the time. Even a panic maneouver would be slow affair indeed for these beasts.

(This is the same maneuver with which they tried to save the Titanic. It failed because they'd also reversed the engines.)

-Key point is that the center engine on the Titanic was a turbine. You cannot reverse turbines and the propeller of this engine is the one forward of the rudder. Therefore, when the other two propellers go in reverse, you loose steering..

Peter Jenssen

[baskerbosse]

Ok,

Here's a course track: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw4pVWYeplU

She was heading north, hit the rock and then somehow managed to do a 180 degree about turn before coming to rest on the bottom.
It's pretty clear she had no hope of entering that harbour as it is so small that it would probably not fit even half the ship.
If she had gone in, the harbour would have been pretty much 100% full of shipwreck!

As for the stabiliser being undamaged, it may have been extended after the accident I think?
Also, if you look at the tracking, she seems to be going pretty fast. I wonder if the bernoulli effect could have been an issue?
QE2 ran aground in 90's due to this. (also known as 'ship's squat')

Peter Jenssen