114,500 GRT cruise ship capsized in Italy

[Sea Skimmer]

'Six dead' as cruise ship runs aground off Italy

At least six people are reported dead after a cruise ship carrying more than 4,000 people ran aground off Italy.

The Costa Concordia hit a sandbar on Friday evening near the island of Giglio and listed about 20 degrees, after which people tried to reach land in lifeboats or by swimming.

The continuing rescue operation is being hampered by what the ship's owners call a "worsening situation".

The coast guard says the last 50 people are being evacuated by helicopter.

There were 3,200 passengers and 1,000 crew on board the vessel.

One thousand passengers were Italian, with 500 Germans, 160 French and the rest from other nationalities.

The Costa Concordia had sailed earlier on Friday from Civitavecchia port near Rome for a Mediterranean cruise, due to dock in Marseille after calling at ports in Sicily, Sardinia and Spain.

'Groaning noise'


Cabin steward Deodato Ordona says the ship suddenly began to tlt.
Passengers were eating dinner on Friday evening, when they heard a loud bang, and were told that the ship had suffered electrical problems, one passenger told Italy's Ansa news agency.

"We were having supper when the lights suddenly went out, we heard a boom and a groaning noise, and all the cutlery fell on the floor," said Luciano Castro.

The 290-metre (950 ft) vessel ran aground, starting taking in water and listing by 20 degrees, the local coast guard said.

Orders were given to abandon ship, Deodato Ordona, a cabin steward on the Costa Concordia, told the BBC.

"We announced a general emergency and took passengers to muster stations," he said.

"But it is hard to launch the lifeboats, so they moved to the right side of the ship, and they could launch."

Elderly passengers were crying, said Mr Ordona, adding that he and some others jumped into the sea and swam roughly 400 metres to reach land.

Rescued passengers are being accommodated in hotels, schools and a church on Giglio, a resort island 25km (18 miles) off Italy's western coast.

Costa Crociera, the company which owns the ship, said it could not yet say what had caused the accident.

It added that "the position of the ship, which is worsening, is making more difficult the last part of the evacuation''.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16558910

The article doesn't say it, yet, but the thing how now been confirmed as sunk by capsizing. The same company had a major liner run aground at Sharm el-Sheik in 2010 killing three people.

[SirNitram]

My god, that's awful.

Small question. What's 'GRT'?

[Simon_Jester]

If I"m reading the article right, they got basically everyone off- "six dead" or maybe a few more sounds more like a handful of unlucky people falling and breaking their necks than it does like the kind of mass drownings you might get if a ship sank more normally.

[Sea Skimmer]

My god, that's awful.

Small question. What's 'GRT'?

Gross Registered Ton. It’s the common way the size of civilian ocean liners and freighters are measured, 100 cubic feet of permanently enclosed volume equals one GRT. It’s the way they tax the ships and decide how to regulate them in terms of safety requirements ect…; but also a pretty relevant guide to the size of liner which is lots of enclosed empty space. Actual displacement/weight tonnage of a ship is almost always much less then its GRT, likely no more then half, but it’s a real pain to find displacement tonnage for this kind of ship. I am looking. This was likely in the range of a 50,000 ton weight vessel. The very largest liners now are ~250,000 GRT, but it wasn't very many years ago at all that the largest ones were ~175,000 GRT. This was a very big ship by any standard, Titanic rated as 46,000 GRT tons in comparison.

One blurb I saw said a 165 foot gash was reported from the grounding. It sank with at least some people still on board, the heavy list seems to have prevented launching all life boats and put a lot of people in the water.

[VarrusTheEthical]

Edit: Sea Skimmer beat me to it.

I fully agree that this is awful. But at least it seems most of the passengers and crew got off. Does anyone else think this incident at all resembles the sinking of the Sea Diamond back in 2007?

[Sea Skimmer]

Daylight photo of the wreck has arrived

[VarrusTheEthical]

Wow! I didn't realize how close to the shore the wreck was. I assume that the ship is likely resting on the bottom, correct?

[Uraniun235]

Actual displacement/weight tonnage of a ship is almost always much less then its GRT, likely no more then half, but it’s a real pain to find displacement tonnage for this kind of ship. I am looking. This was likely in the range of a 50,000 ton weight vessel. The very largest liners now are ~250,000 GRT, but it wasn't very many years ago at all that the largest ones were ~175,000 GRT. This was a very big ship by any standard, Titanic rated as 46,000 GRT tons in comparison.

Out of curiosity, why has cruise ship size exploded in recent years? Some advance in technology, or increased demand, or...?

[JointStrikeFighter]

Booming global trade creating increased shipping demand led to the creation of demand for post Panamax cargo. Consequently more shipyards big enough to build these ships opened up, also allowing for the creation of bigger cruise ships.

[CJvR]

Wow!

I thought the era of sinking liners were behind us.

I wonder if they will ever build a liner as safe as Great Eastern, it must be somewhat embarassing than Brunell still best them even after all these years.

[CJvR]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16560050

That is a deep gash in the hull, a bit odd location though. They probably turned into the reef for it to have struck that far back.

[Sky Captain]

Aren't those things supposed to be able to stay afloat with that kind of damage? a 30 m hole could flood at most 2 - 3 watertight compartaments. Similar damage could also happen from a collision with deep draft cargo vessel far from land in stormy weather when rescue operation wouldn't be as quick and easy as it was here few hundred meters from shore.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Wow!

I thought the era of sinking liners were behind us.

I wonder if they will ever build a liner as safe as Great Eastern, it must be somewhat embarassing than Brunell still best them even after all these years.

Every year, some random barge/boat in the third world sinks with a hundred or so aboard...

[CJvR]

Something must have compromized to water tight compartments, IIRC there was a nasty wreck off South Africa from a busted pipe!

http://www.nedcruise.info/costa_concordia.htm

From the cutaway the damage is around the engineering spaces and even if the engines weren't damaged, since the ship could maintain speed and power for a time, there is a lot of things around the engineering spaces that can go fail though.

[CJvR]

Every year, some random barge/boat in the third world sinks with a hundred or so aboard...

Yeah, but then this wasn't a random brage/boat but a modern cruise ship only 5y old from a first world nation. That doesn't happen every year.

[Surlethe]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16560050

That is a deep gash in the hull, a bit odd location though. They probably turned into the reef for it to have struck that far back.

They could just as easily have drifted into the reef. <Insert speculation about instrument error or operator error.>

[Sea Skimmer]

Aren't those things supposed to be able to stay afloat with that kind of damage? a 30 m hole could flood at most 2 - 3 watertight compartaments. Similar damage could also happen from a collision with deep draft cargo vessel far from land in stormy weather when rescue operation wouldn't be as quick and easy as it was here few hundred meters from shore.

Its not realistic to expect a ship to survive a collision with a similar size vessel even if it did happen. Most ships are designed to survive two main machinery compartments flooding, but anything past that and they go down. Far more concerning then the fact that she sank is that she capsized. A modern ship should be designed to sink bodily.

This class may have critical safety problems since not only did it capsize, it capsized on the damn opposite side as the damage. Also panic set in during the evacuation causing many people to swim to shore when the lifeboats on the port side couldn't be lowered, and roughly 70 people are missing right now many of whom may be inside that wreck. Anyone in the dry portion should still be alive but trapped.



No way did they plow into this rock at anything but full speed. A high level of incompetence or else a massive mechanical failure had to take place, or very likely both.

[CJvR]

There is a closeup of the gash in the BBC pics, you can see straight into the ship on those.

You know you have hit the reef hard when you have half of it stuck in your hull!!!

Seems like high speed and a hard turn - someone had a big OOOPS!!! moment on the bridge by my guess.

[Broomstick]

I thought the era of sinking liners were behind us.

It will never be behind us. If it can float it can sink. That's why all commercial liners that carry passengers have to have safety drills, life boats, etc. It doesn't matter if it's a small dinner cruise vessel on a lake or a massive luxury liner on the ocean. Presumably, commercial freighters have appropriate drills/procedures as well.

It was probably all that safety stuff that has resulted in much better survival rates in recent decades than, say, in 1912. Half the battle is making sure people know what to do in an emergency so they don't simply succumb to blind panic.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Ships are not really supposed to sink on the side away from the damage, because flooding on one side causes a list to that side, not to the opposite side of the ship. So there's something that's very strange about this accident. My first speculation would be that when they ran her aground she rested on the breakwater to port, which shifted water to starboard and caused her to list until her scuttles were taking on water, which then dragged her back off the breakwater and led to the final capsize. This is simply because nothing else at the moment makes sense, but it could.

[Sky Captain]

Maybe water under port side is shallower than under starboard side so when the ship flooded it had nowhere else to list but to starboard. At least near rocky shores it is common to have steep changes in deapth.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Maybe water under port side is shallower than under starboard side so when the ship flooded it had nowhere else to list but to starboard. At least near rocky shores it is common to have steep changes in deapth.

That's more or less what I said regarding the grounding on the breakwater.


Speaking of the damage to the ship:



There's part of the rock she hit.

[Thanas]

According to German TV reports the crew was incompetent in handling safety after the disaster as well with regards to crowd control and information.

[Broomstick]

According the American news, the captain is under arrest. Presumably for incompetence.

I'm just happy there weren't more fatalities/injuries - any are bad enough, but this could have been much, much more tragic.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

According the American news, the captain is under arrest. Presumably for incompetence.

I'm just happy there weren't more fatalities/injuries - any are bad enough, but this could have been much, much more tragic.

Under Italian law it's a crime for the Captain to leave the ship before all the passengers have on a passenger carrying vessel in an emergency (or at least that's how I understand the statute which provides grounds for arrest for "leaving the vessel"); also he's being charged with manslaughter. The ship was 4 nautical miles off course and some passengers are claiming the Captain was dining with the first-class passengers while the cruise line is claiming he was on the bridge.