Largest Passenger Ship Lost
In ship historian Peter Newall’s words, “COSTA CONCORDIA (snip) the largest passenger ship to be lost in peace time, with passengers aboard, since TITANIC, 100 years ago”.
Today another survivor, a senior member of the ship’s crew, was brought out of the overturned hull. The man is reported to have a serious leg injury. Also today, two more bodies were discovered, bringing the death toll up to five.
Questions abound concerning the tragic accident unfolding in the Tyrrhenian Sea. The vessel’s track broadcast from the night of the accident seems to indicate the ship was heading on a straight course at about 15 knots, then perhaps following the moment of impact, there was a slowing and turning north.
Reader David H. records that, “From 20:23 to 20:37, it (COSTA CONCORDIA) was on course 285 at 15.5 knots. Next 18 mins. roughly course 350, slowing to 11 knots.”
Reviewing the many photographs and video shot of the hull, are we looking at a huge rock scooped up by the ship and stuck in the damaged port side?
MaritimeMatters reader, Bob Graham asks, “Did the CONCORDIA possibly strike an uncharted “pinnacle rock” just after her northbound transit of the island and the mainland? Lying in areas of ostensibly deep water such protuberances go undetected until ‘discovered,’ often by accident.”
It appears the CONCORDIA was turned back, towards the lights and possible safety of Giglio, before conditions rapidly worsened, leaving passengers to struggle as attempts were made to overcome the severe list and bring the ship close to shore.
While the investigation ramps up, the media has focused on Captain Francesco Schettino (detained by Italian police), the “black box” (removed by authorities yesterday), and the question of which came first: the power failure causing the ship to drift onto a reef, or the striking of the reef which caused the power to fail. Was the ship off course? What led up to the sudden uncontrollable list to starboard and what of the honeymoon couple trapped in their cabin for 24 hours following the accident?
A comment about lifeboats from a reader William, who says, “The CONCORDIA follows a modified design plan to Carnival’s Conquest class of which I am a former ships staff officer. (I served on board and was on the newbuild of the CONQUEST, itself, as well as a number of other Carnival vessels)”.
William continued, “While the ANDREA DORIA was a different matter all together, on board modern ships, including the CONCORDIA, there are exactly Double the number of lifeboats required to evacuate everyone specifically, so that if a ship is listing too much to launch from one side, they move to the other side — which is exactly what happened here. Even if the boats are totally unusable for some reason, there are sufficient life rafts ready to launch on both sides. (most crew members are actually assigned to evacuate on life rafts so that guests can have the safer life boats, which is why you see some rafts deployed)”.
The inquiry following this harrowing shipwreck will surely answer all these questions and perhaps also answer one I that have been asked repeatedly, “How could this happen?”
Thanks for Ezra Pendleton, Peter Knego, Robert Vongher, Shawn Dake and all MaritimeMatters commentors
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Well, really, its the largest passenger ship ever lost period, whether in peacetime, wartime, with passengers, or without. I guess the only other largish passenger ships lost in peacetime were Titanic, L’Atlantique, Paris, Andrea Doria and Sun Vista. This sort of thing is thankfully a remarkably rare occurrence, and to happen to a ship this size and with this number of passengers is totally unprecedented.
So what is the probability that this ship may be saved?
Can someone tell me how a ship that is holed on its Starboard side is lying on it’s Port side…. is it me…. or is it just possible, like the Andrea Doria, that there is a whole lot more damage under the water that what we are seeing?
Correction, Holed on it’s port side…. but lying on it’s starboard side
I think that, because the ship has capsized, it would be difficult to salvage her. The first task, after searches for any survivors or dead are complete, would be to remove any fuel on board to prevent environmental damage by oil spills. Because of the size of this ship, righting her to an even keel and pumping out and towing to a shipyard would be a colossal job, costing probably more than the ship is worth. I therefore conclude she will become a constructive total loss and probably demolished as she lies. I hate to see a ship like this, she looks like a stranded whale (also not a pretty sight b.t.w.) I could be proven wrong, but don’t see much possibility of further service.
What I do not understand is, how damage on the port side, and the roll to starboard, is not being talked about more. Perhaps the “Top Heaviness” and 4,000 people on the Starboard side caused a weight shift?
If you look at the photos taken of the Starboard under water sections ,she seems to have huge holes where she has grounded on the Island far bigger than the port side damage .So whether these occurred as she rolled and settled you cannot tell , but they could have happened as she came ashore which may account for the roll to Starboard. see
http://www.ilgiornale.it/fotogallery/costa_concordia_foto_sub/id=3671-foto=8-slideshow=0
I think the crew of the ship wanted to compensate the heeling with ballast water due to the water that came in the hull through the hole. In combination with pumps pumping out the water and stability reduction due to water in the hull, it rolled to the other side.
I have to point out that the quote “COSTA CONCORDIA (snip) the largest passenger ship to be lost in peace time, with passengers aboard, since TITANIC, 100 years ago” is totally inappropriate for this article… Titanic has nothing to do with Costa Concordia. ‘Since Titanic’ leads the reader to believe that Titanic was bigger, which it wasn’t.
I suspect that the ship rolled to starboard due to the ship being turned to reach Giglio Port. The water that had been taken on through the hole in the port side then surged across the ship converting a list to port to a much more serious list to starboard and the water kept cascading in through the hole. So we have a similar free surface effect as with the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster. Why aren’t there longitudinal watertight bulkheads throughout all underwater spaces in these ships? Was the hull thick enough to withstand such collisions?
Of course these matters need addressing in ship design but no matter how safe you try to make a ship you can’t cater for a Captain who tries to make a very close pass to an island to impress the locals – evidently he had a congratulatory message from the Mayor earlier in the year. One of the locals thought he was only 150 metres off the coast and names the uncharted rock!
There are presently too many factors going on here to determine what specifically caused this tragic accident. Anyone who has piloted a vessel, large or small knows simply to avoid suspicious areas close to any shoreline…but one might also ask why…why this experienced captain would consider doing this….grandstanding?
Sadly, this reminds me of the Normandie…though two completely different circumstances, we’re seeing a vessel in a position that is any ship-owners worst nightmare.
The irnoy…a ship built with all the ultra sophisticated devices to operate her safely, still needs a clear set of human brains at the helm. A reader commented about nautical design…in this day and age of ships assembled in blocks, I wonder whether this affects overall seaworthiness, strength and the ability to fight mother nature.
Does this remind anyone of images of Normandie? While two totally different set of circumstances, it makes one wonder if…given all
the ultra sophisticated devices required for todays mega-liners, whether a common sense set of brains at the helm is the single most important “device” a ship can have.
Anyone piloting a vessel…large or small…knows simply to avoid suspicious shorelines.
The tragedy of this is totally obvious: this need not have happened.
We know the massive effort it took to salvage the Normandie. Although the Costa Concordia is not completely on her side she is a much larger ship.
I comment “Reader David H. records that, “From 20:23 to 20:37, it (COSTA CONCORDIA) was on course 285 at 15.5 knots. Next 18 mins. roughly course 350, slowing to 11 knots.”.
According to Google Earth from Civitavecchia following a course 285 degrees at 15.5 knots you hit Giannutri Island in less than two hours.
Steering for 350 between 20.37 plus 18 minutes would take you straight to hit Monte Argentario.
I wonder where Mr. David H. info come from.
Thanks for your attention.
Supposedly, and this has stood the test of time, the SS NORMANDY caught fire while being converted to a US liner during the Second World War. She was pumped so fully with fire fighters water that she capsized. Hardly hitting rocks or a reef- she just fell over at the pier on the Hudson in New York.
I say “supposedly” – the fire was allegedly started by a workmans torch.
This is an absolutely terrible circumstance, and I have to point out a number of issues; the crew was barely trained-they were given a line to say and ran with it, telling passengers that there was a ‘technical problem’ for 45 min.–no shit! Pardon my French, but you can’t tell me a line like that at a point when the ship is already heeling over. The captain was theoretically correct–he did the old “Britannic” option and made for land when the “Concordia” was holed. With over 40 nationalities, how many of those people on that ship, or most other massive cruise ships with hundreds of people paid at sub-par wages, going to be loyal to the company or look after passengers to the full? Not too many. When this kind of emergency happens, they tend to save themselves. In any case, there was a total lack of leadership as far as I have heard. Those that died or are still missing are mostly passengers. Also, it is true–the largest peacetime wreak (still on the ocean floor)was the “Titanic”, and the record for the largest passenger ship wreak on the sea floor ever–war or peace–is held by the sister ship “Britannic” in 1916, while the (and forgive my spelling)”Wilhelm Gusllaff” had the largest loss of life-9,640 dead in 1945. The “Costa Concordia” is also the very first 100,000 tonner to be lost since this newer breed of ship came out in 1997. Thankfully, the loss of life is minimal even here. Let’s hope we hear good news. I’m also interested if the ship is salvaged. I’ve heard the question of salvage-it all depends on hull/superstructure damage (as was the factor in the recovery of the “Normandy” whose damage ruled out a restoration), and whether the ship is perched in such a way as the rocks below might cause her to break at least in two massive sections–at the worst. In any case, with a wreak like this and of this size, it going to cost millions to save her. I’m a fan of ships and of the liner trades for nearly 20 years and this is most incredible. Like the “Morro Castle” fire and beaching in 1937, the scene at Giglio is such a sight to wake up to.
Without much in the way of facts, there seems to be many negative comments regarding the behavior of the crew and yet, indeed, virtually all passengers got off safely! Regardless of the initial cause for the reef strike, the awesome hull damage, and what must have been considerable confusion, there appears to have been no fires or large oil spills. So, until the official inquiry, I think the company and the industry got off lightly. The crew must have performed quite well to have safely shut down a very complex engineering entity, including all the kitchens, without fires and remember, most of the crew perform hotel, not ship related, duties. It may have been Friday the 13th, but it was a lucky day for most aboard that ship.
Wreak???
Wreck wreck wreck!
I’ve wondered the same as some of the other commenters above, namely how a large hole on the port side could cause a roll to starboard. Also some good plausible explanations from others on here as to how that could have happened. I’m surprised though that this question hasn’t come up or been reported on in the media at all. I’m sure we’ll find out after all has been thoroughly investigated though.
In other outlets it’s being reported that Carnival Corp. expects Concordia to be out of commission until at least November, but something tells me this ship is totally unsalvageable for continued use. It seems the damage would be too great, when considering water damage, the hole in the port side, and the damage to the starboard side resting on the rocky reef.
Finally, I read a very valid comment somewhere that points to the instability and generally decreased sea-worthiness when comparing these modern megaships with the large liners of the past (which certainly isn’t something the ship-faithful haven’t already known to be true). If you compare what happened to Titanic to the situation we have here with Concordia, from what we know or can see thus far, it took far less damage to sink a ship of far greater size. Titanic was opened across 5 watertight compartments and I believe even a bit into a 6th, stretching over 300ft of her hull, yet she sank with only a minor list and stayed afloat for 2.5 hours. Here we have a ship over twice the size that had a gash much smaller in length, yet she quickly began to list and sink. This has to make one begin to think about top-heaviness, thin hull plating, and inadequate compartmentalization. Certainly we know that cruise ships get ported if weather is too bad, as their hulls are not designed with the same heavy tolerances as liners.
There’s still too little known to definitively say what caused the original list and eventual demise of this ship, but the initial examinations would seem to indicate that ship design has become too “cost-effective,” and that some things in regards to ship design should not be skimped on.
I hadn’t thought along the Herald Of Free Enterprise line of thought. Andrew’s excellent theory about the reported “U-turn” that was mentioned by a couple of news outlets could be a very plausable cause. Especially, in combination with a ship that is, in my opinion, like most cruise ships today, all too top heavy.
However, I’m still thinking that they will find that a sizeable portion of plating is completely missing from the keel to bilge keel area on the starboard side.
On a side note, thank you Andrew Tognola for providing that link with the underwater shots. I’m curious how much is pre-allision related vs post-allision.
Yes we are back to basic stability. This is the same problem as the Herald of Free Enterprise and for that matter the Mary Rose. If a ship is only just stable then any minor alteration will result in capsize. Titanic caused changes in the law that saved many more lives than those lost in April 1912. But we are now looking at very new and yet as old as time problems with ship design. Ships should be able to stay upright if holed. Titanic did. As for longitudinal bulkheads I have never seen such in the Engine room. I could be wrong as I have not seen the ship’s drawings but the hole looked to be a direct hit on the Engine Room. This would account for the immediate count of three lost and the outing of the power.
There is no doubt that a lot of things were wrong. Some because of what happened on the night and some due to the basic greed that has resulted in poor ship design but the one thing that this Capitan did do right was to head for shallow water. The final turn could well of caused the capsize but it was always going to happen. With deep water we would be looking at a much greater loss of life and an up turned hull. The ships design needs to be looked at and not just the sister ships but all the modern cruise ships. I remember my lessons in Plymouth and South Shields Keep you G and M away from each other.
Can’t resist being a pedant: I’m not sure there ever was a ‘Normandy’, but the beautiful liner which, following a fire, capsized due to internal flooding and was cut up in New York harbour was the SS Normandie…
It is true–considering the circumstances, the crew performed better here then I expected. The captain, however, has no real explanation. Can’t wait to see why the man went into uncharted waters at all, or why he felt the need to leave his ship as another captain did in the “Yarmouth Castle” fire in 1965–while passengers were still on board. A captain always remains until all souls are accounted for-as far as can be done. Grounding the ship was a smart move after he found that he was taking on water, but again, why was he even that close to shore at all? What was the compelling idea that took him there-apparently off of the usual route? Investigations are pending, so I’ll leave it up to the law. I think he will be in trouble depending on his exact course, and the reasons therein. Either way, he’s done as a captain of anything.
From what I have read it seems possible that the waters were charted but the charts were inaccurate, showing plenty of depth (more than enough for the CONCORDIA) in the area where the accident happened. In which case the captain could be cleared of any navigational wrongdoing – but it doesn’t excuse his later actions.
What a horrible thing to happen. I still feel in my personal there is damage on the other side as well. If the ship had now been so top heavy it would not have capsized so quickly !!! To many decks and not enough draft. It was boud to happen at some point…I am just glad it did not in the open sea where it would have sunk days age. In looking at the pictures on t v you can still see 2 unused lifeboats on the high side that were unable to be lowered. How many lifeboats were lowered from the side the ship heeled over on before it heeled. It says to me build the hulls stronger and the ships with less decks and stop trying to shove as many cabins in as possible. What a shame
NORMANDIE is correct, as she was christened and sailed for French Line, as SS NORMANDIE. However, for whatever reasons, call it time, the more notable spelling has been accepted in most circles as NORMANDY, perhaps Anglophile simplication. Whatever, nothing can ever detract from the reputed elegance she contained and can be found in many wonderful volumes with pictures.
Why does nobody mention The Sea Diamond from Louis Cruise Lines which went down near Santorini with a father and his daughter still on board?
Take away Capt. Schettino’s masters certificate, tear it in little pieces and throw it to the wind. Oh, and make sure the guy gets a haircut!!! Being Captain of a major cruise vessel, this guy looks nothing like the man in command.