15
   

Italian Cruise Ship Disaster

 
 
Linkat
 
  3  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 02:33 pm
@firefly,
According to the report from CNN it is a law...

"In the Concordia case, the laws of Italy also apply. Schettino may face charges including manslaughter, shipwreck and abandoning a ship when passengers were still on board, chief prosecutor Francesco Verusio said. Abandoning ship is a maritime crime that has been on the books for centuries in Spain, Greece and Italy, according to Alessandra Batassa, a lawyer in Rome, although many other countries have long abandoned it."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/travel/cruise-ship-passenger-safety/

firefly
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 03:36 pm
@Linkat,
That's interesting to know, thanks, Linkat.

The Captain needs a very good lawyer.

Now he says he tripped and fell into a lifeboat.

I can believe he is devastated by all of this.
Quote:
Cruise captain claims he 'fell into lifeboat'
Europe correspondent Rachael Brown and staff
January 19, 2012

The captain who ran his cruise ship onto rocks off the Italian coast has reportedly told investigators he "tripped and fell into a lifeboat" as the stricken ship began to take on water.

The search for 23 people still missing after the wreck of the Costa Concordia was suspended overnight because of bad weather.

While maritime authorities begin their investigation into what went wrong, the ship's owner keeps pointing the finger of blame at captain Francesco Schettino.

Now Italian press reports say Schettino has told investigators he was not on board to direct the evacuation of hundreds of crew and passengers because he accidentally fell into a life raft.

The claim has sparked widespread anger in Italy.

Commander Cosimo Nicastro, from the Italian coast guard, says Schettino broke the golden rule.

"The captain has to be the last one to leave the ship," he said.

"This is international law, it is Italian law. When he left, there was still hundreds of people on board waiting."

Overnight an Italian judge said other crew members stayed on board for the evacuation, apparently refuting the captain's claim he had to oversee the operation from the shore.

And a shipping journal has revealed five months ago the ship passed very close to the island of Giglio on much the same track that it took last week.

The head of Costa Cruises, which owns the Costa Concordia, says the same ship did a similar stunt last August, sailing close to Giglio as the island celebrated its festival of the shooting stars.

But Costa CEO Pier Luigi Foschi said the ship had never been closer than 500 metres to the island.

However, the Lloyd's List shipping journal says its satellite tracking information puts the ship within 230 metres of the island in August - even closer than the accident site.

"I think what we've discovered with this data is that the company's account of what happened, of the rogue master taking a bad decision, isn't quite as black and white as they presented originally," editor Richard Meade said.

"This ship took a very similar route only a few months previously and the master would have known that.

"Now the master's account of the thing is that there were no rocks in his way, this was a perfectly safe route, the ship had done this before, and this evidence really does stack that up."

Schettino's lawyer, Bruno Leporatti, says the captain is devastated by the incident, in which 11 people have been confirmed dead so far.

"The captain is disturbed and indeed heartbroken by what happened, so let's move away from the negative profile that's been portrayed," he said.

"He's not only shaken for the loss of his ship, which for a marine captain is a serious thing, but above all for what happened and the loss of human life.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-19/captain-claims-he-fell-into-lifeboat/3781876


If the Captain believed it was safe to go that close to shore, based on what had taken place last August, he might have Costa Cruises unfairly dumping some blame on him for hitting the rock. And, if Costa hadn't decried the ship going that close to shore last August, they could have been seen as condoning that sort of stunt, and the Captain might have thought it was all right to do it again.

hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:25 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
captain was not doing his duty the CG should have airlifted to the ship someone who was able to take charge of the operation.


Once more where was the rest of the bridge officers as I see it there should had been no need to airlifted anyone else as the first officer should had taken charge then the second and then the third officer.............




When we see such horrible performance from the captain, and when we in hindsight see multiple problems with the safety culture of this company, there is no reason to expect that the underlings are of any better quality than is the captain. It should have been clear early on that the corporate employees were not up to the job, and at that point the government needed to make a stab at doing better. I made the same argument with in two days of the BP Macondo well spewing crude and methane, as at that time it was clear that BP could not handle the job, but the US government refused to take over. I am deeply opposed to government demanding the authority to run our lives, but the government has legal abilities and institutional skills that no private concern can match, in a crisis the most able authority must be in charge, and a lot of the time that is the government.
firefly
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:29 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
in a crisis the most able authority must be in charge, and a lot of the time that is the government.

Isn't that what the Italian Coast Guard was trying to do--to take charge?
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:42 pm
@hawkeye10,
You make some interesting points, Hawk. All we hear about the Italian Coast Guard so far is their giving orders to everybody, including the captain. Has anyone seen a reference to the CG actually participating in the rescue efforts, let alone taking charge which, imo, is what they should have done as soon as the captain left his post?
Linkat
 
  2  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:44 pm
@firefly,
Damn how many times have you fell when a ship is sinking only to end up landing in a life boat....seems a bit like a bad comedy.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:52 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Wasn't the Coast Guard directing the rescue boats in the water and helping to get people out of the water?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:54 pm
@Linkat,
I think Inspector Clouseau is familiar with that kind of experience.
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:55 pm
@firefly,
Were they? All I read is the transcrpt of how they were ordering the return of the captain and shouting and carrying on.
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:56 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Right, Tak. And Mack Sennett utilized that script to a fare-thee-well.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 04:58 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Lustig Andrei wrote:

You make some interesting points, Hawk. All we hear about the Italian Coast Guard so far is their giving orders to everybody, including the captain. Has anyone seen a reference to the CG actually participating in the rescue efforts, let alone taking charge which, imo, is what they should have done as soon as the captain left his post?


In the Coast Guards defense it appears that one of the many failures of this corporation was that they waited hours to alert the CG at all, so I dont know when the CG first had the opportunity to know how poorly this disaster was being handled, but I am not aware of any on the scene activity by them done in a timely manor and I am wondering why this is.
firefly
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:09 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Quote:
Were they? All I read is the transcrpt of how they were ordering the return of the captain and shouting and carrying on.

We haven't heard much about the rescue efforts that went on in the water at all. The media attention has focused on other matters. But, I'd be very surprised if the Coast Guard hadn't been involved in the efforts to rescue people in the water.

And the interchange between the Coast Guard officer and the Captain was leaked to the media.

Maybe after the investigation we will get a better picture of what went on aboard the ship. So far, most of what I've read has come from a relatively small number of passengers and crew.

It's not even clear at what point the Captain left the ship, or how long he had been off it before that conversation with the Coast Guard officer.

0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:15 pm
@firefly,
I'd be interested in learning if it is just this one company that has been okay to "bowing to people on shore" or if it is done by others and in what circumstances, as shores do vary re rocks or lack of rocks.
firefly
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:19 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
In the Coast Guards defense it appears that one of the many failures of this corporation was that they waited hours to alert the CG at all,

They waited hours? Where did you get that information? The ship began tilting fairly quickly--that was one of the main problems in getting people off it.

It was the Captain, not "the corporation" who should have sent out a distress call. That's what would have alerted the Coast Guard. He must have done so, but only after he issued the evacuation order, because they are not accusing him of failing to call for help.

Other than more "leaks" I don't think we'll get complete info until the investigation is completed.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:20 pm
@firefly,
That's what I read/heard. I think. I'm not going to chase links.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:21 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

I'd be interested in learning if it is just this one company that has been okay to "bowing to people on shore" or if it is done by others and in what circumstances, as shores do vary re rocks or lack of rocks.


IE if they track were their ships are...whether they are following orders or not. Now that we know that this ship was miles off course before for the same stupid reason the corporate leadership has much to answer for. If they did not know that this was done they should have known, and if they knew then they should have taken action against the captain who put so many people and such an expensive ship at risk. We also need to ask what the insurer did when they found this boat where it was not suppose to be via GPS tracking.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:24 pm
@hawkeye10,
I agree, especially given the profile of the shore area re ledges, etc.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:27 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
If they did not know that this was done they should have known, and if they knew then they should have taken action against the captain who put so many people and such an expensive ship at risk

I think the real question is why the corporation didn't respond in some way last August after this same ship went close to the same shore--in fact, I think the ship went even closer to the shore last August.
Because of that prior incident, the Captain might have had reason to believe this was safe to do, and that it was permissible.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:44 pm
@firefly,
However, wouldn't the ship's sonar equipment warned of shallow waters? Any seagoing Captain knows water levels change.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 18 Jan, 2012 05:47 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
They waited hours?
turns out no

Quote:
9:30pm: The ship strikes a rocky outcrop just off the Tuscan island of Giglio.

- 9:35pm: The electricity goes off. Many passengers begin to panic.

- 9:45pm: A first alarm is sounded: two long whistles and one short, informing the crew of a problem.

- 9:50 pm: The ship begins to list. In the restaurants, dinnerware crashes off tables. Some passengers rush to their cabins for their life vests.

- 10pm: Some passengers gather on the fourth deck where the lifeboats are located, as the captain tries to manoeuvre the vessel closer to shore.

- 10:10pm: The "abandon ship" signal is given: seven short whistles and one long. Lifeboats begin their deployment.

- 10:20pm: The coastguard launches rescue operations with the help of speedboats and helicopters. Giglio's 800-strong population turns out in force to help transfer passengers to shore. Many passengers jump into the chilly waters instead of boarding lifeboats.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/timeline-of-italian-cruise-ship-costa-concordia-disaster/story-e6frf7lf-1226247193532



Quote:
It was the Captain, not "the corporation" who should have sent out a distress call
The captain is the corporations representative.
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/13/2022 at 03:11:28