Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship design

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dec 2, 1997
8,736
- - LIttle Rock
Re the cruise ship disaster... Cruise ships today are 15+ stories high ABOVE the waterline. This one capsized-- rolled over on its side--almost as soon as it started taking on water. If TITANIC had been the same size configuration as this cruise ship, would she have stayed upright for hours as she did, or most likely have capsized almost immediately as this cruise ship did?

This ship capsized in such shallow water that she's resting on side on the bottom, more of her OUT of the water than under water. If she'd been a ship of the same traditional design of TITANIC, QE II, SS UNITED STATES, is it likely that she'd simply have settled onto the bottom more or less upright instead of capsizing?
 
Sep 25, 2008
1,096
CS 30 Toronto
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

Would they have watertight compartments? Ain't they supposed to be able to flood 1/3 of the ship and still stay afloat, mostly upright.

I think after they holed the ship, they turn her very sharply to port in order to run aground to assist rescue. But that action only helped to tip the ship over on her side.

The hole is on the port side with the front stabilizer intact. That means the grounding may have been minor. I think the captain realize he's too close to shore (depth and GPS alarm etc) and steer hard over to starboard. But that pushed the stern towards port thus opened the hole and pick up a giant rock. He then steered hard to port to go towards shore and the force tip her over.

Classic case of over reacting much like loosing control on icy road.

In either case, going 300 meters near any shore is not a good idea for a ship with 27 feet draft. Going anywhere near land requires a pilot very familiar with local water. In this case, the captain took the ship too close to shore may be hot-dogging!

In the old days, there is a big steering wheel on the bridge to control the hydraulic steering ramp in the rudder room. The hydraulic give some feed back to the helm. Also, the captain never touch the wheel. He only bark out orders on how many degrees to steer the wheel. The helm acknowledge by voice. In today's digital world the wheel is a tiny knob. Anyone (may be the captain) turned the knob fast.

Yes, I have maritime experience on large merchant ships. We'll see in a few month if my analysis is correct.
 

weinie

.
Sep 6, 2010
1,297
Jeanneau 349 port washington, ny
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

I thought the same thing when I first saw those pictures!

ETA: I think after things are said and done there will be a definite re-evaluation of design. Those things look like they are trying to cram more and more rooms and ammenities within the same footprint as older boats.

disclaimer: i know nothing about ship design nor do i play one on tv.

 
Dec 2, 1997
8,736
- - LIttle Rock
Before all of you chime in....

My question isn't about human error and/or seamanship, it's about design and engineering. Roger's a marine architect...and was part of the History Channel team that went down to TITANIC in 2006 (yup...he's been down there). So he knows just a LITTLE bit about this stuff. Let's see what he has to say about it.

Those things look like they are trying to cram more and more rooms and ammenities within the same footprint as older boats.

It's not within the same footprint...they're longer, wider AND higher. And the same is true of freighters and tankers. Ports are having to dredge and widen channels so they can get in. And it's all about money...how to put the most "payload," whether it be goods or people, on each vessel.
 
Sep 25, 2008
1,096
CS 30 Toronto
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

Most ocean going ships are flat bottomed. I worked in a large dry dockyard before.

I've seen a Discovery channel on how one of those big ship was built. Above certain height, they go to aluminium to keep the C.G. from rising too high.

According the AIS web site data, it appears this boat deviated off course by 20 degrees and headed towards the rock. When it gets too close, they turned hard to starboard and the port stern brushed the rock really hard. That explains why the stabilizer was intact. The captain then aim the ship towards the shallow and drop anchor at 11 kt (AIS record). The ship swing around almost 180 degrees and tipped over on the starboard side.

With the high CG, and dropped anchor at significant speed, any boat will tip over. The question is what happened to the water tight compartments.

The Estonia ferry was sunk when the bow car ram was ajar and let water in. The water tight doors were left open because the crews have to go through them. Once water overwhelming the pumps, it's game over.

Once they analyze the box box, more truth will come out.
 
Nov 22, 2008
3,562
Endeavour 32 Portland, Maine
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

Modern cruise ships do look unwieldy but most of what is up there is very light, lots of air (some of it in heads). You can also think of all that enclosed air as buoyancy so these ships are not as prone to capsizing as you might think.

I don't see anything in this that reflects badly on modern design. The essential requirements for stability and watertight subdivision have actually not changed very much since the Titanic. Some aspects of her design were actually in excess of modern standards BTW.

The requirements for watertight subdivision (bulkheads) to allow the ship to survive flooding from hull penetration are primarily based on assumed damage from being struck by another ship. The long gashing damage from sideswiping icebergs or rocks will overwhelm any practical subdivision. A double hull might prevent some accidents but the damage of a collision like this could easily penetrate both hull shells.

There are some things that it simply isn't practical to design for. We don't require airliners to be strong enough to be flown into mountains for example.

The requirements for how much of a ships length can be flooded without it sinking are based on two factors. First on not immersing enough of the topsides so that water starts coming in openings that can not be made fully watertight. Second on the ship having enough stability after settling to it's finally flooded condition so that it won't capsize. Startlingly little stability is required. Collisions, which the rules are primarily aimed at, generally happen in calm conditions because that's when crews aren't paying as much attention. Designing a ship so that it would have enough stability to survive significant wind or sea when flooded to its design limit would cause ships to have so many bulkheads as to be impractical to operate.

Ships are generally designed to survive the flooding of two adjacent compartments on the theory that you can then punch a bow sized hole anywhere and they will survive. In some cases a ship can survive three compartments damaged. Breach just one more, or not have the watertight doors closed in time, and the ship will either sink or capsize.

Ships generally list when damaged on one side. One of the very odd things about the Titanic is the lack of list. One of the calmest nights in the history of seafaring partly accounts for that as does very slow flooding due to a relatively small amount of damage distributed over a large area. The water had time to spread around and not create much off center weight.

The damage in this case was both extensive and over a large area according to the pictures I have seen. One shows a huge boulder imbedded in the hole. The ship would have flooded quickly. The behavior of the crew also is suggestive that the watertight doors did not get closed. Damage to either three or four compartments or open watertight doors would have doomed her.

Stability is, in very crude terms, primarily generated at the waterline plane, where the surface of the water intersects the hull. See http://www.cruisingonstrider.us/Stability.htm Every bit of un-restrained liquid surface, such as liquid surfaces in tanks, reduces it. Flooding turns the compartments into huge tanks and stability is reduced rapidly.

Ship handling so as to create heel from turning forces could have been a factor here as suggested above.

I'm less surprised that this ship capsized than I am that the Titanic didn't.
 

Rick D

.
Jun 14, 2008
7,145
Hunter Legend 40.5 Shoreline Marina Long Beach CA
Hey, Rog...

...got Skype aboard? You ought to put out something to the networks right away re: your availability for interviews. They are hungering for these commentaries right now and you have the credibility they want in the worst way. Especially if you work for nothing..:D I'd start with AP, Reuters, CNN & FOX.
 

Rick D

.
Jun 14, 2008
7,145
Hunter Legend 40.5 Shoreline Marina Long Beach CA
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

Alexco: do you have a link to that AIS track?
 
Nov 22, 2008
3,562
Endeavour 32 Portland, Maine
.You ought to put out something to the networks right away re: your availability for interviews.
After having been up to my eyebrows in several controversial marine accident investigations (3 out of the 5 incidents discussed in "Tall Ships Down" by Dan Parrott), and done several TV shows aside from the two on Titanic, I've got all the glory in that department I need for one lifetime. I'm content to let other yak while I cruise. I was relieved to get out of town in July before anyone tried to suck me into one of the centennial Titanic shows that I won't be watching this April.
 

Rick D

.
Jun 14, 2008
7,145
Hunter Legend 40.5 Shoreline Marina Long Beach CA
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

I understand, but that's too bad. The news providers obviously need someone with credibility to provide some background and context.
 
May 24, 2004
7,131
CC 30 South Florida
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

Roger gives a good explanation about how the boat may look top heavy but is not. The hull has watertight comparments to isolate any damaged comparments and maintain adequate bouyancy. What really happened in this boat will not probably know for many months to come. It could have been the Captain tried to beach the boat and it came to rest listing to shore but it is to early to speculate. The captain and crew failed in safeguarding their passangers but I don't believe the boat designers did.
 
Oct 24, 2011
258
Lancer 28 Grand Lake
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

I saw the exact same thing done on the river clyde many years ago. A cargo ship loaded with sugar, was at a mooring, when another ship broke its mooring, slammed into the sugar boat, and holed her, the pilot got on the radio, and told the captain, "beach her" but the captain delayed, he waisted valuable time telling the pilot station, he didnt want to run his ship aground, the ship now listing badly was finally ran onto the beach, as soon as it hit the beach, it just fell over, and is still there on its side to this day. Its different from these ships, to car ferries, I saw a russian factory fishing ship go down, it was holed, then flooded, and went down in the classic, stern up, bow down, we stood by it for hours waiting for it to go, the crew had been taken off, and we watched as the ship got lower with every lurch, and the lifeboats were eventually torn off the falls, by the sea, and then the water reached the bridge doors, which were just swinging before the ship finally went down, thats the way a ship holed bellow the water line goes down, the weight of water, and loss of buoyancy takes it to the bottom.

A car ferry however, is different, the car deck is above its center of gravity, and the estonian ferry as well as the Herald of free enterprise (the uk ferry sailing from france) both had their bow doors, in one case, smashed in, in the other case, sailed with them open. Water got onto the car deck, and was able to move freely from one side to the other, causing a free surface effect, well above the water line, and above the ships center of gravity, it dosent take much to roll it over. Its like putting water onto a tray, and trying to carry it, a gallon of water, maybe an inch deep on the tray, suddenly makes the tray, hard to control. But when the water is below the ships water line, you dont get that free surface effect, because the water that gets inside, is always lower than the level of water outside, when it gets level with the water level outside, that is when the ship sinks.

As to water tight compartments, Lloyds insist any ship that is insured with them, have a deck level mark, below which, the ship can be made water tight, but nothing above that mark needs to be made watertight, and the watertight doors, need to be able to be operated locally and from the bridge, but, with a hole the size of the hole on that ship, the water tight doors would be all but useless. Anyone near those doors, and seeing that water coming in, is not going to hang around, and drown waiting on a slow moving hydralic door to close, they are going to get out of there, and by the time the bridge know to close the doors, its too late.

Their was a cruise ship, off south africa, ten or twenty years ago, that had either a greek, or italian captain. A cooling water pipe burst in the engine room, and started flooding the place, it was only a short time, before the water shut down the generators, then the engines, and when that happend, it was curtains for the ship, they had no pumps, no ability to close water tight doors, so they just did a mayday, and abondoned, again captain was ashore before the rest of the crew, and most of the passangers, claimed he went ashore in a lifeboat, to direct rescue operations from the shore side. I think their were a few cassualties, but not many, but that was just a burst cooling pipe, and a badly managed engine room.

I was on one, where the same thing happend, engineer, turned off the bilge alarms, and went onto the bridge, spent his four hour watch on the bridge, when he returned to the engine room, to hand over his watch, it was flooded, from a one inch pipe, main engine shut down, a few mins after he got to the engine room, (so he claimed and claimed he had only been gone for five mins) but the generator kept going, and that is what saved the ship, because we were able to run the pumps, which could pump out faster, than water was getting in, the pipe that had broken, was handle shaped, six inches long, and one inch diameter, thousands of gallons passed through that pipe, in the time he was out of the engine room.
 
Nov 22, 2008
3,562
Endeavour 32 Portland, Maine
Re: AIS track

Whole bunch of stuff here:

http://blog.geogarage.com/2012/01/italy-cruise-ship-costa-concordia.html

This is chilling. Be sure to read the transcript.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-57360065-503543/coast-guard-to-capt.-go-back-on-board/

Don't overestimate my interest though. The company that bought mine is one of the top marine salvage and forensic outfits in the nation. Now that I'm a consultant to them and at the table with such high powered people, I'm retiring from making pronouncements about anything to do with ship sinkings unless they bring me into it. I'm focused on keeping my vessel floating and sunny side up while I enjoy the view.
 
Apr 27, 2010
966
Beneteau 352 Hull #276 Ontario
What I find interesting is the way it is lying in the water.

This is an excerpt from comments made:

Prof Philip Wilson at the University of Southampton specialises in ship dynamics and we spoke alongside his 29ft (9m) testing tank.
"Modern ships are safe as they can possibly be," he told me.
"The centre of buoyancy is in the right place... instinctively it doesn't look right but it is in fact very, very stable, the beam of the boat being very large."
We have also heard a lot about watertight compartments since the Costa Concordia went down. The theory is that if one side of the hull is breached, the other side can be flooded to keep the ship upright. The big question is then, why didn't it work in this case? The truth is we won't know until the investigation is finished.
But Prof Wilson wasn't too surprised, saying: "Every ship will sink if you make the hole big enough."
Latest underwater images reveal previously unseen damage to the hull of the ship
He added, however, that something was "puzzling" him.
The hole in the hull is sticking out of the water. It should be under the sea, because that is where the water came rushing in. In other words, the ship seems to be lying on the wrong side.
"We're working on information that's incomplete so we don't know really what's happened. Potentially of course, the crew could have been pumping water to bring the ship upright, and maybe took too much water on board."
 
Nov 22, 2008
3,562
Endeavour 32 Portland, Maine
Re: Cruise ship raises two questions for you about ship desi

From another forum:



(But without the apologies of that post which appear inappropriate in light of the captain's later behavior.)
 
Oct 6, 2011
678
CM 32 USA
They are still looking for survivors. That is where my mind / heart is. Dangerous, tireless work for rescue crews. In the days that follow, it will turn from a rescue operation to a salvage operation, then we can all debate center of gravity over the beam, all we want.

To the families, I wish for strength and wisdom. Two Americans, a couple, are still among the missing. Their families must feel terrible being so far away, not knowing from minute to minute the fate of their loved ones. Possible, not everyone will be recovered dead or alive. Washed out to sea.

So sad a tragedy. So sad.

Want a debate on a shipwreck, someone start a thread on what really happened to the ships of of White Star Line. Hundreds of books on that subject, and some good ones with some not so popular conclusions. As a hint, history is always written by the winning side.

Hope for a miracle.
 
Dec 2, 2003
1,637
Hunter 376 Warsash, England --
Stable?

For those still following this thread and in an idle moment, I gathered the details on Concordia and found an outline sketch of her.
From this information I made the attached drawing.

See the end on view - and note particularly the underwater part of the hull compared to the superstructure.
More learned persons than I will aver the ship was sufficiently stable.


(I would have been inclined to build the above water parts of balsa wood with enormous holes to let the wind blow through.)
 

Attachments

Status
Not open for further replies.