Equipped To Survive Equipped To Survive® Presents
The Survival Forum
Where do you want to go on ETS?

Page 3 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#245321 - 04/26/12 05:31 AM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: dougwalkabout]
frediver Offline
Enthusiast

Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 213
Loc: N.Cal.
Yep I did.

Top
#245327 - 04/26/12 02:57 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: dougwalkabout]
ILBob Offline
Old Hand

Registered: 02/05/10
Posts: 776
Loc: Northern IL
my guess would be that the bridge crew probably has orders not to engage in risky operations with a large ship like that unless there is immediate threat of loss of life. but I can't imagine they would not notify someone else who is in a much better position to actually come and help.

it can take a long time (like hours) for a ship that big just to come about and get in a position to drop a boat in the water to even start a rescue operation. and that assumes they have anyone on board capable of doing so.

it seems unlikely to me that there are any boats a ship like that can easily dispatch and retrieve in the open water.

another "news" report that leaves a lot of things open.
_________________________
Warning - I am not an expert on anything having to do with this forum, but that won't stop me from saying what I think. smile

Bob

Top
#245329 - 04/26/12 03:28 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: dougwalkabout]
Pete Offline
Veteran

Registered: 02/20/09
Posts: 1361
i'm in a much less forgiving position with Carnival.
They broke one of the prime rules - and laws - of the sea.
as others have noted - they should have spotted that vessel in distress from their bridge. think about the height of the bridge above the water - they have a huge advantage. as i said earlier, their seamanship is either in serious question, or there is some kind of "secret protocol" going on where the captains have been told not to stop for "suspicious" boats.

it may be true that it would take time to turn a cruise liner.
but surely they could figure out some way to get a few supplies (blankets, water, rations) to another vessel in distress.

or = as someone said - at least a radio call reporting a problem. but i would think that the laws of the sea would require them to perhaps do more than just make a call. if they are the closest vessel, and seaworthy themselves, it seems like they should be required to respond.

Pete2

Top
#245332 - 04/26/12 03:54 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: Pete]
ILBob Offline
Old Hand

Registered: 02/05/10
Posts: 776
Loc: Northern IL
Originally Posted By: Pete
i'm in a much less forgiving position with Carnival.
They broke one of the prime rules - and laws - of the sea.
as others have noted - they should have spotted that vessel in distress from their bridge. think about the height of the bridge above the water - they have a huge advantage. as i said earlier, their seamanship is either in serious question, or there is some kind of "secret protocol" going on where the captains have been told not to stop for "suspicious" boats.

I don't know what they knew or when, or what rules they have been ordered to operate under. It would not surprise me one bit that they have been ordered by national authorities not to stop for anything on the high seas, fearing terrorism.

Quote:
it may be true that it would take time to turn a cruise liner.

A lot longer than you think. Several hours anyway.
Quote:
but surely they could figure out some way to get a few supplies (blankets, water, rations) to another vessel in distress.

How would you propose doing so with whatever resources they may have available? do they have any means to send out a small boat and retrieve it?

Quote:
or = as someone said - at least a radio call reporting a problem. but i would think that the laws of the sea would require them to perhaps do more than just make a call. if they are the closest vessel, and seaworthy themselves, it seems like they should be required to respond.

I am inclined to agree they are required to at least notify the proper authorities. Beyond that, I don't know what if anything they even could do, assuming they wanted to do more. That also assumes someone in responsible control had any inkling of what was really going on.

I am not sure that it is a good idea to risk a large passenger liner full of people in a rescue attempt in the open ocean. It sounds cold, but there are hard realities in life.

No doubt the stories made up by the PR flacks after the fact make it sound worse than it may actually be.
_________________________
Warning - I am not an expert on anything having to do with this forum, but that won't stop me from saying what I think. smile

Bob

Top
#245333 - 04/26/12 04:30 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: ILBob]
Russ Offline
Geezer

Registered: 06/02/06
Posts: 5074
Loc: SOCAL
Originally Posted By: ILBob
Originally Posted By: Pete
i'm in a much less forgiving position with Carnival.
They broke one of the prime rules - and laws - of the sea.
as others have noted - they should have spotted that vessel in distress from their bridge. think about the height of the bridge above the water - they have a huge advantage. as i said earlier, their seamanship is either in serious question, or there is some kind of "secret protocol" going on where the captains have been told not to stop for "suspicious" boats.

I don't know what they knew or when, or what rules they have been ordered to operate under. It would not surprise me one bit that they have been ordered by national authorities not to stop for anything on the high seas, fearing terrorism.

Quote:
it may be true that it would take time to turn a cruise liner.

A lot longer than you think. Several hours anyway.
Quote:
but surely they could figure out some way to get a few supplies (blankets, water, rations) to another vessel in distress.

How would you propose doing so with whatever resources they may have available? do they have any means to send out a small boat and retrieve it?

Quote:
or = as someone said - at least a radio call reporting a problem. but i would think that the laws of the sea would require them to perhaps do more than just make a call. if they are the closest vessel, and seaworthy themselves, it seems like they should be required to respond.

I am inclined to agree they are required to at least notify the proper authorities. Beyond that, I don't know what if anything they even could do, assuming they wanted to do more. That also assumes someone in responsible control had any inkling of what was really going on.

I am not sure that it is a good idea to risk a large passenger liner full of people in a rescue attempt in the open ocean. It sounds cold, but there are hard realities in life.

No doubt the stories made up by the PR flacks after the fact make it sound worse than it may actually be.

Like others, I have no way of knowing what the bridge crew knew or saw, but do know that any competent bridge crew has at least 7 power binoculars and should have seen any distress signals. Whether or not they have rules/protocols for not engaging smaller vessels at sea is unknown to me. What the ship does have though is outstanding communications and both US and local Coast Guards should have been notified -- apparently they were not.

As for it taking several hours to turn a cruise liner -- maybe if your primary concern is not upsetting the kitchen help. But in the case of a rescue at sea where there are other priorities, the ship can both stop and turn much faster than they do when in hotel/restaurant mode.

Top
#245338 - 04/26/12 05:06 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: dougwalkabout]
Snake_Doctor
Unregistered


Perhaps they were concerned it was a ruse by pirates? That activity is bound to spread someday.

Top
#245343 - 04/26/12 06:16 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: dougwalkabout]
ireckon Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 04/01/10
Posts: 1629
Loc: Northern California
Whatever the problem is, I like the rule of 100% of the responsibility going on the captain. Anything other than, then the captain gets to watch as everybody else argues forever to figure out who's fault it is, accomplishing nothing.

Here's an audio recording of the captain of the Costa Concordia jumping ship and shirking his responsibility:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM9sam2u_Tk

After hearing that audio, there is no wonder why that ship was a death trap at sea. This captain believes in "captain and children first..."
_________________________
If you're reading this, it's too late.

Top
#245346 - 04/26/12 06:45 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: ireckon]
Snake_Doctor
Unregistered


It's not politicly correct, and the mods may chastise me for saying this, but I detest cowards. When you are in command you are the last one you should be worried about. Those under you are who deserve your immediate and devoted attention at all times. Especially in a crises. That captain was concerned only with his own safety. I hope he spends a long time in prison for desserting his post and those he was responsible for.
And you all thought Ol' Snake was warm and fuzzy, didn't you? I am most of the time.


Edited by Snake_Doctor (04/26/12 06:46 PM)

Top
#245387 - 04/27/12 09:27 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: ILBob]
MostlyHarmless Offline
Old Hand

Registered: 06/03/09
Posts: 982
Loc: Norway
Originally Posted By: ILBob

it can take a long time (like hours) for a ship that big just to come about and get in a position to drop a boat in the water to even start a rescue operation. and that assumes they have anyone on board capable of doing so.


Huh? No Man-over-board boat?
]MOB boat definition (with picture)
Those are designed to be launched and retrieved while the mother vessel is moving. If someone falls in the water you drop a buoy (point of reference for where you were when somene went MOB), drop the MOB boat and then turn the boat around. But they require a trained and capable crew, and the will to deploy them.

I would have thought that MOB boats and crew to man them within some response time limit was a requirement for a cruise ship.


Edited by MostlyHarmless (04/27/12 09:30 PM)

Top
#245428 - 04/29/12 02:25 PM Re: Signalling a cruise ship? [Re: ILBob]
Brangdon Offline
Veteran

Registered: 12/12/04
Posts: 1201
Loc: Nottingham, UK
Originally Posted By: ILBob
It would not surprise me one bit that they have been ordered by national authorities not to stop for anything on the high seas, fearing terrorism.
So on the previous 30 times when they did stop, they were disobeying orders? Wow, I wonder how they got away with it.
_________________________
Quality is addictive.

Top
Page 3 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >



Moderator:  Alan_Romania, Blast, cliff, Hikin_Jim 
June
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30
Who's Online
1 registered (Phaedrus), 235 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Mollerstrom, Louis, tomuchgear, salomoncrosk, Claire
5283 Registered Users
Newest Posts
The Best Thing Since Doug Ritter's PSP?
by Jeanette_Isabelle
01:09 AM
Cell phones & Other Electronics
by Russ
06/14/19 06:59 PM
Easy way to start a fire
by hikermor
06/13/19 02:54 AM
Thanks and Congrats, Doug!
by hikermor
06/12/19 05:10 PM
Go or Stay ? An interesting informal discussion
by Jeanette_Isabelle
06/12/19 04:30 PM
Earthh Shaking News
by Janysboy
06/12/19 02:29 AM
Basic Survival Skills that shouldn’t be complicate
by Phaedrus
06/10/19 06:14 AM
Death Cap Mushrooms
by WesleyH
06/09/19 01:17 PM
Newest Images
Tiny knife / wrench
Handmade knives
2"x2" Glass Signal Mirror, Retroreflective Mesh
Trade School Tool Kit
My Pocket Kit
Glossary
Test

WARNING & DISCLAIMER: SELECT AND USE OUTDOORS AND SURVIVAL EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES AND TECHNIQUES AT YOUR OWN RISK. Information posted on this forum is not reviewed for accuracy and may not be reliable, use at your own risk. Please review the full WARNING & DISCLAIMER about information on this site.