Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   Go Down

Author Topic: Costa Concordia  (Read 96512 times)

deadwood

  • Guest
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #150 on: January 20, 2012, 11:08:41 am »

With these mega ships the bow is in one place and the stern is somewhere else entirely, approaching a quarter of a mile away!
That's why they have the distances from the standpoint to beginning of stem and end of stern written on a plate fixed to the bulwark (or similar) in the bridge wings, I suppose.
Logged

Circlip

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,735
  • Location: North of Watford, South of Hadrians wall
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #151 on: January 20, 2012, 12:11:47 pm »

And not to forget, recently one of HMS's warships had to be brought back on a trailer from Southern waters after "bumping" a rock that just happened to be on a crease line on the charts?

 And two of our subs that thought they could "Nudge" an island out of the way?

 I listened to the Captain of Ardent telling that he didn't leave untill he new all the live were off and only the deceased remained, In effect, he was only driving a tug. To draw any comparison you need to look at an aircraft carrier, - well, someone elses' as we haven't got any anymore.

 I wonder what the fatality numbers would have been had the "Ferrari" driver not turned the boat back when he did? At least one mere Woman is hailing his seamanship.

  Regards   Ian.
Logged
You might not like what I say, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.
 
What I said is not what you  think you heard.

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #152 on: January 20, 2012, 12:16:29 pm »

Two points re the previous 2 posts.
The etched plates on the bridge wings are not there for navigational purposes. Sometimes useful when berthing, but otherwise just a datum point.
The second point about distances from the bridge to for'd or aft. For general navigation those distances can be failrly safely ignored and the ranges/bearings etc can be read on a radar screen using the position of the radar scanner as a datum. Once you get to a position wher distances etc are measured in feet rather than miles you are either too close to something or are navigating in very restricted waters. Much of this "close quarters" stuff is, or can be, done by using Mark1 eyeball and compass bearings etc.
However. Another system used is called "Blind Pilotage". Primarily developed for use when in fog and restricted waters. The RFA and RN practice this on a regular basis. I guess the mecanics of the system have changed since I was a Nav, but the principles remain the same. It's called "Parallel Indexing". And can be a long subject all on its own. But it boils down to the Nav having to do an awful lot of preparatory work. Both "on paper" and on the radar plotter. Way points on the screen, tidal flow predictions, wndage etc. Then the distances from the radar scanner to bow and stern have to be marked. Then the ships transverse movement has to be accounted for when turning. This all becomes an art (before modern electronics). BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

dodgy geezer

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,920
  • Location: London
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #153 on: January 20, 2012, 12:59:36 pm »

 are you seaman ?  This kind of passe is not dangerous at all - There is deep water very close to the shore.  Any navigation close to the shore just need that everybody on the wheelhouse do there job properly with preparation work on map - then GPS/radar/electronic maping navigation system but also checking men eyes alignement.


Your right xtitan, this a mistake of the whole bridge team and close passes are very common on ships due to navigational reasons, you would have a navigation officer monitering the position, the officer of the watch would be monitering position and there would be more than likely a jounior offericer of the watch aswell.


Um?  You must be using a different definition of the word 'dangerous' to the one I am using. I mean 'having the potential to cause harm'. An OED definition is 'the condition of being exposed to the chance of evil, risk or peril'. Interestingly, they specifically illustrate the word thus:

Naut 'a submerged rock, or the like, causing danger to vessels.'.
1699 Hake Coll. Voy. iii 29  ".. at three quarters ebb, you may see all the dangers going in....But I would not advise any man to go in until he has viewed the harbour at low water.."


I can find NO indication in the OED that the word has any implication of 'doing something wrong and out of the ordinary', which seems to be the meaning you are ascribing to it.  On the contrary, the word is used to describe anticipated hazards which need to be allowed for, rather than avoided. 

Various levels of danger are indeed a common and unavoidable feature of life. Occasionally, for instance, I cross a road. When I am doing something dangerous, I will usually take especial care, and monitor my position closely - exactly as you both expect the crew of a ship to do.   That is why I said that "Such passes are dangerous - you would expect the company to lay down safety rules for them". I did NOT say "Such passes are dangerous - you would expect the company to forbid them". And I CERTAINLY did not say "Such passes are uncommon and cannot be achieved safely..", which seems to be your implication.


Of course, modern journalists and safety activists frequently try to suggest that any activity involving the slightest risk should be banned, and hence should be rare. But I hope that no one counts me amongst their number....
Logged

roycv

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,753
  • Location: S.W. Herts
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #154 on: January 20, 2012, 01:27:06 pm »

Hi all, I see they are going to pump out 2300 tonnes of fuel oil.  I would think that this would give the ship a lot more buoyancy and so be more at the mercy of the waves, etc.
How do you go about securing 70+ thousand tons to the shore?
regards Roy
Logged

dodgy geezer

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,920
  • Location: London
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #155 on: January 20, 2012, 02:11:35 pm »

Hi all, I see they are going to pump out 2300 tonnes of fuel oil.  I would think that this would give the ship a lot more buoyancy and so be more at the mercy of the waves, etc.

Replace with sea water, perhaps?
Logged

deadwood

  • Guest
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #156 on: January 20, 2012, 02:21:06 pm »

Probably not more buoyancy, but less weight.

What kind of fuel oil are they actually trying to pump out?
I would imagine that the majority of bunkered "oils" would be marine diesel oil for the medium speed 4-stroke engines of the propulsion.
So not quite that tar like heavy fuel oil.
Then they must carry some lube oil, but don't know if these are significant amounts.

Yesterday evening, I saw in the German telly news that the Dutch Smit Tak salvage operators are preparing for one of the probably biggest and most demanding salvage operations.
One professor of naval architecture from the Hamburg Uni was commenting on what they most likely are about to do with the wreck.
He said that as a first attempt they will close the gash on the port side with steel plates.
Then simultaneously apply inflatable blisters beneath her capsized starboard side and try to inflate those while they will be pumping the water from the wreck,
and thus hope to raise her into an upright position again.
If this won't work they probably will apply huge diamond coated saw chains on the hull and try to saw it apart into transportable pieces by tugs thrusting back and forth in apply thus the sawing movement.
That sounds pretty weird.
I've never seen this. Hopefully, they will release some footage of the operation on YouTube or similar.
Logged

pugwash

  • Guest
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #157 on: January 20, 2012, 02:25:38 pm »

I believe it was 2000+ tons of diesel that has to be removed.
As to Salvage there was a naval architect interviewed  on one TV channel who gave then a less than 50% chance of getting it off the rocks in one piece

Geoff
Logged

dodgy geezer

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,920
  • Location: London
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #158 on: January 20, 2012, 02:45:20 pm »

...
He said that as a first attempt they will close the gash on the port side with steel plates.
Then simultaneously apply inflatable blisters beneath her capsized starboard side and try to inflate those while they will be pumping the water from the wreck,
and thus hope to raise her into an upright position again.
....

The water level is well over the starboard side, so water will be easily able to get into the boat through deck-level openings. If they cannot seal these well they will have to tilt the boat more upright before pumping out. Such a tactic would have a high chance of success on a flat, sandy shore.

The big problem here is the fact that the boat is perched precariously on a sloping shore, and any attempt to tilt her upright will probably cause her to slip further down the slope. I do not know if it will be easy to secure the hull against this.

I might suggest that this is a possible candidate for the technique of displacing water from inside a hull by inflating bags/foam/WHY inside the boat. Then any movement as the boat starts to float will not result in immediate buoyancy loss as water re-enters...
Logged

DickyD

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,497
  • www.srcmbc.org.uk
  • Location: Southampton UK
    • SRCMBC
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #159 on: January 20, 2012, 03:13:08 pm »



Um?  You must be using a different definition of the word 'dangerous' to the one I am using. I mean 'having the potential to cause harm'. An OED definition is 'the condition of being exposed to the chance of evil, risk or peril'. Interestingly, they specifically illustrate the word thus:

Naut 'a submerged rock, or the like, causing danger to vessels.'.
1699 Hake Coll. Voy. iii 29  ".. at three quarters ebb, you may see all the dangers going in....But I would not advise any man to go in until he has viewed the harbour at low water.."


I can find NO indication in the OED that the word has any implication of 'doing something wrong and out of the ordinary', which seems to be the meaning you are ascribing to it.  On the contrary, the word is used to describe anticipated hazards which need to be allowed for, rather than avoided.  

Various levels of danger are indeed a common and unavoidable feature of life. Occasionally, for instance, I cross a road. When I am doing something dangerous, I will usually take especial care, and monitor my position closely - exactly as you both expect the crew of a ship to do.   That is why I said that "Such passes are dangerous - you would expect the company to lay down safety rules for them". I did NOT say "Such passes are dangerous - you would expect the company to forbid them". And I CERTAINLY did not say "Such passes are uncommon and cannot be achieved safely..", which seems to be your implication.


Of course, modern journalists and safety activists frequently try to suggest that any activity involving the slightest risk should be banned, and hence should be rare. But I hope that no one counts me amongst their number....

Patronizing or what. Xtian is not a school kid, he's French and will admit that his English is not 100% though most of us can understand his meaning.

He is also a high ranking French naval officer and architect who has served at one time or other with most of the worlds major navies.

Also think before quoting any books at him as he might have written them.

Rant over, now you can have a go at my English.
Logged
Richard Solent Radio Controlled Model Boat Club http://www.srcmbc.org.uk

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #160 on: January 20, 2012, 04:13:50 pm »

Just a quickie....Diesel is Diesel whatever it's used for. Ships or small cars, it's the same stuff.
Can't just pump water or fuel out of a free flooding tank and expect much to happen. Tank (a "container") must be enclosed. BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

DavieTait

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,130
  • Location: Fraserburgh
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #161 on: January 20, 2012, 04:22:21 pm »

She's carrying heavy fuel oil , discussion last night on one of the news channels said they would need to get access to the tank tops to cut into the steam heating pipes to connect external steam generators to heat the fuel up so it can be pumped out
Logged
Davie Tait,
Scotland

Netleyned

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,984
  • Location: Meridian Line, Mouth of the Humber
    • cleethorpes mba
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #162 on: January 20, 2012, 04:52:35 pm »

What is the 'Heavy Fuel Oil' doing on a ships that is powered with 12 cyl Wartsillas?

Ned
Logged
Smooth seas never made skilful sailors
Up Spirits  Stand fast the Holy Ghost.
http://www.cleethorpesmba.co.uk/

Xtian29

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 511
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #163 on: January 20, 2012, 05:04:54 pm »

Hello

Yes I also heard that the fuel onboard is the cheaper heavy fuel ...  A couple of years ago I've seen that a serie of older cruise where "upgraded" to burn heavy fuel : money is money.

One interresting thing about the actual wreck position is that the hull is moving even if the sea state is quite calm and there is one very small tide. That means she's not so heavy and still have some buoyancy.  Nice job and good money for Smit.

Xtian

Thanks DickyD for your comment, it's thrue that my English is a Globish (global English as opposite to pure English).   I'm sorry for that and I have to thank you for your indulgence.  In fact my English is good to speak with the rest of the world ... but not with English  :embarrassed:   

Logged

DickyD

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9,497
  • www.srcmbc.org.uk
  • Location: Southampton UK
    • SRCMBC
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #164 on: January 20, 2012, 05:13:33 pm »

Thanks for the PM xtian.

Have sent one to you.  :-))
Logged
Richard Solent Radio Controlled Model Boat Club http://www.srcmbc.org.uk

Arrow5

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,881
  • Location: Scottish Highlands
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #165 on: January 20, 2012, 05:14:01 pm »

Nice one Dicky :-))
Logged
..well can you land on this?

tr7v8

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 225
  • Location: Chatham
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #166 on: January 20, 2012, 06:16:25 pm »

What is the 'Heavy Fuel Oil' doing on a ships that is powered with 12 cyl Wartsillas?

Ned
Wartsila make both white diesel/LNG & Heavy Oil engines. I was at the factory for the former just before crimbo. They use 2 different bores as the basic design & go from inline 4 pots to V20s! The gig heavy oil only lumps are built at a different factory.
Logged
Jim

Netleyned

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,984
  • Location: Meridian Line, Mouth of the Humber
    • cleethorpes mba
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #167 on: January 20, 2012, 06:22:16 pm »

I suppose it is cheaper to use Heavy rather than white
Thought the tree huggers would be jumping on this

Ned
Logged
Smooth seas never made skilful sailors
Up Spirits  Stand fast the Holy Ghost.
http://www.cleethorpesmba.co.uk/

john s 2

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,184
  • Location: Southend on Sea Essex
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #168 on: January 20, 2012, 06:24:51 pm »

What i as a layman still fail to understand is why the vessal floundered in the first place? i was under the impression that a ship was divided into a watertight compartments with auto closing doors as required. Yes the boat had a rent and may well have some as yet unknown damage . But surely the flooding would have been limited? By the compartments. The Titanic only sunk because the compartments did not go full height and water overflowed from one to the next. What am i missing? Thanks for helping me. John.      
Logged

Xtian29

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 511
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #169 on: January 20, 2012, 06:37:35 pm »

Hello

Yes there is compartments and the regulation is very strict for that. Anyway the ship must stay upright and in floating condition with two flooded compartments. Here with a 70meter cut, certainely more than two compartments are flooded.

Logged

john s 2

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,184
  • Location: Southend on Sea Essex
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #170 on: January 20, 2012, 06:43:55 pm »

Thank you. Surely more than two compartments flooding should not cause a sinking? Should not a big vessel have many compartments? Any idea how many? John. 
Logged

Xtian29

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 511
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #171 on: January 20, 2012, 06:47:40 pm »

Following my experience with a 90's cruise ship with same size, may I say 20-25 - Some have watertght doors as in the middle of the ship, some dont have and you must going up to leave the compartment and going down on the other one.

After she hit the rock, she stay long time afloat then the list came stronger as she U-turn to the island village, then she stay quite upright for while and then she start to capsize falling on the rock. It's hard to know what would happen if she stay on the deep sea, without u-turn and without going ashore. It need some stability calculations with some factor like water movment in the hull during U-turn and going ashore !
Logged

derekwarner

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,485
  • Location: Wollongong Australia
Logged
Derek Warner

Honorary Secretary
Illawarra Live Steamers Co-op
Australia
www.ils.org.au

RaaArtyGunner

  • Guest
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #173 on: January 20, 2012, 09:42:35 pm »

Hello

Yes I also heard that the fuel onboard is the cheaper heavy fuel ...  A couple of years ago I've seen that a serie of older cruise where "upgraded" to burn heavy fuel : money is money.

One interresting thing about the actual wreck position is that the hull is moving even if the sea state is quite calm and there is one very small tide. That means she's not so heavy and still have some buoyancy.  Nice job and good money for Smit.

Xtian

Thanks DickyD for your comment, it's thrue that my English is a Globish (global English as opposite to pure English).   I'm sorry for that and I have to thank you for your indulgence.  In fact my English is good to speak with the rest of the world ... but not with English   :embarrassed:   


Xtian,

Don't worry about the English we in OZ also have trouble understanding English, that's why we speak strine  %) %) %) :-)) :-)) :-))
Logged

Welsh Wizard

  • Guest
Re: COSTA CONCORDIA SINKS
« Reply #174 on: January 20, 2012, 09:59:00 pm »

http://vimeo.com/35351659

Have a listen to this



Dave
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17   Go Up