| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1952.1 | | JUPITR::KEENAN | | Mon Nov 02 1992 12:41 | 8 |
| One of the most threatening things to a large ship is fire. The
engine explosion could have started a fire or ruptured a boiler,
creating alot of heat. This would make it nearly impossible to get
close and make repairs. At a certain temperature, the hull and bulkheads
of a steel ship will buckle.
If the engine room crew jumped overboard like the captain, this ship
never had a chance whatever the problem.
|
| 1952.2 | OCEANOS | SALEM::GILMAN | | Mon Nov 02 1992 14:34 | 10 |
| According to the information I have fire was definitely NOT involved.
But the crew jumping overboard WAS involved, actually they used the
lifeboats. So the ship was doomed from the moment they abandonded her
I wonder if anyone has anymore information regarding the reasons for
the uncontrolled flooding?
And I had the name wrong, its OCEANOS not Oceanic.
Jeff
|
| 1952.3 | at bit more detail. | BTOVT::HILTON_G | SYS-F-UNIVCRASH% REALITY.SYS Corrupted - Reboot Universe? (Y/N/Q | Mon Nov 02 1992 20:24 | 15 |
|
Apparently the ships sewage system holding tank has some sort of
open valuve or tube that was under repair. When the engine room
flooded the water went directly into the tank and slowly and
with malace-a-fore-thought worked its way up through all plumbing
and sank the ship deck by sink by head... (eeewww... ugh.. what
a way to go...)
Anyway... ALL hands and passengers were rescued... including the
captain (whom in my opinion should be Keel-hauled... the long way)
Georgia
|
| 1952.4 | Waste | SALEM::GILMAN | | Thu Nov 05 1992 11:59 | 12 |
| It just amazes me that there wasn't some way they could stop the
flooding of the tank through the generator room. But I guess a
combination of panic, and lots of water coming into a hard to get at
place was sufficient.
Oh, the Captain was 'directing rescue operations from shore', I guess
the crew was helping him out 'directing rescue operations' from the
lifeboats THEY were already in.
At least no one was killed.
Jeff
|
| 1952.5 | Inquiry results available? | RANIER::ROTHENBERG | | Thu Nov 12 1992 15:05 | 45 |
|
From this discussion, it sure sounds as if folks think there could have
been a bit more done to save the ship. The captain probably is in a
bit of professional trouble because of the sinking. 'Go down with the
ship' and all that. It seems as if he should have one of the last to
leave. Does anyone know the results of inquiries? Inquiries are
usually pretty candid.
How big was the hole? How long did it take the crew to identify the
source of the leak? Does anyone know how long the crew had before
they lost access to the 'leak'? Has anyone had to abandon a sinking
500 ft ship before?
Logistics stuff: It takes at least 30 minutes to notify, assemble,
organize, and launch lifeboats full of people. A 500 ft passenger ship
could have been carrying around 600 people, meaning they may have
launched about 10 lifeboats, probably 5 from each side- one at a time
because of weather conditions (Ever seen how a lifeboat surfs back and
forth on its cables when a swell is running? Ever tried to release
those 100 lb blocks that hold a lifeboat fore and aft?). One more
thing, if you don't get out well before the ship goes down, you are
going to get sucked down with the ship and you will be dead.
A few other points:
- no lives were lost
- sounds as if this is a Greek ship (not known for being first class
condition)
- lifeboats I've seen are designed for carrying capacity and not for
maneuverability
- launching lifeboats full of passengers is risky
- launching lifeboats full of passergers in the midst of a mid-winter
storm while a ship is in danger of sinking is *incredibly* dangerous
- again, no lives were lost
What were the captain's priorities? On the one hand, he's got a big
(inanimate) ship with a big leak. On the other hand, he's got a bunch
of lifeboats (with lots of animate people) floating around in the ocean
during a storm in the middle of winter. Was it his own hide he was
trying to save? Or was it the lives of the passengers? It could have
been a cowardly copout, but *if* the captain's priority was the safety
of his passengers, then the best place for the captain was on shore
where he has access to communication and rescue facilities. All this
kind of stuff comes out in an inquiry.
Dave who_worked_on_a_passenger_ship_in_a_previous_life
|
| 1952.6 | things that make you go "Hmmm..." | BTOVT::HILTON_G | SYS-F-UNIVCRASH% REALITY.SYS Corrupted - Reboot Universe? (Y/N/Q | Thu Nov 12 1992 20:18 | 20 |
|
I wouldn't attempt to second guess anyone in THAT position... but..
I seems rather apparent that a series of things caused the sinking.
Any one of which may not have caused it, but in a combined set of
results casued the sinking... As for securing the safty of the
passengers....
it sounds more like
"CAPTAIN and CREW first... screww the others....."
To me it 'appears' that this is just another situation of someone who
probably bought, bribed, slept, knived, or otherwise got lucky in
getting a position instead of deserving and being qualified to drive
that much iron around.
oh well.. I think i just went down a
personal rat hole. sorry....
Georgia
|
| 1952.7 | Oceanos | SALEM::GILMAN | | Tue Nov 17 1992 11:56 | 45 |
| .5 .6
Based on the info I have gathered the Capt. issued NO instructions to
the passengers, he and the Chief Eng. and crew took off in the boats.
The only reason the passengers got off at all is because the leader
of the tour group, a woman, (here is one for you women) took charge
when she realized the capt. and crew were gone and helped GET the
passengers off in the boats. Her heroism combined with rescue efforts
from helicopters and ships saved the passengers. Fortunately the ship
was only about ten miles off shore so was accessable by shore rescue
operations. I wasn't there, but I never heard of a Capt. 'better'
directing operations from the safety of a shore position especially
when he had been ON the ship when the emergency started. The Capt. is
facing formal discipline proceedings so that tells you right there that
others didn't think the better position was from the shore.
As I understand it part of the sewage system was disassembled on a
sanitary waste tank. Somehow the ship got holed in a storm (didnt hit
anything) which caused flooding to start in the generator room. The
generators quit and thanks to the disassembled sewage system the water
from the flooding gen room got into the sewage holding tank, then the
ship flooded via the toilets, drains, etc. In the meantime the crew
had taken off. An airlift drop of 'powerful pumps' might have saved
the ship if the crew had been there to use them. Having spent four
years in the eng. dept. of a naval ship I can well understand how
rapid flooding combined with loss of power could have resulted
in the loss of the ship.
I wonder how a 'sound ship' (the article said it was insured Loyds
Class IV) or whatever the highest rating is, would have had a hull
failure which is what it sounds like in a moderate storm. At least
some plates or fittings failed below the waterline in the generator
room. Photos of the ship revealed a good looking ship in good
condition judging by the photos. That is, she was a white ship without
rust streaks or other obvious external signs of disrepair.
One of the passengers said in the article 'modern liners just don't
sink anymore, why worry?" Wrong.... the ocean is a wilderness and
those that forget it may wind up harshly reminded that man and his
machines survive only when one takes the attitude that the ocean IS
a wilderness and keeps ones' gear in good shape and exercises good
seamanship.
Jeff
|