Follow this blog:
RSS

Costa Concordia disaster: Was faulty ship design to blame?

By | January 18, 2012, 6:05 AM PST

Forty minutes. That’s all the time 4,200 passengers and crew members aboard the Costa Concordia had to evacuate safely after the ship ran aground off the coast of Tuscany. After which point the ship started listing so badly, lifeboats couldn’t be lowered.

The fact that the situation turned so disastrous so quickly has lead many to question the design integrity of modern mega-cruise ships. One such group, Nautilus International, a trade union for Maritime employees, has even called for a re-examination of similar boats in operation.

In a statement released shortly after the accident, the group said they wanted a “thorough review of regulations governing the construction and operation of passenger vessels - in particular, standards of stability and watertight integrity.”

It shouldn’t have happened how it did, Nautilus International spokesman Tony Minns told New Scientist. The design of watertight compartments should be such that such vessels remain stable for much longer, perhaps by having more hull beneath the water or by installing systems that pump water to help rebalance a listing ship.

One of the main causes for concern is the fact that cruise ships have undergone a rapid transformation in a relatively short period of time. Just over the past decade, the vessels have doubled in size, as measured in tons. And while the trend toward mega-ships has enabled the industry to increase profitability, the union feels that the same motivation for higher profit margins has lead the industry to make compromises that increasingly endangers those onboard. For instance, Minns pointed out that shipmakers are now opting for a very shallow draught as a way of providing passengers with stunning views of the landscape. However, the drawback is that shallow draught hulls, coupled with high structures, may cause them to capsize sooner if stability is lost.

Additionally, the group says there are other ways the move toward bigger ships has made ocean travel much riskier:

The height of cruise ships is a problem, too, says Minns. “It is known in sea trials that these vessels are what we call ‘tender’ in stability terms – they are very stable but have a quick rate of roll when the rudder is moved a few degrees.” In other words, they are quite sensitive to being upset.

“So the regulators need to look very, very carefully at balancing commercial needs with the needs in the event of damage to the watertight integrity – as we had on Friday.”

Mark Staunton-Lambert, technical director of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects in London, agrees that the rapid capsizing of Costa Concordia needs explaining. “A modern design should not heel over as far as it did until quite a long time later,” he says.(New Scientist)

However, some experts have disputed these kinds of speculative assessments.

Carolyn Spencer Brown, editor in chief of CruiseCritic.com, was cruising aboard the small Azamara Quest off China when reached Monday by phone. A “sloppy” safety procedure, not ship size, was the issue on the Concordia, she said, adding, “It was a perfect storm.”

Cruising is “nothing to be scared of,” Brown said, but passengers “need to respect the muster drill. I’ve seen people drinking beer and talking like it’s a cocktail party. I think [the drill] is a pain in the butt, but I think it’s a necessary pain in the butt.” A journalist once boasted to her that he hid in his bathroom to avoid the drill.

A super-sized ship can be a super-safe ship, Brown said. On the Oasis, she said she was “absolutely blown away by the steps Royal Caribbean took in designing the ship. I’d put my life in their hands any day of the week.”(LA Times)

An ongoing investigation should turn up some clues as to what transpired that fateful morning and help to address any design issues, if any.

Photo: AP

(via New Scientist, LA Times)

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Tuan C. Nguyen

About Tuan C. Nguyen

Tuan C. Nguyen is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Tuan C. Nguyen

Tuan C. Nguyen

Contributing Editor, Technology

Tuan C. Nguyen is a freelance science journalist based in New York City. He has written for the U.S. News and World Report, Fox News, MSNBC, ABC News, AOL, Yahoo! News and LiveScience. Formerly, he was reporter and producer for the technology section of ABCNews.com. He holds degrees from the University of California Los Angeles and the City University of New York's Graduate School of Journalism.

Follow him on Twitter.

Tuan C. Nguyen

Tuan C. Nguyen

Tuan C. Nguyen does not hold any investments in the technology companies he covers.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
9
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+1 Vote
+ -
Costa Cordia
Tuan and others: Are there no other master class officers on the bridge of such a ship who could have deterred the Captain from sailing too close? No First Mate, etc.? Doesn't such a ship have underwater obstruction sensing equipment that sounds warnings in time or even shuts down and/or reverses the engines under collision sensing conditions or changes course unless manually overridden? As with supertankers, it takes an incredible amount of engine power to stop, then reverse such a ship or even to turn it and a lot of distance.

I read a Wikipedia article that sought to reassure cruise contemplators that such tall ships satisfy stability standards despite their height. It claimed that as long as they were flat, little or no keel and very wide and heavily bottom weighted with engines and enormous fuel and cargo compartments they were ok stability-wise. Now they remind me of the famous picture of the Cutty Sark under full sail in stormy weather. Need to furl some of the topsails! :--(
Posted by robert.cogan@...
18th Jan
+3 Votes
+ -
Costa Cordia
All large ships have 'Ballast tanks' this helps stabilize them in rough water. The ships are safe and obviously there was enough equipment on it to support everyone on board. Sounds like "Nautilus International" is trying to put up a Smoke Screen to take some of the heat off of one of their members. They need to dump this turkey like yesterdays garbage!!
Posted by kfortner51
18th Jan
+4 Votes
+ -
Costa Concordia disaster
Never mind that they were 4 miles off course, disregarded routine, standard, and mandatory ship safety excercises, and the crew didn't follow disaster proceedures...
Posted by bb_apptix
18th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Costa Concordia disaster
They have been 4 miles of the official course, but they have gotten this close to the island several times before.
So the questions need to be ask of the company management of their cruise ships as well. Also how prepared are these vessels for the unexpected changes to the sea floor as well.
Posted by Knowles2
20th Jan
+4 Votes
+ -
Perhaps the fact that the ship was driven over a reef at high speed...
...might have been a factor. I have to wonder how many "properly" designed ships might have fared. At some point, no amount of design can overcome the crass incompetence of a reckless captain, be it a cruise ship, airplane, bus or any kind of vehicle or machine.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 21st Jan
+1 Vote
+ -
Concern was over how fast the ship capsized
Guys, the criticism from the maritime union isn't that a better design would have prevented the disaster. Human error was a major factor. Their argument is that the boat capsized much more rapidly than expected and that perhaps revisiting the design would lead to innovations that would allow passengers more time to evacuate in the event of another accident. Right now it's all still speculative, but hopefully we'll find out sooner than later.
Posted by tuancnguyen
18th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Two Factors
The two factors I see that contributed to the wreck and listing are simply; the error of navigating too close to the island which resulted in a hull breach, and the hull was breached at a point where the ballast tank was breached resulting in a loss of stability.
Posted by ScrLk
18th Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Costa Concordia stability
The hull breach towards the stern reflects that a turn to starboard away from the island was initiated, but as the laws of physics dictate, the stern first rotated to port, closer to the submerged rocks. I hope investigators determine why the ship listed towards its undamaged side, and what effects caused the 180 rotation of course direction after contact. I would think that the list should have been to the side taking in water.
Posted by elderone1
23rd Jan
0 Votes
+ -
Back toward the island...
the reason the vessel listed toward the undamaged side was because when it returned to the coast, it rested on another reef.
Why not equip a ships hull with air/rapidly expanding foam bags
Posted by Kilohawk
5th Feb
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!