Maritime safety experts say that it will be a long time before we know the details of what happened on the night the ship crashed into a small island. Investigators must recover the ship?s data recorders, examine all the evidence, and take witness statements (there were more than 4000 people on board who could potentially be interviewed.)
But based on what we know now, PM talked to the experts about what went wrong on the Concordia, and what tools and training might have prevented this?or at least lessened the scope of the disaster.
Captain and Crew
Italian prosecutors and the Costa cruise line company have both cited operator error, specifically, mistakes made by the embattled ship?s captain, Francesco Schettino, as potential causes of the disaster. Schettino has been roundly ridiculed in the wake of the incident for allegedly deviating from his course and edging too closely to rocks along the coast of the Isla de Giglio. He has also been lambasted for his seemingly abysmal handling of the emergency, including his alleged abandonment of the sinking ship before all the passengers were evacuated?and, according to a tape released this week, his refusal to go back on board to lead the effort.
In a statement issued on Saturday, Costa Cruises issued a statement saying: "While the investigation is ongoing, preliminary indications are that there may have been significant human error on the part of the ship?s master, Captain Francesco Schettino, which resulted in these grave consequences." Italian prosecutors have charged Schettino with manslaughter.
"If a captain did leave his ship, I think most [captains] would be disgusted by that." John Hillin, Safety and Security Division Chief of the United States Coast Guard who supervises foreign passenger ship inspections, says. Despite how poorly the captain is said to have acted, though, Hillin says that things could have been much worse. "Overall, it looks like the evacuation went pretty well, considering how many people were on board."
Of the over 4000 individuals onboard the ship, the fact that the death toll is not higher and that the majority of the passengers and crew were able to evacuate swiftly means that somebody was certainly doing something right. Yet early reports revealed passengers frustrated with crew members because they didn?t appear to be in control of the anxious crowd of passengers.
If the crew erred, it may have been due to panic or because their leader was missing, Hillin says. Although safety training is usually a simple step-by-step procedure, like a recipe in a cookbook, Hillin says a strong leader is needed to adapt that training to events as they happen and to coordinate rescue efforts. "In any kind of disaster, cruise or cargo, the captain is the ultimate authority. A captain leaving ship in a time of emergency, that would be a key level of oversight that would be missing," Hillin says. "In an emergency situation, there?s no cookbook answer. And that?s why the captain is so important."
"The cruise industry is very safe and they have an excellent track record. But when something happens it happens quickly, and when something happens it?s important for people to be trained" says Anthony Patterson, a former captain in the Canadian Coast Guard who has directed search-and-rescue operations.
Hillin and his counterparts around the globe examine cruise ships twice a year, issuing a certificate of compliance for safety drills before the ships can embark. "With these drills, we?re checking crew competency?their familiarity with the ship, familiarity with safe evacuation procedures . . . There are different training requirements for different crews," Hillin says. Crews go through fire drills, launch lifeboats, are interviewed to see if they have kept up with their training, and can cope with inspectors posing as panicked passengers to simulate a crisis.
Preparing Passengers
On large cruise liners, luxury is the selling point. People come on cruises to be pampered aboard a floating palace, to be transported to many ports of call without abandoning the comforts of a single, comfortable resort. Safety drills can seem a boring intrusion into an otherwise relaxing vacation.
Nevertheless, they are required by law. The Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea or SOLAS, an international treaty first drawn up after the Titanic disaster a century ago, says, "On a ship engaged on a voyage where passengers are scheduled to be onboard for more than 24 hours, musters of the passengers shall take place within 24 hours after their embarkation."
The Los Angeles Times reported that the Concordia held a lifeboat drill, in compliance with that law, after it departed from the ship?s port of origin, in Savona, a port in Northern Italy. But the 600 passengers who boarded at the port of Rome on Friday did not go through the lifeboat drill, which was reportedly scheduled for the next day?the ship wrecked before the drill could be held.
Some cruise lines require passengers to go through the lifeboat drills before the ship leaves port. Had the Concordia?s passengers done so, they might have been more prepared for the evacuation. However, since the ship crashed before it was 24 hours out of Rome, those passengers never got the chance.
Navigation Tools
Investigators now say that Capt. Schettino made his course deviation closer to the Isla de Giglio to "salute" a former colleague who now lives on the island. One of the defenses Schettino has offered for his actions is that the rocks he hit weren?t marked on the charts he had onboard.
What tools would a cruise ship captain have at his disposal to avoid a disaster like this? There would certainly have been GPS, giving the exact position of the ship. The ship?s radar should have alerted the officers on deck to any floating objects or obstacles jutting above the watermark. And the Concordia was probably equipped with at least one depth finder, but no sonar, which, according to the Coast Guard?s Patterson, is very rarely used on merchant vessels.
Many modern ships carry both paper and electronic charts, some of which are integrated into a display with GPS or radar overlays. "Both the radar and the ECDIS [chart-plotter systems] have alarm systems [that] can tell them what to watch out for," Patterson says. The ongoing Concordia investigation should reveal whether these rocks were charted or not.
However, according to John Konrad, a former ship?s captain, a ship should never rely solely on gadgets to navigate around an island. The best tool for spotting rocks and other hazards close to shore is surprisingly low-tech: the eyes of the officers on the bridge. "You should have at least five or six people on the bridge when you?re that close to shore," he says. Patterson agrees?any alarm system is inherently redundant because a commanding officer?s eyes should be trained on the water when the ship is so close to shore.
"The technology basically doesn?t do anything active; it only provides information. Humans have to take that information and make decisions," Konrad says. "The currents are always different, the winds are always different. One thing computers haven?t figured out is current. There?s no technological solution that?s 100 percent effective. He claimed that there was an uncharted rock, but the [Italian] Coast Guard claims that the rock was very well charted."
Evacuation
After the Costa Concordia hit the rocks, there was a significant delay between the impact and the order to evacuate?passengers and crew reported that the first announcements stated that there had been some electrical problems, and they should go about their business. But the captain and crew are ultimately responsible for crowd control, Hillin says, and it doesn?t help the situation to lie to them about the severity of an emergency. "Sometimes, if there was a small kitchen fire and the crew had it under control, then it might be okay to say everything is fine, but in this case we?re talking about a gaping hole in the side of a ship? I?d imagine that lying about it would probably cause more chaos later if passengers find out everything is not okay."
And no doubt the delay cost the passengers valuable time. Some escaped the disaster on lifeboats, but eventually the Concordia listed so severely that it was impossible to launch the remaining lifeboats. Passengers still on board had to scramble down rope ladders to waiting inflatable rafts, lifeboats, and rescue vessels that had been launched from shore.
Despite the cobbled-together nature of the evacuation process, circumstances on the Costa Concordia were ideal for an evacuation, probably saving lives. There were helicopters on hand from the Italian Coast Guard to evacuate people who couldn?t make it to the ladders or couldn?t climb down on their own. And some passengers were able to leap from the ship and swim to shore though the warmer, well-patrolled waters of the Mediterranean Sea.
After the evacuation, many survivors were quoted saying that the experience was like that of the Titanic, but Simoes Re says the Concordia?s passengers were much more fortunate than the people who were on board that luxury liner 100 years ago. "What if this had happened in the Arctic? You could not jump in the water because you?d freeze."
Indeed, it could have been worse. But the wreck of the Costa Concordia was also unnecessary. Hillin puts it simply: "It would have been prevented if they stayed away from the shore."
butterball turkey fryer butterball turkey fryer yale harvard dan henderson oregon ducks oregon ducks oregon football
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন