Just in case you're thinking of booking a cruise you might want to check
this out first -

http://thedailywh.at/post/1081298486...g-cctv-footage

And thi is what it looked like from outside -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deX7R...1&feature=fvwp

--
Steve


Never shake the ketchup bottle. None'll come, and then a lot'll

shazzbat wrote:
Just in case you're thinking of booking a cruise you might want to
check this out first -

http://thedailywh.at/post/1081298486...g-cctv-footage

And thi is what it looked like from outside -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deX7R...1&feature=fvwp

I should feel guilty, but I don't. I LOLd and LOLd.


Ian

On 09/09/2010 00:57, Ian B wrote:
shazzbat wrote:
Just in case you're thinking of booking a cruise you might want to
check this out first -

http://thedailywh.at/post/1081298486...g-cctv-footage

And thi is what it looked like from outside -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deX7R...1&feature=fvwp

I should feel guilty, but I don't. I LOLd and LOLd.


Ian


So there was no warning of this? Was the radio operator asleep?

--
Residing on low ground in North Staffordshire

On 09/09/2010 10:33, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:52:57 +0100, wrote:

On 09/09/2010 00:57, Ian B wrote:
shazzbat wrote:
Just in case you're thinking of booking a cruise you might want to
check this out first -

http://thedailywh.at/post/1081298486...g-cctv-footage

And thi is what it looked like from outside -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deX7R...1&feature=fvwp

I should feel guilty, but I don't. I LOLd and LOLd.


Ian


So there was no warning of this? Was the radio operator asleep?

It was a bit late to think about bolting furniture to the floor.
Batten down the hatches is a well know saying for a reason. It was too
late when they were in the mess, but with modern technology there must
have been some warning!

--
Residing on low ground in North Staffordshire

On 09/09/2010 12:58, Moonraker wrote:
with modern technology there must
have been some warning!

Warning?
A rogue wave (the bridge crew maybe saw it bearing down on them 10~20
secs before it hit and they wouldn't have known the full consequences)
broke the bridge windows allowing water into the bridge this water got
into the controls and switched power off to the stabilizers etc. This
allowed the ship to roll in the heavy seas rather than allow the
stabilizers to do their job of keeping the ship stable.
It has to be accepted that every now and then circumstances will
conspire to effect the outcome in a way that humans can't counter.

In article , says...
On 2010-09-09 12:58:26 +0100, Moonraker said:

On 09/09/2010 10:33, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:52:57 +0100, wrote:

On 09/09/2010 00:57, Ian B wrote:
shazzbat wrote:
Just in case you're thinking of booking a cruise you might want to
check this out first -

http://thedailywh.at/post/1081298486...g-cctv-footage

And

thi is what it looked like from outside -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deX7R...1&feature=fvwp

I should feel guilty, but I don't. I LOLd and LOLd.


Ian


So there was no warning of this? Was the radio operator asleep?

It was a bit late to think about bolting furniture to the floor.
Batten down the hatches is a well know saying for a reason. It was too
late when they were in the mess, but with modern technology there must
have been some warning!

If there was a warning it could have been too short and of little use
when out at sea. That vessel clearly didn't expect to encounter heavy
weather. Nothing was secured. But judging by the demeanour of the
stewards at the bar at the beginning, that storm hit them out of
nowhere. It would be interesting to know how long it lasted for but
we've all heard of e.g. freak waves, I'm sure.

These ships rely heavily on their stabilizers to prevent severe rolling
without them they are boardering on unstable, having done the stabilty
calculations for many of these types of ships, nothing not even a fully
paid for cruise would persude me to set foot on one.

Stabilizers like any automated computerised system occassionally get
overwelmed and the results are as you see.

Traditional ships built in traditional shipyards had everything bolted
down and attachments for all the chairs in the saloon, raisable edges to
tables etc but ship owners found yards that would deliver cheaper ships,
without the tradition of shipbuilding and seafaring they don't think to
do all the attachments (one of the reasons they are cheaper)

I once sailed on a new build, built in St Johns Newfoundland, their yard
normally built small fishing boats and the resulting 35,000 ton ship we
ended up with was a disaster, and it too went into self destruct when we
hit the first bad weather, it never occured to us that all the bunks etc
wouldnt be attached.

And no there would be no warning, not even on the bridge would they see
it coming, excepting of course if they were changing course at the time
in which case the company would be 100% to blame (we allways made
anouncements for course changes in heavy weather)

It is not just the size of the wave but its timeing coupled with the
ships size and speed that makes the ship roll in a particular way
--
Charlie Pridham, Gardening in Cornwall
www.roselandhouse.co.uk
Holders of national collections of Clematis viticella cultivars and
Lapageria rosea

"soup" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2010 12:58, Moonraker wrote:
with modern technology there must
have been some warning!


This actually occurred in 2008 in the Pacific. It's quite a large
ocean, with not a lot of places to run to when the frequent, sudden
storms show up. The cruise ship involved was actually heading for a
port, but didn't quite make it, and was in the process of turning into
the waves, which had changed direction, when it broached, resulting in
the incidents in the video. It was actually quite big news in
Australia at the time, as it is an Australian-registered ship/company,
and was in the news again this week when the CCTV footage here was
released. There were no major injuries.

More information at
http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources...Sun_Report.pdf

Mike

MuddyMike wrote:

This actually occurred in 2008 in the Pacific. It's quite a large
ocean, with not a lot of places to run to when the frequent, sudden
storms show up. The cruise ship involved was actually heading for a
port, but didn't quite make it, and was in the process of turning into
the waves, which had changed direction, when it broached, resulting in
the incidents in the video. It was actually quite big news in
Australia at the time, as it is an Australian-registered ship/company,
and was in the news again this week when the CCTV footage here was
released. There were no major injuries.

More information at
http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources...Sun_Report.pdf

So why does the very first paragraph end "...seven sustaining
major injuries."?

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh.

In message , MuddyMike
writes

This actually occurred in 2008 in the Pacific. It's quite a large
ocean, with not a lot of places to run to when the frequent, sudden
storms show up. The cruise ship involved was actually heading for a
port, but didn't quite make it, and was in the process of turning into
the waves, which had changed direction, when it broached, resulting in
the incidents in the video. It was actually quite big news in
Australia at the time, as it is an Australian-registered ship/company,
and was in the news again this week when the CCTV footage here was
released. There were no major injuries.

More information at
http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources...Sun_Report.pdf

Mike

That explains a few things, I wondered why the ship wasn't turned to
head into the wind, although the area exposed to the wind on those tall
cruise liners doesn't make it easy.

On a smaller scale (!) we had holidays on the Thames, and the "plastic"
boats were awkward to handle on a very windy day, compared with the
heavy timber one we had on the first holiday.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

Ian B wrote:
check this out first -

http://thedailywh.at/post/1081298486...g-cctv-footage

And thi is what it looked like from outside -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deX7R...1&feature=fvwp

I should feel guilty, but I don't. I LOLd and LOLd.

Nick's mum has just booked 2 cruises ...

In message , Martin
writes
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:04:09 +0100, Gordon H
wrote:

On a smaller scale (!) we had holidays on the Thames, and the "plastic"
boats were awkward to handle on a very windy day, compared with the
heavy timber one we had on the first holiday.

On canals they are even worse.

Yep, heavy narrowboats would cope better than plastic cruisers through
flat areas.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

On 11 Sep, 17:04, Gordon H
wrote:
In message , MuddyMike
writes





This actually occurred in 2008 in the Pacific. *It's quite a large
ocean, with not a lot of places to run to when the frequent, sudden
storms show up. *The cruise ship involved was actually heading for a
port, but didn't quite make it, and was in the process of turning into
the waves, which had changed direction, when it broached, resulting in
the incidents in the video. *It was actually quite big news in
Australia at the time, as it is an Australian-registered ship/company,
and was in the news again this week when the CCTV footage here was
released. *There were no major injuries.

More information at
http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources...Sun_Report.pdf

Mike

That explains a few things, I wondered why the ship wasn't turned to
head into the wind, although the area exposed to the wind on those tall
cruise liners doesn't make it easy.

On a smaller scale (!) we had holidays on the Thames, and the "plastic"
boats were awkward to handle on a very windy day, compared with the
heavy timber one we had on the first holiday.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I once hired a fishing-boat-converted-to-tourist-accommodation in the
Galapagos islands for a week. That was a violent experience. The
waves seemed to come from all directions. We had lots of escapades
including a fire on board and the engine breakng down.

In message , Martin
writes
On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 13:40:03 +0100, Gordon H
wrote:

In message , Martin
writes
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:04:09 +0100, Gordon H
wrote:

On a smaller scale (!) we had holidays on the Thames, and the "plastic"
boats were awkward to handle on a very windy day, compared with the
heavy timber one we had on the first holiday.

On canals they are even worse.

Yep, heavy narrowboats would cope better than plastic cruisers through
flat areas.

They don't get blown against the bank in a cross wind. It was on the Llangollen
Canal where I saw plastic boats blown up against the bank. The canal is
flat but
not the surroundings

That would be scary on the Pontysilly-illy-iliac aqueduct.
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

In message
,
harry writes

I once hired a fishing-boat-converted-to-tourist-accommodation in the
Galapagos islands for a week. That was a violent experience. The
waves seemed to come from all directions. We had lots of escapades
including a fire on board and the engine breakng down.

Fire on board is big trouble.

I suppose we should mention here that canal narrowboats often have
attractive flower gardens on t'roof...
--
Gordon H
Remove "invalid" to reply

"Gordon H" wrote in message
...
In message
, harry
writes

I once hired a fishing-boat-converted-to-tourist-accommodation in the
Galapagos islands for a week. That was a violent experience. The
waves seemed to come from all directions. We had lots of escapades
including a fire on board and the engine breakng down.

Fire on board is big trouble.

I suppose we should mention here that canal narrowboats often have
attractive flower gardens on t'roof...

Some years ago my sister bought a narrowboat on the Macclesfield canal. Only
after doing so did she discover it had been to the bottom twice.

Steve