Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Home - Sothampton, Boat - Gosport
    Posts
    10,093

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by oldharry View Post
    It's often hugely expensive sometimes impossible to satisfactorily modify a historic vessel and still retain its historicity. A fairly typical pen-pusher reaction to a one off tragedy.

    Ro-Ro car ferries are required by law to compartmentalise the car decks following the Herald of Free Enterprise accident. They are inherently unseaworthy unless the watertight doors are shut against ingress of large amounts of water. It's exactly the same your dinghy becoming unstable if it gets too much water in. All that weight moving around just tips it up whether it's an 8ft dinghy or 500ft car ferry. Its called the Free surface effect
    I don't recall any sign of that the last time I travelled on a Brittany Ferries boat.

    Incidentally, IIRC, the captain of the Herald of Free Enterprise was made scapegoat for the accident. The fact that he had asked for a warning light on the bridge to tell him the bow doors weren't closed properly and management had refused it didn't seem to be relevant.
    Steve
    Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Where life is good
    Posts
    13,873

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by Poignard View Post
    Shortly before the time of the Marchioness sinking my wife and I were invited to a policeman's 60th birthday bash held on one of these Thames river boats (it may even have been the Marchioness).

    She was an old boat and her once open upper deck had had a saloon built completely over it with just a small open area at bow and stern. The only means of exiting from the vessel was by small doors at the forward and aft ends of this saloon.

    Practically everyone got uproariously drunk as the boat sailed aimlessly up and down a short stretch of the river and I remember commenting to my wife that situation was dangerous because in the event of a sinking, the chance of all these drunken people being safely evacuated was nil.

    I am not, for one moment, suggesting that drink played any part in the heavy loss of life in the Marchioness. But even perfectly sober people would have had little chance of escaping her.

    I think the same on a cross channel ferry.
    There is no chance the dining rooms and saloons can be evacuated once the ship starts to list.. Even within the limits of stability one would find it very hard to climb a 30 degree deck towards a door on the upper side.
    Life is too short to drink bad wine.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,164

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomahawk View Post
    I think the same on a cross channel ferry.
    There is no chance the dining rooms and saloons can be evacuated once the ship starts to list.. Even within the limits of stability one would find it very hard to climb a 30 degree deck towards a door on the upper side.
    Or ANY Cruise ship for that matter

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Where life is good
    Posts
    13,873

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    As was demonstrated by the Costa Concordia.

    Aven though is sank very slowly, there was considerable loss of life.
    Life is too short to drink bad wine.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    East coast UK. Mostly. Sometimes the Philippines
    Posts
    9,522

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomahawk View Post
    As was demonstrated by the Costa Concordia.

    Even though she sank very slowly, there was considerable loss of life.
    Exactly. The cruise industry was incredibly lucky that the loss of life was not far larger.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Where life is good
    Posts
    13,873

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Was at SIBS last year when one of those things was next door. It was enormous towering over the entire show and town.
    A few wears ago there was a collision between a container ship and a cruise ship off N Foreland. Ramsgate lifeboat rushed out and filled up with people. As the Cox said later.. "we have saved 20 passengers, now what do we do with the other 1990?"

    Despite all the lifeboats, there will be a major catastrophe some time soon.
    Life is too short to drink bad wine.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    North from the Nab about 10 miles
    Posts
    8,839

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomahawk View Post
    I think the same on a cross channel ferry.
    There is no chance the dining rooms and saloons can be evacuated once the ship starts to list.. Even within the limits of stability one would find it very hard to climb a 30 degree deck towards a door on the upper side.
    Survivor accounts from the HoFE described just that, and the disorientation of everything being on its side. One account spoke graphically of being in an area that was rapidly flooding, but being unable to climb up to the exit. Others spoke too of getting 'to the top' as it were, but being unable to get out of windows made to withstand the sea, and doors hanging on their hinges that were too heavy to open once the ship was on its side.

    The enquiry found that very very few people would have survived had the ferry gone over in deep water, and not capsized on to a sandbank, a bit like Costa Concordia where loss of life would have been far greater had the ship carried on in to deep water after being holed.
    Is Conservation for wildlife or conservationists?
    http://boatownersresponse.org.uk

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cornwall & Solentish
    Posts
    13,734

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomahawk View Post
    Was at SIBS last year when one of those things was next door. It was enormous towering over the entire show and town.
    A few wears ago there was a collision between a container ship and a cruise ship off N Foreland. Ramsgate lifeboat rushed out and filled up with people. As the Cox said later.. "we have saved 20 passengers, now what do we do with the other 1990?"

    Despite all the lifeboats, there will be a major catastrophe some time soon.
    Especially given the MCA's policy of downsizing UK SAR helicopters to the AW189, which can usefully carry about 10.

    The accountant's view that the majority of incidents involve less that 3 casualties, is fine, until the job that involves 40.

    The modern cruise industry frightens the life out of me, especially when you bear in mind that a capsize will wipe out 50% of the lifesaving apparatus, and the very high %age of elderly, inform or immobile passengers.
    Western Solent's Lifeboat -.http://solent-rescue.org.uk/

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    West Sussex / Hants
    Posts
    28,654

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    Quote Originally Posted by chanelyacht View Post
    The accountant's view that the majority of incidents involve less that 3 casualties, is fine, until the job that involves 40.
    .
    On the bright side, it might be 40 accountants

    More seriously, a tip I learned from helo survival training but applies equally to a capsizing ship; before the thing fills with water and the lights go out, grab a backrest etc with an arm outstretched towards the emergency exit as a guide.
    Anderson 22 Owners Association - For info please ask here or PM me.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    367

    Default Re: Marchioness, MCA proposals not yet enacted?

    I studied Nautical Science at University ( pre HoFE disaster) and we were set a assignment of calculating the stability of various types of vessel. No one in the class could produce a calculation for a roll on roll off ferry that met the minimum safety regulations because of the open decks and the results of free surface effect ( technical definition - water sloshing around ).

    Our professor confirmed that our calculations were correct. A ro-ro Ferry was given an exemption from the regulations and a only few inches of water ingress would cause it to capsize. Shocking negligence by the regulatory bodies in my opinion.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Latest YBW News

Find Boats For Sale

to
to