http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2012-2013/2012/12/costa-concordia-the-captains-tale.html
Most of the report is actually made up primarily of portions of the first report that the Fifth Estate broadcast earlier in the year.
Still, it was fascinating and disconcerting to listen to Captain Schettino tell the journalist how the accident really wasn't his fault. He mentions the First Mate, the wheelsman, the company, but only refers to himself as almost a victim of circumstance.
Perhaps if the journalist had referred to the Italian government's preliminary report he might have challenged the captain on some of his assertions.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3544291/Italian%20Maritime%20MSC90%20Presentation%20Costa%20Concordia.pdf
As it is, what amazes me is that, if the bridge team had simply followed some of the basic principles of navigation and pilotage, this event would never have happened.
According to the preliminary report, this was the planned route of the vessel:
Even if you know nothing about navigation, common sense dictates that, if you have a hazard on one side of your planned track and open water on the other, you should err on the side of caution and stay in the safe zone.
Still, planning the turn to pass parallel to the island at the point of the nearest danger demonstrated no thought in the planning at all. If the 278 course had been shifted a mile to the south of the course shown on the chart, it would have allowed for the vessel to be turned on to the next course with room to correct even if they had missed the turn.
Additionally, with all the sea room to starboard, there is no reason why the turn could not have been started early and made in a serious of steps, which is not uncommon with a large turn of almost sixty degrees.
These are basic principles followed by prudent navigators throughout the world and throughout history. It is sobering that while technology can help navigators in the performance of their jobs, it cannot save them if they choose to ignore those principles.
No comments:
Post a Comment