PDA

View Full Version : Ship Size,


Ned
05-21-2006, 11:09 AM
On April 30th there was an article in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel which has just recently been picked up by the wire services, and other newspapers around the country, entitled, Ship size raising safety issue (http://www.travelserver.net/travelpage/ubb-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000481). It's by Tom Steighorst, who is a travel reporter at the paper.

Mr. Steighorst raises the same kind of safety questions about "mega ships" that I have raised about "mega planes" (Airbus A380) in the Tripso Forum. Mr. Steighorst writes, "When the new Freedom of the Seas comes in next month, it will make history as the largest cruise ship, a behemoth built to carry more than 5,000 (Actually, according to Royal Caribbean the total is more than 5,700.) people. Boarding passengers will be easy enough. But questions arise about whether cruise lines can successfully evacuate the Freedom and other ships in emergencies."

Ok, of course people will raise that kind of question. I know I did. What I didn't know, about this issue before, which startled me when I read the article this morning is, "Unlike the airline industry, cruise lines don't have to prove they can get every passenger off ships within a set time. Routine lifeboat drills are done without passengers because of the risk of injury. "It's just too dangerous," said Jack Westwood-Booth, head of marine technology at the International Maritime Organization, which sets safety rules at sea. It's so dangerous that beginning July, the organization will drop a requirement that crews board lifeboats during drills because too many seamen have been killed or injured in accidents."

That should make anyone who ever cruises pause for a moment, even if you're on a ship with less than 1,000 or even 500 people. Let me repeat one of those sentences, "It's (referring to life boat drills) so dangerous that beginning July, the organization (International Maritime Organization) will drop a requirement that crews board lifeboats during drills because too many seamen have been killed or injured in accidents."

Here's a few more tidbits from the article which I suggest you all read in its entirety.

"One realistic test took place in England, two years after a 1994 ferry disaster in the Baltic Sea killed 852 people. British authorities evacuated 723 passengers and 119 crew members from the ferry Stena Invicta, but the exercise took 65 minutes, well beyond the International Maritime Organization standard of 30 minutes for such ships." Now we don't know anything about this ferry with regard to its design or anything else, but still, it took more than an hour to evacuate it, twice as long as the standard!

"On the fire-scarred Star Princess, it was three hours before crews could verify the names of all 2,690 passengers after they had reported to their muster stations." Three hours just to get the passengers at their muster stations and check their names against a list? Give me a break!

I've been on many cruises on many different ships, and I've always wondered what would happen if a fire broke out at one of the muster stations. Most passenger, in my opinion, don't take that 1st day safety drill seriously, and absolutely don't pay attention to where other muster stations are located, in case of such an emergency. Couple that with how long it takes to get everyone to their muster station in that drill, in the first place. I've seen it take more than 40 minutes to get all the passengers to their muster station on a ship of just 1,800 passengers. Now add in the fact that we're talking about a "mega ship" with more than 4,000 passengers, and you can see why Mr. Steighorst raises safety issues about "mega ships."

"At the London-based International Maritime Organization, the Maritime Safety Committee has been working for five years to address the burgeoning size of cruise ships. At a meeting next month, the panel is expected to approve new rules. One will say that ships should have redundant power systems to better insure that they can reach port after a disaster...If a ship has to be abandoned, it should remain habitable for at least three hours, another rule will say."

Three hours may seem like a lot of time at first blush, but is it really? I don't think so. If it takes 40 minutes for a drill, it's going to take longer in a real emergency to get the passengers to their muster stations, and now you've only got 2 hours and 20 minutes left, at most, to get them off.

That 40 minute time period doesn't even take into account that many passengers are walking around with their life jackets, long before the drill starts, because they've read the day's schedule lying on their bed when they got to their stateroom and know precisely when the drill is to begin.

That 40 minute time period doesn't take into account that when a real emergency hits, passengers will be all over the ship, and will have to get back to their cabin, some even to dry off from the pool and get dressed first, under actual emergency conditions, retrieve their life jackets, and get to their muster stations.

That 40 minute time period also doesn't take into account that children may not be with their parents on the ship, because they're being taken care of by crew at a "kids place" on the ship, and may panic (as will their parents who aren't at all sure where their children are at that point, and are going to be running around looking for them) causing even more delays at getting passengers to their muster stations.

I submit it could easily take at least an hour or more to gather the passengers at the muster stations.

Is two hours, possibly less, enough time to get 5,700 passengers and crew to and in the lifeboats from the muster stations and launch them. That's an answer no one really knows. That's an answer that absolutely should be known, and certainly before any rules about evacuation are promulgated.

There's never been a live drill of real ordinary people, of any kind, on a large cruise ship, and certainly not a "mega ship" to make that determination from what I know and read. There's only been computer simulations. "Roland Herwig, an FAA spokesman, (speaking about airplane evacuation) said that less realistic simulations, on computers for example, don't provide the needed reality check." The article also states, "Data from the rig (mock cruise ship cabin, corridor and stairway on a mounted platform) are fed into a computer simulation program used by Lloyd's Register, a safety bureau that verifies ships are designed to International Maritime Organization standards. Programmers need help because data from actual emergencies are rare."

I submit that the computer simulations run are not useless, but are not dependable enough to NOT require an evacuation exercise for new ships before they can be certified, and for all ships so that flaws in procedures and equipment can be ferreted out before a real emergency at sea arises.

From all accounts, the Freedom is an incredible ship for passenger's pleasure, and has been designed with maximum safety in mind, at least as far as can be designed without actual, real (not simulation) data. The question is, is the Freedom safe enough? I think the answer is 'No one knows.' That's not an answer that would satisfy me as a passenger.

What do you think? Do you think the safety issues raised in the article are non-issues. Do the safety questions raised give you pause before boarding any "mega ship?" Do you think there should be a "real" evacuation drill before a ship can be certified fit for sea? I look forward to your posts.

BarkingLeopard
05-21-2006, 06:25 PM
You raise some good points Ned. I've been on one of RC's Mariner of the Seas and never really thought about the whole safety issue- I just assumed that nothing would go wrong.

I that technology etc has improved a lot since then, but the bigger these ships get (and the more that I think about it) the more I think of the Titanic and that disaster. In many ways, the organizational/confusion issues alone would seem to make ships less safe as they increase in size.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it at least somewhat hypocritical to have such stringent standards for the evacuation of new airplanes, but none for cruise ships?

Ned
05-21-2006, 07:09 PM
Originally posted by BarkingLeopard@May 21 2006, 06:25 PM
You raise some good points Ned.* I've been on one of RC's Mariner of the Seas and never really thought about the whole safety issue- I just assumed that nothing would go wrong.

I that technology etc has improved a lot since then, but the bigger these ships get (and the more that I think about it) the more I think of the Titanic and that disaster.* In many ways, the organizational/confusion issues alone would seem to make ships less safe as they increase in size.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it at least somewhat hypocritical to have such stringent standards for the evacuation of new airplanes, but none for cruise ships?
26891

That's why I cited the example of the Airbus A380 in my post, which by the way, I still have no interest in flying.

These ships have incredible technology, yet accidents happen. The Star Princess fire is a perfect example of that. The Star Princess carries 2600 passengers and look what happened when the passengers were called to muster. The Freedom is 53% larger. Technology isn't going to get a ship evacuated. We're still getting passengers first to muster, then to the boats, then get in, then lower the boats via davits into the sea. The life vests are better, the davits run smoother and are more reliable, the life boats are better and all are motorized, and there are enough life boats for everyone these days. Nevertheless we're still using the same basic procedures and essentially the same technology, though updated somewhat, which were on the Titanic.

jfrenaye
05-21-2006, 07:29 PM
I believe that the evacuation procedure is not quite that time consuming, and the time at muster is probably predicated o the severity of the incident.

I also believe that some life boats will be lowered loaded, but a good number of them will leaded on the landing platforms in the hull. Many passengers will go down elevators or stairwells to the landings that you typically use while tendering. There are more of these than you see in use.

Also, I spoke with a Capt of the Sun Proncess several years ago, and he said that the camera that monitors the gunwales is watched essentially 24-7 for man overboard incidents. There is a small rescue craft accessible from the bridge and they can be in the water under way with their own power in 45 seconds while the ship does it's thing to re-maneuver.

Now I don't have an answer as to how all these folks go over without being seen, but perhaps it is because Princess has that system in place and maybe RCCL and CCL do not.

Ned
05-21-2006, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by jfrenaye@May 21 2006, 07:29 PM
I believe that the evacuation procedure is not quite that time consuming, and the time at muster is probably predicated o the severity of the incident.

I also believe that some life boats will be lowered loaded, but a good number of them will leaded on the landing platforms in the hull.* Many passengers will go down elevators or stairwells to the landings that you typically use while tendering.* There are more of these than you see in use.

Also, I spoke with a Capt of the Sun Proncess several years ago, and he said that the camera that monitors the gunwales is watched essentially 24-7 for man overboard incidents.* There is a small rescue craft accessible from the bridge and they can be in the water under way with their own power in 45 seconds while the ship does it's thing to re-maneuver.

Now I don't have an answer as to how all these folks go over without being seen, but perhaps it is because Princess has that system in place and maybe RCCL and CCL do not.
26895

Hi John,

It would be interesting to know how they arrive at how much time they think it will take to load and drop the lifeboats. I've watched the crew drop them for use as tenders, and it's not a 1-2-3 operation. It doesn't look all that safe to me with crew members atop the roofs of the lifeboats as they are lowered to the sea. I've seen more than one crew member slip badly during the operation, saved from going into the sea by a safety harness.

I'm absolutely certain you're right about the tendered ships. On Celebrity's Millenium, while in Europe a few years ago, I asked how they load the lifeboats with passengers in case of evacuation. They told me, many passengers will be loaded at sea level to speed evacuation, if the sea swells aren't too high. No one will be permitted in elevators, however, and during the muster drill, crew members blocked the use of all elevators. This has been true of every cruise I've been on. The concern, of course, is if the power goes off, people will get stuck.

I know on every Celebrity ship (I'm more familiar with Celebrity as it's the cruise line we've been on the most.) I've been on, the closed circuit TV system is operating 24x7, with monitors on the bridge showing the entire perimeter of the ship. I've been fortunate enough to be able to tour the bridge of most Celebrity ships we've sailed. I don't know, that there is enough light at night to see the entire perimeter well enough to detect people going over the side, and I don't know if the cameras can be put in an infrared mode which would ensure such sight. I also don't know how closely they actually monitor them.

The next time we sail, I'm going to get answers to these questions, and others that I'm sure I'll come up with.

I would still be more comfortable if the cruiselines would run a real evacuation drill on each class and general design of their ships, while in a port, to see what would really happen, similarly to what the FAA requires for new plane designs. An evacuation test would tell them alot about how well their procedures work, as well how well their equipment works too. Maybe they could incorporate "free fall lifeboats" into the test to see how well they might work for a cruise ship.

That's really good about the Sun Princess. I wonder if they've ever had to use it. Thanks for all the good info.

jfrenaye
05-22-2006, 07:29 AM
Clarification--they can have the rescue craft (not the lifeboats) in the water in 45 seconds. This is a small 20' RIB that is stowed in the bridge construction and can be almost free falled into the water and yes with crew members on board.

Ned
05-22-2006, 07:50 AM
Originally posted by jfrenaye@May 22 2006, 07:29 AM
Clarification--they can have the rescue craft (not the lifeboats) in the water in 45 seconds. This is a small 20' RIB that is stowed in the bridge construction and can be almost free falled into the water and yes with crew members on board.
26917

It sounds like the rescue craft is a "free fall lifeboat" type boat. Here's a Photo of a Free Fall Life Boat (http://www.fassmer.de/download/gar_gart_ffl.pdf) ready for loading and dropping (deployment).

jfrenaye
05-22-2006, 11:18 AM
It was not like that. It was a RIB (Rigid Inflatable Boat) that is inflated automatically upon deployment. The crew members get in the boat (rigid floor) the pontoons are inflated befroe it is lowered, and it is lowered on two cables and davits that swing out from the bridge and lower it VERY fast--not a free fall, but it is a fast descent. The crew members have helmets and vests and so forth!

Ned
05-22-2006, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by jfrenaye@May 22 2006, 11:18 AM
It was not like that.* It was a RIB (Rigid Inflatable Boat) that is inflated automatically upon deployment. The crew members get in the boat (rigid floor) the pontoons are inflated befroe it is lowered, and it is lowered on two cables and davits that swing out from the bridge and lower it VERY fast--not a free fall, but it is a fast descent. The crew members have helmets and vests and so forth!
26943

Thanks. I had no idea that's what they used. This is why more people should be join Tripso. Where else can you get this kind of information?