_Costa Concordia_ was about as safe as cruise liners generally have to be (apart from that one watertight door that jammed). They don't typically have to be that tough, because they're not expected to force their way through harsh weather the way ocean liners were, they could go around. Ocean liners were used to transport people and cargo from Point A to Point B, like a Greyhound bus they were expected to keep a schedule. Cruise liners are designed to wander up and down coasts with as many people aboard as possible, so they maximize passenger space They _can_ and do cross oceans to service other routes, but again, they can go around storms and other rough weather. So they have watertight compartments as a requirement on pretty much every modern ship, and double-bottom hulls, but usually not double-plated hulls, and the steel that's used is thinner than on ocean liners. Ocean liners got double-plated hulls either because they were expected to serve in wartime, or because _Titanic_ would have survived if she had had that feature (they were among the retrofits made to her sister ships, _Olympic_ and _Britannic_ ). A more recent feature some cruise liners, and the one serving ocean liner, have is engine pods. _Queen Mary 2_ , which started service on January 12, 2004, so she was very much around when _Costa Concordia_ went down, had four engine pods that pull her through the waters. The forward two can rotate, turning the ship. In addition, she has water turbine thrusters in her bulbous bow for additional maneuvering, to the point she doesn't need tugs to get around in port. So a ship like that could have more easily sidestepped the rocks, if it was in that situation in the first place. That's not to say _QM2_ hadn't had her own incidents: she ran aground once when someone miscalculated the distance to the bottom of the ocean underneath her when traveling at speed. They refloated her of course, and she returned to service, but you can bet that wasn't taken lightly. BTW, _QM2_ is operated by Cunard, which was White Star Line's main competitor, before they merged. Cunard struggled, because of course there aren't a lot of people interested in going on ocean liners and cruise liners anymore. The big boss at Carnival Cruiselines had concerns that once _Queen Elizabeth 2_ was retired, no ocean liner would replace her, and felt a connection to the ocean liner tradition because his family had sailed on _Mauretania 2_ . So he bought Cunard, and had the _QM2_ commissioned. With balcony cabins, and too long to use the Panama Canal. That's right, the same company that owns Costa Concierge also owns Cunard. Fortunately _QM2_ isn't run the way Schettino did.
I have some family that worked in the cruise industry. Someone going form head of security to captain is not that odd. What often happens is that someone has all the certificates for being a captain, just there are no jobs open. So they take a job elsewhere, and when a captain job opens up, they apply for it, and companies like hiring those jobs from within. Now, why they would keep him as captain after crashing two ships already is another matter. Also, a new helmsman is not an unusual thing, they have to get experience somehow, but you put a new helmsman on duty when you are out in the middle of the ocean, and nothing to crash into. My sister was the stewardess on a yacht, and she would be put on the bridge during the night shift, and she wouldn't have to touch navigation at all, and her instructions were just to wake the captain of the yacht if anything odd happens.
Schettino had a clear record of crumbling under crisis, however he had full captain's qualifications and certifications. Under any normal circumstances, he was capable. But his steadfast refusal to recognize the situation for what it was was dangerous for the passengers and crew under his stewardship, and that is unacceptable under _any_ circumstances. He refused to acknowledge the situation, he refused to follow procedure and do the right thing, and then he refused to accept his part of the responsibility for this maritime disaster, until it was forced upon him. Fortunate for those aboard that _some_ of the crew stepped up, and fortunate for them as well that evacuation drills are mandatory anytime new passengers come aboard. Just one of the many lessons learned from the _Titanic_ that have changed maritime travel forever, and for the better. Unfortunately _Costa Concordia_ is not the only case of a maritime disaster caused by negligence, not following procedures, and/or general greed. _Oceanos_ and _MV Sewal_ , both went down because the ships were not well-maintained, and the captain and crew abandoned ship first, without even telling the passengers what was going on. In the case of _Oceanos_ , the entertainment staff stepped up, but in the case of _Sewal_ , passengers were actively told to stay in their rooms, and only by defying this order were a very small number of them saved as the ship capsized and went under. _MV Dona Paz_ and _MV Vector_ were both sailing uncertified and poorly maintained, with underqualified interns at the wheel and everyone else partying or asleep when both ships collided at very slow speed on a very clear day. The fuel being carried by _Vector_ spread out everywhere, and then there was fire as both ships sank in shark-infested waters. _Dona Paz_ had oversold and overloaded, so between the two ships, about 9,000 people died, and some of the only survivors did so by jumping into the burning water. And still that's not the worst maritime disaster in history. That, I don't know enough about to talk about. By contrast, the people who died on _Costa Concordia_ did so because none of the crew swept the ship for people who were trapped, and because they started evacuation too late to be able to launch all the lifeboats safely. The sheer negligence is astounding. Fortunately the ship sank close to shore. If she had been at sea, similar to _Titanic_ , the death toll would have been much higher. Resting on its side with so much of it above water meant they had all the time they needed for rescue of those sections. But those trapped underwater and in the elevators were not lucky. Still, I'd say the worst way to go at sea would be to burn to death on a ship.
A lie is acceptable if it's to avoid a panic, witch they did, however after they fully understood the situation they should have evacuated the ship, not tell people everything is fine and lounge about.
8:34 So misbehaving in your streams = Getting face sat on. Duly noted. Love the video by the way. When this was actually happening, I was obsessed with the events around and logistics of this incident. It madee glad to see the Internet Historian hit on stuff I didn't even find.
The fact that My Heart Will Go On started playing over the music system as the ship is sinking is the kind of shit that makes people believe in God. A coincidence of such an insane level that it shouldn't be possible, but happens anyway.
Of course they're owned by Carnival. Not-so-fun-fact: My very first cruise ever was on a carnival ship, and wound up getting deathly sick the last couple of days. So yea, I avoid carnival ships like the plague. Literally.
it would require more power and speed to even put that ship of that mass going *16 knots* for it to even reach a halt not to mention if they did that recklessly a lot of sh1t would go wrong, like imagine braking a ship with thousands of passengers without seatbelts let alone having things that are bolted on to the ship, if they brake now the casualty would be much worse if they had just crashed, also they are on water not land, you can't just "brake" on water because water is malleable as it is a liquid its not a solid like a paved road, it shifts all the time meaning if they did brake suddenly it would also tilt the ship far down and that ain't good when they are already on shallow waters they would just hit the rocks either way
.... Hearing someone say "just stop and put it in reverse" in regards to ship made me cringe. It's not a car you would have more luck stopping and reversing a train than doing this with a ship. Even if you could put a ship in reverse which... No... But even if you could you would have to first bring it to a full stop which means stoppering the engine and dropping anchor which dropping anchor while moving at 16 knots... Will cause just as much damage as a crash would... It is safer to do what you can to avoid the crash while staying in motion. The mistake here involved an inept captain and the hiring of a helmsman that neither spoke or properly understood the only two languages being spoken aboard the ship...
It is, but you have to _stop_ first. There's no mention of reducing speed from 16 knots. Even though _Titanic_ 's central screw couldn't reverse, the others could. _Costa Concordia_ could absolutely be put in reverse. But not at 16 knots. But you know what Schettino was trying to do was correct, trying to swing the ship around the rocks. Bad communication, irresponsibility, and complacency killed 33 people.
@@BNuts I dont doubt that, but heres the thing. you get multi-millions pounds it would take miles and miles to stop. you dont understand boats. even makari understood it but you dont. i said "Reverse isnt a thing, when your moving that fast." break down what i said and try and get it.
_Costa Concordia_ was about as safe as cruise liners generally have to be (apart from that one watertight door that jammed). They don't typically have to be that tough, because they're not expected to force their way through harsh weather the way ocean liners were, they could go around. Ocean liners were used to transport people and cargo from Point A to Point B, like a Greyhound bus they were expected to keep a schedule. Cruise liners are designed to wander up and down coasts with as many people aboard as possible, so they maximize passenger space They _can_ and do cross oceans to service other routes, but again, they can go around storms and other rough weather. So they have watertight compartments as a requirement on pretty much every modern ship, and double-bottom hulls, but usually not double-plated hulls, and the steel that's used is thinner than on ocean liners. Ocean liners got double-plated hulls either because they were expected to serve in wartime, or because _Titanic_ would have survived if she had had that feature (they were among the retrofits made to her sister ships, _Olympic_ and _Britannic_ ).
A more recent feature some cruise liners, and the one serving ocean liner, have is engine pods. _Queen Mary 2_ , which started service on January 12, 2004, so she was very much around when _Costa Concordia_ went down, had four engine pods that pull her through the waters. The forward two can rotate, turning the ship. In addition, she has water turbine thrusters in her bulbous bow for additional maneuvering, to the point she doesn't need tugs to get around in port. So a ship like that could have more easily sidestepped the rocks, if it was in that situation in the first place. That's not to say _QM2_ hadn't had her own incidents: she ran aground once when someone miscalculated the distance to the bottom of the ocean underneath her when traveling at speed. They refloated her of course, and she returned to service, but you can bet that wasn't taken lightly.
BTW, _QM2_ is operated by Cunard, which was White Star Line's main competitor, before they merged. Cunard struggled, because of course there aren't a lot of people interested in going on ocean liners and cruise liners anymore. The big boss at Carnival Cruiselines had concerns that once _Queen Elizabeth 2_ was retired, no ocean liner would replace her, and felt a connection to the ocean liner tradition because his family had sailed on _Mauretania 2_ . So he bought Cunard, and had the _QM2_ commissioned. With balcony cabins, and too long to use the Panama Canal. That's right, the same company that owns Costa Concierge also owns Cunard.
Fortunately _QM2_ isn't run the way Schettino did.
I have some family that worked in the cruise industry. Someone going form head of security to captain is not that odd. What often happens is that someone has all the certificates for being a captain, just there are no jobs open. So they take a job elsewhere, and when a captain job opens up, they apply for it, and companies like hiring those jobs from within. Now, why they would keep him as captain after crashing two ships already is another matter.
Also, a new helmsman is not an unusual thing, they have to get experience somehow, but you put a new helmsman on duty when you are out in the middle of the ocean, and nothing to crash into. My sister was the stewardess on a yacht, and she would be put on the bridge during the night shift, and she wouldn't have to touch navigation at all, and her instructions were just to wake the captain of the yacht if anything odd happens.
Schettino had a clear record of crumbling under crisis, however he had full captain's qualifications and certifications. Under any normal circumstances, he was capable. But his steadfast refusal to recognize the situation for what it was was dangerous for the passengers and crew under his stewardship, and that is unacceptable under _any_ circumstances. He refused to acknowledge the situation, he refused to follow procedure and do the right thing, and then he refused to accept his part of the responsibility for this maritime disaster, until it was forced upon him. Fortunate for those aboard that _some_ of the crew stepped up, and fortunate for them as well that evacuation drills are mandatory anytime new passengers come aboard. Just one of the many lessons learned from the _Titanic_ that have changed maritime travel forever, and for the better.
Unfortunately _Costa Concordia_ is not the only case of a maritime disaster caused by negligence, not following procedures, and/or general greed. _Oceanos_ and _MV Sewal_ , both went down because the ships were not well-maintained, and the captain and crew abandoned ship first, without even telling the passengers what was going on. In the case of _Oceanos_ , the entertainment staff stepped up, but in the case of _Sewal_ , passengers were actively told to stay in their rooms, and only by defying this order were a very small number of them saved as the ship capsized and went under. _MV Dona Paz_ and _MV Vector_ were both sailing uncertified and poorly maintained, with underqualified interns at the wheel and everyone else partying or asleep when both ships collided at very slow speed on a very clear day. The fuel being carried by _Vector_ spread out everywhere, and then there was fire as both ships sank in shark-infested waters. _Dona Paz_ had oversold and overloaded, so between the two ships, about 9,000 people died, and some of the only survivors did so by jumping into the burning water. And still that's not the worst maritime disaster in history. That, I don't know enough about to talk about.
By contrast, the people who died on _Costa Concordia_ did so because none of the crew swept the ship for people who were trapped, and because they started evacuation too late to be able to launch all the lifeboats safely. The sheer negligence is astounding. Fortunately the ship sank close to shore. If she had been at sea, similar to _Titanic_ , the death toll would have been much higher. Resting on its side with so much of it above water meant they had all the time they needed for rescue of those sections. But those trapped underwater and in the elevators were not lucky. Still, I'd say the worst way to go at sea would be to burn to death on a ship.
Ah those random jumpscares. We all love them. Thx Asgier!
A lie is acceptable if it's to avoid a panic, witch they did, however after they fully understood the situation they should have evacuated the ship, not tell people everything is fine and lounge about.
8:34 So misbehaving in your streams = Getting face sat on. Duly noted. Love the video by the way. When this was actually happening, I was obsessed with the events around and logistics of this incident. It madee glad to see the Internet Historian hit on stuff I didn't even find.
It's truely a worthy cause.
The fact that My Heart Will Go On started playing over the music system as the ship is sinking is the kind of shit that makes people believe in God. A coincidence of such an insane level that it shouldn't be possible, but happens anyway.
Of course they're owned by Carnival. Not-so-fun-fact: My very first cruise ever was on a carnival ship, and wound up getting deathly sick the last couple of days.
So yea, I avoid carnival ships like the plague. Literally.
Your typical Saturday boating with the lads
it would require more power and speed to even put that ship of that mass going *16 knots* for it to even reach a halt not to mention if they did that recklessly a lot of sh1t would go wrong, like imagine braking a ship with thousands of passengers without seatbelts let alone having things that are bolted on to the ship, if they brake now the casualty would be much worse if they had just crashed, also they are on water not land, you can't just "brake" on water because water is malleable as it is a liquid its not a solid like a paved road, it shifts all the time meaning if they did brake suddenly it would also tilt the ship far down and that ain't good when they are already on shallow waters they would just hit the rocks either way
.... Hearing someone say "just stop and put it in reverse" in regards to ship made me cringe. It's not a car you would have more luck stopping and reversing a train than doing this with a ship. Even if you could put a ship in reverse which... No... But even if you could you would have to first bring it to a full stop which means stoppering the engine and dropping anchor which dropping anchor while moving at 16 knots... Will cause just as much damage as a crash would... It is safer to do what you can to avoid the crash while staying in motion. The mistake here involved an inept captain and the hiring of a helmsman that neither spoke or properly understood the only two languages being spoken aboard the ship...
The other type of people that would do whatever it takes to scam people
great video mak
Great reaction, Makari~.
Didn't expect top hat limbo, the pervy gentledevil girl is back
PantsGrab
mak im curios what is your gender im not againts it actually im in to it Pls answer me
Thanks
you saved me 30s of my life
So this Vtuber is 1000% a dude right?
lol if only you know reverse isnt really a thing when moving that fast.
It is, but you have to _stop_ first. There's no mention of reducing speed from 16 knots. Even though _Titanic_ 's central screw couldn't reverse, the others could. _Costa Concordia_ could absolutely be put in reverse. But not at 16 knots. But you know what Schettino was trying to do was correct, trying to swing the ship around the rocks. Bad communication, irresponsibility, and complacency killed 33 people.
@@BNuts I dont doubt that, but heres the thing. you get multi-millions pounds it would take miles and miles to stop. you dont understand boats. even makari understood it but you dont. i said "Reverse isnt a thing, when your moving that fast." break down what i said and try and get it.