Italy cruise ship Costa Concordia aground near Giglio

[Wyatt]

I was on board the Laurier during the Clipper Adventurer pull off the reef in the Coronation Gulf. They were using these air bags that were about 80 feet long and when deflated were flat and about 10 to 12 inches thick. Once inflated it went to a 5 foot diameter tube. These were made of a tire like material and were very strong, but even then, lots were ripped to shreds when the vessel started rolling off the reef on top of these tubes. Each inflated tube would lift the vessel close to 10cm. I think they used close to 12 to 15 of these tubes. The Costa will have to use much much bigger tubes than these. I wonder if they have tubes that can be placed inside the vessel and then inflated to encompass curves and recesses and also to plug any holes etc.

[Big Pete]

I believe they use large air bags inside the holds of Bulk Carriers and the Tanks of Tankers in salvage operations. However, the Concordia doesnt have suitable large spaces, all the insides are sub divided into small cabins etc., apart from the Atrium.
Years ago they used to use "Camels", lash a dumb lighter or barge on each side, full of water, once they were secure, pump out the water and the lashings lift up the ship to be salvaged.
Now they use air bags. I expect they will try to pass wires underneath the hull and attach air bags each side, once they have got her off the sea bed I imagine they will try to anchor her while they patch the holes and pump out the water, before towing her to scrap.

BP

[The Dieselduck]

Salvors have worked some pretty amazing feats, but air bags to lift, I am not so sure. That's a ship, well over 110,000 tons, this isn't a large tug... Plus they are pretty close to the shore and the bottom. I think if they have any hope of re floating here, they will have to use the compartmentalization of the ship itself. I think it will be time consuming, but making these watertight I would think would be the best bet. Air bags and par buckling just seems a little beyond the practical, just the shear size of the cabling and equipment would do extensive damage to the structure I think.

Here's the latest news from SMIT about the fuel recovery. http://www.smit.com/sitefactor/page.asp?pageid=1546

[JollyJack]

Just read your movie review on "Contraband" Martin. I really don't know what you doubting Thomases are worried about, all they have to do is hire a Hollywood scriptwriter and a special effects team and publicise it world wide as a "blockbuster". The salvage operation might even get an Oscar next year! Remember the First Rule of PR, if you say it loud enough and often enough, it becomes true.

[Big Pete]

The main difficulty is the shallow water, very little depth of water to deploy the air bags.
I imagine they will rig a network of cables right underneath the ship where possible and weld pad eyes as low as possible on the hull so that the lifting force will be evenly distributed.
In some ways she would be easier to salvage if she had sunk in deep water, there would be much more space to deploy the air bags and you could bring in heavy lift cranes etc.
It will be very interesting to see how they do this, usually salvage operations happen out of sight, but this is going to be very visible.
BP

[jimmys]

We can see the damage on the port side of the vessel but we do not know the damage to the starboard side and this could be a problem in salvage.

We are hearing today Mr Schettino came to the bridge without his spectacles, the Chief Officer had to set up the radars for him he could not do it due to his eyesight. He then commenced to navigate the vessel without glasses in front of the gallery. The Chief Officer has made this statement in Italian court yesterday. It just gets worse!!
The Master formally took command of the vessel at this time. The gallery stood and watched him aware he was visually impaired.

[JK]

Just when you think a higher degree of incompetency cannot be achieved you discover there can.

[JK]

according to this article:

http://www.cinews.ie/article.php?artid=9604,

a Costa Captain from a sistership who was onboard the Concordia gave the abandon ship order:

From his recollection, around 50 minutes after the crash, which occurred at 9:42pm the lifeboats started being lowered and the abandon ship signal was given by Captain Bosio who was not working on the Costa Concordia but had boarded the ship to get to his home town of Savona, near Genoa. He is the captain of one of the Concordia’s sister ships, the Serena.

Captain Bosio is understood to have coordinated the entire rescue effort, working alongside crewmembers throughout the night, helping women and children into lifeboats.

[jimmys]

Press reporting the estimates of salvage costs are in excess of $100,000,000 and will probably be the most difficult salvage operation ever. At least two large rocks have penetrated the starboard side and may be helping to hold her steady. She is written off as a total loss.

[JK]

I can hear the crash of falling (failing) insurance companies.

[JollyJack]

well no, insurance have already said they won't cover for incompetence or negligence, and the cruise company have already blamed the incident on the Captain's incompetence and negligence. The insurance companies won't spend a penny on it.

[JK]

LOL, Costa sure messed up then. All they could think of was 4000 lawsuits from passengers, so the insisted the Captain is negligent. Now the insurance companies will not pay out if it is negligence. It just gets better and better.

[JK]

2000 tonnes of fuel and sewage has been removed from the ship.
Now we wait to see what the next step is.

[JK]

can anyone explain the reasoning behind this statement? I don't get it.

American captain and nautical analyst John Konrad tells Vanity Fair special correspondent Bryan Burrough that the ship had already been listing starboard, toward the peninsula. When Schettino dropped the ship’s anchors in an attempt to prevent it from falling farther, he instead created the opposite effect. “You can see they let out too much chain,” Konrad says. “I don’t know the precise depths, but if it was 90 meters, they let out 120 meters of chain. So the anchors never caught. The ship then went in sideways, almost tripping over itself, which is why it listed. If he had dropped the anchors properly, the ship wouldn’t have listed so badly.” How to explain so fundamental a blunder?

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2012/04/costa-concordia-disaster-bryan-burrough?fb_ref=social_fblike&fb_source=home_multiline

[Wyatt]

If you ask me it is a land lubber writing a story having tried to understand what was explained but did not understand then wrote the story. Or it could be that no one knew what they were talking about and Vanity Fair needed fill. It all sounded like Bull***t to me.