Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

What To Do With a 1,000 Foot Wrecked Cruise Ship?

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the discount-cruises dept.

Transportation 416

Hugh Pickens writes "What do you do with a 1,000-foot wreck that's full of fuel and half-submerged on a rocky ledge in the middle of an Italian marine sanctuary? Remove it. Very carefully. Stuck on a rocky shoal off the Tuscan island of Giglio, leaving the wreck where it is probably isn't an option but removing a massive ship that's run hard aground and incurred major damage to the hull involves logistical and environmental issues that are just as large. First there's the fuel. A half a million gallons of fuel could wreak havoc on the marine ecosystem — the ship is smack in the middle of the Pelagos Sanctuary for Mediterranean Marine Mammals. Engineers may need to go in from the side using a special drill to cut through the fuel tanks in a process called hot tapping. 'You fasten a flange with a valve on it, you drill through, access the tank, pull the drill back out, close the valve, and then attach a pumping apparatus to that,' says Tim Beaver, president of the American Salvage Association. 'It's a difficult task, but it's doable.' Then if it's determined that the Costa Concordia can be saved, engineers could try to refloat the ship and tug it back to dry dock for refurbishing. The job will likely require 'a combination of barges equipped with winches and cranes' to pull the cruise liner off its side then once the Concordia is off the rocks, 'they are going to have to fight to keep it afloat, just like you would a battle-damaged ship.' Another alternative is to cut the vessel into smaller, manageable parts using a giant cutting wire coated with a material as hard as diamonds called a cheese wire in a method was used to dismember the 55,000-ton Norwegian-flagged MV Tricolor. Regardless of how the Concordia is removed, it's going to be a difficult, expensive and drawn-out process. 'I don't see it taking much less than a year, and I think it could take longer,' says Bob Umbdenstock, director of planning at Resolve Marine Group."

cancel ×

416 comments

Nuke it from orbit (4, Funny)

blane.bramble (133160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760002)

It's the only way to be sure.

Thats given me an idea... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760130)

Can't they just burn it? Can't they just drill a hole in the tanks and throw in a match to burn it? Then they can just wait until the fire goes out and it's all safe! If it takes too long for the fire to go out they can just spray sea water on it to put it out.

Re:Thats given me an idea... (3, Informative)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760318)

Maybe it's worth money...

Re:Nuke it from orbit (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760190)

Maybe it can be sold to apple customers. those cocksuckers will buy any old crap lets be honest.

Re:Nuke it from orbit (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760258)

I know this is not the place to ask... but lately (say the last month) I have been given moderator points 4 times, is this normal? I like rewarding people for their comments but seems strange to be given the points soo often.

Re:Nuke it from orbit (0, Offtopic)

Garybaldy (1233166) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760582)

I was getting them as fast as i could get rid of them for the last month then they just dried up. No idea how or why. It just was.

Re:Nuke it from orbit (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760408)

No! It has to be new... and shiny!

Re:Nuke it from orbit (4, Informative)

RDW (41497) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760254)

Re:Nuke it from orbit (3, Informative)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760344)

Not really. Ship is full of fuel being half-submerged is asking for an environmental disaster. You could potentially just avoid it if it were fully submerged (not at risk of being damaged by surface waves and weather). You'd still want to get fuel out even if it was fully submerged though.

I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (5, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760008)

.... it may not advance the salvage process any but hey it can't hurt. This guy was the anti-Sully [wikipedia.org] by all accounts. I wouldn't abandon passengers in my automobile after an accident; this guy is responsible for thousands of souls and abandons them to save his own ass. Pathetic.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760046)

An honorable soldiers death? Too good for him.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760118)

Indeed. Make the captain salvage every last drop of fuel. Single-handedly, with no other tools, one thimbleful at a time!

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (4, Informative)

darkmeridian (119044) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760086)

Don't forget that Captain Crunch ran the ship aground by taking a detour closer to an island where his chef was born.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (2, Informative)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760092)

Yeah, if the accounts I read are right, the local Coast Guard had to order him back to his ship.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (4, Informative)

delinear (991444) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760158)

He had a perfectly reasonable explanation for that. He says he tripped and fell into a lifeboat [telegraph.co.uk] , and then was "stuck" there for an hour before it was lowered into the water. Now, before you say that's an unlikely explanation, imagine if the captain was Mr Bean.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (5, Funny)

CadentOrange (2429626) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760196)

He says he tripped and fell into a lifeboat [telegraph.co.uk]

Somewhere out there, Silvio Berlusconi is slapping himself for not coming up with that excuse. "I tripped and fell, lost my trousers in the process and landed in bed with a beautiful naked girl."

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (1)

Stormin (86907) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760252)

Reminds me of a similar "I tripped and ... fell" statement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLe0T1rUeDA

And about as accurate, I would suspect!

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (4, Insightful)

roothog (635998) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760206)

Not only did the Coast Guard order him back, but he refused the order. He gave excuses that included "it's too dark" and "but it's on its side".

I can't fathom how such a pathetic human being ever made Captain. He is obviously tremendously unqualified.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (2)

doesnothingwell (945891) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760530)

I can't fathom how such a pathetic human being ever made Captain.

I only got a quick look, and I'd say he's a photo opportunity. I can just hear the conversation in HR/Marketing, "Well the computer actually steers the ship so the captain should be seen by the guests." The whole cruise line company should be shut down for this level of stupidity.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (2, Insightful)

deains (1726012) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760622)

If he's only there to reassure the guests, clearly he completely failed at his job precisely when it was needed most. What an absolute tool.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (-1, Troll)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760178)

Anti-Sully? How's that work? There's a fundamental difference between the two. The airline captain saved his own life; he had no way of escaping. That he saved the lives of others was a happy coincidence. The ship captain saved his own life and left his passengers...because he could. The airline captain didn't have that choice. Choosing to endanger yourself when you could clearly escape is heroism.

Sorry to be the one to puncture the image of well-loved heroes, but we all know 100% All-American heroes are frauds anyhow. I love how you advocate for execution, how typically American of you.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760266)

From Wikipedia:

"Sullenberger walked the unflooded part of the passenger cabin twice to make sure everyone had evacuated before retrieving the plane's maintenance logbook and being the last to evacuate the aircraft."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesley_Sullenberger#Flight_1549

OK, what is your next lame argument?

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (-1, Troll)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760388)

We're talking about landing the plane.

I just hate American hero-building. It leads to unpleasant circumstances. Americans think of themselves as Superman, and we can all agree that Americans need to be taken down a notch.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (2)

blane.bramble (133160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760474)

No, you are talking about landing the plane, the OP was clearly talking about abandoning the passengers *AFTER* the accident.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760510)

Actually, we are talking about the captain of a vessel saving his passengers, the landing of the plane being a part of such.

However if you are wanting to compare the prowess of Sullenberger vs Schettino at operating their respective vessel then by all means.

Looks like your anti America shit just exploded in your face. Hope you like the taste.

Ouch (1)

gatkinso (15975) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760566)

It has been a long time since I have seem someone so throughly pwned on /.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (1)

jefe7777 (411081) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760568)

I think we're doing a pretty good job of that ourselves.

Even as we become a nation of bureaucratic document shufflers, I watched the Republican debates, and had the privilege of witnessing the golden rule being booed, and killing cheered.

Americans are the World's Supermen (1)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760576)

They have proven it time and again. Prove me wrong.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760268)

You're ignoring the fact that, by all accounts, Sully only left the plane once he personally ascertained that no passenger had been left behind... Witness say he was the last one onto the wing after walking the length of the plane twice to make sure no one was left inside.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (5, Informative)

ray-auch (454705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760292)

Wrong. And not beacuse I'm american - I'm not.

Sully could have left the cockpit with his lifejacket and got out the front door as fast as he could before the plane sank (which it could have).
He actually supervised the evacuation and went back through the length of the plane to check everyone was off. Twice. Before he got out.

There's captains and there's real captains. Hero ? I think he would jsut say he was doing his job.

The costa captain, however, was just doing a runner. Having spectacularly failed to do his job.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (2)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760392)

I appreciate your answer, but I also would like to point out that it would have been just as valid if an American had said it. I don't think we should ever allow such idiocy as essentially asserting that any person or group of people are inherently barred from answering an argument because of who they are.

An argument is either right or wrong based on facts, logic, and things like scientific theory, not by who says it. Would we allow someone to get away with asserting that a Jew couldn't answer an anti-semitic tirade because they're Jewish, a black person couldn't answer a racist rant because they're black, etc?

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760362)

Really, all this anti-Americanism on this site is just ruining it. I don't know if you're all butthurt Moslems, jealous euro-pansies, or chinese shills, but this site is becoming nothing more than a 24x7 anti-American lynch mob.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (2)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760492)

You are a moron. Sully not only saved his passengers, he was the last dude off the plane after double checking to make sure everyone else was off, and even grabbed the maintenance log book before leaving. This fucker didn't even wait until his hot pocket came outta the Captain's Microwave before bailing.

Very High Survival Rate (2, Interesting)

lemur3 (997863) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760210)

Despite the actions of the captain the odds of surviving this incident were about 99.2%

If he had gone down with the ship I have to wonder if it could possibly get any better than a 99% survival rate.

Clearly the people involved in the evacuation, even without the management of a ships captain, were very capable.

While responsibility for the ship and the passengers remains on his shoulders of the captain I wonder if the idea of the captain going down with the ship has become a bit antiquated.

Considering the dramatic success of the apparently well trained and well drilled crew in getting the staggering majority of people off of the boat safely it seems to me that a captain urging them on is, at least in this case, a frivolity and a hearken back to a possibly bygone conception of the role of a captain of a vessel.

Re:Very High Survival Rate (5, Informative)

roothog (635998) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760236)

There are crewmembers quoted in the press as stating that if the evacuation had been ordered immediately, the survival rate would have been 100%.

The evac didn't even start until more than an hour after the collision. The bridge had been notified by the commander of the engine room that there was a 160 foot long hole in the side and that the ship could not be saved, but chose to tell passengers that it was an electrical problem and they should return to their cabins. Then the captain makes it worse by ordering a turn after taking on water, which then sloshes, tipping the boat and hindering lifeboat launch.

They pretty much did the exact opposite of everything they should have done.

Re:Very High Survival Rate (1)

lemur3 (997863) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760452)

Yes. It is possible that evacuating earlier might have aided in the chances for everyone to survive.

Just as well, if the boat didn't even get that close to the dangerous rocks.. This wouldn't even be a story and there wouldn't have been a survival rate to discuss.

I hearken back to a bit of dialogue from a classic film:

Juror #7: I honestly think the guy's guilty. Couldn't change my mind if you talked for a hundred years.
Juror #8: I'm not trying to change your mind. It's just that... we're talking about somebody's life here. We can't decide it in five minutes. Supposing we're wrong?
Juror #7: Supposing we're wrong! Supposing this whole building should fall down on my head. You can suppose anything!
Juror #8: That's right.

We can suppose anything..

Re:Very High Survival Rate (4, Informative)

roothog (635998) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760298)

Clearly the people involved in the evacuation, even without the management of a ships captain, were very capable.

<sarcasm>Yes, this sounds like a completely capable crew.</sarcasm> Read: BBC News [bbc.co.uk]

Re:Very High Survival Rate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760364)

But do you not think that, for his crew, as they are arranging and organising an evauation in a stressful and potentially dangerous situation (if you can't leave until you have checked everyone else has gone, every second counts), seeing the captain fuck off might be a bit hard on your morale, and also lead to an increase in panic amongst the remaning passengers and crew.

Re:Very High Survival Rate (1)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760450)

The captain does more than urge on the crew. He coordinates, directs effort where needed, and maintains and disseminates a situational overview. Perhaps the crew did well enough in their own in this case, but remember that the captain has his role to play in the subsequent rescue operation as well. He might well have needlessly endangered the lives of the remaining crewmen and rescue guys as he was sitting out in a lifeboat instead of doing his job of coordinating the search&rescue, and I can understand the frustration and anger that was so apparent in that recorded radio call from the Coast Guard.

Re:Very High Survival Rate (5, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760460)

possibly bygone conception of the role of a captain of a vessel.

It's not a bygone conception; when you take charge of passengers (be you the pilot of an airline, the captain of a ship or the driver of an automobile) you are assuming responsibility for their lives. You don't abandon your post during a crisis until every last one of them is safe. I could not look at myself in the mirror if I left a passenger in my car to die and I'm not in responsible for four thousand souls.

Clearly the people involved in the evacuation, even without the management of a ships captain, were very capable.

Actually they weren't. The ship never sent an SOS -- the Italian Coast Guard only knew of the disaster because the ship was close enough to shore for passengers to use their cell phones. Read this op-ed [cnn.com] ; he summarizes it far more eloquently than I can.

Re:Very High Survival Rate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760540)

"Considering the dramatic success of the apparently well trained and well drilled crew in getting the staggering majority of people off of the boat safely it seems to me that a captain urging them on is, at least in this case, a frivolity and a hearken back to a possibly bygone conception of the role of a captain of a vessel."

The captain isn't actually expected to go drown himself, you know. This isn't some kind of aquatic seppuku.

The captain is responsible for the vessel and the people onboard. It's his job, and his duty, and it's certainly at least as important as the duty of anyone else on the crew. And if the crew is competent and well-trained (though there seems to be some disagreement about that in this case) then it's his duty to lend a hand wherever it might be needed. Not cowering in a lifeboat while other people risk their lives.

Re:Very High Survival Rate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760580)

While it's likely your post is flamebait..The core of even basic seamanship dictates that the captain of any vessel is responsible for the safety of everyone on his/her vessel. He has no business doing anything but making sure everyone is accounted for and has done everything possible to ensure their safety. It is less about going down with the ship than fulfilling his duties as the captain of the vessel.

Re:I'd start by shooting the Captain.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760226)

And don't forget that he's alleged to have spent the evening drinking with a nice young lady from eastern europe as well... who was later seen on the bridge.

Wait until a storm takes it down (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760010)

Wait until a storm takes it down to 90 meters below surface, that's what they do at the moment.

Turn it into a Theme park (3, Funny)

realsilly (186931) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760012)

And you can go on the ride where you pretend to be the captain who was thrown from the ship which lands in the water unharmed.

Re:Turn it into a Theme park (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760128)

And than drive to your luxurious hotel and order for diner and dry socks. (His socks apparently did get wet)

sounds like a great idea!

Re:Turn it into a Theme park (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760160)

Wait, I thought he abandoned ship?

Or.. did he get thrown off?

No no, he tripped into a life boat that his 2nd officer just happened to be on!

Hold on, he actually got in a life boat to survey the damage.

I can't keep it straight anymore.

Hypothetical Questions (5, Funny)

Captain Hook (923766) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760028)

"What do you do with a 1,000-foot wreck that's full of fuel and half-submerged on a rocky ledge in the middle of an Italian marine sanctuary?" I do like these hypothetical questions, but we never get to see if they actually work in real life, so I've stop thinking about them.

Re:Hypothetical Questions (2)

lightknight (213164) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760144)

Finish sinking the ship as an artificial reef after removing the fuel, collect the insurance money (in the tech world, it's always time to upgrade), build a new ship, find a new captain, and make the old ship / artificial reef part of the tour.

Re:Hypothetical Questions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760166)

Sell the scrap metal to fuel your meth habit.

Televise it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760548)

I bet the Televising rights for this salvage operations is huge! Both Discovery and National Geographic would want an exclusive on this.

Take the fuel.. (4, Interesting)

malkavian (9512) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760038)

Then set it up as an artificial reef, and have businesses set up to get divers to it. Not sure the decontamination would pay off in the near term, but it'd be an interesting option.

Re:Take the fuel.. (2)

Eggbloke (1698408) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760072)

I think I read somewhere that it is fairly near a ledge so I imagine it would be unsafe for divers to be regularly going inside it.
I guess they could secure it to the rocks it's on though.

Re:Take the fuel.. (1)

ewrong (1053160) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760134)

or push it off the ledge.

Re:Take the fuel.. (5, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760126)

The problem with that is there are other toxic substances aboard a ship besides fuel. It took two years (never mind the time spent procuring approval from various interested agencies) to prepare the USS Oriskany [wikipedia.org] as an artificial reef. It was done while she was in port, not lying on her side half submerged while subject to tidal and wave influences. A modern cruise ship probably has less toxic substances aboard than a warship built in the 1940s (the Essex class carriers used asbestos as fire insulation and PCBs in their electrical cabling) but she still isn't safe for disposal in a marine sanctuary.

The owners may well want to salvage her for a possible return to service too. Not sure if that's feasible with the damage she absorbed (any marine engineers who care to weigh in?) but the owners doubtless want to recover their $400 million investment.

Re:Take the fuel.. (5, Informative)

ElementOfDestruction (2024308) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760146)

Rather, it's up to the insurance company; just like an auto-wreck, they're the ones who determine its ability to be salvaged.

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2012/01/19/231831.htm [insurancejournal.com]

Apparently there's worry that it will end up costing over US$1bn before everything is said and done.

Re:Take the fuel.. (1)

u38cg (607297) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760286)

At this point, probably not. Just getting her off the rocks will probably involve the end of her.

Re:Take the fuel.. (2)

whoda (569082) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760372)

There is no doubt the ship is going to be repaired, and it will take around 1 year, maybe less dependent upon how modular of a construction it is.
The ship is planned to be sailing with paying passengers in 2013.

 

Re:Take the fuel.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760466)

Spot on. The Concordia is already leaking toxic fluids from its hydraulic systems, and that's the real worry right now. A ship like this is just like a 4000-people town; whatever fuel they would be using in their homes is far from being the only pollutant.
I spend my Summer holidays in a secluded cove on the coast right in front of the Giglio island... a true paradise, both above and under water. The impact of this tragedy will be felt for a long time even if the fuel is successfully recovered.
Heartfelt congrats to the "Commander" for being such a dork and coward, and to Carnival Cruises for putting such a dangerous moron to the helm of a cruising ship.

Obvious (5, Funny)

villew (2018258) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760044)

Turn it into a water-cooled data center.

Re:Obvious (5, Funny)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760120)

Turn it into a water-cooled data center.

Too risky. Pirates could hack the databases hosted there-in and leak them to the press.

Patch (5, Interesting)

Polybius (743489) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760050)

Plan A:
1) Pump all the fuel out of it.
2) If there is a hole in the down side of the hull patch it from the inside.
3) Patch any holes on the top side of the hull.
4) Get as many pumps as possible pulling water out of the thing. while you gradually inflate large air bags under it.
5) Ship pops back up, tug it anywhere you want.

Plan B:
Hundreds of millions of ping pong balls.

Re:Patch (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760180)

Plan B:
Hundreds of millions of ping pong balls.

IIRC they often do use bags full of air to refloat downed ships, same principle as the ping pong balls but easier to control and can probablly displace more water (ping pong balls will have holes between them).

Re:Patch (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760186)

Damn, I had points but I've already commented so I'll just say bravo.

fill it with ping pong balls (0)

kae_verens (523642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760064)

worked for the mythbusters...

Re:fill it with ping pong balls (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760346)

I couldn't resist:

ping-pong ball diameter: 40mm (radius: 20mm or 0.02 metres)
ping-pong ball volume: 4/3*pi*(0.02 metres)^3 = .0000335103216m^3
Costa Concordia displacement: 51387 tonnes (various sources give different numbers, but it's on that order, and obviously this is its displacement in a normal situation, which this isn't)

One tonne of water is 1m^3 of volume (I love the metric system), thus the displacement is also about 51387m^3 (although if you want to get technical we're displacing seawater that has a different density from pure water, so the numbers would be a little different). That means you need about:

51387m^3/ .0000335103216m^3 = 1 533 467 825 ping pong balls

"Only" 1.5 billion ping pong balls, and that's floating the thing at its normal displacement. Anyone know how many ping pong balls are manufactured globally per year?

First things first (1)

Obble (1680532) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760070)

You have to check for any lost wallets/purses, safety boxes that hold jewels and return them to their rightful errr salvager. :-)

Paragraphs (-1, Offtopic)

onyxruby (118189) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760080)

Paragrsphs are your friend, they are my friend too. They make things easier to read, they were invented many centuries ago and are available to you now You don't have to pay license fees to use them. Please use them in the future.

Re:Paragraphs (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760156)

This just in: Spell check and punctuation are all the rage with the kids these days! Is it just a fad, or will it be here to stay. News at 11!

Another idea (5, Interesting)

neokushan (932374) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760100)

Right the ship, drain the fuel and leave it there. You only have to stop it from sinking, you don't need to make it seaworthy. There you have it, a top-notch hotel in a prime location with every facility you could possibly need.

Just try not to think of the people that died there. People die in hotels all the time, right?

Re:Another idea (3, Insightful)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760208)

You know what bothers me about that? It's not that people died there. It's that they're profit from those deaths.

Actually, though, cruise ships don't have many luxury rooms. Most of them are barely good enough to sleep in. Most of the time you spend on a ship is not in the room. So as a hotel, it's a loss.

And as a vacation getaway, it's missing the 2 things a cruise ship is really good for: Gambling and shore excursions.

Re:Another idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760396)

You know what bothers me about that? It's not that people died there. It's that they're profit from those deaths.

1: Die on a cruise.
2: ???
3: Profit!!!

Re:Another idea (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760598)

Corrosion would eventually destroy the ship making salvage even more dangerous.

Giglio (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760116)

Giggity

Vada a bordo, cazzo! (0)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760132)

(n/t)

The damaged side is exposed (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760138)

The ship capsized away from the damaged area. Secure the vessel. Weld a big patch over the damage (and optionally over the rock if it can't be removed), and over any other holes they've made during the rescue operation and then refloat the thing. It can be towed anywhere after that.

Re:The damaged side is exposed (1)

BenJury (977929) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760232)

I didn't think ships generally fall away from the side which is damaged.

I'm also just a layman, but to me it would seem that given the hole we can see is toward the stern and the quite sharp angle the rock has managed to hit and become stuck would suggest a bigger impact on the other side, which in turn would force the ship sidewards. All in I'd imagine the hull was a pretty big mess.

Re:The damaged side is exposed (4, Informative)

roothog (635998) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760366)

No, the captain turned to port and sloshed the water that the ship had already taken on. That's why it rolled to starboard. It had been listing to port prior to the turn.

Re:The damaged side is exposed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760446)

There are plenty of underwater pictures from the other side showing substantial damage below the waterline on that side from scraping against the rocks after it toppled, plus you have all the designed holes (doors, windows, etc.) that are on the side of the ship and now below the water. There are probably hundreds of holes that would have to be covered. Although technically possible there's a lot of work to do before it could be patched up and you could pump it out and refloat it. It would be months and months of work. Meanwhile the waves are tossing it around on the rocks and doing more damage as it shifts. It would be very dangerous work for divers to perform (remember that they would at some points be a hundred metres underneath the hull of the ship if it were to shift). I suspect it wouldn't be possible to perform unless you had a sling or some other way to float the vessel in deeper water so that divers could access the bottom of the ship safely.

Why not just patch the leak? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760142)

And then pump out the water in a controlled manner. If done in a controlled manner the ship should just flip back the way its suppossed to.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-03/ff_seacowboys?currentPage=all

Let's patch 70 meters long hole. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760218)

Let's patch 70 meters long hole.
Some of the hole submerged with the object (come called it ship) lying on unstable surface near the real oceanic deep. 20 meters from the ship start's really deep sea.

Re:Why not just patch the leak? (2)

u38cg (607297) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760352)

You're talking about repairing a massive gash underwater. Difficult. Once that's done, you have to float her off the rocks. Dangerous, and liable to more damage. Finally, you have to sort the list, which is not as easy as trimming the ballast tanks.

Re-float (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760200)

Pump it full of expandable foam. It will re-float. Then tow it to the yard, make repairs.

Ghost Cruises (1)

kiehlster (844523) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760270)

And after you're all done righting the ship and making it seaworthy, you can advertise haunted ghost cruises. Costa Concordia Corpse coming to theaters near your in 2014!

Fuel recovery (1)

gadget junkie (618542) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760276)

from wikipedia:
"The chief drawback to residual fuel oil is its high initial viscosity, particularly in the case of No. 6 oil, which requires a correctly engineered system for storage, pumping, and burning. Though it is still usually lighter than water (with a specific gravity usually ranging from 0.95 to 1.03) it is much heavier and more viscous than No. 2 oil, kerosene, or gasoline. No. 6 oil must, in fact, be stored at around 100 F (38 C) heated to 150 F (66 C)–250 F (121 C) before it can be easily pumped, and in cooler temperatures it can congeal into a tarry semisolid. The flash point of most blends of No. 6 oil is, incidentally, about 150 F (66 C). Attempting to pump high-viscosity oil at low temperatures was a frequent cause of damage to fuel lines, furnaces, and related equipment which were often designed with lighter fuels in mind."

As I see it, it could be preferable to try and salvage the ship and tow it away, as long as the fuel inside is not a big problem, due to the winter temperature; it's also stranded not too far away from docking facilities as the crow files.

Hot Tapping (4, Informative)

trout007 (975317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760280)

This is used in the pipeline industry when you need to put a new port or hole on a pipeline but don't want to shut it down.

Here is a little video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJoImbxSMFE [youtube.com]

Fuel needs to be heated to 60+C.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760284)

Your forgot that you need to heat the fuel to 60 C in order to pump it...

Patch it up? (1)

fafaforza (248976) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760324)

The ship is listing on its side and the breach is above the water and easily accessible. Get some welders in there and patch it up? Then just pump the water out and right it up. It should hold at least long enough to get it to a ship yard for disassembly.

The usual way (2)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760338)

Debunker (pump out) the fuel from cruise ship to bunker barges. From there they can either:

1. Cut the vessel into easier to handle parts and load the still quite large size parts onto a vessel designed for carrying other vessels like the ones from Dockwise. The parts will then go to a scrap yard.

2. Attempt to float the vessel using buoyancy bags to where if could be either loaded on the Dockwise ship or onto a portable dry dock where it can be disassembled.

Seriously a year to remove the vessel? Accidents like these aren't a rare occurrence, there is a whole cottage industry that handle these situations.

Imperial and no Metric? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760340)

The ship is 290.20 meters long. Please post also the measurement in meters since this unit is used by the whole world expect in 3 countries.

Ping pong balls (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760348)

Having seen Mythbusters, I know that all you need are several million ping pong balls. With those, you can float the wreck right back up off of where it has grounded. They did have to build a rig to push the ping pong balls in under the water, but once they did that it worked beautifully. So, make sure you can seal the flooded compartments from the top, pump the ping pong balls in, then get some barges and tugs and tow the thing right out.

It's not that deep. (1)

trout007 (975317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760384)

Build a coffer dam around it and pump it out to make a dry dock.

Hot Tapping is interesting tech. (4, Informative)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760386)

Commonly used for pipeline repair, it can involve welding a pipe flange to a full, even pressurised line or container of flammable liquid or gas. The trick is not to blow through the wall. The product cools the container side of the weldment. A cutter head is attached then connected to your equipment of choice. Mechanical connection of hot tap flanges is also done.

http://gs-press.com.au/images/news_articles/cache/FurmaniteHotTapGraphic-0x600.jpg [gs-press.com.au]

http://www.professionalmariner.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=46E64A4C77774A5684F286CF18FCD2F8&nm=Archives&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=5762266029234C438FDE435B61BEFE08 [professionalmariner.com]

It can even be done on BURNING railroad tank cars to offload product. WaPo link in this thread no workee but the others are good. Check the procedure in the .pdf

http://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?t=59857 [weldingweb.com]

Example equipment:

http://easy-tapper.com/ [easy-tapper.com]

Flooding to "float" petroleum for recovery:

http://recyclingships.blogspot.com/2011/11/grounding-off-coast-of-tauranga-last_12.html [blogspot.com]

Smit tak (IRL international rescue) is on the job (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760444)

http://cruiseradio.net/dutch-company-hired-for-salvaging-process-of-costa-concordia/

What to do? Sing about it! (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760478)

(to the tune of "Drunken Sailor")

What do we do with a washed-up cruise ship, (x3)
Early in the morning?

Suck out the fuel 'til she rolls right over, (x3)
Early in the morning.

Lock up the captain with Big Bubba (x3)
Early in the morning.

Steal all the swag and give to the poor (x3)
Early in the morning.

(There's a few verses, make up some more of your own - it's a folk song after all.)

On the bright side (1)

RNLockwood (224353) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760484)

No matter what's planned the end result is a tiny boost to Italy's GDP - and they need it.

Re:On the bright side (1)

trout007 (975317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760526)

Your kidding right?

How about this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38760524)

Wasn't there a James Bond movie where a sunken ship in, what was it, Tokyo Harbor was used as headquarters of MI5's Asian division?

It's not that hard (1)

NemoinSpace (1118137) | more than 2 years ago | (#38760546)

The damn thing was designed to float. It's not like nobody knows how to do it. Thanks to the Captain, it's so close to shore you could build a drydock (cofferdam) in place if you had to. Once you secure the hull and pump out the fuel the thing will pop up like a cork. You don't have to right the ship to tow it to a place where you have the equipment to do the rest safely and efficiently. It could be done inside of two weeks, but won't be because they will be fighting with the insurance company for the next 2 years instead.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...