In article ,
says...

(Really big snip)

I don't believe for a minute that a single one of these
modern cruise ships could have survived such a blow.

All you have to do is look at them. Were those whirlpools that went
overboard on the bow?

It doesn't take much of an eye to see that the QE2 and the Queen Mary 2
were designed as ocean liners, not cruise ships. (I was privileged to
accompany both ships down harbor last year when the QM2 made her first
visit to New York.) Indeed, the QM2 encountered very heavy weather on her
maiden voyage, much to the delight of the liner buffs on board. No
hystericals looking for lawyers.

Unfortunetely, some of thoise hystericals remind me of some members of
our very own club who, on a dinner cruise on the East River, got
terrified when a they deemed a tow to have come too close and cannot now
be persuaded to take another such cruise. So it's back to same old, same
old. And these people are presumeably sailors!

We were on the Italian Line Michelangelo when she encountered a mid
Atlantic storm and a huge wave in the middle of the night. She just
slammed into that wave and the entire ship just rang like a gong. It was
uncanny. Of course, she was rigged for heavy weather and nothing broke
and nobody got hurt. She was, after all, an ocean liner, not a cruise
ship.

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:06:52 -0400, Gogarty
wrote:

In article ,
says...

(Really big snip)


Another big snip.

We were on the Italian Line Michelangelo when she encountered a mid
Atlantic storm and a huge wave in the middle of the night. She just
slammed into that wave and the entire ship just rang like a gong. It was
uncanny. Of course, she was rigged for heavy weather and nothing broke
and nobody got hurt. She was, after all, an ocean liner, not a cruise
ship.

You are so right. Thank God, though, that they at least designed the
new Queen Mary to transAtlantic standards. Someone at Cunard most
have a bit of institutional memory. Interestingly Cunard absorbed the
White Star Line which had built the "Titantic." About five years ago
I was on the QE2 (westbound Southamtpn-NY). There was a lady aboard
who had survived the Titantic sinking. She was in her eighties and
had all of her wits. She delivered a couple of lectures aboard. She
was actually an infant when the Titantic went down. She and parents
were emmigrating to the U.S. in steerage. Her father perished but she
and her mother survived. They returned to England and I believe she
said that she was in her twenties before her mother ever told her
about having been aboard the Titantic. At the time I met her I
believe it was said that there were only two other survivors still
alive.

The "Michangelo!" God! I sailed both on it and on its sistership,
the "Leonardo da Vinci." Beautiful--both of them. Unfortunately they
were launched just as transAtlantic jet travel was cathcing on. A
couple of years prior to that I sailed on another Italian Line ship.
It was named something or other beginning with the letter "O." I can
not remember its name but I have a vivid recollection of it breaking
down in midAtlantic where we were adrift for 36 hours--fortunately in
a near perfect calm.

Well, in re your experiences in NY harbor. People do panic. I'll bet
most sailors in this NG have had guests at one time or another who
were scared out of their wits everytime the boat came about in more
than 15 kts. Hell, I've had guests get seasick sitting motionless at
the dock. I guess if you are not a sailor the noise in coming about
can be a bit disconcerting. But a tow coming too close. Heavens!

I have made a lot of passenger liner transAtlantic crossings in the
winter. I guess people were more stoic or more knowledgeable back
then because I don't remember a single instance when anyone was
panicked by bad weather. And you used to get some bad weather on the
winter crossing of the north Atlantic. Fortunately I have been immune
to seasickness all my life so I never missed a meal but I do remember
times when I would go to the dining room and only one or two other
passengers would be there--even the wait staff would be greatly
reduced. People didn't have a lot of choice. If you were going to
cross the Atlantic that was the only way you could do it.

But today! I would probably be scared ****less if I were ever caught
in a real blow on one of those floating hotels. They are simply not
designed to take it.

On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:49:20 -0400, Joe Bleau
wrote:


But today! I would probably be scared ****less if I were ever caught
in a real blow on one of those floating hotels. They are simply not
designed to take it.

I am not convinced that the officers have the seamanship--or are
allowed to practice it--when these luxury barges are "scheduled" to
cross the Gulf Stream with the current on one beam and the wind on the
other, which I believe was the case here.

Beancounters don't sail ships, even inappropriate ones. The captain of
the Norwegian ship was either inexperienced or getting whipped from
shore to ignore the weather like that.

From what I've read, anyway. There may be more to it that the
generally sea-ignorant press hasn't reported.

R.

"rhys" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:49:20 -0400, Joe Bleau
wrote:


But today! I would probably be scared ****less if I were ever caught
in a real blow on one of those floating hotels. They are simply not
designed to take it.

I am not convinced that the officers have the seamanship--or are
allowed to practice it--when these luxury barges are "scheduled" to
cross the Gulf Stream with the current on one beam and the wind on the
other, which I believe was the case here.

First off, you are talking about a ship crossing the Gulf Stream in contrary
conditions, not a yacht.
Most importantly, you are discussing a "rogue" wave .... all bets are off,
when hit by one of these, as your speed and heading could easily be set for
one set of sea conditions and this wave can well come from another direction
and is out of character for height.
As for construction of "cruise ships", I'd say that since this ship was hit
by a "rogue" and considering some of the documented damage which has
occurred (such as on the Michaelangelo) that she handled it quite well, with
no apparent tendancy to want to "tip over".

otn

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:13:14 GMT, "otnmbrd"
wrote:


"rhys" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:49:20 -0400, Joe Bleau
wrote:


But today! I would probably be scared ****less if I were ever caught
in a real blow on one of those floating hotels. They are simply not
designed to take it.

I am not convinced that the officers have the seamanship--or are
allowed to practice it--when these luxury barges are "scheduled" to
cross the Gulf Stream with the current on one beam and the wind on the
other, which I believe was the case here.

First off, you are talking about a ship crossing the Gulf Stream in contrary
conditions, not a yacht.

Right, a yacht has far less windage and probably better righting
motion G

Most importantly, you are discussing a "rogue" wave .... all bets are off,
when hit by one of these, as your speed and heading could easily be set for
one set of sea conditions and this wave can well come from another direction
and is out of character for height.

While this is technically true, my understanding of rogue waves is
that they arise from a synergistic interaction of existing wave trains
and winds, meaning you need some sort of sea to generate one.
Excepting tsunamis in shoal water, I mean.

As for construction of "cruise ships", I'd say that since this ship was hit
by a "rogue" and considering some of the documented damage which has
occurred (such as on the Michaelangelo) that she handled it quite well, with
no apparent tendancy to want to "tip over".

I didn't say "tip over". I was questioning either the seamanship or
the scheduling from head office that determined the ship's routing,
which may have been different had the captain been able to use his own
judgement instead of being the water-borne equivalent of a bus driver.

R.

rhys wrote:


First off, you are talking about a ship crossing the Gulf Stream in contrary
conditions, not a yacht.


Right, a yacht has far less windage and probably better righting
motion G

Relatively speaking, size for size, mebbe yes, mebbe no on the windage
and mebbe yes, mebbe no, period, on the righting moment.


Most importantly, you are discussing a "rogue" wave .... all bets are off,
when hit by one of these, as your speed and heading could easily be set for
one set of sea conditions and this wave can well come from another direction
and is out of character for height.


While this is technically true, my understanding of rogue waves is
that they arise from a synergistic interaction of existing wave trains
and winds, meaning you need some sort of sea to generate one.
Excepting tsunamis in shoal water, I mean.

From my understanding (since I can't say I've ever encountered one,
only experienced a much higher than average in a wave train) they do not
necessarily have to be part of the general predominant wave train you
are experiencing, but can come from an underlying different direction as
with confused seas.


As for construction of "cruise ships", I'd say that since this ship was hit
by a "rogue" and considering some of the documented damage which has
occurred (such as on the Michaelangelo) that she handled it quite well, with
no apparent tendancy to want to "tip over".


I didn't say "tip over". I was questioning either the seamanship or
the scheduling from head office that determined the ship's routing,
which may have been different had the captain been able to use his own
judgement instead of being the water-borne equivalent of a bus driver.

Someone else mentioned tipping over. As for the Master's determination
of routing ...... most will endeavor to follow the general routing and
schedule as passed down by the "office", because if it doesn't work and
they have to slow down or divert, they can just blame the office for the
delay. Others, take the office routing and schedule, throw it in the
trash and make their own within their best judgment ..... most are
somewhere in between, but all know that it's their butt if they lose
cargo, hurt passengers, or cause damage and don't arrive within a
reasonable time frame, when it could have been avoided.

otn

"otnmbrd" wrote in message link.net...
rhys wrote:


First off, you are talking about a ship crossing the Gulf Stream in contrary
conditions, not a yacht.


Right, a yacht has far less windage and probably better righting
motion G

Relatively speaking, size for size, mebbe yes, mebbe no on the windage
and mebbe yes, mebbe no, period, on the righting moment.


Most importantly, you are discussing a "rogue" wave .... all bets are off,
when hit by one of these, as your speed and heading could easily be set for
one set of sea conditions and this wave can well come from another direction
and is out of character for height.


While this is technically true, my understanding of rogue waves is
that they arise from a synergistic interaction of existing wave trains
and winds, meaning you need some sort of sea to generate one.
Excepting tsunamis in shoal water, I mean.

From my understanding (since I can't say I've ever encountered one,
only experienced a much higher than average in a wave train) they do not
necessarily have to be part of the general predominant wave train you
are experiencing, but can come from an underlying different direction as
with confused seas.


As for construction of "cruise ships", I'd say that since this ship was hit
by a "rogue" and considering some of the documented damage which has
occurred (such as on the Michaelangelo) that she handled it quite well, with
no apparent tendancy to want to "tip over".


I didn't say "tip over". I was questioning either the seamanship or
the scheduling from head office that determined the ship's routing,
which may have been different had the captain been able to use his own
judgement instead of being the water-borne equivalent of a bus driver.

Someone else mentioned tipping over. As for the Master's determination
of routing ...... most will endeavor to follow the general routing and
schedule as passed down by the "office", because if it doesn't work and
they have to slow down or divert, they can just blame the office for the
delay. Others, take the office routing and schedule, throw it in the
trash and make their own within their best judgment ..... most are
somewhere in between, but all know that it's their butt if they lose
cargo, hurt passengers, or cause damage and don't arrive within a
reasonable time frame, when it could have been avoided.

otn

Over the past couple of years, I can't help but notice the press seems
to have an agenda with respect to ships and safety. Recall all the stories
of cruise ships with outbreaks of this and that all hyped up to the max
when statistically the sickness by percentage was no greater than that
of a similar sized group of people ashore? Remember a couple months
ago when some students were knocked about a bit by a large wave in
the Pacific Ocean during a cruise on some classroom ship? Now this
nonsense where some people experienced discomfort and the press acts
as if was the end of the world and idiots here are attempting to blame
an act of God on inept routing of the ship or poor choices by the captain.

It's totally ludicrous that people are so dammed spoiled and used to not
taking any personal responsibility for anything that they now blame a
rogue wave on the captain of a vessel. Sad, very sad. Even sadder, you
watch, some of the irrational passengers will be hiring lawyers and
suing the cruise line, travel agents, NOAA, etc.

CN

In article ,
says...


You are so right. Thank God, though, that they at least designed the
new Queen Mary to transAtlantic standards. Someone at Cunard most
have a bit of institutional memory. Interestingly Cunard absorbed the
White Star Line which had built the "Titantic."

(Big snip)

Hanging on my wall at this very moment is an official travel-bureau Cunard
Line picture of the last of the White Star ships, the M.V. Britannic. The
funnel colors are buff and black though the identity is "Cunard MV
Britannic." The earlier Britannic was a sister ship of the Titanic, which
had been converted to a hospital ship in World War I and was sunk in the
Adriatic, I believe, by A. a mine, B. a torpedo or C. a coal explosion. I
crossed the Atlantic on the MV Britannic in 1947.

The Michelangelo and her sister ship had no hull openings below the main
deck, very unusual but a huge safety factor. Outside cabains below the main
deck were thus nothing special. Didn't help Andrea Doria, though.

My most interesting crossing was on the US Lines SS President Roosevelt in
1939. This was a strange looking ship with a two-island superstructure. The
crossing was in late October 1939 from Cobh to New York. WWII was on but the
US was neutral. The ship had US Lines in huge letters on the hull with
American flags also painted and floodlit at night. Considering the the first
U-boat sinking of WWII was of the Cunard liner Athenia, a wise precaution.

Check out thisd website: http://www.greatoceanliners.net/index2.html