"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