Unfortunately they are all likely dead.
Cruise ship runs aground in Italy
- Thread starter keenest
- Start date
- Status
Unfortunately they are all likely dead.
Sickboy007
Member
Some may be foreign tourists or laborers that weren't correctly identified...but yes, the dead count may rise substantially.
speculawyer
Member
Now I see what is so scary . . . the fact that you are so high above the water line and there is no easy way to get down into the water.
That's exactly what he did.
jamesinclair
Banned
Yes, supposedly a mechanical problem led to the initial crash, so the captain then took the ship as close as land as possible so the boar wouldnt go under water and the rescue would be easier.
Disagree, just people being unaccounted for. Folks who got to shore and got the fuck out of there.
No, not at all, unless there's a high radioactive risk or something like that. So many people naturally think it was done to hide some horrible secret.
eso76
Member
not necessarily all of them, it's being reported that some just ran to hotels before they started checking on the passengers list.
electroplankton
Banned
SOS on Twitter, quite scary (she's safe now): http://firenze.repubblica.it/cronaca/2012/01/14/foto/mi_chiamo_rose_salvatemi-28099322/1/
For those interested, Italian news are following the event minute by minute with a lot of contents as well: http://www.repubblica.it/
For those interested, Italian news are following the event minute by minute with a lot of contents as well: http://www.repubblica.it/
Sickboy007
Member
EvilDick34
Banned
Uh, thats fake. Im pretty sure that was from a ship in a storm.
GasProblem
Member
Yeah, saw this a couple of months ago. It's not from this ship.
I don't know if I would really bother to tweet while my life is in danger.
BobJustBob
Member
Except for "its" and "im", she used proper spelling and grammar while tweeting from a sinking ship. There are no more excuses for all the incoherent idiots on Twitter.
Sickboy007
Member
But think of the retweets!
Apparently that scene was so amazing that it graced the official poster. Or it was just the best way to do the BLUE/ORANGE standard.
TheKaeptain
Banned
I will never go on a cruise in my life.
I am cracking up at the big guy just sliding back and forth. Crawl, you dummy!
At least, so far, it's not as tragica as it could have been.amateur video during rescue
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=mcrBboNWVZ8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=mcrBboNWVZ8
Sickboy007
Member
Emergency workers heard two voices coming from the ship, research is currently underway.
Joel Was Right
Member
I am intrigued. I'm going do some research on this and create a thread on it.
That's horrifying. Holy shit.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Welp. Remember how they wanted to make a sequel to the movie? Looks like they got it.
Pretty horrifying scenario, though. I hope the missing people are found.
Pretty horrifying scenario, though. I hope the missing people are found.
Sickboy007
Member
They were just saved! An asian couple locked in their cabin!
It was mentioned already earlier in the thread. The ship hit some underwater rocks, then went towards the island so they wouldn't capsize in the middle of the sea.
That's some great news, though I wonder why exactly they couldn't get out.
Sickboy007
Member
The ship hit those rocks because they were already too close to the shore, 7 miles off their route.
Maybe their door was damaged in some way? Anyway, that must have been horrifying.
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
Lol what a douchebag
DiscoJer
Member
Admittedly, my experience with ships is very limited. But the boat my parents used to have on the river had sonar - you'd look at the scope and could see the bottom (and fish).
Granted, a ship like this doesn't exactly turn easily. But I find it hard to believe in this day and age on a ship that probably cost several hundred million to make, they didn't have some sort of warning system for shallow ground or reefs.
Granted, a ship like this doesn't exactly turn easily. But I find it hard to believe in this day and age on a ship that probably cost several hundred million to make, they didn't have some sort of warning system for shallow ground or reefs.
Joel Was Right
Member
The official report into the sinking of the Estonia ruled out the possibility of an explosion
Here is what they are talking about. As you can see the metal tears point outwards suggesting an internal explosion.
http://www2.hs.fi/english/archive/news.asp?id=20010220IE10
In 1999, the Joint Accident Investigation Commission responded to rumours in the media of bombs having caused the accident. In the original report, they had already ruled out traces of explosion in the visor, but after analysis of the videos where suspected bomb-like objects had been seen, an explosion as a possible cause or contributing factor in the accident was totally ruled out. In 2000, American adventurer Gregg Bemis and his crew dived (illegally) to the wreck and filmed the damages. They also recovered pieces of metal, which were given to various laboratories for analysis. Stephen Davis, writing in the New Statesman in May 2005, claimed that laboratory tests had confirmed evidence of explosion in the metal. Davis further claimed the ship was carrying a secret cargo of military equipment smuggled from the Russians by the British MI6 on behalf of the CIA, as part of ongoing efforts to monitor the development of Russia's weapons, and that this would explain Britain's signing of the Estonia Agreement. The Finnish members of the Joint Accident Investigation Commission again rejected the possibility of explosion, claiming that the traces found in the metal were caused by the heavy blows of the visor coming off, citing inconclusive results from another laboratory
Here is what they are talking about. As you can see the metal tears point outwards suggesting an internal explosion.
There is no evidence to support the theory.
Finnish police inspected the visor after it was retrieved from the sea bottom, and laboratory tests revealed no traces of explosives. If there had been an explosion, Lehtola maintains that it is more likely that traces would have been found on the visor than that the sea would have washed them away.
The commission has "stared for hours" at the visor without discovering any other signs of an explosion: burning of paint, dents or tears. According to the commission, the timing of an explosion would also have required extreme skill. Judging by the pieces of metal that were bent outwards, the bombs would have gone off when the visor was at least 30-50 centimetres from the hull. How would that have succeeded, and above all, why, the Finns wonder. The bow would have already been a wreck at the time of the detonation.
The Finnish members also point out that none of the survivors heard any explosions. No measuring stations detected explosions either, contrary to what occurred when the Russian submarine Kursk sank last fall. The supporters of the explosion theory answer that it was a matter of blackmail by Estline, the shipping company that owned the Estonia. Another theory was that the ship was deliberately sunk to prevent it from reaching its destination, as the car deck was full of cobalt, Kurds, Russian weapons
The explosion theory is a part of a report by the Meyer shipyard which built the Estonia. The German report was completed about a year ago. In the chapter "unexplained damage / evidence" a group of experts led by Captain Werner Hummel and Meyer lawyer Peter Holtappels presents the assessment of British bomb expert Brian Brainwood that the damages to the bow of the ferry are concistent with explosions equivalent to a few kilograms of TNT. However, the report does not claim that explosions caused the ferry to sink. This is because the experts feel the explosions must be combined with the theory of a large hole in the right side of the vessel - a hole that so far has not been seen by anyone, as the Estonia lies on the bottom on its right side.
The German report is based above all on the testimony of a passenger who stated that the water rushed in from below. This would only be possible if there were a hole in the hull. In their report, the Germans blame the whole accident on the poor condition of the Estonia: the vessel was in fact unseaworthy due to poor maintenance; the bow and hull both leaked.
Finnish police inspected the visor after it was retrieved from the sea bottom, and laboratory tests revealed no traces of explosives. If there had been an explosion, Lehtola maintains that it is more likely that traces would have been found on the visor than that the sea would have washed them away.
The commission has "stared for hours" at the visor without discovering any other signs of an explosion: burning of paint, dents or tears. According to the commission, the timing of an explosion would also have required extreme skill. Judging by the pieces of metal that were bent outwards, the bombs would have gone off when the visor was at least 30-50 centimetres from the hull. How would that have succeeded, and above all, why, the Finns wonder. The bow would have already been a wreck at the time of the detonation.
The Finnish members also point out that none of the survivors heard any explosions. No measuring stations detected explosions either, contrary to what occurred when the Russian submarine Kursk sank last fall. The supporters of the explosion theory answer that it was a matter of blackmail by Estline, the shipping company that owned the Estonia. Another theory was that the ship was deliberately sunk to prevent it from reaching its destination, as the car deck was full of cobalt, Kurds, Russian weapons
The explosion theory is a part of a report by the Meyer shipyard which built the Estonia. The German report was completed about a year ago. In the chapter "unexplained damage / evidence" a group of experts led by Captain Werner Hummel and Meyer lawyer Peter Holtappels presents the assessment of British bomb expert Brian Brainwood that the damages to the bow of the ferry are concistent with explosions equivalent to a few kilograms of TNT. However, the report does not claim that explosions caused the ferry to sink. This is because the experts feel the explosions must be combined with the theory of a large hole in the right side of the vessel - a hole that so far has not been seen by anyone, as the Estonia lies on the bottom on its right side.
The German report is based above all on the testimony of a passenger who stated that the water rushed in from below. This would only be possible if there were a hole in the hull. In their report, the Germans blame the whole accident on the poor condition of the Estonia: the vessel was in fact unseaworthy due to poor maintenance; the bow and hull both leaked.
http://www2.hs.fi/english/archive/news.asp?id=20010220IE10
electroplankton
Banned
Live from Italy: http://video.repubblica.it/copertina/naufragio-del-giglio-la-diretta/85703?video=&ref=HREA-1
They're trying to rescue a person who is almost underwater. A total of 3 people were rescued last night, 24 hours after the accident occured.
They're trying to rescue a person who is almost underwater. A total of 3 people were rescued last night, 24 hours after the accident occured.
Broder Salsa
Banned
Sorry for being a dumbass but how is that even possible? Were they in rescue boats or something?
Pureauthor
Member
Trapped inside the ship due to debris/broken doors?
I've got the weirdest boner right now.
fix the holes (if possible).
attach,( ie weld and bolt ) large pumps to the ship.
pump the water out.
take to shipyard for 2 years to fix the damage.
electroplankton
Banned
The Korean couple was trapped inside its cabin in the part outside the water. The other guy, instead, was in hypothermia because he was partly within the water.
News are reporting 20 days to remove the wreck, but first they have to remove the fuel, and this will take up to 10 days. The area where the ship aground is a natural park.
Sickboy007
Member
Some new developments: Fixing the ship and pumping the water out will be a tecnical nightmare since there are now giant holes on both sides.
It looks like the reason the ship was so close to shore was because of a maritime tradition: the isle of Giglio is full of maritime workers, including a former captain of Costa ships. The captain was "bowing" to them, which is coming close to the shore and blowing the horns.
Eyewitnesses have said that the captain was among the first to evacuate the ship, he was asked by coast guard repeatedly to go back aboard but he refused.
They saved another person after 36 hours, the ship's purser, who after helping out with the evacuation was stuck there with a broken leg.
It looks like the reason the ship was so close to shore was because of a maritime tradition: the isle of Giglio is full of maritime workers, including a former captain of Costa ships. The captain was "bowing" to them, which is coming close to the shore and blowing the horns.
Eyewitnesses have said that the captain was among the first to evacuate the ship, he was asked by coast guard repeatedly to go back aboard but he refused.
They saved another person after 36 hours, the ship's purser, who after helping out with the evacuation was stuck there with a broken leg.
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
Superb leadership skills.
Some new developments: Fixing the ship and pumping the water out will be a tecnical nightmare since there are now giant holes on both sides.
It looks like the reason the ship was so close to shore was because of a maritime tradition: the isle of Giglio is full of maritime workers, including a former captain of Costa ships. The captain was "bowing" to them, which is coming close to the shore and blowing the horns.
Eyewitnesses have said that the captain was among the first to evacuate the ship, he was asked by coast guard repeatedly to go back aboard but he refused.
They saved another person after 36 hours, the ship's purser, who after helping out with the evacuation was stuck there with a broken leg.
Sickboy007
Member
Abandoning a passenger ship is one of the worst crimes in the code of navigation, i hope he goes to jail for a long time.
- Status