33 souls on cargo ship missing in Hurricane Joaquin, October 2015

[Hiandmighty]

If you watch the video of the actual lifeboat,you will see that 95% of it is under water.

Technically, that is "unsinkable" but it is absolutely not helpful.

So you can go by a press release or by what your actual eyes see of the actual lifeboat.

(Also, the second lifeboat has obviously sunk)

 

[KaaBoom]

Here is the video of the lifeboat they found: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U_0gpLoaDVk

The video is too poor of quality to tell exactly what happened to the boat. But it looks to me like it was never launched, and was torn loose when the ship sank. That would explain the damage. Though I suppose it could have been launched and damaged in the sea, and the occupants fell out, but I think that is pretty unlikely.

Either way there were no survivors in the boat. So they must have ended up in the water.

 

[drjones]

it is beyond belief to me that anyone would think to criticize the coast guard in this situation - they had other possible survivors spotted at the time they made the decision not to stay and recover the body they found. they didnt decide to leave the body because they "will not even pull the bodies of dead American citizens out of the ocean", they did it because there were other possible people out there still hanging on, where minutes could make a difference.

does anyone think it wasnt a tough decision and hard on the people that had to leave that body there? does anyone think they just nonchalantly said "eh lets just go, i couldnt be bothered to haul up this dead body"?

 

[KaaBoom]

it is beyond belief to me that anyone would think to criticize the coast guard in this situation - they had other possible survivors spotted at the time they made the decision not to stay and recover the body they found. they didnt decide to leave the body because they "will not even pull the bodies of dead American citizens out of the ocean", they did it because there were other possible people out there still hanging on, where minutes could make a difference.

does anyone think it wasnt a tough decision and hard on the people that had to leave that body there? does anyone think they just nonchalantly said "eh lets just go, i couldnt be bothered to haul up this dead body"?

I have no idea, but more then a few of us are disappointed by their decision to just leave a body floating in the water. As I said, I'm hoping that they did recover that body and are just not reporting it, for what ever reason.

 

[jjenny]

it is beyond belief to me that anyone would think to criticize the coast guard in this situation - they had other possible survivors spotted at the time they made the decision not to stay and recover the body they found. they didnt decide to leave the body because they "will not even pull the bodies of dead American citizens out of the ocean", they did it because there were other possible people out there still hanging on, where minutes could make a difference.

does anyone think it wasnt a tough decision and hard on the people that had to leave that body there? does anyone think they just nonchalantly said "eh lets just go, i couldnt be bothered to haul up this dead body"?

They haven't got any survivors spotted at the time. They haven't got anybody alive spotted at all. I just read a relative stating they want to bury their loved one. So relatives don't expect the bodies be just left at the ocean.

 

[Hatfield]

So often today, staff are given more and more responsibilities and when same staff are late getting out, they are chastised for poor organization when they are trying to accomplish the impossible. Even from a management standpoint, it is easier in an "employer's market" to pressure people into making things sound less serious than they are, because in the event they do survive, management stress will negatively affect them. Catch 22, IMO and I am so disheartened and sad that those precious lives were lost.

I have read a lot of articles and I have to conclude that both management and the captain share in responsibility.

Some say the captain could have made a different choice to avoid the storm and go south or delay leaving and yet we all know management pressure came into play as well.

So even though the captain had ultimate control about the ships route we know that he felt pressured by management and the company too could have ordered him not to sail as they own the responsibility for the cargo.

So the bottom line for me is I have to put blame on both management and the captain.

This is the type of thing where forced regulations and rules are sometimes needed to protect humans from themselves. With weather and hurricanes it is tough to come up with any sort of rules that could be helpful.
Maybe have "no sail zones" defined when a storm is getting really bad like that one.

Of course then we would have some breaking the rules anyway so not sure what could be done to prevent this in future. Maybe heavy fines for the company if they sail into "no sail zones".

 

[Hiandmighty]

The biggest question is: what caused the loss of propulsion/loss of power plant? That is what doomed them.

The ship was well-maintained by US standards and routinely inspected. Their lifeboats were open type, which wouldn't be my first choice for a lifeboat.

900 feet long ships do well in storms and from what I read, the captain was planning to go to the West of the storm but with the loss of power, they were stuck.

Hopefully the investigation will figure some things out.

 

[Hiandmighty]

,

I have read a lot of articles and I have to conclude that both management and the captain share in responsibility.

Some say the captain could have made a different choice to avoid the storm and go south or delay leaving and yet we all know management pressure came into play as well.

So even though the captain had ultimate control about the ships route we know that he felt pressured by management and the company too could have ordered him not to sail as they own the responsibility for the cargo.

So the bottom line for me is I have to put blame on both management and the captain.

This is the type of thing where forced regulations and rules are sometimes needed to protect humans from themselves. With weather and hurricanes it is tough to come up with any sort of rules that could be helpful.
Maybe have "no sail zones" defined when a storm is getting really bad like that one.

Of course then we would have some breaking the rules anyway so not sure what could be done to prevent this in future. Maybe heavy fines for the company if they sail into "no sail zones".

That is a tremendous amount of speculation that may or may not be backed up with facts. Its is way too soon to speculate.

Working on a boat is a RISK. Every time a person steps foot on any boat, you are assuming risk. Humans are not made to live on or in the water. I can't stess this enough.

Tragedies happen on the water and people die. Add in a category 4 hurricane with 140 mph winds and no power to the ship and they all knew they were doomed at that point.

The management or captain may be found liable for some of it, but I can nearly guarantee you its going to be in percentages of blame. Mother nature is to blame, the loss of power is to blame, etc.

New news on the salvage operation and looking for the "black box": http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/08/us/el-faro-missing-ship/

 

[Hatfield]

,


That is a tremendous amount of speculation that may or may not be backed up with facts. Its is way too soon to speculate.

Working on a boat is a RISK. Every time a person steps foot on any boat, you are assuming risk. Humans are not made to live on or in the water. I can't stess this enough.

Tragedies happen on the water and people die. Add in a category 4 hurricane with 140 mph winds and no power to the ship and they all knew they were doomed at that point.

The management or captain may be found liable for some of it, but I can nearly guarantee you its going to be in percentages of blame. Mother nature is to blame, the loss of power is to blame, etc.

New news on the salvage operation and looking for the "black box": http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/08/us/el-faro-missing-ship/

Speculation on what?
That a decision was made to head towards a known storm that was already a tropical storm before they left port and all the forecasts said it was unpredictable and could likely increase in intensity when it hit warmer waters?

I don't think there is any doubt that the decision to head towards it was a bad one and the primary reason this tragedy occurred. They had access to accurate weather reports the whole time. At any point, someone could have decided to turn back or turn away from it and yet they kept going until it was too late.
They lost power very late in the game they were playing so the decision to head that way did not take into account that something like that could always happen at any time.

The decisions they made before leaving port and even when they were under power heading out in that direction is the predominant cause of the tragedy. They gave themselves no "out" if something like an engine going out occurs.

You are right that insurance companies do ultimately give percentages of fault but IMO I think we will find out that the engine going out has a very low percentage in this tragedy. Because I think we will find out the weather caused the engine to fail probably by getting flooded with water as the captain reported they were listing and taking in water.
So if the insurance company gives the engine any fault at all it will likely be in the single digit of percentage since it will be a symptom of the bad decision making.

Human error of bad decision making will be the predominant cause. Both Captain and Management. I think the company may end up getting a lower percentage since they will always claim the captain had ultimate decision making authority.

 

[Hatfield]

Someone in a news site commented that there are times when "Mutiny" is acceptable on a ship.

I don't know anything about maritime rules on ships. It makes you wonder if the crew at any point considered over powering the captain and taking control of the ship to change its course.
We will never know.

The question I have is what are the rules in that situation. Could a crew legally take control of the ship and change its course if they felt the ship was on a suicide mission?

 

[jjenny]

Someone in a news site commented that there are times when "Mutiny" is acceptable on a ship.

I don't know anything about maritime rules on ships. It makes you wonder if the crew at any point considered over powering the captain and taking control of the ship to change its course.
We will never know.

The question I have is what are the rules in that situation. Could a crew legally take control of the ship and change its course if they felt the ship was on a suicide mission?

If their engine failed, they couldn't change course even if they wanted to.

 

[Hiandmighty]

Thai isnt an old seafearing wooden vessel with a round sterring wheel. This is a ultra high tech computerized machine.

Whoever started taking about mutiny needs to get off the computer and go take a walk outside and discover that it is 2015.

 

[Hatfield]

If their engine failed, they couldn't change course even if they wanted to.

True. But from what I can tell there was time before the engine failed where the crew was realizing it was bad to be anywhere near that monster of a storm. Here is what one of the mates said from the ship as she sent some last communication back home:


"We are heading straight into it, Category 3, last we checked," Danielle Randolph wrote, according to CNN affiliate WFOX. "Winds are super bad. Love to everyone."

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/07/us/el-faro-missing-ship-victims/

 

[Hatfield]

Thai isnt an old seafearing wooden vessel with a round sterring wheel. This is a ultra high tech computerized machine.

Whoever started taking about mutiny needs to get off the computer and go take a walk outside and discover that it is 2015.

Agree about the technology at the deck. I wonder if anyone on that ship even had the knowledge with how to control and steer it. Maybe the captain was the only one who could handle the controls of the ship. Not sure if there are co-captains like in airplaines or not.

Biggest question I have is I am wondering what the laws are about it. I suppose it would be up to a jury if they did overpower the captain and had managed to steer it to safety. They would likely be in some sort of trouble regardless.

It does make you wonder though because I am sure other situations may have occurred on other ships where the captain went "crazy". Like a captain getting too drunk to drive a ship or something along those lines. I may have to search to see if there were any recent examples of something like that.

 

[Hiandmighty]

No, mutiny has no place in this discussion; there is no "justifible mutiny" and maritime laws are clear and there is no opening for overpowering the captain, who is the ultimate supreme authority of his vessel. Period. The end. No discussion. No room for discussion.

Yes, the captain has engineers and other specialized men and women with whom he is making decisions. Piloting a ship is a high specialized position.


By the way, any kind of possible compensation would have to come through the Jones Act which makes it exceptionally hard to prove fault. The families would have to Prove that 1) the captain was deliberately negligent and or 2) the vessel was not seaworthy. Compensation is slim.

 

[Hiandmighty]

Mutiny is an exaggerated idea probably from old movies. It's very rare; I doubt you will find much but by all means go ahead and search.

By law, captains are not allowed to drink while piloting a ship, and they are routinely drug tested. So the idea of a drunk captain is also fantasy.

 

[Hiandmighty]

After writing that, I wonder if people dont realize the intelligence, professionalism and advanced degrees it takes to become a captain or an engineer. This is why I'm not so quick to blame the captain. A captain takes his job and the welfare and safety of his/her crew seriously.

He or she is not some drunk old salt picked up on a pier.

 

[Hatfield]

No, mutiny has no place in this discussion; there is no "justifible mutiny" and maritme laws are clear and there is no opening for overpowering the captain, who is the ultimate supreme authority of his vessel. Period. The end. No discussion. No room for discussion.

Yes, the captain has engineers and other specialized men and women with whom he is making decisions. Piloting a ship is a high specialized position.

I tried looking it up. I think the best answer I found is that the word "mutiny" by itself is a definition of wrongdoing so it is illegal. However other terms for a situation where people disobey orders to save lives can be legal in certain situations. Although there is no doubt trials and juries would be involved.

Link below is more or less an example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morotai_Mutiny

 

[jjenny]

After writing that, I wonder if people dont realize the intelligence, professionalism and advanced degrees it takes to become a captain or an engineer. This is why I'm not so quick to blame the captain. A captain takes his job and the welfare and safety of his/her crew seriously.

He or she is not some drunk old salt picked up on a pier.

But this case, for reasons that escape me, the ship went into the storm. They had access to weather conditions, so I really don't understand it. Why didn't the ship turn around? When and why the engine fail? Were they already in the storm when failure occurred? It's an old ship, did the captain really think it can withstand cat 3-5 hurricane?

 

[drjones]

They haven't got any survivors spotted at the time. They haven't got anybody alive spotted at all. I just read a relative stating they want to bury their loved one. So relatives don't expect the bodies be just left at the ocean.

they don't know if a reported sighting is a survivor, or an empty suit, or unrelated until they get there and check it out.

they had multiple other "possible survivor" coordinates to go investigate at the time they were at the location of the deceased. they had more sites to investigate coming in at that very time. this is straight from the coast guard, unless we are now accusing them of lying also.