No thanks to the crew, who abandoned before telling the passengers. There’s even a video of the moment the generators failed: you can hear a muffled bang before the lights go out. The entertainment crew are the ones who sent a distress call and got the passengers off, and the funny thing is Captain Avranas and Captain Schettino had the same excuse for the abandonment: “I can better coordinate the rescue from land.”
People on the boat said they smelled sewage at the beginning when the leak ostensibly began. Is that larger tank at the bottom the septic tank? Was that what got pushed up into the passenger cabins? Great animation - appreciated.
The only problem about Oceanos is that the ship was badly neglected before he went for that last cruise where it sank. It had loose hull plating, there was a hole from rust in the bulkhead between the engine room and the sewage tank room, and the sewage tank had its anti return valve stripped for repair because it malfunctioned. As a result what happened is the rising water entered the sewage network and flooded everywhere through washbasins, toilets etc... Although 38 years old at the time of sinking-Oceanos was the last of five French sister ships from the 50's before it was sold to greek owners-if the sewage tank had its valve on and if there was no hole in the bulkhead nothing would've happened apart from the loss of power. Btw, none of the four other ships of the type ever sank.
+ursuss100 Noneof this would have stopped that sea chest from cracking open. The generator room would have still flooded, leaving the ship without power and vulnerable to waves.
+The Engine Room That kind of failure seems rare. I'm curious if this area was inspected when ship was last in drydock. Cleaning the sea chest is necessary at regular intervals, ships have been crippled temporarily by plugged raw water intakes. From what you mention, they probably just cleaned the screens and didn't care else wise...
A great animation, really says it al, thank you. I sailed on her 2 years before this happened and she was one of the top ships in the fleet, but sadly, it appears as if she was in serious decline. We were very lucky that everybody got off her.
Considering the rumours that went around shortly after she sank this one is one heck of a lot more lucid. From what I read it covers most of the events reasonably well. It does not however explain the behaviour of the Capt.
Fortunately, the time for it to actually sink gave enough time for the entertainment group to get all the passengers out safely. By the time the ship was at its last moments, no one was left onboard the ship at all.
Two things wrong with this, One: There was not a pipe leading from the sewage tank into the engine room, in reality there was a hole rusted thru the bulkhead that allowed the water to get into the tank. Two: the animation doesn’t depict the bow hitting the sea floor while the stern was still above the surface. Being a 500 foot long ship sinking in 300 feet of water that’s what happened.
the sinking is good except for the end. when the funnel went under the starboard list had died down quite a bit and it was vertical when it went under going down slowly then in little chunks.
Its a rough estimate made by someone who isn't familiar with the topic. She hit the bottom right before her stern mast, if you were wondering, and then settled on her side.
The reason it's so famous is because the crew and captain abandoned ship with out helping any of the passengers. Two people actually helped save everyone on the ship. That's why it is so famous. And MsTheBlueGray is right, Queen Mary is in a dock in California. It's a museum.
All the areas that were flooding at that time were, I think, below the waterline. So the water was being forced upwards through the ship just by the pressure from the depth.
Robert Defoe, not bad design, just an old design; the ship (Jean Laborde) was launched in 1952. Furthermore, she wasn't built as a passenger ship, but as a freighter.
I've been on some of these ships to and from Greece/Italy/ Albania..enough said. It's a calculated risk every time, or at least it was a few years ago.
The ending of the video does not at all jibe with the historical footage. She didn't sort of continuously "slide away" as depicted here; the 502ft long ship clearly hit the bottom at about 320ft & all but stopped sinking for a short time before becoming unbalanced & then sliding off to the side. When the footage is as clear as the sinking is there's really no excuse for not getting a simulation correct.
what caused the sinking was the ventalation system for the sewage tanks failed and the pipe that sent the gases up to the funnel was cut out in a section of the generator room. when the valve ruptured the generators had to be shut down unfortunatly that also meant the pumps couldnt be used. therefore the water rose until it flowed through that pipe into the sewage tanks and filled the tank and the water and the water backed through the drainage system. showers, sinks, etc.. thats how it sank
The "chain of events" may be accurate, but the sinking is not. This video shows her sliding beneath the waves in deep water, Titanic-style, when in fact the bow first struck the seafloor 300 feet below, with a good 200 feet of the stern out of the water for sevreral minutes before settling under.
Captain Avranas stated, "When I give the order abandon ship, it doesn't matter what time I leave. Abandon is for everybody. If some people want to stay, they can stay." Erm.
The small square cubicles are all rooms and during the flooding. All the bathroom things (Toilets, Sinks And Showers) All Bursted with water flooding the rooms. Intense Right?
People say titanic had a fatal flaw. No. She was a ship that encountered a freak accident were nothing could be done. Take a look at the this ship the oceanos for example. Small crack in the bottom of the ship tiny. Modern ship from the 90's went down in a matter of hours.
The iceberg was avoidable. The night the titanic sank, there had been iceberg warnings. Due to the calm waters, the possibility of icebergs floating in to shipping lanes was high. The captain decided to ignore this warning and continue towards america at high speed. Therefore, once the iceberg was spotted in its path, it was unavoidable given its speed.
Liam Paquette it was common protocol for ocean liners to steam at full speed until danger was actually spotted. Even if they did receive iceberg warnings, they were only required to slow down after they had actually spotted ice.
Better to upgrade ship to water seal every lower deck area doors that can hold water pressure to prevent other lower compartment water going in to prevent sinking.....also make emergency Air vent valve to prevent water going in...
That's the kind of failure one would expect a safety inspection to have kept it in port for; there would have been at least one main safety valve after that point which must have either been disabled or failed.
So in short terms the watertight bulkheads were useless in this case if the water is just coming up everywhere else. I dont know if there was a shut off for the drains and if there was the crew was probably in so much of a hurry to get to the boats they forgot to close it. Hope that info helps
What happened to standard procedure all they had to do was power the pumps and that should keep the water under control. Also water tight door should of stopped it from sinking by stopping the water from moving around.
Jake Hayes Because the leak was in the generator room. The generators had to be turned off to avoid a short. The real lack of "standard procedure" came from the crew afterwards. They failed to secure the lower portholes, allowing the ship to sink faster. Passengers didn't even know the ship was going down until they saw flooding in the lower decks. They found the crew, including the captain, packed and loading into the life boats, apparently having no care for the fates of the passengers. It was one of the lounge singers who went to the bridge and sent out an SOS. In the end, the South African Navy and Air Force had to use 16 helicopters over 7 hours to evacuate all the passengers.
Because the water wasn't just flooding into areas with pumps. It was flooding up through the sewage system into the ship itself. The water flowed through a hole in the bulkhead and into the sewage waste disposal tank (0:53). Without check valves in the holding tank, the water coursed through the main drainage pipes and rose through the ship, spilling out of showers, toilets, and waste disposal units(0:59). That's what you see here in the animation. If the water is coming in faster than the pumps can pump it out, the water level will continue to rise. There were also reports of an explosion from the lower decks, so who knows what got damaged. Like I said, the crew failed on many levels. Sailing into a storm was the first, as it likely cause the damage.
Explosions would rip the ship apart easily plus the water tight doors could cut everything so the water could stop spreading as quick. Also does mean they would of had a cold bath? And are there not shut off valves?
I don't know dude, you're playing hindsight with a crew that abandoned the passengers. A sinking can happen very fast, and even if all the right moves are made, a ship can still go down. Could a more competent crew have saved the ship? Maybe, but that's beside the point. The company that owned and operated her had already suffered two sinking in three years, so there was a history of negligence. And you gotta remember, she was built in 1952 and not subject to American safety regulations since it was a Greek ship. We shouldn't presume anything about her construction. Apparently, The Oceanos was in a state of neglect, with loose hull plates, check valves stripped for repair parts after a recent trip, and that 4 in hole in the watertight bulkhead between the generator and sewage tank that caused this.
@PBRMafia if the water had just flooded the bow from the start, there wouldnt be any water in the lower interiors of the ship which was clearly seen by moss hills in the video of the sinking. because of an outdated & shoddy sewer system, water was allowed to enter the pipes through a vent underwater & because one of the pipes couldnt take the pressure of the water running through it, it sprung a leak allowing the water to flood the loweer compartments.
Whatever happened to the "water tight" compartments that separate each other so if one gets flooded, the others still keep the water out and the ship maintains its buoyancy?
The ship flooded via the sewage system because of a faulty/missing non return valve. The sewage pipes pass through the watertight compartments. They have to, in order to reach the tanks.
ι just found out about this tragedy.this ship has been used in a greek comedy movie in 1986.the title of the movie was: περαστε φιληστε τελειωσατε and i have upload the whole movie on you tube.
@tupolev141 "If they want to stay, they stay, If they want to jump ship, they drown. It's totally up to them!" Would you believe, I had sailed on that ship around the greek islands a couple years prior. I think we even had that captain, iirc. Glad it didn't sink then!!!
i think that someone should make a ship that is completely unsinkable, using titanics ideas but also adding a lot of layer of different types on metal mostly titanium and then have wood covering the metal on the inside
During ww2 the British had a plan to build a huge air craft carrier made of ice with the addition of a chemical to slow the melting process and to strengthen the structure. It would have worked and it would have been what is termed unsinkable. The reason it didn't go ahead what due to the fact by the time testing got underway the battle of the Atlantic had been won.
They are only determined by their overall watertight integrity... Navy Frigates and other war vessels alike generally have much better WTI than larger vessels.
If they didn't have a plan to dump sewage secretly out the bottom this wouldn't happen. All through hull outlets should be above waterline but they don't want to see the sewage so they dump it underwater. What good are bulkheads if pipes allow water inside?
What sort of Naval Architect designs a large passenger carrying vessel in such a way that a simple, single fracture of a welded seam will lead to the complete loss of the hull? Having actually designed in such a catastrophic fault, they then compounded it by not installing any leak monitoring equipment, water level detectors or emergency pumps at the likely fracture point! For the cost in materials and labour to have reinforced the weak point in the design is negligible in comparison to that of a total hull loss!
Check valves had been removed, and the bulkhead separating the sewage tank from the machinery space had a hole rusted thru it. Negligent maintenance negated the navel architects design.
