Costa Concordia sinks off the coast of Italy

In two pictures I have, "your girl" is together with this Cemortan girl, so they are probably friends, but not the same.

Please can you tell us where this 'quote' came from?

Delving deeper it looks like you're right. The picture on the beach shows up several times captioned "Domnica Cemortan" but I finally found a picture of both of them together. What really matters I guess is he was dining with a passenger/crew/stowaway (her status still seems unclear) when he should have been on the bridge monitoring a potentially risky maneuver that he ordered.

From "The Wit and Wisdom of Winston Churchill" by James C. Humes:

"Late in his life, Sir Winston took a cruise on an Italian ship. A journalist from a New York newspaper approached the former prime minister to ask him why he chose to travel on an Italian line when the Queen Elizabeth under the British flag was available.

Churchill gave the question his consideration and then gravely replied.

'There are three things I like about Italian ships. First, their cuisine, which is unsurpassed. Second, their service, which is quite superb. And then - in time of emergency - there is none of this nonsense about women and children first.'

Another piece of trivia some may find interesting:
HMS Birkenhead, also referred to as HM Troopship Birkenhead or steam frigate Birkenhead, was one of the first iron-hulled ships built for the Royal Navy. She was designed as a frigate, but was converted to a troopship before being commissioned.

On 26 February 1852, while transporting troops to Algoa Bay, she was wrecked at Danger Point near Gansbaai on the outskirts of Cape Town, South Africa. There were not enough serviceable lifeboats for all the passengers, and the soldiers famously stood firm, thereby allowing the women and children to board the boats safely. Only 193 of the 643 people on board survived, and the soldiers’ chivalry gave rise to the “women and children first” protocol when abandoning ship, while the “Birkenhead drill” of Rudyard Kipling’s poem came to describe courage in face of hopeless circumstances.

Thanks Ed.

I have a number of Churchill's books but had not read this before.

bottom alarms

I posted a while back about the use of plotter, gps and forward scanning depth finders roll in cautioning a pilot of dangerous botttom conditions. Do cruise ships employ such gear as a general rule? Second, knowing that cruise ships ply the same waters over and over again, what roll does the helm have in knowing that a course change deviation is out of the norm, and both dangerous to the ship? Can he or she refuse to make said course change and not face deisciplinary charges for not following a order? I never give anyone a pass for saying "I was only following orders..." when they knew that said orders were wrong, dangerous, foolhearty....and could cost lives. Hey, but that's my opinion.

Does anyone know the speed the Costa was making when it rubbed the submerged rock? Did any bottom warning systems alert, fail to alert, were turned off, being serviced at the time? At times the reports make it sound like...."Goose, we are going to buzz the tower.....awwww Mav"
Who would take a risk of going into unknown water with a cruise ship loaded with passengers? In my opinion, anyone on duty on the bridge who stood by and did not protest that course change should be held accountable. I know that there is one Master of the Ship, but the entire crew is responsible for its and the passengers safety

This is wrong. Ultimate responsibility rests with the Captain. If a disaster happens due to an officer or crew error the one responsible may be disciplined and/or prosecuted but so will the Captain. The Captain is responsible for the safety of the ship, crew, and passengers whether he is on the bridge or not. Just ask Capt. Joseph Hazelwood.

There are two terms that relate to disobeying a captain's orders, insubordination and mutiny. Short of being told to run someone over, I'd be hard pressed to disobey. It's the captain's responsibility. It's not the crew's job to question their captain. A boat is not a democracy.

I completely understand what both of the above comments as they relate to the ships authority and command structure. What I don't understand is how you can absolve someone for following an order which they know is wrong and can lead to potential dire consequence. All the while making it ok since the responsibility rests with the Captain, not themselves. That is morally wrong on multiple levels. And it is the crews responsibility for the safety of the ship and the passengers, otherwise the crew member is an idiot for fighting a flash fire, or assisting a passenger to a life boat rather than themselves. Any person in whatever field is held morally responsible for carrying out any order they know to be criminal, or such that could lead to death...and they can't play the " I was told by my superiors to...."

We're not talking about a captain telling his helmsman to commit a crime. We're talking about who's job it is to make the decisions. If a crewman saw that they were going to hit a rock that the captain didn't know about, he would be obligated to let the captain know. It would not be his job to turn the boat without permission of the captain.

Don't get me wrong.....I understand how the chain of command works aboard a vessel. The helm on a cruise ship is much different than one on a naval vessel. As a helmsmen, I see a digital warning for a collision with a submerged object running a cruise ship with 3000 passengers and a half mile of stopping distance...I am not going to ask for someone to go down and ask the Captain at dinner if I should put the boat in reverse.....I don't care who is in charge. BUT, when I see the Captain, or first Officer give me a heading that is off the standard heading we have covered many times before, and knowingly puts us in a reef strewn area, I am going to have to ask to be relieved or for the officer to make that course change himself. Those who follow bad orders without thought are wrong, I don't care what ocean or boardroom you are in.

Sticking to your guns eh? You do understand that many who post here ARE Captains and currently making a living operating boats for hire? You are wrong. As was pointed out, disobeying an order you know to be criminal is one thing but disobeying an order you consider unsafe is an entirely different thing. The helmsman, if there was one, probably had no idea if the course he was steering was safe or not. The officer in charge of the bridge may have had reservations about the course he was ordered to follow and may have even expressed those reservations to the Captain. When the Captain said, "follow my orders", the officer has the choice of ending his career or following orders. They may have even thought it was safe, the track was very close to the one the ship had followed, with corporate approval, in August of 2011. Someone has to be in charge, especially on a ship at sea where quick decisions and actions can mean the difference between safety and disaster. Tradition, corporate policy, and law all agree the Captain is the man in charge.

When have I said anything to not agree that the Captain is the man in charge? It has to be that way....history says that command structure is what works.
I have seen the AIS track the vessel took....they were very much off their usual course, and if it were me at the helm knowing the type of submerged topography of that area, I would not have made that course change. Sure, it might have cost me my job, but how much did it cost the lives on board. Try to sleep with that thought at night..."I was just following orders"

How do you explain that to the families who lost loved ones? "The Captain was in charge?"
I know that Captains are very much on this site, and I value their expertise and knowledge....they are brave and trusted souls who do what many people could never dream.

Their is no disrespect here, I just want to comment on the fact that the bridge crew carried out orders which put the ship in peril...knowingly or not? If knowingly, they were wrong, no matter what maritime law says.

IMO the Captain suffered a serious panic attack he completely bottled it thus doing what he did .
And of the crew from the articles i've read of passenger account's they lacked training they put themselves first before the passengers though accounts vary and how many times throughout the voyage before the incident did the crew actually conduct lifeboat drills with passengers taken part again that is something not even mentioned or even raised by the media . And how did the ship managed to sale the distance it did and nobody noticed her course was wrong ..putting it at great risk and direct collision with a charted reef !!!

More importantly i believe Carnival must be held to account over serious failures in proper procedure of training ..just like how News Corps was held to account over there ownership of the UK Based Papers

This Incident could spell the end for the company and thus seeing those noted companies becoming Independant time will tell !!