Modern Cruise Ships


Kyle Hauser

Member
Sep 26, 2005
28
1
71
If a modern cruise ship say The Navigator Of The Seas sustained the same amount of damage as the Titanic did would it sink?
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,604
627
483
Easley South Carolina
I would say yes. Titanic was considerably over protected by the standards of her day and even by the standards of the modern day when it comes to subdivision. I don't know of any cruise ship that could survive having even three watertight sections in open communication to the sea, much less five.
 

Kyle Hauser

Member
Sep 26, 2005
28
1
71
Seems that if they were to happen to a modern cruise ship like Navigator Of The Seas it would capsize because they are top heavy and why would a modern cruise ship sink with only 3 water tight compartments open?
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,604
627
483
Easley South Carolina
>>and why would a modern cruise ship sink with only 3 water tight compartments open?<<

Because most if not all are designed to remain afloat with only two open to the sea. By law this is the minimum standard, but shipowners tend to treat it as the maximuum.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,604
627
483
Easley South Carolina
>>But would the weight of 3 compartments being open to the sea pull the ship down it seems hard to believe.<<

If they were filling up with water? Yes they would. Just because these ships tend to be large doesn't mean they have a lot of reserve bouyancy to work with. Remember that the Titanic was the largest ship of her day but all it took was human error and a waterweight gain problem to bring her down.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,604
627
483
Easley South Carolina
>>Now I see. Those upper decks sure would and a lot of weight.<<

Errr....uh....sorry...actually, you don't see. Topwieght isn't really much of an issue in an undamaged ship and perhaps not even one that's damaged. Bear in mind that when the hull is breeched, all the weight is coming into the areas below the waterline. How long you stay afloat depends in part on how much reserve buoyancy the vessel has and what happens to compromise the stability of the vessel. Asymmetric flooding for example leads to the vessel capsizing or at least, rolling onto her beam as she goes down. (This is what happened to the Lusitania.) If you have even flooding from one side to another you at least go down on a more or less even keel and can launch lifeboats from both sides of the ship.

The bottom line however is just how much water the vessel can take on and still remain afloat.
 
A

Adam Tarzwell

Guest
I guess the 700 or so survivors of Titanic can thank their lucky stars because relatively speaking the sinking of Titanic was the "perfect" sinking as it were because all life boats were able to be launched without a great degree of difficulty. If say the ship had developed a substantial list to either the port or starboard side it could have been much more worse.
 
J

Jeffrey Beaudry

Guest
Just out of curiosity, how many bulkheads (on average) do modern cruise ships have?
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,604
627
483
Easley South Carolina
>>I guess the 700 or so survivors of Titanic can thank their lucky stars because relatively speaking the sinking of Titanic was the "perfect" sinking <<

Indeed they can. It's not unknown for a ship to go down without listing...sometimes severely...and even rolling over. (Andrea Doria or HMS Barham anyone?) However, it's extremely unusual.
 
A

Adam Tarzwell

Guest
>>Not quite. Eighteen lifeboats were launched, while Collapsibles A & B were washed off the deck.

Forgot about those. Well then most were able to be launched without difficulty.
 

Noel F. Jones

Member
May 14, 2002
857
2
0
“Not quite. Eighteen lifeboats were launched, while Collapsibles A & B were washed off the deck.”

Entirely quite; Adam Tarzwell's point is not assailed by this interjection.

The fact that the collapsibles were not broken out in good time was nothing other than one of a number of fatal procedural errors. Had they been given the requisite priority they could have been cleared sequentially and effectively without impeding the other launchings.

Noel
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,604
627
483
Easley South Carolina
It might have helped if those remaining two collapsibles had been stored under a set of davits as they were designed to be. The top of the deckhouse was a lousy choice...but then it's not as if anyone ever expected to need them.
 
A

Adam Tarzwell

Guest
I remember hearing in a documentary that the davits were designed to take an extra row of boats and that someone by the name of Carlisle (sp) suggested that they make use of these new davits however it didn't go over well with the people of White Star and that Carlisle did not press the point. Interesting thought....
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,604
627
483
Easley South Carolina
>>The question I have is why have those two in the first place?<<

Quite possibly as much for show as anything else. White Star could point to the boats and state with complete honesty that their ships exceeding the regulatory requirements by a considerable margin.

That the regulations were already known to be inadaquate would...of course...not be mentioned in the adverts.
 

Erik Wood

Member
Apr 10, 2001
3,519
11
223
Recall that most modern cruise ships are built to be one or two compartment ships. That meant that if you loose only to compartments the ship is doomed. That figure is completely dependent on the compartment.

I believe that the lifeboat discussion has been discussed in the Lifeboat Forum.
 

Similar threads

Similar threads