Cargo Ship Missing in Hurricane Joaquin

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Jeff-Groves

What I 'mockingly dismiss' is one that can't see a tongue in cheek joke.
Sorry I wasted your valuable post time.

Well, you got me there. I readily admit to being pedantic and often missing the joke. It sounded to me like another slam at Wiki and at me for using it.

You didn't waste anything, and I apologize for missing your intent.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

....http://www.oldsaltblog.com/2015/10/el-faro-a-roro-not-a-container-ship-and-why-that-mattered/

Very good link, thanks!

I still wonder, when looking at this 1975 RoRo ship: Even if there are no bulkheads, this cargo weight distribution alone (vehicles below the deck and containers on the deck way up look like an invitation for disaster to happen. Not only the weight but regarding wind pressure on the stapled containers, adding to a listing already caused by taking on water, and lose cargo piling up at one side. The ship als seems to have had a lot of openings for venting the lower vehicle decks, all along the hull.

A link, from the link above: Admiral Nimitz's Pacific Fleet Confidential Letter on Lessons of Damage in Typhoon:
http://www.history.navy.mil/research...n-typhoon.html


Anyway it is tragic.

[Aktungbby]

[
A link, from the link above: Admiral Nimitz's Pacific Fleet Confidential Letter on Lessons of Damage in Typhoon:
http://www.history.navy.mil/research...n-typhoon.html


Anyway it is tragic.[/QUOTE]
^

Testimony that the ships lost took a long roll to leeward, varying from 50 to 80, hung there a little while, and then went completely over, floating a short time before going down.

About 790 officers and men were lost or killed, and 80 were injured. Several surviving destroyers reported rolling 70 or more; and we can only surmise how close this was to capsizing completely for some of them. It was the greatest loss that we have taken in the Pacific without compensatory return since the First Battle of Savo.

This one gets get swept under the carpet of history.

In conclusion, both seniors and juniors alike must realize that in bad weather, as in most other situations, safety and fatal hazard are not separated by any sharp boundary line, but shade gradually from one into the other. There is no little red light which is going to flash on and inform commanding officers or higher commanders that from then on there is extreme danger from the weather, and that measures for ships' safety must now take precedence over further efforts to keep up with the formation or to execute the assigned task. This time will always be a matter of personal judgment. Naturally no commander is going to cut thin the margin between staying afloat and foundering, but he may nevertheless unwittingly pass the danger point even though no ship is yet in extremis.

Just eerie from 70 years ago! The El Faro's "little red light", the 'free surface effect' and her captain's judgment coupled with/to an apparent engine/power failure passed the dangerpoint unwittingly. This is the more appalling as the weather reporting in the present age is far superior to that of WWII.

[Jeff-Groves]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Well, you got me there. I readily admit to being pedantic and often missing the joke. It sounded to me like another slam at Wiki and at me for using it.

You didn't waste anything, and I apologize for missing your intent.

I have a strange sense of humor that many miss at times so I'm at fault myself.


I don't really believe in the triangle myth by the way.
I do question SOME Wiki posted links to be honest though.

Not saying you do it but some use them as a lazy way to 'prove' a fact that ends up not being fact.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Jeff-Groves

I have a strange sense of humor that many miss at times so I'm at fault myself.

My initial reaction was mostly based on the fact that I had one serious troll use the same tactic.

I do question SOME Wiki posted links to be honest though.

I question pretty much everything. I use Wiki mostly as a starting point, especially when it concerns something I've read before but can't find in a hurry. It's easy enough do more research for backup once the original intent is there. I've also been a part of Wiki's correction process from time to time, and still nag them about mistakes I've discovered.

Not saying you do it but some use them as a lazy way to 'prove' a fact that ends up not being fact.

I probably do do it. I do everything else wrong, so why not that?

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Jeff-Groves

I have a strange sense of humor that many miss at times so I'm at fault myself.


I do question SOME Wiki posted links to be honest though.

Not saying you do it but some use them as a lazy way to 'prove' a fact that ends up not being fact.

Hey I resemble that remark(s)! actually I challenge all sources 'till my comfort level is assuaged?!! "TRUST NO ONE: IT SAVES ENERGY"-me

I probably do do it. I do everything else wrong, so why not that?

Well, we're all a little do-do around here ...and having a better day than the El Faro crew to boot! As long as Jeff's got breathing apparatus and your holding the stair railing with a pizza in one hand and I just stay at home indoors (fewer moving parts)... tomorrow could be another day!

[Jeff-Groves]

Dang it Steve! Can I say I'm sorry without you saying "I'm sorry!"?

Then Aktung comes in with "We're all sorry blah, blah, blah."


And We start again over 'splainin why We are sorry!


(NOTE!! This is ALL INTENDED AS TOUNGE IN CHEEK!!)

[Oberon]

They found her

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-34691321

[iambecomelife]

They finally found the "Black Box", which will hopefully clarify what went wrong:

http://www.today.com/video/el-faro-s...d-674611779672

[Rockstar]

I can tell ya what went wrong, the ship sunk. Why is what I would like to see investigated and then hang the owners and captain for allowing time and money to overrule common sense and good seamanship.