Agree with everyone’s sentiments here. My eyes were not dry last night or again this morning. I’ll go back and re-read it in more detail later. I do have some questions (as we all do). I’ll give that some time to let things process.
Be good to each other out there.
[QUOTE=john;193262]I just finished it and, wow, I don’t think Hollywood could come up with an ending as gut wrenching and true.[/QUOTE]
Was thinking the same thing. Truly shattering. . . I believe the impact is what those “found footage” films are meant to provide. . .but the written transcript, with its dry delivery is far more moving. Reading the mundane conversations early on, and the speculation. . . knowing how it will end. . . truly moving. . .
I have decided to withhold my comments concerning decisions made by the master out of a sense that they are not appropriate at this time when we are all feeling gut punched reading the transcript of the VDR and will wait to make them at a better time in the future. I too feel a horrible wrenching of my lower abdomen as I read the words spoken by the crew in the final half hour of life. This loss was too close to home for this fortunate mariner.
what I will do though it to post the reports coming in from other news sources on the content of the transcript…this is Maritime Executive’s article
[B]NTSB Releases Transcript of El Faro Bridge Audio
[/B]
By MarEx 2016-12-13
On Tuesday, the National Transportation Safety Board released a transcript of the bridge audio recording from the con/ro El Faro’s final voyage.
The long-awaited, 500-page transcript covers audio from the morning of her departure on September 30, 2015 through the master’s order to abandon ship at 0729 the next day.
The NTSB and the U.S. Coast Guard are conducting an in-depth investigation into the sinking, which claimed the lives of all 33 mariners aboard. The transcript and related documents released this week will inform a third and final round of USCG hearings into the loss of the vessel.
A full edition of the transcript may be found here; the NTSB’s summary and a link to related documents is available here.
Watch officers were concerned about worsening conditions
At 2314 on September 30, the third mate called the master to warn of a closer-than-expected approach to the intensifying hurricane. “On the four hundred [watch] we’ll be twenty-two miles from the center,” the mate said. “With . . . max one hundred [knots] with gusts to one-twenty and strengthening so – the option that we do have . . . is at oh-two hundred we could head south.”
However, the third mate told the AB on watch that the master expected El Faro to pass safely through the southern half of the storm, and he intended to hold course.
“I trust what he’s saying,” the third mate said. “It’s just being twenty miles away from hundred knot winds – this doesn’t even sound right.”
At 0120, following news that the storm had been upgraded to a Category 3 hurricane, the second mate called the master and offered to turn “straight south” at 0200, a course which would have taken the El Faro into the lee of Crooked Island in the Bahamas.
Instead, the second mate told the AB that the master had instructed her to make a course of 116, towards the storm, and to “run it.”
An intensifying storm
By 0330, the weather was worsening. The chief mate arrived to relieve the watch at 0344, and the second mate informed him that the master had been called.
The captain arrived on the bridge at 0409, and he suggested that the force of the storm was not a cause for concern. “Well this is every day in Alaska,” he said. “I mean we’re not even rollin’. We’re not even pitchin’, we’re not pounding.”
At 0440, the chief engineer called the bridge and requested a course change to relieve the vessel’s angle of heel.
The master instructed the AB to put the vessel into hand steering and to hold a heading of 065, then 050.
The captain and the chief mate discussed the “oil sumps” and “oil levels.”
“Just the list. The sumps are actin’ up. To be expected,” the captain said at 0444.
The alternate chief engineer (a supernumerary) came up to the bridge and discussed lube oil levels with the master. "[You hit] the low pressure alarm on the lube oil . . . level of the engine . . .” he said.
Over the course of these evolutions, the chief mate reported that the barometric pressure was falling, from 970 millibars at 0424, 960 millibars at 0445 and down to 950 millibars at 0522.
“Feel the pressure droppin’ in your [ears] just then?” the captain said at 0449.
While they could gauge barometric pressure, the bridge team was unable to get a precise reading of the wind speed because they lacked an anemometer. “We don’t know. We don’t have [any] anemometer,” the master said.
Flooding in a cargo hold
At 0543, the captain received a call. “We’ve got a problem . . . Three hold? . . . I’ll send the mate down.” he said.
“Go down to three hold,” he instructed the chief mate. “Start the pumping right now [probably just] water.”
The mate departed the bridge, and on scene he reported by radio “a hold flooded on the starboard side . . . about knee deep in here.”
The captain indicated that the cause of the flooding was from a scuttle that had “popped open.”
To address the starboard list resulting from the flooding, the captain ordered the engineering watch to “pump [ballast] from the starboard ramp tanks to port.” He asked for more turns, and told the helmsman to come to a heading of 350, intending to put the wind on the starboard side and use its force to counteract the list.
It worked, and at 0557 he said that “we got a nice port list” and asked the engineers to stop transferring ballast.
At 0601, the chief mate reported that crewmembers had closed the leaking scuttle.
Loss of propulsion
At 0613, the captain said that he believed the ship had just lost “the plant.”
At 0633, he said that "they’re gettin’ that boiler back up . . . they’re gettin’ lube oil pressure up.”
Ten minutes later the captain indicated that engine RPM was coming back up again, but at 0648 he told the AB on watch that there were no turns on the shaft.
In a call to the company’s designated person ashore at 0707, he said that “the engineers cannot get lube oil pressure on the plant therefore we’ve got no main engine.”
In addition, he said that there was a “considerable amount of water in three hold” and that the vessel had a dangerous list. The scuttle had been secured, he said, but the water level was not going down despite efforts to pump out the compartment.
The El Faro’s final minutes
At 0714, the second mate relayed a message on continued problems in the engine room. “[From] the uh chief [engineer] . . . he’s just telling us the same thing. He can’t do anything with this list.”
At 0715, the chief mate reported that “something hit the fire main” in an unidentified cargo hold and ruptured it, and that the “water level’s rising.” The master instructed the engineering watch to secure the main from within the engine room.
The chief mate said that he had closed a watertight door to four deck and would not be reopening it.
At 0729 the captain ordered the crew to abandon ship. “Tell ‘em we’re goin’ in,” he said. “Bow is down, bow is down.”
For the remaining minutes of the recording, the captain attempted to help the helmsman to get out of the bridge; the AB called for a line or a ladder, but neither were at hand. Both men were within range of the bridge microphones until the end.
as a community we need to learn from this horrible loss and pledge that we will try to force changes to how masters and companies operate their ships so this does not happen again
I’ve only gotten about halfway through the transcript, but reading the MarEx summary of the final moments brought a tear to my eye.its certainly not something any of us would ever want to come close to. Hopefully with some insightful analysis and thoughtful reverence we can learn something from the VDR Tape.
Gut-wrenching reading; my sympathies to all who were affected by this loss.
There was another set of documents released by NTSB, the Meteorology Group Factual Report: http://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/hitlist.cfm?sort=0&order=1&CurrentPage=1&EndRow=15&StartRow=1&docketID=58116&txtSearchT=Meteorology
I have only skimmed it, but at first glance it appears very thorough. Like c.captain, I do not feel it appropriate to offer comments on the contents of that report at this time.
Earl
Edit: To save people time I have archived the whole report and the Appendices (35, one file for each) into a single zip file and uploaded it to my site: http://bit.ly/2hxBp49
Take the advice, get out your favorite drink. My thing is, where are all the bodies??
I mean everybody besides two or maybe 3, supposedly got off the ship! Is there something i don’t understand?
[QUOTE=john;193263]I was planning a tribute and breifing on the gCaptain live show but couldn’t tears back on either dry run… hopefully a nights sleep brings some perspective…[/QUOTE]
But you did make two inflammatory posts on the main page, stories centered on the widow Davidson, allegations of unprofessionalism of the NSTB, Coast Guard, even trying to bring in TOTE mgmt…
two stories that make me wonder, “has John Konrad and gCaptain joined the widow Davidson legal team?” There is no doubt that the transcript is damaging to the Captain, a legal team worth its salt would want to take the focus off the Captain, maybe impugn the investigation effort, try to throw spotlight back on management… all things you have just done. So I guess we’re doing this…coulda waited a week, but nope… Ok…
Let the record reflect that Captain Davidson showed courage. He most certainly did. He also showed courage if he took on Crowley mgmt (if he fully understood the consequences of his acts), and he showed courage in choosing his track and taking on the storm. You opine whether he might have developed a change in attitude based on his firing from Crowley, with possible assistance from TOTE mgmt maybe telling him to toe the line. Possible, perhaps. But it doesn’t fit, such behavior would be evidence of a craven attitude, and the record shows he was clearly courageous. Perhaps too courageous…
Publishing those two articles just 1 day after the release… too soon.
The USCG did find the 1 body in a survival suit but left it citing policy to not retrieve bodies of the dead when the living are still being searched for. I had not heard of that policy previously so I found it intriguing to say the least. So far I haven’t been able to confirm if they ever did go back and retrieve that body.
My fear is that many had not donned their survival suits due to strenuous performance of their duties in attempting to save the ship, and the ten minutes from abandon ship signal to end of recording in the wheelhouse was insufficient time for them to retrieve and don them in the chaos. Im worried they mustered without them and went overboard in life jackets or simply shirtsleeves in their attempts to reach the life rafts.
This may partially explain the lack of bodies found.
I am curious as to the true scientific nature/validity of a foundering ships suction. Many anecdotes and stories but I haven’t read much hard science on it.
[QUOTE=Jamesbrown;193289]But you did make two inflammatory posts on the main page, stories centered on the widow Davidson, allegations of unprofessionalism of the NSTB, Coast Guard, even trying to bring in TOTE mgmt…[/QUOTE]
First, that post was published yesterday. The articles were written today.
Second… I’m not allowed to be critical of Tote mgmt??
Third… no, I didn’t join her legal team. I did call them… but they sure didn’t offer me any money.
Look I could have waited. Maybe I should have waited. But no other media outlet is waiting and every one’s getting the story wrong.
And for those who don’t understand exactly what the big story is here… it has nothing to do with Davidson. He screwed up, we all know that. And there is ZERO percent chance the investigation report will let him off the hook. Davidson is old news. The story today isn’t who is primarily to blame (that’s been established) the question is who is being let off the hook (regardless if it directly caused the sinking). And if you say no one but the Captain is at fault then you need to go retake BRM.
Call me pro-davidson or anti-shoreside or left wing nut or a right wing nut. I really don’t care. The fact is that the media is focusing 99% of there spotlight on the crew and, while you may be able to make an argument that the spotlight belongs on one individual (the captain), you just can’t argue that the mates and engineers deserve blame and the company, USCG and ABS are innocent.
P.S. Nobody called Davidson a Hero… what we report are facts and the word Hero is mostly conjecture. What I did say is “he exhibited physical courage”. And that’s a fact. And that fact doesn’t make him a saint.
[QUOTE=lm1883;193288]Possibly pulled down from the suction when the ship sank. The navy used to have guidance for survivors about safe distance from vessels when they sink.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the insight breaux
[QUOTE=Slick Cam;193290]The USCG did find the 1 body in a survival suit but left it citing policy to not retrieve bodies of the dead when the living are still being searched for. I had not heard of that policy previously so I found it intriguing to say the least. So far I haven’t been able to confirm if they ever did go back and retrieve that body.
My fear is that many had not donned their survival suits due to strenuous performance of their duties in attempting to save the ship, and the ten minutes from abandon ship signal to end of recording in the wheelhouse was insufficient time for them to retrieve and don them in the chaos. Im worried they mustered without them and went overboard in life jackets or simply shirtsleeves in their attempts to reach the life rafts.
This may partially explain the lack of bodies found.
I am curious as to the true scientific nature/validity of a foundering ships suction. Many anecdotes and stories but I haven’t read much hard science on it.[/QUOTE]
Im very curious about the science
Upon reading the transcript; I suppose the conjecture that there were boiler issues that contributed or were a cause of the casualty can finally be put to rest.
[QUOTE=Slick Cam;193290]The USCG did find the 1 body in a survival suit but left it citing policy to not retrieve bodies of the dead when the living are still being searched for. I had not heard of that policy previously so I found it intriguing to say the least. So far I haven’t been able to confirm if they ever did go back and retrieve that body.
My fear is that many had not donned their survival suits due to strenuous performance of their duties in attempting to save the ship, and the ten minutes from abandon ship signal to end of recording in the wheelhouse was insufficient time for them to retrieve and don them in the chaos. Im worried they mustered without them and went overboard in life jackets or simply shirtsleeves in their attempts to reach the life rafts.
This may partially explain the lack of bodies found.
I am curious as to the true scientific nature/validity of a foundering ships suction. Many anecdotes and stories but I haven’t read much hard science on it.[/QUOTE]
Two points regarding the fact that no one survived or was recovered.
First: If I remember correctly the crew in the CG chopper did return for the gumby suit after they ascertained its owner was gone and went looking for survivors but were unable to locate it a second time. I don’t see anything intriguing in making the rescue of the living a first priority.
Second: It’s one thing to board and launch an open lifeboat or to launch, swim to, and board a life raft in ideal conditions. The thought of trying either one in raging hurricane force winds and seas from a listing sinking ship is enough to give me nightmares.
I can’t help but think they might have stood a chance if the ship had been retrofitted with an enclosed freefall lifeboat.
Prioritizing the living is a matter of course, but this was my first instance hearing of a body being quite nearly recovered then abandoned in the search for others. Im sure its happened before in the history of search and rescue but like I said, first I’d heard of it. Thats all.
[QUOTE=lm1883;193288]Possibly pulled down from the suction when the ship sank. The navy used to have guidance for survivors about safe distance from vessels when they sink.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure huge ships don’t create whirling vortexes of doom when they sink. Sure they navy might’ve had guidance for that, but the navy also thought agent orange was perfectly safe to deal with.
[QUOTE=Jamesbrown;193289]
Let the record reflect that Captain Davidson showed courage. He most certainly did. He also showed courage if he took on Crowley mgmt (if he fully understood the consequences of his acts), and he showed courage in choosing his track and taking on the storm. You opine whether he might have developed a change in attitude based on his firing from Crowley, with possible assistance from TOTE mgmt maybe telling him to toe the line. Possible, perhaps. But it doesn’t fit, such behavior would be evidence of a craven attitude, and the record shows he was clearly courageous. Perhaps too courageous…
[/QUOTE]
Courage in choosing his track and taking on the storm? Courage? Really? How, in any sense of the word, can you describe his decision to get underway with a highly unstable hurricane in the area as displaying courage???
Sure he displayed physical courage at the end when he tried to help that AB, when it was way the hell too late, but where was his moral courage when he was faced with the decision to get underway or to wait out the storm? Either he truly believed he would be safe in getting underway, in which case he had very poor judgment, or he was afraid he’d get fired for wasting company money, in which case he wasn’t sticking up for what he believed in.
[QUOTE=Lee Shore;193308]Two points regarding the fact that no one survived or was recovered.
First: If I remember correctly the crew in the CG chopper did return for the gumby suit after they ascertained its owner was gone and went looking for survivors but were unable to locate it a second time. I don’t see anything intriguing in making the rescue of the living a first priority.
Second: It’s one thing to board and launch an open lifeboat or to launch, swim to, and board a life raft in ideal conditions. The thought of trying either one in raging hurricane force winds and seas from a listing sinking ship is enough to give me nightmares.
I can’t help but think they might have stood a chance if the ship had been retrofitted with an enclosed freefall lifeboat.[/QUOTE]
I raised this question long ago; “why have no bodies been found, either during the search, or on beaches in the area in the weeks/months afterward”?
There appeared be have been ample time from the general alarm was sounded, (which should mean; “go to your muster stations and done your immersion suits/life jackets”), until the actual capsize for all/most to have done so.
That they may have been sucked down when the ship sunk is possible, but only for a while, upon which the immersion suit/life jacket buoyancy would would have overcome any suction.
If so, even if knocked unconscious, or otherwise disabled when abandoning ship, the bodies should stay afloat for quite some time, but only one appears to have been seen.(???)
There appear to have been few reports of wreckage found in the area as well. Could the current have taken both debris and bodies away into the open Atlantic and it has all ended up in the Sargasso Sea gyre?
One more question; is it common practice on US merchant ships to keep immersion suits and life jacket in individual cabins, or in boxes at the muster stations, or both? (I know that on US rigs it is common to have them in the cabins) From the transcript it appeared that getting life jackets for the bridge team was not a clear cut thing.
If the first, there may not have been time to return to the cabins to retrieve the immersion suits/life jacket and to done them.
[QUOTE=ombugge;193334]I raised this question long ago; “why have no bodies been found, either during the search, or on beaches in the area in the weeks/months afterward”?[/QUOTE]
So are you trying to tell us there is some nefarious forces at play here? That it is the result of the Bermuda Triangle perhaps? was all the crew save one really rescued by an alien spaceship but not returned to mankind because that is the only way to keep the saved from giving away the secret that we are not alone?
By all accounts there should have been much more flotsam found in the search but there simply wasn’t. Nothing more and nothing less
.
[QUOTE=c.captain;193335]So are you trying to tell us there us is some nefarious conspiracy at play here? That it is the result of the Bermuda Triangle perhaps?
By all accounts there should have been much more flotsam found in the search but there simply wasn’t. Nothing more and nothing less[/QUOTE]
No I’m not. As you say there should be much more of flotsam spotted in the area after the sinking, not only one broken lifeboat, one raft and one body. (I believe a few containers were found on the beaches around the area some time later?)
It is not a conspiracy but a fact that there is something called current and the Sargasso gyre.
If the debris have been carried away from the islands and into the open Atlantic it could very well still be floating around out there, together with the plastic bottles, sea weeds and eels pods in the Sargasso Sea.
[QUOTE=starbored;193331]
Courage in choosing his track and taking on the storm? Courage? Really? How, in any sense of the word, can you describe his decision to get underway with a highly unstable hurricane in the area as displaying courage??? [/QUOTE]
Because it sure ain’t the act of a timid man. Possibly a stupid man, but he was not stupid either.
[QUOTE=Slick Cam;193314]Prioritizing the living is a matter of course, but this was my first instance hearing of a body being quite nearly recovered then abandoned in the search for others. Im sure its happened before in the history of search and rescue but like I said, first I’d heard of it. Thats all.[/QUOTE]
It happens fairly often but typically they leave a tracking beacon on the item (be it a person or some important evidence like a lifeboat) so they can recover it later. I am not sure if a beacon was left this time but you have to remember that, in the mind of the USCG, SAR does [I][U]not[/U][/I] stand for Search and Salvage.
I also want to remind everyone that the SAR started untypical slowly (due to the weather) and there are a number of people (myself included) who believe the search was called off too soon.
Lastly, I was tangentially involved with an even larger search that year. I can’t go into details but I can say that it was one of the largest, longest and most exhaustive searches ever conducted by the USCG and they found nothing… zero. But once the government stepped fully aside lots of evidence was found.
Again, I can’t go into details (not that I’m afraid to call out the USCG… but because my involvement required a DNA) but I can say that the USCG does not have a reliable method for tracking debris in varying weather conditions… nor do they have any interest (that I’m aware of) in working with scientists to develop new debris tracking methods.
Last… don’t forget that it’s a very big ocean and the USCG has no SAR satellites no active duty UAV’s of their own (which, imho, is bloody unconscionable ) and very limited access to advanced reconnaissance assets owned by other agencies.
[B]And, for it’s for all these reasons (and more!!) that, for the past few years, I’ve taken my own personal PLB with me aboard ship and - one of the very first things I do after dropping my bag is to clip it to the PFD (or Gumby suit) assigned to me.[/B]
Note: I doubt that PLB’s would have saved many lives in this scenario… but, I wish they had them anyway… funerals are danm hard on families who have something to bury… but they are much worse for families that don’t.
[QUOTE=Chief Seadog;193299]Upon reading the transcript; I suppose the conjecture that there were boiler issues that contributed or were a cause of the casualty can finally be put to rest.[/QUOTE]
I fully agree with you Chief… but I’m not a Chief… so can you explain to us your professional reasoning?
