South Korea ferry sinks...hundreds missing

This video shows a large variety of small boats responding, taking people off the ship, and dropping them on slightly larger vessels. I’m surprised that it doesn’t show more passengers on the deck waiting to be evacuated and the intermediate sized vessels don’t seem to be very crowded. I wonder if there are cultural issues at play here that we don’t understand that explain the complacent passenger behavior?

[video=youtube_share;Ka14Ee9vobc]http://youtu.be/Ka14Ee9vobc[/video]

[QUOTE=c.captain;135909]I’d say from the photos of the upturned hull, the vessel was not particularly deep drafted and appears to be somewhat shallow draft.[/QUOTE]

According to the Wikipedia article about the disaster, the vessel’s main dimensions were 157 x 22 x 6.2 m (515 x 72 x 20 ft). I quickly browsed some other ro-ro ships and that looks like a typical draft for a vessel of that size. Of course, it’s shallow-drafted when compared to deep-sea cargo ships.

[QUOTE=Tups;135920]According to the Wikipedia article about the disaster, the vessel’s main dimensions were 157 x 22 x 6.2 m (515 x 72 x 20 ft). I quickly browsed some other ro-ro ships and that looks like a typical draft for a vessel of that size. Of course, it’s shallow-drafted when compared to deep-sea cargo ships.[/QUOTE]

well, even if of usual draft the SEWOL being a ro/pax was a type which had unique vulnerabilities to having a high VCG and ability to suffer major uncontrolled progressive flooding. How many ro/pax vessels have been lost over the years due to flooding in the cardeck? Anyone remember the ESTONIA, LE JOOLA, or HERALD OF FREE ENTERPRISE?

Here’s a photograph of the captain leaving his sinking ship, published by the South Korean Coast Guard. How much longer would YOU stay in a vessel that’s about to capsize?

c.captain, you’re right about the unique and potentially dangerous features of ships fitted with continuous car decks. What puzzles me is how water entered the cargo deck in the first place. It should be watertight up to a relatively high level so that grounding, flooding of watertight compartments and subsequent listing should not flood the car deck.

sorry but I am aboard until every passenger is off first or the vessel literally goes down from under me! NO MERCY FOR THIS FOOL!

one would think but there are always vents and drainage systems which can allow water to enter a supposedly tight hull. Remember the EXPLORER in Antarctica that went down because the flooding took place through the blackwater piping?

Or a cross- connect ballast tank issue like the tug Valour.

Most recent news is a new third mate was at the conn.

My guess would be some sort grounding causing a hull breach. When the vessel listed to a certain point, cargo was shifted, causing it to reach deck edge immersion and capsize. It definitely looks like it lost stability well before it started to sink.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/04/19/transcript-shows-ferry-captain-delayed-evacuation/

I think that korean flight in SF was flown by 3rd mate aswell

This story just keeps getting sadder. The high school vice principle, after surviving the sinking, commits suicide.

I just don’t get what could have Caused the capsize. The authorities must have some clues by now.

[QUOTE=Jetryder223;136005]This story just keeps getting sadder. The high school vice principle, after surviving the sinking, commits suicide.

I just don’t get what could have Caused the capsize. The authorities must have some clues by now.[/QUOTE]

Indeed…I thought the Koreans would be more on top of accidents that they have proven here. Little better that the Malaysians in their response and public statements!

I wonder how much life saving gear was launched?
Looks like the crew got the abandon ship call but the passengers didnt

[QUOTE=Tups;135951]Here’s a photograph of the captain leaving his sinking ship, published by the South Korean Coast Guard. How much longer would YOU stay in a vessel that’s about to capsize?

c.captain, you’re right about the unique and potentially dangerous features of ships fitted with continuous car decks. What puzzles me is how water entered the cargo deck in the first place. It should be watertight up to a relatively high level so that grounding, flooding of watertight compartments and subsequent listing should not flood the car deck.[/QUOTE]

This photo absolutely disgusts me.

Poor, scared kids sitting inside with lifejackets on waiting to perish and this coward never even gets wet.

I hope he does the honorable thing and offs himself.

Wow, lots of rafts sitting in cradles there. I see eight canisters in the frame, capacity 200 if they were 25 person rafts, 400 if they hold 50. With that amount of list they could have been launched by one guy and gravity. Getting folks to them from the cabins might have been a challenge though. [sarcasm]Has anybody ever heard of a procedure where passengers are instructed to gather on deck in emergencies?[/sarcasm]

Possibly the seriousness of the situation was not appreciated by the ship’s officers because of the puzzling nature of the problems as compared to, say a fire. Once the problem was understood, an attempt was made to correct it but by the time it was realized the problem was irreversible the crew no longer had the means to evacuate the passengers.

Standard procedure is to muster passengers at emergency stations early in a situation. It’s a common misconception that doing so will increase the risk of panic.

I have been trying to find an AIS generated track of the vessel before the list started and have yet to find a good one. What I have found is that the route through those small islands is not the standard one but one 30minutes shorter in duration than going outside of them. Since the photos of the vessel when heeled over don’t show it in close proximity to those small islands, it is difficult to say that it clipped some underwater obstruction yet that still cannot be ruled out. Certainly any rocks or pinnacles would be marked on charts and with lights or bouys? It was day light when they were passing through those islands.

Obviously, striking an underwater obstruction would explain the accident but we have no direct evidence to say that happened. Why was the vessel taking the shorter route and what dangers existing in that passage? If anyone can find an AIS generated track please post it here.

^ Navigation in that area can be difficult , strong currents, lots of navigation hazards,frequent fog, heavy traffic including tons of fishing vessels and fishing gear but I’d put my money on stability related issues at this point. I would guess that a collision or grounding would have been reported by now.

[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;136035]^ Navigation in that area can be difficult , strong currents, lots of navigation hazards,frequent fog, heavy traffic including tons of fishing vessels but I’d put my money on stability related issues at this point. I would guess that a collision or grounding would have been reported by now.[/QUOTE]

I agree that the ship was woefully short of righting arm but unless the vessel had negative stability from the point of putting to sea it would require an event to heel it to the point where progressive flooding began. Was it really a sharp turn which caused cargo and vehicles to slide to the low side? That ship must have been going very fast with very little righting arm to heel like that!

[QUOTE=c.captain;136036]I agree that the ship was woefully short of righting arm but unless the vessel had negative stability from the point of putting to sea it would require an event to heel it to the point where progressive flooding began. Was it really a sharp turn which caused cargo and vehicles to slide to the low side? That ship must have been going very fast with very little righting arm to heel like that![/QUOTE]

I’d have to read up a bit on angle of loll, isn’t a ship with negative GM at equilibrium at small angles of list? If the problem is misdiagnosed and the list corrected the ship flips the other way.

Didn’t a ship roll over on the ship canal in Seattle a few years back when they pumped ballast to correct a list caused by heavy deck cargo?

Something was just not right with that ship. I’d assume she had no more than one cargo deck and since she was probably carrying vehicles and not, say, granular bulk cargo, cargo shifting alone should have not sunk the vessel…

Here’s a ro-ro ship, built in South Korea in 1978, that sank in the Baltic Sea in November 2006. It had a slightly deeper draft (7.5 m), but otherwise the main dimensions were roughly the same as those of Sewol. Sure, it was not a ropax ferry, but it had more cargo decks which contributed to the higher vertical center of gravity. In fact, the vessel had even been fitted with sponsons to improve the initial stability after her cargo capacity had been increased by adding an extra deck. When I was in school, our professor used it as an example of a ship he’d rather not see us designing…

So, the vessel capsized in heavy weather with shifting cargo as the initiating cause. It took several hours for the vessel to finally sink, meaning that the watertight integrity of the cargo decks was probably not compromised until very late and in calm weather the vessel could even have stayed afloat. Out of the crew of 14 (four from Sweden, 10 from the Philippines), one officer drowned when the vessel sank and a crewman died later in the hospital. After saving three trapped crew members from a storage room, the captain was severely injured when he slipped and fell down while attempting to release the life rafts.

[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;136037]I’d have to read up a bit on angle of loll, isn’t a ship with negative GM at equilibrium at small angles of list? If the problem is misdiagnosed and the list corrected the ship flips the other way. [/QUOTE]

Here’s a diagram which shows angle of loll. It is where the upward force through B’ shifts to where it is inline with the downward force through G zeroing out the negative or capsizing righting arm to halt the further heeling over. At this point the vessel has neutral stability. Won’t go back up but won’t continue to heel.

Once angle of loll is reached the ship can be inclined further and still return (but never upright)…what kills so many vessels is that the angle is past the point where downflooding commences.

This is a terribly dangerous condition if not recognized. To add or shift weight to the high side will now move G from the centerline to offcenter. What usually then happens is the ship will flip and assume an even greater heel to the other side. Often it is so far off center that any point of loll will be so far that the vessel is already on her side by the time it is reached and flooding is well underway. I believe the only safe way to recover from a negative GM list is to flood double bottom tanks very slowly and carefully making sure that G never shifts off the centerline or at least only minimally.

[QUOTE=Kennebec Captain;136037]Didn’t a ship roll over on the ship canal in Seattle a few years back when they pumped ballast to correct a list caused by heavy deck cargo?[/QUOTE]

No major ship accidents like that in Puget Sound in the last couple decades. Lots of fires though. I do recall the WESTWOOD RANIER
having a ballast control accident at Terminal 5 and heeling way over but not rolling on its side.

There was the STELLAMARE in Albany, NY that did roll over at the dock seven years ago. Is that the one you are thinking of?

[QUOTE=Tups;136038]So, the vessel capsized in heavy weather with shifting cargo as the initiating cause. It took several hours for the vessel to finally sink, meaning that the watertight integrity of the cargo decks was probably not compromised until very late and in calm weather the vessel could even have stayed afloat. Out of the crew of 14 (four from Sweden, 10 from the Philippines), one officer drowned when the vessel sank and a crewman died later in the hospital. After saving three trapped crew members from a storage room, the captain was severely injured when he slipped and fell down while attempting to release the life rafts.[/QUOTE]

remember the COUGAR ACE?

Just shows if the cardecks don’t suffer progressive flooding how a ship can survive a major stability event.

.