SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   Egypt ferry sinks (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=89051)

Kapitan 02-03-06 08:33 AM

Egypt ferry sinks
 
egyptian ferry has sunk so far 30 survivors out of 1,400

Etienne 02-03-06 09:01 AM

Authorities claim not to have received a distress signal...

I wonder what happened to the EPIRB. Hope it's not the famous "Sucked through the bridge wing" effect.

Kapitan 02-03-06 09:08 AM

shouldnt laugh

but RAF Kilnoss has picked up the distress beacon from the ship and the british were the first to find it

Rotary Crewman 02-03-06 09:14 AM

Terrible news, panicked at first when i heard a cruise ship had gone down as my mom and dad are on one near mexico. Later confirmed as the red sea.

Just out of interest. If a beacon transmits on 121.5 then RAF Kinloss ignore it on the first pass of the sats and wait for a second pass to confirm it.

So considering we waited for a second pass, we still were first

God bless the queen and her beautiful armed forces :cry:

Kapitan 02-03-06 11:25 AM

now saying 200 people saved

diver 02-03-06 08:49 PM

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...lt-384x256.jpg

Heres what she looked like. Not the prettiest vessel ever, didnt look to stable either, tall and skinny with a vehicle deck that's doors were probably not mainatained too well.


Any idea yet as to what cause her loss?

Kapitan 02-03-06 08:59 PM

i have a hunch same as estonia but instead of the bow door its the stern door that fell off flooding the car deck sinking it.

JSLTIGER 02-03-06 09:36 PM

I wonder if this will spell the end for RO-RO (roll on, roll of) ferrys, as the papers are already blaming the RO-RO design for the disaster. Personally...I blame the lack of lifeboats! Didn't international law ever learn from the Titanic? You need to have a spot on a lifeboat for each person aboard!

diver 02-03-06 11:02 PM

Quote:

I wonder if this will spell the end for RO-RO (roll on, roll of) ferrys, as the papers are already blaming the RO-RO design for the disaster.
I dont think so. It might spell the end of RO-RO's operated by cheap companies held to weak developing nation safety standards.

Modern, safe ships in competent hands are perfectly safe. But from the looks of that ship, i wouldn't have boarded her to cross the red sea if you had payed me.

Letum 02-03-06 11:11 PM

Wasn't me, honest

Kapitan 02-04-06 02:27 AM

I have personaly served on RORO ships, and they are very seaworthy vessels, but yes they do have a few design flaws.

Europe is trying to phase out RORO vessel all together as they constitue a massive saftey issue, in a space of 10 years i can think of three such disasters on RORO ferrys.

Scandanavian star

Herald of free enterprise

Estonia

1987 to 1994 thats 7 years and these three accident took place.

Dowly 02-04-06 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CV-707
I've actually seen the m/v Estonia in port before she sank. Beautiful ship!

Yes it was. :yep:

Oberon 02-04-06 08:03 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4680752.stm

I've heard a lot of people comparing this with the Titanic. Just goes to show how little is learnt by some countries nearly 100 years on.

Sulikate 02-04-06 08:25 AM

why exactly did she sink?

sonar732 02-04-06 09:24 AM

Survivors are saying that there was a fire aboard, not enough lifeboats, and finally...the crew "hoarded" the life jackets.

Etienne 02-04-06 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4680752.stm

I've heard a lot of people comparing this with the Titanic. Just goes to show how little is learnt by some countries nearly 100 years on.

Goes to show how little the media knows about the maritime industry. It's alway the Titanic. Alway.

Even though modern ships have little in common with the Titanic.

Etienne 02-04-06 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rotary Crewman
Just out of interest. If a beacon transmits on 121.5 then RAF Kinloss ignore it on the first pass of the sats and wait for a second pass to confirm it.
:

Nobody just ignores a distress beacon. What happen is that for physical reason, a LUT cannot alway resolve the position of a distress beacon transmitting on 121.5 on the first pass ; they might have to wait until the second pass.

In the case of the 406MHz EPIRB, that is not necessary. (There are also other problems with 121.5, and it's being phased out as we speak) My old copy of IMO's The GMDSS Handbook claims 121.5 as being primarily aeronautical, but ships have been equipped with them. (Or a combination, as aircrafts can home in on 121.5 MHz).

I don't know at the time what kind of beacon the ship had... But it's still weird as heck that the crew didn't send a distress message. Fire on board usually deserves at least an urgency message.

I saw an article where, apparently, a nearby ship heard a distress message from the sinking ferry, but the report didn't say much. Still strange that they didn't manage to contact a coast station.

Kapitan 02-04-06 11:09 AM

As i understand;

Any emergency warrenting aid or evacuation of any ship any where should send a mayday distress call, or send a mayday call to another ship and have them relay the message.

all it takes is one push of a button and a distress signal can be sent.

Godalmighty83 02-04-06 11:14 AM

a bit worrying how the RAF discovered the distress beacon before the people it was meant for, hms bulwark was dispatched immediatly but theres not much an assualt ship can do over a day away.

Kapitan 02-04-06 11:34 AM

Thats why it was it was orderd to turn around.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.