WHY DID COSTA CONCORDIA CAPSIZE? - Explaining the ship's stability using the official report

Join our Exclusive Community over on Patreon: / casualnavigation
Why did Costa Concordia capsize? I use the official accident investigation report to explain the capsize - from a stability perspective.
Costa Concordia was navigating near the island of Giglio when she made contact with a rock. How did that contact result in the vessel capsizing and laying on her starboard side against the island?
With thanks to OpenSeaMap (map.openseamap.org) for the chart that I used in the video. The map is used under the following license: creativecommons.org/licenses/...
--------------JOIN OUR COMMUNITY---------------
We have launched a new community of maritime enthusiasts over on Patreon.
★ / casualnavigation
When you join, you will become part of an Exclusive Community, gain Early Access to our KZbin videos*, receive Exclusive Content* and have influence over Community Videos*
*Everyone becomes a part of our community, but additional rewards will depend on the tier you select.
------------------------DISCLAIMER-------------------------
All content on this channel is provided for entertainment purposes only. Although every effort has been made to ensure the content is accurate and up to date, it remains the responsibility of the viewer to determine its accuracy and validity. The content should never be used to substitute professional advice or education.

[@mikemars261]

Didn't know the ship kept moving after the initial grounding. I thought it hit once and got stuck there. Very informative video, thanks.

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks mikemars261. Glad you found it informative.

[@namewarvergeben]

@John Gault - But this was based on the official report. Does that make it unbelievable again?

[@namewarvergeben]

I don't argue to win, I argue to figure things out. It's supposed to be a dialog, not a conquest. Why would you escalate into insults immediately? That's not very rational. I was merely wondering why you would doubt an "official story" (which apparently doesn't provide a rational explanation?), but accept an explanation made by a third party (this video), which states that it is _based_ on that "official story".

[@dynamicworlds1]

@@CasualNavigation very late, but small correction: The upward force provided by the ground would have been helping to level the ship out by providing "negative mass" (aka a clockwise torque from the perspective of the diagram). It would have had to have been the horizontal force from the ground acting equal and opposite to the wind (thereby providing a clockwise torque) that created the roll.

[@RpMRickyMunoz]

@@dynamicworlds1 yes u r right.

[@BoilerUp3030]

At what point did this center of gravity shift fling the Captain into the lifeboat?

[@lolbots]

lol!

[@dustinjr1993]

Asking for a friend?

[@augenbutter]

at 89.9º

[@mattmopar440]

he fell into a life boat with a roof on it :)

[@iliketurtles1357]

savage stability joke? that is new to me

[@SKF358]

I learned here that the captain Schettino lied when he said he purposefully beached the ship to keep her above water and save more lives. The rudder was stuck and the wind blew her there. Reckless and a liar he is I guess.

[@jayive34]

So, you're telling that the only good thing he did that night was result of coincidence, and that he had nothing to do with it?

[@windsofmarchjourneyperrytr2823]

He was cheating on his wife, so he was already a lying POS. He was showing off, in fact.

[@Kivikesku]

@@jayive34 Beaching a ship can be a good idea, but turning a ship on its side does not count as a good thing, does it?

[@Ekircher5]

Also based on this video beaching the ship could have gotten more people killed and it made the rescue more difficult due to the ground causing the ship to capsize.

[@13dg]

@@Ekircher5 no, less people died because the ship ran ground that 2nd time, the people on board where evacuated too late. there were still people on board when the ship settled on the bottom, if the ship wasnt in that place she would sink with those people still on top of it.. Also, maybe i understood wrong what you mean by 'beaching the ship could have' , the ship was beached the difference is that the captain said he did that to save more people, what would be actually a good decision, but the truth apparently is that this 'good decision' wans't actually his decision and was in fact a coincidence. in the end, those who survive that were stll on the ship when she ran aground were lucky that the ship drifted to that zone. btw, sorry for any mistake, english is not my first language!

[@rodneycaupp5962]

I was on a sinking ship in the Mediterranean Sea, in 1970. "Our Captain tied himself into the Captains seat", with double ropes and double knots, so there was no doubt he would go down with the ship...(6 compartments were flooded. The engine room was next), even the Bridge was flooded. 48 years later, this brings me to tears. The ships crew threw themselves into the tasks of stopping the flooding and keeping the ship from sinking. WE were in what was likely the most massive hurricane in recent history in the Mediterranean, and by radio we were told, "No chance of rescue". That Captain had the kind of respect that made his crew do as we were told. I know what a real Captain is. Captain Robert Marshal, of the United States Navy, was one such man. Thanks Captain Marshal

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks for sharing that Rodney. Captain Marshal sounds like the sort of Captain any crew would have been lucky to serve under.

[@benjiplayford769]

Wow!.. great story bro !!!!

[@raymondleggs5508]

Name of ship?

[@billyobrien3108]

Rodney Caupp z

[@madpenguin9402]

Unable to find any information that the captain tied himself to the seat. Ship didn't sink.

[@EezeeEmporium]

The internet historian recently uploaded a documentary following the incompetence leading up to this disaster and the rescue effort and aftermath. It's a great compliment to this video.

[@cursedhawkins1305]

Don’t forget about the Q&A.

[@summertime9629]

I was just going to write this & was wondering if anyone else had watched or commented on that, Internet Historian gives you an accurate story with SO many LOL, not that the victims or thee unbelievable incompetence of that 💩 should be LOL. But yeah…

[@NoNameNoWhere]

@@cursedhawkins1305 Glad you brought up the Q and A. It provided some needed nuance.

[@seaprofexecutiveeducation3750]

Very well illustrated and explained, inclusive of the killer rise of 'G' when the ship touched bottom. And just in time for me to show to my MSc students next week during our studies on the maritime law relating to passenger ship liabilities, the Athens Convention and a case study on the loss of the Costa Concordia. Thanks very much CN for filling the stability gap in my lecture with an excellent video.

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks for the comments SeaProf. I am glad this video will be useful to your class and will help highlight the stability implications of the incident.

[@benjiplayford769]

Zzzz the captain messed up

[@SixTough]

I would also imagine the ground exerts a sideways force due to the ship's momentum

[@amodpataskar5673]

Wonder why the anchor could not be used to avoid drift

[@Nighthawkrun]

I thought after Titanic and water flowing over the bulkheads like an ice tray, that ships were required to raise the water tight compartments and other strengthening of the hull (it was rock against a moving ship). I can't get in my head how the ship allowed water to repeat Titanic's fate.

[@_gabbogabbo_]

That's a really great video! I'm from Giglio Island and i saw with my eyes the disaster...this video perfectly explains what really happened...at the end, some kind of "flotation boxes" were welded to the ship so that it could stay upright...the ship was then towed to Genova port amd then scrapped. Nowadays, there's a memorial on the pier dedicated to the 32 victims of the incident

[@25Erix]

I've been saying for a while that the salvage of the Concordia should be considered a legendary effort. There was a lot that could've gone wrong at any point of the operation but it more or less went off without a hitch. They got her upright and floating again while she stayed in one piece and carried a lot of hazardous material. And an operation this size had never been done before.

[@user-gt5jp5jy2b]

Francesco Schettino killed 32 people that were under his care. The coward that fled his sinking ship while people died should rot in jail for life. "The captain goes down with the ship" is a maritime tradition that a sea captain holds ultimate responsibility for both his ship and everyone embarked on it, and that in an emergency, he will either save them or die trying.

[@tabushka292]

I would say that principle applies in every situation where your actions can cause or prevent other people's injury or death. Whether you're driving a car, ship or flying aircraft. Or even if leading a country. First comes the people who trusted you to keep them safe. Or at least, that's how it should be.

[@fishyjishy2867]

The only way a captain should end up in a lifeboat when his ship begins to sink is when he is picked up from the sea after the ship has gone down.

[@alexkachok8812]

He is out of jail now I guess

[@rock3tcatU233]

It's easy to speak for all you keyboard captains, but the reality is that when a ship is beyond saving and an order to evacuate has been issued a captain will save his ass by jumping into a lifeboat.

[@QuantumRift]

Captain Schettino said that, before approaching the island, he turned off the alarm system for the ship's computer navigation system.[37] "I was navigating by sight, because I knew those seabeds well. I had done the move three, four times.." Apparently that assclown did NOT know those seabeds well. And he had his girlfriend on the bridge.

[@theemeraldboat9947]

Titanic: I crashed by running into an iceberg. Costa Concordia: I deja-vu’ed into an island.

[@xarianooks7794]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂

[@flarp_]

Oceanic: I was a cruise ship that decided to join the army and went sicko mode on some German uboats It literally rammed a uboat and broke it in half

[@harleyokeefe5193]

Spacecowboy Eson titanic wasn’t a lousy ship wtf

[@harleyokeefe5193]

Yosherboi 420 oceanic was an ocean liner not a cruise ship

[@harleyokeefe5193]

Spacecowboy Eson did u get that from the movie lmao, her rudder was the size of a small house she could turn very well, the reason she turned too slow is because Murdoch ordered the engines full astern (reverse) which slowed down titanic and its turning speed that’s why it didn’t turn in time

[@tjampman]

Yes, like my stability teacher used to say: The ships stability is greatest when the ship is on it's side!

[@robertmartinu8803]

Or: the stability is greatest in conditions you really don't want to be in. Ships, Aircraft, moving vehicles in general. Not to mention buildings.

[@Faolan161]

It is a matter of knowing where the forces are. This guy doesn't, because he is telling us the stationary ground is actually pushing up on the ship... The only force the ground exhibits is gravity. Wind and water currents do the rest... the ground has no effect but as an anchoring point.

[@jasonreed7522]

@@Faolan161 what are you talking about, physics 101 is that if i have a mass of 1kg, i excert a force of 9.8N on the ground called weight, and in response the ground exerts a force of 9.8N upwards or i fall through the ground. Assuming this hypothetical takes place on a level plane then the force the ground provides to counter my weight force would be called the normal force. (The normal force is always perpetual to the surface it originates from, so on a ramp the normal force is less than the weight force because part of the weight is trying to push the object downhill and may or may not be countered by frictional forces) Anyway, its physics 101 that if the ship touches the ground and any of its weight force is transfered into the ground, then the ground must exert an equal and opposite force or crumble away. And the way this ground force is considered for the purposes of stability is to add it to the calculation for the center of gravity by treating it as a negative mass. (There are other ways of doing the same math and coming to the same conclusion that touching the ground causes the ship to fall over because the sum of forces creates a rotational moment about the center of mass)

[@Faolan161]

@@jasonreed7522 it seems you have let your schooling let you percieve forces unseen, but are inherently absent. The earth, aside from it's perpetual spin in orbit of the sun, does not exert any other forces, except in an earthquake or volcano. Here, both are irrelevant. Hence, the earth cannot exert a force on the ship. You have to consider where the forces are before you can say where there is an equal and/or opposite force. It is easy to say how the earth is pushing up on the bottom of the ship, but also ignorant. The earth is stationary, with no movement. How is that so hard to understand? Relying on scientific laws improperly applied is simple obstinance, not wisdom... Wisdom is knowing how to apply knowledge, kid. Savvy?

[@jasonreed7522]

@@Faolan161 I am an engineer, i know how forces work because my job depends on it. 3 laws of motion: 1. Inertia: Bodies at rest tend to stay at rest, bodies in motion tend to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. (Objects velocity doesn't change without influence from an outside force) 2. F=ma (net force equals mass times acceleration) 3. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. (Forces come in pairs, if i punch a wall, the wall exerts an equal and opposite force on my hand. I provide all the energy and if the wall can't match my force it breaks, if it can provide more foce it doesn't break.) This literally doesn't get any simpler than the case of box sitting on a table. If the box has a mass of 10kg, and gravity provides an acceleration of 9.8m/s^2 then the box exerts 98N of force on the table. The table must exert 98N of normal force on the box to maintain a system where everything is stationary. If the table is weak and can only exert 90N of force then it will collapse and the box will fall through the table. If you can't comprehend this basic example then go back to school.

[@guillaumeromain6694]

I'm impressed by the quality of your videos. Your explanations and animations are very clear and easy to understand. Thank you dear uploader. I'm glad I found your channel

[@Tuxfanturnip]

The bit with the "negative mass" doesn't seem right to me... With the ship in a rotational equilibrium, a vertical force starboard of the centerline would create a counterclockwise torque, unless the CoM was already so far to the side that it was starboard of the point of contact. The only way to get clockwise torque from that point of contact would be a lateral force to port as the hull dragged against the bottom; is that really what happened?

[@ilyte1]

It's both

[@taufanaugusta8884]

Here after Internet Historian's video.

[@artyfly100]

"Vada a bordo cazzo!" -An Italian hero

[@hamiltongary1]

"Get the fuck onboard!"

[@mickmcgood6543]

I've seen so many articles about that incident and not a single one explained things as clearly as you. Well done. I was amazed to learn that grounding actually made the hull unstable but I can see why thanks to your amazing skill as a teacher.

[@kkbsrt8687]

This video cleared up a lot. I was wondering why the ship tipped on the opposite side of the damage. This also exposes the Captains additional lie. He said he breached the ship so people could evacuate close to land. The wind did it. Thanks for the info. That Captain was a dirt bag.

[@seabopbeebop6575]

I’ve had a huge hyperfixation on Nautical engineering and commercial ships for years and I’m so glad I found this channel. Keep up the great work I love your content sm!!

[@mustafanizambijunizam3475]

Very good commentary, hats off & Thumsup.

[@billgardyne7328]

Delightfully clear explanation. Thank you.

[@harryt988]

Just found your channel and I’m enjoying it very much You are very scientific in your approach but your explanations are easily understood by people like myself who are not nautical

[@katiekane5247]

Me too. Not even a person who spends any time in boats but really like his style of explaining stuff!

[@BlakeOlson1980]

Fantastic job with this explanation! Thanks!

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks Blake!

[@country_flyboy]

Excellent video. I only have one thing to add. The force from the ground itself would not have been straight up. There would have been a frictional force acting against the ship, which actually would have accelerated the capsizing of the ship.

[@blatherskite9601]

The diagram is simplified. It doesn't show the horizontal wind forces and opposite reaction from the ground, adding an overturning moment. These would have been greater than the vertical righting moment, thus rolling the ship.

[@doctorwho7221]

Amazing explanation of all the processes and forces involved. Thanks!

[@wickras]

You are producing really good videos. Thank you for that!

[@VaranusKomodo]

Great video, thanks for sharing the knowledge.

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks VaranusKomodo

[@GeoffInfield]

Nice video, clear and concise - thank you!

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks Geoff

[@JDnBeastlet]

Thanks for the excellent summary of the report.

[@pra2221]

Very nicely explained

[@MacMcNurgle]

YT has no idea what irony is. First ad was for a luxury cruise.

[@Hidfors]

Thank you, very interesting.

[@thorgargrauwolf1366]

This was really great. Never knew she was free floating after the initial contact. 👍 and subscribed!

[@thomasgamsjager7045]

Very informative!

[@goons123flofy]

Excellent explanation!

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks TurgBurglar

[@katydid5088]

My grandson, sat next to his brother (studying this for his engineering class) just called your diagram "the ketchup bottle sinking". Hope you don't mind the epitaph. Excellent job explaining the situation and best luck to you and your colleagues!

[@rickdeaguiar-musicreflecti7692]

Great explanation of events 👌

[@ghhhp]

Very good video broskie very informative

[@nairsreehari96]

Don't know why this was recommended but anyways great video great voice and i subscribed 👍

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks Sree. Glad you enjoyed it.

[@naturenuggets2813]

Fascinating!

[@CARRJ142]

Another great video.

[@terosevej]

Thank you so much

[@FridayFrida]

Very informative and interesting!

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks Friday

[@TairnKA]

Good work, Thank-you

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks T'airn'KA.

[@colindunnigan8621]

I didn't know that the ship had continued to move after striking land the first time. I also didn't know the wind was that strong that night. Thanks for the info!

[@depressed_neutron]

Nice vid 👍 simple and informative and you explain stuffs realy nice

[@mm0070]

Very interesting video, one small correction: it's negative *weight*, not mass. Mass remains more or less the same.

[@smallstudiodesign]

New subscriber : really enjoy your coverage of events - love your technical breakdown, the crisp clear graphics/animation & narrative. ✨🏆✨

[@davidoldboy5425]

Good video, yes a lot of people don't know of loss of stability when touching bottom and there's one regular and common occasion when this happens, drydocking.

[@GR8TM4N]

Excellent video and channel, and subscribed of course. I suppose you could do a similar one about the Titanic ?

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks Greg. The Titanic would certainly be an interesting one to make. I'll be looking into that in the future.

[@Jammin6796]

the titanic never sunk... but the olympia did...

[@hansvonmannschaft9062]

@@Jammin6796 I think you meant the Olympic. Olympic, Titanic & Britannic. Theory has been proven false, though, but who am I to tell you what to think or believe? :-)

[@riesenflugzeug]

@@Jammin6796 Switch theory?

[@insioni]

Great video. I'm not that well versed in ships though i wonder, why was it allowed to drift so much? How far does a cruise ship drift once the anchors are dropped? And lastly, would dropping the anchors slightly out at shore (but still close) as soon as the ship hit help the situation any better in terms of evacuation and rescue efforts; versus (hypothetically the ship had anchors at both bow and aft) if they dropped the anchors as soon as the ship stabilized in the bow-to-wind position at 4:39, so that the ship would stop turning due to the wind/currents? Granted the ship would still sink in both cases. Thank you for your time.

[@CasualNavigation]

It is an interesting question. I guess if the anchors were dropped, keeping the ship in deep water, it would probably have remained upright while sinking, assisting the evacuation. I am not sure how deep the water was, so it may be that it was actually too deep to drop the anchors.

[@stetlan5582]

From bridge videos the water was said to be 150m deep. Which was why they waited to call for abandon ship. They chose to let the ship drift to shore.

[@silentspring222]

Late but according to reports the anchor was dropped in an attempt to stabilize the ship after she ran aground the second time, but they botched it and let out too much chain

[@insioni]

@@silentspring222 thanks for the info

[@alessandrogallo7969]

Cheers from italy, thanks for the interesting video

[@tommendoza4589]

I learned alot of things good content

[@batteriesrequired9401]

Great channel

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks batteries required

[@SWIFTO_SCYTHE]

That would be TERRYFING. being trapped in elevators no power no lights screams and panic as the ship listing sideways and the water rushing in the elevator cab ....

[@thefrenchareharlequins2743]

What kind of a lazy bastard uses the lift?

[@burt591]

You are a special kind of dumb if you use an elevator on a ship you know is sinking

[@Lunarpollo5622]

Lusitania

[@RyanMcIntyre]

Your imagination is worse than reality.

[@KingCrimson82]

@@thefrenchareharlequins2743 wheelchaired one and grandparents with walkingsticks

[@harvey1965]

Fascinating and horrifying at the same time!

[@louf7178]

I guess it is fortunate it grounded where it did. T/y for the analysis.

[@ZenZaBill]

The center of gravity does not "move up"; it is what it is -- if mass distribution throughout the ship remains (fairly) the same as before grounding. HOWEVER - with wind and perhaps currents pushing the ship on the opposite side of the grounding, those side forces contribute to a moment force now inducing additional rotational movement, with the grounding contact as the pivot point. Add to that the accumulation of passengers on that downward side, the loading and extension of lifeboats on the side going down, and these all contribute to this moment arm, making it greater and thus increasing the roll-over. Free-body diagrams 101.

[@namewarvergeben]

That part of the video didn't seem quite right.

[@CasualNavigation]

Correct. It does not move up. We just model it as moving up to help the calculations. In reality a reaction force is applied by the ground, pushing upwards at the point of contact. We model that as a negative mass at the point of contact, which creates the illusion of the centre of gravity moving up.

[@bearthefear7134]

@@CasualNavigation but then cog should move left and not right. I'd say it was the friction force towards the ground combined with the wind force that toppled her over.

[@altygrae1061]

ZenZaBill The Center of mass would change with the added water in the hull. Once it grounds that weight is somewhat offset by the force of the sea floor.

[@mmmikeyyy]

You're right. This explanation makes no sense at all. When the ship is listing to starboard, pushing up on the starboard side tends to right the ship. It does not contribute one tiny bit to capsizing it, on the contrary. Contact with the sea floor in this context needs to be examined for its effect in the horizontal plane. Boat drifting toward shore has speed and suddenly decelerates with force applied below center of gravity, inducing a moment that helps it capsize on its starboard side. This sudden deceleration probably also shifted water masses to starboard, moving center of gravity further to the same side, contributing to the effect. Finally there's the continuous effect of the wind pushing the top of the ship toward the shore that, if it has any significant effect, had one in a direction that helped the ship capsize.

[@jakubmateuszkowalski4558]

First of all, thank you a lot for making the videos. I found them very interesting. However I wonder, why are you thinking about the ground reaction force as about "negative mass" rather than additional buoyancy? I can think of a stability of a car - if I put "negative mass" at its tires, then it should be highly unstable (which it is not). Do you think an alternative mechanism of capsizing was possible? I think that the grounding may have provided a fulcrum to a lever which allowed the wind to capsize Costia Concordia. Similar may be observed in heeling sailboats on a beam reach. If the wind is strong enough and sails are tight, they may even capsize. But if the centreboard is raised, there is a huge drift but almost no heeling.

[@McLogji1002]

I like ur content keep it up

[@mojojojojowhitequeen1614]

Brilliant anology thanks

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks Jo

[@minecraftXanGaming]

Nice !

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks!

[@jacobparoly5585]

You can actually see the ship laying there on google earth lol i just saw it

[@killian9314]

Check the date of the picture, in many places google earth still uses pictures from as back to 2013, because they haven't gotten permission to update them, also, i thought there was an operation to salvage the ship, didn't that go through righting the ship, like the hms normandie?

[@mrreymundo5383]

@@killian9314 IT has been floated and dismantled. Not sure when, but I saw footage

[@killian9314]

@@mrreymundo5383 thanks

[@jacobparoly5585]

A1pha Ch3rnovak i know

[@Eurodance_Groove]

You are out of date dude... The ship has been removed and the landscape restored...

[@wassollderscheiss33]

That was quite thrilling

[@erenkavilcioglu]

internet historian has a brilliant video on this. also very fun.

[@kjellingvaldsen5086]

This was just because of the stupid captain who went out of planned course, if he didn't do this nothing would have happened.

[@superandreanintendo]

He did that as a routine of the company to show its ships by making them a bright as possible during the night. Giglio is a popular tourist sea location. He and the crew just messed up. Problem his Schettino made it worse after 🙈

[@kingminos1993]

Ever considered doing videos on the making of Ancient and Medieval ships and how they would attempt to keep afloat in battle or if damaged? Think you’d have lost of material to work with the Royal Navy and the Spanish Armada. Love your videos!

[@1joshjosh1]

I love this guy's videos but I always watch at 1.25 speed. Then they're perfect

[@KevinP32270]

Thanks.

[@positronicfeed]

Had they dropped anchor when the ship was level and facing the wind, would that and the wind have kept it stable for long enough to evacuate ?

[@MonkeyJedi99]

That was what I was thinking also!

[@lovelovelove7083]

Me too.

[@jenniferali9457]

I was wondering how the ship hit the rock on her port side, but end up resting on her starboard side.Thank you for answering my question

[@JMAC-rs6ey]

Because the bulkhead was completed flooded

[@tod4865]

What do you do for a living Your videos are so clear and precise. Thanks

[@bieituns]

He is probably a deck officer in the merchant navy. I myself am a 2nd officer and so I can tell he has a similar background and training.

[@JMAC-rs6ey]

He a ship captain. I know him personally

[@ShaunieDale]

The ship capsizing to starboard when the starboard side of the hull grounds out is counter-intuitive until you factor in the rise of the CoG. Interesting to know. Excellent video, thank you.

[@tp6335]

This is actually very counter intuitive, I had no idea that grounding could have this effect. Need to calculate this myself now....

[@CasualNavigation]

I was surprised the first time I learned it too!

[@gonkeyhughes]

Great

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks!

[@Necrobin]

I visited this ship a couple of years back. It was strange to see such a big cruiser just lying there next to that beautiful town almost looking unharmed.

[@ianoliver3879]

Wow! Thank you. FInally a yooootooob chap apart from Tom Scott who makes sense. And a great deal of sense. Good stuff.

[@Paul-ou1rx]

Nice vid. I would also like to see a remake with real footage and with narration by the "Honey Badger don't care" presenter.

[@andomedean]

This explanation has been troubling me. The effect of grounding on the right of the hull causing a clockwise moment is counterintuitive because any vertical force on the right of it will produce a force anticlockwise to the COG. The effect of the wind and horizontal force from the seabed to stop the ship moving right would be clockwise though. I presume all these forces have been modelled physically and theoretically to reproduce the toppling? I can't find this explanation anywhere else either. I've just simulated this by floating a partly filled, closed bottle, of a similar shape to the Concordia hull then placing a small weight on the top to bring the COG nearer the metacentre so its nearly unstable. Then I simply put my hand in the water, and gently push my finger up on the right of the hull to simulate the grounding on the seabed. The bottle just does what you expect it turns anti-clockwise. If however I push horizontally at the bottom or top to simulate the grounding + wind and produce a clockwise moment, it soon spins clockwise and topples over. Obviously the grounding force would neither be vertical or horizontal but at an angle between these extremes. It might the useful to show the effect of grounding with a proper model in a tank, perhaps by grounding on one side and flooding the ship more to produce a vertical force without much horizontal wind component. In either case, whatever explanation is correct, it questions the wisdom of grounding a ship sideways at all, since it was the rapid listing or heeling of the ship rather than the slower vertical sinking which prevented all the lifeboats from launching, restricted movement inside the ship and probably more rapidly flooded the starboard side. It's important Masters understand this effect for future reference, although its unclear how much control he had over the ship other than the timing of the dropping of anchors.

[@icecreambone]

This explanation is only showing the ship stability (in the technical sense, not the layman's), i.e. vertical forces. While the grounding vertical force may cause a anticlockwise moment, it *will* produce a clockwise moment when considering horizontal force balancing with the wind. In this specific explanation it is only showing how grounding causes the effective center of gravity to shift, which then produces an *additional* clockwise moment, and the wind is included only insofar as it is giving the ship an initial list. (The negative mass can be considered the reverse effect of an anchor or mooring line, which is typically treated as a point mass equivalent to the tension it's exerting on the ship.)

[@teeesen]

@@icecreambone The negative mass would be on the right lower corner in the diagram, so it shifts the COG to the left as well as up, making the ship more stable. I think the clockwise torque must have come from the lateral force of the grounding.

[@Mrhvac]

You do a great job on your videos. They are super interesting. Thank you for doing them. I like the longer, more detailed ones. I would suggest keeping them under about eight minutes.

[@BikeWH]

Once the hull was pierced and compartments flooded would it be correct to say the center of buoyancy shifted rather than the center of mass shifted? Does the entering water (below the waterline actually add weight to the vessel?

[@shebby0204]

I wish you included how the crew managed the situation.

[@caricue]

It would also be nice to hear what systems failed and what changes have been made in equipment and procedures to keep this from happening again.

[@cdouglas1942]

This isn't a documentary about the sinking. Its about what happens when a ship takes on water, affects of grounding etc.

[@Alucard-gt1zf]

paul anthony bulao the crew didn’t handle it They were the first to evacuate and instead left the entertainment team to help evacuate

[@Eurodance_Groove]

@@Alucard-gt1zf Most of the crew members were from asia... And they did not how to speak or interact well with other passengers or even crew members... Instead, if they would have been only from one nationality or better qualified and trained... Maybe the accident would have been not so bad...

[@dwright2104]

So once the ship self righted, had they managed to drop anker to prevent the ship re grounding they would have been able to deploy all life rafts.

[@duncanread4442]

Love your vids. Could you put a starboard and port side label on your diagrams please thanks 🙂

[@comingsoon238]

oh my got! my favorite ship costa concordia

[@jamese9283]

Do you think the crossflooding valves made things worse in this accident?

[@CasualNavigation]

Crossflooding valves don't let in extra water, they only aim to bring the ship upright. The heeling graphs in the report show they did work and helped bring the ship upright.

[@jamese9283]

I understand, but by righting the ship, they exposed the port side to the wind and could have led to the ultimate capsize to starboard. Just an idea.

[@CasualNavigation]

In that case I assume she would have just capsized to port sooner instead. Not completely sure though.

[@christophermckeon9030]

Had the captain let go anchor off the coast he would've swung bow on to the wind and ameliorated his listing issues. Basic seamanship. This can be done even without power in an uncontrolled drop. I don't get why the ship couldn't compartmentalise water, esp in the engine spaces. Crappy design I guess. Or crappy leadership from all departments?

[@CasualNavigation]

That's exactly why the investigation was done. Now we have the facts, it is possible to identify how future improvements could help avoid these sort of tragedies.

[@billydamnit]

Exactly. Drop the anchor and wait til it sets

[@Davidkxf]

The water was too deep

[@JasperJanssen]

Cruise ships still have one main engine, afaik, just like container ships, with a bunch of smaller auxiliary engines. But that main engine still has to be centered and in the bottom for CoG reasons and you can’t really compartmentalize through the engine.

[@lucatolin7398]

Just a technical question! In the image at 6:30 we see the Centre of Gravity (acting downwards) on the right compared to the Centre of Buoyancy (acting upwards) creating a clockwise momentum that capsizes the ship. But shouldn't the point of contact with the seafloor, which is even more to the right compared to the CG act as a fulcrum and create an opposite, counter-clockwise momentum that would get the ship back straight? Is it just a simplified diagram or am I missing something?

[@hazza2247]

subscribed

[@lizmacleod5523]

Casual Navigation: *8 MINUTE VIDEO* me: uhhhhh- it hit a rock, and, it’s a uhhhhh a cruise ship, and it’s top heavy so it go flip flip

[@Seth_Arvila]

Has anything been done in newer ships to prevent this from happening again?

[@CasualNavigation]

Newer ships have to meet newer survivability criteria, and onboard procedures have been updated. No ship can ever be made unsinkable though.

[@schwarzerritter5724]

Seth Arvila The only thing you can do is not driving the ship this close to land.

[@trulyinfamous]

The Casual Navigator Well, a submarine is unsinkable because it's already underwater.

[@Stacy_Smith]

Truly Infamous Your attempt at being a smart-ass is futile. Submarines always have maintain a level of buoyancy in order to stay submerged but... Not sink.

[@muuundotarde7914]

DA B dont worry, soon only strong indepentent transgender people of colour, ( no males allowed) And bam, problem solved.

[@ziyanyang9777]

Very good explanation, I wish the audio could be louder.

[@BLackeys2012]

Just a small question, what if the ship dropped the anchor while she was drifting would it stops.

[@mattmopar440]

Holy hell they got so lucky with that wind pushing them back to shore this could of been as bad as titanic

[@elit2175]

mattmopar440 the wind pushing Concordia onto the island is precisely what caused the catastrophe actually. If there was no wind and she had remained drifted out off the coastline, she would have settled level and all boats could have been launched. I think we too often compare these situations to Titanic, especially when there really is no comparison at all. Titanic’s sinking was a complete disaster.

[@mattmopar440]

@@elit2175 would they have gotten the life boats off in time before the power failed tho ?

[@elit2175]

@@mattmopar440 davits can be operated independently of main ship power.

[@mattmopar440]

@@elit2175 I understand that but it's about time they didn't have a ton of time once they announced abandon ship

[@elit2175]

@@mattmopar440 that has nothing to do with what you were mentioning about the ship being pushed ashore. Regardless, if Concordia had not heeled over, her portside lifeboats would have been accessible.

[@herbertmasing]

Not sure if connected, but this was the largest naval insurance claim in history. Maybe that's the real answer to WHY.

[@CasualNavigation]

Thanks herbert, that is interesting. Marine insurance is a surprisingly interesting topic as well

[@herbertmasing]

Reading only a few articles on this catastrophe, immediately 3 themes arise: 1) highest insurance claim, 2) big-scale drug trafficking on that cruise, 3) a strange slavic-background female companion of the captain, whom he wanted to impress by passing by the shore. It just doesn't add up somehow, but sometimes life is that random :| Thanks for Your interesting yt videos :)

[@1Maklak]

I think a better explanation would be that the ship had some momentum and when a part of it got stuck on the bottom, the rest of it wanted to keep moving, so the whole thing started turning. It's what happens when airplane tires make contact with the ground; they start turning. A "negative mass" would move the center of gravity not just up, but also to the opposite side of it, so if the ship wasn't moving (to the side in this view), touching the bottom would stabilize it.

[@59317]

I loved your “did the titanic have to sink?” video. After watching this, I wonder if the Concordia had to sink? Could the crew have dropped anchor at the end of their long starboard turn and kept the boat off the rocks (and therefore sinking slowly but upright?).

[@justinlynch3]

What capsized the ship was a incompetent and negligent captain and crew.

[@MrDorbel]

@ Justin Lynch The Captain was a disgrace, but all the evidence is that the crew actually did a very good job and kept the loss of life very low for such a disaster.

[@m1co294]

Then theres the Oceanos, where the captain amd crew abandoned ship before telling anyone that the ship was sinking, where the entertainers had to save loads of lives instead of the crew

[@justinlynch3]

@@m1co294 Yea I heard of that one. Just awful. Cowards who took no responsibility, they just wanted to save themselves. Props to the entertainers for stepping up.

[@michaelhompus2475]

At 6:15, a 'negative mass' which raises the center of gravity is introduced . That doesn't make sense at all. The upward force on the right side changes the position and magnitude of the upward force (buoancy plus (grey arrow) grounding force). The ship's center of mass (center of gravity???) does not change. So, adding an extra upward force on the right side to assist the buoancy force helps to keep the ship upright. Even Newton would have qualified your explanation as stupid.

[@yutakago1736]

Coincidentally, when the ship first made impact with the rock, it was claimed that Celine Dion's "My Heart Will Go On", the theme song for the film (1997), was playing in a restaurant

[@suleymanbabak1973]

Excuse me, what sowtware do you use for the animations at 1:10? I'm a Nautical Sciences teacher and I've always wished there was something like this. What tools did you use?

[@pstreaks]

Thank you to the captain for bringing us this video, enjoy your 16 years in prison