Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 175 posts

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#81

Post by LgWoodenBadger »

jacquesm wrote: post #59
korethr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my takeaways from the article is that the captain's confidence and willingness to do the right thing had been shaken after he'd been burned the last time he'd refused unsafe orders. I'm wondering if the 1st officer similarly faced bad consequences for doing the right thing and taking command -- mutiny charges are still a thing, aren't they?

There's a movie that reviews that situation in a navy (nuclear submarine) context, it's called 'Crimson Tide'.

There’s an even older and probably more relevant (or at least similar) called “The Caine Mutiny.”

An lt takes command from the Captain during a typhoon due to the caltain’s actions/behavior and is subsequently tried for mutiny.

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#82

Post by lazyant »

Analemma_ wrote: post #74
doughj3 wrote: post #23

For anyone interested in stories like these, I highly recommend "Normal Accidents" by Charles Perrow - there's an entire chapter on maritime accidents.

Seconded, Normal Accidents is one of the best books I've ever read. In addition to the maritime accidents, there are chapters on nuclear plants, chemical plants, and dams. It is a great discussion of how modern industrial accidents rarely have a single cause but instead are cascade failures of systems whose complexity has evolved beyond what we can handle, and presaged many of the messes we've got into with hyper-sca…

Somehow related, "Command and Control" is an excellent read.

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#83

Post by floatingatoll »

SlowBro wrote: post #73
badloginagain wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also note that B.V.S did appear to have a 'Hourly Update' feature that did not appear to be subscribed to. It's also important to realize that the captain was confident with the plan- except the storm in question was abnormal. That's an important fact to consider, as it throws the mariners heuristics off deciding how much more attention to pay.

> Also note that B.V.S did appear to have a 'Hourly Update' feature that did not appear to be subscribed to. From the article, "The Coast Guard report also noted that “El Faro crew did not take advantage of B.V.S.’s tropical update feature,” which would have provided hourly updates." So hourly updates apparently were available even if not subscribed to.

There’s an interesting ethics question here: If your ship’s location places you near a hurricane, should they just quietly upgrade you for free tenporarily so that you don’t sink?

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#84

Post by sdhgaiojfsa »

oh_sigh wrote: post #68
sdhgaiojfsa wrote: post #11

My big takeaway from all of this is that, given the choice between driving your boat into a hurricane and doing something else, something else should be the default.

That's a pretty bad take away - no one wanted to drive trough the hurricane. The captain thought he was further away from the storm than he was, perhaps because of his use of an outdated weather feed. A better take away might be, for important decisions, you should deeply understand the data(and importantly, it's limitations) you are using to make the decision.

The report seems to suggest that his decision to drive where he did was baffling, even with the information he had available. All his officers were telling him to do otherwise, multiple times.

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#85

Post by SeanBoocock »

Luc wrote: post #4

I could tell from the title this was going to be written by William Langewiesche. He really knows how to spin a good yarn. All his articles and books seem to be movie-worthy. I'm not entirely convinced reality is that exciting, though.

A great example is his treatment of Air France 447: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/business/2014/10/air-france-...

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#86

Post by thisrod »

dz0ny wrote: post #12
cesarb wrote: post #2

NTSB report: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/...

It still boggles my mind how three different GPS position formats can be used. And then not used correctly by search crews, which then missed location by 23nm. https://i.imgur.com/nbwkCPY.png

Those formats are simply insane. It's well known that some people use decimal fractions of degrees, so why would anyone even consider using a decimal point to separate degrees and minutes?

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#87

Post by chrisweekly »

1. FYI the article is new but the disaster described happened on October 1, 2015.

2. I was astonished at this: > "It has been reported that a major merchant ship goes down somewhere in the world every two or three days; most are ships sailing under flags of convenience, with underpaid crews and poor safety records."

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#88

Post by JshWright »

dwighttk wrote: post #72
tomn wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

captain: "Can i play it safe on the way back?" boss: "Yes, authorized." NTSB: "What do you mean authorized? It's not your decision. Did the captain ask you if he could go the safe way on the way out?"

I guess I still don't quite understand the importance of "authorized" since the captain wrote: >Question I would like to transit the Old Bahama Channel on our return northbound leg He was clearly asking, not informing.

> He was clearly asking, not informing.

Right, that's the problem. It implies the captain was not free to make the decision himself (as he should have been).

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#89

Post by Declanomous »

floatingatoll wrote: post #83
SlowBro wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also note that B.V.S did appear to have a 'Hourly Update' feature that did not appear to be subscribed to. From the article, "The Coast Guard report also noted that “El Faro crew did not take advantage of B.V.S.’s tropical update feature,” which would have provided hourly updates." So hourly updates apparently were available even if not subscribed to.

There’s an interesting ethics question here: If your ship’s location places you near a hurricane, should they just quietly upgrade you for free tenporarily so that you don’t sink?

They should at least place a large warning stating that the data is not safe to use for navigational purposes.

Re: The Worst U.S. Maritime Disaster in Decades

#90

Post by ams6110 »

SlowBro wrote: post #73
badloginagain wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also note that B.V.S did appear to have a 'Hourly Update' feature that did not appear to be subscribed to. It's also important to realize that the captain was confident with the plan- except the storm in question was abnormal. That's an important fact to consider, as it throws the mariners heuristics off deciding how much more attention to pay.

> Also note that B.V.S did appear to have a 'Hourly Update' feature that did not appear to be subscribed to. From the article, "The Coast Guard report also noted that “El Faro crew did not take advantage of B.V.S.’s tropical update feature,” which would have provided hourly updates." So hourly updates apparently were available even if not subscribed to.

The crew did not take advantage, or the company did not buy the subscription?
Post reply on HN