In recent years, there have been many claims made that modern cruise ships are inherently unstable and unseaworthy. Naval architects, shipyards, and regulators, have replied, “No, they are not,” but the argument continues. Recently, the Anthem of the Seas put the argument to the test. As ungainly, bulky and high-sided as she indeed is, she did rather well under terrible conditions. Here is an article I wrote for gCaptain, yesterday, which I am reposting with permission.
Anthem of the Seas — Is She Seaworthy?
On Wednesday night, the Royal Caribbean cruise ship, Anthem of the Seas, made it safely back to its berth in Cape Liberty in New York harbor, a bit battered, but generally in good condition. Her roughly 4,500 passengers disembarked after a harrowing cruise to nowhere. The obvious first lesson of this unfortunate voyage is that a winter cruise from New York harbor around Cape Hatteras may not be such a good idea. The weather can get very rough. In this case, extremely rough. The captain reported wind speeds of 150-160 knots (172-184 mph), wind speeds comparable to a Category 5 hurricane. There were also reports of 30-foot waves. The Anthem of the Seas was seriously in danger.
Remarkably, the ship did just fine. The propellers kept turning. The lights stayed on. At the height of the storm, passengers in their staterooms were able to watch the Super Bowl without interruption, which was good news at least to Broncos fans. The ship incurred damage but it was reported to be superficial. There were no serious injuries to passengers or crew. As uncomfortable and scary as it must have been for all aboard, the ship; all eighteen decks of balconies, glass, and railings; weathered the storm. No doubt the captain, officers, and crew deserve considerable credit, but so too does the ship.
This matters because there have been many who have stated, matter of factly, that modern cruise ships are unseaworthy, unstable and simply unsafe. In the NOVA program, “Why Ships Sink,” Allan Graveson, Senior National Secretary, Nautilus UK, a trade union, says, “These ships now are being built in such a way that they are inherently unstable. It is a design issue.” The basis of Mr. Graveson’s assertion is unclear but it hasn’t stopped him from repeating it.
Jim Walker, a maritime lawyer who specializes in the cruise industry and writes the popular blog, Cruise Law News, also expressed his opinion. In a blog post, “Are Cruise Ships Dangerously Top Heavy?” he writes:
“I do not pretend to be a naval architect. I studied English and History at Duke. It remains a mystery to me how jumbo jets can take off or huge ships can even float. But you don’t need to be an expert to have an opinion on this issue. Mr. Sheperd reminds us of the old saying in boat building, “if it looks right, it is right.”
“Well, these cruise ships don’t look right to me. They look like condominiums ripped out of Collins Avenue on Miami Beach and placed on a barge. They look eager to tip over.”
The “Mr. Shepard” that Walker refers to is another blogger who also opined: “Why Mega Cruise Ships Are Unsafe.”
The truth is that modern cruise ships do look ungainly and top-heavy. They look like layer cakes with way too many layers. Containerships stacked high with containers or the boxiest Pure Car Carriers look positively dainty next to the modern cruise ship behemoths.
Of course, opinions are not facts and appearances can be deceiving.
I am a naval architect and I know that one cannot calculate a ship’s stability simply by the ship’s appearance. Stability depends on many factors – the ship’s vertical center of gravity, the moment of inertia of the waterplane, the area under the righting arm curve, windage, free surface and so on. It is not enough to say, “Gee, that ship looks top heavy.” Likewise, to suggest that the ships are inherently unstable by design is just silly. Passenger ship design and stability are carefully controlled and regulated.
All this is easy to say, sitting in a heated office ashore. But are those of us who claim that there is nothing to worry about, that cruise ships are stable and meet all the regulations, are we also just expressing our opinions? Are our opinions supported by physics and engineering? The Prussian Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke the Elder said that “no plan survives the first contact with the enemy.” Likewise, ship designs that work on paper don’t always survive a storm at sea.
The recent encounter between a modern cruise ship and major storm was a test, not a calculation or a simulation but a full-scale blowout trial in highly dangerous conditions. It was a test that probably could and should have been avoided, but proved interesting and revelatory, all the same.
The bottom line? The Anthem of the Seas survived. No one died or was seriously injured. The ship made it into port under its own power. This is not to say that all cruise ships under similar circumstances would necessarily have done as well, or that other things could not have gone seriously awry. But, in this case, the critics were proved wrong. A brand new cruise ship, as high sided and ungainly as any of her sisters, survived the worst winds and seas.
So, when the doubters suggest that cruise ships are unstable or unsafe, the right answer may be “they are a lot more seaworthy than they look.”
Anthem of the Seas: Post-Storm Captain’s Interview (Feb 8, 2016)
“The propellers kept turning”
Apparently not.
http://gcaptain.com/u-s-coast-guard-crews-working-to-repair-broken-azipod-on-storm-damaged-anthem-of-the-seas/
Whilst they may have stability these ships do have several recorded incidents of breakdown involving azipods and complete electrical failure, these were the biggest threats during this incident. Whilst she may have remained floating, failure of propulsion and lying a hull would have seen very different possibilities for casualties and potential for damage.
I agree. If she had lost power, had there been a fire, or any number of other mechanical failures had taken place, the outcome could have been tragically different. My point here is that cruise ships are not inherently unstable as has been so often claimed.
Sending the ship into what RCL knew would be a violent storm was stupid and completely irresponsible. The cruise line should never have knowingly sent a ship into a Force 11 storm off Hatteras.
Regarding the azipod failure, it appears that they did not lose power during the storm but rather lost part of their steering, which could have been almost as bad. When they turned North and headed home, they shut down one pod with burnt clutches. The biggest problem with pod propulsion in the past has been a failure of the thrust bearings. In this case, the failure was in the clutches of the four steering motors. Bad, but easier to repair. Reports are that the ship is sailing again tonight. Hope they do a better job watching the weather.
A good quick rule of thumb test of Stability is Time the Rolls. A quick ‘snap’ roll indicates excess stability. When the rolls are slow, with pauses, that seem to indicate if it is making up it’s mind whether to come back or not, this is an indication of potential Danger and possible Capsize. Years ago when I was an engineer on the Grace Line(RIP) Passenger Ships, we as engineers filled out a form with the condition of all tanks; this was passed to the Deck, who filled in the Cargo, etc, and submitted it to the Coast Guard. There were also aids in those pre-computer days like the Stabilogauge, a handheld Mechanical Computer, custom tailored to each ship. Now, I’m sure that ships such as the Anthem can easily calculate their stability with a few clicks. Bottomn Line; She survived. Would have been routine for a cargo ship. Being unprepared, furniture and hundreds of Landlubbers that generated publicity.
Confusing momentary gusts with sustained winds can result in inaccurate and highly exaggerated comparisons to hurricane conditions. And, wave height alone tells very little about sea state and danger. Thirty foot waves with, say, a one-and-a-half minute period …. yawn. With a twenty second period and twelve foot breaking crests and wave trains from different directions and a not so deep bottom and maybe a lee shore…call me good and horrified.
Besides becoming more experienced, “old salts” tend to become arrogant or careless with time. Modern cruise ships are not immune to a “perfect storm” scenario. Two out of three times we sailed out of NY Harbor in winter, we hit storms. We hit a storm off Cape Hattaras in the ’70s on the “tiny” SS Oceanic, but the worst was on the larger ship, Explorer of the Seas, sailing back to Bayonne into the December blizzard of 2009. Another RCI Captain ran “hell bent for leather” into the back of a retreating storm to make his 7AM docking, but Customs could not get in until 9AM due to 2 feet of snow. It would have been more prudent to slow down and arrive a couple of hours later.
Talk about a cruise ship with beautiful lines, SS Oceanic (Home Lines) was one of the most graceful vessels afloat. She later came to Port Canaveral. Fl and acquired the nickname “The Big Red Boat” as she no longer sported the familiar white and buff color scheme. Anthem Of The Seas couldn’t hold a candle to her in looks.
The ABB Azipod brochure shows Four steering motors, and Four Torque overload clutches: one for each steering motor:
With Four clutch gone on the Port Azipod, the Anthem of the Seas’ steering systems were actually compromised during this storm:
https://library.e.abb.com/public/6c1b0250efd18e73c1257a530040dcf2/XO2100_XO2300_Product_Intro_lowres.pdf
Agreed. The damage to the Azipod steering clutches was the equivalent of losing one rudder. They had a second Azipod, so they had a second rudder.
Nevertheless, the statement by RCL that the damage to the ship did not impact its seaworthiness seems far less candid or accurate, in retrospect.
The network news, and media are dropping the ball here.
They are working on percentages. Keep transatlantic and winter trips to an absolute minimum and they may never have a QE2 wave encounter. Thirty feet doesn’t seem like a test to me.