Why Cruise Ships Don't Sink

Why aren't there more cruise ship sinking stories? It's all in the design. Check out today's epic new video that breaks down why cruise ships will never be found at the bottom of the ocean.

🔖 MY SOCIAL PAGES

💭 Find more interesting stuff on:

All videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise noted.

[tristananastasio]

I actually was on a cruise that left from the east coast of the USA (I think it was New York City or Baltimore but I can’t remember). We sailed right through hurricane Irene and I remember it being a blast since I was a kid haha. The ship would dip crazy low and you’d feel completely weightless as it went down, and then it would go back up and you’d feel like you weighed a thousand pounds. My siblings and I jumped up entire staircases when the ship was on its way down lol. Half of the ship was completely seasick though so that must’ve been awful for them, but for us we don’t get seasick so it ended up being fun!

[denorbenen]

The Costa Concordia sank because the captain violated company and nautical rules by sailing too close to the coastline known for its dangerous, rock laden shoreline, so that he could show off to friends on shore. He was also one of the first to flee the ship hours before as his crew rescued the passengers with a minimum loss of life. I believe that he went to prison for that one.

[MartiniBlankontherest]

Your explanation of the Costa Concordia sinking was so far from fact.
Nobody "rushed" to get people off the boat. They actually lied for hours about what was going on, it was a giant mess of mismanagement.

[moonman]

Fact: If you ever go on a Disney cruise, in the unlikely event you fall overboard, a sensor system will alert the captain so they can dispatch lifesaving equipment to you and hopefully bring you back into the ship.

[lkslokinhow]

The Costa Concordia hit the bottom of the sea and because of that it didn't completely sank. There was still a lot of people on board when that happened. Also rescue was right there since it was close to the land. It would be a much worse catastrophe if it happened in the middle of nowhere.
The Titanic was in the middle of the Atlantic with the seafloor almost 4000 meters bellow it. Without any rescue nearby (there is a theory that there was a ship near but for a number of reasons it ignored the distress signal). And the water was extremely cold, quickly killing a lot of people of hypothermia.
Ocean liners are actuality faster and better at handling bad weather. It is just that they don't make economical sense anymore, airplanes does a much better job of crossing oceans.

[Xeronex]

At time index 5:32 the Titanic receives a hole of 300 feet in narration and 3, 000 feet in the graphics. That's pretty impressive for a ship that's only 883 feet long.

[CoffeeMonster]

5:31 3000 feet is quite long of a hole for a ship with a length of 800 feet. Also the damage caused by the collision was several smaller gaps opening up no more than a few inches between the hull plates. The longest gap was around 50 feet. If the damage would have been a 300 ft long hole in the ship, it would have sank in minutes, likely killing everyone on board, not over the course of 2 hours and 40 minutes.

[lizzybearstar]

I think we can all agree to never call a ship or anything like that ocean liner cruise ship anything "unsinkable" because Poseidon is just going to be like challenge accepted

[andykap]

The Costa Concordia didn’t sink slowly due to its design at all. The only reason it sank slowly is because it ran aground and came to rest on it’s side (which made normal lifeboat usage impossible). Also the hole in the side of the ship was 160 ft not 16 ft. I got this all off wikipedia in about 10 minutes. Do your research guys.

[shelty]

Coasta Concordia be like : am I a joke to you?

[quattobeast]

I was on one once near Mexico - a squall came and pushed the ship so far over that the pools lost much of their water and many deck chair went over the edge. Scariest thing I have ever been a part of.

[ivayzi]

I was on a cruise the week Hurricane Ian was hitting Florida, and the water was CRAZY rough. Even the crew, who sailed for months at a time, year after year, were struggling to balance and keep their stomachs in check. Passengers threw up in main areas. It was bad. But, not once, did it feel dangerous. And even after all of that, I’m still going again soon lol

[melsop]

Been partially in this situation and can confirm. Coming back on the Atlantic side of the Caribbean and it was rough! Not stormy, just real windy and nasty waves. But even out on deck...you barely felt it. You could see the water in the on deck pools certainly smashing back and forth...but you really didn't feel too much back and forth.

[LarssaLarsson]

Would love to see a mini documentary about MS Estonia after this! Would fit perfectly with its dark history and hidden reason about what happend to the ship

[reckitboo]

I feel like other people have also noticed that when you guys said that the Titanic hit the iceberg, the animation showed 3, 000 feet, however, you guys said that the Titanic was 883 feet long. Other than that slight mistake, this video was very informative!

[dmsdmullins]

Sunk cruise ships.
1. Titanic – 1912
2. Empress of Ireland – 1914
3. Britannic – 1916
4. Principessa Mafalda – 1927
5. Georges Philippar – 1932
6. Andrea Doria – 1956
7. MV Jupiter – 1988
8. MTS Oceanos – 1991
9. Sun Vista – 1999
10. SeaBreeze – 2000
11. Britanis – 2000
12. Costa Concordia – 2012
13. Eastern Star – 2015
14. Orient Queen – 2020

And these are just the biggest ones....

[noapathy]

I’ve never had a desire to go on a cruise ship. Curious to hear about other peoples experiences

[MrKevb]

I was on the Carnival Destiny leaving Miami the year it came out, which was about 25 years ago when we collided with a large fishing vessel during diner. It was hardly noticeable. We stopped for the coast guard to investigate and clear us. At the 1st port of call I looked for damage and all that there was is pain transfer that they were already in the process of painting over.

[rogerscurlock]

5:30
So the iceberg ripped a hole around the entire hull and credited the White star line with 1, 400' of rip to use at a later date? Or was it a, "Use it or lose it", situation, one that forced the iceberg to make 1 full lap around the ship, then go an additional 7/8 of the way around?

6:16
300' and 16' aren't even in the realm of similar, not to mention one ship was in the coastal shallows(approx. 45' deep), the other was in the middle of the Atlantic(approx. 12, 400' deep). the situations you're trying to compare aren't comparable. The Titanic took 3 hours to completely sink. The Costa Concordia didn't completely sink at all. It actually sat above water for 2.5 years, before being re-floated and towed away to be scrapped.
If the ships swapped accident locations, the stories tied to the ships swap respectively. The results of both collisions were determined by the location, the ship is basically irrelevant.

This channel used to do better. The constant conflicting statements and simple errors that could have been easily caught and fixed are consistently becoming more common.

[deezem]

1:33

this line is quite disputable, as cruise ships cant withstand nearly as much rough weather as ocean liners, as cruise ships are built for crusing near coasts and relatively calm weather, while ocean liners are built for the worst of storms. Also, most modern cruise ships dont travel as fast as even the titanic. cruise ships and ocean liner really cant be compared fairly, as they are built for different uses and circumstances.