No doubt you've all heard by now of the loss of the cruise ship Explorer while on an expedition to Antarctica. In spite of the fact that this was supposedly a vessel specifically designed and reinforced for working in ice, she was apparently holed below the waterline by a submerged berg and sank. Fortunately, the passengers and crew made it to lifeboats and have all been rescued by other vessels and accounted for safe and sound. They were very lucky. If the weather conditions and sea state had been normal for those waters, many would have perished in minutes.

Preliminary news stories about events like are invariably incorrect, but some reports simply beg for a closer look. Supposedly, Explorer went down from a "fist-sized hole", causing uncontrollable flooding. That's a very small hole for a ship that size. My question is, if the flooding was so severe, how did they know it was fist-sized? Ships are usually composed of watertight compartments, their decks and bulkheads pierced by watertight hatches and doors. They are also equipped with pumps to help control flooding, usually it takes severe damage to cause a vessel to founder because of a leak, it requires massive hull damage allowing multiple complartments to flood simultaneously. Ship's crews are trained in procedures that allow leaks to be isolated by sealing off flooded compartments from the rest of the ship as soon as they are evacuated.

This is not a high technology operation, it simply involves checking that a compartment is empty, and then slamming the door or hatch shut and securing it. Every compartment on a ship is classified and prominently labeled so that priority spaces can be isolated in a specific order, depending on their importance, vulnerability, and connectivity to other spaces, as well as the location of the hull breach. The process is coordinated by the engineering officer under the direct supervision of the Captain on the bridge. Learning these procedures is one of the first things mariners are indoctrinated on when they go aboard a new vessel, it's called "damage control", and it is considered an issue of high importance. There are damage control procedures for fire, collision, flooding, and a variety of other possible emergencies, and there are standing orders and plans for each of them. Crews are usually drilled frequently so they will not be taken by surprise by unusual circumstances. Ships with large crews, such as warships and cruise ships, have plenty of human and communications resources to carry this out, even while simultaneously making preparations for a possible "abandon ship". It appears that the crew of this vessel handled the abandonment of the vessel very competently, so the apparent failure of the damage control operation is quite unexpected. I look forward to hearing the full report of the inevitable inquiry.