Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Sea Floor Scan Set To Conclude In A Week; Drone Strike Hits Al Qaeda Suspects; Flight 370: Next Step In The Search; Ferry Survivors And Families Cope With Guilt

Aired April 19, 2014 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: All right, hello again, I'm Fredricka Whitfield. Here are the top stories that we're following for you. The death toll rises in that sunken ferry catastrophe. Divers desperately racing to find survivors and the captain facing charges that could land him in prison for life.

Plus, an underwater drone is scanning the ocean floor in search of Flight 370. But why haven't we spotted any debris from the missing airliner? New details on that.

And the latest on today's deadly drone attack in Yemen that killed 12 suspected al Qaeda militants.

The underwater drone searching for Flight 370 could be done with its work within a week. That's sooner than many experts had predicted. It is currently scanning the ocean floor in the designated search zone. Officials say the Bluefin-21 has captured clear and sharp images of territory that had been uncharted until now. Still, it has not found any trace of the plane.

Malaysia's acting transport minister also says the next two days could be crucial in the hunt for the jet that vanished six weeks ago with 239 people on board. Today, 11 military planes and 12 ships are scouring a search zone that's been narrowed dramatically. Searchers are expected to cover about 20,000 square miles today, but they are still contending with rough weather as rain moves into the Southern Indian Ocean. So what is next for the search operation?

Let's bring in Erin McLaughlin who is following the story for us from Perth, Australia. Erin, they are saying the Bluefin-21 could be done with its current search drone within a week. It seems a whole lot quicker than most had expected. What's happening?

ERIN MCLAUGHLIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Fredricka. Well, authorities here in Australia are saying they have focused in on a particular search area, about a 3-mile radius around the place where they made that second acoustic detection by the American operated towed pinger locator some time ago. It was the strongest signal they detected. They decided to begin their search there. Now six dives in by my math, they've covered about 42 percent of that area.

Australian authorities saying they expect within the next five to seven days to search the rest. It is a really critical area because that's where they believe is the most likely place that they will find the black box, the acting Malaysian transport minister saying how critical this was. Says he is in discussion with Australian authorities about the possible next steps if the next five to seven days doesn't lead to signs of the missing Malaysian Flight 370 -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: Erin, what if they find nothing?

MCLAUGHLIN: Well, as they said, that's something that authorities are currently discussing. They're going to stop and sort of reassess the situation. One of the things that has been talked about is the possibility of broadening out the search area, the acting Malaysian transport minister tweeting out earlier in the week that they're considering exploring the possibility of introducing more underwater submersibles to cover a broader search area.

But again, we have another five to seven days of the critical area they're looking in now. At the moment, we understand they're currently in the midst of dive seven. We understand the Bluefin-21 is still in the water. People here are waiting, watching, hoping, and even praying that it finds something -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, Erin McLaughlin, thanks so much in Perth, Australia.

All right, so the Malaysian transport minister and Australian minister both saying it could be that it's time to reassess the search operations. Let's bring back our panel to talk more about this, Peter Goelz is a CNN aviation analyst and former NTSB managing director, Jeff Wise is a CNN aviation analyst and the author of "Extreme Fear," and Sylvia Earle is an oceanographer and explorer in residence at the National Geographic Society.

All right, so let's continue with our conversation earlier. It sounds like all of you are in agreement that it means going back and reviewing a lot of the information, all of the data in this whole reassessment. It means trying to figure out what are the best tools. It means looking again if they're looking in the right place.

So Jeff, to you first. You know, if there's a way in which to I guess use this current as much as a springboard, what at least has been gained from the way in which the search has been conducted so that they can figure out where to go from here?

JEFF WISE, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Well, I think really a lot has been accomplished in the last -- we're in the sixth week now, over more than $30 million has been spent.

WHITFIELD: What are the accomplishments?

WISE: Well, basically to eliminate where it is not because we've searched on the surface, it is a huge area of the Southern Indian Ocean, found nothing. As time goes by, if the plane did crash in the ocean, you would expect to find a significant amount of debris floating there. At first it would be very tightly clustered together on the surface. As time goes by, it would spread across a wider and wider search of ocean. That makes it less useful for locating wreckage on the bottom, but increases the chances that something will be found.

Remember, the Indian Ocean is a busy ocean. It is crossed by all kinds of shipping and fishing traffic. So you would expect in time that if the plane did crash in the southern ocean, some debris should be found, should turn up.

WHITFIELD: OK, so Sylvia, you're in agreement that eliminating where it is not, at least that's one of the accomplishments here?

SYLVIA EARLE, OCEANOGRAPHER: Absolutely. That's how the "Titanic" ultimately was found. A lot of searching over a long period of time to eliminate places where the ship was not. In this case, there's so much debris already out in the ocean, false leads if you will, just an idea of how much junk is in the ocean, but no evidence from the surface of airplane debris.

Now, to look at the bottom, bringing other equipment, whether it is ships with built in sonar or ships with towed or autonomous vehicles to widen the search area, the reason that it is effective to use Bluefin or the Remus or a handful of specialized autonomous systems is that they have very precise imaging capability.

The kind of sonar readings that you get from the surface or from most mapping sonars. The resolution is relatively coarse and what you need is something with fine resolution to actually locate, once you defined the search area, but we haven't apparently really defined the search area.

WHITFIELD: And to help define that search area, Peter, you were suggesting time for a new team, fresh eyes to look at the data that has already been collected, but then if indeed that ends up being the best course of action, this data, is any of it outdated, been destroyed in the process, compromised, if it means revisiting some of this data?

PETER GOELZ, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: No, I don't think so. I think the Malaysians would have to commit to really sharing absolutely everything they have. And what's probably most important is to go back and look at the work that was done that was based on so-called handshakes with the aircraft while it was in the air, to make sure that the arc, the two arches that were established, that those are in fact the arcs and area we need to look at, that it was accurate. Pretty tough math as I understand it, certainly beyond my capability, but I think we need to assess again fresh, in a fresh way, are we looking in the right area.

WHITFIELD: All right, Peter Goelz, Jeff Wise, Sylvia Earle, thank you so much. Stay with us. I do want to bring back the panel. We're going to talk more about the investigation. How far back do these possible teams with fresh eyes go in revisiting the investigation and advancing it, hopefully consequently. All right, thanks so much to all of you.

All right, a drone takes out a dozen suspected al Qaeda militants. How big of an impact might that have on the terror network? That's next. And living with guilt after surviving a disaster like the ferry catastrophe. We will take a closer look at the psychological trauma that can linger for years.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: A suspected drone strike targeting al Qaeda operatives in Yemen killed at least 15 people today according to officials in Yemen. Twelve of them were suspected al Qaeda militants, according to the Yemeni Defense Ministry. The strike hit a pickup truck in the A U.S. source in the region says it was aimed at three well known operatives linked to a training camp.

CNN national security analyst, Peter Bergen joining me live now from Washington. Peter, in your view, how significant might this be?

PETER BERGEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, Fredricka, it is one of eight strikes this year. It is part of a pattern of U.S. government actions against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, a group that that U.S. officials view as the most threatening right now to American interests. One strike doesn't equal a campaign, but this is part of a campaign that has been going on since President Obama assumed office. There have been 91 drone strikes so far under President Obama and 15 other kinds of cruise missile strikes. So more than 100 taken together. This has cost the group quite dearly, also there are civilian casualties as there was in the strike reported this morning.

WHITFIELD: In your view does this cripple al Qaeda in a big way?

BERGEN: I think it certainly greatly hampers their ability to do business. More than 30 leaders have been killed in drone strikes including of course the American cleric, Anwar Al-Awlaki, who is sort of the operational commander of the group when it came to American targets, so yes, cripple, certainly it really impedes ability to do business. It doesn't put them out of business, no single strike does.

WHITFIELD: OK, do you see that this strike is in any way connected to that new video or at least the recent video that was publicized?

BERGEN: You know, I don't think I know the answer to that. It is likely to be a coincidence. The video was taped last month. The strike happened in a different area than where the videotape is believed to have happened, there may well be no connection at all.

WHITFIELD: How did you interpret that video?

BERGEN: Well, I found it very surprising. When you have more than 100 members of al Qaeda greeting two top leaders of the group and seemingly doing it with impunity and not worried about drone strikes, the videotape speaks for itself. Was that group under surveillance at the time by the CIA? Did they miss this meeting? Did they miss the shot for some reason? We don't know the answers to that, but it is surprising they were able to assemble this large a group of fighters and two top leaders of the group and feel they could get away with it. WHITFIELD: Is it your feeling that Yemen, its government described as being very porous, not very strong, that al Qaeda has found a place in which to restructure and even strengthen?

BERGEN: You know, Yemen is the poorest country in the Arab world and it's running out of water and running out of whatever oil it used to have. Three different civil wars going on. It is a perfect place for a group like al Qaeda to position itself relying on ungoverned spaces where it can basically impose its will and operate with some degree of impunity. Yes, Yemen and of course, it is an Arab country and al Qaeda is largely an Arab organization. So for all those reasons, al Qaeda has found it a somewhat hospitable environment -- Fredricka.

WHITFIELD: All right, Peter Bergen, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

All right, troops are on the move at the Ukraine border. What happened to the international peace deal? We'll have the latest on the crisis in Ukraine next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Despite a new deal concerning Ukraine, tensions there are still heating up. Today, people in Eastern Ukraine awoke to thousands of Russian troops near their border. Ukrainian troops are there, the deal was signed by Russia, the U.S., Ukraine and the European Union to ease tensions and avert civil war. But so far, pro-Russian separatists have rejected calls for them to leave the public buildings they occupied in towns and cities across Eastern Ukraine and lay down their arms.

And Russia's Vladimir Putin refused to recall his troops. Russia says they are there due to political instability. Let's get some more perspective on all of this. Hannah Thoburn is a Eurasia analyst for the Foreign Policy Initiative joining us from Washington. Good to see you.

HANNAH THOBURN, EURASIA ANALYS, THE FOREIGN POLICY INSTITUTE: Thanks for having me.

WHITFIELD: Does the fact that the pro-Russian protesters are not complying with the deal show Russia doesn't have as much control over the situation as some thought?

THOBURN: It is very difficult to say. I think the one thing that's important to note is that the way this document was signed does give Russia plausible deniability. The separatist protesters in Eastern Ukraine, you know, Russia says it is not controlling them, and the Ukrainian government says it does and many governments in the west. It is difficult to say. My sense of this matter is that Russia does have some control over what's going on there and they could in fact really tell these guys to stand down.

WHITFIELD: Well, if Russia didn't have control, why would it sign this agreement?

THOBURN: Well, remember, if you look at the actual agreement, it doesn't really say specifically who is going to leave what buildings. It is just more of a general call for the buildings to be set free, for the militias to disarm. There's really no specifics in the set of the agreement that says who is going to do what. And now the problem is that neither side is willing to be the first one to make a move.

WHITFIELD: So what can or should be done at this juncture, if Russia, Vladimir Putin, is calling the White House, saying we need assistance, or there's some open dialogue about the situation here, why would Vladimir Putin not be able to feel like he has the power to ask pro- Russian troops to lay down their arms?

THOBURN: I think he does feel as though he have the power to do that. The question to me is whether or not he actually does want to do that. I think it is very interesting, if you look at what's going to happen in Ukraine in the next month or so, they have presidential elections scheduled for May 25th. One of Vladimir Putin's major goals is to make sure that Ukraine stays within the Russian sphere of influence. If he needs to do that by destabilizing Ukraine, by making sure presidential elections don't happen or are very difficult or are not recognized by a part of the population in Ukraine, I think he is perfectly willing to do so.

WHITFIELD: Secretary of State John Kerry weighed in saying Russia could face further costs if the situation does de-escalate as laid out in the agreement. Obama says he is skeptical about the situation. Does the U.S. trust anything that Putin says? Should there be trust?

THOBURN: You know, I think it goes back to, you know, the old saying, trust but verify. We should give these things a chance and I think we've shown that we're very willing to give agreements like this, and give diplomacy a chance. If the Russians do not follow through, if all sides do not follow through on their agreement, no matter what kind of denials they issue, I think it is incumbent on the United States to stand up for friends and allies in Ukraine. If that means additional punishments on the Russian government, that's something we should consider.

WHITFIELD: Additional punishments like what?

THOBURN: We could be talking about additional sanctions, whether or not on more members of Vladimir Putin's inner circle, we could be talking about increased sanctions on Russian owned state corporations. Some of their major corporations are very important in oil, in natural gas, in the energy sector. We could, in fact, place restrictions on those companies and their abilities to do business abroad. A strong step to take.

WHITFIELD: Does it seem there's leverage that comes with that, with the notion of increased sanctions?

THOBURN: You know, I think the problem really is getting the west, Europe and the United States all on the same page. A lot of European countries are really tied to Russian oil and gas and feel as though that's not something that they can do because it will hurt their economies so much. So whether or not there actually is political will in the west to do that, and whether or not the Obama administration judges it is a wise move I think is a completely different question.

WHITFIELD: All right, thank you so much, Hanna Thoburn. Appreciate that. We will continue with this discussion. Many ways to look at it. The deal putting Russia's relationships with the U.S. and the European Union on the line, but so far no one has backed down from criticism to threats. Secretary Kerry promising further action if Russia doesn't comply as we just discussed. And Russia hitting back saying Russia should not be treated like a school girl with a list of things to do.

I want to bring in now Anissa Naquai, a senior political correspondent and host of "In The Now" at RT Global News Network in Moscow. Good to see you, Anissa. Many in the international community think they know Putin. He is described as unhinged, out of touch, like a bored kid in the back of the classroom. That he is trying to build a Russian empire. Is all of this accurate? How would you best describe him and his motivation?

ANISSA NAQUAI, HOST OF "IN THE NOW" RT GLOBAL NEWS NETWORK: I think certainly at least in this part of the world and most of the world, people are used to the U.S. sort of going around and that, it comes as no surprise in terms of punishment, how Russia needs to be punished, how Putin needs to be punished. It is a great example of how the blame is trying to be put on Russia when if you look at how this all began, it was the U.S. who helped this peaceful protest that was in fact peaceful beginning back in Kiev earlier this year, even before this year, that turned into a violent armed protest.

WHITFIELD: In what way.

NAQUAI: And traveling to --

WHITFIELD: In what way was the U.S. encouraging or helping in that?

NAQUAI: Well, the U.S. have invested billions of dollars since the early '90s into -- they call it spreading democracy -- in countries that surround Russia's border. They have done it in Georgia and Ukraine. It is an old policy. It goes back to the colored revolutions ten years ago, it was a failed policy then and it is a failed policy now, and it is certainly not the way out. I think your guest was speaking earlier and she mentioned that both sides need to cooperate here, can't just be that the protesters in Eastern Ukraine have to lay down their arms, but the buildings occupied and tanks from Kiev can keep going on.

WHITFIELD: So you're seeing, you're drawing the parallel that there is I guess a double standard here, the U.S. was to encourage the peaceful protest, now that there are weapons involved, there's violence, there are threats, now you're saying the U.S. is back pedalling from that and placing blame as opposed to taking responsibility?

NAQUAI: I don't know if it is necessarily back pedalling. I think there's a policy of double standards coming out of Washington where you have them supporting an illegal government in Kiev and trying to put all the blame on Russia for the protests happening in Eastern Ukraine. Russia needs a stable Ukraine. Russia is owed billions of dollars by Ukraine in terms of the gas debt. Again, the U.S. has invested billions of dollars into spreading democracy in Ukraine. I think the question we should be asking is who benefits really from instability in Ukraine, keeping in mind it is halfway across the world from the United States, and right on Russia's border.

WHITFIELD: Isn't the answer, doesn't the international community believe it is Russia or Putin who ultimately benefits and that's what this is all about? Because it would be he that would come into stabilize --

NAQUAI: That's right. They do believe that. It doesn't mean it is necessarily true. I think that if you open up the dialogue more and debate and delve into the situation, you'll find Russia truly does need a stable Ukraine. It certainly doesn't need it to not have a government that can provide security for all its citizens, not just those in Western Ukraine, but in Eastern Ukraine as well, and Russia, Putin has said just this week that the only way forward is to lay down arms. You have the United States agreeing, but again, demanding only the protesters in Eastern Ukraine put down their arms. And it is just not going to work.

WHITFIELD: Do you have a better understanding of who these pro-Russia militants or protesters are given there are no markings on the uniforms or on clothing, masks that are being worn?

NAQUAI: To be fair, it is really difficult for me to say because I haven't been on the ground. But I think we need to be careful about the implications that are coming in. So you have the United States saying they're absolutely sure that these are Russian military. You have Russia saying that they have nothing to do with Russia, they themselves say they're Ukrainians, they have Ukraine passports. They are former military men, there's no doubt in that because of their coordination, a lot of them probably fought in Afghanistan.

That doesn't necessarily make them Russian or have ties to Russia. And I think the U.S. needs to listen more to some of its colleagues in Europe. You have the head of the E.U. intelligence this week saying he doesn't believe that they're Russian. And I think if the U.S. opens up and listens to some of the dialogue that's happening in Europe that they might find that blaming Russia is not going to be a way out of the solution.

WHITFIELD: All right, very complex, complicated conflict. Anissa Naquai, thank you so much. I appreciate that.

All right, also complicated, the search for Malaysia Flight 370. Is it time to regroup? The panel weighs in on what could be the next phase of the search.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: The next phase in the search for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 could come soon. The Bluefin-21 underwater drone that's been scanning the sea floor looks like it could complete its work in a week. Also, both Australia and Malaysian officials are saying they will have to regroup and reconsider search operations in the next few days.

Well today, 11 military planes and 12 ships are scouring the search zone. While the search goes on today, the longer term operation may be shifting into a different phase. Malaysia acting transport minister says the search will continue through the weekend, but he says if nothing is found, officials will have to rethink their strategy. Listen to what CNN safety analyst, David Soucie, told our Kate Bolduan about that.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID SOUCIE, CNN SAFETY ANALYST: What he is saying here in my opinion is that he's reached the end. That will be the end of the searches. If they don't reach something within a week, they will have said we heard the pings, we looked where the pings were and we didn't find anything. When he says regroup, that's the question. How far do you regroup? Do you go back to the data and pings and say perhaps it wasn't 370. It just says there's something going across there.

At what point do you say how far do you regroup to. What I would do at this point, what I would recommend going back to white sheep planning. That says we reconsider every assumption we made, not just go back backwards. If you make an assumption early on in strategy.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR, "NEW DAY": Set you on the wrong path.

SOUCIE: It can set you on the wrong path. This didn't work, let's work backward and accept the rest of it, still might be on the wrong path. My suggestion is to go all the way back, I am not second guessing them, I am not there, I don't have all of the information, but white sheet to planning would be good to re-evaluate everything.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, lots of ways in looking at this. Let's bring back our panel now, Sylvia Earle is an oceanographer and explorer in residence with the National Geographic Society. Jeff Wise is a CNN aviation analyst and science writer, and Peter Goelz is a CNN aviation analyst and former manager director of the NTBS.

So Jeff, let me begin with you. You heard your colleague, David, talking about the white sheet planning and going as far back as that. Are you in agreement?

WISE: Absolutely. I think we've all been trying to say something similar, although we're using different words. What we're all really saying is you have to go back to stop, in a way we've gotten in the habit of looking at this particular spot. We've gotten in the habit of thinking this is normal, this is probably the most likely outcome. Let's assume that it is here. We need to stop, reverse, undo that mental process of taking for granted it must be here in this area.

As I said earlier, we've got a lot of data about where it isn't. Every time we search and don't find wreckage in the Southern Indian Ocean, that increases the probability that it is not in the Southern Indian Ocean. WHITFIELD: So Peter, does it mean going as far back as re-evaluating Inmarsat, all of that data helped direct searchers to the place that they are right now?

GOELZ: Absolutely. You have to go back as both David and Jeff have indicated and question all of the assumptions and you need to do it with a fresh set of eyes. People say here is the challenge. We're looking at it for the first time. What do we need to do and what does it tell us? If we don't do that, I think we're ready for a very, very long --

WHITFIELD: Might it also mean the data is simple flawed that even if you bring in a fresh set of eyes, if you don't have the right materials in which to evaluate, that doesn't necessarily, you know, increase the probability of more specific points here.

GOELZ: Right. The data is not so much flawed as incomplete. We have a whole lot of assumptions going on and we've got very little hard data from the primary radar tracks, which may or may not be Flight 370 to the suppositions that it was flying at x altitude, at x speed. We have a lot of open space here and very few data points.

WHITFIELD: Sylvia, it seems like the experts have done the best that they have been able to do with the information they've had. If you have the same information, but you have a new team, new set of eyes, I mean, should there be great expectations that the outcome is going to be any different?

EARLE: Well, if in fact the pings that have been detected did come from the airplane, there is a chance that it might still be found in the next few days.

WHITFIELD: So you have a big if. You're not sure about the pings.

EARLE: That's right. But if not, then it's logical that you go back and reassess the assumptions and really starting from scratch.

WHITFIELD: There was so much certainty, just a week ago, we heard Australian officials feeling so confident, saying these pings are the best we've ever had. Now there's a lot of silence coming from some of the same officials, and hearing you and your colleagues here say if, and not so certain, and maybe it was false positives coming from the pings, there really is very little confidence here.

EARLE: But once a location is determined, there is equipment out there that can be brought into the scene, both to refine the search area and recover what's there, if they can zero in on the place.

WHITFIELD: And Peter, have you lost confidence?

GOELZ: Not at all. I haven't lost confidence. This has been a perplexing and challenging event from day one. But if you had been involved in these kinds of searches before, I think people would have been a little more moderate in expectations. Open ocean search really is hard. When you're dealing with the four pings, one of the pings was 17 miles out, which was an outlier from the other three, and not at the correct level of megahertz. So I think statements could have been tempered.

WHITFIELD: All right, so Jeff, maybe that's one of the lessons learned, too. Jeff, did you feel a sense of confidence even a week, week and a half ago, and it simply diminished or do you agree with peter maybe there was expression of overconfidence, too soon, was premature?

WISE: I think I might state it stronger than peter did. I was baffled a week ago that authorities were making such strong statements, given the perplexing consistency of the data, and you know, listen, for me it is just perplexing, for my fellow analysts, we had hopes this mystery would be resolved soon. Think about the families. Think about being told your loved one is dead, that their final resting place is about to be discovered.

I mean, the emotions that must have been -- just the turmoil they had to go through is I think -- it should not have been done. I think it is really a problem. And I think there needs to be some reassessment at a political level in Australia and Malaysia that this kind of language was used.

WHITFIELD: All right, Jeff Wise, Peter Goelz, Sylvia Earle, thanks to all of you, appreciate it.

All right, deep water submarines may or may not help solve the mystery of MH370. As CNN's Martin Savidge found out using manned subs can be pretty challenging.

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: One of the challenges, whether it is an ROV, a submersible, whether it is autonomous, the careful action of retrieving whatever went under the water looking for wreckage there on the airliner is critical. We're going to show it to you live coming up in just a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: If search crews and wreckage from Flight 370 do indeed find anything, they're expected to deploy deep water submarines to the ocean. Getting those subs back to the surface can be a difficult operation. CNN's Martin Savidge went 50 feet underwater in a submarine for a look at how it happens.

SAVIDGE: I can feel them lean to one side.

PHIL NUYTTEN, UNDERWATER RECOVERY EXPERT: The swimmers, divers getting on board on top of the sub, which are floating on the water. He is looking up the crane line to the sub. In a few seconds we are lifting the sub clear out of the water, get a chance to see how the recovery is done. As you point out, no matter what vehicle you use, the recovery phase is as important.

SAVIDGE: A vehicle could have been down there for hours, 15 hours. Getting back to the surface, it is something that has to be dug carefully because you don't want to damage any piece of equipment because you need it again. NUYTTEN: The big thing about it, when you start down, you are in control of the weather. You don't dive if weather conditions are rough. But after you have been on the bottom for 10 or 11 hours, you may have a very stormy condition on the surface. So very often in recovery, it is for more onerous than the launch.

SAVIDGE: Jeff, are we coming up now? Let's go. Let's lift us up, please. It is a pretty cool view, I got to say, Fredricka, as you rise from the water, and all begins to get revealed here. And look at that view. I mean, this is British Columbia, Horseshoe Bay, but this is absolutely gorgeous. I have to say when you have been down below, maybe a little welcoming as well.

NUYTTEN: Every time.

SAVIDGE: So now what happens?

NUYTTEN: Take us up higher than the deck of the recovery vessel, then swing us over, and put us on the deck.

SAVIDGE: Now assuming a vessel like this has gone through 15 hours down below, what has to be done to prepare for the next journey?

NUYTTEN: All systems have to be rechecked to make sure all systems are functioning properly. The co2 scrubber chemical has to be changed for co2 scrubbing. The air bottles have to be recharged with high pressure air.

SAVIDGE: Here we are. Fredricka, that's how you get out of the water. It may look easy but there's a lot to it.

WHITFIELD: No, it does not look easy, but you did it. Thank you so much, Martin, thanks for that perspective.

All right, surviving a deadly disaster. How do you cope when you escape death, but others near you don't.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Families are waiting desperately for news of their loved ones on board that ferry. Senior medical correspondent, Elizabeth Cohen joining me now to discuss the impact survivor's guilt can have. Elizabeth, clearly there is going to be a lot of that.

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: There is. So on top of having lost a loved one, there's guilt that somehow you could have done more, even when you couldn't have. It is a natural human reaction and there are so many stories. Let's talk about a couple of them. There was a 6-year-old girl whose 7-year-old brother and her mother put on her life jacket, now those two, the mother and brother cannot be found.

WHITFIELD: How is she going to deal? Once she comes to terms and realizes her entire family is gone and she's going to remember that moment of when they put that life jacket on her. COHEN: That's true, especially for children. Children often think that they are at fault or sort of at the center of something, even when they're not. For a child or an adult, it is going to take a lot of convincing, talking from family, from friends, from professionals if necessary to say you are not at fault. There was nothing you could do or if you think about a situation where maybe someone was in the boat and managed to get out, but was surrounded by people who couldn't get out, you know, they may remember that moment.

Maybe someone was asking them for help and they couldn't help them. Just those moments could haunt them for a very long time. They need to remember, there was nothing they could have done. They didn't do anything wrong.

WHITFIELD: And of course, we're hearing from family members, the parents, those that encouraged their kids to take the trip. There may have been a couple kids that didn't want to take it, and the regret that some of the parents are feeling.

COHEN: Right, there's a mom named Katherine, we talked about that. She said my child didn't want to go on the field trip and I encouraged them to go on the field trip. Logically, she didn't do anything wrong. People encourage their kids to go on field trips all the time. Still again, it is part of our basic human sort of mental structure that we blame ourselves for something like that.

WHITFIELD: So what will need to be extended to the people feeling this range of emotions?

COHEN: You know, doctors tell me it is different for every person, and also it is different culturally. It is probably a little difficult to sit here not being part of that culture, it does differ culture to culture. In the U.S., for example, some people really benefit from retelling their story. For example, retelling how I escaped from the boat, or parent retelling how they heard their child was in danger and finding out they couldn't be found. Some benefit from retelling.

Other people, that's not such a benefit and need distance. The distance is what helps them. So it is different for every person. And I think what psychiatrists have told me, you may live with some of this forever. It is not always possible to lose it, it is whether you can function with it.

WHITFIELD: This is going to be a long, painful road ahead. Elizabeth Cohen, thank you so much.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: So far this is Easter weekend in Atlanta. Live pictures now. Cool and overcast. Guess what, it looks like showers might dampen the Easter bonnets in many other parts of the south. Areas in the northeast are getting excited. Jennifer Gray with us now. Give us some good news.

JENNIFER GRAY, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yes, we have a mixed bag. That's all there is to it. The northeast, they deserve a nice holiday weekend. You will get it. But the southeast, we're dealing with the rain. Atlanta now pretty much overcast. Most showers have calmed down. We are looking at quite a bit of rain, especially around North Carolina. Raleigh getting rain. The outer banks getting the bulk of it. This will hug the coastline going through the next 24 to 48 hours.

Look at the rain totals as we get close to Sunday evening. The outer banks, about three inches of rain. This is additional rainfall to what you've gotten. We are tapering off in Atlanta. Charlotte could see a quarter to half inch. Jacksonville, West Palm Beach, you start to dry out the next couple hours.

Here is the big picture. Northeast and deep south looking good, even the west coast looking good. We're going to see rain in the plains, could possibly see severe weather on your Easter Sunday in West Texas. Don't let your guard down there. You want to keep updated with that.

In the meantime, look at the temperatures. Syracuse, 66 Sunday, 74 on Monday. Temperatures are going to be running about 15 degrees above normal. I don't think anyone is complaining about that. Boston, you're at 65 Monday, the runners will be out there in full force in New York City. Your forecast by Monday, 64 degrees.

Here is the Boston marathon forecast, 48 degrees is the start time. Of course, you'll be warming to the mid-60s, Fred. It is going to be a great day for running. Couple of clouds out there, that will keep you cool. Overall, the northeast, wow, the place to be for Easter weekend.

WHITFIELD: Thank you so much. Appreciate that, Jennifer.

All right, coming up in the next hour of CNN NEWSROOM, the latest on today's drone strike in Yemen that killed 12 suspected al Qaeda militants.

Plus anguished families facing off with officials as bodies are found aboard the sunken South Korean ferry.

And a student is suspended for asking Miss America to prom. Details on that straight ahead. We have much more to come in the CNN NEWSROOM, which begins right now.