My apologies that they were already posted. I only looked back to about mid-November and might have missed that discussion.
As I said, those inspections were all made as a dockside attraction vessel. In all reality, they are not thorough enough to call a vessel "inspected frequently," implying that they were the same inspections as a vessel under subchapter T or R would have to go through. Really, they were not much more than a fire marshal inspection of a building.
I would not call the 1998/2012 differences completely remade. There was still much that was to be desired, that fact I know from discussion over the last couple years with crew (mostly those who crewed in 2007-2010).
That I don't know the answer to. I do wonder why hand pumps were never installed on her, especially with her familiarity with water in and outside the boat. In all my years on every other boat, anything but the "boards wet" was cause of concern. On the other hand, the owner was quoted:
"At that time it wasn't considered an emergency, even though they had several feet of water inside the boat," Hansen said. "She's a very large ship, and that little bit of water really does not do anything to her." Sandy claims 'Bounty' off North Carolina - CNN.com
Now imagine, hundreds of gallons of water sloshing around a hull with no watertight compartments, and even with perfectly working engines, and pumps primed and high enough away from the water, you're still going to be screwed.