Fire on dive boat Conception in CA

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Status
Not open for further replies.
A watt is energy per second, already a measure of energy rate. So a watt per second would be energy per second per second, as if some kind of measure of acceleration. Is this what is meant, that the fire's rate of output is accelerating by 25 Watts every second?

I wonder why would you register to make this your first comment, but since you did: a watt is a unit of power, not energy. A watt per second is a unit of energy. That said, this is the first time I hear about using these units to quantify thermal power. BTUs (British thermal units) are more commonly used to quantify heat.

EDIT: I made a typo in this post, a watt-second (or kWh, MWh) is a unit of energy, not watt per second. Since it was later quoted, leaving it as is above...
 
The person sleeping in the bunk with the hatch would have known it was there. The fact that nobody got out suggests that either they were incapacitated by something (like the fire toxins) or the fire was so big and so hot before anyone alerted that nobody could make it out of the room to the ocean.

As was pointed out to me (and mentioned by others), 4 souls were found in the water while the fire was still in progress and and obviously before the ship sank. So they did get out. What was their cause death still needs to be fully determined by the medical examiner. As such, in my previous post I noted no one below survived.
 
I wonder why would you register to make this your first comment, but since you did: a watt is a unit of power, not energy. A watt per second is a unit of energy. That said, this is the first time I hear about using these units to quantify thermal power. BTUs (British thermal units) are more commonly used to quantify heat.
Megawatts thermal - Energy Education
 
"DebbyDiver said:
I've been thinking a LOT during the past 24 hours and to be honest, I'd get on one of their other boats tomorrow."

Ditto.

Roak

Ditto x2.

Truth Aquatics does a great job at providing a diving experience. The food is really good and the crews have been helpful and very nice. Fun too. They have a great system--a safety first system. The Channel Islands are fun to dive. It is a different experience than offered by other dive-ops around the world. In many respects they provide a better diving experience than most dive-ops around the world.

Santa Cruz and San Clemente Islands are Crown Jewels.

However, I would speak to the captain and request his/her standing orders for the mate on anchor watch/fire watch. I would ask that the captain have an evacuation drill and a fire drill.

Anyone willing to pay my airfare and provide an adequate excuse for my employer? I will leave today (9-4-19) for an early morning departure (9-5) on Vision. No reservations. No worries.

markm
 
I've seen this unit of megawatts per second used several times now and I'm trying to make sense of it.

A watt is energy per second, already a measure of energy rate. So a watt per second would be energy per second per second, as if some kind of measure of acceleration. Is this what is meant, that the fire's rate of output is accelerating by 25 Watts every second?
Do not read too much into it. People also say knots per hours and energy is usually measured in megawatt hour MWh. So correctly megawatt is already an instantaneous measure of (thermal) power output.
This kind of details are irrelevant in such tragedy IMHO.
 
If it hasn't already been posted, this article contains a transcript of an interview with the owner of Truth Aquatics. It doesn't shed any light on the cause of the fire, but it does give some details on crew actions trying to respond to the blaze, and the location of O2 etc.

"I'm Numb": Boat Owner on Deadly Fire Near Santa Cruz Island

Brunell: "Is there any type of accelerant on the boat? I know that the tanks are very flammable, but was there any propane or anything else that would cause this type of fire?"

Fritzler: "No. On the back deck, that was one of the last things to burn, there [were] some oxygen bottles that the divers use. The rest of the scuba tanks are just air, or what we call Nitrox, which is a higher concentration. It's a 32 percent concentration that divers use, but it's a low oxygen count and they were out on the back deck and that was the last to burn. As far as the accelerant inside the boat, there is no gas, no propane, no diesel. It's all electric."
 
I wonder why would you register to make this your first comment, but since you did: a watt is a unit of power, not energy. A watt per second is a unit of energy. That said, this is the first time I hear about using these units to quantify thermal power. BTUs (British thermal units) are more commonly used to quantify heat.
Sorry, he's right. A watt per second (as you said) is NOT energy. A watt is defined as 1 joule per second. The post he questioned has a problem.
As to why this would be the question he signed up for...he is posting a question of fact in a thread rife with speculation. Seems like a worthy point.
 
I don't think that's a viable solution and I seriously doubt it would be considered... that would effectively ban the use of dive lights, DPVs, and cameras altogether.

First, we do not know at this point if this disaster had anything to do with lithium batteries, so talking about banning is very premature.
My comments had to do with the fact that this is a known hazardous technology that creates exactly the same kind of fire risk that we're possibly talking about in this event. We may really need to rethink how we handle lithium batteries if they are a higher fire risk on a boat.
it is quite possible that just by rethinking where we charge and handle these batteries we could minimize such a risk in the future.
If banning lithium batteries on a marine vessel is the result of this accident, it will not be up to us to make that decision, it will be handed down from powers above ours in this sports industry, and whether we like it or not we will be forced to live with that, if that is the result.
 
This kind of details are irrelevant in such tragedy IMHO.
Not irrelevant if someone is simply trying to understand points of fact. He said he is just trying to follow the argument. That said, I agree with your statement that people get that sort of thing wrong all the time. They sure do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom