And so it begins. Panic in the California dive boat industry

[lexvil]

Thank you for this! The thought hadn't crossed my mind, and it's an example of the Law of Unintended Consequences. Some people afraid they can't charge conveniently onboard up top will start bringing in their luggage high capacity (I'm guessing Li-based?) portable chargers for some of their devices. Which some of them will conceal in bunk rooms/staterooms, I imagine.

A good, solid charging center approach has now moved past good customer service and a good business move to a matter of safety for all aboard, since it reduced the perceived 'need' for this sort of thing.

I wonder what are the risks with charging something like the tiny battery of the Teric from a portable battery pack? Assuming most of the overheating comes from charging how much risk is involved, the power pack is discharging while the small battery is charging?

 

[cerich]

That is one definition but when you add the “assigned as” to it I find it becomes less clear, what is the actual “practice” that is common in the industry? I’m taking the roll of the lawyer/devils advocate ( interchangeable term I’m trying to avoid the emotional hindsight which is the only way a logical solution will be reached that “may” mitigate future disasters like this one. Do we need a watch clock?

How does "assigned as" complicate it? One crew member is assigned the duty. It makes it more clear to me.

How common? I suspect in the context of the California dive boats doing the overnights,it's not common practice, not at all. If the master /owner is serious as heck about it, a watch clock is a good thing, however these days I would just have a CCTV system and if I had any doubt that standing orders not being followed by the roving watch, just watch it and fire as needed.

 

[tarponchik]

I cant imagine how a trip would go with inspectors onboard for several days.

I'm sure the inspectors will work undercover. "Mr and Mrs Smith..."

 

[drrich2]

"Roving patrol at all times" is pretty clear, a crew member is to be constantly in motion checking the vessel for issues. That isn't "once and hour" or "sitting and watching CCTV monitors" or whatever, it is "at all times"

I would disagree VERY strongly that this is something that needs to be lightened up on in any manner.

My concern is that if something is so impractical in real world use that it's not going to happen (unless the Coast Guard is standing there staring at the boat crew at the time), then legislating it may be a bad idea. I assume the purpose of legislation is to make something happen. Unless it's like speed limits on the Interstate, where it's popular knowledge most people speed and 'close enough' is indeed 'close enough.' But discussions about boat safety requirements seem to assume strict adherence is expected, thus I don't see legislating things that won't.

I'm picturing a boat (the Vision I've been on before, which is quite similar to the Conception I'm told), at dock in a marina, and somebody being told that for an 8-hour shift he will be in perpetual motion walking around/through/up-and-down/in it. And I ask myself...is that going to happen? On any similar size and purpose boat? And while it may seem 'too soon' after the Conception disaster, I've got to ask...is that really even necessary/desirable in the context I just described (I didn't say legal/illegal)?

I would like the option to overnight in a dive boat, as has historically been the customary practice for some. Didn't do it my trip, but would like the option.

I guess my life experiences and your differ, because when it comes to safety on vessels, we are at the opposite end of this debate. My defence is experience on boats/ships/submarines with the stuff that can go wrong.

And when it does, consequences can get bad fast, agreed. At the same time, there will aways be risks inherent to the activity and situation, and there are practical limits to how far we should go mitigating those. I'm curious as to what those limits are.

Richard.

 

[lexvil]

How does "assigned as" complicate it? One crew member is assigned the duty. It makes it more clear to me.

How common? I suspect in the context of the California dive boats doing the overnights,it's not common practice, not at all. If the master /owner is serious as heck about it, a watch clock is a good thing, however these days I would just have a CCTV system and if I had any doubt that standing orders not being followed by the roving watch, just watch it and fire as needed.

It’s not the navy with nearly unlimited manpower so standard practices are more the definition than vaguely worded “rules” I know my time in the navy as well as your gives us, possibly, different understanding of the term and duty of a patrol than someone without those experiences, standard practice becomes the definition training as to those practices and documentation of that training matters.

 

[cerich]

It’s not the navy with nearly unlimited manpower so standard practices are more the definition than vaguely worded “rules” I know my time in the navy as well as your gives us, possibly, different understanding of the term and duty of a patrol than someone without those experiences, standard practice becomes the definition training as to those practices and documentation of that training matters.

yeah, but I also have gone to sea as crew outside the navy as well. I won't for a second not agree that it's more.. "slack" but some stuff is still required and isn't optional.

Have I been the only person awake driving with all other crew and passengers racked and no roving watch? yes, and truthfully I hated it, was always worried a passenger would be feeling sea sick and go to the uppers and fall over, and I would never know. I actually wasn't as woorried about fire as maybe I should have been, this was also long before the current issues with battery charging came up, but general fires still happened. Did I say anything? yes, but not strongly. Should I have been more vocal? Possibly, but on same token I am not aware of any liveaboard having that happen either.. so...

That said, it wasn't a licensing requirement nor regulatory under the vessels flag, and had it been, I would have been vocal as hell.

 

[cerich]

My concern is that if something is so impractical in real world use that it's not going to happen (unless the Coast Guard is standing there staring at the boat crew at the time), then legislating it may be a bad idea. I assume the purpose of legislation is to make something happen. Unless it's like speed limits on the Interstate, where it's popular knowledge most people speed and 'close enough' is indeed 'close enough.' But discussions about boat safety requirements seem to assume strict adherence is expected, thus I don't see legislating things that won't.

I'm picturing a boat (the Vision I've been on before, which is quite similar to the Conception I'm told), at dock in a marina, and somebody being told that for an 8-hour shift he will be in perpetual motion walking around/through/up-and-down/in it. And I ask myself...is that going to happen? On any similar size and purpose boat? And while it may seem 'too soon' after the Conception disaster, I've got to ask...is that really even necessary/desirable in the context I just described (I didn't say legal/illegal)?

I would like the option to overnight in a dive boat, as has historically been the customary practice for some. Didn't do it my trip, but would like the option.



And when it does, consequences can get bad fast, agreed. At the same time, there will aways be risks inherent to the activity and situation, and there are practical limits to how far we should go mitigating those. I'm curious as to what those limits are.

Richard.

actually, most countries are not near as "close enough" on speed limits as it is here in the states. In fact that was a surprise when I moved here.

It would be silly to have a 8 hr all nighter watch person and expect them to stay moving on a small vessel with small crew. Alongside or anchor you can do a 2 hour watch that rotates for the roving watchman. The master and mate can divide the day into watches however they wish for steaming/anchor as long as each gets adequate sleep. Alongside the Master and mate can also partake in the roving watch schedule, meaning that everyone gets LOTS of rest. It isn't a hardship at all.

Let's take conception, 6 crew, master and mate at sea and anchor one needs to be awake. That leaves 4 people to divide the night roving watch and 3 the day (the cook is busy). Yeah, it's long days but you can still ensure that all crew get 8 hours a day sleep, even if in 2 segments.

 

[lexvil]

yeah, but I also have gone to sea as crew outside the navy as well. I won't for a second not agree that it's more.. "slack" but some stuff is still required and isn't optional.

Have I been the only person awake driving with all other crew and passengers racked and no roving watch? yes, and truthfully I hated it, was always worried a passenger would be feeling sea sick and go to the uppers and fall over, and I would never know. I actually wasn't as woorried about fire as maybe I should have been, this was also long before the current issues with battery charging came up, but general fires still happened. Did I say anything? yes, but not strongly. Should I have been more vocal? Possibly, but on same token I am not aware of any liveaboard having that happen either.. so...

That said, it wasn't a licensing requirement nor regulatory under the vessels flag, and had it been, I would have been vocal as hell.

Agreed, this is why we’ll written regulations are required and documented training to back them up and maybe a version for the passengers along the line of “if I run to the fantail to puke, I will alert someone” I don’t want to see a water version of the off-road helmet rules where all passengers must wear fireproof suits and flotation devices at all times while on a vessel but reasonable rules that can be adhered to without to much inconvenience.

 

[Johnoly]

... overheating comes from charging how much risk is involved...

It's the concentration of heat that causes a fire ignition. That can be as small as a pencil point on a rubber shelf liner or an explosive flame from a Li-ion. It happens just that easily.

I'm sure the inspectors will work undercover. "Mr and Mrs Smith..."

That's almost EXACTLY what happened with all the arrests in Jupiter/WPB a couple of years ago for the shark-feeding. It was all undercover diver agents on board with electronic recording going on.

 

[lexvil]

It's the concentration of heat that causes a fire ignition. That can be as small as a pencil point on a rubber shelf liner or an explosive flame from a Li-ion. It happens just that easily.

Agreed but can a small battery sealed inside a stainless case generate that much heat? Not arguing just truly curious.

That's almost EXACTLY what happened with all the arrests in Jupiter/WPB a couple of years ago for the shark-feeding. It was all undercover diver agents on board with electronic recording going on.