That looks par for the course for most lobs I've been on. Wiring when not in use looks better than average from quick observation.
Fire on dive boat Conception in CA
- Thread starter divezonescuba
- Start date
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
- Status
HalcyonDaze
Contributor
The LA Times website, like most major newspapers, limits you to viewing a small number of articles per month before putting up a paywall.
That said, that article is seemingly contradictory. That's the opening statement, but then at the end of the article we get this (underline added by me for emphasis):
A source familiar with the crew’s actions said that hours before the fire broke out, the passengers had performed a night dive. A crew member was awake on the boat and straightening up items in the galley and mess area but went upstairs to the wheelhouse about 2:35 a.m.
Before the crew member went upstairs, he checked that the stove was cold and nothing flammable was out, said the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly. Sometime between 2:35 a.m. and 3:15 a.m., the crew member heard a noise and thought somebody had tripped. The crew member went down to the middle level and saw the fire. The flames prevented him from getting down into the galley, the source said.
In the aftermath, the crew has speculated that the fire began in the seating area in the galley area, the source said.
No crew members have reported hearing an alarm sound, the source said.
So if there was "no roaming night watchman" (which I don't believe is an actual requirement of an anchor watch as described by Wookie; yes a crewmember needs to be awake on watch but there's no requirement they be "roaming"), what would you call a crewmember being awake, in the galley, and checking for fire issues at around 2 am?
Would also be interested to see how this jibes with the earlier report that a crewman was awakened by a noise and saw flames as soon as he opened the door onto the sun deck. Same person, or a different one? If different, was the crewman in this account awake when he heard the "tripping" noise? It seems he may have made it down to the middle deck without having to jump. Again, I expect any of this to change - not really comfortable with the idea of anonymous sources commenting to the press in an NTSB investigation.
To
To me it doesn't add up - it was a dark night and foggy, how would you not spot a blazing inferno under you from the top deck, regardless if which direction you were looking? Especially wit the fog that would light up all around the boat.
To me it doesn't add up - it was a dark night and foggy, how would you not spot a blazing inferno under you from the top deck, regardless if which direction you were looking? Especially wit the fog that would light up all around the boat.
Main deck could have been lit, there could have been dense black smoke blocking most of the open fire, and it also would depend on the amount of fog. The nighttime pictures of the burning boat did not show thick mist, although this may have been different when the fire started
I was just going to say something like this. I'm as horrified and saddened as anyone else. It's easy to visualize being trapped below decks with only the stairs and hatch as escape routes, and the difficulty of using the hatch.
But, it's also easy for amateurs (like me) to fall into the trap of focusing only on the facts of this tragedy without a complete appreciation of the difficulty of trying to balance and mitigate all risks. If this boat had had a door through bulkhead instead of a hatch and had sunk because of rapid flooding through that door, we'd be having a very different conversation and I'm sure there would be a lot of criticism about any rule that permitted that.
This is an imperfect example, but it reminds me of how NASA changed the design of the hatch on capsules after Gus Grissom's hatch blew off accidentally and he nearly drowned. They removed the explosive bolts, solving that problem, but probably contributing to the deaths of the Apollo 1 crew, which included Grissom, who were unable to open the hatch to escape the capsule fire.
I am not defending the current regulations. I am not qualified even to have an opinion on them. I think only 2 or 3 people on this thread are.
I am merely pointing out that it is more complicated than coming up with something that would have made a difference here without considering how it might change the outcome in many other scenarios.
You're right, it 'doesn't add up'.
So, it is possible that the best thing to do is wait until we have accurate, organized, factual information available, before drawing any conclusions, rather than speculating on what may or may not have happened, and why and how?
This thread now has 1140+ posts, some of which reflect prior first hand experience on the boat that was involved, or first hand experience operating a dive boat and complying with applicable regulations, etc. A not insignificant number of posts perhaps are more aptly characterized - as Jim Wyatt implied - as seagull droppings. Now, we have a news report, quoting unnamed, and insofar as we know, unofficial sources ('familiar with the investigation' certainly is not the same as 'connected with the investigation') and providing apparently contradictory comment. Another thread (Legal considerations for the Fire on dive boat Conception in CA), also rife with speculation, was previously split off from this one and has 100+ posts.
We know there was a fire on a dive boat. We know that 30+ people tragically lost their lives. We know the NTSB is conducting an investigation. What we also know from experience is that NTSB investigations take time, and that we may not have a final report for quite some time - many months, maybe several years. We know that several members of the crew survived (and, thankfully, may be in a position to offer valuable insight into the sequence of events which will aid the investigation).
Some good discussion has come from this thread. I sense that more divers are now conscious of the broader general concerns about lithium batteries, and issue of charging those batteries in a safe manner. (I have decided to change the location in my house where I charge my DPV lithium batteries, and to pay more attention to the time I keep my lithium battery devices on a charger.) Many of us will probably give considerably more thought to our surroundings, methods of egress in the event of an emergency, and particularly to dive boat safety briefings, as a result of the discussion. Those are good outcomes of the interchange occurring here. Experience is quite often a harsh teacher. This was a horrific event, fellow divers died, and the survivors are quite likely damaged, perhaps for life. I don't see that prematurely drawing conclusions on the basis of limited, incomplete, and possibly inaccurate information serves any useful purpose.
How fire retardant is that table and the soft furnishings?
When I used to tour concerts, at each venue the local fire dept would burn test our cloths and scenery and costumes with a small (cooks) blow torch. The material would burn with the heat source, but was required to stop when heat source removed.
Obv different regs
While a lithium battery is an intense heat, its also short lived. All that electrical gear could go up but the table and the curtains shouldn't continue to burn once the flame has died down
BDSC
Contributor
I actually don’t think waiting for all the facts to come out on an event like this is the best thing. If we did that, you would only need one post with an announcement of what happened and that would be it. Speculation can be a good thing. Maybe a life saving thing for the future.
I know for a fact that the next liveaboard I’m on where there is an escape hatch to the above deck, I will actually try out that hatch for myself and not just glance at where it is. If folks haven’t thought about it before, maybe they now carry a flashlight with them to their room at night. Perhaps liveaboards that in the past allowed charging in cabins as long as you are in the cabin will no longer allow that because it’s human nature to step out of your cabin and forget about batteries/lights/phones/computers that are hooked up. Maybe a lesson learned is for a night watch not just be awake but actually walk around every 15 minutes or so to keep a check on all areas of the boat.
Keep speculating folks because there is a lot to be learned from it.
Ravenware
Registered
If you read some of the reports, the first 4 bodies they found, on Monday, floated up from the boat when it sank, so I do not think anyone jumped off the boat except the 5 crew. It sounds like everyone perished on the boat. I am anxious to read a complete summary of events, on this thread they are pieced together by reading all these posts.
- Status
Similar threads
