• Welcome to ScubaBoard

  1. 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. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Fire on dive boat Conception in CA

Discussion in 'Accidents and Incidents' started by divezonescuba, Sep 2, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bob DBF

    Bob DBF Solo Diver

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: NorCal
    6,700
    7,090
    113
    I understand, I know you get it, but for those that don't...


    Bob
     
  2. EricTheDood

    EricTheDood DIR Practitioner

    # of Dives: 100 - 199
    Location: California
    390
    314
    63
    While not a "good thing", the fact that nobody got out of the bunks might be the biggest wake up call of all, and is probably going to be a major talking point moving forward.

    I think if even one person made it out, some opinions would change.
     
    DebbyDiver likes this.
  3. cerich

    cerich ScubaBoard Supporter ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 5,000 - ∞
    Location: Georgia
    6,698
    3,575
    113
    no, those hatches suck for berthing spaces and over and over and over again history has shown us that at best they work for 1-3 people while the rest perish. That is proven in fires, floods and capsizing. For the few people it works for it's a good thing, but escape hatches generally suck.
     
  4. EricTheDood

    EricTheDood DIR Practitioner

    # of Dives: 100 - 199
    Location: California
    390
    314
    63
    Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with you. Those hatches are complete garbage in my book. Even the staircase is uncomfortably small.

    I'm just saying that "somebody" would be able to come up with an excuse.
     
  5. doctormike

    doctormike ScubaBoard Supporter Staff Member ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: New York City
    6,353
    6,015
    113
    I'm assuming that the deck layout, stair placement and hatch placement are relatively fixed (that is, not going to be changed without a complete redesign and possibly adding risks of flooding, etc...). On the other hand, for the furniture in the berthspace and any ladders, it should be pretty easy to customize the layout to optimize egress, given that the hatch itself isn't going to change. That's what I was getting at upthread asking about the bunk placement.

    Of course, there is ALWAYS going to be some risk of sleeping in an enclosed space at sea, in any sort of vessel that meets the other requirements of the job. Yes, you can dive from a canoe, a kayak or a pontoon boat with only a shade and no enclosed spaces, but other than that, there is going to be some sort of restriction of movement. The question is "how do we optimize things?" Not "how do we make it risk free?"
     
  6. Scuba-74

    Scuba-74 Manta Ray

    # of Dives: 100 - 199
    Location: Longmeadow, Massachusetts
    515
    327
    63
    So, if it's grandfathered and whoever has certified it initially has been honorably discharged, the individual re certifying it annually has no skin in the game? I doubt it very much.
     
  7. KevinNM

    KevinNM DIR Practitioner

    2,904
    1,393
    113
    The issue of how to reduce risk should start with the obvious and easy to fix issues, which in this case is LI charging and smoke alarm monitoring. There really isn’t any reason to not rethink that now. (There are probably others too.)

    Structural modifications are a huge issue that would likely impact the viability of the industry, and would seem like you might want to get a better idea what actually happened before that.
     
    Esprise Me likes this.
  8. Scuba-74

    Scuba-74 Manta Ray

    # of Dives: 100 - 199
    Location: Longmeadow, Massachusetts
    515
    327
    63
    Well that is how military works - orders are given, issues are escalated up the chain of command. Captain/owner of the vessel had no problem stating from Day 1 that the vessel passed all the required inspection, and so did the commanding officer of the responding USCG unit. They are effectively passing the accountability to whoever signed off on the inspection. If that person was ordered by his superiors to do it, he should have no problem passing the accountability to them. But the buck must stop somewhere. All that of course is if investigation finds the design of the boat a major contributing factor to the tragedy.
     
    Hiszpan likes this.
  9. rjack321

    rjack321 Captain

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Port Orchard, WA
    9,142
    3,054
    113
    The CG inspector isn't sleeping there. He/she has no skin in the game. They also have sovereign immunity.
     
    uwxplorer likes this.
  10. dshorwich

    dshorwich Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Castro Valley, CA
    117
    38
    28
    Here are a few pictures, taken August 2016, that might help people visualize the boat's layout. The first shows how the wheelhouse sat in relation to the main and lower deck. In the second photo you can see the steps leading from the main deck to the sun deck. The last photo was taken from the sun deck, looking down on the dive deck.

    starboard.JPG stern.JPG
    dive deck.JPG
     

    Attached Files:

    Seaweed Doc likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page