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.
I'm repeating myself from an earlier post, but I think it significant. Note the advanced stage of burn-through in the hull at the bunk level in the pictures and how it compares so equally to the deck level. Then imagine the convection air flow up through the staircase when it does burn through, it would create a huge towering inferno as was described. The boat was essentially destroyed to the water level in the 15 minutes it took first responders to arrive. It seems a fire started in the salon would have to burn down to the bunk level, and I don't see evidence this in the pictures. Just my nonprofessional observation.

In the interview with the eyewitness captain of The Grape Escape, he said (as reported in the NYT and other sources) holes were visible in the hull through which flames could be seen - when he initially observed the Conception:

NYT Quote: "The desperation became clear to Mr. Hansen when he stepped outside his cabin and saw the glow of the raging fire in the dark. In an interview, he said that he had seen the Conception completely engulfed in flames, “from stem to stern.”

“I could see the fire coming through holes on the side of the boat,” he said. /end NYT quote

In my non-professional observation, the scenario of a berthing-level origin has merit.
 
Why are these charging bags apparently all marked for Li-Po batteries, when it seems to be Li-Ion batteries that have the safety problems?

Incorrect.. Li-Po's are more volatile. Li-Ion is canned and harder to anger.

Not sure if you read my previous posts about lithium chemistry and these bags... It's one of the reasons I asked the question, "Were there Scooters on-board" (real DPV with lithium batts) on this trip. I also touched on can lights, because I know for a fact, many of them also have real Li-Po batteries in them.. NOT Li-Ion. IF it is not cyndrillical, it is not Li-Ion. If it looks like a sandwich, and is marked lithium, chances are it is Li-Po. Doesn't matter the brand (usually) outside of life / endurance.

Li-Ions are much safer... "IMO"... I've never had a Li-Ion pack turn into a flamethrower. I would be absolutely shocked if this fire was due to Li-Ion batteries. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were Li-Po related. Just GTS "lipo fire". Sure, Li-Ion can burn, but I've never seen one that burns anywhere close to a Li-Po.
 
I'm still wondering where "roaming night watchman" appears in the relevant CFRs or case law.
You would have to read their COI to find the passage that goes something like “when away from a shore-side facility for more than 12 hours, the crew must be increased by”. And then a check box for a mate, or a mate and a deckhand, depending on the vessel.
 
In the interview with the eyewitness captain of The Grape Escape, he said (as reported in the NYT and other sources) holes were visible in the hull through which flames could be seen - when he initially observed the Conception:

NYT Quote: "The desperation became clear to Mr. Hansen when he stepped outside his cabin and saw the glow of the raging fire in the dark. In an interview, he said that he had seen the Conception completely engulfed in flames, “from stem to stern.”

“I could see the fire coming through holes on the side of the boat,” he said. /end NYT quote

In my non-professional observation, the scenario of a berthing-level origin has merit.

Sure, it has merit. But from that observation, there's no way to pin down a point of origin. If the entire ship was engulfed "from stem to stern" when he first saw it then we also have to factor in that if the crew was actually able to walk across the sundeck and jump to the dive deck before finally realizing the futility they faced. A great deal of destruction had to take place between when they did that and then took the dinghy over to the rescue boat. With a fire of that rapid destruction, I don't think a civilian making an observation under duress in the fog of the early morning is really a great source for what is the point of origin.
 
To be honest I think we’re really gonna have to wait until the report to get the full picture of what exactly happened between 2:30 and 3:15 am ish regarding who was awake and who was asleep. I’ve been following this very closely and some facts will appear to come out, get reported and then a fact or two contradicts it. I cannot for a second imagine that the boat would ride anchor with no one awake but we’re going to have to wait and see

On that note I am echoing a question from above. I heard the USCG ... captain? Sorry don’t know her rank - say at at yesterday’s presser that CG regs require a roving watchman. We can debate whether what they have complied but anyone know the cite for that?
This is simply not true at least in T-boat regs, as the watchman may also be the navigational watch, and the navigational watch may certainly not roam. But I’ll look for the applicable passage.

Edit-see section (f).
46 CFR § 15.705 - Watches.

Edit to the edit. Section (a) is actually the relevant section, which states in part that safe Manning is detirmined for each vessel and placed on the vessels COI as described above.
 
What I find interesting though is that he and one other “expert” are stating that both exits egress to the galley. The hatch - access issues aside- spits you basically right onto the open dive deck (and looks like the cartoon actually may be a bit off but shows egress outside the salon doors, when I think it is just (2 feet?) inside. Also someone else mentioned that the design, with a rear wall and two sides, forces you to go toward the deck

The escape hatch is (educated guess) 6' from the rear bulkhead, which puts it inside the the lounge / galley compartment, and as I remember the overhead is extended over the back deck a bit, which means you are not actually out of the compartment for say 9' after you are out of the hatch (although technically you might be). It's been a while and I didn't bring a tape measure.

I'm repeating myself from an earlier post, but I think it significant. Note the advanced stage of burn-through in the hull at the bunk level in the pictures and how it compares so equally to the deck level

Look back to the earlier pictures, the advanced stage of burning you show is the final burn down to the waterline after all the superstructure was gone. If it had started there, you would see the burn through, but you would also see the superstructure burning as the lounge / galley deck would have slowed the destruction of the upper deck. And considering the heat generated by your scenario, there would be nothing left of the compartment and its contents.

“I could see the fire coming through holes on the side of the boat,” he said. /end NYT quote

Which could have easily meant the lounge / galley area windows.


Bob
 
Incorrect.. Li-Po's are more volatile. Li-Ion is canned and harder to anger.

Not sure if you read my previous posts about lithium chemistry and these bags... It's one of the reasons I asked the question, "Were there Scooters on-board" (real DPV with lithium batts) on this trip. I also touched on can lights, because I know for a fact, many of them also have real Li-Po batteries in them.. NOT Li-Ion. IF it is not cyndrillical, it is not Li-Ion. If it looks like a sandwich, and is marked lithium, chances are it is Li-Po. Doesn't matter the brand (usually) outside of life / endurance.

Li-Ions are much safer... "IMO"... I've never had a Li-Ion pack turn into a flamethrower. I would be absolutely shocked if this fire was due to Li-Ion batteries. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were Li-Po related. Just GTS "lipo fire". Sure, Li-Ion can burn, but I've never seen one that burns anywhere close to a Li-Po.
To confuse the "Lithium battery" thing even more, there are the non-rechargeable lithium batteries (energizer ultimate photo lithium) that do have a strip of actual lithium in them. They are super contained in a metal can. These are the ones you see on youtube for "recovery of lithium metal from batteries".

There is also LiFePO (or close that that) generically called "Lithium Iron" batteries. These are found as starting batteries in some Motorcycles now and retrofitted to more as they weigh nothing compared to the lead acid they replace. They have good surge capacity when warm for starting a bike but weak reserve capacity (if the charging system fails a lead acid will get you a lot further). I had one once and it was a drop in replacement, no charging system modifications.

A couple years ago PBS NOVA had a really good episode on batteries. If someone wants to look this up and go off on that tangent, please start a new thread instead of making this one even messier. There is enough in that one show for it's own thread. For the most part they were showing a lot of future stuff.
 
Sure, it has merit. But from that observation, there's no way to pin down a point of origin. If the entire ship was engulfed "from stem to stern" when he first saw it then we also have to factor in that if the crew was actually able to walk across the sundeck and jump to the dive deck before finally realizing the futility they faced. A great deal of destruction had to take place between when they did that and then took the dinghy over to the rescue boat. With a fire of that rapid destruction, I don't think a civilian making an observation under duress in the fog of the early morning is really a great source for what is the point of origin.
The first few pictures were taken from the Grape Escape sometime after the crew was pulled aboard. The ones I can find prior to someone putting water on the boat show it very badly burned, with the superstructure collapsed and holes in the side. (see below) There are no timestamps on any of these, so I don't know it it was at 3:20 or 3:30am or even later.

GettyImages-1165761091-e1567471323966.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom