Fire on dive boat Conception in CA

[skwirl]

This video has the first shot I've seen of the underside of the hatch in the sleeping area (at 21 seconds in). It looks like it would have been very obvious to whoever was sleeping in that bunk. It sounds like they had a full boat so someone would have been there.

It doesn't seem like the hatch was of any use in this situation, sadly. Not surprising but interesting to see anyway. There had been some speculation that the guests might not have been aware of it.

 

[Buoy_A]

This video has the first shot I've seen of the underside of the hatch in the sleeping area (at 21 seconds in). It looks like it would have been very obvious to whoever was sleeping in that bunk. It sounds like they had a full boat so someone would have been there.
.

K_Girl on this board has been posting some pictures she took of the Conception in posts #124 and #395

 

[SapphireMind]

No, stuff happens that isn't necessarily the result of negligence. But that doesn't stop the angry mob from trying to assign blame. I will assume goodness, as I am sure was the case on this boat.

Regardless, they deserve the presumption of innocence, just the same as "potential" drunk drivers.

Please don't misunderstand that I'm indicting the boat. I'm saying for everyone, passengers, operators and regulators, what we thought was sufficient has been shown to not be, and it doesn't matter how many times we were blissfully unaware of the dangers, now we know, now we should look at ways to improve.

Yep any automatic water based system ends up exchanging the risk of asphyxiation with the risk of sinking as well.

Having a way to dump smoldering or igniting lithium ion batteries overboard without needing to touch them (shovel?) is not something I would have considered before this accident.

I don't have much boating background, so this is probably a stupid question, but please humor me. This boat ended up sinking anyway. Sinking seems very serious, but from my understanding is not instantaneous typically and there were life rafts etc. How would sinking be worse than a fire like this one?

It was you who said because the NTSB can solve aircrash incidents where you have a ton of evidence and data and compared it to this, where the only remaining physical evidence is the hull below the waterline

I was just pointing out, why I don’t think it’ll be as easy as you think to actually nail down anything other than a highly educated guess

But if you’ve participated in investigations and know differently then please enlighten us all

NTSB doesn't just do aerospace accidents. They have maritime reports too. I trust they will investigate as thoroughly as possible.

Marine Accident Reports

 

[roakey]

Instead of speculating on what started this fire, or placing blame before an investigation is done people, that do still want to support the SoCal dive community should begin thinking of ways that they can double up on safety precautions to potentially help prevent a future incident like those.

I'm sorry, but this translates to "We don't know what happened, we don't want to wait until we know what happened, but we need to do something NOW to prevent it from happening again."

No, if you want to fix something you need to know what's broken first.

Roak

 

[roakey]

34 people below deck. 34 people dead. That justifies the term "death trap" in this case to me.

Thousands of people died in the twin towers. Were the twin towers death traps? Or did something so out in left field no one had ever considered it as a factor happen that caused so many deaths?

Roak

 

[Scubadude_LA]

This one really hits home.
Been on similar boats 10 or 12 times out of Freeport, TX to Flower Garderns, Stetson Bank etc. (Fling and Spree, similar setups). Always well run trips IMO.
Stairs were always open as I remember it and I usually tried to get the little bunk under the stairs on one or maybe both of those boats, been a while they were similar floor plans.
On my bucket list has been the trip involved in this incident. But I won't be swayed. Train could hit me tomorrow.
Sound like a fast incident. Did the boat stock O2 for blending? Probably already mentioned.

 

[NickB-LA]

My thoughts on the whole "death trap" thing are these. This was a catastrophic event that was extremely unusual and unheard of in scope. With the enormity of it, it is easy to sit back in hindsight and use such a loaded term. I get it, under the circumstances, this incident does make the boats look much more dangerous than they truly are. But keep in mind that this single incident was the result of something that was the worst combination of factors - literally thousands upon thousands of trips have safely and successfully concluded amongst the collection of boats that are of the same or similar design.

And here's the thing. There's no bigger death trap than an airplane. It's inherently a craft that if things go wrong in absolutely the most horrible way, there are going to be no survivors. And while some of us may be more or less comfortable with air travel, we don't go around calling planes "death traps" and refusing to fly.

So I think there needs to be some perspective in regards to that label. And before anyone goes the Boeing 737 Max (or whatever the model plane is that was grounded) route in comparison to the design of these California boats. These boats have been running for decades without an event like this.

Yes, this incident did have tragic results and we obviously all want to see nothing like it again. And I suspect there will be some changes in design that come from this - which is always for the best just as it has been when other safety modifications have been made to other boats, planes, trains and automobiles over their existence. But with or without that change, I would board any of these boats without hesitation because the overall track record is as safe as anything else I actively engage in.

Just remember that anything can be a death trap when it is subjected to the worst possible chain of events. If you go through life assuming the absolute worst is going to happen, I'm not sure why you'd be diving in the first place. That is not to say we shouldn't be always trying to make things safer, just that we should be careful about throwing around hyperbole in the aftermath of a tragic, catastrophic and extremely rare event.

 

[HKGuns]

I'm sorry, but this translates to "We don't know what happened, we don't want to wait until we know what happened, but we need to do something NOW to prevent it from happening again."

No, if you want to fix something you need to know what's broken first.

Roak

In the world we live in today, it doesn’t matter if anything is actually fixed, as long as you get immediate gratification and feel good about it at the time. Regardless of the consequences.

This needs to stop on a number of fronts.

 

[Ron Lee]

I'm sorry, but this translates to "We don't know what happened, we don't want to wait until we know what happened, but we need to do something NOW to prevent it from happening again."

No, if you want to fix something you need to know what's broken first.

Roak

Sure that makes sense. But the surviving crew knows things that we do not. They know if someone should have been awake. If so, that person was or was not awake when whatever started the fire happened. They should know what potential fire sources were on/in the boat. The Sheriff and/or others have interviewed some or all of the crew. Maybe those interviews had valuable info. Maybe not. Maybe recollection of the event was not great. I suspect that one or more crew attempted to reach the people below...both access points. If the fire was raging in both spots then they probably had just enough time to save themselves.

There should be adequate information to apply lessons learned against other boats and do thing that reduce or eliminate potential recurrences. Or people can just say "such is life" and continue forward and do nothing.

POST EDITED by Moderators

 

[KevinNM]

Please don't misunderstand that I'm indicting the boat. I'm saying for everyone, passengers, operators and regulators, what we thought was sufficient has been shown to not be, and it doesn't matter how many times we were blissfully unaware of the dangers, now we know, now we should look at ways to improve.



I don't have much boating background, so this is probably a stupid question, but please humor me. This boat ended up sinking anyway. Sinking seems very serious, but from my understanding is not instantaneous typically and there were life rafts etc. How would sinking be worse than a fire like this one?



NTSB doesn't just do aerospace accidents. They have maritime reports too. I trust they will investigate as thoroughly as possible.

Marine Accident Reports

A major fire on a boat or ship isn’t as bad as a major fire on a spaceship or an jet 1500 miles from land, but at best its really bad.

This fire was much worse than that.

Sinking happens for a lot of reasons. If its because you managed to get run over by a 250,000 ton tanker the boat is just gone. Maybe you dinged the front of the tanker and someone will notice it at the next stop, but its not going to end well for anyone on the boat.

Or you start taking water a little faster then you can pump it out, so you have hours to prepare to abandon and call for help.