Hull Material Tradeoffs: Wood/FiberglassPlastic/Aluminum/Steel

[CuzzA]

For boat operator laypeople, what is the big picture?

The big picture is fire prevention and mitigation from well maintained systems and common sense.

Your question about hull material is too broad and has too many variables to consider. There is no such thing as the perfect boat. Every decision has tradeoffs and while fire is always a concern on any boat there's a big difference between in concerns for a 40 ft. center console and a 40 ft. overnight cabin boat.

 

[rjack321]

This is the big one.

Remember there are regulations regarding soft furnishings in many industries. Aerospace, Automotive, Hotels, Care homes and domestic use, all have standards requiring certain flame resistance (Not the term resistance not proofing)

As you correctly say, everything will burn given teh correct temp. The idea is to limit these materials from becoming additional fuel too quickly. Even wood (lumber) can be pressure treated

There are products mainly used by live events, where you can spray the soft materials directly. The principle being, is that if you remove the heat source they will smolder or self extinguish - and have a fire resistance of a certain time (just like a fire door). It's generally not teh materials that combust, but the gasses they give off initially.

Older members will remember the changes to domestic furnishings in the 60/70's? To prevent them catching fire when people dropped cigarettes or fell asleep smoking in bed.

In principle then if say a battery or charge caught fire, on a countertop near a window with curtains, then if teh correct materials were uses, while they'd char they wouldn't coombust adding additional fuel to the fire

The flame retardant for soft furnishings does deteriorate with age (approx 5 years) and certainly with washing/moisture. In the Theatre industry the municipality test shows regularly on a fire inspection (blow torch) but you can spray treat. In automotive and aerospace, the fabrics are presumably different.

Flame retardants are some of the most environmentally problematic chemicals ever made. Most of the older ones are halogen based (PCBs, PBDEs). New ones are often phosphate based. Then there are the thousands of varieties of PFAS. Saying there is a new peer reviewed publication on the a new impact to people or the environment from flame retardants every day is not an understatement at all. Many are incredibly persistent, bioaccumulate, and resistant to any kind of breakdown or decay too. Tumor promotion, immunosuppression, low sperm counts, fetal development delays, neurologic development the list goes on and on. Just slathering on magic chemicals is not a good bandaid to fire mitigation.

 

[Diving Dubai]

Just slathering on magic chemicals is not a good bandaid to fire mitigation.

Agreed.

I just put that out there, since in my industry it's ONLY used for items that can't (or haven't) been constructed from flame retardant materials

As you're aware You're only trying to buy time, and fire protection is multi layered and defined by the weakest link. Eg. A fire door with 30 mins rating is useless is the surrounding walls, floors and ceilings don't match or exceed that time rating.

Considering any rule changes that might come about post Conception investigation, there would (In other sectors at least) be different rules for new builds vs existing builds, and as always there has to be a balance between "perfection" and what is practical and economic viable, especially for retrofitting and converting existing vessels