Vessel Large number of red sea dive boat issues causes the UK to issue warnings

This Thread Prefix is for incidents related to one or more vessels from kayaks to ships.

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!

PBcatfish

Contributor
Messages
5,895
Reaction score
6,475
Location
Florida
# of dives
500 - 999
It seems that the number of significant issues aboard red sea live-aboard dive boats has caused the Brits to sound the alarm. It's being covered more widely than I expected.

 
Unfortunately, many people won't read those, and even those who do, will disregard the good advice. At the very least, you want to make sure and book through a reputable vendor AND check your travel insurance thoroughly to see exactly what it covers and what it doesn't AND what the contract with the liveaboard covers and what it doesn't BEFORE YOU SIGN AND be prepared that your liveaboard may not sail. People don't do this and then you are screwed. They say "I didn't know." This is why anyone should always thoroughly review any contract, and especially the ones for a great deal of money.
 
In yesterday's "Scuba GOAT" podcast, there was a very interesting interview with an Australian Marine Surveyor/Engineer Mick Uberti, who speaks about his findings after inspecting 14 egyptian liveaboard boats.
Link to the episode: Spotify Link
Short summary (AI supported):
Findings on Egyptian Live-aboard Boat Safety:
  • General Overview: Uberti inspected 14 vessels in Egypt and completed 8 reports. The interiors and guest accommodations were generally in good condition, even to "super yacht standard". However, he found widespread deficiencies in safety and compliance with contemporary standards, largely due to a lack of education among crew and operators, not necessarily the cost of repairs.
  • Regulatory Oversight: The Egyptian Authority for Maritime Safety (EAMS) is the regulatory body, requiring excursion vessels over 10 tons to be registered and inspected. Despite this, enforcement of regulations is poor. The certification process exists, with annual certificates of registration issued after inspections, but the system lacks teeth.
  • Specific Deficiencies:
    • Navigation: Many vessels did not comply with collision regulations (rules of the road), a standard developed in 1972 and to which Egypt has been a signatory since 1986. Deficiencies included non-compliant navigation lights (e.g., not separately fused), missing charts, and substandard or absent radars. None of the boats had code flags.
    • Communication: Most vessels had a VHF radio, but none had an HF radio or satellite phone. Emergency radio batteries and onboard communication systems (like a PA system) were absent. Only one boat had an in-date EPIRB (emergency positioning indicating rescue beacon).
    • Safety Equipment: Vessels lacked appropriate safety equipment for passenger vessels. Uberti used the Caribbean dive live-aboard standard (developed in connection with the IMO) as a baseline, considering it the "lowest standard that we could find".
    • Life Rafts: Many life rafts lacked certification, markings, hydrostatic releases, and proper installation for launching. Some had scrubbed-off dates.
    • Life Jackets: Life jackets lacked clear vessel ID markings, lights, and were often inadequate (e.g., 150 Newtons needed for an 80kg person, but jackets were 50 Newtons). Uberti likened them to those used for jet skiing and saw no children's life jackets.
    • Fire Safety: Most boats lacked fixed firefighting systems for engine room fires, operational fire hydrants, and displayed fire safety plans. Structural fire protection (insulation) around engine rooms was absent, and galleys had deep fat fryers without suitable extinguishing systems. Only one boat had a fire detection system, and it wasn't commissioned; these systems should be fixed, with panel alarms, not just cheap, adhesive smoke detectors.
    • Crew Accommodation: Crew accommodations often did not meet the standards of the Maritime Labor Convention (MLC) of 2006, which sets minimum living standards for seafarers. Deficiencies included overcrowding (e.g., 10 crew in one cabin with one bathroom) and improper locations (e.g., forward of the collision bulkhead).
    • Design and Construction: Most vessels were not built to a recognized standard, lacking proper watertight subdivisions and stability books. Uberti emphasized the importance of watertight subdivisions to prevent rapid sinking in case of hull compromise, referencing the Titanic and Costa Concordia disasters. He considered the absence of watertight subdivisions and stability books as making the boats "inherently unsafe".
    • Stability Books: Only one vessel had a stability book, which is crucial for the crew and operator to understand the vessel's limitations. These books are generally developed by the designer or naval architect and can involve modeling or incline experiments to determine stability.
    • Other Engineering Issues: These included the absence of bilge alarms, oil and water in bilges, non-working bilge pumps, inadequate lighting, exhaust system leaks, corrosion, and a lack of machinery guards. None of the boats had a black water treatment system.
  • Positive Findings:
    • The interiors and guest accommodations were generally in very good condition.
    • Tornado Marine took the audit findings seriously and made significant improvements.
  • Mick Uberti's Recommendations:
    • Uberti advocates for public accountability, urging passengers to be more inquisitive about safety.
    • He recommends asking about:
      • Certification and inspection status.
      • The existence of an approved stability book.
      • Compliance with minimum subdivision requirements.
      • Fire safety equipment.
      • Safety equipment (life rafts, life jackets).
      • The date of the last inspection and requesting a copy of the safety report.
I thought this was a very interesting interview, given the number of red sea boat incidents lately..
 
In yesterday's "Scuba GOAT" podcast, there was a very interesting interview with an Australian Marine Surveyor/Engineer Mick Uberti, who speaks about his findings after inspecting 14 egyptian liveaboard boats.
Link to the episode: Spotify Link
Short summary (AI supported):
Findings on Egyptian Live-aboard Boat Safety:
  • General Overview: Uberti inspected 14 vessels in Egypt and completed 8 reports. The interiors and guest accommodations were generally in good condition, even to "super yacht standard". However, he found widespread deficiencies in safety and compliance with contemporary standards, largely due to a lack of education among crew and operators, not necessarily the cost of repairs.
  • Regulatory Oversight: The Egyptian Authority for Maritime Safety (EAMS) is the regulatory body, requiring excursion vessels over 10 tons to be registered and inspected. Despite this, enforcement of regulations is poor. The certification process exists, with annual certificates of registration issued after inspections, but the system lacks teeth.
None of the findings are surprising. They look great in photos but are otherwise substandard vessels.
 
It doesn't matter too much that the living quarters are in great shape when the safety precautions are not. Lifejackets not up to standard? Boats lacking safety features??? No wonder there are so many incidents. This confirms my decision to give any LOB in Egypt a hard pass not even mentioning the bullying of the government and/or the company to sign statements in Arabic, and a National Navy with no rescue divers.
 
I'm surprised he was allowed aboard, but the findings are merely confirmatory. The booking agencies hold at least one of the keys to saving lives here, in my view. One proper EPIRB!
 
I have probably been on 15 Egyptian liveaboards - of which two subsequently sank! Emperor Fraser and Hurricane. The former is actually a dive site itself now I believe!

I am not at all surprised at the findings and I have not been on any Egyptian boat overnight for at least eight years after seeing the safety issues becoming worse and worse.

On liveaboards elsewhere, the only thing I can control is where I sleep and if I can't book a cabin well above the waterline - then I will not book at all.
 
Hi @Matthias Hoeller

Thanks for posting

I did two weeks on the Red Sea Aggressor I in 2016. Though I was an experienced diver, it was my first liveaboard. I was naive with regard to boat construction and safety features. It seemed like a fine boat to me. It gave me confidence that the Aggressor VP of Operations audited the boat over my second week. Three and a half years later, the Red Sea Aggressor caught fire and sank with one fatality.

Following the Conception disaster and the RSA I, I have become much more careful in selecting my liveaboard trip. Some of the safety information is relatively easy to obtain, some is not. So, the question remains, how would one choose a safe liveaboard in the Red Sea today, prior to booking? It's too late to check on things once you arrive. Wouldn't it be great if you could examine a checklist covering the topics outlined in the talk by Mick Uberti?
 
Not only in the Red Sea. Last week I saw a picture on facebook of not certified/too old life rafts on a liveaboard in the Maldives.
Now is 3 years out of date in this case most times no problem. But as a customer, you can or must expect that these things are ok.

At the moment I won't do a lob in Egypte. The prices are way too high for what you get, and this is including the safety issues. And this is not only with boatissues, also I do not like 8 people with 1 guide. The only place in the world I have seen this practise was in Egypt (and then they expect that you go up with 120 bars because another in the group has drained his tank and they also expect you to pay for a 35 minute 'dive' instead of a real dive of 60 minutes or more).
 

Back
Top Bottom