Liveaboards vs day trip boats safety differences

[Wookie]

using media reports, and then SB to find and verify the media reports, when working in a global non universal accident reporting mechanism is not terribly bad given the limitations. I am sure that it was a discussion with his academic advisor. Obviously for a masters or doctoral thesis/dissertation the burden would be higher, but I don't find it problematic for the level, nor the sources as primary sources from official sources like a .gov. Remember that primary sources include news by reporter witnessed events, or the quotes of those that did witness. So, even primary sources in a big picture are not what would be considered as proof in a court nor in math, engineering or say business where you (should) be using much more quantitative data over qualitative

Since we are down to a handful of underwriters in the world, I would think that going to Ryan Meyer would result in better results.

SOMEONE is keeping track of liveaboard accidents. Just not governments.

That would get you the crew injuries and passenger injuries as well, as they get reported if there is a chance of needing coverage later....

 

[kammel78]

Using the news as a source for statistical analysis is problematic because it will only publish the outliers, the worst incidents.

Using the data you derived from those outliers to compare against the data of the European Maritime Safety Agency or insurance providers is pointless, you are comparing a crate of discarded apples with the totality of the orange processing industry.

Cherry picking might be the wrong term.

Yeah, I get where you're coming from and sure, it's problematic but if you have to come to a conclusion based on insufficient data, isn't it better to err on the side of pulling the fire alarm (so to speak) than not?

I'm 100% behind "back of the napkin" statistical analysis, even if all it does is to bring to light the fact that we need better data to further refine and prove/disprove a thesis. Pointing out the source data issues that the author already acknowledged seems like we're missing the point of the discussion.

What's the saying, if you want to get someone's help with a problem on the internet, make an incorrect statement and wait for someone to correct you?

 

[A Bajo]

Are there any liveaboards that follow SOLAS? Is there a way to tell? In the report I didn't really understand part where it show a boat that was under SOLAS.

 

[tursiops]

Are there any liveaboards that follow SOLAS? Is there a way to tell? In the report I didn't really understand part where it show a boat that was under SOLAS.

Nautilus Explorer, best liveaboard experience - Nautilus Explorer

The Nautilus Explorer is unique in the worldwide fleet in that it was certified by Transport Canada as the first and only OLAS ISM passenger ship.

www.nautilusexplorer.com

"The Nautilus Explorer is unique in the worldwide fleet in that it was certified by Transport Canada as the first and only SOLAS ISM passenger ship – the same safety certificats the largest cruise ships in the world."

 

[ofg-1]

Statistically, that report is kaka. Your premise is kaka. "MUCH more likely to die" than what? Staying at home?

You are far more likely to die driving to the dock. Falling in your tub. Smacked by a car riding a bike. Getting knifed in a biker bar. Falling down while drunk exiting a biker bar. Choking on a chicken bone. Hanging over a cliff for a selfie. 100 or so people a year die from falling coconuts.

Don't understand what point you are trying to make.

 

[Lorenzoid]

"MUCH more likely to die" than what? Staying at home?

I thought it meant that when there is a liveaboard accident, the outcome is more likely to be death than a lesser injury. It is confusing to me. I suppose I should read that entire bachelor's thesis before commenting here.

 

[MB NZ]

It's not that surprising given that you are on a liveaboard 24/7. Big boats, more people, more to go wrong. Passengers and staff asleep at night. Harder to keep track of divers coming in/out of water. Based on what I've read on this topic, if I ever go on another liveaboard, I will choose an above deck cabin. Book with a "good" company, not the cheapest, although that in itself is no guarantee that things won't go wrong. What else can you do?

 

[cerich]

Statistically, that report is kaka. Your premise is kaka. "MUCH more likely to die" than what? Staying at home?

You are far more likely to die driving to the dock. Falling in your tub. Smacked by a car riding a bike. Getting knifed in a biker bar. Falling down while drunk exiting a biker bar. Choking on a chicken bone. Hanging over a cliff for a selfie. 100 or so people a year die from falling coconuts.

Don't understand what point you are trying to make.

Well, read the whole post?

You quoted only part and seemed to hit reply before reading

 

[tursiops]

100 or so people a year die from falling coconuts.

It's fun to quote this, but it is not true. Not even close Look it up.

 

[ofg-1]

I thought it meant that when there is a liveaboard accident, the outcome is more likely to be death than a lesser injury. It is confusing to me. I suppose I should read that entire bachelor's thesis before commenting here.

OK, I can kinda go along with that to a point. If the premise is that if you take 2 identical accidents, you are more likely to die isolated in the middle of the ocean than when you are near medical treatment, fine.