| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pacificcoast101
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 717
City/Region: Torrance
State or Province: CA
C-Dory Year: 2008
C-Dory Model: 255 Tomcat
Vessel Name: No Pressure
Photos: No Pressure
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thataway
Joined: 02 Nov 2003
Posts: 20812
City/Region: Pensacola
State or Province: FL
C-Dory Year: 2007
C-Dory Model: 25 Cruiser
Vessel Name: thataway
Photos: Thataway
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2023 11:26 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Phil, Thank you for that information.https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/MAR2003.pdf Is the NTSB report. On page 43, it clearly shows 3 tier bunks as well as two tier bunks..
There is one picture of the secondary escape hatch, over a bunk. It is not clear if this is a double or triple tier bunk, but does not appear to be an "easy" escape route, especially in case of a fire at night. (page 45) Also shown is the escape hatch on the main deck.
There seems to be some discrepancy in the subject of safety briefings from the surviving crew members, also covered in this report.
The cause of the fire could not be determined. There are 3 potential sources.
| Quote: | Although
examination of the Conception’s electrical system was not possible, the examination of the Vision
and the similarity of the two vessels would suggest similar electrical installations and condition.
On October 2, 2019, a Coast Guard inspection found 19 electrical system deficiencies throughout
the Vision. Some of the deficiencies cited were a result of work being done at the time. Deficiencies
in the salon and galley area included corrosion, improper connectors, and signs of overload on a
power strip. Deficiencies of this type can lead to electrical system malfunctions capable of
initiating a fire.
Since the salon compartment was a critical element in the egress pathway from the
passenger bunkroom, prudent fire safety planning would suggest that risky activities (unattended
charging of batteries) and materials, such as the plastic chairs and polyethylene trash cans, that
could contribute to a fire should have been minimized in this area. This was not the case on the
Conception. Crew statements, as well as statements from previous passengers, indicated that the
overnight, unattended charging of a large number of batteries was a normal practice in the salon
compartment and was a risk that had not been considered. Each device and battery represented a
separate potential source of ignition. The passengers on the Conception were recreational divers,
so in addition to common types of electronic items, such as phones, tablets, digital cameras, and
laptops, divers also used underwater cameras, flashes, strobes, and flashlights.
Batteries (in particular, lithium-ion batteries) have a known and documented history of
initiating accidental fires. In the past, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has issued
numerous product safety recalls due to fires caused by electronic devices with defective batteries
and chargers. The NTSB has investigated accidents in which battery failures led to fires, and, based
on the history of incidents involving fires, the Federal Aviation Administration enforces
regulations on the carriage of lithium-ion batteries aboard passenger aircraft.
36 About a year prior
to the fire on board the Conception, a small fire involving a charging lithium-ion battery took place
on board the similar vessel Vision; a passenger was able to extinguish the fire by unplugging the
charger and throwing it in a rinse bin. However, unlike in the incident on board the Vision, the fire
aboard the Conception grew, and the vessel burned for almost four hours, thus destroying much of
the materials in the salon and aft deck area. Further, based on past accidents that the NTSB has
investigated, conclusive causal physical evidence identifying a thermal runaway of a lithium-ion
36 Recent NTSB investigations involving battery fires include Lithium-Ion Battery Truck Fire Following Aerial
Transport, Brampton, Ontario, Canada, June 3, 2016 (HZB-20/01) and Auxiliary Power Unit Battery Fire Japan
Airlines Boeing 787-8, JA829J, Boston, Massachusetts, January 7, 2013 (AIR-14/01). These reports and other
information regarding investigations involving battery fires are available at www.ntsb.gov.
NTSB Marine Accident Report
61
battery is difficult to differentiate from a lithium-ion battery thermal runaway caused by exposure
to fire.
At the exterior of the aft portion of the salon (in the area where the stairs lead to the upper
deck), the only potential sources of ignition would include transient types, such as discarded
smoking materials. Based on the examination of the Vision and the statements from previous
passengers, there was no evidence of electrical systems or electronic devices being charged in this
area. There was, however, one large polyethylene trash can located aft of the salon underneath the
stairs to the upper deck where one could potentially discard smoking materials. Old T regulations
did not allow for the use of these trash cans in the passenger bunkroom but did not preclude their
use in any other area of the vessel. New T regulations do not allow the use of these combustible
trash cans in any areas of the vessel but do not retroactively apply to vessels built under the Old T
regulations unless they are replaced. As stated earlier, polyethylene trash cans are highly
combustible, making them susceptible to accidental fires that could be caused by the improper
disposal of smoking materials or other unforeseen sources of ignition. The NTSB concludes that
although a definitive ignition source cannot be determined, the most likely ignition sources include
the electrical distribution system of the vessel, unattended batteries being charged, improperly
discarded smoking materials, or another undetermined ignition source.
|
_________________
Bob Austin
Thataway
Thataway (Ex Seaweed) 2007 25 C Dory May 2018 to Oct. 2021
Thisaway 2006 22' CDory November 2011 to May 2018
Caracal 18 140 Suzuki 2007 to present
Thataway TomCat 255 150 Suzukis June 2006 thru August 2011
C Pelican; 1992, 22 Cruiser, 2002 thru 2006
Frequent Sea; 2003 C D 25, 2007 thru 2009
KA6PKB
Home port: Pensacola FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pacificcoast101
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 717
City/Region: Torrance
State or Province: CA
C-Dory Year: 2008
C-Dory Model: 255 Tomcat
Vessel Name: No Pressure
Photos: No Pressure
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real550A
Joined: 14 Jul 2023
Posts: 23
City/Region: Stuart
State or Province: FL
C-Dory Year: 2004
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Vessel Name: Deep C
Photos: Deep C
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can't get over the concept of a vessel with 34 paying guests, and 6 crew, not having a posted nightwatch.
That fact just defies all logic, in my mind.
_________________
1988 Albin 27FC (sold)
2004 Key West 2020WA Honda 130 "Spare Key"
(sold)
2004 C Dory 22' Cruiser "Deep C" (Na Waqa) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
B~C
Joined: 31 Oct 2003
Posts: 2861
City/Region: Bend
State or Province: OR
C-Dory Year: 1999
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Vessel Name: Blue~C
Photos: Blue~C
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2023 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
I had an inshore masters and near coastal 50 ton license and spent over a decade running charter fishing boats in AK. Those credentials help me pay for the kids college and his first house 
In 2020 I didn't renew for a variety of reasons, retirement, cancer and not wanting the possible increased liability if I was not going to use the license. I would recommend not getting a license until you're sure you need one.
as mentioned, not having a night watch is nuts. what a tragic collection of bad judgements
_________________
Ken
1999 22' boaterhome |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmetzenberg
Joined: 04 Jan 2014
Posts: 367
City/Region: Santa Barbara
State or Province: CA
C-Dory Year: 2007
C-Dory Model: 255 Tomcat
Vessel Name: Kanaloa
Photos: Kanaloa
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2023 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another licensed Mariner here, for whatever that's worth. I've met enough in my career to know that the little orange book doesn't always mean much. I knew that boat well. When I was a kid I was a deadhead on it's sister ship, the Truth. I knew Jerry in passing. He had been at it a long time and was set in his ways, and this time it didn't serve him. I'm not convinced the night watch would have made a difference, but I am sure some networked smoke detectors that the USCG doesn't require under CFR subchapter T sure would have.
It's been an ordeal, dealing with all the former crew, the FBI, the press...and I was just a teenager on that boat decades ago. She doesn't look like much now. Standing on the transom you can see all the way into the forecastle.
My take away, don't rely on humans exclusively. Plan for them to screw up, have alarms and failsafe in case the humans screw up. They eventually do.
_________________
Conrad Metzenberg
07' Tomcat 255 "Kanaloa"
87' Boston Whaler Guardian 17 (BlackFlag, 03-14)
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
Search
Private Messages
Profile
Log in
Register
Help
