Conception trial begins

[SlugLife]

If my supposition is correct and the ATF is correct about how quickly this spread out of control, this illustrates why I've been harping on the notion that even if there wasn't a roving watch assigned, had there been one, would it have made a difference in the outcome

No one is saying that the night watch could've definitely prevented this. Simply that it might have. And because the captain neglected it the pax had zero chance of survival.

In the three years I worked on small cruise ships for two different companies it was never like this. We would trade off every hour between lookout on the bridge and rounds below. You went, walked your route, punched the clock if there was one, and wandered back up to the bridge about 45 minites later and hung out. Each space got visited once an hour.

Putting these 3 together, "The captain is guilty of neglect which caused the deaths of the passengers" doesn't pass beyond a reasonable doubt (based only on patrols).

• Lets say industry standard for nearly all boats that size, to patrol each area once per hour, and that this patrol is obligated for safety reasons. (I'm not sure if it is or isn't to be clear)
• On average, a patrol would pass any area, where there might be a fire, on average 30 minutes after the fire starts (0 to 60 minutes).
• The opportunity to put out a fire, and warn passengers or crew is only in the first few minutes.

The underlying theme: If there had been a night watchman, none of this would have happened.

There's a chance it may have made a difference, but you'd have to be lucky in that 60-minute window.

If I imagine I'm one of those scuba-divers n the lower-decks, and I want the best chance of getting out alive in case of a fire, what are my own top things in order?

• An integrated-fire-alert system, where a fire in one part of the ship notifies everybody. (Similar to most modern buildings, and many homes in the US)
• Adequate means of escape.
• Adequate and available fire-fighting equipment.

These 3 things require spending money making modifications to the boat itself, and the only person who can actually do something about that is the owner himself. Even if the crew is the most vigilant and professional crew, I'm not convinced I survive a fire without these boat modifications. And negligence absolutely can apply to an owner.

negligence

www.law.cornell.edu

Perhaps the strongest negligence by the crew, might be the lack of safety briefings and procedures. I haven't seen articles mention the prosecutor harping on "The passengers could have escape if they new where the 2nd exit was." That would be the most slam-dunk way to "hang" the captain, if the prosecutor could actually make that case.

---

Legalities aside, I'll still keep harping on that cheap owner, because ultimately he's the one who caused the deaths of my dive buddy's 2 close friends. I don't have kind things to say about the crew either, but the prosecutor sure seems to have shown no interest in the one person most guilty.

 

[KevinNM]

Legalities aside, I'll still keep harping on that cheap owner, because ultimately he's the one who caused the deaths of my dive buddy's 2 close friends. I don't have kind things to say about the crew either, but the prosecutor sure seems to have shown no interest in the one person most guilty.

If you position is that having a night watchman, as required by law for over 100 years, wouldn’t have saved them, then how would the owners actions have helped? The boat passed inspection by the Coast Guard every renewal (despite the lack of the legally required second exit from the bridge), so the boat was not inherently unsafe.

Are you saying nobody would have died if the owner had ensured there was the legally required night watch?

 

[Manatee Diver]

Actually, that's pretty much the prosecution case and certainly the public perception (read a bunch of the posts here). The underlying theme: If there had been a night watchman, none of this would have happened.

When it comes to criminal negligence you are never going to be able point to a single sure fire thing that would've prevented it. But these were standard safety procedures on ships for god knows how long, the Captain blatantly ignored standards.

Putting these 3 together, "The captain is guilty of neglect which caused the deaths of the passengers" doesn't pass beyond a reasonable doubt (based only on patrols).

• Lets say industry standard for nearly all boats that size, to patrol each area once per hour, and that this patrol is obligated for safety reasons. (I'm not sure if it is or isn't to be clear)
• On average, a patrol would pass any area, where there might be a fire, on average 30 minutes after the fire starts (0 to 60 minutes).
• The opportunity to put out a fire, and warn passengers or crew is only in the first few minutes.

Reasonable doubt isn't really the standard juries seem to hold to anymore.

I dealt with the once an hour argument, up thread. But the cliff notes version is, the Conception wasn't a big boat. Outside of being below deck, if the night watch wasn't actively roving, he would be very short distance from the saloon/galley where the fire started.

 

[dlofting]

Is having a night watchman on a ship the law or just "best practice"?

 

[Wookie]

Is having a night watchman on a ship the law or just "best practice"?

On overnight voyages it is a requirement. Someone on the vessel must be awake at all times and roving.

I got out of the roving requirement by doing what the Navy does, I had CCTV cameras in every space aside from the berthing areas and heads. The berthing stairs came up in the same space as the Operating Station (wheelhouse) so any fire would be immediately discovered. The battery charging station was within arms reach of the watchman, and the trash was taken out by the steward after making the coffee pot and cleaning up after brownies and ice cream.

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

I got out of the roving requirement by doing what the Navy does, I had CCTV cameras in every space

So the CCTV sees a fire. How does it report the fire to a human?

 

[Wookie]

So the CCTV sees a fire. How does it report the fire to a human?

Like in Central (DC Central as you knew it, now everything Engineering happens there) the cameras are on and rotating pictures at all times.

We also had heat sensors in the engineroom and generator spaces, and smoke detectors in every space.

Just like the CG requires on new build vessels.

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

Like in Central (DC Central as you knew it, now everything Engineering happens there) the cameras are on and rotating pictures at all times.

So the watchstanders in the machinery spaces are watching the CCTV cameras for fire?

 

[Wookie]

So the watchstanders in the machinery spaces are watching the CCTV cameras for fire?

There are no watchstanders in the machinery spaces on Gas Turbine ships.

Different Navy my friend.

All you get is a roving watch, 2 console operators, and an EOOW. The roving watch has shaft alley, 3 auxiliary rooms and 2 engine rooms to rove. A very busy boy or girl.

Everything is started or stopped from a console in Central.

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

So...who sees the fire on the CCTV?