Fire on dive boat Conception in CA

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!

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is such a tragedy. I was on the exact same trip 4 years ago and even considered going this year. The folks at Worldwide Diving welcomed my friends and I like family and they will be dearly missed. My heart goes out to them and the divers who passed doing what they loved. Regardless of the accident cause, I can't image what the crew and Truth Aquatics family are going through as well. They are an impeccable outfit and I would dive with them any time.

My thought and prayers go out to the victims families.
 
We will never know what happened. My money is on faulty Li-on being charged at the wrong place at the wrong time. Search for any video of burning Li-on battey online to see it's power. The truth is that the design of this vessel was awful in respect to exit routes for both fire and capsizing. Kinda floating morque (c'mon, one narrow stair for 34 people?!! from the room with no windows?!!). I dive on all wooden boats in Red Sea. 20 people below deck in 10 cabins with shower and toilets and small windows which could be opened for air. Two exits. 16 more people in above deck rooms in 8 cabins. Cost a million dollars to build in 2000. Just facts.
 
While not trying to speculate I think there is going to be two primary questions for NTSB to answer:

1. What caused the fire and why did it spread so fast?
2. Were the egress access points adequate?

I think this second point is going be the most critical and something other So.Cal boats will need to look at. As I and others have mentioned the secondary egress on these boats through a bunk. Which as was described by:

So rather than climb down I exited my bunk by literally pushing myself up and out of the rear of my bunk and rolling out of the hatch and onto the floor. It wasn't really graceful as there wasn't a way to step up and out.

I vaguely recall doing something similar on another boat (will not say which one because it has been a long time). That said, I think the NTSB will be looking at these secondary egresses. Especially given the number of people below deck.
 
Do I understand correctly that the pathways from the hatch above the bunks also goes through the galley? Or did I misunderstand?

Egress is always a concern for enclosed spaces like this. Airplanes actually evacuate fairly well - there have been enough examples to prove that.

My biggest concerns are so far this:

The alternate escape hatch possibly also necessitating going through the same area to exit (to be counted as a separate route, imo, it needs to go through an entirely different area. Just like your windows in your bedroom are considered an egress, and the door to your room is a separate one, both going different directions. But two opening windows are not necessarily two different egress paths).

The escape hatch being above a bunk. That is potentially very difficult in the best of circumstances, but with smoke present, when you are supposed to be staying as close to the floor as possible, needing to go into the smoke is a concern, both for visibility and smoke inhalation.

Configuration of it all in general, feasibility of escape in an emergency, how exactly the safety briefings are done, whether people can practice opening the hatch, etc.

By no means do I want to imply this operator was negligent or out of compliance. Those are just general concerns with the the situation as we know it. Terrible tragedy.
 
Side exits seem problematic. The Channel Islands aren't a nice little paradise destination; I have had trips out to San Nic and Santa Barbara on smaller liveaboards where we've had the living bejeebers kicked out of us. Door-sized openings in the hull seem like potential structural and watertight integrity compromises. Has anyone seen a liveaboard equipped with side escape hatches?

I feel the first order of business is to establish how the fire started, how fast it spread, and when the alarms went off. If it was something extremely fast and catastrophic on a vessel where everyone below decks was sound asleep, the question of emergency exits may have been a moot point.
 
We will never know what happened.

The NTSB is very good at what they do, and I would expect they will find the cause.

I am wondering what kind of insurance was carried by the tour operator and vessel operator.

Side exits seem problematic. The Channel Islands aren't a nice little paradise destination; I have had trips out to San Nic and Santa Barbara on smaller liveaboards where we've had the living bejeebers kicked out of us.

I crossed the SB Channel on the Truth years ago. Extremely rough. I was wedged into my bunk, and stuff was crashing around in the galley above.
 
I feel the first order of business is to establish how the fire started, how fast it spread, and when the alarms went off. If it was something extremely fast and catastrophic on a vessel where everyone below decks was sound asleep, the question of emergency exits may have been a moot point.

If it started in the engine room I suspect they would have been required to have a automatically triggered halon system
 
Just a thought about the cause. How is the tender gasoline stored and where?
 
If it started in the engine room I suspect they would have been required to have a automatically triggered halon system
Systems don't always work. It appears fire detection system failed in some fashion. Because, unless a flammable liquid or something managed to somehow set fire to the entire cabin in a moment, fires normally take at least minutes before they get hot enough and big enough to get extremely rapid spread. But we'll need to wait to see the investigation finds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom