Fire on dive boat Conception in CA

[KevinNM]

Apparently all 5 crewman who survived were all sleeping or on duty on the bridge/sundeck level. The crewman sleeping in the main passenger accommodations perished.

 

[ijdod]

I'm wondering if that sound could have been a flashover event, perhaps from the bunks to the salon. It would explain the fire being everywhere, and the quick escalation of events from that point forward.

 

[Storker]

I suppose you could say that Hydrogen Fluoride is the "weak sister" to Hydrogen Cyanide

I suppose you could say that.

It'd also be completely wrong. You've already described why people die from HF inhalation. HCN turns off the energy production in the cells (similar to the action of H2S). So they're completely different beasts.

 

[bowlofpetunias]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

This summary updated 14 Sept 2019 Updates are also posted on page one of this thread. Please follow links and read surrounding posts to keep up to date.

It is always best to read an entire thread before commenting. Due to the length of this one we are providing & updating this summary for topics covered. We believe this information is credible but it can not be established as proven facts prior to completion of the investigation.

Please be kind when you post here remember the special rules and consider families, friends and survivors who are reading this. Consider Accidents and Incident Threads: Victim Perspective

We can not determine the cause here but discussing possibilities may help to prevent future tragedies.

34 Casualties DNA identified

• SB Sheriff Brown (Coroner) states probable COD smoke inhalation
• last victim found 11 Sept

Conception compliant met or exceeded applicable USCG requirements on last inspection implies approved; fire alarms, fire fighting equipment and escape routes

• Grandfathered for inspection requirements. Discussion here
• USCG issue Safety Information Bulletin 10 Sept 2019
  
• Certificate of Inspection here

NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) Preliminary Report
Preliminary Report: Marine DCA19MM047
Discussion points

• concludes all crew sleeping
• Statement in Preliminary Report says it may contain errors

Anchor Watch

• Captain's responsibilities
  
• Regulations
  
• Anchor watch process discussion
• People from prior trips reported meeting the "watchman" at various times during night

Rough time line as reported

• night dive time? commonly done by passengers; NO night dive by Crew
  
• 2:30 crew member finished up in the galley verified heating elements were out and cold etc. Then went upstairs to bed. Not indicated if this was the designated Anchor Watch see
  
• Between 3 and 3:14, a crew member awoke hearing a bang. He attempted to go down to investigate but stairs already afire.
• 5 crew were in the wheelhouse two levels above the berth area. 1 crew member in the berth below did not survive.
• crew jumped to deck, one broke leg other undisclosed ankle injuries
• Captain first Mayday from Bridge documented 3:14
• crew tried to reach the passengers from aft passage into the salon/galley then via forward front windows
  
• forced from the boat by the fire some swam aft to the dingy & brought it alongside to rescue injured crew
  
• sought help from nearby vessel Grape Escape Another Mayday call.

Most suspected causes of fire discussed

• charging batteries either in the Galley or possibly berth area
• Dept of Fire Protection Engineering, U of Maryland video
  
• electrical fires are often a factor
  
• boat fires DO burn quickly
• electrical wiring faults inside walls can smolder for hours before bursting into flame
• Boat USA Foundation boat fire video

Battery discussions here

Original location of fire not yet established

• former owner believes it started in passenger berth area
• some believe it started in galley/salon area

Conception's layout and facilities

• all electric no propane or other fuel used for cooking
• Nitrox = Nuvair Membrane
• NO banked Oxygen
• all O2 First aid tanks or stage bottles were aft (last to burn)
• Conception Safety Video link
  
• Post fire picture
• News footage raising the Conception

Exits from Dorm

• main exit - stairs to starboard forward end of the dorm to the galley/salon.
• emergency hatch above bunks at aft end of dorm exited in aft portion of the salon, just inside the passageway to the after deck.
• no locked doors to the galley, salon or berth area.

The design of berth area and escape hatches discussed extensively. It meets current USCG standards which many believe may be changed as a result of this tragedy.

Excellent DAN article Mental Health post incident

Google Map link that shows Platt Harbor and the US Coast Guard Station, Channel Islands. Ventura and Santa Barbara are to the north

Related threads

A personal perspective on California Live-aboards
Discussion of legal aspects here
Condolences posted here
Donations here

---

 

[gopbroek]

Not sure if this has already been posted but the San Francisco Chronicle has published a partial list of the casualties of this tragic accident.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...AxAB&usg=AOvVaw1rS75GJ_Mh800plgxXdcaX&ampcf=1

 

[markmud]

This is simply not true at least in T-boat regs, as the watchman may also be the navigational watch, and the navigational watch may certainly not roam. But I’ll look for the applicable passage.

Edit-see section (f).
46 CFR § 15.705 - Watches.

Edit to the edit. Section (a) is actually the relevant section, which states in part that safe Manning is detirmined for each vessel and placed on the vessels COI as described above.

Hi Wookie,

I was taught and lived rule 5 "Look-out" in the Navigational Rules Handbook (formerly CG 169):

It states in part: "...by sight and hearing..." My training has taught me that that term has been established to mean: By sight and hearing for 360 degrees of the horizon.

Either the anchor watch was on the bridge wings, in a roving way, port and starboard, or he/she did not have a view of the horizon or vessel for 360 degrees (which is contrary to Spree per your previous statement). The nav watch on Conception did not have a view of half the horizon while ensconced in the helm chair, unless roving between each bridge wing, or leaving the wheelhouse and walking aft.

In my experience, since a vessel at anchor in not considered to be "underway" nor "underway and making way" anchor watches have been a "relaxed watch" whereby roving away from the wheelhouse is appropriate for very short periods while remaining in very close proximity to the bridge. Also, performing work such as cleaning the bridge or correcting charts from Notice to Mariners is appropriate as long as Rule 5 is adhered to (busy-work keeps you awake).

My point is that either the captain should have assigned a stern look-out to cover the aft portion of the horizon (and vessel) or the nav-watch would have to be constantly scanning from the bridge wings on a consistant cycle.

While you stated above that a nav watch may not roam, I contend that a proper nav watch would be scanning the horizon for 360 degrees, by sight and hearing, on a continual basis, and therefore, should have noticed either flames, heat, or smoke, or all of the above, relatively fast.

The question is how fast the fire flashed over. If it completely flashed over in less than 30 seconds, a competent watch stander may not have made a difference even if following the " ...by sight and hearing...(for 360 degrees)" dictum.

thanks,
markm

 

[cerich]

This is simply not true at least in T-boat regs, as the watchman may also be the navigational watch, and the navigational watch may certainly not roam. But I’ll look for the applicable passage.

Edit-see section (f).
46 CFR § 15.705 - Watches.

Edit to the edit. Section (a) is actually the relevant section, which states in part that safe Manning is detirmined for each vessel and placed on the vessels COI as described above.

Tangential but not applicable here as as not the applicable code STCW (A VIII)require the navigation watch officer at anchor to ensure there are established inspection rounds periodically.

I must say, this has been a refresher for me and my first dive into US (versus Canadian or STCW) inshore regs...and they are quite.. something.

 

[Wookie]

Hi Wookie,

I was taught and lived rule 5 "Look-out" in the Navigational Rules Handbook (formerly CG 169):

It states in part: "...by sight and hearing..." My training has taught me that that term has been established to mean: By sight and hearing for 360 degrees of the horizon.

Either the anchor watch was on the bridge wings, in a roving way, port and starboard, or he/she did not have a view of the horizon or vessel for 360 degrees (which is contrary to Spree per your previous statement). The nav watch on Conception did not have a view of half the horizon while ensconced in the helm chair, unless roving between each bridge wing, or leaving the wheelhouse and walking aft.

In my experience, since a vessel at anchor in not considered to be "underway" nor "underway and making way" anchor watches have been a "relaxed watch" whereby roving away from the wheelhouse is appropriate for very short periods while remaining in very close proximity to the bridge. Also, performing work such as cleaning the bridge or correcting charts from Notice to Mariners is appropriate as long as Rule 5 is adhered to (busy-work keeps you awake).

My point is that either the captain should have assigned a stern look-out to cover the aft portion of the horizon (and vessel) or the nav-watch would have to be constantly scanning from the bridge wings on a constant cycle.

While you stated above that a nav watch may not roam, I contend that a proper nav watch would be scanning the horizon for 360 degrees, by sight and hearing, on a continual basis, and therefore, should have noticed either flames, heat, and smoke, or all of the above, relatively fast.

The question is how fast the fire flashed over. If it completely flashed over in less than 30 seconds, a competent watch stander may not have made a difference even if following the " ...by sight and hearing...(for 360 degrees)" dictum.

thanks,
markm

I don’t feel that it is appropriate to assign “proper lookout” requirements to what is essentually a roving watch or a messenger of the watch. When at anchor, a navigational lookout is neither set nor necessary, as it is unlikely in the extreme that someone would run into a well lit vessel in an anchorage, but certainly not beyond the realm of possibility. These boats operate with 6-10 crew, all but one of whom has duties during the day, so the night watch will be either the navigator/proper lookout or will be the rover.

But aside from that, this wasn’t the Navy where there are plenty of watchstanders to be a rover/messenger and lookout and sounding and security and all of those highly trained positions. We (I) don’t know what the backgrounds of the crew was, but at one time, my mate was a valve salesman taking a break, my second deckhand was a solar installation engineer, my stewardess was a P-3 Orion Electronics Wizard and swim instructor down at the community pool, my Chef was a retired IBM something from upstate, and my photo-pro developed apps for iPhones. At these lower level national licenses, Mariners are not trained for firefighting, proper watchstanding, etc. they are required to know how to navigate and perform first aid. I know US based liveaboards that don’t have divemaster certified folks manning the deck, and most divemasters I know on dayboats have no idea that they are deckhands with very legal responsibilities. In fact, next time you ride a day boat, ask the divemaster what their title is, and what their responsibilities are.

I’ll bet none of it has anything to do with being what you and I would consider a deckhand, except maybe 8-10 on the list would be tie up and wash the boat.

 

[shoredivr]

In this later sunrise photo of the starboard hull, the burn through appears to be most severe at the approximate location of the stairs to the passenger bunk deck.

View attachment 539110

Note the container of Platinum AR AFFF at the bottom of the shot.

 

[markmud]

When at anchor, a navigational lookout is neither set nor necessary, as it is unlikely in the extreme that someone would run into a well lit vessel in an anchorage, but certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.

Thanks Wookie,

In your previous post, I was confused by your use of the term "nav-wach". I "felt" you were using it interchangeably with anchor watch. I was wrong.

However, a divemaster who does not know his/her responsibility to the master for established navigational rules and norms, as vessel safety protocols have established, while on a vessel for hire, does not excuse the divemaster from culpability. Navigation and safe operation of the vessel comes first, diving is a tertiary event (I would posit that navigation is first, overall safety of vessel and crew/passengers is second (housekeeping), diving is third).

Ignorance of the law is no defense for the not performing your lawfully prescribed duties.

Edit for additional thoughts:
Also, Rule 30 and 35 prescribe lights and shapes; and sound signals for vessels at anchor including for restricted visibility. I was again taught that a master cannot ensure that sound signals would be properly established if no watch stander is available by sight and hearing, for 360 degrees of the horizon. If fog rolls in, an anchor watch (nav-watch) must be on the job.

I am sorry for the semantics. But it really does matter.

thanks,
markm