• Welcome to ScubaBoard

  1. 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. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Fire on safari boat Suzana in Egypt (Red Sea Aggressor)

Discussion in 'Accidents and Incidents' started by Miyaru, Nov 1, 2019.

  1. Wookie

    Wookie Secret Field Agent ScubaBoard Business Sponsor

    23,893
    33,588
    113
    Remember, Aggressor Fleet is the franchise issuer and marketing/booking arm and 800 lb gorilla in liveaboard diving. They do not tell their franchise holders how to operate. It is done, but only rarely, that Aggressor Fleet will pull a franchise out from under a boat owner, so yes, while they might have sent around a list of safety concerns regarding the Conception fire, they are not the operations arm of franchised liveaboards, and there have been no conclusions in the Conception fire anyway.

    Aggressor looks bad here, but looking at it from their side, they licensed another boat owner to use their name only.
     
    CajunDiva and DavidFL like this.
  2. Lorenzoid

    Lorenzoid idling in neutral buoyancy

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Atlanta, USA
    9,136
    5,665
    113
    Do you happen to know if the arrangement between Aggressor and the boat owners is a franchise or a license? Franchising and licensing are different things. A franchisor has more control over a franchisee than a licensor does over a licensee. I have wondered before about what arrangement Aggressor uses. A licensor can generally require their licensee offer a certain level of quality, but not much beyond that.
     
    peocro likes this.
  3. scubadada

    scubadada Diver Staff Member ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Philadelphia and Boynton Beach
    10,910
    6,357
    113
    Hi Frank,

    I'm not at all sure that is true, see my earlier post Fire on safari boat Suzana in Egypt (Red Sea Aggressor). I'm quite sure that Aggressor fully expects their franchise boats to perform according to their SOPs. Exactly, what that may say with regard to safety issues is up to debate.
     
  4. Schwob

    Schwob Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Illinois
    1,815
    976
    113
    Well, true.

    But my impression was that their first public statement in the matter was something to the effect of:
    Unfortunately, yesterday the Red Sea Aggressor I suffered a fire. After everyone was accounted for at the muster station and the order to evacuate was given, one guest apparently decided to return to their room during the evacuation to retrieve something and is missing. All other guests are safe.

    And if so indeed between them and the two first hand victim accounts I read there are two totally different kind of "truths" being told. One being that no smoke detector beeped, rang or whatever they do, no crew member but passengers alerted passengers to the fire, exiting through the emergency hatch initially being blocked by the mattress of the then still sleeping only then awakening crew member there, that being the first crew member seen during the incident by those passengers and there, so my impression from reading, being no accounting of everyone at the muster station and no crew ordered evacuation but a bunch of passengers jumping off the bow in part because people on the nearby Emperor boat shouted for them to do so (the fire itself likely plaid a bigger role, but jumping off a high boat into a dark sea with nothing but maybe underwear to you is a big decision that will cause some to hesitate).
    At least I think I read that right in that German account. And if so and if that account is truthful (I wouldn't know, but guess who I might think has the bigger motivation to alter the truth, not that what I think is relevant at all) and if the above is indeed the initial public statement by Aggressor, then what makes that them?
     
  5. Urmama

    Urmama Garibaldi

    2
    5
    3
    Uhm.. That's like Mc Donalds doesnt tell their franchise holders how to prepare a bigmac..

    And regarding their over exceptional poor dealing with that whole issue and to keep it hush hush i sincerely hope this will backfire on them. I've made that BDE Tour on that boat almost exactly one year ago and given the quality service on board i would have never thought how bad things can turn out once something goes wrong. Especially as they cost you several hundred bucks more than most competitors.
     
    Scott from LongIsland likes this.
  6. Wookie

    Wookie Secret Field Agent ScubaBoard Business Sponsor

    23,893
    33,588
    113
    I do not know the business arrangements between Aggressor Fleet and the vessel owners.
     
  7. DavidFL

    DavidFL Wide-eyed nube in the Pub ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Orlando, FL
    450
    371
    63
    I have been tempted to post something like this, because I know it's true that Aggressor is mostly a franchise. I think they do own some of the yachts. I had a very positive experience on Kona Aggressor when a hurricane interrupted our trip and we were put ashore early to shelter out the storm. Nowhere near the consequences of this fire, but all of our interaction with 'employees' of the charter were with the company that owns the yachts...which is not Aggressor.

    So as I look at future LOB's, I will try very hard to search 'through' the Aggressor name and brand and dry to discover the record of the yacht's actual owner/operator.

    Having said that, Aggressor is a brand. Notwithstanding the details of the franchising agreement, and the legal owner/operator of the yacht, the Aggressor brand is going to attract a significant amount of the downside. To the extent the brand and the franchise continue, they need to be incredibly pro-active and effective in cleaning up operations that incredibly can somehow allow there to be no watch at midnight.

    And it is professionally and personally very very sad and 'disappointing' is a huge understatement. Setting aside all the legal chains, I believe the 'brand' bears considerable responsibility for this tragedy.
     
    Bob DBF likes this.
  8. DandyDon

    DandyDon Old men ought to be explorers ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: One kilometer high on the Texas High Plains
    48,637
    4,369
    113
    Nope, not buying that. They market these trips under their brand, and people recognize the brand name. They may share responsibility with the owner, but they are still responsible.
     
  9. ReefHound

    ReefHound PADI Pro

    # of Dives: 1,000 - 2,499
    Location: Houston, TX
    5,487
    1,562
    113
    I'll bet the average diver didn't know that.
     
  10. Schwob

    Schwob Solo Diver

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Illinois
    1,815
    976
    113
    Downright spooky, even right now. Zero matching results for "sinking of red sea aggressor". Almost worse, see description below the first result below (in screenshot).

    no-results-aggressor-sinking-2019-11-06_17-37-53.jpg
     
    eleniel likes this.

Share This Page