Cali Dive Boat tragedy

[SumJongGuy]

Device charging station officially mentioned as a possible source of the fire..

https://www.latimes.com/california/s...-out-ntsb-says

[iceman]

^is that criminal?

Well they were at anchor. Not positive on the regulations for a commercial passenger vessel by any means but I wouldn't think they're required to stand watch at anchor.

[AK47bp]

I would hope someone is required to keep watch. Bobbing around in the ocean with 40 people asleep and nobody awake isn’t a good scenario. Leaks, fires, buildup of fumes, pirates, rogue wave. Shit can happen quick.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[iceman]

Yeah I don't think it is but easily could be wrong.

[iceman]

Captain's discretion in Norway:

Ship at anchor
51. If the master considers it necessary, a continuous navigational watch shall be maintained at anchor.

Why the Norwegian regulations are in English is curious. Also why I could find Norwegian regs but not US ones in a quick search is puzzling.

[Chugachjed]

Captain's discretion in Norway:

Ship at anchor
51. If the master considers it necessary, a continuous navigational watch shall be maintained at anchor.

Why the Norwegian regulations are in English is curious. Also why I could find Norwegian regs but not US ones in a quick search is puzzling.

Gotta dive into the CFRs to find it.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/33/164.19

[old goat]

Captain's discretion in Norway:

Ship at anchor
51. If the master considers it necessary, a continuous navigational watch shall be maintained at anchor.

Why the Norwegian regulations are in English is curious. Also why I could find Norwegian regs but not US ones in a quick search is puzzling.

Isn't English the unofficial (or maybe official) language of the maritime industry? BTW I read somewhere that the US Navy says right and left while the rest of the world uses port and starboard. I know we have some sailors who can tell me whether that's correct.

[RockChalk]

No clue on legalities but here's a quote from the NYT article:

"A U.S. Coast Guard spokesman has previously said that a safety certificate for the 75-foot Conception required that at least one crew member serve as a "night watchman" on the ship while passengers slept."


Sad stuff

[highangle]

COLREG Rule 30 (Anchored vessels and vessels aground)

(a) A vessel at anchor shall exhibit where it can best be seen:

(i) in the fore part, an all-round white light or one ball;

(ii) at or near the stern and at a lower level that the light prescribed in subparagraph (i), an all-round white light.

(b) A vessel of less than 50 m in length may exhibit an all-round white light where it can best be seen instead of the lights prescribed in paragraph (a) of this Rule.

(c) A vessel at anchor may, and a vessel of 100 m and more in length shall, also use the available working or equivalent lights to illuminate her decks.

(d) A vessel aground shall exhibit the lights prescribed in paragraph (a) or (b) of this Rule and in addition, where they can best be seen:

(i) two all-round red lights in a vertical line;

(ii) three balls in a vertical line.

================================================== =====================================


Ship at anchor51 If the master considers it necessary, a continuous navigational watch shall be maintained at anchor. While at anchor, the officer in charge of the navigational watch shall: .1 determine and plot the ship's position on the appropriate chart as soon as practicable;
.2 when circumstances permit, check at sufficiently frequent intervals whether the ship is remaining securely at anchor by taking bearings of fixed navigation marks or readily identifiable shore objects;
.3 ensure that proper look-out is maintained;
.4 ensure that inspection rounds of the ship are made periodically;
.5 observe meteorological and tidal conditions and the state of the sea;
.6 notify the master and undertake all necessary measures if the ship drags anchor;
.7 ensure that the state of readiness of the main engines and other machinery is in accordance with the master's instructions;
.8 if visibility deteriorates, notify the master;

STCW.6/Circ.1 ANNEX Page 142

.9 ensure that the ship exhibits the appropriate lights and shapes and that appropriate sound signals are made in accordance with all applicable regulations; and
.10 take measures to protect the environment from pollution by the ship and comply with applicable pollution regulations.

(e) A vessel of less than 7 m in length, when at anchor, not in or near a narrow channel, fairway or anchorage, or where other vessels normally navigate, shall not be required to exhibit the lights or shape prescribed in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Rule.

(f) A vessel of less than 12 m in length, when aground, shall not be required to exhibit the lights or shapes prescribed in subparagraphs (d)(i) and (ii) of this Rule.

[SumJongGuy]

What's the realistic expectations with regard to smoke detectors on a vessel of that type? Shouldn't there have been enough of them with loud enough alarms to have woken everyone up within a few minutes of the fire starting? I'm kinda thinking it's unreasonable to require a night watchman everywhere people sleep. Shit happens other places besides boats but people still sleep when working as guides on multi day outings.

[RockChalk]

This feels like when the cop follows you long enough to get you on a technical violation that everyone (including the cop) does every day. I highly doubt that rule is followed by small(ish) boats. I've spent a lot of nights on the water & not once did anyone stay up & alert for the once in a billion catastrophic lithium battery charging fire. Roasting people in court is no way to resurrect the dead, particularly in something as rare & impossible to predict as this.

Why do you think that certificate stipulation exists in the first place?

[RockChalk]

Theoretical justification for MMQBing, just like many laws & regs out there. A chance for authorities to save face after tragedies.

Ever flown on a commercial plane?

[iceman]

It's there so they'll do it, not so there's something to point at when they don't. It's not specific in the regs for a vessel of that size (as far as I can see) is why they'd put it on the certificate rather than just relying on the regs.

[RockChalk]

It's there so they'll do it, not so there's something to point at when they don't. It's not specific in the regs for a vessel of that size (as far as I can see) is why they'd put it on the certificate rather than just relying on the regs.

qft

[m2711c]

wooden hulled boat and no fire watch? no anchor watch?


that seems less than optimal.

[RockChalk]

You can go beat your chest about how much of an affront to safety that crew is if you like. I just think that rule wasn't followed for the first 38 years of operation on that boat & those similar. Maybe I'm wrong. Just seems impractical to a degree that means following it on a boat like that is the exception rather than the rule. Granted, my experience is on smaller boats & I've never done a trip like that.

Theoretical versus applied safety.... plane travel is a pretty silly comparison to a boat anchored 200 yards offshore.

What do you mean when you say "boat like that"?

I'm not sure you understand what happened. It's awful for all parties involved, I'm not beating my chest for anything. Just relaying facts.

[AK47bp]

You can go beat your chest about how much of an affront to safety that crew is if you like. I just think that rule wasn't followed for the first 38 years of operation on that boat & those similar. Maybe I'm wrong. Just seems impractical to a degree that means following it on a boat like that is the exception rather than the rule. Granted, my experience is on smaller boats & I've never done a trip like that

what’s the worst that could happen?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[BFD]

It's there so they'll do it, not so there's something to point at when they don't. It's not specific in the regs for a vessel of that size (as far as I can see) is why they'd put it on the certificate rather than just relying on the regs.

that is correct. Many regulations are based on length but there can also be requirements based on use. Someone should of been awake. This can not be dismissed as this is the way we always did things.

[mtngirl79]

You can go beat your chest about how much of an affront to safety that crew is if you like. I just think that rule wasn't followed for the first 38 years of operation on that boat & those similar. Maybe I'm wrong. Just seems impractical to a degree that means following it on a boat like that is the exception rather than the rule. Granted, my experience is on smaller boats & I've never done a trip like that.

Theoretical versus applied safety.... plane travel is a pretty silly comparison to a boat anchored 200 yards offshore.

The owner of the company said a crewmember was on watch, awake in the wheelhouse when the fire started.

Seems that that wasnt the case. If you are correct in saying that it's not common to have someone on watch, wouldnt the owner know that? Did he lie in the interview? Did he not know his crew didnt post a watch? Was it standard to disregard the watch requirement or was this just an unlucky time...?

Sucks all around but if the company/crew were skipping safety regulations, it sucks even more.

Vibes divers...

[old goat]

Not specifically talking about boats, which I know little about, but in general and IME some regulations are for theoretical problems but most are because of something bad that happened.

[Cono Este]

Roasting people in court is no way to resurrect the dead, particularly in something as rare & impossible to predict as this.

That’s up the families to decide.

They did not die wingsuit flying, they were asleep in their bunks.

[Svengali]

If maritime law is applicable in this case which is very likely, the victims families should procede carefully before paying any attorney huge sums to go down the cruel path of 1838 justice; It was written entirely to protect the wealthy owners of ships from crew, passengers, and owners of lost cargo.

[Ottime]

Ah geez. Finally popping fun here. The latest knees is very sad indeed.

I knew some of the deceased. Two minors attended school where I work. One was likely to be the first in her family to graduate high school and go off to college. In the brief time where our paths crossed I met both of these lovely young ladies. Our community is still reeling from this. A friends of my son, at another school, lost her mother. I never knew her mom, but she is a super sweet and awesome 8 year old. All of this is terribly terribly sad.

I don’t know about down in SB, but a lot of folks here in SC are starting to lose faith in this operation. Maybe it is just a part of grief and mourning, but this latest news has set a lot of us back a few days. People are starting to wonder if this was avoidable and due to negligence. That is a hard pill to swallow, especially when it hits your youth community directly.

[SumJongGuy]

I'd like to believe that if a battery or anything in another room of my house caught fire in the middle of the night, the smoke alarms would wake us before every path of escape for everyone was engulfed in flames. I get that boats are smaller and tighter with fewer escape options, but damn.. I'm hesitant to put this on some kid or young adult making $20/hr or whatever that may or may not have been sleeping when they were supposed to be on anchor watch. I'd also be hesitant to blame the employer/owners unless it comes to light that the smoke alarms were not in proper working order. Other than that, it's just bad, really bad shit happened and people died, but no one person should shoulder the blame for this.

[m2711c]

i'll bet the lawyers will be disagreeing with you on this point.....