Cruisers Forum
 


Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on Cruisers Forums. Advertise Here
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 07-09-2019, 01:52   #76
Senior Cruiser
 
GordMay's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 49,763
Images: 241
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Greetings and belated welcome aboard the CF, lwiniarski.
__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2019, 05:34   #77
Senior Cruiser
 
hpeer's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Between Caribbean and Canada
Boat: Murray 33-Chouette & Pape Steelmaid-44-Safara-both steel cutters
Posts: 8,679
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

LA Times article

Quote:
Authorities said Friday they believe smoke inhalation caused the deaths of 34 people aboard the Conception dive boat, raising new questions about exactly where the fire started and how it spread.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lat...es%3f_amp=true

That’s the question I was raising in post 53.

Sure they had smoke detectors.
Did they have CO detectors?
Would they have done any good?
hpeer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2019, 09:10   #78
Moderator
 
Don C L's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Channel Islands, CA
Boat: 1962 Columbia 29 MK 1 #37
Posts: 14,589
Images: 66
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

The designer of the boat is quoted here.
https://www.latimes.com/california/s...the-conception

The location and use of the 110 outlets for charging and what others have said here about dangerous batteries and chargers that look identical to safe ones are the things that have caught my eye. The report is not expected for 12 to 18 months. For now I am keeping anything with a lithium battery in an ammo can, and no charging inside the boat.
__________________
DL
Pythagoras
1962 Columbia 29 MKI #37
Don C L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2019, 20:31   #79
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2017
Boat: Retired from CF
Posts: 13,317
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

A detailed discussion of legal issues

https://www.metafilter.com/182982/Raising-the-Titanic
john61ct is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2019, 20:52   #80
Registered User
 
Uncle Bob's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney Australia
Boat: Fisher pilothouse sloop 32'
Posts: 3,443
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don C L View Post
The designer of the boat is quoted here.
https://www.latimes.com/california/s...the-conception

The location and use of the 110 outlets for charging and what others have said here about dangerous batteries and chargers that look identical to safe ones are the things that have caught my eye. The report is not expected for 12 to 18 months. For now I am keeping anything with a lithium battery in an ammo can, and no charging inside the boat.
When battery recharging was first raised here as a possible cause it rang bells with me and from now on recharging on my boat will be far more rigorously monitored.
__________________
Rob aka Uncle Bob Sydney Australia.

Life is 10% the cards you are dealt, 90% how you play em
Uncle Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 08:26   #81
cruiser

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Half Moon Bay, CA, USA
Boat: 1963 Pearson Ariel, Hull 75
Posts: 1,111
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Here is a "B-roll" (no audio) of the NTSB walk-through of Vision, Conception's sister ship.

https://tinyurl.com/y65hkefo

In it, you will get a good look at the escape hatch. The inadequacy of that hatch to quickly evacuate 34 persons in a smoke-filled cabin should be obvious.

Safety and Optimism are often polar opposites. Here, it appears the regulators were delusionally optimistic about the effectiveness of that hatch.

The emergency evacuation standard for passenger aircraft is: "The operator must show that the aircraft, emergency equipment, and emergency procedures allow the evacuation of the aircraft at full seating capacity, including crewmembers, in 90 seconds or less."
Cpt Pat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 08:34   #82
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 500
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

That escape hatch is a joke. Assuming power was out so no lights, thick smoke and a lot of panic. Even without all that it's difficult to get out through it.
B23iL23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 09:06   #83
cruiser

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Half Moon Bay, CA, USA
Boat: 1963 Pearson Ariel, Hull 75
Posts: 1,111
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

A common lithium battery used in battery powered appliances (camera, lights, hand tools) is the model 18650. Here are two related videos.

University of Michigan briefing on lithium battery failure modes - so many things to go wrong:
https://tinyurl.com/y2l4t8s9

"Cooking off" demo of an 18650 battery: https://tinyurl.com/y59khncf. When one battery in a pack fails - the explosion cascades to the rest of the pack.

Here some brave Russians failure test 18650 batteries (with no safety protocols): https://tinyurl.com/yxvkjt9p
Cpt Pat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 09:15   #84
Moderator
 
Don C L's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Channel Islands, CA
Boat: 1962 Columbia 29 MK 1 #37
Posts: 14,589
Images: 66
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

In the aircraft, 90 seconds for evacuation assumes all exits are not blocked, correct? The main entrance to the bunk area is not small. I agree the escape hatch is small but if both exits were unblocked, and there was no smoke or toxic fumes, nor panic in the dark, I believe, in my humble opinion, the bunk area could have been evacuated in 90 seconds.
This is a very unusual situation. Let's remember the boat has been operating safely for nearly 40 years. The escape hatch or its size, while it could have been bigger, does not look like the issue, or one that could have helped, just yet. What those of us who know the boat can't fathom is how not even one person could have escaped. The fire or smoke must have been so incapacitating so quickly that it was the result of a scenario we can't imagine yet.
In any event there will be time to go over the report. It just seems to add to the misery to fault some thing or some one just yet.
__________________
DL
Pythagoras
1962 Columbia 29 MKI #37
Don C L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 09:29   #85
Registered User
 
Cadence's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SC
Boat: None,build the one shown of glass, had many from 6' to 48'.
Posts: 10,208
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don C L View Post
In the aircraft, 90 seconds for evacuation assumes all exits are not blocked, correct? The main entrance to the bunk area is not small. I agree the escape hatch is small but if both exits were unblocked, and there was no smoke or toxic fumes, nor panic in the dark, I believe, in my humble opinion, the bunk area could have been evacuated in 90 seconds.
This is a very unusual situation. Let's remember the boat has been operating safely for nearly 40 years. The escape hatch or its size, while it could have been bigger, does not look like the issue, or one that could have helped, just yet. What those of us who know the boat can't fathom is how not even one person could have escaped. The fire or smoke must have been so incapacitating so quickly that it was the result of a scenario we can't imagine yet.
In any event there will be time to go over the report. It just seems to add to the misery to fault some thing or some one just yet.
Re: escape hatch. If I were one of those unfortunate people, I would hope to have been asphyxiated in my sleep. Possibly, that is the reason not one got out.
Cadence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 11:07   #86
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,075
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don C L View Post
... if both exits were unblocked, and there was no smoke or toxic fumes, nor panic in the dark, I believe, in my humble opinion, the bunk area could have been evacuated in 90 seconds...
I strongly disagree after seeing the NTSB walkthrough of the sister ship.
But, never mind all that. The fact remains: BOTH bunk room "exits" led to the galley, which in turn had only ONE true exit to the outside. That one exit was engulfed in flames when the crew got there. The whole safety concept of two exits from the bunk room is negated if they both lead to one room with one exit. (which happened to be on fire) If the crew couldn't get through the galley windows from the outside, we should not assume anyone could get out from the inside. (among smoke and flames)

On an aircraft, the 90 second test does not involve scrambling to get out of one chamber, and then scrambling to get out of a second chamber.

I would be very surprised if we don't eventually see new regulations on such boats requiring these bunk rooms to have an emergency exit to the EXTERIOR of the boat. Yeah, it might be very expensive to make something like that seaworthy...
BUT what building in the free world would be legally certified to sleep 34 people in windowless tight quarters where the only two "exits" actually went to ONE MORE little room with only ONE exit of its own??. (IMO we are taking liberties with the word "exit" here)
cyan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 14:55   #87
Moderator
 
Don C L's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Channel Islands, CA
Boat: 1962 Columbia 29 MK 1 #37
Posts: 14,589
Images: 66
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyan View Post
The whole safety concept of two exits from the bunk room is negated if they both lead to one room with one exit. (which happened to be on fire) If the crew couldn't get through the galley windows from the outside, we should not assume anyone could get out from the inside. (among smoke and flames)
Point well taken. The galley needed much better exits and/or windows that could be removed, from either side.

This is the last NTSB press conference:
__________________
DL
Pythagoras
1962 Columbia 29 MKI #37
Don C L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 16:15   #88
cruiser

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Half Moon Bay, CA, USA
Boat: 1963 Pearson Ariel, Hull 75
Posts: 1,111
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyan View Post
(IMO we are taking liberties with the word "exit" here)
I agree. Speaking generally about the design, not specifically about the accident: If the main exit was blocked, and everyone was forced to use the emergency hatch (I'm intentionally not using the word "exit"), how long do you estimate it would take each occupant to wiggle through that opening? My estimate is 5 seconds per person: assuming good organization, ideal visibility, and prior practice. No shoving, no pushing, so bunching up at the hatch.

So 34 persons... that's over 2.5 minutes.

I don't care if we've been "doing that" design for a thousand years. It's just wrong, and pointing out that a catastrophe of this magnitude hasn't happened before is a case of "using luck as a strategy." (Or more technically: "normalization of deviance.") And while I'm not trying to solve THIS mystery - I can look at that hatch and say: "That's just wrong."

Regarding fires in general in confined spaces -- one can't count on people behaving rationally. In a real fire, it's complete chaos. The moment people start feeling heat and smelling smoke, all semblance of order vanishes. Here is an example: https://tinyurl.com/y5c676mb. That video was shot at what has become know as "The Station Nightclub Fire." 100 people died. WARNING: The video is VERY disturbing. It's a little less likely to give you nightmares if you turn off the audio. That video was used in my EMT class to illustrate how, in a crisis, people act only on instinct and memory. There were other exists available to that crowd, but few people used them. Most just headed out the same way they'd come in - even after it became clear the exit was blocked.

We may never know what happened on the Conception. But I feel it's unlikely anyone tried to use that hatch.
Cpt Pat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 16:40   #89
Moderator
 
Don C L's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Channel Islands, CA
Boat: 1962 Columbia 29 MK 1 #37
Posts: 14,589
Images: 66
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyan View Post
BUT what building in the free world would be legally certified to sleep 34 people in windowless tight quarters where the only two "exits" actually went to ONE MORE little room with only ONE exit of its own??. (IMO we are taking liberties with the word "exit" here)
I wanted to add I agree here too. My point being that as far as I know the boat complied with all regulations, and I'd agree those need revision now.
__________________
DL
Pythagoras
1962 Columbia 29 MKI #37
Don C L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 19:49   #90
Moderator
 
JPA Cate's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: aboard, in Tasmania, Australia
Boat: Sayer 46' Solent rig sloop
Posts: 28,883
Re: The loss of M/V Conception

Would it "work" to have enough charging outlets so that all night divers lights, cameras, and phones could be charged while someone is awake keeping an eye on it?

Would it "work" to have a hatch with a ladder out in the bow?

The boats in service were 40 yrs. old. Not of steel construction. Maybe charging should take place in a metal vault that could be closed on a fire, and starved for oxygen? How much would it cost? How much would it add to the costs of commercial dives? Remember, it is mostly pretty safe. Kinda makes you wonder what the legislators will make of it......

Ann
__________________
Who scorns the calm has forgotten the storm.
JPA Cate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
concept

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Instant Weight Loss GordMay Cooking and Provisioning: Food & Drink 9 23-09-2019 08:18
Help me plan a trip that involves Conception Island and more! PetePetePete Atlantic & the Caribbean 1 01-02-2018 08:50
Bahamas, Conception Island Achorages caradow Atlantic & the Caribbean 8 19-01-2016 17:15
Am I Stupid to Be Afraid? 15-20 & 25 kt gusts Around Point Conception sww914 Our Community 5 12-02-2012 00:19
Good Place to Anchor Near Point Conception rebel heart Pacific & South China Sea 17 19-10-2010 19:08

Advertise Here


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 19:08.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.