U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Today, 12:16 PM
 
5,036 posts, read 2,259,318 times
Reputation: 7238

Advertisements

Just like the Coast Guard dispatcher, Cloudy Dayz was not there. Neither knows the exact circumstances. Neither do I but it appears the fire was not discovered immediately and progressed quickly. Within minutes it was a raging inferno engulfing the entire salon that was large enough to seat at least 40 people for chow. Any number of fire extinguishers would have been useless to put the fire out. Even if a fire hose was brought to bear it is doubtful it would have been effective. Time is critical here. There is an old adage that at some point, a cup of water can put out any fire. Once a fire is out of control, that is exactly what it means. Many times fire fighters best hope is to keep it from spreading while letting it burn out. I have been in volunteer fire/EMS for almost 30 years. I am a blue water sailor with a navigation rating. I also have an engineering degree. I am not the brightest star in the sky but I know a few things. I like to speculate using available information but I try not to make outrageous accusations because I think I know it all.


No doubt, boat design could have incorporated additional safety measures including a better means to escape. I said from the beginning that future designs will probably require changes. The existing port holes that allow for some light and maybe pass a sandwich through, assuming they could open in the first place, does not mean they could be turned into an emergency exit door. There are trade off for everything. Not so long ago a ferry in Europe (I think) flooded and sank drowning hundreds because a simple seal on a door near the water level failed and flooded it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 12:17 PM
 
33,076 posts, read 16,919,978 times
Reputation: 17922
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
The big fire fighting tool on a boat that size would be the fire hose. But apparently it was not deployed. That likely would have been the only hope of getting to the passengers. Was it deploy-able? If not why not?
Getting a firehose going on a boat requires access to pump controls and the requisite valves. The regs call for two sets of controls, one of which can be in the engineering space, IIRC. Typically the other will be on deck or at the bridge by the engine controls. The fact that the crew didn't even get out a mayday would indicate a problem in reaching the bridge, at least to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:17 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
5,520 posts, read 2,229,201 times
Reputation: 7208
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMBGBlueCanary View Post
From the sound of the reports, there was fire over the exits (both exits came into the galley and the galley was engulfed). Are you telling me you could climb into a fire wearing no protective gear (remember, the crew was on the bridge, two levels above the sleeping quarters--look at the pictures) and walk into a fire and somehow not burn up all the while ushering passengers out of a fire? It sounds like the kind of stuff you see in movies that is, in reality, impossible.

The flip side of your argument, one might ask why didn't the passengers run though the fire to save themselves? If the fire in your mind was tame enough and the smoke not so thick that people could walk though it, why didn't any of the passengers do it?

This is a guess on my part, but my guess is the heat was too much for human flesh (one of the crew was screaming in pain, most likely badly burnt) and the smoke to thick to see or even breathe. The crew aren't fully equipped professional fire fighters. And the passengers were probably dead from smoke inhalation (or unconscious).

I don't think people are "making excuses" I think people are withholding judgement (innocent until proven guilty). Life isn't a fairy tale or a movie after all where people are heroes or villains. Sometimes people are just human.
The boat had onboard fire fighting equipment. There would have been no reason for them not to have had protective gear. The Coast Guard ordered them to return to the boat and try and rescue people. Which is what they should have been trying to do on their own.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
5,520 posts, read 2,229,201 times
Reputation: 7208
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl View Post
You have no idea what they tried or what they saw. He start Marines, these are young men hired to work on a boat. I’m sure they would’ve tried to save them if they could, but there’s no reason to think that they should give up their lives to.

You do this on so many threads, you jump to erroneous assumptions and judgments and conclusions instead of just waiting for the facts or listening to posters who have experience and knowledge ( One of whom stated he’s been on this exact boat several times) and then you dig your heels in and insist you’re right about your assumptions.
You are the one jumping to that conclusion. I have heard no evidence that they tried to save anyone, until after the Coast Guard ordered them to return to the boat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:30 PM
 
33,076 posts, read 16,919,978 times
Reputation: 17922
I had no idea we had so many naval architects on this forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:33 PM
 
Location: on the wind
7,728 posts, read 3,235,463 times
Reputation: 26228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
34 people jammed into one room is overloaded IMHO. The crew certainly did abandon them. Five of the six crew members left the boat. None of the passengers did. The Coast Guard ordered them to return to the boat and try to rescue the trapped passengers. Which is what they should have done on their own.
Ah, OK, there it is. Your opinion. Your opinion is worth less than nothing. No one willingly abandoned anything. Once you become a naval architect, a fully-licensed captain of this class of vessel, participate in USCG rescues involving vessel fires, have 100 hours of deck crew experience on said vessel, or, to lower the bar to make it even easier for you, simply spend time as a paying passenger on such a vessel, you can offer an opinion. I'd also prefer to see you bravely tackle a vessel fire in your skivvies at least once too, but that's me. Sorry for being unreasonable. The ignore button will have to serve to express my disgust for this "opinion".

Ignore button to be engaged in three, two, one...

Last edited by Parnassia; Today at 12:51 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Southwestern, USA
16,000 posts, read 12,454,563 times
Reputation: 16917
Blamers LOVE to blame.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:39 PM
 
Location: Lone Mountain Las Vegas NV
13,297 posts, read 5,088,000 times
Reputation: 5878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
You are the one jumping to that conclusion. I have heard no evidence that they tried to save anyone, until after the Coast Guard ordered them to return to the boat.
You are simply wrong. There was no CG order to return to the boat. Here is a reasonable report on the CG dialog...

https://www.latimes.com/california/s...rnia-boat-fire
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:39 PM
 
Location: In the outlet by the lightswitch
1,832 posts, read 1,069,434 times
Reputation: 3371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
The boat had onboard fire fighting equipment. There would have been no reason for them not to have had protective gear. The Coast Guard ordered them to return to the boat and try and rescue people. Which is what they should have been trying to do on their own.

I don't think they have fire fighting suits on a boat like that. At least, I've never seen anything like that on any boat (either day trip or live aboard). Do you have some information on what gear was on the boat and where? If so, please share it.

And as others said, the Coast Guard didn't order them to do anything. They asked if it was plausible to go back.

There may be fault, I don't know. There will be an investigation. But again, innocent until proven guilty. Too many innocent people have been tried by media for me to participate in it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:48 PM
 
Location: on the wind
7,728 posts, read 3,235,463 times
Reputation: 26228
Quote:
Originally Posted by ditchoc View Post
Just like the Coast Guard dispatcher, Cloudy Dayz was not there. Neither knows the exact circumstances. Neither do I but it appears the fire was not discovered immediately and progressed quickly. Within minutes it was a raging inferno engulfing the entire salon that was large enough to seat at least 40 people for chow. Any number of fire extinguishers would have been useless to put the fire out. Even if a fire hose was brought to bear it is doubtful it would have been effective. Time is critical here. There is an old adage that at some point, a cup of water can put out any fire. Once a fire is out of control, that is exactly what it means. Many times fire fighters best hope is to keep it from spreading while letting it burn out. I have been in volunteer fire/EMS for almost 30 years. I am a blue water sailor with a navigation rating. I also have an engineering degree. I am not the brightest star in the sky but I know a few things. I like to speculate using available information but I try not to make outrageous accusations because I think I know it all.


No doubt, boat design could have incorporated additional safety measures including a better means to escape. I said from the beginning that future designs will probably require changes. The existing port holes that allow for some light and maybe pass a sandwich through, assuming they could open in the first place, does not mean they could be turned into an emergency exit door. There are trade off for everything. Not so long ago a ferry in Europe (I think) flooded and sank drowning hundreds because a simple seal on a door near the water level failed and flooded it.
Again, THANK YOU for an informed perspective! Some here should be paying attention before flapping their virtual lips. But that calls for powers of deductive reasoning.

Last edited by Parnassia; Today at 01:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top