Dive boat fire - 30 trapped

[dom]

Nothing to match the others, but my worst experience with fire was when I was about 14; it was a hot day when our mother told us to burn some cardboard packaging. Splosh of petrol - I know I know! - in a big metal bin, then couldn't find the matches. Came back a few minutes later - bang - and burning rubbish was flung all around the garden. It set fire to some bushes which we managed to pull a garden hose over to quell. Luckily we got away with it.

And that was outside. In the case of the dive boat, according to the LA Times, "prosecutors singled out three violations: failing to have a roving patrol; failing to conduct sufficient fire drills; and failing to conduct sufficient crew training. "

In the context of an enclosed, packed, highly flammable structure, laden with potential fire hazards. Terrible

 

[DownWest]

Extraordinary effort on you part! Was it ever determined what caused the fire?

That was the easy bit. It was in early '74 and cold. The General manager was helping out in the hanger, as he was a good spray artist (previous with cars) The Auster had been recovered (we had a bit of a name for that and people sent bits over) materials were Irish linen and cellulose dope, sprayed over with a UV shield of cellulose aluminum loaded paint.
So, due to the temp he put a two bar electric fire about six feet away, to help with the drying of the registration, also cellulose based. Didn 't sound too bad, but after the event, I figured that the vapour pooled on the floor and was convected towards the fire, unfortunately in the correct mix with air to flash back to the aircraft.
As Artic Pilot said, it is the speed of things. The whole mess was probably over in under five minutes from the first flame, likely less. If it had taken a minute more, likely I would not have been quick enough to stop it. The flames were very close to the belly tank and not that far from the wing tanks either. Any one on those would have taken it out of control immediately. Getting away might have been tricky too. As we were so crowded, the A/c were all wedged in so you could not even walk between them, hence going under them to get there.
We had a complete rehash of the fire equipement six months before so that meant we had good big CO2s to hand, even so, the second guy's didn't work, but the third's did a few seconds later. Bit close...

When it was out, I said 'lets have a coffee' And we all sat down and cooled off. The Auster was due out the next day.. So I walked back and had a good look. The fire was so quick that it had actually not damaged the tube frame or even the stringers, other than a bit of scorched paint. The fire was around 11 am. By 2 the next morning we had it recovered and doped. By 11 the next day, it was having the reg sprayed on (again!). Test flew it after lunch and it went out on time.

 

[PilotWolf]

This one is still close to home.

At my last job I repeatedly tried to make drills realistic but no one including managers seemed to care. It was always a case of it’s never happened before so why should it now.

We had the occasional ‘deadhead’ with no passengers and the deck crew just seemed to think it was a chance to sleep. I was always the dick captain who drilled or had them still do rounds on these trips.

But I was just seen as a trouble maker as it was a won’t happen to us mentality. And that’s the way we’ve always done it.

I wonder if they had the same attitude?

Part of me feels sorry that the captain is carrying the can but at the end of the day it’s down to him.

Maybe it’ll wake up a few managers and kick their butts into gear.

PW

 

[Uricanejack]

Rules and regulation and red tape are unfortunately usually written in blood.

I have no doubt this unfortunate individual who held who one of the lowest levels of qualification in existence to be in charge of a passenger vessel. Actually had Little if any idea what the existing regulations actually required.

He was just doing what the company he worked for and other similar vessels had always done. It was standard practice. On this and other vessels. Which were routinely inspected and passed without question by the regulating authority. Bind eyes turned by everyone because nothing bad had happened yet.

Hanging him form the yardarm 34 times won’t change what happened. If you don’t want it to happen again, The industry needs to change by learning from what happened.
If he is guilty, so are the owners, and the regulators. I doubt if he is actually guilty, I suspect he was simply not competent enough to understand the standard practice was a breach or requirements and ileagle.

The real lesson the company had a good reputation and was popular with its customers even after this incident. Until people started to understand what happened. Now the public is angry and wants some one held to account.
The end result may well be he spends a lot of time in jail.

 

[Stemar]

The end result may well be he spends a lot of time in jail.

And so justice is served...

I'm reminded of the stages of a project, which include
4. Panic
5. Search for the guilty
6. Punishment of the innocent

OK, maybe not innocent, but a lack of training, if that was the issue, and lack of a safety culture isn't the fault of the scapegoat, it's the fault of management, who'll presumably be opening up shortly with a new name.

 

[Tomahawk]

What gets me is that the operators make themselves out to be devout christians...
Burn in hell is too good for them

 

[dom]

And so justice is served...

I'm reminded of the stages of a project, which include
4. Panic
5. Search for the guilty
6. Punishment of the innocent

OK, maybe not innocent, but a lack of training, if that was the issue, and lack of a safety culture isn't the fault of the scapegoat, it's the fault of management, who'll presumably be opening up shortly with a new name.

The captain of a pleasure vessel is a position of great responsibility for which in-date qualifications are required and which is governed by a host of regulations. Ignorance of them is no defence, either in this or any other professional field.

Re the management " who'll presumably be opening up shortly with a new name"; why do you presume that?

 

[Stemar]

Re the management " who'll presumably be opening up shortly with a new name"; why do you presume that?

Only because it's the usual practice of bad managements. A certain yacht broker springs to mind, but there are far too many other examples.