I just heard on NBC News that the boat’s owners have filed a lawsuit (the exact nature, I don’t know) and they said that this is common practice in maritime disasters, because their law system is much different from, if you will, land law.
I don’t see how that follows.
Who was the lawsuit against? The operators? The company that chartered it? Their insurance company?
It’s something to do with limiting their liability.
Perhaps I’m wrong to do so, but I assumed they died in their sleep.
I’m seeing some early reports today that smoke inhalation was the cause of death. I’m also seeing reports that there were some serious safety violations and they are talking to the roving guard, who may have fallen asleep.
Just a terrible tragedy.
Here is an excellent concise write up of what is known so far.
:dubious:
For typical smoke type/density during the incipient stages of a fire, it takes more than one lungful of it to kill you. Which means that, yes, if you’re hampered from getting out because both exits are blocked by fire, then the limited points of egress surely did contribute to their deaths by forcing them to breathe, for a prolonged period, smoke that may have become very dense as the fire progressed. Search YouTube for videos of the 2003 Station Nightclub fire, and you’ll see what I mean.
Whatever the cause of the fire, the sub-header that reads ‘a compliant fire-trap’ sums up my thoughts on the vessel’s design, based on having two exits (one of which was very small and located over a bunkbed) that led out into basically the same confined space. I guess, from the layout, they couldn’t have had the escape hatch open onto the weather deck because the engine room was directly aft of the berthing space and the galley/dining area (the confined space) covered the deck above the berthing space.
I suppose it could be… although, it would draw a lot of current so it could only be used when the engines or generator(s) were running. It seems more likely that a propane unit would be more efficient and utile in this type of setting.
This is the best diagram of the ship’s layout I have seen. I concur that the “escape” hatch was completely useless. There’s almost no way anyone could have found or used it (even if they knew where it was! ) while disoriented by sleep, oxygen deprivation, etc… in a cabin filling with smoke.
I think the expectation was that the escape hatch would be used in a sinking ship scenario rather than a fire, although I don’t know if it would be easier to get to when the ship is sinking and perhaps filling with water.
Well, a sinking ship would presumably not have opaque clouds of toxic smoke and extreme heat to contend with. That might help the evacuation process.
I think the purpose of the escape hatch is to provide an egress in case the main exit is unusable. While I can imagine the stairs would be blocked in a sinking scenario, it doesn’t seem likely.
Criminal Probe under way.
“Criminal probe underway in fiery California boat disaster”
They have recovered the last of the 34 victims, although they haven’t completed identification (DNA testing on 7 victims):
More than 7 have been identified, however. This per the kin of one of the victims.
There were at the time the article was written, seven remaining who had not been positively identified.
I was on vacation when the indecent happened and wasn’t paying much attention to the news, so while I was vaguely aware that there was a fire on a boat in SoCal I didn’t know many details until I came back and read this thread. Now that I have…
I took a trip to the Channel Islands with the Sierra Club a few years ago. I don’t remember the name of the boat we were on, but looking at the layout of Conception it looks exactly like the one we were on. If it wasn’t Conception it was more than likely one of her sister ships.
Well, this isn’t good… looks like someone was asleep on the job…
They are now looking at Lithium Ion batteries in devices being charged as a possible source.
They’ve been saying that the boat’s manufacturer* has “suggested” lithium batteries as a possible cause for some time now. Which, while possibly true, sounds awfully convenient for them, since it would expose another party with deeper pockets to at least some portion of the liability for this.
So I guess I’ll take a “wait and see” approach to likely causes.
*ETA: Designer. That should be the boat’s designer as the source of speculation that it may have been lithium batteries. Just the same, it remains purely speculative and awfully convenient for them to say.