GUILTY CA - Boat fire near Santa Cruz Island; 34 missing, Sept 2019 *captain charged*

[zecats]

Right. I wasn't clear. I think they were both safety compliant upon inspection AND that there likely was no requirement for a roaming night watchman -- although the article implied otherwise.

Still, someone on watch at night to protect from something like this should be considered. Especially with all the cell phones, devices, cameras in need of the charging stations on board. These cords often heat up while charging. I've found my laptop and iPhone cord to be hot to the touch some mornings while charging overnight. (If still charging, that is, once fully charged it cools down). Also computers and phones left lying on fabric covered items like a sofa or a bed have been known to overheat and start a fire from the heat. Again, my laptop gets very warm on the bottom if I hold it on my lap, just against my clothes without a pad underneath. Or if I lay it on the sofa next to me.

These are my opinions, but I do hope they become the opinions and the choices for future trips such as these. It usually takes a tragedy to produce more safety regs, sadly.

 

[danzn16]

My very general understanding of scuba diving is that it can be divided into three categories:

1. General recreational
2. deeper and longer technical diving as a hobby
3. professional technical diving (salvage, repair, recovery etc).

And now some questions for any informed member:

I know that people doing technical diving often use a mix of carefully selected gasses due to depth, decompression tables etc. . Would general recreational diving involve specialized gasses like oxygen and other mixes? Or do such divers simply use "air"?

Did the chartering dive companies do technical diving trips? Or, were the victims doing recreational diving? Is it possible that some divers would have been doing recreational diving and other divers doing technical dives- or is it either "all of one and none of the other" to prevent mix ups etc?

Yes, usually the next course after getting certified as a diver is nitrox training which allows you to stay under longer with less risk of decompression sickness. Most of these divers were advanced and likely only dove with nitrox.

 

[danzn16]

From the LA Times: “Surviving crew member thought phone charging station might have sparked boat fire”

Surviving crew member thought phone charging station might have sparked boat fire

Wow that is insane.

 

[Cryptic]

Right. I wasn't clear. I think they were both safety compliant upon inspection AND that there likely was no requirement for a roaming night watchman -- although the article implied otherwise.

Watches are evidently required. Here is the coast guard regulation regarding night watches:

[USC02] 46 USC Subtitle II: Vessels and Seamen
§8102. Watchmen
(a) The owner, charterer, or managing operator of a vessel carrying passengers during the nighttime shall keep a suitable number of watchmen in the vicinity of the cabins or staterooms and on each deck to guard against and give alarm in case of a fire or other danger.

I imagine that limitations imposed by crew size and the size of the boat may limit the watch to one person as a six person crew cannot place a permanent night watch on all three decks of the Concepcion.

What is required (watch on all decks) and what is practical (single crewman on watch, roves periodically) may support the "gross negligence" legal concept that another member posted.

In short.... Boats with small crews need a watch of some sort. But, failure to have a full watch might not be "gross negligence".

 

[10ofRods]

Do we know where the crew came from? The boat was chartered (by the marine biologists?) but did it come with its own crew? Often, charters do not come with their own crew and there are many in the Santa Barbara/Ventura Harbor areas who are "rent-a-captains" and "rent-a-crew" people. I have a good friend whose son is now in his 10th year of a fairly lucrative (and fun) job as a rent-a-captain.

It's my understanding that the marine biologists did this as their summer side job and organized the cruises themselves, in various places. They advertised, at least in part, on university and college campuses. But it's possible that there's a larger excursion company involved, I haven't heard anything about it.

 

[Cryptic]

Do we know where the crew came from? The boat was chartered (by the marine biologists?) but did it come with its own crew? Often, charters do not come with their own crew and there are many in the Santa Barbara/Ventura Harbor areas who are "rent-a-captains" and "rent-a-crew" people.

Based on the company website which names the various captains and instructs those interested in applying for crew positions to apply directly with the company, the crew is permanent.

As a previous poster noted, the boat does not seem to supply dive masters when on diving charter. Rather, the chartering group(s) supplies the dive masters.

 

[firebird]

Watches are evidently required. Here is the coast guard regulation regarding night watches:

[USC02] 46 USC Subtitle II: Vessels and Seamen
§8102. Watchmen
(a) The owner, charterer, or managing operator of a vessel carrying passengers during the nighttime shall keep a suitable number of watchmen in the vicinity of the cabins or staterooms and on each deck to guard against and give alarm in case of a fire or other danger.

I imagine that limitations imposed by crew size and the size of the boat may limit the watch to one person as a six person crew cannot place a permanent night watch on all three decks of the Concepcion.

What is required (watch on all decks) and what is practical (single crewman on watch, roves periodically) may support the "gross negligence" legal concept that another member posted.

In short.... Boats with small crews need a watch of some sort. But, failure to have a full watch might not be "gross negligence".

That applies to Shipping, not recreational boats.

edited: I should say, it looks to me like that applies to shipping and not recreational boats, but looking at the rest of the chapter, it's clear as mud. Gotta love legislation.

 

[Betty P]

Watches are evidently required. Here is the coast guard regulation regarding night watches:

[USC02] 46 USC Subtitle II: Vessels and Seamen
§8102. Watchmen
(a) The owner, charterer, or managing operator of a vessel carrying passengers during the nighttime shall keep a suitable number of watchmen in the vicinity of the cabins or staterooms and on each deck to guard against and give alarm in case of a fire or other danger.

I imagine that limitations imposed by crew size and the size of the boat may limit the watch to one person as a six person crew cannot place a permanent night watch on all three decks of the Concepcion.

What is required (watch on all decks) and what is practical (single crewman on watch, roves periodically) may support the "gross negligence" legal concept that another member posted.

In short.... Boats with small crews need a watch of some sort. But, failure to have a full watch might not be "gross negligence".

I always wonder if the people who work to lobby for the relaxing of these kinds of regulations ever feel any guilt when people die or are harmed as a result. My reference here is general, applying to any of the applicable regulations that will hopefully be changed to prevent this.

 

[distracted]

Watches are evidently required. Here is the coast guard regulation regarding night watches:

[USC02] 46 USC Subtitle II: Vessels and Seamen
§8102. Watchmen
(a) The owner, charterer, or managing operator of a vessel carrying passengers during the nighttime shall keep a suitable number of watchmen in the vicinity of the cabins or staterooms and on each deck to guard against and give alarm in case of a fire or other danger.

I imagine that limitations imposed by crew size and the size of the boat may limit the watch to one person as a six person crew cannot place a permanent night watch on all three decks of the Concepcion.

What is required (watch on all decks) and what is practical (single crewman on watch, roves periodically) may support the "gross negligence" legal concept that another member posted.

In short.... Boats with small crews need a watch of some sort. But, failure to have a full watch might not be "gross negligence".

The boat was chartered by Kristy Finstad who owned Worldwide Diving Adventures in the Bay area so that would mean she had responsibility to provide a night watchman as well as the owners of the boat.

 

[distracted]

I always wonder if the people who work to lobby for the relaxing of these kinds of regulations ever feel any guilt when people die or are harmed as a result. My reference here is general, applying to any of the applicable regulations that will hopefully be changed to prevent this.

Well, you can't regulate everything. At some point one has to take personal responsibility for any risks taken. I would not be surprised if they all signed waivers before they even boarded the boat.

 

[distracted]

Do we know where the crew came from? The boat was chartered (by the marine biologists?) but did it come with its own crew? Often, charters do not come with their own crew and there are many in the Santa Barbara/Ventura Harbor areas who are "rent-a-captains" and "rent-a-crew" people. I have a good friend whose son is now in his 10th year of a fairly lucrative (and fun) job as a rent-a-captain.

It's my understanding that the marine biologists did this as their summer side job and organized the cruises themselves, in various places. They advertised, at least in part, on university and college campuses. But it's possible that there's a larger excursion company involved, I haven't heard anything about it.

The crew was employed by the boat's owner. It's my understanding that the captain had been in his position on that boat for many, many years.

 

[Lilibet]

Duplicate post deleted. And I didn’t hit “post” twice. What’s up WS?

 

[Cryptic]

That applies to Shipping, not recreational boats.

edited: I should say, it looks to me like that applies to shipping and not recreational boats, but looking at the rest of the chapter, it's clear as mud. Gotta love legislation.

The regulation states "vessel carrying passengers". In short, my strong suspicion is that once a boat accepts paying passengers, they are no longer a 'recreational boat'. Rather, they are a 'shipping vessel' of what ever size and thus need a night watch.

The boat was chartered by Kristy Finstad who owned Worldwide Diving Adventures in the Bay area so that would mean she had responsibility to provide a night watchman as well as the owners of the boat.

Great attention to detail! Could there have been confusion between the crew and the chartering company about who had responsibility for certain night watches and would thus provide people for the watch?

Well, you can't regulate everything. At some point one has to take personal responsibility for any risks taken. I would not be surprised if they all signed waivers before they even boarded the boat.

I agree, and the maritime law at least (probably more olde school conservative than land law) seems to support your view. Seafaring, boating, diving etc. all carry inherent risk.

Evidently boat owners need to show gross negligence before they can be sued. Likewise, as the small and non viable alternative hatch and the less than commercial fire detector on Concepcion were compliant with regulations, boat owners seem to only need to meet basic safety standards.

In short, Boat owners apparently don’t need to provide “state of the art” safety protection, just general safety protection. That is where personal risk choices come in.

 

[Lilibet]

Duplicate post deleted. And I didn’t hit “post” twice. What’s up WS?

And I delete one duplicate and both posts are deleted!

OK. I’ll try again.

The boat was chartered by Kristy Finstad who owned Worldwide Diving Adventures in the Bay area so that would mean she had responsibility to provide a night watchman as well as the owners of the boat.

I expect that providing a night watchman was spelled out in the contract between the two companies. It makes sense to me that Truth Aquatics would provide the watchman since they have a larger staff and more intimate familiarity with the boat than Kristy. JMO

 

[Betty P]

The boat was chartered by Kristy Finstad who owned Worldwide Diving Adventures in the Bay area so that would mean she had responsibility to provide a night watchman as well as the owners of the boat.

Thanks for your input. I like to think of regulations as the way they were once described by someone giving a speech. Regulations are like putting locks on the doors of your home. They're there to protect you and your family, your property. They keep dishonest people from stealing your belongings, your home and money. They keep dangerous (or negligent) people from coming in and harming or killing you. Regulations are based on the principle as those locks on your door, your burglar alarm, etc.

No, you can't regulate everything, but does it help to weaken the regulations you have? The ones that work well?

 

[PrairieWind]

The regulation states "vessel carrying passengers". In short, my strong suspicion is that once a boat accepts paying passengers, they are no longer a 'recreational boat'. Rather, they are a 'shipping vessel' of what ever size and thus need a night watch.


Great attention to detail! Could there have been confusion between the crew and the chartering company about who had responsibility for certain night watches and would thus provide people for the watch?


I agree, and the maritime law at least (probably more olde school conservative than land law) seems to support your view.

Seafaring, boating, diving etc. all carry inherent risk. Evidently boat owners need to show gross negligence before they can be sued. Likewise, as the small and non viable alternative hatch and the less than commercial fire detector on Concepcion were compliant with regulations, boat owners seem to only need to meet general safety standards.

They don’t need to provide “state of the art” safety protection. That is where personal risk choices come in.

I have no idea how these regulations are interpreted. The Coast Guard will figure out if there were violations or not. I can't imagine that the owners of the boat wont be held civilly liable for negligence in wrongful death suits.

 

[SoCalDavidS]

Press Conference in 5 Min. at 10 AM PST. Listen here: https://player.radio.com/listen/station/knx-1070-newsradio/schedule

There will probably be live video here: Live Streaming

 

[weepingangel]

California diving boat owners seek to head off lawsuits after 34 die in fire

 

[firebird]

The regulation states "vessel carrying passengers". In short, my strong suspicion is that once a boat accepts paying passengers, they are no longer a 'recreational boat'. Rather, they are a 'shipping vessel' of what ever size and thus need a night watch.


Great attention to detail! Could there have been confusion between the crew and the chartering company about who had responsibility for certain night watches and would thus provide people for the watch?


I agree, and the maritime law at least (probably more olde school conservative than land law) seems to support your view. Seafaring, boating, diving etc. all carry inherent risk.

Evidently boat owners need to show gross negligence before they can be sued. Likewise, as the small and non viable alternative hatch and the less than commercial fire detector on Concepcion were compliant with regulations, boat owners seem to only need to meet basic safety standards.

In short, Boat owners apparently don’t need to provide “state of the art” safety protection, just general safety protection. That is where personal risk choices come in.

There was a crewmember below. Maybe she was the "watch"

 

[BeachSky]

Presser live: