Technical Fire Discussion

[Host CJSKIDS]

I'm not sure that they are "easy" to ignite. One of the many photos that have been linked here showed a balcony chair cushion that had obviously been exposed to burning material. Large holes had been melted through those cushions but had not caused the cushion to start burning. Every material, even so-called flame-resistant materials, will burn if exposed to a high enough temperature.

 

As I've said earlier, we might not find out exactly what caused the fire aboard Star Princess, but we might be able to infer the cause based on how Princess and other cruise lines modify policies and procedures in the aftermath. Is there a correlation between what happened and the report that children under 16 will be required to have a parent/guardian booked in their cabin? I'm not positive those dots connect yet. The timing of the policy change is interesting.

 

Rob, you are correct about the cushions. The first quick view we got when we opened our curtains by the bed in the suite was to see what was causing the horrible smell and we saw large fire sparks hitting the blue cusions that were on our lounge chairs. My first thought was "Great, now we won't be able to use our furniture and enjoy our balcony like we've been doing" and I even quickly said this to my husband. It just never dawned on me in those first moments that all heck would brake lose, I dont' know why. It just never dawned on me that the fire we could see on the next balcony was about to come crashing through to ours, I guess I just expected it to to go away or some fire truck to pull up and put it out! I guess since there was never a fire of this magnitude before I just didn't know what to think or expect.

[Goldryder]

Going by this safety notice from the ICCL, it looks like there might be a fair bit of modifying done to the balconies of all ships, not just Princess, and the work will have to be done, in part, while the ship is at sea on cruises....

 

http://www.iccl.org/policies/safety_notice_041306.pdf

 

So, if you happen to have a balcony this summer and there is a bloke out there doing modifications, don't get uptight about it, just get the guy a coffee, cos he is doing things to make your holiday safer.

[Globaliser]

Just in case anyone gets puzzled, that ICCL notice is annexed to the MAIB report so you don't need to go to both of them.

 

Many thanks to Goldryder for the links.

[bucket_O_beer4john]

As we say in the aircraft world, all regulations are written in blood. Sadly, deaths cause a very close scrutiny of the event, and often reveal previously unknown mechanisms.

 

 

For example, the entire field of metalurgical fatigue originated (well, at least came to the forefront) after the Comet airliner accidents in the 50's.

 

What I find very interesting is that they came out with this bulletin well before the final report is issued. I do not ever recall hearing of this happening before - usually everyone is pretty tight-lipped until everything is signed, sealed and delivered.

 

I do expect that since they now know why the fire reached the magnitude that it did, and that the sprinkler system apparently worked as advertised, they will spend quite a bit of energy determining the root cause of the blaze.

 

Changes are a'coming. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I cruise Sunday on the Carnival Victory (on a balcony) and I'll let you know what the crew has to say about it and if I see anything going on. At the least, I'm sure it will be discussed during the muster.

[Goldryder]

As we say in the aircraft world, all regulations are written in blood. Sadly, deaths cause a very close scrutiny of the event, and often reveal previously unknown mechanisms.

 

 

For example, the entire field of metalurgical fatigue originated (well, at least came to the forefront) after the Comet airliner accidents in the 50's.

 

What I find very interesting is that they came out with this bulletin well before the final report is issued. I do not ever recall hearing of this happening before - usually everyone is pretty tight-lipped until everything is signed, sealed and delivered.

 

I do expect that since they now know why the fire reached the magnitude that it did, and that the sprinkler system apparently worked as advertised, they will spend quite a bit of energy determining the root cause of the blaze.

 

Changes are a'coming. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I cruise Sunday on the Carnival Victory (on a balcony) and I'll let you know what the crew has to say about it and if I see anything going on. At the least, I'm sure it will be discussed during the muster.

 

 

I would think the main reasoning behind letting the modifications/checklist out early is entirely down to the mock-up fire. Its absolutely terrifying seeing how the balcony dividers feed the fire along with whatever happens to be on the balcony too, such as furnishings, towels, clothing etc.

 

It is very unusual for this sort of safety notification to be released so early but the MAIB have obviously decided that the design/build and materials used in the balconies has had a significant input into the possible cause of the fire and a definate cause for the rapid spread of the fire, along with the toxicity of the smoke given off.

 

It has to be applauded that this move has taken place and that the cruise lines are not only doing the changes with immediate effect but the IMO and other organisations are getting things added to SOLAS in relation to preventing another tragedy like this from happening in the future.

 

There is a design flaw in the balconies and sadly it took a death from a major fire to discover this flaw. The quick thinking and action by MAIB and the other authorities by releasing these safety bulletins will save lives, make no mistake about that.

[Joedog]

There is a design flaw in the balconies and sadly it took a death from a major fire to discover this flaw. The quick thinking and action by MAIB and the other authorities by releasing these safety bulletins will save lives, make no mistake about that.

 

Personally, I dont feel that there is a "design flaw" with the balconies. Certainly they can be made more fire safe but there are a whole lot of ships out there that have gone on a whole lot of cruises with pretty much no problems with balcony fires.

 

Just about every house in the world will burn if the right conditions are present but I dont consider them to have design flaws.

 

I also do not think that the balcony fire "problem" is so urgent that any proposed changes need to be made "right now". I know that balcony fire anxiety will not be keeping me awake at night this coming July when I am on the Crown.

 

While learning the dynamics of balcony fires is interesting, I dont find it to be a serious threat. But that's just me.

[Globaliser]

What I find very interesting is that they came out with this bulletin well before the final report is issued. I do not ever recall hearing of this happening before - usually everyone is pretty tight-lipped until everything is signed, sealed and delivered.

Are you sure? Even in the aircraft world, there are many interim reports and safety recommendations made at an early stage. Take this puzzling incident, for example - that's the second interim report into a recent occurrence.

[DonLou]

...I also do not think that the balcony fire "problem" is so urgent that any proposed changes need to be made "right now". I know that balcony fire anxiety will not be keeping me awake at night this coming July when I am on the Crown.

 

Ouch, Joe.

 

There were 79 cabins damaged by the fire. Another 204 suffered water or smoke damage. One person died. Thirteen others suffered smoke inhalation. The Star Princess has been out of commission since March 23, 2006. The crew of 1100 has been reassigned or laid off until May, perhaps. If you assume May and consider that the Star might have had six sailings since March 23, then you are also talking about 16,200 passengers displaced. Add to the lost revenue the cost of repairs (I've read conservatively between $20-$30 million). When you take into account all these items, you might want to re-consider whether the balcony fire "problem" is so urgent that any proposed changes need to be made "right now".

 

For me, every fire is a "lessons learned". The real gist of the problem is that no one, absolutely no one, had any idea or inkling that a fire on the balcony could spread as rapidly and freely as it did. I feel comfortable with the powers-that-be implementing whatever measures they deem immediate and necessary to mitigate any future fires. I, too, will sleep comfortably in my cabin at night. But at least I'll know for sure where the fire extinguishers are and which muster station to line up at.

[ccrain]

I, too, will sleep comfortably in my cabin at night. But at least I'll know for sure where the fire extinguishers are and which muster station to line up at.

 

And like us road warriors that stay in numerous hotels across the country, I hope all of you take account of the way to the nearest stairwell in one direction and the other stairwell in the other direction. I have been known to count steps from each as soon as I exit the room door in case of total blackout. Memorize landmarks by feel, especially those near the floor since in case of fire you should be crawling to the nearest exit.

 

I can't count the number of times I've been awakened at o dark thirty to the sound of a hotel fire alarm, jump out of bed, throw on clothes and head for the nearest stairwell.

 

In all cases - so far, its been a false alarm, but it sure beats a cup of coffee for waking you up, although several hours later, that thump you hear is your head hitting the wall behind you as you dozed off during the presentation.

[Joedog]

It was not my intention to make light of the seriousness of the fire on the star. It was a terrible fire, both for the loss of life and the extensive damage. I just think that, based on the low number of previous balcony fire incidents in relationship to the high number of non-incident cruises, it was an isolated event that does not require an immediate "fix" and people should not get too worked up about it.

 

I have read enough posts to get the idea that many people are now overly concerned about the safety of the balconies and I just dont think the numbers support that much worry.

 

This is just my opinion.

[judyzoo]

Sure, fires can occur and spread anywhere. But I think that, given the well known principle that fire at sea is the worst, the cruise lines have been remiss in treating balconies like they’re not part of the rest of the ship. Combustible dividers and combustible materials that “belong” on balconies, no sprinklers, in places that are almost impossible for firefighters to access. What were they thinking, other than that we cruisers love our balconies?

 

As for passengers leaving combustible items on their balconies, I keep remembering when we had our first balcony on an HAL ship and tied some fabric item to our balcony railing so that we could locate our cabin while ashore; and when we returned to the cabin our steward had removed it from the balcony. I thought back then that might have been an effort to keep the ship from looking junky with everyone hanging things from their balconies, but now wonder whether it might have been done for fire safety?

[bucket_O_beer4john]

A hazard index is often used to measure the seriousness of a "flaw."

 

On the left side of teh matrix is a scale of the potential consequences of a failure. At the bottom is minimal damage, at the top is death or catastrophic failure.

 

On the bottom of the scale is the likelihood of the event happening. Towards the left is more often, towards the right is very rare.

 

Upper left are more serious, and are addressed immediately. Lower right are more of a nuiscence, and may be dealt with, maybe not.

 

Since this was a catastrophic failure with a loss of life, it is assigned a high priority, even though the likelihood is remote. So, it is apprporiate that an immediate fix be found.

 

Adding to this is the fact that now the cruise lines know there is a problem with the materials typically used for balcony construction. If another event happens without them taking prudent steps to avoid it, their goose is cooked and the lawyers all go away rich and happy.

[Goldryder]

Cruise ship designers and builders made sure the interiors were fire retardant.

 

However, they assumed that balconies did not need this standard for whatever reason.

 

Following the fire on Star Princess and the mock-up test fire, they now know differently.

 

Those nice white plastic coverings on the balcony dividers, those mats on the floor, the seating and furnishings are deadly...not potentially deadly, but proven deadly.

 

Now the hard work has to start, refurbishment of every single balcony afloat. It has to be done in part within 3 months, in full within 6 months. Some ships will have the work carried out at their scheduled drydocking appointments, others will be done while at sea.

 

One thing that comes out of all this, the fire could have been prevented from spreading if the materials used had been of the same retardant standard that are found inside the ship.

 

The materials/construction of the balconies may not have started the fire, but they sure as hell fed the fire. Figure 4 on the bulletin proves that with no room for any doubts whatsoever.

[spongerob]

One thing that comes out of all this, the fire could have been prevented from spreading if the materials used had been of the same retardant standard that are found inside the ship.

I think if you took a bunch of sheets, towels, furniture etc. from inside a typical cabin, and the materials found on the balcony, you'd find that the interior materials are far easier to ignite than those found outside.

 

The conclusion you are trying to draw is simple, obvious, and wrong. No one invests upwards of a half-billion dollars in a ship and cuts corners so stupidly. The real issue that should be of concern is the difficulty the crew encountered trying to approach the fire to get it put out. One of the videos showed the difficulty the crew encountered trying to approach the fire from adjacent cabins.

 

No matter what designers do to prevent accidental ignition will not stop instances where the ignition is deliberate.

[Joedog]

Those nice white plastic coverings on the balcony dividers, those mats on the floor, the seating and furnishings are deadly...not potentially deadly, but proven deadly.

 

None of the materials on the balcony are "deadly". They are just things that given the right circumstances, will burn. Many or the materials inside the ship present the same or similar hazard. Most of the material used as insulation on wiring give off toxic vapors when burned.

 

The difference between the balcony and the cabin is the lack of a fire suppression system for the balconies. I would not be surprised if the only thing that is changed on balcony construction is the addition of a sprinkler system.

 

I still believe that the risk of balcony fires is minimal, even without changes.

[bstrauss3]

Now the hard work has to start, refurbishment of every single balcony afloat. It has to be done in part within 3 months, in full within 6 months. Some ships will have the work carried out at their scheduled drydocking appointments, others will be done while at sea.

 

You vastly overestimate the importance of the ICCL Safety Notice. The 3 month time frame is to assess, the six month is a goal: "... with the aim of completing this action ...".

 

There's no force of law here, nor anything close. ICCL is a part of the group that develops the safety standards (SOLAS - Safety of Life at Sea), but only part.

 

http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?topic_id=257&doc_id=647:

 

Introduction and history

The SOLAS Convention in its successive forms is generally regarded as the most important of all international treaties concerning the safety of merchant ships. The first version was adopted in 1914, in response to the Titanic disaster, the second in 1929, the third in 1948 and the fourth in 1960.

 

The 1960 Convention - which was adopted on 17 June 1960 and entered into force on 26 May 1965 - was the first major task for IMO after the Organization's creation and it represented a considerable step forward in modernizing regulations and in keeping pace with technical developments in the shipping industry.

 

The intention was to keep the Convention up to date by periodic amendments but in practice the amendments procedure incorporated proved to be very slow. It became clear that it would be impossible to secure the entry into force of amendments within a reasonable period of time.

 

As a result, a completely new Convention was adopted in 1974 which included not only the amendments agreed up until that date but a new amendment procedure - the tacit acceptance procedure - designed to ensure that changes could be made within a specified (and acceptably short) period of time.

 

Instead of requiring that an amendment shall enter into force after being accepted by, for example, two thirds of the Parties, the tacit acceptance procedure provides that an amendment shall enter into force on a specified date unless, before that date, objections to the amendment are received from an agreed number of Parties.

 

As a result the 1974 Convention has been updated and amended on numerous occasions. The Convention in force today is sometimes referred to as SOLAS, 1974, as amended.

 

The 1974 change - often credited with spuring the modern cruise industry since older ships could not be refitted - took effect in 1980!

 

 

Take for example the most recent amendment:

 

May 2005 amendments

 

Adoption: May 2005

Entry into force: 1 January 2007/1 January 2009

 

Note the 1.5 to 3.5 years between adoption and effective date?

 

-----Burton

[zackiedawg]

COMBUSTIBLE adj : capable of igniting and burning [ant: noncombustible] n : a substance that can be burned to provide heat or power

 

FLAMMABLE adj : Easily ignited and capable of burning rapidly

 

Not for any person in particular - just thought I'd throw those definitions up there so everyone can have a reference as to their meaning. I've heard both used...but it might be good to know the differences.

 

Some materials are flammable, and should be avoided in construction of ships, hotels, etc as they are a true fire hazard, able to ignite very easily and burn very hot from as little as a smolder.

 

Most materials are combustible, meaning they are capable of burning. In fact, fire-resistant and fire-retardant materials ARE COMBUSTIBLE. If you think the balcony materials were deadly, faulty, or cheap because they were combustible, you'll be disappointed to find that the new fire-resistant materials will also be combustible too.

 

The materials that were on balconies already - those that burned so hot and fiercely - were in fact fire resistant. Had you held a smoldering cigarette to those dangerous balcony dividers, you'd have at worst a small mark or stain. If you were to drop a flaming napkin directly under the divider, it would not catch the divider on fire before running out of fuel itself. A lighter held against the divider would likely not catch the divider on fire unless held there for a minute or more. In other words, it would take an amazingly unlucky series of events which produce a fairly constant open flame to push past the fire resistance level of the various balcony compounds, or a very intentional fire starter.

 

Though the fire itself, if one ever happens, is indeeed very hard to control or extinguish, and potentially very deadly, the risk or danger of such a fire breaking out remains extremely low... once in a lifetime odds. The actions to be taken are not because cruise ships are highly flammable tinderboxes waiting for the tiniest smolder to launch them into floating pyres. The actions are being taken because an extreme event has revealed a previously unknown danger...that if a rare event such as a fire on the balcony of a ship does occur, and the fire resistance of the balcony materials is overcome, the materials burn extremely hot and flare out considerably, aiding in the spread of the fire, and the inherent inaccessibility of a ship at sea makes fighting and controlling that fire very difficult from within.

 

Therefore, to control the risk, additional measures will be taken which are hoped to slow the spread of a fire on the outside of a ship, and allow it to be more easily controlled and extinguished. Additional fire resistance will be sought for the balcony dividers, which due to their particular mounting position are more capable of spreading a fire and because they burn very hot and give off heavier toxins, and possibly additional suppression or detection capabilities will be added, such as external sprinklers, bridge spotters, or alarms. Further fire resistance will be considered for all balcony materials where possible...though some may be deemed to already have sufficient fire resistance.

 

Fire proof will not be acheived. Maximum possible fire resistance, along with consideration of methods of suppression and personnel access, are the primary goal. Lessons will always be learned from unexpected events; and hindsight will always lend critics a sense of superiority and condescension. We seem to have a basic human need to appease ourselves by assigning fault or blame for things we failed to predict, rather than see them as an unpreventable event that can reveal areas of improvement.

 

Princess should not be blamed for failing to prognosticate a one-in-a-million event with no prior precedence. All cruise lines should certainly be expected to learn from this valuable experience and make improvements as soon as possible. Based on the investigation and the initial report, it appears that this tragic incident will indeed improve the safety of all ships, and make another similar incident that much more infinitesimally unlikely.

[smeyer418]

and as an example of what sometimes goes on. The NTSB recommended that the commercial airlines adopt a program that puts inert gas(as opposed to regular air) into fuel tanks when they empty out(to prevent the problem on the TWA flight) as the military does on its jets---so far the FAA has NOT adopted this measure.

[Dolphins]

I seriously doubt that balcony sprinklers will be the result of this fire. The practicality and expense in relation to the potential hazard is not justified. Reducing the potential fuel for fire spread seems far more likely.

[jbrambach]

I have, over the course of two days, read this entire post from start to finish. I wanted to start by saying thank you to all who contributed to this thread for their wonderful insight and knowledge on topics I would have otherwise never had had the opportunity or inclination to learn about. I never knew metals and how they burn would be so interesting. I just wish the lessons I have learned had been under happier circumstances. I am also grateful that the ICCL have gone ahead to take step to issue an advisory to retro fit all ships dividers, etc (without all the redtape that is so often involved in undertaking so large) so cruising can be an even safer form of travel, again we can only wish it was under different conditions, but as many have said before hindsight is 20/20 and it is out of tragic events that safer regulations are achieved.

 

You have all opened my eyes as to how we should at all times try to be aware of our surrounding even though we are on vacation and someone else is "at the wheel" so to speak.

 

Thank you

[Host CJSKIDS]

I seriously doubt that balcony sprinklers will be the result of this fire. The practicality and expense in relation to the potential hazard is not justified. Reducing the potential fuel for fire spread seems far more likely.

 

You're wrong on this when it comes to Princess. This quote is from their latest news release in regard to The Star and what is being done for safety~

 

"We are already well advanced with the development of these permanent measures, which will include the removal of combustible materials from the balconies, and the introduction of fire detection and suppression systems."

 

I for one am glad and it is worth it, just ask anyone else who witnessed first hand and they'll be happy to tell you the same thing, it would be worth every penny.

[Dolphins]

You're wrong on this when it comes to Princess. This quote is from their latest news release in regard to The Star and what is being done for safety~

 

"We are already well advanced with the development of these permanent measures, which will include the removal of combustible materials from the balconies, and the introduction of fire detection and suppression systems."

 

I for one am glad and it is worth it, just ask anyone else who witnessed first hand and they'll be happy to tell you the same thing, it would be worth every penny.

 

We are not talking pennies here. It would take many millions of dollars to install sprinklers on the balconies of all Princess ships currently in service. To say nothing of the loss of income to take the ship out of service to install those sprinklers, a massive undertaking that cannot be done during a normal overhaul. It will be interesting to see the time between "development of permanent measures" and installation. Don't be surprised if more practical and economical alternatives to balcony sprinklers are "developed."

[jbrambach]

In regards to the sprinklers, can one of the experts out there answer:

Earlier in this thread someone mentioned the pipes that run throughout the balconies and questioned what was in them. My question is 1) Do these pipes run throughout all the balcony cabins on the Princess ships? I do remember seeing them but do not remember if they are on all the balconies cabins I have been in. 2) If infact these pipes do run throughout all of the balconies, how easy/difficult would it be to somehow make these part of the sprinkler system?

[Goldryder]

The easiest, cheapest and most effective way to deal with balcony fires...by stopping them getting into the cabins, thus giving time for evacuation...would be water curtains running above the doors. They are already available and would only require minimal alteration, they are used in gardens everywhere.

 

Long piping, that is perforated at equal distances through the entire length. In the event of an emergency, water can be pumped through the pipework and the water would exit the pipes via the perforations and water would spray down the walls/doors, thus giving a water curtain effect. You could have a full blown fire outside but it would not get past the curtain.

 

A modified garden irrigation system would do the job, it wouldn't take much to fit and would not be obvious to the eye, so it would be asthetically acceptable. Being a curtain system, it would not be affected by wind, like a standard sprinkler system would, it would just pour water down the metalwork/glass from above on the architrave.

[Host CJSKIDS]

We are not talking pennies here. It would take many millions of dollars to install sprinklers on the balconies of all Princess ships currently in service. To say nothing of the loss of income to take the ship out of service to install those sprinklers, a massive undertaking that cannot be done during a normal overhaul. It will be interesting to see the time between "development of permanent measures" and installation. Don't be surprised if more practical and economical alternatives to balcony sprinklers are "developed."

 

 

I realize it's not going to cost pennies, that's just an expression!