Technical Fire Discussion

[TinAngel]

Hi

 

The United Kingdom's Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) will lead the investigation. USCG and NTSM will have a major role. http://www.maib.dft.gov.uk

 

Seems the first signal will be if the liner is allowed to sail to a US port.

 

Next we will see in a few days if any repairs are started or if the USCG or NTSB National Transportation Safety Board retains an investigation. If they do "hold" the ship that will denote some "serious findings.

 

I suspect that NTSB is now the lead agency when the Star returns to a US port.

 

The "usual suspects" are as I noted elsewhere: chemicals such as painting supplies, electrical and vent ducts, any laundry shafts (a longtime concern).

NTSB has been active with the USCG getting these inspected and also insuring that basic smoke arlams are installed. I have read of no passenger noting they heard a smoke alarm. NTSB wants them as they fear any "captains" delay.

 

http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2006/060323b.htm

 

I suspect that the issues are not yet presented. The damage was serious and the potential for a catastrophic event is evident. The cruise line now faces British investigation and our USCG and NTSB actions. I really think that this ship is not going anywhere for a while. I have no idea where she was built but suspect that she may be headed there.

 

That is all: do recall my advise to carry an "bug out" bag at all times with key documents, meds and small waterproof flashlight. I added in a bottle of water after reading the reports so far.

 

Good sailing

 

Doc

[katisdale]

Thank you for starting this very informative thread. If I had been on this ship what would have happened if I had left the balcony door open? Is it smart to close the door before going to sleep?

[jetskier]

We haven't seen any pictures of the damage and extent of damage from inside the cabins. As a firefighter, at a Nuclear Power Plant, I have seen in training scenarios how fast a fire can spread through plastic and rubber components. It is pretty fast.

Hypo

 

Hypo,

Tell Mike Higgins hello for me. I worked at River Bend Nuclear Station for 17 years in security. Are you with OPS or SEC at ANO? I got to visit your plant on a couple of occasions for audits. I also worked with Howard Hutchens for a couple of years before he retired.

 

Dave Thomas

[TinAngel]

Suspect one of our "New London" graduates can state this better but:

 

If you see a smoke alarm in the stateroom, and it appears not corroded then open is fine. You could buy a nice $9.95 battery smoke alarm at Walmart and take along. I'd rather have it open as I am paying $ bucks for the sea breeze and view. Closed doors can allow one to have a fire "sneak up". Then one is truly in a bind.

 

In all my "Ports of Call" (military) I never stayed above the second floor in some undeveloped countries hotels. Guess I may have to add a smoke alarm to my "bug out" bag/kit?

 

Doc

 

A bit of sea humor:

 

My Special Cruises: 1956-8+ USS Morton and Shanks "troops ships" and USS Daniel Boone (SSBN-629); the troop ships were truly the utter pits of poor service and a buffet from hell: "SOS" was abundant. But the SSBN sub was trout and filets for lunch! Impressive but still no cruise director unless one wants to count that CPO. Maybe they had special meals for the guests?

No, I was Army but got to do the Panama Canal transit. Norwegian Sea,

Commodore Isle of Enchantment, several Royal Caribbean and such out of Galveston, Houston and New Orleans.

[BuildingMemories]

I'm very naive when it comes to things such as these... but I recall 9/11 and the aftermath. I'm thinking of the smoke exposure the passengers were part of - understandable that those were all toxic fumes from plastics, etc.

 

BUT...Are the people on board right now in any other kind of danger? Exposure to chemicals in the air? Is there exposed asbestos on this ship?

[jenischmeni]

Uh, John? Quick question....What happened to the thread over under Carnival? I posted there, under you, and cannot find either of our posts?!

 

Went into the cyber version of the 'circular file'?

[ALB0711]

Great thread!

 

One thing we might consider is that folks put things on their balconies that aren't necessarily supposed to be there. I have personally taken the comfortable chairs from inside my cabin and placed them on the balcony so that I could enjoy the view. I even added pillows to the chair once so that I would sit a little higher. And yes, I once accidently left that chair on my patio overnight. I never considered the fire danger it would pose, but will now.

 

Imagine that lit ciggerette falling on a piece of interior furniture.

 

Allen

[Dolphins]

I predict that once the details of this fire are determined, there will be changes made on future cruise ships to address the problems exposed here. I suspect that most cruise lines assumed a fire of this intensity would not be possible if they were in compliance with SOLAS? I am sure the powers that be at Carnival are wondering how this could happen on a modern, state of the art cruise ship?

[bdjam]

I predict that once the details of this fire are determined, there will be changes made on future cruise ships to address the problems exposed here. I suspect that most cruise lines assumed a fire of this intensity would not be possible if they were in compliance with SOLAS? I am sure the powers that be at Carnival are wondering how this could happen on a modern, state of the art cruise ship?

And that’s exactly why I think the cause must have been something out of the ordinary. Someone posted it above – there have been ships with balconies and cigarette smokers on them for years…if something like this was going to happen, wouldn’t it have happened before now? Unless it was just one of those bad luck incidents where all the bad luck piled up all at once.

[tgh]

so ..some speculation :confused:

 

The fire started on Caribe forward.. there was fuel in the form of clothing /spilled alcohol/ bottled alcohol / balcony furniture and fittings.

 

Ignition sorce was a candle or a cigarette that ingnited a bathrobe or towel doused in alcohol.

 

There was significant oxygen caused by the ships speed.

 

This spot fire was on the balcony and therefore initially did not ignite a smoke detector.

 

The adjacent balcony had a similar fuel supply available and the domino effect of this was sufficient to ignite all the peripheral balcony furnishings as well as a substantial portion of the balcony structure itself.

 

The internal fire systems are eventually triggered and provide sufficient disincentive for the fire to attack the ship internally.

 

The ship slows and drops the breeze , and eventually organises sufficient extinguishing capability to limit the fire to the external alloy structure.

 

There is lots of anedotal evidence that aluminum , boats and fire are not a pleasant combination.

 

I Look forward to some investigative facts slipping out over time

 

Cheers

[caribbean dreams]

Thankyou for the informative posts, its such a pleasant change from the usual debates.

It has really opend my eyes and hope alot of others eyes also, to the fact that anything could have caused this fire.

I pray for a safe jurney home for all those involved.

[rjg41]

I don't know about the availability of these types of products, but assuming they can indeed make each of the ship's parts on those balconies with this type of material, it probably costs more money to develop, build, and install.

 

The fact that this is a very rare incident, given the number of ships and frequency of cruises they take, there probably has not been any impetus to research these types of materials. Had there been several incidents of similar fires, most cruise lines would probably make efforts to improve the safety of the construction materials. Who knows whether this one incident will be enough to prompt a change, or if it even should. The fact that this incident is so unique and shocking speaks to the fact that ships are already safe by all reasonable standards...otherwise alot more ships would have had similar fire incidents.

 

I agree, the investigation should quickly arrive at the ignition point for the fire, but will have a harder time tracing the whats and whys of the spread.

 

These materials have been around for many many years including self extinguishing plexiglas. Modern bebding is generally self extinguishing. Manys states require these materials in commercial buildings especially highrises. Yes they are a little more expensive but the issue is why aren't they required? The question here is still what was the fuel that ignited from a cigarette and burned hot enough to ignite other materials and cause such an inferno. There is little doubt that the suggested 20+ mile an hour wind increased the intensity.

 

As to this being rare, remember the "mostly balcony" ships are not that old and we have an area that is not sprinkled and must have contained significant, easily ignited material. All new, mostly balcony ships would seem all to be exposed.

 

I willing to bet that out of this will come requirements for material changes on the balconies.

[bucket_O_beer4john]

Jenischmeni - yes it appears that the discussion on the Carnival page went 'poof.' Actually, I am glad it did, because it seemed as if a couple people were going to try to drag the discussion into an emotional free-for-all. There have certainly been quite of few of those threads floating around concerning this incident. Emotions are running high.

 

I would like to thank everyone who has participated so far for treating this with the respect that I wanted. There have been some very good ideas floating around. I love you guys....sniff.....

 

One thing I hadn't considered was the balcony being made from something other than metal. Makes sense weight-wise and corrosion-wise. I tried doing some research, but only found reference to some balconies being made from composites, but not anything for this ship. Anyone else??

 

The NTSB will definitely be involved, and their findings do become public knowledge eventually. However, thier recommendations are just that - recommendations - well in the air arena anyways. The FAA and the NTSB are contantly at odds with each other.

 

One thing that is ALWAYS the case with an air incident - there is NEVER one cause - it is always a chain of events that falls into place to lead to the incident. Sometimes it is painful to read a mishap report and learn what some people did - but at the time seemed perfectly OK. So even if it does turn out to be a cigarette that started it, there were other things going on.

 

Hindsite is always 20-20. Hopefully they can determine the cause with reasonable certainty, and simple steps can be taken to prevent a re-currence.

 

Lastly, in the aircraft world, accidents always happen in threes. I mean ALWAYS. I was an engineer on F-14's, and every time one went in, we always waited for 2 more. Without fail, something happened. So, we have the tour bus, we have the Princess fire. Anyone one know what the third was, or are we still waiting? (yes- sailors and pilots are pretty superstitious)

[Cindy]

 

Lastly, in the aircraft world, accidents always happen in threes. I mean ALWAYS. I was an engineer on F-14's, and every time one went in, we always waited for 2 more. Without fail, something happened. So, we have the tour bus, we have the Princess fire. Anyone one know what the third was, or are we still waiting? (yes- sailors and pilots are pretty superstitious)

 

I would say the BC Ferry that sank yesterday qualifies as the third incident. It's been a rough week for the maritime world.:(

By the way, this is a very interesting and informative discussion. I appreciate the insights of posters with far more technical knowledge than I have (none).

[CruiCin]

I wish all posters would read your post and quit speculating on what happened and wait to see what the investigation uncovers:) .

[Saga Ruby]

I have not been on the Princess forum before and have so much enjoyed this thread - all the information, calm speculation, expert input and reasoning.

 

Then I read another thread about the April 2 Star cruise being canceled and somebody who admits to being a TA named cabledon actually wrote that another poster was a liar! Wow!

 

Can I stay here with y'all where it's safe?!!! :eek:

[spongerob]

Stick around Ruby. Isaac's coming up with champagne shortly. We've got a good seat to watch the fireworks.

[kimanjo]

I am going to guess that there was an (unintentional) accellerant involved and that it was liquor...back in the days when I was a bartender we always kept a bottle of Overproof 151 in the bar just to do a couple of "cool tricks" . Unfortunately, one night the bottle of Overproof 151 spilled onto the oak bar counter, and, combined with the ember falling from a cigarette...you can guess the rest of the story.

[jenischmeni]

I have not been on the Princess forum before and have so much enjoyed this thread - all the information, calm speculation, expert input and reasoning.

 

Then I read another thread about the April 2 Star cruise being canceled and somebody who admits to being a TA named cabledon actually wrote that another poster was a liar! Wow!

 

Can I stay here with y'all where it's safe?!!! :eek:

 

I quite agree. I'm normally over at the Carnival end and wondered if the posters were just more cordial over there?! (How I ran across this thread w/ John. The Carnival thread disappeared!)

 

Let me reiterate my post (the one that disappeared)....Thank you John for starting a no blame post. Until the final report is in, we won't know for sure, but I do like investigating the angle of how this happened scientifically. I'm glad that there are more knowledgeable people than me speculating these facts rather than just posting and bashing!

[jenischmeni]

P.S.....I TOTALLY agree w/ the 3 principle. It ALWAYS happens that way. I don't think the ferry accident is quite it though. I imagine it'll be more cruise related. (But, yes, I am superstitious also)

[DeepWaterMariner]

I think this thread has made some pretty sound points. As far as cabin smoke detectors are conserned, on my last cruise my cabin had two, right next to each other. One was the same type you have in your home powered by a 9 volt battery with no external connection...I know this because it started beeping due to having a low battery. The second detector was the important one as far as alerting the bridge of a possible fire. It was tied into the ships fire detection system. Based on those observation I would agree that it seems unlikely that the fire started in a cabin (unless the detector wasn't working) since that would have led to a very fast response which should have contained the fire to a smaller area. Also I would think that a fire of this size internal to the ship would have caused a far higher number of smoke inhalation injuries.

 

My second thought is that if the initial source was a cigar or cigarette it does not necessarily follow that the cigarette originated on the balcony where the fire started. Ever since I started cruising passengers have been warned to not throw lighted cigarettes over the rail due to the potential of being blown back into the ship. A potential senario (and there are many) is that a tossed cigarette lands on a second balcony full of easily ignited fuel, even a spilled glass of some of that 151 proof rum.

[jetskier]

I am going to guess that there was an (unintentional) accellerant involved and that it was liquor...back in the days when I was a bartender we always kept a bottle of Overproof 151 in the bar just to do a couple of "cool tricks" . Unfortunately, one night the bottle of Overproof 151 spilled onto the oak bar counter, and, combined with the ember falling from a cigarette...you can guess the rest of the story.

 

You were no longer a bartender. :)

Dave

[Silvery Seas Cruiser]

Many thanks for this fascinating and highly informative discussion of the possible technical aspects of the tragic ship fire. I have learned a lot from the experts here and really appreciate your having taken the time to put some facts on the table so that we, who have no training whatsover in the science of fire can be enlightened. Again, many, many thanks.

[bibb]

Great post. I read much of it but not all so, if this has already been stated, forgive me.

 

However the fire got started, the ship was under way and most likely had very strong winds in the balcony areas. If the fire was under way for any length of time before being discovered, it may have already become an inferno and traveling like a range fire by the time it was discovered. It was 3:00AM and there may not have been much deck traffic. Then, stopping the ship (and the winds) would take some time.

 

Just a thought.

[Larry502]

I agree with you Dolphins. With fire on three or four desk you would need atl least 6 1 1/2 handlines. I know the balconeys have a blue matting on them. You would not think that the material would support an open flame. With the sprinklers in each cabin That would limit the spread to only the balconeys. Something just does not add up with this whole thing. From what I have read it appers that the fire was reported by phone and did not triger an alarm. That means that it was burning for some time. Sould it be that someone was burning somthing on there balconey? The bridge has CCTV pointed along side the ship. I have seen them on the CB Princess and the Grand. Why was nobody watching the monitors? Also I have not read any posts about water damage. If sprinklers did go off in any of the cabins you would have water leakage in the cabins below. Each head flows about 18-20 GPM of water. I think below these cabins are the public rooms. Nobody has said anything about having water flowing on them. I will be really interested in reading the USCG report.