Technical Fire Discussion

[donnaw]

I think this should get nominated for thread of the year! So glad I fouind you since I have pretty much stayed off CC with the expectation that it would be an absolute war which it is. Have to thank all the experts and novices alike for their input and help in trying to get a better idea of what happened and what went wrong. I will keep following this because I had already figured out that the cigarette theory and the results just don't match up without some other things happening at the same time.

 

I also share the concern that the easiest answer for Carnival is a cigarette and hope that the number of agencies involved means we actually get an answer at some point in time.

 

I'm surprised that we haven't seen pictures yet from inside the cabins and suspect they will show up soon. Until we have a better idea, I will be putting any transatlantic plans on hold and will keep listening with the hopes that we can make sense of this as more information is released.

[spongerob]

Now, if aluminium is indeed the metal used for balconies, and is used instead of steel because it's lighter and therefore allows more balconies (and perhaps more decks with balcony cabins) within stability requirements, what might the longer-term effects be for the design of ships? Could we see a move back to all-steel construction? Fewer decks with balcony cabins? Fewer balconies? How will this affect the economics of cruising? Could the price premium for a balcony cabin increase with reduced supply? In the extreme situation, could we see the cruise lines having to replace existing aluminium balconies?

 

I'm no expert, but the questions about design are interesting. I don't think we'll see a rush to replace the aluminum balconies, if in fact that is what they are made from. Replacing them with steel might create a stability problem, and would create a higher risk of catastrophe under conditions the ship is likely to face. The ship that capsized near Egypt was top heavy, so I think we have evidence of the risks there.

 

The circumstances around this fire have to be extremely unusual. If in fact it was intentionally started, there isn't much design work that could stop that. I'm sure we'll see some changes. I've suggested exterior heat sensors that would monitor balconies.

 

Some of the comments in the story W0kie linked are interesting. Those people said the fire started on Deck 10 (Caribe). Do the suites on Caribe deck have teak balconies? The aft suites do not, except possibly the Grand Suite.

[JohnCW]

My wife and two kids are scheduled to cruise on the Star Princess April 2nd. I have been busy trying to digest the accident and in trying figure out whether our cruise will happen. Princess is hopeful, suggesting that the effected areas might be closed off and people booked to stay in the affected rooms given a refund. I guess I'm not as hopeful. I've read through the forum posts, I'm a non-smoker. Here are some of the thoughts I have been chewing on:

 

First, if the fire was caused by a cigarette(which might be the best case cause for the cruise line), the cigarette must have blown in to an open room or in a wind shield corner on a material that burns at a fairly low temperature. Like others have stated, the balconies are usually wet and windy(from the forward velocity of the ship), which would make it hard to keep a cigarette going much less start a fire from it. The wind will provide oxygen to a large fire(that doesn't need more heat such as the case when the fire on the Star was in full bloom), but serves to cool(remove heat which the fire needs to spread) from a small fire.

 

A ban on smoking will not eliminate the risk from cigarettes, people will still smoke just like they do illegal drugs, drink to much, etc. Many cities have ban smoking in public places, but none to my knownledge have ban smoking in citizen's homes. A cruise liner's room is our home, abet a temporary one. Enforcement of such a rule would be a nightmare. We usually request non-smoking rooms when we stay in a motel, frequently even those rooms smell like smoke. I assume smokers will take a non-smoking room if no smoking rooms are available, then choose to smoke anyway. The cruise liners would just loose revenues from the honest people(and probably more responsible people), but they would still have to plan for smoking.

 

Even if Princess wants to sail on the 2nd of April, the two teams of fire investigators(British & American) will not let that happen until they determine the cause and whether materials or ship design, or failed fire systems contributed to the outcome. Also they will need to determine the fire temperature and what damage it might have done to the ship structure. To avoid structural failures, designs are over design by a factor of safety, for civil engineering applications this factor is 4 - 8, meaning the structure can withstand 4 to 8 times the maximum anticipated load. To my knownledge, the modulus of elasticity for most materals is not available at high temperatures. The necessary testing is not done and would be nearly impossible. During a hot fire metals can be re-heat treated by fire and can also be plasticly deformed. Once either happens its strength and fatigue life changes drastically and in the case of plastic deformation the load paths used in calculation of the original design may no longer apply - plastic deformation changes the dimensions of a structural member permanently. How the part will structurely perform from that point on is very complicated. In either case the structure in question is usually replaced. While the investigators hope for the best for the cruise industry, their responsibility is safety and I doubt that they will allow the Star to sail until the are satisfied that it is safe, and Princess loosing money while it is dock for the inspection and possible corrections should not change when they will allow it to sail again. The fire did spread fast and doesn't look like it was contained by measures that were designed into the ship - both of these statements might mean some major changes/delays are in order for the ship. I don't even want to consider the possibility that something like the ships electrical system caused the fire, as this would add another layer of complications/changes/liability to the fire for Princess. If the fire was the result of a criminal act, I guess I could see the investigators not wanting any one on board until every shred of evidence was collected.

[Goldryder]

There is one thing to be considered, that as yet hasn't been.

 

If, and only if, there is a design problem that is implicated as something that didn't help with this fire and its subsequent spread, there are 3 other sister ships of the same/similar build design and builder that may have to have alterations made. Grand, Golden and Caribbean. If this is the case, then those ships would be forced on safety grounds to have alterations made as soon as possible, which could cancel even more cruises.

 

No-one knows what caused the fire or why it spread so badly and melted balconies etc yet. But if there is something in the design of the ship or the materials used, that has very wide rammifications for the other 3 ships.

 

Something to think about, perhaps.

[emerald777]

KroozCams is showing the Star underway. Heading to Freeport, Bahamas. Isn't that a major drydock port?

[patwell]

Hi Saga....thanks for your post. I found the other thread you directed me to and will post to you there later today when I return home. Wonderful little ships.....

 

Thanks again all you posters...this really is what Cruise Critic should be all about. Not conspiracy theories or smoker-bashing but an intelligent discussion of the more realistic causes of what caused this frightening event. I hope the on site experts will be able to piece the facts together in the same logical fashion that is emerging here. Cheers, Penny

[iPodboi]

There has to be something that Princess is not wanting the U.S. Government to find out. There is no way that a fire can burn that hot just by a tiny cigarette. I also dont think i was electrical either because there are no outlets on the balconies. I would have to say that the cruise line failed this test severly.

[skilledcruiser]

Hey,

 

I've read through 5 pages on this thread and something jumped into my head. Anything on the sides of ships, cameras, sprinklers, etc. are really weak against a bad storm or high seas. All those components need to be in a very protective area. The side of the ship is a very hard place to keep those protective devices safe. I know this because I was involved in a post 9/11 saftey assesement on cargo ships coming in and out of Newark. The gov't wanted cameras on every side of the cargo ships and they also wanted key card access to get into any door on the ship. There were so many variables that could destroy these components it seemed worthless to install them on to the ships. Remember, these ships somethimes see 40+ foot waves and constant seawater spray, along with 50+ knot winds. So, all of these ideas are easier said than done. I've seen those cargo containers bent in half from a bad wave, just imagine what that will do to a water line. Anyway, just my 2 cents,

 

 

Larry

[loungelizard]

This thread is a real breath of fresh air...thank you to all who have shared here. I'm certainly no expert, but like all of us, I AM very curious about this incident. I have a few questions about this whole tragedy and I am hoping that some of the experts here may be able to answer them...

 

When you consider the HUGE amount of cigarettes consumed on all cruiseships it's hard for me to believe that a stray cigarette caused this fire. You'd think this would have happened before...many times. I was on the Caribbean Princess a few years ago and I almost booked a balcony but I chose not to because there was no privacy. The cantilever design of the balconies allowed people above to look down at people below. My question is...would this type of design allow a fire to spread faster? If the balconies were structured so that they were straight down from each other ( like a building ) would the fire have been less damaging?

 

Do lifeboats have firefighting capabilities? Were they lowered for that purpose or were they trying to protect the boats from the fire? The pictures of the fire show 2 lifeboats lowered from their housing...if they were going to abandon ship, why weren't the rest of the boats lowered as well?

 

Is there a possibility that something was launched from the sea on to the ship?

 

Again, this is a very fascinating and informative thread...thank you all :)

[mrcc]

I recently came back from a cruise (different ship and cruise line). On one of the days the crew re-varnished the railings that go along the balconies. Perhaps this had recently been done on the Sea Princess.

 

Varnish can burn like gasoline. With a virtual 35 knot wind this kind of fire would have spread quickly. So then the question becomes, how did the fire start in the first place....perhaps a cigarette held against the railing ?????

[patwell]

Here is a link to the first actual photo I have seen of the fire as it was burning....also a first person account from the people who took the photo. Folks, THIS is scary to contemplate!!! Hope it's OK to post this link...I think anything involved in this terrible event should be shared from one site to the other. Cheers, Penny

 

/www.*****/travelpage/ubb-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=008476&p=5

[GSDsky]

Has anyone put the pool towels, bathing suit, wet socks (water type), flip flops on the plastic chair on the balcony? I know I have at night. Could a smoke land on the towel, smolder, eventually catching bathing suit which would ignite I think faster, melt chair onto the plastic egg flooring on balcony?

Just my 2 cents but could see that happening...

But leave that up to the experts and who knows it may not have been a smoke after all.

[Goldryder]

The bridgecam was facing the funnel at the time of the fire. The images bring it home just how lucky they were and how hard the wind was blowing too. Had this happened during the day when more people were on deck...well, I don't want to think about it tbh.

 

http://www.houseofpancake.com/tmp/star_fire/

[wookie]

This link is from a Deputy Fire Chief on board during the fire

A commercial comes up first, but then shows a news report with some pictures

 

Another expert who finds it unlikely a cigarette could have started this fire

 

http://www.ksdk.com/video/player.aspx?aid=31957&bw=

[Ethel5]

There has to be something that Princess is not wanting the U.S. Government to find out. There is no way that a fire can burn that hot just by a tiny cigarette. I also dont think i was electrical either because there are no outlets on the balconies. I would have to say that the cruise line failed this test severly.

 

Evidently you didn't read al the posts before writing yours. You fail to understand that the ship MUST pass SOLAS guidelines. It goes through USCG inspections several times a year. And, finally, what makes you an expert?

[CruiseWacker23]

I'm no expert, but the questions about design are interesting. I don't think we'll see a rush to replace the aluminum balconies, if in fact that is what they are made from. Replacing them with steel might create a stability problem, and would create a higher risk of catastrophe under conditions the ship is likely to face. The ship that capsized near Egypt was top heavy, so I think we have evidence of the risks there.

 

The circumstances around this fire have to be extremely unusual. If in fact it was intentionally started, there isn't much design work that could stop that. I'm sure we'll see some changes. I've suggested exterior heat sensors that would monitor balconies.

 

Some of the comments in the story W0kie linked are interesting. Those people said the fire started on Deck 10 (Caribe). Do the suites on Caribe deck have teak balconies? The aft suites do not, except possibly the Grand Suite.

 

I agree with Spongerob that I do not expect to see many design changes as far as the use of light weight metals for the upper decks. The fact that you very seldom see sprinklers on the verandahs are an indication that the risk analysis models concluded a low likelyhood of fires originating on the balconies. I think they may revisit the possibility of putting recessed, dry pipe sprinklers on verandahs in the future however. It wouldn't be that big of a deal, a separate riser and air compressor unit. The aluminum is here to stay.

Basfreeman...O2 units and cylinders are subject to ANSI, NIOSH and NFPA standards and rest assured that they are safe. Obviously safeguards need to be taken from fire and yes if O2 is added to the fire origin, it will aid in its spread. I doubt that it played a role in this one.

How I would love to be one of the investigators on this case. The single damaged cabin on the Dolphin Deck has been mentioned as the point of origin by some. In looking at the picture on the link below, my hunch would be one of three cabins directly above the Dolphin cabin...on the Caribe Deck. My guess the damage on the Dolphin Deck was due to "drop down" fire. I also guess that the crew waged their fire fight from the Dolphin. Also, we haven't heard for sure yet if this started inside or out. On the HAL ships, there are lights located above the doors on the verandahs and light switches and cabin lights inside on that wall. Believing that the Princess Ships are designed in a similar way, folks we can't rule out electrical yet!! If it was not intentionally set, as an investigator I would look long and hard before ruling out electricity. By the way, that is how a fire investigation works. First you locate the ORIGIN of the fire, then you systematically rule out all possibilities for CAUSE until you discover a cause that can not be ruled out. The floor in the area of the origin will be looked at for any evidence of accelerants etc. If signs indicate a possibility of some form of liquid accelerant, chemical samples and even arson dogs will be used to "hit" on any suspicious burn patterns. The whole process is based on "The Scientific Method".

I will be anxiously awaiting the final report on this investigation.

 

http://home.alltel.net/hyatts1/startiff.tif

[Saga Ruby]

CruiseWacker (may I call you CW?) and our other experts - Please give us any educated guesses you may have about when it is reasonable to expect an official preliminary report and eventually a final report.

 

We know the ship is Bermuda registered, we know the NTSB and U.S. Coast Guard plus innumerable insurance companies will investigate the fire. Do we know which authority will be primarily responsible for running the investigation then which authority will be issuing the final report?

 

When the news media gets leaked information long before the final official reports are issued, I assume we will have to allow for what I call the "Oz Factor" - rumor and speculation that turns out to be inaccurate.

 

Thoughts?

[D4]

I recently came back from a cruise (different ship and cruise line). On one of the days the crew re-varnished the railings that go along the balconies. Perhaps this had recently been done on the Sea Princess.

 

Varnish can burn like gasoline. With a virtual 35 knot wind this kind of fire would have spread quickly. So then the question becomes, how did the fire start in the first place....perhaps a cigarette held against the railing ?????

 

When I was on the Caribbean Princess last summer I got talking to the supervisor of the exterior maintenance crew. He said he has 2 people that varnish full-time. He said it takes them 1 month to do the entire ship and then they start over. So yes, they're varnishing somewhere every day.

 

I also remember that after they varnished railings, they put a sort of saran wrap over the freshly varnished railing. I don't know how long they left it on.

[Goldryder]

The British Maritime Accident Investigation Branch are in overall control. This is due to the ship being flagged in Bermuda, and Bermuda being a British Colony and that the ship was in international waters when the fire broke out. Assisting them are representatives from the US Coast Guard, FBI and Jamaican Police.

 

Priliminary reports may come out in the next 3-4 months and the main one probably anything upto 12-18 months. If the fire was malicious, chances are the report will be followed by legal moves culminating in a court appearance(s).

 

The ship is unlikely to be released back to Princess for some time if the fire is proven to be malicious, even if the cause(s) have been determined. If the fire was caused or hampered by a design feature, then that holds implications for ever passenger liner on the sea and on the drawing boards.

 

Tomorrow (Monday) the ship arrives at the drydock, in the meantime the investigation team are combing the debris to establish the foot and cause(s) of the fire. They will also be going through the large number of pasenger/crew eyewitness accounts. Once the ship is deemed safe, the cruise company's own insurer will assess the damage and decide with Princess the best way to go about repairs. Worst case scenario would be to write her off. This is by no means impossible as we do not know the extent of the damage to the superstructure of the ship, all we have see, and all we are likely to see, are the outer and probably less damaged areas of the ship. She will have been severely weakened by the heat from this fire, of that there is no doubt.

 

Reports will be issued as and when by the British investigators, copies of which will be released via the NTSB Maritime Dept in due course.

[fireofficer5]

Just a thought. If too many sprinkler heads activate, the system becomes ineffective.

[mii]

Wookie thanks alot for that film coverage about the Deputy Fire Chief who was on as a passenger of the Star.

 

Cruisewacker did you by chance see that piece of film. it is on this thread #139. I am pretty sure he showed the Lido deck where he said that the floor buckled. Now that is on the top of the ship right above the Aloha deck, then Baja, then Caribe, and then Dolphin. Going from top to bottom. Thank you very much for your insight. This has been the great thread for getting some very good knowledge.

 

Marilyn

[fireofficer5]

Also how much water damage is there?

[D4]

Here's an article that shows passengers looking out of their balcony at the fire. (The photo is on the right side of the article - it shows the fire picture for a few seconds and then switches to a photo of a couple in a picture frame for a few seconds.)

 

http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=32996

[Saga Ruby]

To our experts - I am aware of some safety precautions in a fire like touching the door before opening and to stay low (like in corridors), but does it help at all to wet a washcloth or towel to breathe through as we work our way to safety? Would the cloth help filter out some of the soot and chemicals in the air or is it just better to make a run for it ASAP?

[Globaliser]

Reports will be issued as and when by the British investigators, copies of which will be released via the NTSB Maritime Dept in due course.

You should be able to get them direct from the MAIB. The website is http://www.maib.gov.uk/ - and it may be worth visiting this from time to time.

 

The website actually has some pretty interesting stuff on it, including a relatively recent re-appraisal of the role of the Californian in the Titanic rescue effort.