A lake tragedy

[diver dave]

Practice and training do make lots of progress into the extreme. But, pilots do not practice ditching, captains do not practice sinkings, and divers don't practice wrestling panicked buddies at depth. Lots of times these do have successful outcomes, but there are no guarantees.

 

[Fletcher500]

I haven't followed the story close enough to have an opinion regarding this particular incident. There are quite a few of these in the SD area, and I guess they are also called duck boats - not sure. I have paddled literally 100 ft. away from these boats so I am viewing them at the ocean level. The ones I have seen have a low freeboard, did not appear to handle boat wakes well, a lot of people crammed in there. Sketchy.

 

[psneeld]

Well, I used to have to practice full autorotations on instruments to the water....maybe you just haven't seen extreme training.... How about the damage control chamber that floods to simulate sinking that the Navy has?

Good training might be rare, but it IS what makes the difference.

But true .....practice usually never takes the body all the way......but true pros do it in their minds every day so they ARE prepared for extremes.

Again training is only to a point....usually constrained by risk management....but constant exploration of alternative actions in emergencies is the mark of a pro.

 

[FoxtrotCharlie]

I have seen these 'duck boats' all my life on lakes in Ark and MO - never wanted to go on one as a kid, and was the bad guy with my kids. My daughter called after to seeing this and thanked me

 

[johnma]

just watched the news on this. There had been a severe thunderstorm watch in effect for 12 hours prior. A severe thunderstorm warning was posted 40 minutes before the duck boat launched.
The "captain" had 16 years experience operating duck boats on the lake. The owner of the operation (he owned it for 6 months) said all boats have radar on board. (I cannot see a radar dome in the video)
I used to see these boats every weekend in Philadelphia. The last year of operation there prior you the accident with the barge they could not go more than 20-30 yards off shore. Even in calm weather they did not look very sea worthy.
John

 

[BandB]

but constant exploration of alternative actions in emergencies is the mark of a pro.

I have always been a proponent in business of "what if" and "contingency" planning and as a boater I'm the same way. The ownership and management and captains should have extensively discussed what to do in a situation like this, even if it had never happened and they never expected it to happen. These type storms, even tornadoes, are not uncommon in that area of the country.

Every time I go out in a boat, I think of and talk through various types of potential emergencies. I have escape plans. I can't guarantee they'd work, but at least I have thought them through and discussed with those with more experience than I have. I may plan on running 200 nm in a day far offshore, but I've made note that day of every inlet along the way and the feasibility of entering.

In this case there were options and I can't say the captain didn't consider them all. They included dropping the canopy, ordering life jackets on, and abandoning ship. They included beaching the duck. They included not going out at all. They included heading to shore earlier, either the ramp or an island or elsewhere. The lake has many ramps and the captain should know the feasibility of each. Also, if safety is your priority, you have double checks and more than one person who can decide to cancel a tour.

We don't get chances to practice emergencies, even in the best training. It's not the same. I've fought fires in a school and gotten a feeling of how difficult it is, but that's not having a real fire on board with no instructors and no safety valve. You practiced full autorotations but you knew what you were practicing and it was practice.

Still, we don't have to have been through a simulation or an actual experience to prepare to deal with an emergency. We need education and continued refreshing ourselves. If there's a way to practice that adds to it but we all must prepare for things we've never encountered and never practiced.

Safety is an ingrained state of mind. It's preparation. We love NYC but we discussed a potential mugging before our first time there together with everyone in our group and what to do. I hope never to be mugged, but my mental practice and preparation may well safe my life if I am.

Perhaps all bases were covered by the Duck company, but if not, then they failed to prepare. If they had never discussed or thought through what to do in this type situation, then that was a critical weakness in preparation.

 

[psneeld]

Like llive fire exercises, full autos are the real deal once the instructor chops the throttle,.....no spooling up that turbine in time.

So some practice still puts you to the point of no return and does something to you simulators may or may not do.

But that kind of practice takes lots of practice in baby steps, and I have not seen that kind of intensity outside of the military.

In fact, little training at all was ever done in the private businesses I worked for....sheer economics and insurance against all out training probably factored in.

So yes.... there are plenty of weak operators out there, but with the right training, thinking outside the box to save yourself, your boat and your passengers in dire situations should not be an impossible situation. One does not have to panic and put blinders on because it is basic human nature.

 

[diver dave]

The salient point I have trying to make is not what "we" have been trained to do, or what "we" would have done, but our expectations, as a buying public, of just what we will accept in the forward seat. What we have set up at this point, is an industry with low paid workers in a position to affect lives. It was a duck boat driver this week, but a couple weeks ago it was a paragliding boat captain, before that, it was a Korean ferry boat captain that screamed for all the teenagers to stay seating as the vessel was capsizing. Its a long list.
Again, this is a not a "blame the captain" speech. It is more of a "why are we blaming the captain", when the safety issue is more systemic. The public is not making the demands that should be made for safety. The NTSB had the brains to effect change, but was not put into law. The public really does not appreciated highly trained folk in positions where it matters. We don't stand for this in the highly $ sensitive aviation world, yet we accept it when water is involved. If we don't change our demand, then we will see the same type of incidents in the future. OR, we simply accept our odds.

 

[BruceK]

However accurate the criticism of the operator,if this was "an accident waiting to happen" due to the very nature of the "vessel",the lack of training and or overconfidence of "Captains",failure of the operators and the Captain to maintain a proper watch of weather conditions,and maybe a lack of maintenance if the engine failed, etc,some good will come out of the detailed study of "what went wrong",in a Coroners Inquest or whatever process is used there.
Personally, I don`t place much trust in "amusement ride operators",and that`s about what this is. We currently have an Inquiry running into a simulated river rapids ride at an amusement park,which killed all 4 people in one "raft". So far, among other things, it seemed the water pump which powered the "rapids" failed and was repaired twice earlier in the day,with electricians saying they could not be sure it would not fail again. The wiring is described as a "ratsnest". The Amusement Park is in trouble, the Chairman and CEO of the company which owns have gone. More worrying(or perhaps comforting), they recently sold off a number of marinas, to concentrate on their core business of amusement parks.
No good can come out of this awful incident for those who died, their family and friends, but if it is prevented from happening again by hue and cry,however strident, let it be so.

 

[Wxx3]

Diver Dave, I agree with much of what you say, but your above posts tries to shift responsibility to some vague bureaucracy, be it the company or government.

As PSNeeld and B&B have pointed out, part of the job, being responsible for other humans, means they should have at least thought out other possibilities. If that's not part of the licensing requirements, it should be.
The buck has to stop somewhere and that place is on that boat with the customers you are supposed to protect.

These people died hundreds of feet from shore and other boats.
If nothing else, there is a big ass showboat that could have provided some protection or even help, let alone all the other options that have been mentioned.

I also agree with PSNeeld that the military practices, trains for events in a way that other's don't. Even NYC, with a large anti-terror department, doesn't really train in any real world way.

 

[Benthic2]

I don't want to send the thread down a political side street here, but I think will come down to how safe should something be to be open to the public ? We could positively reduce the duck boat fatalities by forcing them to operate to standards that NASA requires with minimal tolerances, redundant redundancies, overdesign and the most qualified staff...but it would cost $10,000 per ticket, and no one would go.

We try to legislate safety in cars, but 35,000 people die every year. Things like mandatory airbags, speed limits, traffic lights and so on all of pro's and con's that get people very divided.

All a duck boat captain has to do is drive in a big circle on very closed, calm and protected waters. I'm not sure it makes sense to have him be qualified much more than that. In my opinion, all corrective action here should not be to get more capable captains, but to ensure that the boats are not put in situations that are beyond the capability of the current captains and the vehicles.

I would think there could be some enhancements to the vehicles, like keeping the side curtains open when in the water, or have windows with hinges and styrofoam frames that float open as the boat submerges....I know the captain was able to release the canopy in this incident and that seems like a direct response to previous NTSB recommendations.

I suspect this will, like most tragedies of this nature, be a series of problems: not taking the weather warning seriously, lack of flexibility or training on the captain's part, and an inability of the boat to shed water sufficiently.

 

[AlaskaProf]

I'm sorry, but we have been enormously successful in legislating highway safety.

If you assess the number of fatalities with respect to total driving population and especially with the number of miles driven, you will find vast improvement in automotive safety through improved design and equipment much of it driven by regulation and government funded initiatives.

 

[Benthic2]

Yes we have. All I was trying to say is that there are have been oponents to all of that legislation for one reason or another, and that it will never be reduced to zero.

 

[BandB]

I suspect this will, like most tragedies of this nature, be a series of problems: not taking the weather warning seriously, lack of flexibility or training on the captain's part, and an inability of the boat to shed water sufficiently.

I think there will be a number of contributing factors, most of which aren't legislative or governmental issues. Among those I see are:

1. Canopies on duck boats.
2. Exhaust system may be. That's to be determined.
3. Company philosophy as to safety and their drive to live up to their slogan of going our rain or shine like ducks. The litigation in this case may well take care of that. If you're never cancelling tours, there's something wrong with your practices.
4. Training as to what to do with threatening forecasts and when storms arise. Back to company philosophy.
5. Some degree of licensing and review of companies in the business including policies and safety plans.

As I generally do in these cases, I assign in my mind the vast majority of the responsibility on the company. They're responsible for the training and decisions of their employees. They're responsible for the safety of their customers. And, if they don't take those things seriously, they shouldn't be operating.

Someone mentioned amusement parks earlier and we've recently seen some extreme examples of amusement parks that not only didn't take safety seriously but intentionally and flagrantly ignored the safety problems they had.

Now, someone also mentioned judgement by those taking tours but that's easy for knowledgeable boaters to say. I would never be tempted to get on one of their boats. However, the average tourist who does, has no knowledge of boating safety. That's why we have rules and regulations and why we require good safety practices from companies.

I predict the involved company (the legal entity running the tour) will be out of business. The question is will a successor company take their place and will they have better practices.

 

[Genecop]

Just visited Boston this past weekend, (Eagles Concert) first thing I noticed while walking into the TD Arena was the many packed Duck Boats passing by...funny how the public refuses to get together and send a message..

As long as $ is valued more than life, and people remain ignorant, nothing will change..

 

[ssobol]

Just visited Boston this past weekend, (Eagles Concert) first thing I noticed while walking into the TD Arena was the many packed Duck Boats passing by...funny how the public refuses to get together and send a message..

As long as $ is valued more than life, and people remain ignorant, nothing will change..

As unfortunate as in the latest incident with the duck boats is, you have to remember that it is a reasonably safe method of transportation. It's not like they are sinking right and left. Before this incident it had been a few years since the previous one. In the meantime, how many trips were made and how many passengers were carried without problems?

It's sort of like plane crashes. A plane goes down and there is a great hue and cry about it and there can follow a dip in airline passengers if the crash is large enough. However, the odds of any person actually being in a commercial plane crash are very, very low.

People tend to get wound up tight about one off accidents and pretty much ignore things that are killing multitudes of people every day. How many people have been killed in/by cars in just the US since the duck boat sinking? Likely hundreds. Yet you don't hear anything about that. Less people have been killed in duck boat accidents in the last 20 years (<50) than in half a single day's worth of auto fatalities. More people are killed in the US in auto accidents every single year than in the entire Vietnam War. Where's their memorial?

How many people are killed each year by guns? Yet almost any politician that tries to anything about it has a pretty good chance of not getting reelected.

 

[BruceK]

...People tend to get wound up tight about one off accidents and pretty much ignore things that are killing multitudes of people every day. How many people have been killed in/by cars in just the US since the duck boat sinking? Likely hundreds. Yet you don't hear anything about that. Less people have been killed in duck boat accidents in the last 20 years (<50) than in half a single day's worth of auto fatalities. More people are killed in the US in auto accidents every single year than in the entire Vietnam War. Where's their memorial?

You might as well raise for comparison the number of people shot dead every day. Doubtless these deaths, by number, pale into insignificance.

The difference is these deaths were preventable by the simplest of mundane procedures, someone with an ounce of commonsense checking the weather was safe for operation.

 

[Benthic2]

I would agree that the company will bear most of the responsibility, as they are the ones that sets policy, training regimen and so on. The captain will bear some as well since he is supposed to be a licensed professional.

I have ridden the ducks in Boston many times, and find them really enjoyable. I take my kids on them, and when folks visit its high on my list of suggested activities. ( (Provided they can swim and water temperatures are not dangerous) I do know the Boston Duck Tours have 2 way radios on board and sometimes do cancel for weather reasons.

 

[ssobol]

You might as well raise for comparison the number of people shot dead every day. Doubtless these deaths, by number, pale into insignificance.

The difference is these deaths were preventable by the simplest of mundane procedures, someone with an ounce of commonsense checking the weather was safe for operation.

Already did.

Gun deaths could be reduced by some fairly mundane procedures (although the cat is pretty much out of the bag by now), but it is taboo in this country to seriously discuss them.

 

[BandB]

All Duck boats are not created equal, nor are all operators of Duck tour companies. More of their accidents in total have been on land than on the water. The two largest water incidents have been 19 years apart but on very similar boats on very similar bodies of water. The small bodies of water have perhaps lulled one to a false sense of safety. I doubt those on the coast have that same feeling nor do they likely operate the same.

This is really about one specific tour operator and perhaps in a broader sense about small tour boats on relatively small inland lakes. However, I'm not ready to equate the Table Rock operator to the entire industry. Duck boat isn't even a specific term of a single design but a generic terms for similar looking amphibious vehicles. I'm not ready to condemn an industry, but I am ready to condemn the company operating the boat in question. They failed to have adequate safety policies and practices and take adequate precautions. Whether through acts of omission or of commission, they put other things ahead of the safety of their customers.

It's like tour buses and the small time operators who fail to maintain their buses and hire drivers they shouldn't and wreck and cause losses of life. I can't condemn all tour buses as some are well maintained and companies with highly skilled drivers.

In the tour boat and tour bus industries, we must address the offenders, not the entire industry. We also must look at the exceptions to normal rules that allow some of these operators to continue. The public does depend on regulatory bodies to insure they are operated safely as the average person can't know.

When you go to an amusement park, do you know if the rides are safe? I can't tell by looking. I have to depend on regulatory bodies to protect me. When they fail, the park operator must be investigated, but the authorities that allow them to fail to meet reasonable standards must also.

We all depend on regulatory authorities in many things we can't possibly know ourselves. I know absolutely nothing about airplanes so I sure depend on them for the safety of the planes I take.

 

[Boat]

My number one question is with floatation devices. When boarding the craft were the passengers informed as to floatation device locations? Secondly, as the water spilled inside the craft, did anyone yell out to "put-on your floatation device, now"?

There is always going to be unpredictability with the weather. It may have gotten worse in recent times with the dramatization and sensationalism in the media. Heard a weather reporter "cry wolf" lately?

The eight-hundred pound gorilla in the room who must not be mentioned is of course the underwriter. Lawyers will reduce settlements any way they can and ugly is the way it looks.

I intentionally left out the reference to gun deaths because so many gun deaths are suicides and I doubt this is a case of suicide by duck boat.

 

[BandB]

The eight-hundred pound gorilla in the room who must not be mentioned is of course the underwriter. Lawyers will reduce settlements any way they can and ugly is the way it looks.

I'm sure the backs of the tickets and/or signs also were present, designed to limit the liability of the tour operator. In many cases, that becomes the real battle, whether those items are legally binding and whether they stay in place considering the events. It often becomes a battle over whether it was negligence or gross negligence in establishing the liability of the company and any amounts due for the deaths. The other factor that plays though is the total insurance the company has. It may well be they're only required to have $5 million in coverage. If so, we're not talking multi million dollar settlements, we're talking a maximum of $294,000 per person. I doubt seriously that there's any money to be gotten beyond the insurance amount as I doubt the operator has significant assets. Often we see small offers quickly and a long process to get the full amount. However, if the total available insurance is small, the initial offer may be all that is possible to receive.

 

[psneeld]

Unpredictability in weather?

Sounds like it was right on.

One may not think forecasts are reliable, but a licensed captain should have more skills and experience than the CH 6 umbrella forecast.

 

[Benthic2]

Ripley's website claims they have 14 million visitors per year and are part of the Pattison Group, Canada's second largest private company, so their could be some deep pockets, here.

 

[BandB]

Ripley's website claims they have 14 million visitors per year and are part of the Pattison Group, Canada's second largest private company, so their could be some deep pockets, here.

Rest assured they have this entity in a separate corporation to protect any other entities they own.

My understanding is the duck company got new ownership about six months ago. Was this Ripley?

 

[Benthic2]

Yes....Ripley is a very new owner

 

[BandB]

Yes....Ripley is a very new owner

You can rest assured Ripley hasn't left themselves exposed.

 

[Benthic2]

yeah....you're probably right about that.

 

[rjwilliams11741]

Unpredictability in weather?

Sounds like it was right on.

One may not think forecasts are reliable, but a licensed captain should have more skills and experience than the CH 6 umbrella forecast.

Many, many years ago an uncle who was a commercial fisherman in the Monterey, CA area told me that although it may look sunny and bright out right now remember that weather man is right enough of the time to always take heed. This served me well during my years of full time cruising. One would think that the "professional" captains and officials of the company would also take heed of the weather prediction which was issued hours before the incident.

 

[BandB]

One would think that the "professional" captains and officials of the company would also take heed of the weather prediction which was issued hours before the incident.

Understand too that this wasn't a forecast based on a possible system developing. It was based on the path of a storm which had already done significant damage west of there and was on a direct path for that area. This storm continued after the Branson area to hit areas east of there.