Duck Boats

You have to wonder why one sank and the other came through fine. They were traveling pretty much side by side. Watching the video, one took on water and the other didn’t.

CNN said there were life jackets on board.

Steve Paul, with Test Drive Technologies, does not indicate why or when he inspected them, but said he inspected 24 Duck Boats in Branson last August and their exhaust systems didn't meet "federal standards" as their exhaust systems are on the front of the vehicle. Per him, this leads to water to the engines which can seize and then no bilge pump to remove water. Note that there is no evidence that this did, in fact, lead to the sinking but it could certainly help explain it. Also, he was working under DOT standards which require the exhaust to be higher than or behind the passengers. However, oversight of amphibious vehicles falls under the jurisdiction of the USCG, per the DOT spokesman.

The articles keep referencing two crew, the "captain" and "driver." Perhaps they switch off? The one duck boat "driver" I spoke with years ago said he had to have a master's and a CDL with passenger bus (forget what they call it) endorsement.

From the video I saw, it looked like there was a rooster tail right up to the end. Not sure if the person with the camera stopped recording just before it sank, or the news media is cropping that part out of respect for the families (not a bad thing, IMHO.)

I think we now have enough fatalities with a canopy as a contributing factor that it should be looked at. There seem to be competing priorities; keep the passengers from accidentally getting/falling out, vs. making it easy for them to abandon ship. I don't have an answer, although I like the idea of carrying a knife if I ever board one of those things again.

I also wonder if it would have been even harder to escape from beneath that canopy if everyone was wearing a life jacket.

One last thing; some reports use the word "capsize," however, I've also read that it remained upright all the way to the lake bed, and even rolled down the bottom on it's wheels. That has implications for any suggested canopy design changes.

High Wire said:

About 20 years ago a Baltimore Inner Harbor pontoon boat water taxi flipped during a thunderstorm. No one banned pontoon boats but they did change their procedures.
Lack of anticipation of what could go wrong.

Click to expand...

I remember the Baltimore event. I'm sure that there will be lessons learned from this tragedy, too.

Is there no shallow water or beach where the damned thing could have gone?

I know...hindsight has 20-20 vision. So sad.

Wxx3 said:

But then you are a man of action.
It's amazing how passive people become in any kind of "mechanical" crisis.

Click to expand...

You're right about that. In the few situations I've been on a boat where things were going wrong I was surprised how poorly others onboard were reacting to the situations. Folks want to follow direction or cling to notions of what "should be happening" instead of taking faster actions that could help save their lives.

Under normal conditions I think it's fair to say boat operators don't want passengers handling PFDs all the time and passengers don't want to wear them. But in the footage I've seen, they're clearly there on the ceiling and nobody's reaching for them, let alone wearing them! You can be damned sure I'd have pulled mine down, regardless of what the tour guide said or wanted. I'd much rather have someone yelling at me instead of drowning because of bad advice.

Reflections of a DUKW driver

Many years ago (like more than 50) I was a member of an Army Amphibious Support Command and we had DUKW's, I was licensed to operate one. They were basically 2 1/2 ton cargo trucks modified to float with this huge steel (?) tub around the chassis. They were difficult to handle on both land and sea but served effectively as a lighter to carry cargo from a supply ship to a land based supply dump. Their bulk made visibility on land difficult and their single small screw made steering on the water a bit of a challenge. We NEVER took these vehicles out in any sort of weather or sea conditions.
I understand that these "Duck Boats" have been stretched and modified to allow them to accommodate more (paying) passengers. A canopy and side curtains were added for passenger comfort (with little regard for un-assing the vehicle).
I concur that these now ancient vehicles should be retired. Perhaps the sight-seeing boating industry could find a more suitable vehicle.

These land crafts should be outlawed asap for public tours. If you want to privately own and run, have at it. The public unaware of seamanship rely on captains for their life safety. These families are being murdered on these vessels. They are not proper for general public.

cruise said:

These land crafts should be outlawed asap for public tours. If you want to privately own and run, have at it. The public unaware of seamanship rely on captains for their life safety. These families are being murdered on these vessels. They are not proper for general public.

Click to expand...

This was a thoughtful discussion up to this point.

Carl Martin said:

This was a thoughtful discussion up to this point.

Click to expand...

Because you perhaps disagree with him, you don't think he was thoughtful?

I might point out that the former head of the NTSB, who headed it during the 1999 incident, agrees that DUKW tours should be outlawed. Are you saying he wasn't thoughtful?

I'd also point out that many captains strongly disapprove of the convenient limited licensing used by tour operators. Now, the tour operators say the captains are merely being self serving so they could get the jobs, but also say there is no way they could afford full captains.

I personally don't push outlawing but I would push for far more stringent oversight and regulation and for some specific changes. I'm not ready to say no DUKW tours should take place, but I've very ready to say this one should not have under the conditions it did.

I would think using the term "murdered" took away reasonableness and threw it into the pile of so many other emotional, not objective discussions.

I also think the term “murdered” goes too far. It implies intent to kill.

I keep coming back to the fact that the other Duck Boat, that was on the lake at the same time, did not take on significant amounts of water. In the video, the second boat had a nice high freeboard through the whole event.

Since one of the boats didn’t have a problem handling the conditions, my guess would be that there was a failure of a hatch, thru-hull fitting or something like that on the one that did sink.

I bet the investigators already have a good idea of what happened but it will be months before they release any information.

Chrisjs said:

When you take an unstable vessel onto the water in a gale and passengers are not required to wear PFDs is it any surprise that disasters happen?
Duck boats were a simple/cheap solution to a war time need. They were unstable then and are still unstable. They did their job. Time to retire them to the museum.

Click to expand...

That's is just a brilliant statement! I would have expected a more intelligent comment on this forum. The NTSB and the Coast Guard have formally discussed wearing of life jackets in enclosed spaces. The airline industry also warns you on every flight not to inflate until after you exit the aircraft. Wearing them topsides in any condition is advisable. I was in an overturned vessel passed out and if I had a life jacket on the angel/rescuer would never of found me much less pulled me through a small broken window in time.

The coast guard inspects these vessels for stability within reason so my uninformed guess is that the storm was too strong. Guessing most small boats would of gone down but fortunately the other duck boat did make it back. Does the fact that it made it back make all duck boats stable and sea worthy? I think not.

Instead of making uninformed comments focus on the people that help the survivors and hope they are around you when you need them.

psneeld said:

I would think using the term "murdered" took away reasonableness and threw it into the pile of so many other emotional, not objective discussions.

Click to expand...

You're right. I overlooked that one word, although technically that could be found in Involuntary Manslaughter of some sort. However, I stuck to the rest of what he was wanting done and that wasn't beyond reasonable.

HopCar said:

I also think the term “murdered” goes too far. It implies intent to kill.

I keep coming back to the fact that the other Duck Boat, that was on the lake at the same time, did not take on significant amounts of water. In the video, the second boat had a nice high freeboard through the whole event.

Since one of the boats didn’t have a problem handling the conditions, my guess would be that there was a failure of a hatch, thru-hull fitting or something like that on the one that did sink.

I bet the investigators already have a good idea of what happened but it will be months before they release any information.

Click to expand...

50% of the duck boats making it safely is hardly a cause for relief. They shouldn't have been out there. Then, once they were, there were factors that allowed one of two to make it and that will be figured out. I suspect the exhaust issue contributed, but it may not have.

Ok my selection of the this word was meant as the condensed version.

Is what I meant by this these innocent families are completely unfamiliar with the integrity of the vessel they are boarding. As for most of us on this forum, we would not board a vessel we thought was not sea worthy. We have the experience and knowledge to make this decision. I have never boarded a duck boat by decision. They are trouble. There is one in Boston near by. It has had some close calls also.

This being said, if you and I (us on this forum) probably agree these boats have no business hauling families let alone open water capable of seas beyond 1 foot. Then why are the owners , and captains of these vessels unaware of this?

I don,t think they are truly unaware. Therefore there is some type of awareness that they could have major incidents and death aboard these vessels. So in a way it is a type of 2nd degree murder. I agree it sounds extreme. The owners and captains are not breaking the law. I am for less regulation, but sometimes regulations are required for the ignorant to not hurt others.

As I said earlier, as a private vessel have at it, and hopefully warn your friends the risk at hand.

I could understand if it was a bungee jumping activity or skiing, were the risk is communicated or even waivers are signed. People getting on these boats with there families thing they are as safe as a ride in a taxi..

psneeld said:

I would think using the term "murdered" took away reasonableness and threw it into the pile of so many other emotional, not objective discussions.

Click to expand...

Wish I was so certain that the basic design is that unseaworthy to blame people for murder.

From my reading, the basic design is not that unseaworthy.

When I finally watched that video I found I was indeed filled with emotions, mostly sadness for the victims of this tradgety.

If these vehicles were really unstable there would be more sinkings. The Boston Ducks take 600,000 people per year. Ride the Ducks takes over 1 million people per year...and they are also happening in a dozen other cities.. When you look at the number of sinkings compared to the number of successful trips there is no way you can conclude that these vehicles are unsafe. Based on the Branson incident you can say they are unsafe in hurricane force winds and 6 foot seas, but a blanket statement that all of them are unsafe is just absurd.

Benthic2 said:

If these vehicles were really unstable there would be more sinkings. The Boston Ducks take 600,000 people per year. Ride the Ducks takes over 1 million people per year...and they are also happening in a dozen other cities.. When you look at the number of sinkings compared to the number of successful trips there is no way you can conclude that these vehicles are unsafe. Based on the Branson incident you can say they are unsafe in hurricane force winds and 6 foot seas, but a blanket statement that all of them are unsafe is just absurd.

Click to expand...

This goes to my earlier statement that people get all bent out of shape for one off or out of the blue accidents and decide that all things related to said accident should be banned/outlawed. The duck boat thing goes on all over the country and the accident rate is very low. Like aircraft accidents, you have more chance getting maimed or killed in your car on the way to the duck boat than actually on it. On the water there have only been 2 or 3 fatal accidents in the last 20 years or so (depending on what you count).

However, it would seem that the typical tourist duck boat is only really suited for calm waters when carrying fare paying passengers and the operators should hew to that rule. Someone needs to man up when the s**t hits the fan and say "Sorry, we've cancelled this run because the weather is unsuitable."

I am interested in the response from all included in this discussion.

Would you take a tour on a duck boat if your family asked you to come along and they had the tickets paid for you?

I actually would if I knew the course did not take us more than a couple hundred yards of the shore, and if it were a time of the year the water is warm enough to survive in for a bit.

But I can honestly say I would not be interested in seeing people i care about in one of these boats.

The design may have been seaworthy on paper... for experienced and trained material movers. But as they age they have some unconventional mechanicals that may not be properly maintained. Along with improperly trained captains for handling this specialty machine...

HopCar said:

I also think the term “murdered” goes too far. It implies intent to kill.

Click to expand...

Exactly,the "guilty" intention is missing.
But negligence causing death,or manslaughter, is a possibility. Wait for the inevitable inquiry,there is much to discover and consider.

cruise said:

I am interested in the response from all included in this discussion.

Would you take a tour on a duck boat if your family asked you to come along and they had the tickets paid for you?

I actually would if I knew the course did not take us more than a couple hundred yards of the shore, and if it were a time of the year the water is warm enough to survive in for a bit.

..

Click to expand...

No, I would not nor allow others in my family do so, at least in the Branson situation. My reasons are as follows:

1-I know the limitations for which the boats are licensed.
2-I know the limitations of the licensing of the "captains".
3-I've seen the judgement of the operator and captains.
4-I know the design issue of the bow exhaust which hasn't been addressed.
5-I would never ride in a boat which provided no easy escape as the canopied and fully enclosed duck boat.

BandB said:

No, I would not nor allow others in my family do so, at least in the Branson situation. My reasons are as follows:

1-I know the limitations for which the boats are licensed.
2-I know the limitations of the licensing of the "captains".
3-I've seen the judgement of the operator and captains.
4-I know the design issue of the bow exhaust which hasn't been addressed.
5-I would never ride in a boat which provided no easy escape as the canopied and fully enclosed duck boat.

Click to expand...

Yet you probably let you or your family either drive a car or be in a car driven by others. Perhaps many times a day.

Which has demonstrated the worse safety record?

In most states it is not that difficult to get a driver's license. In a lot of states being able to read, write, or understand English is not a requirement (the English requirement would be discriminatory and is against the law).

My point is there is a whole of things that most people do EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. that is a lot more risky than spending an hour in a duck boat probably in their whole lives.

You've probably ridden in a "friend's" boat that was just as dodgy as the typical duck boat and didn't think twice about it. When you get on the "friends" boat, do you discuss where the life jackets are, how to get out of the boat, what to do in emergency, who is in command when a emergency occurs, etc., before you set off? Every time?

The duck boat drivers and captains are required to meet some standard set by the USCG. How 'bout your "friend"? AFIAK there is no certification requirement that must be met by private or non-commercial boat operators to demonstrate their ability to safely operate boat before they are allowed to carry (non revenue) passengers.

good point .. but I always remind that lifejackets are under the starboard settee.

I would go without hesitation. I've probably been on the Boston Duck boats 3 or 4 times and everyone I've taken on them has loved it.

ssobol said:

Yet you probably let you or your family either drive a car or be in a car driven by others. Perhaps many times a day.

Which has demonstrated the worse safety record?

In most states it is not that difficult to get a driver's license. In a lot of states being able to read, write, or understand English is not a requirement (the English requirement would be discriminatory and is against the law).

My point is there is a whole of things that most people do EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. that is a lot more risky than spending an hour in a duck boat probably in their whole lives.

You've probably ridden in a "friend's" boat that was just as dodgy as the typical duck boat and didn't think twice about it. When you get on the "friends" boat, do you discuss where the life jackets are, how to get out of the boat, what to do in emergency, who is in command when a emergency occurs, etc., before you set off? Every time?

The duck boat drivers and captains are required to meet some standard set by the USCG. How 'bout your "friend"? AFIAK there is no certification requirement that must be met by private or non-commercial boat operators to demonstrate their ability to safely operate boat before they are allowed to carry (non revenue) passengers.

Click to expand...

Driving and riding in cars is a necessity. Still I make choices on the cars and boats I ride in. I don't ride in either with drivers who have been drinking or I know to be irresponsible and have bad driving history. I'm very selective about whose boat I ride in.

You're right about doing risky things daily but I'm aware of the risks of the duck boats in Branson now and find it unacceptable. I don't and won't ever eat Blue Bell Ice Cream again. Why? Not just their listeria issues but the fact the same managers who are still running the company are the ones who covered up the listeria problems and filthy conditions plus the fact they have had at least one recurring problems. Now, I don't know about Breyers or Tom and Jerry's or all the other brands, but what I know about Blue Bell dissuades me just as what I know about Ride the Ducks in Branson dissuades me. I'd also never ride on any boat run by TOTE. As to the standards the duck operator was required to meet, they weren't supposed to go out in stormy weather. They'd also been advised about the exhausts and the industry had been about the canopies. As to the captain, he didn't show the diligence I'd expect.

As to cars and the roads, they do carry a risk that I've decided is worth assuming for my needs. Also, I don't ever get out on the roads the night of New Year's Eve.

I make judgments based on the information I have and, at this point, the information I have regarding this one duck operator leads me away from his boats. It's not simply because lives were lost. I fly airlines who have lost lives. It's because of what I see as the priorities they established and where passenger safety apparently ranked in those priorities. I've also judged what I have access to of post accident reactions and what I've seen from Ride the Ducks disappoints me. I did see a better response from the President of Ripley than from Ducks.

Benthic2 said:

I would go without hesitation. I've probably been on the Boston Duck boats 3 or 4 times and everyone I've taken on them has loved it.

Click to expand...

My answer did not state whether or not I'd go on the Boston ducks, simply the Branson ones. I'd have to observe the Boston ones more carefully to make a decision there.

Just saw this and there was some new to me information.
Duck boat capsized amid fast-changing conditions on Missouri lake, NTSB says | Fox News

HopCar said:

Just saw this and there was some new to me information.
Duck boat capsized amid fast-changing conditions on Missouri lake, NTSB says | Fox News

Click to expand...

While fast changing, they were not without warning though. In fact, the watch was there all afternoon and the Severe Thunderstorm Warning was issued 23 minutes before they entered the water.