More trouble for the Duck Boat.

[2LaneCruzer]

I predict this will be the death knell for the duckboats. If they don't make some major mods, they will be relegated to "Mysteries at the Museum".

 

[/pine]

I predict this will be the death knell for the duckboats. If they don't make some major mods, they will be relegated to "Mysteries at the Museum".

As long as a vessel can pass the CG inspections they can carry passengers for hire...it seems likely the CG will be changing a few things in the way of safety to passengers etc. after this tragedy....

 

[PILOON]

I wonder how the bilge alarm wiring is set up.
Is the alarm to announce the pump is running? or to tell U to turn on the pump?
If a warning of high bilge then should it not only quieten only when bilge is dry or low?
Also should a bilge pump not be an automatic device rather than a manual one? Like float or sensor activated. (heck sump pumps in septics and basements are automatic)

You have to wonder if the bilge pump circuitry hasn't been modified from factory settings.

 

[dmccarty]

You can make a vehicle operate under water without a great deal of technology or expense. How difficult would it be to afford such a duck boat a little protection from the engine (immediately) succumbing to a wave? Having said that. Does anyone know at what point the engine quit?
...

I have seen no evidence that the engine quit until the boat sank.

Later,
Dan

 

[dmccarty]

I'm still amazed that the boat was out there for 7 MINUTES from the time whitecaps appeared... and nobody thought to put on life jackets. I just can't get that through my head.

Life jackets are not always a life saver. In some circumstances they can kill you.

In the sailing community there is a great debate, that will not, and cannot be "won," over which is better/safer, automatic inflating life jackets or manual inflating life jackets. A self inflating life jacket has a good chance of saving a life if one is sent over the side of a boat which often happens when the sail boat is knocked down by a wave or has an unexpected gybe. When this happens there is a good chance the sailor would have a head injury and knocked out. A self inflating light jacket could save a life in those circumstances.

But, there always seems to be a but, in a capsize or knock down, which is going to be in heavy seas, the sailor is almost certainly going to be tethered to the boat. During a capsize the sailor is very likely to be trapped in the cabin or in the cockpit which is now over the sailors head. In this situation having an auto inflating PFD could get you killed since one will be pinned to the upturned boat. A manual inflating PFD would be better in this case. If the sailor is knocked out, well they are almost certainly going to die.

The sailor has to make a choice, flip a coin, etc., on what circumstances one would LIKELY find themselves in and pick the "correct" inflatable PFD.

In the case of the DUCK they had regular old PFDs, which in this accident, would be like having an auto inflating life jacket.

The key question to me is did the overhead structure on the DUCK trap people on the vessel? If so, the PFDs would not help the people but would in fact hinder their escape. On airplanes they tell you to put on the PFD, BUT DO NOT INFLATE it until you have gotten out of the aircraft.

Did that overhead structure meet Federal regulations and could people escape from under it? There are DUCKS in Dublin doing the same thing these DUCKS were doing. The Dublin DUCKS have an over head structure but from what I have seen it would be easy to swim off the DUCK if it started to sink. The Dublin DUCKS also appear to have the passengers wearing PFDs when the DUCK enters the water. I would be OK with wearing a PFD on a DUCK in Dublin based on what I saw, but on the DUCK that sank, I am not so sure. I have not seen a good photo of the top of the DUCK that sank, but from the photos I have seen, I would be concerned with wearing a normal PFD or an auto inflating PFD.

NTSB will answer the questions.

Later,
Dan

 

[2LaneCruzer]

As long as a vessel can pass the CG inspections they can carry passengers for hire...it seems likely the CG will be changing a few things in the way of safety to passengers etc. after this tragedy....

Wait until all of the lawsuits are settled. The CG standards, although relevant, are not the whole story. If I had to guess, I would guess that suing the manufacturers would be futile, since the boats were (1) Made for the government for use in time of war, and (2) seeing as how the standards applicable to manufacturing are those at the time of manufacture and intended use, it doesn't seem like a productive avenue. That basically leaves the company that operates the ducks as the fall guy. Meeting CG standards still doesn't excuse them from negligent operation, and considering the age and design, they have their work cut out for them.

 

[1stDeuce]

Didn't any of you read that on this model, the exhaust is in the front bow of the machine. Water can go into the exhaust and kill the engine if waves get high enough. I think I read that in the safety report by the inspector that the company hired before they bought the business. He warned them of that. So if the engine dies, the bilge dies, the boat takes on more water and down she goes.

I did, and IMO as an automotove engineer and a boat guy, it was way off base. Boats commonly have exhausts that exit below the water. In the case of these ducks, what they have done is bring the exhaust out through the hull high, and then pipe it down to the waterline, likely to keep the engine a bit quieter for passengers. The exhaust flow coming out is far more powerful than any wave action trying to follow backwards against the direction of travel and up into those exhaust outlets.


Wave action isn't going to stall the motor. It'll keep chugging happily along, just like my little Mercruiser, which runs happily with the exhaust exit well below the water line, and more than 4' below if I come to an abrupt stop. Heck, at that point, the top of the engine is better than a foot under, and it still runs happily. Same with my Jeep, which certainly isn't at risk of stalling simply because the tailpipe is underwater.

It may also be relevant to point out that although these ducks are based on the DUKW from WW2, they have been extensively modified. My understanding is that they are longer, and that the payload has been increased over the WW2 version. It also appears that they may have less freeboard, though that may simply be due to seeing DUKW's operated with light loads, while ducks are commonly operated very near capacity.

In the picture that BCP posted, you can clearly see the hood that I was talking about being propped up. In heavy seas, that's a water scoop. I still suspect that may have been a large part of the problem, especially since one boat negotiated the same heavy seas without sinking, or even taking on water as far as we know...

It is interesting to note that the thing that got the original DUKW program approved was using a prototype to rescue stranded sailors in very heavy seas.

 

[dmccarty]

I wonder how the bilge alarm wiring is set up.
Is the alarm to announce the pump is running? or to tell U to turn on the pump?
If a warning of high bilge then should it not only quieten only when bilge is dry or low?
Also should a bilge pump not be an automatic device rather than a manual one? Like float or sensor activated. (heck sump pumps in septics and basements are automatic)

You have to wonder if the bilge pump circuitry hasn't been modified from factory settings.

It really depends on how the pumps and alarms are setup. Some boats have smaller bilge pumps that come on when there is minimal amounts of water in the bilge but these would not alarm since the water is normal/expected. Often, there is a counter that indicates how many times that pump has activated which gives one a clue if they have a worsening situation. In these cases, there is another bilge pump mounted a bit higher that has larger GPM and will alarm if the water gets to it. There could be more pumps as well.

Bilge alarms are supposed to be LOUD. They are wake the dead LOUD and they need to be turned off to have a conversation. Since the alarm came back on after being silenced, the pump was not keeping up with the water ingress.

The bilge pump(s) should go off automagically.

Later,
Dan

 

[dmccarty]

I believe you'll find that getting enough water in the bilge of a duck boat to snuff out the engine by submerging the distributor or air intake with 30 people on board would only happen after buoyancy is lost and the boat is already headed under... The bilge pumps on these boats are engine driven, and capable of moving massive amounts of water when they're working properly...

Duck boats are often operated on land with the the "hood" slightly open to vent the engine compartment, which is in front of the driver. Watching the video, it's obvious that every time the nose goes under, the boat gets lower in the water... I wonder if this one had the hood left open while they were on the water...

As larger waves come over the nose, the open hood would act like a water scoop. Probably not much concern with one or two waves, but add that water to any leaking seals, and then keep dumping water in through the hood, and you can probably overwhelm the bilge pump pretty quickly...
...

The engine in the front of the boat is danged interesting information. Having water ingress via the hood might very well be how the DUCK flooded. I have been wondering about the prop shaft seal or possibly engine cooling. Since the DUCK has a dry exhaust stack, the leak is not from a failure in the wet exhaust.

An failure of the hood locking mechanism or failure to get the hood locked correctly would explain why one DUCK sank, and the other DUCK in the same conditions, did not sink.

...
Seems like the captain would have made for shore immediately after the first alarm, with conditions as they were. I know hindsight is everything, but my philosophy is that any port will do in a storm. Get. Off. The. Water.
...

Once the waves kicked up the captain can only keep the bow into the waves. To turn broad side to the waves would be the wrong thing to do and almost certainly lead to a sinking.

I have wondered if they were trying to get across the lake to either get on shore or get into the lee of a point of land. From the photos I have seen that may have been possible but the photos are not showing enough shoreline. I would think the NTSB will show the boats course on a chart before she sank which will answer that question.

Later,
Dan

 

[MossRoad]

Wait until all of the lawsuits are settled. The CG standards, although relevant, are not the whole story. If I had to guess, I would guess that suing the manufacturers would be futile, since the boats were (1) Made for the government for use in time of war, and (2) seeing as how the standards applicable to manufacturing are those at the time of manufacture and intended use, it doesn't seem like a productive avenue. That basically leaves the company that operates the ducks as the fall guy. Meeting CG standards still doesn't excuse them from negligent operation, and considering the age and design, they have their work cut out for them.

Was this unit manufactured for WWII or was it one of the newer models?