More trouble for the Duck Boat.

[dmccarty]

I've white water kayaked what some would consider to be some BIG water level rivers (on the east coast, the Upper Gauley is generally commercially run at 2-3k CFS and I've been on it over 10k, not to mention some insane runs at high levels in Idaho and Montana and Canada).

1- Life jacket will ALWAYS help you, not hurt you in moving water.
2 - although I have only sailed on a sail boat as a guest, and by no means know sailing in a body of water, I do know that you NEVER teather yourself to an object in MOVING water. You tie yourself onto something in moving water, you've just increased the odds that you will kill yourself.
3 - For a two bit ride on a duck boat, I highly doubt that the life jackets on the duck boat were auto inflating. Generally, auto inflating PFD's cost more money.

Yes, for white water boating, being tethered to a boat would be dangerous and wearing a PFD is what should be done. But in sail boats this is not true. In a boat, especially offshore, falling off the boat is almost certain death. The chance of being found in any kind of sea state without the use of electronic devices is all but zero. Thus the use of teather to keep people on the boat. People do make the mistake of having a teather that is too long. People have fallen off the boat and drowned being pulled through the water. Proper teathering is not as easy as tying a rope to the boat and around one's waist. There is quite a bit of thought that has to be done to get it right. Otherwise, the teather can hurt or kill instead of helping.

Yes, the PFD's on the DUCK were not inflatable PFDs but the DUCKS PFDs would be comparable to auto inflating PFDs. The comparison I was making is that PFDs in can kill you or save you depending on the circumstances. People keep saying that the DUCK passengers should have had on PFDs. That is only true if they could escape the superstructure easily. During the safety conversations on an airplane, which does have manual inflating PFDs, they tell you to inflate OUTSIDE of the aircraft. Inflating the PFD inside an aircraft can hinder movement and might get one killed if the plane sinks. This DUCK could be the same.

The DUCK that sank appears to have a structure that limits or prevents people swimming out the top. If that is the case, a PFDs would be dangerous. The DUCKS is saw in Dublin had a fabric top that appeared to be easily removable by the passengers and crew. In the Dublin DUCKs, wearing a PFD would not be an issue, and in the photos I have seen, the passengers where wearing PFDs while the DUCK was in the water.

We were in Dublin early in the summer and happened to see the DUCKs picking up passengers for a tour. We were on some high steps and able to look down on the top of the DUCKs and I noticed they had a fabric covering for a roof. They did not have on PFDs yet but some were wearing fake plastic Viking hats with horns. :laughing::laughing::laughing:

Later,
Dan

 

[k0ua]

The duck that sank had a fabric top as well.

 

[Sigarms]

Yes, for white water boating, being tethered to a boat would be dangerous and wearing a PFD is what should be done. But in sail boats this is not true. In a boat, especially offshore, falling off the boat is almost certain death. The chance of being found in any kind of sea state without the use of electronic devices is all but zero. Thus the use of teather to keep people on the boat. People do make the mistake of having a teather that is too long. People have fallen off the boat and drowned being pulled through the water. Proper teathering is not as easy as tying a rope to the boat and around one's waist. There is quite a bit of thought that has to be done to get it right. Otherwise, the teather can hurt or kill instead of helping.

Yes, the PFD's on the DUCK were not inflatable PFDs but the DUCKS PFDs would be comparable to auto inflating PFDs. The comparison I was making is that PFDs in can kill you or save you depending on the circumstances. People keep saying that the DUCK passengers should have had on PFDs. That is only true if they could escape the superstructure easily. During the safety conversations on an airplane, which does have manual inflating PFDs, they tell you to inflate OUTSIDE of the aircraft. Inflating the PFD inside an aircraft can hinder movement and might get one killed if the plane sinks. This DUCK could be the same.

The DUCK that sank appears to have a structure that limits or prevents people swimming out the top. If that is the case, a PFDs would be dangerous. The DUCKS is saw in Dublin had a fabric top that appeared to be easily removable by the passengers and crew. In the Dublin DUCKs, wearing a PFD would not be an issue, and in the photos I have seen, the passengers where wearing PFDs while the DUCK was in the water.

We were in Dublin early in the summer and happened to see the DUCKs picking up passengers for a tour. We were on some high steps and able to look down on the top of the DUCKs and I noticed they had a fabric covering for a roof. They did not have on PFDs yet but some were wearing fake plastic Viking hats with horns. :laughing::laughing::laughing:

Later,
Dan

Dan

I completely agree with you if you're on a sailboat, if you're going to be teathered, ensure that you DON'T go into the water. Also agreed that if your in the water in the ocean miles off shore, good chance you're going to die if you don't have a beacon device of some sort on your body.

Thing is, this duck boat I believe could see "land" around them per being in the lake.

I completely understand about armchair quarterbacking, and the reality is as you've mentioned, if you have a PFD on and your inside the boat with a structure on the boat over you, if the boat goes down, that PFD can really hurt you instead of help you.

Since there were boats in the area, the best call IMO would of been to abandoned the boat, with everyone in life jackets in the water. That many people, with a roof overhead, even with life jackets on, when the boat went down, good chance everyone else as going down, life jackets or not due to the mad scramble of everyone trying to get out of the boat. Best chance for survival is OUT of the boat.

Even though I've done a lot of whitewater boating, I've also done a lot of diving in the ocean. Although that boat was going through some swells and rough water, the waves were not large by any means. Everyone would of been safer out of the boat than inside the boat.

Again, armchair quarterbacking.

However, since it appears that the boat changed it's itinerary to hit the water first because they knew a rough storm was forecasted, they should of bagged the water trip all together and issue the people a refund.

Again, hindsight is the best science, but I have no doubt because this was a commercial paid trip, the government is going to get involved with laws because of people's stupidity. That's a sad fact.

Funny enough, I got stopped by a park ranger because he told me I couldn't kayak a creek. Thing is, when my buddy showed up and the park ranger knew him, and then let me go kayaking because he knew the company I was in, if something should happen to me beacuse of my own stupidity or lack of skill, should the park ranger be held liable for letting me do it? I believe the answer is NO. That said, I wasn't paying anyone to take me on a trip.

On second thought, the procedures set in place is if that boat got stuck in VERY bad weather on the lake, life jackets should be handed out and strapped on your person, and then there should of been a meathod for the people to get off the boat in a safe and quick manner. Thing is, if it's bad weather and it's raining, with that boats design, do you want the top on to keep the rain out or the top off so it's easier for people to get out?

Generally, when you're in a group of large people and there is a chance of panic, the idea is to act calm and work your way out of the situation without creating a stampede. Yet another reason why I don't like large groups of people.

 

[Liquidsilver]

Friday, I drove our boat to the spot where the duck sank. We were surprised there weren't more memorials, even though the spot is on private property. We did see a tour bus drive around that private driveway and drive out, which we thought was odd, because anything you would previously see on that path were ducks, coming and going.

You can pretty accurately judge where the duck sank from the video shot from the Branson Belle restaurant boat. The duck was VERY close to making it back to the ramp. I estimate it was 50 yards or less from the landing ramp. The depthfinder in my boat said the water was 50 - 70 feet deep right there, obviously a steep slope on the bottom, because they said the duck rolled on its wheels on the bottom to a deeper spot that was about 70 feet deep.

Looking at the victims that survived and those that didn't, I can speculate that most of the fatalities were non-swimmers or poor swimmers. It wasn't an easy swimming environment either. But, the top of the boat ripped open as it was designed to do, so I understand PFDs may not be 100% guaranteed, but I believe in this circumstance that PFDs may have prevented all of the fatalities.

Having ridden the ducks, full of tourists, I don't believe the boat would have been too cramped to deploy PDFs without difficulty. To my recollection, those 'Mae-West' style PFDs didn't look like little skimpy ones you might see on a canoe trip. I'm confident they are effective and ample sized.

I still say that with 7 minutes of very scary water, I can't understand why noone thought to put them on. I'm a good swimmer and I'd have wanted one on.

 

[k0ua]

My opinions

The captain should not have taken the duck out on the water knowing that bad weather was imminent. They decided to "do the water part first" to try to outrun the storm. Didn't work. It got to them faster than they thought it would, but they took the risk. It was a bad idea in my opinion.

The passengers should have had the brains to put on the PFD's themselves. But according to one passenger they were ordered to stay seated and not put them on. The Captain should have ordered them to be put on. But he apparently didn't. At least according to the one passenger.

I think all else is somewhere beneath these two things. Should not have went in the first place, and should have made the passengers put on the PFD's.

I think there would have been far fewer if any dead passengers if it had went this way.

 

[dmccarty]

The duck that sank had a fabric top as well.

Yes, but could it be removed easily by the passengers? That is the question.

The ones in Dublin looked to be easy to move out of the way by the passengers. I just saw a photo of the DUCK that sank. It did not show the very top of the DUCK but what could be seen, it looks like the fabric was a solid and not removable. The super structure of the DUCK has PFDs hanging down under the fabric. I am assuming that is where they stored the PFDs.



The other thing interesting about the photo, is that the clear plastic curtains seem to be gone. A photo of the DUCK when it was pulled from the lake showed the curtains and one has to wonder if those curtains trapped people inside the DUCK.

Later,
Dan

 

[k0ua]

Yes, but could it be removed easily by the passengers? That is the question.

The ones in Dublin looked to be easy to move out of the way by the passengers. I just saw a photo of the DUCK that sank. It did not show the very top of the DUCK but what could be seen, it looks like the fabric was a solid and not removable. The super structure of the DUCK has PFDs hanging down under the fabric. I am assuming that is where they stored the PFDs.

View attachment 566607

The other thing interesting about the photo, is that the clear plastic curtains seem to be gone. A photo of the DUCK when it was pulled from the lake showed the curtains and one has to wonder if those curtains trapped people inside the DUCK.

Later,
Dan

Can't answer any of those questions. The fabric was opened up when the duck was pulled out, but don't know when that happened. Might have been the divers cut it open to remove bodies? Just don't know. Yes the PFD's are stored in racks overhead.

 

[aczlan]

Yes, but could it be removed easily by the passengers? That is the question.

Another reason why I always have a razor knife in my pocket (unless I'm going someplace where I'm not allowed to have it such as a courthouse or Airport).

Aaron Z

 

[Industrial Toys]

If in fact safety was a mere 50 yards away, it seems obvious to me what was on the captains mind. That would be a tough call and gamble.

 

[dragoneggs]

Another reason why I always have a razor knife in my pocket (unless I'm going someplace where I'm not allowed to have it such as a courthouse or Airport).

Aaron Z

Going off topic but being prepared is part of my training. Going back to Cub and Boy Scouts. My trusty Leatherman tool rides on my hip most everywhere I go (on the ground). It is really frustrating not being permitted to carry a small pocket knife or tool when flying anymore. Took me several confiscated Swiss army knives at TSA before I finally remembered to leave those at home. Still pisses me off. And I'm still a bit puzzled how someone with a box knife held grown men at bay when it is do or die? That damm box knife changed my biz travel as I routinely brought tools aboard.