La Dolce Vita NTSB fire report

I just read the report and was about to post the link. It is very interesting and in my opinion a must read for captains and owners.

A few comments. I hope others will pitch as well

- inspection. Pretty much every boat I have taken over including the 116 i run now had not have their fire system inspected for a few years. This was not the case in this incident… I bet the insurance company would not have paid… how can owners and especially captains not get this done.

- I find it very surprising that the system was not set up for automatic shut down of all machinery incl blowers using being triggered. Every year during testing we start both engines and gens and test the shutdowns and dampers.

- I really don’t want to second guess the crew but I can’t help wonder if the manual trigger of the fire system should not have been pulled sooner. I can understand the desire to manually put out the fire but I wonder what the best course of action is in this case. How much time was wasted between the captain’s arrival and the moment he pulled the handle while fetching for extinguishers, getting a wet towel, fighting a loosing battle. Again not second guessing just trying to figure out what the best course of action is in case any of us in this situation.

Every second counts when a fire starts. Do you pull the handle or manually try to control the fire? I think I would pull the handle knowing that all systems will shut down. But is it the right call? What would you do ?

we don’t have external shut downs for the generators on the 116 i run. Engines and blowers can be shut down from the RPH but the Ohnos have to be shut down from each unit. I wonder if adding a remote shut down outside the ER wouldn’t be wise since to get to the shut down switch we d have to walk close to a potentially burning genset…

finally…. I insisted on 100% cotton crew polos and tee shirts. Cotton will protect your skin at least for a few seconds vs polyester which melts instantly.

we all tend to get complacent and incidents like this are something we can all learn from.

Good update and good comments, Pascal. Our larger boats are classed, even though we don't charter them. People wonder why. Well, it's a standard and a large part of it is for our safety. With all that happened, I find their failure to meet LY2 standards most bothersome. Maintaining all standards for Class Surveys and at all times in between is just something we insist on.

Still glad they all escaped safely.

Sadly what's missing/omitted from this report is the mention of Cayman flag state surveys for this vessel. I've found that when transitioning vessels from private use to commercial use (charter) the Cayman Island flag state surveyors were more than willing to turn a blind eye and bend the rules to issue 180 day dispensations on critical safety equipment installations to allow vessels time to implement the needed changes to meet the commercial requirements all the while having been issued the commercial certificates and allowed to sail. Some of these issues would be relatively small but critically important like external on deck fuel shut offs and ventilation shut offs, other would involve massive changes to the structure of the vessel like raising the engine room weather deck entrance casing to 26 inches from the deck. The problem is that these dispensations are automatically renewed by the flag state multiple times unless the underwriter takes note and steps in requiring immediate action after the second or third round of renewed dispensations. I've been on commercially registered yachts that have had their 5 yr. annual surveys and still had outstanding deficiencies with dispensations in place. All flag states are not created equal and some are stricter than others but I will say that back in the day, Bermuda with Lloyds surveyors involved wouldn't re-issue expired dispensations and if the required changes weren't made in the 180 day time frame than the vessel will remain tied to the dock. I've found over the years the Cayman flag state to be extremely malleable on dispensations and nothing more than money blinded toothless tiger bellying up to the $$$ trough extracting exorbitant fees from owner's while pretending to be diligent on safety and maintenance of classed vessels.

Very interesting. I've never dealt with Cayman flags. As to Class and surveyors, I'm only dealt with ABS, Lloyd's and RINA. What classification society have you found these Cayman flagged vessels to be using, if any?

Bureau Veritas, RINA & Det Norske Veritas. Depending on the year of your Wesport 130 you have either a builder's or a society dispensation for the weather deck engine room casing door.

Correction, depending on the year built your 130 has either a dispensation or a builder's exemption for the engine room weather deck entrance door casing not being 26 inches due to aesthetics amongst other things. Kinda like the dissection and enforcement of MLC aboard commercially registered yachts but that's a whole other nest of compromise.

I don't understand the relevance to this discussion at all. Huge difference between an agreement between builder and class society in advance of build and a failure to comply and failure of states to enforce safety issues on existing boats.

The relevance is the compromise of flag state surveyors on LY 2 updates on existing vessels transitioning that begins with builders getting away with building sub LY2 vessels through exemptions.

I do not equate the two situations described at all. Plus we're also dealing with LY2 code vs. US and other. You may see one as the start of a slippery slope but some things are just more appropriate for the specific boat, not less safe. I don't recall our situation on the 130 off the top of my head. We have one builder exception on the AB as well. Builder and RINA agreed the code wasn't adequate for 55 knots and triple jets.

The Hargrave build La Dolce Vita was launched in 2009 as King Baby and was flagged U.S. & commercially registered and fell under ABS survey.
This vessel didn't have the ABS required automatic fire dampers installed from the builder nor the emergency external or remote fuel and generator shutdowns and was provided with a 180-day dispensation from ABS that rolled over for 10 years and well past the extremely stringent ABS 5 yr class survey until the vessel was sold in 2019. Once sold she became La Dolce Vita and was Cayman Island flagged with commercial registry and still had not fitted the required automatic fire dampers and external remote fuel and gen control stops and again was furnished with a dispensation for these systems and allowed to carry passengers for hire. Both flag states should have held the vessel responsible for rectifying the emergency equipment dispensation's and not allowed the vessel to sail / charter or be commercially registered after the first 180-day expiration. Now on the builder's side of things what % of total build cost would it have been to build this vessel to minimum LY-2 or ABS code and install auto dampers and remote shutdowns for gens and fuel amongst other things? I would figure less than 1 %. She was built with first rate intake de-misters by Delta-T Sytems but didn't fit the Delta T auto dampers? Would the size and configuration of the air intakes not allow these? What was the class societies position on this along with not fitting the other equipment on a vessel over 24 meters? Builders don't have to build to LY -2 or ABS code classification and the smaller ones usually don't to save as much $$ for an attractive purchase price going in and then make allowances for change orders to upgrade systems if the intended use will be commercial. Builder also petition class societies on certain rules and regs that would make their builds unorthodox and not pleasing to the eye nor practical space planning wise. The class societies will bend the rules on certain items and not on others hence the builder's exemption for things like on deck engine room casing doors or the minimum required square footage of a twin crew cabin via LMC that's just not practical on a 50-meter or under vessel. Very basic explanation of both scenarios but both go much deeper on the flag state side and the classification side.

Your points are valid. However, you've created additional complexity by combining four different elements. We have flag state vs. classification societies. Then we have agreements reached between builders and class societies prior to build, based on plans, vs. temporary exemptions approved after build and then often extended time after time. In all this, we have exceptions that represent safety risks and those that may in fact improve things.

I do agree flag states often play fast and loose and class states do too much with temporary exemptions. I think they should be limited to one time of a pre-determined length. If considered a safety risk, boat should not be allowed to operate commercially.

What is also not directly addressed is the difference between classification societies and what is now sometimes shopping of such groups. Then combine that on top of having multiple organizations representing different countries and RYA vs. MCA vs. USCG vs. every other country with their own rules. A lot of attention has been given traditionally to shopping countries for price, but it's not just price, it's a safety factor as well. There are 12 members of IACS and they vary widely, but there are 20 non-members and 12 new societies since 1980, non of whom are members.

Aviation regulation is MUCH more standardized internationally. The yacht world could use a central governing body like the ICAO, it seems.

While the class discussion is very interesting I wish it woudl be split to its own thread so we can focus on handling fires.

personally this report has caused me to implement a few changes including…

- getting a fire mask and storing it by the ER door
- relocating the manual ER fire extinguisher from along the hull side to just outside the entrance.
- adding a second manual FE by the ET door

i m still wondering what the decision should be as to triggering the ER system manually vs trying to control the fire with hand bottles.

It seems to me that a short in the electrical end of the gen should remain contained in there and I m not sure how it could start a fire outside the enclosure.

There's plenty of oil mist that soaks into the sound dampening insulation inside an enclosure along with the ever present oil sorbs in the drip pan. I've had many of classed vessels with the racors located inside the enclosure along with the hydraulic PTO and associated hosing hanging out of the end of the enclosure. Electrical ends have built in fans to cool the alternators and will supply all the fresh air needed to maintain combustion once a fire starts that will melt the round pie hatches located above inspection or fill points and allow fire to spread. I was always uneasy about the lack of visual access on generators with sound enclosures when performing quick engine room checks hourly underway and we always had an infra red thermal gun at the ER entrance next to the ear protection for shooting the mains & gearboxes but we would only remove a sound shield door a couple times in 24 hrs. to visually check the gens and log the infra red readings. I felt that the generator sound enclosures and back of the switchboard should have there own dedicated fire suppression systems along with the general FM 200 system for the ER. I've had a few ER fires in my career and found the small 5 & 10 lb hand held extinguishers virtually useless. The only extinguisher with enough agent to put down an ER fire is the 150 -200 lb extinguishers on wheels. Granted that smaller vessels don't have room for them but a 110 Lazzara would.