Star Princess Fire Report Published

[dli4323]

Report Published Today on the Star Princess Fire

 

http://www.maib.gov.uk/publications/investigation_reports/2006/star_princess.cfm

 

http://www.princess.com/news/article.jsp?newsArticleId=na834

[chrysalis]

Thanks for that. I see that the report and investigation only came up with a "probable" cause for the fire.

[Ethel5]

Thanks for that. I see that the report and investigation only came up with a "probable" cause for the fire.

 

I agree-it still doesn't give an exact cause of the fire. I guess we'll never know. Without going into all the crap again, I still find it hard to believe that a cigarette butt caused so much damage without some help from an accellerant.

[spongerob]

I'm a bit disappointed, too, that the cause can only be listed as "probable". But then again, how often are people warned about tossing anything over the side, and how often do we hear that it actually happens? It's sad, really.

 

Oh well, let the arguments commence.

[Host CJSKIDS]

I'm very disappointed in the reports. I really thought we were going to be given more information and not probable causes. I feel like we don't know any more than we did a month ago.

It does sound like the furniture and balcony dividers really helped with the spread and intensity of the fire so I'm glad that Princess has taken care of these issues.

 

Oh well, it's time to move on and let go. We'll never have all the answers and there really isn't anything left to discuss without the definitive answers.

[nrdsb4]

I agree-it still doesn't give an exact cause of the fire. I guess we'll never know. Without going into all the crap again, I still find it hard to believe that a cigarette butt caused so much damage without some help from an accellerant.

 

Seems like the presence of an accelerant would be pretty easy for experts to rule in or out. I remember reading something to that effect once.

[Ethel5]

Seems like the presence of an accelerant would be pretty easy for experts to rule in or out. I remember reading something to that effect once.

 

It's going to remian one of life's great mysteries. Let's just hope that it never happens again.

[RSWBADGER]

Star Princess Video day before the fire

 

 

Video of Actual Fire (Bad Language)

 

 

During the Fire in the lounge

 

[DonLou]

The report directly addressed the accelerant issue. Here is the section:

 

1.11.4 Tests for accelerants

A number of items, along with debris, were removed from the initial seat of the fire by a forensic chemist from the FBI Explosives Unit. Subsequent tests on the materials indicated that no accelerants were present.

[tom_uk]

I don't think that stating that the cause is only 'probable' really leaves any uncertainty. It's strict statement of fact: since no-one actually saw the fire start (or is prepared to admit seeing it start) they have to reconstruct the cause from the evidence. They have no eye-witness account from someone who saw it start, and since the cigarette and the towel or whatever that initially caught fire would have been consumed by the fire, there is little evidence left. But the overwhelming likelihood is that that is how it started: a cigarette tossed over the side landing on something left out on a balcony below & aft.

 

What's really important is the statement that even though the balconies "met the requirements of the fire protection regulations" they "crossed main fire boundaries, both horizontally and vertically, without structural or thermal barriers at the zone or deck boundaries". There's a pretty clear call for action to revise the regulations, within the overall context of the SOLAS initiatives.

[arabrab]

I'm very disappointed in the reports. I really thought we were going to be given more information and not probable causes. I feel like we don't know any more than we did a month ago.

It does sound like the furniture and balcony dividers really helped with the spread and intensity of the fire so I'm glad that Princess has taken care of these issues.

 

Oh well, it's time to move on and let go. We'll never have all the answers and there really isn't anything left to discuss without the definitive answers.

 

Just curious -- did you read the 2 page summary or the 58 page report? It seems quite comprehensive to me. They'll never know exactly where the cigarette came from, but the report does indicate that they don't think that it came from the cabin balcony where the fire appears to have started. There is quite a bit about the fire fighting, including problems, communications and the muster problems.

[Dortmunder]

Another interesting paragraph is this one:

 

2.2 SIMILAR ACCIDENTS

During the course of this investigation, the MAIB was made aware of six fires on

the balconies of cruise ships during which either plastic chairs or beach towels had

caught alight. A cigarette end started one fire; the cause of the remaining five was not

known. Following the fire on board Star Princess, one passenger reported that during

the voyage, a discarded cigarette end had landed on one of the plastic chairs on his

balcony, and had left a burn mark. Several other passengers reported that discarded

cigarette ends had also landed on their balconies.

In 2003, a fire was started on a cruise ship after sparks from the funnel made contact

with the padding to a roller skating track and ignited it. With winds in excess of 30

knots over the deck, the fire quickly spread further aft over a children’s slide and

the remaining roller skating area. The padding and decking was not required to be

fire resistant or non-combustible. The padding material was later found to be highly

flammable.

On 20 July 1998, a fire occurred on board the Liberian registered passenger ship

Ecstasy. The fire was investigated by the US NTSB, which determined that the fire had

started in a laundry space, and spread to the aft mooring deck via lint in the ventilation

system. The NTSB investigation report concluded that the lack of an automatic fire

suppression system on the aft mooring deck, which was categorised as an open deck

space, contributed to the extensive fire damage caused. Recommendations in the

investigation report to a number of cruise ship owners and operators, including Princess

Cruises and the Carnival Corporation, included:

For existing vessels with mooring deck design arrangements similar to Carnival

Cruise Lines’ Fantasy Class ships, install fire detection and suppression

systems on mooring decks that carry high fire loads and presently have no

automatic fire protection (M-01-8)

Install emergency call systems in passenger staterooms and crew cabins so

that people trapped during a fire emergency will have a means of signaling their

location (M-01-10) [sic]

[Host CJSKIDS]

Just curious -- did you read the 2 page summary or the 58 page report? It seems quite comprehensive to me. They'll never know exactly where the cigarette came from, but the report does indicate that they don't think that it came from the cabin balcony where the fire appears to have started. There is quite a bit about the fire fighting, including problems, communications and the muster problems.

 

 

The full report must not be coming up for me as I didn't see 58 pages. I just disabled my pop-up blocker thanks to you and was able to see the whole report.

Thank you so much for pointing this out. Guess I have a lot to read though I'm not sure it's the best idea as I board the Crown on 11/4.

[jhannah]

I can fully understand the "probable cause" conclusion. The intensity of the fire would reduce all surrounding materials to wads of (basically) plastic. Any remaining portion of a cigarette would be inside a ball of plastic.

 

Remember "The Graduate"? Plastics. That seemed to be the main fuel in this fire. Polycarbonate material will feed a fire more easily/strongly than wood, and is responsible for the production of the dense black smoke that hindered firefighting operations.

[cruzegirl]

Ok, it sure seems it was the cigarette that started the fire.... And if it wasn't a cigarette, what else could it have been??? They didn't find candle material and it wasn't determined to be electrical, they would have figured that out.... So it seems the cigarette is to blame. I know I'll get flamed for this but banning smoking in all but 1 or 2 places that can be controlled should occur... But we know it won't so we all remain at risk..... What a shame..... and if it wasn't a cigarette, they find something else, I still stand my feelings.. Because the next time it may happen, it could be a cigarette... EVERYONE should be careful.... Smokers AND non smokers....:p

[bdjam]

I know I'll get flamed for this but banning smoking in all but 1 or 2 places that can be controlled should occur...

I agree that it’s unfortunate that we only have probably and not absolute cause. But now that Princess is retrofitting their ships with heat sensors and sprinkler systems on the balconies, it will be just as safe smoking there as any other place on the ship.

[Hondu]

Even if it was difinitive, smokers would still say that it is safe to walk around with a lighted torch in the mouth.

[cruzegirl]

Hondu

Even if it was difinitive, smokers would still say that it is safe to walk around with a lighted torch in the mouth.

FONT=Book Antiqua]Hondu,[/font][/b]

I agree with you....

And just because they have better fire protection measures on board, doesn't mean it's ok to light up on the balcony...If you can prevent something terrible from happening versus dealing with putting it out, wouldn't you do it?????????????:confused: Between fire if the cig gets away from you or is left burning or whatever.... Better to prevent than treat.......:D

[Goldryder]

Lets not forget one detail in all this.

 

The changes made to the design/build/materials in balconies after the fire proves without a shadow of a doubt that in an effort to keep the ships lighter in weight to carry more passengers, thus earn more money for the operators/shareholders cost a passenger their life.

 

Looking at the photos and reading that report carefully, they were damn lucky not to lose more passengers....if not the entire ship that night.

 

There were several failings, circumstances that all met up in one place and the same time that lead to a devastating fire.

 

As usual, it takes a death for the companies to act. Why have such materials on balconies in the first place? Cheaper? Lighter?

 

Who knows. On a comparison to Grand and Crown tipping, the only reason why they didn't capsize is cos the upper superstructures are built to be light...if they weren't, well they couldn't be as big and they couldn't have as many passengers on them and the bank balances wouldn't be so healthy.

 

So...is big, better?

 

Are cheaper/lighter weight materials better?

 

You decide.

[bdjam]

I agree with you.... [/b]

 

And just because they have better fire protection measures on board, doesn't mean it's ok to light up on the balcony...If you can prevent something terrible from happening versus dealing with putting it out, wouldn't you do it?????????????:confused: Between fire if the cig gets away from you or is left burning or whatever.... Better to prevent than treat.......:D

I don’t know where lighting a cigarette on a balcony can be attributed to the cause of the Star Princess fire – the report indicates the probably cause was a smoldering cigarette – how do we know it wasn’t originally lit by someone on the upper decks of the ship and not even on a balcony in the first place? People handle cigarettes safely every day – some people are careless but some people drive drunk as well. It’s unfortunate that this incident inevitably is being used to further an anti-cigarette agenda. Perhaps whomever left or dropped the cigarette was drunk - we should take alcohol away from passenges as well because as we all know, alcohol impairs judgement.

Who knows. On a comparison to Grand and Crown tipping, the only reason why they didn't capsize is cos the upper superstructures are built to be light...if they weren't, well they couldn't be as big and they couldn't have as many passengers on them and the bank balances wouldn't be so healthy.

I would think the reason neither Grand nor Crown Princess capsized was because both ships had the appropriate ballast to keep them upright while engaged in the types of turns they performed. While lower weight in the upper superstructure certainly plays a part in ship design, there are other factors that need to be considered when making this kind of analysis. Of course we should never forget that the cruise line's desire to make money comes at all costs, including safety. :rolleyes:

So...is big, better?

Definitely not.

[Globaliser]

I see that the report and investigation only came up with a "probable" cause for the fire.

This is a very common wording for accident reports. If you look at NTSB aviation reports, for example, "probable cause" is the furthest that they will go. And in that field, the NTSB are often criticised for going even that far.

[dan40]

We are just off the SUN PRINCESS [10/11-10/21] built in 1995. While sitting on our balcony I noted 2 sprinklers. Why would the STAR PRINCESS built in 2002 not be fitted with a balcony sprinkler system?

Was is a cost saving effort that will turn out to be a false economy?

It seems to me that sprinkler systems could be classified as routine, if not standard, safety devices. Why would they be left off a newer ship when older ships have them.

 

Dan

[Roses2]

It is obvious that those taking issue with the use of the phrase. "Probable Cause" have never been involved with conducting or writing accident investingations.

 

As a previous infomed poster has written that in almost every case, that is as far as an accident investigation will go in its determinations.

 

From a careful reading of the report it is obvious that the board concluded that the proximate cause of the fire was a smoldering cigarette. The board could not conclude the origin of the cigarette but in making their time line they doubted that the fire resulted from a cigarette smoked by the occupants of the cabin where the fire began.

 

Therefore the board surmised that the cigarette blew or was tossed from another balcony and smoldered, finally igniting a towel or other material on the balcony then the fire whipped by wind spread to other flamable materials.

 

Smoldering cigarette + flamable material + wind = fire

[cruzegirl]

I don’t know where lighting a cigarette on a balcony can be attributed to the cause of the Star Princess fire – the report indicates the probably cause was a smoldering cigarette – how do we know it wasn’t originally lit by someone on the upper decks of the ship and not even on a balcony in the first place? People handle cigarettes safely every day – some people are careless but some people drive drunk as well. It’s unfortunate that this incident inevitably is being used to further an anti-cigarette agenda. Perhaps whomever left or dropped the cigarette was drunk - we should take alcohol away from passenges as well because as we all know, alcohol impairs judgement.

My point exactly... We don't know if it was someone who was smoking in the room and left it or if it was someone who was careless and tossed it over and it landed on that balcony... The point I was making was that better to prevent i.e. not have smoking at all in the cabin or on the deck, only in an approved room on the ship- than to worry about whether the fire prevention devices or the sprinklers are enough to put out the fire when those accidents/fires do happen.....

Also, I agree that people do stupid things when drinking like driving. And I also feel that anyone who drinks anything and drives, should have their license/vehicle taken away. It's just as stupid to drink/drive as to be careless with a cigarette.... ;)

[Host CJSKIDS]

Rather than this thread turning into a huge debate about smoking where it will get all heated and then yanked, is there anyway it can be left for a discussion about the news that the report was published so that everyone involved can find the link and know the report was published today?

 

I know, I know, run on sentence.....