Extra weight may be factor in boat accident

Extra weight may be factor in boat accident
Owner could get $25 fine for staffing violation

LAKE GEORGE, New York (AP) -- Just days before a tour boat capsized in
the Adirondack Mountains, killing 20 elderly people, the Coast Guard
began rethinking its passenger-weight calculations to take into account
Americans' expanding waistlines.

At the time it flipped over, the 38-foot Ethan Allen was just under its
capacity of 48 passengers -- a figure that was arrived at by using a
New York standard that assumes a 150-pound average for each man, woman
and child, authorities said. The U.S. Coast Guard standard assumes a
140-pound average for each person.

Investigators looking into the accident have said that too much weight
may have been a factor and suggested those standards may have to be
revised because Americans are getting heavier -- something the Coast
Guard recognized well before the tragedy. (Listen to the 911 calls for
help -- :48)

"We are looking at that and we know that if you look around at average
people, you know this is not an accurate average to be using," said
Coast Guard spokeswoman Angela McArdle.

The disclosure from the Coast Guard in Washington came as divers combed
the bottom of Lake George for the belongings of the elderly passengers
tossed into the water, and experts examined the boat for clues to why
it overturned on a calm, clear Sunday during a one-hour sightseeing
tour.

At a news conference late Tuesday, the acting chairman of the National
Transportation Safety Board said investigators would conduct tests
Wednesday to see how the Ethan Allen would have handled at various
speeds while carrying its maximum load of 50 people using a
160-pound-per-passenger calculation.

The test also will explain what might have happened if the weight
suddenly shifted to one side, a possible cause of the accident.

Acting chairman Mark Rosenker also said the 39-year-old boat had
modifications that would have made it heavier.

A canvas canopy was replaced with a wood-and-Fiberglas design, a larger
engine was installed, and seven lead bricks for ballast were placed in
the bow, probably to keep the boat balanced after the larger engine was
installed.

The NTSB will do the tests on the Ethan Allen's twin sister boat, The
de Champlain, in what Rosenker called "a very scientific road test."

"We're going to learn a lot," he said.

Rosenker said four passengers interviewed Tuesday told investigators
the windows on the boat were open when it flipped, helping some to
escape.

An examination of the boat also found no automatic bilge pump in the
Ethan Allen, meaning a pilot or crew member would have to manually pump
out water.

Finally, Rosenker said a "human factor" test would study the actions of
the boat's captain in the 72 hours leading up to the accident.

Understaffed
Earlier, police said the boat's operator, Shoreline Cruises, could face
a fine of $25 to $100 for failing to have a second crew member on board
to aid the 74-year-old captain, Richard Paris. A state inspector
determined in May the boat needed two crew members.

"You could imagine the things that could go wrong," said state police
Maj. Gerald Meyer. "There may be times when someone may need to attend
to someone while the vessel was being operated."

The state on Monday night suspended the operating certificates for all
five of Shoreline's boats.

Other government regulators also are changing standards to adapt to
heavier Americans.

Following a commuter plane crash that killed 21 people in 2003 in North
Carolina, the Federal Aviation Administration raised its summertime
weight average from 160 pounds per person to 174, including carry-on
baggage.

McArdle said the Coast Guard awarded a contract just a few weeks ago to
a research firm to determine how increasing the average weight per
passenger would affect vessels around the United States.

McArdle said the Coast Guard knew the weight requirement has been
outdated for some time, but did not move on the issue until the NTSB
warned about the problem following the sinking of a water taxi in the
Baltimore harbor that killed five people in 2004. (Full story)

Asked why the Coast Guard did not move more quickly on the
weight-per-person calculation, McArdle said: "It has such wide-ranging
implications. You need to address the economic impact on the industry,
looking at the scope. It's not something where we can just say, '`Now
passenger ferries must carry 20 fewer people.'"

McArdle said it was too early to say when a new regulation would be
drawn up or what the new weight standard might be.

Investigators believe a combination of factors could have contributed
to the Ethan Allen tragedy, including a large wake created by another
boat, a sudden shift of passengers' weight on the boat's bench-style
seats, and the overall weight of the passengers.

The 47 passengers were senior citizens from Michigan and Ohio who had
come East to see the changing fall colors.

The investigation continued Tuesday with a scheduled interview of the
captain and the examination of the Ethan Allen in a nearby airplane
hangar.

Rich Morin, a professional scuba diver who helped raise the boat
Monday, said when he saw the boat underwater, "there didn't appear to
be any damage at all."

Of the 27 people brought to Glens Falls Hospital after the capsizing,
four remained hospitalized Tuesday.

Owner 'shocked'
Also Tuesday, Shoreline owner James Quirk said he and his company were
"shocked and saddened" by the sinking.

He refused to answer questions beyond a statement that said: "This
company's been in the passenger boat business for 27 years and until
this event we have had a perfect record."

Police also released tapes of 911 calls made minutes after the boat
tipped over.

One caller frantically told a dispatcher: "Oh my God! Oh, my God! A
boat! A boat! A boat went over!"

When asked how many people were on the boat, she answered: "Oh, a lot
of people -- they're hanging on to the bottom where it went over! Oh,
please hurry!"

Setting aside the question of whether people that age, some with
mobility problems, were rushing anywhere, a mass movement (no pun
intended) to one side of a crowded vessel has caused some bad problems
in the past. The Eastland tragedy in Chicago lo these many years ago
(admittedly on a vessel with a history of roll stability issues) was
probably the worst example.

(Well, that and the Swedish warship from centuries ago whose center of
buoyancy and center of gravity got crossways with each other on the
maiden voyage, but naval architecture as a science-based engineering
field thankfully advanced beyond *that* stage long ago...)

The Eastland was of course significantly overloaded -- perhaps due to
the legendary transparency and accountability of officialdom in a
different time and place, rather than to obsolete weight estimates;
but it made me wonder about the statistical basis of the rules as well
as about people's average weight. The two go together.

I have no idea what the average adult weighs (the airlines, who care
the most, might be the best people to ask), but 145 or even 160 seems
like an odd basis. Nobody would describe me as a conspicuously big
man, but I'd go 190 in fighting trim (reality, alas, is a bit on the
winter-survival-ready side of 200) and probably left 160 behind forever
in the freshman dorm.

Now for the statistical part -- how far do you have to go in the
distribution to be considered as having a prudent safety margin? Is
there a reasonable chance that some passenger loads will have more
people like me, not far enough off average to attract attention but far
enough off to add up to an overload?

These are not trivial numbers for a fairly small vessel. If chance put
48 of me aboard and their design basis assumed 140 pounds apiece on
average, there'd be an invisible Volkswagen somewhere on deck, with
implications for the static and dynamic issues of center of gravity and
balance as well as static buoyancy. Even an average 20-pound mistake
would mean half a ton. Throw in changes to the weight and location of
the superstructure, and yeah, you can see how these things can sneak up
on you while you were obeying the rules and maybe even thought you were
being prudent...

"Ad absurdum per aspera" wrote in message
oups.com...
Setting aside the question of whether people that age, some with
mobility problems, were rushing anywhere, a mass movement (no pun
intended) to one side of a crowded vessel has caused some bad problems
in the past. The Eastland tragedy in Chicago lo these many years ago
(admittedly on a vessel with a history of roll stability issues) was
probably the worst example.

(Well, that and the Swedish warship from centuries ago whose center of
buoyancy and center of gravity got crossways with each other on the
maiden voyage, but naval architecture as a science-based engineering
field thankfully advanced beyond *that* stage long ago...)

The Eastland was of course significantly overloaded -- perhaps due to
the legendary transparency and accountability of officialdom in a
different time and place, rather than to obsolete weight estimates;
but it made me wonder about the statistical basis of the rules as well
as about people's average weight. The two go together.

I have no idea what the average adult weighs (the airlines, who care
the most, might be the best people to ask), but 145 or even 160 seems
like an odd basis. Nobody would describe me as a conspicuously big
man, but I'd go 190 in fighting trim (reality, alas, is a bit on the
winter-survival-ready side of 200) and probably left 160 behind forever
in the freshman dorm.

Now for the statistical part -- how far do you have to go in the
distribution to be considered as having a prudent safety margin? Is
there a reasonable chance that some passenger loads will have more
people like me, not far enough off average to attract attention but far
enough off to add up to an overload?

These are not trivial numbers for a fairly small vessel. If chance put
48 of me aboard and their design basis assumed 140 pounds apiece on
average, there'd be an invisible Volkswagen somewhere on deck, with
implications for the static and dynamic issues of center of gravity and
balance as well as static buoyancy. Even an average 20-pound mistake
would mean half a ton. Throw in changes to the weight and location of
the superstructure, and yeah, you can see how these things can sneak up
on you while you were obeying the rules and maybe even thought you were
being prudent...


Trouble is on a boat large enough for 48 people 1/2 ton is trivial.
Its only half a cubic meter of water, an amount that can be dumped
into the boat by a single small wave.

Any passenger boat should have large safety margins especially as
weight doesnt carry anything like the penalty it does in aviation.

You mention the Eastland, this was a case in which a ship
designed as a freighter was modified in the shipyard to
be a passenger ship. These mods included adding a complete
new upper deck. No naval arcitect was ever consulted about
the affect this would have on the stability of the ship. the ship was
also grossly overloaded.

She was certified to carry over 2500 passengers but was only
196 ft long and under 2000 tons displacement. In comparison
the Titanic which was 880 ft long and displaced 46,000 tons
was licensed to carry 3500 !

It has been reported that the boat that capsized on Lake George
was originally equipped with a canvas awning but had been
requipped with an enclosed fibreglass covering. This extra weight
high up could have diastrous effects on stability and the fact
that the boat was operating illegaly with only one crewman
aboard suggests a cynical disregard for safety.

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Keith W wrote:

It has been reported that the boat that capsized on Lake George
was originally equipped with a canvas awning but had been
requipped with an enclosed fibreglass covering. This extra weight
high up could have diastrous effects on stability and the fact
that the boat was operating illegaly with only one crewman
aboard suggests a cynical disregard for safety.

I read where The Authorities filled 55-gallon drums with enough water to equal
the weight of 10 150-pound passengers (apparently 150 is what they regard as
an appropriate average weight) and placed them on one side of one of the
duplicate ships, which rapidly became unstable. I would assume that
"unstable" means "starting to lean".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100500187.html

Given that small amount of weight, the average passenger weight used seems
relatively unimportant.

--
Cheers, Bev
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for
anything, but they still bring a smile to your face
when you push them down a flight of stairs.

The Real Bev wrote:

I read where The Authorities filled 55-gallon drums with enough water to equal
the weight of 10 150-pound passengers (apparently 150 is what they regard as
an appropriate average weight) and placed them on one side of one of the
duplicate ships, which rapidly became unstable. I would assume that
"unstable" means "starting to lean".

In another group someone who had recently taken pictures of the Ethan Allen. It was a
pretty flimsy looking boat with a narrow hull at the water line, much wider at the
gunwales, and then a roof over top. It sure didn't look like it would be stable with 15
people, never mind the 40+ that were on when it capsized.

{Many good points deleted}

[Eastland] was also grossly overloaded.

Some sources (e.g., http://iltrails.org/cook/eastlanddisaster.html)
state that her allowable passenger count had been reduced drastically
on more than one occasion over the years, bottoming out at a third of
the orginal, then increased not long before the tragedy. I'm not sure
what the basis for that was.

Getting back to the Ethan Allen,
Trouble is on a boat large enough for 48 people 1/2 ton is trivial.

Well, yes and no. In news media pictures of the Ethan Allen and of a
near sister ship, what I see is a vessel meant to be operated in
permissive conditions and optimized for sightseeing and openness. Form
follows function and perhaps so do safety margins in both lading and
operations... doubtless under different rules and thinking when she was
new than today.

Cheers,
--Joe

"Ad absurdum per aspera" wrote in message
oups.com...
{Many good points deleted}

[Eastland] was also grossly overloaded.

Some sources (e.g., http://iltrails.org/cook/eastlanddisaster.html)
state that her allowable passenger count had been reduced drastically
on more than one occasion over the years, bottoming out at a third of
the orginal, then increased not long before the tragedy. I'm not sure
what the basis for that was.


Thats accurate, she was originally certified for an almost unbelievable
3500 people, this was cut back radically in 1912. In July 1915 she
was fitted with extra lifeboats to boost the number of passengers
carried. At the same time several tons of concrete were added to
the upper and tween decks to cover the rotting timbers.
She rolled over and sack as pax were boarding for the next voyage.


Getting back to the Ethan Allen,
Trouble is on a boat large enough for 48 people 1/2 ton is trivial.

Well, yes and no. In news media pictures of the Ethan Allen and of a
near sister ship, what I see is a vessel meant to be operated in
permissive conditions and optimized for sightseeing and openness. Form
follows function and perhaps so do safety margins in both lading and
operations... doubtless under different rules and thinking when she was
new than today.


The ship looks FAR too small to carry 50 people even in a flat calm.

Keith

"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
Keith W wrote:

It has been reported that the boat that capsized on Lake George
was originally equipped with a canvas awning but had been
requipped with an enclosed fibreglass covering. This extra weight
high up could have diastrous effects on stability and the fact
that the boat was operating illegaly with only one crewman
aboard suggests a cynical disregard for safety.

I read where The Authorities filled 55-gallon drums with enough water to
equal
the weight of 10 150-pound passengers (apparently 150 is what they regard
as
an appropriate average weight) and placed them on one side of one of the
duplicate ships, which rapidly became unstable. I would assume that
"unstable" means "starting to lean".


All ships list when weight is placed assymetrically, the vessels is unstable
when it rolls so far as to dangerous.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100500187.html

Given that small amount of weight, the average passenger weight used seems
relatively unimportant.


Agreed

Keith

Can you imagine being old AND fat?
"Keith W" wrote in message
...

"The Real Bev" wrote in message
...
Keith W wrote:

It has been reported that the boat that capsized on Lake George
was originally equipped with a canvas awning but had been
requipped with an enclosed fibreglass covering. This extra weight
high up could have diastrous effects on stability and the fact
that the boat was operating illegaly with only one crewman
aboard suggests a cynical disregard for safety.

I read where The Authorities filled 55-gallon drums with enough water to
equal
the weight of 10 150-pound passengers (apparently 150 is what they regard
as
an appropriate average weight) and placed them on one side of one of the
duplicate ships, which rapidly became unstable. I would assume that
"unstable" means "starting to lean".


All ships list when weight is placed assymetrically, the vessels is
unstable
when it rolls so far as to dangerous.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100500187.html

Given that small amount of weight, the average passenger weight used
seems
relatively unimportant.


Agreed

Keith

"clint" wrote in message
...
Can you imagine being old AND fat?

I am old AND fat

No Imagination is needed

Keith