Insignia Post Fire Location and Movement

[ruderhaus]

I contrast, there was never any public report released about the Carnival Triumph fire.

 

While no U.S. authority has released a report, The Bahamas Maritime Authority did publish a report, which can be downloaded from its web site.

[dwgreenlee]

While no U.S. authority has released a report, The Bahamas Maritime Authority did publish a report, which can be downloaded from its web site.

 

Thanks for the link and correction, I missed that one. r/Don

[rallydave]

Hi Dave,

 

I started with open mind about how NCL Holdings will work to preserve the "brand identity" of Oceania. I was a frequent traveler on Princess when Carnival acquired P&O and Princess. I am pleased to say that I think Princess actually improved particularly in the area of port access and I like the NCL brand - but I digress.

 

I agree the creation of the "shared services" at the NCL Holdings Executive and Senior vice-president levels is not a good sign for the Oceania brand. I am also concerned that the only statement made by NCL Holdings about Insignia was about the impact to stock values. Then we come to the lack of information. I could begin to worry.

 

R/Don

 

Hi Don,

 

Actually it's my opinion that this new structure will be a significant improvement in the home office support of the on board excellent experience. Only time will tell.

 

And, yes, IMO lack of communications seems to be a common issue among most cruise lines that needs improvement.

[Mura]

I'm a bit late in the game here due to other distractions, but Greenlee, my first interpretation of your comment was that you were indeed blaming Oceania for the fire and we don't know yet that they were at fault, and so I agree with Lyn's comments (not unusual). And if you don't like "surprises", then I'd tentatively suggest that maybe you shouldn't travel at all ... because surprises do happen, as do accidents. (In case you think I'm attacking you, I'm really trying NOT to.)

 

We were booked for a trip to the Gapalagos Islands through Inca Floats in August 1989. At the time Inca Floats chartered various vessels, although these days they have their own. We had opted for a three cabin sailboat which had extra large cabins. Just before we were due to leave for the cruise (quite last minute but not the day before) the sailboat sank! It had been docked (or anchored) but apparently not properly Fortunately they were in port so no one was hurt, but we had to change to another boat at the last minute. It worked out for us but yes, we'd have preferred that sailboat with the king size beds!

 

That problem turned out indeed to be due to some negligence in the way the boat had been "parked", but I don't think we know yet that the Insignia fire was due to negligence. Maybe it was! If that turns out to be the case, I will apologize to you. I'm just waiting to see.

 

I admit that I also have some apprehensions about whether Insignia will be able to get to Singapore in time for a March 22nd departure. (I'm not personally involved on the cruise so this is an intellectual curiosity and nothing more.)

 

We won't know until we have more info ... And I also understand that Oceania/NCL may want to wait until THEY have more definitive information to say anything to us.

 

Mura

[dwgreenlee]

Hi Don,

 

Actually it's my opinion that this new structure will be a significant improvement in the home office support of the on board excellent experience. Only time will tell.

 

And, yes, IMO lack of communications seems to be a common issue among most cruise lines that needs improvement.

 

You may be right. The NCLH Company will have much greater "clout" in the port and procurement areas and much greater depth in the customer service area. I really do like the NCL brand - have about 150 days with them - but NCL is not as service intensive as Oceania. As you note time will tell on that. My comment about not being good for the brand was focused upon independent operations by current Prestige officers - not sure that will continue but we will see.

[Travelcat2]

Hi Don,

 

Actually it's my opinion that this new structure will be a significant improvement in the home office support of the on board excellent experience. Only time will tell.

 

And, yes, IMO lack of communications seems to be a common issue among most cruise lines that needs improvement.

 

Strongly disagree as our experience with home office support has been excellent. Secondly, I must comment on your statement regarding the "excellent on board experience". This comes as a surprise to me as I was not aware that you had sailed on Oceania. Would love to hear more about your onboard experience.

[dwgreenlee]

I'm a bit late in the game here due to other distractions, but Greenlee, my first interpretation of your comment was that you were indeed blaming Oceania for the fire and we don't know yet that they were at fault, and so I agree with Lyn's comments (not unusual). And if you don't like "surprises", then I'd tentatively suggest that maybe you shouldn't travel at all ... because surprises do happen, as do accidents. (In case you think I'm attacking you, I'm really trying NOT to.)

 

We were booked for a trip to the Gapalagos Islands through Inca Floats in August 1989. At the time Inca Floats chartered various vessels, although these days they have their own. We had opted for a three cabin sailboat which had extra large cabins. Just before we were due to leave for the cruise (quite last minute but not the day before) the sailboat sank! It had been docked (or anchored) but apparently not properly Fortunately they were in port so no one was hurt, but we had to change to another boat at the last minute. It worked out for us but yes, we'd have preferred that sailboat with the king size beds!

 

That problem turned out indeed to be due to some negligence in the way the boat had been "parked", but I don't think we know yet that the Insignia fire was due to negligence. Maybe it was! If that turns out to be the case, I will apologize to you. I'm just waiting to see.

 

I admit that I also have some apprehensions about whether Insignia will be able to get to Singapore in time for a March 22nd departure. (I'm not personally involved on the cruise so this is an intellectual curiosity and nothing more.)

 

We won't know until we have more info ... And I also understand that Oceania/NCL may want to wait until THEY have more definitive information to say anything to us.

 

Mura

 

Hi Mura,

 

I appreciate your comments. Language is imprecise and I could have worded better. As clarification, I would not ever use the word "blame" but I do hold any carrier that I travel on accountable for my safety - with my full cooperation as assistance as necessary. Oceania and/or NCL holdings, or whoever is in charge, is accountable for the fire and loss of life - regardless of cause - just as I assume responsibility for folks on my property or in my car.

 

I understand travel has surprises - it goes with the adventure of doing new things and seeing new places. I would rephrase to "avoidable surprises" if I wrote that again. People are reporting in the roll calls that they are canceling - I do not want to do that but I started this thread in hopes of gaining additional information about what is happening with Insignia in hopes of making a more informed decision.

 

I am a planner; I read incident reports from aircraft and ship incidents. I review the State Department travel notices for each country I visit. I include safety in my booking considerations and I am frustrated when companies are not transparent and forthcoming about incidents.

 

I have some fun stories about travel but none as good as your boat sinking - at least you were not onboard.

 

Anyway, thanks for your comments. R/Don

[Waynetor]

One thing that puzzles me about the fire is that 2 contractors from South Korea died. Wondering if any experts can explain.

Normally crew working in the engine room would be on a multi month contract just like waiters and most others but to say someone was a contract worker to me implies they were there to address a particular problem or issue. From my experience South Korean crew are a rarity - was the engine made by Hyundai or some other South Korean company and these workers were brought in as experts?

[Noxequifans]

Having worked as an aircraft maintence controller the most important things to me were (1) the ETIC (Estimated Time In Commission) and (2) that the repairs were being done to proper standard. To suggest that O should be releasing detailed technical Information seems useless. What is the reason someone would want this level of detail.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Noxequifans

[Mura]

Hi Mura,

 

I appreciate your comments. Language is imprecise and I could have worded better. As clarification, I would not ever use the word "blame" but I do hold any carrier that I travel on accountable for my safety - with my full cooperation as assistance as necessary. Oceania and/or NCL holdings, or whoever is in charge, is accountable for the fire and loss of life - regardless of cause - just as I assume responsibility for folks on my property or in my car.

 

I understand travel has surprises - it goes with the adventure of doing new things and seeing new places. I would rephrase to "avoidable surprises" if I wrote that again. People are reporting in the roll calls that they are canceling - I do not want to do that but I started this thread in hopes of gaining additional information about what is happening with Insignia in hopes of making a more informed decision.

 

I am a planner; I read incident reports from aircraft and ship incidents. I review the State Department travel notices for each country I visit. I include safety in my booking considerations and I am frustrated when companies are not transparent and forthcoming about incidents.

 

I have some fun stories about travel but none as good as your boat sinking - at least you were not onboard.

 

Anyway, thanks for your comments. R/Don

 

Thanks for the clarification of your comments. Obviously, none of us wants to take unnecessary chances.

 

And yes, we're glad we weren't on that sailboat when it sank! We did have a wonderful Galapagos cruise but rather than being in a room with a kingsize bed and ensuite bathroom, we were in the smallest cabin I have ever seen -- imagine one bed going N to S, and the other just above it going

E to W. There was enough room for one person to dress at a time. The bathroom was down the hall (but very close). So our deluxe sailboat became a 45 foot motor cruiser but we had a marvelous time, had wonderful fellow passengers, and delicious food. The crew caught fish every day and fed it to us.

 

We'll see what develops down the road.

 

Mura

[rallydave]

Strongly disagree as our experience with home office support has been excellent. Secondly, I must comment on your statement regarding the "excellent on board experience". This comes as a surprise to me as I was not aware that you had sailed on Oceania. Would love to hear more about your onboard experience.

 

As in many other cases, your experience with the home office differs greatly from what the average cruiser encounters as we don't have a direct line to the executive suite, have lunch or phone calls with the CEO. Nor do we or many others on this board stay in the upper suites where occupants experiences differ greatly from the great unwashed.

 

As to our onboard experience, did not know that I was required to report to you all of my cruise experiences.

[Travelcat2]

As in many other cases, your experience with the home office differs greatly from what the average cruiser encounters as we don't have a direct line to the executive suite, have lunch or phone calls with the CEO. Nor do we or many others on this board stay in the upper suites where occupants experiences differ greatly from the great unwashed.

 

As to our onboard experience, did not know that I was required to report to you all of my cruise experiences.

 

Not sure why you seem defensive. Since you were a former Regent cruiser and now state that the onboard experience on Oceania is "excellent" (as do we), it did not seem odd to ask you about your Oceania cruise.

 

In terms of our experience with Oceania's home office, when the phone is answered, they have no idea what my name is, how much experience I have on Oceania and certainly do not know what suite we are in. My calls to Oceania's home office have not been specific to us, but rather an explanation of some of their policies as they were new to us. Admittedly, I have had a handful of calls to Oceania and many more with Regent. As with customer service employees anywhere in the world -- there are some that are better than others. Sometimes it can be necessary to speak with a supervisor.

[ORV]

Having worked as an aircraft maintence controller the most important things to me were (1) the ETIC (Estimated Time In Commission) and (2) that the repairs were being done to proper standard. To suggest that O should be releasing detailed technical Information seems useless. What is the reason someone would want this level of detail.

 

Been wondering that myself. I'm not sure exactly what some people think the cruise line owes them in the way of information. Plain and simple, if I don't feel safe on a cruise line and don't feel confident in their procedures then I'll just not go.

 

As in many other cases, your experience with the home office differs greatly from what the average cruiser encounters as we don't have a direct line to the executive suite, have lunch or phone calls with the CEO. Nor do we or many others on this board stay in the upper suites where occupants experiences differ greatly from the great unwashed.

 

As to our onboard experience, did not know that I was required to report to you all of my cruise experiences.

 

I've stayed in an upper suite and I've stayed in an Oceanview. My experience has been that I was treated no different while on board in either, other than the published perks that come with the suites. Then again, we don't require or seek out smoozing like some do.

 

Nothing wrong with someone asking if you've actually been on a cruise line that you critique or review. Experience on a line lends credence to an opinion, or at least it does to me. Kind of like one poster here that held themselves out as an expert on Oceania,(and pretty much everything else) while their whole experience was only reading this board.

[bbwex]

We will all have to wait for any formal reports, but I think many posters are being a bit unfair here. There was a fire. Fires are the most common casualty and the biggest danger on any ship. Oceania might be found "at fault," but that might not mean that the ship was being operated in any sort of unsafe manner. If there were a fire in your home, and the fire marshal found that some wiring had started the fire, you would be at fault for having that wiring, but if it were not really unsafe but had deteriorated over the years, that would be far less "fault" than intentionally installing underrated wire, etc.

 

It is indeed unfortunate that several men, whether they were employees or contractors, lost their lives. And that will lead to a more in depth investigation of what happened. At this point, however, there is no inkling that there were the serious failures, poor planning or serious mistakes similar to the Carnival Splendor fire. It is also way too early to expect any details, as it takes time to figure out what exactly happened.

 

Whatever reports and investigations are filed by the USCG will be available in due time. Would I expect Oceania or NCL to take the time to detail what exactly happened and what exactly they are doing? Absolutely not. I would expect some statement generally telling customers what happened and that appropriate steps are being taken as called for as a result of the investigation and their own determination as to what extra things should be done. Details would only confuse 99.999% of the people who would get it if they sent it to everyone. USCG and NTSB reports are certainly transparent, and there is no hint that anything is being covered up.

 

As to whether this was a "surprise," I am only reminded of a call on "Car Talk." The caller said her car broke down with no warning, and Click and Clack asked if she had expected a postcard! Airplanes have maintenance issues, and hopefully they are not serious or midair! Ships have equipment failures, fires, etc., just like everything and everyone else. If you don't like surprises, you need to lock yourself in your home, and you still might have a surprise!

 

I come to this discussion having been an Officer-of-the-Deck (Underway) on an aircraft carrier and having been the assistant legal officer and investigated incidents from the boiler rooms all of the way to the uppermost deck that had personnel on it. While on the bridge, I was responsible for everything that went on (and happened) while on watch from one end of the ship to the other. Like others on CC, I bring a trained, critical eye to ships' operations, and I can say that to date, I have not had any concerns with the way Oceania operates. And from what I have read so far of the details of the fire on Insignia, I have not seen any major deficiencies that I should be worried about. That being said, I will read the final reports to make sure that I have the facts.

[neepawa]

bbwex

 

+1

[RJB]

And, an abundance of speculation:rolleyes:

Yes, Something that most of us do all the time. Nothing wrong with it.

[dwgreenlee]

We will all have to wait for any formal reports, but I think many posters are being a bit unfair here. There was a fire. Fires are the most common casualty and the biggest danger on any ship. Oceania might be found "at fault," but that might not mean that the ship was being operated in any sort of unsafe manner. If there were a fire in your home, and the fire marshal found that some wiring had started the fire, you would be at fault for having that wiring, but if it were not really unsafe but had deteriorated over the years, that would be far less "fault" than intentionally installing underrated wire, etc.

 

It is indeed unfortunate that several men, whether they were employees or contractors, lost their lives. And that will lead to a more in depth investigation of what happened. At this point, however, there is no inkling that there were the serious failures, poor planning or serious mistakes similar to the Carnival Splendor fire. It is also way too early to expect any details, as it takes time to figure out what exactly happened.

 

Whatever reports and investigations are filed by the USCG will be available in due time. Would I expect Oceania or NCL to take the time to detail what exactly happened and what exactly they are doing? Absolutely not. I would expect some statement generally telling customers what happened and that appropriate steps are being taken as called for as a result of the investigation and their own determination as to what extra things should be done. Details would only confuse 99.999% of the people who would get it if they sent it to everyone. USCG and NTSB reports are certainly transparent, and there is no hint that anything is being covered up.

 

As to whether this was a "surprise," I am only reminded of a call on "Car Talk." The caller said her car broke down with no warning, and Click and Clack asked if she had expected a postcard! Airplanes have maintenance issues, and hopefully they are not serious or midair! Ships have equipment failures, fires, etc., just like everything and everyone else. If you don't like surprises, you need to lock yourself in your home, and you still might have a surprise!

 

I come to this discussion having been an Officer-of-the-Deck (Underway) on an aircraft carrier and having been the assistant legal officer and investigated incidents from the boiler rooms all of the way to the uppermost deck that had personnel on it. While on the bridge, I was responsible for everything that went on (and happened) while on watch from one end of the ship to the other. Like others on CC, I bring a trained, critical eye to ships' operations, and I can say that to date, I have not had any concerns with the way Oceania operates. And from what I have read so far of the details of the fire on Insignia, I have not seen any major deficiencies that I should be worried about. That being said, I will read the final reports to make sure that I have the facts.

I think your summary is petty accurate, I especially agree with your expectation that there should be some sort of some "statement generally telling customers what happened and that appropriate steps are being taken as called for as a result of the investigation and their own determination as to what extra things should be done."

 

To data that has not happened. Besides cruise cancellation statements, Oceania has issued one public statement - just after the incident - expressing their "deep sadness". NCL Holdings - the new owners of Oceania - only public communications is an assessment of the incident on their stock value.

 

I am hopeful for a transparent investigation but I am not as optimistic as you. Insignia is flagged in the Marshal Islands - under the flags of convenience procedures - and was not in US waters nor had it just departed from or was immediately destined to a US port. Thus, the authority of the US Coast Guard and National Transportation Safety Board is limited. The US Coast Guard will do a port state inspection prior to the vessel leaving San Juan but since that is just a ferry operation that inspection will be limited in scope. The actual re-certification of the vessel to carry passengers will be done in Singapore by the Flag State, the Recognized Organization (i.e. registry) and the Singapore authorities.

 

The Marshal Islands Maritime authority is not noted for comprehensive investigations. For example, the Deepwater Horizon oil-drilling platform was flagged in the Marshal Islands and the report they released was only a few pages long and contained few details.

 

In current world events we have a ferry on fire - last reports all were evacuated with just one casualty - and an airplane missing presumed down in the ocean with all onboard lost. I really do not think it is asking too much for carriers following an accident to do more than express sadness and assess impact to stock values.

 

I spent 31 years engineer, project engineer, project manager and program manager for the Naval Sea Systems Command. I have investigated incidents - including JAGMAN investigations - where poor designs, poor maintenance, bad training, and simple human error cost lives. It is fair to say that I have a very low tolerance for accidents and have strong conviction that the lessons learned be applied to save lives. It is also fair to say that I would understand any technical details released by Oceania/NCLH.

[kiawahdon]

bbwex

 

+1

 

+2

 

Just to add a little more sanity to some of the above comments:

-it is highly likely Oceania may still not know all the causes of the fire or the exact cause of the 3 souls who died.

-Also they likely do not know the total extent of damage or repair issues.

-And finally in today's litigious society, any statements will be carefully prepared and few in number. No CEO is going to ignore his counsel.

-To infer that Oceania is hiding something or slow on releasing details is baseless at this point.

[Porthopper101]

We will all have to wait for any formal reports, but I think many posters are being a bit unfair here. There was a fire. Fires are the most common casualty and the biggest danger on any ship. Oceania might be found "at fault," but that might not mean that the ship was being operated in any sort of unsafe manner. If there were a fire in your home, and the fire marshal found that some wiring had started the fire, you would be at fault for having that wiring, but if it were not really unsafe but had deteriorated over the years, that would be far less "fault" than intentionally installing underrated wire, etc.

 

 

 

It is indeed unfortunate that several men, whether they were employees or contractors, lost their lives. And that will lead to a more in depth investigation of what happened. At this point, however, there is no inkling that there were the serious failures, poor planning or serious mistakes similar to the Carnival Splendor fire. It is also way too early to expect any details, as it takes time to figure out what exactly happened.

 

 

 

Whatever reports and investigations are filed by the USCG will be available in due time. Would I expect Oceania or NCL to take the time to detail what exactly happened and what exactly they are doing? Absolutely not. I would expect some statement generally telling customers what happened and that appropriate steps are being taken as called for as a result of the investigation and their own determination as to what extra things should be done. Details would only confuse 99.999% of the people who would get it if they sent it to everyone. USCG and NTSB reports are certainly transparent, and there is no hint that anything is being covered up.

 

 

 

As to whether this was a "surprise," I am only reminded of a call on "Car Talk." The caller said her car broke down with no warning, and Click and Clack asked if she had expected a postcard! Airplanes have maintenance issues, and hopefully they are not serious or midair! Ships have equipment failures, fires, etc., just like everything and everyone else. If you don't like surprises, you need to lock yourself in your home, and you still might have a surprise!

 

 

 

I come to this discussion having been an Officer-of-the-Deck (Underway) on an aircraft carrier and having been the assistant legal officer and investigated incidents from the boiler rooms all of the way to the uppermost deck that had personnel on it. While on the bridge, I was responsible for everything that went on (and happened) while on watch from one end of the ship to the other. Like others on CC, I bring a trained, critical eye to ships' operations, and I can say that to date, I have not had any concerns with the way Oceania operates. And from what I have read so far of the details of the fire on Insignia, I have not seen any major deficiencies that I should be worried about. That being said, I will read the final reports to make sure that I have the facts.

 

 

 

Thank you bbweex for your posted. Last night I said to my husband "some people need to take a chill pill"

 

M

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Travelcat2]

I think your summary is petty accurate, I especially agree with your expectation that there should be some sort of some "statement generally telling customers what happened and that appropriate steps are being taken as called for as a result of the investigation and their own determination as to what extra things should be done."

 

 

Your background is most impressive and it apparent why you would be interested in the details of the investigation and "fix". In your opinion, how long would you expect this type of investigation to take? I would think that part of moving forward would include learning if this incident was related to the incidents that occurred on both Princess and Azamara "R class" ships. One would want to know if the cause was the same in all three cases. Won't all of this take a bit of time?

 

I'm curious why you feel that Oceania should do "their own determination as to what extra things to be done." IMO, this should be done by the investigators and outlined in the final report. I would assume that they would have been doing whatever they needed to do to avoid this tragedy if they knew that was a problem.

 

In any case, the type of detail you are looking for will no doubt be in the final report. I can't see Oceania or its parent company (PCH) or PCH's parent company making a statement with technical details. I do expect everyone to learn what caused the accident and what steps are being taken to insure that it does not happen again.

 

I hope they continue to take their time to do a thorough investigation as rushing can cause important details to be missed.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Travelcat2

[dwgreenlee]

Your background is most impressive and it apparent why you would be interested in the details of the investigation and "fix". In your opinion, how long would you expect this type of investigation to take? I would think that part of moving forward would include learning if this incident was related to the incidents that occurred on both Princess and Azamara "R class" ships. One would want to know if the cause was the same in all three cases. Won't all of this take a bit of time?

 

I'm curious why you feel that Oceania should do "their own determination as to what extra things to be done." IMO, this should be done by the investigators and outlined in the final report. I would assume that they would have been doing whatever they needed to do to avoid this tragedy if they knew that was a problem.

 

In any case, the type of detail you are looking for will no doubt be in the final report. I can't see Oceania or its parent company (PCH) or PCH's parent company making a statement with technical details. I do expect everyone to learn what caused the accident and what steps are being taken to insure that it does not happen again.

 

I hope they continue to take their time to do a thorough investigation as rushing can cause important details to be missed.

 

The data collection part of the investigation is likely over unless there was some parts or materials removed for laboratory analysis. The writing, review and approval of the report is a bureaucratic thing within the Marshal Islands and St Lucia authorities - with some input from the US Coast Guard and NTSB. That process will take from several months to never. Generally reports are released in about a year.

 

In my opinion, coordination with other R class ship is not necessary and likely would only cause confusion and delays. Timely release of the "lessons learned" to other R class operators is extremely important so those operators can assess the impact to their configurations.

 

With regard to the comment that Oceania should do "their own determination as to

what extra things to be done"; I was quoting another author but I would note in the Carnival fires, Carnival had already implemented - or was in the process of implementing - the recommendations made by the time the report was published. Problems identified should be corrected as soon as possible and not wait for a final report - waiting can cost lives.

 

I also do not expect Oceania or NCL Holdings to provide a statement with technical details. I would expect a simple summary of what happen, some information on the expected repair process, and when the next update is expected. Not really any more that the airline agent would release while you are waiting for your plane to be fixed. This would help the folks on the truncated world cruise make a more informed decision about canceling or continuing.

[MightyQuinn]

This feels like deja vu all over again. We were aboard Azamara Quest when a fire in the engine room debilitated the ship, resulting in passengers being disembarked early and the rest of our voyage being cancelled. We heard "bravo, bravo, bravo" at about 8:00 pm on March 30, 2012 when we were sailing off the coast of the Philippines en route to our next port. The captain sounded the general alarm and ordered passengers to proceed to our muster stations. We were in muster for almost 3 hours while crew worked to contain the fire and restore power. Early the next morning, we learned that power had been restored to engine #1 which allowed basic essentials but we still had no propulsion, no A/C, no hot water and no food preparation facilities.

 

Quest was adrift in the Sulu Sea until 7:30 pm on March 31, 2012 when propulsion was restored. We then began to make our way to the nearest port in Malaysia, traveling at 3-6 knots per hour for the next 24+ hours, under the watchful eye of the Philippines Coast Guard. We arrived about 9:30 pm on April 1, 2012 and disembarked about 2 hours later. Priority was given to a crew member who was seriously injured in the fire. Passengers were housed in the best available accommodation for 2 nites and then we were flown by charter to Brunei and onward to Singapore, which was to be our final destination. Meanwhile, Quest also made its way to Singapore, very slowly and with a skeleton crew, where the engine was repaired. The ship was out of service until April 24, 2012.

 

Of course, we were curious as to the cause of the fire but we weren't given any details at the time. In light of the recent fire on Insignia, I googled and found the final report for the Quest incident, prepared by the Malta Marine Safety Investigation Unit. The fire was caused by a fuel oil leak and there is some discussion as to why/how a fuel leak occurred at all. There are also some interesting details on the engine design and power management for the "R" class ships which may (or may not) be transferable to Insignia.

 

http://mti.gov.mt/en/Document%20Repository/MSIU%20Documents/Investigations%202012/MV%20Azamara%20Quest_Final%20Safety%20Investigtion%20Report.pdf

[PaulMCO]

Interesting read. Very interesting to see how much human error and the amount of destruction will occur/amount of repair needed.

 

One item that would concern me is that the R ships are equipped with low pressure water extinguishers instead of Hi Fog high pressure system that are more effective.

[dwgreenlee]

Interesting read. Very interesting to see how much human error and the amount of destruction will occur/amount of repair needed.

 

One item that would concern me is that the R ships are equipped with low pressure water extinguishers instead of Hi Fog high pressure system that are more effective.

 

You might also enjoy reading the USCG report on the Carnival Spendor fire. It was equipped with the Hi-fog system but I will let you read about that. It can be found at http://www.cruisejunkie.com/Splendor.pdf

 

Like most accidents that incident, and the consequences, were a combination of mechanical failures and human error. There are two things noteworthy here, in my opinion anyway. First, despite cascading failures and errors, the consequence management system onboard was sufficiently robust to mitigate the incident without the loss of life or serious injury. Second, the USCG lead investigator made five categories of recommendations including two that were directed at the USCG. It is a brave employee that reports his own employer can do more to prevent this sort of thing.

[Westaussie]

This feels like deja vu all over again. We were aboard Azamara Quest when a fire in the engine room debilitated the ship, resulting in passengers being disembarked early and the rest of our voyage being cancelled. We heard "bravo, bravo, bravo" at about 8:00 pm on March 30, 2012 when we were sailing off the coast of the Philippines en route to our next port. The captain sounded the general alarm and ordered passengers to proceed to our muster stations. We were in muster for almost 3 hours while crew worked to contain the fire and restore power. Early the next morning, we learned that power had been restored to engine #1 which allowed basic essentials but we still had no propulsion, no A/C, no hot water and no food preparation facilities.

 

Quest was adrift in the Sulu Sea until 7:30 pm on March 31, 2012 when propulsion was restored. We then began to make our way to the nearest port in Malaysia, traveling at 3-6 knots per hour for the next 24+ hours, under the watchful eye of the Philippines Coast Guard. We arrived about 9:30 pm on April 1, 2012 and disembarked about 2 hours later. Priority was given to a crew member who was seriously injured in the fire. Passengers were housed in the best available accommodation for 2 nites and then we were flown by charter to Brunei and onward to Singapore, which was to be our final destination. Meanwhile, Quest also made its way to Singapore, very slowly and with a skeleton crew, where the engine was repaired. The ship was out of service until April 24, 2012.

 

Of course, we were curious as to the cause of the fire but we weren't given any details at the time. In light of the recent fire on Insignia, I googled and found the final report for the Quest incident, prepared by the Malta Marine Safety Investigation Unit. The fire was caused by a fuel oil leak and there is some discussion as to why/how a fuel leak occurred at all. There are also some interesting details on the engine design and power management for the "R" class ships which may (or may not) be transferable to Insignia.

 

http://mti.gov.mt/en/Document%20Repository/MSIU%20Documents/Investigations%202012/MV%20Azamara%20Quest_Final%20Safety%20Investigtion%20Report.pdf

Thank you for attaching the report it made very interesting reading especially having been on Quest with you on that fateful day. I was also on the old Royal Princess one cruise before their fire in 2009 and now Insignia my next cruise in July - interesting to find out if all three fires are caused by similar problems with fuel leaks.