Missouri duck boat passengers were told not to wear life jackets by captain, survivor says

[DonViejo]

Source: The Independent



'When it was time to grab them it was too late. I believe that a lot of people could have been spared'

4 hours ago

The captain of a tour boat that sank killing 17 people had told passengers not to bother putting on life jackets, a survivor has claimed.

Nine members of a Tia Coleman’s family were among those who died when the amphibious duck boat capsized during bad weather at Table Rock Lake in Branson, Missouri.

She said: "The captain told us 'Don't worry about grabbing the life jackets, you won't need them,' so nobody grabbed them because we listened to the captain and he told us to stay seated.

"However, in doing that, when it was time to grab them it was too late. I believe that a lot of people could have been spared."

Read more: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/missouri-duck-boat-latest-life-jackets-captain-survivors-deaths-branson-a8457606.html

[lark]

1. Captain needs to be fired today!

Murderer is what he is.

[ck4829]

4. I think he could very well be charged with multiple counts of manslaughter

[Sancho]

5. I think the captain was reported dead...or maybe that was one of the crew. It's not clear.

I am on the water every week (in FL)...if you get on my boat, you wear a PFD....no matter the weather.

[Cracklin Charlie]

7. Captain died in the tragedy. (Sorry, incorrect see below)

He was a beloved ambassador for Branson.

But he was a bad boat captain. Every person on the boat, including the captain, should not have been on the boat without a life preserver.



Edit: this article DOES say the captain survived, and the boat DRIVER perished. I live in Missouri, and ALL our local news was reporting this story yesterday as if the boat driver who perished was the captain of the boat. I find it odd that the local news did not clarify who was the actual captain of the duck boat. They would have known this information then.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

13. Seems there's always a 2 man crew now and the Capt is

supposed to be a member of the Coast Guard via a series of classes. From my recollection, there used to be a hole near the front cab in the top where a .50 cal. machine gun used to be fitted. These are, in the end, war machines. Either the Capt got out there, or through the front window. Just a guess.

[Cracklin Charlie]

18. I've been to Branson many times.

I don’t do the tourist stuff, but there’s good shopping there. I’ve seen these boats there a lot, and I always thought they looked kinda scary.

But, I can’t believe in all the news reports I saw, and they were plentiful, that the actual captain of the boat survived the tragedy, while someone DRIVING the boat perished. There was no mention of a captain that survived. Just seems odd. Probably an investigation thing.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

21. They are cumbersome. DUKW.

Not a ferry or a pleasure craft. Most of them are almost 70 years old. Even though the prop can be pulled up slightly when going on land...they have to have woefully small propellers and were notoriously underpowered for a vehicle that big.
Reports last night said they were zippered from the outside and snapped shut. Probably from a retrofit canvas being put on there after the old ones just disintegrate over time. They are war machines, not pleasure craft. (at the end of the day.)

[hlthe2b]

16. you should correct your subject line to reflect it was driver not captain who perished.

[Cracklin Charlie]

20. Does my fix above work?

I never had to edit my title before.

Sorry bout that. My local news reporting on the tragedy was somewhat confusing.

[hlthe2b]

28. Yeah, I think a lot of confusion out there... Thanks!

[exboyfil]

14. I don't think a Duck is ever going back

in the water in Branson - at least not as currently configured.

[B2G]

15. Well he's dead, so...

[hlthe2b]

17. No... the "driver" died. There is also a Captain, who survived. See the article

[B2G]

19. Ah. The driver was identified as Captain Bob,

hence the confusion. Thanks!

[hlthe2b]

29. wow.. no wonder!

[hlthe2b]

2. I had predicted this might be case... shameful...

I really want to avoid victim blaming, but I honestly can't figure out why these people would go out in that kind of weather to begin with. Perhaps they were also told it would quickly blow through?

[LisaL]

22. Sounds like bad weather hasn't started yet when they left.

[Codeine]

31. It was a very sudden storm.

Freakishly sudden. I heard on NPR that the storm front itself was moving at 65mph. Not the winds, but the storm itself!

[LisaL]

34. Not to someone who should have followed weather report.

There were warnings that storm was coming.

[The Genealogist]

44. Yes, this!

I live in Springfield about 30 miles north of Branson. That same evening we had wind gusts of 70 mph here. They actually sounded the sirens here in town. The clouds looked terrible for quite a while before the storm hit. I'm sure it was similar in Branson. That boat shouldn't have been out.

[.99center]

40. It wasn't sudden. A watch was issued 8 hrs before the incident.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/07/20/the-violent-storm-behind-the-duck-boat-tragedy-was-well-predicted-not-out-of-nowhere/?noredirect=on

In the wake of the tragedy, Jim Pattison Jr. president of the parent company for Ride the Ducks Branson, said the storm “came out of nowhere.” This is simply not true. Meteorologists had been tracking the storm for hours, and their forecasts offered considerable lead time for the hazardous weather.

“[T]his indirect blaming of meteorologists was old a decade ago and is completely inappropriate in this particular situation,” wrote Mike Smith, a retired meteorologist and former executive at AccuWeather in a blog post.

The National Weather Service issued a severe thunderstorm watch, signaling conditions were favorable for dangerous storms in the region, at 11:20 a.m. Central time, nearly eight hours before the storm struck. The watch cautioned “widespread damaging winds likely with isolated significant gusts to 75 mph possible.”

As the storms drew close, the Weather Service issued a severe thunderstorm warning at 6:32 p.m. Central, indicating a violent storm was imminent, about 30 minutes before the boat capsized.

[Codeine]

46. Yikes.

So much for relying on early information.

[hlthe2b]

3. if you read the article: the captain survived....

He may wish he had not.

[Snellius]

6. Children under 13 are required to wear life jackets. This is negligent homicide.

In states where no children's life jacket law is in place, a U.S. Coast Guard interim rule requires children under 13 on moving boats to wear a U.S. Coast Guard approved life jacket that fits. ... Please note that these laws provide boaters with the minimum age that a child is required to wear a life jacket.
State Laws for Life Jackets : BoatUS Foundation
https://www.boatus.org/life-jacket-loaner/state-requirements/

[exboyfil]

8. The NTSB warned about the canopy

20 years ago after a disaster in Arkansas like this one. From the pictures it looks almost completely enclosed. It may be difficult to even get out with a life jacket.

The ironic thing is that Ripley's bought this attraction in Dec., 2017. That has to be one of the worst timed acquisitions in history. I have to think, in addition to the lawsuits by the victims and their families, you will also have Ripley seeking recovery from Herschend Family Entertainment Corporation as they seek to show that Herschend was not forthcoming on the risks during due diligence.

This is also an example of a company acquiring an asset that does not fit into its core mission. Herschend operates rides - Ripley's mostly operates "museums" and aquariums.

Also the CEO of Ripley's saying the boat should not have been on the water seems to be a big legal mistake. I don't know what the corporate structure is (perhaps the Ducks is operated as wholly owned subsidiary with its own corporate veil), but admitting to that implies corporate guidance as well as fault.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/branson-missouri-duck-boat-tour-company-boat-shouldnt-have-been-in-water/

Jm Pattison Jr., the president of Ripley Entertainment, which owns the duck boat tour company involved in the incident, told "CBS This Morning" on Friday the boat "shouldn't have been in the water."

"I don't have all the details, but to answer your question, no, it shouldn't have been in the water if, if what happened, happened," he said when asked why the tour continued in such rough conditions.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

9. You could see the freeboard disappearing rapidly.

My guess is the water was coming through the windows and over the front end into the drivers area. If you don't have a near perfect bilge in a situation like that, it can compound itself quickly. I think one report said it was a new/old used DUK and wasn't as good as the other one. You can tell the other boat jammed the throttles and turned into the wind and got lost quickly. Once you start to flounder and turn sideways even a little, the water weight of a DUKW w 31 people in it gets heavy quick. These are old WW2 military vehicles re-purposed usually. Unless they are constantly maintained, they are unsafe for loads of people this big. They aren't pleasure craft. They are for landing troops quickly, or for fording rivers etc w trained soldiers onboard. The propellers are smaller bc they drive on land as well, and have to have clearance for the same. That means they are very sluggish to begin with.
My guess also is, that the Capt knew very early on it was taking on too much water and figured an escape route himself based on what he knew, and when it started to capsize, he made his break in a very quick fashion. No question the life vests shouldv'e been on, but if the thing flipped over, it sank like a rock, and chances are life preservers would have been a foregone conclusion. I'm told there were lots of elderly folks on there and probably he thought he could make it back without alarming folks any more than they were.
All the way around a sad day for humanity. 9 members of one family were lost in one fell swoop.

[MichMary]

25. Conflicting reports

Some say it capsized, but others say it landed on its wheels in 40 feet of water, then rolled down to 80 feet. The video seems to support that version.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

26. Yes.

the video we see shows it turning just at the end and the side going real close to the water. It may have had so much watr in it that the front end dipped like the Edmund Fitz and just nose dived. The waters can be over 100 feet deep there. There's no telling if the folks were moving back and forth, but, shifting cargo or passengers can be fatal as well to a ship already in distress.

[Yellowdog88]

38. Video

From the other craft shows what likely happened.

Passengers were probably nervous but somewhat thrilled by the conditions. Until it rapidly deteriorated.

There should have been a point to order all life jackets on and preparing to jump out. Captain should have complete knowledge of the weaknesses of this vessel (which are many without the 60mph winds). Perhaps he remained hopeful and confident. But there had to be a lot of water in the boat with plenty of time to cut bait based on that video.

The lifejackets are a hazard if it goes down, so they've said. Therefore, once the jackets go on, your next option is to leave the boat.

Like a plane crash, there are a series of errors and missed indicators that lead to a preventable disaster.

Weather monitoring prior to departure
Pulling boats out of the water by radio
Training
Life jackets donned.
Procedure for evacuating

But these are costly regulations for a business that wants to ferry sightseers around a lake on a hot day!
Costly indeed.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

43. Right there w you. terrible thing that it happened.

A whole family wiped out. Losing even ONE person is awful. If it was branson then there were most likely a majority of older people. LOTS of older people can't swim. In the 60's and 70s swim classes started to be taught in public schools. Most people now a adays can save themselves in an emergency. Having been a lifeguard myself and grown up on a lake however, I can tell you that w those waves, even w life jackets, hypothermia and water intake would kill most of the older folks. I'm surprised the bigger ships didn't heel over immediately, and lash it to the side. It's the law of the "sea" and the paddlewheel ship Capt was up high enough to have observed all of it, and react.
The Capt should've been blowing the horn in distress fashion as well. The other DUKW driver did exactly the right thing. Even if he couldn't get back to HIS dock...straight across to ANY beach is preferable to drowning. The roll of that DUKW when he went sideways for just a second was chilling.

[leftyladyfrommo]

10. The driver of the Duck Boat died.

He was a 76 year old former pastor that everyone loved.

The KC Star reported that wearing life jackets on those covered duck boats can get you killed. The people in jackets get caught under the canopy and just get sucked down.

That boat just should not have been on the water.

[hlthe2b]

11. the problem is not the life jackets, it is the canopy which has caused issues before & which

there have been warnings issued. To suggest wearing life jackets, especially for children is NOT to be recommended is irresponsible.

The captain survived, btw. The "driver" did not.

I do agree that boat had no business being on the water.

[Snellius]

24. There is a report that the captain released the canopy.

Though I see no evidence of that in the existing videos.
There was also evidently a similar boat on the lake at the same time that did reach dock safely. So the question becomes what was mishandled in this case.
There is also a report that the worst of the storm came up quite suddenly.
Also that this service has been running safely for 37 years before Ripley's bought it.

[LisaL]

35. These boats aren't designed to be out in very bad weather.

One made it, the other one didn't. Presumably the difference here is luck.
And neither boat should have been out in such bad weather conditions.

[Ligyron]

39. It's true that wearing them could trap you under the canopy or the bottom of the boat.

Depends on how fast it rotated and whether it stopped doing so in the right position.

Still, not wearing one is kinda like the old argument against wearing seat belts I once heard: "But what if I ran into the back of a truck transporting irrigation pipes that were sticking out the back? I'd be trapped and unable to jump to one side as they came crashing through the windshield"!!

[exboyfil]

12. Before it goes into the corporate black hole

The acquisition message from Ripley's when they purchased Ride the Ducks.

Ride the Ducks has been around for 40 years, and Ripley’s is proud to add them to the Ripley Entertainment growing roster of family-friendly attractions. Founded in 1918 with the debut of Robert Ripley’s newspaper cartoon, the company now encompasses more than 100 attractions in 11 countries across four continents including: Ripley’s Believe It or Not! Odditoriums, Guinness World Records Attractions, Ripley’s Aquariums, Louis Tussaud’s Waxworks, Ripley’s Marvelous Mirror Mazes, Ripley’s Mini Golf, and Ripley’s Traveling Shows. Ripley’s media division boasts the longest running syndicated cartoon strip, and annually publishes best-selling books. The local Ripley’s Believe It or Not! Odditorium in Branson has been operating for almost 25 years.

“Ripley’s is incredibly excited about this new acquisition and the opportunity for new partnerships and continued growth in the Branson market.” – Jim Pattison Jr., President of Ripley Entertainment.

Ride the Ducks is a 70-minute guided amphibious tour that takes guests through the scenic Ozarks on both land and water. Ride the Ducks is a seasonal business that runs from March – November and operates 22 Duck vehicles.

Ripley’s is pleased to welcome the Ride the Ducks team to the Ripley Entertainment family. Ripley Entertainment is eager to maintain Ride the Ducks existing local partnerships and are looking forward to opening doors to new business opportunities.

[Bengus81]

23. All one has to do is look at a radar loop to tell what was going to happen....

ANYONE and everyone has access to a weather radar--especially that tour Company. Those asshats are trying to play this like they no idea of any severe weather coming yet those storms rolled out of Kansas about 11am and just kept heading that way to the SE. ANYONE monitoring weather that day could clearly see those storms were not weakening,they were gaining strength and continuing to move in the general direction of Table Rock lake.

But...like someone said $30.00 bucks per head,62 people between the two boats if they were both full. Hmmm,go the safety route and keep them on shore OR load em up and pull in $1860.00.

[B2G]

30. Yep. Our local meterologist said the exact same thing.

Completely unavoidable had anyone been paying attention.

[BumRushDaShow]

27. The lawyer for the Duck Boat case here in Philly said

that when it comes to the life vests, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. He noted that once the boat starts sinking, it can be even harder to get out from under the canopy (essentially since the opening is narrow) with the vest on because the vest starts to float you up against the canopy and then that canopy traps you as the whole boat goes down.

The canopy is the issue. Before they go out on the water, the canopy should be removed or be able to be retracted or should have some sort of emergency release.

[Boxerfan]

32. I was a Captain-this was negligent homicide....

When you are a Captain you have one duty-the safety of the passengers on board.

Life vests go on at the 1st sign of trouble-period.
If this makes egress or exit from the passenger cabin more difficult then you have a design flaw that should fail inspection.

The whole fleet should be pulled for the cabins to modified.

And with live weather radar online it is also irresponsible to not actually monitor conditions.


And why didn't he head straight to shore when it started getting bad.

The captain was a idiot maybe still is. And the operation needs to be sued out of existence.

[Snellius]

45. "why didn't he head straight to shore" - No kidding!

They were so close. He should have just tried to beach it to stabilize the boat.

[forgotmylogin]

47. Those things apparently weigh about seven tons unloaded.

They're not nimble watercraft meant for rough seas. They are essentially a heavy truck that can drive into the water, and the prop that moves the vehicle in the water has to be small so it can be retracted for driving on land. They sit low, and once the thing starts taking on water, there's not far for it to go before it loses all buoyancy.

[joshcryer]

33. Called it.

As soon as the storm started to brew they should've donned the life jackets.

[BannonsLiver]

36. The canopy was a big part of why so many died

A life vest isn’t going to help you if you’re pinned up against a canopy of a sinking boat, in fact at that point it’s more likely to hinder your escape. This is why when people put on vests in an aircraft they are advised not to inflate them until they are out of the aircraft. The decision to go out with the threat of severe weather, and the canopy were the two biggest problems people on the boat faced, if one reads the accounts of those who survived.

Where they lifejackets would be of use is if someone was able to escape the boat itself and then was unable to swim to shore or tread water long enough to be rescued, but none of that matters if you can’t escape the boat.

[wcmagumba]

37. Pretty sure...

as part of the ticket purchase there is one of those disclaimers about accident and injury. This should not
cover such obvious negligence, safety violations and horribly bad judgement but might make the suits more
difficult...seems like greed and stupidity did take precedence...

[marble falls]

41. Can not believe they went out in that brick with the chop like that. NOT wear ...

safety gear???? In these days of legal action I'm surprised they didn't have them double vested and rubber rafts. I can't believe the state regulations allow for this. I won't get on a small boat without flotation. Don't worry? I won't need them?

The three most told lies: "the checks in the mail", "I will respect you in the morning" and "don't worry, you won't need them".

I used that last one when a co-worker asked me if I shouldn't put the guard down on a monster table saw. What I told him: "you don't need a guard if you know what you're doing". And stuck my thumb into the blade. Fortunately for me this was a big saw used to cut cottonwood into crating for tombstones. And the teeth were too big and too dull too actually drag my hand into the saw.

I used to screw up an awful lot, mostly out of over confidence in my self-alleged 'innate' skills. Its a wonder I survived long enough to get good at anything. I generally don't make any bad mistake more than once. I have noticed as I've gotten older, I've gotten more risk adverse at least to the point of measuring pros and cons.

There was a plane full of parachutists who were dropped through clouds into Lake Erie from a B-25 in '67. I might have been on that plane if I had been two years older. A few of the jumpers worked for my dad or my uncle. These days? GWHB wants to jump out of a plate at 90? Let him.

Think we could get cheetolini interested in jumping out of airplanes?

[ET Awful]

42. Having been on many such tours in my life -

I've never once been told to wear a life jacket. Life jackets are stored on board in case of emergency (in the case of these style boats, there's no time in an emergency to do anything really). Likewise for ferry boats, other tourist style boats, water taxis, etc. This is the fault of the canopy over the boat and having no means of egress. If they'd been wearing life jackets, they would still have been trapped under the canopy.

If you look at photos of people on duck boat tours anywhere, you won't see life jackets. For instance:







Having passengers were life jackets would be the exception, not the rule.