https://ca.news.yahoo.com/seattle-bus-crash-2-confirmed-195109957.html (https://ca.news.yahoo.com/seattle-bus-crash-2-confirmed-195109957.html)
Looks like the left front axle broke and the duck made a hard left turn into the bus.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/seattle-bus-collides-duck-tour-killing-2-officials-say-n433156 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/seattle-bus-collides-duck-tour-killing-2-officials-say-n433156)
A 16 passenger van Here in SW ind --carrying 24 people flipped= 1 dead all the rest in area hospitals. Something sound wrong here? wooden benches and wooden back bumper.
Clearly the high prow hit the bus above the frame, which is why the bus is torn open the way it is.
The duck is sturdier than I expected. From the pictures, I'd guess it'll be worth repairing when the investigation is over.
I've been in the DUKWs at Boston - they're definitely sturdy and robust! Between a 1940s wartime military design and a current tour bus, it's hardly surprising what happened.
John
Reading the news there the usual ban it brigades around. It just looks to me that the driver was distracted. Reading further, I gather the driver does the tour guiding etc as well as driving. Could have the answer there. A vehicle that's hard to handle and a distracted driver.
Sent from my Nexus 7
The report I read said he lost the left front wheel while making a lane change to the left. That points to maintenance to me. With a vehicle that is regularly submerged in brackish water what could possibly go wrong? I smell a big lawsuit and my guess is if you haven't already had your duck ride you may already be too late.
The Duck operator's life as he formally knew it is now over. 70 year old vehicle that was never intended to operated this way, salt water immersion for years, and no parts availability = this outcome.
Hang on, parts are available though the vehicle was admittedly only designed for six months operation during ww2
Sent from my Nexus 7
I actually know quite a bit about these units.. even driven one..
The parts are a pain, in fact a lot of the parts have been salvaged from the English channel.. there's over 2000 DUKW's at the bottom of the sea and divers have been picking the parts for years..
The only problem is the salt water with the metal, I once saw a drive shaft that had corroded from the inside first..
Very study vehicles, great engineering!
There was a Dukw 'scandal' here a couple of years ago after one sank whilst full of passengers. I forget the details (whether anyone died) but it was national news for a short time. The company operated several of them and ironically the Queen had been for a ride in one some time before (dunno whether it was the same one that sank).
I've no-doubt that they were sturdily built, but on the other hand they where only ever intended to be disposable vehicles for carrying disposable people, and on the face of it it's quite hard to imagine how the licencing authorities could consider them to be satisfactory vehicles for fare-paying passenger use 60 years later. Shame though, 'cos they're cool.
Jeremy
My gripe is that the use that dukws are put to is beyond their design specifications. I hate that they're not owned, loved and used AS historical vehicles
Sent from my Nexus 7
They've had a few "scandles"
1st problem was the glass windows, once sank, the passengers were unable to break the glass due to the pressure difference.. So all the owner/operators changed the design to plastic roll up windows that go up prior to water launch.
2nd problem, the bilge only worked when under heavy RPM.. so when one had a problem, was taking on water, the driver let go of the gas, the pump stopped and enough water flooded inside to cut the motor.
I once had to help recover one that was stuck turning to port only, the river in question was pretty gross as well.
Its always astonished me that these vehicles could be registered for public transport. We once tied up at a marina on the north end of Lake Union where they enter and leave the water. Seeing them up close 2 or 3 times a day as they chugged by us on the water convinced me that I didn't need to pay to ride on one.
NTSB has both vehicles in a warehouse inspecting them. Today's news shows a pic of the left front hub broken off (they called it the axle). I imagine this was the cause. Also said there was strange red fluid splattered on wheel wells but that may have been atf from the coaches power steering. Expect drastic new regs on these vehicles. On another note, my father served in combat with the 10th Mountain Div. in Italy. Lots of experience with ducks. The Italians are trying to raise one from Lake Garda that sank fast with all aboard, it's 100% intact but the human remains are an issue.
I'm amazed nobody has built a modern edition given their popularity. It surely can't be hard!
Sent from my Nexus 7
This needs to be addressed. Does the average intelligent person today have any basic understanding on what they are about to do? We know about DUCKS. Does not everybody know about DUCKS and the environment they visit? Their age? Their original function and design specifications? We know this. Does the average Joe know this? Should they have known the potential risk? Or am I presuming too much here. There are lots of things I will just not do due to danger potential. Respectfully.
If properly maintained, they aren't much different from any other vehicle on the road - as long as they are properly used within their limits.
Even brand new units can be abused to the point of catastrophic failure.
BTW, I have seen several bus conversions that made me cringe -
- brakes so bad the only one working was one of the fronts.
- Batteries on the compartment floor, inverter mounted to the wall just above them and the generator fuel tank mounted above - all with no partitions or ventilation.
- OLD radial tires
- etc.
Be careful when calling for a ban on old vehicles, your definition of old may not be the same as a lawmaker's and we could end up without anything over 20 years old!
Latest word up here today is that the outfit that must franchise (Ride the Ducks International) put out an inspection and repair notice on the front axle assembly and the outfit in Seattle (Ride the Ducks Seattle) did not do it. Game over for that operator.
there is a company who makes a new version. can't remember the name but I rode on it in Boston a couple of years ago. At the time I looked it up and it was built on a f-650 ford chassis. they also had a 2nd person as the tour guide all the driver did was drive
Quote from: c-coop on September 28, 2015, 02:19:28 PM
there is a company who makes a new version. can't remember the name but I rode on it in Boston a couple of years ago. At the time I looked it up and it was built on a f-650 ford chassis. they also had a 2nd person as the tour guide all the driver did was drive
Seems a good idea to use more modern kit for daily use and keep the 80 year old ww2 kit for pleasure.
Quote from: Boomer on September 28, 2015, 08:29:54 AM
Latest word up here today is that the outfit that must franchise (Ride the Ducks International) put out an inspection and repair notice on the front axle assembly and the outfit in Seattle (Ride the Ducks Seattle) did not do it. Game over for that operator.
Hah! Of course they might have been within a window... Get it done by x and it wasn't yet x.
Sent from my Nexus 7
or it could have said, inspect and review periodically to insure....
Quote from: Zephod on September 26, 2015, 08:04:04 AM
My gripe is that the use that dukws are put to is beyond their design specifications. I hate that they're not owned, loved and used AS historical vehicles
Sent from my Nexus 7
I don't agree that their design specifications are being abused. And I'd argue they are being USED as historical vehicles even in commercial operations...I'm sure it's in their literature.
They were designed to travel in rough water and launch/land in 10-foot surf on unimproved beaches. In fact, the design was accepted by the military because a prototype made a beach rescue in conditions coast guard equipment was unable to respond to. They were designed to haul 25 troops with their gear, or up to 10,000 pounds of cargo (depending on sea conditions). They should be as roadworthy as the army 2.5 ton 6x6 truck they're based on.
Civilian use is typically in calm water fairweather conditions, using boat ramps, carrying less than the rated load in passenger weight. Plus they don't ask the passengers to use ammunition crates for seats.
Now if you want to discuss the increased upkeep and maintenance requirements of older vehicles and boats (the duck being both), that's a good subject.
They have 2 new DUCKS on Lake Havasu I think they were made in SC both have a Cummins and Allison transmissions so some one makes new ones.
Sad 2 or more government agencies at least policing that and people died you know it had to have a Coast Guard inspection once a year
In fairness to the Duck, I think all the deaths were on the transit.
Comes under Coast Guard regs while on the water and under WUTC and USDOT when operated on land. Today the WUTC issued a shut down to Ride the Ducks Seattle (for Duck ops). The owner agreed with it.
Saw one driving down the road in Santa Barbara Monday morning, had the name of a tour on it but don't remember it now, didn't look that old
Just happened across a British company making a modern Dukw called the 'Seahorse'. All fibreglass construction with hydraulic motors for drive both to the propeller and wheels (which it says is a big safety benefit as there are no apertures in the hulls).
There's a press release on the company's website that actually calls for the banning of 'original' Dukws from use on safety grounds:
The following Press Release was issued by Porcellio Manufacturing Ltd on 30 September 2013 in response to the fire on a London DUKW.
The recent accident, together with the sinking of the two Liverpool DUKWs serves to emphasis that these old machines are long past their safe commercial use as passenger-carrying machines.
The objective and proven success of the SeaHorse machines is
to build brand new, safe machines to the very latest modern regulatory standards: and
to promote the replacement of the unsafe 70-year old machines.
The Text of the Press release is as follows:
A manufacturer of modern amphibious vehicles has warned that a blaze, which saw 30 passengers evacuated from a craft on The Thames yesterday (29 September), was "an accident waiting to happen."
The company, Porcellio Manufacturing Ltd, believes many amphibious vehicles currently in use risk staff and passengers' lives, as they are more than 70 years old and don't meet new and current stringent safety standards.
This is the third accident in 2013 so far and follows two in Liverpool, in which two similar machines sank. In the wake of the news, the manufacturer is now urging authorities to withdraw the current certificates for all old crafts currently running tours in the UK, until they can be checked for compliance against the latest regulations.
Porcellio Manufacturing Ltd managing director Howard Slater said: "This was an accident waiting to happen and in fact, based on the safety record of these vehicles, we are lucky we have not yet seen a much higher injury toll, even deaths."
Calling upon the Port of London Authority (PLA) and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) to take decisive action, Mr Slater added that many older vessels don't meet new and stringent safety regulations. In order to make them more water-worthy, he also said it was imperative their standards were reviewed respecting those applied to new machines.
He added: "These machines are around 70 years old and aren't built to the same quality standards as modern-day versions. They don't have enough internal buoyancy and are made with unsafe metal, which can easily spring a leak. As a result, some owners fill them with foam to aid floatation, which can mean the crafts get too hot and run the risk of catching fire.
"If built new, the boats simply would not be given the seal of approval for use in the tourism industry today."
The company manufactures the new SeaHorse machine, which was designed and built to comply with current requirements of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) and Vehicle Operators Services Agency (VOSA). It is a new and more technologically advanced version of the older DUKW model.
"We've seen too many close calls with older amphibious vehicles, so it's time they were taken off the river for good, making way for a safe and more modern design that doesn't pose a risk to staff and passengers," Mr Slater said.
(https://busconversionmagazine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seahorseamphibious.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F0036a.jpg&hash=646e9ac91db79f3dcf74d8ab66c5f318fcf44154)
(https://busconversionmagazine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seahorseamphibious.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F7031.jpg&hash=8e36f02302f2f6f2199c6e3e5fe4fd7872c1f86d)
Jeremy
Howard Slater wouldn't have any reason to be biased, would he?
Do you think he would keep his job as managing director if he didn't generate propaganda touting the virtues of his company's product while bashing the competition?
About the reference to being old, I wonder how long the new vehicles will last?
Fiberglass has it's limitations too. . . .
Always a compromise . . . .
Yep, tricky thing to get right when your marketing strategy consists of writing polemics against the people most likely to want your product
Jeremy
I totally disagree with his pre release.. I know the people behind the London operation and they are experts and professionals and safety is their primary concern, I guess thats the only way that guy can promote his "newer" product is by trying to discredit the competition.. poor poor marketing..
I go out of my way to not do business with companies that market that way.
Quote from: Lee Bradley on September 30, 2015, 12:30:53 PM
I go out of my way to not do business with companies that market that way.
Good plan !