Boom.

[Murflynn]

6 hours ago, roland elsdon said:

Yep carbon monoxide blame it on the weather, 34 degrees and 100kph wind, distracted in mid post by power going out and trees getting blown across paddock

34 degrees?  where are you?  Brisbane?

[ditchcrawler]

3 hours ago, mross said:

Taken from the Petrol Filling Stations Guidance on Managing The Risks Of Fire & Explosion
(The Red Guide)

MOBILE TELEPHONES
7) Generally mobile telephones are not designed and certified for use in
explosive atmospheres. Their use can also create a serious distraction for
people carrying out dispensing activities. Radio transmissions from individual
mobile telephones are generally too low to induce dangerous electric currents
in nearby equipment and the risk of incendive sparking from the battery is
low, however, they should not be used in the hazardous areas that exist
when actually dispensing petrol. Neither should they be used in the
hazardous areas around the fill and vent pipes during petrol deliveries.
8) Rather than applying a total prohibition on the use of mobile telephones on
petrol forecourts which has resulted in some anomalies and frequent abuse
to staff, the following controls are recommended:
a) Mobile telephones should not be used by customers or forecourt staff
whilst actually dispensing petrol into fuel tanks or containers;

 

The risk is low, but the consequences are horrendous.  If the forecourt operators safety policies talk about restricting the use then they have to comply with them.  I won't be using my phone while actually fuelling.

I would suggest that if it has a battery attached then the risk of it causing an explosion is just as high if it is in use or not.

3 hours ago, mross said:

Taken from the Petrol Filling Stations Guidance on Managing The Risks Of Fire & Explosion
(The Red Guide)

MOBILE TELEPHONES
7) Generally mobile telephones are not designed and certified for use in
explosive atmospheres. Their use can also create a serious distraction for
people carrying out dispensing activities. Radio transmissions from individual
mobile telephones are generally too low to induce dangerous electric currents
in nearby equipment and the risk of incendive sparking from the battery is
low, however, they should not be used in the hazardous areas that exist
when actually dispensing petrol. Neither should they be used in the
hazardous areas around the fill and vent pipes during petrol deliveries.
8) Rather than applying a total prohibition on the use of mobile telephones on
petrol forecourts which has resulted in some anomalies and frequent abuse
to staff, the following controls are recommended:
a) Mobile telephones should not be used by customers or forecourt staff
whilst actually dispensing petrol into fuel tanks or containers;

 

The risk is low, but the consequences are horrendous.  If the forecourt operators safety policies talk about restricting the use then they have to comply with them.  I won't be using my phone while actually fuelling.

I would suggest that if it has a battery attached then the risk of it causing an explosion is just as high if it is in use or not.

3 hours ago, mross said:

Taken from the Petrol Filling Stations Guidance on Managing The Risks Of Fire & Explosion
(The Red Guide)

MOBILE TELEPHONES
7) Generally mobile telephones are not designed and certified for use in
explosive atmospheres. Their use can also create a serious distraction for
people carrying out dispensing activities. Radio transmissions from individual
mobile telephones are generally too low to induce dangerous electric currents
in nearby equipment and the risk of incendive sparking from the battery is
low, however, they should not be used in the hazardous areas that exist
when actually dispensing petrol. Neither should they be used in the
hazardous areas around the fill and vent pipes during petrol deliveries.
8) Rather than applying a total prohibition on the use of mobile telephones on
petrol forecourts which has resulted in some anomalies and frequent abuse
to staff, the following controls are recommended:
a) Mobile telephones should not be used by customers or forecourt staff
whilst actually dispensing petrol into fuel tanks or containers;

 

The risk is low, but the consequences are horrendous.  If the forecourt operators safety policies talk about restricting the use then they have to comply with them.  I won't be using my phone while actually fuelling.

I would suggest that if it has a battery attached then the risk of it causing an explosion is just as high if it is in use or not.

[mross]

The whole point is to leave the phone inside as you fuel.  Perhaps the battery might self heat if it were dropped?  

Edited March 28, 2017 by mross

[Mike Todd]

38 minutes ago, mross said:

The whole point is to leave the phone inside as you fuel.  Perhaps the battery might self heat if it were dropped?  

It seemed to me that the point of the advice was to recognise that there is no direct technical reason why a mobile phone should cause an explosion but, just as when driving, the distraction cause by talking, texting or googling etc whilst fueling can itself be the bigger source of danger. For the most part, mobile phones today are treated as always-on so, even if not being answered etc they will be in-use whilst on the forecourt. The safest place for them during this time is inside the car - out of temptations way. After all, the call itself may be 'incendiary' . . . 

[Naughty Cal]

More on the story here:

http://www.ybw.com/news-from-yachting-boating-world/two-boats-destroyed-by-fire-at-burton-waters-marina-50018

[mross]

1 hour ago, Mike Todd said:

It seemed to me that the point of the advice was to recognise that there is no direct technical reason why a mobile phone should cause an explosion but, just as when driving, the distraction cause by talking, texting or googling etc whilst fueling can itself be the bigger source of danger. For the most part, mobile phones today are treated as always-on so, even if not being answered etc they will be in-use whilst on the forecourt. The safest place for them during this time is inside the car - out of temptations way. After all, the call itself may be 'incendiary' . . . 

 

 

No, that may be a factor but the main reason is that a phone is not designed or licensed for use in an explosive atmosphere.  I accept the risks are very low.

Edited March 28, 2017 by mross

[ditchcrawler]

2 hours ago, mross said:

The whole point is to leave the phone inside as you fuel.  Perhaps the battery might self heat if it were dropped?  

I think you are right, If it gets dropped and broken it could cause a spark, I have an electric garage door and the key fob in my pocket got pressed for an extended time and that got quite hot. When I worked Offshore we had to remove batteries from electrical items put in the helicopter hold because of the fire risk.

[Mike Todd]

3 hours ago, Naughty Cal said:

More on the story here:

http://www.ybw.com/news-from-yachting-boating-world/two-boats-destroyed-by-fire-at-burton-waters-marina-50018

Gives a different cause than previously suggested here?

[Naughty Cal]

3 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Gives a different cause than previously suggested here?

Indeed it does.

The cynic in me suggests for insurance purposes. 

[Jess--]

7 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Gives a different cause than previously suggested here?

so... a freedom 22 refueled from the diesel pump and then a spark from its carburetor ignited fuel vapour....

since when do diesel engines have carbs?
 

[Naughty Cal]

5 minutes ago, Jess-- said:

so... a freedom 22 refueled from the diesel pump and then a spark from its carburetor ignited fuel vapour....

since when do diesel engines have carbs?
 

It was petrol as was the Fairline.

Bad journalism really. It should be fuel pump!

So bad in fact they missed that the boat was a Freeman!

Edited March 28, 2017 by Naughty Cal

[Jess--]

Quote

It is believed the fire started accidentally after a visiting boat – a Freedom 22 – had just refuelled at the marina’s diesel pump. It is thought a carburettor of the motor yacht backfired and ignited fuel vapour.
Read more at http://www.ybw.com/news-from-yachting-boating-world/two-boats-destroyed-by-fire-at-burton-waters-marina-50018#0YvJUQHUQ2hiZ2oP.99

from the article

[Naughty Cal]

17 minutes ago, Jess-- said:

from the article

Yes I have seen it!

I posted it. 

As I said bad journalism!

This is the Freeman which was caught up in the blaze. Definitely petrol:

https://www.burtonwaters.co.uk/boat-for-sale/Fairline-Holiday-FOR-SALE-6089439.html

And the Freeman 22 was also petrol.

Edited March 28, 2017 by Naughty Cal

[Señor Chris]

So what did happen? I'm confused now.

 

[Naughty Cal]

The little blue Freeman set alight after refuelling, which set light to the Fairline, which set light to the fuel berth, pumps and trees behind it.

[David Mack]

"Firefighters used special pumps to prevent the boats from sinking."

So that didn't work then!

[Naughty Cal]

One of them didn't sink. They pulled it out before it had chance!

[Alan de Enfield]

Story 'on the Trent' today is that the owner of the boat that 'caused the fire' did not have insurance, and is now in a 'bit of a financial mess', with not only the loss of his new boat, but the costs of the other boat + the marina jetty / fuel berth costs, + recovery costs.

 

Any comment as to if this is known to be fact -  or just the rumour mill at full throttle ?

[Naughty Cal]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Story 'on the Trent' today is that the owner of the boat that 'caused the fire' did not have insurance, and is now in a 'bit of a financial mess', with not only the loss of his new boat, but the costs of the other boat + the marina jetty / fuel berth costs, + recovery costs.

 

Any comment as to if this is known to be fact -  or just the rumour mill at full throttle ?

We have heard similar but don't know if it is true or not.

He bought the boat from Torksey not so long ago and it had been moored outside one of the houses at Drinsey Nook. 

[Murflynn]

2 hours ago, Jess-- said:

It is believed the fire started accidentally after a visiting boat – a Freedom 22 – had just refuelled at the marina’s diesel pump. It is thought a carburettor of the motor yacht backfired and ignited fuel vapour.

I'm sure all owners of Freemen 22 (or is is Freeman 22's ? ) will be delighted to know that they are the proud owners of a Motor Yacht.  Prob'ly all fly the Blue Ensign, for what it's worth.

[PotteringPete]

Greetings all. 

Being a long standing member of the YBW Forums I can confirm that the news articles posted on that site leave a lot to be desired as to their accuracy and reporting.  This has long been the case and the ofttimes subject of much derision/annoyance from the forum members.   I sometimes wonder if any of the journalists have ever been near a boat. 

[Naughty Cal]

Burton Waters now have a temporary fuel berth in place selling diesel only at the moment.

The decking and canopy still need replacing.

In other news it looks like another petrol powered boat set fire to itself on the Thames yesterday! 

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/gallery/hurley---the-walthams/113723/hurley-yacht-explosion-leaves-man-in-hospital.html

[MtB]

Hmmm that looks to me like a Princess 32 or similar. More likely to be diesel.

I'm inclined to think gas is the more likely source of the explosion.

(Or does the article actually say petrol? I can't see any mention of the cause.)

[Naughty Cal]

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

Hmmm that looks to me like a Princess 32 or similar. More likely to be diesel.

I'm inclined to think gas is the more likely source of the explosion.

(Or does the article actually say petrol? I can't see any mention of the cause.)

It is a Selcruiser 27 and that particular one was petrol. Was called Drifter.

[X Alan W]

On 25/03/2017 at 20:17, ditchcrawler said:

Even using Avtur Jet Fuel which has a much higher flash point than petrol

& even for JP7 & you have a hell of a job to get that to burn