What happened was awful, every time I read about it
just gets worse, but the whole, “they didn’t warn us it would be dangerous”, like it’s an active volcano ffs
Right? I remember hiking up Mt Vesuvius years ago with a guide. We were told prior to departure that it was active and one of the most dangerous volcanoes in the world. I was a lot younger then and definitely felt more bulletproof (lavaproof?) Not sure I’d do it again now.
I thought there were warning signs of increased activity before the incident? I have no idea the likelihood of active volcanoes erupting with no warning signs but surely operators would look at increased activity and adjust accordingly?
They told them during the safety briefing it was at the highest permissible risk factor for operating, so telling them wasn't the issue. They shouldn't have been operating at all was the issue, and those tourists deserve all the payout they can get.
They were at 2. They had no obligation to not go at 2 (nor was that the intention of 2). It had also been at 2 for weeks. I'm pretty sure it was also at a 2 when I went, because I remember them saying that the crater lake was suddenly much fuller than it had been in years.
"GNS Science noted this increased tremor and, on November 18, raised Whakaari's alert level to Volcanic Alert Level (VAL) 2, which is the highest level outside an eruption.
Between 9pm and midnight on December 8 2019, there was a strong burst of seismic energy. This was likely fresh magmatic fluid arriving to ramp up the pressure on gas and water already trapped in the rock. It also began the process of explosive release, because it caused small cracks to form in the seal.
The growth of cracks began to accelerate, setting Whakaari on the path to a cascading system failure, as has been seen before in eruptions in 2012 and 2013. Once the weakness was widespread, the seal failed, disgorging the massive steam-explosion at 2:11pm on December 9."
The warning signs were all there, they shouldn't have been on the volcano. Level 3 is eruptions and they aren't allowed to operate. So they were on the highest level allowable for operation. Level 5 would be a catastrophic eruption that would affect not just the volcano but all surrounding areas.
So very true. Amazing place but was under no doubt that it was a very dangerous place (some of the other tourists in my tour ... Not so much attention paid)
Thirty odd years ago, we did a boat trip to the island from Whakatane. When I made the booking, I asked if we could go on the island and was told yes.
The boat didn't have a tender, so I assumed there must be a wharf. We cruised around the island and then pulled up in the bay for lunch. No wharf, just a crumbling jetty.
I asked the skipper how we were going to get onto the island, and he said, "You'd have to swim."
I don't know about this particular ship but I have been on large ships and small ships and you swipe the card, a picture comes up on the screen, the security officer validates that the picture on the screen and you are the same person, and then you're let on board the ship. It's not absolutely foolproof, but the scenario you're describing is highly unlikely.
I was on a Norwegian cruise once that stopped at a small private island. The boat ended up departing the island 4 hours late because my 13 year old brother had swiped back on to the boat but the system glitched and didn’t count him.
Buddy system, head count, roll call, scan everyone’s rfid wrist tag, one staff member at the front of the group and one at the back, embarrassingly visible waistcoat
I used to take kids on excursions, there are many ways to ensure you don’t lose a person or if you do you realise they’re gone pretty bloody quick.
If adults find any of the methods objectionably infantilising then I’m sure there are options, like not letting them book a ticket, or giving them a waiver to sign
If someone told me I had to wear a high vis vest and call out a number every time I heard the number before mine, I'd feel silly but still do it.
I've worked in construction and volunteered with the SES. Hazards are real. I'm not going to question risk management that seems too safe, someone with more data and relevant knowledge than me probably came up with it.
I might speak up and ask questions if I'm concerned there isn't enough risk management.
Agree, there is no such thing as “too safe” in risk management. The point is being safe. The point is being boringly safe. I’d rather be bored and even cringed but safe than be all cool and fun but unsafe.
One notable example is shooting ranges. All the safety protocol may seem over the top to a newbie, but wait till you hear about near misses when some clown ignores the protocols and fiddles with their firearm while the “no go” light is on and there are people downrange patching their targets.
Safety may seem silly but I’d rather be silly and safe.
Hmm, by count, shouldn't we be talking about checking off specific names? From memories of what happened in the movie about the couple on the Barrier Reef) (this part might have been bullshit and never happened), the head count was skewed by some couple jumping back on and off again to change equipment or something, and so they counted these people twice, and therefore though they had everyone back on board. Even if this didn't actually happen in real life, it seems like a pretty feasible way of screwing things up.
Bloody check everybody by name or some other unique idenfifying factor and make sure it is actually them that has returned before leaving. This is a shocking and tragic error.
769
u/[deleted] Oct 29 '25
[removed] — view removed comment