(f) Designated manifestly unsafe for a specific voyage on a specific body of water due to:
(1) Unsuitable design or configuration, or
(2) Improper construction or inadequate material condition, or
(3) Improper or inadequate operational or safety equipment, and set forth in an order issued by a District Commander according to the provisions of § 177.04.
I’d imagine it’s because no country’s coast guard has jurisdiction over international waters. IIRC, they shipped OceanGate out on what was presumably an actual seaworthy vessel, then once they were out in the badlands, nobody could stop them killing themselves.
But they left from somewhere, and I thought I had read that he had industry people concerned with his building practices. So people were aware that it wouldn’t be sea worthy for what he was purporting to do.
Thought the same thing so I googled “manifestly unsafe voyage”:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/33/177.07
(f) Designated manifestly unsafe for a specific voyage on a specific body of water due to:
(1) Unsuitable design or configuration, or
(2) Improper construction or inadequate material condition, or
(3) Improper or inadequate operational or safety equipment, and set forth in an order issued by a District Commander according to the provisions of § 177.04.
Wonder why the OceanGate guy was not dealt with under this.
I’d imagine it’s because no country’s coast guard has jurisdiction over international waters. IIRC, they shipped OceanGate out on what was presumably an actual seaworthy vessel, then once they were out in the badlands, nobody could stop them killing themselves.
But they left from somewhere, and I thought I had read that he had industry people concerned with his building practices. So people were aware that it wouldn’t be sea worthy for what he was purporting to do.
$$$