If the black box isn't found on the surface, I have to wonder if the bazzillions of taxpayer dollars that would be spent to find it with an ROV would be worth it. The general causal factors surrounding the incident are fairly obvious. If it's about settling law suits, then let the litigants foot that bill. Given the circumstances, I doubt that safety regulations would change as a result of findings.
Actually the causal factors are not at all obvious. We know engines failed, but have no idea why. We know 5 Polish mechanics were on board, but not what they were doing. We know it was in a hurricane path but not why. We know nothing about the condition of the boat. Three former crewmen have reported many issues in that regard. We don't know about the communication between the captain and the company. We don't know how well the cargo was loaded and secured. We don't know about the crew and their training. We don't know the weight of the cargo or the center of balance. Much loading is done based on standard container weights. Was there anything unique about the containers on this ship? There are probably many factors involved.
The investigation is like that of any other boat or vehicle or plane in the US. They are not done for litigants, they are done to save lives. Look at the charter bus companies that have been put out of business and others with additional requirements. Did the ship owner push, encourage, or fail to stop the ship from a dangerous undertaking. What pressure was there? What were the known issues with this boat and it's boiler system? If this was an airplane crashed, wouldn't we also want to make an attempt to retrieve the black box? Should this boat have been removed from service previously? The last inspection was early this year, was it done satisfactorily or what might have happened since then? Will the CG learn something that improves their inspections and oversight and prevents this from recurring?
There is nothing simple about this.
in January 2011, the sister ship, the El Yunque, lost water to its boiler, triggering a shutdown of the boiler fires, causing the ship to lose propulsion for three hours. Should this have been a warning, especially with people on board to work on a boiler? I read a statement that indicated the captain had a plan to clear in advance of the hurricane if everything went right. Do we predicate our plans on everything going right? Maybe there's a lot for other skilled, respected captains to still learn from this. Maybe a bit more attention to be paid to Murphy's law, especially when dealing with hurricanes. In April 2011, the El Faro temporarily lost power when the generator breaker tripped and main propulsion was lost. Engineers later found that it was caused by a severed wire. Things do happen, especially to old boats about to make their final run before refit and being sent to another area for smaller runs.
I'm sure the sister ship will be looked at closely for any clues and also before allowing it on the water again.
One crewman who ended his time in January said "The El Faro was on its ... needed a death certificate. It was a rust bucket," Cash said. "You don't take a ship like that ... that ship wasn't supposed to be on the water." Well, the USCG did inspect it after January. Obviously they didn't agree.
Investigation is primarily to learn. Secondarily it may assess blame as part of that. Was there any irresponsibility on the part of the ship owner? If so, that merits harsh actions.
By doing such investigations on planes we've found major issues in the past that have led to the grounding of many other planes until changes were made. Now, there aren't many other ships like this one, but it could still lead to some changes.
As to litigation this information isn't really likely to change it that much. The ship owner is liable regardless and his insurance will be expected to pay.
As to agencies lawyering up, there's no lawyering of agencies. Only lawyers are the ship owner and his insurer's defending against the crew families.
The NTSB, which will make records -- including documents, diagrams, interview transcripts and data -- public throughout the investigation through its open docket, is expected to release a final report on its findings within 12-18 months. I've read many of their reports and they seem to me to do an excellent job. I believe wholeheartedly that their overall work saves lives. It saves lives on the roads, in the air and on the water. They are already well into the investigation, having been conducting many interviews and collecting a lot of information and data.