Big sailboat sunk by tornado

[BruceK]

The builder also said it was unsinkable…

As attributed to Christine Keeler in The Profumo Affair "He would say that wouldn`t he?"

 

[SeaDogAK]

But as it lists more the righting moment of the keel keeps increasing and the "wronging" moment of the mast decreases. Well before 73 degrees the hull is going to direct airflow up and over the mast reducing its tilting force completely. Theoretically the boat should only lean until a sufficient portion of its mast is in the wind shadow of the hull to make the keel the dominant force.

The mast was 246 feet long. At a 73 degree list, the tip of the mast would be 72 feet above the base. Still plenty of windage at that angle.

Even with no windage, if 73 degrees is the point of negative stability (if that is the right term), that is the point at which the boat would roll over. So the keel would not right the boat after that point.

 

[Benthic2]

Italian Airforce has confirmed it was a microburst.

 

[Comodave]

One report I read said that it may have been a microburst instead of tornado/straight line winds so wind angle guesses could all be way off.

The Italian Air Force confirmed that it was indeed a downburst/microburst.

 

[psneeld]

Plus there were quite a few spreaders now at an an

The Italian Air Force confirmed that it was indeed a downburst/microburst.

Thanks...wonder if the US Military bases there can confirm that with second opinions or they just use the Italian weather sources.

 

[Ithaka7]

My current hypothesis is that the Bayesian was taking on water before it heeled. When the microburst came it heeled 20 degrees, the loose water shifted and it never recovered afterwards. The reports that it heeled 20 degrees and then continued seem to indicate that. Something was wrong with the boat way earlier than we think.

 

[twistedtree]

Has there been any definitive answer on whether the two garage doors were open or closed prior to the storm? Between crew statements and reports from the divers, I would expect a definitive answer.

 

[Benthic2]

We may not know until the raise the vessel. I am surprised that decision has already been made. I would think with remotes and divers they could do a pretty thorough investigation without the expense of recovery. I did read that the cost of recovery is born by the owner, so maybe the authorities called for raising the wreck because they don't have to pay for it.
Does an insurance company do their own investigation or do they just wait for the official gov't investigation ? If the cause is determined to be a design flaw, would the insurance company reimburse the owner and then go after the builder, or just deny the claim and make the owner pursue the builder ?

 

[psneeld]

I had read where they were concerned about pollution. So the concern is to get the oil/fuel out

At 160 feet, may just be easier to raise it. Lots of things to consider.

I was involved with the raising with a very expensive yacht off Cape May, NJ. It was a 100+ foot sportfisherman worth millions (gold plated plumbing fixtures, marble everything, and a big insurance policy reported as worth more than the yacht was).

They tried for months and weather kept hampering the efforts. We had to fly USCG inspectors out every time they thought it might be on the way up. It never really happened and the kevlar slings trying to raise it wound up sawing into the hull so all attempts were scratched. So some salvages go easy, some not so much.

 

[SeaDogAK]

FYI:
Bayesian stability report

 

[Comodave]

According to a report that I saw the lady with the infant was on deck and a large wave took the infant out of her hands. But a couple of seconds later another wave brought the infant back to her and she was able to grab the infant and then kept the infant above the water until they got into the life raft.

 

[ScottC]

According to a report that I saw the lady with the infant was on deck and a large wave took the infant out of her hands. But a couple of seconds later another wave brought the infant back to her and she was able to grab the infant and then kept the infant above the water until they got into the life raft.

Simply astounding!

 

[Comodave]

Yes, maybe the one good thing to come out of the whole ordeal.

 

[Delta Riverat]

Poseidon was gracious. Gave the innocent infant back -

 

[Comodave]

Pretty incredible isn’t it?

 

[Nick F]

FYI:
Bayesian stability report

Very interesting to read the instructions to the master. They were entirely concerned with stability while under sail with almost no concern while at anchor. The only instruction of note was to have the engine room door closed while the stern garage was open.

Also, the keel was only required to be lowered for sailing.

 

[ScottC]

Interesting new information...

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/21/europe/bayesian-yacht-watertight-safes-intl/index.html

 

[Comodave]

I just saw a video reporting that the boat builder is going to sue the owner of the yacht…

But then another report says they are not going to sue, who knows.

 

[Ertyqway]

Uh... isn't the owner dead?

 

[sunchaser]

It would seem the boat is owned by a corporate entity which the wife controls

 

[Comodave]

That is what I heard too. But they could also sue the estate.

 

[Benthic2]

Apparently the builder has 4 boats in production and the customers are cancelling or suspending their orders because sinking at anchor is not a desirable feature. I feel for the business as it is suffering and might have no fault at all. I just have trouble accepting that a vessel that has been plying the seas for 16 years had a design flaw. I think an angle of vanishing stability of 45 degrees seems low, but I don't have much feel for the elements of boat design. I spent a lot of time in a Pearson 26 as a kid and a 45 degree heel wasn't unheard of. I guess I sort of feel that if a buyer is aware of the specs for a boat and buys it anyway, you can't blame the builder. (Obviously if the builder lied about the specs, that's different.)
I also wonder to what standard a builder has to build a boat to survive a weather event. If an event is a once in a 25 year kind of event, I think it should be survivable. If it is a once in a thousand year event, I think it is unreasonable to expect that kind of survivability. I guess I'm saying I think a boat should be able to survive something that happens every "X" years. X should be greater than 25 and less than 1000, but I don't know where exactly.

 

[Delta Riverat]

I agree. A tornado can (and does) turn a whole house into toothpicks. If a water spout runs over your boat?

 

[Comodave]

Now they are saying that the lawyer that filed the suit went rogue so they fired him and pulled the suit.