sailaboutvic
Well-known member
these are people we met some years back.
Use a perventer guys .
Anatomy of a Tragedy at Sea - Blue Water Sailing
Use a perventer guys .
Anatomy of a Tragedy at Sea - Blue Water Sailing
a real tragedy to our follow cruiser
- Thread starter sailaboutvic
- Start date
Buck Turgidson
Well-known member
sailaboutvic
Well-known member
Did I suggest they didnt?
Of cause reef early but its easy to get caught out .
billskip
Well-known member
Very sad, and yes it's very easy to get caught out.
First for me is for any voyage over 36 hours maximum I would want minimum 6 crew to ensure good rest periods.
Yes reef early, what's the rush,
better 6knots overnight than have panic.
The sea doesn't take prisoners, its dangerous, err on the side of caution, then err a bit more.
wilkinsonsails
Active member
Sadly some in boom furling systems are so critical with criteria for a good furl ,it’s not always possible in even in benign conditions to get a decent reef .
My experience has led me to have a deep distrust of their reliability.
Night time reefing in stormy conditions ,the sail cannot be reduced quickly enough .
I don’t think I would recommend or fit ,on a Blue water yacht .
Deeply saddened to hear of Karl and Annmarie death.
My experience has led me to have a deep distrust of their reliability.
Night time reefing in stormy conditions ,the sail cannot be reduced quickly enough .
I don’t think I would recommend or fit ,on a Blue water yacht .
Deeply saddened to hear of Karl and Annmarie death.
Zing
Well-known member
That’s a shock. I met them a few times a few months ago in the Caribbean. A very nice couple, positive, friendly and modest. They were at the start of their adventures and were looking forward to cruising the world in their beautiful brand new CNB66, which they were so proud of. Very sad.
Yngmar
Well-known member
This is why I never liked boats with the main sheet/traveller in the middle of the cockpit. Fine maybe for Sunday racing around the buoys, but for cruising long distance it's a constant source of danger you need to be acutely aware of. When you're very tired and/or?hits the fan, it's easy for this awareness to fade and go terribly wrong in mere moments.
Looking at this CNB66 cockpit, it seems exceptionally ill suited for going offshore in rough weather. Wide open spaces to cross with handholds far apart, low coamings to tumble out of and sharp corners to crack your ribs on. It looks nice for a sundowner though, which is probably what sells it.
Looking at this CNB66 cockpit, it seems exceptionally ill suited for going offshore in rough weather. Wide open spaces to cross with handholds far apart, low coamings to tumble out of and sharp corners to crack your ribs on. It looks nice for a sundowner though, which is probably what sells it.
Wansworth
Well-known member
Advert on ybw banner for a 595 oyster with one man on the helm and female crew lounging on lee cockpit cushion,everything seemably in control have we gone too far in yacht design in encouraging the idea that technology an make sea going practical for a small crew
Zing
Well-known member
Yes, that was my main take-away too. All sheets can be dangerous and best located out of the way, but I hadn’t fully appreciated how much greater the danger is with a centrally located point. Clearly a big length of rope whipping across from an uncontrolled boom in a storm is going to be deadly to anyone nearby, even at at the helm or at the rear of the cockpit.
Hand-holds are poor indeed. That can be easily fixed though and it didn’t seem to be a factor here.
billskip
Well-known member
Single handed sailing is not really a problem, and sometimes better than trying to educate someone at a time of concentration.
That said, any boat that is going to be sailed off shore should be equipped to control the sails from the cockpit imo.
The CNB66 is I'm sure well capable of coping with the conditions in the write up, but it would appear that although qualified,experience was lacking.
I understand the necessity for time saving on delivery skippers, but to try and fit into small uncertain weather windows for cruising and not reefing early as a precaution I dont understand.
KeelsonGraham
Well-known member
Have you actually used an in-boom furler? Provided you have the correct boom angle it’s easy to reef quickly. Quicker, in fact, than many other reefing systems.
Getting the boom angle correct is also relatively easy if you fit an angle indicator onto the vang. If you don’t pay attention to boom angle and do get a jam, it’s usually at the equivalent point of a 3rd reef. So not a catastrophe in all but the worst conditions.
Our boat has in-cockpit controls, so reefing by the single person on watch is perfectly doable. But no boat, including ours, will reef with the main still powered.
Having said all that, the helming positions on the CNB 66 look horrendously exposed. What’s even more difficult to understand is a £140k electric furling system that isn’t controlled from the cockpit.
Finally, a mainsheet that comprises just a single turn around a single block - WTF.
Last edited:
KeelsonGraham
Well-known member
On a 60 footer maybe. But on typical mid sized yachts a crew of three gets you 6 hrs sleep a night, with plenty of opportunity to catch up during the day.
billskip
Well-known member
When you are in weather like described in the link and big confused seas, it's not sleep, its sheer exhaustion.
One has to experience conditions to know what can cause sheer exhaustion, fear in the darkness with all hell let loose is not something I would wish on anybody.
This boat is probably a sound boat, but and theres a big but, when things are getting challenging one shouldn't be fighting with systems that require energy to go forward to the mast to operate a furling system.
The reason I say six crew is not because I dont think it could be handled with just two, but because the story indicates to me they wanted a fast passage in a tight weather window.
For me I would have prepared the boat for worst conditions prior to sunset, ok it would have slowed me down, but I didn't set out as a race.
Last edited:
KeelsonGraham
Well-known member
It’s easy to be wise after the event. To my mind, they didn’t doing things terribly wrong. They just got terribly unlucky.
billskip
Well-known member
Yes I agree, armchair sailors with hindsight, but something was seriously wrong for two people to sustain life threatening injuries in succession, and eventually die
Is unlucky?
If the keel had fallen off that's unlucky.
Wansworth
Well-known member
Having been in small coasters with small crews in normal situations everything is ok it’s when it all goes pear shaped that you need to call on reserves of stamina.Two summers ago I crewed on a 45 footer ,the sheets were 18 mm the gooseneck needed a step to reach everything was heavey to pull or gather in.A sixty footer is a very powerful machine with tremendous loads involved.Probably as mentioned it would have been more seaman like to shorten down at dusk which used to be the norm now we have too much faith in technology .From a personnel point of view I would not consider the deck plan particularly great for short handed ocean sailing…….but I an only an armchair sailer
Zing
Well-known member
No, that’s bad engineering.
Laminar Flow
Well-known member
Actually, yes and it can be a right gefaffle, precisely because the boom has to have the exact angle for it to work flawlessly. The margins of misalignment of said angle are quite small. A reefing system that does not work perfectly and particularly in the "worst of conditions", is not worth it's money and definitely not 140 K.
As to boat size: as one designer of my acquaintance said: As of a certain size of boat managing them has more akin to operating heavy machinery. The risks are proportional
tkalfaoglu
Member
I have a feeling we do not have the whole story here. After all it is based on the account of the surviving crew.
I am sure that IF the survivors had made any mistakes, like leaving the boom loose, then they would not mention it to the authorities.
I am sure that IF the survivors had made any mistakes, like leaving the boom loose, then they would not mention it to the authorities.
Supertramp
Well-known member
I don't have experience of blue water sailing but from this analysis and that of other accidents it is the human factor that often tips the balance.
Different boats and equipment call for different behaviours and tactics. It's easy to see the weak spots in this boat in the situation described but they weren't doing anything extreme or unusual overall.
There were several points where different decisions could have been made well in advance of the journey and its unforseen weather, especially whether and how to shorten sail at night but also watch patterns. Carrying full sail while the skipper has 4 hours off in the darkest hours can be questioned too. Easier to rest for a longer period in daylight when changing or adjusting sails is less demanding.
The comparison with heavy machinery is a good one. In industry the risk assessment process can be formalised, involve several people and be done in advance If your boom is a big safety risk, then adjustments for wind and weather should reflect this. And practices will be different when passage making versus racing. On a boat, risk assessment is often done by one person (skipper), often subconsciously and under pressure (and perhaps while half asleep) rather than in advance. Making conservative choices well in advance seems a wise practice to me.
I don't judge - these were all people who knew what they were doing, and the outcome is truly tragic.
Different boats and equipment call for different behaviours and tactics. It's easy to see the weak spots in this boat in the situation described but they weren't doing anything extreme or unusual overall.
There were several points where different decisions could have been made well in advance of the journey and its unforseen weather, especially whether and how to shorten sail at night but also watch patterns. Carrying full sail while the skipper has 4 hours off in the darkest hours can be questioned too. Easier to rest for a longer period in daylight when changing or adjusting sails is less demanding.
The comparison with heavy machinery is a good one. In industry the risk assessment process can be formalised, involve several people and be done in advance If your boom is a big safety risk, then adjustments for wind and weather should reflect this. And practices will be different when passage making versus racing. On a boat, risk assessment is often done by one person (skipper), often subconsciously and under pressure (and perhaps while half asleep) rather than in advance. Making conservative choices well in advance seems a wise practice to me.
I don't judge - these were all people who knew what they were doing, and the outcome is truly tragic.
