Bayesian Interim Report

At this size is there any difference in the qualifications required of the master between motor and sail powered vessels?
 
My understanding is that the Perini Navi manufacturers documents (manual) state that the keel should be lowered in offshore sailing conditions and can be raised for motoring purposes. The keel is a centreplate which is housed in a ballasted keel box.

Surprised there has been little mention of the down flooding angle - which I understand to be about 45 degrees due to open (generators and air con running) air vents in the rear of the hull and possibly the lowering steps into accommodation along the side decks
My impression is that the capsize was so fast that it’s considered that the downflooding through relatively small ports couldn’t have made the difference between safe and catastrophic. And that it was being blown past its AVS that was the real issue.
 
For some perspective....the Cutty Sark doesn’t have a fin and it’s main mast is 47 m....the Bayesian with the fin up (or down) has a 75 m mast. That strikes me as a huge difference

Good comparison.

...and if you put two 1m square air inlets that can't go on the centre line onto Cutty Sark's deck I suspect it wouldn't have survived its first voyage.

I think the fundamental problem with this style of yacht is that they have to have two great big metre square holes in them and those holes can't be far enough away from the water. Never mind 70 degrees at about 45 degrees it's letting in 60 tons a minute.

On a traditional ship or yacht they can be high up and/or on the centreline, not so on something styled like a sailing boat.

I appreciate it was turned over, but for me the biggest lesson here is that it didn't need to be turned over to sink - jammed mainsheet could sink it.
 
…I appreciate it was turned over, but for me the biggest lesson here is that it didn't need to be turned over to sink - jammed mainsheet could sink it.
It’s a moot point, a jammed mainsheet could sink any yacht in the right conditions.

The Curry Sark was ballasted with cargo or stones to be able to sail safely. Many sailing ships of a similar design sank when they were overwhelmed, including the last wind jammer in the late 1950’s

Sailing a Sigma 41, full sail, F1, Firth of Clyde, I got knocked down, pinned flat, in clear blue sky, sunny day. The wind blew down Loch Fyne at speed, about a F8. The boat luffed up, remained pinned down, water cascading over the side decks, until the Genoa sheet got dumped and the sail taken down.
 
Sailing a Sigma 41, full sail, F1, Firth of Clyde, I got knocked down, pinned flat, in clear blue sky, sunny day. The wind blew down Loch Fyne at speed, about a F8. The boat luffed up, remained pinned down, water cascading over the side decks, until the Genoa sheet got dumped and the sail taken down.

I've had similar near Tobermory.

Neither of us sank. If the companionway hadn't been on the centre line, we might have. That's exaclty what I'm saying. By design a Sigma 41 survives a knockdown - even with (I suspect) the washboards out. (Never heard of a Sigma 41. I'm off to google.)
 
Which only goes to prove you knowledge is somewhat limited..
I doubt many if any reading this thread has the answer you are looking for without actually doing searches for that information the answer to your question could simply be "yes" and "the difference is different depending on design characteristic."...which I presume (it's dangerous to presume here) you are capable of.
Flaming was able to answer the point which in any case was erased in a reflective manner ( rhetorical ) but there are Southerly owners on here and probably others with lifting keels and or centreboards.
Keep digging
 
Good comparison.

...and if you put two 1m square air inlets that can't go on the centre line onto Cutty Sark's deck I suspect it wouldn't have survived its first voyage.

I think the fundamental problem with this style of yacht is that they have to have two great big metre square holes in them and those holes can't be far enough away from the water. Never mind 70 degrees at about 45 degrees it's letting in 60 tons a minute.

On a traditional ship or yacht they can be high up and/or on the centreline, not so on something styled like a sailing boat.

I appreciate it was turned over, but for me the biggest lesson here is that it didn't need to be turned over to sink - jammed mainsheet could sink it.
For examples read about the Mary Rose and Vasa
 
Wasn't it the extra gun deck that was her undoing?
I think the major refit that sometimes gets pointed to was several years before the capsize, though it's possible it had been upgunned again and that had affected stability. I think there's an eyewitness report that there was a sudden gust of wind as it turned, but...

It's analogous to Bayesian in that the gunports were open and allowed massive downflooding though. Just not a maiden voyage.
 
Now Vasa... Whew. Most naval architects at least agree on how big an inch is, and that these inches should be the same on both sides of the boat. And that's only the start of your problems...
 
Read elsewhere that the centerboard weighed 60 tons, so would be influential.
But, I doubt that the crew thought they were vunerable to wind with the sails down.
 
Read elsewhere that the centerboard weighed 60 tons, so would be influential.
But, I doubt that the crew thought they were vunerable to wind with the sails down.
That is interesting.....because that’s a lot of weight that moves up to raise the center of gravity
 
If the mast is hitting the bottom in 50m of water I'm going out on a limb to suggest that whether it snaps or not is the least of your concerns!

I always feel a deep sense of embarrassment when i have to sail part of a Laser regatta with black mud on the head of my sail

On the other hand, if it causes people to keep their distance, maybe it helps...
 
Top