Bouba
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately your newspaper probably got soggy before it got to youI'm not at home so can't comment on the river Mole in Surrey, but if it had risen by that amount it would have been mentioned in the news
Bayesian Interim Report
- Thread starter DreadShips
- Start date
Boathook
Well-Known Member
Newspaper was delivered OK yesterday. It is 1992 isn't it
Bouba
Well-Known Member
As you know....but for the edification of the masses....the river Mole is near St Tropez
Boathook
Well-Known Member
You mean La Mole which is inferior to the River Mole. You must get the wording correct Bouba !
billskip
Well-Known Member
Also a large patch of Surrey would be a bit soggyI'm not at home so can't comment on the river Mole in Surrey, but if it had risen by that amount it would have been mentioned in the news
Bouba
Well-Known Member
La Mole…The Arsenal…whatever
franksingleton
Well-Known Member
I have not been following this debate as much was beyond my competence. I know that there has been some discussion about the decisions by skipper and crew. I apologise if my pennyworth below repeats what others have said. I have only skimmed the 300+ posts.
As we all know, the skipper is response for the safety of vessel and crew. However, in this case the skipper, according to the MAIB interim repot, was not informed about some aspects of the design of the Bayesian. It is not clear what more the skipper should have done. He had probably sailed other large boats that would not have capsized in those conditions. It will be interesting to see what the Italian court case decides.
However, more generally, and notwithstanding any questions of yacht designs we should all recognise that such storms are of too short a duration and limited extent that meaningful specific prediction is not possible. Computer model output, even using the finest scale models, is far too coarse to do other than indicate the possibility of something exceptional. Radar would probably see storms forming but the time scale would make issuing of useful warnings impossible.
In general terms, higher sea temperatures will lead to more intense storms and increasing risk of severe phenomena such as thunderstorm downbursts. Largely, this is a latent heat effect with more energy being available. This is already the case with tropical cyclones. Sea temperatures are increasing at an accelerating rate. This raises the wider question of engineering design criteria generally from large structures downwards.
As we all know, the skipper is response for the safety of vessel and crew. However, in this case the skipper, according to the MAIB interim repot, was not informed about some aspects of the design of the Bayesian. It is not clear what more the skipper should have done. He had probably sailed other large boats that would not have capsized in those conditions. It will be interesting to see what the Italian court case decides.
However, more generally, and notwithstanding any questions of yacht designs we should all recognise that such storms are of too short a duration and limited extent that meaningful specific prediction is not possible. Computer model output, even using the finest scale models, is far too coarse to do other than indicate the possibility of something exceptional. Radar would probably see storms forming but the time scale would make issuing of useful warnings impossible.
In general terms, higher sea temperatures will lead to more intense storms and increasing risk of severe phenomena such as thunderstorm downbursts. Largely, this is a latent heat effect with more energy being available. This is already the case with tropical cyclones. Sea temperatures are increasing at an accelerating rate. This raises the wider question of engineering design criteria generally from large structures downwards.
ylop
Well-Known Member
Is there definitely going to be a court case? I can't remember where it has reached in the process and the Itallian judicial process is somewhat different from "ours".
franksingleton
Well-Known Member
My understanding is the Italian authorities are still investigating the sinking of the Bayesian, including the possibility of manslaughter charges against the captain. The captain is not in custody, but he cannot leave the country.
Cerebus
N/A
I apologise if this has been asked before, but did the yacht have two anchors deployed at an angle?
Would it have made a difference? I am not au fais with the design arguments and “downflooding” specifics.
The Sir Bayden Powell dragged too, did she have two anchors out?
Or did they both only have one out because it was an unexpected weather event?
I have not sailed the med and it’s tideless nature and sudden and ferocious wind events, so know little about anchoring there.
Would it have made a difference? I am not au fais with the design arguments and “downflooding” specifics.
The Sir Bayden Powell dragged too, did she have two anchors out?
Or did they both only have one out because it was an unexpected weather event?
I have not sailed the med and it’s tideless nature and sudden and ferocious wind events, so know little about anchoring there.
westernman
Well-Known Member
I am of the opinion that one good anchor is best.
Cerebus
N/A
I agree. A good anchor of sufficient weight or design and decent length of chain. I know nothing of superyachts except what I see on tv.
A programme called “Below Decks”. Can be a little entertaining.
I have seen them deploy two anchors. I do not recall size of yacht and it was just ‘very windy’ not ‘super cell’ stuff.
I do not know if they were good anchors on the tv yachts. To my eye they seemed to be designed more for “fitting in the pocket” or looking aesthetically pleasing rather than being good anchors.
westernman
Well-Known Member
The only scenario where I would ever consider two anchors is in a very tight location, e.g. a narrow river estuary, when I would use a both a bow and stern anchor to keep the boat from moving much at all. I would not want to be anchored like that in rough and/or windy conditions though.
billskip
Well-Known Member
According to Google...but argued here....
Attachments
ylop
Well-Known Member
It's not been mentioned anywhere I've seen that they had two anchors out. Given the captain's instructions were to wake him if the wind speed exceeded 20 knots or if they dragged it doesn't seem he was expecting horrendous conditions.
Hypothetically if she has 2 anchors out, she might not have dragged, but might still have been rolled over. The crew were only alerted because she was dragging... potentially that saved many of those who did survive, another six min delay and she might have gone down with everyone still in their cabins.
billskip
Well-Known Member
All the might's and if's and but's.... so I'll add another one...if she hadn't dragged she might have not been exactly where the conditions to unsettle her existed and not gone down....fact is she did and all the armchair guessing ait goin to change that.
doug748
Well-Known Member
Now some nutter of a lawyer is suggesting that the chief engineer could have been ashore and only came on the boat at the last minute. On top of all the other false trails I would not like to be in the position of the crew in an Italian court, even before all the crap that the media are going to come up with.
.
.
Poignard
Well-Known Member
Here's an article by Christopher Deacon, International Injury Partner with Stewarts Law, that sets out the legal ramifications of this tragic case:
The Bayesian superyacht tragedy: what next for the victims, their families and loved ones?
The Bayesian superyacht tragedy: what next for the victims, their families and loved ones?
dunedin
Well-Known Member
Very interesting, thanks. This will run for some time.
newtothis
Well-Known Member
Italian courts think Jarndyce v Jarndyce was rushed through without adequate time for consideration.