Catamaran capsizes off the Portugal coast. Three crew rescued, one lost

[dom]

If it was a container strike then it is likely that a lead-mine monohull might have sunk entirely.

In which case only multiple watertight bulkheads are likely to help buy time.

Anecdotal evidence certainly suggests that there is an increasing amount of garbage floating about the oceans - I can add to that with sight of some large floating steel structure mid-Channel a few years ago.

Very worrying and a terrible tragedy

 

[Greenheart]

In Jimmy Cornell's article about his new all-electric Outremer in YW, he talks about a camera device which can spot things in the water ahead of the boat. Sounds like a worthwhile gadget on boats capable of these high speeds.

I believe forward-facing sonar has been discussed here for at least as long as I've known the forum. It's a nice concept.

Jimmy Cornell's camera system may be the same or quite different, better or more applicable to sailing, but I would have expected that in very short order after such a thing could be proven a practical and reliable option, insurers and owners alike would favour and adopt the technology.

...only multiple watertight bulkheads are likely to help buy time.

No comfort to the bereaved in this sad case, but for remote offshore work in a ballasted monohull, I'd find watertight bulkheads very reassuring, and the lack thereof to be rather a concern. Do big multihulls segment their hulls for guaranteed buoyancy in extremis?

 

[kof]

I'm not convinced this boat hit anything. From the photos I've seen there is no damage to the boards (one is down, one up) or to either hull - Unless I've missed photos and there is clear damage.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was a straight capsize , although in 20 knots of wind that would be very strange.

 

[r_h]

Jimmy Cornell's camera system may be the same or quite different, better or more applicable to sailing, but I would have expected that in very short order after such a thing could be proven a practical and reliable option, insurers and owners alike would favour and adopt the technology.

That's already happening - the kit is fitted to 18 of the boats in the Vendee Globe.
I've written a piece about it for the January issue of Yachting World.

 

[Roberto]

camera system may be the same or quite different, better or more applicable to sailing, but I would have expected that in very short order after such a thing could be proven a practical and reliable option

FWIW, this OSCAR system costs around 30k euro. Vendée globe boats having installed it have already had bumps into floating objects, as far as I know no skipper reported having heard any alarms from the system, or having safely avoided a floating obstacle thanks to the system.

 

[Greenheart]

Interesting, though not necessarily very encouraging.

It wouldn't need to be a difficult bit of kit to test...without necessarily running a long offshore race.

I saw a log - actually it was a tree-trunk - floating in the Itchen the other day. It was all I could do to move it a few inches. I doubt it weighed less than 400kg. Not a pleasant thing to run a fast light yacht (or a speedboat's propeller) into.

I think I prefer the idea of solidity of construction - and sealable compartments - over electronics and sonic beams.

 

[dom]

I think I prefer the idea of solidity of construction - and sealable compartments - over electronics and sonic beams.

The tech will undoubtedly come on.

In the meantime, be careful of the "solidity of construction" argument in the absence of watertight bulkheads. It's a notion incorrectly thrown around on here to exaggerate the seaworthiness of MABs, IPs, etc. The premise is sound; indeed, a friend of mine a few berths down tells me his 60'ish Nordhavn has a hull bottom constructed of 5" solid laminate and walls of 1 3/4"!! Nordhavn say it's as strong as steel and can back it up scientifically. Fair enough, but a ballasted yacht would barely move with such a layup. And yet even Nordhavns have watertight bulkheads.

In practice, the use of modern materials and techniques, materials like Kevlar, etc. means that modern yacht layups are just as strong as their forefathers, but far short of the likes of Nordhavn. Most worrying of all is a long Titanic-like glancing impact which compromises a large forward section and will leave even a watertight-bulkhead equipped yacht floating nose down and bunched. It's last job being to provide a safe access platform for the liferaft.

Sobering stuff.

 

[RichardS]

FWIW, this OSCAR system costs around 30k euro. Vendée globe boats having installed it have already had bumps into floating objects, as far as I know no skipper reported having heard any alarms from the system, or having safely avoided a floating obstacle thanks to the system.

First big impact for a VG boat was reported yesterday. The Skipper has reported no permanent damage but he lost a lot of diesel so it might be worse that he thinks.

Richard

 

[GHA]

A 5t boat a 20Kts has about 8 times more kinetic energy than a 10t boat doing 5 kts.....

 

[caiman]

The OSCAR has a max range of 500m ?
20k is roughly 10m/s, so 50 seconds from the alarm going off(at max range)to decide on avoiding action and taking it ?
Ok if you are at the helm or nearby at the time I guess.
As OSCAR is developed/refined the detection range will increase ?
Cheers

 

[kof]

Not sure where this 2o knots is coming from. The original report said the wind was 20 knots , not the boat speed.

The OSCAR has a max range of 500m ?
20k is roughly 10m/s, so 50 seconds from the alarm going off(at max range)to decide on avoiding action and taking it ?
Ok if you are at the helm or nearby at the time I guess.
As OSCAR is developed/refined the detection range will increase ?
Cheers

 

[dunedin]

The OSCAR has a max range of 500m ?
20k is roughly 10m/s, so 50 seconds from the alarm going off(at max range)to decide on avoiding action and taking it ?
Ok if you are at the helm or nearby at the time I guess.
As OSCAR is developed/refined the detection range will increase ?
Cheers

Yes, suspect OSCAR won’t help much in this race. Not yet interfaced to autopilot to take evasive action.

But in 4 years I expect range will have increased substantially and boats will auto swerve to avoid. Hang on tight when that happens on foils at 30 knots !

 

[Frogmogman]

Not sure where this 2o knots is coming from. The original report said the wind was 20 knots , not the boat speed.

Its from a report on another forum in GHA's post #46

 

[r_h]

Spec says it will detect a 6.5m object at a distance of 1km and at least one of the Vendee Globe competitors already has it interfaced with the pilot.

 

[LONG_KEELER]

I think I prefer the idea of solidity of construction - and sealable compartments - over electronics and sonic beams.

What about a crumple zone to absorb the kinetic energy like cars ?

Could work quite nicely for cats. More difficult perhaps for ballasted boats where aerodynamics could probably be more of a problem.

 

[Tomahawk]

Tomahawk has foam filled waterproof compartments below the water line up front so if I do ever hit something... she should not sink if holed.. But the boards have no where to go neither does the sail drive

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I have an idea that 'record breaking' Tris,eg Jules Verne Trophy contenders etc, have a form of forward looking Sonar?
This for spotting Flotsam/Jetsam,and for 'bergy bits'when well South.
On fast Cats, the windward dagger board is extended rather than the leeward,so that if the windward hull lifts, the dagger becomes less effective,and the smooth leeward hull has less lateral resistance,to allow the boat to slip sideways.
At least that's how it was on a Formula 40 I sailed on a lifetime ago.
At 20K,the sails would be set to the apparent wind,and so sheeted in quite hard.A sudden reduction of speed by hitting something(or stuffing the leeward bow into a big wave)would bring the apparent wind aft, and so finish off a pitchpole by pushing the boat finally over.
A sheet 'fuse' has been mentioned which should 'blow' the sheets past a certain angle of heel.?

Very sad.
Cheers

I would have though that a forward looking sonar would have insufficient range to be of much use - the power consumption to achieve a greater range than 100-200m would be very high. And at 20 knots that would only be 10-20 seconds notice.

Small icebergs wtc. can be detected by radar, but of course, if there's a lot of surface scatter, smaller ones won't show up. And again, there''s the issue of power.

 

[caiman]

Frogmogman-thank you for responding to the reply from kof.
Yes,that is the origin from were I'm basing my assumption about the boat speed.
However,would not a Cat such as that be sailing at,or close to wind speed anyway?Depending ,of course,on the sea conditions and the wind aspect?
AntarcticPilot-Thanks for your reply,I am asking the question re forward looking sonar on the VG v JV tracker thread over in the Racing section.I take your point regarding clutter.A trick I used years ago trying to differentiate between weak 'real' and false radar returns was to use the 'trail' function for a short while.If a line was 'painted' on the screen,it was more likely to be a real object rather than sea clutter.
I cannot believe that VG boats,and soon Gitana in the Jules Verne Trophy are not using radar,as well as AIS in their respective races for collision avoidance.I believe that the JV boats use a water driven generator? I am asking this,and I don't mind being corrected/educated.
Thanks again.
Cheers

 

[kof]

Yeah I'm familiar with that post - I think he/she misread the original report. It said "in 20 knots" not "at 20 knots". Anyways I'm still not convinced this boat hit anything. There is no damage on either hull that I can see - this is a carbon hull so hitting a container or even a whale would show something on the hull.

Its from a report on another forum in GHA's post #46

 

[dom]

Yeah I'm familiar with that post - I think he/she misread the original report. It said "in 20 knots" not "at 20 knots". Anyways I'm still not convinced this boat hit anything. There is no damage on either hull that I can see - this is a carbon hull so hitting a container or even a whale would show something on the hull.

There is insufficient evidence to reach hard conclusions at this stage.

Best to wait until the facts are established.

Especially considering the loss of life.