Cornish Cruising has incredibly safe boats.

Status
Not open for further replies.
photodog said:
Egads man, now your really gonna get me worried! I was on my back inspecting the quadrant/cables/attatchments etc in mid August...

Steering failure is one of my big fears... the other one being losing the keel when working upwind... If I lose the rig I would brick myself.. but I dont think it would mean the loss of the boat...

I would rather not blow up at breakfast as well.
Click to expand...

Suggest cutting down on the baked beans then :rolleyes:
 
Have you got anything slightly wider than 7889 (number 6) that shows the entire area of contact between the hull and the keel?



Thats a great set of pics BTW!
 
Is it normal to have 'progressive' rusting across the hull/keel interface (water ingress?), just those four bolts doesn't look much to hold a 1.7 tonne keel on, there doesn't seem to be any hull deformation aft of the keel - suggesting fatigue??

Great to see the photos, the story is still astonishing on so many levels though... would make a great case for an ethics class. I still pin the blame on the original party who didn't fully disclose what might have happened.

Anyone know how the keel was found (needle in a haystack unless it was above low water mark)?
 
Boomshanka said:
Is it normal to have 'progressive' rusting across the hull/keel interface (water ingress?), just those four bolts doesn't look much to hold a 1.7 tonne keel on, there doesn't seem to be any hull deformation aft of the keel - suggesting fatigue??
Click to expand...

The four bolts at the front merely attach the front of the keel, there's plenty more bolts ;-)

These bolts look bent and sheared to me!!
 
It says a lot for the hull strength that bolts of that size sheared without damaging the hull itself. It also adds reason to be glad that Jeanneau keel bolts are glassed over inside since on many boats there would surely have been significant leakage.

It also begs the question what the crew of that thing were doing to cause that amount of damage, not to mention how they survived that impact without significant whiplash injury to themselves.
 
heres a couple more, I'm afraid they're not great as most of these were on my phone rather than the camera.

I would like to question whether anyone can understand why the 'stump' (sorry dont know what its called) which goes into the keel apparently suffered no damage...surely if the keel hit something hard enough to cause all the bolts to shear the way they have, then that stump part would have shown some damage, as on the side (closest to where it hit) broke and then tore at the other side causing the whole thing to come off? Hope this makes sense, I'm struggling to explain what I mean. :confused:
 
We are probably assuming it something whilst moving forwards at speed, but maybe it grounded and was wedged solid, then fell over sideways shearing the bolts and leaving the stub undamaged? The bolts appear to have chosen to shear at the point where they enter the keel rather than where they exit the hull, possibly because there was a hard spot there compared to a hole in the glass hull filled with mastik?
 
Robin said:
It also adds reason to be glad that Jeanneau keel bolts are glassed over inside since on many boats there would surely have been significant leakage.
Click to expand...

this could also be viewed as a a negative aspect...surely had there been a significant amount of water entering the bilges, we would have never got out of the marina before realising a problem. I'm guessing the chances are greater that we could have effectively pumped the bilges long enough to get back in (had we even got out without noticing), than the chances of us managing to sail for as long as we did, with no keel and without capsizing (although of course we did somehow).
 
I don't think the keel could have been between 2 rocks as suggested. The stump would have been damaged or torn off.

I hope the previous skipper is brought to task - he/she owes an explanation.
 
oopsmykeelfelloff said:
this could also be viewed as a a negative aspect...surely had there been a significant amount of water entering the bilges, we would have never got out of the marina before realising a problem. I'm guessing the chances are greater that we could have effectively pumped the bilges long enough to get back in (had we even got out without noticing), than the chances of us managing to sail for as long as we did, with no keel and without capsizing (although of course we did somehow).
Click to expand...

I think the leak then might have meant the boat never returned from that original charter and would be keeping the keel company - albeit in two parts, on the bottom! On balance I like the glassed over idea.
 
mmm, I can see that charter companies will be extending the inventory check at the end of a cruise. Let's see...

Mast √
Engine √
Rudder √
Keel ... oooops


or you could wait until another keel falls off a J*no or B*v and join the two boats to make a rather wide catamaran.
 
Last edited:
I have to say... thats a bit scary.

I am no structural expert, so hopefully some will come on and give us the benefit...

But the only damage appears to be to the bolts themselves... and the keel appears to have seperated from the boat almost entirely kleenly..

This says to me that the laminate is stronger than the steel bolts...

So something must have taken place to make the bolts weaker than the laminate....

Looking at the join it appears that there has been the ingress... could this be a long term problem... Maybe the keel was never attatched properly at the factory... which allowed the bolts to corrode over time and then to fail after a minor shock...

Possibly exacerbated over the years by a number of minor collisions which didnt cause visible damage..

Does look like a failure of the bolts though... versus a big grounding/collision.
 
photodog said:
Does look like a failure of the bolts though... versus a big grounding/collision.
Click to expand...

it would be good to have details of what REALLY happened to the original charteres - the ones who were sailing in the IoS.

Maybe ScillyPete knows where the keel has been found: is it anywhere near the surface (say at low water)?
 
Presumably the join mastik stayed with the keel rather than the hull? There would be a hard edge where the bolts (studs really) entered the iron keel, whereas where they went though the hull there would have been a clearance hole and a flexible mastik. Earlier damage could well have caused a leak that might have set up crevice corrosion (where oxygen is excluded from S/S) but I would have thought it localised and unlikely to have affected all bolts. I think of ll things the 'shock' here was not minor!
 
Robin said:
Earlier damage could well have caused a leak that might have set up crevice corrosion (where oxygen is excluded from S/S) but I would have thought it localised and unlikely to have affected all bolts. I think of ll things the 'shock' here was not minor!
Click to expand...

Well thats what I would have thought.... but even if one or two of the bolts were at full strength... then I would have thought there would have been considerable damage were those bolts were ripped from the hull.... (Instead of failing...)

ALL the bolts appear to have failed in a almost identical manner.. which seems to say to me that there must have been a issue affecting all of em...

Which seems to say either a manufactureing fault... or if the keel had ever been off in the past then a issue from the re-installation...??
 
Robin said:
I think the leak then might have meant the boat never returned from that original charter and would be keeping the keel company - albeit in two parts, on the bottom! On balance I like the glassed over idea.
Click to expand...


possibly, although they may have not attempted to bring her back from the scillies had they had water coming in...although given their track records maybe they would have tried lol :D
 
jimi said:
The four bolts at the front merely attach the front of the keel, there's plenty more bolts ;-)
Click to expand...

As far as I can see from the pictures, there are four to one side of the downwards projecting lug and one on the other side. That seems to cover almost all the top surface of the keel - are you sure that there are more?

I'd put money on there being more to this than a grounding, even a hard one. What sort of blow could break five (at least) hulking great stainless bolts and leave the grp structure, including the locating lug, without a scratch?

I'd love to see a detailed photograph of the fracture surfaces.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Top