Loss of yacht - lessons to learn

[jimi]

I'm horrified that Beneteau bolt a 2 ton keel to their hull with 6 or 7 bolts with just large washers on the inside. It would also seem that all the bolts are in line. Any lateral load must put tremendous loads on the hull GRP. Surely designers should allow for some grounding in a boats life because it does happen often. If the structure cannot take a typical grounding they will get a very bad press if keels fall off. Bavs first suffered loss of reputation, then Jeanneau by a keel coming off with hardly a touch and now it would seem Beneteau also.

My old boat has a big flange at the top of the keel . There are 6 bolts spaced at least 12" centres across the centre line and there is a stainless steel plate 1/2" thick 4" wide and goes right across both bolts which are at least 1" diameter. The flange is recessed into the hull moulding so it doesent add drag. So boats with bolted on keels can be designed strongly.

Just think what would happen to a car makers reputation if the wheels fell off if the the car hit a kerb at some time in its past. Designers have to allow for some misuse by the user. Someone ought to tell Bruce Farr!

If the Jeanneau you are referring to is the one in the Scillies, I saw that boat when it was lifted, there were a considerable amount of keel bolts in two rows all of which were bent and sheared. The boat must have been tanking along full speed when the bottom of the keel hit an immoveaveable object. IMHO it says more about the strength of the hull rather than the weakness of the keel bolts. The charterers of that boat would in my opinion have been guilty of manslaughter if there had been any fatal consequences as a result of them failing to report the incident. They were aware of what had happened and were able to say tell the exact location when subsequently questioned.

I'm wondering if there is any easy and cheap way to inspect the integrity of bolts other than by drawing them as visual inspection will not show anything unless its blindingly obvious.

 

[Neil_Y]

This incident has raised some questions that could save lives in the future so I think the discussions are good, even so close to the event, there are also many people here who I respect the opinions of as they clearly have years and many miles of experience, it's a very useful resource to all saillors.

There will always be sinkings and breakages and the need to abandon yachts at sea, so rather than looking at prevention Snowleopards look at the survival after a disaster is perhaps more useful.

If it is fact that they only had one liferaft and it was a 12 man I think the size of liferaft may have had an impact on the decision to or ability to get it ready to launch quickly. The size of liferaft you choose for your boat or passage is an important decision to take.

My feeling is I would not have set off with 4 people and one 12 man liferaft. From reports I've read after the Sydney Hobart storm and on what I was taught doing a sea survival course, you want your liferaft to be full or as full as possible. It is less likely to invert/tumble in breaking seas, you will stay warmer longer as it's a smaller space to heat and you benefit from the heat of the others with you and in this case would have been far easier to launch. The nagging question (easy with hindsight I know) in my mind is why would you agree to skipper a yacht in the very likely rough cold water on this rouite with a liferaft that big relative to crew numbers? Put the 12 man on a bunk and hire a 4/6 man ocean liferaft.

Keels, rigs and through hull fittings will break, some boats will hit whales or containers and yachts will continue to sink, lets think about preparation to cope with what happens.

Did they have a dinghy? I would have thought so why was that not inflated and on the transom?

 

[jimi]

I think there is 2 angles:
1) Simple and cheap preventative measures, hence my question on keel bolt inspection earlier.
2) Surviving the worst.

on 2 , I fear the liferaft size was irrelevant here as it was not deployed, I agee that smaller is better I sold my 8 man last year and replaced it with a 4 man

 

[Tranona]

I'm horrified that Beneteau bolt a 2 ton keel to their hull with 6 or 7 bolts with just large washers on the inside.

Think you will find the centre part of the keel has 3 pairs of bolts. It is not uncommon to have single bolts at the ends as there is not enough width in the casting to take a pair. You will find many older boats with narrow base keels have the same arrangement. The bolts go through a structural grid inside the hull, not just the hull.

 

[sarabande]

assuming that a grounding, or hitting a rock with the keel will 'crack' the hull joint, what about a few sea water sensors built in to the joint and connected to warning lights ? Yes, boat electrics are susceptible to adjustment or being ignored, but if it's a coding requirement to have them working ?

Similarly, continuity circuits wired to each top and bottom of each bolt so that if one shears, again a red light appears somewhere.


I have a feeling that we could learn a lot from aircraft and race cars which have all kinds of strain gauges and tell tales built in to the chassis. On the forum we have learned quite recently from Tinkicker that vehicle engines have overheat detectors glued to the side of the engine to indicate operation above standard temps; thus, some form of recording impact along the edges of the keel ?

 

[Laundryman]

I'm not a racer and I bow to the forum users who are far more experienced than I. It strikes me that here was a crew who delighted in pushing themselves and their boat to the limits,Atlantic crossing,racing and little fear of the weather. A world apart from my pootling around the Solent. When signs of taking on water appeared, did they take their foot off the gas? When the weather turned really bad, did they consider their experience, strength and determination would win through? If the water ingress was the start of a keel problem and they didn't realise the cause, would they have continued to battle the elements spurred on by their racing pedigree and confidence? It's very easy to blame the boat, builder or designer but when you push things to the limit, something has to give. I, like many others on this forum actually felt pain when I heard the news that the upturned hull had been found. Perhaps limping home was less than their macho confidence would allow. Will we ever know ?

 

[onesea]

I am going to put myself as skipper... For thought process, boat crossed I guess on the arc. Needing larger liferaft for larger crew. Knowing it was going to do high crew racing other end, no point changing for that leg.

Now for return passage from commercial point of view changing the liferaft is going to cost a couple of thousand to the company. Ás it will need changing back again the other end although you could carry two is still a cost.

Known boat going to get delivered, should be fine nothing is going to happen. It's a commercial operation, boat had passed all surveys inspections and is deemed fit for passage.

A May crossing a little early but again commercial pressure, the worst of the winter lows should of passed. The object is to get boat back not wait for dinner cruising weather.

Now it comes to the incident.

Weather rough boat starts taking water, cannot find source. Know rate controllable no noticeable increases.

Immediately contract shore side set communications schedule. Diverted towards safety, that is still some distance away. Get on with finding and fixing leak and getting boat to safety.

To early for distress call, company do not want you to abandon and water is not coming in so quick. Also given conditions any boat to ship transfere well be a difficult operation. The boat is leaking not sinking..

Weather up so keeping crew on deck will only create cold tired crew. 2 off watch below 1 on watch monitoring leak one sailing.

Catastrophic failure of keel boat turns over in seconds. Below will be chaos a fight for air and escape.
Escape to surface what do you have? A boat that you cannot stay near because of the weather pounding you against her, inaccessible liferaft 1000's of miles of ocean.

Your situation is dire...

I cannot criticise the decisions made from the point of view of the crew.

The questions in my mind should be asked about the history use and inspection maintenances schedules of the boat.

This is nothing to do with design, it's not a boat I would chose to do that passage in. Then at the same time it's not a boat I would refuse to do that passage on.

I would be interested in the survey requirements for the boat. The periods and the items covered. By the sound of it the boat had been worked hard for several years. Eventually fatigue and age are going to catch up.

For the usage of your average private boat this is not an issue, a survey every say 5 years would be fine. Plus the owner/ skipper should know about and incidents groundings etc. Most die of old age rather than failure.

When a boat is being used commercially week in week out. Every month she does more sailing than most pirvate boats in a year. The inspection needs to be regular and through.

 

[Sailfree]

I think it would be more useful to concentrate on finding ways of checking the integrity of keels and the keel bolts, than being critical of the design.

Bolted keels are as unsafe as steel boats that sink when the hull hits an object. At last count loss of life from steel boats (eg Titanic etc) was far greater than the loss of keels.

 

[ProDave]

I would vary that description in post #27

If I had been in charge and we started taking on water, I would reduce sail area, even take the sails down totally to de power the boat while investigating the source of the leak

That might have prevented the keel from coming off? Or if the keel had come off with no sail up, would it still have inverted?

Consider deploying and towing life raft in case of catastrophic failure?

Of course they didn't have the benefit of hindsight.

But then I'm not an ocean racing sailor, just someone that bumbles around inshore in good weather so naturally more cautious.

With the benefit of hindsight, knowing the boat would never actually sink, would bailing out to the liferaft and keeping the raft tethered on a long line to the boat be a good plan? Easier for searchers to locate?

 

[alant]

I think there is 2 angles:
1) Simple and cheap preventative measures, hence my question on keel bolt inspection earlier.
2) Surviving the worst.

on 2 , I fear the liferaft size was irrelevant here as it was not deployed, I agee that smaller is better I sold my 8 man last year and replaced it with a 4 man

But 'IF' it had been a 4 man, it might have been more 'ready' to deploy, whereas a 12 man is a great lump to move & have ready in the cockpit. Speculation of course, since we weren't on the boat.

 

[doug748]

Uh? Don't think they set off with a leak, it was reported the day before they went missing......

Thank you DownWest. I thought I had missed something.

There has been enough bull and bluster, without more things being invented.

 

[alant]

I'm not a racer and I bow to the forum users who are far more experienced than I. It strikes me that here was a crew who delighted in pushing themselves and their boat to the limits,Atlantic crossing,racing and little fear of the weather. A world apart from my pootling around the Solent. When signs of taking on water appeared, did they take their foot off the gas? When the weather turned really bad, did they consider their experience, strength and determination would win through? If the water ingress was the start of a keel problem and they didn't realise the cause, would they have continued to battle the elements spurred on by their racing pedigree and confidence? It's very easy to blame the boat, builder or designer but when you push things to the limit, something has to give. I, like many others on this forum actually felt pain when I heard the news that the upturned hull had been found. Perhaps limping home was less than their macho confidence would allow. Will we ever know ?

However 'gung-ho' a crew are when racing, on an Atlantic delivery crossing, I doubt if they would "delight in pushing their boat to the limits".

Its an endurance trip, not a run around the buoys trying to break records.

 

[sarabande]

some quick figures on liferafts.

12 man 56kg Vol 120litres £1631

4 man 34kg Vol 80litres £1254


Prices are standard internet, not commercial user. http://liferafts.com/


So with a weight about half that of a clothed sailor, there must be a way of making a liferaft easily deployable, without having to drag it out of a seat under the helmsman, with the boat on its side.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

So with a weight about half that of a clothed sailor, there must be a way of making a liferaft easily deployable, without having to drag it out of a seat under the helmsman, with the boat on its side.

On the boat in question you just lift the seat out of the way and the liferaft is there. If the boat is on its side the seat would probably fall out of the way.

 

[jimi]

I prefer the liferaft mounted on a cradle on the pushpit, instant deployment from the cockpit, however in the case of catastrophic inversion not much use to crew trapped below.

 

[Wandering Star]

I don't think anyone knows how long before the disaster the leak was identified (or do we?) before the boat inverted. Doug of Stormforce mentioned he was in touch with crew, presumably by satphone, and the crew reported the water ingress. That was the last the owner heard from the crew.

I'm guessing, the crew saw water sloshing around inside the cabin, were all, apart from the helm, on their hands and knees in the cabin pulling up the sole boards thing to identify the source of the water without realising the keel had already dropped off. The few seconds or minutes lost looking for the source of the water was the vital time which with benefit of hindsight should have been used to deploy the EPIRB and liferaft. But they didn't have the benefit of hindsight and the boat capsized leaving them no chance. Losing my keel isn't something I'd expect to happen, it's certainly not something I'd be specifically prepared for. If I saw water sloshing around in the cabin I'd immediately think "hoses" or "seacocks" - I wouldn't be thinking "I wonder if my keels dropped off".

My feeling is the boat probably capsized very shortly, maybe within a couple of minutes or seconds of Dougs radio comms with the crew and the crew had no chance to abandon the boat in an organised manner. The crew probably did everything correctly and exactly as I would have done given the situation, I wonder how mant false call outs to the SAR there would be each month if everyone fired off their EPIRB and launched their liferaft at the first sign of water above the sole? They had to inspect for the source of the leak and would never have expected to have lost the keel or for the boat to invert so rapidly.

That's my speculation.

 

[Tranona]

I prefer the liferaft mounted on a cradle on the pushpit, instant deployment from the cockpit, however in the case of catastrophic inversion not much use to crew trapped below.

The location and deployment of liferafts has often been an issue discussed at length in the various MAIB reports on founderings, with little agreement on an ideal location/method. There is some bias in favour of a pushpit mounted hydrostatic release arrangement, but there are some situations where this is unsatisfactory. For example the crew loses control over when it is deployed and it is not always easy to exit the boat and get into the raft. Much of the experience of liferaft deployment from small boats is related to fishing boats where sudden capsize is a common cause. However it is not so common with yachts where causes are much more diverse.

The reality is that in the extreme conditions that usually necessitate the use of a raft there are so many things that can go wrong. This case is an example. A sudden inversion (seemingly) with no time to launch the raft where an automatic launch might have enabled crew thrown in the water to board the raft. Problem is, one never knows if there are no survivors so it is all speculation.

 

[jimi]

The location and deployment of liferafts has often been an issue discussed at length in the various MAIB reports on founderings, with little agreement on an ideal location/method. There is some bias in favour of a pushpit mounted hydrostatic release arrangement, but there are some situations where this is unsatisfactory. For example the crew loses control over when it is deployed and it is not always easy to exit the boat and get into the raft. Much of the experience of liferaft deployment from small boats is related to fishing boats where sudden capsize is a common cause. However it is not so common with yachts where causes are much more diverse.

The reality is that in the extreme conditions that usually necessitate the use of a raft there are so many things that can go wrong. This case is an example. A sudden inversion (seemingly) with no time to launch the raft where an automatic launch might have enabled crew thrown in the water to board the raft. Problem is, one never knows if there are no survivors so it is all speculation.

The most pressing reason for liferaft use is generally fire on board, not extreme conditions, in that scenario it makes sense for rapid release from a position likely to be unchallenged by the initial outburst of fire and fumes.

 

[bedouin]

I prefer the liferaft mounted on a cradle on the pushpit, instant deployment from the cockpit, however in the case of catastrophic inversion not much use to crew trapped below.

But there have been a number of instances (I think including Fastnet 79) where a liferaft so mounted has been lost in heavy weather before it was needed. I like the way they are stored on the beneteau - the only possible improvement would be to have it accessible from the transom (I think I have seen another design that does that)

 

[bedouin]

The most pressing reason for liferaft use is generally fire on board, not extreme conditions, in that scenario it makes sense for rapid release from a position likely to be unchallenged by the initial outburst of fire and fumes.

You know I've never actually heard of anyone taking to a liferaft for that reason.