Questions to be asked again

Re: We know nothing.....we can talk about.

Speaking to Goran, our Finnish distributor, he claims that a lot of boats in Finland have a sacrificial part of the keel that breaks off if it hits a rock. I had never heard this before but have no reason not to believe him.
 
Re: We know nothing.....we can talk about.

It sounds a very sensible suggestion!
 
Re: God, now I\'m worried...

I don't even know who to reply to, but with regard to Hooligan V, please be very careful who or what you put the blame on as friends and family of the crew members are reading these posts. Just to clarify things, Hooligan V was not offshore racing at the time of this tragedy, she was merely taking a gentle sail from Plymouth to Southampton and believe me there are many less seaworthy boats who take that trip!
And as for blaming the design of the boat, you can't until you know exactly why the keel fell off, there are many reasons why the structure of a boat may fail from an engineering point of view.
Hooligan was definitely not a flimsy go faster 'big dinghy' but a fantastic racing yacht.
 
Re: God, now I\'m worried...

Very well said.

I'm very sorry that you had to make your first post on the forum as a result of a very tragic accident.
 
Looks more like it dropped off rather than broke off !
hooligan.jpg
 
My sincere sympathies to all involved. I hope they will not interpret this posting as prurience, but I am puzzled by the photographs.

I got the impression that the incident stemmed from the loss of a fixed fin keel - but isn't that the slot for a lifting keel? If not, where are the remains of the keelbolts or, as the case may be, the holes they would have left behind when the keel parted company?
 
Firstly can I add my comment that I think you are correct in starting threads about this tragic incident albeit at this stage they must be mostly speculation.

This is a tragic event and my sympathy goes out to those involved and their families.

Incidents like this do unfortunately occur and there seems to be 2 options a) say nothing until the full findings are published or b) start discussion threads like this. It is implied by some that to do a) is to be disrespectful to those involved.

I believe that nearly all that posters on here can identify with the event and probably feel " There but for the grace of god go I". People that share a love of sailing would never intend to be disrespectful but unfortunately out of tragic events such as these lessons are learned.

On balance providing these threads are respectful and don't try attribute blame without full knowledge of the facts they can be informative, raise all sorts of issues, including many that were not relevant to the actual event but due to the dissemination of so much speculation and knowledge the threads raises others awareness of many issues and could possibly prevent other incidents and ultimately save lives. To await the outcome of the official investigation would delay things by probably 2 years and mresult in only the actual events being discussed when often the comments about possible causes can be just as informative.

The recent sad case of the boat missing off the I of W has made me far more concious of the need for a stern watch when doing a x channel at night and to frequently check that my navigation lights are working (I once arrived at Guernsey to find my tricolour completely missing).

Regarding Keel attachments, here I would like to comment as a structural engineer. Firstly there are no standards that I am aware of that specify the strength necessary for boat components. The manufacturer is guided by experience and cost criteria as if its too expensive it won't sell.

What impact should a keel be designed to withstand? Cars have standards for impact but they don't have to be watertight after such an impact. If I design a building I can overdesign it and it causes no problem unless it is a high rise (where it must support its own weight at the bottom) or a bridge. If I design a bridge to be stronger than it needs to be I create problems in trying to support that weight. Structural design and materials have moved on a lot and we now have longer span bridges - and lighter boats, both though should be fit for purpose.

Recent tragic events have demonstrated that it is not practical to design a high rise building to resist a 747 flying into it. We accept that cars cannot withstand 20mph collisions without serious deformation and structural damage. I therefore liken a boat to a bridge it must be heavy enough to sustain the likely forces we impose on it but light enough that the cost of the materials make it affordable. To ask that a boat retains its water integrity after striking a rock is really being unrealistic. Yes expensive high strength materials could be used but the manufacturer would price himself out of business.

The only answer is for standards to be imposed in legislation but I would hate to be the one that decides at what speed of impact or how many stress cycles(in the case of fatigue) a particular boat component should be designed to take.

Without specifications we must rely on our personal knowledge and manufactures reputation to decide what boat we want and can afford.

Until there are standards I will only buy certain makes of boats, appreciate those that are including Kevlar in their layout appreciate that HR make a inner watertight bow bulhead with a tiny water bled hole to demostrate that you have sustained some damage /leak and check my keel fixing regularly especially after any grounding.
 
Re: We know nothing...

The PIC is confusing. I saw the damage to the Fast 42 which lost it's keel - very different scene! The laminate around the keel box was super-thin and under specification (not the designer's fault and proven in the official investigation). This looks like the foil has simply torn off the plate, i.e. the welding was not up to specification. On this type of keel the blade tends to be made up of steel and welded to a flat Keel plate which in turn has keel bolts welded to/in it. The keel plate is recessed into the hull (moulded insert). Before all of this happens, the keel has a grp 'foil' shape bonded to it, i.e. around the steel blade which goes down to the lead bulb. The pic is not great quality but it look like there is no damage to the keel plate which means it is still in situ.

Condolences to the family of the deceased.

South Africa.
 
There are standards. Most designers use the USA boat building design standards which include specs for the design of keels, plus they have D-Value specs which they use, i.e. a Designer will draw a keel arrangement which will withstand a force of say 'X' negative G's to simulate a sudden stop (if the boat was to hit something). Also it takes into consideration certain fatigue stats which are inherent in plastic boats, and steel too. Speculation is all that exists at present.
 
I am not suprised that America has some standards but are they standards that have the force of law in the USofA or merely recommendations?

Do European boat builders comply with these standards?

I would not be surprised that some sensible organisations has made recommendations but from the different keels I have looked at on new boats and their vastly differing strengths I cannot believe they all comply to one standard.

In the example of the unfortunate Bavaria match there was no manufacturers claim that the keel complied to any standard design criteria.

There were recommendations about AVS after the Fastnet race but manufacturers have largely ignored them. At that time the USA bought in the capsize factor but is it quoted in USA boat brochures?
 
My understanding of the RCD was that it was a good idea hijcked by European boatbuilders to make it more difficult to import boats into europe and ensure every European boat over 32' in length got a Cat A Ocean status.

As a chartered structural engineer I can decide not to comply with British Standards or Eurocodes but my design would have difficulty getting through building regulations. From what I have seen of boat construction they are still at the stage of pre-building regulations and that designs are emperical with various guidance documents but no statutory minimum standards. If there were standards I would not expect the great differences in boat weights for any given length to be possible.

At one time large boats and marine structures had to be Lloyds approved - possible before they could get insurance. I am aware that the ferry walkway that collapsed at Dover? some years back was checked by Lloyds and Lloyds approved!

I would add that I am not a yacht designer but have read Killings? book on yacht design and he makes no mention of standards merely advances, developments and inovation in yacht design.

I cannot claim any expert knowledge in yacht design but hope this thread attracts some contributions that establish what criteria a yacht must be designed to.
 
I am very disturbed by the amount of supposition which is being expressed by members of the forum.

None of us was there when this incident occured, nor do we know the circumstances.

It is for the MAIB to investigate, and find out what happened, and without the full facts supposition of the type shown in a number of the postings is unhelpfull, and possibly scare mongering.

If you dont know, my suggestion is to zip it, and await the outcome of the enquiry.,
 
As others have said, if you want to wait for the enquiry results, be prepared to wait a couple of years.

In a case like this, though, with one vessel involved, the boat available and witnesses to interview, I don't see why a report (even if preliminary) couldn't be prepared in a week or two, on the basis that there are boats being built or maintained at this moment that might be replicating whatever problem caused Hooligan's capsize.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I am very disturbed by the amount of supposition which is being expressed by members of the forum.

None of us was there when this incident occured, nor do we know the circumstances.

It is for the MAIB to investigate, and find out what happened, and without the full facts supposition of the type shown in a number of the postings is unhelpfull, and possibly scare mongering.

If you dont know, my suggestion is to zip it, and await the outcome of the enquiry.,

[/ QUOTE ]

May I refer you again to my post above where I state "The recent sad case of the boat missing off the I of W has made me far more concious of the need for a stern watch when doing a x channel at night and to frequently check that my navigation lights are working (I once arrived at Guernsey to find my tricolour completely missing)."

There has been no official report to my knowlege on this sad case but the speculation has caused me to tighten up my safety in 2 possible areas that "may" have been contributory factors.

The attitude of "zip it" is not helpful to those that learn so much from these threads and I do not believe anyone who regularly sails will not have the deepest sympathy for those involved.

The only caveat is that any posts or speculation be respectful to the people and the families that are involved and they don't try to either attribute or imply blame. Attributing blame is something that should only be done after the facts are known and by people qualified to do so.

I have just noticed that you are a new user and as such you may not have read or benefited from many similar threads that have been written after other incidents including those where regretably there has been a loss of life. As humans we have evolved possibly greater than any other species mainly because we can communicate and learn from others and most importantly through others mistakes. To "zip it" so that discussion can only occur when there is no injury or loss of life would be a retrograde step IMHO.

I agree with Ken that it is a pity that preliminary official report cannot be issued quicker but with ultimately the possibility of a prosecution (not refering to this incident) many of the facts in accidents/incident become sub judicy and may not be diseminated to the public for years!
 
We know the keel came off because the lifeboat cox reported it and provided pictures which can be found in the YBW news items. There is nothing disrespectful, prurient or premature about the way in which this strand has developed and if it expands people's knowledge and understanding of events such as this terrible tragedy, why should there not be a debate? The only disturbing thing to my mind is the sheer number of attempts made in this and other threads to suppress the debate - including by two new posters whose motivation remains unclear.

I'd be tempted to say 'zip it yourself', except that I don't know if you are somehow connected to the tragedy and could therefore be excused for your lack of manners.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top