To scuttle or not?

[scotts_mist]

After reading the article in this month's YM, and on the web here...

http://www.yachtingmonthly.com/news/535045/yacht-abandoned-in-mid-atlantic-storm-found-off-ireland

...I wondered what the general consensus was on leaving several tonnes of yacht as a floating shipping hazard when forced to abandon it?

Whilst I'm very happy that the owner was reunited with his pride and joy (and result of his life savings), it was discovered by chance in dense fog. It could have lead to some loss of life if someone had collided with it. I've read several tales of blue-water rescues where the coordinating rescue service have pretty much ordered the craft to be sunk.

I also thought it curious that he embarked on such a long voyage, knowing the boat was uninsured and the VHF aerial was a but troublesome but I am the first to admit that I've not always been as prepared as hindsight said I should have been, though on much shorter trips.

 

[Seajet]

Well it must be hard to abandon ones' pride and joy, and a lot of unmanned boats do make it through awful conditions - the 1979 Fastnet being an example.

To try to reduce her being a hazard to others I'd leave the masthead light on, the solar panel should cope with that indefinitely; but then the only way I'd leave my boat is when they pry my cold dead hand off the tiller, as was the case with R.T.McMullen, found dead at the helm with his face into the sun !

 

[Slipstream 34]

Well it must be hard to abandon ones' pride and joy, and a lot of unmanned boats do make it through awful conditions - the 1979 Fastnet being an example.

To try to reduce her being a hazard to others I'd leave the masthead light on, the solar panel should cope with that indefinitely; but then the only way I'd leave my boat is when they pry my cold dead hand off the tiller, as was the case with R.T.McMullen, found dead at the helm with his face into the sun !

Unless you pass away on your porta-potti.!

 

[Seajet]

Actually I've sometimes thought it would make a good emergency float, but the idea of turning up on youtube clutching a bobbing loo makes the whiskey and revolver seem the better option.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I must say that I'm very impresed with the generosity of the fisherman who found her. At the end of the story it says he decided not to claim salvage, which he would have been entirely entitled to. A gentleman indeed.

I would imagine that scuttling a yacht without the aid of guns or a suitable demolition team would be pretty difficult, especially under survival conditions. I suppose a ship might do it by either deliberately running the yacht down (though that would be to endanger the ship) or by dropping a heavy weight through the bottom - something like a crow-bar end-on. The only way I can imagine doing it on Capricious would be to unscrew the log or take off the inspection plate off the cooling water inlet. Neither would be easy to do in a heavy sea, and both would take a long time to sink her as they would only open very small holes. I know the inflow from the log is slow; I've often withdrawn the log impeller to check it.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I would imagine that scuttling a yacht without the aid of guns or a suitable demolition team would be pretty difficult, especially under survival conditions. I suppose a ship might do it by either deliberately running the yacht down (though that would be to endanger the ship) or by dropping a heavy weight through the bottom - something like a crow-bar end-on. The only way I can imagine doing it on Capricious would be to unscrew the log or take off the inspection plate off the cooling water inlet. Neither would be easy to do in a heavy sea, and both would take a long time to sink her as they would only open very small holes. I know the inflow from the log is slow; I've often withdrawn the log impeller to check it.

Didn't the US Coastguard sink Raw Faith with gunfire to get her out of the way? Maybe it's time the RNLI armed their lifeboats ...

 

[Kelpie]

I must say that I'm very impresed with the generosity of the fisherman who found her. At the end of the story it says he decided not to claim salvage, which he would have been entirely entitled to. A gentleman indeed.

I would imagine that scuttling a yacht without the aid of guns or a suitable demolition team would be pretty difficult, especially under survival conditions. I suppose a ship might do it by either deliberately running the yacht down (though that would be to endanger the ship) or by dropping a heavy weight through the bottom - something like a crow-bar end-on. The only way I can imagine doing it on Capricious would be to unscrew the log or take off the inspection plate off the cooling water inlet. Neither would be easy to do in a heavy sea, and both would take a long time to sink her as they would only open very small holes. I know the inflow from the log is slow; I've often withdrawn the log impeller to check it.

Surely removing a through-hull hose, or the log as you say, will get the job done in a few hours at most. How much of a hurry do you need to be in?

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Surely removing a through-hull hose, or the log as you say, will get the job done in a few hours at most. How much of a hurry do you need to be in?

I wouldn't be in any hurry at all. But in survival conditions - which after all, are the only conditions most of us would consider abandoning ship - it would be difficult to remove a through-hull hose. All mine are made of material that won't cut with a knife, so a hacksaw would be the minimum tool to do it. And fiddling around with a screw-driver trying to undo hose-clips doesn't sound very feasible either; it's hard enough to do it in calm water! The log aperture and cooling water intake would be the only ones that would be feasible, as they're simple screw-caps.

If I were on a marina berth I can think of many ways of sinking Capricious. But If I were being thrown around in gale conditions, scared, cold, wet, exhausted and possibly injured, I don't think I could manage any of them. And I can't envisage abaondoning ship if I weren't in that condition.

 

[prv]

I would imagine that scuttling a yacht without the aid of guns or a suitable demolition team would be pretty difficult, especially under survival conditions. I suppose a ship might do it by either deliberately running the yacht down (though that would be to endanger the ship)

Have to say I really can't see how an oceangoing ship is going to be endangered by hitting the bow on a yacht. Not even a little bit.

The only way I can imagine doing it on Capricious would be to unscrew the log or take off the inspection plate off the cooling water inlet.

I did read an account in the last few years where a crew were planning to evacuate to a ship, and they cut the heads outlet hose in preparation for scuttling. They left the seacock closed, the plan being for the skipper to open it once everyone else was on board the ship, then leave himself.

I can't remember the outcome, I have a feeling the circumstances changed and in the end they stayed on board. But assuming your heads seacocks are accessible as they are on many boats, this seems like the sensible way to me. The hose on mine cuts easily with a few strokes of a hacksaw, and I keep one relatively handy for the same reason many boats carry bolt-croppers.

Pete

 

[DaveS]

Of course for those of us with unsinkable boats (Etaps and some Sadlers) it is all a bit academic...

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Have to say I really can't see how an oceangoing ship is going to be endangered by hitting the bow on a yacht. Not even a little bit.

Yes, but the debris might still be floating when it gets to the stern-gear, and I don't think that rigging wire, spars etc. drawn into the propellors, rudders or any manouvering thrusters would do them any good. Also, the hull plating of ships other than ice-breakers isn't all that strong (one reference suggests thicknesses up to 20mm for load-bearing parts of the ship, and the bow bulge is not load-bearing so I'd expect it to be less). It is also designed to take stresses along the plates, not impacts perpendicular to the plate. So, although I doubt it would be penetrated, it might well be sufficiently damaged to require inspection in dry-dock. Insurance and/or certification societies might well require that even if there were no visible damage. If I were the master of a commercial vessel, I'd decline to take the chance

Point is that almost ANY damage or risk of damage to a ship involves a high cost. Even if there's nothing wrong at all, but the incident required a day in dry-dock for inspection to satisfy insurers or certification societies, that would be a loss of earnings comparable to the value of a lot of yachts. Damage to the stern gear would certainly be very costly indeed. Damage incurred because of a deliberate act by the Master would almost certainly not be covered by insurance.

Worth remembering that ships are much weaker in proportion to the likely stresses on them than yachts are, with much smaller engineering margins. Most yachts will survive truly awful conditions and keep afloat even after dismasting or being rolled repeatedly. The crew are the weakest point when a yacht is subject to extreme conditions, and most of the situations we're considering arise because the crew can't take any more, not because the yacht is in imminent danger of sinking - the thread title says it all, really! Most modern yachts, for example, would survive a glancing blow on a rock - with damage, no doubt, but remaining seaworthy unless very unlucky. I've certainly been on a yacht that has been on rocks and sustained no damage at all, admittedly under very benign conditions. Costa Concordia, anyone? Ships are less likely to experience an extreme event because of their size and basic strength, but when their design limits are passed, they are weaker in proportion to their size than a yacht, and less capable of surviving.

I should say, I'm not a professional mariner - but I have belonged to an organization a large proportion of whose income went on operating ships. Even minor incidents on the ships could have an enormous knock-on effect on the rest of our operations, so we were all very sensitive to the weaknesses and operating limits of our ice-breaker and ice-strengthened ship. For example, a very minor incident in Port Stanley resulted in several weeks loss of operations, along with repair costs in the 6 figure region - fortunately retrieved from the other ship's insurance! The damage was "only" bent plating, AFAIR. But the loss of operations could never be recovered, nor could it be covered by chartering another vessel. And that was a minor incident involving another ship. OK, collision with a yacht isn't going to cause that much damage (unless you were unlucky and damaged the stern-gear), but you might well incur costs in the tens of thousands of pounds.

 

[OceanSprint]

Here is a recount of someone who did scuttle their boat. A sad read, but he survived.

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=78146