What do you think of this one?

[Caer Urfa]

Surprised many are blaming the boat design when to me in this case the boatyard is responsible as they have not fitted the hoist slings correctly to start with so the boat only 'looked level' but was not level and should also have been spotted when lowering onto blocks

 

[RunAgroundHard]

... I note a number of images where the boat is shown from both the beam and aft - they all look perfectly normal. The above oblique shot was taken as the boat was raised after the disaster, nothing adverse to see there either.

.

They actually explain what happened, first hand, from 06:18 onwards and summarise again at 12.17

 

[doug748]

They actually explain what happened, first hand, from 06:18 onwards and summarise again at 12.17

They don't - explain what happened.

What they do is give their explanation of what happened.

.

 

[Roberto]

I have just looked at the pictures: why is paint missing from the front half of the keel and bulb?

 

[boomerangben]

I find it hard to believe as with others that this is not a single failure, more likely a cumulation of incidents. So this then begs the question, how should such a boat be supported ashore? Clearly a boat is designed to be lifted and supported by two slings, with the keel unsupported other than via its hull attachment. So should it be supported on a cradle using 2 or more webbing slings with the keel clear of the ground and once settled, chocks are used to take some of the keel weight?

 

[Daydream believer]

Following on from #105
Some people are craftier than a bunch of monkeys. Has it occurred to anyone that there may have been a known collision & the owners are now putting this video out and making a massive fuss to put all the blame on to the yard? The cracking noise etc could well have happened. But due to the hull having sustained earlier damage, things have got worse. The owners have looked at this as an opportunity to post a vid & appeal to the wider audience. Then when it goes to the insurance, or is presented to a surveyor, it puts their claim that the yard is to blame well away from them. It makes them look the victim, when in fact they may be a pair of fraudsters trying to pull a fast one. No one will know until the end but I expect it has been tried before & should be investigated, before we all start feeling sorry for them.

 

[doug748]

Following on from #105
Some people are craftier than a bunch of monkeys. Has it occurred to anyone that there may have been a known collision & the owners are now putting this video out and making a massive fuss to put all the blame on to the yard? The cracking noise etc could well have happened. But due to the hull having sustained earlier damage, things have got worse. The owners have looked at this as an opportunity to post a vid & appeal to the wider audience. Then when it goes to the insurance, or is presented to a surveyor, it puts their claim that the yard is to blame well away from them. It makes them look the victim, when in fact they may be a pair of fraudsters trying to pull a fast one. No one will know until the end but I expect it has been tried before & should be investigated, before we all start feeling sorry for them.

Well I don't think that.

However it is a natural reaction, if someone is working on your boat and it breaks, to think they have broken it by negligence. Cause and effect, a very natural link to make. Eye witness reports are notoriously variable, even if you are not emotionally invested.

I feel for the couple, they may go to the grave believing that the boat was handled badly but, I have got to say I have seen no evidence for it in the video. It may turn out to be as they say but in any case, no minor handling error should ever virtually scrap a cruising boat in that manner.

.

 

[Poignard]

[...] but in any case, no minor handling error should ever virtually scrap a cruising boat in that manner.

.

 

[Baggywrinkle]

Following on from #105
Some people are craftier than a bunch of monkeys. Has it occurred to anyone that there may have been a known collision & the owners are now putting this video out and making a massive fuss to put all the blame on to the yard? The cracking noise etc could well have happened. But due to the hull having sustained earlier damage, things have got worse. The owners have looked at this as an opportunity to post a vid & appeal to the wider audience. Then when it goes to the insurance, or is presented to a surveyor, it puts their claim that the yard is to blame well away from them. It makes them look the victim, when in fact they may be a pair of fraudsters trying to pull a fast one. No one will know until the end but I expect it has been tried before & should be investigated, before we all start feeling sorry for them.

What is there to be gained if they have adequate insurance? The only motivation to try and push the blame to the yard is if they are only covered for 3rd party claims - and it's a real long-shot that they will win a dispute with the yard, especially as the crucial bit wasn't filmed.

If their own insurance company take up the claim, the cost may end up being shared with the yard in a settlement, but as individuals claiming against the yard, they won't be sailing for a long time while the legal stuff plays out.

 

[Sandy]

I have been in a marina where owners were not permitted near while boats were being lifted. The marina in question had to use a crane, as the heritage dock it was located in could not be modified to take one, and while lifting operations were taking place, the whole area was taped off with "Do not pass" black and yellow tape.

I prefer to walk away and let the yard team get on with the job in hand.

The last thing they want is me faffing about like an expectant father.

I deliver the boat to the lifting pontoon, check I've got my car keys and return the next day to do what I need to do.

 

[srm]

I have been in a marina where owners were not permitted near while boats were being lifted. The marina in question had to use a crane, as the heritage dock it was located in could not be modified to take one, and while lifting operations were taking place, the whole area was taped off with "Do not pass" black and yellow tape.

Totally understandable.

Having supervised a significant number of boat lifts both out and in by crane over some 35 years the potential for serious injury should someone wander into the working area is always there. Even a small boat on a hook carries a lot of momentum. We never put a boat ashore with mast in so that was another very interesting exercise that required planning, and a long rope from just above the mast + rigging's centre of gravity to keep the crane block and hook clear of the masthead. Placing the boat into a cradle could generated a fairly high level of adrenaline.

I did see one boat being lifted out of its cradle where the crane jib was out of line with the centre of gravity of the boat. As the keel came off the blocks the boat swung aft and one of the cradle legs punched a hole in the hull. Not one of my lifts.

Travel hoists make life so much easier.

 

[steveeasy]

Following on from #105
Some people are craftier than a bunch of monkeys. Has it occurred to anyone that there may have been a known collision & the owners are now putting this video out and making a massive fuss to put all the blame on to the yard? The cracking noise etc could well have happened. But due to the hull having sustained earlier damage, things have got worse. The owners have looked at this as an opportunity to post a vid & appeal to the wider audience. Then when it goes to the insurance, or is presented to a surveyor, it puts their claim that the yard is to blame well away from them. It makes them look the victim, when in fact they may be a pair of fraudsters trying to pull a fast one. No one will know until the end but I expect it has been tried before & should be investigated, before we all start feeling sorry for them.

That’s were the surveyor comes in. It does sound like it’s a rather poor design not being glassed in but bonded.
But why did it get put down on the keel. As Tranona stated. The slings can be independently raised or lowered. What where they going to do bob it around to level it. If this is what happened as we don’t know

Following on from #105
Some people are craftier than a bunch of monkeys. Has it occurred to anyone that there may have been a known collision & the owners are now putting this video out and making a massive fuss to put all the blame on to the yard? The cracking noise etc could well have happened. But due to the hull having sustained earlier damage, things have got worse. The owners have looked at this as an opportunity to post a vid & appeal to the wider audience. Then when it goes to the insurance, or is presented to a surveyor, it puts their claim that the yard is to blame well away from them. It makes them look the victim, when in fact they may be a pair of fraudsters trying to pull a fast one. No one will know until the end but I expect it has been tried before & should be investigated, before we all start feeling sorry for them.

not sure of that. They would not have guessed the boat would have been lowered down on to the keel would they.
No one here has come up with any reason why they would do so.
For what it’s worth I suspect to the boat had a problem or weak spot prior to this but the yard putting it on the keel out of the cradle was just dam stupid of them unless it normally happens which I don’t think it does.

Steveeasy

 

[Baddox]

I cannot see the problem of resting a boat on its keel, doesn't this happen when a boat dries out alongside a wall? Yachts in our local yards are rested on their keels and supports used mainly to keep them upright.

It’s odd that the couple were filming the lift-out, clean, move, etc but didn’t record the boat being lowered and secured in a cradle. We only have their version of what they think happened. If the boat had prior damage, lowering it onto its keep may be the first time it became apparent to them and so they blame the lift.

 

[Sea Change]

I cannot see the problem of resting a boat on its keel, doesn't this happen when a boat dries out alongside a wall?

Not every yacht can sit on its keel.
Personally I would never buy a yacht that couldn't be dried out against a wall, but perhaps that makes me a grumpy old man stuck in the 1970s .

 

[steveeasy]

I cannot see the problem of resting a boat on its keel, doesn't this happen when a boat dries out alongside a wall? Yachts in our local yards are rested on their keels and supports used mainly to keep them upright.

It’s odd that the couple were filming the lift-out, clean, move, etc but didn’t record the boat being lowered and secured in a cradle. We only have their version of what they think happened. If the boat had prior damage, lowering it onto its keep may be the first time it became apparent to them and so they blame the lift.

I agree that the boat should be able to sit stand on its keel, but I don’t understand why the yard put it down on its keel instead of sitting it on its cradle.
My point is the yard have probably left themselves open to a huge claim unless they can show 1, what they where doing was safe and sensible, and 2 the damage was not caused by their actions.

It’s not odd they were filming stuff at all. As I’ve said how could they ever have guessed the yard would decide to balance their boat on the keel. At the alleged angle with a weak frame it simply gave way.

Is it really the norm to bond structural frames in. They should be glassed in well to take significant force in all directions. It should be so strong that the hull should give way first.

Steveeasy

 

[srm]

I agree that the boat should be able to sit stand on its keel,

Older designs with cut away forefoot and keel hung rudders can usually take their full weight on the keel provided the bottom of the keel is near parallel to the waterline and under the centre of gravity. I had this discussion with a yard as they were reluctant to put my boat in a cradle with side supports above the waterline so that I had a clear run to apply Coppercoat. They were used to handling designs with bolt on keels and their working "rule of thumb" when chocking up was no more than 70% of the boat's weight on the keel.

 

[Roberto]

Not every yacht can sit on its keel.
Personally I would never buy a yacht that couldn't be dried out against a wall, but perhaps that makes me a grumpy old man stuck in the 1970s .

Some Owners' manuals have the legal specification "not to be dried against a wall".
Some haven't, but after having seen the keel negatively flex the hull bottom by 1-2cm, Owners do not try a second time (and sometimes require a brand new hull).

 

[Tranona]

Is it really the norm to bond structural frames in. They should be glassed in well to take significant force in all directions. It should be so strong that the hull should give way first.

Steveeasy

Pretty much standard in production boats now and has been for some time. Glassing in is not a panacea as it depends on the skill of the operator. Seen some pretty awful GRP layups on hull reinforcements over the years.

Lot of work has gone into bonding structural members into hulls because in theory it is more reliable than slapping in loads of mat and resin, but of course does not mean it is foolproof and the downside it is difficult to repair because you can't replicate controlled factory conditions.

 

[Sea Change]

Some Owners' manuals have the legal specification "not to be dried against a wall".
Some haven't, but after having seen the keel negatively flex the hull bottom by 1-2cm, Owners do not try a second time (and sometimes require a brand new hull).

It would be good if this information was always readily available. I must admit it came as a bit of a suprise to me that not every production cruising yacht could be dried out. I'd probably not have been able to afford to run a yacht if I couldn't do my antifouling between tides. A robust keel is far more important to me than pointing ability.

 

[steveeasy]

Pretty much standard in production boats now and has been for some time. Glassing in is not a panacea as it depends on the skill of the operator. Seen some pretty awful GRP layups on hull reinforcements over the years.

Lot of work has gone into bonding structural members into hulls because in theory it is more reliable than slapping in loads of mat and resin, but of course does not mean it is foolproof and the downside it is difficult to repair because you can't replicate controlled factory conditions.

Funds will never allow but I was really coming round to the idea of a much newer boat. If ever there was a put off, then that keel and what apparantly tries in vein to support it is a massive turn off. Utter madness.

I could drop my twister and the other thing from a great height and the keels would be intact. Not much else would but I’d not sink.

Steveeasy