We had to abandon ship - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

spdrun · #31 01-19-2014, 06:21 PM

(1) No shakedown cruise -- why go all the way to the USVI on the first run, in winter?
(2) Major design flaws
(3) No one on the boat attempted to troubleshoot the failed charging systems? Did they at least have a multimeter and basic electrical tools aboard? I wouldn't go on an extended CAR trip without a full set of tools, electrical and otherwise, let alone a sailing trip hundreds of miles from potential rescuers.
(4) No way of starting the engines in an emergency? What kind of engines are we talking about? Friend's family has a smaller boat with a Yanmar 1-cyl diesel that's started with a crank handle in a pinch. If they needed two motors running, could they have fired up the "good" motor, removed the starter while running, swapped it onto the other motor, fired that up, and ran for port (as someone else suggested)? Assuming there's decent access to the area, pulling a starter while hot might be possible.
(5) Why were they drinking while waiting for the Coasties to show up instead of yanking the starter on the bad engine and seeing if there's anything to be done for it?

Sounds like bad engineering on the boat builder's part, and a horrific lack of preparedness AND lack of imagination on the sailors' parts. Entitled rich people more money than technical prowess.

kerry · #32 01-19-2014, 06:50 PM

Yes to all that stuff. Why abandon ship before pulling the starter and troubleshooting it? Also couldn't they have wired the one functioning engine's alternator directly to the batteries to charge them? They had a Sat Phone--they could have even got Yanmar on the phone and had them talk them thru troubleshooting procedures.

Engine access looks pretty good. http://www.aeroyacht.com/2013/11/10/pro-panel/

Hatterasguy · #33 01-19-2014, 06:57 PM

That's all easy to say on shore, but seasick at night its another thing.

Have either of you every gone into an engine compartment on a big cat before? You have to go threw hatch's on the back deck, and offshore when its very rough its not a good idea to open them, and its very easy to get seasick once your inside. Depending on the layout if they stuck something like say a water maker next to one of the motors getting to the starter might be a big project.

Chances are since it was a new boat it was probably an electrical problem, I doubt a starter went bad. A lot of those panels are pretty complicated and hard to troubleshoot. New boats are not like cars, they typically have teething issues that need sorting out.

Besides it sounds like running motors wouldn't have really helped them to much anyway.

They went offshore in a floating condo and got into trouble, having looked into that boat its a cheap charter special. Its a long way from an Atlantic, Voyage, or Catana.

Lastly I question their logic of taking a 2 week old, new boat out into the North Atlantic in January. That seems like all kinds of bad decision making right their. If I was on that boat I would have jumped ship if they wanted to do that.

kerry · #34 01-19-2014, 07:42 PM

It was calm enough for the owner to dive on the rudders and determine their condition. Seems like they could have had someone in the engine room pulling or troubleshooting a starter when that was going on.

link · #35 01-19-2014, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

Lots of discussion of the event over here, including trying to divest the boat of one of the rudders.

First Alpha 42 Abandoned on Maiden Voyage - Page 2 - Multihull Anarchy - Sailing Anarchy Forums

The linked article is an interesting read and if i read correctly that the boat had one or more sea trials (noted here also) before delivery. No one has explained how a trial would subject a boat to the kinds of conditions it experienced, but that doesn’t forgive some seeming design and/or build failures.

BTW, the link provided by Kerry (above) brings the reader into page 2 of that thread. Page 1 has some good observations, as does page 2. At least no one there bounded to the conclusion of anyone being impaired because they had some wine, but one insightful person did suggest or perhaps it was a complaint that the people were taken off in the wrong order.

Also noted, the executive editor of Sail magazine was onboard and some there suggested he is known as a pretty resourceful fella. Anywho, there will be some facts before too long, and probably something mebby a whisker shy of a adoring review in the near future. It’s probably a good idea to withhold judgment until more facts are known. Not that a lack of facts would be a hindrance for some ...

t walgamuth · #36 01-19-2014, 10:29 PM

Lack of facts never seems to hinder a good discussion!

link · #37 01-20-2014, 11:48 AM

^Agreed, and while a lack of facts doesn’t necessarily hinder discussion, using made up details can quickly run an otherwise rational discussion into the ground.....or add commedy, i guess.

kerry · #38 01-20-2014, 12:21 PM

There are a number of facts available if you follow the links. There are pictures of the failed rudder/tiller link, pictures of the engine room, pictures of the boat in general (incredibly ugly IMO), description of the water ingress thru the window frames and hatches etc.

link · #39 01-20-2014, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

There are a number of facts available if you follow the links. There are pictures of the failed rudder/tiller link, pictures of the engine room, pictures of the boat in general (incredibly ugly IMO), description of the water ingress thru the window frames and hatches etc.

Agreed that there are a number of facts and thanks for supplying the links. Comments proclaiming no shake down cruses took place or that it is somehow irresponsible if people have wine while onboard, or that people were taken off in the wrong order don’t well serve the interest of the topic.

Thanks for the link to the engine compartment fotos. I too was surprised that no one used the sat phone to contact the manufacturer. At one point in the following link the author who was aboard noted that there was no one with a lot of engine mechanics knowledge aboard. That would contribute to not wanting to mess too much with the engines. This link is another good read. BE GOOD TOO: Answering Critics | Sailfeed

As I read more, it sounds like everyone was rattled by the QC issues combined with the changing sea conditions and a rudderless ship. It's easy to lose faith in the vessel when the elements conspire. I’ve done much the same with a months old car that was a clear lemon. The Be Good Too more than hints at lemon-like problems.

kerry · #40 01-20-2014, 01:26 PM

I agree that fundamentally, the issue may be about faith in a vessel. If these problems had occurred on a boat which had 10 yrs of successful cruising under its belt, the occupants may have been more inclined to stick it out. I wonder what the insurance company will make of the circumstances.

t walgamuth · #41 01-20-2014, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

I agree that fundamentally, the issue may be about faith in a vessel. If these problems had occurred on a boat which had 10 yrs of successful cruising under its belt, the occupants may have been more inclined to stick it out. I wonder what the insurance company will make of the circumstances.

Yes, I suspect that is true.

As for my lack of facts comment, no criticism intended just good clean fun.

...more accurately I should have said lack of all the facts.

Hatterasguy · #42 01-20-2014, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Lack of facts never seems to hinder a good discussion!

Their are plenty of facts available.

Firstly they shouldn't have sailed, and not taken that route, their weather guy was an idiot. This is surprising since they captain and owner were very experienced.

Its starting to look like it was a poorly built boat, great bay boat but not for offshore. Those rudders should have never bent, that just doesn't happen on a good boat. Unless they hit a whale or container, but it doesn't sound like that's the case.

This sounds like the Hunter of cats. Its low priced and a floating condo. Its not an offshore design or built to the necessary standards. Their is a reason an Atlantic costs over twice as much, they got what they paid for half of an offshore boat. Some boat owners get their feelings hurt but certain boats are built for certain things. Their is a reason real offshore boats are built like tanks and very, very expensive.

If they made the poor decision to leave in a good boat it probably would have saved them. A Gunboat, Atlantic, Voyage, Hallberg Rassy, Swan, or Amel would not have had the problems they experienced. I have seen a number of lightly built cruising boats suffer series failures in the islands when they are subjected to a lot of wind, they are just not built for it. Salesmen at the boat shows will tell you all kinds of BS, but when its blowing 30+ at night with 15ft seas and building only a seaworthy boat will help you, and people have know what is and isn't seaworthy forever. Boats like the Alpha appeal to none boaters who want to be comfortable, and for near shore work they are fine. When trying to sell a big boat to someone who has only been on a cruise ship before proper offshore boats are hard to sell. They lack the condo like features of boats like the Alpha and carry very high price tags.

MTUpower · #43 01-20-2014, 10:43 PM

With perhaps over 50K miles of small vessel ocean cruising experience, 20+ years of professional experience as a USCG captain and another 5 as a diving guide in some of the most remote places on earth I've found only fools and dead folks drink while the **** hits the fan onboard. Awaiting rescue in a disabled vessels in the open ocean fits the **** hits the fan criteria.

barry12345 · #44 01-21-2014, 03:28 AM

Wonder if they will eventually get it ashore? I also wonder if they experienced what I did on a very small cat. We were hustling along decently with my self and the one other person on board with our weight tending to be towards the stern.. It was going fairly fast when we buried the leeward hull. We both landed in the sail with the boat capsized. I think we did a partial pitchpole but far from a complete one.

That's where the boat turns over by burying the front and the stern or rear comes up and over. Or kind of a forward flip. The cat had very little mass to push that nose of the hull through solid water so it acted as a brake. When this happened the centre of force the sails where delivering was much higher and this acts as a lever. Plus what inertia is present probably completes it. Soon enough on a capsize on a cat the mast lands up pointing at the bottom.

Their explanation is the cat was forced backwards. My feeling with enough wind and burying the bow well enough might produce an almost identical scenario with even a large cat. Thats with too much sail for the conditions. Also if you look I may have missed it but the two hulls do not appear to have a substantial tie structure forward. I know there has to be something to support the jib stay. The primary structure that links these two hulls together is well back. They had leakage that was not only windows. I suspect things where giving and perhaps some cracks where letting in some water as well. There are many indications if you examine the whole reported issues. That's if they are true indicate this boat was fragile.

For example we were racing one night on lake Ontario. Using a heavy displacement mono hull alberg 30. They have a long keel.

I really would not think that particular cat would have done well in the severe conditions we encountered that time. The waves were very close together in fairly shallow water and very high.

When I went up through the forward hatch to tie the jib in half to reduce it's area I could not even guess the height of the waves that were going under us. We had removed the main as conditions had gotten really bad . We had been beating into this worsening situation for some time. I timed the turn to get us stern on to the waves and weather very carefully.

I know just looking at that larger cat and the windage it presented probably would prevent the execution of it. Especially with no daggerboards. Plus because of the closeness of the waves I would have to wonder how much of a heel or tilt it could stand.

About the only thing possibly on that cat with all its windage would have been to use a sea anchor to keep the boat into the conditions. Or use long ropes or whatever over the stern to kill off the bare poles speed. It blew like hell for hours that night.

Only one boat completed that race. I suspect he may have been the leader and got into semi sheltered waters early enough. Fortunately nobody was sunk. There where a few dismastings though. I saw next morning that a large lake freighter was close to shore and anchored.

For those that have no respect for weather out on the water. You should try a really strong line squall with lots of lightning as a teaser. No time for waves to build but there are components that are interesting. Initially it blows the waves flat if it is violent enough.. As for wind speed I was always too busy to look at it. One I was in lasting maybe five minutes blew trees down ashore. Rain can go completely horizontal for all practical purposes and the close lightning strikes and smell of the ozone from them is almost constant. As soon as it arrives it is gone just as quickly in short time.

I have always suspected this was one substantial method of sinking large and small sailing vessels over the centuries. There usually would be no survivors. I believe one Canadian based sail training vessel went in this fashion off south America a few years ago. That time there where survivors though.