Paul Allen's yacht allegedly destroys acres of coral

[Macblaze]

Ouch!

Ironically, Allen now works to "save endangered species," and "improve ocean health" through his charitable foundation and research projects.

Microsoft cofounder's yacht allegedly destroyed a coral reef - Jan. 27, 2016

[undercutter]

Ah, those Cayman Island boys certainly know how to make money. direct the yacht to anchor over the coral reef and then fine them for destroying the reef.

Maybe the Captain of the yacht will have to visit this forum to learn how to anchor. Seems hard to believe that 11,000 sq feet of sea bottom could have been affected unless they were dragging all over the ocean. Must of had a CQR. Wait a minute I have 2 of those.

[Reefmagnet]

Yep. What better way to save endangered species and care for the ocean / environment in general then prancing around on a 300 foot oil burner.

through his charitable foundation and research projects.

= Tax write offs

[Jim Cate]

Umm, Macblaze, could you perhaps have used slightly less inflammatory prose in your thread title? There were not "acres" destroyed (or otherwise harmed... unlikely to be really destroyed), but rather less than 1/4 acre.

I'm surely not a fan of the mega rich in huge motor yachts, but let's not make wildly exaggerated statements like these; it really distorts the image of objectivity.

Jim

[Macblaze]

Hmmmm... my bad? I didn't mean it to be inflammatory and an acre is a completely nonsensical unit of measurement to me. All i know is there's 640 of them in a section... And I did include the "allegedly" so I get points for that don't I?

Still, you gotta admit it's a lot of destruction for one 'little' yacht.

[Nicholson58]

I can only imagine dragging the considerable scope of heavy chain around a reef. Sort of like dragging a trawl.

[GoingWalkabout]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

Ouch!



Microsoft cofounder's yacht allegedly destroyed a coral reef - Jan. 27, 2016

I know this is not the point of the OP but I immediately thought of the deal Alan has cooked up to pay for his boat using it as a vessel involved in Ocean research. I'm sure there must be some great tax break angles associated with his little venture. Perhaps I should rig my boat with ocean sensing stuff and get in on this one. Or am I being too cynical?

[TacomaSailor]

Apparently folks here have little contact with math or life on the hook.

One Acre = 43,560 square feet

Area of a circle = PI (3.1416)*radius squared

The boat is accused of damaging 14,000 square feet so the radius of their swing (if they did a full circle) is 66 feet, or maybe they had 132 feet of chain out and swung in a half circle. The 14,000 sq feet number comes from a Seattle newspaper which I trust much more when talking about Paul Allen (home boy) and boats (they have a few there) than I do CNN.

That seems like a pretty normal scope (4:1 for all chain) in 16 or 32 feet of water.

The article says the boat was anchored where directed by the Port Authority. It sounds like they put out a "normal" amount of chain and swung a little. That is life on the hook - what do the critics here the captain of the boat should have done and where should he have anchored?

[undercutter]

Originally Posted by TacomaSailor

Apparently folks here have little contact with math or life on the hook.

One Acre = 43,560 square feet

Area of a circle = PI (3.1416)*radius squared

The boat is accused of damaging 14,000 square feet so the radius of their swing (if they did a full circle) is 66 feet, or maybe they had 132 feet of chain out and swung in a half circle. The 14,000 sq feet number comes from a Seattle newspaper which I trust much more when talking about Paul Allen (home boy) and boats (they have a few there) than I do CNN.

That seems like a pretty normal scope (4:1 for all chain) in 16 or 32 feet of water.

The article says the boat was anchored where directed by the Port Authority. It sounds like they put out a "normal" amount of chain and swung a little. That is life on the hook - what do the critics here the captain of the boat should have done and where should he have anchored?

Most of these big boats that I have seen do not use as much scope due to their big heavy anchors. And even so, how much of this chain is actually on the sea bottom. We can assume that at least 1/2 of the scope is elevated or if not they would have been in dead calm with no current and would not have been swinging around at all.

Just an opportunity to grab some money especially since they were instructed to anchor at this location. We will see. Not that it matters anyway as He is worth how many billions.

Amazing how fast they were able to do a complete survey of the bottom and assess how much damage was done to the coral.

[canyonbat]

I was told by someone that used to work aboard all of Paul Allen's yachts that they normally do not drop anchor at all. They use a sophisticated GPS positioning system in conjunction with various thrusters. Put the boat where they want it and say "Stay!"

[reed1v]

Besides, Billionaires are exempt from laws designed for common folks. Besides, they have their own armies so watch your tongue.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by canyonbat

I was told by someone that used to work aboard all of Paul Allen's yachts that they normally do not drop anchor at all. They use a sophisticated GPS positioning system in conjunction with various thrusters. Put the boat where they want it and say "Stay!"

Ii want one of these. And I would so add "Fetch" to the list...

[reed1v]

Originally Posted by canyonbat

I was told by someone that used to work aboard all of Paul Allen's yachts that they normally do not drop anchor at all. They use a sophisticated GPS positioning system in conjunction with various thrusters. Put the boat where they want it and say "Stay!"

Octopus uses a system adapted from open ocean drilling platforms. Not sure why they were using an anchor. It is a magnificent vessel. The advantage of the active stationary system is that it allows the boat to keep its bow pointed in whatever direction you desire and with the stabilizing system operating, you might as well be standing on land.

[nigel1]

The dis-advantage of the Dynamic Positioning System is that you would need to keep main engines and generators running. No doubt they can afford the diesel, but it's not "environmentally friendly" in all cases, although it might have been the better option if they wanted to stop over the reef.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by reed1v

Octopus uses a system adapted from open ocean drilling platforms. Not sure why they were using an anchor. It is a magnificent vessel. The advantage of the active stationary system is that it allows the boat to keep its bow pointed in whatever direction you desire and with the stabilizing system operating, you might as well be standing on land.

This wasn't Octopus. It was his "smaller" yacht, Tatoosh... probably didn't come with the upgraded parking system