GUNBOAT Dismasting

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by smj

Two points. The Gunboat is not a flat bottomed landing craft. And Nicks Sundeer in an anchorage with a beam sea will roll its guts out.

I can confirm this, the rolling is horrible. We quickly learned that the best way to stop it is to use a bridle on the anchor chain that leads to a cockpit winch. This allows us to point the bow into the waves.

On a cat it ain't fun either. I had my plate flying through the air once with the jerking motion you get on a cat anchored with the swell on the beam. This too is easily fixed with the bridle.

The difference between the Gunboat and the landing craft is the weight.

[paxfish]

I'll be interested to see any info they decide to release, but am content to believe that the folks on board made a bad decision about their departure, got in over their head and called for rescue. I've been through those waters in relatively benign conditions and even then it was unpredictable. Current changing constantly, and a squall that seemingly appeared out of nowhere.

As far as doing stuff?

Whether you're tumbling through space or fighting for your life in a river rapid or watching a white squall approach and thinking "oh ****" or sitting in an oily bilge, emergency tiller in one hand, puke bucket in the other. All of that kind of stuff beats the hell out of sitting in an armchair shaking your fist at the politicians on TV (or the trolls on the internet, for that matter!)

Even though the folks on board likely screwed up, and probably put others at risk, I commend their spirit. They found their limits as men, and unfortunately found themselves on the other side of that hairy edge. The USCG helped them survive it, and possibly the good construction of the GB was a positive factor. But the point is, the vast majority of us never go there.

I submit that the "good stuff" is found along that edge....

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Going Walkabout

For some with a large enough check book it could be their entry level boat.

Why people give a rat's .......... is very simple to understand. When you make over the top claims and you promote your storm survival systems and your cutting edge new design abd then you have your sails and high tech storm system if not even your new design fails then you bet your bottom dollar your going to get well deserved criticism. Add to this the obvious continued silence of the boat builder but more importantly the passengers I think the criticism is not only fair but warranted.

I'm not one of those who are waiting with baited breath for a sanitised statement from the builder. I'm sorry the time for that has long past. The information from the crew and the passengers could have been gathered and released within days of the accident. For me as each day has gone by my trust in veracity of anything that comes from the obviously self interested boat owner is diminished.

So can you explain to me why the owner of Rainmaker would want to lie to defend Gunboat?

He'll most likely be getting an insurance payout, if he's unhappy with the boat he'll surely spend the money on something else, so why this supposed loyalty, to the point of dishonesty, to Gunboat?

[GoingWalkabout]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

So can you explain to me why the owner of Rainmaker would want to lie to defend Gunboat?

He'll most likely be getting an insurance payout, if he's unhappy with the boat he'll surely spend the money on something else, so why this supposed loyalty, to the point of dishonesty, to Gunboat?

I tried go back and edit but I couldn't. I took too long. I meant to say boat builder... not boat owner. And I'm not saying the boat builder is or will lie. Its just that for me I have zero trust in anything he has to say now. You of course are free to trust whomever you choose. So am I.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by GoingWalkabout

I tried go back and edit but I couldn't. I took too long. I meant to say boat builder... not boat owner. And I'm not saying the boat builder is or will lie. Its just that for me I have zero trust in anything he has to say now. You of course are free to trust whomever you choose. So am I.

So basically, whatever comes out, Gunboat are damned in your opinion.

Fair enough. You're supposedly going to buy a Lagoon. I've seen a Lagoon start to come apart, to the point their crew was preparing to abandon ship in far milder conditions that the Gunboat reportedly faced. And in fact not long ago another larger Lagoon was abandoned off the Aus East coast when in milder conditions.

Catamaran Connection: Lagoon 500 ONE WORLD Abandoned off Sunshine Coast of Australia

Are they damned too?

[Delancey]

Originally Posted by Delancey

From Peter Johnstone yesterday on SA -

Posted Yesterday, 02:20 PM
This thread has some wild speculation. We'd prefer that the Captain get his account written and out there. We led this story with as much information as we could glean with the goal to promote safety from the learnings.

Some clarifications to various speculation:

1) The longeron is held by the side-stays. It can only drop about 150mm from its tensioned position. Crew were able to walk on the nets and knock the forestay pin out. The longeron was not an issue during her brief time under power after the rig was cleared away.
2) The roof took the load of the boom and rig on it, including the leverage of the mast and sails in the water. There may have been damage, and one window broke, but it safely protected the five crew.
3) The open layout does not appear to be an issue in this incident. Water has not been mentioned as a contributing factor in any way.
4) Rainmaker was 240 kgs over her planned lightship of 12,500 kgs due to the original owners extensive additions. Her loaded displacement prior to passage appeared well under her designed full loaded displacement of 15,250 kgs. Her loaded displacement does not appear to be a contributing factor.
5) According to the Captain, rigging and attachment points were all intact after the incident.

In summary, a sizable weather event hit Rainmaker. It was either a microburst or a water spout. The crew saw 75+ knots but have no idea of top gusts. There was no visibility, just a complete white out.

I'm quoting myself quoting SA quoting Peter Johnstone because maybe a couple salient points in what he said have been missed, or maybe I'm not hearing what he is saying correctly. Tell me if I am wrong-

The boat protected the crew during a disastrous dismasting. An event which can in-and-of-itself be potentially fatal to both the crew and the vessel.

If the rigging and attachment points were all intact after the incident as stated, it can be presumed the the failure occurred within manufacture of the carbon spars themselves or as a result of flaw in the design. This is a Hall Spars problem and not GB problem.

Scuppers drain on the low side.

[Arthur Garfield]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

What would be the point of them answering your questions? You lot have already decided any answers forthcoming will be lies anyway.

Entirely ridiculous statement.


All the Best

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Arthur Garfield

Entirely ridiculous statement.


All the Best

You clearly haven't read the thread.

[GoingWalkabout]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

So basically, whatever comes out, Gunboat are damned in your opinion.

Fair enough. You're supposedly going to buy a Lagoon. I've seen a Lagoon start to come apart, to the point their crew was preparing to abandon ship in far milder conditions that the Gunboat reportedly faced. And in fact not long ago another larger Lagoon was abandoned off the Aus East coast when in milder conditions.

Catamaran Connection: Lagoon 500 ONE WORLD Abandoned off Sunshine Coast of Australia

Are they damned too?

Your right. I'm now not a Gun Boat buyer. As far as Lagoon's go I will study the incident you sent me. Thank you.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Delancey

If the rigging and attachment points were all intact after the incident as stated, it can be presumed the the failure occurred within manufacture of the carbon spars themselves or as a result of flaw in the design. This is a Hall Spars problem and not GB problem.

To be honest, I think the rig design is worth questioning. I've never seen any other modern cat with a rig like that. There are no lower shrouds or jumper struts. Basically nothing (except the stiffness of the mast section) to prevent the mast from being bent forward in the middle.

And DDW with triple reefed main in strong winds would see a considerable load doing exactly that.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Uhhh, and you know what I am "hoping", how? Appears to be a bit of "speculation" on your part, there... ;-)

Yes, it is my opinion and I still think its correct

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

I haven't said that... What we DO know, is that they ultimately failed to do so, but given the lack of information known at this point, we can only speculate as to the reason(s) WHY...

I'm sorry but that's still not correct. Saying that someone failed to do something implies that they tried to do it in the first place. You don't know that they tried, you're assuming they did.

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Well, we do know that Peter Johnstone has nothing but the highest regard for the skipper Chris Bailet, he has been widely referred to as perhaps THE top dog among the pros out there running Gunboats today. The writer Charlie Doane went out of his way in his review of the 55 at the Newport Show, to mention how impressed he was with CB... And I seem to recall Maine Sail, posting either here or over on Sailnet, that he had spent a couple of hours with Chris going over the boat in Newport, and was likewise favorably impressed with his knowledge of the boat's systems, etc... Then there's this from soma over on SA, a fellow Gunboat pro sailor who has sailed over 10K miles with Bailet:

We do know that other model Gunboats have completed numerous offshore passages successfully, and have racked up OVER 2 MILLION OFFSHORE MILES, according to Johnstone. (Personally, I find that total a bit hard to swallow, but I'll take his word for it ;-)) And we do know that Hull #1 of the 55 Series was abandoned roughly 200 miles into its first bluewater passage... If that's not an example of a new model failing to live up to the builder's hype, well.... we'll just have to agree to disagree, on that one... ;-)

Do you realise what putting all these winks on your posts comes across like? It’s clearly not an example of the boat failing to live up to its marketing, you only think it is because you’ve made a bunch of assumptions that confirm your bias.

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

I think it's pretty safe to assume the passage plan was dependent upon the vaunted speed potential of these boats, and that departing into the weather they did, and threading the needle between the 2 fast moving lows racing past Hatteras, would be something a Gunboat skipper would not even "blinked at" on any of the other Gunboat models...

Again, from soma, who would have been aboard RAINMAKER, if not for the fact that his wife had just had a baby the week prior to their departure:

However, the fact the boat was abandoned before ever having the chance to thread that needle between those lows remains indisputable...

You even call out your assumptions, unbelievable. You really don’t get it do you. You have no idea of their intentions or what routing, stops, what happened in the lead up to the event. All of this is your assumptions, which I’ve already pointed out.

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

That is true, we don't know any of that for certain... Again, I've never asserted the boat actually sank, only that I doubt it will ever be salvaged, or seen again, unless by accident... But, we do know that the CG watchstander in Norfolk who worked the communications during this incident, has stated the crew was prepared to abandon to a liferaft... Sure, perhaps he 'misspoke', or doesn't know what he's talking about ;-) But if the official statement from the CG is to be taken literally (not to mention taking the very hazardous chance of transferring the crew to a merchant ship in those conditions) the only logical conclusion to be drawn is that the crew had extremely grave doubts about the wisdom of remaining aboard the remarkably "safe platform" ALL Gunboats are claimed to represent, per their marketing...

Again, you don’t know what happened, who made the call and why. You’re assuming … Further, you pasted in part of the GB marketing that talked about it being unsinkable and suggested it hadn't lived up to the claims. Maybe you should be a little clearer in what you're disputing while you're wailing on someone's product.

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Based on my own experience, I believe I have a pretty good idea who made either the initial, or final call to abandon RAINMAKER... It's the reason why I'll politely decline to do an offshore delivery with the owner aboard ;-) Under the right circumstances, coastal trips with owners can be one thing, but a passage in the North Atlantic in winter with an owner making his first-ever offshore passage, no freakin' way... But, that's just me, guys like Chris Bailet are more than delivery skippers, after all...

But in that regard, Bailet and his crew did their job, the owner and his son are still alive, and I'm certainly not intending to second guess their decision to abandon RAINMAKER given the circumstances...

More winking … bloody hell. But you ARE second guessing it by trying to claim that the GB hasn’t lived up to its marketing. You really haven’t thought this through.

[pbr]

Originally Posted by colemj

I'm curious to understand your reasoning. Series drogues are active steering devices with the boat moving downwind at reduced speed, so one doesn't really lie to them like a parachute. A mono - particularly a Westsail 32 - is a rollamatic machine down-seas, while a catamaran hardly notices them.

Having a lot of experience with both monos and multis, I would vastly prefer running with a series drogue on a multi than a mono. I would not prefer a parachute on a multi unless one really did need to stop dead in the water.

But with either one, I would suspect the multi to have vastly more comfortable motion than a mono.

Mark

The sea anchor is much more versatile than a drogue and much easier to retrieve. You can't stop the boat with a drogue and effect repairs or an injured person, the drogue could very likely send you the wrong direction and much further out of your way. If it were a choice between sea anchor or drogue it would be sea anchor every time.

[SVNeko]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

To be honest, I think the rig design is worth questioning. I've never seen any other modern cat with a rig like that. There are no lower shrouds or jumper struts. Basically nothing (except the stiffness of the mast section) to prevent the mast from being bent forward in the middle..

Aren't a few Catana models rigged this way?

Sent from my SM-T210R using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[GoingWalkabout]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

To be honest, I think the rig design is worth questioning. I've never seen any other modern cat with a rig like that. There are no lower shrouds or jumper struts. Basically nothing (except the stiffness of the mast section) to prevent the mast from being bent forward in the middle.

And DDW with triple reefed main in strong winds would see a considerable load doing exactly that.

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

So basically, whatever comes out, Gunboat are damned in your opinion.

Fair enough. You're supposedly going to buy a Lagoon. I've seen a Lagoon start to come apart, to the point their crew was preparing to abandon ship in far milder conditions that the Gunboat reportedly faced. And in fact not long ago another larger Lagoon was abandoned off the Aus East coast when in milder conditions.

Catamaran Connection: Lagoon 500 ONE WORLD Abandoned off Sunshine Coast of Australia

Are they damned too?

I read the report on the Lagoon that was abandoned. Thank you for drawing my attention to it. How refreshing to have a frank disclosure by its owner/captain. It was a 3 year old craft that had been around the world. It took omen water with water up to the floor boards. The source of the leak was not known and the decision was made to abandon the boat.

Mr Garner and crew were only 16 Nautical Miles from the mainland at 2am when the hull began to fill with water after being battered by 35-knot westerly winds and 3m seas.
“We were in the last leg of our journey,’’ Mr Garner said.
“The water was coming over the floorboards. We did our checks, but couldn’t detect where the leak was coming from.

The big difference here it wasn't a maiden blue water voyage. They admitted it was taking on water. This was no secret. It serves as an instruction to regularly check your vessels belly including through holes. I would also say having a number of well located sensors to detect water in the hulls as well as a good pump system.

If the GB took on water and this was admitted early on then no one would be saying what they are saying now. Yes questions would be still asked about its design but that is expected when you have a boat with a radically new design. The Lagoon incident you brought up is so very different to the GB saga.

[pbr]

Originally Posted by SVNeko

Aren't a few Catana models rigged this way?

Sent from my SM-T210R using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

I have built over 100 catamarans with a rig exactly like it, we lost a few rigs to terminal failures, but no one ever had to abandon the boat. It is all about the engineering whether aluminum or carbon. Most manufacturers are using more rigging support because it is less expensive than buying or engineering a stronger section which offers a much cleaner rig aerodynamically with a lower CG. I like the rig concept, in fact I like the idea of no spreaders at all!