Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 26-06-2015, 15:29   #331
Senior Cruiser
 
Ann T. Cate's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: aboard, cruising in Australia
Boat: Sayer 46' Solent rig sloop
Posts: 7,353
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwyckham View Post
John from Morgan's Cloud has just posted a great article with his analysis of the report. He feels pretty strongly that the report was excellent but that the recommendations didn't go nearly far enough. I don't disagree.
"I don't disagree," either. If the author's recommendations were accepted, we could all feel better about the long term survival of the owners of boats with the new/old construction.

I support John's recommendations.

Ann
__________________

__________________
Ann & Jim, U.S. s/v Insatiable II, free at last, will check in when in internet range
Ann T. Cate is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2015, 16:28   #332
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,267
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

^^The difficulty is that:

(1) to get the boat builders to change you (probably) have to change the ISO standard, which is near impossible to do. I tried for about 5 years to get a couple rudder improvements into ISO and found it to be an impossible process.

and

(2) the builders will say this keel particular failure has only happened once, on a boat that was "rode hard and put away wet" - a pleasure boat that was really inappropriately put to commercial use. And Bendy (at least) do not believe they are making a 'forever' boat - just for instance they have speced their thru-hulls/sea cocks for a 7-10 year life and they believe their customers are fine with that. So, they will say, the report is actually correct as written and John is wrong.

I personally think there is a place for both a 'forever' boat in the market, and for a '10 year possibly disposable' boat. . . .and it's a case of Caveat emptor for the buyer to know which is which.

I do think John is wrong when he says it is relatively easy and relatively inexpensive (using today's typical boat building quality standards) to make an e-glass laminate structure for a thin fin keel that can withstand multiple 8 kt groundings without damage. I happen to know its hard to accomplish even with an aluminum structure.

You can certainly make a 'better' structure than this glued in grid (just doubling the amount of e-glass and making the bolts bigger would of course help), but an 8kt impact on the bottom of the keel on a granite ledge (just for example) is a serious shock load for any structure. In fact the greatest reduction damage could come from elasticity/deformation measures added in the potential impact zone (eg crush boxes) . . . . more leverage there than in changing the keel attachment structure. Structurally, putting the keel in a socket is the 'best' structural solution but that is not extremely inexpensive, nor that easy to engineer and will impose on interior space (in a shallow bilge boat like these are) . . . boat designers certainly know of that solution and there is a reason the boat builders do not do it.

Regarding his aircraft analogy, I get his point, but airplane wings are not expected to survive impacts with tree trunks! And thin keel boats probably need extensive inspection after a hard grounding no matter the structure.
__________________

__________________
www.bethandevans.com
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-06-2015, 07:13   #333
Registered User
 
transmitterdan's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Boat: Valiant 42
Posts: 3,132
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

My opinion is the existence of an ISO standard is one root problem. Unless the ISO standard mandates adequate margins of safety these things will keep happening. Because Bene met the standard at the date of manufacture they are absolved of any wrong. If there were no ISO standard and all other facts were the same would a similarly situated builder/architect be so easily absolved in this case. I doubt it.
__________________
transmitterdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-06-2015, 07:51   #334
Long Range Cruiser
 
MarkJ's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australian living on "Sea Life" currently in New York
Boat: Beneteau 393 "Sea Life"
Posts: 12,252
Images: 25
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Evans writes very well about the real ability for manufactures to go backwards, or as John from Morgas Cloud says 'return'. Forward is better. Make modern design better, not modern design older.

More interesting to me is surviving a situation.

From the report page 23

Quote:
At 0940 on 18 May 2014, the search effort was terminated.
RCC Boston calculated the estimated survivability of the crew members based on their average descriptions, assuming that they were dressed in full foul weather sailing gear, immersed to the neck in water and wearing a personal flotation device (PFD). Using these criteria, the estimated functional survivability and survival times were 12.3 hours and 15.5 hours respectively.

Using similar parameters but assuming that the crew members had been submerged to the waist in water, sitting in a liferaft in heavy weather, produced estimated functional survivability and survival times of 14 hours and 21 hours respectively.

RCC Boston also calculated the probability of success (POS) of finding the following objects based on the probability of containment (POC) for the areas searched, and the probability of detection (POD) from searching those areas:

POS for a person in the water with a PFD: 6%
• POS for a swamped/capsized boat: 95%
• POS for an upright liferaft: 82%
• POS for a capsized liferaft: 92%
Note the last 3 items are objects, not people!

Basically it means even if you do get in a liferaft in those conditions you have only 14 hours survival time, maybe up to 21 hours. Thats not much when outside aircraft range.
__________________
Notes on a Circumnavigation.
OurLifeAtSea.com

Somalia Pirates and our Convoy
MarkJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 06:36   #335
Registered User
 
scuba0_1's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: naples
Boat: 2005 Catalina 350
Posts: 660
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Manslaughter charges to be brought.

http://www.yachtingworld.com/news/ch...-brought-95523



Sent from my SM-N910V using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app
__________________
scuba0_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 07:39   #336
Registered User
 
Travis McGee's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Jax, FL
Boat: 48' steel cutter
Posts: 291
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

I have never had a reason to regret building a steel boat. Especially after hard groundings and slamming into various hard objects over the past 20+ years.

Rafiki would beat me into port by days, but I have always slept well offshore in rough stuff.

1992, under construction.

__________________
Travis McGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 08:17   #337
Registered User
 
Polux's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Portugal/Med
Boat: Comet 41s
Posts: 4,876
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Quote:
Originally Posted by scuba0_1 View Post
It is significant that is not Beneteau that is charged but the boat operator and It can only be for inadequate maintenance and inadequate repairs to groundings (negligence).

I would like to read the reason for the charges. Anyone has find them?
Polux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 08:22   #338
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 68
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

I'm surprised that this is a criminal case and not a civil case. Someone somewhere must have been pushing this case to the forefront.
__________________
Tetra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 09:34   #339
cat herder, extreme blacksheep
 
zeehag's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: furycame alley , tropics, mexico for now
Boat: 1976 FORMOSA yankee clipper 41
Posts: 16,645
Images: 56
Send a message via Yahoo to zeehag Send a message via Skype™ to zeehag
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...aughter-deaths


negligence caused the deaths. yes criminal and yes manslaughter.
be wary of what condition the boat is in which you send folks to sea
zeehag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 09:56   #340
Registered User
 
transmitterdan's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Boat: Valiant 42
Posts: 3,132
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Quote:
Originally Posted by Polux View Post
It is significant that is not Beneteau that is charged but the boat operator and It can only be for inadequate maintenance and inadequate repairs to groundings (negligence).

I would like to read the reason for the charges. Anyone has find them?
Polux,

Who gets sued in a case like this has more to do with legal issues such as jurisdiction and time limitations than with technical design matters. And the first parties to be sued will have an opportunity to argue someone else is at fault. It is an insignificant detail that Beneteau are not yet being sued.
__________________
transmitterdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 10:20   #341
Senior Cruiser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2005
Boat: Outbound 44
Posts: 3,392
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Quote:
Originally Posted by transmitterdan View Post
Polux,

Who gets sued in a case like this has more to do with legal issues such as jurisdiction and time limitations than with technical design matters. And the first parties to be sued will have an opportunity to argue someone else is at fault. It is an insignificant detail that Beneteau are not yet being sued.
These new charges are not a civil suit, it's a criminal prosecution. The prosecutors must feel they have enough evidence to prove the negligence that caused the deaths. Seems pretty hard to make that argument with the limited evidence.
__________________
Paul L
http://svjeorgia.blogspot.com
Paul L is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 10:27   #342
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 421
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

I'm almost certain the crown's prosecutors must have taken the management company's internal communications and records into account before proceeding with a case.

Regardless of what one thinks is best design practices and whether Beneteau's cost design errs to far in one direction, fact is most Beneteau's don't lose their keels, and the management company responsible probably provided some level of indifference or negligence in how it approached grounding repair/inspection.

In a civil case they may argue there's design or manufacturing liability, and designing to ISO standards doesn't protect you from liability if you've had notice that the design is flawed for intended purpose or expected conditions. But I Don't think repeated groundings is one of them.
__________________
SV DestinyAscen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 10:47   #343
Registered User
 
Polux's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Portugal/Med
Boat: Comet 41s
Posts: 4,876
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Quote:
Originally Posted by transmitterdan View Post
Polux,

Who gets sued in a case like this has more to do with legal issues such as jurisdiction and time limitations than with technical design matters. And the first parties to be sued will have an opportunity to argue someone else is at fault. It is an insignificant detail that Beneteau are not yet being sued.
I don't understand how you find that insignificant or a detail.

The ones that are bringing the charges is the crown prosecution service based and in close cooperation with the marine coastguard agency, the ones that investigated for two years and made the report that has examined closely on this thread. The announcement was made simultaneously by the two agencies:

"
Now the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and the Crown Prosecution Service have announced that Douglas Innes, director of Stormforce Coaching, has been charged with four counts of manslaughter by gross negligence....

A spokesman for the agency said: ďThe Maritime and Coastguard Agency has carried out an investigation lasting more than two years into the circumstances surrounding the loss of the Cheeki Rafiki in May 2014.

ďFollowing that extensive investigation, a decision has been made by the Crown Prosecution Service to bring charges against Douglas Innes and Stormforce Coaching Limited.Ē"

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...aughter-deaths

It is pretty clear that, as I had been saying, (as a well known American surveyor had said and posted on sailanarchy), that the experts that made that extensive investigation put the essential blame not on the boat design or building but on gross negligent maintenance, otherwise it would be Beneteau that would be charged and not the one responsible for the operation e maintenance of that particular boat.

The first to talk about gross negligence and accountability was that Surveyor,
E.S. Geary that said long ago:

"The tragic death of the four crew and loss of the yacht was a result of third party incompetence and negligence and was preventable. Those who were responsible and negligent in the proper care and maintenance of the vessel should be indentified and held accountable to ensure something like this doesnít happen again. Having recently dealt with a number of claims on behalf London underwriters with similar deficiencies I believe the cause of this tragedy is obvious....

The skipperís first message reported the yacht was taking on water and requested the owners permission to divert to the Azores; he didnít report striking anything. Itís apparent that the ingress of water reported by the skipper was experienced and began as the keel bolts lost integrity. The keel bolts were loose and leaking water as evidenced by the rust stains on the apertures which could have resulted from corrosion or metal fatigue; their ultimate failure allowed the keel to separate from the hull. Tightened keel bolts donít fail, loose ones do. ...

During the 640 nm voyage north the approximately 3500 kg keel was only partially held against the flat hull surface by the defective keel bolts which initially allowed to keel to move with a limited ingress of water. Unknown to the crew because of the sea state and parametric rolling which would have aggravated and accelerated ultimate failure, the keel would have experienced a slow swinging motion before it eventually dropped from the hull....

The inverted hull of the Cheeki Rafiki was found and the photo silently speaks volumes confirming the keel bolt failure that led to the loss of the keel and the rise of the VCG that resulted in the immediate capsizing of the vessel.

This tragedy should not have happened. Through no fault of the crew the Cheeki Rafiki was sent to sea in an unseaworthy condition and those responsible should be held accountable. The families of the victimís have a right to know of the unseaworthiness and that their loved ones paid a terrible price and died because of the gross negligence of others."
Polux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 10:55   #344
Registered User
 
transmitterdan's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Boat: Valiant 42
Posts: 3,132
Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul L View Post
These new charges are not a civil suit, it's a criminal prosecution. The prosecutors must feel they have enough evidence to prove the negligence that caused the deaths. Seems pretty hard to make that argument with the limited evidence.
I agree with you. But if the prosecutors feel that someone was paid (enticed) to go to sea in a boat known not to be fit for purpose (whether ill maintained, poorly designed, etc.) then died as a direct result there may be a criminal liability question. The MAIB report said it was easy to find several examples of keel problems on these boats. Presumably the owner(s) could have done the same.

A bad example might be that if someone paid a crew of mentally deficient sailors to sail a cast iron bathtub from UK to New York the bathtub manufacturer would not be at fault. But the person paying the crew could probably be criminally charged.
__________________
transmitterdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2016, 11:03   #345
Freelance Delivery Skipper..
 
boatman61's Avatar

Community Sponsor
Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK/Portugal
Posts: 18,535
Images: 2
Send a message via Skype™ to boatman61
pirate Re: Cheeki Rafiki loss report

Further.. remember, all we have seen is what the Yachting mag's reported the owners saying re; e-mails sent and received.. based on that there's a flimsy case but if the authorities seized the companies computers etc.. its likely a lot more was uncovered than we.. the public could ever be aware off.
__________________

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Click on de Pic 4 de Site^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
boatman61 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
UK yacht Cheeki Rafiki missing in mid-Atlantic 1000 islands General Sailing Forum 517 11-06-2014 16:32
Cheeki Rafiki gmthompson99 Monohull Sailboats 107 30-05-2014 13:37
Restart the search for the missing Cheeki Rafiki crew members. mikethedane General Sailing Forum 0 20-05-2014 08:47


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 14:45.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.