Broken Lagoon

[owly]

Originally Posted by moonmist

I see this as more of a design flaw. Structurally not able to do it's job. The boats are falling apart. Groupe Beneteau is a large company, most likely with some very qualified engineers. But they missed the mark on this one, and I am sure they can trace it back to find the blame. ( we will most likely never see the the outcome of any internal investigation)

Boeing has some of the most highly qualified engineers in the business....yet the737 Max made it out the door...........


Faith in modern engineers is unrealistic. In my business I see some really STUPID engineering. It often involves failure to learn from or pay attention to the past. The most important course of study in engineering should be a study of what has NOT worked in the past and why. Engineers unfortunately are the product of academia....not of the real world. I've for many years held that an engineer should have to work in the field doing repair and construction for 20 years before being allowed to design ANYTHING, and perhaps should continue with hands on real world work. I feel the same way about doctors... they should have to work their way up from and LPN through RN, NP, PA in an integrated alternating work study environment... Enter the medical work environment at the bottom, and at each point decide weather to pursue ongoing education, and in what direction. The product would be vastly superior. This is a failure of our education system that permeates every field. Education and work need to be integrated in some way. Remote learning, sabbaticals for furthering education, etc. A variation on the old apprenticeship model.


Note on Chinese "junk": I've come to the realization some time ago that the Chinese are capable of building extremely high quality products..... or of building junk. They build what they are told to build and paid to build, nearly always by westerners who are importing and selling the products. "Chinese quality" does not really reflect the the ability of the Chinese so much as the greed of the westerners who commission them to manufacture things. That is true of ALL offshore manufacturing. You offshore manufacturing to increase profit. I own a few Chinese manufactured items that are of superb quality..... and plenty that are not, but the latter I bought because they were cheap and sufficient to my needs.

[NaClyDog]

Originally Posted by owly

Note on Chinese "junk": I've come to the realization some time ago that the Chinese are capable of building extremely high quality products..... or of building junk. They build what they are told to build and paid to build, nearly always by westerners who are importing and selling the products. "Chinese quality" does not really reflect the the ability of the Chinese so much as the greed of the westerners who commission them to manufacture things. That is true of ALL offshore manufacturing. You offshore manufacturing to increase profit. I own a few Chinese manufactured items that are of superb quality..... and plenty that are not, but the latter I bought because they were cheap and sufficient to my needs.

Extremely well said. Bravo.

[smj]

Originally Posted by owly

Boeing has some of the most highly qualified engineers in the business....yet the737 Max made it out the door...........


Faith in modern engineers is unrealistic. In my business I see some really STUPID engineering. It often involves failure to learn from or pay attention to the past. The most important course of study in engineering should be a study of what has NOT worked in the past and why. Engineers unfortunately are the product of academia....not of the real world. I've for many years held that an engineer should have to work in the field doing repair and construction for 20 years before being allowed to design ANYTHING, and perhaps should continue with hands on real world work. I feel the same way about doctors... they should have to work their way up from and LPN through RN, NP, PA in an integrated alternating work study environment... Enter the medical work environment at the bottom, and at each point decide weather to pursue ongoing education, and in what direction. The product would be vastly superior. This is a failure of our education system that permeates every field. Education and work need to be integrated in some way. Remote learning, sabbaticals for furthering education, etc. A variation on the old apprenticeship model.


Note on Chinese "junk": I've come to the realization some time ago that the Chinese are capable of building extremely high quality products..... or of building junk. They build what they are told to build and paid to build, nearly always by westerners who are importing and selling the products. "Chinese quality" does not really reflect the the ability of the Chinese so much as the greed of the westerners who commission them to manufacture things. That is true of ALL offshore manufacturing. You offshore manufacturing to increase profit. I own a few Chinese manufactured items that are of superb quality..... and plenty that are not, but the latter I bought because they were cheap and sufficient to my needs.

I feel the same way about architects. They should spend some time building before they take on the task of designing, that way maybe they would realize what does and doesn’t work when it comes to designing.

[owly]

Originally Posted by smj

I feel the same way about architects. They should spend some time building before they take on the task of designing, that way maybe they would realize what does and doesn’t work when it comes to designing.

Obviously you are a carpenter or builder, and I fix broken things for a living ;-)

[smj]

Originally Posted by owly

Obviously you are a carpenter or builder, and I fix broken things for a living ;-)

Yes, a house framer by trade and turned into the occasional builder!

[cyan]

Originally Posted by moonmist

I see this as more of a design flaw. Structurally not able to do it's job. The boats are falling apart. Groupe Beneteau is a large company, most likely with some very qualified engineers. But they missed the mark on this one, and I am sure they can trace it back to find the blame. ( we will most likely never see the the outcome of any internal investigation)

This is a very good point. We do know that the naval architect for the L450, Vincent Lauriot-Prévost of VPLP Design, recently stated this about the obviously weak mast bulkhead on the very boat that he (reportedly) designed:

"there are 2 holes for piping and wiring which are just in the area where the loads are transmitted from the beam to the hull itself, just near the door... and here is the weak point of this boat."

(eyebrows raised)
What we don't know is exactly how detailed his design was and why these (now) obvious flaws made it out of the factory. Did he just roughly specify the bulkhead, leaving it up to Lagoon engineers to determine the actual thickness, glassing, and cutout details?

He does refer to "they" when talking about the number of plywood sheets used for reinforcement. Also, reports have it that the FEA was done by Lagoon staff, not the design firm VPLP, which is probably more famous for racing boats. Did Lagoon take a solid design and cut it down too far in an attempt to save costs?

I think you're right, moonmist. We will most likely never know the answers to these questions. Hopefully Lagoon comes through for the owners, without the need for a thick application of sticky lawyers.

[owly]

Originally Posted by cyan

This is a very good point. We do know that the naval architect for the L450, Vincent Lauriot-Prévost of VPLP Design, recently stated this about the obviously weak mast bulkhead on the very boat that he (reportedly) designed:

"there are 2 holes for piping and wiring which are just in the area where the loads are transmitted from the beam to the hull itself, just near the door... and here is the weak point of this boat."

(eyebrows raised)
What we don't know is exactly how detailed his design was and why these (now) obvious flaws made it out of the factory. Did he just roughly specify the bulkhead, leaving it up to Lagoon engineers to determine the actual thickness, glassing, and cutout details?

He does refer to "they" when talking about the number of plywood sheets used for reinforcement. Also, reports have it that the FEA was done by Lagoon staff, not the design firm VPLP, which is probably more famous for racing boats. Did Lagoon take a solid design and cut it down too far in an attempt to save costs?

I think you're right, moonmist. We will most likely never know the answers to these questions. Hopefully Lagoon comes through for the owners, without the need for a thick application of sticky lawyers.

As a designer, engineer, architect, something is either built to your design, or it is NOT. If it is NOT built to your design, it is not your design....period, and your name and reputation are not on the line. You need to publicly and notoriously disown the product as a cheap knock off to cover your ass. If you do not, and continue to claim it as your design. It's on your head....... I have zero sympathy... Your can't have it both ways.

[JC Reefer]

Tough to argue that leopard and lagoon are anything but made for the charter world. They may work for some, especially with the owners version, but the primary driver of sales for these is charter. Everything else come second.

This is my observation. I loved my leopard 47. Don’t recognize the brand now.

[Sand crab]

Originally Posted by EarlWer

The document shows that they knew about the problem and modified the bulkhead construction back in 2012 !

Colin's boat is post-2012 and still failed... but it has gone through a lot of stress.
There was one early episode (in 2018) before he found the structural failure that showed how they tensioned the rigging and the problems they had.
I don't think they realized at the time what the real problem was... ;-)

https://youtu.be/pDHzOyg8nIs?t=321

Actually his boat is a 2012. I can't find the first year of production but I think it was 2011, the last year for the L440 was 2010 so this would be the new model to replace it back then. The YW listings start with 2011. They still make the 450 sport top btw but discontinued the flybridge model. The L46 replaces that one.
If they knew about the problem early on then the "fix" wasn't very good.

[owly]

There is no question that this is a fundamental "design flaw"......... and again the designer should have very publicly and loudly disowned the design when he realized that they were deviating from his design. Unfortunately having small highly stressed points in the main "beam structure" was itself a design flaw. We have a massive boat.... over 17 tons empty (light displacement), probably over 20 tons as sailed. These are HUGE stresses when you consider the dimensions of the boat.


In the most recent Utube, they finally realize that this is a universal fundamental weakness, and that there are numerous similarly broken boats of the same model.


Lawsuits will likely fail....... How far out does the manufacturer's liability extend, and the lawsuits would be across multiple jurisdictions.


Made for a fairly short life as a charter boat where they will not get heavy use, one has to ask how many other of these monster condo cats will show up similar weaknesses when faced with REAL water sailing">blue water sailing and being faced with real storms at sea. How would they fare alongside something like Ramtha (a Simpson) in the Queen's Birthday Storm, or various others..... I suspect poorly...... What is a "blue water" boat?

[PaulBartomioli]

You missed the key point. Colin has been contacted by 10 or so other owners with the same issues. It appears a Class Action lawsuit is being considered. Colin admitted the problem is larger than they thought.

[rabbi]

Originally Posted by PaulBartomioli

You missed the key point. Colin has been contacted by 10 or so other owners with the same issues. It appears a Class Action lawsuit is being considered. Colin admitted the problem is larger than they thought.

Good luck to them. Seriously!
This is a French company with no assets in the US so they have to follow up in France. They will need all the luck they can find .

[more]

The lagoon factory hull warranty will cover the original owner for anywhere from one to 5 years, but it may not be transferable when the boat is sold. If it is transferable, it may require the buyer to contact the builder and pay a ’registration’ fee, and the builder may require the boat to be surveyed at the buyer’s expense.

[owly]

Originally Posted by PaulBartomioli

You missed the key point. Colin has been contacted by 10 or so other owners with the same issues. It appears a Class Action lawsuit is being considered. Colin admitted the problem is larger than they thought.

Class action lawsuit ....... really? That's kind of idiotic. Class action lawsuits are usually taken on contingency. Because of the risk of not making anything, the lawyers take most of the settlement. The result is punishing the company financially, which in this case probably has few assets, making money for lawyers, and yielding a pittance for the plaintiffs. Threat of such a suit will be far more effective in obtaining some kind of help than an actual suit. The "court of good will and cooperation" will likely yield far better results than a court of law.
I've had excellent results by simply making it clear that if a company didn't make things right I would use the full power of the internet to drag them through the proverbial mud damaging their reputation and discouraging customers.



Just the fact this this is n Utube, and also on CF and other forums is a start.... However the company needs a path to redemption so to speak. If their reputation is already seriously damaged beyond repair....and it isn't yet, there is no incentive to cooperate. The company knows this is on Utube. They have two possible courses.... cooperation & damage control, or going to war so to speak. The problem is not going away, and turning it into a gloves off conflict will serve nobody.........nor will a lawsuit unless you love lawyers.....
This is best handled discretely by customers and the company if one wants to get meaningful help....... it may already have gone beyond that. Forums like Facebook, Utube, Twitter, etc can have a lot of reach and a lot of impact.

[owly]

Originally Posted by more

The lagoon factory hull warranty will cover the original owner for anywhere from one to 5 years, but it may not be transferable when the boat is sold. If it is transferable, it may require the buyer to contact the builder and pay a ’registration’ fee, and the builder may require the boat to be surveyed at the buyer’s expense.

This goes far beyond the small print of "hull warranty".... The company probably is not responsible legally............. But reputation is far more important than fine print legalities. If all their boats break up a few years past warranty, it is likely to destroy the company in the end. Who's going to buy boats knowing that they will have zero resale value? Charter companies like auto rental companies buy their fleet with the idea that the boats will have enough value 5 years (or whatever time frame) down the road that they will only have to amortize that depreciation. If they depreciate to virtually zero in that time, they will lose money, and have to greatly increase charter rates losing business.



I don't see anybody lining up to buy off charter Lagoons after reading about this and watching the Utube...