Catamaran collides with object off DR

[maxingout]

When they were talking about nine foot seas, maybe they were talking about the ocean swells.

There easily could be swells that large offshore, especially if they wandered over a reef or bank where the swells built up.

A catamaran being dropped on an offshore reef makes sense to me.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by maxingout

When they were talking about nine foot seas, maybe they were talking about the ocean swells.

There easily could be swells that large offshore, especially if they wandered over a reef or bank where the swells built up.

A catamaran being dropped on an offshore reef makes sense to me.

That’s what I was thinking. The boat looks like it could be in 9 foot swells. Not that big of a deal. It looks like it’s kind of rising up one of them actually in the picture.

[ItDepends]

Originally Posted by marcvilleneuve

Looking at the map (Navionics) they were on the Saba Bank that says ''AERA TO BE AVOIDED''. Did they really look at the map when planning this?
https://webapp.navionics.com/?lang=e...%7DaliBlc%60aK

Huh? What ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? You did see that they were headed from Turks and Caicos to Puerto Rico, right? Saba Bank is more than a little off that path!

[rapanui 2]

Originally Posted by Tin Tin

Interesting story from last week, wonder what they hit.



https://www.acrartex.com/survivor-st...e-puerto-rico/

THAT IS THE RISK with all the brand built catamarans to offer maximum space and cabins below deck they have not bulkheads and because they are VERY lightly build will broke and flood fast like a monohull if punctured .on custom built blue sea boats it is current to have a large crashbox in front,and the hull separated separated by a strong bulkhead with or without a strong waterproof pump....
but on boat show the saleman will never talk about hurting object at sea..
It should be mandatory to build boat with this safety that have save life and money.....

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by rapanui 2

THAT IS THE RISK with all the brand built catamarans to offer maximum space and cabins below deck they have not bulkheads and because they are VERY lightly build will broke and flood fast like a monohull if punctured .on custom built blue sea boats it is current to have a large crashbox in front,and the hull separated separated by a strong bulkhead with or without a strong waterproof pump....

but on boat show the saleman will never talk about hurting object at sea..

It should be mandatory to build boat with this safety that have save life and money.....

All of my pumps are waterproof I wasn’t aware you could get non waterproof ones.

Let’s face it boats sink. It why we carry life rafts

[rapanui 2]

I make a mistake not strong waterproof pump but strong waterproof DOOR !! by the way a lot of socall marine pumps are not waterproof for long!!

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by rapanui 2

I make a mistake not strong waterproof pump but strong waterproof DOOR !! by the way a lot of socall marine pumps are not waterproof for long!!

Watertight compartments are not the answer too expensive , let the vessel sink get in the life raft the rescue agencies will be along side soon enough.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Watertight compartments are not the answer too expensive , let the vessel sink get in the life raft the rescue agencies will be along side soon enough.

Plus.. the builder gets to sell another boat... Growth 101

[FlyingScot]

To be fair, they did say "a day later" referring to hitting the obstruction. So the the seas could be significantly less by then.

I agree without location, it would be hard to figure any real details.

But with the jib/genoa furled and the main sail lowered, It should be safe to assume they weren't sailing at all.

Regarding shipping containers, I agree it is an extremely low risk. There is no such thing as a container "floating" just below the surface. It will either float or sink, not remain in between.
https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com...do-they-float/

[team karst]

I have come across a very large upside down tree one time. Looked perfectly vertical. Interesting to see it stay stationary while the sea swells went up and down.

[ItDepends]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Watertight compartments are not the answer too expensive , let the vessel sink get in the life raft the rescue agencies will be along side soon enough.

Watertight compartments are certainly too expensive for Barvaria and Group Jeanneau.

But they have been a standard construction feature on Amel yachts for decades.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by ItDepends

Watertight compartments are certainly too expensive for Barvaria and Group Jeanneau.



But they have been a standard construction feature on Amel yachts for decades.

Yes but when I was talking about to to a Beneteau designer several years again he said below 50 feet it’s very difficult to keep the boat afloat with one compartment.

Given Amel is over $1 million. Let’s stick to reality

The point is you can just step up into a life raft that step saved you 0.5 million $

[thataway41]

Just to relate having presumably hit a shipping container at sea:

We were racing a 55' sloop named "Cannibal" (https://www.sailingtexas.com/scustom54100.html) designed by Morgan Embroden (Designer of Trismus) built by Dennis Choate. She had just been launched and weight was about 18,000 lbs. with no interior furniture. Cannibal had 4' draft dagger board up, and 10' draft dagger board down draft. We were racing back from Guadalupe Island (115 miles SW of Ensenada, Mexico), beating into ~8 foot seas and about 40 to 50 knots of breeze under a 50/75% storm jibs and triple reefed main. Speed was ~ 8 knots thru the water. Each wave was a major slam, and shudder, so we would not have known when the strike with the container occurred.

The construction of the boat prevented a total breach of the hull. Basic structure was a strip planked hull of 2.75" longutional balsa coved planks, glued with epoxy resin and aluminum nails. The outer layer of about 5/16" thick fiberglass: 24 oz roving and mat was breached over an area of several square feet. The balsa core was indented almost all of the way thru, and the inner fiberglass (about 1/4" thick of 24oz roving and mat) was delaminated over an area of about 25 sq feet, but remained intact. The double layers of glass, and the shock absorbing properties of the balsa core prevented water intrusion and sinking of the vessel. This was not discovered until we anchored in Ensenada, and the panga who had been hailed to take the crew ashore offered to "Paint the damage to the bow while we ate dinner". Of course we did a quick analysis (Designer Embroden was aboard) and decided that the hull was sound enough to continue the race to San Diego the next day. The only thing which could have impacted the hull with this damage was a shipping container, with the impact area consistent with a corner of the container.

If this catamaran had hit a shipping container, it would have most likely slid off, or bounced off, it would not pound on it. I have hit an underwater rock when under sail in my own vessel. It was not marked on DMA charts, but was on Admirality Charts off the coast of Turkey in the 1980's (long before GPS and Chart plotters). A pinnacle rock is something you have to work the boat off (in my case, I hardened up on the sail trim and with increased heeling, the boat easily slid off.

My conclusion is that this catamaran most likely hit a reef or rocks, based on the location given by the CG (Off Cockburn Town of San Salvador Island + plotting the location by Lat. and Long.). Definitely not in the "middle of the Atlantic Ocean."

Shipping containers are floating out in the oceans. Even the $200,000 (installed)Furuno’s Omni-Directional Sonar probably would not pick up that rare just under the surface floating shipping container.

[rapanui 2]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Yes but when I was talking about to to a Beneteau designer several years again he said below 50 feet it’s very difficult to keep the boat afloat with one compartment.

Given Amel is over $1 million. Let’s stick to reality

The point is you can just step up into a life raft that step saved you 0.5 million $

Bulkhead are effective only for multihull ... for monohull you have 25% of the boat with an heavy keel that think the boat very fast a bulkhead on mono will solely give you more time to fight the water and /or to take your belonging and escape in the dinghy and liferaft ....

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by thataway41

Just to relate having presumably hit a shipping container at sea:



We were racing a 55' sloop named "Cannibal" (https://www.sailingtexas.com/scustom54100.html) designed by Morgan Embroden (Designer of Trismus) built by Dennis Choate. She had just been launched and weight was about 18,000 lbs. with no interior furniture. Cannibal had 4' draft dagger board up, and 10' draft dagger board down draft. We were racing back from Guadalupe Island (115 miles SW of Ensenada, Mexico), beating into ~8 foot seas and about 40 to 50 knots of breeze under a 50/75% storm jibs and triple reefed main. Speed was ~ 8 knots thru the water. Each wave was a major slam, and shudder, so we would not have known when the strike with the container occurred.



The construction of the boat prevented a total breach of the hull. Basic structure was a strip planked hull of 2.75" longutional balsa coved planks, glued with epoxy resin and aluminum nails. The outer layer of about 5/16" thick fiberglass: 24 oz roving and mat was breached over an area of several square feet. The balsa core was indented almost all of the way thru, and the inner fiberglass (about 1/4" thick of 24oz roving and mat) was delaminated over an area of about 25 sq feet, but remained intact. The double layers of glass, and the shock absorbing properties of the balsa core prevented water intrusion and sinking of the vessel. This was not discovered until we anchored in Ensenada, and the panga who had been hailed to take the crew ashore offered to "Paint the damage to the bow while we ate dinner". Of course we did a quick analysis (Designer Embroden was aboard) and decided that the hull was sound enough to continue the race to San Diego the next day. The only thing which could have impacted the hull with this damage was a shipping container, with the impact area consistent with a corner of the container.



If this catamaran had hit a shipping container, it would have most likely slid off, or bounced off, it would not pound on it. I have hit an underwater rock when under sail in my own vessel. It was not marked on DMA charts, but was on Admirality Charts off the coast of Turkey in the 1980's (long before GPS and Chart plotters). A pinnacle rock is something you have to work the boat off (in my case, I hardened up on the sail trim and with increased heeling, the boat easily slid off.



My conclusion is that this catamaran most likely hit a reef or rocks, based on the location given by the CG (Off Cockburn Town of San Salvador Island + plotting the location by Lat. and Long.). Definitely not in the "middle of the Atlantic Ocean."



Shipping containers are floating out in the oceans. Even the $200,000 (installed)Furuno’s Omni-Directional Sonar probably would not pick up that rare just under the surface floating shipping container.

I had forward looking sonar several years ago ( echo pilot ) it was basically a “ thunk sensor “