Helia 44 abandoned off Puerto Rico

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

Jim,
You're not wrong, as I mentioned previously I think discussions about known issues like the Lagoon mast step are spot on and they should be held to account for them. My point was squarely aimed at a certain poster making patently absurd allegations that all boats from Lagoon and FP suffered structural issues or as you mentioned that two entire model fleets were somehow secretly sailed back across the Atlantic after first crossing the Atlantic because of structural failures.
If tens of thousands of boats built in the last decade had serious structural issues you'd have to see at least a few mishaps attributable to that. Either that or the "structural issues" weren't really very serious to start with or again inexplicably tens of thousands of boats were made with serious structural issues but they caught every one of them and fixed them before they caused a mishap. If the latter were true it definitely would suck from a usability perspective, but not from a safety standpoint as alleged.

Yes, we are 100% on the same page.

Those known issues apply to not just production boats. I remember Kelly Peterson 44's needing support added as the staysail was pulling the deck up, I remember fire retardant blisters on old valiants etc , problems in design and production isnt new,, yet they get free passes, theres many more examples. When you build stuff things dont always go to plan ,the example of Toyota you used is right on.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

Our area of responsibility when I was at Barbers Point (Hawaii) went from Hawaii to American Samoa to the south, Federated States of Micronesia to the west (the US still provides SAR service to the FSM), half way to Alaska (picked up by Air Station Kodiak for the rest of the way) and half way back to the mainland (picked up by Air Station Sacramento the rest of the way), 12.2 million square miles of ocean we were always proud to say. So yes, quite a bit of trans oceanic there and that's just the Pacific side.

That doesn't really answer the question. Your area of operating was large and covered lots of ocean area. The question was does the data include a significant number of incidents that occurred while on trans-oceanic passages were being made. I suspect there is very little in the data that really applies to long distant cruising boats. That said, the CG data is interesting.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Jim, all boats flex to some degree ,this includes large ships but thats not what's been asserted here, the many claims or accusations towards production boats is much more than some flexing, you know that. The claims are they are structurally inadequate for anything but coastal leisure.

And of course theres boats that are built more robustly than many production boats, no one is claiming anything different but once again that's not what this is about, it's the constant dribble about production boats not being built robust enough for Bluewater and my point is that's just BS, the proof is in the fact that they are crossing oceans regularly and this cant be dismissed with "many boats cross oceans and dont see bad weather", Jim they arent just all lucky, they are out there in real life doing it, there is no greater proof regarding there capability than this. Many Beneteau firsts have Ocean raced in challenging conditions and , to say production boats dont see adverse conditions is another rubbish. As mentioned Jim, I've quite a few friends that have now circumnavigated in the likes of Beneteaus you just cant dismiss them all, they aren't just idiots that got lucky and never see bad weather, they've done it.

In regards to me defending my choice, that's just a dismissive accusation, my choice was made after seeing so many production boats crossing oceans while I was extensively cruising on my 1984 older boat, it made me realize most of my biases regarding these boats were in fact unsupported, they were adopted after reading stuff on the likes of Cf, they weren't based on what was actually happening.

A side note, out of the four boats that I personally knew that have been lost at sea due to structural problems, not one was a production boat.

Production boats have a fantastic record that gets ignored and replaced with unsupported predjutice.

I'll leave it at that, my forehead is getting sore..lol.

Dale
Like most extended arguments on CF, this seems to be focusing on letting perfect get in the way of good. Your argument that dozens of production boats are succesfully used by cruisers to cross oceans is unquestionably true. They are the majority boats doing it. And many are not that expensive, being years old.
Comparing these to 30 year old Taiwanese boats is not much of a comparison, as these were not really built that well and much of the equipment and metals are at the end of their life.
Not sure what boats that leaves. Custom and semi-custom boats that cost 2 or 3x???

Like you, I've seen tons of production boats out cruising. I do think that they are built to production spec that doesn't take into account the extremes. They are designed to be strong enough in the places that are normally required. In other places that don't normally take stress they tend to be fairly weak. A couple of examples.
I rafted many times with a production Cat on one of my Panama Canal transits. One of the raft ups was a little abrupt. I watched the hull side on the Cat flex in maybe 4 or 5 inches on contact.
A friends Beneteau was side tied to the fuel dock in Balboa next to the Canal. A canal work boat threw up a large wake and pushed the Bene up on the edge of the fuel dock and then it slid back down. Major crack in the hull that required removing all interior furniture on that side to repair the hull.
I watched an Oceanis have an unfortunate run in with a draw bridge. The resulting damage was repairable, but I was pretty surprised at what was holding some of the parts together once I saw them torn out of the hull.
Last example and one that is totally conjecture. The Bavaria that was recently lost off NZ while on transit from the islands with the loss of life. It was knocked down and lost a port. I suspect that the port was lost when the hull excessively flexed - no proof.

[Brewgyver]

Originally Posted by Paul L

I suspect there is very little in the data that really applies to long distant cruising boats.

It would appear the data you want to see isn't collected by USCG. If it were, I'd hazard a guess that it would be in the report, as they certainly have a wide variety of factors included.

I think it's an assumption to say that there is very little that really applies, when in fact just about any of the factors listed in contributing to accidents could apply to any boat, anywhere, doing any kind of sailing, or not sailing at all (note number of deaths with boats tied to docks).

I would also add that the total number of pleasure boats cruising long distance is a tiny fraction, far less than 1%, of all boats.

There's a reason we all know the boat name Cheeki Rafiki. The reason is that such incidents are extremely rare.

[Valiente]

And regarding blue water capability, in my opinion is not JUST the disasters or lack of them:
IF as delivered, after the first long passage or encounter with significant weather, deck gear is damaged, halyards chafed, ...you name it, even if repaired hassle free under warranty
AND/OR
after delivery, you need to reinforce elements, reroute sheets/halyards or soften edges, change hardware on your own,.... in order to have a reasonable peace of mind to cross oceans
THEN
Boat is not delivered blue waters ready.

My .005 cents

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Dale
Like most extended arguments on CF, this seems to be focusing on letting perfect get in the way of good. Your argument that dozens of production boats are succesfully used by cruisers to cross oceans is unquestionably true. They are the majority boats doing it. And many are not that expensive, being years old...

...Like you, I've seen tons of production boats out cruising. I do think that they are built to production spec that doesn't take into account the extremes. They are designed to be strong enough in the places that are normally required. In other places that don't normally take stress they tend to be fairly weak.

A couple of examples.
I rafted many times with a production Cat on one of my Panama Canal transits. One of the raft ups was a little abrupt. I watched the hull side on the Cat flex in maybe 4 or 5 inches on contact.

A friends Beneteau was side tied to the fuel dock in Balboa next to the Canal. A canal work boat threw up a large wake and pushed the Bene up on the edge of the fuel dock and then it slid back down. Major crack in the hull that required removing all interior furniture on that side to repair the hull.

I watched an Oceanis have an unfortunate run in with a draw bridge. The resulting damage was repairable, but I was pretty surprised at what was holding some of the parts together once I saw them torn out of the hull.

Most of that seems fair and reasonable (although the 4-5in flex doesn't seem right, how would it even sail like that?).

These types of boats are Toyotas (or these days, Kias). They will do everything you ask of them, and then some, and all for an affordable price.

But of course be reasonable. A Toyota is not a Porsche, or a Mercedes, or a Range Rover, and if you treat it as such for long enough it might (finally) start to show some deficiencies for being (only) a Toyota.

And these boats are certainly not in the same league as an old Swan from years ago either, almost so indestructible that the crew will have long since given up before the boat shows any signs of doing so.

But times have changed, weather and routing is readily available, boats sail in convoy, and for most people there is no reason to get caught out, to get a good kicking, or to be anywhere near a survival situation. So mostly, in general, a Toyota is good enough to get the job done.

I think that seems reasonable and understandable.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

Most of that seems fair and reasonable (although the 4-5in flex doesn't seem right, how would it even sail like that?).

These types of boats are Toyotas (or these days, Kias). They will do everything you ask of them, and then some, and all for an affordable price.

But of course be reasonable. A Toyota is not a Porsche, or a Mercedes, or a Range Rover, and if you treat it as such for long enough it might (finally) start to show some deficiencies for being (only) a Toyota.

And these boats are certainly not in the same league as an old Swan from years ago either, where the crew will have long since given up before the boat shows any signs of doing so.

But times have changed, weather and routing is readily available, boats sail in convoy, and for most people there is no reason to get caught out, to get a good kicking, or to be anywhere near a survival situation. So mostly, in general, a Toyota is good enough to get the job done.

I think that seems reasonable and understandable.

It deflected in when we hit and bounced back out. It was the outter hull side away from the chain plates where the two boats had a hard glancing blow. Why wouldn't it sail?

Good car analogy.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by Paul L

It deflected in when we hit and bounced back out. It was the outter hull side away from the chain plates where the two boats had a hard glancing blow.

This makes more sense now

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by Paul L

That doesn't really answer the question. Your area of operating was large and covered lots of ocean area. The question was does the data include a significant number of incidents that occurred while on trans-oceanic passages were being made. I suspect there is very little in the data that really applies to long distant cruising boats. That said, the CG data is interesting.

It includes any incident that happened in that piece of ocean. Given that the piece of ocean specified is a significant percentage of the Earth's surface, then if it doesn't reflect many trans-oceanic incidents that fact in and of itself indicates that there aren't many trans-oceanic incidents of any kind!

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

It includes any incident that happened in that piece of ocean. Given that the piece of ocean specified is a significant percentage of the Earth's surface, then if it doesn't reflect many trans-oceanic incidents that fact in and of itself indicates that there aren't many trans-oceanic incidents of any kind!

I agree, there are not a lot incidents in the area. So you can't use the data set to make inferences on the offshore cruising boats issues.

[AllenRbrts]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

Not actually confirmed but seems pretty darn likely given both were FP Helias in Puerto Rico. Yes very sad.

It was certainly seemed like it must be the same boat, but here is the post from San Juan USCG confirming it. The boat was on the beach for a couple of days before they removed it. They have the boat size incorrect, it should be 44' not 36'.

Coast Guard, DNER personnel oversee SEATOW’s removal of catamaran from Jobos Beach in Isabela, Puerto Rico

Coast Guard Sector San Juan Incident Management Division personnel received multiple reports of a catamaran washing ashore in a very populated area of Jobos Beach in Isabela, Puerto Rico Dec. 12, 2019.

Incident Management Division personnel initiated an investigation and confirmed the vessel was the catamaran, Blue Cocktail, which had been involved in a recent Search and Rescue case in the Atlantic Ocean, approximately 10 nautical north of Manati, Puerto Rico.

The night of Dec. 6, 2019, Coast Guard air and surface crews rescued a man and a woman after the 36-foot sailing catamaran, Blue Cocktail, began taking on water and the two-sole passengers were forced to abandon the vessel. Following the rescue, Coast Guard watch standers issued and Urgent Marine Information Broadcast to advise marine traffic that the Blue Cocktail remained adrift, partially submerged and constituted a hazard to navigation.

Once the vessel was confirmed to be the Blue Cocktail, Incident Management Division personnel and a Department of Natural and Environmental Resources representative met with SEATOW salvage company representatives, the company contracted by the owner to remove the vessel from the beach, and approved their proposed salvage plan.

Vessel removal operations began on Dec. 14, 2019 and were finalized today with all the cleaning and remaining debris removal from the beach.

“This was a fantastic case where the federal and the state government came together to ensure this threat to the environment was quickly removed and the pristine shore of Jobos Beach was protected from any further damage,” said Cmdr. Juan Hernandez, Incident Management Division chief. “This area is well known for its turtle nesting grounds, luckily there were nests at the time of the incident.”

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Hi Belize, I think debate is very productive as long as all remain civilized, which I think is happening here.

Personally I do push back, my main reason is often theres alot if misinfomation posted ie cats are dangerous etc.

As long as it's done with no malice I think people should speak up or the false narratives flourish, repeated over and over again. Lots of newbies rely on forums like this to learn, facts matter.

Btw, great time in San Blas, thanks for the help, the tablet chart thing worked awesomely.

I agree, civilized debate is good, but some of what I saw further back in the thread was not.

Glad you enjoyed the San Blas and that I was able to help. Time for me to start prepping the boat to head that way soon!

[Gerrit Coetzee]

Please post when the cause is known.

[AllenRbrts]

Tracked down the insurance company for Blue Cocktail. They say they believe it was the escape hatch but not yet confirmed. Here is quote from the email I received.

At this time, it looks like , but not ascertained, we are facing to a defect of the port safety /escape hatch, already observed on other yachts.
These failures concern GOIOT HATCHES Nr 49.42 and similar produced between 2012 and August 2018 and GOIOT has launched in April 2019 a large recall campaign that should be relayed to owners by the various boatyards and associated network .

[AllenRbrts]

Yet another FP Helia lost its escape hatch lens, this time in the BVIs. Amazing the crew was able to save the boat stuffing mattresses, pillows in the hole. An incredible job.
What is important to note is the boat was fitted with the official Goiot recommended fix and it still failed. This should be a huge wake up call to all Goiot hatch boats that using the Goiot fix will not make you safe, you need to use a solution that doesn't use adhesive to bond to acrylic. I have been advocating a fix which uses solvent glue to weld to the acrylic and others have drilled through the acrylic.