The previous master of the Bayesian, Stephen Edwards has stated that the stability manual for the yacht requires that the keel had to be down when sailing and whenever more than 60nm off shore whether motoring or sailing. At all other times it could be up.
I found Stephen Edwards's article disturbing. He describes a vessel that was built and was to be operated within defined circumstances by defined procedures. If such and such a situation pertains, the vessel is "sound and seaworthy". His subtext, whether he realizes it or not, is that no margin of error or safety was added to the calculations and instructions. IF you can use counter measures as instructed to keep the vessel's heel under 40-45 degrees, you'll be all right. IF you can't, then it floods until it sinks. IF you do heel over, and its shy of 70-75 degrees, you may get her to come up again, but don't count on it. Counter measures might include leveraging the dropped keel underway to bring her up, I don't know. But the bottom line is that for other sailing vessels, the downflooding angle, that 40-45 degrees of "sound and seaworthy," has an additional 70 degrees of "just in case" added to it for the safety margin. For other sailing vessels, that 75 degrees for vanishing stability has an additional 35 degrees at least. You can furl the sails, you can build a drop keel. But you can't remove the mast. A vessel with such a high and massive mast isn't truly "sound and seaworthy" even on the blueprints.
@@I_Am_Monad I couldn't agree more. I see the skipper of the Lord Baden Powell has gathered together the photos that his crew/guests took of the Bayesian as they returned to their boat on the evening of the sinking. The lighting isn't good but they do show fairly clearly that neither the transom or clamshell door were open. Despite his bullish rhetoric, I wouldn't want to be in Giovanni Costantino's shoes...
Thank you for sharing your expertise and experience. Very informative and balanced. More reserved than the dialogue going on in my head, though. The vessel's design was hyperbolic, and not in a good way, since the AVS was inversely hyperbolic. And it doesn't seem to me at this time that the crew had a reason to roust the passengers in a 20 knot wind and rain. All ten of them were stowing deck items and nothing more. The downburst pushed the mast over and tossed those on the upper deck right into the water within about thirty seconds, according to the admittedly poor CCTV videos. Tentatively, my read is that the crew made proper decisions at the time and under the conditions that they were made. My other takeaway is a depressing series of related questions: would Bayesian's sister ships, of more modest and redundant design, have survived the same winds beam on? What is the calculated righting moment of each of the sister ships from this same ship builder, Perini Navi, both with and without the keel dropped (if they even have drop keels)? What was their total mast profile compared to the Bayesian? Did their decks nest down or up, as is desirable? Can water reach the inner stairwells through a common area above? How much water/minute could the starboard vents take in when submerged? I'll give you a thought, if and when the Italians analyze and publish official findings.
Building a sailboat with a down flooding angle of 45 degrees of heel is criminally negligent for indulging a billionaires preferences over seaworthiness. To be focusing on the crew that operated it is morally repugnant.
@@BitcoinNewsTodayLive there are hundreds of vessels with sail, no one can recover a 90 degree position, like a commercial airplane can't do a loop or any acrobatic evolution. She sunk stern first with an anchorage pivot on the bow, totally different case. I see you are not an expert
@@BitcoinNewsTodayLive sure, from I was a kid, European no limit license sail and motor, three stars divers plus nitrox, involved here in Italy in some yard
The previous master of the Bayesian, Stephen Edwards has stated that the stability manual for the yacht requires that the keel had to be down when sailing and whenever more than 60nm off shore whether motoring or sailing. At all other times it could be up.
I found Stephen Edwards's article disturbing. He describes a vessel that was built and was to be operated within defined circumstances by defined procedures. If such and such a situation pertains, the vessel is "sound and seaworthy".
His subtext, whether he realizes it or not, is that no margin of error or safety was added to the calculations and instructions. IF you can use counter measures as instructed to keep the vessel's heel under 40-45 degrees, you'll be all right. IF you can't, then it floods until it sinks. IF you do heel over, and its shy of 70-75 degrees, you may get her to come up again, but don't count on it. Counter measures might include leveraging the dropped keel underway to bring her up, I don't know.
But the bottom line is that for other sailing vessels, the downflooding angle, that 40-45 degrees of "sound and seaworthy," has an additional 70 degrees of "just in case" added to it for the safety margin. For other sailing vessels, that 75 degrees for vanishing stability has an additional 35 degrees at least. You can furl the sails, you can build a drop keel. But you can't remove the mast. A vessel with such a high and massive mast isn't truly "sound and seaworthy" even on the blueprints.
@@I_Am_Monad I couldn't agree more.
I see the skipper of the Lord Baden Powell has gathered together the photos that his crew/guests took of the Bayesian as they returned to their boat on the evening of the sinking. The lighting isn't good but they do show fairly clearly that neither the transom or clamshell door were open. Despite his bullish rhetoric, I wouldn't want to be in Giovanni Costantino's shoes...
Thank you for sharing your expertise and experience. Very informative and balanced. More reserved than the dialogue going on in my head, though.
The vessel's design was hyperbolic, and not in a good way, since the AVS was inversely hyperbolic. And it doesn't seem to me at this time that the crew had a reason to roust the passengers in a 20 knot wind and rain. All ten of them were stowing deck items and nothing more. The downburst pushed the mast over and tossed those on the upper deck right into the water within about thirty seconds, according to the admittedly poor CCTV videos. Tentatively, my read is that the crew made proper decisions at the time and under the conditions that they were made.
My other takeaway is a depressing series of related questions: would Bayesian's sister ships, of more modest and redundant design, have survived the same winds beam on? What is the calculated righting moment of each of the sister ships from this same ship builder, Perini Navi, both with and without the keel dropped (if they even have drop keels)? What was their total mast profile compared to the Bayesian? Did their decks nest down or up, as is desirable? Can water reach the inner stairwells through a common area above? How much water/minute could the starboard vents take in when submerged?
I'll give you a thought, if and when the Italians analyze and publish official findings.
Building a sailboat with a down flooding angle of 45 degrees of heel is criminally negligent for indulging a billionaires preferences over seaworthiness. To be focusing on the crew that operated it is morally repugnant.
Bayesian sailed across seas for over 16 years and sunk during a poor anchorage. btw she was a vessel, not a sailboat
@@fabioprimaio8503 It has a mast and sails, that means it should be able to take a 90 degree knockdown and recover. I think you are being pedantic.
@@BitcoinNewsTodayLive there are hundreds of vessels with sail, no one can recover a 90 degree position, like a commercial airplane can't do a loop or any acrobatic evolution. She sunk stern first with an anchorage pivot on the bow, totally different case. I see you are not an expert
@@fabioprimaio8503 I see you are a power boater. Ever sailed?
@@BitcoinNewsTodayLive sure, from I was a kid, European no limit license sail and motor, three stars divers plus nitrox, involved here in Italy in some yard