"the primary assessment is that the yacht’s cradle (owned and provided by the yacht, warrantied by the yacht for sea transport and assembled by the yacht’s crew) "
I expect that the ship owner’s insurance company lawyers allowing this policy to exist are reviewing it as we speak.
Here’s the whole quote:
“The primary assessment is that the yacht’s cradle (owned and provided by the yacht, warrantied by the yacht for sea transport and assembled by the yacht’s crew) collapsed during the voyage from Palma to Genoa and afterwards resulted in the loss of My Song overboard.”
It doesn’t look collapsed, it looks like the top section was ripped apart when the boat went over.
Either way, whether the cradle collapsed or was ripped apart, it failed. It strongly suggests that its design parameters and installation failed to meet the requirements necessary for the intended voyage.
I’m sure some people are being asked tough questions including the ship’s loading master who signed off on it.
It doesn’t appear that the cradle failed under compression or because of any lateral loads. My guess is that to fail in that way most of the lashings would had to have parted already.
Is it possible the yacht’s people calculated the moments and tipping forces on the keel cradle based on the resistance of the keel while submerged while the only down force once aboard ship was the weight of the keel suspended in air to counter the effect of side forces acting above it.
The height, weight and windage of the tall rig although designed to be as light as possible is also a factor in raising the CG.
On a more or less related subject, It’s been said that the ultimate design for an America’s Cup racer would be one where the boat disintegrates as they pull into the dock after the final race.
For the guys in the racing yacht designing busines, the pursuit of lighter weight is a religion. If these were the guys who designed the cradle, maybe they carried their mantra a little too far.
Was it Australia that broke in half during a race? Yes, yes it was.
The keel was down fourteen feet as shipped, so there seems to be a good chunk of the cradle that’s just missing.
No, I take that back. Sorry.
If the lashing parted and the 100 ton boat slipped off in weather some damage to the cradle would be expected.
IIRC one of the AC 72’s in the last series was resorting to strong tape to keep all the pieces together in one race. Can’t remember which boat.
Quoting Navig8tor on SA:
Looks like a pretty well engineered base.
There appears to be a few critical bits missing from above this base though.
Remember the boat sat about 14ft above the deck. Whatever failed appears to have been in the approx 7 ft above this base.
The presence of the forward and aft splash assemblies close in proximity to the bases seems to imply a collapse type event between the splash assemblies and the bases that tipped the boat to starboard.
Note also there appears to be half an A frame behind the guys to the right this appears to be half of the brace for the keel.
I suspect a collapse event followed by a rolling of the vessel which blew half the keel support A frame off the deck.
A 105 tonne lever will do that.
This is supported by the way the remaining A frame is partially jacked off the deck.
Also the base being inspected looks secured to the deck to the left but is racked about 1 1/2 ft where assessors are standing.
Thats my ten cents worth, here is the caveat:
Until we know for certain the chain of events this is conjecture however that said I do work in Marine Loss Assessment .
That seems legit, a partial collapse. I can’t see it but this guy sounds like he knows.
If you look at the after one there are a number of beams visible that are buckled in half.
Response to Navig8tor by Stayoutofthemiddle:
Good armchair assessment. As an engineer I would second that theory. The bolts that hold down the keel bulb a-frame are intended to take load in tension. If the boat collapsed and forced the kee[l – dgb] to the side this would have created shear loading on the a-frame bolts. A this point there would be nothing to stop the keel walking towards the edge of the deck and pulling everything with it once it went over. That’s my guess anyways…
Yeah, that after one does look a little catawampus.
Rimwracked for sure.
It kind of begs the question, “why bother?”
Other than the rudder and the rig and the holes in the hull it looks pretty good.