K4309
-
Content Count
620 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
36
Content Type
Profiles
Media Demo
Forums
Gallery
Calendar
Store
Posts posted by K4309
-
-
11 hours ago, bigal.nz said:
For one reason or another we have had to replace our Gas Solenoid and regulator. Unfortunately although we got the same solenoid (BEP) I didnt take a picture of the old setup.
Does it go BOTTLE----SOLENOID-----REGULATOR--->
Burnsco happily sold me a hose with a regulator at the BOTTLE end, but this must be for BBQs or something as if the above is correct I need a regulator on the other side of the solenoid.
Yes, it goes bottle, solenoid, regulator.
BUT, technically (legally) you aren't able to replace the solenoid yourself. You need to get a certified gas fitter to do it, and pay the $1,000 to re-issue the gas certificate.
It is questionable if you require a solenoid for safety purposes. Some gas fitters say you don't, some say you do. That is with respect to having two gas sniffers interlinked with a solenoid. Of course if you want want so you don't have to physically go to the gas locker to turn the gas off, then knock yourself out.
Oh, and if any other part of your system isn't complaint with the current regs, a gas fitter will make you change the whole lot so that he can re-install your solenoid. That includes replacing your stove if it doesn't have auto-flame out on all elements. And replacing any flexible hose that are older than 7 years.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Bad Kitty said:
Superyachts use a different system for calculating stability, the boat would have had a full stability book, like any ship. It’s not a clear comparison to say “it wouldn’t meet Cat 3”
No, it's not a clear comparison, you are correct.
BUT, this Superyacht (with the tallest mast in the world) couldn't dip it's mast head in the water and recover, where as any boat in NZ that meets Cat 5 (and Cat 3) can.
It appears that the result of that is the boat is 50m under water, its wealthy owner and his daughter are dead, along with several others. Noting of course that what I am saying is completely uneducated assumptions on the interweb.
I guess you could say its just like any cruise ship, or other large commercial ship. They can't roll to 90 degs and recover either. The only difference being no other commercial type of ship has a 75m tall lever that can easily make that vessel roll to 90 degrees. (which, as an aside, would appear to be why every vessel that does have a lever on top has enough lead underneath so it can roll to 90 degrees and recover).
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Psyche said:
any idea what this means?
I think this is going to be key to the skipper not being charged / getting off.
From that article posted above by the previous skipper, it sounds like they have a stability manual for all scenario's, like exactly what sails to have up in what wind strength. I assume much like how most of us know when we need to reef the main, and that we can use the number 1 jib up to X knots, the blade jib up to Y knots, and that you can't (or at least shouldn't) put the A2 up if its blowing dogs of chains, etc.
Being a 460 tonne yacht, instead of just letting the crew see what she can handle, the document all of this using the design data and possibly dynamic modelling, CFD analysis, or at least the sailmaker software for sail design, healing forces and structural function of the rig.
I'll bet a good bottle of whiskey though that all the analysis and the stability / operating manual did not consider what happens in the freak event of a violent downburst or waterspout.
In short, the crew have a manual / standard operating procedure and probably aren't allowed to make the boat heel more than X degrees while sailing. IF they did, that would be taking outside the operating limits.
Given they were an anchor, I can't see how they could have taken her outside of the operating limits.
In this way, the designers / builders can make a boat with a very low AVS and an even lower downflooding angle. To make that safe, they write a manual that says the crew can't lean the boat over more than a little bit. In normal operation the crew can meet those requirements. In violent downdraft / water spout, everything is completely beyond the crew's control, boat capsizes and sinks.
-
3
-
-
-
1 hour ago, CarpeDiem said:
I found this written by Tad Roberts:
The head of the Italian Sea Group, parent of the builder Perini, has stated Bayesian had positive stability to 73 degrees with the board up and 88 degrees with the board down.
In the same post, written by Tad Roberts I find:
The boat would meet or exceed stability regulatory requirements with the centreboard retracted and sails down.
CONFUSING!!!!
I think the stability requirements are the classification society requirements, not the requirements as per the laws of physics to keep it afloat.
I know it is only a song, but it does remind me of the esteemed and highly regarded data by one Mr Frederick Dagg, that the boat met the minimum crewing requirements, of one, and had very stringent design and materials requirements. No cardboard. No cardboard derivatives...
Jokes aside, the only plausible explanation I can think of for a boat like that sinking in a water spout is that it was laid flat, exceeded it's AVS and capsized. We do know (without reference to FB or MSM experts) that it had the tallest mast in the world, the mast was alloy (so not carbon, and comparatively heavy), and that of the 12 or 15 sister ships, the rest are all ketches, and therefore have lower C of G of the rig.
We know it is entirely plausible a water spout or down burst can lay a yacht like that over flat, cause we've seen it on CCTV from Westhaven.
The AVS data appears to come from the Chairman of Italian Sea Group. So it all adds up. The only inconguity in all of that is that the Chairman of Italian Sea Group seems to think an AVS of 73 degs is good, where as it couldn't even get Cat 5 in NZ, hence why the yacht his company built is 50m under water and we are all talking about it.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, harrytom said:
read it went stern first,does that means rear launching deck open?
I read that it went down bow first.
What we can conclude from this is there is an even chance that your sources is right and my source is wrong, or:
Your source is wrong and my source is right.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, LBD said:
Was on the news... local fishermen were all prepared.
You wouldn't be implying MSM is any more reliable than FB?
That particular weather forecaster, Lowinski, also made statements that all the passengers should have been dragged out of bed at 4am, put in Lifejackets and made to stand in the rain, as a safety precaution. Not sure what qualifies a weather forecaster to make such statements, other than a PhD in Hindsight.
PS, it is curious to note that an increasing majority of MSM stories and leads are now based off information X'ed on X. The rest of MSM content appears to be AI produced now.
I do understand the mirth at 'sources on FB', but it doesn't conversely mean sources on MSM are reliable. Some are, many aren't.
PPS, I imagine the local fishermen were simply looking out the window, the one I saw interviewed had gone down to the harbour to see if it was calm enough to go for a fish, i.e. 'local observations'. Instead of using the latest high tech weather satellite, he may have been using a mark one eyeball
-
-
If it is leaking air, you can get a product you put inside the tubes and it self seals all the leaks. I think Sailors sell it. It is an Merican product.
Alternatively, there are loads of the same product for bicycles. Smaller quantities but loads cheaper, and stocked by a wide array of bicycle shops. I had a good look into it but never used it, having managed to find a pin-hole leak and patch it.
If you are just worried about the exterior appearance of the tubes, I don't think there is anything you can do about that, accept sew chaps for the boat.
-
1
-
-
On 23/08/2024 at 9:13 PM, K4309 said:
Bayesian AVS with the keel up is 73deg,
but keel down doesn't help much, AVS 88deg.
Contrast, That wouldn't even get YNZ Cat 5.
Refer YNZ safety regulations:
"Limit of Positive Stability"
Cat3 - 100deg
Cat4 - 95 deg
Cat5 - 95 deg,
And:
6.02(k) d:
For yachts complying with Category 4 and 5,
it may be demonstrated that compliance is
achieved by demonstrating a physical pulldown test in which the masthead shall be
pulled down until it touches the surface of
the water. The yacht will maintain a positive
righting moment at all times during the test
Bayesian couldn't achieve that, with an AVS of 88 deg, the mast could not reach the water in a pull down test without the boat capsizing...AVS data from the Financial Times, story quoting the Chairman of Italian Sea Group, which owns Perini Navi.
Bayesian maker says crew should have had time to rescue passengers (ft.com)
Def not a seaworthy vessel IT, if it can't make NZ Cat 5.
-
14 minutes ago, aardvarkash10 said:
Agree with your sentiment K, or as I understand it.
To move away from geopolitics and into media and advertising, the reason we are in thrall with this is that we are fed it.
I'd expect interest on a site like crew or anarchy, but the wider interest globally is the result of media selling advertising. Nothing else.
There is no deep public interest in the narrow subject area of "billionaires dying in unusual circumstances".
There is, however, a fatburg of schadenfreude and celebrity fascination that makes this stuff a goldmine for ratings.
Absolutely Aardvark.
I understand where Rats is coming from too, it is a bit of a first world problem having your superyacht sink, especially in contrast to so many of the world's humanitarian issues. The part I am interested in is the how bit, which is relevant to a sailing forum, I'm hoping.
It is certainly an intriguing story that the guy died on his sinking superyacht whilst celebrating winning a huge fraud trail on said superyacht with his lawyers and supporters, the day after his co accused got killed being hit by a car. That is just red meat for the MSM and click-baiting platforms. I haven't checked out the conspiracy theories, and to be honest, I don't really know where to go to find them, but on this one I bet they are good.
-
1
-
-
57 minutes ago, Rats said:
Somewhat ironic that a superyacht sinks and everyone's suddenly positioning for the coming lawsuit city Italy tour.
Meanwhile boat loads of poor brown people fleeing shithole countries in search of a better life and freedom, sink daily but they have been reduced to a mere comma in the ongoing narrative obsessed with the how and why a rich dude died on his very large special boat.
A large theatrical song and dance will proceed but at the end of the day we will come back to the quaint term Perils of the Sea, occasionally unexpected sh*t will happen.
You can try and plan for most of it but every so now and then, mother nature is going to circumvent it all.
Bloody sad they are going to try and hang this all on a well regarded NZ Captain.
Possibly cause we know how the poor brown people are dieing, just no one gives a sh*t. Strewth, half of England is throwing bricks at Cops to stop them being allowed to live next door.
We also know exactly how over 40,000 have died in Palestine, but for some strange reason the whole western world is falling over themselves to supply more weapons so some more can be killed. For some reason no-one wants to talk about that either, I suspect I'll be torn a new one for daring to even mention the genocide, but each to their own.
There is a high degree of mystery and curiosity as to how a 180ft superyacht managed to sink. Most people would think discussing that is a fairly safe topic. Especially on a sailing site. No?
-
1
-
-
Bayesian AVS with the keel up is 73deg,
but keel down doesn't help much, AVS 88deg.
Contrast, That wouldn't even get YNZ Cat 5.
Refer YNZ safety regulations:
"Limit of Positive Stability"
Cat3 - 100deg
Cat4 - 95 deg
Cat5 - 95 deg,
And:
6.02(k) d:
For yachts complying with Category 4 and 5,
it may be demonstrated that compliance is
achieved by demonstrating a physical pulldown test in which the masthead shall be
pulled down until it touches the surface of
the water. The yacht will maintain a positive
righting moment at all times during the test
Bayesian couldn't achieve that, with an AVS of 88 deg, the mast could not reach the water in a pull down test without the boat capsizing...AVS data from the Financial Times, story quoting the Chairman of Italian Sea Group, which owns Perini Navi.
Bayesian maker says crew should have had time to rescue passengers (ft.com)
-
1 hour ago, Black Panther said:
It can't have been pushed past 90 degrees by any amount of wind. If any boat goes to that it should not sink.
The only (logical) explanation I can think of is if they left the toy garage doors open overnight. If they did do that, then the captain and crew will be up for legit criticism. Personally, I can't image a boat doing that, not with 10 crew, it's not like they don't have enough people to tidy the toys up properly, oh, and noting from that article and vid posted above, they moved out to that anchorage about 10pm local time, so not like they had a day playing at anchor and simply didn't get around to closing the garage doors.
They only other explanation is this was straight out just an Act of God. As in an extreme and very rare, very localised intense weather feature. Given the guys mate got ran down and killed by a car the day before, it sounds more like Devine intervention than anything logical.
As an aside, it is becoming fashionable for recreational yachts to have large openings near water level. Trends in Euro yacht design is to have a dinghy garage inside the transom. It would be interesting how they keep the water out of those, and what effect it has on stability if it is half full of water (half full being worse than completely full, as you get the free body effect, sloshing from side to side.
A couple of years back I had a look on a large Euro stink pot at the boat show, It's grand design feature was a 'cabana beach club' at the transom. That was a cabin with floor below water level at the transom, a large lifting hatch the beam of the boat, and like a boarding / swim platform infront. The cabin facing the swim platform had a bar and barstools etc, kind of like a swim up bar you get in tacky Merica. What I can't recall was the freeboard of all this set up. My recollection was the bar and cabin hatch wasn't much higher than the water level, maybe 1 or 2 feet. Certainly enough to get wake it from your average Rivitmo pegging it through the anchorage. I made a comment to the sales guy about it, and he mumble something about bilge pumps.
Anyway, great sales feature in a glassy calm bay or marina, a bit marginal if you think about the risk of down flooding.
Wonder if I can find the boat.
-
1 hour ago, Deep Purple said:
If it was up then someone is in a lot of trouble
I would argue that leaving the keel up at anchor should not result in a 180ft boat sinking in 2minutes flat. If that was the primary cause, then there is a fundamental design flaw, and a fundamental certification flaw.
The keel is primarily designed to provide righting moment for sailing, like with the sails up. The boat should be inherently safe with the keel in either position.
That said, I'm sure the insurance companies will be crawling all over this, and if the keel was up, the insurance co's lawyers will be asking why, given it was parked in 50m of water. The Captain will need to answer that question. But he may have a defense in pointing to the stability curves and design specs (I've forgotten the proper name for how to make sure a ship is trimmed properly and stable, like when they load ferries and what not).
I would expect that, as with all accidents, there were a number of minor and separate issues coming together in a random sequence resulting in the outcome. The old domino theory.
One of the guests reported the boat leaning over suddenly then lots of breaking glass, and having to get out of her cabin quickly, over broken glass, cutting her feet etc. The windows on those boats are supposed to be structural components effectively and are definitely not supposed to break. The would have been designed to handle green water coming over them. So if windows have broken, that may explain getting enough water into the boat to sink it. Obviously the question would be why did the windows break? Again, another design and certification question.
The boat had a beam of 11.5 m / 38 ft, but more importantly a displacement of 473 tonnes.
For it to sink in 2 minutes would need a flowrate of water entering the boat of about 4,000 l/s. There needs to be something fundamentally wrong for that to happen, even with the boat laid over flat.
-
5 minutes ago, Black Panther said:
There was one occasion passing through Gatun lake at the high point of the Panama canal. There was a large sign on shore that said No Swimming. Of course once anchored I went for a swim along with several of my crew.
Next day when the pilot turned up I asked him why there was no Swimming. His one word answer: Alligators.
In a past life I was up the back of the Amazon on a wee adventure. After having a nice cool and freshening swim in the river (The Rio Negro), our guide asked if we wanted to go Piranha fishing for the rest of the afternoon.
We were a little perplexed, as there was only one river around that we knew of, the one we were just swimming in...
It did explain why the guide discretely checked with the ladies of the group that they weren't at 'that time of the month' before going swimming though. In hindsight he did also check none of us had grazes or cuts that might bleed when we were swimming. The Guide promised we were perfectly safe as long as the Piranha couldn't smell blood. Damn jungle was so hot and humid we were drenched in sweat about 5 seconds after swimming anyway.
That same trip, for some random reason, four of us and the guide were trying to stalk a black jaguar. It seemed a bit futile to me, trying to stalk a wild cat that lives in the jungle, while we crashed along making more noise than a noisy thing in it's environment. We gave up and went back to camp after my mate got attacked by a poisonous caterpillar. Very amusing, stalking a jaguar and getting taking out by a caterpillar... To be fair, it was very big, and colourful.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Black Panther said:
So, did you go swimming?
-
45 minutes ago, LBD said:
37.98416567333028, 13.709466983699906
Paste that in Google maps and zoom in....
It is not the boat in the news, but in the marina close to where she was anchored. ( This image has been on google maps for some time, I had found it before today)
I can't find the name of that boat, but I remember reading about it. Or at least one very similar. If it is the one I was thinking of, it was a recently restored classic, or something notable anyway, sunk tied up to the quay.
Was wanting to find the details to see if it was sunk due to weather or some other sort of random problem.
You can see the masts sticking out on street view...
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Nathan1000 said:
This story is full of ???. An 56 metre super yacht sinking at anchor during the celebration of the owner being acquitted from a fraud case whilst in the same weekend the co defendant gets run over while jogging.
A curious coincidence?
God works in mysterious ways?
Hired assassins getting better at covering their tracks?
There are certainly enough 'coincidences' to raise some suspicions. I can't work out how a 180ft boat can sink at anchor in a thunderstorm. Yes, I know it can get knocked down and suffer downflooding, but we are talking a 180ft superyacht, not a mullet boat.
And the neighbouring skipper reckoned it sank in 2 minutes. That is 120 seconds. You need a hell of a lot of downflooding to sink a boat that big that quickly...
-
Linking back to the original question,
Lets assume this wasn't forecast, you didn't see it coming and found yourself pinned down in a crowded anchorage on a lee shore with, what did they say? 60 knt winds and a sharp nasty sea state.
What can you do?
Other than already having the best anchor you can get, a sarca excel from Chains Ropes & Anchors, I'd let all my chain and rode out, and basically sit tight. The only other thing I can think of is having the motor running (for a couple of reasons) and having it in gear and driving forward modestly to try and reduce the risk of dragging anchor. Noting I've never been in this situation and have no idea how effective that would be. There would also be the risk of fouling the prop if you weren't careful, but the situation is generally high risk anyway. Noting if the engine is already running it gives some ability to maneuver if you do drag, or possibly to yaw out of the way if someone else is dragging past you.
I would think once in the situation any though about reducing windage is futile.
I would not try raising the anchor, due to the seastate and a fairly dangerous motion on the foredeck. That, and if you did raise anchor, you'd have to be absolutely convinced you could motor into it. By the looks of the videos, several boats motoring were getting their bow blown off, so they couldn't actually get around to motor into it. Possibly better to reverse into it, but I bet you'd take a heap of water over the stern. Possibly bugger the rudder too?
I guess overall I am genuinely bemused how so many people can get trapped on a lee shore with such a violent weather feature coming through. That links back to my earlier comment of checking the forecast. My other thought is how many of these boats were charters? Possibly a lot of people ashore when the blow came through, and being a crowded anchorage, or the classic anchoring technique of making sure the anchor is on the bottom but not much else, also led to a lot of dragging. Crowded anchorages like that normally has someone dragging in 5 knts, or chains and anchors fowled across each other like my Nan's knitting.
It certainly looks like a lot of drama, stress and confusion all in a small space and time.
-
1
-
-
Unless of course I was on a charter boat, in which case I'd take me passport, wallet and bag and head to the pub.
Then I would phone the charter company and tell them it's broken, could they send me another one?
Jokes aside, no point risking the safety of your family or crew if you don't have to.
-
I would check the forecast, even if I was on holiday...
-
1 hour ago, Bad Kitty said:
Yeah i get that, but it’s on a breaker! Flick it left & you’re out of touch. And for us it’s not a choice of being in touch or not.
It’s a choice of having 3 months in the tropics on the cat, while checking in with the office now & again, or staying at home?
If you don’t want to have a zoom call, don’t have it. I’d have starlink just for the weather.
So, 3 months here, or stay home? Mmmm?
Surely posting this photo breaches the site rules? It must be contrary to the terms and conditions?
Posting content that deliberately antagonises other site users, it's just blatant trolling now.
I mean, here I am, stuck in Auckland on a rainy grey weekend, two bored kids in the house, a very long list of boat maintenance jobs confronting me, and Bad Kitty is posting this sort of inflammatory and controversial material...
-
1
-
4
-
1
-
-
I have what I'm hoping is a simple question on VSR's, that I think I understand, but just want to make sure my understanding is correct.
We have a basic battery system on our boat, single start batt and modest house bank. We have a standard switch bank that includes an isolating switch for each battery, a parallel switch for emergencies and a VSR so that the start battery gets charged first off the alternator.
When the engine is off and the battery isolators have the batteries isolated and there is a charge source on the house batteries (solar normally, or right now a mains powered charger as we are in the shed doing work), the VSR will open, charging both batteries.
Is it normal for the VSR to open and connect both batteries when the isolator switches are isolated?
Below is the link to the BEP manual and wiring diagram.
Whilst wiring diagrams normally make my brain explode, this one looks fairly simple, and there is a direct pathway between the two batteries via the VSR. It doesn't have any isolator switches on it. So as far as I can tell, it looks normal for the VSR to 'join' the batteries, provided the voltage is high enough.
Am I missing anything?
The main thing I've got to get my head around is the concept of charging both batteries off solar, not just the house batteries. I have some small parasitic loads on the house batteries (the battery monitor mainly) so have a small solar panel for floating. I like to monitor the battery resting voltages and what not and keep on getting foxed because the VSR is open and I'm dealing with two different batteries, not one.
Recommendations for getting gas checked
in TechTalk
Posted
This.
All the explosions, fires and deaths I've heard of have been from portable gas appliances. Either those old portable LPG heaters, or butane stoves used in confined spaces, like tents.