Well, apparently the mast is intact. The waterspout is a contributing factor but why not wait till the facts and witness statements are all collated before making any assumptions.
Absolutely. In addition, the owner of the yacht (who is one of the survivors) stated that she saw windows blowing out and she had to walk over broken glass while escaping. This appears to indicate an outside force, the weather, had a devastating effect on the yacht which compromised its watertight structure. My assumption is that water may have flooded the aft watertight compartment(s) of the yacht, due to a garage door left open. But, there is a fixed bulkhead between the engine room and the living quarters which would have contained the flooding to the aft compartments (not enough to sink the yacht). I believe that when the weather event caused the yacht to begin to capsize, that weak points around the yacht failed and/or flooded causing it to sink. I don’t believe that the crew failed under these unique weather conditions, but that the yacht’s design was not robust enough for the conditions they encountered. Videos of the yacht, showing the interior and exterior, are available online from the manufacturer. While the design is beautiful, it certainly doesn’t look like vessels that are intentionally built for the harshest conditions imaginable (vessels purpose built for extreme weather).
The Bayesian disaster In very simple terms for the layperson. This is a one in a million tragedy but we should examine the facts and learn from them. Bayesian boasts the second highest mast in the world at 75 metres on a length of 56m. She has a lifting keel to enable her to get into shallow areas. Fully down it gives a draft of 9.83m and raised a draft of 4m. A sailing yacht has a keel to counter the heeling moment generated by the power of her sail plan. I’m sorry to say that size matters to a superyacht owner and naval architects are seduced into providing solutions. As yacht size increases the resistance of the hull reduces in proportion, so less sail area is required to adequately power longer yachts. But these floating fashion items are driven by appearance and bragging rights - and you lose prestige if someone has a bigger mast than you. Always the status pecking order questions are - how big - how fast - what cost - and is it black? If you designed Bayesian with a reasonable sail area and a ‘normal’ mast she would not look impressive - which is what superyachts have to be. It may be controversial to say it but the owners of these yacht are in some way victims of their own egomania. They want the biggest. When they go to a designer he has to go along with the ideas or lose the job to someone who will simply say yes to megalomania because they need the work. The rich and famous are used to being in charge and have a degree of certainty about their opinions which can make them immune to good professional advice. Often they appear with their own ‘expert’ who also depends on their patronage. A yes man. I have been in this position. I once took on a big project thinking I could recover sensible management and control downstream. How wrong I was. The result was predictable. The stability of a yacht has to be sufficient to counter the power of the rig but, as mast heights increase, the keels can often become so deep that the places of interest are restricted hence the lifting keel solution. Stability comes from two factors - the hull form and the ballast keel which acts like a pendulum. As the yacht heels the volume of the immersed hull section produce a buoyancy force which resists heeling. Initially the keel gives little force but as the angle of heel increases ‘physics’ makes the keel contribution significant (leverage). The greater the keel length, the greater the effect. The combination of the hull buoyancy on the heeled side and the keel on the ‘windward’ side produces the force necessary to keep the yacht from capsize. If the keel of Bayesian was retracted it would lose a significant six meters of moment arm or leverage from its probable 200 tons of keel bulb. When we design yachts we calculate the stability, or righting lever, as a function of heeled ‘bouyancy’ force and the ballast moment arm combined. (the GZ) This can be plotted on a graph to show the stability at any heel angle and identifies the angle at which stability becomes negative causing the yacht to capsize. Normally an ocean yacht will experience a negative point at about 120/30 degrees of heel. With a lifting keel this point is greatly reduced maybe to less than 90 degrees. Well designed oceanic yachts over 10m with normal ballast keels generally do not capsize due to wind because the, as the yacht heels, the wind spills from the sails and the keel develops an increasing righting moment. It is mainly wave systems which produce capsizes. If Bayesian was at anchor with the keel raised and no sails set the crew would have every confidence that she could remain safe in most normal wind conditions. But its centre of gravity would be higher than if the keel was down. Every captain at this level has passed an exam on stability and would be aware of his vessels stability graph. Many years ago I sat at Cremorne and watched a spiralling williwaw race across Sydney harbour and pass through Mosman. This twister was only about 30 metres wide but it destroyed houses and overturned cars in its path. A few feet away nothing was harmed. The power inside a twister is intense and powerful with the wind is coming from every direction One problem of large rigs is windage, even with no sails. Wind pressure increases to the square. A 20mph wind gives 1lb per sq foot pressure. In a fresh gale at 40mph the wind pressure is 4.1 lb sqft . In a moderate twister of 100mph the wind pressure is 25.6 lbs sqft. Internally twisters are often in the 200mph range causing 100 lbs + sqft pressures. This was the sort of event that hit Bayesian. You cannot plan or design for this sort of event. In their write up about the yacht Peri Navi wrote - “To optimise sailing performance of the powerful Cutter Rig sail plan, Salute (later Bayesian) has modified keel and rudder lines to improve her stability in keeping with the higher centre of gravity the tall mast produces.” But this yacht had three furling sails forward and a big boom with the weight of a furled mainsail inside all above the centre of gravity. Also there were large communication domes on the spreaders. Even without sails the wind pressure coefficients for Bayesian would have been abnormally large when hit by the wind force of varying direction in a twister. Once she was knocked down beyond her stability limit with the keel up she stood no chance and, laying flat to the water, her deck openings, which are more like a hotel than a ship, would have allowed a flood of water aboard and she would founder. This would happen in a couple of minutes. The watertight bulkheads are there to control flooding in the event of collision when the yacht is upright. They have no purpose when the yacht is on its side after a knockdown. In the Bayesian case they were useless - closed or open. As Sysman correctly says the climate control system on these is so extensive that, in all probability, all hull openings would have been closed. The observation of a lightning strike can be discounted because these vessels are grounded and any damage from a strike would have caused a slow sinking at worst - not a capsize and founder. The individuals within a professional crew with sailing experience may have sensed the wind and motion of the vessel changing and quickly reacted to instinctively save themselves in the seconds they had. My guess is that some were already on deck alarmed by the general conditions.The guests would have found themselves totally disoriented in flooding cabins, in darkness with the walls, doors and passageways at ninety degrees to the norm. Everything loose, including the people, would fall across the accommodation. They had practically no chance because it would be completely beyond their experience. The crew would have been unable to be of any help due to the speed of the unexpected event. I have been a professional yacht designer and builder for fifty years specialising in lifting keel yachts. My son, a professional navigator, was Third Officer on a ketch superyacht with masts 100m tall; a yacht so big, at 88metres, that it was almost beyond human handling even with the machinery on board. But of course it is the biggest and most expensive’ etc etc. His previous 73m power boat had 23 crew. The crew on the 88m ketch, which has all the complexities of the power superyacht and then this enormous rig to handle, had only 18 crew due to the shape of the vessel restricting accommodation. What we have here is a one off accident which is a wake up call to an industry where common sense has departed as yachts get more silly in size and design. In summary Bayesian was caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. A freak accident which the designers and crew would have little chance to predict. If the keel had been down she may have survived the knock down. But the crew would have experience of her basic stability which would be adequate for normal conditions. Any enquiry must examine the design factors such as the keel design and the stability vanishing point in the condition she was at the time of the accident; keel up, tank loadings and rig factors for windage (WPC) and centre of gravity etc. And a calculation of the wind force required to heel the boat to 90 degrees in the condition at the time of the accident. The news hounds will pick on any obvious sensational line of inquiry and any credible or incredible accusation. The fact is that normal storms are predictable to some extent but waterspouts and their paths are not. The boat was average for its type and suffered from ‘tallest mast’ syndrome. Sadly, she was in the wrong place at the wrong time. You cannot plan or design for this sort of event. Blaming the builder is somewhat like blaming a ski manufacturer for deaths in an avalanche. My best mate died in one while attempting a dangerous black run in Verbier simply for bragging rights. He ignored common sense. All forms of transport have had these unpredictable one off events leading to changes of regulations and professional practice. Titanic, Boeing, 1955 Le Mans, the 1952 Farnborough crash, the 1979 Fastnet - all have made a difference and these events all came unpredicted and out of the blue often at a time of complacency. Chris Freer - yacht designer - Lagos Portugal August 2024
Sorry you ate all the fake news from medias At the beginning of this video you can see the proof of the proofs.....that video of the Bayesian where we can see there was NO INCLINATION while lights started being switched off In addition to many other very strange factors, we have not doubts about what happened that night. Which is simple: MURDER
This can be a unfortunately chain of many events, misfortune and human errors that made this happen, but if you put all the things together it looks very suspicious... And I guess some company also had around 8 billion reasons to be angry, in their eyes at least.
Important revelation. The tender is missing. Its normally secured on deck when not in use. This could mean that the rear door or the side door or both were open at the time and the tender tied up to either one but still in the water. The open door(s) would have facilitated the flooding of the vessel, along with the raised keel (which lessened stability).
It could also be a complete shutdown and sliding doors opened when it keeled over. Which would then allow water to rush inside which would cause sinking. It could be a multitude of things and we have to wait until it has been investigated
a freak weather incident and arrogance sunk this ship , when you push the boundaries the unforeseen happens and people die , the crew are not guilty of anything
Who are you to tell people what so do? No reason people can't speculate. Speculation can lead to discussion and learning as to what makes a yacht good.
The anchor failed to hold 'Bayesian" head to wind. She was drifting, out of control, may have struck bottom and turned sideways to the full force of the storm. The centreboard being up and the mast being high weren't the problem. The problem was the Captain didn't do his due diligence and was not securely anchored. ANY vessel would be knocked down if it became broadside to the wind.
The statement of the builder that they built a watercraft that unsinkable is understatement ... remember that the titanic was also describe as unsinkable by ots uk builder
My theory is that the passengers and crew raised the keel to keep it quiet, lifting keels are annoyingly noisy when the ship is rolling, thereby dangerously de-stabilising the vessel. Once on its side, and it would happen in an instant, the vessel would be unable to be saved. I would NEVER have a single lifting keel on a large vessel. They are for small vessels up to forty feet. Instead I would have used Instead twin bilge keels if one MUST enter shallow water and sit on the hard as the tide goes out. Bilge keels and long keels for shallow draft vessels are a small amount less efficient but are silent and safe and anyone who says a raised heavy keel is NOT s destabilising factor with such a large mast needs to have their qualifications re-assessed before they design any more inherently dangerous vessels.
I believe, that the coincidences and circumstances uncovered by the ongoing investigations and autopsies are more than strange. They not only reveal a series of highly unlikely mistakes by the captain and crew but also contain baffling details. All the victims were found in the same cabin, which was different from the one they were originally assigned. The autopsies revealed that they died of suffocation, and no water was found in their lungs. How can this be explained? Imagine passengers gathering together in a single cabin below deck while the boat is filling with water and sinking. Instead of trying to escape, they would all hide in one cabin? Unlikely. Why did they suffocate and not drown? Even if they had run out of oxygen in an air pocket, they would have eventually swallowed water. Only if they had already died would they have avoided ingesting water. Everyone involved in the trial has died-including Chamberlain, who was hit by a car in England-while the entire crew survived. How can we define a captain who abandons his ship without ensuring the safety of his passengers? This reflection points to a series of unexplained anomalies and raises serious questions about the events surrounding the incident. The choices and outcomes seem too improbable to be attributed to mere accident, leading to suspicions of foul play or deeper, hidden causes.
It was naive negligence! How come they didn’t prepare for bad weather? Why was there no back up warning signs just in case? Was the Anchor still down? It must have been ignored by naive captain and no safety drill or warning! So sad…
A Micro-Burst took down a building in Phoenix Az killing a man a few weeks back. The Building was a Big Tilt up where they make concrete walls then lift them up.
And WHO exactly are these commentators???? Yachties? Captains? Yacht designers? anyone with yacht industry experience? My thoughts go to the survivors especially to the crew & the Captain. None of your commentators have ANY idea of the case. The wife of Mike Lynch survived. I suggest that the focus should be on the ship as opposed to scapegoating of the Captain & crew. You don't have all the information, you also don't have the expertise. I suggest that people look at the Yacht press, who are more thorough, and also have the facts rather than this type of kangaroo court! The manufacturer was quick off the mark to scapegoat the crew as their careers & licenses are worth nothing in comparison to their business. Currently refurbishing Putins yacht. The boat was owned by Lynch's wife. I suggest that YOU and this Marco actually do the research. He also doesn't tell you what the crew have already said in their statements. The weather turned incredibly quickly, the Captain called all crew to deck immediately to secure & harness all loose items which they did, whilst they were doing that the boat heeled 20 degrees within seconds the boat listed even further & they all got thrown off - many with serious injuries. Hence all the crew were in the water. As for the chef - he is the only crew member NOT required for such tasks. As for mustering guests there was no time it went from rough sea to sink within a very short period. If you follow yachts you could see the data online. The one thing you don't do is have unnecessary guests milling around when you're preparing a boat in stormy seas as it's dangerous, but also the boat has survived storms before. As for the life boat - no one launches a lifeboat they are sophisticated pieces of equipment that will release themselves & inflate - hence everyone was in the water & had to scramble to the vessel. Following on about the keel, SOP for this yacht was to have the keel up when sails down. The Bayesian has also sailed the atlantic ocean several times & has done this for years! This sort of absolute garbage as sheer contempt for young people doing a hard job and a tiring one is out of order! I hope those crew members are getting the mental support & especially Captain who is under extensive mental pressure atm! Shit has happened on his watch, something no Captain or crew would want but get your facts right before launching such spurious rubbish.
Will said. I've been a Naval Architect and pro skipper for nearly 40 years so I have a bit of a clue and the comments from people online are just ridiculous. Suddenly everyone is an expert. My sincere condolences go out to everyone involved in this incedent.
@@CK-fe3vg But most of the people commenting in the actual video are "supposedly" experts and they came out with one supposition after another. You have experience and yet repeated the heeling theory, which was just that, a theory. In FACT they have now announced it went down by the stern, which is completely believable if you view the ONLY bit of evidence we have available, the AIS track and heading info for the period. This shows the Sir RBP and Bayesian hit by very strong wind at 01.57 UTC, Sir RBP dragging but Bayesian turning to port and heading downwind, then stopping stern on to the weather for the next hour before sinking stern first. I am not making any assumption about how that water got in, whatthe crew did or didn't do during that hour, or even what happened to the anchor/chain in the original anchoring position.
Ports(windows) don’t open. Hatches and vents do,air con running leaves vents open,danger is she heeled to 45 degrees water then water comes in.Can come in sink drains as well.crew were quickly tipped into sea ,but watchman should have told captain of storm must have been on radar
What are you talking about? Mike Lynch, Jonathan Bloomer and Chris Morvillo have been killed in advance and then they sunk the yacht! Bad weather? Just moving the covers on small boats.
It amazes me how fast the media will blame the crew, with numeral false claims. The mast played no rule, windows and portholes cannot be opened, and the lazaret and tender garage doors were closed. But please don't let facts stand in the way of a prosecution, and a trail by media. My thoughts are with the crew that had to live through an horrible ordeal. One of there crewmates dead, and several of there passengers that were in there care.
I think the system went after him when he won the case! I hope the sloppy Italians can get to the bottom of this? Its a little too convenient and bad collaterals too.
How? There were 22 people on that yacht. You think the wife was in on it and killed her daughter too? They ordered the violent storm and told it to knock the ship over to sink it…..
@@amyeck7559 read my comment AmyEck. I mentioned there were bad collaterals. Do you know the other friend that they won the case in America, Mr Chamberlian, was killed by a car too.
It must have been a downburst. The yacht was flooded from above. A downburst is like a small lake that falls from the sky. While falling some kilometers, the downburst creates a heavy wind that destroys anything standing, masts tree's, anything. I don't think this could have been prevented. Maybe have a look at these footings of downbursts czcams.com/video/meHOQ3oCqxU/video.htmlsi=GFidaafIUw3gEy67 czcams.com/video/ObYRYF3d38Y/video.htmlsi=8I7fykVVAVtH-Apy czcams.com/video/EMBi1fTKZdw/video.htmlsi=t9tLyz_R2iQfMIxx
And yet it happened Constantinople. This guy is trying to shift any blame away from his build. This one in a million tragedy is no ones fault. This doesn’t happen unless the ship is creamed by a waterspout coming out of nowhere in the pitch black environment at 4:45am.
It is clear that having the keel retracted would have reduced the stability. Likely that does not pose a risk in calm weather but in 100 km wind, that is another matter. Does Perini have test data or calculations for such wind force? Why would the yacht lift its 10 m keel when anchored in 30 m of water? The notion that portholes would be open is not credible. The hotter the weather, the more one uses aircon and the portholes are shut. Besides, a few open portholes don't sink a 500 ton ya chat in a few minutes. Most likely, there were other bigger openings like the side terrace or garage that were not shut and allowed large volumes of water to enter in a very short time. It points to design errors, insufficient protocols and crew negligence. The inquiry will find out soon.
The boat was dead in the water, which is very dangerous in stormy weather. The crew of the Robert Baden Powell used their engines to keep their vessel’s head to the wind. The Bayesian crew did not.
See the clip from NZ similar yacht same lit up mast, shows a big catamaran get hit first which is moored in the marine it back flips up in the air , then it hits the yacht side on it lays down, mast hits the water then pops straight up right again it's what the Bayesian should have done.
If only Italy were an advanced country, they would have Doppler radar and we would be able to see if there was a tornado or water spout. Unfortunately, they're just a bunch of poor spaghetti farmers over there.
The bodies have only just been recovered, the families are still grieving, the Italian Coastguard has yet to release a full statement and yet you begin the speculation and conspiracy theories. PLEASE SHOW SOME RESTRAINT AND RESPECT !
First witness said MAST was flat to water..meaning it was down before it sank..perhaps not up atall..the video of it's last momments is fake full stop ..she ships hull isn't even moving in the video..lol
Whenever man claims their design and structure to be unsinkable that's when God puts man on his place..Titanic , Titan submersible and now Baysian ..the builders claimed they were unsinkable and they sank in terrible circumstances. If there is room for human error and machine/ design relies on humans to take certain actions then they are not unsinkable ...Point is nothing can stand in front of God's mighty power ..
WOW... the fact that two 14 year old girls were also found bereaved but not reported has the owners pedo past called into reason here... apparently. "They need to get to the bottom of this" A skippers desperate final msg
It had nothing to with winning a criminal fraud case against HP, and his co defendant in the case being run over around the same time is totally a coincidence. Just like Boeing whistleblowers suddenly dying is totally coincidence.
Need to look at the bigger picture a court case for over 10 years Found innocent just recently? His lawyer dead pre yacht disaster ran over? Yes she stopped and reportrd it but he jogging, how hit?? Day night? Remote or busy area? Where jogging? Cctv? Who is driver connected to? Any threats to his or associates life? Odd all in same cabin? More escaped compared to passengers? Many on boat from law firm? All survivors need interviewing and anyone on shore connected Radio on boat ? Life boats Postmordem Flares Business connections All staff employed Places they regularly went shops, hairdresser any clubs etc? Conversation s about concerns? Innocent? But died? Who were all people who survived connections? Crew connections and experience Anyone on yacht alone pre trip Camera on yacht Insurers of boat Condition of yacht Any errors Inspection of yacht Repairs of yacht Any drones Westher conditions but other boats not sink? Standard of yacht ie safety Need separate private interviews of each passenger who survived Tampering of yacht Capsize quick It's all assumptions may may? Some answers from survivor's needed?
Bottom line: they don't have a clue yet as what exactly happened to that boat!
"bottom line" 👍😅
It’s pretty obvious what happened. Keel up, hatches open.
Well, apparently the mast is intact. The waterspout is a contributing factor but why not wait till the facts and witness statements are all collated before making any assumptions.
I agree the divers say the mast is still intact
It doesn't matter how hot it was.The ship has generators on board that run the air-conditioning system to all rooms.
Absolutely.
In addition, the owner of the yacht (who is one of the survivors) stated that she saw windows blowing out and she had to walk over broken glass while escaping.
This appears to indicate an outside force, the weather, had a devastating effect on the yacht which compromised its watertight structure.
My assumption is that water may have flooded the aft watertight compartment(s) of the yacht, due to a garage door left open. But, there is a fixed bulkhead between the engine room and the living quarters which would have contained the flooding to the aft compartments (not enough to sink the yacht).
I believe that when the weather event caused the yacht to begin to capsize, that weak points around the yacht failed and/or flooded causing it to sink.
I don’t believe that the crew failed under these unique weather conditions, but that the yacht’s design was not robust enough for the conditions they encountered.
Videos of the yacht, showing the interior and exterior, are available online from the manufacturer. While the design is beautiful, it certainly doesn’t look like vessels that are intentionally built for the harshest conditions imaginable (vessels purpose built for extreme weather).
The air conditoning vents were wide open?
The Bayesian disaster In very simple terms for the layperson.
This is a one in a million tragedy but we should examine the facts and learn from them.
Bayesian boasts the second highest mast in the world at 75 metres on a length of 56m. She has a lifting keel to enable her to get into shallow areas. Fully down it gives a draft of 9.83m and raised a draft of 4m. A sailing yacht has a keel to counter the heeling moment generated by the power of her sail plan.
I’m sorry to say that size matters to a superyacht owner and naval architects are seduced into providing solutions. As yacht size increases the resistance of the hull reduces in proportion, so less sail area is required to adequately power longer yachts. But these floating fashion items are driven by appearance and bragging rights - and you lose prestige if someone has a bigger mast than you. Always the status pecking order questions are - how big - how fast - what cost - and is it black? If you designed Bayesian with a reasonable sail area and a ‘normal’ mast she would not look impressive - which is what superyachts have to be.
It may be controversial to say it but the owners of these yacht are in some way victims of their own egomania. They want the biggest. When they go to a designer he has to go along with the ideas or lose the job to someone who will simply say yes to megalomania because they need the work. The rich and famous are used to being in charge and have a degree of certainty about their opinions which can make them immune to good professional advice. Often they appear with their own ‘expert’ who also depends on their patronage. A yes man. I have been in this position. I once took on a big project thinking I could recover sensible management and control downstream. How wrong I was. The result was predictable.
The stability of a yacht has to be sufficient to counter the power of the rig but, as mast heights increase, the keels can often become so deep that the places of interest are restricted hence the lifting keel solution. Stability comes from two factors - the hull form and the ballast keel which acts like a pendulum. As the yacht heels the volume of the immersed hull section produce a buoyancy force which resists heeling. Initially the keel gives little force but as the angle of heel increases ‘physics’ makes the keel contribution significant (leverage). The greater the keel length, the greater the effect. The combination of the hull buoyancy on the heeled side and the keel on the ‘windward’ side produces the force necessary to keep the yacht from capsize. If the keel of Bayesian was retracted it would lose a significant six meters of moment arm or leverage from its probable 200 tons of keel bulb.
When we design yachts we calculate the stability, or righting lever, as a function of heeled ‘bouyancy’ force and the ballast moment arm combined. (the GZ) This can be plotted on a graph to show the stability at any heel angle and identifies the angle at which stability becomes negative causing the yacht to capsize. Normally an ocean yacht will experience a negative point at about 120/30 degrees of heel. With a lifting keel this point is greatly reduced maybe to less than 90 degrees.
Well designed oceanic yachts over 10m with normal ballast keels generally do not capsize due to wind because the, as the yacht heels, the wind spills from the sails and the keel develops an increasing righting moment. It is mainly wave systems which produce capsizes.
If Bayesian was at anchor with the keel raised and no sails set the crew would have every confidence that she could remain safe in most normal wind conditions. But its centre of gravity would be higher than if the keel was down. Every captain at this level has passed an exam on stability and would be aware of his vessels stability graph.
Many years ago I sat at Cremorne and watched a spiralling williwaw race across Sydney harbour and pass through Mosman. This twister was only about 30 metres wide but it destroyed houses and overturned cars in its path. A few feet away nothing was harmed. The power inside a twister is intense and powerful with the wind is coming from every direction
One problem of large rigs is windage, even with no sails. Wind pressure increases to the square. A 20mph wind gives 1lb per sq foot pressure. In a fresh gale at 40mph the wind pressure is 4.1 lb sqft . In a moderate twister of 100mph the wind pressure is 25.6 lbs sqft. Internally twisters are often in the 200mph range causing 100 lbs + sqft pressures. This was the sort of event that hit Bayesian. You cannot plan or design for this sort of event.
In their write up about the yacht Peri Navi wrote - “To optimise sailing performance of the powerful Cutter Rig sail plan, Salute (later Bayesian) has modified keel and rudder lines to improve her stability in keeping with the higher centre of gravity the tall mast produces.”
But this yacht had three furling sails forward and a big boom with the weight of a furled mainsail inside all above the centre of gravity. Also there were large communication domes on the spreaders. Even without sails the wind pressure coefficients for Bayesian would have been abnormally large when hit by the wind force of varying direction in a twister. Once she was knocked down beyond her stability limit with the keel up she stood no chance and, laying flat to the water, her deck openings, which are more like a hotel than a ship, would have allowed a flood of water aboard and she would founder. This would happen in a couple of minutes. The watertight bulkheads are there to control flooding in the event of collision when the yacht is upright. They have no purpose when the yacht is on its side after a knockdown. In the Bayesian case they were useless - closed or open. As Sysman correctly says the climate control system on these is so extensive that, in all probability, all hull openings would have been closed.
The observation of a lightning strike can be discounted because these vessels are grounded and any damage from a strike would have caused a slow sinking at worst - not a capsize and founder.
The individuals within a professional crew with sailing experience may have sensed the wind and motion of the vessel changing and quickly reacted to instinctively save themselves in the seconds they had. My guess is that some were already on deck alarmed by the general conditions.The guests would have found themselves totally disoriented in flooding cabins, in darkness with the walls, doors and passageways at ninety degrees to the norm. Everything loose, including the people, would fall across the accommodation. They had practically no chance because it would be completely beyond their experience. The crew would have been unable to be of any help due to the speed of the unexpected event.
I have been a professional yacht designer and builder for fifty years specialising in lifting keel yachts. My son, a professional navigator, was Third Officer on a ketch superyacht with masts 100m tall; a yacht so big, at 88metres, that it was almost beyond human handling even with the machinery on board. But of course it is the biggest and most expensive’ etc etc. His previous 73m power boat had 23 crew. The crew on the 88m ketch, which has all the complexities of the power superyacht and then this enormous rig to handle, had only 18 crew due to the shape of the vessel restricting accommodation.
What we have here is a one off accident which is a wake up call to an industry where common sense has departed as yachts get more silly in size and design.
In summary Bayesian was caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. A freak accident which the designers and crew would have little chance to predict. If the keel had been down she may have survived the knock down. But the crew would have experience of her basic stability which would be adequate for normal conditions.
Any enquiry must examine the design factors such as the keel design and the stability vanishing point in the condition she was at the time of the accident; keel up, tank loadings and rig factors for windage (WPC) and centre of gravity etc. And a calculation of the wind force required to heel the boat to 90 degrees in the condition at the time of the accident.
The news hounds will pick on any obvious sensational line of inquiry and any credible or incredible accusation. The fact is that normal storms are predictable to some extent but waterspouts and their paths are not. The boat was average for its type and suffered from ‘tallest mast’ syndrome. Sadly, she was in the wrong place at the wrong time. You cannot plan or design for this sort of event. Blaming the builder is somewhat like blaming a ski manufacturer for deaths in an avalanche. My best mate died in one while attempting a dangerous black run in Verbier simply for bragging rights. He ignored common sense.
All forms of transport have had these unpredictable one off events leading to changes of regulations and professional practice. Titanic, Boeing, 1955 Le Mans, the 1952 Farnborough crash, the 1979 Fastnet - all have made a difference and these events all came unpredicted and out of the blue often at a time of complacency.
Chris Freer - yacht designer - Lagos Portugal August 2024
Freak weather combined with too high center of gravity (poor design).
Thank you and Congratulations 🎉🎉🎉
You are now officially the most boring commenter in YT history🎉🎉🎉
The entire thesis. 🎉 clear explanation. Good.
Well written and very polite, you did not call the yacht by its real title, " Gin Palace ".
Sorry you ate all the fake news from medias
At the beginning of this video you can see the proof of the proofs.....that video of the Bayesian where we can see there was NO INCLINATION while lights started being switched off
In addition to many other very strange factors, we have not doubts about what happened that night.
Which is simple: MURDER
Where is the weather data to show doppler winds and tornadic activity? Havent seen any of that in these videos..
This can be a unfortunately chain of many events, misfortune and human errors that made this happen, but if you put all the things together it looks very suspicious... And I guess some company also had around 8 billion reasons to be angry, in their eyes at least.
Important revelation. The tender is missing. Its normally secured on deck when not in use. This could mean that the rear door or the side door or both were open at the time and the tender tied up to either one but still in the water. The open door(s) would have facilitated the flooding of the vessel, along with the raised keel (which lessened stability).
The old phrase batten down the hatches comes to mind. If water is allowed to pour inside most anything will sink.
So the news report says that a massive amount of water entering the boat was the main cause for the sinking. Wow!
You have to consider the audience these days...
Yeah, this post is a bunch of bullshit.
Tragedy indeed but is it not strange that the whole crew was rescued while some passengers are dead.
It could also be a complete shutdown and sliding doors opened when it keeled over. Which would then allow water to rush inside which would cause sinking. It could be a multitude of things and we have to wait until it has been investigated
a freak weather incident and arrogance sunk this ship , when you push the boundaries the unforeseen happens and people die , the crew are not guilty of anything
Keel must have been raised. Only explanation why it would fill with water so quickly and submerge.
Think everyone needs to shut up and allow the evidence be gathered so that the reasons for this tragedy might be understood.
Who are you to tell people what so do? No reason people can't speculate. Speculation can lead to discussion and learning as to what makes a yacht good.
Weather too hot? No air conditioning?? Why all windows and doors were open?
Freak accident, it happens……perfect storm 🤷🏽🤷🏼♂️🤷🏻♀️
The anchor failed to hold 'Bayesian" head to wind. She was drifting, out of control, may have struck bottom and turned sideways to the full force of the storm. The centreboard being up and the mast being high weren't the problem. The problem was the Captain didn't do his due diligence and was not securely anchored. ANY vessel would be knocked down if it became broadside to the wind.
The statement of the builder that they built a watercraft that unsinkable is understatement ... remember that the titanic was also describe as unsinkable by ots uk builder
Was the AC on? Also, the ship was in deep harbor water and therefore the keel should have been positioned all the way down.
My theory is that the passengers and crew raised the keel to keep it quiet, lifting keels are annoyingly noisy when the ship is rolling, thereby dangerously de-stabilising the vessel. Once on its side, and it would happen in an instant, the vessel would be unable to be saved.
I would NEVER have a single lifting keel on a large vessel. They are for small vessels up to forty feet. Instead I would have used Instead twin bilge keels if one MUST enter shallow water and sit on the hard as the tide goes out. Bilge keels and long keels for shallow draft vessels are a small amount less efficient but are silent and safe and anyone who says a raised heavy keel is NOT s destabilising factor with such a large mast needs to have their qualifications re-assessed before they design any more inherently dangerous vessels.
I believe, that the coincidences and circumstances uncovered by the ongoing investigations and autopsies are more than strange. They not only reveal a series of highly unlikely mistakes by the captain and crew but also contain baffling details. All the victims were found in the same cabin, which was different from the one they were originally assigned. The autopsies revealed that they died of suffocation, and no water was found in their lungs. How can this be explained? Imagine passengers gathering together in a single cabin below deck while the boat is filling with water and sinking. Instead of trying to escape, they would all hide in one cabin? Unlikely. Why did they suffocate and not drown? Even if they had run out of oxygen in an air pocket, they would have eventually swallowed water. Only if they had already died would they have avoided ingesting water. Everyone involved in the trial has died-including Chamberlain, who was hit by a car in England-while the entire crew survived. How can we define a captain who abandons his ship without ensuring the safety of his passengers?
This reflection points to a series of unexplained anomalies and raises serious questions about the events surrounding the incident. The choices and outcomes seem too improbable to be attributed to mere accident, leading to suspicions of foul play or deeper, hidden causes.
The only explanation is that it was a killing
“Owners” do not want to be “bothered” with safety drills, Just like they do not want to be bothered with paying their fair share in taxes.😂😂😂😂😂
or paying for a capable dedicated crew...
in Italy 🇮🇹 it's all clear, and we're saying that
no boat can face a sea force 007 ....
👆
The diver said that the Keel was in the up position, clearly the hatches were not secured. And no proper Anchor watch.
Ho do know that the sudden healing force didn't smash out the side windows and then flood the yacht.
@@AORD72
But it was unsinkable! How could this happen!
The Bayesian had broken her anchor for one hour prior to sinking? Portholes do not open?
You dont have to open the hatches or windows on superyacts to cool the air, you just turn on the advanced AC system.
the A/C vents plus engine vents can cause water ingress if the heel is enough
It was naive negligence! How come they didn’t prepare for bad weather? Why was there no back up warning signs just in case? Was the Anchor still down? It must have been ignored by naive captain and no safety drill or warning! So sad…
The anchor was down but it got ripped out when the weather hit allegedly
A Micro-Burst took down a building in Phoenix Az killing a man a few weeks back. The Building was a Big Tilt up where they make concrete walls then lift them up.
The “Swiss Cheese Model” of accident causation strikes again.
And WHO exactly are these commentators???? Yachties? Captains? Yacht designers? anyone with yacht industry experience? My thoughts go to the survivors especially to the crew & the Captain. None of your commentators have ANY idea of the case. The wife of Mike Lynch survived. I suggest that the focus should be on the ship as opposed to scapegoating of the Captain & crew. You don't have all the information, you also don't have the expertise. I suggest that people look at the Yacht press, who are more thorough, and also have the facts rather than this type of kangaroo court! The manufacturer was quick off the mark to scapegoat the crew as their careers & licenses are worth nothing in comparison to their business. Currently refurbishing Putins yacht. The boat was owned by Lynch's wife. I suggest that YOU and this Marco actually do the research. He also doesn't tell you what the crew have already said in their statements. The weather turned incredibly quickly, the Captain called all crew to deck immediately to secure & harness all loose items which they did, whilst they were doing that the boat heeled 20 degrees within seconds the boat listed even further & they all got thrown off - many with serious injuries. Hence all the crew were in the water. As for the chef - he is the only crew member NOT required for such tasks. As for mustering guests there was no time it went from rough sea to sink within a very short period. If you follow yachts you could see the data online. The one thing you don't do is have unnecessary guests milling around when you're preparing a boat in stormy seas as it's dangerous, but also the boat has survived storms before. As for the life boat - no one launches a lifeboat they are sophisticated pieces of equipment that will release themselves & inflate - hence everyone was in the water & had to scramble to the vessel. Following on about the keel, SOP for this yacht was to have the keel up when sails down. The Bayesian has also sailed the atlantic ocean several times & has done this for years! This sort of absolute garbage as sheer contempt for young people doing a hard job and a tiring one is out of order! I hope those crew members are getting the mental
support & especially Captain who is under extensive mental pressure atm! Shit has happened on his watch, something no Captain or crew would want but get your facts right before launching such spurious rubbish.
Will said. I've been a Naval Architect and pro skipper for nearly 40 years so I have a bit of a clue and the comments from people online are just ridiculous. Suddenly everyone is an expert. My sincere condolences go out to everyone involved in this incedent.
@@CK-fe3vg But most of the people commenting in the actual video are "supposedly" experts and they came out with one supposition after another. You have experience and yet repeated the heeling theory, which was just that, a theory. In FACT they have now announced it went down by the stern, which is completely believable if you view the ONLY bit of evidence we have available, the AIS track and heading info for the period. This shows the Sir RBP and Bayesian hit by very strong wind at 01.57 UTC, Sir RBP dragging but Bayesian turning to port and heading downwind, then stopping stern on to the weather for the next hour before sinking stern first. I am not making any assumption about how that water got in, whatthe crew did or didn't do during that hour, or even what happened to the anchor/chain in the original anchoring position.
@@helmshardover I mentioned nothing about any theory in my comment above.
I hear you. But why was the keel up? Is there a reason?
@@CC-xn5xi I am am member of eSysman Super Yachts take a listen to his CZcams channel - he explains it
Lifting keel was prob up making the boat top heavy so it rolled easily in the wind
Ports(windows) don’t open. Hatches and vents do,air con running leaves vents open,danger is she heeled to 45 degrees water then water comes in.Can come in sink drains as well.crew were quickly tipped into sea ,but watchman should have told captain of storm must have been on radar
What are you talking about? Mike Lynch, Jonathan Bloomer and Chris Morvillo have been killed in advance and then they sunk the yacht! Bad weather? Just moving the covers on small boats.
WE WERE ALL DRUNK. CREW & REST. I'm now in heaven. Great here.
The "Italian Airforce Officials" have stated that it was hit by a "DOWNBURST" !
Why was the yacht designed with recessed stairs on the side decks which often go under water when sailing hard or other conditions?
~ 75 Meter mast ?..... It couldn’t sail under the Golden Gate Bridge .... and we have Air craft Carriers sail under the Bridge .....
It amazes me how fast the media will blame the crew, with numeral false claims. The mast played no rule, windows and portholes cannot be opened, and the lazaret and tender garage doors were closed. But please don't let facts stand in the way of a prosecution, and a trail by media. My thoughts are with the crew that had to live through an horrible ordeal. One of there crewmates dead, and several of there passengers that were in there care.
I'm confused, i thought that it sunk right away apparently it didn't sink for 32 minutes so how did everybody not get off of the yacht?
I think the system went after him when he won the case! I hope the sloppy Italians can get to the bottom of this? Its a little too convenient and bad collaterals too.
How? There were 22 people on that yacht. You think the wife was in on it and killed her daughter too? They ordered the violent storm and told it to knock the ship over to sink it…..
@@amyeck7559 read my comment AmyEck. I mentioned there were bad collaterals. Do you know the other friend that they won the case in America, Mr Chamberlian, was killed by a car too.
Definitely killed by someone he wronged….
There is a video and you can see when it tilt over.
It must have been a downburst. The yacht was flooded from above. A downburst is like a small lake that falls from the sky. While falling some kilometers, the downburst creates a heavy wind that destroys anything standing, masts tree's, anything.
I don't think this could have been prevented.
Maybe have a look at these footings of downbursts
czcams.com/video/meHOQ3oCqxU/video.htmlsi=GFidaafIUw3gEy67
czcams.com/video/ObYRYF3d38Y/video.htmlsi=8I7fykVVAVtH-Apy
czcams.com/video/EMBi1fTKZdw/video.htmlsi=t9tLyz_R2iQfMIxx
HP wanted their pound of flesh.
Flesh & Cash! HP won in civil court too!!👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Lots of blame to go all around.
And yet it happened Constantinople. This guy is trying to shift any blame away from his build. This one in a million tragedy is no ones fault. This doesn’t happen unless the ship is creamed by a waterspout coming out of nowhere in the pitch black environment at 4:45am.
It is clear that having the keel retracted would have reduced the stability. Likely that does not pose a risk in calm weather but in 100 km wind, that is another matter. Does Perini have test data or calculations for such wind force? Why would the yacht lift its 10 m keel when anchored in 30 m of water? The notion that portholes would be open is not credible. The hotter the weather, the more one uses aircon and the portholes are shut. Besides, a few open portholes don't sink a 500 ton ya chat in a few minutes. Most likely, there were other bigger openings like the side terrace or garage that were not shut and allowed large volumes of water to enter in a very short time. It points to design errors, insufficient protocols and crew negligence. The inquiry will find out soon.
Suspicious
The boat was dead in the water, which is very dangerous in stormy weather. The crew of the Robert Baden Powell used their engines to keep their vessel’s head to the wind. The Bayesian crew did not.
It was at anchor, probably in calm water until an unexpected equal/water spout hit.
@@AORD72 The storm was forecast. The crew should’ve worked their ship.
@@AORD72 There was a storm and there is no calm water in a storm.
@@zagortenay33 Yea? A well built yacht can handle a squall come though. it is a 50 meter yacht, they should easily handle a little storm.
Do de dew thing again?
State of that Dale thing.
See the clip from NZ similar yacht same lit up mast, shows a big catamaran get hit first which is moored in the marine it back flips up in the air , then it hits the yacht side on it lays down, mast hits the water then pops straight up right again it's what the Bayesian should have done.
the bayesesian was essentially a sail asisisted powerboat. The yacht in Auckland was a true yacht. Very different dynamics
If only Italy were an advanced country, they would have Doppler radar and we would be able to see if there was a tornado or water spout. Unfortunately, they're just a bunch of poor spaghetti farmers over there.
So basically we are saying some kinda weather controlling device,
This was just a settlement.
follow the money.
...... not theories, hypotheses.
A lack of respect to the people, to the weather, to the physic, just like 1909. Arrogance.
A lightning ?
Spend millions studying why or simply conclude that a boat filled with water will sink, especially one clearly top heavy.
Theories? Bcoz being hit by a tornado in the dark of night is not real enough?
Its mother nature...no need to overthink....
Close doors öööh
no yacht it unsinkable,
The bodies have only just been recovered, the families are still grieving, the Italian Coastguard has yet to release a full statement and yet you begin the speculation and conspiracy theories. PLEASE SHOW SOME RESTRAINT AND RESPECT !
Hand of god
First witness said MAST was flat to water..meaning it was down before it sank..perhaps not up atall..the video of it's last momments is fake full stop ..she ships hull isn't even moving in the video..lol
Whenever man claims their design and structure to be unsinkable that's when God puts man on his place..Titanic , Titan submersible and now Baysian ..the builders claimed they were unsinkable and they sank in terrible circumstances. If there is room for human error and machine/ design relies on humans to take certain actions then they are not unsinkable ...Point is nothing can stand in front of God's mighty power ..
Mother Nature is at fault. Sue her. 🤪
Simple someone left the door or window open 👍🏴🦊
WOW... the fact that two 14 year old girls were also found bereaved but not reported has the owners pedo past called into reason here... apparently. "They need to get to the bottom of this" A skippers desperate final msg
Is that true? Could you provide link to the finding pls?
@@philsogood2455 pis off copper!
MI6
It had nothing to with winning a criminal fraud case against HP, and his co defendant in the case being run over around the same time is totally a coincidence. Just like Boeing whistleblowers suddenly dying is totally coincidence.
Rich people problems 😂😂😂
🙏🙏🙏
karma
No more Oxford University for the daughter 👊❤️🥳
Probably bad design. A good design wouldn't allow for human errors/misuse.
"A god design wouldn't allow for human errors/misuse." Sometimes human errors are deliberate. No good design can stand against evil intentions.
Must have been climate change 💫❤️
Need to look at the bigger picture a court case for over 10 years
Found innocent just recently?
His lawyer dead pre yacht disaster ran over? Yes she stopped and reportrd it but he jogging, how hit?? Day night? Remote or busy area? Where jogging? Cctv? Who is driver connected to?
Any threats to his or associates life?
Odd all in same cabin?
More escaped compared to passengers?
Many on boat from law firm?
All survivors need interviewing and anyone on shore connected
Radio on boat ?
Life boats
Postmordem
Flares
Business connections
All staff employed
Places they regularly went shops, hairdresser any clubs etc?
Conversation s about concerns?
Innocent? But died?
Who were all people who survived connections?
Crew connections and experience
Anyone on yacht alone pre trip
Camera on yacht
Insurers of boat
Condition of yacht
Any errors
Inspection of yacht
Repairs of yacht
Any drones
Westher conditions but other boats not sink?
Standard of yacht ie safety
Need separate private interviews of each passenger who survived
Tampering of yacht
Capsize quick
It's all assumptions may may?
Some answers from survivor's needed?
Assassination
is his wife dating yet?