@l0st I agree that there must have been a larger aperture to allow so much water to enter so quickly. Our seas are so polluted nowadays, but I can’t see a rogue 20-40ft container anywhere new a small fishing village.
The foam-filled hulls seem like a great idea. It makes sense for small dinghies and boats, but I don’t know if it can be scaled up for 50+m craft.
On the unsinkability of the Bayesian, here is the most recent information I read this morning, specifically from the actual designer of the Bayesian.
The article is in Italian, so I’ve just taken an excerpt and translated and bolded the key points.
Source: https://www.superyacht24.it/2024/08/26/s...le-aperto/
Also in the article, it mentions that the anchor was down, which in the case of inclement weather, the captain should have raised, along with, lowering the keel (yet to be confirmed), sealing all windows and hatches and assembling the passengers… all precautions that appear to have been disregarded. So, even if he ignored Italy’s Marine weather reports and considering he had been warned about bad weather, specifically by email, it would seem that the sinking was caused by negligence… but that’s for the courts to decide.
The foam-filled hulls seem like a great idea. It makes sense for small dinghies and boats, but I don’t know if it can be scaled up for 50+m craft.
On the unsinkability of the Bayesian, here is the most recent information I read this morning, specifically from the actual designer of the Bayesian.
The article is in Italian, so I’ve just taken an excerpt and translated and bolded the key points.
Source: https://www.superyacht24.it/2024/08/26/s...le-aperto/
Quote:According to the architect Romani, when the bad weather arrived, the hatch on the side was left open and not the stern one, as some had hypothesized, because: «The stern hatch is closed, it does not allow any access to the inside. The side hatch instead gives access to a huge locker where there are the Scuba, the tanks for diving, the windsurf. Everything that is used to go to sea is kept there because this hatch is 60 centimeters from the water: it is easier to dive but, if the boat tilts, it immediately lets water in».
The hatch could have been opened by the guests to go swimming and perhaps left that way even after they got back on board because normally in good weather its opening is useful and pleasant "but if you know a storm is coming, everything should be closed". Among other things, the Bayesian prosecutor claims that it sank by the stern and this gives value to Romani's hypothesis: entering from the side hatch the water ended up in the stern locker which is adjacent to the engine room. There is a watertight door there, but it could have been left open and for this reason the boat sank.
With bad weather approaching, the captain must first of all close doors and hatches, then warn all passengers and make them aware that they will have to face a situation of instability that requires great attention. From the news that emerged we know that the agency that followed the Bayesian sent an email on Sunday morning to warn the captain of the bad weather asking him if he needed assistance, but no response was given and this - according to the architect Romani - supports the hypothesis of underestimating this aspect.
Also in the article, it mentions that the anchor was down, which in the case of inclement weather, the captain should have raised, along with, lowering the keel (yet to be confirmed), sealing all windows and hatches and assembling the passengers… all precautions that appear to have been disregarded. So, even if he ignored Italy’s Marine weather reports and considering he had been warned about bad weather, specifically by email, it would seem that the sinking was caused by negligence… but that’s for the courts to decide.
