Power cat disaster in Hout Bay, South Africa

I agree that the cockpit should have been a quick draining cockpit, that the downflooding height was way too low, that the old inboard engine vents should have been closed, that 42 people is way too much. But the engines failure caused the boat to fail in outrunning the waves.

Attached pic with the 4 months old Susuki. I still can't believe our maritime authorities approved this vessel!

 

I also note that the thread was moved from multihull to powerboat. So this why is this not a multihull?

 

Very wise words Manie I totally agree with you.

 

Thanks for the pic
Thanks for the pic
Thanks for the pic

SAMSA and this boat = sick sad joke
As I said before and will say now again, I really dont like this installation.
Those motors are sitting 1.5 meters aft of the original hulls which is way worse than my original guestimate of 0.5 m
This is a "novice" job that went horribily wrong
42 people on a 10m boat out of Houtbay = madness

can you imagine how far the boat had to be over to have the motor "go under"
nothing wrong with the motors - the installation is not suitable for the application and evironment

SAMSA you suck

 

Note the size of the cockpit drains. (they were none before the conversion)

 

Taniwha any idea what the original motors were
it seems like they were I/O
or were they shafts thru the hulls ??

 

the picture tells the story

 

Originals were Volvo Pentas but they could not afford the high maintenance costs anymore.

 

...and the old engine rooms vents and the bilge pump outlets very low above the waterline without non-return

 

Balls scuppers fitted to small wet deck fishing boats (4 -6m range) are much bigger than those silly deck drains...
I would say minimum of 100mm (4") diameter drains are needed for a boat this size with non return system to keep a following sea to push into the boat.

The engine cavitation plate is in line with bottom of hull which is by the book for installation. However, those hydrofoils are a cause for concern for me.
I would venture to say that due to lack of knowledge about proper boat behavior when pushing max displacement speed - that is when the boat tries to get over the bow wave to plane and the stern wave passed pass the stern causing the stern to "drop" down much like the boat falling into its own hole and take a bow up position - these were fitted.
I believe the hydro foils were fitted to help "trim" up the stern at about max displacement hull speed. Again, those things do help planing hulls to get on the plane faster, but in a displacement hull just causes extra drag on the engines...

 

they don't run under water. get your facts right.

 

The reverse rake of the stern above the pods seems to invite a breaking following sea to enter the cockpit. And it is not over-endowed with freeboard either, for a cat. If this boat had taken several tonnes of water over the back, gunning the engines if they were running would have sent it all to the stern and submerged the engines well before the water on-board was cleared by the drains. The central fact is the boat wasn't safe to carry 42 people other than on smooth water.

 

if the top of the antifoul is the waterline then the bottom crank seals must be almost submerged when stationary.

 

Could you help you friends if this happened to you ??

people love to overload boats you see it every day where ever you happen to go . and if theres a upper deck then thats where they will gather to get a better veiw
Even 20 people on a boat that size is trouble,remembering people really dont like to stay in one place and if theres a fish swims by, like they often do then all of a sudden weight has shifted to one side or the other !!
Who ever thought up the idea of taking the inboards out and fitting outboards is number one in the blame list !! as well as the poeople doing the work .
Yes it should have had 25 or 30 inch legs and got the motor up out of the water so they wouldnt get swamped from a following seas .
once all the work was done and the boat came back into use the skipper should have known he could of should have only been able to carry x number of people in relative safety .
so the skipper is number 2 on the list !!
then there was a crew member as well he to is a good part to blame because he to should have know how many people the boats would or should have had onboard . so number 3 on the list .
some where in amongst all those people some one was thinking hell theres a lot of people for such a small boat !! they should or could add him or her to the list as well .
In a panic situation the weight would have been shfting as people moved from one place to the next ! convert all that weight into figures and oh no a couple of tone of moving ballast then as one side went down and the movement of the boat in the sea and people all on one side swim time and there she blows !! over and upside down .

I was recently on a river ferry in Shanghai river ! big wide and flowing !! this boat was really loaded 3 decks no seating left and a upper deck shoulder to shoulder !!,so myself and my friends i made sure we all made our way onto a upperdeck outside away from the roof covering the deck 1.
It was the natural thing to do for me !!

I have been puddling in boats all mylife and spent lots time fishing with my father when i was quite young .
How well do you know you friends ?? can they all swim ? do you know ?? There was one member of my friends i knew first hand could not swim and had vertually no water sense at all the other two could stay afoat and make an attempt at getting to shore if need be .

 

I was on a whale-watch cat just recently that had about 50 -60 onboard, it was a 20 metre or so vessel, but when the whale came alongside and everyone rushed across the top deck to get a look, it was quite noticeable how she tilted, and that was a 50 tonne boat. 42 people on that runabout was plain silly.