So what went wrong???

I guess there are many questions that are looking for an answer. For example if a crane was attached to the bow and it started lifting, the stern would tend to trim down. So you would think keeping the rear door closed would be a good idea .How did water enter this boat ? In the stability report the boat already weighed 2.2 ton heavier on the port side .In the report with a lightship weight of 110ton including 17 ton extra ballast vcg was 8.7ft without that ballast weight would be 93 ton .76ton was the figure for report weighing so where did they put the extra 17 ton ? obviously(hopefully some of that would be ballast to compensate the 2.2 ton to port my guess has always ways been the vcg was over 10 ft . My point has been also the metacentre in report of 13ft is incorrect at best it could be 11ft .I think there is a design problem .Relying on ballast and stabilizers to keep a boat upright is not the boat to be going on expeditions . Stabilizers are good to dampen roll on boats with excessive stability!

 

It certainly was, and it was "outgassing" like a U-boat victim !

 

Somewhere I read (maybe in the link I posted to the Woodenboat Forum thread) that the engine was started once the boat was in deep enough, so that could have been the out gassing.

The news article or commentator said the engine was started to help pull the boat off the carriages and they were going to use the bow thruster to maneuver in the little area they had. It was questioned why there were no support boats to help, or why there were no lines to shore or anywhere to help maneuver such a large, untested boat in such a tiny marina.