NTSB Report on Northern Marine Capsize

Discussion in 'Stability' started by ABoatGuy, Aug 10, 2015.

  1. ABoatGuy
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 208
    Likes: 6, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 79
    Location: LeftCoast

    ABoatGuy Member

  2. rasorinc
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 1,854
    Likes: 70, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 896
    Location: OREGON

    rasorinc Senior Member

    How can a boat like that be called a total loss just for flopping over on it's side while not moving under power?
     
  3. NavalSArtichoke
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 431
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 83
    Location: GulfCoast

    NavalSArtichoke Senior Member

    Because the cost of renewing/replacing all the interior, furnishings, engines, generators, electrical and electronic equipment, the labor to do it, etc. exceeds the value of the boat.

    You might run an ad in Craig's List:
    "For Sale: Brand new $10 million yacht. Only capsized once at launch."

    See if you get any offers which are even close to $10 million.

    If your car gets into a moderate collision where the bumpers and front end get mashed up a bit, but the air bags deploy, your insurance company is going to total the vehicle, even though it might theoretically be repaired.

    It's a dollars and cents decision for the underwriter
     
  4. AndySGray
    Joined: Jun 2014
    Posts: 296
    Likes: 13, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 91
    Location: Cayman

    AndySGray Senior Member

    It's taken a long time to establish the cause of the accident - during that time the dilemma is to 'refit' what could be a flawed design or write it off. Of course rapid intervention would have minimised the damage but the authorities don't want the condition changed until their investigations are complete.

    Once the payout is made (and provided the relevant authorities have finished with it) the salvaged hull becomes the property of the insurance company and will probably be auctioned off to mitigate their loss, but is likely worth considerably more now that the sinking is attributed to a launch error than a design fault, even so, it will always have a tainted reputation.

    I wonder what the situation is as the builders went into receivership -

    :?:
    Were the insurers acting for the company or the new owner, presumably the new owner had paid a significant part of the price to commission the build?
     
  5. Rurudyne
    Joined: Mar 2014
    Posts: 1,145
    Likes: 33, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 155
    Location: North Texas

    Rurudyne Senior Member

    If two had capsized you could make a catamaran from them.
     
  6. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 6,161
    Likes: 397, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    This too is telling (p14):

    "..As a recreational vessel, the Baaden was not required to be inspected by the Coast Guard or meet commercial Coast Guard standards..."


    This is the principal reason why ISO rules and Recreational Craft rules are now being adopted and enforced in the UK/EU to plug the loop holes of similar accidents. Wont be long before the same occurs in the US.
     
  7. NavalSArtichoke
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 431
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 83
    Location: GulfCoast

    NavalSArtichoke Senior Member

    I don't think there is any evidence for the latter. The types of vessels which must undergo inspection by the USCG are spelled out in the U.S. Code, and it would take an act of Congress (literally) to add private recreational craft to that list.

    As an example, prior to 2004, towing vessels and fishing vessels were two examples of vessels which were not inspected. Most towing vessels operate inland or coastwise in the US; there are a few which operate offshore, and if they are long enough, they must carry a load line. Very few US towing vessels have ever had a stability test done on them, and most inland boats operate with minimal freeboard, if not with some parts of the deck awash at times.

    A case which was decided by the US Supreme Court in 2003 extended the authority of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to regulate those vessels which were not inspected by the USCG. In the years since, OSHA has issued interpretations of existing regulations to cover vessels, but has otherwise not written or issued new regulations intended for vessels.

    As an aside, OSHA does not inspect work places regularly, unless a serious accident has been reported. On the other hand, the USCG is required to examine inspected vessels at least annually and endorse the Certificate of Inspection for the vessel.

    The towing industry, which operates about 5,000 vessels of various sizes in US waters, feared that OSHA would require them to refit their vessels with costly upgrades to meet their regulations. To forestall this, the towing industry associations lobbied Congress to add towing vessels to the list of vessel which must undergo inspection, and they were successful.

    (Except for meeting applicable OSHA regulations and USCG regulations on lifesaving and firefighting, US fishing vessels are still uninspected.)

    The ball was then placed in the hands of the USCG to write a set of regulations which could be applied to thousands of vessels of all sizes and power, which had not been required to meet any standard except that they float and be able to push or pull another vessel or vessels.

    The USCG has spent the years since 2004 gathering information on towing vessels in order to write regulations, which currently exist in draft form, but has still not issued final regulations or developed a program to inspect all these vessels, assuming they can meet whatever the final regulations require.

    It's also not clear if the USCG has a large enough corps of uniformed personnel to perform towing vessel inspections without affecting inspections not only of larger, US-flagged ocean-going vessels, but also the Port State inspections of foreign-flag vessels docking at US ports.

    In the US currently, powered recreational craft under 20 feet in length which are manufactured must meet some minimal standards about proper powering and maneuverability, flotation, lifesaving equipment, etc., but these vessels generally do not receive any periodic inspection by the USCG after purchase.

    As in the case of towing vessels, it's not clear that the USCG could round up enough personnel to inspect all the private recreational craft in the US.
     
  8. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 6,161
    Likes: 397, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    N.S.A

    Thanks for that, most interesting. A totally different philosophy from the UK.

    Perhaps this is then the reason why naval arch's in the US must be licenced??..since any safety aspects are carried out by the NA and the NA alone; where such vessels fall through the gaps of compliance and checks by any regulatory authority?
     
  9. AndySGray
    Joined: Jun 2014
    Posts: 296
    Likes: 13, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 91
    Location: Cayman

    AndySGray Senior Member

    Agreed, I think there needs to be some differentiation between privately owned and operated vessels and those which are professionally crewed.

    If somebody has (is likely to have) paid staff on board, the recreational exclusion should not apply? The welfare and safety of the crew must be looked after.

    Just my 2 cents
     
  10. NavalSArtichoke
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 431
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 83
    Location: GulfCoast

    NavalSArtichoke Senior Member

    Like any engineer practicing in the US, a professional license is required only under certain circumstances.

    If you advertise your services as an "engineer" of whatever stripe, generally you must personally hold a professional engineer's license or work under the supervision of another engineer who does hold a professional engineer's license.

    Prior to about 20 years ago, there was no separate licensing examination for naval architects in the US. Broadly, the licensing exam was split up between civil engineers and mechanical engineers, and most N.A.s tended to take the exam for the mechanical engineers and be licensed as such, though practice as N.A.s. Now, there is a separate exam for N.A.s who wish to become licensed as such, but the exam is only offered in the few states which have a large enough population of prospective N.A. candidates or working N.A.s.

    (In the US, professional licensing is still handled by the separate states. Generally, engineers who are licensed by one state can get recognized to practice in another state, but must do so by asking the state board of prof. engineers to grant them the privilege to do so, without having to take the exams again.)

    This casualty also brings up an interesting point about stability regulations in general. Even for large vessels, stability must be shown by calculation and confirmed by a stability test only for the vessel as completed and about to be certificated to go into service. There's no regulation which states how much stability an incomplete vessel must have on launch, or indeed, if it must be stable at all. The launch serves, de facto, as the first (and perhaps, the most important) stability test of all: does the vessel float, and does it float upright?

    Even if the Baaden had been an inspected vessel, there's no requirement to submit launching stability calculations to the USCG for review, nor is there a requirement that the launch be witnessed officially by a member of the USCG, as is the case when doing a stability test.

    Most smaller vessels are stable enough to launch, but then, every once in a while, there comes along a case where circumstances conspire to cause an embarrassing incident, such as what occurred with the Baaden.
     
  11. NavalSArtichoke
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 431
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 83
    Location: GulfCoast

    NavalSArtichoke Senior Member

    Under US regulations, you can still operate a yacht or other recreational craft of whatever size and hire as many people as you can afford to run it, without being required to be inspected.

    The bright line which broadly separates recreational craft from commercial vessels is crossed when you start charging passengers for the use of the vessel.
     
  12. nzboy
    Joined: Apr 2011
    Posts: 154
    Likes: 4, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 36
    Location: nz

    nzboy Senior Member

    All this confirms what I was saying at the time that there was a lot of weight high up on the port side and it was launched with very little ballast .The other thing that was not taken into account was they had the engine in reverse thrust which would have been converted into list and not into thrust as the boat was dragging on a fin . So where is the world coming to when you can spend 10 million and cant get the maths right .The old saying if you cant fit the boat in a square box don't launch it (eg greatest beam is about the same as height ,so much for triple deckers
     
  13. DCockey
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 4,409
    Likes: 213, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1485
    Location: Midcoast Maine

    DCockey Senior Member

    Licensing requirements for engineers in the US vary greatly by state. Some states require anyone representing themselves to the public as an engineer be licensed, while other states only require licensing for specific areas subject to state jurisdiction, such as approving structure plans for buildings and bridges.

    The US Coast Guard does not require licensing of naval architects, and as far as I know does not officially recognize state licenses. My understanding is the USCG reviews plans and inspects construction of all inspected vessels for compliance with US federal requirements whether a state licensed naval architect, a naval architect without a state license, or no one identified as a naval architect is involved with the design and build.
     
  14. nzboy
    Joined: Apr 2011
    Posts: 154
    Likes: 4, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 36
    Location: nz

    nzboy Senior Member

    my original post from 2014

    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! This was my post last year
     

  15. NavalSArtichoke
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 431
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 83
    Location: GulfCoast

    NavalSArtichoke Senior Member

    The Coast Guard does accept the review of plans and calculations by outside organizations, like ABS and other classification societies, for certain things like tonnage assignment.

    In the US, although the USCG is the load line administration, all load line assignment functions for US vessels are delegated to the ABS.

    USCG will accept ABS review of plans for US vessels under a Memorandum of Understanding, but one must obtain prior approval from the USCG for ABS to do the review.

    Due to the volume of vessels awaiting review and the scarcity of personnel available for doing the review, the USCG decided several years ago to accept plans and calculations which had been stamped by a registered professional engineer and treat them as if they had been officially reviewed and approved.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.