14 ms·

What sank the Bayesian superyacht in Italy?

158 points by rediguanayum 2y ago

rediguanayum 2y ago
NY Times found that an unusually tall mast, and the design changes it required, made the superyacht Bayesian, owned by a tech billionaire Michael Lynch, vulnerable. Lynch co-founded Autonomy and was celebrating his court case against HP when his yacht sank.
- Hilift 2y ago
  Actually the case that Lynch won was the US vs. Lynch criminal case. HP won their civil case against Lynch years ago (~$4 billion). The deal overall was a colossal failure by HP. The fraud was merely icing on the cake. "HP lost more than $30 billion in market capitalization during Apotheker's tenure, and on September 22, 2011, the HP Board of Directors fired him as chief executive and replaced him with fellow board member and former eBay chief Meg Whitman, with Raymond J. Lane as executive chairman. Although Apotheker served barely ten months, he received over $13 million in compensation." The Autonomy leftovers was eventually sold to OpenText. Also the previous HP CEO (Mark Hurd) went to work for Larry Ellison. He had the highest bonus for any CEO in 2008.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  Was this a machine summary? Because, I mean, you realise it's not correct?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
serf 2y ago
one of the quickest ways to ruin the way an established boat plan 'swims' is by adding a tall rig after de-masting. it's extremely enticing to 'add more sail' to a boat in order to squeeze more speed out of it, or achieve easier lufting. turns out that marine architecture is a lot harder than one thinks at first glance, and just about everyone that tries to tweak specs afterwards does so in such a way that makes the boat categorically worse. (don't ask me how I came to realize this after many dollars spent)
- TylerE 2y ago
  This is true in many things. Most car mods make the car objectively worse unless you really need the niche thing the mod does - and even if you think you do, be really sure.
  - clivestaples 2y ago
    I'm a full-time RVer and see this all the time with diesel trucks. The trucks get "deleted" and modded for more power and to disable the DEF system. Almost everyone I've known throughout the years begins having transmission trouble within months, especially after heavy load. A few swear by it. I've got a very expensive Cummins and I'm hellbent to leave it stock (and under warranty).
    - m463 2y ago
      I swear the older pre-def cummins engines got like 15% more mpg than the def ones. but RVs have been getting heavier too.
      - jabl 2y ago
        AFAIU modern diesels have lower combustion temperatures in order to limit NOx formation. I imagine this comes at a cost in thermodynamic efficiency. Similarly particle filters, catalytic converters and whatnot reduce efficiency via exhaust backpressure. So all in all, reducing non-CO2 emissions do come at a cost in CO2 emissions (or fuel consumed, if you like). Is it as much as 15%? No idea.. And is it all worth it? I'd argue yes, old-school diesel exhaust is nasty stuff.
        TylerE 2y ago
        Exhaust back pressure is not an issue at all on diesels because they all run big turbos. As for your later point...I very much concur. I started masking (n95) during the pandemic, and haven't stopped. I have a... large number of health issues including several respiratory ones. Exhaust in general really is nasty stuff. I live in pretty quiet smallish (100k) town, and it can be bad enough around here with all the pollen, but I wasnt recently on a whirlwind trip through the north east that saw me visit the dense urban cores of DC, Philly, Manhattan, and Boston. The difference in odor on the occasions I'd take my mask off on the sidewalk were kinda shocking as someone not used to it.
yial 2y ago
https://archive.is/2024.10.31-234729/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/31/world/europe/bayesian-yacht-sinking-italy.html https://archive.is/2024.10.31-234729/https://www.nytimes.com...
karaterobot 2y ago
Were mistakes made? The retractable keel was up. I'm no grizzled mariner, but that feels like a thing you'd want to do in a storm. Feels like at that point your yacht has all the stability of a guy standing up in a canoe.
- LgWoodenBadger 2y ago
  The keel's purpose is to balance the boat so it remains upright. A sailboat without a keel can be capsized incredibly easily.
  - karaterobot 2y ago
    I think I phrased my comment poorly, causing confusion. I meant that putting down the retractable keel is something you'd want to do in a storm.
  - jabl 2y ago
    Presumably the thinking was that with all the sails down, there was no need to have the keel lowered. Which it probably wasn't, until the boat suddenly gets hit hard by an unexpected gust from the side and the windage of the rig is sufficient to capsize it.
    - laichzeit0 2y ago
      What would the advantage to not have it lowered be? Like you're sitting there, sails down, anchored. Why would you go "Nope, better if keel isn't lowered"?
      - krisoft 2y ago
        > Why would you go "Nope, better if keel isn't lowered"? We don't know yet. The rumour is that the mechanism of the extendable keel was prone to banging in the lowered state. You don't want to be disturbing the sleep of the guests paying you fortunes. That plus the also rumoured fact that the operating manual only required it to be lowered when sailing could explain why the crew did not opt to lower it at anchor. All of the above is based on internet whispers. The investigation report hopefully will answer this question with authority.
initramfs 2y ago
Seems like yachts are kind of like the private airline industry- when a super rich person can afford to request a bespoke design, safety requirements sometimes get eased. Plus less testing of the boat could be it. Pilots and captains for unique designs/mods might not have as much experience as commercial airlines: https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/is-flying-private-more-dangerous-than-commercial-19763007.php https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/is-flying-private-mor... One example is the standardization of buttons in an airplane make it easier to know where to locate the important latches in an emergency. Also, it's possible some of these basic balancing and center-of-gravity considerations were already known over 500 years ago- it's when a novel feature gets prioritized that the fundamental stability of the design gets overlooked.
- jabl 2y ago
  > Also, it's possible some of these basic balancing and center-of-gravity considerations were already known over 500 years ago To nitpick, properly being able to do these kinds of stability calculations are a considerably newer invention. E.g. the famous Vasa ship capsized in 1628 because at that time ships were still designed based on rules-of-thumb and the experience/intuition of the builders, with no stability calculations done.
  - cratermoon 2y ago
    Pretty sure the builders knew the Vasa wasn't stable. The King of Sweden wouldn't take 'no' for an answer. Just 358 years later, the people in charge of a different kind of ship, named Challenger, also wouldn't take 'no' for an answer.
    - graeme 2y ago
      Yeah the Wikipedia is instructive. >In the last part of the inquest held after the sinking, a group of master shipwrights and senior naval officers were asked for their opinions about why the ship sank. Their discussion and conclusions show very clearly that they knew what had happened, and their verdict was summed up very clearly by one of the captains, who said that the ship did not have enough "belly" to carry the heavy upperworks.[81] When other ships that predated stability calculations were found to lack stability, remedial action could be taken to increase the beam. Also the original builder and his successor both died before completion. (Not suspiciously, but makes responsibility in construction harder)
einpoklum 2y ago
> The retractable keel, which helped to keep the boat stable, was not fully extended when it sank. Regardless of inherent design issues which are perhaps debatable, this seems like a bit of a "Have you tried plugging it in?" kind of a situation.
- krisoft 2y ago
  The rumour I heard on “The Yacht Report” youtube channel is that when the retractable keel was down it was noisy. (Probably because there was enough play in the mechanism so it was banging around as the waves passed.) And the thought was, again according to this unverified rumour, that they only needed to extend the retractable keel when they had the sails up. Now obviously nobody sane would make the knowing trade to risk their life for a bit of quiet. But it is easy to imagine the crew getting into the habit of retracting the keel so they can keep the rich guests comfortable. And especially if they were doing that on the regular and nothing bad happened ever people would normalise it and see it as the correct operating procedure. One might view this as a form of normalisation of deviance. “The gradual process through which unacceptable practice or standards become acceptable. As the deviant behaviour is repeated without catastrophic results, it becomes the social norm for the organisation.” (Technically speaking of course it is only normalisation of deviance if this was unacceptable practice. If it is true that the ship’s operating manual did not require them to have the keel down in that configuration then it is not deviance and then the term does not apply.) Will be interesting to read the exact findings about this in the investigation report once it is out.
  - Theodores 2y ago
    I thought the keel only needed to be down when they were something like 70 knots out at sea with the sails out, otherwise it was in the 'keel lite' position. Like yourself, I await the investigation report, however, I suspect that will be a bit underwhelming and only confirm speculation. It is not good to speak ill of the dead, so it will take a lot longer before someone tells the unvarnished truth. I suspect that will be a story of folly, with the big mast being the 'invisible clothes'. We have lots of these stories at the moment, from Oceangate all the way to the Boeing 'projects' that have been off the mark. You could 'explain it like I am five' to write a really good story book for bedtime reading for kids, going from the depths of the ocean to space, with follies that follow the same story, all the way. What a great time to be alive.
pluc 2y ago
Pretty ironic that the single mast, that was added for sailing speed, was the likely cause yet they never used the sails. They just enjoyed it looking imposing and different.
jabl 2y ago
As a slight aside, if anyone is interested in the topic the 'standard' introductory text is apparently 'Principles of Yacht Design' by Larsson and Eliasson. In particular, including a chapter on stability calculations. You can find an older edition freely available on archive.org.
SMAAART 2y ago
https://archive.is/RSOcI https://archive.is/RSOcI
dredmorbius 2y ago
The cascading set of design failures brings to mind the 17th century Swedish warship Vasa: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship)>
- 1attice 2y ago
  I thought of this too! But I thought the Vasa was sunk by leaving the gunports open?
  - stoperaticless 2y ago
    Gunports were meant to be used while sailing. (Good documentary: the pirates of caribean) reason according to wikipedia: > Vasa sank because she had very little initial stability—resistance to heeling under the force of wind or waves acting on the hull. This was due to the distribution of mass in the hull structure, and to the ballast, guns, provisions, and other objects loaded on board placing a lot of weight too high in the ship. This put the centre of gravity very high relative to the centre of buoyancy, thus making the ship readily heel in response to little force, and not providing enough righting moment for her to become upright again. My memory of vasa museum: At that time, ship designers not necessarily calculated center of mass and center of buoyancy.
    - mingusrude 2y ago
      The way this is told in elementary school in Sweden (source is Swedish) is that the Vasa was too narrrow, given it's height. So then the question is, how much wider should she've been to carry the extra height. Vasa's sister ship, Äpplet (the Apple) had a similar deck layout and was about a meter wider. As a layman, considering the technology at the time, it does not sound so much more wider.
      - potato3732842 2y ago
        >As a layman, considering the technology at the time, it does not sound so much more wider. Think about the lever arm of that "other half meter" of ship that you're dragging up into the air when you heel the ship over plus the increased displacement of the half meter you're burying into the water. Remember, ships aren't really subject to huge propulsive forces relative to their mass compared to land vehicles. So something like an extra meter is gonna make a pretty big difference.
InTheArena 2y ago
I subscribe to the NYT, via login with Apple. Try to login, and it never responds to the login. So I remember that I registered an account with an old email. Login, it send a verification code. And then doesn’t respond to that verification number. So I drop VPN… and it accepts the number… and immediately spams that email address.. Only to throw up another paywall. And it still doesn’t accept the subscription I pay for.
- mintplant 2y ago
  Do you have the Bypass Paywalls extension installed, by any chance? You may need to disable it for NYTimes.com.
- TikTikFook 2y ago
  [dead]
- oriettaxx 2y ago
  amazing! the very basic undervalued, as with the subject
water-data-dude 2y ago
“Giovanni Costantino, the chief executive of the Italian Sea Group, the company that owns Perini Navi, said that when operated properly, the Bayesian was ‘unsinkable.’” I assign a rather low prior probability to any ship being “unsinkable”, so I’ll need better evidence than that before my posterior probability becomes more than minuscule
- mulmen 2y ago
  “Operated correctly” is the true scotsman of unsinkable ships.
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    Just don't crash it into an iceberg and you're all set.
- stavros 2y ago
  Everything is unsinkable if you exclude the sinking conditions as "improper operation".
- Animats 2y ago
  It's possible to come close. This is a U.S Coast Guard response boat being tested.[1] Using big straps and winches, it was pulled all the way over until it was upside down. It immediately righted itself. Most modern rescue boats and lifeboats are self-righting. With proper hull design and enough foam flotation blocks in the right places, boats can be made to right themselves. Unless the boat is chopped into bits, it will float. It's worth it for those classes of vessels. Their job is to handle very rough conditions. The price of such extreme stability is a rough ride. Self-righting yachts exist.[2] But they look like rescue boats with nicer interiors. Many recreational sailboats have enough flotation to survive 90 degrees of roll, with the sails flat on the water. This is called a "knockdown". In small craft, it's usually embarrassing but not a disaster. Larger sailing craft are usually built to avoid rolling that far. There's a conflict between luxury and seaworthyness. The things you want for rough conditions, such as high freeboard and few openings, conflict with what people want in a luxury craft. Bayesian apparently couldn't go past 45 degrees without water pouring in. A stupidly tall and heavy mast allowed wind to push it that far over with no sails raised. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXF-TjOjD5k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXF-TjOjD5k [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqVItm0jfE0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqVItm0jfE0
dang 2y ago
[stub for offtopicness]
- meindnoch 2y ago
  The one good thing about the sinking of the Bayesian: we can at least update our posteriors.
  - gosub100 2y ago
    And I know I'll fail at trying to understand it.
- Jemm 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - dang 2y ago
    You can't post like this here, and we ban accounts that do, so please don't do it again. You may not owe billionaires better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- rkagerer 2y ago
  [flagged]
- krick 2y ago
  Didn't bother to read the domain and didn't remember the boats name, so I didn't quite understand the title at first. Funnily, it immediately occurred to me, that it must be "that boat", but I half-expected to see some Alex Jones meets Eliezer Yudkowsky attempt to calculate how likely this stuff is to happen using Bayesian inference.
shagie 2y ago
URL Share version https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/31/world/europe/bayesian-yacht-sinking-italy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Wk4.0IfT.r6aJqK0bbIRc&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/31/world/europe/... (the richer media on the site doesn't get archived well)
Onavo 2y ago
Seems like the Bayesian owner needs to re-examine his priors.
- relistan 2y ago
  Hey, he passed way in this incident.
xiaodai 2y ago
the Frequentists?
- egl2021 2y ago
  I never expected to see headlines like "Authorities investigate Bayesian disaster".
- raverbashing 2y ago
  Nah, they would try to sink the boat by attacking it at its most common location. Even if it wasn't there in the first place
walrus01 2y ago
The former captain of the Bayesian laid out his opinion of what caused the sinking: https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2024/08/27/former-bayesian-captain-offers-insight/ https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2024/08/27/former-bayesia... It should also be noted that the fishermen in the area all received notice of incoming storm activity and many of them took precautionary measures HOURS in advance of when the storm actually hit. Whoever was the bridge watchstander on duty during that time should have been paying attention to the immediate near term weather forecast info. This was an entirely preventable incident.
- gloflo 2y ago
  Direct link to the statement: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7233792846770659328/ https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7233792... (no account needed)
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  This was a very informative article. It seems they should have shut down the generator and hvac and closed the vents. Pretty wild that a 45° heel angle caused it to ship water, that sounds pretty scary, as does the 75° righting angle with the keel up.
- mattpallissard 2y ago
  > Bayesian (ex Salute) Changing the name of a vessel is bad luck. That's all I need to know.
irrational 2y ago
> "The ship was an unsinkable ship. I say it, I repeat it." Saying that when the boat is nearly 200 feet under the surface of the sea seems insane.
- noncoml 2y ago
  The set of boats characterized unsinkable and are now laying at the bottom of the sea: {Titanic, Bayesian}
  - alvah 2y ago
    Are you sure that's the complete set?
    - rbanffy 2y ago
      Very few ship designers say that.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    The Titanic, at least, _was_ largely operator error (they shouldn't have tried to avoid the iceberg unless they were certain that they could do so; it was designed for a head-on collision and _that_ would not have sunk it).
- tanelpoder 2y ago
  Unsinkable ship, with design flaws…
- aidenn0 2y ago
  In context he was trying to place blame on the crew, so he clearly meant "unsinkable when crewed correctly." He goes on to claim that they must not have properly closed hatches &c. for the storm.
  - 2y ago
kortilla 2y ago
Bad priors
asdfman123 2y ago
Unstable design and hurricane force winds are unfortunate Bayesian priors
HPMOR 2y ago
These stories sound so abstract, and it’s hard to remember that real people suffered a real tragedy. I was visiting my friend at Princeton, when an acquaintance of his remarked that both of her parents were on the yacht. Really brought home how real it all was.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- closewith 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - Angostura 2y ago
    I like the way your immediate response is to try and make these deaths abstract again.
    - nathan_compton 2y ago
      I don't think that is a charitable read of the comment. The point, I think, was to cast into relief who gets this treatment and who does not.
      - AYBABTME 2y ago
        People aren't surprised that crappy overloaded rafts sink. But they're surprised that top-of-the-line yachts sink in a minor squall. It's not confusing to me why one is more noteworthy than the other, technically. The wealth of the loss of life isn't really what's the difference here.
        closewith 2y ago
        > The wealth of the loss of life isn't really what's the difference here. It's the only difference here. Otherwise, people would be wondering why some people boarded overloaded rafts to begin with.
barbegal 2y ago
The main problem is various vents along the side of the hull. Typically these are placed closer to the centreline of the vessel such that they can't be flooded at extreme heel angles. On luxury vessels they are placed out of sight of guests and in this case along the hull. Hatches into the water tight compartments were close to the centreline but in this case flooding would have occurred rapidly through the various ventilation systems instead. The boat builder will blame the crew for not closing these but I doubt there was any procedure to actually close them. The engine needs to run to generate power and the engine needs fresh air and an exhaust.
- madaxe_again 2y ago
  I’m baffled (boom boom) as to why the vents aren’t designed such that they don’t allow water ingress - surely this would just be a matter of a manifold with a float in it, or a Tesla valve or similar. Fails safe, no power required.
  - grugagag 2y ago
    They probably will, Im sure luxury boat manufacturers learned something from this
    - terrut 2y ago
      Thankfully, international shipping safety standards aren’t left up to individual manufacturers. Having worked on ships worldwide for several years, I’ve seen how each major incident drives tighter, more effective regulations. The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), established in 1974, is continually updated based on lessons from past accidents, mandating strict requirements for all ships over a certain size. Parts of SOLAS even apply universally to all ships on any voyage, regardless of size. https://www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/Pages/International-Convention-for-the-Safety-of-Life-at-Sea-(SOLAS),-1974.aspx https://www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/Pages/International...
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
trhway 2y ago
>Beyond being exceptionally tall — more than 40 feet higher than the original foremast — it was also very heavy, at least 24 tons of aluminum, possibly more. the yacht is 500 ton, 4m draught (with the retractable keel not extended). The mast is 72m height. So, the 24 tons at say 30m above center of buoyancy require - minimum - 240 ton at 3m below the center of buoyancy. Add to that that the center of buoyancy is inside the body at some depth under the deck, so the weight of the body above the center of buoyancy also needs corresponding weight (lever momentum, ie. mass x lever length) below the center of buoyancy. Doesn't look good.
- bell-cot 2y ago
  > ...24 tons at say 30m above... And also the weight of full, rain-drenched sails. And a few crew aloft, fiddling with those sails. And...
  - joha4270 2y ago
    This isn't a square rig, but a bermuda rig. You don't go climbing on those. And while the article doesn't explicitly say that sails was stowed, it does mention that they were only under sail propulsion once during the trip and that they started the engines to maneuver into the wind. While a (rolling? I don't know the English term) sail is somewhat exposed to the elements even while stowed, its rolled up fairly tight. In short, I strongly doubt either wet sails or climbing crew contributed in any way to the sinking.
    - mr_toad 2y ago
      They were at anchor, the sails weren’t up.
    - bell-cot 2y ago
      > In short, I ... Correct. But my point was about the design & stability calculations. Not about the rigging state at critical moment, when this vessel failed. (And if things go seriously wrong up in the rigging, a few of your crew might just have to go climbing. Just like "sails could be wet", safety margins must allow for that.)
Walterpine 2y ago
I heard there was a secret vault onboard. This rumor wasn't mentioned in the article.
- avazhi 2y ago
  Because it’s not relevant.
Rattled 2y ago
It's not mentioned in this article but it seems Michael Lynch's codefendant in the HP trial Stephen Chamberlain died a few days earlier - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/05/mike-lynch-associate-hit-by-car-died-from-traumatic-head-injury-inquest-hears https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/05/mike.... Seems to be a genuine coincidence though.
- rijoja 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - geysersam 2y ago
    There is no motive, assuming multinational corporation typically murder people for profit, and not just out of spite.
    - rijoja 2y ago
      A few people working for boeing met early unexpected ends as well...
      - nkrisc 2y ago
        How many people total work for Boeing? What’s the typical rate at which people die while employed or recently employed by Boeing?
        rijoja 2y ago
        It's not that a huge part of their business-idea is, and has been to build machines designed to kill large amounts of people either.
        nkrisc 2y ago
        Boeing is a company, and companies don’t make decisions. People do. So who at Boeing is motivated enough to take on the personal liability of a first degree murder conviction?
sillycd 2y ago
A wave hit the ship
sillycd3 2y ago
A wave hit the ship
- _dain_ 2y ago
  Is that unusual?
p0w3n3d 2y ago
I thought it would be about game theory...
jbs789 2y ago
I like that the article acknowledges the trade-offs between comfort and safety in the design of these luxury yachts. So many seemingly small compromises along the way that seem to increase the vulnerability, then the crew is expected to compensate.
jakub_g 2y ago
An interesting piece that contradicts the early reports about crew leaving vents open: > The company speculated that the crew did not close a watertight door between this hatch and the engine room. (...) > But witnesses, an Italian official familiar with the investigation and the underwater video challenged the company’s versions of events. The footage appeared to show the watertight door to the engine room closed, and the Italian official said the divers had not seen any open hatches on the hull. > Mr. Borner also said that after rescuing the captain, he asked him if he had shut the hatches. The captain said he had. Mr. Borner shared pictures taken by his guests a few moments before the Bayesian sank that appear to show that hull hatches were closed. Overall, a very informative article, it analyzes boat's documentation and compares it with other boats from the same manufacturer.
- zeagle 2y ago
  I got the impression the yacht manufacturer is very motivated to attribute this on user error, likely for future sales.
  - noitpmeder 2y ago
    Hard to fault them for taking that stance
    - mywacaday 2y ago
      Very easy to fault them, an innocent until proven guilty persons reputation and freedom are on the line.
      - shreddit 2y ago
        Yachtmaker: But… money
      - krisoft 2y ago
        Even if after all the investigations it turns out the manufacturer were without blame (which usually is not the case) their attitude doesn't reflect well on them. Do you want to buy your yacth from someone who will blame everyone but themselves when things go wrong? I would rather buy a yacht from someone who will incorporate all the learnings into their new designs to make them as safe as possible. The attitude of "we are perfect, somebody else's fault" stinks, even if they are. More so if they are not.
rsynnott 2y ago
> The days were typically warm, sunny and calm, and finished off with plates of fresh langoustine and sumptuous chocolate. Hopefully not concurrently.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  That line made me laugh too... langoustine as appetizer yes please, as dessert I don't think so.
AYBABTME 2y ago
"Single mast for better sailing performance" and then "only sailed once in 5 days, motored the rest" silly tradeoffs.
- argiopetech 2y ago
  Silly tradeoff, but typical of motor sailors/sailing. Wind isn't blowing the right direction? Easier to motor than tack. Sailing upwind? Easier to motor than have the guests stumbling into walls due to heel. Variable winds? No wind? Have to be at <place> by <time>? Easier to motor.
  - AYBABTME 2y ago
    Yeah, then get the double masted one? They made huge sacrifices and redesign to focus on a feature they barely use. Which is why I think it's silly.
ak_111 2y ago
I didn't read the article but did it shed light on why some survived and some didn't? I am wondering if those who didn't survive probably died from trauma/injury during the capsizing, or was it because they were incapable of swimming in the rough waters?
- jnovacho 2y ago
  From skimming the article, it seems the boat sunk in about 2 minutes. While most of that time it was already laying on it's side. This would make it virtually impossible to get out, if you were below deck.
- krisoft 2y ago
  > was it because they were incapable of swimming in the rough waters? Maybe that was the case with the chef who was found outside of the vessel. The rest of the casualties unfortunately seems to have been trapped in the capsized vessel. (This is based on my present knowledge of rumours, the proper investigation is still on-going and our understanding might change.)
wkat4242 2y ago
I don't really understand all the media hubbub about this. People die in private boats all the time, probably several more that week alone. But this is being treated like a major disaster and someone must be held responsible. Is it just because it was some rich guy that died? I don't think that makes it worse in any way than any other accident where people died, to be honest. I just don't really understand the outrage about this. When I hear that a young family is killed by a drunk driver I'm much more angry and sad. But you don't see the New York Times writing about those when they happen on the other side of the world. These people mattered too but they knowingly took a risk by camping out in the sea.
- orbital-decay 2y ago
  How many of them are poorly designed superyachts, though? Superyachts are perceived as extra safe, and surely design blunders like this one are outstanding in 21st century naval engineering. I think a lot of people on HN would love to read a postmortem on how exactly the process in an experienced engineering company got bent to cater to the client's preference enough to kill him, or at least a safety board investigation report.
  - foobarian 2y ago
    It does seem like the incident is shedding a lot of new light on how poorly the super yacht design is regulated. Honestly one look at that mast and unless that thing is on a submarine I really don't know what the builders were thinking.
- BJones12 2y ago
  1) Rich guy died 2) Crazy expensive luxury vehicle found to be secretly death trap 3) Millions/tens of millions of people are now familiar with luxury yachting thanks to the Below Deck TV shows 4) Undoubtedly some story of incompetence or negligence lurking
atx2bos 2y ago
[dead]
runamara 2y ago
The incompetente decision to anchor there. And to stay there with the forecast. Knowing you are the captain of a yacht with the tallest mast! They were anchoring on a sort of reef. Where wind and waves in strong winds can be very dangerous. Further more no precisions the stay on deck, start the engine, get the guest on deck or on shore. This is what his Dutch neighbours did!
runamara 2y ago
Further more, there was a forecast. But no real action. You can blame the yacht builder. But then you are an incompetent captain..sailing in and accepting guest in a very dangerous environment.
runamara 2y ago
This is not boat vents or the angle of the yacht on the water. It’s about a captain who should have make decisions, not to sail, not to anchor, get the guest off board. Lower more life rafts..
JanetMcC 2y ago
[flagged]

158 points by rediguanayum 2y ago

NY Times found that an unusually tall mast, and the design changes it required, made the superyacht Bayesian, owned by a tech billionaire Michael Lynch, vulnerable. Lynch co-founded Autonomy and was celebrating his court case against HP when his yacht sank.

Hilift 2y ago
Actually the case that Lynch won was the US vs. Lynch criminal case. HP won their civil case against Lynch years ago (~$4 billion). The deal overall was a colossal failure by HP. The fraud was merely icing on the cake. "HP lost more than $30 billion in market capitalization during Apotheker's tenure, and on September 22, 2011, the HP Board of Directors fired him as chief executive and replaced him with fellow board member and former eBay chief Meg Whitman, with Raymond J. Lane as executive chairman. Although Apotheker served barely ten months, he received over $13 million in compensation." The Autonomy leftovers was eventually sold to OpenText. Also the previous HP CEO (Mark Hurd) went to work for Larry Ellison. He had the highest bonus for any CEO in 2008.
rsynnott 2y ago
Was this a machine summary? Because, I mean, you realise it's not correct?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

serf 2y ago

one of the quickest ways to ruin the way an established boat plan 'swims' is by adding a tall rig after de-masting. it's extremely enticing to 'add more sail' to a boat in order to squeeze more speed out of it, or achieve easier lufting. turns out that marine architecture is a lot harder than one thinks at first glance, and just about everyone that tries to tweak specs afterwards does so in such a way that makes the boat categorically worse. (don't ask me how I came to realize this after many dollars spent)

TylerE 2y ago
This is true in many things. Most car mods make the car objectively worse unless you really need the niche thing the mod does - and even if you think you do, be really sure.
- clivestaples 2y ago
  I'm a full-time RVer and see this all the time with diesel trucks. The trucks get "deleted" and modded for more power and to disable the DEF system. Almost everyone I've known throughout the years begins having transmission trouble within months, especially after heavy load. A few swear by it. I've got a very expensive Cummins and I'm hellbent to leave it stock (and under warranty).
  - m463 2y ago
    I swear the older pre-def cummins engines got like 15% more mpg than the def ones. but RVs have been getting heavier too.
    - jabl 2y ago
      AFAIU modern diesels have lower combustion temperatures in order to limit NOx formation. I imagine this comes at a cost in thermodynamic efficiency. Similarly particle filters, catalytic converters and whatnot reduce efficiency via exhaust backpressure. So all in all, reducing non-CO2 emissions do come at a cost in CO2 emissions (or fuel consumed, if you like). Is it as much as 15%? No idea.. And is it all worth it? I'd argue yes, old-school diesel exhaust is nasty stuff.
      - TylerE 2y ago
        Exhaust back pressure is not an issue at all on diesels because they all run big turbos. As for your later point...I very much concur. I started masking (n95) during the pandemic, and haven't stopped. I have a... large number of health issues including several respiratory ones. Exhaust in general really is nasty stuff. I live in pretty quiet smallish (100k) town, and it can be bad enough around here with all the pollen, but I wasnt recently on a whirlwind trip through the north east that saw me visit the dense urban cores of DC, Philly, Manhattan, and Boston. The difference in odor on the occasions I'd take my mask off on the sidewalk were kinda shocking as someone not used to it.

yial 2y ago

https://archive.is/2024.10.31-234729/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/31/world/europe/bayesian-yacht-sinking-italy.html https://archive.is/2024.10.31-234729/https://www.nytimes.com...

karaterobot 2y ago

Were mistakes made? The retractable keel was up. I'm no grizzled mariner, but that feels like a thing you'd want to do in a storm. Feels like at that point your yacht has all the stability of a guy standing up in a canoe.

LgWoodenBadger 2y ago
The keel's purpose is to balance the boat so it remains upright. A sailboat without a keel can be capsized incredibly easily.
- karaterobot 2y ago
  I think I phrased my comment poorly, causing confusion. I meant that putting down the retractable keel is something you'd want to do in a storm.
- jabl 2y ago
  Presumably the thinking was that with all the sails down, there was no need to have the keel lowered. Which it probably wasn't, until the boat suddenly gets hit hard by an unexpected gust from the side and the windage of the rig is sufficient to capsize it.
  - laichzeit0 2y ago
    What would the advantage to not have it lowered be? Like you're sitting there, sails down, anchored. Why would you go "Nope, better if keel isn't lowered"?
    - krisoft 2y ago
      > Why would you go "Nope, better if keel isn't lowered"? We don't know yet. The rumour is that the mechanism of the extendable keel was prone to banging in the lowered state. You don't want to be disturbing the sleep of the guests paying you fortunes. That plus the also rumoured fact that the operating manual only required it to be lowered when sailing could explain why the crew did not opt to lower it at anchor. All of the above is based on internet whispers. The investigation report hopefully will answer this question with authority.

initramfs 2y ago

Seems like yachts are kind of like the private airline industry- when a super rich person can afford to request a bespoke design, safety requirements sometimes get eased. Plus less testing of the boat could be it. Pilots and captains for unique designs/mods might not have as much experience as commercial airlines: https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/is-flying-private-more-dangerous-than-commercial-19763007.php https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/is-flying-private-mor... One example is the standardization of buttons in an airplane make it easier to know where to locate the important latches in an emergency. Also, it's possible some of these basic balancing and center-of-gravity considerations were already known over 500 years ago- it's when a novel feature gets prioritized that the fundamental stability of the design gets overlooked.

jabl 2y ago
> Also, it's possible some of these basic balancing and center-of-gravity considerations were already known over 500 years ago To nitpick, properly being able to do these kinds of stability calculations are a considerably newer invention. E.g. the famous Vasa ship capsized in 1628 because at that time ships were still designed based on rules-of-thumb and the experience/intuition of the builders, with no stability calculations done.
- cratermoon 2y ago
  Pretty sure the builders knew the Vasa wasn't stable. The King of Sweden wouldn't take 'no' for an answer. Just 358 years later, the people in charge of a different kind of ship, named Challenger, also wouldn't take 'no' for an answer.
  - graeme 2y ago
    Yeah the Wikipedia is instructive. >In the last part of the inquest held after the sinking, a group of master shipwrights and senior naval officers were asked for their opinions about why the ship sank. Their discussion and conclusions show very clearly that they knew what had happened, and their verdict was summed up very clearly by one of the captains, who said that the ship did not have enough "belly" to carry the heavy upperworks.[81] When other ships that predated stability calculations were found to lack stability, remedial action could be taken to increase the beam. Also the original builder and his successor both died before completion. (Not suspiciously, but makes responsibility in construction harder)

einpoklum 2y ago

> The retractable keel, which helped to keep the boat stable, was not fully extended when it sank. Regardless of inherent design issues which are perhaps debatable, this seems like a bit of a "Have you tried plugging it in?" kind of a situation.

krisoft 2y ago
The rumour I heard on “The Yacht Report” youtube channel is that when the retractable keel was down it was noisy. (Probably because there was enough play in the mechanism so it was banging around as the waves passed.) And the thought was, again according to this unverified rumour, that they only needed to extend the retractable keel when they had the sails up. Now obviously nobody sane would make the knowing trade to risk their life for a bit of quiet. But it is easy to imagine the crew getting into the habit of retracting the keel so they can keep the rich guests comfortable. And especially if they were doing that on the regular and nothing bad happened ever people would normalise it and see it as the correct operating procedure. One might view this as a form of normalisation of deviance. “The gradual process through which unacceptable practice or standards become acceptable. As the deviant behaviour is repeated without catastrophic results, it becomes the social norm for the organisation.” (Technically speaking of course it is only normalisation of deviance if this was unacceptable practice. If it is true that the ship’s operating manual did not require them to have the keel down in that configuration then it is not deviance and then the term does not apply.) Will be interesting to read the exact findings about this in the investigation report once it is out.
- Theodores 2y ago
  I thought the keel only needed to be down when they were something like 70 knots out at sea with the sails out, otherwise it was in the 'keel lite' position. Like yourself, I await the investigation report, however, I suspect that will be a bit underwhelming and only confirm speculation. It is not good to speak ill of the dead, so it will take a lot longer before someone tells the unvarnished truth. I suspect that will be a story of folly, with the big mast being the 'invisible clothes'. We have lots of these stories at the moment, from Oceangate all the way to the Boeing 'projects' that have been off the mark. You could 'explain it like I am five' to write a really good story book for bedtime reading for kids, going from the depths of the ocean to space, with follies that follow the same story, all the way. What a great time to be alive.

pluc 2y ago

Pretty ironic that the single mast, that was added for sailing speed, was the likely cause yet they never used the sails. They just enjoyed it looking imposing and different.

jabl 2y ago

As a slight aside, if anyone is interested in the topic the 'standard' introductory text is apparently 'Principles of Yacht Design' by Larsson and Eliasson. In particular, including a chapter on stability calculations. You can find an older edition freely available on archive.org.

SMAAART 2y ago

https://archive.is/RSOcI https://archive.is/RSOcI

dredmorbius 2y ago

The cascading set of design failures brings to mind the 17th century Swedish warship Vasa: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasa_(ship)>

1attice 2y ago
I thought of this too! But I thought the Vasa was sunk by leaving the gunports open?
- stoperaticless 2y ago
  Gunports were meant to be used while sailing. (Good documentary: the pirates of caribean) reason according to wikipedia: > Vasa sank because she had very little initial stability—resistance to heeling under the force of wind or waves acting on the hull. This was due to the distribution of mass in the hull structure, and to the ballast, guns, provisions, and other objects loaded on board placing a lot of weight too high in the ship. This put the centre of gravity very high relative to the centre of buoyancy, thus making the ship readily heel in response to little force, and not providing enough righting moment for her to become upright again. My memory of vasa museum: At that time, ship designers not necessarily calculated center of mass and center of buoyancy.
  - mingusrude 2y ago
    The way this is told in elementary school in Sweden (source is Swedish) is that the Vasa was too narrrow, given it's height. So then the question is, how much wider should she've been to carry the extra height. Vasa's sister ship, Äpplet (the Apple) had a similar deck layout and was about a meter wider. As a layman, considering the technology at the time, it does not sound so much more wider.
    - potato3732842 2y ago
      >As a layman, considering the technology at the time, it does not sound so much more wider. Think about the lever arm of that "other half meter" of ship that you're dragging up into the air when you heel the ship over plus the increased displacement of the half meter you're burying into the water. Remember, ships aren't really subject to huge propulsive forces relative to their mass compared to land vehicles. So something like an extra meter is gonna make a pretty big difference.

InTheArena 2y ago

I subscribe to the NYT, via login with Apple. Try to login, and it never responds to the login. So I remember that I registered an account with an old email. Login, it send a verification code. And then doesn’t respond to that verification number. So I drop VPN… and it accepts the number… and immediately spams that email address.. Only to throw up another paywall. And it still doesn’t accept the subscription I pay for.

mintplant 2y ago
Do you have the Bypass Paywalls extension installed, by any chance? You may need to disable it for NYTimes.com.
TikTikFook 2y ago
[dead]
oriettaxx 2y ago
amazing! the very basic undervalued, as with the subject

water-data-dude 2y ago

“Giovanni Costantino, the chief executive of the Italian Sea Group, the company that owns Perini Navi, said that when operated properly, the Bayesian was ‘unsinkable.’” I assign a rather low prior probability to any ship being “unsinkable”, so I’ll need better evidence than that before my posterior probability becomes more than minuscule

mulmen 2y ago
“Operated correctly” is the true scotsman of unsinkable ships.
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  Just don't crash it into an iceberg and you're all set.
stavros 2y ago
Everything is unsinkable if you exclude the sinking conditions as "improper operation".
Animats 2y ago
It's possible to come close. This is a U.S Coast Guard response boat being tested.[1] Using big straps and winches, it was pulled all the way over until it was upside down. It immediately righted itself. Most modern rescue boats and lifeboats are self-righting. With proper hull design and enough foam flotation blocks in the right places, boats can be made to right themselves. Unless the boat is chopped into bits, it will float. It's worth it for those classes of vessels. Their job is to handle very rough conditions. The price of such extreme stability is a rough ride. Self-righting yachts exist.[2] But they look like rescue boats with nicer interiors. Many recreational sailboats have enough flotation to survive 90 degrees of roll, with the sails flat on the water. This is called a "knockdown". In small craft, it's usually embarrassing but not a disaster. Larger sailing craft are usually built to avoid rolling that far. There's a conflict between luxury and seaworthyness. The things you want for rough conditions, such as high freeboard and few openings, conflict with what people want in a luxury craft. Bayesian apparently couldn't go past 45 degrees without water pouring in. A stupidly tall and heavy mast allowed wind to push it that far over with no sails raised. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXF-TjOjD5k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXF-TjOjD5k [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqVItm0jfE0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqVItm0jfE0

dang 2y ago

[stub for offtopicness]

meindnoch 2y ago
The one good thing about the sinking of the Bayesian: we can at least update our posteriors.
- gosub100 2y ago
  And I know I'll fail at trying to understand it.
Jemm 2y ago
[flagged]
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  [flagged]
- dang 2y ago
  You can't post like this here, and we ban accounts that do, so please don't do it again. You may not owe billionaires better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
rkagerer 2y ago
[flagged]
krick 2y ago
Didn't bother to read the domain and didn't remember the boats name, so I didn't quite understand the title at first. Funnily, it immediately occurred to me, that it must be "that boat", but I half-expected to see some Alex Jones meets Eliezer Yudkowsky attempt to calculate how likely this stuff is to happen using Bayesian inference.

shagie 2y ago

URL Share version https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/31/world/europe/bayesian-yacht-sinking-italy.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Wk4.0IfT.r6aJqK0bbIRc&smid=url-share https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/31/world/europe/... (the richer media on the site doesn't get archived well)

Onavo 2y ago

Seems like the Bayesian owner needs to re-examine his priors.

relistan 2y ago
Hey, he passed way in this incident.

xiaodai 2y ago

the Frequentists?

egl2021 2y ago
I never expected to see headlines like "Authorities investigate Bayesian disaster".
raverbashing 2y ago
Nah, they would try to sink the boat by attacking it at its most common location. Even if it wasn't there in the first place

walrus01 2y ago

The former captain of the Bayesian laid out his opinion of what caused the sinking: https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2024/08/27/former-bayesian-captain-offers-insight/ https://www.sailingscuttlebutt.com/2024/08/27/former-bayesia... It should also be noted that the fishermen in the area all received notice of incoming storm activity and many of them took precautionary measures HOURS in advance of when the storm actually hit. Whoever was the bridge watchstander on duty during that time should have been paying attention to the immediate near term weather forecast info. This was an entirely preventable incident.

gloflo 2y ago
Direct link to the statement: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7233792846770659328/ https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7233792... (no account needed)
jcgrillo 2y ago
This was a very informative article. It seems they should have shut down the generator and hvac and closed the vents. Pretty wild that a 45° heel angle caused it to ship water, that sounds pretty scary, as does the 75° righting angle with the keel up.
mattpallissard 2y ago
> Bayesian (ex Salute) Changing the name of a vessel is bad luck. That's all I need to know.

irrational 2y ago

> "The ship was an unsinkable ship. I say it, I repeat it." Saying that when the boat is nearly 200 feet under the surface of the sea seems insane.

noncoml 2y ago
The set of boats characterized unsinkable and are now laying at the bottom of the sea: {Titanic, Bayesian}
- alvah 2y ago
  Are you sure that's the complete set?
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    Very few ship designers say that.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- rsynnott 2y ago
  The Titanic, at least, _was_ largely operator error (they shouldn't have tried to avoid the iceberg unless they were certain that they could do so; it was designed for a head-on collision and _that_ would not have sunk it).
tanelpoder 2y ago
Unsinkable ship, with design flaws…
aidenn0 2y ago
In context he was trying to place blame on the crew, so he clearly meant "unsinkable when crewed correctly." He goes on to claim that they must not have properly closed hatches &c. for the storm.
- 2y ago

kortilla 2y ago

Bad priors

asdfman123 2y ago

Unstable design and hurricane force winds are unfortunate Bayesian priors

HPMOR 2y ago

These stories sound so abstract, and it’s hard to remember that real people suffered a real tragedy. I was visiting my friend at Princeton, when an acquaintance of his remarked that both of her parents were on the yacht. Really brought home how real it all was.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
closewith 2y ago
[flagged]
- Angostura 2y ago
  I like the way your immediate response is to try and make these deaths abstract again.
  - nathan_compton 2y ago
    I don't think that is a charitable read of the comment. The point, I think, was to cast into relief who gets this treatment and who does not.
    - AYBABTME 2y ago
      People aren't surprised that crappy overloaded rafts sink. But they're surprised that top-of-the-line yachts sink in a minor squall. It's not confusing to me why one is more noteworthy than the other, technically. The wealth of the loss of life isn't really what's the difference here.
      - closewith 2y ago
        > The wealth of the loss of life isn't really what's the difference here. It's the only difference here. Otherwise, people would be wondering why some people boarded overloaded rafts to begin with.

barbegal 2y ago

The main problem is various vents along the side of the hull. Typically these are placed closer to the centreline of the vessel such that they can't be flooded at extreme heel angles. On luxury vessels they are placed out of sight of guests and in this case along the hull. Hatches into the water tight compartments were close to the centreline but in this case flooding would have occurred rapidly through the various ventilation systems instead. The boat builder will blame the crew for not closing these but I doubt there was any procedure to actually close them. The engine needs to run to generate power and the engine needs fresh air and an exhaust.

madaxe_again 2y ago
I’m baffled (boom boom) as to why the vents aren’t designed such that they don’t allow water ingress - surely this would just be a matter of a manifold with a float in it, or a Tesla valve or similar. Fails safe, no power required.
- grugagag 2y ago
  They probably will, Im sure luxury boat manufacturers learned something from this
  - terrut 2y ago
    Thankfully, international shipping safety standards aren’t left up to individual manufacturers. Having worked on ships worldwide for several years, I’ve seen how each major incident drives tighter, more effective regulations. The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), established in 1974, is continually updated based on lessons from past accidents, mandating strict requirements for all ships over a certain size. Parts of SOLAS even apply universally to all ships on any voyage, regardless of size. https://www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/Pages/International-Convention-for-the-Safety-of-Life-at-Sea-(SOLAS),-1974.aspx https://www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/Pages/International...
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago

trhway 2y ago

>Beyond being exceptionally tall — more than 40 feet higher than the original foremast — it was also very heavy, at least 24 tons of aluminum, possibly more. the yacht is 500 ton, 4m draught (with the retractable keel not extended). The mast is 72m height. So, the 24 tons at say 30m above center of buoyancy require - minimum - 240 ton at 3m below the center of buoyancy. Add to that that the center of buoyancy is inside the body at some depth under the deck, so the weight of the body above the center of buoyancy also needs corresponding weight (lever momentum, ie. mass x lever length) below the center of buoyancy. Doesn't look good.

bell-cot 2y ago
> ...24 tons at say 30m above... And also the weight of full, rain-drenched sails. And a few crew aloft, fiddling with those sails. And...
- joha4270 2y ago
  This isn't a square rig, but a bermuda rig. You don't go climbing on those. And while the article doesn't explicitly say that sails was stowed, it does mention that they were only under sail propulsion once during the trip and that they started the engines to maneuver into the wind. While a (rolling? I don't know the English term) sail is somewhat exposed to the elements even while stowed, its rolled up fairly tight. In short, I strongly doubt either wet sails or climbing crew contributed in any way to the sinking.
  - mr_toad 2y ago
    They were at anchor, the sails weren’t up.
  - bell-cot 2y ago
    > In short, I ... Correct. But my point was about the design & stability calculations. Not about the rigging state at critical moment, when this vessel failed. (And if things go seriously wrong up in the rigging, a few of your crew might just have to go climbing. Just like "sails could be wet", safety margins must allow for that.)

Walterpine 2y ago

I heard there was a secret vault onboard. This rumor wasn't mentioned in the article.

avazhi 2y ago
Because it’s not relevant.

Rattled 2y ago

It's not mentioned in this article but it seems Michael Lynch's codefendant in the HP trial Stephen Chamberlain died a few days earlier - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/05/mike-lynch-associate-hit-by-car-died-from-traumatic-head-injury-inquest-hears https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/sep/05/mike.... Seems to be a genuine coincidence though.

rijoja 2y ago
[flagged]
- geysersam 2y ago
  There is no motive, assuming multinational corporation typically murder people for profit, and not just out of spite.
  - rijoja 2y ago
    A few people working for boeing met early unexpected ends as well...
    - nkrisc 2y ago
      How many people total work for Boeing? What’s the typical rate at which people die while employed or recently employed by Boeing?
      - rijoja 2y ago
        It's not that a huge part of their business-idea is, and has been to build machines designed to kill large amounts of people either.
        nkrisc 2y ago
        Boeing is a company, and companies don’t make decisions. People do. So who at Boeing is motivated enough to take on the personal liability of a first degree murder conviction?

sillycd 2y ago

A wave hit the ship

sillycd3 2y ago

A wave hit the ship

_dain_ 2y ago
Is that unusual?

p0w3n3d 2y ago

I thought it would be about game theory...

jbs789 2y ago

I like that the article acknowledges the trade-offs between comfort and safety in the design of these luxury yachts. So many seemingly small compromises along the way that seem to increase the vulnerability, then the crew is expected to compensate.

jakub_g 2y ago

An interesting piece that contradicts the early reports about crew leaving vents open: > The company speculated that the crew did not close a watertight door between this hatch and the engine room. (...) > But witnesses, an Italian official familiar with the investigation and the underwater video challenged the company’s versions of events. The footage appeared to show the watertight door to the engine room closed, and the Italian official said the divers had not seen any open hatches on the hull. > Mr. Borner also said that after rescuing the captain, he asked him if he had shut the hatches. The captain said he had. Mr. Borner shared pictures taken by his guests a few moments before the Bayesian sank that appear to show that hull hatches were closed. Overall, a very informative article, it analyzes boat's documentation and compares it with other boats from the same manufacturer.

zeagle 2y ago
I got the impression the yacht manufacturer is very motivated to attribute this on user error, likely for future sales.
- noitpmeder 2y ago
  Hard to fault them for taking that stance
  - mywacaday 2y ago
    Very easy to fault them, an innocent until proven guilty persons reputation and freedom are on the line.
    - shreddit 2y ago
      Yachtmaker: But… money
    - krisoft 2y ago
      Even if after all the investigations it turns out the manufacturer were without blame (which usually is not the case) their attitude doesn't reflect well on them. Do you want to buy your yacth from someone who will blame everyone but themselves when things go wrong? I would rather buy a yacht from someone who will incorporate all the learnings into their new designs to make them as safe as possible. The attitude of "we are perfect, somebody else's fault" stinks, even if they are. More so if they are not.

rsynnott 2y ago

> The days were typically warm, sunny and calm, and finished off with plates of fresh langoustine and sumptuous chocolate. Hopefully not concurrently.

crazygringo 2y ago
That line made me laugh too... langoustine as appetizer yes please, as dessert I don't think so.

AYBABTME 2y ago

"Single mast for better sailing performance" and then "only sailed once in 5 days, motored the rest" silly tradeoffs.

argiopetech 2y ago
Silly tradeoff, but typical of motor sailors/sailing. Wind isn't blowing the right direction? Easier to motor than tack. Sailing upwind? Easier to motor than have the guests stumbling into walls due to heel. Variable winds? No wind? Have to be at <place> by <time>? Easier to motor.
- AYBABTME 2y ago
  Yeah, then get the double masted one? They made huge sacrifices and redesign to focus on a feature they barely use. Which is why I think it's silly.

ak_111 2y ago

I didn't read the article but did it shed light on why some survived and some didn't? I am wondering if those who didn't survive probably died from trauma/injury during the capsizing, or was it because they were incapable of swimming in the rough waters?

jnovacho 2y ago
From skimming the article, it seems the boat sunk in about 2 minutes. While most of that time it was already laying on it's side. This would make it virtually impossible to get out, if you were below deck.
krisoft 2y ago
> was it because they were incapable of swimming in the rough waters? Maybe that was the case with the chef who was found outside of the vessel. The rest of the casualties unfortunately seems to have been trapped in the capsized vessel. (This is based on my present knowledge of rumours, the proper investigation is still on-going and our understanding might change.)

wkat4242 2y ago

I don't really understand all the media hubbub about this. People die in private boats all the time, probably several more that week alone. But this is being treated like a major disaster and someone must be held responsible. Is it just because it was some rich guy that died? I don't think that makes it worse in any way than any other accident where people died, to be honest. I just don't really understand the outrage about this. When I hear that a young family is killed by a drunk driver I'm much more angry and sad. But you don't see the New York Times writing about those when they happen on the other side of the world. These people mattered too but they knowingly took a risk by camping out in the sea.

orbital-decay 2y ago
How many of them are poorly designed superyachts, though? Superyachts are perceived as extra safe, and surely design blunders like this one are outstanding in 21st century naval engineering. I think a lot of people on HN would love to read a postmortem on how exactly the process in an experienced engineering company got bent to cater to the client's preference enough to kill him, or at least a safety board investigation report.
- foobarian 2y ago
  It does seem like the incident is shedding a lot of new light on how poorly the super yacht design is regulated. Honestly one look at that mast and unless that thing is on a submarine I really don't know what the builders were thinking.
BJones12 2y ago
1) Rich guy died 2) Crazy expensive luxury vehicle found to be secretly death trap 3) Millions/tens of millions of people are now familiar with luxury yachting thanks to the Below Deck TV shows 4) Undoubtedly some story of incompetence or negligence lurking

atx2bos 2y ago

[dead]

runamara 2y ago

The incompetente decision to anchor there. And to stay there with the forecast. Knowing you are the captain of a yacht with the tallest mast! They were anchoring on a sort of reef. Where wind and waves in strong winds can be very dangerous. Further more no precisions the stay on deck, start the engine, get the guest on deck or on shore. This is what his Dutch neighbours did!

runamara 2y ago

Further more, there was a forecast. But no real action. You can blame the yacht builder. But then you are an incompetent captain..sailing in and accepting guest in a very dangerous environment.

runamara 2y ago

This is not boat vents or the angle of the yacht on the water. It’s about a captain who should have make decisions, not to sail, not to anchor, get the guest off board. Lower more life rafts..

JanetMcC 2y ago

[flagged]