Conference unifix::sailing

    I was on Coyote a couple of times the week before he left. The boat was
    at the Annapolis boat show. The BG article mentioned estimated design
    speeds in the 25 knot range and the guys who brought the boat down from
    RI said they sustained 22 knots much of the way.
    
    I thought the boat looked particularly well designed and very well
    constructed. I was somewhat surprised by the comment in the article
    that predicted the boat would either blow-up the competition or simply
    blow-up.
    
    None of the press I've heard mentions the likelyhood that he might be
    drifting around in a raft somewhere. Wouldn't he have multiple EPIRB's?
    At least one in the boat and one in the raft? (Hindsight is wonderful
    but not registering your EPIRB when heading across the Atlantic has
    got to rank right up there with some of the dumbest moves of all time.)
    
    JR
    
    

Why did the non-registration of the EPIRB prevent action?
Imagine if I made a "Mayday" call but was turned down by the
coast guard because my boat was not registered...
Mike

    My guess:
    
    Each EPIRB transmits a unique signal to a COSPAS/SARSA satellite
    network. The SAR teams didn't simply ignore the transmission. But
    the lack of any info in the database about this particular EPIRB
    created a situation where there was an opportunity to 'lose' the
    paperwork. Nothing to crosscheck against. No followup.
    
    It was only after Plant was overdue that friends were able to work
    backwards, first locating the store where the EPIRB was purchased,
    then contacting the manufacturer, were they able to figure out that the
    signal was legitimate (and his).
    
    Will probably be a while before the full story come out.
    
    JR

re .2:

Apparently, the vast majority (90% or more) of EPIRB signals are false
alarms. The cost of a search far offshore is quite substantial. The
latest EPRIBs transmit the name of the boat and some other information.
Registration forms are included with the EPIRB at the time of purchase.
I can understand why the various search and rescue folks might not
respond to an unregistered EPRIB. I heard via a long grapevine that
Plant radioed a passing freighter that he as activating his EPIRB to get
a position and would the freighter please ask the Coast Guard to ignore
the signal. I'm not sure how one gets a position from an EPIRB, so this
may not be correct. 

I can also understand how Plant might have forgotten to send in the 
registration amidst doing the zillion other things he had to do to be 
ready for the race. 

    This story was printed in today's (11/17) Washington Post:
    
         Hurricane, Failed Electronics Swell Worry for Lost Sailor
                              Angus Phillips
    
    
    When Mike Plant left New York on Oct 16, headed for France alone for
    the start of his fourth single-handed round-the-world race, he carried
    every imaginable electronic aid to navigation, communication, and
    weather analysis aboard his new, low-slung 60-foot sloop, Coyote.
    
    Plant and the $600,000 vessel were bound for a 24,000-mile race around
    Antartica in the wild Southern Ocean after the quick hop to Europe. But
    he's missing in the North Atlantic, apparently tripped up by total
    electrical failure that left him blind to the approach of a fast moving
    hurricane.
    
    Plant, 41, is now two weeks overdue at the starting line in Les Sables
    d'Olonne, France, where 18 other boats are to begin the Globe Venture
    Challenge race on Sunday. No one has heard from him since Oct 21, when
    he radioed a passing freighter to say his electrical gear was out but
    he was proceeding, hoping to fix it. He was then 900 odd miles from New
    York.
    
    Six days later, just after Hurricane Francis roared through the area
    with 75-knot winds and high seas, Canadian and U.S. officials picked up a
    brief burst of weak signals from an emergency position-indicating radio
    beacon (EPIRB) they later learned was Plant's.
    
    The best anyone can tell, the EPIRB, deployed by sailors in distress,
    had been activated 750 miles northeast of Bermuda in the wake of
    Hurricane Francis. But in his haste to get away, Plant evidently had
    failed to register the EPIRB's code signals, and it was two weeks
    before anyone knew it was he who was calling for help.
    
    Since Friday, Canadian and U.S. search airplanes have combed a 100,000
    square mile area northeast of Bermuda for signs of Coyote, it's remains
    or it's life raft. Neither agency has confidence in the accuracy of the
    EPIRB position because it was so brief and so weak, and hope is waning
    that Plant will be found in the only area known to search.
    
    "He could have run into trouble anywhere between the Oct 21 position and
    France," said Chief David Cooke of the Coast Guard's search and rescue
    office in New York. "That's a big area to search." Added Cooke, "The
    whole thing is baffling."
    
    Plant, a tacturn, tough, wiry Minnesotan who had completed three
    round-the-world races since 1986 when he was first in Class 2 in
    England's BOC race, is America's most experienced solo offshore racer
    and a veteran survivor of sea perils, having sailed 200 miles safely
    through mast rigging failure in one Southern Ocean race and through
    debilitating illness in another.
    
    The resourcefulness and experience of the former Outward Bound
    instructor left friends and family hoping he'd made repairs or deployed
    his life raft and was heading slowly to landfall, but his three-week
    silence comforts no one.
    
    "He's always been able to fix things," said his mother, Mary, who had
    planned to meet him for the start in France. "Everybody thought he'd
    fix it, but this [electronics] is an area he didn't feel totally
    confident in. Our concern now is to keep those Coast Guard planes flying
    and get the Navy planes in the Azores [off Portugal] off the ground and
    looking too."
    
    David Stevens, who is writing a book about Plant's exploits, said the
    skipper left New York in a rush after a whirlwind, unsuccessful effort
    to line up corporate sponsorship for the $1 million effort. Plant never
    had a chance to thoroughly sea-trial his new boat, launched in early
    October.
    
    He sailed with crew from the Concordia Yacht Yard in Massachusetts,
    where it was built, to Annapolis, for the U.S. Sailboat Show, then back
    to New York for the departure. But Plant was preoccupied during those 
    passages with fund-raising, Stevens said, and left the sailing mostly to
    his crew while he worked the phones from the cockpit.

    (I sailed part of the Annapolis-New York leg with Plant last month, and
    watched him furiously jockeying phone calls and working to learn the
    complex electronics system below, while leaving sail trim, steering and
    navigation of the high-strung racer almost exclusively to others.) 

    Stevens said that "privately, to friends," Plant had expressed
    disappointment that he hadn't had time to work on sailing the sled-like
    speedster with it's tall carbon fibre mast. But Stevens said that Plant
    was welcoming the Atlantic crossing as a chance to work out any problems. 

    But problems apparently were serious and came quickly. Plant phoned home
    from sea on Oct 17 and 18, then fell out of communication until his chance
    chat with a passing Liberian freighter Oct 21. He requested a position fix,
    then asked the skipper to call his longtime companion, Helen Davis, to say
    his electronics were out and he was proceeding. 

    Stevens said Plant told the skipper if he couldn't fix the electrical
    problems, he planned to sail for Nova Scotia to make repairs. 

    Coyote without her electronics was no picnic to sail alone, Stevens said.
    Without autohelm, Plant had to hand-steer day and night; without radar he
    had to keep constant lookout for traffic; he had to desalinate drinking
    water with a hand pump and had no weather data to detect approaching
    storms, navigation aids to fix position nor power to communicate farther
    than about 14 miles with a battery-powered VHF radio. 

    Plant evidently never fixed the electrical charging system because he has
    not made voice contact with shore again. 

    The EPIRB which activates automatically when taken off it's mount is
    designed to emit siginals for 48 hours after activation and is considered
    highly reliable. But Plant's sent only two short bursts late in the night
    of Oct 27, one picked up by Canadian authorities and the other in the
    United States. 

    Neither was strong enough to establish a certain position, and since
    Plant's signal had not been registered, the source was unknown. Both EPIRB
    bursts went uninvestigated for those reasons, authorities said. 

    It wasn't until Stevens called U.S. and Canadian authorities and asked them
    to search the data base for records of a call from Plant's EPIRB, whose
    signal he described, that the calls were dug up from computer files and the
    tentative position off Bermuda was established. 

    U.S. Coast Guard officials expect to hunt for Plant by air again today, but
    Cooke said searches of this sort generally last only about six days. 
    
    End
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    There was a map accompanying the article which presents a picture not
    fully addressed by the story:
    
    Plant's estimated EPIRB position on Oct 27 is at least 500 miles south
    of his known (freighter) position on Oct 21. The resolution is not real
    clear but his lat/lon went from 43N x 54W, to 36N x 53W.
    
    He was closer to Brazil than either Nova Scotia or France, heading
    directly south (the wrong way?). By this time Hurricane Francis was
    over 1000 miles north of him. 
    
    JR

    This story illustrates once again that the combination of a virtually
    untried high tech boat, single handed sailing, and heavy dependence on
    electronics in a marine environment creates a risky set up.
    I certainly hope is he is found ok, but it sure looks as if he is lost.
    
    Jeff

    The Coast Guard had announced yesterday that they were going to resume
    their search for Mike Plant because of his past successes in overcoming
    problems at sea.
    
    "Because of his reputation we will continue the search," said Petty
    Officer Paula Tomaselli, a spokeswoman at the Coast Guard's Atlantic
    rescue center in New York. "We're considering that he was not in the
    area searched," she added.
    
    Today it was announced that a freighter had spotted Plant's capsized
    boat approximately 550 miles SW of Ireland. No sign of Plant although
    the story held out hope that he was trapped inside.
    
    JR

The Mike Plant's capsized boat has been found 400 miles north Acores (sp?) 
islands. Sails were still set up but his liferaft was missing...
It's been one month now we had his last news.

. Pierre .

Correction: As no boat has been able yet to reach the "Coyote", nobody can say 
if Mike is still in or not.

. Pierre .

    More details today:
    
    The ballast bulb attached to the bottom of a keel fin is missing,
    explaining the capsize. It will be several days before military
    rescue ships (with diver) can get on the scene to check inside.
    
    More intriging is the fact that Coyote is 1800 miles NE of it's last
    contact with a freighter, and nowhere near where the EPIRB signals were
    estimated to be sent from. Plant was still right on course for France
    well after he was thought to be in trouble.

    The designers/builder said 'they couldn't understand' how the bulb keel
    had failed.  As I understand it this boat had a number of high tech
    innovations, I wonder if the design of the keel/ballast was part of the
    new design?  Once, that ballast bulb dropped off he didn't stand much
    of a chance staying upright.  A prior note said 'capsized with sails
    still set'.  I assume that what was LEFT of the sails was still set
    underwater.
    
    A month since he was first reported missing.  I wonder how long a man
    could live inside a capsized hull?  The Boston Globe said that the
    designers said that he could 'live in an air pocket and replenish his
    air via the thru hull fittings'.  NOT if the boat was open to the sea
    from below because opening a hull fitting would VENT air and allow the
    boat to flood further.
    
    I wonder if carbon fiber was involved in the keel/ballast arrangement?
    
    Jeff

    I don't know the rule for the Globe, but I suspect many of these boats,
    and Cayote as well are expected to be raced in the BOC. I vaguely
    remember reading an article a year or so ago, which described the
    unlimited 60 rule. One of the major restrictions in the rule was that
    the boats be designed with three bulkheads, making 4 airtight
    compartments. If he's got 3 airtight and one vented I imagine the boat
    would still float. 
    
    	It would be an amazing feat if he greated his rescuers with a,"Hey,
    what took you so long?". 
    
    Geoff

    There was an article a month or so ago in Cruising World about a
    Tri-maran that capsized on it's way from New Zealand to somewhere in
    Polynesia or Micronesia.  The four crew members lived in the hull for
    something like 120 days if I remember correctly.  The floats provided
    the necessary bouyancy I guess.  They did poke through the hull for
    ventilation and they were able to get their stove working again.  Quite
    a story.  I certainly hope Mike Plant is around to share a similar
    tale but not for the entertainment value.  
    
    Brian

According to an article in today's Boston GLOBE:

The search for Plant has so far cost an estimated $668,000 and has 
covered nearly 200,000 square miles.

Coyote ran aground in the Chesapeake Bay, but Plant did not take the 
time to have the boat hauled and inspected.

Coyote's draft is 14 feet, and the 8400 pound lead ballast bulb was 
affixed to the keel with 6 3/4" thick (sic) bolts. The ship that sighted 
the capsized Coyote reported that the ballast bulb is missing. [Hmmmm,
that's a very deep keel. For what it is worth, the 4800 pound keel on
our boat is attached with 8 3/4" diameter keel bolts. Perhaps Coyote's
ballast wasn't strongly enough attached?] 

A French naval ship with divers is expected to reach Coyote tomorrow.

    >>the capsized Coyote reported that the ballast bulb is missing. [Hmmmm,
    >>that's a very deep keel. For what it is worth, the 4800 pound keel on
    >>our boat is attached with 8 3/4" diameter keel bolts. Perhaps Coyote's
    >>ballast wasn't strongly enough attached?]
    
    That was Ross's opinion - and it was obviously likely to be damaged
    from running aground - but then (as Alan knows better than anybody,
    having helped to install them) Ross's boat has 18 3/4" bolts for a 7200
    pound ballast keel....
    
    Lois

Number of bolts is a very crude measure of goodness. Besides, the failure
may be due to something other than simple bolt shear. For example, if
the keel was loosened slightly by grounding, then there could be working
of the keel from side to side in the heavy weather. Any bolt will fail
if you flex it often enough. The geometry of bolt placement (in-line vs
multiple rows) may have a lot do with susceptibility to this failure mode.
It's also possible that corrosion may have played a major role. (There were
reportedly electrical problems during the voyage. Perhaps the batteries were
discharged through keelbolts exposed to the sea...)

--RS

    Metal fatigue will do amazing things.  A bolt rated at X pounds
    breaking or shear strength can seem impressively strong, and it is
    as long as the conditions are the same. Flexing as an earlier
    noter said can break virtually any bolt if there are enough flex
    cycles.  There is some point where cycles (I think its 100,000) cycles
    (flexes) which is the standard point where a parts resistance to
    fatigue is considered virtually infinite.  It is amazing how quickly
    cycles (flexes) can add up on a boat.  So if Mike ran the boat aground
    and loosened that keel bulb up enough to let those bolts flex just a
    little I can see how those bolts could have flexed to failure.  I also
    agree that if the bolts were set in a fore and aft straight line with
    one another it would make a fatigue failure even more likely.  If they
    were offset from one another it would help to reduce the liklihood of
    the bolts failing from fatigue.
    
    No one has said what the bolts were made of, stainless I assume.
    Stainless is susceptible to anaerobic corrosion if it is not installed
    so that water has free access to the surface.  An example would be
    keel bolts tightly installed into the keel with no free movement of
    the ambient water.   Stainless prop shafts in a rubber underwater
    bearing are likely to corrode for the same reason.
    
    I am studying to be a Marine Architect at Westlawn Marine Inst. and 
    my instructors keep saying that liability is a BIG risk in this
    profession.  This tragedy with Mike Plant and Coyote certainly shows
    how the designers could have been at fault.  Running the boat aground
    and not getting her hauled for an inspection may save their XXXX's. 
    
    Jeff

re last two:

Given that Coyote was virtually a brand new boat, I would argue that 
failure of the keel bolts from corrosion would be unlikely in the 
extreme. Corrosion failure takes a while. 

re fatigue: 

Certainly possible, most especially if the keel/keel bolts were damaged 
in the grounding. Still, only six bolts hardly seems to provide an 
adequate margin of safety. Boats should be designed to survive expected 
dangers, of which grounding is one, even for an ocean racer. If I were 
the legal counsel for Coyote's designer and builder, I'd be hoping that 
the boat is not recovered, which will make determining what happened 
difficult or impossible. If the boat is recovered, I'd be rather
surprised if the designer and builder aren't sued for faulty design
and/or construction. 

    I just received a call...  They have reached Mike's boat.  The life
    raft was inflated and attached to the boat.  Mike was not aboard.

    Re: -1
    
    This is very sad news. I hope there's some remote chance that
    he's still alive, but it doesn't seem possible.
    
    Re: keelbolts
    
    I'm sure the designers try to use as many bolts as possible. The
    problem is, these elliptical keels and bulb-fin keels have small
    cross sectional areas where the bolts go.  There's no room for more.
     

Why do designers use bolts to attach keels? Is this primarily for convenience,
so that the keels can be attached and removed easily? (I presume this is
important for a racing boat, so that the keel can be removed and modified as
needed.) 

My fin keel boat has a cast iron ballast inside the hull. (Was this cast in
place?) There are no bolts involved, to the best of my knowledge. This
arrangement seems inherently less likely to fail than a bolted on keel. Does
anyone know of any concrete data to support this? 

Are there other keel attachment methods?

--RS

The Race that Plant was headed for seems to be turing into a disaster.

After last weeks start, three boats have returned to the start ( the only place
they are allowed outside assistance ), and one of those ( one of the race
favourites ) has delaminted so badly that it is unlikely to restart.

This morning bought news of another fatality, that of the British sailor 
Nigel Burgess. His body was recovered from the sea near his yacht, which
was close to sinking. Burgess was wearing a survival suit and lifejacket,
with one of the emergency beacons tied to it. It would appear that he was
preparing to abandon the ship when he recieved a serious head wound.

There must now be serious questionmarks over the construction of these 
lightweight flyers, which are built almost entirely unrestricted by any rules.

Chris

    The bolts themselves are not a problem- even a single 3/4" dia bolt
    will support over 30,000 pounds, based on nominal 70,000 psi tensile
    strength alloy- and thats a very low number. The problem comes from
    the loading of the hull material where the bolts come thru. Various
    designs are used to spread the load, all in essence being like placing
    a large washer under the bolt heads. Im sure if you could find this
    keel it would have all its bolts intact, each holding a small chunk of
    hull around it.
    
    Placing the ballast inside the hull casting is no better, an impact
    will still break the hull shell from the mass inside loading around the
    skin. And obviously shapes like the long bulb to get weight very deep
    dont lend to moulding, and fiberglass could never stand the bending
    stress where a bulb is attached to a bottom. 
    
    Building very lightweight structures heavily loaded is tough. And the
    sea always seems to have the extra bit of energy to provide the stress
    just higher than the designer though possible.

    Why are you so sure that the bolts didn't fail due to fatigue from a
    slightly loosened ballast bulb?  You might be right but repeated slight
    bending of even high strength bolts will eventuall break them.  They
    did recover the hull, right?  They should be able to see from the
    hull whether fractured bolt stubs are sticking out or whether the hull
    tore away.
    
    Last I heard a French Tug was going out to tow? the hull in and they
    had divers to check the inside of the Coyote?  Any more news on what
    the tug found?
    
    The 79 Fastnet Race was a perfect example of high tech lightweight
    boats not holding up well under severe conditions.
    
    Jeff

    From what I've read, though I don't know whether the source was the
    paper of this note, the keel/hull interface is not the point of
    failure. It is my understanding that the ballast bulb, the topeedo
    13 feet down, is what's missing. The blade I understand to still be
    attached. 
    	Regardless, it is a sad result of a material failiure. 
    
    Geoff
    

    I have no idea what the construction details around the bulb/blade
    interface on Coyote are like.  But....the bolts are probably fairly
    short, running from 6" inside the bottom of the blade to some distance
    into the bulb.  They're unlikely to run the 14' from bulb to hull.
    
    Given that the blade is thin, probably too thin to accomodate the
    access holes required for the threaded portion of the bolts to be
    inside the blade, I assume the bolts are "upside down".  The fixed
    portion is imbedded in the epoxy/carbon matrix at the bottom of the
    blade.  The bolts would go right through the bolb with the threaded
    section sticking out some countersunk recesses at the bottom.  The nuts
    are threaded from the bottom up and are normally covered with epoxy
    putty.
    
    One possible scenario would go like this:  grounding abrades away putty
    and loosens nuts on keelbolts.  A couple of weeks of sailing makes them
    looser and looser.  Finally, the bulb slips right off when the last nut lets
    go.  With the bulb 14' under him, Plant never would have heard or felt
    a thing until his boat capsized.
    
    - gene

    I think he may well have felt clunking if the ballast bulb was free
    to move some.  As an earlier noter suggested the nuts didn't have to
    loosen up for a failure to occur, either the bolts themselves could
    have fatigued due to having been loosened during the grounding or the
    keel material itself could have fatigued due to working of the keel
    bulb bolts.   If its ever made public I will be interested to learn 
    what the actual failure was.  Coyote may well have not immediately
    capisized when the bulb fell off, I don't know what the righting arm
    of that boat was but she may have remained upright for a while until
    an increasing wind knocked her over or increasing wave action.  But
    if I had to bet I bet she went right over.
    
    Jeff

    It is all very, very sad...
    
    May God have pity of his soul.
    
    Sincerely, Arrigo.
    

    I case some of you missed it, last week's Sports Illustrated had a
    fairly detailed article on Mike Plant.
    

    Has there been any new information since the French Tub had pulled up
    to the Coyote and found an empty life raft?  That is the last I have 
    heard.  Did they tow the Coyote to port, find Mike Plant, determine the
    probably cause of the keel ballast coming loose or what?
    
    Did the Sports Illustrated Article have any new information?
    
    Tx.  Jeff

    No, SI went to press after Coyote was located but before it was
    searched by divers. I haven't seen any more articles. Expect that
    we'll have to wait for the next issue of Soundings for more detail as
    that's the magazine with the shortest publishing cycle time. There were
    some very good photos of Plant on Coyote as well as a closeup of the
    keel/bulb prior to launching. Interestingly, and granted the conditions
    were pretty benign, but none of the photos show Plant wearing a harness.
    
    Also, not that it made any difference but Coyote's bottom was painted
    black, which made it all the more difficult to spot in it's capsized
    state.

    Who would think of that... that is, what color to paint your underbody
    in case you capsize!  I suppose flourescent orange would be an
    appropriate choice.  
    
    Thanks for the info.
    
    Jeff

    Paint color on the underbody is only important when you sail boats that
    have two stable positions- upright and upside down.
    
    Us old gaffers can use any bottom color we want :-)

Red seems to be a commonly available color in anti-fouling paint. I
always wondered why there appeared to be a market for red paint.

    Not to minimize Mike's tragedy.  But we sure could use some humor
    in this string.  
    
    Now you know why some choose red for the underbody.
    
    Jeff

    The Canadian Coast Guard actually capture the bottom colour in their
    S.A.R. database.  I once worked on a system where CG took data on
    fishing boats in the event of an S.O.S.  I still remember saying in a
    Steering Committee  that if they could see the bottom they should be
    pretty sure that this was the boat that they wanted! (smart alec) ...
    the coast guard guy patiently told me that they use colour filters over
    their eyes to help zero in on just that colour.  They also spoke about
    how tough it is flying hour after hour scanning the waves looking for
    stuff .... its amazing sometimes that they can find anyone.
    

    .......the boat they wanted.  Yeah,  unless there were SEVERAL boats
    out there bottoms up with red bottoms.  During the Fastnet Race I am
    sure a variety of casualties WAS a real problem.  Filters for the
    bottom color, good idea.  I hadn't thought of that.
    
    Finding a small boat or persons head at sea is 'rather' difficult.
    It is amazing they find as many as they do.
    
    And, boredom would be a real hazard too.  Just when you yawned is
    when the guys head bobbed up on a wave crest.
    
    Jeff

    The following is from the L.A. Times 12/18/92 by Times staff writer
    Frank Clifford who is Mike Plant's first cousin and grew up with him in
    Minnesota.
    
    For many of us who knew him, the mystery surrounding Mike Plant did not
    begin with his disappearance in the North Atlantic last month.  Asked
    to explain his love of solitude, high adventure and the sea, his mother
    was at a loss.  "I'm not where his adventurer's blood came from," she
    said.  "Ancestral genes I guess."
    
    He grew up on the shores of Lake Minnetonka, in a bedroom community 12
    miles west of Minneapolis.  The town stresses athletic and academic
    competition.  Mike played hockey in the winter and sailed in the
    summer.  He also chafed and rebelled and, by his own admission, wasted
    a lot of time spinning his wheels.  Not long ago he told a friend he
    didn't grow up until he was pushing 40.  He would have been 42 in
    November.
    
    Although it is inspiring to have a relative like him, it is also more
    than a little dismaying when you compare your life--as you inevitably
    do--with his.  Gathered to pay our respects recently, a group of
    us--brothers, cousins, in-laws--mulled over lives insulated by air bags
    and insurance policies.  We wondered what it took to break free,
    knowing all the while it's not a choice.
    
    Mike's boat, Coyote, was aptly named.  Coyotes prowl the margins of
    civilization and taunt us with eerie cries.  When house dogs hear them,
    they fret, whine and occasionally send up a howl of protest against
    captivity.  Then, slowly, they lie down again, giving themselves up to
    fretful dreams of coyote life.
    
    That's what a fellow like Mike Plant can do to you.  But there were
    also times when no one would have yearned to trade places with him.
    
    Several years ago, I joined his brothers and sisters in an effort to
    win his release from a Portuguese jail.  After sailing across the
    Atlantic in preparation for his first around-the-world race, Mike had
    been arrested on a 12-year-old Interpol warrant charging him with
    transporting drugs.  It dated to a time when he had been a charter boat
    operator in Greece.
    
    Two of his passengers turned out to be drug dealers and named him as an
    accomplice after they were arrested by Greek authorities.  Mike had
    insisted he was innocent, but chose to flee the country rather than
    stand trial.  (Sometime later, his accusers recanted, saying they had
    implicated Mike in hopes of easing their sentences.)
    
    After Mike's arrest, his family sought the help of a retired statesman
    who had close ties with top officials in Greece.  The man agreed to
    intercede if the family would furnish him with a letter attesting to
    Mike's character.
    
    I was asked to help draft the letter.  Mike's life was not easily
    summarized.  There were large pieces of it I knew nothing about.  He
    was a college dropout and something of a nomad, once walking across
    South America, using a child's coloring-book map as his only guide.  He
    had worked as an Outward Bound instructor, a carpenter and a charter
    boat captain.
    
    He had been in a few scrapes along the way.  I didn't think he was a
    felon.  But I was having a hard time fitting his life into what I
    thought the letter was supposed to be--the literary equivalent of a
    Brooks Brothers suit.
    
    "Maybe, it wouold be enough to say that Mike is a character," someone
    joked.  We didn't get anywhere until Mike's younger brother called to
    ask where the letter was.  He had no patience with our qualms.  Who did
    we think we were writing about, Captain Kidd?  Mike was family.  He was
    in trouble, and he needed our help.  As for character, this was a guy
    who had just sailed across the Atlantic in a small boat, who was
    preparing to circumnavigate the globe alone.  Didn't that say something
    about his mettle?
    
    The letter was written.  Mike was released.  And nine months later the
    red hull of his 50-foot sloop flashed onto the horizon off Newport,
    R.I.  He had finished ahead of all the boats in his class--those less
    than 60 feet long--to win the first round of his first world race.
    
    But the experience had been much more than a boat race, and the
    celebration of Mike's victory was bittersweet.  He had twice averted
    disaster, first after his boat capsized in 50-foot seas in the Indian
    Ocean, then again days later when he came on deck just in time to steer
    clear of a huge iceberg that his radar had failed to detect.
    
    And halfway around the world, tragedy struck his friend and closest
    competitor, Jacques de Roux who was apparently washed overboard as he
    struggled to sail a storm-damaged boat.  An accomplished single-hander
    who had survived worse, the quiet, disciplined de Roux had been
    something of a role model for Mike.  His death brought home a humbling
    truth about the vulnerability of even the very best ocean sailors.
    
    Amoung us landlubbers, there wasn't much more talk about Mike's
    character after that first race.  Mike had become an even larger
    enigma--but now he was an unassailable one.
    
    At his memorial service, however, the character issue came up again. 
    An old family friend said that Mike's brief six-year career as a
    long-distance sailor had transformed a combative, quixotic kid into a
    patient, compassionate human being--and an effective self-promoter. 
    For those of us who had known him as a taciturn teen-ager, it was
    amusing to watch Mike try to master the chicken-dinner circuit, as he
    sought to raise the hundreds of thousands of dollars necessary to build
    and outfit a competitive yacht.
    
    Someone also spoke of his integrity, recounting the time Mike resisted
    any temptation to cheat after a piece of broken rigging forced him
    ashore on a remote island.  By touching land, he had disqualified
    himself from a nonstop global race.  Still, he could have fixed the
    rigging and sailed on, no one the wiser.  Instead, he radioed his
    position and declared his disqualification.  Then, he fixed his boat,
    resumed sailing as an unofficial participant and set an American speed
    record, 134 days, for a solo global sailor.
    
    These were comforting words to those of us who want to believe that
    heroic adventure is not all derring-do, that a "top gun" must also
    possess some of those solid virtues that lesser mortals hope to have
    etched on our tombstones.
    
    Mike's younger sister brought the eulogies back on track.  Of everyone
    in the family, she might have known him best.  She had been living in
    Greece when Mike was chartering his boat.  She knew that the boy and
    the man were not altogether different people, that the sailor who found
    peace of mind in his 40s was the same feral kid who had lit out for the
    South American jungle 20 years earlier.
    
    "Mike burned his way through life," she told 500-plus people who showed
    up at the memorial service.  The service was held on a snowy night in a
    venerable old club on the shores of the lake where Mike learned to
    sail.  By and large, the people who came were fellow sailors, friends
    and associates of his family.  A TV camera crew showed up.  So did a
    U.S. senator.
    
    But among the coats and ties, one group stood out.  With long beards
    and well-worn, homespun-looking clothes, they seemed spectral, like
    throwbacks to that ancestral generation Mike's mother referred to when
    she talked about his genes.
    
    They were buddies Mike ran with in another time, in one of those
    undocumented periods of his life when he disappeared into one
    wilderness or another.  With their beards and heavy woolens, these
    fellows looked as though they had just emerged from a snow cave in the
    north woods somewhere.
    
    And as the crowd left, climbing into cars pre-warmed by valet parkers,
    you half expected those old boys to lope out across a frozen bay,
    howling for Coyote and her skipper.
    
    Don

The latest issue of Practical Sailor has a lengthy article about Mike 
Plant and Coyote. My interpretation of what was said was that disaster 
was almost inevitable. 

Some points:

Coyote was not launched until early September of this year, many months 
behind schedule, leaving no time for adequate sea trials or necessary 
modifications. 

Plant decided to use a 24V autopilot, which thus required both 12V and
24V electrical systems. These systems were, in the opinions of two
experts who worked on them (David Smead of Ample Power and Rick Proctor
of Cruising Equipment), an unmaintainable nightmare that Plant had
virtually no hope of repairing at sea. Yet Concordia, Coyote's builder, 
assured Plant all would be well in spite of the systems not functioning 
properly before Plant left. One generator apparently wasn't working, and 
the other wouldn't work under full load.

The 85' carbon fiber mast developed cracks even before Plant left. The 
mast was not designed to have winches mounted on it, yet winches were. 
One tore off, in part because it was improperly installed. The mast need 
three or four sets of running backstays to support it, and it may not 
have been properly set up before Plant left. When the French divers 
inspected Coyote, the mast was broken several feet above deck. It is not 
known when it broke, and it may have done so after Coyote capsized.

The ballast bulb was secured to the 14' carbon fiber keel by six bolts 
screwed into tapped holes in a stainless steel plate. This plate was 
embedded in the carbon fiber keel with no other reinforcement (eg, such 
as the steel frame inside the carbon fiber keel of one of the boats in 
the last BOC). In the opinion of Dr Jerome Milgram of MIT, this design 
was inadequate. It is possible (even likely) that the plate was simply 
pulled out of the keel by the loads of the ballast bulb. The grounding 
in the Cheasapeake might have damaged the keel, too. Plant speculated 
aloud about possible damage, but decided not to have the boat hauled for 
inspection.

Because of Coyote's extreme beam (over 19') and low freeboard, she was
nearly as stable upside down as right side up, even with the ballast
keel attached. She was also very light -- under 22000 pounds.

All in all, I had a feeling of inevitable doom in reading the article. 
Plant was attempting to do too much in too little time with too little 
money. He expected Coyote to be some 11% faster than Duracell, and 
perhaps it would have been had Plant the time and funding to get
everything right. Possibly the keel design was a minimum cost design. An
internal steel frame to carry the ballast loads would have been stronger
but (I assume) more costly to construct. The electical systems (critical
to Plant's success) simply weren't well-designed or well-built, and were
certainly not thoroughly tested. 

    Thanks for the update!  Since Mike had circumnavigated the Globe (what?
    3 times?) before one would think he would have developed an
    appreciation for the rigors of the sea and the demands which would
    be made on his boat. Therefore, shortcuts relating to safety would
    not be acceptable.  But, I guess he kidded himself about the readiness
    of Coyote.
    
    As a student Naval Architect I am most interested in the details of
    any boats loss so I can avoid making similiar mistakes in any boats I
    will design in the future. 
    
    The recommendations of Ample Power and the other Co. should have been
    followed IMO.  Obviously the builder just wanted to get the boat out
    of there and get their money, or it sure seems like it.  A vendor such
    as Ample Power who SPECIALIZES in boat electrical systems should have
    been listened to. I just can't believe a pro like Plant would let 
    important details like that slip.  The EPIRB not being registed either
    makes me wonder just how rushed he was.  He seems to have missed alot
    of important details, and in ocean crossings its the details that tend
    to kill you, and in this case apparently did kill Mike Plant.
    
    The modern lightweight ocean sailers don't seem to hold up as well
    as the more traditional designs, and Coyote seems to be another
    illustration of that.
    
    Jeff

re .40:

Coyote's builder, Concordia, only worked on the boat as they were paid, 
which was why launching was so delayed. Plant simply did not have the 
money to have construction proceed faster. Reading between the lines it 
would appear that construction quality was not as good as it should have 
been, but that too may have been due to underfunding and finally 
hurrying to complete the boat.

I have no idea what conditions were attached to the sponsorship money
Plant did find. His budget for the race was around a million dollars,
which is probably rather minimal. What a contrast to the millions spent
(to no useful purpose in my biased view) on the last America's Cup. 
Clearly, Plant was under tremendous pressure to get the boat finished
and into the race. It is possible that he had to repay the sponsorship
money if he didn't actually start the race. Having once upon a time been
an underfunded and unsponsored motorcycle racer I can appreciate in a
small way how desperate Plant must have felt to get to the start of the
race. To have time and money running out after years of work is a
terrible feeling. In some ways it would take more courage to admit
failure than to set off across the Atlantic desperately hoping for a
miracle. 

Alan

    Alan,
    
    As one who is one of the MOST conservative sailors within this
    notesfile and one who offers so many "BE CAREFUL" type suggestions, I
    sure am interested in your earlier (and crazier ? motorcycle racing day
    stories).
    
    It sure would be nice for us to get a glimpse of the REAL Alan Berens!
    
    	;-)
    

re .42:

I did my motorcycle roadracing over twenty years ago. I and (I assume) 
my fellow racers had a naive belief in our immortality. We never really 
believed we'd be killed, or, I suppose, even seriously hurt. My belief 
and a collarbone were shattered on lovely May Sunday afternoon when I 
crashed at something like 120 mph. I'm told I tumbled about a hundred 
yards before sliding to a stop and that another racer missed running over 
me by inches. I have some traumatic amnesia about the actual crash, 
which is no doubt just as well. 

I only raced once after my crash. Prior to my crash I was going fast
enough that racing wasn't really fun anymore -- it was mostly just fear.
Moments like passing a slower rider in a bumpy downhill 130 mph bend
while setting up to brake for the next much slower corner finally just
weren't enjoyable enough to compensate for the risks. While my bones
mended and skin grew, I decided that there were other ways to have
exciting times, ways that might let me grow old(er) less painfully.

Back when I was motorcycle racing I rather thought that being killed
doing something I very much wanted to do wouldn't be so awful. I still
rather think this. I also think that ocean sailing is far from safe (and
is occasionally downright dangerous), and as I have no particular desire
to die any time soon I tend to be very conservative. Nonetheless, I have
taken and do take risks, such as sailing our 32' boat to Bermuda and back. 

Someday the risks of ocean sailing may become unacceptable to me, just
as they did recently for some friends of some friends of ours. In their
70s, this couple has decided to give up ocean sailing. The old
motorsports aphorism "there are old racers and there are bold racers,
but there are no old, bold racers" applies to racing (and cruising)
sailors, too. Disasters happen, but there is no benefit in making them
more likely, said the careful sailor. 

Alan

    Hmmm, I had a motorcycle once, never raced it, but I crashed it. 
    
    	When I woke up in the recovery room and was told what happened my 
    first word were, "That does it, I'm selling the motorcycle and buying a
    sailboat". I had my 470 a little over a year later and would state that 
    if an armored truck cut off my sailboat the truck would sink. 
    
    Geoff

Gee, I guess there's no hope for me, I have a motorcyle and a sailboat(s).

Steve

        ride fast, die hard

    I never even thought about owning a motor cycle ! but anyway ....
    
    I cant help but wonder what's the point of all this hi-tech go-fast
    round the world stuff (and would make the same argument re. America's
    Cup).  To me, the real thing being tested in a round the world race is
    not - Carbon Fiber masts, Titanium thingamijiggs etc. it is the skill
    and ability of the people involved.  So what if someone makes it around
    the world 11% faster than last time ?  One good run across the southern
    ocean would nix any technical "breakthrough", one Navigational error
    (if that is possible anymore) could change the race results.
    
    If a sailor of the capability of Mike Plant is driven by the technical
    side of the race and the million dollar price tag to make mistakes that
    take his life how has this changed or benefitted anything ?  I much
    rather prefer the concept of the British Steel Challenge ... one design
    around the world and may the best crew win.  
    
    The same point on America's Cup ... I know that Dennis Connor could
    sail rings around Bill Koch but bill could afford more boats and
    technology (and also had the unfair advantage of access to a Vax 9000)
    so what happenened ? Good sailor loses to bad sailor with money.  Why
    bother with the boats at all, why not just shred dollar bills until
    everyone else runs out and then declare yourself the winner ?
    
    anyway that's my $.02 worth.
    
    

re   .46

>>>>Why bother with the boats at all, why not just shred dollar bills until
>>>>everyone else runs out and then declare yourself the winner ?
    


	My guess is that a dollar bill shredder (+dollar bills to feed 
	into it) is quite a bit cheaper than running the average boat ...  

			.......	and thus no fun at all
							;^)

	St 
(off to Florida tomorrow to go sailing)
    

    Geez, if your going to shred dollar bills let me bid on the unshredded
    bills first.  Smile. 
    
    You know the slogan "a boat is a hole in the water into which you pour
    money", it seems that appeals to people more than shredding bills.  
    Smile again.
    
    Some of the races are designed to test new equipment, materials, boats
    etc.   To me, the challenge is largely a personal one, courage, skill
    and luck.   I would much rather take a well founded older designed boat
    around the World and test the attributes in myself than push the
    cutting edge of technology.  
    
    I WONDER if Mike didn't get a bit overconfident after his earlier 
    successful voyages and allow time financial pressure to override common
    sense because of the earlier successes.
    
    Does anyone know if they recovered Coyote?
    
    Jeff

    re. -1
    
    When you`ll find the older one gimme a call and I`ll be happy
    to test myself too... Smile!
    But if you find an hi-tech one, pls, forget me...
    
    (apart from an AC around the buoys...)
    
    Happy New Year to you all and, apart from any other aspect,
    
    		GOD bless Mike`s soul !
    
    I sure didn`t know him but some replies made me regret not to have
    known him.
    
    Ciao, Arrigo.
     

    For those people who with negative comments on the America's Cup
    and BOC - you're missing the point.
    
    There are plenty of sailing contests that test sailing skill, such
    as one design racing. The AC and BOC are contests with extra
    dimensions such as keel, hull, sailplan design, funding, management,
    etc. etc.
    
    It's what you call the BIG TIME. All out competition on many levels.
    We all compete here at Digital against this company's competitors
    in exactly the same way, and many of us enjoy our jobs. These people
    approach sailing in the same way.
    
    Paul
    

    Paul, your point is well taken.  To each their own.
    
    Jeff

    The Feb issue of Cruising World has, by far, the best and most detailed
    story of the events leading up to this tragedy to date.
    
    For example: previous references to the grounding in the Chesapeake Bay
    which *may* have led to the keel bulb failure were all described as a
    trivial little bump on the bottom. In fact, Coyote was stuck solid and
    had to be pulled off by a passing fishing boat using a halyard for
    leverage. During that process Coyote was twisted 180 degrees before
    the bulb came out of the mud.
    

One of the other boats in the event is heading for Australia, as the designers
are  concerned about his keel design following some bolt breakages aboard a
Whitbread 60 boat ( Brookfield ?? or something similar ) in another race.
Any Outside assistance leads to disqualification from the race.

This skipper ( Bruno de somebody ) has also had to stitch up his own tongue which
was partly severed in an accident. Yeuch !

The other British entry ( sorry, I have a terrible head for names ) is also
ducking out, following injuries received in a knockdown. He is thought to have
several broken ribs.

Chris.

    Sailing Worl has atleast three articles relating to the Globe Challenge
    and Mike Plant. The low encountered a few days into the race wreaked 
    havoc on the fleet. It seems like the seas in general are being
    unpleasant to vessel this season (with megaton oil tankers being other
    common victims). 
    
    	Bagages Superior (Alain Gutier?), with 19 feet of beam, appears to 
    be a kick butt machine and doing well. Although I really have no up-
    to-date information on the progress.
    
    Geoff 
            

The Boston Globe had an article this past weekend (I can't remember which day)
that said Coyote has been recovered by a salvage crew and will be sent back to 
the States.  It appears that the steel plate, to which held the ballast bulb was
bolted, had torn free from the keel.

The article mentioned that there wasn't much left inside the hull.    

My cousin remarked in passing that he had heard on the radio that Plant's body
was found/recovered?.

This would have been about two weeks ago.  He thought it was some Irish fishermen
who found Plant.  Eric may have been listening to shortwave, or local radio.

Can any one substantiat this?  I suspect he will have died from exposure, but
an autopsy may indicate otherwise.  Also, what were the circumstances of the
alledged recovery?  Forinstance, did he have a survival suit on or a life raft
etc?  This would give some indications as to how quick and unexpected the
disaster could have been.

I know it is sort of macabe, but the more we learn from this accident, the
less like it is to repeat.

Lessons so far:

1	This is a biggy.  Don't go if you are not prepared!

2	You should thoroughly understand any system on your ship which you
	depend upon.  Plant's electrical system was beyond his ability to control.

3.	Offshore use of a float plan is a good idea.

4.	Verify that all of your safety systems are in good working order.  This 
	includes registering the EPRIB.

5.	Be willing to give the boat a complete once over whenever you run hard
	aground.  If Plant had pulled his boat to check the keel, he may have 
	been in debt, but alive now.  Also electrical connections could have
	started working loose as a result of transmitted vibrations when the
	boat was being pulled free.

6+	Things we may still learn:
	How fast did events occur.
	Was the life raft in a good position.
	In hind sight, what improvements in the survival systems could have
		been installed/implimented?

Doug Claflin

    Regarding the electrical problems he had:
    
    I would be very interested to know (but never will) what the cause(s)
    of the electrical failures were.  For example, many boats are wired
    using crimp style electrical connections.  I have found these to be
    MOST unsatisfactory in my boat... the wires often pull out of the
    crimps at the slightest tug, and they tend to CORRODE between the crimp
    connection and the wire.
    
    Its far better to solder the connections even though its labor
    intensive.
    
    IMO, Mike should not have been so dependent on electricity in a small
    boat ocean environment.  Some World Class Sailors such as Hal Roth
    minimize the use of electricity even to the point of using kerosene
    lamps.  There is alot to be said for that approach.  Something that
    is not there can't go wrong.
    
    I too would be interested to know more detail about the overall
    circumstances which led to his death.
    
    Jeff

    If anyone is interested, Coyote's hull is back in Rhode Island at the
    Ted Hood Little Harbor complex in Portsmouth.  (At least as of last
    weekend it was)  
    
    Don't know what future plans for it are.
    
    John
    

    > Don't know what future plans for it are.
    
    Our society being what it is, I suspect that part of it will
    be heading to court. 
    
    JR

    I stopped by to see Mike Plant's boat this weekend. It's the most
    radical design I've ever seen. The beam is extremely wide with
    low freeboard. It looks more like a flying saucer than a boat.
    
    The hull is in good shape. I couldn't get a close look at the keel
    strut because the boat's behind a barb wire fence. The strut design
    appears to be extreme just like the rest of the boat; it's very
    long and narrow. From my viewpoint, I couldn't see any damage to the
    bottom of the strut. The keel bulb seems to have dropped off cleanly. 
    
    Paul

    
    	>>>dropped off cleanly<<<   I think I read that the end was cut
    off, and was going to be analyzed by Prof. whatzisname at MIT-
    you know, the guy they quoted every day for a week after the QEII
    grounding...
    Anyway he said he'd figure out what happened- why the metal plate
    yanked out along with the bolts-
    The article also mentioned that the boat might be put back in (racing)
    service by Mike's widow, and maybe even she would do some racing with
    it- wow, that's a sailing family!
    Anyway-
    Materials Science trudges on.
    
    Scott.

    re: -1
    
    Was Mike married? I thought that he left a girl friend behind.
    
    Joe

    What kind of shape did the boat appear to be in...... considering it
    spent a month capsized in the North Atlantic?
    
    What is the speciality/qualifications of Prof. Whuz-his-name?  Is
    he primarily a materials science/electron microscope guy?  Does he
    have Marine Architect qualifications too?
    
    I ask, because to evaluate the reliability of the information, you have
    to know the background of the person supplying the information.
    
    Its uncommon today to find somebody who is well rounded in a broad
    range of disciplines.
    
    Jeff

re .63:

The MIT professor referred to is, I think, Dr. Jerry Milgram, a 
professor of naval architecture who has consulted for various America's 
Cup campaigns, among other things. My impression is that he is the 
foremost authority in the US on boat/ship design and construction. 

    
    	Correcto-Mundo Alan.
    
    	Rather than E-Beaming or flame loops, I'd guess he'll ask his
    chemisty buddies at MIT to check the mix (enough hardener?) and
    materials scientists to check the physical stuff (Oxidized plate?
    Pulled out, torqued out...?). I mean, it's West System, not rocket
    science, right? The boat would have never seen the light of day if it
    turned into a government-style project, choosing which rivets go well
    with aluminum AND titanium at 18�C...
    
    	Jerome Milgram _is_ the local foremost authority, from a oceano-
    Massachusetts point of view-
    
    	Scott.

Mike Plant's fiance, Helen Davis, has filed a $6 million lawsuit against 
Concordia Custom Yachts, Coyote's builder, alleging negligence and 
defective workmanship. Davis paid for the salvage of Coyote. 

    I still think running the keel bulb aground and than NOT inspecting the
    keel/hull afterwards might be able to be construed as negligence on Mike
    Plants part?
    
    I would think that a lawsuit of this type could only be won (I hope) if
    the design was truely defective.  i.e. Not able to withstand the
    'NORMAL' rigors of the sea.  Running aground isn't normal in my book.
    
    Jeff

re .67:

>>> Running aground isn't normal in my book.
    
It has always been my view that it is more a question of "when" not
"if". I think that it is perfectly reasonable to expect that any yacht 
will sooner or later run aground. 

By your argument, Ford/GM should not be liable for all those exploding
Pinto/pickup truck gas tanks since collisions are not "normal" use of
automobiles, right? 

Alan

    While I recognize what you are saying Alan, isn't the analogy more like
    a dragster that has a crash and then being raced again without a
    checkup ?
    
    When I sail my Pinto, I accept that the designers added a bunch of
    go-slow engineering that gives more reliability after the inevitable
    brush with the bottom whereas the round the world types take that stuff
    out in order to get the speed.  Either way it will be interesting to
    see what happens in the court case ..... I still think that they should
    all be racing around the world in one design (with a small
    psychological ability to change the design) hulks that are safe as
    anything and we know that the first around is the best sailor.
    
    see Chris Dickson Vs. the other W 60's, pretty conclusive when you
    think about it although the time spread is amazingly close.  I just
    read an article in last month's Cruising World about the reconstructed
    "Jester" which seems to be more my style of Ocean Racer.  The Author
    was asked what his best finish in all of his transats (I think 7 races)
    and he smilingly answered "Last" !

    As a student Naval Architect the question of whats normal concerns me.
    Hopefully, the answer to that question won't be academic because I will
    have a career in the field.  Normal: Where are the limits?  Its normal
    to expect a boat will will run into foul weather and fogs, but
    grounding?  It may be normal in the sense that many boats do ground
    but how does a Naval Architect design a boat to be fast, light,
    durable, able to cross oceans safely and run aground?  How much
    aground, should the boat be able to safely withstand beating against
    rocks on a lee shore or just a minor brush with the bottom?  I
    do know what you mean though... most boats will touch bottom lightly
    with their keel.  I don't know how severe Mikes grounding was. Well,
    actually it was severe enough because the keel bulb fell off. BUT if
    the keel bulb design was defective then even a light grounding could
    have caused the eventual failure.  I suppose the answer will revolve
    around whether the design was a commonly accepted method used in the
    industry, or, whether it was a new experimental untried method.
    
    Jeff

re .70:

I think that the facts are these:

  1. Coyote grounded.
  2. The ballast keel later separated from the rest of the boat.

I don't think it has yet been established that there is any relationship
whatsoever between these two facts. The keel failure may or may not be
in any way related to the grounding. The failure may or may not be the
result of improper design, improper fabrication, or faulty materials. 

Whatever the cause and the cause aside, the design criteria for Coyote
certainly explicitly or implicitly include sufficient structural
strength to survive prolonged sailing in the roughest oceans in the
world. That she didn't survive is, in and of itself, evidence of some 
failure of design and construction, in my opinion. I'm really rather 
surprised that so few BOC and Whitbread boats have sunk. 

Alan

re .70:

You cannot design for absolute immunity from all possible failure modes.

However, you can design to make the failure modes less dangerous to the
customer. For example, if you bolt a keel on a boat, it would be good if the
bolts are visible for inspection! Also, it would be good if there are enough
bolts, and the attachments are strong enough so that the keel will not fall off
in a grounding, and so that catastrophic failure of the keel attachment is
preceeded by a substantial period of loose dangling keel. This will give the
crew some time to plan their escape. There was a boat "Martella OF" in the last
Whitbread that suffered this fate, also after a grounding! (See 1332.243) The
crew was rescued, since they had ample time to report their problem and prepare
to abandon ship.

In a competitive situation, these precautions can be deliberately thrown to
the wind (so to speak), but presumably with the knowledge and consent of the
competitor.

There are many aspects of boat construction that have the potential to create
a disaster, including such simple things as scuppers that are too small.
The responsible architect will use due care, and will not leave known hazards
in a design to save a few pennies or a few minutes. (This is what Ford did
with the Pinto, and the juries nailed 'em for it.)

--RS

    In 1989, West Shore Sail club relayed its Wednesday Night course to
    include two windwardl/leeward legs.  Unfortunately the new east leg ran
    directly across a massive boulder.  (I dove on this thing - it was
    about eight feet in diameter in 12 feet of water.  Assassin was showing
    less than .03mi cross track error from C to A and hard on the wind at
    6.6kn when.......CRASH!  dead stop.  Luckily everybody was on the rail
    and no one was hurt.  We were parked on the rock.  Finally someone back
    the main and we got pushed off by wind and current.  We took on 4" over
    the floorboard before sailing the 3mi back to dock.  
    
    Damage = $10,900  The bolts held, the fairbody did not.
    
    We were the first of seven
    
    Jazzy, J29 = $11,000
    Surely Too = $8,900
    Quest,     = $14,000
    
    and three other I cannot remember.  I doubt there is a fin keel boat
    made today that can take that impact without major structural damage. 
    Getting stuck in the mud at 2kn is not what I'm talking about.  That's
    hardly worthy of mention.  When someone says "grounding", this
    experience is what always comes to mind.  
    
    I cannot imagine going into bluewater without serious inspection after
    grounding.
    
    
    

    I thought there were questions regarding Mikes grounding?  i.e. whether
    he hit hard enough to have made an inspection advisable?  I believe
    money was a factor in the decision not to inspect the boat out of the
    water.
    
    It is interesting that he did in fact ground out, and later the keel
    bulb fell off.  
    
    Jeff

    I agree w/ .73 completely. A real hard grounding on rock at hull speed
    is an impulse load that produces tremendous forces. Nothing short of
    a full keel can be considered a safe if hard groundings are
    included as part of the design criteria.
    
    I've seen the Coyote hull, it is radical. That keel bulb was
    cantilevered about 14 feet on a narrow foil shaped strut. I've
    seen Allied Bank and Hunter's Child, they're about the same.
    It's clear to me, to have a competitive design in this arena,
    hard groundings are not considered part of the design criteria.