Helia 44 abandoned off Puerto Rico

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

Boat came ashore. Not this photo answers many questions except it was not a collision and of course the boat never sank.Attachment 205278

The escape hatches appear to be open, but cant tell anything about their condition otherwise.

Interesting how these wreck threads almost always degrade into a big fight. Why is that?

[mbuckely]

More photos on the USCG Facebook page

https://m.facebook.com/uscoastguardsectorsanjuan/

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by skipperpete

There was a company called "Floatpac" in Australia that made exactly this device, I saw a video of a flooded ballast keel monohull being recovered as a demo. Maybe the market was too small to sustain the product. You can however buy airbags used by 4WD guys that will lift 4 tonnes so maybe buy a few of them and DIY .

FYI. Emergency inflatable floatation bags.

https://www.turtlepac.com/products/i...k-containment/
https://www.turtlepac.com/products/u...buoyancy-bags/

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by belizesailor

The escape hatches appear to be open, but cant tell anything about their condition otherwise.

Interesting how these wreck threads almost always degrade into a big fight. Why is that?

Because forum posters fail to maintain their netiquette.

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Because forum posters fail to maintain their netiquette.

But wrecks in particular, like anchors anchoring and multi vs mono, seems to be one or those things that brings it out.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by belizesailor

But wrecks in particular, like anchors anchoring and multi vs mono, seems to be one or those things that brings it out.

Indeed it does make one wonder how those that loose control of the appropriateness of their replies to a thread would handle the stressful situation of a boat flooding or wrecking given they can't even maintain proper forum decorum.

[RaymondR]

Thats a sad sight.

Even if the hatches open outward any large amount of water surging around inside is likely to pop them open and render the vessel unsalvagable.

[chris in SG]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

Thats a sad sight.

Even if the hatches open outward any large amount of water surging around inside is likely to pop them open and render the vessel unsalvagable.

Somehow I doubt that is how the hatches opened but if it is, then it's certainly evidence of inadequate hatch design.

But why are we speculating? I thought I'd followed this thread carefully and I don't recall seeing any interview with the crew. Surely, even if they can only recall a sudden influx of water, they could confirm that it started in one hull and then flowed across the bridgedeck, etc. Surely they must have had time to peer into the (first) flooded hull from the bridgedeck and see whether water is entering from under the steps - the location of the emergency hatch - because that massive 'hole' would be inches away from the crew who, you imagine, would be kneeling on the bridgedeck floor.. Apologies for the additional speculation.

If one hatch failed, why is the other one open? Surely not failed at the same time. The crew were saved before the cat lost its rig and turned turtle, so there was no need for anyone to open the 2nd escape hatch. Aside from Raymond's suggestion, the only other possibilities are that the hatches were accidentally left open by the crew OR were opened from the outside by curious beachcombers or the coastguard.

[AllenRbrts]

Another photos show both saildrives still on the hull, so that was not a cause of the accident. If and I repeat if the escape lens came out, then frame will be “open” because the latch handles would have exited with the lens. Based on the other coast guard photos, it seems they wanted to get into the hulls based on holes cut, so they probably opened closed escape hatches as another means of entry.

[NevilleCat]

Is that the boat from the original post of this thread?
Bummer

[AllenRbrts]

Originally Posted by NevilleCat

Is that the boat from the original post of this thread?

Bummer

Not actually confirmed but seems pretty darn likely given both were FP Helias in Puerto Rico. Yes very sad.

[Valiente]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

I think we all have to admit that there's a world of difference between "quality issues" on some boats and "These boats - Lagoon and FP are not built to go offshore" and completely implausibly "All of the lagoon 560 and 620 that goes across the atlantic ( all of them ) have to go back to the factory for structural repair" among other ridiculous unsupported assertions from our friend pguillemin. The first is a perfectly reasonable statement about any new boat, be it an Oyster or Swan or a Lagoon or FP. The second is borderline if not full on libel and absurd. I get that you're trying to avoid conflict, but at some point you have to call complete and utter BS for what it is. Close to none of the assertions that he's making about entire fleets are even remotely close to true, and given that we all strive to make this a place for useful information it's somewhat important that someone not be able to claim to be a dealer and spout utter nonsense without being called on it without mincing words.

Of course i try to avoid a personalized discussion.
However,some of the design and quality control issues of major serial manufacturers are serious. if that makes them suitable or not to go off-shore under serious weather is subjetive.
Examples that come to my mind:
- escape hatch recall
- mast base recall
- whole mast recall
- bulkhead tabbing issues.
- 50ft Cat engine compartment not watertight, vessel lost. Sales documentation, brochures.. modified by manufacturer afterwards.
- 45ft model with structural problems after heavy pounding.

if you follow forums, blogs, etc....most serious ocean going sailors perform many reinforcements on underdeck plates....even bulkheads.

so, i lean toward the statement that ex-factory, some (or many) mass produced models are lacking as all weather, ocean going vessels, and need further work (not just aftermarket equipping)!

And.....it seems to be a common practise among the big manufacturers, to use their dealers not just as claim managers, but also as legal firewall in between the owners and factory in case of legal claims.

Those are my perceptions of the state of business, even if i intend to sail the world on one of those boats . Your mileage may vary though.
-

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by Valiente

Of course i try to avoid a personalized discussion.
However,some of the design and quality control issues of major serial manufacturers are serious. if that makes them suitable or not to go off-shore under serious weather is subjetive.
Examples that come to my mind:
- escape hatch recall
- mast base recall
- whole mast recall
- bulkhead tabbing issues.
- 50ft Cat engine compartment not watertight, vessel lost. Sales documentation, brochures.. modified by manufacturer afterwards.
- 45ft model with structural problems after heavy pounding.

if you follow forums, blogs, etc....most serious ocean going sailors perform many reinforcements on underdeck plates....even bulkheads.

so, i lean toward the statement that ex-factory, some (or many) mass produced models are lacking as all weather, ocean going vessels, and need further work (not just aftermarket equipping)!

And.....it seems to be a common practise among the big manufacturers, to use their dealers not just as claim managers, but also as legal firewall in between the owners and factory in case of legal claims.

Those are my perceptions of the state of business, even if i intend to sail the world on one of those boats . Your mileage may vary though.
-

If this is the case, and I don't doubt it often is, for this kind of money, why the heck aren't more people doing proven, custom boats??

It seems borderline insane to spend the amount of money one if these things costs new and end up with a so-so boat.

I don't see why everyone wants a prefab boat instead of new construction they supervise to be sure it's high quality and exactly what they're looking for. It can be thought of like a house in many ways.

Instant gratification?

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by daletournier

I ask this regularly, how do you explain that I see them off shore in faraway places and they are having no more trouble than anyone else?

double u mentioned here or elsewhere that the production boats hes anchored near in Tahiti currently all look fine and sailed there!

Here's my take from what I've experienced, many old Taiwanese boats arent built as well as many think they are, most new boats are more capable than most believe they are and most really dont know what they are talking about, they repeat bar room chatter and arent actually crossing oceans seeing the reality of what's happening......dosent the fact that people like me are actually seeing these boats successfully circumnavigating offer real proof that they can?

Being an American heavy forum limits perspective, talk to french sailors about their modern designed twin rudder boats, while most here still idolize the likes of Bob Perry many others from around the world are sailing fast ,comfortable cool looking monos and cats around the world without their hulls collapsing.

I agree with your perspective. To clarify, I don’t think it’s as much a structural issue as numerous small corners cut during production. Like cheaper brass through hulls and seacocks, and escape hatch weakness like those detailed in this forum.

However there have also been larger issues like the beneteau rudder issue which was a major structural underdesign where the rudder post was supported by plexus glued plywood box

I agree that heavy does not mean stronger. There aren’t absolutes here.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by malbert73

I agree that heavy does not mean stronger. There aren’t absolutes here.

And in fact, it often means the opposite since as everything gets heavier, the structural reinforcement requirements go up, the engine size goes up, the sail area required goes up, which in turn makes everything heavier yet again. It can become a negative design spiral making everything heavy.