Has the Bayesian yacht sinking been discussed?

[Anonymous]

Are there updates?

[Anonymous]

Not that I’m aware of.

[Anonymous]

Here you go. Salvage to begin in April. https://www.boatinternational.com/yachts/news/bayesian-sailing-yacht-sinking-salvage-dates

[Anonymous]

The yacht maker is suing the NYT over its article that suggested it was primarily a design error issue

[Anonymous]

They were gonna try to lift it recently but then a Dutch diver died and they stopped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are there updates?

Design flaw.

This was released a month or two ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The yacht maker is suing the NYT over its article that suggested it was primarily a design error issue

That’s dumb. The article was based on the lawsuit discovery and experts. NYTimes just summarized the trial. My kid did his physics class project on it. Maybe he should get sued too. Ballast be damned!

[Anonymous]

No updates. One of the divers died during the start of the operation to raise the vessel. It’s going to take a while to have a conclusive (or not) report after the shipwreck has been inspected.

The Yacht Report on YouTube featured periodic updates.

[Anonymous]

It’s obviously a design flaw.

[Anonymous]

Stupid yacht was too top heavy and off-keel to make it through a storm.
The buyer and seller pushed for a super tall heavy mast to show off and there you go.
I know people who would never have gone to sleep on a boat mis-designed like that.

[Anonymous]

Death trap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are there updates?

Darwin wins again.

Common sense prevails, and vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The name isn’t the problem. It was that the mast had to be the tallest single mast in the world.

It wasn’t rigged for sail while sitting at anchor, so I don’t understand why you think that is somehow damning.

So it’s the tallest sloop ever made. Ok? And?

It’s basically a scaled-up design, so nothing about it is exactly bleeding edge design. I would argue the retractable keel, assuming it’s retracted while at anchor, which it probably is, is more at-fault than the mast.

Even with sails down the mast and huge boom might have contributed to this boat reaching its tipping point and unable to reset

This. The mast was supersized and heavy. The boom was heavy. The keel was up.

Keel was up but according to builders regs that was appropriate. So they’re gonna try to pin it on the crew but this seems like a design flaw to me.

It’s appropriate to have the keel up while *at anchor* - which it was. The problem was, the weather conditions created by the storm did not reflect the typical weather conditions of a moored vessel. They were more similar to a Cat II-III hurricane, albeit briefly. And during those conditions, the boat would *definitely* have the keel extended, to achieve extra leverage/stability from the fulcrum-effect of the extended keel, and offset the wind loading from the bare mast.

When they put the ship to sleep for the evening, the weather conditions dictated normal mooring conditions - the keel would be up. But conditions obviously changed very rapidly in the early morning, to a situation that would absolutely require the keel to be down.

Is that a design flaw? Not in my educated opinion as an engineer and lifelong boater. It’s operator error. The crew member standing watch should’ve noted the weather changing rapidly and deployed the keel. If the keel were down it wouldn’t have gone over. That’s human error, not a design flaw.

This is on the crew. Specifically the watch-stander and the Captain.

So there shouldn’t be an allowance for less than perfect human performance in a split second emergency? Really? That seems like a design flaw to me.

Hey Perini shill, how’re you doing?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/14/world/europe/bayesian-superyacht-sinking-report.html?unlocked_article_code=1.HU8.fqCF.XRnKIJilIP7g&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare