Betram 630 "Absolutely" sunk

[VetteLT193]

In a short nutshell, 63 foot Bertram sunk. Bertram says they hit a buoy... Owner says they hit a wave.

Scuba evidence: http://www.yachtforums.com/forums/general-yachting-discussion/12624-yachtforums-exclusive-underwater-pictures-sunk-bertram-630-a.html

Pretty interesting for anyone interested in the way boats are built, etc.

[MOP]

Years back I did some insurance diving, even though I know from being a broker that the late Bertrams are no where near the quality of the older boats some things about the photos don't look right. For a buoy strike to blow the front deck off and the transom also showing such damage just looks odd. I decided to look through the blog on the site, it is Bertram that is saying they hit something, no matter how you look at the photos they show of no damage like that. I believe what the captain says they came off a big wave and stuffed it into the next and the boat blew apart, that is exactly what it looks like. I inspected a 48 Viking that stuffed a wave at speed and the deck blew off of it, it did not sink. Both the yard and myself were surprised to find #12 sheet metal screws holding the deck to the hull, all of the forward cabinetry was pulled loose from the hull. I spoke with the captain he said the hull flexed outward about one foot each side almost in slow motion as the deck popped up, it took on very little water he said the pumps ran for maybe 30 minutes on the way back through the inlet. These newer cored boats are faster but should be driven easier in big seas! Anyone that thinks the 90's vintage Bertams are anywhere near what they used to be you are dreaming! Believe me I surveyed a few and my clients and I walked away, one in particular an owner of Bertrams for at least 20 years could not believe the surveyors report and all the pencil marks showing areas of voids! Just like the blog stated Bertram needs new owners!

[mrfixxall]

From looking at the pic's i think they mistaken a buoy for a super liner cruise ship..I can't believe that a 2-- lb buoy would do all that damage to a 30 mph boat?

[realbold]

Wow looks like it hit a tsunami

[BUIZILLA]

that's NOT the first late model that came apart... another one did last tear around Stuart inlet, and just made it to the drydock...

[Donzi Vol]

Very interesting, and very sad. Glad the crew is ok.

This makes aluminum look pretty good...

[silverghost]

Strange also that the transom is ripped-off and the rudder it's stuffing box is pulled-out & back on an angle.
Looks like the aft part of the boat hit a submarine sail c. tower.

Long live the Old Bertram 31 ! One of my all time favorite boats from the 70s !

[VetteLT193]

I browsed the 40-ish page long thread about what people thought about it. there is one guy who supposedly works down the road from Bertram and knows something about the core they use. Basically says it's junk and is the cause for the de-lamination. Who knows... either way, Betram's story about it hitting a buoy isn't going to sell them any boats after seeing the pictures.

One theory on the transom coming off is the force of the water running into and through the boat. Meaning: you are going 30 MPH doing your thing. the front of the boat gets blown off like it was attacked by a giant can opener. Water rushes into the boat from the front (at 30 MPH) runs through the boat and blows through the boat until it hits the transom... boom, transom itself hangs in there but there isn't enough support to keep it attached to the sides. It seems to me that transoms are built to be pushed on from the outside rather than pushed on from the inside so it does make some sense.

[BUIZILLA]

water coming through the cabin didn't blow out the transom... it would have taken out the rear salon bulkhead first before it did that, and it's intact.... there are no pic's showing the transom piece(s) in another location, maybe they didn't find it... looks like a clean break at the corners... when you see the older Bert pic's of them falling of 25-30 footers with no issues it's obviously a lamination/bonding issue..

[BlownCrewCab]

In the 80's I painted boats for Tempest Marine, they had a disgruntled employee put "Modifier C" or "Wax" in the resin for one of the scedules of layup for a 44', Between Miami & Bimini the Laminate came apart and what looked like a boat coming out of the mold, A Whole Boat Popped off except for the Transom where there was too much connecting the two, what was left was a perfectly fine boat that looked like it was built inside-out, floated just fine, but was Raw Glass all except the transom, they took it back and re-Gelled it..Quite a site to see the whole boat missing it's outer skin..

[gcarter]

I suppose the incoming water sank the boat, if it settled by the stern, the impact of hitting the bottom could have popped the transom and broken out the rudder stuffing boxes...........

[gcarter]

If a boat loses all bouancy, it could hit a reasonably high speed before hitting the bottom.

[BUIZILLA]

In the 80's I painted boats for Tempest Marine, they had a disgruntled employee put "Modifier C" or "Wax" in the resin for one of the scedules of layup for a 44', Between Miami & Bimini the Laminate came apart and what looked like a boat coming out of the mold, A Whole Boat Popped off except for the Transom where there was too much connecting the two, what was left was a perfectly fine boat that looked like it was built inside-out, floated just fine, but was Raw Glass all except the transom, they took it back and re-Gelled it..Quite a site to see the whole boat missing it's outer skin.. was this the one with Merlin's and ASD's? owned by a French guy and ended up in Grand Cayman?

[BlownCrewCab]

was this the one with Merlin's and ASD's? owned by a French guy and ended up in Grand Cayman?

I don't recall where it went (I did get paid to stripe it twice though:yes:), Very well could have been Merlins, that was around the highpoint of their existance.

Hows your corn guzzler?

[Ghost]

Buoy strike is ridiculous for all the reasons mentioned. I'll add one more--you'd see scratching from the thing moving across the glass.

But for the big picture. Bow stuffed into a wave. Sides of hull move inward. Deck pops mostly off due to sides moving inward. A huge mass of water is on top of the deck at this point, heading aft. The sides of the deck, where it turns up to the bridge, are overhanging the hullsides, and they tear under the weight of water on the bow. The mass of water hits the front of the salon, and the tears in the two sides continue and meet. (And/or, the flexing of the hull's nose upward relative to the stern compresses the deck, and it gives at the corner where it turns upward to the bridge, completing the tears in the sides.)

Now the entire bow deck is loose EXCEPT the strongest bit, the last few feet up at the bow. When the deck tears off, it goes off the port side. This cuts the starboard hull/deck joint off cleanly to the point of the bow. The port side of the hull/deck joint is the last part to give way, and it tears like a hangnail, with the torn-away bow deck taking a piece of the port bow hullside away with it.

I am curious about the transom and rudder damage...need to ponder that some more. Do they know where the transom ended up and I missed it?

[joseph m. hahnl]

:rofl::rofl::rofl:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcU4t6zRAKg[/URL][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcU4t6zRAKg"]

[Just Say N20]

But for the big picture. Bow stuffed into a wave. Sides of hull move inward. Deck pops mostly off due to sides moving inward.


I suspect the sides would move OUTWARD, for several reasons.

For one thing, the natural shape of the boat is convex at the hull/deck joint. If the bow was stuffed into a wave, the hull would automatically flex outward. (If you wear slip on shoes, take one off and look at it; the sides are convex like the hull of a boat. Now "pretend" to stuff the bow into a wave. This will cause the sole to flex in the middle, and the sides to push out.)

Additionally, for the sides to move inward, they would have to shatter/destroy bulkheads and other structural things, that don't like to compress. It would take far less force to destroy the shoe box joint at the hull/deck. And if the was poor adhesion between the coring and the glass, there wouldn't be much structural integrity provided by the bulkheads/structures inside the boat, and the inner glass would just pull away from the coring, as is shown in many of the pictures.

Strange occurrence, whatever actually happened.

[handfulz28]

1 in a million combination of circumstances. Poor layup. Unseen internal weakness and failures. Scrapes the buoy, slices the skin, pounding through the waves and eventually blows the deck off. Between already filling with water, and now having the starboard side ripped open, she floats only long enough to get the raft and get off.

It's only in 80ft of water, so it's not like it accelerated on a 1000' trip to the bottom. I'm guessing it dragged along the bottom finally ripping off the transom and tearing out the rudder, especially since the thing wasn't put together all that well to begin with.

Crappy story for all involved, glad nobody was hurt. Just reinforces my desire for the classics...take a beating and keep on floating...

[Ghost]

I suspect the sides would move OUTWARD, for several reasons...

Interesting. Good point. You pretty well sold me. (Funny, I think the subsequent effects would be pretty similar.) And I swear that bit on the port bow hullside is where the otherwise liberated deck tore off a piece of the hull.

But in general, I think you are right and there is probably a bit of a folding effect, where the bow is raised and the hullsides spread. That would account for the bulhead breaking free as shown in the pictures too.

Whatever the case, I don't see a buoy involved in the structural damage--that seems ridiculous given the pictures.

[Just Say N20]

I don't see the buoy fitting into it either. For that buoy to have done that, I think it would have had to work like a pin popping a balloon. The hull would have to be stressed to the max, and ready to "explode" at the slightest structural failure.

[Walt. H.]

I don't see the buoy fitting into it either. For that buoy to have done that, I think it would have had to work like a pin popping a balloon. The hull would have to be stressed to the max, and ready to "explode" at the slightest structural failure.

Yes because remember its just a round floating 200 lbs fiberglass buoy thats easily deflected when hit by a multi ton vessel and not a stationary structure that would hook and tear into it like a can-opener.

Lets add another possible scenario, he hit a large submerged swimming sea mammal at the exact same time he stuffed it, plausible?

[gold-n-rod]

Yes because remember its just a round floating 200 lbs fiberglass buoy thats easily deflected when hit by a multi ton vessel and not a stationary structure that would hook and tear into it like a can-opener.
Lets add another possible scenario, he hit a large submerged swimming sea mammal at the exact same time he stuffed it, plausible?

You mean a Manatee?

Damn those license plate people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Walt. H.]

You mean a Manatee?
Damn those license plate people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hah ha' they're not the only only big creature that swims in front of boats so I didn't want to exclude anything else by just mentioning a manatee, but yeah they are most likely to get in the way.

By the way, I don't work for the DMV....! :confused:Licence plate people???

[silverghost]

In my opinion the "buoy strike theory" is just Bertram's & possibly the Insurance Co's way of avoiding or limiting liability !
I see the Legal Eagles at work here~
It was that theory or the "Rogue Whale Theory"~
These are the same Rogue Whales that the Japanese Research ships are looking for !

[gold-n-rod]

Hah ha' they're not the only only big creature that swims in front of boats so I didn't want to exclude anything else by just mentioning a manatee, but yeah they are most likely to get in the way.
By the way, I don't work for the DMV....! :confused:Licence plate people???

Doesn't Florida have a special "Save the Manatee" license plate? If so, they are to blame for the unfortunate sinkage of the "Sloop Bertram B!"

[My grandfather and me.]

[Pull up the captain ashore, let me go home.]

[I want to go home]

That. Is. All.

;)

[CHACHI]

Cardboards out....

Thanks for posting that video Joe.

Every time I see it, I chuckle, chuckle hard.

Ken

[Walt. H.]

Doesn't Florida have a special "Save the Manatee" license plate?
;)
Hell' I wouldn't know, i'm located 8 states northeast of Fla. but I bet you're on to something, maybe now his insurance company can file a suit against the state rather then the manufacturer?
:shades:

[Craig S]

Ghost...yours actually sounds pretty good.

Makes me wish we had found a way to glass my hull/deck joint.

[handfulz28]

Did it say anywhere whether Adventure had ARGs?

[zelatore]

Did it say anywhere whether Adventure had ARGs?

I didn't see anything about the boat having a gyro, although Bertram likely offers it as an option on that model. Actually, with a boat that size you'd want 2 ARGs installed.

That said, I don't think it would matter one way or the other. The ARGs only affect roll, not pitch (at least the ones I've played with). And while they exert a huge load on the boat's stringers, that load would be toward the center/back, in the engine room, as they are too big to install forward near the bow. A couple of those guys could certainly exert enough load to tear up a poorly installed stringer, but they don't put out more force than the engines themselves, so I'd think if they caused a failure it would be a manufacturing defect, and not something directly related to the ARGs.

[handfulz28]

Really just "useless trivia" as I like to call it more so than a potential cause. I saw a piece on Ship Shape TV a while back - the 630 gets two ARG units.

How big of a wave/sea state would you need to stuff a 63 footer moving at ~30kts? And would the boat make 30kts in those seas?

[Schnook]

I suspect the sides would move OUTWARD, for several reasons.
For one thing, the natural shape of the boat is convex at the hull/deck joint. If the bow was stuffed into a wave, the hull would automatically flex outward. (If you wear slip on shoes, take one off and look at it; the sides are convex like the hull of a boat. Now "pretend" to stuff the bow into a wave. This will cause the sole to flex in the middle, and the sides to push out.)
Additionally, for the sides to move inward, they would have to shatter/destroy bulkheads and other structural things, that don't like to compress. It would take far less force to destroy the shoe box joint at the hull/deck. And if the was poor adhesion between the coring and the glass, there wouldn't be much structural integrity provided by the bulkheads/structures inside the boat, and the inner glass would just pull away from the coring, as is shown in many of the pictures.
Strange occurrence, whatever actually happened.
Interesting question about the forces at work on the hull, because in the act of stuffing I would think the sharp point of the bow breaks the water first, not a flat surface like the sole of a shoe. But that's just speculation.

[Ghost]

Interesting question about the forces at work on the hull, because in the act of stuffing I would think the sharp point of the bow breaks the water first, not a flat surface like the sole of a shoe. But that's just speculation.

Agreed. I think it is theoretically possible to basically poke into a wave, with the predominant effect being compression of the hullsides inward at first. (Before the effect of buoyancy overcomes that with a folding action, lifting the bow relative to the stern (the shoe flex analogy.))

However, I suspect N2O is right and I was just wrong about the chance of this. And the real likelihood is less of a "poke into the wall" effect and more of a "slam the bow down so hard you then plow the bow forward and under", if I am characterizing that properly. And thus the effect is to try to fold the boat's bow upward.

I imagine some other folks with tons of experience might weigh in on this, but this is how I think I understand it now, FWIW.

Mike

[Ghost]

Ghost...yours actually sounds pretty good.

Makes me wish we had found a way to glass my hull/deck joint.

Thanks.

As for your hull/deck joint, I always used to think that. Dunno what is best. I would think a good third piece that fit in the angle between the two, triangulating the joint outward from the thin glass-on-glass strip would help, if the fasteners were done right.

As for the sunken 630, I think most of my speculation there could have some truth even if the initial hull flex was a folding action, with the bow going up and the hullsides going out. Either way, I think you can tear the corner where the deck turns upward along the front of the salon, and I think the hangnail effect on the port bow is real--that looks like the last part to give when the deck came loose.

The transom amazes me, but I wonder if the spreading of the hullsides could have torn the vertical corners of the transom, leaving only the edge along the bottom of the transom. It seems more likely than doing it by compression, and it might also explain the ripped out bulkheads.

If the hullsides splayed out with the nose under, the bow would have filled with water instantly and this might have sent her down by the bow, which might explain the angle of the rudders, getting kicked aft, not forward. I still wonder where the transom piece is, and what tore it the rest of the way off.

The engineering aspect of failures is almost always interesting, in that only a small portion of a design usually fails in its intended place/orientation. After that, you have to imagine what will happen once things start to twist, slide, whatever. The book numbers on the limits usually suggest things are stronger than they are, and the failure finds its own path of least resistance. Would have been fun to study more of this than I did, which was not much.

Mike

[BlownCrewCab]

Ghost...yours actually sounds pretty good.

Makes me wish we had found a way to glass my hull/deck joint.

Ha, My 18 Barrel Back was glassed together (where ever possible) and some people on this board (That live in the n/e) criticized me for it. they asked how would the hull & Deck be seperated Next time for a rebuild..well I'll hire the same little Kid that glassed it-to go in there and cut it, he'll be lookin for work.

[Scott Pearson]

My thoughts...not that it means anything. I think it was some sort of explosion on board.

But, what the hell do I know.

[Just Say N20]

My thoughts...not that it means anything. I think it was some sort of explosion on board.
But, what the hell do I know.

Why do you suggest this?

[McGary911]

Damn, it took me 3 days to read that thread. Interesting read for sure. I'll go back to read more. For anyone waiting for all of the details to come out, they'll be waiting for a looooong time.

I don't think the buoy theory explains this, unless a more accurate pic of the buoy looks like this:

http://www.bactec.com/images/news/main/1255965638.jpg

[BUIZILLA]

Bertram wants you to believe the buoy also took out the entire transom...

yeah, righttttt

[joseph m. hahnl]

If the deck went under the boat after it came off:idea: . Then KA-BLAM:propeller: there goes the prop an ruder:yes:.

As far as an explosion goes, water can more explosive than TNT.


http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/geology/publications/inf/72-2/sec5.htm

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/geology/publications/inf/72-2/images/fig20.jpg

[Ghost]

Going with that as a quick aside--there is a show about the scablands mystery (how a region with an unusual landscape was formed). If you like those sort of subjects, I highly recommend it. It's fascinating all the way round. And now back to our regularly scheduled Bertram sinking.