# Vendee Globe boat in trouble



## cb32863 (Oct 5, 2009)

Hitting a container at 17kts or so does a bit of damage.

News - Thomas Ruyant in serious difficulty - Vendée Globe 2016-2017


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

DUDE!
Ain't yachting fun?


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Yikes...

Doesn't look like the bow section will get through two days.. looks fairly calm, but always hard to tell on video.

I feel for the guy - lots of effort and investment there.

Side note.. I think the bean bag bed is brilliant!


----------



## Barquito (Dec 5, 2007)

So, if he hit something and came to a dead stop, why would he see what he hit? I would think they would both just be sitting there in the water for a bit.

I suppose seat belts and airbags with be required equipment soon.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I do nothing close to the vendee crowd but this is my nightmare. Offshore I would say 95%+ of boats are under AP or vane. At night with any kind of sea running or in the absence of a clear ski and good moon odds of seeing anything in time to react is nil. From what I've seen many watchstanders scan the horizon and look at the screens from time to time. This is especially true after a few days of voyaging. Even on my own boat I've been known to briefly go down below to get a snack, something to drink or clothes. Would think other than AIS and radar alarms these hardy folks have no watch when sleeping.
I know industry says loose containers are extraordinarily rare but I've seen them, cars with their new protective plastic, bulks of wood, whales and other detritus sufficiently large to sink a boat. Yes cats have two crash zones and even small monos like mine have a collision bulkhead but a collision like he experienced going from even 8-10kt hull speed to zero in a fraction of a second is likely to cause bodily harm. 
What a nightmare. I keep telling myself miles traveled passagemaking are safer than driving but it's still scary.


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

outbound said:


> ...
> I know industry says loose containers are extraordinarily rare but I've seen them, cars with their new protective plastic, bulks of wood, whales and other detritus sufficiently large to sink a boat.


CARS? I would think that they would be on the bottom, or in a car carrier.

The thought sailing at night at 7kts, and hitting something solid, like a container floating at the surface, in my O'day 35 scares the bejeezzus out of me.


----------



## Barquito (Dec 5, 2007)

What are the salvage rules for floating cars?


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

outbound said:


> I keep telling myself miles traveled passagemaking are safer than driving but it's still scary.


As someone who has hit both a container and a sleeping whale (I can only assume he was sleeping?) it's just not something I think about even occasionally. No more so than I worry about my vessel being struck by something falling from space, and I've had several meteorites strike within the visible horizon at sea.
The only real defense against this sort of encounter becoming a catastrophe is to buy a vessel that can sustain such an encounter with little or no damage. The Vendee Globe boats are certainly not of this ilk.
As mentioned, even the best watchstander isn't going to be able to see a danger of this sort in the dark and most probably not even in daylight, unless conditions are benign.
From what I've read on this and other forums, few even take their watchstanding responsibilities seriously. Cowering under the dodger listening to music or a podcast is not acceptable watchstanding etiquette on any vessel I'm captain of. A watch should be stood at the helm, without distractions like music or podcasts, the watchstander instantly able to take any action necessary to avoid catastrophe. Everybody else onboard is relying on that watchstander to do whatever possible to insure their safety.
Perhaps the watchstander couldn't avoid a first strike from a container, a tree/log or stop a breaking shroud, stay, tearing sail, etc., but being alert and in position to turn off the vane gear or autopilot and take some action, just might avoid a second strike, save the rig or the sail.
I've known cruisers who go to bed early in the evening and rise at dawn, leaving the boat to tend itself all night. Now that's something that terrifies me.


----------



## bletso (Oct 17, 2013)

capta said:


> From what I've read on this and other forums, few even take their watchstanding responsibilities seriously. Cowering under the dodger listening to music or a podcast is not acceptable watchstanding etiquette on any vessel I'm captain of. A watch should be stood at the helm, without distractions like music or podcasts, the watchstander instantly able to take any action necessary to avoid catastrophe. .


Now let's get down to the real world. I am sure you drive your car with no music and both hands on the wheel! These guys know the risks at the onset. Like young adults, they probably think it's worth it. Yes it is an insane race, but people get killed in a lot in their "sports" entertainment. i.e. race cars, hang gliding, scuba, you get the gist of it. :captain:


----------



## mbianka (Sep 19, 2014)

I get nervous just heading down below to make a quick sandwich. Agree with Capta about the nixing the music underway I save it for when I'm at anchor. I actually like to hear the sound of the water, birds etc... But, I also like to be able to hear the sounds on the boat that could be a tip off of something wrong like the bilge pump cycling on and off. 

Still wish these racers had bow mounted recording cameras so we could find out exactly what they hit.


----------



## cb32863 (Oct 5, 2009)

Current update translated from French;

"The Skipper of the "Le Souffle Du Nord pour Le Projet Imagine / Vendée Globe" is currently trying to get his sailboat heavily injured, due to a collision, to a safe harbour namely bluff in New Zealand. Thomas Ruyant has developed well that night, he arrived in the area "protected" by the southern tip and is currently 80 miles of the ultimate goal. He moves between 8 and 12 knots but the situation is particularly difficult."


----------



## Waterrat (Sep 8, 2007)

The longitudinal stiffness of those Open 60's must be insanely huge. Even with all that damage he can cruise along at 8-12 knots and not be torn apart. Basically 30K lbs plus all stores etc cruising at 17 knots instant stop. The force is amazing. 

It is hard to tell from damage where hull impacted UFO. He didn't mention damage to keel or rudder. Do you think he hit bow above waterline? 

My hypothesis is that the southern ocean has more shipping containers then the rest of the oceans. Premised on high volume of shipping combined with high median wave height.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

bletso said:


> Now let's get down to the real world. I am sure you drive your car with no music and both hands on the wheel! These guys know the risks at the onset. Like young adults, they probably think it's worth it. Yes it is an insane race, but people get killed in a lot in their "sports" entertainment. i.e. race cars, hang gliding, scuba, you get the gist of it. :captain:


My "car" is a Zodiac Mark 1 Classic, so no wheel, sorry.
My comments regarding watchstanding obviously weren't be meant for those singlehanding. I can't see how you wouldn't understand that. They were regarding cruisers primarily and perhaps some delivery crews, not singlehanded ocean racers. 
I wasn't in any way putting down the guys or the boats in the Vendee Globe, just stating that their boats are very lightweight, designed for speed and ease of handling, not surviving a collision of any kind at sea. Almost all of us out here sailing have made some compromise in this regard or we'd all be sailing around in 4 knot steelies. It's just that some boats are heavier built than others and I didn't want to start a battle by naming specific manufacturers.
As an ex-Alaska crab fisherman, I really don't give much thought to the 'dangers' of the cruising life. Perhaps I should, with all the mosquito born diseases in the islands and the very real possibility that I too could be killed by a stingray while snorkeling, as Steve Irwin was. lol


----------



## Waterrat (Sep 8, 2007)

capta said:


> My "car" is a Zodiac Mark 1 Classic, so no wheel, sorry.
> My comments regarding watchstanding obviously weren't be meant for those singlehanding. I can't see how you wouldn't understand that. They were regarding cruisers primarily and perhaps some delivery crews, not singlehanded ocean racers.
> I wasn't in any way putting down the guys or the boats in the Vendee Globe, just stating that their boats are very lightweight, designed for speed and ease of handling, not surviving a collision of any kind at sea. Almost all of us out here sailing have made some compromise in this regard or we'd all be sailing around in 4 knot steelies. It's just that some boats are heavier built than others and I didn't want to start a battle by naming specific manufacturers.
> As an ex-Alaska crab fisherman, I really don't give much thought to the 'dangers' of the cruising life. Perhaps I should, with all the mosquito born diseases in the islands and the very real possibility that I too could be killed by a stingray while snorkeling, as Steve Irwin was. lol


Gentlemen's bet Capta. The scantling numbers on this Open 60 would be significantly more robust then your sailboat. Knowing virtually nothing about either vessel. A sailboat traveling at the speed of these Open 60's, with huge sail areas and cantilever keels, open ocean long distance racing etc. They are light but they are strong as a brick sh*t house. Though quite a bit faster then said house. The difference in fiberglass weave, resin type and glass to resin ratios, cores, etc would be significantly stronger then roving, mat and polyester resin.


----------



## Lazerbrains (Oct 25, 2015)

Here is an interesting video of crash tests with a more typical cruising boat, and typical cruising boat speeds. They test against various objects: floating log, container, and even a rock jetty. 
I am suprised and somewhat reassured and the lack of damage to the boat.


----------



## Waterrat (Sep 8, 2007)

I have seen this video before. I also found it reassuring. There is a huge difference in force between a 8K boat at6- 7 knot compared to 30k at 17. Pretty wild.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Waterrat said:


> Gentlemen's bet Capta. The scantling numbers on this Open 60 would be significantly more robust then your sailboat. Knowing virtually nothing about either vessel. A sailboat traveling at the speed of these Open 60's, with huge sail areas and cantilever keels, open ocean long distance racing etc. They are light but they are strong as a brick sh*t house. Though quite a bit faster then said house. The difference in fiberglass weave, resin type and glass to resin ratios, cores, etc would be significantly stronger then roving, mat and polyester resin.


Though I also have no familiarity with the Open 60's, I wouldn't argue that they were very well designed for their purpose, but I doubt that, other than a crash bulkhead forward, they were designed to for impact resistance. How many have circled the globe at terrific speeds and had a collision as this boat has?
As with anything else, a designer must work with the most likely scenario, not the most unlikely.
One does not design a home in Florida with the same attention to earthquake probability that one does in California. Nor hurricanes in California, yet.


----------



## rgp (Jul 20, 2005)




----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Was sailing to Maine from Massachusetts. Clearly there was enough air to keep whatever it was afloat. Saw the white plastic first. Both friend on the boat and I were pretty convinced it was a brand new car. Of course just saw the parts above surface. Maybe we were wrong but both our impressions were it was a car.


----------



## willyd (Feb 22, 2008)




----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Aren't these boats CF and closed cell foam? Given the amount of punishment they get without hitting anything one would thing the scantlings are extremely robust. Would think there's merit in WRs thinking.

Wonder if the expedient of placing some device in containers that would ensure they sank before just rusting out or seals degraded is in order. Perhaps a hydrostatic trigger like on pfds opening a hole at top and bottom. Of course if what was packed inside floated it wouldn't help but it would decrease risks overall.


----------



## Stumble (Feb 2, 2012)

Waterrat said:


> Gentlemen's bet Capta. The scantling numbers on this Open 60 would be significantly more robust then your sailboat. Knowing virtually nothing about either vessel. A sailboat traveling at the speed of these Open 60's, with huge sail areas and cantilever keels, open ocean long distance racing etc. They are light but they are strong as a brick sh*t house. Though quite a bit faster then said house. The difference in fiberglass weave, resin type and glass to resin ratios, cores, etc would be significantly stronger then roving, mat and polyester resin.


Of course these boats are stronger the forces they have to contain are exponentially larger than a normal sail boat. But the safety margin is much lower. If I remember my engineering right when you double the speed you quadruple the force applied. So let's say wave impacts at 5kn generate 100 units of force. At 10kn that's 400 units of force, and at 20kn that's 800 units of force. The boats, at least the modern custom boats, have a predicted top speed of 40kn. So the expected force would be in the 1,600 range.

But a 5kn boat may be designed to contain forces in the 20kn range by the time you take into account safety factors. The VOR boats on the other hand are probably designed to handle 45kn.

A very clear example is that the old style VOR had mast rams that could tension the standing rigging. Those rams had a maximum designed use of ~30,000psi. So obviously the rigging needed to be massive. On the other hand the safety factor for the rigging was set at 2:1, where a cruising boat would start at 5:1 and might eek up to 10:1. Meaning despite containing far higher loads than most boats the VOR rigging wasn't physically much larger because the safety margins were reduced to the minimum.

So sure they are stronger than most boats, but they are very fragile compared to the loads they are asked to harness. As for stiffness, these things have effectively zero flex when built. If you look at the pictures of the damage, that saddle on the starboard bow that is broken off is what's called a ribblet, and is a critical structural member. It looks like the boat is going to make it to the dock, but I wouldn't be suprized if the front falls off as soon a second they try to lift her.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

So she's toast? The structure so stressed by that single impact she's not to be trusted to be put back into any form of service let alone racing.


----------



## rgp (Jul 20, 2005)

SetSail FPB » Blog Archive » ?Bommies? And Brute Strength: DF 2-62 Moonshadow Reports


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

outbound said:


> Wonder if the expedient of placing some device in containers that would ensure they sank before just rusting out or seals degraded is in order. Perhaps a hydrostatic trigger like on pfds opening a hole at top and bottom. Of course if what was packed inside floated it wouldn't help but it would decrease risks overall.


I believe there are rules in place that new containers must have a device such as this; "Containersinka is a valve designed to sink shipping containers that have been lost overboard and become floating hazards at sea."


----------



## Stumble (Feb 2, 2012)

outbound said:


> So she's toast? The structure so stressed by that single impact she's not to be trusted to be put back into any form of service let alone racing.


Maybe, maybe not. It isnt that uncommon to cut the bow section off and add a new one. Wild Oats has done it a number of times. But I have no idea about the economics of doing so. Unlike on any cruisingboat where there is a lot of stuff that adds value and justification to do repairs, here the interior is nothingbut an unpainted carbon shell. It may be cheaper to strip the hull of equipment and install it on another's shell than try to repair what's there.


----------



## Waterrat (Sep 8, 2007)

Stumble said:


> Of course these boats are stronger the forces they have to contain are exponentially larger than a normal sail boat. But the safety margin is much lower. If I remember my engineering right when you double the speed you quadruple the force applied. So let's say wave impacts at 5kn generate 100 units of force. At 10kn that's 400 units of force, and at 20kn that's 800 units of force. The boats, at least the modern custom boats, have a predicted top speed of 40kn. So the expected force would be in the 1,600 range.
> 
> But a 5kn boat may be designed to contain forces in the 20kn range by the time you take into account safety factors. The VOR boats on the other hand are probably designed to handle 45kn.
> 
> ...


Greg I agree with your general premise. I still think you may want to review Newtons Second law. F=MA. I do appreciate all the other details.


----------



## Waterrat (Sep 8, 2007)

rgp said:


> Hobie 33 Crash Test - YouTube


Anyone have an urge to ski while watching this video?


----------



## Stumble (Feb 2, 2012)

Waterrat said:


> Greg I agree with your general premise. I still think you may want to review Newtons Second law. F=MA. I do appreciate all the other details.


I was actually thinking of the Kenetic energy of a system since the Force caculations require a lot more information, like the duration of the impact, and change in velocity of the components. Which is frankly way above my poor engineering skills. To use F=MA you need to know the acceleration rate of the boat as it hits something, so a major change in velocity over a short period of time is a major problem, but a major change in velocity over a long period of time isn't.

For Kinetic Energy...

K=.5(mv^2). But I. Think I got the math wrong anyway. But anyone who relies on an attorney do do their engineering is a bit nuts anyway.

Just to run the numbers with the formula in front of me... a 20,000lb boat at 7kn has a kinetic energy of 490,000 units. The same boat at 14kn has a kenetic energy of 1,960,000 units, or four times as much energy. So my terminology was wrong, but my numbers were correct.

A bigger question is if Kinetic Energy is a reasonable measure to use to predict the loads on the boat. I think it is, but I am not enough of an engineer to be sure.


----------

