[Donzi 54]

The C/G report does state early morning, so it is possible that they could have left in the dark. The damage that the boat sustained looks more likely hitting a tow then high flyer buoy to me. Hitting that type of buoy should have only resulted in some gouges or fouled running gear at most and not total destruction. I don't buy the buoy theory nor do I buy that a 63 Bertram could self destruct at any speed. Just my $0.02.

[Adad]

Originally Posted by YachtForums

The legs of the tower are still attached, but they are bent forward, much like you would expect when extreme deceleration forces are present. There was nothing remaining of the crows nest. (that I could see in the video)

Foward as is if it hit the bottom stern/tower first?
Would a surveyor spend much time checking jointery between deck and hull? Possibly missing damage from improper strapping and lifting of the boat. The cracks in the hull look like inward flex cracks, there appears to have been enough movement to tear the exterior laminate. If there was proper bond between the laminate and foam then I would expect to see pieces of core on the inner AND on the outer skin.

[capitano_65]

Originally Posted by Bill106

As a professional yacht builder (actually a minor league competitor of Bertrams) with a lot of experience in cored composite construction, I had to register and log into this forum to add my two cents worth.
I've read a number of posts that alleged problems with core seperation but from the pictures shown, it appears the core was adhered to the skins as well as could possibly have been. The core looks exactly like a leading cross-linked PVC foam {brand name omitted}, grid scored, and all the kerfs, the gaps between the blocks, are filled with resin, which is actually a credit to Bertram and their lamination work. Many times these gaps aren't filled and that is what causes the majority of cored hull failures. I also believe I observed numerous locations where the skin seperation actually fractured the core, and some where the core didn't fracture but left a thin layer of core attached to the skin. Both are entirely normal events when a cored panel suffers a catastrophic failure!
Whatever event started this terrible damage, it most certainly didn't start with a core failure! Hull to deck joint failures could initiate delamination, but the damage shown indicates a major impact below the hull to deck joint, and a tremendous amount of force would have been required to tear the entire hull laminate "across the grain" halfway down the length of the hull. I didn't see any pictures of the foredeck, but if the missing sides of the hull are still attached to it, delamination is almost certainly ruled out.
My initial observation of the damage was that the boat was "clotheslined". I repaired a boat years ago that had run into a concrete pier (the concrete won), peeling back the foredeck and the upper portion of the hull nearly to the front of the cabin, this looks almost exactly the same. I know there is a lot of barge traffic in that area. Maybe one was running that night with the lights out? Just an idea?

Very very interesting.......

[CTdave]

Welcome Bill.
Beautiful sporty in your avatar/picture!

Originally Posted by Bill106

As a professional yacht builder (actually a minor league competitor of Bertrams) with a lot of experience in cored composite construction, I had to register and log into this forum to add my two cents worth.
I've read a number of posts that alleged problems with core seperation but from the pictures shown, it appears the core was adhered to the skins as well as could possibly have been. The core looks exactly like a leading cross-linked PVC foam {brand name omitted}, grid scored, and all the kerfs, the gaps between the blocks, are filled with resin, which is actually a credit to Bertram and their lamination work. Many times these gaps aren't filled and that is what causes the majority of cored hull failures. I also believe I observed numerous locations where the skin seperation actually fractured the core, and some where the core didn't fracture but left a thin layer of core attached to the skin. Both are entirely normal events when a cored panel suffers a catastrophic failure!
Whatever event started this terrible damage, it most certainly didn't start with a core failure! Hull to deck joint failures could initiate delamination, but the damage shown indicates a major impact below the hull to deck joint, and a tremendous amount of force would have been required to tear the entire hull laminate "across the grain" halfway down the length of the hull. I didn't see any pictures of the foredeck, but if the missing sides of the hull are still attached to it, delamination is almost certainly ruled out.
My initial observation of the damage was that the boat was "clotheslined". I repaired a boat years ago that had run into a concrete pier (the concrete won), peeling back the foredeck and the upper portion of the hull nearly to the front of the cabin, this looks almost exactly the same. I know there is a lot of barge traffic in that area. Maybe one was running that night with the lights out? Just an idea?

[Teddy1]

Thank you Bill, I think finally, you have pointed us in the right direction, with your expert opinion!

[CTdave]

Originally Posted by 84far

As u can see at the end of the fibreglass (the break), is pointing upwards, to me that means that there was an upwards force generated below the boat…

Now just before it went under, the force of the water (a f##k load of it), is rushing down to the back of the boat,

f the boat was pulled the deposit of sand would be behind the prop… not in front like in the pic. Correct if wrong?

far

Far, I'm not saying you are wrong in any way. I'm just exploring my own theory.
My response to the three items listed above in your quote...

1. upward force from the lines on the transom cleats upward to the tug.

2. But where was it moving through? The salon? The salon bulkhead is still there in one piece so tons of water didn't rush through there.

3.Correct. There very well might be a small pile behind it but being pulled backwards but the rake of the prop would be sending sand in the opposite direction. There was possibly a last stitch effort where the boat was moved slightly forward too (missing tower with legs bent forward??).

[CTdave]

Looking at the prop trench digging observation of mine, look at what appears to be something resembling a sheet or cover which obviously was caught by the prop. It's leading forward, away from where it's been dragged. Yet another sign of the boat being dragged astern.

Tower was torn off eh? Legs pointing forward huh? You could have hit a brick wall & the tower wouldn't have been ripped off not there at all. The initial impact might break it free but all the cables and wires would act like rubber bands & kept it on what remained of the boat. It could be torn down but it would be there, hanging all over the boat. Yet another attempt to drag it after dragging astern failed? It would have been the last easy thing to grab with lines.

[84far]

Bill106, welcome, hopefully u and Shazam can come up with something.

yes the glue has gone through the gaps, but when i was doing some work a few months back with a core material, and did a few tests (as such), i noticed the weakest part was the core... it always gave way, fractured through itself, and left half still on the other part/surface (cause the glue adhere between the core and the other surface), it was a 75kg density. what im saying is the glue is not adhering to the outer layer of the fibreglass... just like the other bertram 'certifiable'. Ill have a talk to a friend who worked at High Modulus? im not saying your wrong, just like second opinions

to me the boat looks like it has hit a barge (or a very solid object), which is what i was first going to say/ask... BUT why havent Bertram gone with that (apart from the tower not being wrapped around the cabin), it would have been a get out of jail card for Bertram, and this thread would of max out at 10 pages, any boat would have blown out like it did and they could have just hung the skipper on a f**kup...? instead, we are 700 posts in with the biggest pile of B/S about a pissy buoy that couldnt hurt a fly...? the situation just doesn’t add up…?

and come on! who in there right mind would try and drag a $2-3m boat with a mayday (which everyone knows about, including myself… in australia, including the people who rescued)/and a please don’t touch or your go straight to jail all over it. Bertram cant, if they get busted there going down. The skipper can just blame equipment on the boat/the boat, that’s his get out card, so why would he have to drag it… your still going to find the boat, if he did make a mistake? And the barge cowboys… wouldn’t that be like trying to steal a broken down Ferrari on the side of the highway, and trying to steal it by strapping some rope around its carbon bumper….? Sorry, but dragging that boat just has stupid stamped all over it, im not saying it didn’t happen, it would just be stupid for the party that tried.

CTdave, maybe the hatches gave way from the air pressure, and let the water in through there…? with that kind of damage I would be surprised if the bulk heads are still intacked, because there was a pic of one that was free as a bee (I think pic #26). The boat still had 10 mins on the surface pitching and rolling… flexing in the wrong directions with that f-load of water rolling around in there…
Cant explain the trenches, it could be the tide ripping through. Not to sure.

far

[84far]

to show how fast they can go, check out the links. note on the tug vid and on how violent it all is, and if it went down on a angle. cheers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0ClIx8-L3M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceoPC...eature=related

far

[Adad]

Was there ever a description of the blue object in pic # 5 and #12 jutting out on the starbard side? Sorry if I missed it

[Capt Bill11]

Originally Posted by goof2

Not that the rest of your post wasn't meaningful, but this is the meat of it right here. From the perspective of an amateur enthusiast isn't this exactly what they are asking anyone who steps aboard a potentially defective boat to do?

That was my point. If they are not willing to "put up" then perhaps, sadly, they should fail as a company.

And hopefully some one else will step up and buy the name Bertram and start making solid, well built boats again. There by resurrecting the name Bertram.

[Capt Bill11]

Originally Posted by CTdave

Looking at the prop trench digging observation of mine, look at what appears to be something resembling a sheet or cover which obviously was caught by the prop. It's leading forward, away from where it's been dragged. Yet another sign of the boat being dragged astern.

"sheet or cover"?

All I see is sand and fish.

[NYCAP123]

Originally Posted by Capt. Bill11

That was my point. If they are not willing to "put up" then perhaps, sadly, they should fail as a company.

Good call Bill. Bertram should go out of business. They should close their doors. The municipality where they're built can do without that tax revenue, the investors can do without their investments, the current Bertram owners won't mind having their boats value cut in half and the employees can collect welfare (Glad you don't mind your taxes going up to cover this). No need to wait for the involved parties to reach conclusions based on ALL the evidence after all Capt. Bill had determined that ALL Bertrams are c--- boats. BTW, it's a safe bet that IF that name ever gets ressurected it will not be in the US, but what the heck. Americans shouldn't be building boats anyway.

[Teddy1]

At this point I'm not sure why you say Bertram should go out of business. It's easy for all of us to sit and type these posts, but we have no idea whats going on behind the scenes? In the end, if the experts determine that the accident was caused by a barge or other object, Bertram is saved and all Bertram owners can breathe easy.

It really isn't fair to convict or aquit, until all the evidence is in, this could take a while, when you think about it, really not so much time has elapsed.

[trisdee80]

Teddy, I believe NYCAP was being sarcastic in his last post. And I agree with him in waiting to hear ALL the facts first.