Bertram 630 Sportfish Sinks?

rcrapps · 01-11-2010, 10:46 PM

Holy crappola

Yes, Did somebody call??

Capt Bill11 · 01-11-2010, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTdave

Can anyone else see it????? I can clear as day. Either I'm looking at a different picture or there is a weird smudge on my screen (dam questionable web sites) LOL
It's running paralell, below the length of the prop shaft in the picture.

OK OK, I'll look again....................... Nope, I still just see fish and sand. :-)

rcrapps · 01-11-2010, 11:14 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTdave
Can anyone else see it????? I can clear as day. Either I'm looking at a different picture or there is a weird smudge on my screen (dam questionable web sites) LOL
It's running paralell, below the length of the prop shaft in the picture.

I guess your talking about that sheet or plastic bag? I don't see it either.

Scott Pearson · 01-12-2010, 06:48 AM

Someone is not telling the whole story about what happened. Call me crazy.... Buy the looks of all the pictures I would have to say maybe an on board explosion of some kind.

alacrity · 01-12-2010, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rcrapps

Hello All.
Just some questions in the other direction and hoping there are a few real legal/beagles out there;
Some legal documents have already been posted here. Some legal comments. Can anybody describe what is really going on in the courts? Any real comments released passed the Bertram Letter? Any quotes from the lawyers? Can anybody describe the real movements in the judge’s chambers yet? Any access to any court records yet?

i've checked the docket and there was a complaint filed, followed by an order agreed to by all parties that the vessel would not be disturbed, and then followed by an amended complaint on december 23. i've not compared the complaint to the amended complaint to determine what was added to the amended complaint. the amended complaint has various counts against both defendants for breach of express and implied warranties, breach of the magnuson moss act, breach of maritime contract etc. ordinary causes of action when a product disintegrates.

marine max and bertram are the defendants and they have not yet responded to the amended complaint. it seems today would be the deadline for doing so, unless the parties have agreed to an extension of time to respond.

Henning · 01-12-2010, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTdave

I have first hand experience from my past life as an offshore powerboat racer. This video isn't me but take a look at the first boats footage. Case and point of a stuff with structural failure which looks exactly like that of the Bert. This is a C class boat & given the conditions is probably running in the mid 70 mph range. Yes its faster than the bert but with a fraction of the drag surface impacting the water. Think of the weight that the bertram was pushing when the nose went deep into a wave.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpHjLS8IoaU

Remember though that drag is a cubic component of speed so between 25 & 70 kts is almost 22 times the amount of drag. The inertias behind the speed are irrelevant to damage occuring since the construction should be rated to the kinetic energy the vessel operates at, but does factor into the quantity of damage once something lets go.

Henning · 01-12-2010, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYCAP123

I believe some of my TVs are Japanese and some of my clothes are from China. My next car will probably be a Chevy, but I don't see what any of that has to do with this thread. I am not an isolationist and I am not defending Bertram. I just don't want to see more American boat building gone due to rumor, innuendo and speculation. The facts will come out. Let the chips fall where they may at that time.

What rumor and innuendo is it that you keep referring to? This boat should have never come apart as it did, period. The bouy is a red herring, there is no possible way that the damage on the bouy is reflective to the damage on the boat. The transom is completely irrelevant, the bow of the boat tore off. Even if stuffed into a wave, the result there should not have occurred. There is delamination obvious in several of the pictures, because you don't recognize it does not make it a rumor. The man was sold damaged goods. The captain screwed this royally by not making sure the trip was insured. If it had been, we probably wouldn't know to much about this.

Henning · 01-12-2010, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTdave

Can anyone else see it????? I can clear as day. Either I'm looking at a different picture or there is a weird smudge on my screen (dam questionable web sites) LOL
It's running paralell, below the length of the prop shaft in the picture.

The white sheet kinda half buried in the sand in front of the prop that pops up in a couple of places? Yep, I see it. Maybe thats what happened, they left a port light open and a sheet got out and caught the water and cut the bow off....

Henning · 01-12-2010, 12:16 PM

Shazam, why on earth did you set out in those conditions? They were well forecast and known. There is never an excuse to set out for a trip like that in a pleasure boat. You did a lot of damage and got your crew injured. Not wise in the slightest.

PropBet · 01-12-2010, 12:19 PM

Carl-

Are held by a confidentiality agreement in that you can not share the video footage that was released to you?

Perhaps you could post it to the forum in DIVX format or something of the like?

Seafarer · 01-12-2010, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henning

The white sheet kinda half buried in the sand in front of the prop that pops up in a couple of places? Yep, I see it. Maybe thats what happened, they left a port light open and a sheet got out and caught the water and cut the bow off....

Perhaps it was the captain's chart drawn crudely on a napkin that got caught in the pulpit, and a gust of wind caused it to shear the entire foredeck off along with half the hull sides? It would explain how the captain ran aground on Frying Pan Shoals and rammed that little plastic toothpick straight up through the gunwales!

SHAZAM · 01-12-2010, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henning

Shazam, why on earth did you set out in those conditions? They were well forecast and known. There is never an excuse to set out for a trip like that in a pleasure boat. You did a lot of damage and got your crew injured. Not wise in the slightest.

No doubt it was a mistake but as you can see in the YouTube videos I posted it wasn't that bad when we left, by the time we got into the real nasty stuff it was too late to turn around.

CTdave · 01-12-2010, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seafarer

Perhaps it was the captain's chart drawn crudely on a napkin that got caught in the pulpit, and a gust of wind caused it to shear the entire foredeck off along with half the hull sides? It would explain how the captain ran aground on Frying Pan Shoals and rammed that little plastic toothpick straight up through the gunwales!

Right after the back fell off when the tower fell over & hit it when the pigeon landed.

Didn't someone post that funny video "the front fell off" ?

YachtForums · 01-12-2010, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PropBet

Carl-

Are held by a confidentiality agreement in that you can not share the video footage that was released to you?

Can't publish at this time.

Adad · 01-12-2010, 01:44 PM

On scene explanation; The story is that the captain was at the wheel on the bridge with the mate, chartplotter running, and yacht running approx 25 kts. The Bertram rose up and over one wave and dove into the next wave, with the “bow failing and folding inward”.

Speculation; The Bertram Yacht company representatives think the captain hit a buoy, but the captain disputes that theory. Bertram has claimed they have photos of the buoy and that it looks like something big ran it over.

If he hit something he would have admitted hitting something knowing there would be evidence. I think he was as surprised as everyone else is that the boat came apart like it did.