92 footer sinks off Monterey

It's interesting just to look at the last four days of rescues.

92 ft. south of Monterey.
Search for missing diver near Port Royal Sound
Disabled charter vessel, adrift offshore off Cape Lookout.
Search for missing sailboater 80 miles east of Cape Canaveral
Rescues 3 from a 17' bass boat near Grand Isle, LA
Assists mariner with fouled prop on 35' boat near Galveston
Medevvacs man 60 miles east of Tybee Island
Searches (now suspended) missing person near Grand Isle, LA
Medevacs crew member from ship 48 miles NE of VA Beach
Rescues 3 from a sinking 14' skiff near Card Sound Bridge

That's the last four days and sure makes me happy they are out there in case I do ever need them.

Sounds normal for the CG.

Looks like THIS one. Click on the past track, it ends at the location reported.
Appears to have been North bound. Another testament to a double-handing crew, it appears.

Which leads to what I always keep saying. Should have had more crew on a vessel that size, and more crew for a trip like that.

Why? I've seen a lot of boats that size with 2 crew; often a husband and wife team.

Due to the size. It's very borderline being able to tie up and untie a 92' with just 1 mate in all conditions one can encounter (high wind, high current) and that is on a 92' that has full side decks from bow to stern, most do not which require going through a pilothouse door, through the salon, out the salon door, to the stern. Plus the time it takes to go from the helm to do an engine room check, etc.

Not the case with this yacht

Not the case with this yacht. Easier working that deck than on Valhalla, and all I had on that was the owner.

Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it's something I'd recommend. I'd never recommend just a crew of two on anything over 85'. I also would never recommend less than three on any boat doing runs of 48 hours or greater without stopping. Plenty do it. People single hand across oceans, sleeping with the boat on autopilot. I don't consider someone who is asleep to be on watch.

It's a matter of safety first to me. I don't find the deck or docking to be the issue. Our 130' docks as easy as our 63' and the 63'. It's keeping an eye on everything and it's getting adequate sleep.

It's still difficult with full side decks. I was running around a new 90' MY with full side decks quite a bit and only 1 mate...…..and it was a work out and chore for 1 mate, to make sure the fenders were in the right spot, to get the appropriate lines I wanted...…..for example, it's a long run to go from a aft leading spring line cleat to the appropriate stern line. Then if you have to shift fenders around and balance getting spring lines too, because the rub rail is higher than the pilings (like this one was) it becomes a nightmare while trying to hold the yacht in place because of a lot of wind or current.

Even on the yacht in the picture......to go from a aft leading spring to the stern line, you have to run down the side of the boat, then go down what 6-7 steps to the cockpit then across the cockpit, then reverse order to get the next spring line or bow.

On Valhalla (60' with an enclosed aft-deck) I simply set up the lines where the boss could get to them, drop them on where I told him and tie up as best he could. Then I redid them once settled. No big deal. About 2,000nm, docking every night, and never an issue.

Recognizing that we are pleasure boaters, not commercial, 46CFR15.705 has an interesting take.
"(b) Subject to exceptions, 46 U.S.C. 8104 requires that when a master of a seagoing vessel of more than 100 GRT establishes watches for the officers, sailors, and oilers, “the personnel shall be divided, when at sea, into at least three watches. . ."

and,
(f) Properly manned uninspected passenger vessels of at least 100 GRT—
(1) Which are underway for no more than 12 hours in any 24-hour period, and which are adequately moored, anchored, or otherwise secured in a harbor of safe refuge for the remainder of that 24-hour period, may operate with one navigational watch;
(2) Which are underway more than 12 hours in any 24-hour period, must provide a minimum of a two-watch system;
(3) In no case may the crew of any watch work more than 12 hours in any 24-hour period, except in an emergency.

In the commercial world, we've done 6-on/6-off, and 12-on/12-off quite often. My preference is for the 6x6, but there isn't much time for socializing, but we can operate the vessel safely.

So in conclusion, I agree with you - 3 is better than 2, but 2 for 48 would work. I wouldn't suggest much longer trips due to lack of "training" for the trip, and the infrequency which could lead to a problem.

Good pictures from the scene, apparently taken from the USCG assets HERE. I can't help but wonder if "the back fell off" due to the weight of the skiff on the stern (sorry, I couldn't resist that).
It could be that there was a failure associated with the structural work for accommodating the skiff at the swim step causing the water ingress.
One of the news reports suggests that one crew was taken off the yacht when first contact was made to put a pump on board the yacht, but it's not clear and no other report I've seen confirms that. If that's the case, there may have been three on board.

I am told boat had a new exhaust system put on right before this trip that let loose. Does that make sense?