Italy - Sailing yacht sank off Italian coast, 15 rescued, 7 missing, 19 August 2024

[SouthAussie]

I guess
lack of experience played a part.
And
the wrong conviction/assumptions concerning The Mediterranean Sea.

JMO

I think the said downdraft likely did them in. I can't imagine that anyone would know how to deal with such a force. It must have been horrendous.

imo

 

[ch_13]

Sounds as though all of the surviving people from the yacht are on the "same side".

Mario Scopesi, who is the lawyer for Parker-Eaton and Griffiths, was hired for them by Revtom - the company that owns the Bayesian superyacht and whose sole director is Mr Lynch's wife Angela Bacares. (as per your link)

imo

I wonder if the boat owner has a duty to defend the crew members in court. Similar to how a business has E&O insurance to protect their employees from lawsuits. (As a billionaire, it's quite possible that the Lynch's self-insured.)

Also, I don't know that "all" the survivors are on the same side. The passengers who were guests on the boat as well as the crew members who are not being investigated may not see themselves as being allied as those under investigation or with the yacht's owner.

 

[SouthAussie]

I wonder if the boat owner has a duty to defend the crew members in court. Similar to how a business has E&O insurance to protect their employees from lawsuits. (As a billionaire, it's quite possible that the Lynch's self-insured.)

Yes, I think you are likely right.


Maritime law holds yacht owners responsible for ensuring the safety of their vessels and crew, and any breach of this duty could lead to hefty fines, legal action, or even criminal charges.

A yacht like the Bayesian is insured for a staggering amount—likely upwards of tens of millions of dollars. Insurance companies will be looking closely at the investigation to determine if they’re on the hook for the payout. “In a case like this, the insurance claim process can get messy,” said Rossi. “The insurance company will want to know if there was anything the owner or crew could have done to prevent the disaster. If they find evidence of negligence, they could deny the claim, which would leave the owner in a very precarious financial situation.”

It’s not uncommon for lawsuits to be filed by multiple parties, including the families of the missing, crew members, and even suppliers who had contracts with the yacht’s owner. Each party will be seeking compensation for their losses, and these cases can drag on for years in the courts.

Who Owns the Bayesian Yacht? The Untold Story Behind the Tragic Sinking

Discover the mystery behind the owner of the Bayesian yacht and the tragic sinking off Sicily that left seven missing amid a frantic rescue effort.

aestetica.net

 

[SpanishInquisition]

I think the said downdraft likely did them in. I can't imagine that anyone would know how to deal with such a force. It must have been horrendous.

imo

The ship captain a few hundreds yards away on an old yacht was able to deal with it to not only avoid sinking but to rescue passengers from the Bayesian. I get the impression that the Bayesian crew were disoriented and two steps behind in dealing with the situation, not that it would have been impossible to deal with...but I do think ship design contributed as well. It seems like the crew might have had it in their heads that the vessel was 'unsinkable' so weren't responding correctly while at the same time the vessel was particularly at risk of cascading failures so the situation kept deteriorating with those who survived being tossed in the water unexpectedly.

 

[ItalyReader]

I just think if there is nothing to hide there is no reason to exercise silence when they asked further questions.

Honestly, speaking as an Italian citizen and resident, I don’t trust the judicial process here.
They want to find a scapegoat and they will.
That is the Italian way.

 

[RedHaus]

I think the said downdraft likely did them in. I can't imagine that anyone would know how to deal with such a force. It must have been horrendous. Imo

I agree @SouthAussie. Here is a little weather tutorial as it may relate to this tragedy.

From investigators' statements, the original idea this was a waterspout (tornado over water) event switched to a downdraft/burst event.

"Downbursts are particularly strong downdrafts within thunderstorms... a downburst is a strong downward and and outward gushing  wind system that emanates from a point source above and blows  radially, that is, in straight lines in all directions from the area of impact at surface level... Capable of producing damaging winds....These usually last for seconds to minutes." (see image).



A sub-category of the downburst is a microburst. Check out the video in that link!!

Of course this presumption by invesigators is confirmed (IMO) by the historical Weather Underground data for that area 19-8 at ~3:50 am per my post up thread, and this screenshot.


All IMO

 

[RedHaus]

The ship captain a few hundreds yards away on an old yacht was able to deal with it to not only avoid sinking but to rescue passengers from the Bayesian. I get the impression that the Bayesian crew were disoriented and two steps behind in dealing with the situation, not that it would have been impossible to deal with...but I do think ship design contributed as well. It seems like the crew might have had it in their heads that the vessel was 'unsinkable' so weren't responding correctly while at the same time the vessel was particularly at risk of cascading failures so the situation kept deteriorating with those who survived being tossed in the water unexpectedly.

IMO you are perfectly correct.

The only tweak I'd suggest, per my last post, is that if this was a downburst event, perhaps the epicenter was right over the Bayesian and the other yacht only got caught up in the radial winds.

 

[vls12345]

IMO you are perfectly correct.

The only tweak I'd suggest, per my last post, is that if this was a downburst event, perhaps the epicenter was right over the Bayesian and the other yacht only got caught up in the radial winds.

That's what I have been thinking too. MOO.

 

[Ruthbullock]

I think the said downdraft likely did them in. I can't imagine that anyone would know how to deal with such a force. It must have been horrendous.

imo

I think about that, and then think about the reports that the inflatable life raft survived unscathed and so many managed to get into it with only a few getting injured in the process. Pictures of the life raft in the article below

Pics show life raft that saved Bayesian survivors as they crammed on screaming

NEW pictures show the tiny life raft that saved 11 people after the Bayesian superyacht sank in Italy on Monday. The £14million luxury vessel plunged more than 160ft to the bottom of the sea after …

www.thesun.co.uk

 

[Yellowbelly]

Sounds as though all of the surviving people from the yacht are on the "same side".

Mario Scopesi, who is the lawyer for Parker-Eaton and Griffiths, was hired for them by Revtom - the company that owns the Bayesian superyacht and whose sole director is Mr Lynch's wife Angela Bacares. (as per your link)

imo

Everything being said at the moment is exactly as you would expect at this stage. The designers are saying the yacht was perfectly sound and it's not their fault that it's sunk and the crew are saying they did everything they could and it's not their fault that it's sunk. It's as if super yachts just sink to the bottom of the sea of their own accord and there's nothing anyone can do to stop them.

In reality there will turn out to be some fundamental design flaw or some obvious oversight on the part of the crew. It's just at this stage nobody is going to admit it. A yacht that can't heal over by more than 45 degrees otherwise it floods through the engine room vents, which have to be open if you're running the engine, doesn't look good for the designers. The fact that an older, smaller yacht was anchored near Bayesian and survived the storm fine doesn't look good for the crew.

Also, I think Cutfield has been quite shrewd to get his own lawyer rather than relying on one paid for by his employers. At the end of the day, whose interests is Parker-Eaton and Griffiths' lawyer going to be looking after? His clients, or the people paying his bills? The interests of the owner and the interests of the crew members might not turn out to be aligned.

 

[ItalyReader]

I agree @SouthAussie. Here is a little weather tutorial as it may relate to this tragedy.

From investigators' statements, the original idea this was a waterspout (tornado over water) event switched to a downdraft/burst event.

"Downbursts are particularly strong downdrafts within thunderstorms... a downburst is a strong downward and and outward gushing  wind system that emanates from a point source above and blows  radially, that is, in straight lines in all directions from the area of impact at surface level... Capable of producing damaging winds....These usually last for seconds to minutes." (see image).

View attachment 527966

A sub-category of the downburst is a microburst. Check out the video in that link!!

Of course this presumption by invesigators is confirmed (IMO) by the historical Weather Underground data for that area 19-8 at ~3:50 am per my post up thread, and this screenshot.

View attachment 527967
All IMO

Great post — there’s been a lot of confusion about waterspout vs downburst.
Here’s a bbc article

I agree @SouthAussie. Here is a little weather tutorial as it may relate to this tragedy.

From investigators' statements, the original idea this was a waterspout (tornado over water) event switched to a downdraft/burst event.

"Downbursts are particularly strong downdrafts within thunderstorms... a downburst is a strong downward and and outward gushing  wind system that emanates from a point source above and blows  radially, that is, in straight lines in all directions from the area of impact at surface level... Capable of producing damaging winds....These usually last for seconds to minutes." (see image).

View attachment 527966

A sub-category of the downburst is a microburst. Check out the video in that link!!

Of course this presumption by invesigators is confirmed (IMO) by the historical Weather Underground data for that area 19-8 at ~3:50 am per my post up thread, and this screenshot.

View attachment 527967
All IMO

Thank you @RedHaus Great post - here’s bbc on this topic too- some other news outlets seem confused


“Italian authorities say a downburst was the most likely cause of the sinking of the Bayesian superyacht which led to the deaths of seven people.

Initially it was thought that a waterspout - essentially a tornado over the sea - was responsible for the incident.”


Sicily yacht sinking likely caused by 'downburst' - BBC News

 

[Dotta]

Ummm...

Bayesian was built in 2008.

If there had been any imaginary faults in its design,
I suppose they would have been known/noticed during these 16 years, no?


JMO

 

[SpanishInquisition]

Ummm...

Bayesian was built in 2008.

If there had been any imaginary faults in its design,
I suppose they would have been known/noticed during these 16 years, no?


JMO

The prior captain was aware of the 45 degree tilt for downflooding, but based on how the current captain responded I'm not sure that was on his mind at the time. Certain things wouldn't have been an issue at least as far as casualties go if the captain had responded differently. It doesn't seem like the crew was taking the situation seriously when the vessel was flooding at 20% and deteriorating where instead of getting passengers on deck they're clearing the deck of debris, which heightens the issue of sunken cockpit and other such design decisions. There's clearly some issue since those who got on deck on or before the initial tilt survived (except perhaps for the cook) while those who didn't get immediately on deck after the initial tilt perished below deck. To me, I think the overall design made it so that the passenger staircase became inaccessible due to flooding when in other better designed vessels you wouldn't have passengers trapped at like say 35% tilt. It's like once the vessel tilted at 20% while taking on water it went into self-destruct with it only being a matter of who would have survived...again this isn't 100% on the ship design, like the neighboring old yacht didn't end up tilted and taking on water which I think was because the old yacht captain was proactively managing the storm while the Bayesian captain was reactive and left the ship vulnerable then didn't respond correctly in the emergency.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

Honestly, speaking as an Italian citizen and resident, I don’t trust the judicial process here.
They want to find a scapegoat and they will.
That is the Italian way.

Amanda Knox?

 

[Dotta]

The prior captain was aware of the 45 degree tilt for downflooding, but based on how the current captain responded I'm not sure that was on his mind at the time. Certain things wouldn't have been an issue at least as far as casualties go if the captain had responded differently. It doesn't seem like the crew was taking the situation seriously when the vessel was flooding at 20% and deteriorating where instead of getting passengers on deck they're clearing the deck of debris, which heightens the issue of sunken cockpit and other such design decisions. There's clearly some issue since those who got on deck on or before the initial tilt survived (except perhaps for the cook) while those who didn't get immediately on deck after the initial tilt perished below deck. To me, I think the overall design made it so that the passenger staircase became inaccessible due to flooding when in other better designed vessels you wouldn't have passengers trapped at like say 35% tilt. It's like once the vessel tilted at 20% while taking on water it went into self-destruct with it only being a matter of who would have survived...again this isn't 100% on the ship design, like the neighboring old yacht didn't end up tilted and taking on water which I think was because the old yacht captain was proactively managing the storm while the Bayesian captain was reactive and left the ship vulnerable then didn't respond correctly in the emergency.

Besides,
With exceptionally hot summer in Europe,
it was obvious that weather might prove unpredictable.

Even in my country in Central/Eastern Europe (Poland) we have had constant 30+ degrees Celsius and sudden flooding storms NON STOP the whole summer.
Today is 32 degrees C where I live - and it is the end of August

Italy, Spain, Greece and others are boiling hot.

JMO

 

[RedHaus]

There's clearly some issue since those who got on deck on or before the initial tilt survived... while those who didn't get immediately on deck after the initial tilt perished below deck.

RSBM. +

With exceptionally hot summer in Europe,
it was obvious that weather might prove unpredictable.

RSBM. +

... yacht that can't heal over by more than 45 degrees otherwise it floods through the engine room vents, which have to be open if you're running the engine, doesn't look good for the designers.

RSBM

As much as I believe the downburst event precipitated the sinking of the Bayesian, I also believe there was considerable human error that sealed the yacht's fate and that of the passengers below deck. And IMO the human error can be categorized by the three points you make:

1. 2008 - Building of the Bayesian
Why was the yacht built with such catastrophic vulnerability to flooding at such a relatively low (45°) heel angle? And if that's acceptable by ship building standards, was there adequate operations / storm risk warnings from the builder?

2. 19-8-24, Before 3:50am - Weather Preparation
Why was the origin thunderstorm not tracked more carefully on radar and prepared for - shutting vents, dropping keel, lifting anchor, starting engines?

3. 19-8-24, 3:50-4:00am - Protecting Passengers
Why wasn't more done* to get people in their staterooms to muster above deck - fire alarms, speaker broadcast, physically carrying or guiding people up stairs?

* My caveat is we don't know what was done by the crew to save people's lives, but I assume most people of sound mind would heed any urgent alarm to act. And I think the investigators know enough so far to identify three crew for further inquiry.

All IMO.
ETA: third point (item #1)

 

[branmuffin]

I just think if there is nothing to hide there is no reason to exercise silence when they asked further questions.

On the off chance you ever have to be interviewed by LE regarding a suspicious death, hire a lawyer and follow their advice.