JustSurfaceInterval
Contributor
His profile says "Yesterday at 7:19 PM" 
Vessel Divers Searching Sunk Superyacht- Sicily
- Thread starter Cornellxc
- Start date
This Thread Prefix is for incidents related to one or more vessels from kayaks to ships.
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Here is what MultiDeco gives for a ~10 minute bottom time 70/85 profile, 24 hour surface interval. Much sportier that I first imagined
JustSurfaceInterval
Contributor
Sorry, can not process Imperial... has no meaning for me.
- Messages
- 54,186
- Reaction score
- 8,307
- # of dives
- 500 - 999
Here in West Texas, we have whirlwinds, we have tornadoes, and they share some similarities, but they're quite different in their power. No whirlwind could have sunk that yacht; it has to have been a much stronger wind out of a strong cell. Whether or not a firewatch crewmember could have recognized the threat and sounded an alarm is questionable.
Barefoot_Lawyer
Contributor
It means you are planning to use 74/80ths of your available gas on that dive. Converting to metric, 74/80ths of an 11L 207 bar tank would mean you are planning* to finish that dive with 15 bar / 165 liters of air left. *If everything goes to plan.
Ok so they are not sucking the last few PSI/Bar out of the tank. It is reported that they only have 10 minutes of bottom time.
So either A:the divers are blowing through their deco stops, or B: they understand basic technical diving and are following something close to what MultiDeco gives me.
"A" is to stupid to fix (even with duct tape), "B" means they could sling another bottle and spend more time looking.
You choose, both are highly un-optimal
From the three or four channels on the TV I watched, it seemed that they were all using the same diver footage over and over. Given that rescuers don’t normally want press crews hanging around, it’s possible that it’s just one cameraman’s footage from the early phase with the generic police/fire/rescue divers before the specialist technical divers were brought in. Almost like the Thai Navy Seals during the Thai cave rescue.
Squalls, thunderstorms, tornadoes and water spouts most definitely are visible on radar from many miles away so unless this developed right on top of them , which is certainly possible , the night watch should have seen it coming
Waterspout
A waterspout is a column of rotating, cloud-filled wind. A waterspout descends from a cumulus cloud to an ocean or a lake.education.nationalgeographic.org
I doubt very much this would have been seen at night. I have seen them form many times in the past and it usually is quite quickly and for a brief period of time. The most I ever saw at one time was 6 and often saw 2 or 3. Mainly when I was sailing in tropical waters albeit as a Captain on 100,000 ton oil tankers so no worries, but always kept an eye out and adjusted course if needed. If it barrelled straight towards this yacht there would be no indications until winds picked up and the sea state rapidly deteriorated. Too many unanswered questions at the moment to form any opinions ( which should be left to maritime experts in any case, such as classification society surveyors, marine incident investigators, etc. NOT these money grabbing lawyers who know jack **** but want to appoint blame for compensation to line their pockets. Insurance will of course investigate to wriggle out of it too. I don't know if standard procedures on these boats is to have a night watchman or officer of the watch posted or not ( unlike commercial shipping) and I doubt that "just because the weather forecast is bad" there would be any written procedures that all crew & passengers should be mustered on deck wearing lifejackets ( especially during hours of darkness)-hindsight is a wonderful thing and no incident should ever be judged or investigated in this way. The big question is what caused it to heel over so much in the first place. The fact that ports and hatches may have been open in my mind are secondary and contributing factors. (Think of the Britannic ). The majority of incidents are caused by human factors, whether it be errors of judgement, negligence, lack of maintenance and often design failures (which may be got away with until a critical issue arises). How much did that massive mast weigh? If it snapped and toppled it would immediately make the vessel unstable (lack of intact stability).
Were the waterspout forces too great for the mast to withstand? What were the design shear force calculations etc etc? Many many questions here. It's a very sad incident and my sympathies go out to all involved and to all who lost their loved ones. I do fear the local authorities and lawyers will try and hang the captain out to dry with criminal proceedings and jail. I hope he is well protected by support of some kind and in a "Just Culture" investigation. It's the only way to find out the causes and for experts to develop rules and regulations for construction & operational procedures to ensure this type of incident never happens again ( albeit if humans don't do anything stupid! ).
I know this is a diving forum but diving incidents should be investigated the same way in order to educate us all involved to be always focused on doing the right thing whist enjoying ourselves in the wonderful oceans we have, so we can go and do it again.
Similar threads
