Bertram 630 Sportfish Sinks?

Do you work for or associated with the manufacture in any way?

Thank you for the FACTS carl. Makes things much more simpler.

I didn't pronounce the cap guilty; I said I wouldn't want to be him. I'd be very surprised to see this turn into a CSI episode when only a preponderance is required. Hitting a container or drum or log is every captain's nightmare. To have it happen in the vicinity of a damaged buoy would be a horrible coincidence. Horrible for the captain, for at the very least he' got legal fees and at worst....

When the De-lamination issue occurred Travelers Insurance had EVERY Bertram (that they insured) “put up hard” until they could be surveyed and found to be “sound”. That included Marine Max’s inventory, & Allied’s inventory. That’s a whole bunch of boats (including this one)! No issues where found (including this one).

It’s looking more & more like they hit something. If this is not the case I’m sure of (2) things:
1) The blocking “means & methods” @ Lindenhurst will be questioned (it was up hard for over 8 months and a boat like this 110,000 lbs should never be!).
2) The insurance Company that did insure this vessel would have issued the same orders that had been done for the previous vessel that had an issue “all Bertram’s Up Hard NOW!”.

Just to confirm, you are saying that a 110,000lbs boat can't be out of the water and on blocks for 8months?

Not sure the people at LMC, Rolly etc would agree with that one.

Again, are you an employee or related to this sinking in *any* other way than another boating enthusiast?

You obviously have a reference to the above in bold..... care to share the reference or is this general rumor mill drivel?

I agree with what Propbet seems to be inferring: this "letter" from the President of Bertram must be taken with a grain of salt- as it seems to absolve Bertram and it comes from Bertram.

reminds me of airbus and air France in the wake of the first A320 crash in the 90s... Pilots were blamed right away, they actually spent a couple of years in jail, then further investigation revealed some issues with the then ground breaking fly by wire system and cockpit layout/instruments. there was also proof that the evidence (black boxes) had been tampered with.

that's what happens when you listen to the party with the most at stake (the manufacturer/builder).

Yeah, except the problem is, every picture of a 63' Bertram running has over 1/2 of the boat out of the water when it's running at cruise..... so the bow half isn't even wet..........

I too would take a letter from the president of Bertram with a very LARGE grain of salt.

The letter is nothing more than Corporate CYA Kool-Aid. it means nothing. (IMO/ YMMV) I'm surprised it took that long to surface.

??? Of course it can. It's simply a matter of force. The kinetic energy of 110,000lb boat travelling 20+ kts is around 9 gigajoules. In an impact of that level, there is nothing that will survive completely unscathed regardless the materials, and fiberglass is quite strong. The fiberglass would see the majority of the damage, but the steel bouy would definitely show damage from the collission. Given the layup schedule of the glass and the contruction details of the bouy, it wouldn't be that difficult to give a good estimate of how much damage one would see even.

Asseline got 10 months in jail and 10 months probation for manslaughter on his appeal. His original conviction only got him 6 months in and 12 months out.
There is a bunch of BS about that flight, but in the end of it, it was the pilot not understanding that the "laws" to that throttle set is programmed to ignore throttle advances below 100' in the landing configuration. Had he hit the "go around" button, the plane would have then tried to spool up and fly away, though from idle speed, I'm not sure it would have made it anyway. The aircraft FBW system also kep the plane from stalling which is why only 3 people died of smoke inhalation instead of 130 dying in an impact. A large factor in this was also inadequate training for which the senior management at Air France also received probation sentences.

I am not nor have I ever been an employee of Bertram and/or Marine Max.

PROPBELT: "You obviously have a reference to the above in bold..... care to share the reference or is this general rumor mill drivel?"

This was common knowledge (back when it occurred). They (Travelers Insurance) hired several surveyors throughout the country to conduct this work. Other then supplying you the names of some of them (the surveyors) I cant offer you anything else….for now

correct that the crew was in part responsible but there was a lot of BS as you said and airbus was very quick to blame the crew. tehre are even questions about the flight recorders being tampered with...

here i think that Bertram is a little quick in claiming that the boat hit the buoy. Maybe they did, although again, i can see a sunday driver hitting a charted buoy but this guy was obvioulsy experienced enough to plot his course, note any obstacle and watch for them.

Heck, when running offshore passing near a buoy is a treat, something you get to look for

Sorry Pascal, but I've seen too many "licensed captains" fall asleep at the helm and do innumerable other brainless moves to buy that. It's easy to lose concentration running the ocean on a calm day and at 30kts you come onto things fast. I also find the statement about "extensive damage to the bow" and "the starboard rudder shaft is bent aft and the starboard propeller exhibits a substantial ding" particularly telling. I've seen that before from a buoy strike with a fast boat. As for Bertrams statement being a CYA move, hell yeah. I'd have to guess that the insurance companies and the captain have had divers down as well so they also can CYA. But a captain (or pilot in the other cited incident) always starts out at fault for anything that happens. That goes with the job. Like Marmot, I too would love to see some forensics from this. However, I doubt we will. More likely just a bunch of suits arguing across a table. BTW, how many of us plot our courses on paper so we can see the full detail or at least zoom in and backtrack our plotted course to check mile by mile what doesn't show on the large scale view?

As I said before, I don't know the captain on this, but I have seen on more than one occasion people mark bouys on charts as way points. Not saying it happened here, just that I don't eliminate the possibility. There is also the possibility that the bouy was off station from previous bad weather and whomever was on watch jumped down for a minute to grab a coke or make a quick sandwich. Of course the bouy could have been hit by a different vessel, it is a pretty busy stretch of water. There's too much on this I don't know to be willing to make a call. However if one gives this story a shave with Occam's Razor, it cleans up to say they hit that bouy.

Somewhere along the thread I read the boat is in 80 feet. Would it be feasible for it to be salvaged and raised?

It depends on what was onboard, but the answer is "not really". If the engines were running when they went down, most likely they are heavily damaged. Mot all the expensive components have been ruined, the salvage value will probably not exceed the cost. Typically you'd only salvage something like this under the threat of an environmental fine or other hazard to navigation liability, and I don't think that's applicable in this situation.