Boat Sinking?????

[sa meredith]

Ok..here's the thing.......I have thought a while about posting this, and decided that, with the proper disclosure, no harm can be done.
I have no way of verifying he following information, and certainly welcome anyone refuting what I am going to post (in fact, I hope it happens). My source is simply a vendor of the Marina from where the boat was purchased (an employee of one of their suppliers, NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF THURSTON'S.)
He states that there was nothing at all wrong with the boat when it was inspected. Bellows fine, drain plug fine, coolant hose fine, all fittings fine. Simply no problem found.
So, I would ask from people more knowledgable than myself...is this possible? Could the boat sink to the bottom simply by being "swamped"? I did not think this possible, but it is what I am told. I remember that the lake was very very rough the day the event occured. This in no way is meant to vindictive, but is it possible that some error by the captain actually took place that day?
I mean, something should be wrong with the boat, right?

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Ok..here's the thing.......I have thought a while about posting this, and decided that, with the proper disclosure, no harm can be done.
I have no way of verifying he following information, and certainly welcome anyone refuting what I am going to post (in fact, I hope it happens). My source is simply a vendor of the Marina from where the boat was purchased (an employee of one of their suppliers, NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF THURSTON'S.)
He states that there was nothing at all wrong with the boat when it was inspected. Bellows fine, drain plug fine, coolant hose fine, all fittings fine. Simply no problem found.
So, I would ask from people more knowledgable than myself...is this possible? Could the boat sink to the bottom simply by being "swamped"? I did not think this possible, but it is what I am told. I remember that the lake was very very rough the day the event occured. This in no way is meant to vindictive, but is it possible that some error by the captain actually took place that day?
I mean, something should be wrong with the boat, right?

This should answer your query.

[GWC...]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Ok..here's the thing.......I have thought a while about posting this, and decided that, with the proper disclosure, no harm can be done.
So, I would ask from people more knowledgable than myself...is this possible? Could the boat sink to the bottom simply by being "swamped"? I did not think this possible, but it is what I am told.

Someone asked the factory about floatation...

[sa meredith]

So GWC,
I take from yours posts that the info I received may be accurate?
I have received private messages from others indicating they have heard the same story...no problem found with the boat.

[jrc]

The short answer is yes, you can sink most boats by swamping them.

I've heard that boats under a certain size must have positive floatation and some vendors provide positive floatation. But most boats just count on a big chunk of their volume being air, once you displace that air with water, down she goes.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by jrc

I've heard that boats under a certain size must have positive floatation and some vendors provide positive floatation.

If you look back at the begining of this thread there are some good links to the rules pertaining to Positive floatation. It is only required in boats up to 19 feet in length......

So the question on bigger boats is how much water can they become swapped with for they are in danger of going down......

Last whether or not what people are hearing is correct and nothing was wrong is still to be determined. I think in all fairness and respect to those families personally effected by this, it is best not to speculate and talk about hearsay information.......That is how rumors get started

[Senter Cove Guy]

A report may be available at the Bureau of Marine Patrol in Gilford. Does anyone have the time to go over there during the week to check it out and report back to us?

[sa meredith]

Very old issue here, I know...but, before this season kicks off, I'd thought I'd ask one final time...Does anyone know of an official report of what happened here? I recently posted (post #301) what I had heard took place, and received two messages from people who said they had heard the same story, and from two different sources. Just curious if this sort of things requires the filing of some official report.
I found it very ironic, that in the very first post in this very old thread, it states the news paper's "speculation" as to what happened...and it, most likely, turned out to be correct (I guess...I have no hard facts).

[Seaplane Pilot]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Very old issue here, I know...but, before this season kicks off, I'd thought I'd ask one final time...Does anyone know of an official report of what happened here? I recently posted (post #301) what I had heard took place, and received two messages from people who said they had heard the same story, and from two different sources. Just curious if this sort of things requires the filing of some official report.
I found it very ironic, that in the very first post in this very old thread, it states the news paper's "speculation" as to what happened...and it, most likely, turned out to be correct (I guess...I have no hard facts).

What about the State of NH Right to Know Law? Kind of the the Federal Freedom of Information Act. I would think that one could file the appropriate form and get a copy of the Marine Patrol incident report (but I could be wrong).

Anyway, here's the link to the Right to Know website:

http://doj.nh.gov/publications/right_to_know.html

[Airwaves]

Before anyone goes filing a FOIA request it would be a lot easier to give Glendale a call and see if you can set up a time to go over and look at the report. Unless it's still an open case I would assume it's available for public inspection. A lot easier than a FOIA request and creates fewer issues.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Seaplane Pilot

What about the State of NH Right to Know Law? Kind of the the Federal Freedom of Information Act. I would think that one could file the appropriate form and get a copy of the Marine Patrol incident report (but I could be wrong).

Anyway, here's the link to the Right to Know website:

http://doj.nh.gov/publications/right_to_know.html

If anyone is interested in an accident report held by the NHMP, just contact them using the resources listed HERE. They will advise you if the report exists and what steps need to be taken, including the appropriate filing of a 91-A (NH Right to Know) request if applicable.

[kjbathe]

Was this investigation concluded and were there any meaningful findings (i.e. lessons learned that the rest of us might apply)?

[sa meredith]

kjbathe
Although it certainly is not "official", after I posted #301, I received messages from other forum members that they were told the same thing.
Two credible sources that I can confirm are:
1. A vendor who does business with the selling dealer.
2. Another Cobalt dealer (not a NH dealer), who certainly was careful to watch for a finding. (as were several of his customers).
Now, if by some stretch this is not true, I would think the person who posted very early in this thread, stating he was on the boat, would post telling me I have bad info. Unless, of course, they have entered into some sort of settlement, and agreed to secrecy.

[Senter Cove Guy]

I made an inquiry at Marine Patrol Headquarters in Gilford about a report on this boat sinking. There is a lengthy report and it is available to the public. The catch is that anyone who wants a copy of the report has to pay about $1.00 per page. I did not see the report and I did not purchase it.

I asked if I could review the report and I was told it contained personal info (birthdates, etc.) which would have to be redacted before viewing. That's where the costs come in.

[mpeterson]

Dear boat guy64 and the others involved in the Cobalt sinking,

First of all let me say that i am so glad that you and your family are ok. Second i believe every word you say about Cobalt boat hull failure. Let me tell you and any other interested parties my story and you can make your own judgment....

I am a very experienced boater and have been since i was 5 years old. My family built planing hull boats for 20 years. Models were 16'-32' runabouts and cruisers. I have owned boats from sail to power, skiboats to large cruisers. I am a member of the Seattle Yacht Club. My family's passion in life was boating.

In April of 2005 my family and I met the local Cobalt dealer here (Seattle Boat) on Lake Washington (where we live) to test drive (sea trial) a basically new (38 hours old) cobalt 282. We were with the salesperson from Seattle Boat and did everything he asked us to do while he continued to "sell" us.

We were starting out basically from a dead stop and were getting up on plane. We were running about 45-50 mph (the boat is marketed to do 68 mph). We were going strait ahead running parallel (150-200 yards to the south) of the 520 bridge having a very nice relaxing time on the water. Suddenly, out of nowhere, and within a milli-second the port bow and port side raised up so quickly and so high that no one had anytime to react. Unfortunatly every one was ejected/fell out of the boat. The boat stopped (thank god) and layed back down about 50 yards away. We were just able to make it back to the boat just long enough (about 60 seconds) to get life jackets on and then the boat sank in about 200' feet of water. It all happened so shockingly fast.

There were multiple injuries but (again thank god) nobody died that day.

Now the really sad part......Cobalt boat company, the dealer and their respective insurance companies Chubb and American Hardware ignored us for years. You would think that Cobalt would want to know what caused the accident and bring the boat up. Instead they immediately pointed the finger at me, their client, and said I must be the cause of the accident! They had many theories (none of which admit any wrongdoing on their part of course). They speculated that I must have operated the trim tabs and/or power trim incorrectly (if those little trim tabs or power trims can cause a boat to eject its occupants in a milli-second in excellent sea conditions Cobalt should recall every boat they have ever made with trim tabs in the interest of public safety!!).. They said i was going too fast for conditions because their manual states the operator should have at least 10 hours experience. They said I was reckless and wake jumping because we crossed over our own wake! (all the sworn testimony from my family and the salesperson state the exact opposite). I find it sickening that they would accuse me of putting my family in jeopardy like that. They also said I should have read all the manuals before taking the test drive. I submit to you; how would Cobalt or its dealers ever sell a boat if you had to have 10 hours behind the wheel and read the hundreds of pages in all the manuals before taking a test drive??? (If this isnt proof of Cobalt's absence of reality i dont know what is)

Maybe because i am stubborn or maybe because i just refuse to let people make false, malicious, accusations about me and my family I spent nearly $20,000 to have the boat raised off the bottom of the lake. I have spent countless thousands on marine architects and marine surveyors and other experts to prove to Cobalt and Seattle Boat the serious problems they have with their design and quality, to restore my good name and hopefully save some lives in the process!

Here are the undeniable facts:
1) According to NOAA; wind speeds were from the south 6-10mph. Seas were 6"-12" chop. In short it was a very pleasant day on the water, a day in which any boat, including a Cobalt should be more than able to handle with ease. (Conversely if the boat can not handle those simple conditions the salesperson should have told me so and not directed me to go to the south side of the bridge and Cobalt should instruct people that their boats can not handle these mild conditions)
2) We were going in a straight line.
3) We were going just over half throttle at 45 mph.
4) We did not hit anything. The bottom of the hull is perfect.
5) The trim tabs were all the way up in the neutral position.
6) The power trims were all the way down or in their neutral position.
7) The hull to deck joint failed catastrophically from the transom to the winshield. As it turns out Cobalt does not "bond" the hull to the deck. Instead they use the cheap and easy way; sheet metal screws under a rub rail.
8) The starboard hull collapsed inward nearly 10". (We know this because the micro-commander module in the engine compartment was mounted on the starboard hull. When the hull concaved in it smashed the microcomander box against the starboard engine block.)
9) The boat has significant freeboard but has no bulk heads and little to no lateral support for the hull.
10) In the absence of bulkheads and significant lateral support Cobalt designs their boats to use the deck to obtain the needed lateral support for the hull. In short a Cobalt is a "shoe box" boat; If you put a heavy object in a shoe box the sides fold in but if you put the top of the shoebox on and tape it to the box the sides will hold and not concave in.
11) Many of the screws used to secure the deck to the hull were missing and so badly drilled at the top of the hull they provided little to no strength. In one area near the transom there was no hull to drill into so Cobalt filled the area with putty and screwed into said putty.
12) This poor Cobalt design and manufacturing of the hull to deck joint caused the hull to fail nearly killing my family.

I have now spent well over $100,000 to make Cobalt and Seattle boat do the right thing. Frankly i have strong principles or right and wrong and I expect people I do business with to have integrity and do the right thing. Because of this simple belief I refuse to let people or companies get away with murder which is exactly what Cobalt has tried to do. Instead of being honorable they have stalled and ignored us and continued, rather feebly to point the finger at me and their very own dealer even after the evidence (the boat) was quite literally brought to the surface and put right in front of them.

Trial is set for August. There we will be vindicated and hopefully the boating public will be educated and wary of Cobalt boats, their warranty, and their claims of treating their clients as "part of the family".

Cobalt boat company's web site and brochures want their clients to believe they are "part of their family" alright......that is until their product fails and nearly kills you. They ignore you, hang you out to dry, and to add insult to injury try and blame their clients they proclaim to care so much about! Any prospective boat buyer should think twice before buying a Cobalt boat.

If anyone would like pictures of the mountains of evidence i have please let me know.

Here is some other good reading that might help explain what happened to you and I and things for people to watch out for.

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/Screwit.htm

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/HullFailPart1.htm

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/HullFailP2.htm

[secondcurve]

Mpeterson:

You sound very educated about all things boats. I have always wondered why we didn't hear anything on the Winnipesaukee Cobalt boat failure. It seems strange. Do you have any theories? In any event, good luck with your lawsuit and please let us know how it turns out.

Thanks

[sa meredith]

Wow! After 1.5 years, and 47000 views, this thread has the single most informative post.
How, on God's green earth, did you find us, mpeterson?
What a horrific story.
Please be sure to let us know what becomes of the trial.
If I had to venture a guess, I would say Cobalt will settle with you in the next month or so, and you will be asked to sign a Confidentiality Agreement as part of the settlement. Who knows...
Quite an education, for me anyway, on the way a boat is constructed, and where errors can occur. I simply had no idea.
The report of the findings of the sinking on lake Winni have never been published here, and I often wonder what was found.

[Ropetow]

Wow, mpeterson, what a story. And what an education. Best of luck with your lawsuit, and thank you for such an informative post.

[Seadoo]

not sure if this has been talked about, but while driving to weirs today we passed this 35 fountain that sank while moored.

[fatlazyless]

.....who knows...maybe Cobalt used the same epoxy glue as what the Boston big-dig used for gluing its concrete ceiling panels in place....ouch.....

....whoopsie.....there goes the bow area....hey look....the bow is separating and the boats splitting along its seam....that's ok....cold water can be very invigorat'n


....remember old Noah....of Noah's Ark fame.....now he was a wise old boat builder....he knew to build his ark with aluminum.....it was an aluminum ark....and that's why all the animals were saved.....aluminum hull & aluminum rivets....all cut from an aluminum tree growing in the nearby aluminum jungle........ !

[robmac]

Now that's an education on design and construction. Glad to hear all aboard survived,sorry that a company that prides itself on top quality doesn't appear to in construction.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

"...How...did you find us, mpeterson...?"

I just Googled Colbalt sinking: even with my misspelling, this site was brought up.
http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...t%2Dsinking%22

Originally Posted by sa meredith

"...The report of the findings of the sinking on lake Winni have never been published here..."

Don't expect it to, either. Whenever "a settlement" is reached between the two or more parties, a gag order will be placed on them by the judge. Violations of the gag order can be very expensive to the violator.

As for mpeterson...

>>>>>>> sigh <<<<<<<

I need to re-emphasize my previous advice—found here:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...1&postcount=17

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by Senter Cove Guy

I made an inquiry at Marine Patrol Headquarters in Gilford about a report on this boat sinking. There is a lengthy report and it is available to the public. The catch is that anyone who wants a copy of the report has to pay about $1.00 per page. I did not see the report and I did not purchase it.

I asked if I could review the report and I was told it contained personal info (birthdates, etc.) which would have to be redacted before viewing. That's where the costs come in.

APS
According to this posting, a report is available, for a fee.
I'd like to know the official finding.
As I've posted before in this thread, I heard the same story from two different sources: Absolutely no problem found with the boat. Although this is hearsay, the same story was told by two different individuals, who have no connection to each other.

[VtSteve]

After reading the many posts on this once old thread, I agree with APS's :::Sigh:::: The thread eventually morphed into an attack and lynch mob mentality about Cobalt. News Flash.....Bowriders have problems of this nature due to the design. Since I've not heard of any catastrophic hull failure, it probably shouldn't have been brought up. If this was a case of stuffing the hull in waves, it certainly wouldn't be the first time, nor the last. I believe this year already another maker, Crownline I believe it was, was being sued because someone riding upfront died as a result of the boat being a bowrider. Must be dangerous, so despite the overload, sue the boat maker.

In cases like these, settlements are common. Why you ask? Because threads and discussions and news articles start appearing like flies on a cow patty. As for Mr. Pascoe's reviews of hull construction? Although they appear to have no bearing on this case from the information known at this time, people should browse his site and other articles about him. He's a great surveyor for sure. Meticulous and knowledgeable. He's mainly interested in ocean type vessels that are larger and more of the cruiser/offshore fishing variety. He thinks Sea Rays are pure crap, as are most vessels in his opinion. From a purist standpoint, he's absolutely correct.

But for those that insist on making this a Cobalt problem, look at your own boats. If you have a bowrider especially, you will sink and swamp faster than my cuddy cabin boat. But if you have most every boat from 21' or over, you will eventually sink given the right circumstances. Cobalt puts more time, effort and money into their boat manufacturing than most brands do. Some of it is pretty anal IMO, but it does make for a pretty great boat. I believe the most boats they made in any one year this decade was around 2500. Hardly a puppy mill amongst boatmakers. Like all companies, I'm sure they've had some problems and a few lemons. But I'll venture a guess that that Cobalt was probably more seaworthy than many poster's boats here, and Mr. Pascoe has some really fine reviews of Sea Rays, including ones much larger than the one that was next to the Cobalt in question. Hint: They use duct tape

I didn't intend to make this a stick up for anyone comment. Just to point out how ludicrous it has become. My first "new" boat was a small bowrider. I vowed that I would never own one again for many reasons, particularly on a large body of water. If a hull comes apart, stern drive falls off, whatever the problem, those are definitely the manufacturer's fault and should be their responsibility. I've not read anything in this thread yet that indicates this was anything other than unfortunate circumstances, and kudos to the skipper and the crew for having an outcome with no fatalities.

[BroadHopper]

appears to be more seaworthy than the new boats. I have been boating for over 50 years, and I have driven/ride more boats than you can imagine in all kinds of weather.
The old wooden hulls ride storms far better than the new boats. Old fibreglas hulls are better than new. The deep-Vee hulls are the way to go in large lakes such as Winnipesaukee. They can ride out a very bad chop much better than the semi-vee or flat bottom boats.
Most new boats on the market are semi-vee and do not handle heavy chops well. My old 4-winns Liberator was a far better riding boat than a new 4-winns Horizon. Even at the same length. (21')
I would not trust a boat under 21' on the Broads any day. It appears to be too small to handle large chops.
That being said. A boat not only have to be built well, the hull should fit the worst conditions of a particular lake.
Most boats I have seen on lake Winnipesaukee are not design for the rough waters on Lake Winnipesaukee.

[sa meredith]

VTSteve...
Although I may be wrong, I not certain you read post #315 from last night.
It is what brought this thread back up. Info that that most poeple never had, I believe.
Maybe you did read it, but just did not reference it in your post.
Would you not consider this important info that pertains to the sinking on Winni?

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

VTSteve...
Although I may be wrong, I not certain you read post #315 from last night.
It is what brought this thread back up. Info that that most poeple never had, I believe.
Maybe you did read it, but just did not reference it in your post.
Would you not consider this important info that pertains to the sinking on Winni?

I did read that, and have read the threads from Pascoe's site many times. The reason I didn't consider the information to pertain to this particular incident on Winni, is that from all the information gather on this thread it doesn't seem to pertain to the sinking? I have not read anywhere that this particular Winni Cobalt sunk because the hull was compromised. Maybe it was, but nobody's indicated it yet, and one poster stated that someone familiar with the recovered boat says it looked fine. Maybe that's not correct?

I think people may (and some have), gotten the wrong impression from reading that post, and Pascoe's threads. I doubt there's more than one or two boats on Winni that would meet his standard of "good" construction. I will say one more thing with a high degree of certainty. If you stuff a good sized wave on a Sea Ray, Cobalt, Bayliner, fill in the blank Bowrider, you stand a good chance in some circumstances of taking on more water than your boat can reasonably handle. This is especially true if your boat has a number of people onboard.

I had a rather precarious experience once on my boat. I was out on Champlain trying to get my boat to the dealer on a particularly rough day. I had only a one-day window of opportunity to do this, and my determination exceeded my common sense. Winds of 35 mph from the south make for big water that even 30 footers plus avoid on this lake. Stupidly, I continued on. From crest to trough (the way most people "see" waves, was getting into the 6' to 8' range before I realized it. The freqency of the waves was such that rollers started to come in faster than I was prepared to handle them. Even using the bow up and speedier than comfortable tactics, a few times my bow dipped through a wave or two. I managed to head back without suffering any consequences, other than a shattered ago and a very real feeling of mortality.

As precarious as my situation was, I put myself (no one else aboard) in that situation. I was stupid that day and learned a lesson. Sometimes I think about what would have happened if I had been in the same size bowrider. If left open, hundreds of pounds of water would have entered the open cockpit. Given the right circumstances and a full load, the onboard water could have shifted forward, driving the bow of the boat deep into either an oncoming or following wave. I don't know in this particular incident whether they were dealing with following waves or straight on. I do know that in the ocean, fishing type center console boats have been to capsize from water over the transom, as the scuppers can't possibly keep up with a quick thousand pounds of water.

Unless I've missed something, I don't see the relevance of a possibly defective hull in one case being pertinent to this particular sinking. I've read a lot of stories about boat accidents and sinkings, everything from Crownlines to Hatteras yachts. Unless warranted by the facts, I don't feel the need to post about one incident involving a structural issue. People should read more of Pascoe's reviews, or buy one of his books if they want to know what's up.

Please forgive me if there are facts I overlooked that indicate a massive structural issue in this incident.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

appears to be more seaworthy than the new boats. I have been boating for over 50 years, and I have driven/ride more boats than you can imagine in all kinds of weather.
The old wooden hulls ride storms far better than the new boats. Old fibreglas hulls are better than new. The deep-Vee hulls are the way to go in large lakes such as Winnipesaukee. They can ride out a very bad chop much better than the semi-vee or flat bottom boats.
Most new boats on the market are semi-vee and do not handle heavy chops well. My old 4-winns Liberator was a far better riding boat than a new 4-winns Horizon. Even at the same length. (21')
I would not trust a boat under 21' on the Broads any day. It appears to be too small to handle large chops.
That being said. A boat not only have to be built well, the hull should fit the worst conditions of a particular lake.
Most boats I have seen on lake Winnipesaukee are not design for the rough waters on Lake Winnipesaukee.

I'll be an old timer and agree with you there. Many fiberglass boats in the old days were over-designed due to both technology and fear. I've ben out in very rough water in The Broads in the old days in boats that would terrify people today. One thing to note is that a 20' boat today probably would equate to a 17' or 18' boat back then. Times change, people demanded lighter and faster, better hole shots, etc... Give me one of those old Skikcraft deep Vees anyday.
I've been out on a 24 plus Cobalt BR in some pretty choppy stuff. Much more comfortable than most newer boats I've ridden in. But my preference is closed bow. My feet get cold in bowriders, and I hate the canvas covers when running.

[Dave R]

I'd guess 95% of the fiberglass boats on Winni use the shoebox and sheet metal screw hull to deck joint described in post 315. It's certainly the weakest and cheapest way to build a boat, but is a proven method that enjoys a long history of being adequate, unless done poorly

If you want a better hull to deck joint in a lake-sized craft, you need to go into a go-fast boat, or an off-shore fishing boat. Many of these types of boat makers use adhesive in the joint or glass it over. Others use screws or bolts, nuts, and backing plates. Any of these mothods are superior to plain sheet metal screws through fiberglass.

The only exception I am aware of in the "lake bowrider" class of boats is Bryant. They use through bolts or macnine screws with nuts and aluminum backing plates. There may be others though.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I've been out on a 24 plus Cobalt BR in some pretty choppy stuff. Much more comfortable than most newer boats I've ridden in. But my preference is closed bow.

I have also been out in a 24 foot Cobalt bowrider (a 240) in some chop. It handled it quite well, but I still prefer the closed bow, just in case...

I have taken water over the bow of my 25 foot cuddy a few times. Twice on Winni from chop, once on Winni from a multi-boat standing wake, once at the mouth of the Merrimack River, and a few times in wind driven chop on Sebago. At no time did water enter the (self bailing) cockpit, and I never felt unsafe.

I took a wake over the bow of my old 21 foot bowrider once, just sitting still waiting for a dock space to open up in Wolfeboro. The offending operator/wake maker was really rude and nailed the throttles on a big cruiser about 10 feet after leaving the dock. We took on about 50 gallons of water.

[VtSteve]

I believe you're correct Dave, which is kinda why I brought it up. Not all go fast boats use the bonding, and I won't bring up the popular one I know of that doesn't I don't think it's quite as bad as people are led to believe though. I may be wrong, but I think Cobalt and some others use reinforced marine plywood or something like that to fasten the screws to. I remember seeing a Sea Ray involved in an collision where the side looked like tarpaper that had been ripped.

At any rate, I was just trying to dilute the impact of the brand new poster's statement (one post only?) as I just knew people would get the wrong impression from what was most certainly intended to deliver maximum impact. Sometimes we forget that many people haven't been involved in boating that long, and many more know very little about the inner makings of boats. I should include myself in the latter category as I learn something new everyday.

[VtSteve]

Not to get terribly off target here....But long ago, as my dad cursed to loud go fast boats (they weren't all that fast long ago, I loved them. Hey, I was young.Not so much to go terribly fast, but as an alternative to being rocked and gut punched over the cruiser and other boat wakes.

I used to ski in the open parts of the lake because it was rougher. Skiing behind a 31' Bertram was quite the blast on two skiis. My knees have memories of those days as well

I've heard that your boat rides very well, and I'm looking forward to fueling it up for a ride this year I'll be at the Naswa waiting for you when I come over.

[Nadia]

I don't know much about boats, I'm just a happy passenger. Don't know much about chop, hulls, sterns or much that pertains to boat structures. That being said I do know a lot about the law, and the slimy things that companies do to avoid being penalized by it. Regardless of the "we know nothing" attitude this company (Cobalt) is giving you, I'm willing to bet the "big wigs" know exactly what your talking about. The dirty, filthy secret is that it is cheaper for them to pay out and settle all the lawsuits, rather than recall all these boats with this potentially lethal flaw in the design and fix them. It's slimy, greedy and horrible to think, but they are not the first or only manufacturing company to do so. The case study I focused on in school was regarding a vehicle that had a flaw in the fuel system in the early 80's. To make a long story short this flaw would sometimes cause the car to catch on fire. The manufacturer was well aware of this flaw but kept it under wraps. It's reasoning was just that it was much cheaper to pay out settlements (because most of these cases settle outside of court) then to recall and fix all the vehicles. When a large group of people were seriously injured and somehow came together to bring a class action suit against the manufacturer, they were found guilty of concealing such flaw and ordered to pay up big time AND recall their product. It happens a lot more then we know about. Like I said, most cases are settled outside of Court. Like APS said, a gag order is then put in place on all parties to protect the company from future lawsuits, and to keep it under wraps. They don't make it to the class action stage, where more attention gets drawn to the case. They don't want to get into Court for the same reasons. They pay out the lawsuits in the form of settlements agreeing that their product caused harm to the Plaintiff. They do not admit they knew about this, or know about more of it. They simply admit that this incident is their fault and make it appear to be isolated. All companies make mistakes right? They stay just under the radar this way. Another reason for this is so that when someone else is injured again by this same "flaw", their Attorney won't find any previous cases because they were all settled privately. Voilà. They also know that not all their flawed products will cause death or injuries. This is another part of their sick equation that spits out the answer to pay out rather then recall. Think about the tobacco companies? Ever watch the movie Erin Brocovich? A Civil Action? Both true stories, and good examples of class action suits where persistent paralegals and Attorney's sniffed around and found some foul stuff going on. Greed and money are a potentially disastrous combination. These companies do not care about anything but their profits.

Not to mention there are two people who had similar experiences with Cobalt, running into each other right here on this forum! Now that you both know about each other, I'm willing to bet there's probably 10, 20, 30, 40 or even hundreds of people with similar horror stories who think or are being made to think by the company that they are alone. A greedy company's first line of defense. On another note I truly admire your persistance mpeterson, it looks like it is already paying off. I wish you and boat guy much more luck. Any eager Attorney's out there?

On a better note, glad to know mpeterson and boat guy's families are okay. I know first hand how horrifying it is to be in a boat taking on water pretty fast. I was eight years old when myself, my Dad, my cousin and my Uncle took my Dad's very small boat out on Chelsea Harbor. Something went terribly wrong, very fast with an area of the floor that had been repaired not long before. I remember looking down and seeing water around my ankles, the back of the boat getting closer and closer to being flush with the sea level. It was eerie and I'm getting chills thinking about it. A very large party boat heard my Father and Uncle's distressed calls and the blast of his horn. I remember my Dad picking me up and putting me on the deck of this large boat. I was very upset that he stayed to try and save his boat, I thought he would die. Somehow they were able to get the boat to shore, might have had a tow. I can verify it's truly terrifying.

[VtSteve]

While I'm certain it was terrifying Nadia, I haven't seen anything to indicate that this particular thread involves and boat problem. It looks like they hit a wave or two, took on water, and sunk. I've not read anything that indicates this is a Cobalt problem, or any particular boat design problem.

I would think the comments about such things should either be qualified, or in a different thread altogether. I read the comments re:design and failure. It's like linking an auto accident where a Ford Explorer hits a tree to the old Firestone tire problems.

Feel free to add anything that may enlighten me here.

[MAXUM]

When you're in the business of mass production a certain percentage of the product is going to have issues. This is not necessarily a poor reflection on the company, rather a fact of life. On the flip side there is a whole lot of ignorance in thinking that just because an item has a big shot price tag doesn't mean it's any better than the rest, just more expensive.

What bothers me is if for argument's sake Cobalt were to settle any pending lawsuits and recognizes that they either have a design or internal QA problem it does the general pubic a disservice to allow these findings or admission of guilt by a particular party to be quelled with a gag order.

[Nadia]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

While I'm certain it was terrifying Nadia, I haven't seen anything to indicate that this particular thread involves and boat problem

I don't completely understand what you mean VtSteve but I will try to respond as best I can. One thing I concluded when I read this thread was that two different owners of a similar model or style Cobalt brand boat had experienced serious problems when a similar part or area of both of these boats malfunctioned. I drew my conclusions based on the information provided by boatguy_64 & mpeterson in this thread.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

It looks like they hit a wave or two, took on water, and sunk.

This type of speculation was not all that important to the point I was trying to make BUT I noticed you are only making reference to one incident. In this thread, two different members describe the specific details of each of their incidents. Although some of the details leading up to the failure they describe are different (i.e. their speeds) , they have both come to the conclusion that their accidents were caused by a design or structural flaw. How they came to this conclusion is described in their posts. For instance boatguy_64 says the dealer mentioned the hull being the problem. mpeterson's post is very, very detailed. However it happened...they both describe a problem which I theorize is very possibly a major structural problem that:

A) Cobalt is most likely aware of
B) Has caused others similar harm by malfunctioning in the same way

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I've not read anything that indicates this is a Cobalt problem, or any particular boat design problem.

Neither have I. However, this is not enough evidence to keep me from believing that it is not a Cobalt problem that Cobalt is not aware of. Furthermore if my theory and it's data and correct, it is highly unlikely you would read anything that said: "This indeed is a flaw in the design of this model Cobalt boat that given the right conditions said flaw will cause a mechanical failure in a specified area of the boat. In turn leading to the possiblity of serious injury or even death to any passengers". Reasons why you will probably never read anything like this are mentioned in my post above yours, but I would be happy to list them again:

A) Any lawsuits regarding this flaw causing harm or death to people are more than 75% of the time willingly settled outside of Court. Manufacturers will pay up if they (their lawyers) feel they may be brought to Court.

B) Litigants & Attorney's in lawsuits settled outside of Court are not obliged to disclose the amount or details of settlement. In fact, just like APS mentioned they are usually under strict order not to do so, ever. Major consequences can follow any breach of this order.

C) Settled lawsuits do not become case law or precedent. There could be 20 Attorney's & Plaintiff's bringing suit against Cobalt at the same time for the same exact reason, yet there is no case law for their Attorney's to refer to.

D) Settling a lawsuit is not an admission of guilt on behalf of the manufacturer. More or less an admission of responsibility for that specific incident only. So even if you were to read about one that made it to Court, it would not put up a red flag. Only when it happened frequently would you or I pick up on it. But by the time one or two seperate incidents make it all the way to Court and start to blow their cover, the company will usually recall the product and fix it, what they should have done in the first place before things get way too out of hand and end up like the company did in the movie Erin Brocovich. However, it was cheaper for them to gamble with people's lives instead. AND:

D) Not all their flawed products will malfunction, cause injury or cause death.

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I would think the comments about such things should either be qualified, or in a different thread altogether. I read the comments re:design and failure. It's like linking an auto accident where a Ford Explorer hits a tree to the old Firestone tire problems.

Feel free to add anything that may enlighten me here.

You are entitled to your opinion and I respect it 100% on the same token I think you are misunderstanding me. Before I explain that, I wonder what you mean by qualified? Interpretations could be different. Maybe you mean proven or substantiated. If that's the case, in my theorizing I have explained several reasons why this usually does not happen. Definitive links between similar cases or manufacturers admissions of flawed products are hard to come by because of the reasons I listed in A-D.

I am not implying Cobalt is at fault. The only thing I am implying is that it's possible they know very well about a flaw in one of their boats design that they are marketing. They possibly know this flaw can cause serious injury as well as death. They are possibly concealing this info for many reasons that almost always come to down to money. It's cheaper for them to settle the lawsuits outside of Court then to recall all the boats and fix them. It has been done before and it will continue. That's pretty much all I'm saying. I hope I answered your question

[VtSteve]

I just think people are implying way too much, and attribute their remarks to this thread. I doubt you could find a single boatmaker that doesn't have several customers that have had some issue, and some serious issues.

"I drew my conclusions based on the information provided by boatguy_64 & mpeterson in this thread.
"

I drew no conclusions to mpeterson's comments, since it was a hit and run that related to another issue. I've not read anything, anywhere in this thread, by Boatguy_64 nor anyone else that indicates the boat fell apart and led to this accident. I think the facts of the case, as well as those revealed by others were fairly clear, and some ambiguous.

There's a pretty clear term in the boating world for what most of us think happened in this sinking case. I just think it's pretty misleading to bring in other cases and discuss it in the same thread. But I'm sure you, and probably mpeterson know this.

I have no axe to grind, no company or people to defend. But this thread took a turn for the worse and has developed into a diatribe that has no facts.

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by Nadia

D) Settling a lawsuit is not an admission of guilt on behalf of the manufacturer. More or less an admission of responsibility for that specific incident only. [

OK so I have a question in regards to this since I'm no lawyer and is something that I mentioned in my post. I'm taking this completely out of context.

If a company were to settle out of court how can that not be an admission of guilt of some sort? I submit that there is probably some legal mumbo jumbo that can be thrown together that may imply otherwise however that
I was always of the opinion that if a settlement did occur then there was a darn good reason for it, usually a way out of a lawsuit at a bargain basement price. For example, if Cobalt was guilty of a design flaw (let me re-iterate that I'm suggesting this only as a hypothetical) I could see where it would be cost effective for them to settle out of court versus taking the chances on what the court may award the plaintiff. If there was no or not enough evidence to convict the accused then there would be absolutely no benefit to settling the case right? Additionally the manufacturer, in this case Cobalt would be vindicated of any wrong doing thus not tarnishing their reputation.

[Airwaves]

Actually it is quite common for a corporation to settle out of court even when they feel confident that they would win a civil suit.

Why would they do that? Fighting a lawsuit of this nature is a lose-lose for the corporation. They will spend money on lawyers fees for a trial that will likely last for years and their corporate name will be dragged through the mud of an open trial.

If they win the court case their reputation is still damaged and in all likelihood they will not be able to recoup their legal costs from the plantiff.

It's in the best interest financially of the corporation to let their insurance company pay a bargained settlement then slap a gag order to prevent anyone from talking about it, thus reducing the likelihood of copycat lawsuits.

Just my $.02

[Paugus Bay Resident]

I would think if there we're truly an issue (defect) with the boats construction, settlement or not, the manufacturer would have to do a recall to correct the defect. Unless, of course it was a one off type issue The USCG maintains a database of all recalls http://www.uscgboating.org/recalls/recalls_database.htm

[sa meredith]

It was stated earlier in this thread that the official MP report about the recovered boat is available to the public, but I believe there is a cost of $1 per page (at least I think that is what was written). I guess if someone paid and got a copy, and then posted it's content here, it would answer all questions.
Also, as I have stated several times before, I was told from two different sources that the boat was found to be in fine shape. No issues.
But I have no way to know if this is true..other than buying a copy of the report, I guess.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

It was stated earlier in this thread that the official MP report about the recovered boat is available to the public, but I believe there is a cost of $1 per page (at least I think that is what was written). I guess if someone paid and got a copy, and then posted it's content here, it would answer all questions.
Also, as I have stated several times before, I was told from two different sources that the boat was found to be in fine shape. No issues.
But I have no way to know if this is true..other than buying a copy of the report, I guess.

You only have to buy a copy if you intend to remove the report from the building. Anyone is free to read any released report during regular business hours at NHMP HQ, just call ahead so they know to have it available.

If I ever get a chance to be up that way this summer I might take the time to read it myself, purely out of curiosity. If I do I will be sure to post my opinion of what the report contains within this thread...

[VtSteve]

On the outcome of this event?

[Senter Cove Guy]

Originally Posted by boat_guy64

...I was on that boat with the other family...Someday, I'll write the full story of what happened...

It's been almost three years. Do you or the owner of the boat know what really caused the boat to sink? Have you or the owner seen the MP report? I'm still curious as are many others.
Thanks.

[Grady223]

Originally Posted by Senter Cove Guy

It's been almost three years. Do you or the owner of the boat know what really caused the boat to sink? Have you or the owner seen the MP report? I'm still curious as are many others.
Thanks.

That is persistence SCG!

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

Originally Posted by Grady223

That is persistence SCG!

Inquiring minds want to know!!!

[VtSteve]

Unless you get a copy of the report, I doubt you'll ever hear anything. Skip said the report would be freely available if you don't remove it from the building. I don't know if he ever got a chance to read it or not.

You will never hear anything from someone with a shattered ego after an experience like that. I'm quite sure many, many people saw the boat after it was reclaimed from the bottom.

[LIforrelaxin]

Let me just say this.... what does it really matter what happened. What matter, is that the capt got everyone off the boat and everyone was rescued, That is the bottom line.

Now because of insurance, and blame, and fault, etc, etc, etc, and expensive operation was undertaken to recover the boat from over 100 feet off water... in my mind that boat could have just been left. There wasn't enough gas or oil to worry about poisoning the lake it would of slow dispersed to the top of the lake and evaporated.

But the boat was raised, and was hauled off for investigation, the investigation was done and reports where written. Now if the results where anything but weather, of operator error, or some fluke accident I am sure there would have been note worthy new reports. If Cobalt had a defective hull, or Thurston's Service dept. had made a mistake the reports and gossip would have run wild, they didn't....

My guess, is that something totally innocent happened that day out of the control of the capt of the vessel, that cause water entry...a bellows tear, a hull fitting not properly sealed that finally reached a critical point. The problems are numerous.

The bottom line is this... the investigation probably showed that it was a series of issues that lead to the problem, that no one entity was the culprit, and unfortunately, an accident occurred.

Let all hope that if something like that happens to any one of use, that we are able to keep are cool and keep everyone safe.

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

Unless you get a copy of the report, I doubt you'll ever hear anything. Skip said the report would be freely available if you don't remove it from the building. I don't know if he ever got a chance to read it or not.

You will never hear anything from someone with a shattered ego after an experience like that. I'm quite sure many, many people saw the boat after it was reclaimed from the bottom.

Shattered ego aside...there is something to be learned from this. If post 301 is indeed accurate (many PMs to me saying they heard the same thing) , people need to realize, myself included, that a bow rider (even a good size Cobalt), in the broads, loaded very close to/slightly over capacity, on a day when the lake is crazy ugly, is a dangerous proposition.
On this particular day, I believe swells were over 3', very windy, and 8 passengers aboard. Certainly not a disaster waiting to happen, but the situation warrents extreme caution, and proper precautuons need to be taken.
This is in no way meant to a negative post toward those families...the fact that they all had PFDs is evidence of a good captain...but once that nose dipped...just too late. A wake up call for everyone else.
Again, possibly my info is wrong, and there was a boat issue.

[samosetguy]

I heard there was an issue with the transducer on the boat. My recollection is the selling marina could never have known about it. It was a construction issue that didn't come to light until the boat was stressed in open waters.

QUALIFYING LANGUAGE:
Please note that I don't actually know if Cobalt boats have a transducer that goes through the hull. I heard this from someone that owns a marina on Lake Winni (not Thurston's) that I'd rather not name just because I value that friendship and don't want to inadvertantly get someone in trouble.

If this isn't a possible explanation please feel free to challenge it. I'm only sharing what I had heard from a source I personally believe is reliable/honest because I believe some folks here may find it interesting/helpful.

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

Let me just say this.... what does it really matter what happened. What matter, is that the capt got everyone off the boat and everyone was rescued, That is the bottom line.

Now because of insurance, and blame, and fault, etc, etc, etc, and expensive operation was undertaken to recover the boat from over 100 feet off water... in my mind that boat could have just been left. There wasn't enough gas or oil to worry about poisoning the lake it would of slow dispersed to the top of the lake and evaporated.

But the boat was raised, and was hauled off for investigation, the investigation was done and reports where written. Now if the results where anything but weather, of operator error, or some fluke accident I am sure there would have been note worthy new reports. If Cobalt had a defective hull, or Thurston's Service dept. had made a mistake the reports and gossip would have run wild, they didn't....

My guess, is that something totally innocent happened that day out of the control of the capt of the vessel, that cause water entry...a bellows tear, a hull fitting not properly sealed that finally reached a critical point. The problems are numerous.

The bottom line is this... the investigation probably showed that it was a series of issues that lead to the problem, that no one entity was the culprit, and unfortunately, an accident occurred.

Let all hope that if something like that happens to any one of use, that we are able to keep are cool and keep everyone safe.

After I read this thread I sent and email to Four Winns asking about bouyancy (22 ft boat). The basically said they only guarantee positive bouyancy equal to the weight listed on the plate. If you get swamped and exceed it, down she goes.......

[VitaBene]

I'm sorry but I will be shocked if it was not operator error. I think that BR scooped water. I can't believe that short of the outdrive falling off leaving a huge hole that any other opening (transducer) etc would overcome the bilge pump.

If there is a lesson to be learned- trim up (just a few degrees) and keep your bow cover on when the weather gets rough. That open bow creates a giant scoop.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

I am glad she was raised for selfish reasons. The spot where the oil and gas would float to was about perfectly in the prevailing wind line with my water line. I am hardly a tree hugger but not sure I would have enjoyed being in the evaporation / slick zone.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I'm sorry but I will be shocked if it was not operator error. I think that BR scooped water. I can't believe that short of the outdrive falling off leaving a huge hole that any other opening (transducer) etc would overcome the bilge pump.

If there is a lesson to be learned- trim up (just a few degrees) and keep your bow cover on when the weather gets rough. That open bow creates a giant scoop.

A broken hose where the water being pumped gets into the engine compartment instead of the engine will overcome most bilge pumps.

[Yankee]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I'm sorry but I will be shocked if it was not operator error. I think that BR scooped water. I can't believe that short of the outdrive falling off leaving a huge hole that any other opening (transducer) etc would overcome the bilge pump.

If there is a lesson to be learned- trim up (just a few degrees) and keep your bow cover on when the weather gets rough. That open bow creates a giant scoop.

To preface, I grew up on this lake and also spent several years living in Michigan and boated on the big water of all the Great Lakes except Superior. All in my measely 22ft Formula. It's not the size of the boat that is the problem in this case. Winni, contrary to many folk's opinion, is not a big lake. As in all circumstances, it is up to the Captain of the boat to make the right decisions and the most important of these includes mating his choice of craft in which to ply the waters with his experience and seamanship.

Having said that, I also believe that the captain of this boat stuffed the bow into a wave that flooded and consequently caused the boat to go down...I admit that this is purely speculation on my part.

For the record I do not believe that Cobalt is capable of a producing a structural defect that would cause one of it's boats to sink. A Bayliner maybe, not a Cobalt

IMHO, the captain kept his nose into the wind and had a wave come over the bow. And short of a maintenance issue, I believe that this was the cause of sinking. If he was travelling in the opposite direction, my experience tells me that a boat of this size in rough water couldn't go fast enough and then back down on the throttle in those conditions to take that amount of water over the rear of the boat to cause it to flood.

IMHO, bowwriders and big waves do not mix well. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that having an open bow is a bad idea in rough water.

[Just Sold]

Sunset Bob, Island Girl and I were there for the Cobalt raising and the fluids, if they leaked, from the boat should have gone past RG's water line pick up had the boat not been raised.
SB accompanied the MP to the sand bar near W. Alton Marine where they pumped the Coblat out and continued onto the MP Headquarters.

[VtSteve]

So I assume the Cobalt was towed back to HQ? Some witnesses know what happened, or more accurately, what did not happen.


As for the rest?
The term "Catastrophic" is usually used for insurance cases of this type, which is probably why is was repeated by two people here, and a third that had no idea what she was talking about.

[boat_guy64]

I’ve always wanted to write what happened that day. I’ve hesitated because it wasn’t my boat and I was just a passenger. I also hoped that someone would read the MP report, report on it and then I could say what I wanted to say without being scrutinized by the people that are sure they know what happened or heard from a friend of a friend of a friend that there was nothing wrong at all with the boat. The last thing that I want to do is argue, debate or have to defend my view in this forum. If you don’t believe me, go spend the $2 to get the MP report and come to your own conclusion.

That said. I feel that it may be worthwhile to share what happened. I’m an electrical engineer and not a marine surveyor or a marine mechanic so excuse my lack of in depth knowledge.

The day the boat came up was beautiful. It was a warm September day with no wind on the broads. We hung out at the scene all day until MP took control of the boat and towed it back to MP headquarters at about 9:30pm that evening.

The boat sank in rough conditions on September 1. That day, Seatow was hired to find and recover the boat. They searched for about two weeks and never found it. It seems that Seatow and the people helping them just didn’t have the required equipment to find a boat that was 138 feet below the surface. They did the best they could with the equipment they had. MP was always available to control traffic and was helpful in the entire process. On September 13, as documented in post 159, a third party came in with commercial grade side scan sonar and found it in about two hours. They held the coordinates of the boat secret until a payment was agreed to by the insurance company.

The boat was raised by Seatow as documented in pictures and video that members of the forum documented here on the forum. The boat was then towed to the Alton Sand Bar to finish the job of raising it and the towed away by Marine Patrol.

Marine Patrol had their Marine Surveyors look at the boat. They found no physical issues with the boat. As a last test, they put it back in the water. After some time they noticed that the boat was leaking and taking on water back near the outdrive unit. They included pictures of the leak in the report but my copy isn’t clear so I can’t see the exact location of the leak. At this time they secured the boat and watched it continue to take on water. Then, they began to wonder why the bilge pump was not running. They determined that the bilge pump would only run if the battery switch was in the “both battery” position. That is not the position that it was in and not the position that it should ever be in. You never want one battery to go bad and take out the other battery. They didn’t state the root cause so I don’t know if it was mis-wired or a defective switch. At this point they took the boat out of the water and concluded their investigation.

So what do I think? I think that with many accidents, several things went wrong simultaneously to make that boat sink.

1. The boat leaked and as we were driving, it was slowing took on water.
2. The bilge pump never ran.
3. With the boat gaining weight and being heavy, we took on waves.

I think that it took all three things to make that boat sink.. By the time that we noticed the hull being heavy, we could have made it to Rattlesnake if not for the waves. If the bilge pump worked, it probably would have kept up with the leak. No leak and none of the other factors would have mattered.

The captain was in control of at all times. The boat is rated for 15 passengers. We had 8 and 6 of them were in the 100 pound range. (I can’t say the same for myself  ) We had many life jackets on the boat and had them on at the first sign of trouble.
Thanks to our rescuers and the people of Rattlesnake Island that offered up docks, facilities and guidance to the location of the boat. We were lucky that day but we were also prepared. I’ve logged hundreds of hours on Winnipesaukee before and after this accident. You need to respect the lake and be prepared. I’ll say that my level of preparedness was always good but now it is even better.

[ApS]

Originally Posted by boat_guy64

"...So what do I think? I think that with many accidents, several things went wrong simultaneously to make that boat sink.

1. The boat leaked and as we were driving, it was slowing took on water.
2. The bilge pump never ran.
3. With the boat gaining weight and being heavy, we took on waves.

'Zackly what happened to my former boss on a nice sunny day in the Gulf Stream with a borrowed 40-foot Sport Fisherman.

A small opening had been previously enlarged by a marine mechanic to install new steering gear near the transom. In reverse (while fighting a big fish) they failed to notice the boat was taking on water. Far from shore, it was only when the engines stopped—and floorboards were floating—that they became aware there was a problem.

The Coast Guard appeared promptly enough, but a silly procedural delay ensued in getting a portable pump aboard the stricken craft. A short time later, the attempt by the Coast Guard to tow the boat resulted in the towline parting—then "glug" went the Sport Fisherman into 80-feet of water.

BTW I: A storm in 2005/2006 was called at "60-MPH" winds by poster DRH in West Alton. Looking out at the lake just a few miles away, I didn't see three-foot waves—or any waves at all!

All I could see was a huge sheet of white spray across two square miles of Lake Winnipesaukee.

BTW II: This Cobalt could appear for sale—advertised:

"Fresh water use only".

[LIforrelaxin]

Boat Guy 64,

I want to thank you for putting the information out there. The truth is always good to know. I am glad to know that the proper investigation was completed, and the true root cause was found. As an electrical engineer, I am dam disappointed that the wiring on the boat, even has the possibility of being miswired like that. Hopefully Cobalt has since redesigned there wiring for a dual battery set-up.

I hope that your friend has continued to boat as well and that this Mishap hasn't discouraged him away from boating. This indeed could have happened to any of us.

Accidents happen folks....Even in a Colbalt.....

[sa meredith]

Thanks, boatguy64, for the story of what happened. I just can't imagine what it must have been like the second you all realized the boat was indeed going down. Must have caused some sleepless nights.
As an aside...I'm curious about something, and would welcome advise from anyone...
We always run the boat with the battery switch on "Both", yet you stated that is not the correct way to operate. Are you certain? I guess I just never ask anyone...just the way I was taught after the switch was installed. Maybe I just assumed...

[OCDACTIVE]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Thanks, boatguy64, for the story of what happened. I just can't imagine what it must have been like the second you all realized the boat was indeed going down. Must have caused some sleepless nights.
As an aside...I'm curious about something, and would welcome advise from anyone...
We always run the boat with the battery switch on "Both", yet you stated that is not the correct way to operate. Are you certain? I guess I just never ask anyone...just the way I was taught after the switch was installed. Maybe I just assumed...

This all depends on the boat and its set up actually. I personally run mine on one only. This way if after a day rafting or if there is a charging problem you have the second to start. Also in some boats there is a battery specifically for starting and one for sitting. Normally this is done when there are battery "banks" for overnight and larger power draws over time and / or larger engines that need a bigger boost.

There was actually a good article in the last Powerboat Mag. edition that talks specifically about this.

So to answer your question.... it all depends. sorry for being so vague.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by VitaBene

I'm sorry but I will be shocked if it was not operator error. I think that BR scooped water. I can't believe that short of the outdrive falling off leaving a huge hole that any other opening (transducer) etc would overcome the bilge pump.

If there is a lesson to be learned- trim up (just a few degrees) and keep your bow cover on when the weather gets rough. That open bow creates a giant scoop.

Ever launch a boat without the plug in it? Trust me, they fill VERY quickly. I made the mistake once in a 20' Ebbtide at the Wolfeboro town docks. We barely got it back on the trailer. The engine compartment filled extremely fast from just a drain plug hole. It does not take long, and the bilge pump was not keeping up.

My point is, it does not take a large hole.

[NoBozo]

I haven't had a battery Master Switch since I had my cabin boats.. you know, the ones that has bunks, you can sleep aboard, has cabin lights, stereo, ship to shore VHF radio, etc.

The master switch usually has Four positions. #1 battery, #2 battery, OFF, and BOTH. When the engine is running, the battery the switch is set to, will be On Line meaning it will be charging. If Both is set, both battery's will charge at the same time. When I was underway under power (It was a sailboat) I was always On BOTH Battery's to take advantage of the engine charging both battery's.

When I shut the engine off to SAIL, I would switch the Master Switch over to a single battery. It will take quite awhile to run a battery down using just a VHF, sailing instruments, and maybe the stereo.

Something to ponder..and I'm sure it will confuse those not familiar with how some stuff works. A friend of mine had a '79 Ferrari 308 GTS. It had carburetters Vs Electronic Fuel Injection. The alternator was kapoot and would NOT charge the battery or do anything else. It's location in front of, and down under the engine made it almost imposable to remove. So it had to be done by a professional with the proper tools..most importantly a LIFT, which he did not have.

Cash was not readily available at the time, for various reasons. This did NOT mean the car could not be driven. It was just an occasional Sunday Driver anyhow.

He would routinely take the car out for an entire Sunday ride...with NO functioning Alternator. ONLY the battery was there for electricity for Ignition and anything else. You could start the engine any number of times, and then Drive It ALL DAY On The Battery Alone....say 150-200 miles..Rhode Island down to Connecticut and back. The only catch was don't use the headlights or radio. No one with a Ferrari uses the radio anyway.

If the car had had Electronic Fuel Injection requireing electrical power, it might have been a different story.

My current 20 foot runaboat with a 350 V8 does not have a battery switch... just one battery which I have replaced twice in 14 years.. last.. just last summer. The bilge pump is always set to Automatic and is Always connected to the battery...UNLESS I accidently "bump" the dashboard toggle switch to OFF. NB

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Ever launch a boat without the plug in it? Trust me, they fill VERY quickly. I made the mistake once in a 20' Ebbtide at the Wolfeboro town docks. We barely got it back on the trailer. The engine compartment filled extremely fast from just a drain plug hole. It does not take long, and the bilge pump was not keeping up.

My point is, it does not take a large hole.

This is true. Shortly after I got my current 20' runabout, I forgot the plug. I got the boat back on the trailer without sinking.. Bilge Pump WAS running on Automatic. When I got home I got out my textbooks to see if I could calculate HOW Long it would have taken the boat to sink IF the Pump had NOT been running. The time was something like NINE Minutes...to sink with water coming in from just one... One Inch diameter drain hole. NB

[OCDACTIVE]

NB, interesting story on the Ferrari.. I am not an electric engineer so I couldn't explain why that would work but from my limited experience I have seen that there are many different ways these systems (car or boat) over the years have been set up.

As an example, as many may recall, you could run your car or boat without the battery at all. You could start a boat just by jumping it off a battery or another boat and as long as the engine was running you were fine. However 2 years ago I found out the hard way that on newer boats the circuits are set up a bit different. I was out on my 17 foot runabout. The boat was going perfectly and then just stopped. I checked everything and couldn't figure it out. I thought the way it simply shut off that there was a fuel pump problem.

After getting towed back and checking everything I noticed the battery connections were a bit corroded. Never would I think that this was the problem but thought it was best to clean them regardless.... Guess what! that was it. Somehow if the ciruit was broken (due to the corrossion) on the battery terminals the boat would not run.

Needless to say I now keep them very clean and keep a wire brush in my tool box.

[robmac]

In my experience,engines with electronic ignitions( non points distributors ) you will need a good connection to keep the engine running. With EFI you will have some sort of controler weather a PCM,ECM etc.,those systems you need more than 12 volts,generally closer to 13.2 to run at optimal performance. As a Kid I remember running on just an altenator no battery,you won't get away with that on todays vehicles.

[VtSteve]

Like others have stated, thanks for the follow-up. Interesting battery setup, I know some boats actually run like this for charging, but I think it depends on the switch itself. I was going to do two batteries, until I became confused over the choices and setups.

Hard to say what was leaking and when. Possibly something was damaged when it hit the lake bottom? Who knows when it occurred. Might have been a leak near the outdrive not being properly sealed, any number of things. This is the best ending to a nearly tragic story. Everyone was rescued and nobody was hurt.

Has the boat's owner had it with boating, or did he get back up on the horse?

[NoBozo]

Something to consider. We all know that when the battery is dead (for whatever reason) we can Jump Start the car with another car, or battery and you are good to go as long as you don't shut off the engine UNTIL.... you have allowed the alternator enough time to RE Charge the battery. This assumes that the alternator was not the problem in the first place, and the battery just went dead because you left the lights on.

If the battery is OLD, and will no longer "hold a charge".. and is deemed Useless, you can still drive the car..... "on the alternator".. as long as you jump start the car every time. Even though the battery is useless for starting the car.. it is Still IN The Circuit.

If you were to remove the battery from the Circuit while the engine is running, and the alternator is making power as it is, you will have broken the Circuit and I think you may be at Great RISK of damaging (Frying) the alternator. The battery, even though dead, acts like a Surge Protector...and completes the Circuit. Nobody FIXES Alternators, so you replace it even if it only has a cooked Diode.

In the case of the Ferrari, the BAD alternator was Left IN the Circuit. In a different case where the Battery is BAD, or Just Dead, The BAD battery should be left in place, connected, providing a complete Circuit.

OBVIOUSLY, in either case you are going to Replace the bad part VERY SOON.

If you feel left out reading this.. NOT TO WORRY: Today's engines in boats and cars are pretty much Well Beyond the capability of even those of us who used to work on our own stuff. No more self taught "Mechanics" who could actually FIX something. Today we have "Technicians" who have to go to school at great expense, where they learn how to hook up a computer to the engine to Diagnose the problem...... then replace the defective part in it's entirety.

My boat is a 1986 with an Old GM 350 V8, ...a Real Carburetor, a Real Distributer, Real Ignition Coil, Real Spark Plug Wires. I Can.... and Do.. work on my own boat. NB
--------------------------------------------

DAM: I really got carried away this time. My wife sometimes tells me to STIFLE when I start getting technical. Time for an Adult Beverage.

POP QUIZ Tomorrow at 10:00.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

It may seem strange but if you drive the boat with the plug out it will actually drain. ( No I did not see this on the three stooges) My dad used to do it on our boat which did not have a bilge to drain the rain water out. The water behind creates a vacuum if you are moving. And if that does not work, just drill more holes to let the water out...

Also keep in mind that if you blow a cooling hose you can pump even more gallons per minute into the boat by keeping the boat running.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Guy

It may seem strange but if you drive the boat with the plug out it will actually drain. ( No I did not see this on the three stooges) My dad used to do it on our boat which did not have a bilge to drain the rain water out. The water behind creates a vacuum if you are moving. And if that does not work, just drill more holes to let the water out...

Also keep in mind that if you blow a cooling hose you can pump even more gallons per minute into the boat by keeping the boat running.

Just don't stop the boat!!!!

[Just Sold]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Guy

It may seem strange but if you drive the boat with the plug out it will actually drain. ( No I did not see this on the three stooges) My dad used to do it on our boat which did not have a bilge to drain the rain water out. The water behind creates a vacuum if you are moving. And if that does not work, just drill more holes to let the water out...

Also keep in mind that if you blow a cooling hose you can pump even more gallons per minute into the boat by keeping the boat running.

Just ask John Birdsall about taking the plug out on the Puddy Tat every morning for the first run of the day or if it sat too long not being used. It was a ritual otherwise the boat would sink from the leaks.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Rattlesnake Guy

It may seem strange but if you drive the boat with the plug out it will actually drain. ( No I did not see this on the three stooges) My dad used to do it on our boat which did not have a bilge to drain the rain water out. The water behind creates a vacuum if you are moving. And if that does not work, just drill more holes to let the water out...

Also keep in mind that if you blow a cooling hose you can pump even more gallons per minute into the boat by keeping the boat running.

We used to do that on an old Glastron outboard we had. It had problems draining, and this worked fine.

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

We used to do that on an old Glastron outboard we had. It had problems draining, and this worked fine.

Same here except the Glastron didn't have problems draining so much as I was lazy and it didn't have a bilge pump. So out for ride we'd go and then I'd open up the drain plug. Since it was the lowest point on the transom and the water behind the transom was being pushed out of the way, the water in the bilge drained out at the lowest point. Much manual pumping was thus sidestepped.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

Same here except the Glastron didn't have problems draining so much as I was lazy and it didn't have a bilge pump. So out for ride we'd go and then I'd open up the drain plug. Since it was the lowest point on the transom and the water behind the transom was being pushed out of the way, the water in the bilge drained out at the lowest point. Much manual pumping was thus sidestepped.

This was the way we handled things on our 75 Bayliner.... for many years....pop the plug, let even a little more water in getting the boat moving..... slowly it starts going back out as you speeded up.... stick the plug back in from the inside... and you where all set.... Man outboards where nice, with a little bilge area, back at the transom..... It wasn't until the boat was 20 years old that the boat got a bilge pump.... But even then we would do it the old way to relive the memories once or twice a year.....

[Mee-n-Mac]

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

Boat Guy 64,

I want to thank you for putting the information out there. The truth is always good to know. I am glad to know that the proper investigation was completed, and the true root cause was found. As an electrical engineer, I am dam disappointed that the wiring on the boat, even has the possibility of being miswired like that. Hopefully Cobalt has since redesigned there wiring for a dual battery set-up.

I hope that your friend has continued to boat as well and that this Mishap hasn't discouraged him away from boating. This indeed could have happened to any of us.

Accidents happen folks....Even in a Colbalt.....

As a general rule I thought the bilge pump was supposed to be wired to one of the batteries, no switch (other than the float) involved. I suppose you could wire to both batteries via an "isolator" (aka diodes) but I've yet to see that done. I don't know what happened in this case but let me suggest a few possibilities.

First lets assume a leak of some kind is filling the bilge and engine compartment. Seems to the case given what we've heard. Now lets say the pump is wired to one of the batteries and the boat is switched to, and running off, the other battery. So why doesn't the bilge pump "work" ? Well perhaps it did and that batttery ran until it was dead. Now the water comes in unabated and the boat goes down. The pump won't run until the battery switch is set to "both". Why ? What's happening is the voltage is now being sent from the good battery through the switch to the terminal of the bad battery. While the bad battery loads the circuit down, the good is strong enough to run the pump. Alternately the connection between the clamp and the (bilge pump) battery terminal could have been corroded or even disconnected. The end result is the same, the pump wouldn't run until the switch was set to "both".

As for proper operation of the switch ... as OCD said it depends. I run off 1 battery one day and then the other the next day, cycling so as to charge both. If I'm making a long run I'll switch to "both" to charge both batteries but I try to remember to switch back to "off" (or just 1 battery) when I'm done so I can't kill/drain both batteries while on the hook or at the dock. Really the best thing to do is get an automatic charging relay (ACR) and let it do the switching. The ACR disconnects the secondary batt when the engine is off. When the engine is on and the voltage is "high", a relay connects the secondary battery so it get's charged as well. If you run all your "accessories" off the secondary battery then the ACR will prevent you from draining the main, starting battery whilst listening to tunes at the sandbar.

What this thread has reminded me to do is to get a bilge pump alert that let's me know if the pump is on, or has been on in my absence. And ideally for how long. And mebbe I should make a relay circuit to switch the pump(s) from battery #1 to battery #2 if #1 ever goes dead for some reason. Might as well give the pump(s) every opportunity to save the boat ... if needed.

[trfour]

I only forgot to put the transom plug in once, and just beached it...

Thank God I was close to home!... Ya,I know I could have gassed her up all day and stayed afloat, but that would have put a huge cramp in my get along!

What a Twerp!


Disclaimer, I water test with the engine cover UP...
I'm 66, so no big thing, been there done that, but still very lucky to be here. And also, I think God has had something to do with this as well...



I will go away now!




Terry
_____________________________________

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

What this thread has reminded me to do is to get a bilge pump alert that let's me know if the pump is on, or has been on in my absence. And ideally for how long. And mebbe I should make a relay circuit to switch the pump(s) from battery #1 to battery #2 if #1 ever goes dead for some reason. Might as well give the pump(s) every opportunity to save the boat ... if needed.

I have not modified my bilge pump circuit, but I did make a change to my raw water washdown that might appeal to you and could help save the boat. I added a three-way valve between the through-hull seacock and the pump inlet so that I can draw water from the bilge rather than the seacock, with just a flip of a lever. I did it mostly to make Winterizing easy, but having a backup bilge pump may come in handy some day, though I hope not...

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Mee-n-Mac

As a general rule I thought the bilge pump was supposed to be wired to one of the batteries, no switch (other than the float) involved. I suppose you could wire to both batteries via an "isolator" (aka diodes) but I've yet to see that done.

I think the problem is that the idea of the bilge pump being hooked directly to the battery is just that a general rule. There is no regulation. Probably a suggest by the NMMA, but no hard set fast rule.

And of course now float switches are the norm, some people remember the days when they where not. And depending on who does the wire diagram for the boat if they don't think about thing properly... you can have no automatic bilge pump at all.

[MeEscape]

Originally Posted by Just Sold

Just ask John Birdsall about taking the plug out on the Puddy Tat every morning for the first run of the day or if it sat too long not being used. It was a ritual otherwise the boat would sink from the leaks.

Ask John about all those times he stopped BEFORE putting the plug back in!!

[Just Sold]

Originally Posted by MeEscape

Ask John about all those times he stopped BEFORE putting the plug back in!!

Yes I do remember that too!!!

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

Originally Posted by NoBozo

He would routinely take the car out for an entire Sunday ride...with NO functioning Alternator. ONLY the battery was there for electricity for Ignition and anything else. You could start the engine any number of times, and then Drive It ALL DAY On The Battery Alone....say 150-200 miles..Rhode Island down to Connecticut and back. The only catch was don't use the headlights or radio. No one with a Ferrari uses the radio anyway.

If the car had had Electronic Fuel Injection requireing electrical power, it might have been a different story.

Going back to the Ferrari question for a moment, I'm certainly not an expert but the Ferrari may have had a magneto ignition. Magnetos generate their own electricity to fire spark plugs so as long as the battery was in good enough condition to start the engine a few times (assuming they would make some occasional stops during their Sunday drive) and they didn't run any other electrical systems (radio, lights, etc.), the magneto would have taken care of the ignition system.

Magnetos are still in use today; remember what provides the spark for your basic chainsaw, lawn mower, weed wacker, etc., etc.? As a matter of fact, NHRA Funny Car and Top Fuel engines still use twin magnetos to fire 2 spark plugs per cylinder. How else would they be able to make 8,000 HP??

Regarding the discussion on battery switches, my Outlaw has twin batteries with a switch with positions labeled Batt #1, Batt #2, Both and Off. If memory serves me correctly, there's a label on the switch that says do NOT run the engine with the switch set to Both (something about frying the alternator or regulator). I also know for a fact that when I'm towing to the lake after a rainy week and I go up a hill, the bilge pump will come on if there's enough rain water collected and pump it out; the switch is set to Off when the boat is on the trailer. I have yet to figure out in what conditions I would use the switch set to Both. Any ideas?

[NoBozo]

Originally Posted by Wolfeboro_Baja

Going back to the Ferrari question for a moment, I'm certainly not an expert but the Ferrari may have had a magneto ignition. Magnetos generate their own electricity to fire spark plugs so as long as the battery was in good enough condition to start the engine a few times (assuming they would make some occasional stops during their Sunday drive) and they didn't run any other electrical systems (radio, lights, etc.), the magneto would have taken care of the ignition system.

Any ideas?

Yes Baha. I have ideas. Ferrari's do not have magnetos. I believe General Aviation Aircraft DO...but that is another topic.

The '79 Ferrari 308 GTS was the last 308 to have carburetters. Four Weber two barrels. The HP rating was 230 HP. Picture Magnum...PI. After that the cars went to Fuel Injection....the HP went down to 205......the environment and whatnot.

BTW: If you Turn OFF the electrical system in a General Aviation Aircraft..say a Cessna 172, The engine will continue to run. You will not have radios or anything else ...but you will have the engine. This happened to me on my "Long Solo Cross Country".

Early gasoline engines were Battery Ignition. Generators hadn't been invented yet. ..............NB

[jrc]

Originally Posted by Wolfeboro_Baja

... I have yet to figure out in what conditions I would use the switch set to Both. Any ideas?

A lot of boats only charge the battery that is on. So if you put the switch to "1" then battery #1 starts the boat, runs the engine and is charged by the alternator. In this case battery #2 in not used but also not being charged.

If you switch to "2" it's exactly the opposite. So if stop at the sandbar and run your radio all day and kill one battery the other will get you home.

Now if you get to the boat and batteries are a little weak from sitting too long, you can select "both" to get more cranking current and start the boat. You can also leave it on "both" to charge both batteries. But if you forget and leave it on "both" and go to the sandbar, run your radio, you drain both batteries. If you use enough current you could be stranded.

When I had this setup, I used "1" on Saturday and "2" on Sunday. That way both batteries got a charge every weekend and I avoided the risky "both"

Finally don't use "off" while the engine is running, on most boats it will instantly fry the alternator diodes and a possibly damage your electronics like stereos and GPS.

[Grady223]

Originally Posted by jrc

A lot of boats only charge the battery that is on. So if you put the switch to "1" then battery #1 starts the boat, runs the engine and is charged by the alternator. In this case battery #2 in not used but also not being charged.

If you switch to "2" it's exactly the opposite. So if stop at the sandbar and run your radio all day and kill one battery the other will get you home.

Now if you get to the boat and batteries are a little weak from sitting too long, you can select "both" to get more cranking current and start the boat. You can also leave it on "both" to charge both batteries. But if you forget and leave it on "both" and go to the sandbar, run your radio, you drain both batteries. If you use enough current you could be stranded.

When I had this setup, I used "1" on Saturday and "2" on Sunday. That way both batteries got a charge every weekend and I avoided the risky "both"

Finally don't use "off" while the engine is running, on most boats it will instantly fry the alternator diodes and a possibly damage your electronics like stereos and GPS.

And, don't leave it set to both, neither will charge and you could damage the alternator

[sugatam]

Is it true that when in a whaler you don't have to worry about getting swamped? My friend was telling me that a fully swamped whaler would still float and run like normal, and not sink or become prone to rolling over. If true, why don't more manufacturers build in enough positive flotation into their hulls?

[jrc]

Grady - That's not how my previous boat, with 1,2,both ,off switch worked. Both position would charge both batteries.

Sugatam - All boats under a certain size need positive flotation. On larger boats, the only way to get positive flotation would be to fill usuable areas, like cabins, closets and bathrooms with styrofoam. Most people would rather have the interior space.

[Grady223]

Originally Posted by jrc

Grady - That's not how my previous boat, with 1,2,both ,off switch worked. Both position would charge both batteries.

Sugatam - All boats under a certain size need positive flotation. On larger boats, the only way to get positive flotation would be to fill usuable areas, like cabins, closets and bathrooms with styrofoam. Most people would rather have the interior space.

My engine is a 250 Yamaha 2 stroke. It came with a warning not to use both at the same time as it would damage the alternator. If you had an I/O perhaps the alternator is more powerful.

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

Thank you JRC and Grady for your responses.

JRC, we do the same thing you mentioned about alternating battery usage each time we go out. For us, it's a little more difficult to remember which battery we used last since we tow our boat to the lake and usually only one day a week (usually Sunday, occasionally Saturday).

So it sounds like the only time I should use the "Both" position is when neither battery is strong enough to crank the engine by itself. And assuming it starts on "Both", I should switch back to battery 1 or 2 as quickly as possible WITHOUT hitting the "OFF" position. I may have to ask a Mercruiser mechanic the next time I'm at Channel Marine.

[Kerk]

I drove my first car home with No battery in it ! Ran off the generator. Took the 6 volt battery out of the ford 8 N tractor and started the car. I wrapped a rag around the cables. Returned the battery to the tractor and put it away. Drove the 32 Ford home with no registration or plates ! Did not get caught till my father found out !! Things were different in 52! Kerk

[NoBozo]

When the battery switch is set to BOTH.....BOTH Batterys WILL charge at the same time while the engine is running. There will be NO Damage to the alternator.

I can't speak for a two stroke as that infers an outboard. I have no recent experience with electrical systems in outboards. NB

[Airwaves]

Originally posted by Sugatam

Is it true that when in a whaler you don't have to worry about getting swamped? My friend was telling me that a fully swamped whaler would still float and run like normal, and not sink or become prone to rolling over. If true, why don't more manufacturers build in enough positive flotation into their hulls?

I don't know if a Whaler over 19 feet will do that or not. Whaler's website shows a 19 foot model overloaded and swamped and they claim to install two and a half times the floation required by law. Federal law requires boats up to 19 feet with greater than 2hp engines to meet certain floatation requirements, but 20 feet and above no floatation is needed, so chances are if you have a 22 foot bowrider that swamps and the pump can't keep up, then it's going down. The reason is pretty $imple!

[Grady223]

Originally Posted by NoBozo

When the battery switch is set to BOTH.....BOTH Batterys WILL charge at the same time while the engine is running. There will be NO Damage to the alternator.

I can't speak for a two stroke as that infers an outboard. I have no recent experience with electrical systems in outboards. NB

It is a Yamaha outboard, I'll go by their warning in the manual.

[OCDACTIVE]

each boat, depending on year, type, set up etc. (too many variables) can have different electrical set ups. So although operating on "both" may inevidebly be bad for one type may be fine for another.

You hit the nail on the head, definately go with whatever your manual or manufactorer says.

[XCR-700]

Saw this on the news last night. The owner said it sank because the waves were coming over the back and swamped it,,,

Five rescued from lighthouse after boat sinks in squall