Hmmm, speaking of sailing under autopilot... Too bad the camera was not on a gimballed mount, to better convey the full effect...
Your mention earlier in the thread about the inversion/righting test was dismissed by some, as having little meaning... Yeah, well, I'd love to see anyone here try it with their own boat... :-)
Incredible broach on a sailing boat - YouTube
Suffice it to say, guys like Stamm are cut from a different cloth than you and me... :-)
Yes, regarding the inversion/righting test to serve only to see how much water would go inside the boat, as someone stated, it seemed so absurd that I did not even reply. Regarding the inversion test without a mast: do you know that a boat would re right itself easily if the mast stays in place? I agree, that seems strange but serious tank testing took away any doubt.
These boats have the most demanding mandatory stability requirements in all industry, racing or cruising alike. As you know they have many thousands of liters of liked ballast and a canting keel. Putting everything on the wrong place, meaning keel canting to the side of heel as well had thousands of liters of water ballast, even so they have a mandatory AVS superior to the one of many cruising boats, one that would allow them to pass RCD class A requirements by a large margin.
When they are hit broadside by a wave, they will have normally all on the right place, canting keel and ballast, so you can imagine the stability of those animals.
In what other type of 60ft sailing boat it would be possible to be inside chatting with the other crew member on big seas with 45/50K of wind on autopilot doing over 10K with the boat [B]"behaving very well... in complete security and the boat was very little stressed"[/B
Yes, I know, the boat broke
but the fact that a very experienced sailor can fell this about his sailboat (that he knew very well) on those conditions show the sailing potential of these boats in bad weather as well it shows how unusual it was that type of breakage.
These guys, I mean IMOCA sailors have something good for them, they form a very tight association that rules the way the boats are developed and modified. This accident will be investigated even if the boat is lost. The JK project of Stamm's boat, in what regards hull and structure safety margins will be compared with the other class projects where an incident like this never happened and if the problem has to do with a too fragile boat and not with a building defect, minimum mandatory factors will be implemented for hull and structure as they had already been implemented for the keel.
That boat had passed for much worse than that and I would wait with interest the developments of this case in what regards this investigation. Anyway Stamm's boat had suffered along the years several unusual problems and that only makes it more interesting: A not reliable building, a not reliable project or other factors?