Boat sunk in Glacier Bay

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
BandB said:
Wifey B: Wow....that shivers me timbers. So lucky to survive. I'm sure survival time in those waters would be very short. I'm just glad they were rescued so promptly. :)
Click to expand...

They say a person has a 50/50 chance of making it 50 feet to shore in the cold water
 
Looks like it’s a 66 foot Grand Banks out of Seattle.
 
Having poopie suits handy and prepared for donning and regular training isn't a bad idea.

Serving as a rescuer and being a boater in Alaska (including far northern and southern realms) certainly convinced me of that.
 
Would have liked more details--that is a large boat to just capsize in relatively protected water.


Glad all got off safely.
 
It says it capsized after taking on water. Must have been an awful lot of water coming in very fast. Maybe it’s an old wood GB and hit a rock?
 
Not a woodie, it says it was built in 1997.
 
bowball said:
Photos from Marine Traffic show it to be the yacht Christina.
Click to expand...

Good catch, I looked for sales ads but came up empty.

Interesting the term “capsized” is being tossed about, I don’t see that anywhere.

Even the linked news piece says the 4 people were "rescued AFTER the boat capsized." But then that's journalism, isn't it?

One of the pictures of it heeled over, makes it look very much like she grounded, and I’m surprised a local hasn’t chimed in to point out a well-known (and charted?) rock.
 

Attachments

  • C n D.jpg
    C n D.jpg
    127.4 KB · Views: 117
Last edited:
In the sailboat world that would be considered capsised. Bottoms up would be turtled. Looking at the crane and the rib in the water looks like they launched with 2 in the rib and 2 left on the boat.
 
Old Sea Dog said:
In the sailboat world that would be considered capsised. Bottoms up would be turtled. Looking at the crane and the rib in the water looks like they launched with 2 in the rib and 2 left on the boat.
Click to expand...

Agreed on that being considered capsized. Although I wonder if it actually capsized or if it grounded and then fell over when the tide went out.
 
rslifkin said:
I wonder if it actually capsized or if it grounded and then fell over when the tide went out.
Click to expand...
Yes, my thoughts, as well.
The picture I linked shows a very odd angle and possition of settlement, suggesting it is perched or hung up on something.

If AIS last position is accurate, it was in Sandy Cove, which is pretty unobstructed, with the exception of a couple charted rocks near shore to the east of Puffin Island.
 
I'm curious too
It looks like a well built trawler!

???

When I was a younger:
We once forgot to put the drain plug back in the boat we took on a dive trip Florida keys!
Later in the day we wondered why we where sitting so low in the water...

We were fortunate to drive the 45 minutes -hour back to the boatyard without additional water getting in...
 
soin2la said:
Yes, my thoughts, as well.
The picture I linked shows a very odd angle and possition of settlement, suggesting it is perched or hung up on something.

If AIS last position is accurate, it was in Sandy Cove, which is pretty unobstructed, with the exception of a couple charted rocks near shore to the east of Puffin Island.
Click to expand...


I'd love to know exactly where this happened. I don't trust the Marine Traffic reports. Some of the cruise ships are floating AIS relay stations so when one goes by you location gets recorded, but then lost. Similarly with the satellite received position reports. So what you end up seeing are snap shots of where the boat has been at some time, but not a complete track. This is from observing out own position reports over about 2 weeks in the park.


Sandy Cove is one of the popular and few anchorages, so it's very likely they were there at some point and got picked up. But the reports say the boat finally sank in 300' of water.


I agree that the photos look like it's on it's side on teh bottom, but that doesn't agree with it then sinking in 300' of water.


And reports say it was in Muir Inlet which is north of Sandy Cove.


So it's unclear, at least to me, how all this adds up and fits together.
 
The CG knows exactly where the boat sank. Reports are forthcoming once the initial paperwork clears this Holiday weekend. The real story and conundrum is who pays for vessel recovery in a National Park done under very strict protocols yet to be developed.

Given the Glacier Bay Park’s tight restrictions the boat owner is in for a rough ride.
 
sunchaser said:
The CG knows exactly where the boat sank. Reports are forthcoming once the initial paperwork clears this Holiday weekend. The real story and conundrum is who pays for vessel recovery in a National Park done under very strict protocols yet to be developed.

Given the Glacier Bay Park’s tight restrictions the boat owner is in for a rough ride.
Click to expand...


The boat owner is responsible. I think that part is clear.
 
I saw another report that cleared some things up a bit. It says the boat sank in 150' of water, 300' from shore. And there's a picture showing both the boat and the shoreline.


In my opinion, 300' from shore is uncomfortably close in Alaska if you are really underway as opposed to drifting to fish or watch wildlife. There are just too many abrupt changes in depth, increasingly poorly charted as you get closer to shore. Now we don't know if that's where the problem started, or if that's just where they ended up, nor do we know what caused them to take on water. As always, it will be an interesting report to read once released.
 
twistedtree said:
I'd love to know exactly where this happened. I don't trust the Marine Traffic reports. Some of the cruise ships are floating AIS relay stations so when one goes by you location gets recorded, but then lost. Similarly with the satellite received position reports. So what you end up seeing are snap shots of where the boat has been at some time, but not a complete track. This is from observing out own position reports over about 2 weeks in the park.


Sandy Cove is one of the popular and few anchorages, so it's very likely they were there at some point and got picked up. But the reports say the boat finally sank in 300' of water.
Click to expand...
Excellent observations from personal experience.
The 300 feet though, is believable. As you well know, there are rocks all over the west coast which rise up from great depths.----Ok, I've read your later post and so no need for my 300' comments.

I like Sunchasers comments.
 
Last edited:
twistedtree said:
I saw another report that cleared some things up a bit. It says the boat sank in 150' of water, 300' from shore. And there's a picture showing both the boat and the shoreline.
Click to expand...

Yes, this...
Sorry couldn't get the pic to attach. It is among the 4 embedded images in the link and shows shore nearby.
 
Last edited:
The National park service will evaluate the the requirements of retrieving the sunken vessel. If retrieving the vessel causes more issues than leaving it they will let it stay.

I was indirectly involved in a similar situation were an AS350B helicopter crashed into Crater Lake. The Aerospatiale factory actually wanted to retrieve the air craft but the Park Service determined that it was better for the overall environment to leave the aircraft at the bottom of the lake.
 
My problem with this as others have noted is why is the boat on it's side???

I admittidly have not seen a boat sink but logic tells me that a boat taking on water would tend to favor the end of the boat where water starts to collect.

Then the angle would continue to increase as more water weight enters the hull

The boat would not tend to list, at least in my mind.

It certainly would not go over. Actually the opposite I would think. As more water enters the hull my imagination tells me the boat would tend to maintain a upright attitude side to side.

Is this logic correct???
 
With that enclosed fly bridge/pilothouse and placed so far forward, does that make the center of gravity affect this situation at all?. Visually I’m not a fan of the profile.
 
The fact that it sank 300 feet from shore doesn’t necessarily mean that’s where the problem occurred. If I started taking on water fast I’d head for shore as long as the boat had power.
 
ksanders said:
My problem with this as others have noted is why is the boat on it's side???

I admittidly have not seen a boat sink but logic tells me that a boat taking on water would tend to favor the end of the boat where water starts to collect.

Then the angle would continue to increase as more water weight enters the hull

The boat would not tend to list, at least in my mind.

It certainly would not go over. Actually the opposite I would think. As more water enters the hull my imagination tells me the boat would tend to maintain a upright attitude side to side.

Is this logic correct???
Click to expand...

This can’t be right, didn’t you see the Poseidon Adventure?
 
ksanders said:
My problem with this as others have noted is why is the boat on it's side???

I admittidly have not seen a boat sink but logic tells me that a boat taking on water would tend to favor the end of the boat where water starts to collect.

Then the angle would continue to increase as more water weight enters the hull

The boat would not tend to list, at least in my mind.

It certainly would not go over. Actually the opposite I would think. As more water enters the hull my imagination tells me the boat would tend to maintain a upright attitude side to side.

Is this logic correct???
Click to expand...

In perfectly calm conditions that may be how it goes. But if the boat is rolling a little, water will start to slosh. That can majorly destabilize a boat.
 
twistedtree said:
In my opinion, 300' from shore is uncomfortably close in Alaska if you are really underway as opposed to drifting to fish or watch wildlife. There are just too many abrupt changes in depth, increasingly poorly charted as you get closer to shore.
Click to expand...

Speaking as a Juneau boy who grew up boating there I’d have to say the opposite in most of Glacier Bay. The shores drop steeply into deep water outside of the few anchorages in the upper bay. There are a few drying rocks outside the entrance to S Sandy Cove near where she sunk that could have been at the right depth to hole a trawler at certain tides, but they are charted and off a point that I would think most skippers would know to stay well clear of. There is rarely much ice that far down the bay to hit either. My bet is that something very flukey happened here.
 
Whenever I see discussions of forward looking sonar, I usually see some comments that it is a gimmick, you don't really need one. Others say the forward looking sonar is only good at 8 knots or less, what good is that?

Most don't understand why and how to use this type of sonar, they feel if you can't use it when you are underway over 8 knots, what's the point. But the scenario above is the perfect location and scenario for forward looking sonar. Its good for going into locations where you don't trust the charts, its a confining location and you aren't sure about shoals, ice, floating debris, etc. You tip toe in at 3 - 5 knots and turn the sonar on so you can "see" what's going on underneath you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Covequest
Hi from the new guy
Replies
18
Views
1K
Covequest
Covequest
D
Velair VSD New Installation
Replies
3
Views
628
Vatu
V
S
Safety course recommendations for S.F. bay area
Replies
11
Views
493
psneeld
psneeld
RT Firefly
Overturned catamaran
Replies
15
Views
2K
brian eiland
brian eiland
T
Chesapeake Bay members heading south late season
Replies
11
Views
1K
ranger58sb
ranger58sb

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom