Northern Marine Incident

This just released...

PRESS RELEASE
NORTHERN MARINE
90-ft Vessel Launch
On Sunday, May 18, 2014, New World Yacht Builders LLC (DBA Northern Marine) suffered a major accident during the launch of its new 90’ expedition yacht, as the yacht capsized onto its port side during the launch and settled to the bottom of the launch area. Fortunately, the experienced master and crew responded to the peril professionally and all aboard escaped, with only two employees suffering minor cuts. There was no property damage to the surrounding launch area and potential environmental contamination was negated as a result of instant response to avoid possible fuel leakage, of which there was none.
Since the casualty, there has been much speculation as to what happened, often with little or no supporting evidence. Northern Marine is cooperating with the United States Coast Guard in its investigation into incident.
Northern Marine has launch more than 35 vessels, ranging from 57 to 151 foot motor yachts, with all of its trawler models having been launched using transport dollies at the same ramp where the accident occurred on the 18th. Northern Marine continues to have complete confidence in its trawler designs, all of which have been tank tested and passed the same United States Coast Guard (USCG) stability standards applied to commercial fishing vessels operating in the North Pacific. Northern Marine trawlers have safely sailed to destinations throughout world, such as the 75-foot Starship that successfully completed a 1000 day, 78,000 mile journey to explore parts the world rarely seen by mankind.
Northern Marine believes the 90 foot yacht involved in the launch accident to be no exception. Since the accident, the project naval architect/Professional Engineer has confirmed that the yacht, as designed, had adequate stability with the amount of ballast aboard at the time of launch, provided that “severe heeling moments” were not induced during the launch. Unfortunately, it appears that just such a severe heeling moment did occur during the launch. While investigations as to the cause of the capsizing are continuing, the physical evidence on, and adjacent to, the launch ramp suggests that the dolly carrying the weight of the port stern of the yacht may have suddenly dropped off the edge of the boat ramp during the launch, causing the vessel to experience a sudden list to port from which it could not recover in its light condition for launch.
As noted above, the official USCG investigation continues and Northern Marine will cooperate in those investigations to their conclusion. Northern Marine is also working closely with the yacht’s purchaser and their insurance underwriters to address the losses resulting from the accident.
Northern Marine wishes to express its heartfelt appreciation for its many employees that contributed their talents to the construction of the yacht.

wouldn't surprise me...just would love to know what flooding if any occurred and if any residual water was causing it to stay unstable when in the slings.

psneeld said:

...and if any residual water was causing it to stay unstable when in the slings.

Click to expand...

That is the question that comes to mind after reading this release.

I spoke with one of their contractors Monday and he says NM is still in business at the present time. But they did lay off their construction crew, which is typically what they do when there are no boats to build. I also see there are people working at and coming and going from their facility. So maybe there is still life in the company?

"Reports of my death are greatly exaggerated!!"

(Mark Twain's response to New York Times publishing his obituary.)

Good to hear...
Hate to hear the demise of any boatbuilder...unless deserving...
I'll wait till the "best of one's knowledge" facts are in before making judgement.

People in suits are gathering as we speak to decide what the facts are that they'll tell you.

Rambler said:

People in suits are gathering as we speak to decide what the facts are that they'll tell you.

Click to expand...

Thankfully I've worn both USCG and civilian suits that would be making those decisions ....so I can read between the lines.....

Thankfully almost all accident reports contain enough facts to steer the truth in the right direction though not always to the right conclusion...

This is major reason in our family's boatbuilding business we always used a marine railway. Whether one on our property or one at another facility. Ocassionally, we'd use a travel-lift and sling for the wood hull boats - holding them in position while the boards swelled.

psneeld said:

wouldn't surprise me...just would love to know what flooding if any occurred and if any residual water was causing it to stay unstable when in the slings.

Click to expand...

The KIRO interview with one of the guys who was pulled from the boat, mentioned that "the water had started to rush in."

The lazarette door does seem to be open when she initially started her way down the ramp.

It does appear that there was no righting arm whatsoever at the angle of heel when she was launched. Whether it was due to inadequate light ship ballasting, free surface effect from in-flooding, dolly dropping off of ramp, unaccounted for design changes, or I'd guess, a little bit of everything.

It would be interesting to see if they did (while in the slings) or are are going to do an inclining test. Without an actual inclining test, it will be just speculation.

Although I am not particularly fond of this boat, I do think Northern Marine makes a striking yacht. I hope they weather this storm out.

On the prior thread, it was reported that when the slings were loosened after pumping, the vessel began to roll over again. If true, whatever anyone says the boat is dangerously unstable. If false, then the ingress of water from an open ER door as alleged could be the issue, although that was not noted in the press release. Either way, the USCG report will sort it out.

Lotsa bubbles from rapidly escaping air / rapidly inflowing water on the video, well before it went over...

Lotsa bubbles. That seems odd to me, if the water is coming in wouldn't the air just be displaced and exhaust taking the easiest route out. Like an open hull vent or something. Just sayin.

The press release is nothing but self serving babble. Stand up and speak. Someone other than Wes. Fact is for whatever reason, Northern screwed up badly. Doesn't matter the cause, it's their fault. Then the closed the doors, told all employees to go home. Is their rustling around their facility? Yes. But are they doing anything to finish the partially constructed boats there? No. Now even word leaking they launched because the owner had big plans of using it this year. Well, of course he did. But why did they launch that day, then close the doors? Could it be that the real push for the launch was a progress payment they'd receive?

Some think they're a huge builder. Just over 35 boats in their history. Typical year is two. And long before this incident their were multiple pending suits against them in Superior Court. Easy to see and verify if you just go to the Superior Court site for Skagit county. They've let their customers, their employees, and likely their vendors down. But then this isn't their first time closing.

They say wait for the USCG report but then they try to diffuse any blame of themselves by stating a cause. Fine to defend the dollies. They aren't the only ones who do so. But then don't overlook that in a sling, it wouldn't have turned and sunk. The cause the ramp then? Well, check the ramp out before this. It's common knowledge it only is solid a certain distance. That's a reason they probably chose high tide. If you want to be a stand up company then speak to all the issues, talk about the employees, the reason for closing, and how the owners of this boat and the others on the lot will get their boats or money back. Don't issue a press release this many days later. Have anyone heard a single word from the owners of the company? I sure haven't.

And Conrad, can you please post a link as to where that release can be found online as I've searched and can't locate it? Or is it just in the hands of a few who are posting it on forums?

The press release is on their Facebook page. It is also on PassageMaker's e- newsletter.

BandB said:

The press release is nothing but self serving babble. Stand up and speak. Someone other than Wes. Fact is for whatever reason, Northern screwed up badly. Doesn't matter the cause, it's their fault. Then the closed the doors, told all employees to go home. Is their rustling around their facility? Yes. But are they doing anything to finish the partially constructed boats there? No. Now even word leaking they launched because the owner had big plans of using it this year. Well, of course he did. But why did they launch that day, then close the doors? Could it be that the real push for the launch was a progress payment they'd receive?

Some think they're a huge builder. Just over 35 boats in their history. Typical year is two. And long before this incident their were multiple pending suits against them in Superior Court. Easy to see and verify if you just go to the Superior Court site for Skagit county. They've let their customers, their employees, and likely their vendors down. But then this isn't their first time closing.

They say wait for the USCG report but then they try to diffuse any blame of themselves by stating a cause. Fine to defend the dollies. They aren't the only ones who do so. But then don't overlook that in a sling, it wouldn't have turned and sunk. The cause the ramp then? Well, check the ramp out before this. It's common knowledge it only is solid a certain distance. That's a reason they probably chose high tide. If you want to be a stand up company then speak to all the issues, talk about the employees, the reason for closing, and how the owners of this boat and the others on the lot will get their boats or money back. Don't issue a press release this many days later. Have anyone heard a single word from the owners of the company? I sure haven't.

And Conrad, can you please post a link as to where that release can be found online as I've searched and can't locate it? Or is it just in the hands of a few who are posting it on forums?

Click to expand...

Sooo...

Are you the owner of one of the boats not yet completed or perhaps the broker representing them?

I ask because you seem to be the only person posting to these threads on 2 forums with such a passion. The rest of us just seem to have a passive morbid curiosity about the event.

CPseudonym said:

I ask because you seem to be the only person posting to these threads on 2 forums with such a passion. The rest of us just seem to have a passive morbid curiosity about the event.

Click to expand...

That's because Marin doesn't participate anymore. He was passionate about everything...

CPseudonym said:

Sooo...

Are you the owner of one of the boats not yet completed or perhaps the broker representing them?

I ask because you seem to be the only person posting to these threads on 2 forums with such a passion. The rest of us just seem to have a passive morbid curiosity about the event.

Click to expand...

No, I'm not an owner or in any way related or financially involved or impacted. I just happen to have more information on the way they've been conducting business than others, although a good bit of that is publicly available. The history of Northern and previous closures and bankruptcy are also public knowledge.

I also have observed their actions in this and many things I see are things I've seen many times in business. And I simply follow logic, as to how the sinking led to them immediately telling the employees they were closed and their jobs were gone.

As to morbid curiosity, I'm actually one of the few not to express an opinion as to which of the many possibilities or which combination led to the sinking. Stability of the boat, dollies, stabilizer, open engine door, windows below water line, off end of ramp, I don't know. But either way it was their fault. Do you believe the buyer of that boat will get all his money back?

I actually believe they built a good boat, excluding this one on which I don't think anyone knows. But when I see posts talking about their hundreds of boats or what a great company they were, that's simply in error.

I feel for all those damaged by the way things have happened, the employees, vendors and customers. Was the builder damaged? Well, only if they failed to carry proper insurance. If they had it properly insured then they suffered no financial loss. If they suffered loss, then it's for not insuring. Or perhaps for already collecting payments in excess of recoverable losses. I don't know. But again one tragedy doesn't sink a solid company. And a solid company doesn't shut things down immediately in this type situation.

As to this boat, it was already planned to be listed for resell. Oh and the buyers of it, over a year ago, chose to place a lien on all the equipment on it.

There are many builders who conduct their business the right way, who have never once been sued, who have never declared chapter 7 bankruptcy, then key people and prior owners buy the assets and restart. I feel for the innocent people harmed and suffering losses.

As to asking for the link or where the release was found, I simply wanted to go to the source to see if there was any context or comment on who sent it. I am trying to know the facts as opposed to the supposition.

Northern Spy said:

The press release is on their Facebook page. It is also on PassageMaker's e- newsletter.

Click to expand...

Thanks. Google didn't lead me to either place. Maybe operator error.

BandB said:

And Conrad, can you please post a link as to where that release can be found online as I've searched and can't locate it? Or is it just in the hands of a few who are posting it on forums?

Click to expand...

I simply lifted it from their facebook page, which anyone can access, but only if you like them.

Conrad said:

I simply lifted it from their facebook page, which anyone can access, but only if you like them.

Click to expand...

Ah.....and hence my failure to see it...lol. Thanks for posting it. There have been several articles today on the local news in the area. Funny how several days with nothing and then a good bit today.

I will probably see the boat in person in about 11 days although I imagine the photos show it better than I'll be able to from the boat or marina there. I can imagine the boat in limbo for a very long time. It's a shame that no effort was made or could be made to salvage the engines or any of the equipment. Obviously the norm would have been to have raised it and immediately set to work doing so before oxidation and rust completely destroyed them.

We moor next door to where Baden was launched, and information from folks who know is starting to come out. According to one contractor on the boat, the original design ballast was 60,000#. A fair amount of stone work was added up top, so the consensus was this ballast needed to be increased to 80,000 - 100,000#. The boat was launched with 30,000#. The same contractor confirmed that the vessel would not stay upright when the slings were loosed, hence she was towed in the slings for haul out.

If that much additional ballast was added, she would sit 6 - 9 inches further in the water, so it's hard to see how this vessel ever gets off the hard as is.

Steve Seaton is the original designer of this hull, Northern built all boats from the same mold, extending/damming/widening as required to build hulls from 58' to 85' and apparently 90'. The original design called for ballast from 25,000 to 40,000 pounds (lead shot in resin), the larger amount being for the 83 footer. The published weight study of Blood Baron/Baden states 20,000 pounds of ballast, then calls for an additional 38,000 pounds of ballast to bring her into compliance with USCG stability standards (CFR) which she doesn't need to meet as a pleasure vessel. The weight study states a total of 1829 pounds of stonework aboard, spread over 4 deck levels. That's less than 10 extra people (185 lbs per person), which certainly should not imperil the stability of such a vessel.

Tad Roberts said:

Steve Seaton is the original designer of this hull, Northern built all boats from the same mold, extending/damming/widening as required to build hulls from 58' to 85' and apparently 90'. The original design called for ballast from 25,000 to 40,000 pounds (lead shot in resin), the larger amount being for the 83 footer. The published weight study of Blood Baron/Baden states 20,000 pounds of ballast, then calls for an additional 38,000 pounds of ballast to bring her into compliance with USCG stability standards (CFR) which she doesn't need to meet as a pleasure vessel. The weight study states a total of 1829 pounds of stonework aboard, spread over 4 deck levels. That's less than 10 extra people (185 lbs per person), which certainly should not imperil the stability of such a vessel.

Click to expand...

Any thoughts then on why she turns turtle when released from the slings?

Tad Roberts said:

The published weight study of Blood Baron/Baden states 20,000 pounds of ballast, then calls for an additional 38,000 pounds of ballast to bring her into compliance with USCG stability standards (CFR) which she doesn't need to meet as a pleasure vessel.

Click to expand...

So if the vessel was launched with only the 20,000 pounds of ballast on board with little or no other ballast on board do you think the vessel could/would behave the way it did?

I have personal knowldege of a large yacht that had a hollow keel. A well known PNW NA said the vessel would be unstable if the keel was left hollow, so about 1200 gallons of water/AF mixture were added. When looking at the stability analysis it was revelating to me that a hollow keel could be such an "unsettling" issue, but it was.

The Blood Baron NM issues will be interesting to see spelled out - logically of course.

sunchaser said:

I have personal knowldege of a large yacht that had a hollow keel. A well known PNW NA said the vessel would be unstable if the keel was left hollow, so about 1200 gallons of water/AF mixture were added. When looking at the stability analysis it was revelating to me that a hollow keel could be such an "unsettling" issue, but it was.

The Blood Baron NM issues will be interesting to see spelled out - logically of course.

Click to expand...

True dat. Whatever is published about what should have worked on this vessel, stability wise, or whatever experts say about its design coherence we have the physical fact that it turns turtle to port when left to its own devices. So clearly, reality trumps theory, and the reality is that this vessel should not have been launched without more ballast. If the port side hadn't hit the rocks, it would have been upside down in its presently most stable position.

I still find the whole thing mystifying, at least in terms of how something can get this effed up with so many presumably smart people involved.

Has anyone been in working on the mechanicals and flushing things out?

Moonstruck said:

Has anyone been in working on the mechanicals and flushing things out?

Click to expand...

I sure hope so. So many times I have seen engines get wet in some sort of event, and the insurance co and others fiddle fart around for weeks, then decide to check out the machinery. Well, duh, its all rusted up.

A proper recovery of a wet engine can mean basically zero long term damage. Lots of electrical stuff is a different story, but even generator ends can be rinsed and dried and live a full life. Key is getting to it right away after unsinking. As in a day or two or three.

CPseudonym said:

The rest of us just seem to have a passive morbid curiosity about the event.

Click to expand...

or an active morbid curiosity. Just say'n

Moonstruck said:

Has anyone been in working on the mechanicals and flushing things out?

Click to expand...

I drive by most days, and I have yet to see anyone on the vessel. That suggests to me that those in a position to know realize that there are aspects of this boat that are simply unsalvageable, otherwise the sensible thing would be to work frenetically to save equipment that was only submerged a short time. Anything on the starboard side is probably fine. My guess is that post lawsuits, she will be sold as a wreck, the waterline adjusted, port side cabinets and equipment replace, and ballasted so she doesn't roll over if a duck bumps up against the hull.