A chartbook does make it so easy to review a route, much easier than futzing with zooming a little screen.
Only for those of you who grew up in the paper generation. I don't have to futz. Plus my screen isn't little.
Now as to the other comments, we always have two different systems in use and we do the double checking that was referred to, but we have a check list to make sure we do. Prior to the start of the leg, we check the charts thoroughly and note all potential issues. We also check possible deviations from plans. If, in the course of the day we decide to change our plans entirely, we repeat the process. The real work is done before you start cruising, not while cruising. While cruising you use the information you saw earlier and combine it with what you visually see now. The owner had a good system in place, just failed to use it that time. The owner did an excellent analysis. This wasn't an accident due to failure to see the jetty. It was due to failure to follow their procedures, designed to prevent failure to see accidents.
As to whether steel or aluminum would have survived, due to the nature of the major damage as it being weight more than just an initial impact, I think they would also have had serious problems.
Then the talk of whether more flotation earlier might have saved the situation. It might have helped, but there was already some serious damage developing long before the water inflow and before it was known. The stress under the boat didn't just happen at once. It became known at once though. And, I toss something else out. The owner noted the time at which it became strictly salvage. There's an earlier point that I would have no regrets it wasn't saved. There were signs of structural hull damage, although not clearly understood at the time. However, let's say you save the boat from sinking completely but you have a hull with serious structural damage from the stress of the weight, do you really have anything at that point that you care to recover? Would you have had more of a battle getting the insurer to declare it a total loss? I don't know when the time was but there was a time some hours after the boat sat as it did, that unknown to everyone at the time, the hours of stress made it something I wouldn't have wanted to have tried to restore. In fact, this is the reason in most damage claims that items are declared total losses when the cost of repairs exceeds a certain percentage, such as 75%, not when it's 100%. Yes, there are people who could have restored it but basically they're boat builders and would have been rebuilding not repairing. Then it's not the boat it was, might be a better version or worse version, and it's a boat with a lot of bad history.