Italian Sea Group sues NY Times over Bayesian sinking investigation
The Italian Sea Group (TISG) has announced legal proceedings against the New York Times in response to an article published on 31 October 2024.
The article discussed the sinking of the superyacht Bayesian, which made international headlines when it sank in a freak maritime accident during a storm off the Sicilian coast in August.
Bayesian was the family yacht of British entrepreneur Mike Lynch, who was confirmed dead in the incident along with six others.
Bayesian was built by Perini Navi, an Italian brand that TISG acquired in January 2021 from a bankruptcy auction along with Perini Navi’s brand, archives and real estate.
The incident quickly turned into a PR nightmare for TISG, which reportedly dismissed its legal team after they filed a rogue lawsuit against Mike Lynch’s widow Angela Bacares and the yacht’s crew, only a month after the tragedy.
The lawsuit, which sought up to €222m (£186m) in damages for reputational harm, was filed by Tommaso Bertuccelli, a lawyer working with TISG, Italian publication La Nazione first reported. TISG has since revealed that Bertuccelli had done so without the company’s knowledge or approval, and the lawsuit was withdrawn.
Few days ago we encountered the exquisite Bayesian vessel,anchored near us. All night until sunrise we took plenty of picts of it. The 75-meter mast illuminated at night was spectacular. We speculated about the individuals on board,enjoying the time of their lives. What a tragedy pic.twitter.com/OqYIwaV1vb
— Khorakhané(@Khorakhane100) August 19, 2024
Chief executive Giovanni Costantino spoke out about his “sadness on one hand and disbelief on the other” at the incident, maintaining there was no fault with the vessel’s design.
On 31 October, New York Times published an in-depth investigation exploring what caused the sinking, and claiming that the extra-tall mast made the yacht “vulnerable to capsizing”.
TISG refutes the article’s claims, asserting that it contained “inaccurate technical assessments”. The company argues that the narrative lacked source transparency and expressed intent to protect the reputation of Perini Navi, which it describes as a longstanding symbol of Italian yachting.
In a statement, TISG responds to specific claims raised by the NYT piece:
Vessel design
TISG addresses concerns raised about the single-mast design of the Bayesian, emphasising that the vessel meets the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s stability standards.
TISG says: “The NYT attributes undocumented instability to the single-mast design choice: the Bayesian while having a stability curve slightly different from a ketch, still fully and largely complies with the stability criteria set by the Maritime Coastguard Agency for commercial sailing vessels.”
Consultation with experts
The New York Times article referenced insights from over a dozen unnamed experts, suggesting structural weaknesses in the yacht’s design.
NYT states: “More than a dozen naval architects, engineers and other experts consulted by the Times found glaring weaknesses in the Bayesian’s design that they say may have contributed to the disaster.”
TISG counters: “The Bayesian was designed by one of the world’s most famous naval architects, Ron Holland, while we do not read any names of these self-proclaimed designers who apodictically state that the yacht offers obvious weaknesses.”
Doors and hull openings
TISG addresses statements regarding hull openings. The NYT article highlights that doors and windows could have been a “weakness”. TISG argues that all doors were watertight and adhere to safety regulations, remaining secure unless improperly managed.
Earlier this month, UK paper The Times reported that a photograph taken minutes before the Bayesian superyacht sank appears to show that a door in the hull was closed in the minutes leading up to the disaster, contradicting claims that the crew had left it open, allowing water to flood in during a storm off the coast of Sicily. These claims have not been verified and investigations into the exact circumstances of the incident are still ongoing.
Ballast positioning
The NYT quotes Tad Roberts, who said: “The ballast appears to have been pushed towards the rear of the vessel to compensate for the single, heavy mast closer to the front.” Roberts said he had never seen main ballast used in such a design tactic before.
TISG argues that the fixed ballast was placed on the aft end of the skeg to balance the weight of the single mast, which was further forward than on the sister ketch yachts. “This arrangement did not in any way compromise the fixed ballast centre of gravity height on Bayesian,” they say in a statement. “Every expert naval engineer can confirm that.”
Buoyancy concerns
The article quotes ‘naval architects’ who argue the ship had reduced buoyancy due to a sunken deck design. TISG responds that the deck configuration does not affect buoyancy at typical angles and that the area is equipped with drainage.
“This arrangement can reduce buoyancy but only at very high heel angles and does not affect the regulatory stability requirements,” TISG says. “This area is also equipped with freeing port drains to drain any water that might become trapped there.”
TISG emphasises that all technical aspects of the Bayesian’s stability and design were validated by class and flag surveyors, with safety measures such as watertight closures for potential openings.
Breaching MCA safety thresholds
“In particular, the data shows that the two-masted vessel could list at least 10 degrees more on its side before taking on dangerous quantities of water,” the NYT article reads. “The documents also show that the Bayesian could start taking on water at angles that appear to breach the safety threshold set by the British Maritime and Coastguard Agency.”
TISG says it strongly disputes these claims, “which not only are not supported by appropriate details, but they are completely false.”
In a statement, TISG argues: “Once again, [NYT] reiterates that the Stability Booklet is MCA approved, therefore fully compliant with the applicable regulations and that the angle of inclination at which the first significant opening immerses causing the flooding of the yacht’s engine room is 42.7°.
“It is emphasised that these openings are in any case protected by remotely controlled watertight closures.”
Wind-related heeling concerns
The NYT reports that two Spanish naval engineers, Guillermo Gefaell and Juan Manuel López, “calculated that the sheer size of the Bayesian’s mast and rigging made the yacht a wind catcher, even with the sails down.”
“Writing for the Association of Naval and Ocean Engineers of Spain, they used a computer model to calculate what would have happened to the Bayesian if a strong gust of roughly 54 knots, around 62 mph, hit its side,” the NYT writes. “Under those conditions, the Spanish engineers estimated the Bayesian could lean dynamically and take on nearly a ton of water each second through an engine room vent.
“In an interview, Gefaell noted that he, like almost everyone else, did not know everything that happened that night. But if the gusts were as strong as…60 knots the punch would have pushed the boat to an even more severe angle, his calculations showed, very quickly knocking the boat all the way over onto its side, as the witnesses recounted. At that point, Mr. Gefaell said, ‘the boat was certainly lost’.”
TISG “specifies that the calculated heel angle with 60 knots of crosswind is approximately 18 degrees and therefore in adequate conditions cannot lead to the immersion of any downflooding point (at 80 knots of wind the heel angle is approximately 28 degrees).”
“In order to have a water ingress of 1 tonne per second as stated above, the engine room ventilation opening would have had to be completely immersed at about 3m depth and this condition cannot be achieved even with a complete capsize (heeling of 90° or more),” the firm argues.
“TISG highlights that that night the wind gusts reached 60 knots for only about 1.5/2 minutes. Therefore, with such wind pressure the vessel would have listed by 18 degrees, which confirms the total absence of risk, even in the hypothesis that the crew had not carried out all the necessary activities correctly. It follows that, in such conditions, the only cause of greater heeling angle is due to the flooding of more than one compartment.”
In its statement, TISG stresses its commitment to resolving these allegations through “legal means”, as well as its confidence in the Italian investigation into the incident.
The post Italian Sea Group sues NY Times over Bayesian sinking investigation appeared first on Marine Industry News.
