Boat logo

The global authority in superyachting

  • Yachts Home
  • The Superyacht Directory
  • Yacht Reports
  • Brokerage News
  • The largest yachts in the world
  • The Register
  • Yacht Advice
  • Yacht Design
  • 12m to 24m yachts
  • Monaco Yacht Show
  • Builder Directory
  • Designer Directory
  • Interior Design Directory
  • Naval Architect Directory
  • Yachts for sale home
  • Motor yachts
  • Sailing yachts
  • Explorer yachts
  • Classic yachts
  • Sale Broker Directory
  • Charter Home
  • Yachts for Charter
  • Charter Destinations
  • Charter Broker Directory
  • Destinations Home
  • Mediterranean
  • South Pacific
  • Rest of the World
  • Boat Life Home
  • Owners' Experiences
  • Interiors Suppliers
  • Owners' Club
  • Captains' Club
  • BOAT Showcase
  • Boat Presents
  • Events Home
  • World Superyacht Awards
  • Superyacht Design Festival
  • Design and Innovation Awards
  • Young Designer of the Year Award
  • Artistry and Craft Awards
  • Explorer Yachts Summit
  • Ocean Talks
  • The Ocean Awards
  • BOAT Connect
  • Between the bays
  • Golf Invitational
  • Boat Pro Home
  • Pricing Plan
  • Superyacht Insight
  • Product Features
  • Premium Content
  • Testimonials
  • Global Order Book
  • Tenders & Equipment

nadine yacht sinking

How Jordan Belfort's 37m superyacht Nadine sank off the coast of Sardinia

Related articles.

Coco Chanel was famously outspoken on many things, but yachting, in particular, attracted her ire. “As soon as you set foot on a yacht you belong to some man, not to yourself, and you die of boredom,” she was once quoted as saying.

Her solution was to buy her own yacht. A 37m with a steel hull, built by the Dutch yard Witsen & Vis of Alkmaar. The yacht passed through many hands, finally ending up belonging to the Wolf of Wall Street, Jordan Belfort, on whose watch she foundered and sank in 1996.

The yacht was originally built for a Frenchman under the name Mathilde , but he backed out and she caught Chanel’s eye instead. With a narrow beam, a high bow and the long, low superstructure typical of Dutch yachts of her era, she was certainly a beautiful boat. But she was also well equipped, with five staterooms in dark teak panelling, magnificent dining facilities, room for big tenders and, later, a helipad. A frequent sight along the Florida coast, she caught the eye of a young skipper called Mark Elliott.

“In those days, she was the biggest yacht on the East Coast,” he remembers. “Nobody had ever seen anything like it. I needed a wrench once and went up to the boat - Captain Norm Dahl was really friendly.” He didn’t know it then, but Elliott was destined to become the skipper of the boat himself and was at the helm when the storm of the century took her to the bottom off Sardinia.

Coco Chanel died in 1971 and sometime thereafter the yacht was renamed Jan Pamela under the new ownership of Melvin Lane Powers. He was a flamboyant Houston real estate developer, fond of crocodile skin cowboy boots and acquitted of murder in a trial that gripped the nation.

Powers sent Jan Pamela to Merrill Stevens yard in Miami, where a mammoth seven-metre section was added amidships. “We made templates for the boat where we were going to cut her in half, then she went out for another charter season,” remembers Whit Kirtland, son of the yard owner. “When the boat came back in, we cut it just forward of the engine room, rolled the two sections apart and welded it in.”

He remembers how the sun’s heat made the bare and painted metal expand at different rates. “You had to weld during certain time periods – early in the morning or late at night,” says Kirtland.

The result of the extension was a huge new seven-metre full-beam master stateroom, an extra salon and one further cabin – pushing the charter capacity to seven staterooms. During this refit, the boat’s colour was also changed from white to taupe. “No one had really done it before and it was gorgeous,” says Elliott. By 1983, Powers was bankrupt and the yacht was sold on again. She next shows up named Edgewater .

Elliott’s chance came in 1989. He was working for the established yacht owner Bernie Little, who ran a hugely profitable distribution business for Bud brewer Anheuser-Busch. “Bernie Little had always wanted to own the boat,” Elliott says. “He loved it. He bought it sight unseen – and I started a huge restoration programme, including another extension to put three metres in the cockpit.”

It was a massive task, undertaken at Miami Ship. “We pulled out all the windows, re-chromed everything, repainted – brought it back to life,” says Elliott. They also cut out old twin diesels from GM and replaced them with bigger CAT engines, doubling her horsepower to 800. “Repowered, she could cruise at up to 20 knots. She was long and skinny, like a destroyer.”

A smart hydraulic feature was also brought to life for the first time. Under two of the sofas in the main stateroom were hidden 3.6m x 1.2m glass panels giving a view of the sea under the boat. At the push of a button, the sofas lifted up and mirrors above allowed you to gaze at the seabed – from the actual bed.

Now called Big Eagle , like all of Little’s boats, she was a charter hit and her top client was a certain New York financier named Jordan Belfort. He fell in love with her and begged Little to sell to him. But he needed to secure financing, and in 1995, Little agreed to hold a note on the boat for a year if Mark Elliott stayed on as skipper.

With the boat rechristened Nadine after his wife, Belfort set about another round of refit work, restyling the interior with vintage deco and lots of mirrors, extending the upper deck this time, and fitting a crane capable of raising and stowing the Turbine Seawind seaplane.

Nadine also carried a helicopter, a 10m Intrepid tender, two 6m dinghies on the bow, four motorbikes, six jetskis, state-of-the-art dive gear. “You pretty much needed an air traffic controller when all these things were in the water,” says Elliott.

Belfort’s partying was legendary and Elliott clearly saw eye-watering things on board, but as far as he was concerned, he was there to safeguard the boat. “When Jordan Belfort became the owner, he could do whatever he wanted. I was there to protect the note,” says Elliott. “He is a brilliant mind and a lovely person. It was just when he was in his party mode, he was out of control.”

Nadine and her huge cohort of toys and vehicles plied all the usual yachting haunts on both sides of the Atlantic. But Belfort’s love story was to be short-lived. Disaster struck with the boss and guests on board during an 85-mile crossing between Civitavecchia in Italy and Calle de Volpe on Sardinia.

What was forecast to be a 20-knot blow and moderate seas degenerated into a violent 70-knot storm with crests towering above 10.6m, according to Elliott. Wave after wave pounded the superstructure, stoving in hatches and windows so that water poured below and made the boat sluggish. By a miracle the engine room remained dry and they could maintain steerage way, motoring slowly through the black of the night as rescue attempt after rescue attempt was called off.

Nadine eventually sank at dawn in over 1000m of water just 20 miles from the coast of Sardinia. Everyone had been taken off by helicopter, and there was no loss of life. Captain Mark Elliott was roundly congratulated for his handling of the incident. “The insurance paid immediately because it was the storm of the century,” he says. “I took the whole crew but one with me to [Little’s next boat] Star Ship . That was my way to come back.”

More stories

Most popular, from our partners, sponsored listings.

Join our Newsletter

The Ridiculous True Story Behind Wolf Of Wall Street’s Yacht

Share the article

Royal Huisman’s Project 406 Is The World’s Largest Purpose-Built Fishing Boat

Royal Huisman’s Project 406 Is The World’s Largest Purpose-Built Fishing Boat

Ferrari Is Officially Entering The Yacht Game

Ferrari Is Officially Entering The Yacht Game

Steven Spielberg Takes Delivery On His Cinematic $250 Million Superyacht

Steven Spielberg Takes Delivery On His Cinematic $250 Million Superyacht

The 33-Metre Sanlorenzo SP110 ‘Steel It’ Motor Yacht Is A Jet-Powered Masterpiece

The 33-Metre Sanlorenzo SP110 ‘Steel It’ Motor Yacht Is A Jet-Powered Masterpiece

Conor McGregor Enjoyed The Monaco Grand Prix From His $5.5 Million Lamborghini Yacht

Conor McGregor Enjoyed The Monaco Grand Prix From His $5.5 Million Lamborghini Yacht

Related articles.

royal huisman project 406

BMW Debuts ‘The Icon’ Boat With Soundscape Designed By Hans Zimmer

nadine yacht sinking

Step Inside The 75m Kenshō: 2023’s Motor Yacht Of The Year

Alfa Nero Crew Spends Year Playing 'Call Of Duty' & Swimming

Russian Superyacht’s Crew Spends Past Year Playing ‘Call Of Duty’ & Chilling By Pool

Superyacht gun battle yemen

Superyacht Private Security Engaged In A Gun Battle With Pirates Off The Coast Of Yemen

Feadship Project 710

The Feadship Project 710 Is 84m Of Sustainable Superyacht

  • TV & Film
  • Say Maaate to a Mate
  • First Impressions - The Game
  • Daily Ladness
  • Citizen Reef

To make sure you never miss out on your favourite NEW stories , we're happy to send you some reminders

Click ' OK ' then ' Allow ' to enable notifications

Jordan Belfort’s ex-wife tells the real story behind the yacht on The Wolf of Wall Street

Jordan Belfort’s ex-wife tells the real story behind the yacht on The Wolf of Wall Street

The ex-wife of jordan belfort shed some light on the infamous scene.

Ben Thompson

Jordan Belfort's ex wife, Nadine Macaluso, has set the record straight about the scene in The Wolf Of Wall Street where Belfort splashes out and buys his wife a yacht on their wedding day.

I mean, when you have a lot of money , what better way to treat your new spouse after saying I do?

After their lavish wedding, Belford ( Leonardo DiCaprio ) covers Nadine's, or Naomi as she's known in the movie, eyes with a blindfold before revealing the huge yacht, which has been christened the 'Naomi'.

And Naomi (played by Margot Robbie ) cannot contain her excitement.

"Are you serious? A f***ing yacht?!" she exclaims.

However, it seems that the real Belfort wasn't very serious, as Macaluso revealed on TikTok that her ex-husband, who she was married to from 1991 to 2005, 'did not' actually buy her a boat on their wedding day.

Margot Robbie played Naomi, who was based on Nadine.

She said: "Actually what happened I think we were married for a few years and we were always chartering yachts, because he loved to do that.

"And I had given birth to my beautiful daughter Chandler and he said 'I want to buy a yacht'."

However, this idea didn't sit well with Macaluso at the time.

She continued: "I said 'I don't think we should buy a yacht, we have a baby and I don't feel comfortable.

'She can't swim.'

"I had visions of her falling off the boat and I was actually terrified.

"I did not want to buy the yacht ironically. And he was like 'Nope, I'm buying a yacht and I'm calling it the Nadine'. And I was like 'Okay, here we go'.

"And you know how that went."

Nadine Macaluso opened up about the real life story of the yacht on TikTok.

Macaluso's final line is a nod to a scene in the film, in which Belfort and Naomi need to be rescued from the yacht after it gets caught up in a storm.

This scene was indeed based on the real life sinking of the ship in June 1996, which resulted in a rescue by the Italian Navy Special forces.

The yacht was sunk after violent waves repeatedly hit it, but luckily everyone on board was able to escape the ship in time.

Belford didn't actually buy the yacht for his wife as a wedding gift.

Macaluso has previously commented on the scene's accuracy , where she admitted in a TikTok video that the yacht sinking scene was 'totally true'.

Speaking of the memory, she said: "It was horrific, horrifying, we were in a squall for 12 to 18 hours and we lived, thank god, for my kids."

She even showed real life footage of her, Belford and their friends being rescued by the Navy.

Topics:  TV and Film

  • Real Wolf of Wall Street's ex-wife gave Margot Robbie important advice about doing completely nude scene
  • Real footage of the beach party from the Wolf of Wall Street shows how accurate the movie is
  • Real Wolf of Wall Street’s ex-wife shares common ‘red flag’ that means your partner might be cheating
  • Company Looking To Pay Someone €50 An Hour To Watch Wolf Of Wall Street

Choose your content:

There's an unknown Osbourne sibling who moved out at 16 and never appeared on their TV show

There's an unknown Osbourne sibling who moved out at 16 and never appeared on their TV show

She's since spoken out about why she wasn't there.

Woman says there's two signs to look out for in men that show they are 'always down to cheat'

Woman says there's two signs to look out for in men that show they are 'always down to cheat'

People are finding out they can buy a tiny home from Amazon for less than £20,000 and say it's 'worth it'

People are finding out they can buy a tiny home from Amazon for less than £20,000 and say it's 'worth it'

Michael Schumacher’s friend claims ski trip that led to F1 legend's life-changing crash was 'harmless'

Michael Schumacher’s friend claims ski trip that led to F1 legend's life-changing crash was 'harmless'

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

The Real Story Behind the Yacht in The Wolf of Wall Street

nadine yacht sinking

Based on the eponymous memoir, the 2013 hit The Wolf of Wall Street told the story of Jordan Belfort, a former stockbroker who was convicted of securities fraud and money laundering. Directed by Martin Scorsese and starring Leonardo DiCaprio, the movie was a smashing success through and through. Amongst its many impressionable scenes, one of the most memorable ones was the yacht party, where Belfort and his colleagues indulged in lavish excess. However, Belfort’s ex-wife, Nadine Caridi, has now spoken out about the real story behind the yacht.

Nadine Caridi, the Ex-Wife

nadine yacht sinking

Caridi, who was portrayed in the movie by Margot Robbie, gave an interview in which she revealed that the yacht scene was not entirely accurate. According to Caridi, the yacht that was shown in the movie was not the one that Belfort actually owned. Instead, it was rented for the filming of the scene. In reality, Belfort owned a different yacht called Nadine. Caridi claims that the yacht was named after her and that she played a significant role in its design and decoration. She says that the yacht was much smaller than the one shown in the movie, but it was still luxurious and served as a symbol of Belfort’s wealth.

The Sinking of the Nadine Yacht

Nadine Caridi recently spoke about the sinking of the yacht in June 1996, an event that inspired a scene in the movie. The yacht’s sinking during a storm off the coast of Italy was a terrifying experience for everyone on board. The waves were violent and relentless, hitting the yacht repeatedly. Rescue services had to be called in to rescue the passengers and crew, including Belfort and Caridi. In a recent TikTok video, Caridi shared real-life footage of the rescue, showing the fear and chaos that ensued during the storm, while expressing gratitude that everyone survived.

Can a Circle of Salt Paralyze a Self-Driving Car?

nadine yacht sinking

Autonomous vehicles are truly within the grasp of humankind. But the brain of a sci-fi geek can wonder whether it’ll bring an apocalyptic scene, where a troop of autonomous cars is pursuing human prey across a desolate landscape. Well, of course, it’s not going to happen, but luckily, if it did, there’s a strangely simple solution for that. And it involves nothing but salt!

The Salt Trap

nadine yacht sinking

Back in 2017, artist James Bridle demonstrated how an understanding of road markings using salt could paralyze a self-driving car midway by delivering confusing messages. You need to draw two circles of salt, one in a block line and the other in broken stripes. When the car comes to the middle of it, the markings will direct it to go right ahead and also not to cross, simultaneously. The result is the fabulous “Autonomous Trap 001.” Future models may be able to overcome this fun technological quirk, but it has surely raised a valid question about the possibility of the success of the trick. It’s astonishing to find out that there may be a simple way to manipulate the environment to disrupt the self-driving capacity of an autonomous car.

The Response

This salt circle trap has caught the attention of none other than Elon Musk, the Tesla boss and newly-appointed CEO of Twitter. As an avid enthusiast, Musk is known for dabbling in autonomous vehicles. Responding to the demonstration, he explained that the salt circle trick will probably be able to trap a Tesla car with the production Autopilot build. But he suspected that it won’t work its magic on the FSD models or the cars with Full Self-Driving capabilities. Musk further suggested that making a ring of traffic cones would be effective on the FSD cars. So, if you ever find yourself facing a murderous fleet of autonomous cars, all you need to do is just take your salt bags and traffic cones out! Easy-peasy, right?

Welcome, Login to your account.

Recover your password.

A password will be e-mailed to you.


The true story of Wolf Of Wall Street’s yacht ‘Nadine’

Jordan Belfort’s antics are so legendary that sinking a multi-million dollar yacht is just another act of depravity that Martin Scorsese manages to weave among The The wolf of Wall Street grotesque film adaptation. Those who know the wolf of Wall Street book will have read Belfort’s account about it in more detail, but the backstory of the superyacht Nadine is a lesser-known tale with unexpected twists.

Despite Jordan’s notoriety for unbridled bacchanalia, Nadine was sunk by natural forces far greater than even the fiercest drinking bout he could muster. In the middle of a pedestrianized Mediterranean cruise, a storm unexpectedly turned into a raging storm with high winds and huge swells to send the pride and joy of the wolf into Davey Jones’ locker.

In fact, this type of storm is so specific that it has its own name. The mistrals get their name from the winds that blow from the French Alps into the Mediterranean. This convection cycle is caused by warm air rising from African deserts and colder air from the Alps rushing through the void for sustained round trips of 12 to 40 hours. Nothing like a strong relentless wind to generate a dangerous swell. And the kicker? Mistrals are difficult to predict.

RELATED: Asymmetric superyacht hits market for $ 47 million

En route from Riva de Travino to the island of Sardinia, off the west coast of Italy, what should have been a routine race (which usually takes around 7 hours) ended in the fiasco that International Yachts described as ‘Mayday in the Med.’

“When we set off,†said Captain Mark Elliot, “the forecast told us to expect wind and choppy but small seas. Knowing that this wouldn’t be an ideal crossing, the captain asked if the guests wanted to delay until the next morning. The answer was a definite ‘no’ as they were all eager to head to Sardinia for a round of golf the next morning. So, they cast off and set sail for another corner of paradise.

Hours later, the guests were enjoying the sunny afternoon weather of another dream day in the Mediterranean… when a rogue wave reached the bow and wheelhouse, inundating a hostess from head to toe. Immediately after this warning sign made contact, a transmission was received via radio warning of unexpected gale force winds in the area. The mistral had announced. The swell heights doubled, the winds intensified, and the shit became real.

еденёв 8956453

However, before Belfort throws next-level parties aboard his elegant ship and charters it across the Mediterranean to Sardinia on that fateful day, Nadine had already lived many lives. In truth, the luxury yacht seen in The Wolf of Wall Street movie bears no resemblance to the period ship owned by Jordan Belfort. Scorsese hired a yacht called Lady M for these stages, which was originally built by Intermarine Savannah in 2002.

On the other hand, the real one Nadine (Where Mathilde as it was originally called), was built in 1961 and delivered by the Dutch shipyard Witsen & Vis for none other than fashion mogul Coco Chanel. At the time, Mathilde had five dark teak cabins, exceptional dining rooms and a helipad.

“At that time, it was the largest yacht on the East Coast,†recalls Captain Mark Elliot. “No one had ever seen anything like it.”

Wolf of Wall Street yacht

After Coco’s death in 1971 the yacht was renamed Jan Pamela by its new owner, Melvin Lane Powers. While not as decorated as his predecessor, Powers was a notorious and ostentatious Houston real estate developer known for wearing crocodile skin boots and driving a golden Cadillac after being acquitted of the murder of her lover’s husband. The New York Times described his 1966 trial as “one of the most spectacular homicide trials of all time.”

Powers ordered a huge refit and extension of the ship, but in 1983 it hit rock bottom and Jan Pamela was sold before being renamed Waterside . In 1989, it was Bernie Little’s luck, and he bought her sight without seeing her. She then underwent another refit, before becoming Great eagle under the command of Mark Elliot once again. In this form, she caught the attention of Jordan Belfort, who took possession of it in 1995. Of course, he had to undertake his own additions and renovations, before renaming the ship after his second wife, Nadine .

However, the reincarnation of this historic yacht as Nadine was to be short lived. After 35 years of leisure, sailing on the most beautiful coasts and welcoming the great names of the time, Mother Nature would have the last word.

Back in the Mediterranean, hours later, roaring gusts ripped the $ 100,000 tender from its tow lines. Captain Mark Elliot calls to abandon yacht, as turning point Nadine against the crashing waves would have courted disaster. Abandoning the course to try to outrun the mistral was out of the question for the same reasons. They are there now – every captain’s nightmare – with seventy knot winds and 35 foot ridges to negotiate.

Wolf of Wall Street yacht

Then, Nadine’s The moment of “perfect storm” pointed its formidable head. The huge wave crashes all over the ship, tearing off the hatches and deck fittings, triggering a death knell that can only end with a day of disaster. The remaining supply crashes into the dining room window, causing it to collapse wave after wave flooding the living room.

“I knew at that time that Nadine had received a fatal blow. Once I assessed the damage, I walked over to the deck and used the satellite phone to contact the Italian Coast Guard known as “Gruppo Marine Italian,†says Captain Elliot.

First aid stations. Guests are gathered in a secure central location and escorted one by one to their cabins to collect passports and any valuables that can fit in a small bag.

Half an hour later, a rescue helicopter attempts to bring down a diver to pick up guests. However, the gusts of wind turned out to be too violent, and after almost losing the said diver, the helicopter aborted. Imagine the heartbreaking feeling of those on board Nadine , as the Coast Guard abandon ship, defeated by the rampaging elements, and return to the safety of the coast as the sun sets below the horizon and night sets in.

Hurricane-force winds, severe flooding and a 15-meter-high sea are now pounding Italy’s shores in what will be known as the storm of the century. The situation is so tumultuous that when a large merchant ship attempts another rescue attempt a few hours later, it almost crashes in Nadine , before setting off again and again, abandoning the crew and the frenzied guests.

31cf4e10 409f 11ec 9876 69705d7108ad Nadine dining room

The liferafts are deployed as a precaution… until the roaring wind also tears them from the sea, leaving the crew completely stranded on board.

Below deck, the flooded kitchen has become an electrified death trap, and the chef and engineer receive jolts from the current before pulling the ass out of there to the (relative) safety above. It should be noted that this is probably around the time when a deranged and drenched Leo shouts at Jonah Hill with the unforgettable line: “Get the ludes downstairs!” I will not die sober! To have. The. Whore. Ludes! ”

Times of crisis. With no options left, Captain Elliot calls to throw the helicopter off the bridge to free up space for another rescue attempt. He unhooks the tie-downs and rolls the ship twenty degrees, throwing the expensive equipment overboard and into the Mediterranean, where its rusty skeleton undoubtedly lies to this day.

31b22920 409f 11ec 9876 69705d7108ad Nadine superyacht interior 3

At around 5 a.m., the Coast Guard returned and began to hoist the guests, then the crew to safety in the reassuring light of dawn. The weather calmed down as the winds and waves calmed down, but the damage was done. The last to leave the ship he commanded for so many years, Mark Elliot takes stock of the wreck before finally accepting his loss, closing the engine room controls and seizing the buoy rescue package handed to him by the coast guard.

Nadine is swallowed up by the sea, just ten minutes after Captain Elliot left his decks.


While all the guests and the crew of 11 survive, the prestigious motor yacht and its collection of toys (including eight jet skis, four motorcycles, snorkeling gear, a helicopter and a seaplane) sink into the deep end. at the bottom of the Mediterranean, over 1000 m deep. the water.

“The insurance paid off immediately because it was the storm of the century,†said Captain Elliot.

Back on dry land, Mark Elliot was hailed as a hero after showing courage and leadership in such a dire situation. He was then offered command of Bernie Little’s famous yacht Vessel , and today works as a broker in Miami as one of the most experienced and capable men in the business.

Related posts:

  • KartCMP1: Styrian Grand Prix Data Crunch
  • An affordable, scalable and highly sensitive testing approach based on the viral genome
  • Italian decision against counterfeiting protects Dior Book Tote and Stripe – WWD
  • Canada Goose plans to phase out fur by 2022 – will the alternative material be sustainable?

Protective Coating for Motorcycle Restoration: Metal Polishing Explained

Insulating Techniques for Motorcycle Restoration: Electrical Wiring

IAG takes interest in ITA Airways, hinders Lufthansa

“Just read this …” Books by Wesleyan Authors Gottlieb ’94,…

The Best Gothic Horror Movies

How climate change is making extreme weather a regular occurrence

Comments are closed.

Everything The Wolf Of Wall Street Doesn't Tell You About The True Story

Jordan Belfort laughing

Martin Scorsese's film "The Wolf of Wall Street" is an over-the-top celebration of greed and excess, inspired by the memoir of the notorious stockbroker Jordan Belfort, who is played by Leonardo DiCaprio in the film. It tell of the rise of Jordan Belfort from a low-level assistant at L. F. Rothschild to a Long Island penny stock pusher, as well as Belfort's dramatic fall from filthy rich CEO of Stratton Oakmont to a stint in federal prison for stock fraud and money laundering.

Despite being ostensibly based on a true story, many question the veracity of the film because of how absolutely outlandishness of Belfort's claims, and how outrageous the antics at Stratton Oakmont are. Scorsese obviously recognized Belfort is an unreliable narrator with a penchant for exaggeration. In the film, Belfort breaks the fourth wall, addressing the camera and the audience directly. This was a strategic choice by the screenwriter and director. Screenwriter Terence Winter told Esquire , "Jordan is talking directly to you. You are being sold the Jordan Belfort story by Jordan Belfort, and he is a very unreliable narrator. That's very much by design."

Despite how unlikely this story is, most of what transpires in the film actually happened. Winter added, "I assumed he must've been embellishing. But then I did some research, and I talked to the FBI agent who arrested him, who had been tracking Jordan for ten years. And he told me, 'It's all true. Every single thing in his memoir, every insane coincidence and over-the-top perk, it all happened.'" 

That said, this film is Belfort's truth, not necessarily the definitive truth. Keep reading if you want to learn everything "The Wolf of Wall Street" doesn't tell you about the true story of Jordan Belfort's meteoric rise and fall.

Belfort's wives' names were changed for the film

Although their real-life counterparts are obvious, the names of Jordan Belfort's ex-wives were changed in the film, giving the filmmaker creative license with the characters. Belfort's first-wife in the film is Teresa Petrillo (Cristin Milioti), but her real-life counterpart is Denise Lombardo. Denise met Belfort in high school, and the childhood sweethearts married in 1985 after Denise graduated from college. Belfort founded Stratton Oakmont while married to Denise, and they divorced after she found out about his affair in 1991 (per The U.S. Sun ). After their divorce, Denise led a low-profile life, staying out of the public eye.

Belfort's second-wife in the film is Naomi Lapaglia (Margot Robbie). Naomi's real-life counterpart is Nadine Macaluso. Like Naomi, Nadine was a model and met Belfort at a party before they married in 1991. Nadine and Belfort had two children together and separated in 1998 as depicted in the film (per the U.S. Sun). Nadine got a Ph.D, becoming a marriage and family therapist. She lives in California with her second husband (per Daily Mail TV ).

Margot Robbie , who played Naomi in the film, met Nadine while preparing for her role. Robbie told IndieWire meeting Nadine helped her understand her character's motivations, saying, "I could do or say any horrible thing and know that my character's motivation was out of protection for her child. Whether or not the audience sees my side of events is another matter, but just to know my motivation can give me an authentic performance." She added how strong Nadine is, saying, "She's has to be, to have put up with Jordan and his shenanigans."

The original crew Belfort recruited from friends are composite characters

Although Belfort recruited the original crew for his Long Island brokerage firm from a group of friends; Alden "Sea Otter" Kupferberg (Henry Zebrowski), Robbie "Pinhead" Feinberg (Brian Sacca), Chester Ming (Kenneth Choi), and Nicky "Rugrat" Koskoff (PJ Byrne) are composite characters with fictitious names. These characters are an amalgamation of numerous people who worked at Stratton Oakmont and do not represent actual people.

This didn't stop Andrew Greene, a board member of Stratton Oakmont, from filing a defamation suit against the film's production company. He was offended by the depiction of "Rugrat" in the film, saying the character damaged his reputation. He called the character a "criminal, drug user, degenerate, depraved and devoid of any morals or ethics" (per The Guardian ).

In 2018, Greene lost his suit . In 2020, an appellate court threw the suit out, stating that the filmmakers, by creating composite characters and fictitious names, "took appropriate steps to ensure that no one would be defamed by the Film," (per the Hollywood Reporter ). The filmmaker included the hijinks of the employees at Stratton Oakmont in the film to illustrate the raucous corporate culture of the brokerage firm, rather than defame former employees.

Donnie Azoff doesn't exist, his real-life counterpart is Danny Porush

Jonah Hill 's character Donnie Azoff in "The Wolf of Wall Street" doesn't exist. He is a composite character created to avoid defaming anyone while making the film. To anyone who is familiar with Jordan Belfort and Stratton Oakmont's story, it's obvious Danny Porush is Azoff's real-life counterpart. Porush disputes the veracity of both Belfort's memoir and the film, telling Mother Jones , "The book ... is a distant relative of the truth, and the film is a distant relative of the book." Porush admits to swallowing the goldfish, but under different circumstances than depicted in the film.

As reported by Mother Jones, Porush was Belfort's friend and business partner between 1988 and 1996. Like Belfort, he cooperated with authorities, ultimately serving 39 months in prison for his securities and financial crimes at Stratton Oakmont. Porush disputes the throwing of dwarves, insists there were never animals in Stratton Oakmont — other than the goldfish he ate — but admits to the wild parties and taking part in the depravity and excesses encouraged at the brokerage firm, saying "Stratton was like a fraternity."

Porush told Mother Jones, "My main complaint [regarding the memoir] besides his inaccuracy was his using my real name," something that was remedied when the filmmakers created the composite character of Donnie Azoff. Ultimately, Porush doesn't seem to hold a grudge despite his grievances with the inaccuracies saying, "Hey, it's Hollywood ... I know they want to make a movie that sells. And Jordan wrote whatever he could to make the book sell."

Danny Porush's wife introduced Jordan Belfort to her husband

In "The Wolf of Wall Street," Donnie Azoff (Danny Porush's fictional counterpart) approaches Belfort at a restaurant about what he does for a living, after seeing Belfort's Jaguar in the parking lot. In reality, Belfort met his future business partner, Danny Porush, through Danny's wife Nancy.

Porush and Nancy lived in the same building in Queens where Belfort lived with his first wife Denise, as Nancy told Doree Lewak with The New York Post in 2013 shortly before "The Wolf of Wall Street" came out. Nancy explained how she took the same bus into the city for work as Belfort, saying, "the commute to the city each day was hard because I became pregnant right away. There was a nice boy from our building on the same bus who always gave up his seat for me. His name was Jordan Belfort, and he worked in finance ... I pushed Danny to talk to Jordan ... After just one conversation, Danny came back and announced he was taking the Series 7 exam to get his stockbroker's license."

In the New York Post article, Nancy detailed how her husband changed once he began working with Belfort and making serious cash, saying, "Up until then, Danny never seemed to care about money ... I saw him morph from a nice wholesome guy into showy narcissist whom I hardly recognized anymore." After being arrested for securities fraud, Porush left Nancy for another woman. They are now divorced, and he lives in Florida with his second wife. We can't help wondering if Nancy ever regrets introducing her ex-husband to Belfort.

Belfort's destroyed yacht once belonged to Coco Chanel

Jordan Belfort bought a yacht and named it after his second wife. In the film, the boat is named Naomi after the character played by Margot Robbie, but in real life the boat was called the Nadine . True to the film, Belfort insisted his boat's captain take the yacht into choppy waters, where the boat happened upon powerful but unpredictable mistrals, leading to the Nadine sinking into the Mediterranean Sea in an event known as Mayday In The Med . Belfort, his guests and crew, were rescued by the Italian coast guard.

What the film doesn't tell you is that Belfort's yacht had an interesting past. Belfort's vintage yacht once belonged to none other than the famous French fashion designer Coco Chanel. Chanel is known for her outspoken nature and is associated with quite a few fiercely female quotes. Chanel is quoted as saying , "As soon as you set foot on a yacht, you belong to some man, not to yourself, and you die of boredom." Rather than avoid luxury yachts all together, Chanel made the boss move of buying her own in 1961, naming her the Matilda (per Boss Hunting ).

As bizarre as this interlude of the film was, it actually happened, with one major difference. In an interview with The Room Live , Belfort explained how the group waiting to be rescued had to push the helicopter off of the boat to make room for a rescue team to lower down onto the yacht. In the film, the waves knock the helicopter off of the yacht. Belfort also explains that although his private jet also crashed, it was 10 days after the yacht sunk, not at the same time, as it was depicted in the film for dramatic effect.

Steve Madden spent time in prison for stock fraud

Although they don't talk about it in the movie, Steve Madden also went to prison for stock fraud and money laundering along with Jordan Belfort and Danny Porush. The New York Times reported in 2002 that Madden "was arrested in 2000 as a result of an investigation of a scheme to manipulate 23 initial public stock offerings underwritten by the companies Stratton Oakmont and Monroe Parker Securities ... It included the initial public stock offering of his own company in 1993."

True to the film, Danny Porush, Azoff's real-life counterpart, really was childhood friends with Steve Madden. Like Belfort and Porush, Madden loved debauchery and Quaaludes, so much so he didn't finish college because of how much he was partying. Although Madden wrote about his wild days in his memoir, his time partying with the Stratton Oakmont "fraternity" was not included in the film. Stratton Oakmont took Madden's company public, making him instantly rich ( per The New York Post ).

As reported by the New York Post, Madden wrote about this period of his life in his memoir "The Cobbler: How I Disrupted an Industry, Fell from Grace & Came Back Stronger Than Ever." In his book, Madden wrote, "Jordan was like no one else I have ever met before or since. He became one of the most influential people in my life ... I was pumping and dumping [stocks] right alongside them." Madden wound up serving 31 months for his financial crimes and his involvement with Stratton Oakmont's schemes. Unlike Porush and Belfort, Madden could continue working at his company after being released from prison.

Belfort was ordered to pay restitution to his victims

When Belfort was convicted of money laundering and stock fraud in 2003 for Stratton Oakmont's "pump and dump" schemes, he was sentenced to four years in prison and ordered to pay over $110.4 million in restitution (per Crime Museum ). Belfort only served 22 months for his crimes and a judge ordered him to pay half of his income once he was released from prison.

In 2013, just after the film was released, CNN reported Belfort had only contributed a little over $11 million to the fund for victims, much obtained from confiscated possessions. At the time the film came out, Belfort allegedly stated he would hand over all of his royalties from the film and the book. But in 2018, Fortune Magazine reported government officials claimed Belfort still owed $97 million, meaning that over the previous 5 years, Belfort only contributed an additional $2 million dollars to the victims' fund. $2 million dollars is more than most of us will ever see, but Belfort is still making good money as a motivational speaker.

As reported by Fortune Magazine, there is a disagreement between Belfort's attorneys and prosecutors over what income can be garnished for restitution. Belfort reportedly earned around $9 million dollars between 2013 and 2015, but neglected to pay half of those earnings to the victims' fund. Although Belfort claims he will feel better after he has paid the money back, he doesn't seem to be fulfilling his end of the court order. Belfort obviously still enjoys a life of luxury and it is hard to reconcile his claims of being reformed with his reluctance to pay the restitution to his victims. In her New York Post article Nancy Porush reminded us, "Greed is not good — it's ugly."

Tommy Chong was Belfort's cellmate in prison

"The Wolf of Wall Street" ends with Jordan Belfort in a cushy white-collar prison with tennis courts, but the film didn't tell us who Belfort's cellmate was. Belfort and Tommy Chong of the comedy duo "Cheech & Chong" were cellmates before Chong was released. In 2014, Belfort spoke to Stephen Galloway with The Hollywood Reporter about his time in prison. He explained, "[Chong] was in the process of writing his book. We used to tell each other stories at night, and I had him rolling hysterically on the floor. The third night he goes, 'You've got to write a book.' So I started writing, and I knew it was bad. It was terrible. I was about to call it quits and then I went into the prison library and stumbled upon 'The Bonfire of the Vanities' by Tom Wolfe, and I was like, 'That's how I want to write!'"

In 2014 Chong spoke with Adrian Lee at Maclean's about how he met Belfort in prison and giving Belfort feed back on his pages, saying "After a while he showed me what he had written, and it was the only time I had critiqued someone really heavy — usually when someone writes something, you say, 'Oh yeah, that's great, keep going.' But I knew instinctively he had a lot more to offer than what he showed me ... I told him ... 'No, you've got to write those stories you've been telling me at night. Your real life is much more exciting than any kind of imaginary story you could come up with.'"

Stratton Oakmont was never on Wall Street

Although the memoir and film are titled "The Wolf of Wall Street," Jordan Belfort only worked on Wall Street for several months in 1987 at L. F. Rothschild. Black Monday put an end to his days at a Manhattan based brokerage firm. As we see in the film, it was on Long Island that Belfort got a job at the Investor's Center selling penny stocks from the pink sheets and found his calling: his get-rich-quick scheme, selling nearly worthless stocks for a 50 percent commission to people who couldn't afford to lose the money (per NY Times ).

Belfort soon went out on his own, founding Stratton Oakmont with Danny Porush, where they began targeting rich investors using a persuasive script and "pump and dump" tactics — making Belfort, Porush and their brokers rich, while leaving their clients broke. As reported by the Washington Post in 1996, Stratton Oakmont was disciplined for securities violations as early as 1989, and continued to be disciplined almost annually.

Jimmy So with The Daily Beast, maintains, "The problem with 'The Wolf of Wall Street' is that the self-fashioned wolf was nowhere near the real Wall Street." The memoir and film made the brokerage firm seem like a much bigger deal than they really were, despite the financial ruin they left in their wake. Stratton Oakmont's offices were on Long Island, not Wall Street.

Jordan Belfort was never called 'The Wolf of Wall Street'

Scorsese's film makes it seem like Forbes gave Jordan Belfort the nickname, "The Wolf of Wall Street" when they published a takedown about Stratton Oakmont's questionable business practices. Forbes wrote an article about Stratton Oakmont's dirty deeds in 1991, but the article did not call Belfort "the wolf of wall street." In 2013, Forbes revisited Roula Khalaf's original article, where she called Belfort a "twisted Robin Hood who takes from the rich and gives to himself and his merry band of brokers." 

Danny Porush, Belfort's former partner and one-time friend, told Mother Jones  that nobody at the firm ever used the "wolf" moniker. As reported by CNN , Belfort came up with the nickname himself for his memoir. As Porush told Mother Jones, Belfort's "greatest gift was always that of a self-promoter." But as Joe Nocera with the NY Times said, "who would ever buy a ticket to a movie called 'The Wolf of Long Island'?"

Belfort had a head-on collision while driving under the influence of Quaaludes

When the real Jordan Belfort crashed his car while on Quaaludes, he was in a Mercedes Benz rather than a Lamborghini, and someone was actually injured. Belfort had a head-on collision while driving home from the country club where he used the pay phone, sending the woman he collided with to the hospital (per The Daily Beast ). None of Belfort's crimes are victimless.

This type of discrepancy is central to the complaints about both Belfort's memoir and the film. Although Belfort says he regrets his crimes, he is too busy boasting about the parties, the riches, the drugs, and the sex to sound like he regrets anything except getting caught. Belfort's memoir and the film it inspired might seem like a celebration of greed and excess, but they are also a depiction of the ostentatious behavior that eventually drew the attention of the authorities.

Scorsese's "The Wolf of Wall Street" might not tell you everything about the true story, but what it does is reveal how audiences love watching someone else's destructive behavior. We get all the thrills and none of the consequences. As screenwriter Terence Winter told Esquire, "I'd much rather watch somebody who isn't responsible, who makes all the wrong decisions and hangs out with the wrong people. That's more satisfying. We may live like saints, but when it comes to our fantasy life, everybody's got a little larceny in their soul."

Did Jordan Belfort Sink Coco Chanel's Former Yacht?

Jordan Belfort insisted that they go through a storm in the Mediterranean Sea, which wasn't the best idea while using Coco Chanel's Luxury yacht.

Jordan Belfort was always an eccentric character, although he probably never intended to become a star associated with Hollywood as he is today. His memoir about the time he spent manipulating stocks in the '90s became the inspiration for the acclaimed Martin Scorsese film, The Wolf of Wall Street .

It has been a surreal rollercoaster ride for Belfort, who spent nearly two years in prison for his crimes, but later saw Leonardo DiCaprio earn at least $25 million to portray him in the film.

The 59-year-old's current net worth is in negative figures , mostly thanks to the debts he still owes the victims of his scam. However, he is still making a killing from his story, as he charges a pretty penny for his motivational speech seminars.

As with any other film based on a true story, there were elements that were purely historical in the Scorsese picture, and others that were fictional - for dramatic purposes. One of the iconic scenes depicted Belfort and his friends in a sinking yacht , which actually turns out to be one of the crazy things that did in fact happen in real life.

Jordan Belfort Insisted That They Go Through A Storm In The Mediterranean Sea

The Wolf of Wall Street had a stellar cast, but the yacht scene itself is quite a star-studded affair. DiCaprio was joined by Jonah Hill as Belfort's business associate Donnie Azoff. Margot Robbie played Belfort's wife Naomi Lapaglia, in what was the breakout role of her career .

Also, on the yacht were Shea Whigham as the captain of the boat and MacKenzie Meehan as Donnie Azoff's wife. While on the yacht, they receive news that Naomi's Aunt Emma - under whose name Belfort had been hiding money in a Swiss bank account - had died.

At the same time, the hustler receives a call for a business opportunity in Monaco, which prompts him to insist that they go through a storm somewhere off the coast of Italy. Despite the protestations of the women, the boat captain concedes and the yacht ends up sinking.

RELATED: The Truth About Jordan Belfort’s Massive Net Worth And How He Really Spends It

In 2010 - about three years before the movie came out - Belfort confirmed that the story was in fact based on real life events, and he even confirmed that he was high on drugs at the time.

Belfort Was High On Substances

Talking about his intoxication during an interview with The Room Live, Belfort said that he had been high on several substances.' The movie would come to repopularize the term ludes, a sedative that was largely abused in the '70s as a party drug when mixed with alcohol.

In the yacht-sinking sequence in the film, Belfort at one point shouts at Donnie to go and 'get the ludes downstairs,' humorously proclaiming, "I will not die sober, get those ludes!" Belfort had gone on to explain the potency of the said ludes in his 2010 interview.

"For those who don't know... for the benefit of your viewers who are normal and haven't been addicted to ludes - thank God for that," he explained, "one lude is enough to knock out a 220-pound navy seal for eight and a half hours. I was taking four a day and walking around."

RELATED: 'Wolf Of Wall Street' Legend Jordan Belfort Flirts With Tana Mongeau On Twitter

The passengers were eventually rescued by the Italian navy. This is where the movie embellished some details differently than what actually happened in real life.

Belfort's Yacht That Sank Was Once Owned By Coco Chanel

Belfort also had a chopper on the upper deck of the yacht, which was shown to have been knocked off by the waves in the movie. In the actual events back in 1997, however, they had to climb up to the deck where the helicopter was, and literally push it off in order to make space for the Italian navy seals to land.

The yacht that sank that day in the Mediterranean was once owned by French fashion icon and entrepreneur, Coco Chanel . When he bought it, Belfort decided to name it Nadine, after his then-wife Nadine Caridi. In the film, the character's name was changed to Naomi, which is what the boat was subsequently called.

While this scene was mostly scripted according to actual happenings, there were also a lot of innovation going on on set. DiCaprio for instance improvised one scene where his character was totally drunk and unable to get into his car.

Matthew McConaughey also played a character called Mark Hanna, who kept humming and pumping his chest as he spoke. The actor would later reveal that this was his own personal routine that was imported into the story.

NEXT: Here's How Much Jordan Belfort Gets Paid For His Motivational Speeches

Language selection

  •  |  Français fr
  • Search and menus

Marine Investigation Report M90L3034

Sinking of the Fishing Vessel "NADINE" Gulf of St. Lawrence 16 December 1990

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) investigated this occurrence for the purpose of advancing transportation safety. It is not the function of the Board to assign fault or determine civil or criminal liability. This report is not created for use in the context of legal, disciplinary or other proceedings. See Ownership and use of content .

  • Download this investigation report in PDF
  • See other information related to this investigation
  • Factual information
  • Safety action

On 16 December 1990, while returning in heavy weather from fishing grounds in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the "NADINE", a 37-metre fishing vessel, listed to port and sank by the stern. A search and rescue operation was immediately undertaken to locate the ten people aboard. Two crew members were rescued and the bodies of six victims were recovered. Two crew members are still missing.

The Board determined that the "NADINE" sank because the openings on the afterdeck and in the transverse bulkheads were not secured. Water was thus able to enter the vessel and eventually flood the lazaret, the fish holds and the engine-room. This ingress gradually reduced the vessel's stability until all reserve buoyancy was lost and the vessel sank. Poor weather, darkness, lack of training and the suddenness of the sinking hindered the abandonment and contributed to the loss of life.

1.0 Factual Information

1.1 particulars of the vessel, 1.1.1 background of the "nadine".

Although built as a trawler, the "NADINE" was converted into a seiner during her middle years and then reconverted to a trawler in the latter part of her working life. During the final reconversion, the vessel's original design appears to have been faithfully reproduced except for the placement of the trawl warp winches, which were relocated forward of the fish hold hatches (see Appendix A).

1.2 History of the voyage

The "NADINE" left Cap-aux-Meules, Quebec, for fishing grounds 30 nautical miles (M) off Cape St. George, Newfoundland, at about 0830 Footnote 3 on 12 December. She carried a crew of nine and a marine biologist from Fisheries and Oceans Canada (F&O). She reached the 4Rd and 4Ss fishing grounds in Fishing Zone 1 (see Appendix B) approximately nine and a half hours later and commenced fishing.

The following day, the vessel put into St. George's Bay to shelter from strong south-easterly winds. At about 1900 that day, she sailed for Stephenville where she spent 14 December repairing fishing gear.

On the morning of 15 December, after leaving Stephenville, the chief engineer reported to the master that he had had to pump out the steering gear compartment while at Stephenville because a leak had caused water to rise above the level of the floorboards. Apparently, he had also had to retighten the stuffing box around the rudder stock — a task that had also been necessary on previous occasions.

At about 1530 on 16 December, the "NADINE" completed her final trawl and departed for her home port, Cap-aux-Meules, with a catch of approximately 330,000 lb. (149.7 t) of redfish. Because heavy seas were constantly washing the afterdeck, the crew elected to leave approximately 14,500 lb. (6.6 t) of fish from the last catch in the trawl on the afterdeck instead of stowing it in the fish holds.

As the "NADINE" made for home, the bad weather reduced her surface speed to eight or nine knots (kn), and rain reduced visibility to 2 to 3 M.

Several courses were steered in increasing easterly winds (See Approximate Track, Appendix C). At about 2130, in a position approximately 15 M ESE of Pointe de l'Est, the master issued instructions regarding the navigation of the vessel to the first mate, asked to be wakened when the vessel reached Alright Reef (Trois Pierres), and then retired to his cabin. He left the mate to keep the watch. It is possible that one other person, perhaps the biologist, assisted the mate.

At about 2140, the master of the "NADINE's" sister ship, the "RALI II", who was in port aboard the fishing vessel "ADÈLE", called the "NADINE" to find out how she was progressing. The mate reported that the return voyage was proceeding uneventfully and that the "NADINE" would arrive the following morning.

At about 2230, the mate woke the master and told him that there was something wrong, the steering was not working and the vessel was settling in the water. The master went to the bridge and there noted that the rudder angle indicator read 10° to port, that the vessel was veering to the left and listing approximately 20° to port, and that the afterdeck was awash from the goalpost mast on the starboard side to the trawl warp winch on the port side. He immediately ran to check the situation in the engine-room. From the top of the companionway to the engine-room, he asked the chief engineer to pump out the lazaret. The chief engineer, who was at the foot of the companionway looking toward the tunnel's forward entrance, replied that he was doing everything he could.

On his return to the wheel-house, the master asked the mate to wake the crew members and instruct them to put on their immersion suits and assemble in the wheel-house. The biologist was seen leaving the wheel-house at about this time.

At 2235, the master sent out a distress call by very high frequency (VHF) radiotelephone informing the Coast Guard Radio Station (CGRS) at Cap-aux-Meules that the "NADINE" was sinking in position 47°26′N, 61°19′W as determined by Loran C. The CCGS "SIMON FRASER", anchored SW of Havre-Aubert Island, also heard the call and began preparing for departure.

The master then attempted to put the vessel back on course, but the steering gear failed to respond. The propeller pitch was then reduced. The "NADINE" rapidly developed a list of 60 to 70° to port.

The crew assembled in the wheel-house, but no count was taken and, reportedly, there was some panic. The crew members were advised to put on their immersion suits immediately, but some opted to delay putting them on until they got into the liferaft.

At this time, the master went to his cabin to get his immersion suit. When he returned to the wheel-house, he put on the suit, further reduced the propeller pitch to dead slow ahead, and then proceeded to the starboard boat deck. Most of the crew members were already outside.

The vessel, by this time, was lying on her port side with the stern and half of the wheel-house under water. The last of those to leave the wheel-house did so through a starboard window.

The mate informed the master that the entire crew appeared to have assembled to abandon ship. Some had gathered on the starboard side of the hull while others were standing on the starboard side of the accommodation house.

When the mate threw the starboard liferaft into the water, it inflated upside down. By standing on the starboard side of the hull, some of the crew members were able to turn the raft over. At about this time, the generator failed and the vessel was plunged into total darkness. Suddenly, at 2247, the "NADINE" sank by the stern in position 47°26'58"N, 61°19'32"W, and the crew was thrown into the water. The boatswain (bosun) was the only person who succeeded in getting into the liferaft. Shortly after he did so, the raft drifted rapidly away and the bosun lost sight of the other crew members.

The master lost contact with most of the crew when he fell into the water; only the mate and one fisherman remained with him. The master held the mate with his legs until about dawn when exhaustion forced the master to release him. The fisherman was with the master until the master was rescued.

1.3 Injuries to Persons

1.4.1 damage to the vessel.

Underwater inspections of the "NADINE" by the TSB were conducted in July 1991, at the wreck site, and in November 1991, after salvage. They revealed that:

  • the after port ballast tank was damaged;
  • the lower section of the port quarter shell plating was holed;
  • the afterdeck plating around the port ballast tank had buckled;
  • the port door to the accommodation on the boat deck was bent inward and its porthole was shattered;
  • the cradle of the port liferaft on the boat deck was missing;
  • the forward cradle and the forward portion of the lifeboat on the boat deck were missing;
  • the after hinge of the lazaret scuttle cover was severed; and
  • some lens caps from the alarm panel in the wheel-house were shattered.

1.5 Certificates

1.5.1 vessel's certificate.

The "NADINE" held a Commercial Fishing Vessel Inspection Certificate for the east coast of Canada, Home-trade Voyages, Class II, issued by the Department of Transport on 03 May 1990 and valid until 02 May 1991. The vessel had also received an exemption allowing the chief engineer to serve in that position without holding the required Chief Engineer, Fishing Vessel Certificate or its equivalent, the Engineer, Class III, Motor Certificate.

An inspection certificate (SIC 7) issued in 1989 authorized the owner, Madelipêche Inc., to increase the crew on the vessels of its fleet up to 12 provided that all crew members were supplied with immersion suits.

1.5.2 Crew's certificates

1.5.3 marine emergency duties (med) training.

Certificated members of the crew had completed the MED training required for their qualifications. One of the five other crew members had also taken MED training.

The biologist had not completed MED training. At the time of the accident, F & O scientists were not required to have such training before going to sea.

1.6 Crew's experience

All those on board were regular crew members except for the cook, who was replacing a regular member for one voyage, and the biologist, who was on the vessel for a single voyage in connection with the planned installation of a temperature-recording device on the vessel's trawl to gather data on the relationship between fish concentrations and water temperature at various depths.

1.6.1 Master

The master had obtained his certificate as Fishing Master, Class III in November 1987 and, since then, had served as master of the "NADINE". Before then, he had served two years as first mate and one year as master of another vessel while holding Fishing Master, Class IV credentials. He had previously served as fisherman and bosun on a number of other vessels in a career dating back to 1967. He received his MED training at Cap-aux-Meules in 1983.

1.6.2 Officers

The chief engineer had been a member of the crew since the spring of 1990 having previously served as chief engineer aboard the "G.C. GRANDE ENTRÉE". He had received his certificate as Engineer, Motor, Class IV, in February 1990, and taken his MED course in 1989.

The first mate had received his certificate as Fishing Master, Class IV, in April 1985.

1.6.3 Bosun

The bosun began his shipboard career on a shrimp boat. Since 1987, he had worked aboard the "NADINE", serving as bosun for the past three years.

1.6.4 Training

The crew members had been selected by the master and had either been trained by him or gained their experience on other vessels in the fleet.

The bosun did not know that he was responsible for closing other deck openings in addition to the covers for the manholes to the fish holds. He thought that the chief engineer was responsible for securing the lazaret scuttle cover as the engineer used that compartment regularly in carrying out his duties. No written guidelines had been issued concerning the closing of the openings.

Although the master had sailed aboard the same vessel for three years, he did not know that the push-buttons in way of the bridge control disengage the clutch of the propeller shaft and shut off the main engine. Nor did he know that the wheel-house alarm panel had no water level alarm for the fish holds.

1.6.5 Guest biologist

The biologist had been to sea once a year for the last three years, one voyage lasting approximately three weeks. This was her second voyage during 1990.

1.7 Weather

1.7.1 weather forecasts.

The following is the marine forecast issued by the Maritimes Weather Centre of Environment Canada at 1130 AST, Sunday, 16 December 1990:

Eastern half of Magdalen-Gulf

Gale warning still in effect. Winds from the east at 30 kn, gusting to 40, increasing to north-easterly gusts from 40 to 50 kn this afternoon. South-westerly gusts diminishing to 20 kn late this evening. Winds increasing to north-westerly gusts of up to 35 kn Monday afternoon. Rain and fog changing to snow flurries during the night ... Visibility fair with precipitation and fog. Temperature zero to three degrees.

The forecast issued at 1700 AST indicated substantially the same weather conditions as the 1130 forecast.

1.7.2 Recorded weather conditions

At about 2235, the following conditions were recorded at the Havre-aux-Maisons airport located 18.5 M west of the site of the sinking: cloud cover, visibility 7 M, light rain and wind from 110° (T) at 25 kn with gusts of up to 32 kn.

The CCGC "CAP-AUX-MEULES" sailed from Cap-aux-Meules at about 2300, 16 December, and recorded force 9 south-easterly winds, 4 to 5 m seas and visibility reduced to 2 to 4 M in rain. When she arrived at the search site at 0128, winds were ESE at 35 to 40 kn, visibility was reduced by sea spray, air temperature was 2° C and water temperature was −1° C with 6 to 7 m seas.

1.7.3 Safety code

IMO's Code of Safety for Fishermen and Fishing Vessels, under the heading "Safety of the Vessel," reads as follows:

3.1.6 The crew should be alerted to all the dangers of following or quartering seas. If excessive heeling or yawing occurs the speed should be reduced.

3.3.1 All doorways, ventilators and other openings through which water can enter into the hull or deckhouses, forecastle, etc., should be suitably closed in adverse weather conditions and accordingly all fixtures and appliances for this purpose should be maintained in good condition.

3.3.2 The fittings for closing and securing hatches should be kept in good condition.

3.3.3 All hatches and flush deck scuttles should be closed and properly secured when not in use during fishing.

3.3.5 In bad weather, inspections should be made to ensure that hatch covers and lashings are in order.

The Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) publication, Small Fishing Vessel Safety Manual, TP 10038, which addresses these safety aspects, is available on request, free of charge, to persons engaged in the fishing industry.

1.8 Navigation equipment

1.8.1 navigation instruments.

Fitted on board the "NADINE" were:

1.8.2 Aids to navigation

All navigation aids were operating satisfactorily.

1.9 Radio communications

1.9.1 inter-ship.

When the "ADÈLE" contacted the "NADINE" by radio at about 2140 on 16 December, the mate of the "NADINE" said that she had a good catch, that she had experienced no problems during the storm of 13 December, and that the wind was from the SE. He also said that heavy seas were washing over the afterdeck and that every now and then the vessel's movement was such that one could 'see the vessel's bottom'. There was no mention of a leak, but he indicated that the vessel had a 'heavy roll'.

At 2235, the "SIMON FRASER" and the CGRS Cap-aux-Meules, which were maintaining radiotelephone watch, noted the distress message from the "NADINE" and began preparing for a search and rescue operation.

1.9.2 Coast Guard radio station (CGRS)

At 2235, CGRS Cap-aux-Meules received a 'Mayday' call from the "NADINE". The caller reported the vessel's position as 47°26′N, 61°19′W, stated that there were 10 persons aboard and indicated a strong possibility that they would sink. From 2240 to 2245, the CGRS attempted to call the "NADINE" but received no reply.

1.10 Emergency equipment

1.10.1 lifeboat.

An eight-person open boat used as a lifeboat was installed on the port side of the boat deck. The severe list made it inaccessible to the crew at the time of the abandonment. It subsequently broke in two with the after portion remaining secure in the cradle and the forward portion breaking free.

1.10.2 Inflatable liferafts

There was one raft on each side of the wheel-house on the boat deck, each with a capacity of 12 persons. The rafts were not equipped with hydrostatic release devices.

Because of the severe list to port at the time of the abandonment, the port raft was not accessible. However, it floated to the surface and inflated. There was no evidence that the port raft had been used.

As the "NADINE" sank, the sea washed the crew members off and the righted liferaft away from the vessel's side, and the raft passed around the bow. The raft's sea anchor, which had not been deployed, does not release automatically.

1.10.3 Lifebuoys

Three of the four lifebuoys were recovered during the search. They were not reported to have been used during abandonment of the vessel.

1.10.4 Lifejackets and Immersion suits

Of those victims who were recovered, only one member of the crew was wearing a lifejacket when his body was found. Five others, including the two survivors, were wearing immersion suits. The remaining crew member and the biologist were wearing neither lifejackets nor immersions suits.

There was no indication of what life-saving gear the two missing victims may have used. Type of Immersion Suits

According to the owners of the "NADINE", the vessel was equipped with nine immersion suits, all Narwhal brand, model E-38-001 (see Appendix D). Spare immersion suits were stored ashore and supplied to vessels on request. No request had been received for an additional immersion suit for the "NADINE" on this voyage, but this was not considered unusual as it was believed that government employees generally had their own immersion suits.

The suits used by the crew had a date of manufacture of 27 May 1985. Each suit had a registration certificate issued by the company listing the owners' name and the serial number. Features of the Immersion Suits

According to the manufacturer, the suits, made of 3/16-inch neoprene, provide 42 per cent greater buoyancy than lifejackets, and they meet the Coast Guard's minimum requirements of preventing a drop of more than 2° C in body temperature over a period of six hours.

The suits are supposed to be inspected periodically with special attention being given to the zippers which should be clean, in good condition, and lubricated to ensure proper operation. Any immersion suit suspected of being defective should be removed and replaced. Useful life of the suits is estimated at 10 years. During training sessions, MED instructors require that a fellow crew member check that the other person's suit is properly fastened. Requirement to Carry Immersion Suits

The CCG has required the use of immersion suits since 1985. The regulations require that a sufficient number of suits be available on board.

The CCG recommends that 80 per cent of immersion suits carried be "one size fits all"; 10 per cent be "adult, small"; and 10 per cent be "adult, large". The "one size fits all" suit is designed for adults weighing 50 to 150 kg (110-330 lb.), and is suitable for 90 per cent of Canadian adults. All the suits carried by the "NADINE" were "one size fits all".

During the CCG's annual inspection of the "NADINE" on 03 May 1990, none of the crew commented on the universal size of the suits or the functioning of the zippers.

At the time of the sinking, F & O did not issue immersion suits to its scientists going on sea voyages, nor was it required to do so. It could not be ascertained whether the biologist had been given an immersion suit by the crew of the "NADINE". Storage of the Immersion Suits

The master and the chief engineer stored their suits in their cabins in the accommodation on the forecastle deck. The other suits, in their bags, were kept in a cabin used as a storeroom near the rear exit from the port alleyway of the accommodation on the main deck. Use of the Immersion Suits

When the crew assembled in the wheel-house, no one complained of not having an immersion suit.

Two immersion suits were found in the wheel-house during an underwater inspection of the vessel in 1991.

Immersion suits are required to be designed such that the wearer has a degree of mobility in the water, but some persons wearing the suits could have difficulty in swimming to a liferaft in weather conditions such as those which existed at the time of the abandonment. Immersion Suits: Survivors

The two survivors (the master and the bosun) reported difficulty in putting on their suits and closing the zippers. The master eventually got his closed, but the bosun, in spite of repeated attempts in the wheel-house and in the liferaft, was never able to do up his suit.

The master had received no training on immersion suits in the MED I course that he took in 1983 but, being a diver, he was familiar with donning diving equipment. At the time of the accident, he was wearing a t-shirt, underwear, cotton socks, and corduroy pants. He put on his immersion suit in the wheel-house.

The bosun had never put on an immersion suit before this accident. When he entered the liferaft, which was already swamped, he was wearing an open immersion suit over his underwear. His suit quickly filled up with water, his feet and legs became very cold, his hands became numb, and he was unable to put on the one glove that he could find. Immersion Suits: Victims

Of the three victims who were wearing immersion suits, none had put on the entire suit or done it up to make it watertight.

The first victim was wearing a suit from the shoulders down, but had not put on the hood; no gloves were found. The second victim had put on the entire suit but the zipper was not done up to form a watertight seal; the suit was torn and the horizontal buoyancy cushion was missing, as were the gloves. The third victim was wearing an immersion suit, but it was completely open across the chest; the zipper was stuck and one glove was missing. Inspection of the Immersion Suits

Zippers on three of the four immersion suits recovered during the rescue operation were difficult to use. However, the garments had been submerged in salt water for several hours before the victims were found. No conclusions could be drawn regarding the two suits recovered from the wheel-house during the underwater inspection of July 1991 since they had been underwater for approximately seven months. A boot was found in one of the two suits.

1.10.5 Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs)

The "NADINE" was equipped with one Class I and two Class II EPIRBs which had been installed in the fall of 1990. The owners had registered them with the Canadian Emergency Beacon Registry on 14 November 1990, but they had not yet been inspected by either the Ship Safety or the Radio inspector. Classes of EPIRBs

In the event of a vessel sinking, Class I EPIRBs are automatically released from the vessel and automatically begin transmitting as soon as they reach the surface. A transmitter of this class, with a hydrostatic release device, had been installed on the roof of the wheel-house (see Appendix E).

Class II EPIRBs must be removed from their cases (which should be located near the life-saving equipment), manually activated, and then thrown into the water or brought aboard the lifeboats. Of the two EPIRBs of this type installed on the "NADINE", one was in the wheel-house and the other in the port alleyway of the main deck accommodation (see Appendix F).

The master stated that he had activated the Class I EPIRB in accordance with the instruction manual although he had received no training in its use. The EPIRB released automatically and came up to the surface as designed, but it did not transmit. Inspection revealed that the activation button had not been turned from "Safe" to "Arm" during installation (see Appendix G). The owners' fleet director stated that he had read the instruction manual to the master in his office. However, this assertion was not borne out by the evidence as neither the master nor the crew knew how to operate the EPIRBs. Ultimately, it is the master's responsibility to familiarize himself with all safety devices on the vessel and to provide appropriate training to the crew.

The EPIRB Regulations stipulate that vessels carrying more than two lifeboats must have Class II EPIRBs installed near the lifeboats, and that the EPIRBs should be placed in the first two lifeboats launched. The Class II EPIRBs on the "NADINE" were not used. Recovery of EPIRBs

On 17 December 1990, the Class I EPIRB of the "NADINE" was recovered in position 47°33′N, 61°24′W.

Neither the name of the vessel nor the service date appeared on the transmitter. However, the date of the most recent battery change was indicated. The regulations specify that no vessel required to carry an EPIRB may make a Class II home-trade voyage unless the EPIRB is marked on its outer surface with the vessel's name or permit number.

In July 1991, after being under approximately 30 m of water for seven months, the two Class II EPIRBs were recovered. Both were still in their cradles. Testing of the EPIRBs

In January 1991, the Quality Assurance Directorate of the Department of National Defence tested the Class I EPIRB and found it to be fully operational. In October 1991, the two Class II EPIRBs were inspected. One was not watertight and was not in working order. The other had operational electrical circuits but failed the short-term frequency stability test.

1.10.6 Muster List

Copies of the muster list from the "RALI II", the "NADINE's" sister ship, prepared by the owners, were posted in the wheel-house of the "NADINE", in the alleyway of the main deck accommodation and in the galley. The muster list, which is not required by existing Canadian regulations, lacked the following information:

  • the location of muster station where roll call will be carried out;
  • the emergency stations of the crew members responsible for picking up the two Class II EPIRBs;
  • the duties assigned to the ninth crew member;
  • the duties assigned to the F & O biologist or the emergency station of the crew member required to supervise her.

No notices describing the stations to be occupied by crew members during boat and fire drills were posted above the bunks in the cabins, and no such notices were required by the regulations.

1.10.7 Emergency Drills

A drill was performed on 03 May 1990 during the annual inspection. It was reported that a second drill was usually performed during the summer at sea. However, others stated that only one drill a year was usually conducted. Regulations require that such drills be performed at least once a month aboard vessels of more than 150 gross registered tons (GRT). In the course of such drills, masters are required to instruct their crews on their duties, on the layout and facilities of the vessel, and on the operation of any equipment that they may be called upon to use. The crew is required to demonstrate its familiarity with that equipment, including immersion suits.

During the annual boat and fire drill in May 1990, the crew members donned lifejackets and proceeded to muster stations with their immersion suits. Crews of other vessels were gathered on the wharf at that time, but of the 60 or so fishermen who were present, only 1 or 2 volunteers put on their immersion suits and jumped into the water.

The owners had not issued any guidelines for boat and fire drills, nor were they required to do so by regulation.

There was no general alarm bell on board the "NADINE" and none was required. During annual drills, the alarm was sounded by means of the ship's whistle.

1.11 Search and rescue (SAR)

1.11.1 distress call.

The distress call transmitted by the "NADINE" at 2235, 16 December, was received by the CGRS at Cap-aux-Meules and by the "SIMON FRASER", which was anchored SW of the island of Havre-Aubert. At 2237, CGRS Cap-aux-Meules informed the Halifax Rescue Coordination Centre (RCC) of the accident.

1.11.2 SAR mobilization

On receipt of the distress message, the Halifax RCC mobilized four CCG surface units, and assigned duties to vessels in transit or berthed in the Gulf of St. Lawrence that were able to respond.

At 0128, about 2 hours and 45 minutes after the sinking, the "CAP-AUX-MEULES" became the first surface unit to reach the scene. She was unable to conduct an effective visual search because her bridge is only about 3 m above the surface of the water and the seas were running at 6 to 7 m.

At 0320, the "SIMON FRASER" arrived at the scene and assumed the duties of Coordinator Surface Search (CSS). She assigned search sectors to incoming units as they arrived.

The RCC also called on helicopters and fixed wing aircraft from Canadian Forces Bases (CFB) Summerside, Shearwater, and Greenwood. Bad weather severely hampered aircraft operations, but four helicopters and two fixed wing aircraft did get airborne on 17 December and participated in the search. The first aircraft, an Aurora from CFB Greenwood, arrived at the scene at 0445, approximately six hours after the sinking.

1.11.3 Search objectives

At 0610, the first search objective, the lifeboat, was located by the Aurora aircraft with the assistance of the "SUZANNE P". This was the forward portion of the boat, which had broken in two, and no survivors were found with it.

At 0635, the "SUZANNE P" observed a strobe light and located the master and the first of the victims. The master was picked up by the "SUZANNE P" and the victim by the "MARY HICHENS".

At daybreak, the weather became calmer with an easterly wind of 10 to 15 kn, seas of 2 to 3 m, and fog.

At 0700, using a heat detector, the Aurora located one survivor, the bosun, in liferaft No. 2151. He was later picked up by the "CAP-AUX-MEULES".

At 0715, the "CAP-AUX-MEULES" discovered the second liferaft, No. 2077. Its canopy was deflated and it had no occupants. The raft was later recovered by the "SIMON FRASER".

At about 0800, the RCC decided to restrict the search to locating victims in the water. At 0844, the last of the life-saving gear was recovered.

At 0910, the "G.C. GORTON" discovered a second victim who was later recovered by the "SIMON FRASER". At 0930, a Buffalo aircraft located a third victim who was picked up by the "MARY HICHENS". At 0942, the "SIMON FRASER" located and recovered the fourth and last victim found that day.

At 1140, the "G.C. GORTON" recovered the Class I EPIRB.

Search activities for 17 December ended with the return of the fishing vessels to port between 1800 and 2000.

On 18 December, the search resumed with the assistance of one Buffalo aircraft, one Labrador helicopter, four CCG ships and several fishing vessels.

At 1510, the "SOULEIADO" located the wreckage of the "NADINE" in position 47°26.43′N, 61°19.35′W, in 28 m of water. Divers aboard the "G.C. GORTON" recovered the body of one fisherman from the wreck. At 1800, the Halifax RCC reduced the search and, at nightfall, the operation was concluded. The outcome: two survivors, five dead and three missing.

During the underwater inspection of the wreck in July 1991, the body of the biologist was discovered in the utility room under the wheel-house . The remaining two victims were not found.

1.11.4 Survival

Studies show that, at a water temperature of −1° C , the predicted survival time for a person not wearing an immersion suit is about 20 to 60 minutes (see Appendix H). There are recorded cases of persons wearing an immersion suit surviving in water at temperatures near zero for up to 24 hours.

The master, who was floating in the water, deflated his immersion suit whenever he began to shiver, and then blew it up again with warm air. He repeated this operation approximately three to four times an hour. In addition, he refrained from urinating in order to remain dry.

The bosun, who was alone in the liferaft, launched a parachute flare at about midnight. However, no rescue unit was in sight. Approximately 15 minutes later, he saw some lights on the horizon and he launched a second parachute flare. The hand flares were not used. Shortly afterward, an aircraft overflew the site.

1.12 Design of the vessel

The steel vessel's hull was subdivided by three watertight transverse bulkheads: one collision bulkhead between the forepeak tank and the oil fuel bunker tank, at frame 76; one bulkhead between the after end of the engine-room and the forward end of the fish holds at frame 43; and one bulkhead between the after end of the fish holds and the lazaret at frame 11 (see Appendix J). The two latter bulkheads were equipped with watertight doors to the tunnel below the fish holds. There was no mechanism allowing these doors to be closed by remote control, nor was this required by regulation, and there were no notices on the doors requiring that they be kept closed at sea. It is the master's responsibility, as indicated in several CCG Ship Safety Bulletins, to ensure that such closing appliances are closed at sea when necessary.

1.12.1 Lazaret

Below the stern ramp, the steering gear compartment lies between the starboard and port ballast tanks. The net store at the forward end lies between the starboard and port oil fuel bunker tanks. Forward, on the centre line, there is a casing with a watertight door leading to the propeller shaft tunnel and, to port, a companionway to the scuttle leading to the afterdeck. The steering gear compartment and the storeroom are separated by a transverse bulkhead with a permanent opening. The lazaret has a volume of 60.4 m³ (see Appendices J and K).

1.12.2 Propeller shaft tunnel

This compartment extends longitudinally from the casing in the lazaret to the after engine-room bulkhead. It contains the propeller shaft, the bearings and the controllable-pitch mechanism. The tunnel projects into the lower portion of the fish holds. Because the service area is located to port of the shaft, the tunnel occupies a larger portion of the port hold. The tunnel has a volume of 46.9 m³.

1.12.3 Fish holds

The two longitudinal fish holds are located between the engine-room and the lazaret. They are separated by a watertight longitudinal bulkhead above the tunnel. Each hold is subdivided horizontally in two by floorboards, and vertically in three by corrugated aluminium poundboards. There is a drainage well in the middle of each hold in way of the tunnel. The starboard and port holds have volumes of 221 m³ and 213 m³ respectively.

1.12.4 Engine-room

This compartment is located forward of the fish holds, below the forecastle accommodation. The engine-room has a volume of 340 m³.

1.12.5 Openings lazaret scuttle.

A scuttle cover mounted on two hinges and located on the port side of the afterdeck provides access to the lazaret (see Appendix J ). The scuttle cover is secured by steel wedges. The lazaret was used primarily for maintenance of the fishing gear and by the chief engineer for inspection of the steering gear. Reportedly, no one checked that this opening was secured before the return voyage and no leakage was noted in the lazaret on the last day. Neither of the two survivors had gone to the lazaret on the day of the sinking. Tunnel

The forward door between the tunnel and the engine-room is reported to have remained open at all times on the "NADINE", as on other trawlers, and the after door at the lazaret casing was reportedly closed at the time of the accident. The master did not notice any flooding from the tunnel during his last visit to the top of the engine-room, nor was any flooding mentioned by the chief engineer who was looking toward the tunnel entrance at the time of that visit. Manholes

When the trawl is hauled in, it is hoisted onto the afterdeck above the manholes and then opened. The catch spreads over the afterdeck and drops into the fish holds through those manholes from which the covers have been removed. The catch is then stowed in the various compartments of the holds. When a compartment is full, and before the manhole covers are replaced, silicone is applied to the rim of the manholes to ensure a proper seal. The covers are then replaced and secured with dogging clips. Without the silicone, water may leak in around the rims or dogs of the manholes. New covers are provided on request when defects are noted.

There were 20 manholes on the afterdeck of the "NADINE". Eighteen of the covers had three dogging clips, one had four, and one was a permanently secured welded plate.

During the last voyage, many members of the crew had been involved with closing the manhole covers, therefore, the bosun was unsure whether all the manholes had been sealed with silicone and secured.

Neither the owners nor the master had issued clear instructions making a specific person responsible for checking that the openings were closed.

It is common practice for the manholes to be secured during the outbound voyage to preserve the ice supply and during the return voyage to preserve the catch (see Appendices L, M and N). The CCG inspected these openings in May 1990 and found no defects.

In the interest of safety, the Large Fishing Vessel Inspection Regulations state that the covers should be secured or attached by a permanent chain. The TSB found only one piece of chain on the underside of a single cover. Hatches

The hatches of the fish holds are used for loading ice and unloading the catch. There is one hatch for each hold on the afterdeck. The covers of the hatches are generally closed by the shore crew before the vessel leaves port and remain secured for the duration of the voyage. At the beginning of the final voyage, the covers were secured by the vessel's crew. They were still secure when the underwater inspection of the vessel was conducted in 1991.

For safety purposes, the Large Fishing Vessel Inspection Regulations state that covers must be equipped with devices to ensure that they are watertight. Engine-room

The outside companionway to the engine-room was closed off by a watertight door on the afterdeck and there was a fire door at the top of the interior companionway to the accommodation. On each side of the hull, there was a ventilation shaft running from the upper part of the engine-room to the boat deck. Doors to accommodation

The port door from the alleyway to the afterdeck was usually left open to improve air flow to the accommodation. The portholes on this deck are permanently secured. Air pipes

During the vessel's mid-life refit as a seiner in 1979, the original after air pipes to the ballast tanks were replaced with air pipes without non-return valves and covers. The "NADINE" was subsequently refitted as a trawler, but the air pipes were not equipped with non-return valves or covers.

Current regulations make no reference to means of closing ventilators. Freeing Ports

Water which broke over the bulwarks onto the afterdeck was cleared on each side of the vessel by a series of four freeing ports. The fifth and foremost port on each side was welded closed. When first launched, the "NADINE" had six ports, one measuring 0.179 m 2 and five measuring 0.336 m 2 , for a total of 1.859 m 2 .

The minimum required freeing port area for this vessel was 1.990 m 2 .

At the time of the sinking, the total freeing port area was 1.523 m 2 .

It is reported that during heavy weather the "NADINE" tended to ship water and was slow to clear water washing over the afterdeck.

1.13 Inspections

1.13.1 underwater inspections.

The underwater inspections performed at the wreck site by the TSB in April and July 1991 revealed the following:

  • the speed control lever was set to full speed and the propeller pitch control lever to full astern;
  • there were no water level alarms for the fish holds or the lazaret on the alarm panel in the wheel-house;
  • the two Class II EPIRBs were still secured in their cases;
  • the air vents to the engine-room on each side of the accommodation on the boat deck were open;
  • the starboard door from the afterdeck to the engine-room was closed but not secured;
  • the port door from the afterdeck to the accommodation alleyway was open;
  • approximately 10 m of netting was unrolled from the trawl drum;
  • fourteen manholes were secured (see Appendix M);
  • there was no sign of damage to the manhole covers that were in place;
  • six manholes were open, two to starboard and four to port;
  • five manhole covers were spread out over the afterdeck with their dogs turned to the open position;
  • there was no sign of damage to the dislodged covers;
  • no damage was evident to the rims of either the open or the closed manholes;
  • the lazaret scuttle cover was closed but not secured, the after hinge was broken, and the steel wedges were not in position;
  • the after door from the tunnel into the lazaret was partially open and a section of net was lying on the doorsill;
  • the forward door from the tunnel to the engine-room was closed but not secured.

On 10 November 1991, divers from the Quebec Police Force (SQ) inspected the hull and found that there was no major damage except for a crack in the shell plating in way of the after port ballast tank. They found that the propeller pitch control was set to astern.

1.13.2 Dockside inspection

On 08 November 1991, the floating crane "TAKLIFT 4" refloated the "NADINE" which was then towed to the wharf at Grande-Entrée, Magdalen Islands. A dockside inspection by the TSB revealed the following:

  • the vessel floated alongside the wharf without the use of a pump;
  • Engage Propeller Shaft Clutch;
  • Disengage Propeller Shaft Clutch;
  • Emergency Stop, Main Engine;
  • a red handle in the "use" position indicated that the main engine was in operation at the time of the sinking;
  • power was being provided by the port generator immediately prior to the sinking;
  • sea water suction;
  • ballast tank suctions;
  • keel cooling;
  • fire and wash-deck discharge;
  • overboard discharge.

During the winter of 1992, the following observations were made by the present owners:

  • the oily water in the lazaret was pumped into the tunnel to reduce the oily water level to about 5 cm below the floorboards in the steering gear compartment, and no appreciable ingress of water was observed; and
  • the after starboard ballast tank could not be permanently pumped dry.

An inspection of the lazaret by the TSB in April 1993 revealed that:

  • over a period of about one year, the oily water level in the lazaret had increased by some 10 cm (i.e. to about 5 cm above the floorboards in the steering gear compartment); and
  • the stuffing box of the rudder stock was not accessible.

1.14 Stability

When operated in the loading condition at the time of the accident with all openings subject to downflooding secured, the "NADINE" had an angle of downflooding of 45.3°, as downflooding would occur when the louvres of the engine-room ventilation shaft located on the boat deck became immersed. However, when the door to the accommodation is left open on the afterdeck, the angle of downflooding is reduced to 25.7°. The CCG Stability Standards for Fishing Vessels Footnote 5 state that "a ship is to be considered as having entirely lost her stability at (the downflooding) angle", and the criteria of CCG STAB 4 tacitly infer that the minimum downflooding angle should not be less than 30°.

Calculations were carried out by the TSB to check the vessel's subdivision and hydrostatic characteristics. These were found to be in general agreement with the builder's original data and were used in the verification of the vessel's transverse stability and trim conditions at the time of the accident.

The vessel's stability condition was assessed on the basis of the reported condition at the beginning of the return voyage in conjunction with the progressive reduction in positive stability during four hours of downflooding. With about 150 tonnes (t) of fish, the vessel was carrying only half of her maximum capacity. The fish remaining on the afterdeck only marginally affected the vessel's stability and, for the purposes of calculations, it is assumed that there was approximately 6.6t of fish in the trawl net.

At the beginning of the return voyage, the vessel had positive intact static and dynamic stability. However, because the door to the accommodation had been left open, the "NADINE" did not meet the requirements of CCG STAB 4 which include maintaining the watertight integrity of the hull.

Nevertheless, even with the lazaret, the tunnel and both fish holds filled, the vessel would have retained reserve buoyancy and remained afloat. The static and dynamic stability diminished gradually as the settling by the stern increased. The free surface effect created by the sea water on the afterdeck further reduced the trawler's residual stability. Despite the complete flooding of certain compartments, the vessel retained positive stability for a while and remained afloat until the reserve buoyancy was eliminated.

Several hours of downflooding at the reported rate would be required before the "NADINE" would sink in the prevailing conditions.

1.15 Machinery

1.15.1 bridge control.

The vessel was equipped with a Seffle bridge control system consisting of three sets of synchronized control levers: one controllable-pitch lever on the central console; one controllable-pitch lever on the bridge's port bulkhead; and one set of two levers on a console by the open starboard wheel-house window. The small lever on the left controlled the main engine speed, the larger one on the right controlled the propeller pitch. The bridge control was connected to a hydraulic controllable-pitch unit manufactured by Osborne Propellers Ltd. The pitch control unit was located in the after portion of the tunnel while the pumps were located in the engine-room beneath the floorboards.

The vessel could be stopped at sea from the wheel-house by:

  • pressing the black main engine emergency stop button;
  • pressing the propeller shaft clutch release button;
  • reducing the propeller pitch to zero;
  • reducing the speed of the main engine.

When the ship was being abandoned, the propeller pitch lever was set to "two ahead", a setting equivalent to the neutral position. In other words, the pitch was reduced to zero.

1.15.2 Recurring controllable-pitch failures

It was stated that on many occasions following electrical power failures while the vessel was at sea, the pitch had suddenly and automatically changed to astern while the vessel was under way. The controllable-pitch alarms apparently did not sound when this happened.

The pitch control unit on board the "RALI II" is similar to that aboard the "NADINE". Under the supervision of the Head, Laurentian Vessels Branch of F & O, the performance of the sister ship's pitch control unit was tested on 17 September 1991. It was found that when a power failure occurs while the vessel is going full ahead, the propeller pitch changes from full ahead to full astern in 7 minutes and 15 seconds. On the other hand, if the vessel is not moving and the propeller is immobile, the propeller pitch does not change. The test report therefore concludes that when the controllable pitch becomes inoperative while the vessel is going full ahead, the thrust of the water against the blades gradually pushes the propeller pitch from ahead to astern. When the main engine is on slow ahead, it takes significantly longer for the pitch to change from ahead to astern.

Information from the manufacturer of the controllable-pitch propeller confirmed that "hydrodynamic forces will move the pitch to full astern if the hydraulic pressure is lost." How quickly this occurs is partly dependent on the rate at which "the oil escapes from the hydraulic intermediate shaft to the tank."

The TSB data bank, which contains data on occurrences since 1976, has no report of these power failures or pitch reversals on the "NADINE".

1.15.3 Steering gear

The electrical drive component of the electro-hydraulic steering gear was a non-watertight electric motor installed on the bulkhead aft of the steering gear compartment in the lazaret.

When the master went up to the bridge, the vessel was turning to port, and the rudder angle indicator, which was no longer operational, showed a constant rudder angle of 10° to port.

The master first attempted to set the vessel back on course by adjusting the autopilot, but the autopilot did not respond. He then disengaged the autopilot, but the vessel still failed to respond. After these attempts, the pitch was set to neutral.

The master reported that his attempts to use the steering in the manual mode were unsuccessful. This is contrary to the results of tests conducted on the sister ship, "RALI II", with the wheel in the manual mode. These tests showed that the telemotor turns the rudder even when there is no electrical power to the steering gear.

The steering gear of the "NADINE" was operating normally on departure from Stephenville.

1.15.4 Power system

Normal lighting was provided by a power system consisting of two generators used alternately. They could not operate in parallel. If one generator broke down, the other had to be turned on manually from the engine-room. At the time of the sinking, the port generator was in operation.

1.15.5 Emergency lighting

The emergency lighting in the companionways and the engine-room was powered by two batteries connected in series. The power supply for the emergency lighting was located in the wheel-house but, at the time of the sinking, it was not turned on. The lights went out before the vessel went down, and the crew abandoned ship in total darkness.

1.16 Information on the pumping system

1.16.1 pump suctions.

The steering gear compartment, the storeroom of the lazaret, the tunnel and both fish holds each contained one drainage suction. The engine-room had two.

Drainage was effected by two main pumps: one connected to a generator and the other to an electric motor. In an emergency, a third, auxiliary pump could be placed in service. In addition, a manual pump could be used to pump out the forecastle storeroom. The vessel carried no submersible automatically activated pump. All pumping was initiated from the engine-room.

An inspection of the valves following the refloating of the vessel indicated that no pumping of the lazaret, the tunnel, or the engine-room was under way when the vessel went down. Only the valves to the after ballast tanks were open.

1.16.2 Alarm panel

A panel in the wheel-house contains sound and visual alarms for the tunnel and engine-room only. There are no water level detectors for the fish holds or the lazaret, which includes the after storeroom and the steering gear compartment (see photographs, Appendix P).

The panel was recovered from the wreck but, although several indicator bulb filaments were broken, it could not be determined if the bulbs were illuminated at the time of the sinking.

The installation of water level alarms in the various compartments of a Canadian fishing vessel is not a regulatory requirement.

1.16.3 Leak

Two days before the sinking, on Friday 14 December, the chief engineer pumped out the lazaret using the engine-room pump. He retightened the stuffing box of the rudder stock at about the same time. The leak must have been relatively large because the water was above the floorboards in the steering gear compartment. The leak, of unknown origin, appears to have been restricted to the steering gear compartment and was not reported to the master by the chief engineer until the following day. The master did not ask the chief engineer about it again nor did he personally check the water level in the lazaret to ensure that the leak had been permanently plugged.

The master saw the chief engineer go down into the lazaret on the day of the sinking, but he received no reports of a further leak. The bosun did not see the leak on 14 December and did not go down into the lazaret on 16 December.

1.17 Information on the voyage

1.17.1 loading.

At the beginning of the voyage, the fresh water tanks were full and the fuel bunkers were down approximately 250 mm. Fifty-six tonnes of ice had been loaded into the fish hold to preserve the catch.

According to the master, the fish holds of most stern trawlers are loaded from the stern forward. Because the "NADINE" was trimmed by the stern in the light condition, the fish holds were loaded diagonally, that is, simultaneously in the forward portion of one and the after portion of the other. The middle portions were never filled to capacity because the approximate 147t (325,000 lb.) per-trip quota for each vessel prevented the "NADINE" from taking on a full load of redfish. The fish holds of the "NADINE" had a maximum capacity of 325t (716,800 lb.).

During this last voyage, the "NADINE" caught a total of approximately 149.7t (330,000 lb.) in five trawls.

When the fish from the last catch was left on the afterdeck in the trawl, the 1 m high, 10 m long trawl was not secured on deck but, instead, was wedged against the trawl drum. Stowing the balance of the last catch in the holds would have taken approximately 20 minutes.

Before the sinking, the two ballast tanks near the steering gear compartment were empty. These tanks can be used to trim the vessel when necessary.

1.17.2 Impact

According to the witnesses, the vessel had not struck a reef or other object which may have caused a leak.

The master normally had the conduct of the vessel during trawling operations. When he handed control to the mate at about 2130 on 16 December, he had been directing the crew for more than two days except for a few rest periods. He had been in his cabin for less than an hour when he was summoned to the wheel-house by the mate at 2230, 16 December.

The mate had been given time to rest during the day of 16 December before he relieved the master, taking over the navigation watch. From the evidence, it was not possible to determine with certainty whether or not the regulatory requirement for a vessel the size of the "NADINE" to have an additional qualified person present on the bridge was met.

Crews have approximately two days off between fishing voyages, which last five to six days each.

1.19 Maintenance and safety

Following each voyage, the mate and the chief engineer would submit a list of repairs to be performed by the shore maintenance crew. Records were kept only of maintenance to the main engine and the auxiliaries (oil changes, etc.). The fleet director would meet the master and the chief engineer to discuss requisitions and to pass on the owners' instructions for the fishing operations.

The owners do not appear to have received any documentation from the CCG, and the fleet director had discontinued receiving the Notices to Shipping because he did not consider them useful. However, no differentiation between the Notices to Mariners, Notices to Shipping and Ship Safety Bulletins could be made.

The master had sole responsibility for safety on board.

2.0 Analysis

2.1 leak during last layover.

The cause of the leak discovered while the vessel was in Stephenville is unclear. There is no evidence to suggest a striking or bottom contact. The stuffing box of the rudder stock was tightened and the lazaret was pumped out. It is stated that, on this vessel and other fleet vessels, the stuffing box had to be retightened on a regular basis. It is unclear whether the corrective action taken in Stephenville was permanent. The survivors had not visited the lazaret during the return voyage. Because the stuffing box remained inaccessible and the owners provided scanty maintenance records, the condition and maintenance of the stuffing box remain unknown. It was reported that similar leaks had occurred in the past. Whatever the extent of the leak, the April 1993 inspection revealed that when the vessel was dockside and the rudder stock left motionless over a long period of time, ingress of water in the steering gear compartment was negligible. Evidence suggests that the rate of ingress of water before the foundering could only have occurred through downflooding.

2.2 Closing of the openings

Because the crew decided to leave part of the final catch on deck, the manholes located under the trawl became inaccessible. The covers for those manholes therefore remained unsecured. Other manholes located in the forward portion of the afterdeck were also left unsecured, probably because they were overlooked.

Although the mate had had some rest during the day of 16 December, he may well have been fatigued from two days of fishing when he took over the final watch. It is also possible that there was no other crew member in the wheel-house to help him remain alert. The mate may thus have been operating at something less than peak efficiency as the emergency developed.

As the chief engineer did not have a fixed schedule, it was impossible to determine whether he was working on the evening of 16 December.

2.4 First Indication of a leak

When the "NADINE" was called by the "ADÈLE", the first mate mentioned that the vessel 'rolled heavily'. This could have been an indication that the vessel's stability had possibly been altered by downflooding. An accumulation of water combined with the associated free surface effect can affect a vessel's manoeuvrability. Confirmation that the vessel was in trouble came when the mate on the bridge realized that the steering gear had failed. Shortly thereafter, the flooding in the lazaret was discovered. The flooding had caused the electric motor for the steering gear to short-circuit and the electro-hydraulic steering gear to fail. There was no water level detector in that compartment and, therefore, no alarm in the wheel-house to alert the bridge team.

Hull inspections carried out in 1991 revealed that the flooding was not caused by a major leak below the waterline. Furthermore, since the "NADINE" was 15 years old and had weathered storms of equal or greater severity on numerous occasions, it is unlikely that the trawler's design was a factor in this occurrence.

2.5 Flooding of the compartments

The reported increase in stern trim must have resulted from flooding of the vessel's after compartments. A leak in the stuffing box may have contributed to the flooding, but the lazaret compartment would have flooded through the scuttle in any event since underwater inspections revealed that the lazaret scuttle cover wedges were not in place, and that the cover was therefore not secure. One of the hinges of the cover was damaged, probably as a result of battering by the waves which were constantly washing over the deck while the cover was not secure. The motion of the water on the afterdeck, induced by the vessel's pitching, rolling and listing, would have started the trawl moving also and caused the unsecured manhole covers to the fish holds to become dislodged from their rims.

There were twice as many closed but unsecured covers on the port fish hold as on the starboard hold (see Appendix M). The unsecured manhole covers furthest aft were more likely to be the first open because they would be disturbed by the trawl. The furthest aft unsecured manholes were on the port side fish hold. In all probability, the port hold flooded first through the after manholes. As the after compartments were flooding, the trim by the stern would have increased, and more and more sea water would have washed over the afterdeck above the fish holds.

Because the doors to the tunnel were not secure, water was able to flood from the lazaret into the tunnel, and from the tunnel into the engine-room. The open doors of the alleyway and the companionway on the afterdeck would also have allowed water to flood the engine-room.

Because the air pipes to the after ballast tanks were not fitted with non-return valves or covers, downflooding into these tanks could also have occurred.

Because the port door to the accommodation had been left open in the bad weather, sea water could have entered the accommodation area as the vessel heeled to port.

When the vessel's list reached 45°, downflooding would also have occurred through the louvres of the engine-room port ventilation shaft.

2.6 Crew assembly

Because of a combination of fatigue and inadequate training in boat and fire drills, the crew's performance in the emergency may have been somewhat inefficient. Although participation in boat and fire drills was mandatory on board the "NADINE", one drill a year is simply not enough to enable a crew to become thoroughly familiar with emergency procedures.

The muster list that had been posted by the owners was a copy of the sister ship's ("RALI II") and did not contain the location of the muster station, the emergency stations of the crew members responsible for picking up the Class II EPIRBs and the duties assigned to the ninth crew member and the biologist. The lack of such information may well have detracted from the crew's handling of the emergency.

The master's decision to have the mate wake each member of the crew individually used up much of the time available for the abandonment. The last members to be awakened had little time to get dressed and get to the boat deck before the vessel sank. Also, the mate's involvement with the alerting process delayed his efforts to launch the liferaft. Although it is reported that the ship's whistle was used to sound the alarm, there is no indication that it was heard. Nonetheless, assembly took place, but no head count was taken outside the wheel-house.

When the wheel-house was evacuated, the propeller pitch had been reduced to neutral, but the propeller shaft was not disengaged and the main engine was not stopped.

2.7 Launching of the liferaft

The crew members' limited or lack of training in emergency procedures may have contributed to the difficulty that they experienced in launching the starboard liferaft. Weather was certainly a factor, but the use of proper procedures might have enabled more than one crew member to make use of the raft.

Inflatable liferafts such as those carried by the "NADINE" are designed to be boarded from the sea. One person can jump onto the canopy and go inside the raft, but others must jump into the water next to the raft and climb in with the help of the person already aboard.

2.8 Loss of lighting

When the on-line port generator flooded, the vessel was thrown into total darkness. No emergency lighting was available because the switch in the wheel-house was not turned on. The lack of lighting may have contributed to the confusion and panic that attended the abandonment.

2.9 Sinking

Because the initial downflooding took place in after compartments, the vessel initially trimmed by the stern and the stern trim increased as the downflooding continued. When reserve buoyancy was lost, the vessel sank by the stern.

2.10 Survival and rescue

The survival experience of the "NADINE's" crew was directly related to the use of immersion suits. The master, who had used the suit correctly, survived in the water for a long time with relatively few ill effects. Those who had donned their immersion suits but had not done them up stood a better chance of surviving than those who had not put them on at all. Crew members who did not make use of the suits stood little chance of surviving for more than a few minutes.

To be fully effective, an immersion suit must be made watertight. It is essential, therefore, that the zipper be tightly closed. Some crew members underestimated the importance of donning their immersion suits and closing the zippers before leaving the wheel-house.

2.11 EPIRBs

The EPIRBs had been installed on the "NADINE" shortly before the end of the 1990 season. However, neither the master nor the crew knew how to operate them properly, and the EPIRBs therefore contributed nothing to the rescue operation. None of the three units transmitted a distress signal, but the vessel's radio distress call was picked up by the CCG, and rescue units had no difficulty in locating the site of the sinking.

2.12 Damage

Underwater examination of the hull showed only one crack that could have resulted in a leak. The cause of that crack is unknown. However, witnesses stated that no impact was felt before the sinking, and no evidence exists of any pre-sinking structural problem.

The area of the crack would have been the first part of the vessel to make contact with the ocean floor. It is thus considered that the damage may have occurred when the vessel hit the bottom.

After the vessel was salvaged, she floated evenly without the use of a pump despite having water in the lazaret and the two after ballast tanks.

2.13 The Biologist

The biologist had not taken part in a boat and fire drill on the "NADINE" and, at the time of the accident, members of the F & O staff, like the biologist, were not required to take a MED course before going to sea.

It is not known whether the biologist had been issued an immersion suit. If she did have one, it would probably have been kept in the storeroom that contained the crew's suits.

Although there are several possibilities, it is not known how the body of the biologist came to be in the utility room below the wheel-house.

What is known is that one body and two immersion suits were found inside the wheel-house, and that divers reported a significant current inside the wreck. The crew member and the biologist may have been putting on their immersion suits in the wheel-house when the vessel went down.

2.14 Fatigue

It is likely that on the final day of the voyage the crew members were suffering from fatigue after a busy period of fishing. Evidence suggests that they may therefore have paid less attention than they ordinarily would to routine tasks such as replacing and sealing the manhole covers.

Some of the crew members were undoubtedly suffering from the cold. Their ability to launch the liferaft correctly may have suffered as a result.

3.0 Findings

3.1 findings.

  • The source of the leak discovered at Stephenville and whether that leak was permanently plugged remain unknown. The leak was not reported to the master until 15 December when the vessel was already under way.
  • The stuffing box of the rudder stock had leaked on a number of occasions and had to be retightened in Stephenville.
  • Five of the 10 persons aboard had taken MED courses.
  • Only the starboard inflatable liferaft was accessible to the crew at the time of the sinking. The port liferaft and the lifeboat were inaccessible because of the pronounced list of the vessel.
  • Because of inadequate training, not all crew members knew that they should put on their immersion suits before abandoning ship.
  • Five crew members donned their immersion suits, but only one closed the suit to make it watertight.
  • Both survivors had put on their immersion suits.
  • Some of the crew members had difficulty in putting on their immersion suits and doing up the closures to make them watertight.
  • The Class I EPIRB was released automatically but failed to function because it had not been activated when it was installed on the vessel.
  • The two Class II EPIRBs were not activated and were not thrown overboard or taken aboard the liferaft.
  • The crew had not received adequate training in the use of EPIRBs.
  • The EPIRBs were not marked so as to be easily identifiable.
  • The crew was not required to perform a standard life-saving drill every month.
  • The muster list did not call for taking a crew count in a specific location, nor did it assign responsibility for the deployment of EPIRBs.
  • The transverse bulkheads forward and aft of the fish holds on the "NADINE" were not watertight because the tunnel doors had not been secured.
  • There was no notice on the watertight doors indicating that they should be kept closed.
  • The lazaret scuttle cover was not secured.
  • The port door of the alleyway leading to the afterdeck was open and the starboard door leading to the engine-room was not secured.
  • There were no watertight covers for the air pipes.
  • The total area of the freeing ports was less than the minimum required for safety.
  • The switches for the emergency lighting system were in the open (off) position and the emergency lighting did not come on after the power failure.
  • There were 143t of fish stowed in the fish holds and another 7t on the afterdeck (figures are approximate).
  • Before the flooding of the after compartments, the trawler's static and dynamic stability would still have met STAB 4 standards had the openings on the afterdeck been secured.
  • Only the valves for the after ballast tanks were open.
  • The main engine emergency stop button and the propeller shaft clutch engagement and disengagement buttons were not labelled and the master was unfamiliar with them.
  • The main engine was not turned off before the crew abandoned ship.
  • The alarm panel in the wheel-house did not include water level alarms for the fish holds and the lazaret.
  • The starboard fish hold had two unsecured manholes and the port hold had four. About 10 manholes had not been sealed with silicone.
  • After the sinking, the main engine speed control was found in the full speed position and the propeller pitch control in the full astern position.
  • The electro-hydraulic steering gear was the first auxiliary mechanism to fail.
  • The vessel was running before heavy seas.
  • As a result of flooding, the stern of the trawler settled and a list to port developed, but this went unnoticed until the situation became critical.
  • The reserve buoyancy was eliminated as a result of flooding.
  • Only one person was able to board the starboard liferaft.
  • The shell plating in way of the after port ballast tank was found ruptured on the ocean floor.
  • Although the CCGC "CAP-AUX-MEULES" was the first unit to arrive at the site of the sinking (LKP), her small size prevented her from making a thorough visual search in the heavy seas.

The "NADINE" sank because the openings on the afterdeck and in the transverse bulkheads were not secured. Water was thus able to enter the vessel and eventually flood the lazaret, the fish holds and the engine-room. This ingress gradually reduced the vessel's stability until all reserve buoyancy was lost and the vessel sank. Poor weather, darkness, lack of training and the suddenness of the sinking hindered the abandonment and contributed to the loss of life.

4.0 Safety Action

4.1 action taken, 4.1.1 company - madelipêche inc..

The immersion suits carried on the "NADINE" were of a universal size and difficult for some crew members to put on and to close so that they were watertight. Since this occurrence, the company has provided each crew member of its fleet with his own personal suit. The company has also purchased some extra-large suits.

4.1.2 Department of Fisheries and Oceans (F & O)

As a result of this occurrence, F & O now requires that all members of its seagoing scientific staff attend Marine Emergency Duties (MED) courses.

4.1.3 Canadian Coast Guard (CCG)

The Class I Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon (EPIRB) on the "NADINE" released automatically but it had not been activated. A subsequent inspection indicated that the activation button of the EPIRB had not been turned from the "Safe" to the "Arm" position during installation. Subsequently, the CCG issued a Notice to Shipping and a Ship Safety Bulletin (SSB No. 1/91) advising of the importance for all Class I float-free EPIRBs to be set for automatic operation as soon as they are installed on a vessel.

4.1.4 Transportation Safety Board (TSB) marine safety advisories.

Based on the early evidence of the investigation, in May 1991, the following areas of safety concern were brought to the attention of the CCG:

  • adequacy of MED training and survival skills of the ship's crew members;
  • adequacy of practices with respect to fire and boat drills;
  • adequacy of set-up procedures and operational practices for EPIRBs;
  • operational practices for securing openings in the ship's watertight bulkheads; and
  • serviceability of immersion suits. Marine safety recommendations

Following the sinking of the scallop dragger "CAPE ASPY" in January 1993, the Board identified safety deficiencies common to both the "NADINE" and the "CAPE ASPY" and issued three recommendations:

In view of the continuing loss of vessels due to downflooding through unsecured openings, the Board recommended that:

The Department of Transport develop and implement measures to ensure that owners, operators and masters of vessels under its jurisdiction have effective training and procedures for securing all openings sufficient to preserve the watertight integrity of the hull. Transportation Safety Recommendation M93-01

In its reply, Transport Canada (TC) has confirmed that watertight integrity and its effects on vessel stability will be brought to the attention of the industry by the CCG Examiners of Masters, Mates and Engineers by intensifying the examination in these areas. Further, the CCG issued a SSB urging mariners and operators to keep watertight openings closed at all times except when it is absolutely necessary to open them to gain access to spaces (SSB No. 16/92). The CCG also reissued previous SSB Nos. 1/83 and 4/87 on the same subject.

In view of the continuing apparent lack of knowledge of critical safety information by fishermen, much of which has already been promulgated by TC in SSBs, the Board recommended that:

The Department of Transport evaluate the effectiveness of its distribution practices for all marine safety information aimed at fishing masters and fishermen. Transportation Safety Recommendation M93-02

In response to Recommendation M93-02, TC has issued a Special Edition of the SSB to reach several thousand new audience members including many fishing vessel owners. This Special Edition requested all recipients to inform their colleagues, shipowners and companies of the existence of the SSB so that they can be added to the mailing list. It also listed the titles of all SSBs published since 1977 for ease of reference and included them in a Notice to Mariners.

In view of the extremely harsh physical conditions under which abandonment may be required, the Board believes that all life-saving appliances must be readily accessible and easily deployable for safe abandonment. Therefore, the Board recommended that:

The Department of Transport ensure that liferafts on all federally approved or inspected vessels are stowed in such a manner as to permit easy manual launching under distress and any environmental conditions likely to be encountered by that vessel. Transportation Safety Recommendation M93-03

In response to Recommendation M93-03, the CCG has issued SSB No. 9/93 which provided recommended guidelines for the stowage and installation of throw-over type inflatable liferafts for ease of launching under icing conditions.

The regulations require fishing vessels to be fitted with freeing ports of adequate area to facilitate rapid and effective freeing of shipped water from the deck. There were six freeing ports on each side of the "NADINE". However, the fifth and foremost port on each side was welded closed. Reportedly, the "NADINE" was slow to clear water washing over the afterdeck.

It is not uncommon to find freeing ports welded or bolted shut on many fishing vessels to prevent the catch or equipment from slipping through. Apparently, the crews do not always realize the perilous effect of water retained on deck.

Following a 1990 occurrence involving the sinking of the fishing vessel "STRAITS PRIDE II", the Board was concerned that a vessel's inability to adequately drain shipped seas off the deck will impair stability. Therefore, the Board recommended that:

The Department of Transport require the installation of water level detectors in all compartments below the waterline on large fishing vessels. Transportation Safety Recommendation M92-09

In response, TC stated that it will continue to give wide distribution to the Small Fishing Vessel Safety Manual, TP 10038, which covers the subject of stability on small fishing vessels.

4.2 Action required

4.2.1 water level detectors.

The ingress of water flooding the lazaret, the fish holds and eventually the engine-room of the "NADINE" gradually reduced the vessel's stability until all reserve buoyancy was lost and the vessel sank. The flooding of the lazaret had caused the electric motor to short-circuit and had disabled the steering gear. Lazarets present special safety hazards resulting in numerous fishing vessel casualties. Therefore, the North Pacific Fishing Vessels Owners Association of the United States advocates the fitting of water level alarms in lazarets.

Fishing vessels are fitted with numerous openings above and below decks and their watertight integrity is constantly dependent upon the vigilance and timely reaction of the crew. In recent years, failure to monitor and redress water ingress in a timely manner has resulted in the sinking of several fishing vessels. For example, the fishing vessel "NORTHERN OSPREY" sank when water in the flooded engine-room was not detected in time. The high water level alarm in the engine-room was disabled at the time.

The installation of water level alarms in various compartments of fishing vessels is presently not required by regulation. Accordingly, neither water level detectors nor alarms for the fish holds, the lazaret and the steering gear compartments were installed on the "NADINE". The absence of water level detectors and bridge alarms caused a delay in the crew's appreciation of the flooding that eventually led to the sinking of the "NADINE".

Delay in identifying and draining water from any compartment can jeopardize a vessel's seaworthiness, due to the water's adverse effect on vessel stability through free surface effect. Therefore, the Board recommends that:

The Department of Transport require the installation of water level detectors in all compartments below the waterline on large fishing vessels. Transportation Safety Recommendation M94-06

4.2.2 Fire and boat drills on fishing vessels

The decision to abandon a vessel at sea is often made under intense pressure in a very short time. The more familiar crew members are with their vessel's survival gear and how to use it, the better they will be able to respond to the emergency.

The donning of immersion suits during emergency drills conducted several times a season can reduce the time required to find and don the equipment in a real emergency. During such exercises, defects in immersion suit zippers or in lifeboat release mechanisms, etc. can be identified and rectified before an actual emergency arises.

Some crew members on the "NADINE" had difficulty donning and closing their suits. Some suits were found torn, the zippers on others were poorly maintained and difficult to close. Of the five crew members who donned their immersion suits, only the master was able to close his suit properly. The bosun, in spite of repeated attempts, was never able to do up his suit; he had never donned an immersion suit prior to this accident.

The existing Boat and Fire Drill Regulations require that the drills be conducted regularly at intervals of not more than one month on vessels of the "NADINE's" category. The master of every such ship is required to enter in the official logbook or in another register the full particulars of each boat and fire drill. However, such drills were not held regularly on the "NADINE". It is not uncommon for ships required by regulations to hold regular fire and boat drills, not to do so.

Since crews who have little or no experience in using survival gear are prone to making fatal mistakes, the Board recommends that:

The Department of Transport take whatever measures are necessary to ensure that the safety intent of the Boat and Fire Drills Regulations is being fulfilled by owners and operators of fishing vessels. Transportation Safety Recommendation M94-07

4.2.3 Accessibility of life preservers

During the abandonment of the "NADINE", the crew members had to go below deck to retrieve their immersion suits from a storeroom near the after exit from the port alleyway of the accommodation to the main deck.

In this occurrence, the situation developed so quickly that the last of the crew had to leave the ship through the starboard window of the wheel-house. Under such circumstances, it is critical that life support equipment, such as immersion suits, be readily accessible and rapidly retrievable without confusion.

In view of the record of rapid capsizing and sinking of fishing vessels, often leaving crews insufficient time to avail themselves of on-board life-saving equipment, the Board recommends that:

The Department of Transport conduct a formal evaluation of current practices for the stowage of life preservers and immersion suits on fishing vessels with a view to ensuring immediate accessibility. Transportation Safety Recommendation M94-08

4.2.4 Muster lists

The current Boat and Fire Drill Regulations do not require vessels with 12 crew members or less to have written muster lists. Being manned by nine crew members, the "NADINE" was not required to have a written muster list. Nevertheless, the "NADINE's" muster list lacked critical safety information; e.g. the location of the muster station for head counts, the emergency stations of the crew members responsible for picking up the two EPIRBs, and the duties assigned to each crew member, including the guest.

In order to survive abandonment at sea, crew members depend upon their foreknowledge and preparedness — their own and their crewmates'. Muster lists identify vital duties that must be performed in emergencies and assign them to each crew member; muster lists also provide crew members with a plan to manage an emergency situation, thus increasing their chance of survival. Since muster lists present little financial implication for owners, the Board recommends that:

The Department of Transport encourage all fishing vessel masters/owners to prepare and maintain appropriate muster lists for each vessel, regardless of the crew size. Transportation Safety Recommendation M94-09

4.2.5 MED Training for Fishermen

During most of the year in Canadian waters, protection against hypothermia is essential for survival. On the "NADINE", some crew members and the biologist were not wearing their immersions suits during the abandonment. Only 5 of the 10 persons aboard had taken MED training and only 2 survived. Due to inadequate training, not all crew members on the "NADINE" knew that they should don their immersion suits before abandoning ship. Lack of training in survival skills undoubtedly contributed to the loss of lives.

In a January 1993 occurrence involving the sinking of the scallop trawler "CAPE ASPY", 10 of the survivors were rescued from their liferaft after three hours, and 1 other was pulled alive from the frigid sea approximately six hours after the vessel sank. Immersion suits were credited for saving the lives of these survivors.

Between 1986 and 1991, over 30 Canadian fishing vessels were recorded as being lost due to capsizing, foundering or sinking. Having to abandon their vessels, over 70 fishermen died in this same period. As in this occurrence, some of these losses were exacerbated by a lack of understanding of safety considerations routinely covered in MED training.

At present, uncertificated crew members are not required to receive such training. Currently, on fishing vessels of between 100 and 400 GRT, only the master is required to have certification. However, approximately 98 per cent of Canadian commercial fishing vessels are less than 100 GRT, and the majority of them are manned by uncertificated crews.

As a result of the investigation into the sinking of the Canadian fishing vessel "STRAITS PRIDE II" in 1990, the Board recommended that:

The Department of Transport ensure that personnel who regularly crew closed-construction fishing vessels receive formal training in life-saving equipment and survival techniques. Transportation Safety Recommendation M92-06

It is understood that TC has completed a proposed amendment to the Canada Shipping Act .CSA) that would meet the intent of this recommendation. However, it is not known when this amendment will come into effect. In the meantime, lack of knowledge with respect to life-saving and survival techniques continues to reduce fishermen's chances of survival in emergency situations.

This report concludes the Transportation Safety Board's investigation into this occurrence. Consequently, the Board, consisting of Chairperson, John W. Stants, and members Gerald E. Bennett, Zita Brunet, the Hon. Wilfred R. DuPont and Hugh MacNeil, has authorized the release of this report.

Appendix A - Sketch of the "NADINE"

 Appendix A -

Appendix B - Fishing zone 1

Appendix B - Fishing Zone 1

Appendix C - Approximate track of the "NADINE" on 16 December 1990

Appendix C - Approximate Track of the "NADINE" on 16 December 1990

Appendix D - Survival suit (immersion suit)

Appendix D - Survival Suit (Immersion Suit)

Appendix E - Sketch of 406H(Y) and 406HH(Y) Lokata EPIRBs

Appendix E - Sketch of 406H(Y) and 406HH(Y) Lokata EPIRBs

Appendix F - Sketch of 406M(Y) Lokata EPIRB

Appendix F - Sketch of 406M(Y) Lokata EPIRB

Appendix G - Class I EPIRB control panel

Appendix G - Class I EPIRB Control Panel

Appendix H - Cold water survival chart

Appendix H - Cold Water Survival Chart

Appendix J - Cross-section forward of frame No. 9

Appendix J - Cross-section Forward of Frame No. 9

Appendix K - Layout of compartments

Appendix K - Layout of Compartments

Appendix L - Photograph of a manhole cover and its dogging clip

Appendix L - Photograph of a Manhole Cover and its Dogging Clip

Appendix M - Diagram of manholes, hatches and doorways as found after the sinking

 Appendix M - Diagram of Manholes, Hatches and Doorways as Found After the Sinking

Appendix N - Condition of manholes and covers after the refloating

 Appendix N - Condition of Manholes and Covers After the Refloating

Appendix O - Wheel-house console controls

 Appendix O - Wheel-house Console Controls

Appendix P - Photographs

 The "NADINE" after being salvaged.

Appendix Q - Glossary

Log in or Sign up

Click for Westport

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser .

nadine yacht sinking

kc135delta Member

I saw this m/y on another thread here and it peaked my curiosity. Very narrow beam, apparently extended a couple times and then it sank off the coast of france. Does anyone know where she was built? Specs? Engines? Any sister ships? And why did she sink?


Norseman Senior Member

And why did she sink? Click to expand...


captholli Senior Member

Built in Holland in one of the founding federation of ship builders that finally became the modern day two Feadship yards of Van Lent and DeVries. Believe she was launched as CoCo Chanel (not sure) than named Jan Pamela and "Jumbolized" or a mid section of 30' fabricated @ Merrill Stevens and installed in 1982. Sank while making passage from Naples to Sardinia as the loss has been well documented.


NYCAP123 Senior Member

Back at the time of her sinking I'd heard that a forward hatch blew open in rough seas and it was a done deal from there. They tried to jettison the toys to regain stability, but it was too little, too late.


K1W1 Senior Member

Hi, The Skipper of it when it sank is a well known and active character within the industry to this very day. I found this on another site. Nadine's sinking was indeed caused by the violent waves. A foredeck hatch was smashed, allowing water to flood the crew quarters and bringing the yacht down by the bow. This allowed more waves to break over the fordeck and they caused one of the large tenders carried there to shift, breaking one of the dining salon windows that overlooked the foredeck, which causing flooding on the maindeck. As if that wasn't bad enough, the violent motion of the yacht caused the swim platform to rip off the hull, allowing the lazarette to flood.
Ahh, now its coming back to me, The first lengthening was the 12' cockpit addition @ Merrill Stevens in 1980 the original machinery in place when launched was Detroit Diesel 12-71 naturals for mains and 6-71 gens. Mains replaced in 1991 with Cat 3412 and Gens replaced with N.L. -This work was also done by Merrill Stevens in Miami.
captholli said: Mains replaced in 1991 with Cat 3412 and Gens replaced with N.L. -This work was also done by Merrill Stevens in Miami. Click to expand...


C4ENG Senior Member

But then not to long after the Nadine sinking, Mr. Little hired that Capt to run Starship. Proved to be a good idea because that captain did an excellent job marketing the vessel for charter. I then felt fortunate enough to be there when Mr. Little did has last boat ride before departing for the big boat in the sky. We went to Freeport Bahamas Port Luycaya. The unique thing was, on that trip I never seen him happier.
Hi, Uncle Bernie as we used to call him was an outstanding Owner and one heck of a gentleman to work for or be associated with.
I was the Engineer from '80 to '84 when Mel Powers out of Dallas owned her as Jan Pamela and Norm Dahl was Capt. So I have first hand knowledge of what, when and where the cockpit and and mid section were added right down to a young Kiwi, Paul Solenicks contracted to provide the electrical work through his newly formed Co. Tess Marine. After Mel filed chapter 13 the boat went up for auction and the Whole crew went on to Empress Subaru.


nas130 Member

The autobiography "The Wolf of Wall Street" and "Catching the Wolf of Wall Street" both have some information about the sinking of the Nadine. The movie "Boiler Room" was allegedly the story of Nadines owner’s business on Long Island. I think the book about megayacht disasters also has some interviews with the captain and crew that were taken after sinking.
Hi, Captholli- Would your first name be Mark by any chance?
No, But enjoying the anonymity as you do "Kiwi" Cheers!
Hi, I asked because in 1984 I met a guy who was Chief on Empress Subaru and I thought his name was Mark Hollingsworth. He also got speared in the foot with a dart at a party I was at. By the way Paul Salenieks expanded his co - Tess Electrical Marine and sold it out to a multi national.

Neil Rooney

Neil Rooney Senior Member

Seawind with Allison C-18 I have been a passenger in that Seawind a few times. She was powered by an Allison C-18 Turbine with a cut down 3 blade prop. Quite a fast plane. The plane was in the USA when Nadine went down. Do read the account in "The Wolf OF Wall Street".


Benprez New Member

this boat was once owned by Jordan Belfort the wolf of wall street it sunk watch the youtube story jordan belfort yacht story
Hi, It had a few more interesting Owners as well. The late great Bernie Little and the infamous Mel Powers to name just two.


CaptTom Senior Member

Benprez said: ↑ this boat was once owned by Jordan Belfort the wolf of wall street it sunk watch the youtube story jordan belfort yacht story Click to expand...


stgeorge123 New Member

MY Nadine With the new movie 'The Wolf of Wall Strret' about to come out, I relooked at this thread and discovered it has never been clearly answered. The 'Nadine' was originally built at Niklaas Vitsen und vis in Aalkmar Holland circa 1962 for a wealthy French industrialist - she was floated as 'Mathilda' and retained this name until May 1977 when she was renamed Coco Chanel and crossed over to the US. She was originally fitted with GM Diesels and Mercedes gensets.The next time she was over in the Med, if my memory serves me right was in 1988 at the Cannes Film Festival, on charter having come across on Dock Express. Jordan Belfort was onboard with guests and full crew when she sadly sank off Corsica (all rescued fortunately) - theories and way she sank are numerous and probably mostly inaccurate, but I believe her length, by now 53 metres instead of the 40 metres she was originally built at, contributed. However, having sailed on this vessel as Ch.Off from 1970 - 1977, she should never have set sail in the weather conditions that day, which eventually were worse than forecast - whatever the Owner said!!
Hi, Mel Powers owned it when it was stretched by Merril Stevens in Miami. It lurked around the area for a few years and the late Bernie Little expressed an interest in it when it was called Jan or Jam Pamela and was laying at Merril Stevens in 1988. I was working for BLL on something else and was asked to go take a look. I next saw it when I was in Astilleros in Palma in the summer of 1989. Follwing this it was acquired by BLL and I worked on the refit when it was repowered with CAT 3412's and CAT Gensets in late 1992. The rest as they say is history - there are varying accounts of many historical events so this fits well.
  • No, create an account now.
  • Yes, my password is:
  • Forgot your password?

YachtForums: We Know Big Boats!

  • 12 Mighty Orphans
  • 12 Years a Slave
  • 15:17 to Paris, The
  • 300: Rise of an Empire
  • 80 for Brady
  • A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
  • A Journal for Jordan
  • A Million Miles Away
  • A Small Light
  • Against the Ice
  • All Eyez on Me
  • All My Life
  • American Gangster
  • American Hustle
  • American Made
  • American Sniper
  • American Underdog
  • Amityville Horror (1979)
  • Amityville Horror (2005)
  • Annabelle: Creation
  • Antwone Fisher
  • Bad Education
  • Battle of the Sexes
  • Beanie Bubble, The
  • Beautiful Boy
  • Beauty and the Beast
  • Being the Ricardos
  • Best of Enemies, The
  • Big Lebowski
  • Big Short, The
  • Big Sick, The
  • BlacKkKlansman
  • Bleed for This
  • Blind Side, The
  • Bling Ring, The
  • Blue Miracle
  • Boardwalk Empire
  • Bohemian Rhapsody
  • Boston Strangler
  • Boys Don't Cry
  • Boys in the Boat, The
  • Breakthrough
  • Brian Banks
  • Bridge of Spies
  • Burial, The
  • Butler, The
  • Bye Bye Man, The
  • Calendar Girls
  • Can You Ever Forgive Me?
  • Captain Phillips
  • Case for Christ, The
  • Catch Me If You Can
  • Charlie Wilson's War
  • Chasing Mavericks
  • Cocaine Bear
  • Concrete Cowboy
  • Conjuring 2, The
  • Conjuring, The
  • Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It, The
  • Courier, The
  • Crowded Room, The
  • Current War, The
  • Danish Girl, The
  • Danny Collins
  • Darkest Hour
  • Dear Edward
  • Death of Stalin, The
  • Deepwater Horizon
  • Deliver Us From Evil
  • Devil Wears Prada, The
  • Disappointments Room, The
  • Disaster Artist, The
  • Dolemite Is My Name
  • Donnie Brasco
  • Downton Abbey
  • Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story
  • Dream Horse
  • Dropout, The
  • Eddie the Eagle
  • Emancipation
  • End of the Tour, The
  • Erin Brockovich
  • Exorcism of Emily Rose, The
  • Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile
  • Eyes of Tammy Faye, The
  • Fabelmans, The
  • Farewell, The
  • Fault in Our Stars, The
  • Favourite, The
  • Fighter, The
  • Fighting with My Family
  • Finding Neverland
  • Finest Hours, The
  • Five Days at Memorial
  • Flamin' Hot
  • Florence Foster Jenkins
  • Ford v Ferrari
  • Founder, The
  • Free State of Jones
  • Freedom Writers
  • Gigi and Nate
  • Girl from Plainville, The
  • Glass Castle, The
  • Goldbergs, The
  • Good Nurse, The
  • Good on Paper
  • Goodbye Christopher Robin
  • Gran Turismo
  • Greatest Beer Run Ever, The
  • Greatest Showman, The
  • Gridiron Gang
  • Hacksaw Ridge
  • Hands of Stone
  • Haunting in Connecticut, The
  • Heaven is for Real
  • Hidden Figures
  • Hillbilly Elegy
  • Hollywoodland
  • House of Gucci
  • Hurricane, The
  • I Am the Night
  • I Can Only Imagine
  • I Saw the Light
  • I Still Believe
  • I Wanna Dance with Somebody
  • Imitation Game, The
  • Infiltrator, The
  • Inventing Anna
  • Irishman, The
  • Iron Claw, The
  • Jerry and Marge Go Large
  • Jersey Boys
  • Jesus Revolution
  • Jimi: All Is by My Side
  • Judas and the Black Messiah
  • Kill the Messenger
  • Killers of the Flower Moon
  • King Arthur
  • King Richard
  • Last Duel, The
  • Last Full Measure, The
  • League of Their Own, A
  • Lone Survivor
  • Lost City of Z, The
  • Ma Rainey's Black Bottom
  • Maggie Moore(s)
  • Man Who Invented Christmas, The
  • Masters of the Air
  • Mauritanian, The
  • McFarland, USA
  • Megan Leavey
  • Men of Honor
  • Military Wives
  • Million Dollar Arm
  • Miracles from Heaven
  • Molly's Game
  • Monuments Men, The
  • Mothman Prophecies, The
  • Mrs. America
  • Munich: The Edge of War
  • My All American
  • Next Goal Wins
  • Not Without My Daughter
  • Old Man & the Gun, The
  • On a Wing and a Prayer
  • Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
  • One and Only Ivan, The
  • Only the Brave
  • Operation Finale
  • Operation Mincemeat
  • Oppenheimer
  • Ordinary Angels
  • Outlaw King
  • Outpost, The
  • Pain & Gain
  • Pain Hustlers
  • Passion of the Christ, The
  • Patch Adams
  • Patriots Day
  • Pawn Sacrifice
  • Penguin Bloom
  • People v. O.J. Simpson, The
  • Pianist, The
  • Pope's Exorcist, The
  • Prayer Before Dawn, A
  • Promise, The
  • Public Enemies
  • Pursuit of Happyness, The
  • Queen of Katwe
  • Quiet Ones, The
  • Railway Man, The
  • Remember the Titans
  • Rescued by Ruby
  • Revenant, The
  • Richard Jewell
  • Right Stuff, The
  • Rookie, The
  • Saving Mr. Banks
  • Saving Private Ryan
  • Schindler's List
  • Serpent, The
  • Slender Man
  • Social Network, The
  • Society of the Snow
  • Soul Surfer
  • Sound of Freedom
  • Staircase, The
  • Survivor, The
  • Tender Bar, The
  • Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The
  • Texas Rising
  • Theory of Everything, The
  • Thing About Pam, The
  • Thirteen Lives
  • To Write Love on Her Arms
  • Top Gun: Maverick
  • Trees of Peace
  • Trial of the Chicago 7, The
  • True Spirit
  • United Kingdom, A
  • United States vs. Billie Holiday, The
  • Upside, The
  • Victoria and Abdul
  • Walk the Line
  • Watcher, The
  • We Own This City
  • Weird: The Al Yankovic Story
  • Welcome to Marwen
  • When the Game Stands Tall
  • When They See Us
  • White Boy Rick
  • White House Plumbers
  • Wicked Little Letters
  • Wolf of Wall Street, The
  • Woman in Gold
  • Woman King, The
  • Zookeeper's Wife, The

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

Did jordan belfort really meet his future business partner in a restaurant.

Jordan, Nadine, Nancy and Danny

What was the name of Belfort's brokerage house?

The Wolf of Wall Street true story confirms that, like in the movie, Stratton Oakmont was the name of the real Jordan Belfort's Long Island, New York brokerage house. Belfort and co-founder Danny Porush (played by Jonah Hill in the movie) chose the name because it sounded prestigious ( ). The firm would later be accused of manipulating the IPOs of at least 34 companies, including Steve Madden Ltd. (their biggest deal), Dualstar Technologies, Paramount Financial, D.V.I. Financial, M. H. Meyerson & Co., Czech Industries, M.V.S.I. Technology, Questron Technologies, and Etel Communications.

What exactly did Jordan Belfort do that was illegal?

Belfort's Stratton Oakmont brokerage firm ran a classic "pump and dump" operation. Belfort and several of his executives would buy up a particular company's stock and then have an army of brokers (following a script he had prepared) sell it to unsuspecting investors. This would cause the stock to rise, pretty much guaranteeing Belfort and his associates a substantial profit. Soon, the stock would fall back to reality, with the investors bearing a significant loss.

How many employees worked for Jordan Belfort's brokerage firm?

At its peak in the 1990s, Stratton Oakmont, Belfort's firm that he co-founded with Danny Porush, employed more than 1,000 brokers.

Danny Porush says the movie's dwarf-tossing scene (above) never happened. Even Belfort's book only discusses it as a possibility. Did Jordan Belfort really host an in-office dwarf-tossing competition?

No. "We never abused [or threw] the midgets in the office; we were friendly to them," Danny Porush (the real Donnie Azoff) says. "There was no physical abuse." Porush does admit that the firm hired little people to attend at least one party. Jordan Belfort's memoir The Wolf of Wall Street only discusses the tossing of little people as a possibility, not something that actually happened.

During what years did the events in the movie take place?

The events in The Wolf of Wall Street movie took place during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Jordan Belfort and Danny Porush founded the brokerage firm of Stratton Oakmont in the late 1980s. The securities fraud and money laundering charges brought against the firm involved companies that Stratton Oakmont helped raise money for in public stock offerings from 1990 through 1997. In 1996, Stratton Oakmont was banned from the brokerage industry, which eventually forced the company to close its doors.

Was Jordan Belfort really known as the "wolf" of Wall Street?

No, at least not according to the former co-founder and president of the Stratton Oakmont brokerage firm, Danny Porush (portrayed by Jonah Hill in the movie). The real Porush says that he is not aware of anyone at the firm calling Jordan the "wolf." Porush says that it's just one of a number of exaggerations and inventions in both Belfort's book and the movie.

Is Matthew McConaughey's character, Mark Hanna, based on a real person?

Yes. In exploring The Wolf of Wall Street true story, we learned that Jordan Belfort claims to have met Matthew McConaughey's character's real-life counterpart, Mark Hanna, in 1987 when he was working at the old-money trading firm of L.F. Rothschild. His new acquaintance was an uproarious senior broker at the firm and introduced Belfort to the excess and debauchery that Belfort would later make a daily staple at Stratton Oakmont. Like in the movie, the real Mark Hanna behind McConaughey's character told Belfort that the key to success was masturbation, cocaine and hookers, in addition to making your customers reinvest their winnings so you can collect the commissions.

Did Jordan Belfort really abuse cocaine and other drugs?

Yes. In The Wolf of Wall Street movie, Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio) is shown snorting cocaine off a prostitute's backside and nearly crashing his private helicopter while high on a cocktail of prescription drugs, including Quaaludes, morphine and Xanax. In researching The Wolf of Wall Street true story, it quickly became clear that Belfort used drugs heavily in real life too. In his memoir, he states that at times he had enough "running through my circulatory system to sedate Guatemala."

Jordan Belfort did give speeches like DiCaprio in the movie (left). Right: The real Belfort speaks at a 1994 Stratton Oakmont Christmas party (right). Did Belfort really stand in front of his employees and give riling speeches with a microphone?

Yes. Belfort was known to stir his troops into action by belting out words of motivation through a microphone. However, his speeches were often filled with more self-adulation than DiCaprio's speeches in the movie.

Did a female employee really let them shave her head for $10,000 to pay for breast implants?

The real Jordan Belfort claims this is true in his memoir. The female employee let them shave off her blonde hair for $10,000, which she used to pay for D-cup breast implants. Co-founder Danny Porush also says that the shaving took place, "...the worst we ever did was shave somebody's head and then pay 'em ten grand for it," says Porush.

Was Jordan Belfort's Quaalude dealer in the movie, Brad Bodnick (Jon Bernthal), based on a real person?

Yes. The character in the movie, Brad Bodnick, who has a goatee and is portrayed by The Walking Dead 's Jon Bernthal, is based on Jordan Belfort's real-life Quaalude supplier, Todd Garret. In his memoir, the real Jordan Belfort claims that Garret sold him approximately 10,000 Quaaludes.

Was there ever a chimpanzee in the office?

No. According to co-founder Danny Porush (played by Jonah Hill in the movie), the scene where Leonardo DiCaprio's character pals around with a chimp is pure monkey business. "There was never a chimpanzee in the office," says Porush. "There were no animals in the office...I would also never abuse an animal in any way" (though he does admit to eating the goldfish, see below).

Did he really almost crash his helicopter in his yard?

Jordan Belfort helicopter

Did Danny Porush really marry his own first cousin?

Yes. According to Jordan Belfort's memoir, the real Donnie Azoff (whose actual name is Danny Porush) did marry his first cousin Nancy "because she was a real piece of ass." After twelve years of marriage, the couple divorced in 1998 after Danny told Nancy that he was in love with another woman ( ). Danny and his ex-wife share three children together.

Did Belfort and his colleagues really have drug-addled nights and sexcapades with prostitutes on a near daily basis?

Though the movie and Belfort's memoir might seem like gross exaggerations of the truth, depicting heavy drug use and sexcapades in the office during trading hours, they're not exaggerations at all says the F.B.I. agent who finally took Belfort into custody, "I tracked this guy for ten years, and everything he wrote is true." Kyle Chandler portrays the agent in the Martin Scorsese movie.

Was Belfort really arrested for crashing his Lamborghini while high on expired Quaaludes?

Yes, but according to Belfort the car wasn't a Lamborghini like in the movie, it was a Mercedes. He was so high in a drug daze that he couldn't remember causing several different accidents as he tried to make his way home. In real life, one of the accidents was a head-on collision that actually sent a woman to the hospital.

The real Donnie Azoff, Daniel Porush, says that he really did swallow a goldfish like Jonah Hill (pictured). Did Danny Porush really swallow a goldfish?

Yes. According to the real Donnie Azoff, whose actual name is Danny Porush, the scene where Jonah Hill's character eats a goldfish is based on a true story. "I said to one of the brokers, 'If you don't do more business, I'm gonna eat your goldfish!'" Porush recalls. "So I did."

Did they really tape money to a woman's body?

In one scene of The Wolf of Wall Street movie, bricks of cash are taped to a Swiss woman's body. "[I] never taped money to boobs," the real Danny Porush says (played by Jonah Hill in the movie). According to Jordan Belfort's memoir, the event did happen but his partner Porush wasn't there.

Was footwear mogul Steve Madden really involved in Belfort's scheme?

Yes. As shown in The Wolf of Wall Street movie, Steve Madden had been a childhood friend of Belfort's partner Danny Porush (renamed Donnie Azoff in the movie and portrayed by actor Jonah Hill). Their fondness for drugs and alcohol reunited the two of them. During the initial public offering of his footwear company, Steve Madden Ltd., Madden acquired a large number of shares of his company, which were actually being controlled by Belfort and his firm, Stratton Oakmont. Once shares became available to the public, Stratton Oakmont got down to the business of selling them to unsuspecting suckers. Billing Madden's company as the hottest issue on Wall Street, Belfort's brokers in turn drove up the price. Eventually, Steve Madden was to sell off his shares when the hype was at its peak, just before the stock began its inevitable decline. Similar to what is seen in the movie, Belfort still maintains that Steve Madden tried to steal his Steve Madden shares from him. However, Jordan Belfort did make approximately $23 million in two hours as part of the deal with Steve Madden, who would later be charged as an accomplice to Belfort's scheme. For his part, Steve Madden was sentenced to 41 months in prison and was forced to resign as CEO of Steve Madden Ltd. He also resigned from the company's board of directors. However, he did not leave the company entirely. He kept his foot (or shoe) in the door by giving himself the title of creative consultant, for which he was well-compensated even while he was in prison.

Did Jordan Belfort really name his yacht after his wife?

Jordan and Nadine movie and real life

Did Belfort's yacht really sink in a Mediterranean storm?

Yes. In real life, Belfort's 167-foot yacht, which was originally owned by Coco Chanel, sunk off the coast of Italy when Belfort, who was high on drugs at the time, insisted that the captain take the boat through a storm ( ). Listen to Belfort tell the story during The Room Live 's Jordan Belfort interview . As he states in the interview, his helicopter didn't fall off the boat during the storm like in the movie. Instead, they had to push the helicopter off of the top deck of the boat to make room for the rescue chopper to drop down an Italian Navy commando.

How long did FBI agent Gregory Coleman spend tracking Jordan Belfort and his firm?

FBI agent Gregory Coleman, renamed Patrick Denham for the film and portrayed by actor Kyle Chandler, made tracking Belfort and his firm, Stratton Oakmont, a top priority for six years. In an interview ( watch here ), Coleman says that the factors that drew his attention to the firm were "the flashiness, the brashness of their activities, the blatantness of the way they were soliciting people and cold calling people, and the number of victims that were complaining on a daily basis." -CNBC

Did Jordan really strike his wife?

Yes. The Wolf of Wall Street movie shows Jordan (Leonardo DiCaprio) hitting his wife (Margot Robbie) with his hand and fist. According to his memoir, he actually kicked his wife Nadine down the stairs while he was holding his daughter. She landed on her right side with "tremendous force."

Did Belfort really endanger his 3-year-old daughter's life by crashing his car through the garage door?

Yes. In real life, he put his daughter Chandler in the front seat of the car without a seat belt on, before crashing it through the garage door and then driving full speed into a six-foot-high limestone pillar at the edge of the driveway. Like in the movie, he was high at the time.

Tommy Chong was Jordan Belfort's cellmate in prison and encouraged him to write the book. What was Jordan Belfort's punishment?

When he was finally arrested in 1998 for money laundering and securities fraud, Jordan Belfort was sentenced to four years in prison. This was after agreeing to wear a wire and provide the FBI with information to help prosecute various friends and associates. In the end, the true story reveals that he served only 22 months in a California federal prison. His cellmate in prison was Tommy Chong of "Cheech and Chong" fame, who was serving a nine month sentence for selling bongs.

What inspired Jordan Belfort to write his memoir?

It wasn't so much a what as it was a who. Tommy Chong (one half of "Cheech and Chong") was Jordan Belfort's cellmate in prison. After laughing at some of Belfort's stories from his days running the firm, Chong encouraged him to write a book.

Why is Jordan Belfort's memoir filled with so many exclamations?

Jordan Belfort attempted to model his writing after Hunter S. Thompson ( Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas ), who was known for using plenty of exclamation points.

What happened to Belfort's partner, Danny Porush, portrayed by Jonah Hill in the movie?

Danny Porush, renamed Donnie Azoff for the movie and played by actor Jonah Hill, served 39 months in prison for his part in the corrupt dealings of Stratton Oakmont, the firm that he co-founded with Jordan Belfort. Porush currently runs a medical supply business in Florida, where he lives with his second wife Lisa in a $4 million mansion. A 2008 Forbes article pointed out his company's fraudulent tactics, which included trying to persuade people to order diabetic supplies and getting them to provide information about their physicians that could be used to bill Medicare. A number of complaints surfaced accusing Porush's company of sending unsolicited packages that were accompanied by unexpected Medicare charges. Back in 2001, Porush was arrested in connection to a fraud scheme surrounding Noble & Perrault Collectibles, a company that sold commemorative coins over the phone. Victims saw their credit cards charged repeatedly, at times for thousands of dollars, while often never receiving any merchandise for purchases that were largely unauthorized to begin with. -Sun Sentinel Enjoying a well-to-do life in Florida, Daniel Porush and his wife drive matching Rolls-Royce Corniche convertibles. With regard to The Wolf of Wall Street movie, Porush said, "I really have no comment other than to say I would never try to profit from a crime I'm so remorseful for."

I heard that Jordan Belfort is a motivational speaker, is that true?

Jordan Belfort Motivational Speaker

How much did Jordan Belfort earn from his books and the movie?

Catching the Wolf of Wall Street includes more of Belfort's outrageous stories that were not included in his first book. As we investigated The Wolf of Wall Street true story, we discovered that Jordan's books, The Wolf of Wall Street and Catching the Wolf of Wall Street , netted him a $1 million advance from Random House. He also earned $1 million for the film rights to his story ( ). In a response to criticism over these profits and future profits from the movie, Jordan Belfort said the following via his Facebook page, "I am not turning over 50% of the profits of the books and the movie, which was what the government had wanted me to do. Instead, I insisted on turning over 100% of the profits of both books and the movie, which is to say, I am not making a single dime on any of this." According to Jordan, the money is being used to pay back the millions still owed to those who were scammed by his brokerage firm Stratton Oakmont.

Does Jordan Belfort have a cameo in The Wolf of Wall Street movie?

Yes, the real Jordan Belfort appears at the end of the movie as the person who introduces Leonardo DiCaprio's character before he takes the stage at his Straight Line seminar.

Have any other movies been based on Jordan Belfort's story?

Yes, but only loosely. The brokerage firm in the movie Boiler Room , released in 2000, was inspired by the illegal practices of Jordan Belfort's Stratton Oakmont firm. In the movie, actor Ben Affleck portrays Jim Young, the Belfort-esque co-founder of the firm, who, like Jordan Belfort, trains his brokers in the "pump and dump" scheme.

Watch The Wolf of Wall Street movie trailer. Also, view Jordan Belfort interviews and home video footage of him speaking at a Stratton Oakmont party in the 1990s.

  • Jordan Belfort's Website
  • Danny Porush's Website (played by Jonah Hill)
  • Mark Hanna's Website (played by Matthew McConaughey)
  • The Wolf of Wall Street Official Paramount Movie Site
  • San Lorenzo
  • Yacht Rental in Dubai Marina
  • Yacht Party Dubai
  • Overnight Experience
  • Formula 1 Abu Dhabi
  • Corporate Events
  • Fifa World Cup 2022
  • Anniversary Celebrations

Connect with a yacht expert & get per personalised Deals

yacht rental in dubai, uae

Jordan Belfort Yacht: The True Story and The Wolf of Wall Street Version

The true Jordan Belfort yacht story is as strange and unbelievable as the hit movie The Wolf of Wall Street depicts it to be. There are several insider stories behind the sinking of the mighty yacht that are not widely known but are quite interesting and different from the reel version in several ways.

Nadine yacht model

What happened to the Jordan Belfort yacht Nadine?

As the movie, The Wolf of Wall Street shows, the superyacht Nadine sank close to the coast of Sardinia in 1997 while battling what many calls “the storm of the century”. Jordan Belfort narrates the event in detail in the memoir describing his life in the 90s, which is what the Martin Scorsese movie is about.

Before getting into the details of the sinking, it is worth noting that the 37m yacht had a long and interesting history. She carried renowned celebrities like Coco Chanel before reaching Jordan Belfort (played by Leonardo DiCaprio in the movie) and was one of the largest yachts in the East Coast’s waters.

While the yacht was initially manufactured for a French native and given the name Matilda, he backed out of the deal. This led Coco Chanel to buy the beautiful yacht with the low superstructure that Dutch yachts are famous for.

You can learn more about our yacht charter services in Dubai

The yacht took on different names as it passed through famous hands, even those of the murder trial acquitted Melvin Lane Powers. Belfort named the yacht after his wife and renovated it with the capacity to carry a helicopter, 6 Jetskis, 4 motorbikes, and much more. Under Belfort’s ownership, the yacht witnessed a series of wild parties that were like unlimited glamour and fun in a package until disaster struck unexpectedly.

Jordan belfort yacht sailing

Did the yacht scene in The Wolf of Wall Street actually happen?

The Jordan Belfort yacht sinking scene in The Wolf of Wall Street was heavily inspired by a real-life event, though the movie did take some creative liberties. For one, the yacht was called Naomi in the reel version since the name of Belfort’s wife (played by Margot Robbie ) was changed in the movie. In reality, the yacht was named Nadine.

The movie further depicts Belfort’s helicopter getting thrown off the yacht by strong waves. In reality, the yacht’s crew went up to the deck and pushed off the helicopter so that Italian navy seals would have a space to land. The yacht’s itinerary was altered a bit by the movie’s director Martin Scorsese to add to the drama, though the power of the storm was scarily accurate.

Belfort admitted that the yacht’s captain Mark Elliot explicitly warned them not to sail to Sardinia on that fateful night. But according to the movie, there was a business opportunity in the city that Belfort could not bear to miss out on despite his wife’s protests.

Some sources claim that in reality, the passengers were simply eager to hit the golf course at Sardinia the next morning. They refused to pay heed to the captain’s warning and asked him to go through the storm, which eventually led to the famous Jordan Belfort yacht sinking incident. Therefore, unfortunately, if someone wants to have a yacht rental in Dubai or any other destination, they have missed their chance with this yacht.

Take a look on our Yacht Dubai Party

Interesting insights on the sinking as portrayed in the movie

The movie captures the fear and stress that each passenger felt when the yacht got caught up in the 70-knot storm. There is some hilarity when Belfort starts yelling for his drugs to avoid the horror of dying sober.

Several rescue attempts were made, but due to rising risks, each of them was called off. By some twist of luck, the yacht’s engine room remained mostly undamaged for a while, because of which they were able to make their way through the sea.

In the end, everyone survived the incident without any major injuries. At dawn, the Nadine made its way 1000m under the water only 20 miles away from Sardinia’s coast. Now, the movie’s audience gets to watch the Jordan Belfort yacht story unfold on the screen with a pinch of humor.

The Nadine’s captain Mark Elliot’s heroic actions did not go unnoticed. He was praised for leading all the passengers to safety, though he was able to get out of the yacht only 10 minutes before it sank. The captain also admitted that the insurance was granted immediately considering the ferocity of the storm. As for the yacht, many still wonder about the highly expensive equipment that had to be thrown into the water and is probably rusting away at the bottom of the sea.

The best features of the Jordan Belfort yacht Nadine

jordan belfort yacht nadine sail

The 167 ft Nadine, as its former passengers claim, was a beautiful yacht. When owned by Coco Chanel under the name Matilda, the yacht had five staterooms, large dining areas, and a helipad. The interiors were furnished with dark teak paneling. Each new owner customized the yacht’s name and interiors based on their tastes.

Belfort decorated the Nadine lavishly with a variety of mirrors and set a vintage deco theme. He renovated the upper deck to fit a crane that was able to stow his Turbine Seawind seaplane. The yacht carried the best dive gear available in the market plus a variety of Belfort’s ‘toys’ such as his motorbikes and jetskis.

Which model was portrayed as the Jordan Belfort yacht Nadine in the movie?

lady m yacht model

Martin Scorsese got the yacht Lady M to represent Nadine onscreen. While Nadine actually had a luxuriously vintage charm to it, Lady M is a modern vessel with contemporary features. Lady M was manufactured in 2022 by Intermarine Savannah, while Nadine was built in 1961 by Witsen & Wis. The 147 ft Lady M is currently worth $12 million and is similar to Benetti yachts in its glamorous design.

Jordan Belfort’s life today

The entrepreneur and speaker Jordan Belfort’s shenanigans are well-known thanks to his detailed memoir and the hit movie based on some parts of his life. He spent 2 years in prison and now, at 59 years of age, has a practically negative net worth. Yet, his extraordinary motivational speaking skills continue to attract and inspire people even today.

It is easy for anyone watching the movie to wonder if many of the incidents are exaggerated. But considering Belfort’s eccentric life, even the Nadine sinking incident remains another regular anecdote shared in the movie.

Sunset cruise dubai


Browse our Yachts


  • Mon – Sun: 9:00AM – 6:00PM
  • Sales | (800) 741-YACHT (9224)
  • Destinations
  • Instant Quote

Motor Yacht Nadine

nadine yacht sinking

June 1997 She was built in 1961 by Witsen & Vis in Holland for fashion icon Coco Chanel with a length of 37 metres. In the 70s she was extended by 4.5 metres through the addition of cockpit and in 1988 she was cut in two halfs and a 9 metre section was inserted amidships by Merrill-Stevens yard, which gave her a complete salon amidships in addition to the more usual aft one.

In 1989 she was for sale bearing the name Edgewater and was by then still powered by two 480 hp diesels. In 1993 she was for sale once again, this time bearing the name Big Eagle and repowered with two Caterpillar 3412-diesels. Her beam was always a very slender 6.8 metres. There was actually a feature of her in February 1993 in Boat International when she was on a yacht charter at the Fort Lauderdale yacht show.

Nadine’s sinking was indeed caused by the violent waves. A foredeck hatch was smashed, allowing water to flood the crew quarters and bringing the yacht down by the bow. This allowed more waves to break over the fordeck and they caused one of the large tenders carried there to shift, breaking one of the dining salon windows that overlooked the foredeck, which causing flooding on the maindeck. As if that wasn’t bad enough, the violent motion of the yacht caused the swim platform to rip off the hull, allowing the lazarette to flood.

“Nadine” sank during a storm off the east coast of Sardinia, while crossing from Porto Cervo to Capri. Some people may recall her as the yacht that has an incredible number of toys onboard such as a seaplane, a helicopter, 8 jetskis, 4 or 5 tenders and much more including two large glass windows in the master stateroom that allowed to see the sea floor. Everyone onboard was saved by the Italian coast guard also thanks to all the floating devices the yacht carried.

  • Login or Register


Jordan Belfort Yacht: The True Story and The Wolf of Wall Street Version

' src=

luxuo guide

Jordan Belfort Yacht

Share This Article

The true Jordan Belfort yacht story is as strange and unbelievable as the hit movie The Wolf of Wall Street depicts it to be. There are several insider stories behind the sinking of the mighty yacht that are not widely known but are quite interesting and different from the reel version in several ways.

Nadine yacht model

What happened to the Jordan Belfort yacht Nadine? As the movie, The Wolf of Wall Street shows, the superyacht Nadine sank close to the coast of Sardinia in 1997 while battling what many calls “the storm of the century”. Jordan Belfort narrates the event in detail in the memoir describing his life in the 90s, which is what the Martin Scorsese movie is about.

Jordan belfort yacht sailing

Did the yacht scene in The Wolf of Wall Street actually happen? The Jordan Belfort yacht sinking scene in The Wolf of Wall Street was heavily inspired by a real-life event, though the movie did take some creative liberties. For one, the yacht was called Naomi in the reel version since the name of Belfort’s wife (played by Margot Robbie) was changed in the movie. In reality, the yacht was named Nadine.

Interesting insights on the sinking as portrayed in the movie

The movie captured each passenger’s fear and stress when the yacht got caught up in the 70-knot storm. There is some hilarity when Belfort starts yelling for his drugs to avoid the horror of dying sober. Several rescue attempts were made, but each was called off due to rising risks. By some twist of luck, the yacht’s engine room remained undamaged primarily for a while, because of which they were able to make their way through the sea.

The best features of the Jordan Belfort yacht Nadine

The 167 ft Nadine, as its former passengers claim, was beautiful. When owned by Coco Chanel under the name Matilda, the yacht had five staterooms, large dining areas, and a helipad. The interiors were furnished with dark teak paneling. Each new owner customized the yacht’s name and interiors based on their tastes.

Which model was portrayed as the Jordan Belfort yacht Nadine in the movie?

Martin Scorsese got the yacht Lady M to represent Nadine onscreen. While Nadine had a luxuriously vintage charm, Lady M is a modern vessel with contemporary features. Lady M was manufactured in 2022 by Intermarine Savannah, while Nadine was built in 1961 by Witsen & Wis. The 147 ft Lady M is currently worth $12 million and is similar to Benetti yachts in its glamorous design.

Jordan Belfort’s life today

The entrepreneur and speaker Jordan Belfort’s shenanigans are well-known thanks to his detailed memoir and the hit movie based on some parts of his life. He spent 2 years in prison and now has practically negative net worth at 59 years of age. Yet, his extraordinary motivational speaking skills continue to attract and inspire people even today. It is easy for anyone watching the movie to wonder if many of the incidents are exaggerated. But considering Belfort’s eccentric life, even the Nadine sinking incident remains another regular anecdote shared in the movie.

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You May Also Like

Unveiling Cam Newton's Net Worth, Salary, and Endorsement Deals

Unveiling Cam Newton’s Net Worth, Salary, and Endorsement Deals 

Luxury Villas in Mykonos JG villas

Explore the unparalleled world of Luxury Villas in Mykonos by JG villas

© 2024 Truth. All Rights Reserved.

Read the Latest on Page Six

latest in US News

Boy, 15, charged in the murder of Lyft driver who served as interpreter for US forces in Afghanistan

Boy, 15, charged in the murder of Lyft driver who served as...

'Incel' learns his fate after planning to 'slaughter out of hatred' 3,000 'innocent women,' including sorority girls

'Incel' learns his fate after planning to 'slaughter out of...

Economic problems are Americans' top issue on Super Tuesday: poll

Economic problems are Americans' top issue on Super Tuesday: poll

Illegal migrant on terror watchlist arrested at Eagle Pass days before Trump, Biden visits: sources

IIllegal migrant on terror watchlist arrested at Eagle Pass days...

Scammers are impersonating postal inspectors on the phone -- and accusing targets of phony drug trafficking charges

Scammers are impersonating postal inspectors on the phone -- and...

Florida sheriff's office slammed after 'accidentally' posting photo of dead teen's body on Instagram: 'Shameful'

Florida sheriff's office slammed after 'accidentally' posting...

Wild video shows escaped police horses running wrong way down a highway: 'Real horsepower'

Wild video shows escaped police horses running wrong way down a...

Pregnant Amish mom found slaughtered in her home had throat cut and appeared to be scalped

Pregnant Amish mom found slaughtered in her home had throat cut...

Dramatic video captures the moment superyacht sinks off italian coast.

  • View Author Archive
  • Email the Author
  • Get author RSS feed

Contact The Author

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

Dramatic footage has emerged of the moment a 130-foot superyacht capsized off the Italian coast over the weekend, sinking stern-first into the water.

The video, released by the coast guard, showed the yacht named My Saga struggling against the waves before sinking near the Catanzaro Marina on Saturday.

Video shows the boat listing to one side before sinking.

Officials confirmed that nine people were rescued from the sinking vessel.

The cause of the incident is under investigation.

Designed by naval architect Tim Heywood , My Saga was built in Italy in 2007. At the time of the incident, the boat was en route from Gallipoli to Milazzo under a Cayman Islands flag.

Share this article:

nadine yacht sinking


nadine yacht sinking

Justluxe Twitter

featured hotel destinations

  • Atlantic City
  • Los Angeles
  • New Orleans
  • Napa Valley
  • Philadelphia
  • San Francisco
  • Washington DC

hotels by continent

  • Middle East
  • North America
  • South America

nadine yacht sinking

  • lifestyle home
  • resort & spas
  • travel home
  • jewelry & watches
  • womens style
  • fashion home

Meet the Real Wolf of Wall Street Superyacht Built for Coco Chanel

Share on Facebook

The yachting disaster is one of the most dramatic scenes in Martin Scorsese’s blockbuster The Wolf of Wall Street , and like many of the tales in the Leonardo DiCaprio flick, it’s based on a true story. In real life, predatory tycoon Jordan Belfort bought a yacht in 1993 called Big Eagle and renamed her Nadine , after his English-born second wife. The vessel had been built in 1961 by Witsen & Vis in Holland for fashion icon Coco Chanel, but had undergone many transformations by the time Belfort got his mitts on it. Originally 121 feet long, in the 1970s she was extended by nearly 15 feet, and in 1988 she was cut in half and had another 29-foot section grafted on, finally totaling 167 feet.

The Lady M Yacht

The luxury yacht used in Scorsese’s film actually bears little resemblance to the  Nadine , being a far more modern vessel. The director hired the 148-foot  Lady M , built by Intermarine Savannah in 2002 and refit in 2011, for filming. It features luxury accommodations for 10 guests, and a marble and granite interior with gold accents.

In Coco Chanel’s day the yacht was mainly used to cruise from Monaco to Deauville for the summer horse racing season. The real  Nadine  sank in 1997 during a storm off the east coast of Sardinia while crossing from Porto Cervo to Capri, much as the movie depicts. Belfort has said that his insistence on sailing in a storm caused the yacht to capsize. Luckily, everyone on board at the time was rescued by the Italian coast guard. 

Share on Facebook

Jared Paul Stern

Jared Paul Stern, JustLuxe's Editor-at-Large, is the Executive Editor of Maxim magazine and has written for the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, the New York Times' T magazine, GQ, WWD, Vogue, New York magazine, Details, Hamptons magazine, Playboy, BlackBook, the New York Post, Man of the World, and Bergdorf Goodman magazine among others. The founding editor of the Page Six magazine, he has al... (Read More)

nadine yacht sinking

Related Articles

nadine yacht sinking

Swap2Zero Cruise SHIP Project: Ponant Joins Other Operators In A Mission To Cut Carbon Emissions

nadine yacht sinking

A Guide to Buying Your First Yacht

nadine yacht sinking

The Steamer 888 Is A Stunning 289-Foot Art Deco-Inspired Superyacht Concept

nadine yacht sinking

Matthew Stone, Awards-Winning IYC Yacht Broker on The Future of The Luxury Yacht Market

Around the web. and LivingLuxe are entities and marks owned by Luxemont LLC. 2004-2024 All rights reserved. Privacy | Terms

  • Best of Luxe
  • City Guides
  • Destinations
  • Custom Content

Justluxe Facebook

Moskva warship sinking: Dramatic photos and video give clues to flagship's fate as Ukraine and Russia tell contrasting tales

Smoke billows from a tilted warship on a grey sea, as viewed from a ship nearby

Almost a week after the sinking of the Moskva near the port of Odesa, Russia and Ukraine are sticking to vastly different accounts of what happened.

But photos released on social media give clues about the incident and appear to poke holes in the Russian explanation that the Soviet-era flagship of its Black Sea fleet sank in stormy seas after an onboard fire.

Ukraine's version is that it hit the ship in a brazen missile strike which would be one of the highest-profile naval attacks in decades.

Russia disputes this, saying the vessel was damaged after an onboard fire caused ammunition to explode.

Moskva Russian ship onboard damage close-up Ukraine war

The Moskva subsequently sank, it says, as it was being towed in a storm.

But images and video posted on Twitter appeared to show a badly damaged Moskva, with black holes in its side, in calm seas and benign weather.

Pictures of damage 'consistent' with missile attack

Conversely, they fail to provide conclusive proof that the Moskva was struck by two Neptune missiles, as Ukraine insisted on April 14.

However, military experts say the damage shown by social media images is "consistent" with a missile attack.

Retired British rear admiral Chris Parry, a former NATO commander, told the BBC he was sure the damage was caused by a missile strike, rather than an internal explosion, saying he believed the ship was hit "by one or two missiles".

A three-second video, taken from a nearby ship and posted on Twitter, appears to show the Moskva shortly after the attack.

In the video, a tug boat is on the right of the Moskva.

The freeboard section of the ship is badly damaged as smoke billows into the air.

The Moskva looks unstable and is leaning heavily to the left, having taken on water.

Author and ship captain John Konrad tweeted another view of the Moskva, using arrows to show the tug's position.

"[It's] close alongside starboard aft," he tweeted.

"It is also possible the tug is made fast and is pulling the ship astern."

While the loss of the 510-crew warship is seen as a boost for Ukrainian morale, experts do not expect its loss to have a major impact on Russia's invasion campaign.

Stark contrast between new Moskva and blackened remains

Another Twitter post appears to show before and after images of the Moskva, which first entered service with the Soviet navy in 1983 and had seen leaders from Mikhail Gorbachev to Vladimir Putin host world dignitaries onboard. 

The before and after of a blue warship sitting on the sea and then charred after a fire or explosion

Russia has not admitted that it suffered any casualties in the loss of the ship.

On Saturday — three days after the initial incident —  the Russian defence ministry released video of what it described as the entire crew of the Moskva marching in a parade at Sevastopol, a Crimean port city.

After the demise of the Moskva, the Russian navy will look to the Marshal Ustinov and the Varyag — the only other two ships that have multiple anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles.

Before being renamed Moskva (Russian for Moscow) in 1995 after the fall of the Soviet Union, the vessel was called "Slava" ("Glory").

But the social media images seem to suggest a rather inglorious end to the 39-year-old ship, even if we may never know the true story of its sinking.


  • X (formerly Twitter)

Related Stories

Here's what we know about russian warship moskva.

A large military ship with the name Moskva written across it sits in water near land where a Russian flag stands.

US supports Ukraine's claim that Moskva was hit by Neptune anti-ship missile


Russia says the Moskva, the flagship of its Black Sea fleet, has sunk

A large warship in water near a bridge. The numbers 121 are written on the side of the ship.

  • Russian Federation
  • Unrest, Conflict and War
  • World Politics

nadine yacht sinking

Russia-Ukraine War Ukrainian Drones Hit 2 Bases Deep in Russia

  • Share full article
  • Saratov Oblast, Russia Explosion rocks Russian military base. EYEPRESS via Reuters
  • Kyiv Residents take shelter in the Metro. Laura Boushnak for The New York Times
  • Irpin Winter in Ukraine. David Guttenfelder for The New York Times
  • Kherson region Salvaging a refrigerator from the ruins of a home. Finbarr O'Reilly for The New York Times
  • Borodyanka A makeshift center for those whose homes have been destroyed. Dimitar Dilkoff/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
  • Kharkiv Police officers look at collected fragments of Russian rockets. Libkos/Associated Press
  • Bakhmut Chopping wood in a basement shelter. Tyler Hicks/The New York Times
  • Donetsk An office building destroyed in shelling. Alexander Ermochenko/Reuters
  • Eastern Ukraine Soldiers on the front line. Yevhen Titov/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Follow live news updates on the Russia-Ukraine war .

Ukraine attacks military bases hundreds of miles inside Russia.

Video player loading

KYIV, Ukraine — Ukraine executed its most brazen attack into Russian territory in the nine-month-old war on Monday, targeting two military bases hundreds of miles inside the country, using drones, according to the Russian Defense Ministry and a senior Ukrainian official.

The drones were launched from Ukrainian territory, and at least one of the strikes was made with the help of special forces close to the base who helped guide the drones to the target, said the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to convey sensitive information.

The strikes signaled a new willingness by Kyiv to take the fight to bases in the heart of Russia, raising the stakes in the war, and demonstrated for the first time Ukraine’s ability to attack at such long distances. Shortly after the attacks on the bases, Russia sent a barrage of missiles streaking toward Ukrainian cities.

The Kremlin said that the weapons launched by Ukraine were Soviet-era jet drones and were aimed at bases in Ryazan and Engels, about 300 miles from the Ukrainian border. It said that its forces had intercepted the drones, and that “the fall and explosion of the wreckage” had “slightly damaged” two planes, killing three servicemen and wounding four others.

The Engels airfield, on the Volga River in southern Russia, is a base for some of Russia’s long-range, nuclear-capable bombers, including the Tupolev-160 and Tupolev-95. Ukrainian officials say it is also a staging ground for Russia’s unrelenting campaign of missile attacks on infrastructure, which have left millions of Ukrainians with intermittent light, heat or water — or none at all — at the onset of winter. Security footage from an apartment complex near the base showed a fireball lighting up the sky.

The other explosion occurred at the Dyagilevo military base in the central city of Ryazan, only about 100 miles from Moscow, according to Russia’s Defense Ministry. It was there that the fatalities and injuries occurred, the Russian state news agency RIA Novosti reported.

Ukraine’s government declined to publicly acknowledge the strikes, in keeping with its practice with other attacks on Russia and Russian-occupied Crimea.

The Engels air base and the Ryazan military installation are between 300 and 450 miles from the Ukrainian border, which is beyond the range of any known missile in Ukraine’s arsenal.

Even before Russia’s Defense Ministry accused Ukraine of sending drones to attack, the blast at the Engels airfield had prompted some of Russia’s influential pro-invasion bloggers to call for more strikes against Ukraine, and to renew criticism of the Russian armed forces. “Sometimes we feel that even if you put a bomb into these people’s pockets — they wouldn’t notice anyway,” Voenniy Osvedomitel, a popular commentator, wrote on the messaging app Telegram.

After the explosions, Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukraine’s president, appeared to note the strikes obliquely, as Ukrainian officials have often done after unexplained explosions inside Russia.

“The Earth is round — discovery made by Galileo,” he wrote on Twitter . “If something is launched into other countries’ airspace, sooner or later unknown flying objects will return to departure point.”

Only a few hours after the explosions, Ukrainian officials said that more than a dozen Russian bombers had taken off from the Engels air base.

Ivan Nechepurenko and Helene Cooper contributed reporting.

— Andrew E. Kramer ,  Michael Schwirtz and Marc Santora

Russia fired a barrage of missiles across Ukraine on Monday.

Russia launched a volley of missiles at Ukraine’s energy grid on Monday, knocking out power in several regions, officials said, the latest in a monthslong campaign of strikes by Moscow targeting civilian infrastructure.

Ukrainian air defense systems fired into the sky in multiple areas of the country but not all missiles were intercepted. Four people were killed by the Russian strikes, President Volodymyr Zelensky said, and officials reported damage to energy infrastructure.

When air-raid warnings were issued for most of the country, Ukrainians followed a grim routine and headed for bomb shelters in Kyiv and other cities. Shortly after the all-clear was given, Mr. Zelensky addressed the nation to praise both the military and utility workers fighting to keep the lights on.

“Air defenses shot down most of the rockets, energy workers have already started to restore electricity,” he said. Ukraine’s Air Force later said that it had shot down more than 60 missiles out of more than 70 fired.

Russia’s Ministry of Defense said in a statement that it had targeted power plants and other sites in Ukraine. Ukraine’s prime minister said energy facilities were hit in the Kyiv, Vinnytsia and Odesa regions, according to the Ukrinform news agency.

The strikes occurred hours after explosions were reported at two military bases deep inside Russia, including one that Ukraine said has been used as a staging ground for aircraft in previous attacks against Ukraine’s energy grid. Russia’s Ministry of Defense later accused Ukraine of using drones to attack the bases.

By midafternoon in Ukraine, multiple reports had surfaced of inbound missiles. A New York Times reporter south of Kyiv saw a cruise missile in flight traveling toward the capital. Another New York Times reporter observed what appeared to be a surface-to-air-missile launched outside of Sloviansk in eastern Ukraine. The extent of damage, and of casualties, was not immediately clear.

The governor of the Kyiv region, the administrative district around the capital, said that air defense systems had fired at incoming missiles. “Stay in shelters and safe places,” the governor, Oleksiy Kuleba, wrote in a statement on Telegram.

Ukraine’s national energy company, Ukrenergo, said that the “mass missile attack” had damaged electrical facilities. In a statement posted on Facebook , it said emergency energy shutdowns would be imposed to help balance the grid.

Blackouts were reported in several regions, from Sumy in the north along the border with Russia to Odesa in the south on the Black Sea coast.

The Russian military typically launches missiles from multiple directions and in successive waves, a tactic intended to overwhelm or avoid Ukraine’s air defenses, Yuriy Ihnat, a spokesman for the Ukrainian Air Force, told a Ukrainian television news show.

Russia began firing missiles at Ukraine’s energy grid in October after its forces lost ground on the battlefield in two Ukrainian counteroffensive operations in the south and northeast.

Ukrainians have responded to the wave of strikes on infrastructure by building emergency heating shelters in towns, dispatching linemen to repair the grid as swiftly as possible and powering restaurants, stores and hospitals with generators . In hard-hit areas, residents stockpile water in bottles in their homes.

And Ukrainians have adapted. In Kryvyi Rih, a central city that is a hub of the iron-mining industry, miners evacuated to the surface on Monday, lest electricity for their elevators be lost, the city’s mayor said. After past strikes, miners had been trapped underground.

Ukraine has greatly increased its capacity to shoot down incoming missiles, aided by air defense systems supplied by the United States and some European countries..

Carlotta Gall and Thomas Gibbons-Neff contributed reporting.

— Andrew E. Kramer and Matthew Mpoke Bigg


When the air raid sirens ring out, residents of Kyiv head underground.

Video player loading

KYIV, Ukraine — In a city where daily routines have been wrecked by unrelenting Russian missile strikes, unpredictable power cuts and unreliable water supplies, residents of Kyiv know that, at any time, they might have to spend a few hours in an air raid shelter.

It had been 13 days since the last large-scale barrage of Russian missiles fired at targets across Ukraine, the longest stretch without blasts in and around the capital since Moscow began its assault on the nation’s energy infrastructure in early October. For days, Ukrainian officials had been warning that another attack was imminent.

So when the air raid alarms sounded across Kyiv early on Monday afternoon, many people were not surprised. The sirens were followed by warnings that missiles were inbound, and soon after the thunder of air defense systems could be heard over the capital.

“To be honest I feel relief this time,” said Olha Kotrus, 34. “For two weeks there were reports that it might happen and then you live in constant tension.”

Ms. Kotrus was sitting on the floor of a Kyiv metro station with her mom, a cat in a cage and her dog. The dog, dressed in a blue outfit to keep it warm in the winter chill, was visibly stressed. Ms. Kotrus was angry and fed up.

She joined a crowd of hundreds people deep underground at the metro station Golden Gate, named after the main fortification that served as the entrance to the city 1,000 years ago.

By evening, however, the famed gate was not illuminated, forced into darkness like much of the city. Monday’s barrage of rockets targeting sites around the country was the eighth such wave of attacks on key energy infrastructure targets, according to the national utility operator, Ukrenergo.

“Unfortunately, energy infrastructure facilities have already been hit and there have been emergency power outages related to this,” Ukrenergo said in a statement.

At least ten rockets were aimed at Kyiv on Monday, according to local officials. Nine were shot down above the capital, the officials said.

Like everyone interviewed in Kyiv, Ms. Kotrus’s anger was directed at Russia and her frustration was the result of many days filled with anxiety and long, dark nights with no power.

Anna Sokolova, 21, said she had endured cuts in power and water supplies for two weeks, ever since the last wave of missiles. Ms. Sokolova lives near a local utility headquarters that has been targeted in recent Russian strikes and said she always takes shelter when the alarms sound.

But she did not want to complain about her own hardships, saying it is nothing compared to what her friends, soldiers fighting on the front lines, are experiencing.

Lyumyla Vonifatova, 66, agreed.

“We all understand that without electricity, life becomes impossible,” she said. “Yet, we will just have to find a way to get through it.”

She was passing the time in the subway shelter by looking at a small display of photos of this war and others that came before it.

“Despite all the loss of human life and economic hardship, we will stand until the end,” she said. “Because this is a fight for our freedom.”

But Tetyana Tkachenko’s six-year-old son is too small to understand that. She said he is terrified every time the alarms sound.

“He was crying, running around,” when the alarms began to sound, Ms. Tkachenko said. He quickly put on warm clothes and begged to “go to the subway,” she said.

She grabbed two foldable chairs, previously used for the park or beach. But now they were part of the family’s new routine, for when the sirens sound and they head deep underground.

— Marc Santora and Maria Varenikova

Putin inspects a bridge linking Russia and Crimea, two months after a damaging explosion.

President Vladimir V. Putin inspected repairs to a bridge that links the country with the Crimean Peninsula on Monday, two months after an explosion partly destroyed it in an embarrassing blow to the Russian leader and Moscow’s war effort in Ukraine.

The October attack on the Kerch Strait Bridge, a pet project of Mr. Putin’s that became a key supply route for Moscow’s forces in southern Ukraine, was a critical moment in the war. The Kremlin accused Ukraine of orchestrating the blast, which underscored Russia’s inability to protect a key strategic asset and prompted Moscow to unleash a wave of airstrikes on Ukraine.

Video published by the Kremlin showed Mr. Putin driving a Mercedes car over the bridge. Accompanied by Deputy Prime Minister Marat Khusnullin, who is in charge of the repair, Mr. Putin inquired about the progress of the work and said he hoped the road and rail bridge would be fully restored by the middle of the summer vacation season.

Pointing at the still-charred railway section of the bridge, he said that “this was a big explosion.”

When the bridge opened in 2018, it was a powerful symbol of the connection the Kremlin was attempting to forge between Russia and Crimea, a Ukrainian region illegally annexed by Moscow four years earlier. Mr. Putin took personal credit for its construction, driving a truck along its 12-mile span at the head of a convoy.

On Monday, he also took credit for building two railway tracks and two traffic lanes each way, as the redundancy allowed traffic to be partially restored soon after the explosion hit in October.

While Ukraine’s government did not claim responsibility for the blast, which sent part of the bridge crashing into the sea on Oct. 8, a senior Ukrainian official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of a government ban on discussing the blast, confirmed that Ukraine’s intelligence services were behind it .

The Kerch attack came during a period of setbacks for Russian forces in Ukraine, including the loss of territory it had captured in the northeast of the country. Two days after the attack on the bridge, Russia escalated a strategy of pounding Ukraine’s energy infrastructure with waves of missiles launched at power stations and other facilities.

— Matthew Mpoke Bigg and Ivan Nechepurenko

A woman is shot and killed trying to cross into Ukrainian-held territory in Kherson.

KHERSON, Ukraine — A 65-year-old woman was shot to death on Sunday evening as she tried to escape in a boat from Russian-occupied territory in Kherson, Ukrainian officials said, illustrating the perils of Ukraine’s call for civilians to evacuate Russian-held areas in the heavily contested southern region.

Ukrainian officials blamed Russian soldiers in the killing; there was no immediate comment from the Russian side. The woman was crossing the Dnipro River, attempting to thread a gantlet of Russian and Ukrainian troops dug in on opposite banks near the city of Kherson, when she was killed in a hail of automatic gunfire, according to a statement from the City Council.

Both armies have been heavily shelling each other across the river, which has become a front line three weeks after Ukraine reclaimed Kherson city on the west bank and Russian forces withdrew to defensive positions on the eastern side. On Saturday, Ukrainian officials encouraged people to flee Russian-occupied areas on the eastern bank, warning of a “possible intensification of hostilities.”

But even before the woman was killed, many Ukrainians had complained on social media channels that the evacuation plan, which required individuals to use private boats to cross a dangerous river, was poorly organized. The announcement on Saturday did not specify the areas people should flee from or whether the advice applied in towns still occupied by Russian troops.

One of those towns, Hola Prystan, which lies several miles downriver from Kherson, was the area that the woman who was killed tried to escape, according to a statement released by the Kherson City Council on Sunday night.

“A 65-year-old woman who was crossing the Dnipro River with her husband on a boat, leaving a country house in the Hola Prystan district, was wounded by automatic fire. Unfortunately, the woman did not survive,” the statement read.

On Monday, Oleksandr Tolokonnikov, a spokesman for the Kherson regional military administration, said that the area was not covered by the evacuation plan.

“Navigation there is not open,” he said. “It is still banned to cross river there by boats. People can move there at their own risk.”

The area around Kherson and Hola Prystan is a watery landscape of river channels and small marshy islands, some with summer homes on them. The Kherson authorities’ plan was to have evacuees come to Kherson’s main river port, which itself has come under heavy shelling in the past week. Until the evacuation was announced, the Ukrainian military had prohibited people from traveling by boat on the river. The plan was to allow daylight river crossings for three days, Saturday, Sunday and Monday.

The mood in Kherson has turned grim in the three weeks since Ukrainian forces swept in, when the city throbbed with jubilation as people poured into the streets, hugged soldiers, waved flags and snapped selfies. As Russian forces continue to shell the city relentlessly, more than 18 people have been killed in the past two weeks and dozens more wounded, according to Ukrainian officials.

Ukrainian forces have been eager to push the Russians farther away and get Kherson out of artillery range. Over the weekend, a Ukrainian military unit released a video purporting to show the raising of a Ukrainian flag on the eastern bank of the Dnipro. Although there was no indication that Ukraine had established a permanent military presence at the site, the video was an apparent sign of Kyiv’s intent to continue its counteroffensive in the south.

Oleksandra Mykolyshyn contributed reporting.

— Jeffrey Gettleman

An E.U. embargo of Russian oil and the G7’s price cap take effect.

Europe and the United States started enforcing on Monday two of the toughest measures aimed at curbing Russia’s income from oil, the principal source of cash used to fund its nearly 10-month-old war in Ukraine.

The first, a price cap initiative led by the United States, aims to increase economic pressure on the Kremlin while avoiding a global oil shock . The limit was set at $60 per barrel, and was endorsed by the Group of 7 countries, Australia, and members of the European Union.

The second is an embargo under which European nations will no longer be able to buy most Russian crude as of Monday. It was a step that the European Union had agreed to months ago but that was phased in with exceptions to prepare member nations.

Prices gyrated in the oil markets on Monday, with Brent crude, the international benchmark, up by about 2.5 percent, to $87.75 a barrel, at midday in Europe. West Texas Intermediate future were selling at $82 a barrel.

An immediate impact on oil supplies in Europe was not expected, partly because the embargo has been in the works for months, and energy companies have already begun buying more oil from the United States, Brazil, Guyana and the Middle East.

Although analysts and traders say the price cap may prove a nightmare to administer, one expert on sanctions said the lengthy negotiations had produced a deal with the potential to work.

“I suspect the compromise that was reached gives the policy the best chance it could have to succeed,” said Edward Fishman, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.

Mr. Fishman, who previously led planning and implementation of sanctions on Russia at the Department of State, said there were several reasons to be optimistic. One is the recent softness of oil markets, which he interpreted as meaning that Russian oil was no longer as critical to the markets as it was a few months ago. He also said the agreed $60 price was a “Goldilocks” level, not so high as to give Russia even more revenue than it is currently receiving or so low as to discourage Moscow from producing oil.

He also said that the cap’s provision to review the price level every two months, or more frequently if needed, provided the “flexibility” that historically has helped make sanctions, like those targeting Iran’s oil sales, effective.

Still, skepticism about the likely efficacy of the measures stems in part from the United States and European countries mandating European shippers and insurers to enforce it by declining to handle cargoes priced above the $60-a-barrel level.

— Stanley Reed

Ukraine will auction a yacht seized from a Putin ally.

As Ukraine scrambles to fund its fight against Russia’s invasion, a potential new source of tens of millions of dollars has materialized — the planned sale of a superyacht seized from one of Ukraine’s most famous pro-Russian oligarchs.

Soon after Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February, Ukrainian authorities announced they had taken possession of properties belonging to Viktor Medvedchuk , a prominent pro-Russian politician and a close friend of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

For years, Mr. Medvedchuk was seen as the Kremlin’s primary agent of influence in Ukraine. Mr. Putin is the godfather of Mr. Medvedchuk’s daughter.

The confiscated assets included the Royal Romance, a 300-foot yacht docked in a Croatian port that is linked to Mr. Medvedchuk. According to its Dutch manufacturer, Feadship, the ship has a 40-foot swimming pool, a gym, a waterfall feature, and an estimated value of more than $200 million. The yacht and other assets were confiscated as part of a criminal investigation in which Mr. Medvedchuk is suspected of treason, according to Ukraine’s State Bureau of Investigation .

Last week, ARMA, Ukraine’s government agency for asset recovery and management, said that a district court in Split, Croatia, had entrusted the city’s port administration with implementing the transfer of the yacht to the agency. ARMA described the Royal Romance, which has 50 rooms, as “one of the largest yachts in the world” and said that it plans to auction the vessel to “preserve its economic value.”

Ukrainians welcomed the proposed sale, with some celebrating on social media and joking that Mr. Medvedchuk would be making a large donation to Ukraine’s armed forces.

ARMA was created in Ukraine in 2016 to seize the assets of officials in corruption cases, but since the invasion it has also turned its attention to the property of Russians and of Ukrainians who are accused of collaborating with Russia.

Mr. Medvedchuk, a prominent figure in the pro-Russian wing of Ukrainian politics and a former deputy speaker of Ukraine’s Parliament, had been under criminal investigation in Ukraine before the invasion. Ukrainian security forces captured him in April, after he fled house arrest while awaiting trial on treason charges. Ukrainian authorities handed him over to Russia in September in a prisoner exchange.

Mr. Medvedchuk was also mentioned in U.S. investigations into Russian electoral meddling, as a client of the Republican political consultant Paul Manafort. He denied wrongdoing and said Mr. Manafort had merely advised his party on electoral strategy.

The Royal Romance officially belongs to a company called Lanelia Holdings, based in the Marshall Islands, according to Equasis , a major shipping information database. The ship changed ownership in 2021, when Ukraine imposed sanctions on Mr. Medvedchuk.

Last summer, a superyacht linked to a Russian businessman under sanctions was auctioned in Gibraltar, but the profits were set to repay his creditors rather than replenish Ukraine’s accounts. In general, the process through which seized assets can be permanently confiscated and sold to benefit Ukraine is cumbersome and can take years .

— Emma Bubola and Anastasia Kuznietsova

To help Ukraine, a widow parts with a rare emerald from a 1622 shipwreck.

For years, Mitzi Perdue looked down at her hand and saw history.

The emerald stone on her ring finger told a story stretching back nearly four centuries, to the sinking of a Spanish galleon near the Florida Keys in 1622 and a decades-long effort of a colorful undersea treasure hunter named Mel Fisher to retrieve its payload of gold and silver coins, gold nuggets and jewelry.

It reminded her, too, of her late husband, the chicken magnate Frank Perdue, who received a share of the bounty in return for his investment in Mr. Fisher’s search. He donated most of it, but kept the emerald and presented it to her when he proposed marriage in 1988. She wore it until his death in 2005 , when she put it away for safekeeping.

Now, 400 years after the Nuestra Señora de Atocha sank in a hurricane, Ms. Perdue, 81, is putting the emerald up for auction on Wednesday at Sotheby’s in New York City. All proceeds from the sale of the ring, which Sotheby’s says has an estimated value of $50,000 to $70,000, will be donated to support humanitarian efforts in Ukraine, prompted by Ms. Perdue’s visit there this year after the Russian invasion .

“What must it be like for the people who have been there enduring, continuously with no respite, for at least half a year?” she said. “After five days, I wanted to do more. And then I started thinking, ‘What can I do to be most helpful?’ And then I thought, ‘I own something that’s of historic significance.’”

— April Rubin

Russia continues to manufacture cruise missiles despite Western sanctions, experts say.

Some of the cruise missiles that Russia launched at Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure in late November were manufactured months after the West imposed sanctions intended to deprive Moscow of the components needed to make those munitions, according to a weapons research group.

Experts examined remnants of Kh-101 cruise missiles found in Kyiv, the capital, after an attack on Nov. 23 that knocked out electricity and shut down water systems in large areas of the country. One of the missiles was made this summer, and another was completed after September, markings on the weapons show, according to a report released by the investigators on Monday .

That Russia has continued to make advanced guided missiles like the Kh-101 suggests that it has found ways to acquire semiconductors and other matériel despite the sanctions or that it had significant stockpiles of the components before the war began, one of the researchers said.

The findings are among the most recent by Conflict Armament Research , an independent group based in Britain that identifies and tracks weapons and ammunition used in wars. A small team of its researchers arrived in Kyiv just before the attack at the invitation of the Ukrainian security service.

— John Ismay


  1. rumor Overwhelming fingerprint jordan belfort sunken yacht population

    nadine yacht sinking

  2. Nadine Yacht Sinking

    nadine yacht sinking

  3. Heartbreaking Photos Show A $6 Million Dollar Yacht Sinking Into The

    nadine yacht sinking

  4. Nadine Yacht Sinking

    nadine yacht sinking

  5. Mayday In The Med

    nadine yacht sinking

  6. Nadine Yacht Sinking

    nadine yacht sinking


  1. The story of the Wolf of Wall Street Jordan Belfort's 37m yacht Nadine

    How Jordan Belfort's 37m superyacht Nadine sank off the coast of Sardinia. Coco Chanel was famously outspoken on many things, but yachting, in particular, attracted her ire. "As soon as you set foot on a yacht you belong to some man, not to yourself, and you die of boredom," she was once quoted as saying. Her solution was to buy her own yacht.

  2. Mayday In The Med

    The real story of the sinking of the Wolf of Wall Street's yacht. In 2000, Doug Hoogs interviewed Capt. Mark Elliott about the sinking of the motoryacht Nadine.Elliott was in command of Nadine on the fateful day in 1996 when she encountered a powerful mistral in the Mediterranean between the Italian mainland and Sardinia. All guests and crew survived, but the real story of the sinking, which ...

  3. Nadine: The Incredible True Story Behind Wolf Of Wall Street's Yacht

    Jordan Belfort's seshes were so legendary that sinking a multi-million-dollar yacht was simply another act of depravity that Martin Scorsese could weave into The Wolf of Wall Street's preposterous film adaptation. Those familiar with The Wolf of Wall Street book will have read Belfort's account of this in closer detail, but the backstory of the superyacht Nadine is a lesser-known tale ...

  4. Jordan Belfort's ex-wife tells the real story behind the yacht on The

    Jordan Belfort's ex wife, Nadine Macaluso, ... where she admitted in a TikTok video that the yacht sinking scene was 'totally true'. Advert. Speaking of the memory, she said: "It was horrific ...

  5. The Ridiculous Truth Behind The Wolf of Wall Street Yacht Scene

    The outrageous sinking scene in Martin Scorcese's 2013 film really happened, and the real story might be even better than the movie ... According to an article by Brad Hutchins on, the real Jordan Belfort was on a luxury yacht called the Nadine that was caught in a raging tempest and before sinking, nearly took everyone with it.

  6. The Real Story Behind the Yacht in The Wolf of Wall Street

    Nadine Caridi recently spoke about the sinking of the yacht in June 1996, an event that inspired a scene in the movie. The yacht's sinking during a storm off the coast of Italy was a terrifying experience for everyone on board. The waves were violent and relentless, hitting the yacht repeatedly.

  7. The true story of Wolf Of Wall Street's yacht 'Nadine'

    Jordan Belfort's antics are so legendary that sinking a multi-million dollar yacht is just another act of depravity that Martin Scorsese manages to weave among The The wolf of Wall Street grotesque film adaptation. Those who know the wolf of Wall Street book will have read Belfort's account about it in more detail, but the backstory of the superyacht Nadine is a lesser-known tale with ...

  8. Everything The Wolf Of Wall Street Doesn't Tell You About The ...

    True to the film, Belfort insisted his boat's captain take the yacht into choppy waters, where the boat happened upon powerful but unpredictable mistrals, leading to the Nadine sinking into the ...

  9. Did Jordan Belfort Sink Coco Chanel's Former Yacht?

    The yacht that sank that day in the Mediterranean was once owned by French fashion icon and entrepreneur, Coco Chanel. When he bought it, Belfort decided to name it Nadine, after his then-wife Nadine Caridi. In the film, the character's name was changed to Naomi, which is what the boat was subsequently called.

  10. Marine Investigation Report M90L3034

    Marine Investigation Report M90L3034. Sinking. of the Fishing Vessel "NADINE". Gulf of St. Lawrence. 16 December 1990. The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) investigated this occurrence for the purpose of advancing transportation safety. It is not the function of the Board to assign fault or determine civil or criminal liability.

  11. Any info on the yacht 'Nadine'

    Nadine's sinking was indeed caused by the violent waves. A foredeck hatch was smashed, allowing water to flood the crew quarters and bringing the yacht down by the bow. This allowed more waves to break over the fordeck and they caused one of the large tenders carried there to shift, breaking one of the dining salon windows that overlooked the ...

  12. Wolf of Wall Street True Story

    The real-life yacht was named "The Nadine" after Belfort's wife, who, like in the movie, he affectionately referred to as "The Duchess of Bay Ridge." In the movie, the yacht bears the name "Naomi" after the character portrayed by Margot Robbie (Belfort's wife's name was changed for the film). ... the story about his yacht sinking from the book ...

  13. Jordan Belfort Yacht

    The Jordan Belfort yacht sinking scene in The Wolf of Wall Street was heavily inspired by a real-life event, though the movie did take some creative liberties. For one, the yacht was called Naomi in the reel version since the name of Belfort's wife (played by Margot Robbie) was changed in the movie. In reality, the yacht was named Nadine.

  14. REAL WOLF OF WALL STREET Yacht Sinking Story

    LEAVE THE CASH... TAKE THE QUAALUDES!The REAL Wolf of Wall Street tells how he sunk his 167-foot yacht, The "Nadine," with its own plane & chopper. This was ...

  15. Motor Yacht Nadine

    Nadine's sinking was indeed caused by the violent waves. A foredeck hatch was smashed, allowing water to flood the crew quarters and bringing the yacht down by the bow. This allowed more waves to break over the fordeck and they caused one of the large tenders carried there to shift, breaking one of the dining salon windows that overlooked the ...

  16. The True Jordan Belfort Yacht Story: Fact vs. Fiction

    For one, the yacht was called Naomi in the reel version since the name of Belfort's wife (played by Margot Robbie) was changed in the movie. In reality, the yacht was named Nadine. Interesting insights on the sinking as portrayed in the movie. The movie captured each passenger's fear and stress when the yacht got caught up in the 70-knot storm.

  17. Video captures the moment superyacht sinks off Italian coast

    Dramatic footage has emerged of the moment a 130-foot superyacht capsized off the Italian coast over the weekend, sinking stern-first into the water. The video, released by the coast guard, showed ...

  18. Meet the Real Wolf of Wall Street Superyacht Built for Coco Chanel

    The luxury yacht used in Scorsese's film actually bears little resemblance to the Nadine, being a far more modern vessel.The director hired the 148-foot Lady M, built by Intermarine Savannah in ...

  19. Dramatic video captures luxury yacht sinking off the coast of Italy

    Dramatic footage shows a 131-foot luxury yacht sinking in the Ionian Sea over the weekend.Italy's coast guard said they coordinated a rescue operation to try...

  20. Russian warship seen listing in Black Sea after Ukrainian sea drone

    CNN was provided with footage showing an unmanned sea drone approaching a ship that appears to match the identity of the one later seen listing in the port of Novorossiysk. The 36-second video ...

  21. Moskva warship sinking: Dramatic photos and video give clues to

    Almost a week after the sinking of the Moskva, Russia and Ukraine have different accounts of what happened. But photos and video released on social media appear to cast doubt on Moscow's version ...

  22. Sinking of the Moskva

    The Russian warship Moskva, the flagship of the Russian Navy's Black Sea Fleet, sank on 14 April 2022 during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.Ukrainian officials announced that their forces had hit and damaged it with two R-360 Neptune anti-ship missiles, and that the ship had then caught fire.The United States Department of Defense later confirmed this, and Russia reported that the ship had ...

  23. Russia-Ukraine War Ukrainian Drones Hit 2 Bases Deep in Russia

    Ukraine will auction a yacht seized from a Putin ally. ... to the sinking of a Spanish galleon near the Florida Keys in 1622 and a decades-long effort of a colorful undersea treasure hunter named ...