SailNet Community - View Single Post - HMS Bounty in trouble...
View Single Post
  #258  
Old 11-04-2012
chef2sail's Avatar
chef2sail chef2sail is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,964
Thanks: 29
Thanked 54 Times in 50 Posts
Rep Power: 7
chef2sail will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to chef2sail
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
I see no harm in the sailors here who have gone on long offshore/ocean passages and faced departure and routing decisions discussing the evidence, options available to the vessels skipper, and then providing their opinions regarding the Bounty captain's decisions on departure and the track chosen. Such discussions help us all learn from each other's experinece and knowledge.Billyruffin
Thank you for the thought provoking post. I have great respect for your experience and read your posts always. You manage to present your opinion which is well thought out, but also not accusatory. I couldnt agree with you more about the track he took,as well as the consequences of taking that track. Having done both Gone outside the GS ( both south and north and sailed closer through/ around Diamond Shoals, I have always advocated in many other SailNet threads what I perceived as the dangers of the inside route and for me personally, I avoid it and have not gone on vessels anymore with captains who chose the route.

Quote:
]I see no harm in the sailors here who have gone on long offshore/ocean passages and faced departure and routing decisions discussing the evidence, options available to the vessels skipper
You will find on very few of the posters have this experience, but many have offered opinions or accusations and they did so without hesitatuion or hardly any information at all

My biggest problem with the postings are the rush to judgement to afix blame on the captain entirely, and then the glee to assassinate his character. This isnt done by a group of savy well experienced ocean and blue water sailors ( my apologies to the few who have this experience) but is being done by the armchair quarterbacks who start analyzing the situations as soon as the story comes apparent. It leads to this feeding frenzy which can prevent them from looking and absorbing other details as wells as focusing on unimportant snippets of u tube postings as the paramount reasoning. Its like its a story of thodse damn shows following network news at 7 PM. The SN jury has already found the captain guilty as charged and not even waited for any evidence of the companies pressure or involvement, statements from the survivors. or atatements from professionals.

As this continues to play out with more and more information a clearer picture will take place. Already we have some CG reports and some people on a CG blog which I have seen are less vitriolic and hype minded than the posts on SN. There are key pieces of information I would like to see before I damn the Captain in hell like most of the SN posters. ( Funny many of the interviews I have seen with the Captains professional aquaitences do not paint a picture of a reckless man), I would like some eye witness testimony or statements ( what happened on boartd, sea state, how she got in trouble other than what we can see on GPS position fixing and storm histroy, I would like a professional report concerning the condition of the ship before it left ( not speculation reposrts of cousins whoi visited the ship once or saw it, but people who recently refit it and worked on it, I would like to know what role the company played in coercing or pressuring the captain to leave the dock in the first place.

None of us know for certain that this storm and waves were the only things directly responsible for its sinking. Which one of you know for a certain that there was no failure of the bulkheads/ structure on the ship which could have happened on the very next
passage, heavy weather or not. How do you know there was not a material defect in the refit, wrong materials used, designs not followed?

I have my initial opinions of what has happened here. I question mightily him leaving and sailing into this particular enlarging storm with any ship let alone the one he had. I question like you trying to squeeze between a storm and the "Graveyard of the Atlantic. I also question why....why a man with good credentials and experience0 ( better than almost everyone on here casting judgement) would make this decision. Maybe then that gets answered we will find the real culpruit in this is just not him and that someone may be hiding behind the screen or that someone was negligent in the repair of the ship.

Ultimately he will be held with some of the responsibility because he was the captain of the ship. I am pretty sure of that.

When a plane crashes in bad weather do you think immediately that the captain was responsible and get on the internet blaming him/ her. If you saw him drinking with dinner two nights before...do you assume he/ she was a drunk and that caused it? Do you blame it on the heavy weather? The route he took...he could of flown around it or landed somewhere else. See in this instance...very similar to this incident there is a very detailed investigation and NO ONE declares after 1-4 days after the event happend that it was the captains fault. Here however those rules dont apply. Thats what I have a problem with

Dave
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
___________________________
S/V Haleakala (Hawaiian for" House of the Sun")
C&C 35 MKIII Hull # 76
Parkville, Maryland
(photos by Joe McCary)
Charter member of the Chesapeake Lion posse

Our blog-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


“Sailing is just the bottom line, like adding up the score in bridge. My real interest is in the tremendous game of life.”- Dennis Conner

Last edited by chef2sail; 11-04-2012 at 12:20 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook