SailNet Community - View Single Post - HMS Bounty in trouble...
View Single Post
  #1262  
Old 12-11-2012
sparklepl3nty sparklepl3nty is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Breckenridge, CO
Posts: 25
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
sparklepl3nty is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by chef2sail
I am actually quite suprised you have never heard of Witchcraft before.
Can't say that I have. It has been two years since I lived in MD, and I've bounced between coasts in the previous years. Also, I never sailed on the original Pride (I was born after she went down) and sailed as volunteer on Pride II whenever I could.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chef2sail
From your post it seems as though one of the things you are saying here is that this underfunded vessel, staffed by mostly green sailors was kind of a train wreck waiting to happen..

It almost sounds from what you say that them even taking this vessel out of the harbor is something they were not really qualified for by your description of dock lines and the thru hulls. No wonder you had no confidence in allowing your friends to board her in any way other than the dock. I guess she should have just stayed a dockside attraction some
where and not moved...

You and your associates on the well funded tall ships must have joked and talked about the Bounty in amazement and worried all the time that she would self destruct due to her green crew inability to handle the most basic of operations, or the lack of managerment of the vessels maintainence. You probably are not suprised that she sunk and assumed some tragedy would eventually befall her sooner or later...Sandy or not. The other TSC boats propbablky though it was grossly unfair all the regulations/ certifcations you had to undergo, while the Bounty went many places and didnt have to go through the same paces. They essentially got a free ride while you were under a microscope/

I bet she was a true embarrassment..
Whoa, I sense a lot of animosity here, and I'm not sure why. There was certainly no case of "well-funded" vs. "underfunded," as most TallShips are not well-funded. In the last four years, a handful of TallShips have gone out of business (many are non-profits, by the way), or lost their funding (Pride II is not funded by the city or state anymore, and is now maintained by donors and a non-profit). I have only worked on one vessel where money was seemingly "unlimited;" usually we even re-use our chip brushes to save money.

So no, we didn't see her as an embarrassment, or ask why we had to jump through hoops for our COI and regs, or why she got attention (sometimes, but not always true).

I and the TSC would NEVER want a boat to sink, fall into disarray, or go out of business, no matter the ship. I as well as many of the TSC heard the news and were stunned and mourned the loss of one of our own, as well as Captain Walbridge and Claudene Christian. For several days my close sailing friends texted and called each other with the news and cried. There was no sigh of relief that she went down, if that's what you are inferring.

As for Bounty getting "a free ride while [we] were under a microscope," I don't feel that that was the case at all. Sure, regs and inspections can be a pain (having to re-set and drop two tons of sail three times, then a MOB drill is exhausting!) but I know we as crews were proud of being well-trained and proud of our tidy bilges. Not to mention, it also was a standard to how safe our ship was. We all knew that the more we trained, the less stressed we'd be if a situation were to occur.

This isn't to say she didn't undergo any inspections at all as she still had inspection as a dockside attraction. It was just different regs.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook