Sinking

[CBinRI]

Originally Posted by camaraderie

Bubb...you got that right. I've been looking at what CAUSED them to be out there in that weather as that is the real question. These were experienced sailors so one would assume that they had done their homework on weather given the time of year and the north atlantic.
Ocean Prediction Center - Product Loops
If you look at the individual maps on this last 14 day loop of offshore wind wave forecasts you will note that the forecast made on 12UTC the 26th looks rough for the 28th but nothing a good boat and crew can't handle...30-35kts on a reach with 10-15ft. seas. By the next forecast on 00utc on the 27th...the two day forcast called for 40-45knots from abeam and 15-20ft. seas...higher gusts and waves of course to be expected. By then it was too late to seek shelter and the expected conditions are what the coast guard reported.
In summary...the weather forcast deteriorated rapidly while they were out to sea and I can't see any lack of judgement based on the evidence at hand. The Atlantic can sneek up on you quickly at this time of year...and in this case, it appears that despite having a premium blue water boat...the boat did not stand up to the sea as welll as the crew. Of significance it that is was a bilge pump that let them down on a new to them boat. Lesson: Never go to sea without multiple bilge pump backups and a LARGE manual pump.

I had heard that they consulted a weather router who told them to go but I'm not sure how reliable that is.

[CBinRI]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

In short - this looks like another case of "BFS Proponents" that weren't prepared, got into a situation that was far above their heads, and had to punch the EPIRB.

Only in this case, these experienced sailors needed a very, very expensive rescue and actually caused injury to one of the SAR personnel.

Man, looks like even a seasoned Captain needs some serious second guessing if he sailed himself and his crew into a mess like this.

Idiots?

I was going to try not to get sucked into this debate but if you are comparing three extraordinarily experienced sailors making a delivery (after consulting a weather router) in a well-found seven year old Swan (purchased for more than half a million dollars) to your friend in the other thread -- a novice sailor purchasing a forty year old boat for a price that clearly indicates that it was not up to the task and NOT GETTING A SURVEY -- you clearly are missing the point. But it is quite apparent that you do not change your mind. You prefer to dig in your heels -- no matter how incorrect you might be.

And by the way, your insensitivity is staggering.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by CalebD

...
I am always amazed by the CG and the fact that they do rescue people in distress in horrible conditions such as we had a few days ago. Most here are sympathetic to those who know how to take care of themselves and know when to call for help. Trying to discern how much scorn this one versus that one gets on these forums is pointless. Sometimes people should just not leave the dock (this includes me and I have a pretty healthy respect for the weather and my lack of abilities and I do not like getting caught 'ass out').
Every day sailor should be prepared to get themselves out and back in without assistance if they are doing their homework. The same applies to every vessel. I suppose it is the amount of 'homework' that some people apply to their endeavors that some are critical of. To his credit, at least SnackDiddy is asking questions.

Wow. Caleb...I'm speechless. And that doesn't happen often. Thanks for the objectivity.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by CBinRI

...And by the way, your insensitivity is staggering.

Yes my post was insensitive. However, you have to remember that it was composed of quotes and paraphrases from other Sailnet posters regarding other sailors who'd also been rescued in very difficult conditions. At least you saw the point.

[camaraderie]

This from another board going through the same critique of the incident and written by one of the actual Coasties on the mission. I hope he will not mind me cross posting here and I will also extend my thanks for him and the USCG who will always go in harms way for any of us.
*********
Hello, I cannot speak of anything official but it appears you all have valid concerns about what happened. Understand we all take our job very seriously. Never hesitate to call the Coast Guard, if we can we will come. And we will always do all we can as we did here. Thank you for your praise and I wish we could have been more sucessful we will NEVER leave anyone behind if there are options left. I'm glad they had an EPIRB, but please always have survival suits on board along with every other piece of safety gear you can think of. I've never witnessed seas that angry and it reminds me why I have no desire to spend much time out to sea. I am amazed that you have the courage to, amazing how diverse our interests as humans are. Thanks for reading.

[smackdaddy]

Cam,

Thanks for that. It is great to hear directly from those guys. And a little sobering to realize his take on the sea and sailing in it. Good stuff. What board is that from?

PS - Interesting also about the survival suits. That's not been something that has been touched on here. If I'm reading it correctly on NOAA, 44004 is showing almost 78 degrees water temp. How long was this guy in the water?

[CBinRI]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Yes my post was insensitive. However, you have to remember that it was composed of quotes and paraphrases from other Sailnet posters regarding other sailors who'd also been rescued in very difficult conditions. At least you saw the point.

Sorry if my reaction was a bit over the top. I had read elsewhere that his family was reading some of these threads on SA and here and I may have overreacted.

[smackdaddy]

CB - no problem. Your post was perfectly justified. And my apologies to the family members if they are reading this thread without knowing the intent behind my post. I've been pushing for some objectivity on this site in terms of evaluating SAR events such as these.

Again, my sincere sympathies to the family.

[rayncyn51]

Total newbie here, 2 years sailing in LA harbor. I don't for a moment question any of the technical information or experienced opinions that have appeared so far in this post. I simply want to comment on Smack's tenacious quest for objectivity.

I have always held that there is a difference between prejudice and experience. I think this is what is at play in the heated words in this thread. A given level of experience allows a certain bias. If it did not, we would have to do an unbiased eveluation every time the sun came up in order to determine if it were really the sun, or simply a large star or a police helicopter with the light on. Mindless simplicity acknowledged, but hopefully you get the point.

If we did start our discussion at square one with a complete lack of bias, we would most likely eventually arrive at many of the same conclusions (prejudice? bias?) drawn by those who have already been in situations similar to the situation under scrutiny. This, I fear, is a point that neither side has articulated effectively.

As for the (relative) lack of bias in professional investigations, a large purpose of those investigations is to establish facts for any future claims of liability. Ant that is entirely another subject.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by rayncyn51

Total newbie here, 2 years sailing in LA harbor. I don't for a moment question any of the technical information or experienced opinions that have appeared so far in this post. I simply want to comment on Smack's tenacious quest for objectivity.

I have always held that there is a difference between prejudice and experience. I think this is what is at play in the heated words in this thread. A given level of experience allows a certain bias. If it did not, we would have to do an unbiased eveluation every time the sun came up in order to determine if it were really the sun, or simply a large star or a police helicopter with the light on. Mindless simplicity acknowledged, but hopefully you get the point.

If we did start our discussion at square one with a complete lack of bias, we would most likely eventually arrive at many of the same conclusions (prejudice? bias?) drawn by those who have already been in situations similar to the situation under scrutiny. This, I fear, is a point that neither side has articulated effectively.

As for the (relative) lack of bias in professional investigations, a large purpose of those investigations is to establish facts for any future claims of liability. Ant that is entirely another subject.

Ray, welcome! And great post!

I do tend to agree with you here (in terms of big picture), except for one point. The bias I'm attacking immediately established a certain kid an "idiot"...for reaching the same end result as an honored, and revered sailor (or sailors). See the "BFS Proponent rescued at sea" thread to get more of a perspective on what's being debated in this particular thread. That's what drew me in in the first place.

This bias, however, gets very slippery if one is to trace back the facts of any of these events purely on their own merit. It's the classic "cascade effect" of one "bad" decision or technical malfunction leading to another, and another, until it cascades into catastrophe. And, as we've seen across all these examples, this can happen to anyone and everyone - regardless of experience level.

Now, I've also said that making an "absolute" judgment/argument - from either side of it is, in the end, very slippery. It is absolutely correct and inarguable that more experience gives one more ability to deal with, and possibly reverse, more of the cascade (back to the "Black Box Theory" Omatako discussed in the other thread) - AND it definitely gives a "reviewer" of such an event more perspective on what went wrong and why. No question. BUT, I'm simply saying that it's STILL a stretch, and very misleading, to selectively label sailors based on very similar events. This particular thread seems to prove that.

What people have tried to do is assume that I'm somehow defending Ronnie and his admitted poor planning and prep - or conversely, attacking other more experienced sailors by implying they're "idiots just like Ronnie". I'm not by any stretch of the imagination doing either! That language and viewpoint has been theirs not mine (unless I'm quoting them).

My point is, for anyone to say "Look, this guy was rescued at sea because he obviously got in over his head - what an idiot!" is not really an objective way of looking at the issue. And this certainly seemed to be the slant of the "BFS Proponent" thread which preceded this one.

Again, I completely agree with you that there is a difference between prejudice and experience. I just think they've gotten somewhat conflated around here.

Finally, I also agree that a truly objective analysis of the chain of events will absolutely bring us to the fact that Ronnie was woefully unprepared. Of course it will. He's admitted that. But if that experienced bias refuses to, with the same level of scrutiny, walk through the decisions and technicalities of another more seasoned sailor who ended up in the same situation - something's wrong. Because that's an even more valuable lesson to a newbie if you think about it. As long as this is the attitude, that very well may be a helicopter in the sky - even though they insist it's the sun.

I just think it would be extremely helpful and educational to objectively look at such decisions and technicalities with equal scrutiny - and learn from ALL of them. Then let the lessons stand on their own without the name calling and questionable implications.

So - I'll back out now. My face is blue.