HMS Bounty in trouble...

[casey1999]

Originally Posted by chef2sail

You dont know that. What kind of info did Colombus or Shakleton get, Hillary get. How about those guys who race those vessels sailing around the world in the Roaring Fourties around Cape Horn with 40 ft seas////are they reckless. Do they stop when the conditions get worst and think about killing the rest of the crew? Hell no the put the pedal to the metal. They stop for nothing.

Dont tell me those boats are really made to stand the weather they encounter. They are Carbon fiber/ Kevlar flyers

dave

I am not quite sure how these men sailed there ships. But like I said, they would use whatever knowledge they had at the time. I am sure once they learned about the season of hurricanes, they would do they best they could to avoid sailing in that season. These ships followed the trade wind route for good reason, once they learned the routes. They would keep an eye on the sky and wave height and direction- from these they could make educated guess as to what was over the horizon. These men did not have satelite forecast, nor radio comms (as Bounty had), but they made the best use of what they had. Sometimes they could not avoid a storm, and would loose a ship, but they would never knowingly sail into a hurricane.

Bringing up sailboat racing into this is a whole nother topic, let's not go into that here as that would be thread drift, maybe start another thread for that.

[chef2sail]

Originally Posted by Minnewaska

Ok, here is how I see the half time report going.........

Critics of the Captain and Bounty have found and posted several first hand accounts of the voyage and condition of the ship, letters from professional members of the Tall Ship Community, media interviews, official Bounty web pages, tracking of the boat's path, etc, and have found the preponderance of this evidence to be convincing of some level of wrong doing and criticism.

Supporters of the Captain dispute the validity or applicability of all of the above mentioned references and have offered no contradicting evidence of their own.

Spoken like a true member of the critic brigade

I dont think you can call us supporters of the Captain. We just want a fair shake here and no rush to judgement. I think I and others see orselves more as not willing to rush to Judgement.

Those in this flotilla are waiting for true facts to come out with regards to inspections, maintainence records, condition and tolerances of the ship, experience of the crew, conditions of the seas the whole , a chronological timetable of events, questioning of the first hand particpants vs TV interviews or posts, roles of the crew the days she was sailingquestioning of the companies role on leaving and the true past sailing hisories of the Captain and the ship with regards to heavy weather/ hurricanes to name a few.

I would say we the the fact checkers as opposed to

offering no contradicting evidence of their own

. The facts may do that when the investigation commences.

[PCP]

Originally Posted by casey1999

I am not quite sure how these men sailed there ships. But like I said, they would use whatever knowledge they had at the time. I am sure once they learned about the season of hurricanes, they would do they best they could to avoid sailing in that season. These ships followed the trade wind route for good reason, once they learned the routes. They would keep an eye on the sky and wave height and direction- from these they could make educated guess as to what was over the horizon. These men did not have satelite forecast, nor radio comms (as Bounty had), but they made the best use of what they had. Sometimes they could not avoid a storm, and would loose a ship, but they would never knowingly sail into a hurricane.

Bringing up sailboat racing into this is a whole nother topic, let's not go into that here as that would be thread drift, maybe start another thread for that.

The boats used to find new routes and explore were Caravelas. That was mostly done by Portuguese and some Genovese that worked with Portugal. Even Colombo learned in Portugal and was married with a Portuguese. Magalhães that discovered the way to go to Spain trough the Pacific Ocean was also a Portuguese working for Spain.

Caravelas where the best upwind boats of that time.



After the map of winds was discovered those boats were substituted by ships that were made to sail mostly downwind. to give you an idea of the size of those babies take into consideration that the Bounty had a displacement of about 500T, those babies, the called Manila Galleons, on the XVI century averaged between 1600 to 2000 tons. They had full knowledge of the Hurricane season and sailed out of it even if several big vessels were sunk by hurricanes out of season.

Manila galleon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regards

Paulo

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by chef2sail

Spoken like a true member of the critic brigade

I dont think you can call us supporters of the Captain. We just want a fair shake here and no rush to judgement. I think I and others see orselves more as not willing to rush to Judgement.

Those in this flotilla are waiting for true facts to come out with regards to inspections, maintainence records, condition and tolerances of the ship, experience of the crew, conditions of the seas the whole , a chronological timetable of events, questioning of the first hand particpants vs TV interviews or posts, roles of the crew the days she was sailingquestioning of the companies role on leaving and the true past sailing hisories of the Captain and the ship with regards to heavy weather/ hurricanes to name a few.

I would say we the the fact checkers as opposed to . The facts may do that when the investigation commences.

Agree 100 percent. Minnie's summary is grossly unfair to those of us who merely want to wait to hear more real facts. I do not understand why he feels the need to belittle and mock that position.

[JonEisberg]

Originally Posted by chef2sail

Again this is not a fact that is wasnt seaworthy. You keep beating this drum, but this has not been proven,. Posting something you do not know to be true and pretending it is fact is dangerous. Someone might read it and mistake it for fact and actually beleive it. Just because you find a few posts from people who comment on it, you dont know this for sure. There are conflicting reports even from even the people who were on the boat. Until they are examined with challenging questions, the repair records, the maintainence records are examined BY PROFESSIONALS, which has not been done to date you can only claim this. It is not a fact and should NEVER be posted like it is.

Probably just me, but I view the notion of "seaworthiness" as more of a relative term in most cases, rather than something that can be established as an empirical "fact"... We see repeatedly here, how miserably most attempts to classify or define what makes a "Bluewater" boat wind up failing, for example... I'd suggest any attempt to "prove" whether the BOUNTY was "seaworthy", or not, would entail similar difficulties...

Only thing I can assert with any certainty, at this point - just my opinion, of course...

After seeing some of the various photos posted of the engine/generator/machinery spaces, and viewing the YouTube of the BOUNTY lying ahull in what appeared to be near-gale conditions at most, well... that wallowing pig was most certainly not a vessel I would care to be aboard, anywhere in the remotest vicinity of a major hurricane... And, she certainly was not "worthy" of being placed in a position between such a storm, and Cape Hatteras...

[chef2sail]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Agree 100 percent. Minnie's summary is grossly unfair to those of us who merely want to wait to hear more real facts. I do not understand why he feels the need to belittle and mock that position.

I think its just his sacasm at play. When it comes down to it he is respectful and listens and has generally good arguments and also he is is the critic flotilla so you dont expect he will agree with what I wrote do you????

[PCP]

Originally Posted by JonEisberg

Probably just me, but I view the notion of "seaworthiness" as more of a relative term in most cases, rather than something that can be established as an empirical "fact"... We see repeatedly here, how miserably most attempts to classify or define what makes a "Bluewater" boat wind up failing, for example... I'd suggest any attempt to "prove" whether the BOUNTY was "seaworthy", or not, would entail similar difficulties...

Only thing I can assert with any certainty, at this point - just my opinion, of course...

After seeing some of the various photos posted of the engine/generator/machinery spaces, and viewing the YouTube of the BOUNTY lying ahull in what appeared to be near-gale conditions at most, well... that wallowing pig was most certainly not a vessel I would care to be aboard, anywhere in the remotest vicinity of a major hurricane... And, she certainly was not "worthy" of being placed in a position between such a storm, and Cape Hatteras...

Fact is the chief had made that quote seam meaningless, I am sure it was not intentional. He quoted me: "No matter what, the Captain was responsible for having sailed out of port in a ship that was not seaworthy" and forget : to sail near a HURRICANE

Even so he seems to have doubts about that

Originally Posted by chef2sail

quote=PCP;963703].....
No matter what, the Captain was responsible for having sailed out of port in a ship that was not seaworthy


Again this is not a fact that is wasnt seaworthy. You keep beating this drum, but this has not been proven,. Posting something you do not know to be true and pretending it is fact is dangerous. ..

the full quote:

Originally Posted by PCP

.....
No matter what, the Captain was responsible for having sailed out of port in a ship that was not seaworthy to sail near an hurricane; he was responsible for instead of running from the Hurricane or going to one of the possible good ports available; he was responsible to chose to sail a Hurricane.

These are errors that had tragic consequences, errors that a professional captain should not have made under any circumstances. These were no mistakes, this were gross errors. You have already basically agreed with this.

Regards

Paulo

[chef2sail]

Originally Posted by JonEisberg

Probably just me, but I view the notion of "seaworthiness" as more of a relative term in most cases, rather than something that can be established as an empirical "fact"... We see repeatedly here, how miserably most attempts to classify or define what makes a "Bluewater" boat wind up failing, for example... I'd suggest any attempt to "prove" whether the BOUNTY was "seaworthy", or not, would entail similar difficulties...

I am wondering if their are tolerances though. Stability factors. It was questioned before that the ballast was lightened and placed in a shoe. How doid this affect the relative motion of the boat. Somewhere in this thread
a expert who designed tall ships posted about the stability of the Bounty. Was it up to snuff? I think thats one of the Seaworthy factors I am talking about.

[sparklepl3nty]

Originally Posted by casey1999

I have asked many times what are the sailing options and techniques of this ship in a serious storm. No one has provided a response. Not even the Bounty crew member who posted on this thread a while back. From what I gather, the only technique used by bounty in a storm was furl all the sails and start the engines. That is not historically what these ships did in storms.

Sorry, I might have missed your questions among the other posts.

I don't know what Bounty would typically sail with in bad weather, but in the past on other vessels, we have set fore and main staysails (usually "storm sail" sized) and the occasional spanker or reefed mainsail. On my first ship, when the captain decided the weather was harsh enough to take in our lighter sails, we set the main staysail, and pretty much "flew" under these smaller sails and otherwise bare poles.. I think we reached 11 knots, compared to our usual 5-6 knots. A former crewmember on Pride of Baltimore II told me they had storm trysails to set in place of the foresail or mainsail.

[chef2sail]

Originally Posted by sparklepl3nty

Sorry, I might have missed your questions among the other posts.

I don't know what Bounty would typically sail with in bad weather, but in the past on other vessels, we have set fore and main staysails (usually "storm sail" sized) and the occasional spanker or reefed mainsail. On my first ship, when the captain decided the weather was harsh enough to take in our lighter sails, we set the main staysail, and pretty much "flew" under these smaller sails and otherwise bare poles.. I think we reached 11 knots, compared to our usual 5-6 knots. A former crewmember on Pride of Baltimore II told me they had storm trysails to set in place of the foresail or mainsail.

Sparkle..Glad to see you back

did you have a threshold of wind speed/ sea height you would not travel in? I know this is hard to define as it could also be directional also and of course doesnt take into account what you may encounter in the course of passage making.

What are the two largest wind speeds and sea states you have sailing in on a Class A Tall Ship. Which one was it?

Dave