HMS Bounty in trouble...

[chef2sail]

No one said testified to anything about the Captains mental health that I heard. Supposedly he got his ribs/ back hurt when he was thrown into something when the boat pitched and rolled near the end.

[ShoalFinder]

Very good article, thank you for linking to it. I found this part very interesting since the topic comes up on this forum quite a bit:

According to Svendsen’s testimony on day one of the hearings, Walbridge told him that he planned to wait until the water reached the vessel’s tween deck to abandon the boat. Perhaps he had that ridiculous old sailor’s maxim stuck in his head, “You never step off until you have to step up.” It’s terrible advice and almost never true.

[PCP]

Originally Posted by ShoalFinder

Very good article, thank you for linking to it. I found this part very interesting since the topic comes up on this forum quite a bit:

According to Svendsen’s testimony on day one of the hearings, Walbridge told him that he planned to wait until the water reached the vessel’s tween deck to abandon the boat. Perhaps he had that ridiculous old sailor’s maxim stuck in his head, “You never step off until you have to step up.” It’s terrible advice and almost never true.

He is talking about ships. when that has been said here, we are talking about boats. That is not the same thing. When in a boat the water that is coming in is more than the one that is pumped out, the boat will sink quickly. On a ship that is inevitable also but it can take many hours.

Regards

Paulo

[Hartley18]

Originally Posted by chef2sail

Wonder how this will affect the Windjammer cruises and the ones my daughter did her Outward Bound on 15 years ago. Maine has a few classroom vessels like that. Thats how I originally met Walbridge.

Dave

I would expect it will.. but exactly how is a little difficult to tell, because the distinction between, say, "private yacht" (do what you like) and "ocean going passenger vessel" (regulations up to your eyeballs) is rather large in maritime law.

So long as a ship like the "Bounty" doesn't travel overseas and doesn't carry "paying passengers" there really isn't a lot the authorities can do, but once you start carrying passengers (like Outward Bound do) there are plenty of regs that start to kick in.. although you can be sure there would still be loop-holes for the crafty and unscrupulous at the smaller end of the scale.

Perhaps the lesson is to always check a ship's survey status before sending your kids on-board. If it's all okay, they'll not be hiding that fact.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Hartley18

I would expect it will.. but exactly how is a little difficult to tell, because the distinction between, say, "private yacht" (do what you like) and "ocean going passenger vessel" (regulations up to your eyeballs) is rather large in maritime law.

So long as a ship like the "Bounty" doesn't travel overseas and doesn't carry "paying passengers" there really isn't a lot the authorities can do...

Well if there's such a wide gulf between the two classifications, I think it's a definite possibility that the investigators will recommend new classification between those two.

I think you can expect that after 8 days of investigation something will be done, either stricter enforcement of current regulations or, if that is as impossible as you suggest, then new regulations.

[smurphny]

Originally Posted by Minnewaska

Massive cultural problem across the entirety of the Bounty organization. The CEO sets cultural tone. Even if the shareholders put him up to it, he/she sets it. Structurally, the CEO is the Captain, who all aboard reported to, not the owner.

So, let's keep hearing what was wrong, but same conclusion.

I am interested in a conclusion on what to do about it. Perhaps nothing, as there are bad apples in every bunch and I'm not interested in rules to prevent every exception. However, as I've said before, it wouldn't bother me to see severe restrictions in the mobility of these vessels with anything other than a highly qualified crew, no passengers, no fake paid crew.

The corporate mentality and culture that worships profit at all costs is ok when dealing in electronic gizmos, probably NOT when dealing in the safety of crews.

[davidpm]

Originally Posted by smurphny

The corporate mentality and culture that worships profit at all costs is ok when dealing in electronic gizmos, probably NOT when dealing in the safety of crews.

In this case it is just as likely if not more likely that the corporate error if any was not one of profit at all cost but one of romantic yearning to keep a beautiful ship alive at any cost.
The lose of life is a high price to pay for either profits or romanticism.

The chances of the owner being able to take any cash out of an enterprise like this is low. If it is self sustaining it is lucky.

[Hartley18]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Well if there's such a wide gulf between the two classifications, I think it's a definite possibility that the investigators will recommend new classification between those two.

I think you can expect that after 8 days of investigation something will be done, either stricter enforcement of current regulations or, if that is as impossible as you suggest, then new regulations.

We'll see what happens at the end of all this.. but I do hope for all your sakes that the status quo is maintained with perhaps a bit better policing around the edges.

My fear is that any further cost/compliance obligations on smaller vessels like the "Bounty" will mean more of them end up as penniless dockside attractions and die prematurely and less remain in a truly "seaworthy" condition allowing especially the younger generation to experience Tall Sail on the open ocean.

[chris_gee]

There seems some confusion over where one might like to be placed as regards a hurricane other than well away from it.

On basic principles in the Northern hemisphere the wind moves anticlockwise around a low, while the hurricane tends to move to the NW but it can initially move NE.

Assuming the former, then the least dangerous quadrant is the NW ie front left, and the most dangerous front right, because in the former the track speed of the hurricane or storm subtracts from the wind speed, and in the latter case it adds to it.

As far as being just back from the eye to pick up good wind that seems dubious to place oneself there. Apart from anything else the course of the storm is not stable, and the thing has a large diameter. It is also likely to be moving faster than most boats so one would be overtaken with either stronger winds or unfavourable ones.

To be behind it implies one wants to go in the same direction however to get favourable wind one would need to be on SE side and presumably to get there only approach from the east. One could also expect a substantial sea which would have had time to build. One would also have to be a fair way behind it for the wind to have abated like 100 miles plus to get anything much under say 50 knots.

Behind and in the SW sector one could expect head winds and a significant if lesser sea.
That doesn't sound a very viable option if one is heading NW.

Also to get into the SE region behind if not coming from the east one is presumably coming from the west crossing through it. Great.

The other options are one is trying to gain on it. That doesn't seem that great an idea one as the sea state will be high, and two it is unlikely since as I understand it these things move at around 15-20 knots. So you are going faster than that through a heavy sea?

If you are heading south then you might get a bit of a ride for a time behind it but that will abate. Given the uncertainty and conditions one might well opt to wait for calmer conditions.

I am not familiar with his course, but suggest hitching behind a hurricane is bragado, and the logic does not seem well thought out be it SE or SW said or intended.

[seanseamour]

If you go back to last summer when Wallbridge was in London glorifying or rather bragging his seamanship and strategy to navigate in eye of a hurricane I could not believe there was no query on how he would get there, as leaving safe harbor in the face of an oncoming hurricane that was to be his demise - Hubris bred infatuation from first mate on down!