SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

HMS Bounty in trouble...

278K views 2K replies 105 participants last post by  PCP 
#1 ·
The HMS Bounty is a tall ship that was built in Nova Scotia in 1961 for the MGM movie "Mutiny on the Bounty", starring Marlon Brando...she appears to be in trouble from Hurricane Sandy.

From ABC News:
2:55 AM EDT: Coast Guard spokesman David Weydert tells ABC News, "The Coast Guard received notification that the sailing vessel HMS Bounty was in distress. We responded by sending out a C-130 aircraft and we're currently monitoring the situation."

And the ships website confirms she is in harms way:
TallShipBounty.org

I sure hope this story has a happy ending.
 
#185 ·
After hearing about the video of the Captain and his cavilier attitude concerning hurriacanes, I question the licensing process. I would think the initial licensing process might be pretty stringent, but are there periodic reviews? Adequate periodic reviews? I would think that such an interview would be cause for him loosing his ticket.

Then there is the question of adequate regulation concering the design, construction, maintenance and operation of the vessel. A 50 year old wooden ship built as a movie prop does not pass the smell test. I know for a fact that there are too many useless regulations. Try getting a permit for building a dock and bulkhead in Maryland. Regulations should be based upon good engineering practices and not on burecratic bull ****.
 
#186 · (Edited)
The interesting legal liability issue is whether the owner would be liable for the woman's death after this video is posted to YouTube, assuming he continues to employ the captain.

I believe he is the president and CEO of a large intl. corp, Dow Corning maybe? Find the deep pockets, as they say in the PI field.

If you continue to employ this kind of captain, should you be held personally liable for his negligence? Does the posting of the video constitute sufficient notice/knowledge of the captain's recklessness and incompetence?
 
#190 ·
Tricky question. You would first have to be established that the captain was serious when he made the "chasing hurricanes" comment. You would need testimony of the crew that either he said that and followed up on his word or that he had established a history of putting the ship and crew in stormy weather while avoiding calmer weather.

Then you would have to establish if the owners knew about the video. That would require eye-witness testimony or some documentation proving the owners were aware of the video.

If you didn't have that you would need to convince a judge or jury that it would be a reasonable expectation to say the owners SHOULD have known about the interview as it was their responsibility to be proactively knowledgeable on what activities were taking place on the ship. Any lack of knowledge on their part about the captain's activities and attitudes, especially regarding safety, could be construed as negligence on the part of the owners.

You can be sure the insurance company lawyers are already looking into this. This video is very damning.
 
#187 ·
The ultimate goal of choosing a captain for a ship should be to find one who is experienced, skilled and knowledgeable enough to keep the ship and crew out of those situations where all of the captain's experience, skill and knowledge would not be needed to save the ship and crew.
 
#188 ·
You guys are really too much. Sitting in your computer chairs making speculations and pronouncements with only the evidence you can find on your computer screens....and then whats worse...making judgements with the limited information you have. Some of you have appointed yourself members of the jury, donned spacesuits, taken an oath not to allow or listen to any evidence or arguments which are contrary to what you think, listened to only the first 10 minutes of the prosecutors evidence, and delivered your verdict. Hohw can you even form an opinion on this until there are more facts....especially first hand statements.

Most of you are adults who have made done things in your hisory you may not be proud of and even made stupid statements youd love to retract. Using some statement of You tube ( which could of been altered even) , which could have been taken out of context, which really has shown to have no relevance to the captain leaving on this journey and then making it the central theme of your hysterionics is ridiculous.

There beleive it or not may be other scenerios to this accident then a man hell bent on dying and taken 15 people with him while he commited suicide.

Maybe something catastrophic happened to the ship physically which the bulider or restoreing commpany did which the captain didnt know about. Maybe they used defective materials or a defective process in repairing the ship, how would you know? You wount even wait to find out...guilty as charged

Maybe the captain was not even in control of the ship, maybe he was hurt, maybe there was a mutiny who knows for sure yet.

No person who left on board that day was forced to by gunpoint as far as I know, the forecasts were out.

While the INITIAL evidence looks suspect it is only the beginning of the evidence and only what you can see from your computer screens. To draw conclusions from it is dangerous, unsubstantiated, and shallow IMHO.

Oh yeah some denizen will post like they always do that we are doing this so we can learn some kind of "lesson" or "teaching experience" from it, when actually up to know it has been a character assasination by the internet mob who love to speculate on others tradgedy. Ive seen it happen here with the Rule 62, Fairlones Incident, Encenada incident, the lady leaving on the boat in England, and now this tragedy. What is it about tradgedies which brings the worst out in some of you? You dont even wait for all the facts before your theories start and then come the judgement. But I guess thats easy because no one knows who you really are making these public statements, as you hide behind your screen.

Slow down here, two people have died......hardly any of the facts are in yet. The ship left on the 25th,THE CG is remarkable. Those are really the only facts which are really undisputed and have been verified. There will be plenty of time to understand and process the facts and I am sure it will be done by real experts on the field and real lawyers rather thean the computer screen lawyers here. Then and only then will we really have the truth about this. Until then tell me....what pleasure do you derive from speculating on this.

Dave
 
#192 ·
That video is incredible -- I can't imagine anyone with any sailing experience chasing hurricanes in a 50-year-old wooden ship.
Seems that standard practice when facing really heavy weather was to send down the topmasts. Wonder if they did that before they left the dock. Can't imaging them doing it while underway. Those ships also had heavy shutters to protect the stern windows in a following sea. Wonder if this version of the Bounty had them and if they were deployed.
If not then flooding through the stern windows is another possibility.
I have to confess that through an act of incredible stupidity I've actually been in conditions that almost duplicate those faced by the Bounty.
Simply put, at the beginning of March, 1962, four of us decided to sail from Long Island to Bermuda. We were all young men and young men in groups are exponentially more stupid than any one individually. We got caught by one of the worst winter storms to hit the east coast, and the strength and direction of the wind forced us to take the inside track. We survived because we we on a very strongly-built steel ketch, because we did know our boat very well and because of our seaswing stove. I figure I owe the ocean one so I am very cautious.
In any case, we were running in really mountainous seas and we did everything we could to keep our speed as slow as possible. Our real problem was the huge following sea. The boat would rise to the crest and then plunge down to the trough. During all of this the boat had to be steered kep at a slight angle to the crest and to the trough. If we came straight down the crest the bow of the boat could be buried enough that it would coem up in time and we'd be pitchpoled. If we were too far orr we could be rolled. It meant whomever was at the helm had to pay attention every second and and react when necessary. We relieved the helm every 90 minutes or so, you just couldn't keep it up for longer.
I suspect the Bounty was in the same situation and I wonder if they had enough experienced people to keep relieving the person at the wheel. It doesn't matter whether they were under sail or power, the conditions would have been the same.
I just can't understand how anyone could put so many lives at risk, Not just the crew but all those Coast Guard pilots and rescue swimmers ... it's just beyond me.
 
#193 · (Edited)
Coast Guard to conduct investigation into HMS Bounty sinkingPORTSMOUTH, Va. - Rear Adm. Steven Ratti, the Coast Guard 5th District commander, ordered a district formal investigation Thursday to determine the cause of the sinking of the Tall Ship Bounty, a three-masted sailing ship, 90 miles southeast of Hatteras, N.C., Monday, which resulted in the death of one crewmember, and one crewmember who remains missing.

A district formal investigation consists of a Coast Guard investigating officer who will receive evidence and testimony using formal rules and procedures and is convened when the information to be derived has considerable regional significance, or may indicate vessel class problems or areas of technical importance.

The district formal investigation will probe every aspect of the accident and will determine as closely as possible:

the cause of the accident;
whether there is evidence that any failure of material or equipment was involved or contributed to the casualty;
whether there is evidence that any act of misconduct, inattention to duty, negligence, or willful violation of the law on the part of any licensed or certificated person contributed to the casualty;
whether there is evidence that any Coast Guard or other government agency personnel caused or contributed to the casualty; and
whether the accident should be further investigated by a Marine Board of Investigation.
The Investigating Officer, Cmdr. Kevin M. Carroll, is the chief of the Coast Guard 5th District Marine Inspections and Investigations Branch and will be assisted by investigating officers from Coast Guard Sector North Carolina in Wilmington, N.C.

Coast Guard investigations of marine casualties and accidents are for the purpose of taking appropriate measures for promoting safety of life and property and are not intended to fix civil or criminal responsibility.

A district formal investigation often takes several months to properly complete.

http://www.uscgnews.com/go/doc/4007...conduct-investigation-into-HMS-Bounty-sinking
 
#196 · (Edited)
Doesnt anyone else remember the projected storm track published on
the 24th ( I think it was way back in this thread ) that showed
the overwhelming probability of the storm curving out into the Atlantic
without comming ashore ? I have to say honestly on that day
it does look that by hugging the coast line he could make it to
Florida. Now I believe the 25th and for sure the 26th (on the
2nd day out) the storm models began to show storm path
curving into new england. I can justify him leaving port leaving
with info from the 24th but on the 26th the storm news was bad
and he had a chance to find safe harbor somewhere. On the 26th
is where I think his decision making was faulty and he even sent
the facebook message after two rough days at sea that he seemed
to recognize that he had underestimated the difficulties ahead.

I am not trying to pass judgement but I do think it fun to recreate
what info was available day by day and speculate whether the
captain knew it and then then look at his actions to try to understand
his "bets" as essentially that is what all our decisions are. Some are
carry more risk than others.

I would like to see a replay day by day of the ships position and the
weather forcasts that were available on those days.

You can bet that from the survivors we will someday know more
about the conversations and decisions made aboard the ship
on a day by day basis and how both the crew and the ship
were handling the rough conditions. I think it would be safe
to say most of the survivors had had not had any sleep
for 36 or maybe even 48 hours and the skipper maybe
even 72 hours.. How could anyone sleep
in 25 to 30 foot seas in that small of a boat and probably
they were in a constant state of panic for fear of dying.

So in addition to the crews lack of experience and training, being short handed,
and overwhelming fatigue, we might have had a ship that was
basically being operated by maybe two people who had
not slept for a couple of days. Yessir there will be movie
rights worth millions. Wonder who gets the millions ?
 
#197 · (Edited)
Doesnt anyone else remember the projected storm track published on
the 24th ( I think it was way back in this thread ) that showed
the overwhelming probability of the storm curving out into the Atlantic
without comming ashore ?
One of the outstanding characteristics of this storm from its inception was the lack of consensus on its probable track. The European model and others showed it hitting the east coast anywhere from Va. Beach to N.Y. early on, before it hit Cuba. There was a huge cone of probable tracks.

There is simply no excuse for leaving port when he did. Human life is more important than saving property. It does not really matter what he did after he left port, other than his choice to head South toward the storm, and his failure to seek a port after leaving.

It also does not matter what a great guy he was, or how outstanding his seamanship was, or what experienced yachtsman think about his plans.

This case will be decided by a jury of ordinary people, with competing expert witnesses testifying about whether he failed to meet the standard of a reasonably PRUDENT professional captain.

Even if the ship sank due to material failure, or a freak wave, or mechanical breakdown, it does not matter. Those are all things that are reasonably foreseeable by a prudent professional captain who heads out in that kind of weather.

I believe a jury can easily find the causal connection to this tragedy. The only issue will be damages.
 
#198 · (Edited)
Guilty as charged....lets electrocute him...oh hes already dead and couldnt defend himself and he paid with his life...oh thats right he went down with the ship because he knew the SN jury would convict him

So lets say you are right.He went on a suicide mission and took 15 people with him.

Lets move on to the compensation phase since the SN jury has already convicted him. What should the compensation be?

So lets say you are right and he made an eggregious error in judgement, which cost the ship, and one life. Lets say this is true. Lets say a jury finds this and makes an award. So what????
This happens all the time in real life with auto accidents, product injury cases etc.

What is it about this that attracts the amateur Perry Masons ( showing my age), the spectators in the Collesuem of SN to rant on and on about this? Is it your like for a train wreck? What fascinates you about this story?

People are dying every day from poor judgement. Why isnt anyone focused on that young mother who didnt heed the warnings to evacuate on Staten Island who had the babies ( 2 and 4) ripped out of arms and killed by the storm surge? They just found tem yesterday...dead. Shouldnt she have known the storm was coming, shouldnt she have evacuated...why did she try and drive out through the surging water...maybe they should look at all the statements shes made about kids in her short life....find the one where she says raising the kid is a pain and then go after her for killing them because of her negligence....everything you are saying about this captain could be said about her.

Dont give me the excuse you are looking for a learning or teaching moment Focusing in on tradgedy is human we all feel for these people. But talking about them add nauseum and affixing blame, making assunptions not knowing ALL the facts, assasinating the reputation of a dead man while sitiing at your computer desk eating twinkies smacks of the mobs going to the Roman Collesuem to watch the inevitable outcome and cheering it on.

Thats my humble opinion and only mine. Take it for whats its worth one mans opinion right, partially right, or wrong. Excuse me I need to get some coffee with my twinkie.

dave


Dave
 
#201 ·
Why isnt anyone focused on that young mother who didnt heed the warnings to evacuate on Staten Island who had the babies ( 2 and 4) ripped out of arms and killed by the storm surge? They just found tem yesterday...dead.

Dont give me the excuse you are looking for a learning or teaching moment Focusing in on tradgedy is human we all feel for these people. But talking about them add nauseum and affixing blame, making assunptions not knowing ALL the facts, assasinating the reputation of a dead man while sitiing at your computer desk eating twinkies smacks of the mobs going to the Roman Collesuem to watch the inevitable outcome and cheering it on.
Dave
Because Dave, the last time I checked this forum is a "SAILING" forum and it
is what we want to talk about. IF it were a child care forum we would
be talking about the dead babies. I for one am trying to find out more
of the facts in the hopes his decision making can be better explained.
I personally have made as stupid or worse mistakes but luck was with
me... We learn from our mistakes and sometimes from the mistakes of
others and we sometimes die when luck is not with us.

Maybe they should make videos of the half dozen worst preventable
sea tragedies and make all captains view the video each year in order
to renew their license. That type of thing occurs in some other industries.

I do somewhat agree that we have done as much as we can with
available info. Until we get the feedback from the survivors which could
be substantial, we probably wont be able to form many more opinions.

I dont expect the Coast Guard investigation will turn up much because
they dont want to find very much. The guys who refurbished the ship
a few years back would be experts as to the type and manner of construction but they better watch their butts or could be named as a cause
of problems occuring.

Also someone said several 1st Engineers have quit the job ostensibly
because of the impossible condition of the ship and what I inferred
to be the unwillingness to assume responsibility etc. Wait till we
hear from those guys.

My engineering background makes me want to know the angle
of the ships pitching to and from between waves tops to troughs
and what the bow or stern looks like when reaching the bottoms
of the troughs. One fellow talked about a similar situation
where his boat would bury the bow under the water comming
down to the trough..

Just cant wait till we hear from the crew so we can know when
the masts broke along with other stuff that made it apparent
the ship had crossed the threshold from survivability.

How bout this as a question.... did the Captain wait too
long to abandon ship or to call for rescue ?

If I am not mistaken, his first distress call was 10:30 pm
right? Abandon ship then at 4:00am. That is a long long
four and a half hours for a crew that probably all thought
they were going to die.
 
#199 ·
Chef,

I think I understand your concern for the dignity of those lost. However, you ironically tried and convicted all those that you've accused of trying and convicting Bounty.

Some feel, like I do, that the loss of human life was avoidable in this circumstance and discussing it is not as reprehensible as some feel. I recall the exact prediction on the day they departed CT. I hauled out the day before. This novice crew would have been influenced by the Captains decision making. There didn't need to be a gun to their heads. If my daughter were aboard, I would be doing more than just simply analyzing a decision making process at this point. I think you would too.
 
#200 ·
Chef, I don't agree that this is a lynch mob a la some of the Treyvon Martin discussion.

There seems to be enough clear fact here to condemn the captains decisions in putting to sea. Setting sail in an old square rigger, with an untrained crew that would have been undersized if they WERE trained, and then heading towards a hurricane, hoping to dodge it doesn't meet my criteria for good seamanship or even basic judgement.

Think about this - suppose Sandy HAD stayed well offshore - that would have put the Bounty in or near the "safe" quadrant of the storm at which point the high winds would have been blowing against the Gulf Stream with consequent NASTY effect on sea state.
 
#202 · (Edited)
I agree with Dave about the excessive captain-bashing. The video said it all. The caption on SA had it right. But this is a learning opportunity and will continue to be so as the facts emerge. People are interested because we are all threatened by storms. It's only natural to want to know what happened because it is much more personal and relevent to sailors than to those on land. Every sailor learns from these types of tragedies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidpm
#203 ·
The things that don't make sense to me is the Capt states in the video he likes to chase hurricanes. But then he states the ship normally sails when at sea at 4-5 knots, and the ship can only go sideways to the wind or downwind. Does not sound like the ship could hove to. The Capt also states the diesel auxillaries are underpowered for the ship and are only used when coming into port.

So this Capt wants to chase hurricanes in a ship that is limited to sailing only 90 degrees off the wind (and with lee way probably more like 100 degrees or more), and the ships diesels were not strong enough to power it in any kind of stong wind or high sea condition.

Sounds like a suicide mission to me.
 
#204 ·
Let's say, for arguments sake, that the conversations held regarding this incident lead to safety measures that ultimately result in a reduction of loss of life at sea. Would it be worth questioning the decision the captain made (and possibly tarnishing his reputation) to head out to sea in the direction of a hurricane, that at the time was decimating the Bahamas, if that meant saving lives in the future?

We are all emotionally invested in the loss of the life of a sailor. We can't help it. We all know the call of the sea and most of us have put ourselves into a situation that we later regretted. But trying to stifle the conversation, when emotions are high? I don't agree with that.

After the shootings in Aurora, CO, officials were asking those who were calling for an end to the sale of assault weapons to please withhold their criticism and demand for action out of respect for the deceased. Where is that conversation today? But it will begin again the next time it happens. And it will.

The same goes for sailors needlessly dying at sea. One side wants to know how this could have happened, the other side says remain silent out of respect for the deceased. And if we follow the latter, the conversation dies and only re-emerges when another life is avoidably lost at sea. And that too will happen again if measures aren't put into place to prevent it.

We can't prevent all loss of life at sea but we can certainly take certain measures to reduce that loss. Heading out to sea in the direction of a hurricane is one of those measures.
 
#206 ·
Let's say, for arguments sake, that the conversations held regarding this incident lead to safety measures that ultimately result in a reduction of loss of life at sea. Would it be worth questioning the decision the captain made (and possibly tarnishing his reputation) to head out to sea in the direction of a hurricane, that at the time was decimating the Bahamas, if that meant saving lives in the future?

We are all emotionally invested in the loss of the life of a sailor. We can't help it. We all know the call of the sea and most of us have put ourselves into a situation that we later regretted. But trying to stifle the conversation, when emotions are high? I don't agree with that.

After the shootings in Aurora, CO, officials were asking those who were calling for an end to the sale of assault weapons to please withhold their criticism and demand for action out of respect for the deceased. Where is that conversation today? But it will begin again the next time it happens. And it will.

The same goes for sailors needlessly dying at sea. One side wants to know how this could have happened, the other side says remain silent out of respect for the deceased. And if we follow the latter, the conversation dies and only re-emerges when another life is avoidably lost at sea. And that too will happen again if measures aren't put into place to prevent it.

We can't prevent all loss of life at sea but we can certainly take certain measures to reduce that loss. Heading out to sea in the direction of a hurricane is one of those measures.
Agree, we as a society have become too politically correct.
 
#208 · (Edited)
OK back from my twinkie

Let's say, for arguments sake, that the conversations held regarding this incident lead to safety measures that ultimately result in a reduction of loss of life at sea. Would it be worth questioning the decision the captain made (and possibly tarnishing his reputation) to head out to sea in the direction of a hurricane, that at the time was decimating the Bahamas, if that meant saving lives in the future?
JuilieMor
Just like I said...a teaching moment would be the answer from many of you. I agree with you if it lead to a safety procedure which would save someones life it would be worth while. I dont hink the discussion of sailing into a hurricane warrents what is common sense. And the lessons to be learned would be from the RESULTS of an impartial investigation not the Colleseum members cheering on the decapitation of the dead captain. So my issue here is not about learning a lesson for all sailors, that can be done after this truly gets investigated and thoroughy thought out. My issue is the rush to judgement and the finger pointing at the captain at such an early moment in this tradgedy. It may come to bear that he had 80 % of the responsibilty for the accident, but we dont have any idea of that now. Again the colleseum mentality hasnt even heard a statement of ONE of the survivors, but the captain bashing has begun.

I supervise over 1500 employees. A great amount of my time is dealing with issues related to personel. Usually there are two sides to a story and then there is the truth which may be closer to one side than the other but usually lies between the two stories. What I have learned humbly as I grew more mature, was that I had to be careful not to go with my INITIALevaluation and facts concerning an incident, and allow the ivestigation to play out without predisposing myself to an opinion. I cant say I was always good at that or even now perfect about that, but letting facts surface is better to realizing what really happened instead of speculating.

other side says remain silent out of respect for the deceased
No I didnt say that either. Remaining silent until some of the facts are known and you have at least eyewitness acccounts would seem to be more rational and just. Read some of these posts villifying the Captain and ridiculing him. Since you just recently joined go back to the threads on Rule 62, the Farlonnes incident, the Encinada incident, the british Lady and read the threads. These threads perhaps got almost as much if not more paticipation than the gun or anchor threads. The blame game starts early on in those threads too. Even before very many facts were in evidence. Mmost of the "lessons" came only after all the facts were revealed and resulted in good lessons ie teathers and sea state close to shoal area ( Farlonnes), crew sleeping ( Encinada- the initial collesuem reaction had them looking for a freighter who cut them up), coming in during a Rage, how a crew cant affect best judgement of a captain when they get sick ( rule 62)

What I object to is the rush to judgement...remember that phrase. It can means taking a few facts and then CONSTRUCTING scenarios to fit what YOU want it to appear to be. When that happpens other facts can be ignored or overlooked. What I have seen in some of the posts here is a rush to judgement on the captain. Weve seen posts looking at the righting moments, sea state, condittion of the vessel etc. We see hypothesis from a few facts. No eyewitness accounts yet, except a hypothesis of a conspiracy as to why that has not occured. Even a recent statement that the Coast Gaurd would hold hearings, but wont want the facts to come out. Why would someone say that? Why would someone say its a suicide mission? Do you think the captain though as he did this that he wanted to commit suicide with 15 people?

One thing I have not posted here which I guess I should. Like wingnwing I have been on the Bounty and met the captain. If someone asked me for a judgement of him, and this is a big time snap judgement, he seemed professional, knowledgeable about his ship, a teacher of others and dedicated to his responsibility for the ship and its crew.

I guess its human nature for people to love to take something, think the worst, and then fabricate reasons to support their conclusions

I am withholding my personal opinions about what happened till I find out more facts, but one fact I know is that if he is found to have been the whole cause he paid the ultimate price.
 
#211 ·
one fact I know is that if he is found to have been the whole cause he paid the ultimate price.
And that could be viewed as rough justice. The problem is he wasn't the only one.
 
#209 ·
In the world of aviation, I know that certain kinds of conditions require
certain kinds of equipment and special training certifications.
I wonder if in the nautical world if certain kinds of boats either
by size or type or category etc could legally be restricted
from venturing into certain sea states. Further that
any captain after the fact having violated the rules could
be liable legally for having done so. Carrying passengers
verses not is a big distincition in aviation and in this case
the untrained crew or many of them might be characterized
as passengers based upon actual training history.

Also, it has been mentioned several times that the
winds going against the gulf stream would result
in worse conditions, ... why not invent a new term
of airspeed called air vs water speed or hydromic relative
air speed etc. I assume the seastate of a 25 knot wind
pushing against a 7 knot gulf stream would be the equivalent
of a 32 knot wind over calm seas. Right ?
 
#213 · (Edited)
The coast guard required the Pride of Baltimore II to be designed differently (higher free board, larger engine, different ballasting) after sinking of the original Pride. I had crewed on the original Pride, and knew some of the crew that was on the ship when it sank.



"Guided by the experience of the original Pride, the Board determined that this vessel could better fulfill the mission of Globe-trotting Ambassador that had evolved over the years if she was larger and had more cruising range both under sail and under power. It was also determined that Pride II would be licensed by the US Coast Guard as a subchapter "T" vessel approved for carrying passengers. With these guidelines in hand, designer Gillmer set out to create a new Pride that would look much like the original on the outside but have more contemporary amenities and safety features below deck."

Regards
 
#212 ·
While you all are trying to respond to me remember I am not defending the captain or his actions. Not to be politically correct, cause the chips should fall where they may. Lets find all the chips first and examine them.

dave
 
#216 ·
Chef, I appreciate your call not to rush to judge, but there are a lot of experienced captains that question why the Bounty set sail.:

Local captain shocked and dismayed by sinking of HMS Bounty - Baltimore Sun

It is also human nature to judge prior to knowing all the facts, and is hard to surpress. But even when you have a long jury trial with all the facts presented, justice is many times not served.
 
#220 ·
Chef, I appreciate your call not to rush to judge, but there are a lot of experienced captains that question why the Bounty set sail.-Casey1999
As do I. Hopefully that comes out. And also those who tried or attempted to dissuade him. Time will tell this.

Of course I was summarily awarded the Darwin award by a quick to judge SN who beleived because i stayed with my boat during the storm that my judgement was not to be trusted.

It is also human nature to judge prior to knowing all the facts, and is hard to surpress- Casey1999
It is something which people who have good judgement learn to control or their decisions will fall vistim of their own haste and immediate gratification. One of the lessons of Rule 62
 
  • Like
Reactions: casey1999
#221 ·
I'm waiting for the results of this: Coast Guard to conduct investigation into HMS Bounty sinking

The sea is big and sometimes scary. If we can convince ourselves that other peoples' dumb decisions are the cause of their problems, then we can convince ourselves that since we would NEVER make a decision like that, we would be safe no matter what, and we don't have to face the real truth, that whenever you go to sea, however much you prepare, however vigilant you are, sometimes things will happen that put you at risk that you cannot control.
 
#223 ·
A skilled mariner does not simply go to sea. They look at their ship, they look at their crew, the look at the weather and the forecasted weather. They look at the risk vs reward of the trip, they look at the need for making the trip, they look at back up plans in case of foul weather, they look at how they can perform damage control, they look at safety gear and equipment, they look at communications equipment.

Sailing is actually very safe if done in a seaman like manner, you make it out to be much more dangerous than it has to be.
 
#222 ·
worded that badly.

I should have said does not a 25 knot wind pushing over opposing 7 knot current
result in the same sea state as a 32 knot wind blowing over water
that is not moving. My use of the terms "calm seas" screwed up
the meaning.-preventec47
Answer is still NO, not at all.

Waves, seas state not only depend on wind speed, but also depth, fetch, topography,and current at a minimum. There are other factors also.

I have crossed the Gulf Stream many times. Take 4-5 GS knot current with wind from the North. Lets assume a gentle 20 knots. The sea state outside the GS could be 4-6 swells at 15 second period, which is easily sailed in all directions, but in the GS the same 20 knorts would make it a very uncoimfortable ride and almost stop you from heading northerly. The sea state might be 10-12 with a 8 second period.

Inlets such as Barnegat in NJ are another example. Water rushing out the inlet on the outgoing tide in Barnegat Bat moves at 2 knotss east. In the inlet channel which is narrow ( Bernullis pricipal) that water is now moving 5 knotts east.

If you come in on an onshore breeze of 15 knts ( opposing) the ocean would be a nice 2-4 easy swell, because there are shoals extending outward 1/2 mile from the inlet these 2-4 foot sweels hit the 5 knot current in substabtially shallower water these swells now become 8 foot breaking crashing rollers aross the inlet which can throw you on the rocks.
Back in the Bay behind the inlet the water has no swell in the 15 knot breeze becasue there is no open fetch. Sames scenario with incoming tide would be maybe 2 ft brakers in the inlet channel with no danger at all.

Other NJ Inlets without the shoaling such as Cape may, AStlantic City ( Absecon) and Manesquan have no shoals so there arent breakers like barnegat, bit the current against wind does create a rougher sea state in the inlet.

This is a very simple explaination to a solution that contains many variables including the ones I mentioned above.
 
#225 ·
I didn't say you "simply put to sea." I said that no matter how carefully you prepare and how vigilant you are, that you can only influence, but not control, what happens after you set sail - and that some of that will be dangerous.
 
#228 ·
After you set sail, you can control your boat, maybe not the weather, but you should be in control of how and where your ship is going. Sure things break and weather changes, but a good seaman adjusts for that. And most seamen would not set sail when a huricane is lurking. And knowing that predicted huricane tracks are not very accurate, and in no way should lives be dependent on a predicted course of a storm that would have nearly a 100% chance of causing equipment damage and or loss of life.

Everything we do can be dangerous, from waliking across a street, to driving to flying, sailing is actually one of the safest activities.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top