Oh, and this about having to be rescued far far away. Risking others life, costly as well. Is this really an argument? Is it better with a 50 year old Swan? Or, any other kind of boat which for some reason starts to leak, hits something or whatever?
Should we prohibit sailing over large distances? That would be the ultimate consequence of such an argument.
Well, yes, it is really an argument. Your rescuers will ideally be fellow racers who nevertheless take a big risk doing it, but they are "in the game" so each racer is grateful if they can assist another, and typically get time-compensation for it, which is only fair.
But (as here) the containership crew were volunteers following "the best tradition of the sea" as the merchant sailor typically do, and at considerable cost to their companies in lost time, willingly undertaken by owners as well as crews. This is how AMVER works, and why most ships volunteer to be in it. The Open 60 crew here describe how they were getting smashed around on the Jacobs ladder, and *how the ships crew descended to help them nevertheless* Sometimes these rescue crews are injured or lost themselves, either physically or the whole ship can be lost as they stand by the distress vessel in worsening weather, and lose their own ship as a result (yes, it's happened, the MARINE ELECTRIC lost off the Virginia Capes in 1983, only three survivors).
It's a real risk to them. And the Coast Guard's (informal) motto at the rescue stations is, "you have to go out--you don't have to come back", and they didn't make it up out of thin air either. Yes, it's their job, but making them do it is not a zero-sum game. And as a matter of principle they do not charge money for it, even though sometimes it would seem (to me) more than fair to do so in the event of some particularly sketchy voyages.
And no, we shouldn't prohibit sailing long distances nor singlehanding, but nor should we be dismissive of the risk of rescuers, when going for "maximum" anything (speed, distance, endurance) out there. To me it borders on irresponsibility in *some* instances. I'm not sure this is one of them, I do tend to think this was an atypical failure (meaning hull vice rudder or rig, whose cause may never be known absent that hull to look at).
Full disclosure: I'm retired USCGR so I like them....