HMS Bounty in trouble... - Page 110 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > Out There > Vessels Lost, Missing, or in Danger
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree718Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1091  
Old 12-01-2012
Faster's Avatar
Just another Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Westminster, BC
Posts: 15,346
Thanks: 88
Thanked 242 Times in 233 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Interesting article, Roger (once I actually found it!!). Nice magazine/site too..
__________________
Ron

1984 Fast/Nicholson 345 "FastForward"

".. there is much you could do at sea with common sense.. and very little you could do without it.."
Capt G E Ericson (from "The Cruel Sea" by Nicholas Monsarrat)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1092  
Old 12-02-2012
Bristol 45.5 - AiniA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,615
Thanks: 5
Thanked 86 Times in 75 Posts
Rep Power: 9
killarney_sailor is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faster View Post
Already in place in Canada.. it's not onerous, and not particularly qualifying, but everyone, youngsters included, need to have a PCOP (Pleasure Craft Operators Card) for any powered vessel - including your 7 foot tender with a 2 hp outboard. It was phased in over a period of time, and was issued to anyone who had ever taken, or takes, the Canadian Power and Sail Squadron basic boating course as well as being offered separately, even on-line.

Fees are reasonable and there's been little hue and cry, though I imagine there are a lot of crusty oldtimers still boating without it....
The PCOP is a joke and just gives the impression of certification ... and provides some income for those who sell them at boat shows. In South Africa, a resident must have a Yachtmaster certificate before they are allowed to leave harbour in command of any pleasure craft. Obviously it is serious bit of ocean, but it is also very serious certification. BTW, a British Yachtmaster certificate is not accepted, you need to get one here.
__________________
Back in the water in Grenada - with new main and #2 and cockpit canvas (Santa came early). Will spend the winter and early spring in the Caribbean and then head to Bermuda and the northeast US. Still trying to decide if we will bring the boat to Canada, either in 2015 or 2016.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1093  
Old 12-02-2012
Faster's Avatar
Just another Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Westminster, BC
Posts: 15,346
Thanks: 88
Thanked 242 Times in 233 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about Faster has a spectacular aura about
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by killarney_sailor View Post
The PCOP is a joke and just gives the impression of certification ... and provides some income for those who sell them at boat shows. .
I agree.. hence the statement "not particularly qualifying".. but it's at least a start. For most Canadian cruising grounds I think full on Yachtmaster/Oceanic certification would be overkill, but I'd like to see the CPSS basic course the minimum rather than the $60 quickie course/test.

I think we'd see far fewer boats stranded on sandbars or rocks immediately adjacent to the buoy that told you to go the other side.

The other failing of this system is, at least in Vancouver, the 16 foot rental runabouts where all you need is a credit card, and they put the renter (often foreign visitors) through an even more abbreviated checklist before sending them on their way. We frequently find them totally lost, or out of fuel, or both.
__________________
Ron

1984 Fast/Nicholson 345 "FastForward"

".. there is much you could do at sea with common sense.. and very little you could do without it.."
Capt G E Ericson (from "The Cruel Sea" by Nicholas Monsarrat)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1094  
Old 12-02-2012
MarkofSeaLife's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 33
Thanked 95 Times in 78 Posts
Rep Power: 5
MarkofSeaLife is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

A nicely thought out post.

There are so many things to wonder about... But it may come down to just a little something that's the death knell.

You mention twisting. It's been mentioned before, too. Now remember the ship was off Cape Hatteras, in contrary current with a strong wnd that had been there over many days. Also any waves coming from the center of the hurricane itself would have been coming from the south, against the wind waves from the north.

With those waves and that twisting its quite likely a plank sprung... And if it was forward it would have made the flooding worse to drive the boat forward.

Maybe it was water inundation, or sloshing around that caused the engine and generators, or pumps to fail. Remember the roll in that video? I the engine room that would have been putting forum foot of water all over the engine room!

In the 18th Century if Bligh had known there was a hurricane he would have been a long way away. All sailing ships would.


Mark
__________________
Sea Life
Notes on a Circumnavigation:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1095  
Old 12-02-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,193
Thanks: 21
Thanked 100 Times in 83 Posts
Rep Power: 11
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal Paradise View Post
What I wonder about is that the period of time where the Bounty took on too much water seems to coincide not with the pumps failing so much as with the loss of propulsion. I am wondering if, once they lost steerage, they got sideways and spun around and overstressed the hull. Would it have been better to put all effort into trying to sail rather than work on the engines and pumps? Sometimes survival comes down tobuying time.

I would also like opinions about hull stress Bounty was subjected to when they lost propulsion sometime Sunday. I’ve read that in fact the pumps operated during Sunday night even after the engines quit. From the Bounty specs online, I read she was equipped with (2) 35 kw generators. If thats true , and I think it can't be, but - those are massive, each one easily capable of powering 2 pumps. The engineer stated the second generator was the last thing to go, but that for reasons he “ didn’t want to speculate” about, the water suddenly came in faster than they could pump out. Many have speculated that a plank sprung or some type of seam opened. I would like opinions as to whether the first course of action should have been to get sailing, get steering and point the ship so as to be more stable and less stressed. I wonder if that were even possible in those conditions , on this type of ship with 16 people.

The timeline seems to be that things were fairly normal, “ all is well” as they said Sunday on FB and then they lost propulsion. Shortly after that, the engineer, first mate and captain all went into the engine room clearing pumps, and the crew put up some sails. But in the ABC interview they said “ we had so little control” The engineer described being exhausted from holding on as the ship “ twisted” . He also said that Walbridge and the fist mate were in there helping him. My question, which I don’t think we can really answer, is what if the captain and first mate put all their energy into furling sails and steering the ship east thereby minimizing hull stresses. I wonder if it even occurred to them to try and stabilize the ship, or if they were fixated on the engines and pumps, “ Stewing over them” as Claudene Christian wrote.

What if Walbridge put everything into sailing during those last hours? Would that course of action have reduce the hull stresses and delayed the big leak long enough for the ship to survive Monday morning? And wouldn’t still sailing bounty be a more stable ship? That would have been a much better scenario. Helicopters overhead, a deck to launch rafts from, daylight. Or did they fixate too long on the engine room? Leaving the ship to twist and roll in the hurricane eventually leading to catastrophe when the ship rolled and threw everyone into the water in the dark.

I got this idea from another article -- Sal Mercogliano, a former merchant marine who is now a maritime historian at Campbell University had this perspective -

In the 18th century, the original Bounty’s full crew would have hoisted smaller storm sails to keep the ship plowing in one direction. But that didn’t happen as things began to go wrong on Sunday, including the reported loss of diesel power.
Powerless “that ship would have been careening on all three axes and it’s possible that a hole opened up, a plank loosened up, and once she lost power there’s no chance to get storm sails up and manage them with just 16 people on board – remember, the original Bounty had a crew of 100,” says Mr. Mercogliano.
Mercogliano answers to that question when he says: "there’s no chance to get storm sails up and manage them with just 16 people on board – remember, the original Bounty had a crew of 100",

He is exaggerating a bit because the original HMS Bounty had a crew of less than 50 and not all were sailors, but that ship is not a Yacht and the two professional sailors, the captain and the first mate would not be able to sail the boat and take care of the sails alone without the help of a qualified crew. We are not talking about small sail areas like on a yacht. Even on a storm the sail area needed to steer the ship would have been significant if compared with the sail of a small boat and their handling much more complicated.

The boat was making water and the pumps were running already for a long time. The situation, as you say, seemed to be controlled till the moment they had problems with the engines and stayed with only one generator....but you don't mention an electric problem that was clearly stated and that I think it is on the origin of the pumps not working. They were electric pumps and with the system shorted even if they had the generator still working it will not be able to put them working.

Some photos that were posted show a very poor electric installation and the ingress of water could have been on the origin of the electric problem.

Anyway, even making a controllable amount of water, one that the pumps could handle, the moment the pumps went out of service they where domed because they had not an independent reserve pump system and the boat was making water. They had one hydraulic pump system connected to the engines and other electric depending on the generators. In the past they had had an independent diesel pump system as main but they had not replaced it when he broke some years ago.

Regards

Paulo
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1096  
Old 12-02-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,193
Thanks: 21
Thanked 100 Times in 83 Posts
Rep Power: 11
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

This was posted in another thread as if there was not already enought threads about the Bounty. I guess it belongs here. Comments please

December 1, 2012

AN OPEN LETTER

Dear Robin,

It has been a month now since the USCG stopped looking for you. Claudene is dead and BOUNTY, like you, is lost at sea as a result of your decision to sail directly towards Hurricane Sandy. Your action reminds me of the movie “Hunt for Red October”. I am thinking of that captain of the submarine hunting the other submarine. The captain on the hunt for the fleeing sub threw all caution away in his hunting effort. Why did you throw all caution away by navigating for a close pass of Hurricane Sandy? I was so surprised to discover that BOUNTY was at sea near Cape Hatteras and close to Hurricane Sandy Sunday night October 28th! That decision of yours was reckless in the extreme!

The outcome of your action makes you the only captain of the current crop of long experienced American maritime licensed sailing vessel masters’ actually willing to voyage anywhere near a hurricane! Did you not remember the fate of the FANTOME? Like BOUNTY she was a slow, less than 10 knot capable vessel under engine power. Not fast enough to run out of range of the reach of Hurricane Mitch. Additionally the master of FANTOME had too much confidence in hurricane forecasting accuracy. Mitch made an unexpected left turn after consistent movement westward before slowing down to near stopped about the time FANTOME made her run eastward from Belize trying to escape Mitch. A stationary hurricane is nearly impossible to predict future motion. To the best of anyone’s knowledge (FANTOME was lost with all hands) Mitch ran right over her. You, on the other hand, maneuvered directly toward a very accurately forecast and steadily moving Hurricane Sandy with a slow moving vessel of wood construction, FANTOME was of metal. Also, BOUNTY is quite a bit smaller than FANTOME. Still you aimed all but directly at Sandy. That was reckless my friend! Was it wise or prudent to set off into the teeth of Sandy in BOUNTY? Did it make any sense at all? Virtually all of your professional friends and colleagues back here do not think so, not at all.

You told everyone you were going east around Sandy. But you did not even try to do so. Your track line indicates unequivocally a trail all but directly toward Sandy. When I heard east around was the strategy I immediately wondered about it. I am not the only one to know that BOUNTY is not highly powered with her engines. You yourself are publicly recorded as saying BOUNTY is under powered. Looking at weather conditions east of Long Island for Friday October 26 it is clear there were northeast winds. They were not strong winds...near 5-10 knots at the buoy 50 miles SE of Nantucket with a slight sea of between 1-2 feet. But windage of any sailing vessel under auxiliary power is significant. A full-rigged ship has a whole lot more windage. 5 knots of boat speed into 10 knots of wind means a lot of drag slowing BOUNTY down...maybe with the underpowered engines BOUNTY could barely reach 5 knots of boat speed? Saturday Oct. 27 at the buoy wind had increased to around 15 knots NExE and sea had increased to around 3-4 feet. With staysails set and motor-sailing what would BOUNTY have been steering? Maybe something south of true East? What kind of speed would BOUNTY have made? On Sunday Oct. 28 wind had jumped to 30-35 knots NExE and the sea was up around 12 feet and building. Considering those big bluff bows of BOUNTY and massive windage in her rigging you probably decided to abandon the "go east around Sandy" strategy long before even trying it out because of the increasingly slow progress BOUNTY would eventually be making with ever increasing winds and swell from the northeast plus the knowledge the wind would eventually veer to east and on toward southeast as Sandy moved north forcing BOUNTY to turn southward and even southwestward and that would be back toward Sandy. You may also have still been doubtful of Sandy actually turning NW. Considering Sandy did go toward land rather than toward sea, had you tried to go eastward as you originally intended with any kind of will, BOUNTY might have wound up pretty far away from Sandy’s center, but the storm was so big you might actually have met conditions somewhat similar to what you actually met by heading straight toward Sandy. Having to abandon BOUNTY well out to the eastward would likely have been at a location somewhat further away from rescue assets than you actually were. So, ironically, it may actually have been fortunate for your crew that you did not try to go eastward.

An even more distressing puzzle is brought forth by BOUNTY’s steady movement directly at Sandy after you had abandoned your original notion of going east around. Friday Oct. 26 forecasting confirmed an even higher confidence Hurricane Sandy would turn left after some more time going north. But BOUNTY continued straight southward! Why did you not turn for New York Harbor? The light northeast flow I describe above was occurring all the way down past the mouth of the Delaware Bay. You could have gone way up the Hudson River. With the NE’rly wind behind BOUNTY is it likely speed might have been more than 5 knots on her way to New York? Alternatively, by my calculation, at 5 knots BOUNTY could have diverted toward Delaware Bay and gone up that bay and through the C & D Canal by late Saturday night. Wind in the Upper Chesapeake Bay Saturday night was light and variable with a forecast to increase from the NE overnight into Sunday before backing toward the north and continuing to increase overnight Sunday into Monday. At midnight Saturday northeast wind strength in Baltimore Harbor was actually 10 knots. Late Sunday wind had backed to north and increased to near 20 knots. If BOUNTY were in the Inner Harbor of Baltimore by early Sunday she would have been sheltered from wind by all of those tall city buildings that ring the north side of the Inner Harbor. There would have been no sea action. Harbor water levels did indeed increase above normal, but only by 3-4 feet. BOUNTY would not have floated over any dock. Even if she had, the damage would unlikely be the loss of the ship and certainly not the loss of any life!

So what was it you were thinking by not diverting toward shelter once you knew about the confirmed forecasting that not only continued to indicate Sandy going ashore in New Jersey but also Sandy would likely be the largest hurricane in some time? No slow boat was going to be speedy enough to get out of Sandy’s long reach from where BOUNTY was on Friday. Certainly resurrecting the "east around" strategy would be impossible now that the distance to Sandy had reduced bringing with the reduced distance soon to increase NE’rly winds, soon to start a steady veer through East. But a slow boat would have had time to get inshore from where BOUNTY was on Friday before Sandy’s strength was felt. Why did you persist in steering BOUNTY directly toward Sandy? Was it confidence in her physical strength after all of the rebuilding over the last several years? If that was the case, that is recklessly cavalier to the extreme! Not even the big powerful tug and barge combinations that regularly ply the East Coast were fooling around with facing Sandy! But you were. I find myself wondering again…What were you thinking?

On top of this, you told folks during the south bound journey directly toward Sandy that it was safer to be at sea. Hmmm...an interesting & vague notion that. It is true the US Navy in Norfolk goes to sea ahead of an approaching hurricane. But they are high endurance (high speed) ships with mariners trained and contracted to go in the way of danger, not young keen professionals & volunteers on an harbor attractions’ vessel!

I understand there might be two reasons for sending a navy fleet out. One is their wind resistance at the dock…and probably also concern for extra high water from storm surge. That wind resistance could play great havoc keeping the ships tied to the dock. Maybe wreck the pier by the pressure against the dock. Extra high water causes all kinds of concerns. The other reason is our nation’s security. A navy bottled up in port for a hurricane is not a navy able to provide for national defense. Meanwhile those navy ships have a lot of speed they are capable of. And they do not hang around at sea in the path of a hurricane. They keep going out to sea to get away from the rough seas that will be created by the approaching hurricane. Making 20 knots means they could be 480 nautical miles to the eastward in 24 hours. Something not possible with a smaller slow boat that departed closely ahead of Sandy with the idea of protecting itself from dock damage on the premise it would be safer instead to experience big seas as well big winds creating them. Now that is just plain illogical thinking! With a choice between suffering strong wind by being inshore while avoiding big seas verses being at sea with both big seas and strong winds you should have diverted Friday as soon as you got the updated weather forecasting confirming Sandy was going ashore in New Jersey.

Yeah, you were a reckless man Robin. I would not have continued to proceed as you did. Frankly, I do not know anyone with a lot of experience in large, slow (still faster than BOUNTY), strong, steel motor vessels like the powerful tug & barge combinations we see plying the East Coast would have considered heading toward a hurricane like you did with Sandy…not only forecast as going ashore rather than turning towards sea…but also described as a “storm of the century”. Those tug & barge operators would seek shelter inshore or not proceed to sea at all. I also do not know any sailing vessel masters that would head toward a hurricane as you did with hopes of negotiating a pass like two vessels meeting head-on. The tug & barge industry has a lot of reason to stay on schedule. Lots of money at stake with timely delivery. But it is even more money if there is significant damage from big seas. Plus, if the cargo is chemical or oil there is the cost and criminal consequences of a polluting spill. I cannot imagine there was any reason existing that would force BOUNTY to directly approach a hurricane. Loss of BOUNTY is so permanent. No more voyages after losing the ship…don’t you know!

But the loss of life is the most tragic. You not only lost your own, you lost that of Claudene’s. Hell man, the BOUNTY can be replaced. But why ever risk loss when it is so much more important not to risk a crew member’s life? Having BOUNTY remain in port, or seek port when it became evident Sandy was not going to turn eastward as most often hurricanes do, might have meant damage to BOUNTY, but unlikely any loss of life. If you found no dock willing to accommodate BOUNTY up the Delaware or in the Chesapeake Bay, put her in the mud and hang on. Doing that would mean no reason to fear sinking completely below water. Even if she were to roll on her side while aground she would not have sunk below the surface. Maybe she would have become a total loss, but the crew could remain sheltered in her hull, assuming there was no safe way to get off of her and ashore before high winds arrived. Putting BOUNTY aground for the winds of Sandy because of no dock option would have been a bold decision! Actually, I believe your request to get to a dock would not have been turned down. However, all of the above was avoidable by not going to sea at all. Your focus should have been the same focus of all of your East Coast sailing vessel contemporaries…not go to sea…rather get tied up in as safe a place as you could find…not waste time trying to gain some distance toward your intended destination.

Robin, for all of the experience you have, it was recklessly poor judgment to have done anything but find a heavy weather berth for your ship, rather than instead intentionally navigate directly toward Sandy with no thought given to deviate if the original plan of yours was not panning out. During the nineteen years you were master of BOUNTY you were the single reason she remained active. Under your command she went from being an aging wooden vessel with all of the typical problems age brings to a vessel, to a reviving vessel as a result of several significant re-buildings over the last several years. You were a hero in everyone's eyes. Deservedly so I will freely add!!! I so respected your even, steady persistence to celebrate what BOUNTY could be and as a result was becoming. After years of barely surviving coastal trips here in America, after significant rebuilding, you successfully managed two safe and productive European voyages. That success was surely destined for more voyages to ports thrilling throngs of public in love with BOUNTY's roll in Hollywood movies. But that future is gone now. Because you chose to do something that no one of your experience, and all those young professionals with less experience, several that sailed with you, would have done. Some might have sailed and diverted. Some might have sailed with the plan to get some distance south along the coast then duck inshore long before any real impact from Sandy would be felt. But most did not depart at all. They worked from the start locating as safe a harbor arrangement as could be figured out. Up there in Southern New England is the fine port of New Bedford with its storm dyke to protect the fishing fleet. Surely BOUNTY would have been welcomed? I cannot conjure any reason why your friends in New London would not have responded with welcome of shelter had you asked.

While there are many memories I have of conversing with you about things marine affecting what we do as masters of sailing vessels, we never discussed the topic of delivering on schedule as promised and the problems of failure to arrive as promised. This is coming oh so very much too late, but I feel compelled to share that during my many years as master of vessels, there has never been any pressure put on me to make sure promises of arrival were kept. What I was told is that safety was most important. Safety of the ship was desired. But safety of the crew was most essential. As a result I have been master aboard when I have had to inform the company the intended arrival would not occur as scheduled due to weather. Sometimes the weather concern involved a hurricane. Sometimes the concern was a cold front and resultant head winds or a typical mid latitude low passing by. The decision we were going to be tardy to the destination port had to do with risk of damage to the ship. Preventing ship damage most often meant there would be little to no additional risk of injury to the crew and in the case of an inspected vessel also the passengers. Yep, unlike BOUNTY, most of the sail training vessels in America are certified and inspected for underway activities; several in the American fleet are certified for ocean service. Those that are wood built are pretty strong. Yet they avoid hurricanes. Being tardy always meant there would be another opportunity in the future. With BOUNTY now gone, with you and Claudene as well, there is no future to share with Claudene, with you, with BOUNTY, for all of us…for everyone.

If confidence was the basis in your decisions, no ship is invulnerable. And in a career at sea one cannot avoid every gale or nasty storm – but you set out with the BOUNTY with whatever her strengths and weaknesses into the biggest one some of us have ever seen dominating the Western North Atlantic. Many stronger, faster ships than BOUNTY chose to stay in port for this one. What was your need?

Well my very recklessly cavalier friend. I cannot say I told you so. But I sure can say I am surprised! Not Robin! This stunt is so amateurish as to be off the scale! But stunning surprise of surprises! It is Robin! Heading directly at a hurricane in a small, slow boat. Instead of running and hiding...or not venturing out at all. You have provided everyone with a great deal of hurt and sadness and consternation as well a firestorm of gossip nearly full of blame and foolishness directed at the whole of our sailing community.

That is an inestimably be-damned legacy my friend.

Signed,

Jan C. Miles
sailingmum and jameswilson29 like this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1097  
Old 12-04-2012
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,028
Thanks: 0
Thanked 142 Times in 126 Posts
Rep Power: 5
JonEisberg will become famous soon enough
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Some more details about the final days/hours that I haven't seen reported before... Sounds like the engineer Barksdale may not be as inclined to remain as silent as the rest of the crew in the wake of this fiasco... More information is revealed about the timeline of the failure of the generator(s), appears one may have simply run out of fuel, due to a damaged fuel gauge on the day tank...

Two tidbits in particular jumped out at me (emphasis mine):

Quote:

The crew recognized that the ship was moving too slowly, and that they would be caught in the middle of the storm.

Walbridge wasn't saying much anymore. Once, when Barksdale went on deck to get some fresh air, he discovered that the captain had changed course, and that they were now traveling to the southwest...

...

At about 4 a.m., Barksdale realized that he had lost his battle against the water in the engine room. He climbed up to the lower deck, where he saw his fellow crewmembers, but not the captain. The others told him that it was time to abandon ship.

A Legendary Ship's Final Hours Battling Sandy - ABC News
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1098  
Old 12-04-2012
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Narragansett Bay
Posts: 9,502
Thanks: 10
Thanked 159 Times in 145 Posts
Rep Power: 6
Minnewaska will become famous soon enough Minnewaska will become famous soon enough
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonEisberg View Post
Some more details about the final days/hours that I haven't seen reported before... Sounds like the engineer Barksdale may not be as inclined to remain as silent as the rest of the crew in the wake of this fiasco.....
Another notable report of Barksdale's feedback:

Quote:
"There wasn't much time left to think about it and Barksdale hesitated for but a moment. If he wanted to go on land, he would have had to go into the cabin immediately to pack his things. The thought of it felt like betraying the crew, which had become like a family to him."
Quote:
"When Barksdale saw the engine room for the first time, before the trip began, he wanted to clean it up, but there was no time for that."
This is the part that has me so pissed off about the Capt's decision to launch. She seems to have suffered as are her parents:

Quote:
"Christian was dead -- her body was found drifting in the water on the same day. She had an injury on her face and a black eye, and there were two liters of water in her lungs"
Quote:
"Claudene shouted, sounding distraught. "I might lose my phone service. We're already out in the water. I got to tell you how much I love you and dad." "Why are you saying it like that?" Gina asked. "I just want you to know," Claudene replied. "We know," answered Gina. "Now hang up," Claudene said. "I'm going to call back, but don't answer it. I'm going to leave you a message."

Gina Christian is holding her iPhone in both hands. She still hasn't listened to it yet."
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Jeanneau 54DS

In the harsh marine environment, something is always in need of repair. Margaritas fix everything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1099  
Old 12-04-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,193
Thanks: 21
Thanked 100 Times in 83 Posts
Rep Power: 11
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

yes, some of this new stuff could only come from Barksdale but it is meaningful that he is not directly quoted or interviewed like if he wanted to talk but not come openly publicly in what regards this. I guess that many would have wanted to interview him if he was available.

quote:

He had also had few conversations with the other crewmembers, which is why he hadn't even heard that a storm was approaching….

"I know that some of you all have been getting e-mails and phone calls regarding the hurricane," Walbridge told his crew as he stood on the deck. Then he said that the ship would be safer out at sea than in port…..

When Barksdale saw the engine room for the first time, before the trip began, he wanted to clean it up, but there was no time for that. New fuel tanks had been installed, and he spent his first three weeks connecting the tanks to the engines, laying the pipes and securing the connections….

Early Sunday morning, Barksdale shut off one of the two generators for maintenance work. ….

As the generator cooled down, Barksdale escaped the hot engine room for an hour. During that time, the gauge on the day tank, which contains a one-day supply of fuel for the engines, was smashed. Barksdale saw the damage when he returned, but he didn't notice that the tank was almost empty. According to the gauge, there was still enough fuel in the tank. Barksdale didn't notice the error until the generator failed……

He was exhausted, the result of being thrown back and forth in the engine room. His body was covered with bruises, his leg hurt, he had injured his index finger and he could hardly breathe. Nevertheless, he managed to keep at least one generator running. But the water was rising underneath the floorboards. Barksdale noticed that the power from the generator was fluctuating, and that the bilge pumps, which are supposed to pump water out of the ship, seemed to be clogged. They weren't pumping quickly enough, and the water level kept rising. Taking on Water….

The water was now almost two meters high inside the Bounty….

At about 4 a.m., Barksdale realized that he had lost his battle against the water in the engine room.


A Legendary Ship's Final Hours Battling Sandy - ABC News

This article seems an informed one (by Barksdale) and "The Spiegel" is one of the most reputed information newspapers in Europe but Braksdale is not quoted directly and some things are a bit contradictory with other information, some of them give also from Barksdale. Before going on what seems to be those contraindication let me talk about what seems new and relevant:

First of all it seems that part of the crew, or at least Barksdale did not have an idea of how big was the storm coming in. they just trusted the Captain.

The other important information is that this statement "Then he said that the ship would be safer out at sea than in port" that I had seen attributed to the bounty organization was after all stated by the Captain to the crew as the reason for leaving port. This is relevant in my opinion. The crew just assumed that they were doing the safest and right thing to do even if some had doubts (that Claudene phone call and email). Some had doubts but in doubt they trusted their Captain assuming he new better what was doing in what regards the Ship and their lives safety.

Regarding the contradictions, it has been reported that the Captain refereed to the organization (they had said that publicly) that one of the Generators? had an electric problem.

No electric problem is referred on this account.

On the other article that quoted Barksdale and used him as information source it is referred the frantic and desperate attempts by himself, the captain and the first made to unclogging the water pumps. Nothing is referred here as if he was all alone dealing with the problem. It refers however that clogging of the pumps was a major problem and that the second generator was not working properly. Ir was also referred that the bilges were not properly cleaned after works being performed on the ship and that the Captain new about that.

He says also that he stooped one generator for maintenance but does not say why he stopped it when he new that he was going to need all the power he could get on the next hours. It is referred "As the generator cooled down" and that eventually indicates that he stopped it because he was malfunctioning and overheating. Nobody does maintenance on a generator in the sea in bad weather if it is not urgently needed.

Two final comments: It is odd that he talks about the generators pumps and clogging but does not talk about the engines. This does mean that he is talking about the last hours of the ship and the two engines were out of service already for a long time? It is said that they had given up when there was already two meters high on the bilges and no engines would work on these conditions.

I guess that more information will be given by Barcksdale now that the American media notice that he is willing to talk. I hope for a more consistent and complete report on what really happened with the engines, generators and pumps since he is the one that knows all about that.

The other comment is about "The Spiegel" that shows here, relating an American story, why he is considered one of the best European news source. I am a regular reader and I recommend it to all that want to follow European problems and European views about the world. They have an English international site on the Internet and even the news on the German pages are easily translated to a comprehensive English by the automatic Google translater.

....
Sal Paradise likes this.

Last edited by PCP; 12-04-2012 at 10:43 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #1100  
Old 12-04-2012
MarkofSeaLife's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,549
Thanks: 33
Thanked 95 Times in 78 Posts
Rep Power: 5
MarkofSeaLife is on a distinguished road
Re: HMS Bounty in trouble...

Good article.
Barksdale was a handyman, not a marine diesel engineer. I think he did a great job under the circumstances. I think that ship needed a chief engineer and a qualified offsider.

Interesting he didn't even know about the hurricane when the captain talked to them. I wonder if some of the other crew hadn't heard of it? The whole world knew, but sometimes people in a close community might not watch TV etc.

His point about if he wanted to leave the ship it had to be immediately... No time to,think, no time to check the weather for themselves.... And where do they go when they leave the ship? No home, no car, no job....

Christians injuries suggest she was hit by the masts or rigging as the masts hit the water when the ship rolled on its side. Barksdale was caught three or four times.... It amazing not more crew were caught and drowned.

Barkesdale is brave and correct to come forward and be interviewed. I thank him for it.
He must have had a terrible time in that hot stinking water filled engine room. Terrible and terrifying.
PCP, xymotic and Sal Paradise like this.
__________________
Sea Life
Notes on a Circumnavigation:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by MarkofSeaLife; 12-04-2012 at 10:32 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rhodes Bounty ll white rabbit Introduce Yourself 3 07-13-2014 06:00 AM
New Member - Hardin 45 ( 44 voyager bounty ) Bianchi Introduce Yourself 9 01-29-2011 10:33 PM
HELP!! , Need move a boat NC to WA (Rhodes Bounty II, 40'10 x 28' x 10'3" x 5'9") sailandoar General Discussion (sailing related) 1 08-23-2006 02:11 PM
Bounty Windjammer Spectacle (Boothbay Register) NewsReader News Feeds 0 06-23-2006 04:15 PM
April 28, 1789, Aboard the HMS Bounty: NewsReader Mass Bay Sailors 0 04-28-2006 02:15 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:09 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.