The sinking of "RAW FAITH" - Page 6 - SailNet Community
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #51 of 60 Old 12-08-2010
tdw
Super Fuzzy Moderator
 
tdw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 17,137
Thanks: 22
Thanked 128 Times in 119 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
Hey Jones....you mean a Tea Partier is capable of embarassment ? Nah.. I don't believe it....

and Ne57301 (where do you people come up with your ID's ?) while I take umbrage with your "Thank God" your "Good exercise for the Coast Guard" is one of the more sensible statements in this thread.

Look, I'm thankful that those guys are there for the times they are needed, same goes in our case for the Navy, who perform our search and rescue work but these lines of 'waste of money' and "putting in harm's way" are just so much nonsense.

Your Coast Guard and our Navy both go out on a regular basis for exercises and they do it in apalling conditions sometimes. We've all seen those vids of the Coast Guard cutters playing in the surf off the Columbia River entrance. Why do they do this ? They do it in the expectation of going to sea on search and rescue missions. It is their job. It is what they volunteered to do. Yes, they are brave men and women. Yes they deserve a pat on the back for what they do but come on, they are in the end only doing their jobs. If they didn't want to hang off a piece of string under a thundering helicopter in the middle of an Atlantic gale then they should have become accountants. We all know that while occasionally the rescuee is a fine upstanding example of the seaman's craft, reality is the vast majority of rescuees are dills, dunderheads and dip*****, a waste of perfectly good semen in the main.

Had the knobhead skipper of the Raw Faith drowned I for one would not shed a tear, but in reality it is the rescuing of morons like that which hopefully shows the human race is not utterly beyond redemption.

And who knows, one of these days it could me and I reckon I'll then be pretty happy that they got to do a dry run or two on the Darwin Award Nominees, like the skipper of the Raw Faith.

Andrew B (Mal 39 Classic)

Life is a trick, and you get one chance to learn it.
― Terry Pratchett.

Last edited by tdw; 12-09-2010 at 04:41 PM. Reason: Grammar and Spelling
tdw is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #52 of 60 Old 12-09-2010
PCP
Senior Member
 
PCP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,466
Thanks: 21
Thanked 114 Times in 97 Posts
Rep Power: 16
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyandjebus View Post
..
Paulo
While I can agree with you on this case I can't agree in practice as a rule/law. Guys like him are what we have to put up with to have the freedom to go to sea with out big government telling us how and when to do it.
I hope some day to take off in my contessa 26, if your above statement were turned into law I am sure there would be a government bureaucrat at the dock stopping me, in my "best interest" If not mine then in the the best interest of the greater good.

John
John,

I don't know very well the American reality in what regards recreational boating. I have started a thread about that (in America and in the world) but it seems there is not much data about that. It seems however that in Europe the number of sailboats is much superior and is increasing every year, as the potential number of guys that dream to retire in a sailboat.

Rescue services are an expensive service and they were devised as a mean to create a safety back up to professional boating that is an important part of any maritime state economy. Even if in many cases it is carried by volunteer service, when we talk of Ocean rescues the means involved make it a state funding affair.

If the huge increase of recreational boating translates in a huge increase on the number of ocean rescues (as it is the case), in these times of austerity, sooner or later someone is going to say: Hey! why are we all paying a lot for the safety and freedom of a few that want to risk their lives in some unnecessary and hazardous recreational activity?

An then, all of us, that know what we are doing, that are properly equipped and the controlled risks we take, will pay for all of those that go offshore in old or unsuitable boats and that don't have the knowledge to do so (if they had, they would not be offshore in an unsuitable boat anyway) and are responsible for 90% of all rescue missions, not to mention the increase in insurance premiums to sail offshore.

How do you want to solve this? Are you going to wait for the inevitable an do nothing about it?

Regards

Paulo



PCP is offline  
post #53 of 60 Old 12-09-2010
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 29
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bljones View Post
Something tells me we are going to see the skipper working the church circuit shortly, telling his tale of woe and adventure and soliciting donations to do it all over again.

The worst part is that he is gonna get donations. People love the story of a lone man following a dream against all odds , fighting the authorities determined to end his quest....
He's already given a very sympathetic sounding interview on TV...although if you watch the whole story the news station does point out that the taxpayers had to foot the bill for his rescue.

Link to the video here: Homemade Schooner Headed to Bermuda Sinks off Nantucket | Daily Sailing News from North American Sailor.
boomvangdc is offline  
 
post #54 of 60 Old 12-09-2010
Tundra Down
 
downeast450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Seal Harbor, Maine
Posts: 1,290
Thanks: 51
Thanked 21 Times in 20 Posts
Rep Power: 12
 
I have followed the saga of "RAW FAITH" for years. Whenever we came across it along the Maine coast it was seeking a place to stay. The guy who built it was operating on RAW FAITH. It is a tragic story without this latest chapter which provided the best possible solution of its "place to stay". I almost expect he knew that. I never met the guy. His motives for attempting his misguided mission were not personal gain. He lost his home and his family in the process. The boat was built out of a blind desire to take handicapped people sailing? What a goal. What a tragic sacrifice he forced on his family and others. No one was killed. The goal was not achieved. Yet??

Smack, this is a BFS! If this guy gets the right person to manage his story he can sell the book and film rights for enough money to buy and support a nice, professionally crewed catamaran for handicapped sailing and reimburse the government for its rescue expenses! Goal achieved!

Down

Last edited by downeast450; 12-09-2010 at 07:16 PM. Reason: correction
downeast450 is offline  
post #55 of 60 Old 12-09-2010
Senior Member
 
johnnyandjebus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 426
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 11
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
John,

I don't know very well the American reality in what regards recreational boating. I have started a thread about that (in America and in the world) but it seems there is not much data about that. It seems however that in Europe the number of sailboats is much superior and is increasing every year, as the potential number of guys that dream to retire in a sailboat.

Rescue services are an expensive service and they were devised as a mean to create a safety back up to professional boating that is an important part of any maritime state economy. Even if in many cases it is carried by volunteer service, when we talk of Ocean rescues the means involved make it a state funding affair.

If the huge increase of recreational boating translates in a huge increase on the number of ocean rescues (as it is the case), in these times of austerity, sooner or later someone is going to say: Hey! why are we all paying a lot for the safety and freedom of a few that want to risk their lives in some unnecessary and hazardous recreational activity?

An then, all of us, that know what we are doing, that are properly equipped and the controlled risks we take, will pay for all of those that go offshore in old or unsuitable boats and that don't have the knowledge to do so (if they had, they would not be offshore in an unsuitable boat anyway) and are responsible for 90% of all rescue missions, not to mention the increase in insurance premiums to sail offshore.

How do you want to solve this? Are you going to wait for the inevitable an do nothing about it?

Regards

Paulo

Hey Paulo

Up front;
1) excuse my ramblings below, consider it a brain dump rather than a well thought out argument.
2) I may or may not be back peddling on my original post.

If the skipper of RAWFISH was involved in any criminal or devious activity, like sinking intentionally then let the full force of the law fall on him like a ton of bricks.

In isolation, on the surface, it appears to me that this is a case of severe incompetence at best. I would detest the idea of my tax dollars used to pay for this rescue.

As to your point/question. I suspect quite strongly that what you predict may very well come true so perhaps you are right but I am not quite ready to concede the idea that the cost of rescue should be paid for by the tax payers not the individual for a couple of reasons

1) We already pay for any rescue costs thru taxes. I pay for a lot of services thru taxes that I will never use. i.e welfare checks, subsidies to the arts, unemployment cheques to the seasonal workers etc.

Let me lay out a scenario for you. Hockey is a big deal here, all levels of government fund, thru tax dollars, the building of hockey rinks, my home town included. I don't play hockey and can count the # of times I have been in a indoor rink in my life on one hand. Why am I paying for a "service" I don't use? Hockey is inherently a dangerous sport, a guy gets checked into the boards and ends up with serious injuries. Why is my health tax dollars used to pay for the costs of his health care? He knew the risks before he stepped onto the ice did he not?
I see no difference in the above scenario when compared to the cost of rescue for sailors, back country skiers etc. We all pay for rescue services thru tax dollars and should not have to consider the cost to ourselves if we call in for a rescue.

2) Canada is a big country, a good chunk of the land is crown land, the people own it. We should all be encouraged to use it,explore it. yes there will be rescues and they will be expensive but the country will better off if more people understood just how special the outdoors(sailing included) is. This will not happen if we send everyone a bill when they get into trouble. Why go outside and risk financial disaster when I can stay inside and play video games? We need a serious attitude adjustment in how we think and treat our environment, this will not happen if people are not our there living in it.

Did I say I was going to ramble?

3) what you are suggesting leads to, as you put it, higher insurance rates. I don't want the government mandating to me that I need insurance at any rate every time I put myself at any level of risk. The government having a say in what is a "suitable" boat to go off shore with will lead to some bureaucrat, who doesn't have a clue, telling me what is a suitable boat, and what isn't. Maybe it is different in your part of the world, but experience has taught me that that government intrusion rarely leads to a better out come but always leads to higher taxes and less personal choice.

John
johnnyandjebus is offline  
post #56 of 60 Old 12-10-2010
Senior Member
 
sailguy40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 312
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 10
 
Thats was a big ship and I find it amazing the guy built it! What I don't understand is how a 118ft 300 ton vessel can dock or depart without an engine? Then in the video they were not flying any sails on any of the masts so the ship was not moving and instead getting tossed all around. I guess this is how 10 to 15ft waves can sink something this size? Those waves should be nothing to a large sailing ship underway.

Tim
s/v Pirates Lady
Hunter 33

"The sound of the sea, is becoming very familiar to me."
sailguy40 is offline  
post #57 of 60 Old 12-10-2010
Senior Member
 
bljones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Coast Ontario
Posts: 8,476
Thanks: 35
Thanked 94 Times in 83 Posts
Rep Power: 13
   
they used an inflatable to tow/push it out of the harbour.
I am not kidding. Google "Raw Faith Woodenboat Forum" to see just what a clusterpluck this whole debacle is. Woodenboaters are traditionally a little into the red zone on the weird-o-meter, and they usually bust the peg on the opinionometer, so when THEY excoriate a wooden boat builder, you know it has to be a nightmare.
bljones is offline  
post #58 of 60 Old 12-10-2010
Sunsets and Warm Beer....
 
LandLocked66c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Bottom of a Pint Glass...
Posts: 2,116
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 11
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bljones View Post
they used an inflatable to tow/push it out of the harbour.
I am not kidding. Google "Raw Faith Woodenboat Forum" to see just what a clusterpluck this whole debacle is. Woodenboaters are traditionally a little into the red zone on the weird-o-meter, and they usually bust the peg on the opinionometer, so when THEY excoriate a wooden boat builder, you know it has to be a nightmare.
LOL

You can't steer a boat that isn't moving? Just like a life - P. Lutus
LandLocked66c is offline  
post #59 of 60 Old 12-10-2010
Learning the HARD way...
 
eherlihy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Boston / Ft Myers Area
Posts: 6,837
Thanks: 394
Thanked 296 Times in 291 Posts
Rep Power: 13
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
John,

I don't know very well the American reality in what regards recreational boating. I have started a thread about that (in America and in the world) but it seems there is not much data about that. It seems however that in Europe the number of sailboats is much superior and is increasing every year, as the potential number of guys that dream to retire in a sailboat.

Rescue services are an expensive service and they were devised as a mean to create a safety back up to professional boating that is an important part of any maritime state economy. Even if in many cases it is carried by volunteer service, when we talk of Ocean rescues the means involved make it a state funding affair.

If the huge increase of recreational boating translates in a huge increase on the number of ocean rescues (as it is the case), in these times of austerity, sooner or later someone is going to say: Hey! why are we all paying a lot for the safety and freedom of a few that want to risk their lives in some unnecessary and hazardous recreational activity?

An then, all of us, that know what we are doing, that are properly equipped and the controlled risks we take, will pay for all of those that go offshore in old or unsuitable boats and that don't have the knowledge to do so (if they had, they would not be offshore in an unsuitable boat anyway) and are responsible for 90% of all rescue missions, not to mention the increase in insurance premiums to sail offshore.

How do you want to solve this? Are you going to wait for the inevitable an do nothing about it?

Regards

Paulo
Paulo,

I hope that you don't mind my jumping in...

I have no problem with the CG rescuing Captain McKay, and his son. They were clearly in trouble.

Regarding having him pay for his rescue, I think that the motivation for his actions should drive that decision.

Raw Faith was McKay's passion. He did not do this for personal gain, but rather to promote the cause of enabling disabled kids to experience sailing. Inspired by his daughter, he made an effort to provide an opportunity to people (not only his daughter) who would not otherwise have it. He put everything he had (including his home, and all of his worldly possessions) into his cause. He left on this voyage because he had been kicked out of Salem, and every other port that he had "visited" in the US. I see this guy as a modern day Don Quixote....

I hesitate to bring this up but, with regard to paying for rescue, I cannot help contrast McKay's folly with the "youngest sailor to circumnavigate alone" contestants. Motivation for their voyages; "To become the youngest sailor to circumnavigate alone and unaided," and publicity. Were there predictions that Abby and Jessica would need rescue - yup. Did they need rescue - yup. Who paid for their rescues?... The only people to benefit from Abby, or Jessica exploits would be Abby or Jessica and their sponsors.

I realize that we have already thrashed the "youngest sailor" issue in other threads, and I don't want to start again here.

However, no one should ever have been allowed to put to sea in Raw Faith. Sailing this vessel ANYWHERE, let alone from Salem, MA, USA to undisclosed port, BERMUDA seems to fit the definition of Manifestly Unsafe Voyage.
Quote:
A Coast Guard boarding officer who observes a boat being operated in an UNSAFE CONDITION, specifically defined by law or regulation, and who determines that an ESPECIALLY HAZARDOUS CONDITION exists, may direct the operator to take immediate steps to correct the condition, including returning to port. Termination of unsafe conditions may be imposed for:
Insufficient number of CG Approved Personal
Flotation Devices (PFDs)
Insufficient fire extinguishers
Overloading condition
Improper navigation light display
Fuel leakage
Fuel in bilges
Improper ventilation
Improper backfire flame control
Manifestly unsafe voyage
An operator who refuses to terminate the unsafe use of a boat can be cited for failure to comply with the directions of the Coast Guard boarding officer, as well as for the specific violations, which are the basis for the termination order.
PROHIBITION TO SAIL - MANIFESTLY UNSAFE VOYAGE
Under the authority of 46 United States Code 4302 and 4308, the Commandant, U. S. Coast Guard has authorized the District Commander to prohibit the voyage of any vessel if he determines that said craft is unsuitable for the intended trip. His determination will be based upon the design, condition and outfitting of the vessel in relation to what the District Commander deems necessary for a safe voyage. Operator competency is NOT a factor in the final determination. If a manifestly unsafe ruling is issued, the voyage is terminated and the vessel will be prevented from getting underway. The person making the voyage may
appeal.
I question why the coast guard did not intervene sooner (like 6 years ago).
eherlihy is online now  
post #60 of 60 Old 12-10-2010
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Three Mile Harbor, East Hampton, NY
Posts: 511
Thanks: 3
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Rep Power: 13
 
Dock
I always wonder at so many events that are billed as being done for some cause or another, but happen to coincide with the person's interests, how much their motivation is truly selfless and how much an opportunity to get sponsors and general social approval for an otherwise harebrained scheme. I don't know in the case of Raw Faith, but it definitely was harebrained, whatever the motive.
tweitz is offline  
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:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tanzer 26 - "Starter" or "Build like a tank" asdf38 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 7 12-05-2018 11:23 PM
"Seacock" vs. "ballcock" or "ball valve?" SEMIJim Gear & Maintenance 18 09-02-2013 06:31 PM
"Oily Pollution" and "MARPOL Trash" Placards? SEMIJim Gear & Maintenance 16 11-15-2011 10:39 PM
"Blue Water Boats?" "Rescues" snider General Discussion (sailing related) 37 07-01-2007 11:21 PM
C270 Main Sail "stack Pack", Quick Cover", "lazy Bag" Install randy22556 Catalina 1 02-28-2007 12:53 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome