SailNet Community banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The U.S. Coast Guard said Saturday morning on Twitter that rescuers were searching for Charlotte Kirby, Nathaniel Davis and Wilfredo Lombardo, who were aboard the 40-foot sailboat named Dove. The boat was last known to be about 20 miles south of Mount Desert Island, where the famed Acadia National Park and seaside hamlet town of Bar Harbor are located.

The Coast Guard said that dispatchers on the mainland received a 911 call at about 3 a.m. from passengers on the boat that warned they were in distress.

“They basically said ‘help’ and ‘we’re on a boat’ before the call cut out,” Coast Guard spokeswoman Petty Officer Nicole Groll told the Portland Press Herald.


https://www.foxnews.com/us/missing-sailboat-maine-coast-coast-guard-massive-search
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,534 Posts
This is in Maine?


"The air temperature hovered around 34 degrees, with a water temperature of 52 degrees."

Hypothermia calculation ain't great :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: mbianka

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Good lord. Pray they have an inflatable or a dinghy, food and water.
I pray they are found in good shape.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Good news, they were found.

My post count isn’t high enough to post a link.


“BAR HARBOR, MAINE (AP) — The Coast Guard says a sailboat that placed a distress call off the Maine coast has been located.

The Coast Guard ended a three-day search Monday after the 40-foot boat, Dove, was located safe and sound, nearly 100 miles off the New Jersey coast.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,549 Posts
Well that's good news! But,

"The search began when a woman dialed 911 to make a distress call early Saturday.
The Coast Guard determined the call came from a location 20 miles south of Mount Desert Island. Groll said the Coast Guard wants to interview the crew at its next port of call."


Damn right. Got to be more to this story. Lucky they had Locator device on board. Stupid that they had not renewed the subscription before the started the passage to Florida.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
Glad they've been found. A happy ending for once.

Much as I hate to speculate, it sounds like a classic case of something frightening an inexperienced passenger who panicked and made the call. Someone else snatched the cell phone and ended it. My best guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,549 Posts
Glad they've been found. A happy ending for once.

Much as I hate to speculate, it sounds like a classic case of something frightening an inexperienced passenger who panicked and made the call. Someone else snatched the cell phone and ended it. My best guess.
Similar situation that happened during the Perfect Storm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Similar situation that happened during the Perfect Storm.
This is harsh, but it's my interpretation that the two women aboard S/V Satori, the real-life sailboat depicted in The Perfect Storm, were possibly the "proximate cause" of the loss of one crewman aboard the rescue helicopter and a possible "factor" in the loss of the entire crew of F/V Andrea Gail -- by diverting resources to an unnecessary rescue. The Satori was so robust that, though abandoned by order of the USCG, she went on her way with no one aboard and was recovered later intact. The whole story is here: https://www.westsail.org/satoristorm.

We can't know what happened aboard F/V Andrea Gail. No one lived to tell the story. The movie is pure speculation based on little objective fact. But if the rescue helicopter hadn't ditched due to fuel exhaustion while en-route to her, the story may have ended very differently.

The lesson is: don't let people aboard your vessel issue a spurious distress call. I show my crew and passengers how to use the radio, how the "distress" DSC button works, and how to activate the EPIRB. But I stress, they are not to touch those emergency functions unless I am incapacitated, overboard, or dead. I also stress how a rescue can be more hazardous than hunkering down on board. And that the liferaft is to be used only if they have to step up to get into it. I see the main utility of a liferaft is for rescuing people from another vessel, sent down on a lanyard, where the seastate is too dangerous to lay alongside.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,366 Posts
This is harsh, but it's my interpretation that the two women aboard S/V Satori, the real-life sailboat depicted in The Perfect Storm, were possibly the "proximate cause" of the loss of one crewman aboard the rescue helicopter and a possible "factor" in the loss of the entire crew of F/V Andrea Gail -- by diverting resources to an unnecessary rescue. The Satori was so robust that, though abandoned by order of the USCG, she went on her way with no one aboard and was recovered later intact. The whole story is here: https://www.westsail.org/satoristorm.

We can't know what happened aboard F/V Andrea Gail. No one lived to tell the story. The movie is pure speculation based on little objective fact. But if the rescue helicopter hadn't ditched due to fuel exhaustion while en-route to her, the story may have ended very differently.

The lesson is: don't let people aboard your vessel issue a spurious distress call. I show my crew and passengers how to use the radio, how the "distress" DSC button works, and how to activate the EPIRB. But I stress, they are not to touch those emergency functions unless I am incapacitated, overboard, or dead. I also stress how a rescue can be more hazardous than hunkering down on board. And that the liferaft is to be used only if they have to step up to get into it. I see the main utility of a liferaft is for rescuing people from another vessel, sent down on a lanyard, where the seastate is too dangerous to lay alongside.
Many of us know and understand the way that Satori story went.
It is -20/20 hindsight to interpret that as the ladies fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuffyN

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Many of us know and understand the way that Satori story went.
It is -20/20 hindsight to interpret that as the ladies fault.
Maybe true. But the lesson still stands. The skipper should make the risk assessment and decide if the risk of staying aboard is greater than the risk of being rescued - which can be substantial. Once the call goes out that conditions have put your vessel in unsurvivable peril, you've almost certainly committed to abandoning ship. There are other less drastic options, like being on a radio watch. They'll ask how things are going, and if you go silent, they'll dispatch a rescue.

You can also ask another nearby vessel to stand alongside. I've done that once. With my little personal boat, a 26 foot Pearson Ariel standing alongside a 50 foot sailboat hove to in 12 foot swells at 16 seconds and 40 knot winds, my reports that everything was fine aboard my boat had a real calming affect on the people aboard the "imperiled" bigger boat. If my "little" boat was doing OK, maybe they were worrying too much.

It's happened to me that an inexperienced person insisted on calling in a rescue in just a bit worse than moderate conditions. Mostly, they were seasick, which makes everything seem worse. I sent that person down below with the instructions to: "check to see if there's smoke or water greater than ankle deep in the cabin." When they returned to report neither, I said: "Good. Then we aren't sinking or on fire. Please relax. I'll have you check again in 10 minutes." (Keep scared people busy and reassured.) That went on until the seastate improved and my nervous shipmate fell asleep. Now, if it'd been up to that person, we'd have had a dangerous ride up a cable to a Coast Guard helicopter, putting all of us and the Coast Guard crew in unnecessary danger. Plus, taking away that rescue asset from someone who may actually need it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,366 Posts
Maybe true. But the lesson still stands. The skipper should make the risk assessment and decide if the risk of staying aboard is greater than the risk of being rescued - which can be substantial. Once the call goes out that conditions have put your vessel in unsurvivable peril, you've almost certainly committed to abandoning ship. There are other less drastic options, like being on a radio watch. They'll ask how things are going, and if you go silent, they'll dispatch a rescue.

You can also ask another nearby vessel to stand alongside. I've done that once. With my little personal boat, a 26 foot Pearson Ariel standing alongside a 50 foot sailboat hove to in 12 foot swells at 16 seconds and 40 knot winds, my reports that everything was fine aboard my boat had a real calming affect on the people aboard the "imperiled" bigger boat. If my "little" boat was doing OK, maybe they were worrying too much.

It's happened to me that an inexperienced person insisted on calling in a rescue in just a bit worse than moderate conditions. Mostly, they were seasick, which makes everything seem worse. I sent that person down below with the instructions to: "check to see if there's smoke or water greater than ankle deep in the cabin." When they returned to report neither, I said: "Good. Then we aren't sinking or on fire. Please relax. I'll have you check again in 10 minutes." (Keep scared people busy and reassured.) That went on until the seastate improved and my nervous shipmate fell asleep. Now, if it'd been up to that person, we'd have had a dangerous ride up a cable to a Coast Guard helicopter, putting all of us and the Coast Guard crew in unnecessary danger. Plus, taking away that rescue asset from someone who may actually need it.
Certainly lots of different issues presented in 1 paragraph. All may contribute to thread drift

1- responsibilities of the captain to informing newbies how the should act on the boat ie,. Man overboard, contacting authorities, using VHF, pfd use. Head use. Etc On Haleakula use of VHF restricted to wife oe myself unless incapacitated

2- assessing the guests abilities designated to the captain, ive take many guests on board from first timers to experienced crew. Sounds like you had an inexperienced nervous Nellie. It’s ok different people react differently. Placing a real newbie on a 26 ft boat like your or #35 ft boat like mine is intimidating for some. I tailor our day out around that and how they react when they first come aboard. I wat h carefully. Last thing I want is them uncomfortable when it takes a few Hours to get to dock. They can upset themselves and others.

It’s a big leap from a basic sail on a realitively heavy sailing day to the need to call the CG for rescue. We’ve all read what the captain responsibilities are are most on here know them. Asking for assistance is a big step. Askking for xassistance to step of the boat. More or less a final step. The crew is not involved in these decisions. Calling in the CG is the captains responsibility unless incapacitated. Also checking the vessel for that potential....again the captains responsibility.

Maybe explaining what was the actual emergency ( smoke / water) you mentioned. I have found that many nervous people are looking for confidence in the captain. It goes a long way to settling them down, how the captain reacts. That can set the tone in many guest situations.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,534 Posts
To me it's "same old, same old".

It never changes.

Sail in the right season.

Maine and November are not correct together.

You get terrifying storms that rightly terrify even experiend sailors who then do terrifyingly stupid things that they think are correct.

Often people mention that an evacuated boat has popped out the other side of the storm. But I wonder the permanently altered minds of the people who remain on-board.

Sailing is easy. Passage making is much more difficult. Passage making in the wrong season is insane.


Mark
 

·
Master Mariner
Joined
·
8,957 Posts
In my opinion, if the story is as it appears to be, this is a case where these people should be held accountable for the costs of this search. At the very least that the person who ended the call to 911 so abruptly should have called back and made it clear that there was no emergency. If not common courtesy, then put that under common sense! Time to make an example of these people and charge them for every penny spent searching for them!
The powers that be should make it expensive enough that folks think twice before calling out SAR on a whim and only use the system when life (not a boat) is at stake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanderO

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,366 Posts
In my opinion, if the story is as it appears to be, this is a case where these people should be held accountable for the costs of this search. At the very least that the person who ended the call to 911 so abruptly should have called back and made it clear that there was no emergency. If not common courtesy, then put that under common sense! Time to make an example of these people and charge them for every penny spent searching for them!
The powers that be should make it expensive enough that folks think twice before calling out SAR on a whim and only use the system when life (not a boat) is at stake.
No way. Bad idea.

Only when there is an obvious hoax that is preplanned should their be “ punitive renewmerable damages “ to recover the costs.

I understand it puts assets in harms way potentially.
I understand there is a monetary cost .
I understand your intention is to prevent frivolous alarms, which I agree with wholeheartedly.

I however I have more faith and trust with the professionals of the CG to determine what actions need be taken. Not you sitting behind a computer or a civilian . I am sure they assessed the situation, with ALL the facts they knew at the time meaning they had more info than you and I though just reading the internet, and determined that a search was necessary.

Putting some predetermined deterrent with penalty of costs so people don’t call does not make sense. It isn’t done when you call the cops when you see something suspicious like a possible terrorist attempt. It isn’t done when a neighborhood watch calls something in. More appropriate it ISNT done when someone files a missing persons report.

Again...I trust the professionals to evaluate the information and take what they deem are appropriate protocols in reacting to what they see. Any time wasted by restrictions or hesitations could have negative consequences
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
If you call the police - it's free. But call an ambulance, and it can be very costly. There's something vaguely ironic about that.

Some counties and states will charge a hefty price for rescues. And they'll go so far as attaching liens to your property to collect.

Here's an article on the topic: Get into Trouble Outdoors -- Who Pays for the Rescue? - TIME

In the context of USCG rescues, I'd like to see more after-incident boards of inquiry with judicial authority. If the mariner was grossly negligent, he/she could be compelled to attend remedial training or in extreme cases, be judicially prohibited from operating a vessel in waters within the jurisdiction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,220 Posts
Very sticky wicket. Since last go round have thought some on this. Still, think below needs improvement and further thought.
1- statistically passage is safer than coastal. Believe that’s so because fewer %age of people do passages unprepared and on unsuitable vessels. However, there are a constant stream of folks who are the exceptions proving the rule.
2. It’s inappropriate to have people die when resources are standing idle which could save them.
3. It’s inappropriate to have people not take some level of personal responsibility for their actions.
Hence, if a mayday is judged to have been within some measure of appropriateness by a experienced jury no punitive action be taken. Be that conditions beyond skills of crew, mechanical failure, inter current illness, exhaustion or other state that a prudent person could judge placed life at risk. If the jury of mariners judged the mayday to have been frivolous then crew pay damages capped at the value of the vessel involved. Independent wrongful death torts could apply however. If repetitive frivolous maydays occur non monetary actions also occur. Depending upon specifics - unpaid labor at a coast guard station or other government facility, mandatory education and passing proscribed testing, incarceration or other actions as deemed appropriate.
Think there’s a general consensus that is bad news to place CG service people at risk to no good purpose but acknowledge one of their purposes is SAR and impeding SAR should not occur.
 

·
Master Mariner
Joined
·
8,957 Posts
No way. Bad idea.

Only when there is an obvious hoax that is preplanned should their be “ punitive renewmerable damages “ to recover the costs.

I understand it puts assets in harms way potentially.
I understand there is a monetary cost .
I understand your intention is to prevent frivolous alarms, which I agree with wholeheartedly.

I however I have more faith and trust with the professionals of the CG to determine what actions need be taken. Not you sitting behind a computer or a civilian . I am sure they assessed the situation, with ALL the facts they knew at the time meaning they had more info than you and I though just reading the internet, and determined that a search was necessary.

Putting some predetermined deterrent with penalty of costs so people don’t call does not make sense. It isn’t done when you call the cops when you see something suspicious like a possible terrorist attempt. It isn’t done when a neighborhood watch calls something in. More appropriate it ISNT done when someone files a missing persons report.

Again...I trust the professionals to evaluate the information and take what they deem are appropriate protocols in reacting to what they see. Any time wasted by restrictions or hesitations could have negative consequences
Again, if this story is as we have heard, this was a call to 911, not the CG. How difficult would it have been for the person who ended the call to recall 911 and tell them it was a mistake and everything was fine.
No, in this case it was a massive abuse of the system and they should be required to pay the whole SAR expenses, all of which could have been avoided by someone on the boat using a tiny bit of common sense, common courtesy and/or just plain good judgment. This is every bit as bad as those hoax calls you refer to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Maybe explaining what was the actual emergency ( smoke / water) you mentioned. I have found that many nervous people are looking for confidence in the captain. It goes a long way to settling them down, how the captain reacts. That can set the tone in many guest situations.
There was no actual emergency, except for a seasick SF Bay sailor shipmate in consequent misery. Conditions were worse than predicted passing Pigeon Point on a passage from Half Moon Bay (Pillar Point) to Santa Cruz. This isn't rare: Pigeon Point juts out into the northerly winds creating a venturi effect with localized high winds to the south causing windwaves to stand up against westerly swells causing moderate cross-seas. Conditions were 25 to 30 knot northerly winds with 8 foot windwaves and 10 foot westerly swells at about 16 seconds. We were 8 miles offshore. The boat never heeled past 30 degrees (I was down to my second reef with a 50% jib) while sailing right up against but not exceeding hull speed (not surfing). Wing-on-wing configuration, sailing directly downwind. The bow would bury occasionally for a second scooping up some water on the foredeck, and there was occasional spray over the side into the cockpit. Myself: I was not only confident but clearly enjoying the ride. That confidence led my shipmate to conclude I was more than "confident", but, because I was completely calm, had crossed the "confidence" threshold into insanity.

In all due sympathy, those were conditions very unusual to a Bay sailor, even a very experienced Bay sailor, like my shipmate. One can sail a lifetime in the SF Bay and have no acquired tolerance to seasickness. The San Francisco Bay is just a big lake with a half-mile wide channel leading to the sea. Except in that channel, there are no swells in the Bay (only nasty awful short-period chop). There was no smoke or water in the cabin, and my asking for a check was only my way of keeping the person purposefully busy (which helps with seasickness) and directly demonstrating the boat was not in any peril of sinking. I thought that point was obvious in my previous post. Sorry if I didn't express that clearly.

The nearest harbors, Pillar Point and Santa Cruz, were each 20 miles away north or south, respectively. Diverting to a closer harbor was not an option. Conditions improved in less than 2 hours. My shipmate was in the throes of severe seasickness in an unfamiliar and perceived-threatening environment. We have sailed together many times since.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top