SailNet Community banner

21 - 40 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
Good God. I live near Penobscot Bay, although at the moment I'm looking out the window at Jost Van **** across Pillsbury Sound. When I spoke with my wife the other day, it was 14 friggin' degrees F in Maine. She wasn't happy I was down here working, and I was happy I wasn't performing morning snow removal. Back up on Tuesday.

Mid November is an incredibly bad time to do a delivery south. But it sounds like someone dropped the ball. SAR USCG should have been immediately contacted and called off. Sorry, but I agree this was as close to a fraudulent "remunerable" call as you can get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
It is a matter of local policy, but for the most part, you can't "unmake" a 911 call. If you even dial the number, say nothing and hang up, they will use your phone's location to dispatch police to investigate. When a mistake is made, we owe it in good faith to call them back and explain, I agree, but don't count on them to accept your explanation and do nothing.

A mayday call on a VHF can be cancelled, of course, but not a 911 phone call. It would be interesting to know what USCG's policy is on a situation like this.

We don't know because the skipper didn't think to call them and straighten it out. It's also quite possible, even likely, he had no idea there was a SAR effort out looking for him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
No second guessing here. Just an absolutely DUMB ass time to head out of Somes Sound. Temps were in the single digits a few days ago, and "34F" when they headed out. Someone got some splanin' to do about the 3 AM phone 911 call that triggered all this. Even the old man says "I'm pissed, I want to know what the hell happened."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
There seems to be two camps--one for charging them full freight for this debacle, and one for not charging them at all.

What about a fine? Punishes folks for stupid things but doesn't bankrupt them like a full rescue cost could. I recently bought a PLB, and I believe that the instructions/literature mentioned fines.

The PLB also doesn't need a paid subscription for emergency calls like inReach, so those on a budget don't have a monthly charge.

People are always going to afford what they want to afford though anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
I don't think that "obvious hoax" should be the criteria for forcing those triggering a very expensive search by calling 911 to take some responsibility for their misguided decision. If someone feels like they are in danger (even if it turns out to not be life threatening conditions) then they have acted in good faith when they call 911 and I wouldn't want to discourage that. But in this case someone apparently got scared and called 911 but then hung up or was forced to hang up by someone else aboard before they could explain that there was no emergency and no need for a search. It's not the initial calling of 911 (however unnecessary) that I have the biggest problem with, but rather it's the prematurely hanging up and apparently not making any effort to explain their actual situation so the search that the curtailed call predictably triggered could be curtailed or avoided altogether. Everybody knows you can't call 911, hang up and hope nobody notices. What they did wasn't a deliberate hoax but it was very irresponsible and cost a lot of money and effort on a lot of peoples part so all those aboard who had knowledge of this call and failed to contact the authorities to explain that there really was no emergency should be held responsible for the consequences their irresponsibility caused. I don't expect they can afford to pay for the whole rescue effort, but if it went down as the info we now have seems to indicate, they should be fined a very substantial amount of money.

Regarding earlier comments regarding Sartori, yes it's 20-20 hindsight to see what the lady or ladies did wrong, but that doesn't change that it's true and we shouldn't pretend otherwise. Their panicked action disrupted lots of peoples lives and cost a small fortune and had much wider consequences to lots of people than their "emergency" that wasn't an emergency deserved. I suppose it was ultimately the owner/skippers fault for taking on such inexperienced and undisciplined crew so in that sense he bears some responsibility for the temporary loss of his boat, but I'd say that about 90% of the blame goes to the panicked crewmember who called Mayday when the conditions didn't warrant it and when their captain had a plan in place and had experienced worse conditions on that same boat. It amounts to mutiny when a subordinate crewmember makes an irrevocable decision and takes action that effects the entire crew and the voyage. I'm not saying captains are always right but before a crewmember of any vessel decides to override the captains judgment and override his authority by doing something like calling Mayday unnecessarily, they better be very, very sure that they will be proven right or expect to never be asked to crew again. Part of signing up to go to sea as crew is implicitly agreeing to put your trust for your life in your captains hands and then reminding yourself of that whenever you have doubts. If you can't do that, don't sign on as crew under that captain. You can discuss your thoughts or worries or suggest alternate courses of action to your captain, but ultimately whatever he/she decides is the course of action you need to support to the very best of your ability. Apparently the ladies on Sartori didn't understand any of that and they should have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,369 Posts
Regarding earlier comments regarding Sartori, yes it's 20-20 hindsight to see what the lady or ladies did wrong, but that doesn't change that it's true and we shouldn't pretend otherwise. ..... I'd say that about 90% of the blame goes to the panicked crewmember who called Mayday when the conditions didn't warrant it and when their captain had a plan in place and had experienced worse conditions on that same boat. It amounts to mutiny when a subordinate crewmember makes an irrevocable decision and takes action that effects the entire crew and the voyage. I'm not saying captains are always right but before a crewmember of any vessel decides to override the captains judgment and override his authority by doing something like calling Mayday unnecessarily, they better be very, very sure that they will be proven right or expect to never be asked to crew again. Part of signing up to go to sea as crew is implicitly agreeing to put your trust for your life in your captains hands and then reminding yourself of that whenever you have doubts.
Unfortunately, the age old maritime laws of the British Navy don't exactly apply to a non-commercial pleasure craft, taking friends along on a pleasure cruise. It's not clear if their agreement was that they would serve as active crew, or if they were just invited along for the ride. For some people who are not experienced sailors, it may seem like the equivalent of saying, "I'm not comfortable with your driving. Pull to the side of the highway and let me out."
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,366 Posts
Now we’ve graduated to MUTINY.

Bit of a reach or overeaction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuffyN

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Now we’ve graduated to MUTINY.

Bit of a reach or overeaction.
Not at all a reach or overreaction to call what the crew of Sartori did to their skipper mutiny. The reference to mutiny was in the second paragraph where I was addressing what the two women did to the owner/circumnavigator/ skipper of Sartori, nothing to do with Dove. Their panicked overreaction to conditions the captain had experienced many times before at sea cost him, against his will, to be removed from his perfectly seaworthy vessel. That sounds a lot like mutiny to me. They substituted their own (limited) judgment for his and overthrew his authority and it was only luck that he ever got his sailboat back.

I don't think this Dove incident amounted to anything close to that and that's why I didn't say what you seem to be suggesting I said in reference to it, but rather was a case of one panicky crew member starting to call for help but then reconsidering or another crewmember intervening, but whatever happened here, whoever aboard knew about the aborted 911 call should have made it a top priority to notify SAR forces that they were indeed OK so nobody would be wasting their time out searching unnecessarily. Considering all the assets expended and people inconvenienced, those who caused it should have to bear some responsibility.

But both of these cases involved subordinate crewmembers panicking to the point of using their own judgment to at least momentarily override the captains. Crew members need to understand that the captain is the captain because he is the ONE who is entrusted to make all the big decisions aboard his boat. It's not a committee and it's not like in a car where you can ask to be let out on the side of the road at any time if you don't like what the driver is doing. Crew members need to understand and accept that, or not go to sea as crew.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Unfortunately, the age old maritime laws of the British Navy don't exactly apply to a non-commercial pleasure craft, taking friends along on a pleasure cruise. It's not clear if their agreement was that they would serve as active crew, or if they were just invited along for the ride. For some people who are not experienced sailors, it may seem like the equivalent of saying, "I'm not comfortable with your driving. Pull to the side of the highway and let me out."
It may not be clear to you that they were crew but it is to me because I used to know one of the individuals involved and have heard her talk about this incident over drinks and she described it as crewing. It was just a couple years after this incident and she was living aboard her boat in Portland, Maine but she had agreed to help crew this boat for a free ride south and to gain offshore sailing experience. So she was definitely crew, and it's not just the laws of the British Navy that make it clear the skipper is solely responsible and is in charge of his boat, it's universal at sea and in the air. Even if you invited some friends along for the ride on your pleasure craft, that doesn't mean they have any legal standing to overrule the skipper/owner unless he's doing something that's clearly unsafe enough to make removing him from command a necessity. We're talking something like the skipper having a stroke or going insane, not just a judgment call you disagree with. Societal norms on land have changed but the law regarding this hasn't changed. He who has the responsibility also must have the power to do what's necessary to conduct a safe voyage in his judgment and that's as it should be. Of course if they are friends of yours and they feel unsafe, the polite thing to do would be to accommodate them as best you can even if you know their fears are entirely irrational. But you don't legally have to. In the case of the Sartori incident, when the young ladies wanted to get off the boat, the captain had a good reason for not accommodating them and this is that the approach to shore at night in a storm would likely have been much more dangerous than remaining at sea with nothing out there to bump into.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,366 Posts
I read the statement from the CG which states that the original cell phone call To them from the Dove cut out and that no one asked for help specifically.....do you have and further information we haven’t seen ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuffyN

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
It may not be clear to you that they were crew but it is to me because I used to know one of the individuals involved and have heard her talk about this incident over drinks and she described it as crewing. It was just a couple years after this incident and she was living aboard her boat in Portland, Maine but she had agreed to help crew this boat for a free ride south and to gain offshore sailing experience. So she was definitely crew, and it's not just the laws of the British Navy that make it clear the skipper is solely responsible and is in charge of his boat, it's universal at sea and in the air. Even if you invited some friends along for the ride on your pleasure craft, that doesn't mean they have any legal standing to overrule the skipper/owner unless he's doing something that's clearly unsafe enough to make removing him from command a necessity. We're talking something like the skipper having a stroke or going insane, not just a judgment call you disagree with. Societal norms on land have changed but the law regarding this hasn't changed. He who has the responsibility also must have the power to do what's necessary to conduct a safe voyage in his judgment and that's as it should be. Of course if they are friends of yours and they feel unsafe, the polite thing to do would be to accommodate them as best you can even if you know their fears are entirely irrational. But you don't legally have to. In the case of the Sartori incident, when the young ladies wanted to get off the boat, the captain had a good reason for not accommodating them and this is that the approach to shore at night in a storm would likely have been much more dangerous than remaining at sea with nothing out there to bump into.
Did your friend pretty much confirm what the captain of Sartori said? Many times there is "she said", "he said", and the truth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
The 911 call would be classed as "needless" not a crime, versus a "false" call which is only a misdemeanor anyway. They didn't do anything illegal.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,366 Posts
The 911 call would be classed as "needless" not a crime, versus a "false" call which is only a misdemeanor anyway. They didn't do anything illegal.
Certainly not a mutiny....lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Did your friend pretty much confirm what the captain of Sartori said? Many times there is "she said", "he said", and the truth.
You can read up about this incident or even watch the utube video of the "rescue" (which endangered many and killed one) if you're really interested. I don't think any of us would choose to go sailing in those conditions but I wouldn't abandon my boat as long as my rig was still up and the boat seemed to be handling it ok. The female crewmember had never been in any significant offshore weather and panicked, called Mayday and described to the Coast Guard her perception that they were in very dangerous conditions and were taking on water, etc. so the CG made the decision the crew of Sartori must be removed based on her description of conditions aboard, even against the skippers will. It's not a he said she said thing at all because they whole incident is so well documented. Their only disagreement (he said she said) was the judgment call whether conditions were "dangerous" enough to abandon the ship by calling in the cavalry. He had circumnavigated on Sartori, and she was a young, inexperienced sailor. Even with no one onboard, Sartori survived the storm just fine and was reunited with her owner a few days later and he resumed sailing her.

I wouldn't call her a "friend," more like a fellow member of an organization called the Maine Island Trail Association so I associated with her occasionally. The time she talked about it was in an informal setting and since it was before the movie about the storm came out I hadn't heard anything about it so didn't know what questions to ask. Others were talking with her about it and she seemed sort of embarrassed about it and didn't really say much other than that she thought they were going to sink and didn't trust the skipper when he said it would be OK and he' been through worse conditions before aboard that same boat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
697 Posts
These guys abandoned ship the other day and were picked up by a freighter, dismasted. There is an article in the Bangor Daily News, but I refuse to pay to have advertising flashing in my face. You can actually read the articles on your phone, but not on your computer (after something like "4 free peeks"). Rescued on Nov. 19th by cargo ship Jaguar Max the day after the USCG tracked them down off Long Island. No further comment from me on this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
These guys abandoned ship the other day and were picked up by a freighter, dismasted. There is an article in the Bangor Daily News, but I refuse to pay to have advertising flashing in my face. You can actually read the articles on your phone, but not on your computer (after something like "4 free peeks"). Rescued on Nov. 19th by cargo ship Jaguar Max the day after the USCG tracked them down off Long Island. No further comment from me on this one.
By Bill Trotter, BDN Staff • December 4, 2019 5:32 pm
Updated: December 5, 2019 10:12 am

"The 911 call that prompted a two-day search last month for a sailboat off Mount Desert Island came from a boat passenger who said she was “cold and uncomfortable” and “was not sure she was going to get warm again,” a U.S. Coast Guard spokesman said Wednesday."

https://bangordailynews.com/2019/12...i-was-because-she-was-cold-and-uncomfortable/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
By Rob Wolfe, Portland Press Herald

NORFOLK, Va. — "The three boaters who were feared lost off Mount Desert Island last month were pulled from their 40-foot sailboat near Norfolk, Virginia Nov. 19 according to the U.S. Coast Guard.

A Coast Guard official said that a cargo ship, the Jaguar Max, rescued the trio off the coast of Virginia. The ship’s crew reported that the sailboat had lost its mast and its occupants were donning lifejackets.

At the request of the Coast Guard, the 750-foot ship had diverted course toward the sailboat and subsequently made visual contact with the boaters. But it had to hold off on picking them up until the next day because of high winds and seas."


https://www.mdislander.com/maine-news/sailors-rescued-boat-abandoned
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,571 Posts
Weird, because in the La Vagabond thread everyone says is safe to sail in November.

What a difference a thread makes
 
21 - 40 of 48 Posts
Top