Merged Threads: HMS Bounty

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Doodles

I'm not questioning bravery once they were at sea and in trouble. My point was that I wouldn't call it brave to leave port and sail directly into a monster hurricane when you have a choice. I'm sure there was peer pressure and all that, so maybe a truly brave response would have been to go against peer pressure and say ... no, this is too dangerous and I respectfully decline.

Well, really, it was Zeehag who first called the crew brave, and I think they HAD to get brave once things started going bad. No one said it was "brave" to make the decision to sail. We're all wondering about that. But if they really thought there would be 40k winds, who would look at that boat and think it couldn't handle that? We have to see what information was available when they left, and ... we don't have those details there.

But just to clarify, I didn't say they were brave to leave port. I am predicting that the crew acted admirably while trying to save the ship. In fact I'm thinking they waited too long to abandon ship. But even there I'm second-guessing. They might have wanted to make sure rescuers could get to them before leaving the ship.

[Maine Sail]

Posted by HMS Bounty on Oct 27th on the HMS Bounty Facebook page...


"Bounty's current voyage is a calculated decision...NOT AT ALL... irresponsible or with a lack of foresight as some have suggested.
The fact of the matter is...

A SHIP IS SAFER AT SEA THAN IN PORT!"

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Maine Sail

Posted by HMS Bounty on Oct 27th on the HMS Bounty Facebook page...


"Bounty's current voyage is a calculated decision...NOT AT ALL... irresponsible or with a lack of foresight as some have suggested.
The fact of the matter is...

A SHIP IS SAFER AT SEA THAN IN PORT!"

Yes, that doesn't look very good.

Still, it is possible that the passage plan did not involve unreasonable risks, that they knew they would get past the hurricane (as they apparently did), and that this post is just a little bravado.

Let's see what the crew say. Anyone spoken out yet?

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Maine Sail

Posted by HMS Bounty on Oct 27th on the HMS Bounty Facebook page...


"Bounty's current voyage is a calculated decision...NOT AT ALL... irresponsible or with a lack of foresight as some have suggested.
The fact of the matter is...

A SHIP IS SAFER AT SEA THAN IN PORT!"

Both views have validity, and neither are 100% facts under all circumstances.

This is proven by what happened: this ship was *not* safer at sea, and neither were its crew, two of whom died and two more of whom were injured badly enough to be hospitalized.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yes, that doesn't look very good.

Still, it is possible that the passage plan did not involve unreasonable risks, that they knew they would get past the hurricane (as they apparently did), and that this post is just a little bravado.

Let's see what the crew say. Anyone spoken out yet?

I expect they've been instructed to be quiet until the inquiry is held.

[Triton318]

Bligh and 18 of the Bounty's crew were brave -- sailing 3,618 NM in a 23' open boat after the mutiny.

[Tripod]

Originally Posted by reed1v

nothing hanging down in the photos so looks like the timbers were shipped prior to leaving for st. pete.

Look again. The top masts are broken off just above the trucks.

[osirissail]

Originally Posted by Maine Sail

Posted by HMS Bounty on Oct 27th on the HMS Bounty Facebook page...

"Bounty's current voyage is a calculated decision...NOT AT ALL... irresponsible or with a lack of foresight as some have suggested.
The fact of the matter is...

A SHIP IS SAFER AT SEA THAN IN PORT!"

I would suggest that is a typical C.Y.A. or political response which is also typically deliberately incomplete. A ship is only safer at sea during such a storm situation - if - the port is expected to take a direct hit - and - the vessel can maintain a speed sufficient to exit the danger area.

As Doodles and maybe others have mentioned Connecticut was not anywhere near to being considered a "direct hit" or even a glancing hit location. And if if was, taking a heading south into the projected path was certainly not going to sea to avoid the danger area. Like crossing a major interstate highway it is normally safer to cross behind an oncoming tractor-trailer truck and not ahead of the truck.

Pure speculation but I suspect the cost of securing the vessel properly in the Connecticut port was considered too expensive versus just sailing out of the port. However, the route taken to "avoid" the storm was just downright, IMHO, indefensible.

By my definition "Mutiny" can only occur "after" a vessel is at sea, not while it is in port. Unless "shanghaied" any crewmember has the right to "sign off" a vessel if they do not like the proposed route, conditions, or any other factor that would put their life at risk. However, I agree with Thompsonisland that the "school" environment was probably a major factor in each crewmember's decision to stay with the vessel even when a prudent seaman would have signed off the vessel.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

An administrator at GCaptain kindly sent me this link: Hurricane Survival – No Place for Absolutes | gCaptain - Maritime & Offshore News

with comments from the Coast Guard's top rescue swimmer. Very interesting stuff.

Yes, very interesting indeed. I agree that making absolute statements or decisions is absolutely a bad idea.

Yes there can be situations where stepping down to a life raft would be the correct decision but in my opinion I think those situations would fall into the 1% range. It would take specific circumstances and a lot of convincing to get me to leave a well found vessel that was not sinking.

[Dsanduril]

The thing that I take away from this is that the Bounty crew had everything going for them in terms rescue and yet one is dead and one is missing.

1. EPIRB that successfully notified authorities
2. Apparently survival suits for all crew members (and a boat that despite its problems was big enough and stable enough to allow the suits to be donned)
3. Large life rafts capable of accommodating the entire crew twice over
4. Within spitting distance of at least four major SAR centers, all of which were on high alert and particularly well prepared to respond because of the approach of Sandy
5. Response from SAR practically before it happened

Even with all of these "advantages" it was too late for Ms. Christian and the captain is still missing, possibly still floating around in a tiny one-man "life raft".

I feel sorrow for the families that have lost loved ones, and I can armchair captain the captain's decisions until the cows come home, but the big question to me is "what can I learn from the position they ended up in?" Despite a nearly textbook SAR effort one is dead and one is missing. I wonder how that could be different and want to learn from it, since I suspect if it ever happens to me I will be much farther removed from such SAR assets.

There have been threads ad nauseam on CF about EPIRB vs. PLB vs. SPOT vs. Yellow Brick vs. In Reach vs... Would some form of radio transmitter on the survival suits have increased the chances for Ms. Christian and Mr. Waldridge? A PLB? AIS? MOB? Would they have been better off with 16 PLBs than one EPIRB for the ship? Would any radio 6" above the water surface part of the time have been effective in the conditions encountered? Dye packets on the survival suits? Flares on the survival suits (assuming person could operate them)? I'm sure there will be lots of stuff that comes out of any inquiry, but I suspect the things I want to know/learn from this are items that won't be covered. The only thing I know is that the crew of Bounty were far better equipped/prepared than I, and yet it was not enough.

[thompsonisland]

One thing that strikes me already is the "trust your gut" rule. Claudene was afraid-she called her family and told them. Not nervous, but actually afraid that she might die, or be seriously in peril. When I feel that, I bail.

I have been in situations where my research and experiences suggested that I should be fine, but my heart told me no. Clearing out the crap so that the receivers work when that message comes through seems super important.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by skipmac

Yes, very interesting indeed. I agree that making absolute statements or decisions is absolutely a bad idea.

Yes there can be situations where stepping down to a life raft would be the correct decision but in my opinion I think those situations would fall into the 1% range. It would take specific circumstances and a lot of convincing to get me to leave a well found vessel that was not sinking.

I think it might be more than 1% of cases; I think vessels that are sinking and/or not well found are more than 1% of rescue cases. The Bounty was surely the right case for an early call for help, as the water was rising and pumps not keeping up -- inevitable sinking.

I read somewhere that the ship was knocked down and most of the crew thrown into the water just as they were getting ready to board the rafts. A number of the crew did not make it into a raft and were plucked out of the water by the Coasties. I suppose that is why despite so many other things done right, there were two casualties.

The biggest mystery to me is why they didn't have any sail up, especially after they apparently lost mechanical propulsion. Why? If they could have kept sailing, they could have maintained steerage (assuming steering gear was still in order), and might not have gotten knocked down -- seems tragic.

[Tripod]

Originally Posted by Barnhard_Marine

She was built as a prop to be burned at the end of the film. When she was on the ways at Samples Shipyard in Boothbay harbor a number of years back she was a wreck. The yard did some major bottom work but she was rotten from the bull works to the water line.

True that she was built as a prop, but one of the reasons the plan to burn her was changed, was because she was built as the real deal. Prior to being used in the Pirates of the Carribean film, she was extensivly refit. Not that I did a survey or anything, but the last time I was aboard, she appeared to be in better than good shape.

[Vasco]

Originally Posted by osirissail

By my definition "Mutiny" can only occur "after" a vessel is at sea, not while it is in port. Unless "shanghaied" any crewmember has the right to "sign off" a vessel if they do not like the proposed route, conditions, or any other factor that would put their life at risk. However, I agree with Thompsonisland that the "school" environment was probably a major factor in each crewmember's decision to stay with the vessel even when a prudent seaman would have signed off the vessel.

If you have signed ship's articles you cannot sign off until the vessel returns to its home port. Unless things have changed drastically since my seagoing says crew cannot just "sign off" whenever they please or do not agree with the voyage.

[Barnhard_Marine]

Key word appeared to be in good shape. Appearance means nothing as my long time friend and Master Shipwright said as we boarded her while she was on the ways. Carful where you step and what you grab hold of she is not as stout as she looks... I'm not going to name names but most of the town knew her condition. You could see her on the ways from the street that passes by the shipyard. Samples has the largest marine railway in the US north of New Bedford, MA. 750 tons or 200'. They have seen many Tall Ships and Wooden Tugs their craftsman and tradesmen are beyond comprehension. I am proud to say I worked there many years ago. I always love to visit the yard and view their latest project.