Merged Threads: HMS Bounty

[micah719]

There are ways of driving through floodwaters without guaranteed disaster....but most folks aren't equipped or experienced properly to do it.

Apparently fighter pilots are most at risk of doing something fatally stupid at about 900 hours....been everywhere, done everything, she'llberightmate, no wuckas, kaboom.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by Feral Cement

You're on your own in dangerous waters, mate. Been nice knowin' ya.

Am not expecting everyone to agree with (hey, it's the interent ) - but it's what I would do, if I thought the circumstances made that a sensible option. Putting a fit and able person into a liferaft first to assist (haul in) others would likely make the boarding of subsequent folks quicker. and speed probably important around the time that boarding a liferaft becomes important.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

Am not expecting everyone to agree with (hey, it's the interent ) - but it's what I would do, if I thought the circumstances made that a sensible option. Putting a fit and able person into a liferaft first to assist (haul in) others would likely make the boarding of subsequent folks quicker. and speed probably important around the time that boarding a liferaft becomes important.

So you believe in the survival of the fittest! You don't need to work out a reason.

[Astrid]

Well generally, in life boat drills, the crew of the life boat embark first so as to be able to help the less experienced or fit into the boat. I should imagine that a similar notion would be good for life rafts.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

So you believe in the survival of the fittest! You don't need to work out a reason.

Nothing so principled - simply pragmatics. IMO the more survivors the better, PC a secondary consideration.......if it did suddenly descend into a debating contest on the finer points of gender equality, then likely me the first into the liferaft - as Capt or not .

[carstenb]

Never allow chivalry to get in the way of survival!

jes' sayin'

[Captain Jeffry]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

A charitable interpretation, and maybe even right

Thanks for that - I would really like to think that's what it was all about. . .

Agreed! I hadn't considered that at all. If this Captain did not have the 'right stuff' the insurance carrier would never have allowed him to be in command of this kind of vessel. Still, he may have enjoyed chasing monsters..

[Captain Jeffry]

Originally Posted by Astrid

Well generally, in life boat drills, the crew of the life boat embark first so as to be able to help the less experienced or fit into the boat. I should imagine that a similar notion would be good for life rafts.

Agreed! Need someone strong to help others get into the life raft quickly. Very likley the raft will need righting and this must be done by a strong swimmer. That same person should then be the person helping everyone else from the inside. Getting in to a L/R is not an easy event especially with full gear and after some swimming.
But I believe that the next persons in to the raft, after the first strong person, should be the weakest next. Another strong swimmer should take up the end, assisting if possible to the weaker ones.

[Captain Jeffry]

This just in:
HMS Bounty Survivors: Crew of Ship Sunk During Hurricane Sandy Speak of Lost Shipmates - ABC News

"The crew says their unexpected adventure began on October 25, as the ship set sail from Connecticut. Captain Wallbridge wrote on Facebook that with Hurricane Sandy on the move, "a ship is safer at sea than in port." But three days into the voyage, the crew found themselves in the middle of the ferocious storm, with heaving waves three stories high.
"The weather was so bad and we had so little control," said Douglas Faunt."

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Captain Jeffry

This just in:
HMS Bounty Survivors: Crew of Ship Sunk During Hurricane Sandy Speak of Lost Shipmates - ABC News

"The crew says their unexpected adventure began on October 25, as the ship set sail from Connecticut. Captain Wallbridge wrote on Facebook that with Hurricane Sandy on the move, "a ship is safer at sea than in port." But three days into the voyage, the crew found themselves in the middle of the ferocious storm, with heaving waves three stories high.
"The weather was so bad and we had so little control," said Douglas Faunt."

This is how it will unfold, that without the aid of a crystal ball, the captain made the best call he could make (look at what happened at marinas all up and down the coast), and that the crew agreed with the call and trusted his judgment.

Then we'll find out exactly what went wrong, but I'm not convinced it was an automatic, slam-dunk fact that they shouldn't have gone.

[Captain Jeffry]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

(look at what happened at marinas all up and down the coast.

Most respectfully dissagree. First, the 'marinas hit up and down the coast' can not be compared to the type of harbor HMS Bounty was in nor have we seen any damage to larger ships in the same harbor as she was in. Hindsight I agree. Secondly, do we know if she was sailing at any point in this trip? If not, (I could be wrong) but this crew of 16 looks a bit shy on ability and manpower to set proper sails in 40++ kts of wind and associated sea state. Lastly, (a question which will never be answered) if the date in Florida was one month away, would they still have put to sea. Not buying the point that a ship AND HER CREW are safer at sea. This is never a fact...

[carstenb]

It is easy to second guess, but I also don't buy that the ship was safer at sea. This might be true if the boat were in an uprotect anchorage and exposed. It is not true in a major US harbor.

According to the article, the boat had been taking on water for 24 hours. They were also close to several major harbors where they would have been perfectly safe. Why did they not run for cover? Apparently they had a full day to do so.

In retrospect, they should not have left harbor. They did and failed to run for cover when faced with incurring water. Perhapsnthe leak was not serious at the start, but prudence would probably have dictated making for port.

It is easy to sit here and second guess and of course i've never made any bad calls or mistakes when sailing ( yeah-right ), so my observations are gospel.

But, seeing as how I'm a coward, I probably would have stayed in harbor, and had I gone out, run for the barn when faced with incurring water.

Jus' sayin'

[Captain Jeffry]

Originally Posted by carstenb

It is easy to second guess, but I also don't buy that the ship was safer at sea. This might be true if the boat were in an uprotect anchorage and exposed. It is not true in a major US harbor.

According to the article, the boat had been taking on water for 24 hours. They were also close to several major harbors where they would have been perfectly safe. Why did they not run for cover? Apparently they had a full day to do so.

In retrospect, they should not have left harbor. They did and failed to run for cover when faced with incurring water. Perhapsnthe leak was not serious at the start, but prudence would probably have dictated making for port.

It is easy to sit here and second guess and of course i've never made any bad calls or mistakes when sailing ( yeah-right ), so my observations are gospel.

But, seeing as how I'm a coward, I probably would have stayed in harbor, and had I gone out, run for the barn when faced with incurring water.

Jus' sayin'

I've made some bad decisions in the past, we all have! What keeps me from making the same or similar mistake with the same general concepts involved is from second guessing myself and others with a whole bunch of why's and what if's. It's a great learning event.

[GaryMayo]

Originally Posted by Captain Jeffry

This just in:
HMS Bounty Survivors: Crew of Ship Sunk During Hurricane Sandy Speak of Lost Shipmates - ABC News

"The crew says their unexpected adventure began on October 25, as the ship set sail from Connecticut. Captain Wallbridge wrote on Facebook that with Hurricane Sandy on the move, "a ship is safer at sea than in port." But three days into the voyage, the crew found themselves in the middle of the ferocious storm, with heaving waves three stories high.
"The weather was so bad and we had so little control," said Douglas Faunt."

Well that video is a group hug feel good event of the year.

Don't get me wrong. Tickled 14 made it home safe. However, a group hug on abc news does not answer the questions of why sail 24 hours with a leaking ship when surely there were better answers than the solution of don't get off the ship till the ship throws you off as she breaks up, or why sail into storm of this magnitude at all?

I suppose this will be the last news of this event until a coast guard issues a report, a long time from now.

As a landlocked owner of a small sailboat, none of what has happened to the crew and HMS Bounty in that storm, adds up to a good investment, in my best judgment. Two lives erased, lost ship. Pretty big price to pay for someone that likes 70' seas and chasing hurricanes.

[xymotic]

As has been posted before, the ship may or may not be safer at sea, but the crew certainly wasn't.