Visit our Popular Forums

zeehag · 02-11-2012, 09:11

atoll--to answer the question you posed yesterday--no--i'd-a gone faaarr away. very far away--i dont like being inside furyycames--they are treacherous.
cs-you have no clue what i do and do not know and practice. this is an internet forum, not my parlor. some things folks happen to over worry about--like lightning--RODLMAO---like you are going to prevent it from hitting you?? minimze damage?? rodl

try light'ning up. that is best lightning info i can give...AS USUAL.

sabray · 02-11-2012, 09:29

Mark,
my past was as a shipwright too. I was getting confused as well. The Marlon Brando Mutiny sank. Which is the one I was on. The boat was built oversized to accommodate filming requirements.
below was clipped from wired.com...
" Two replicas were built, one in 1960 and one in 1978. The latter was created in the late 70s for the movie The Bounty starring Mel Gibson and Anthony Hopkins. You can still visit it in Hong Kong. The former was the first ship of its size built for a film “from the keel up,” as the trailer describes, using historical source material. It was created by MGM for the 1962 version of Mutiny on the Bounty, starring Marlon Brandon and Trevor Howard. It was this first replica that sank this week."

Mark Johnson · 02-11-2012, 09:30

Mark Twain had a point...

Mark Johnson · 02-11-2012, 09:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabray

Mark,
my past was as a shipwright too. I was getting confused as well. The Marlon Brando Mutiny sank. Which is the one I was on. The boat was built oversized to accommodate filming requirements.
below was clipped from wired.com...
" Two replicas were built, one in 1960 and one in 1978. The latter was created in the late 70s for the movie The Bounty starring Mel Gibson and Anthony Hopkins. You can still visit it in Hong Kong. The former was the first ship of its size built for a film “from the keel up,” as the trailer describes, using historical source material. It was created by MGM for the 1962 version of Mutiny on the Bounty, starring Marlon Brandon and Trevor Howard. It was this first replica that sank this week."

FINALLY an answer! THANK YOU for clearing this up. Evidently our local news got it wrong in assuming that this HMS Bounty was the newer, Mel Gibson, Bounty, (that had been on display here 5 years ago, and was the one that I toured).

It is a sad story, nonetheless, but at least we know which Bounty we're talking about. Being that it was indeed a 52 year old, traditionally planked, wooden hull, I change my original statement. Unless built and maintained impeccably, the vessel may well have self destructed in the seaway. Only the crew knows at this point.

M.

Steve W · 02-11-2012, 11:42

Whatever parameters that Zee is using to define that the Bounty was not sailing in a hurricane zone seem odd to me at best, especially when applied to being anywhere near Sandy on a boat. Due to the weather forecast, we canceled our long weekend on the boat. The Admiral and I spent last Friday, Saturday and Sunday hanging out on the balcony of an oceanfront hotel in Daytona Beach watching the amazing power of Sandy as it passed by about 200+/- miles offshore. It was quite a show and really rough.Local news was reporting 35-40mph winds with gusts to 50. I had my binoculars and could see huge waves at the horizon. The tops of roughly 1 out of 5 waves were tall enough to touch the underside of the long fishing pier that extends into the Atlantic. I guess that pier was about 25-30' above the normal mean tide level. Never saw a single vessel of any size go by until after it passed on Sunday. Technically, we were not in the hurricane cone, but I can't imagine taking the Bounty out in that given the forecasted track. Makes no sense to me.

Rakuflames · 02-11-2012, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by GaryMayo

In this case, it was not a problem of knowing when to get off the boat. It was a problem of not knowing, not to get on it.

Well, I disagree on that. I don't think they should have been out there, but once they were, I think they may (may) have waited too long to throw in the towel. Given the ship they had, their experience, etc., even that is understandable.

I refuse to second-guess them about sailing. I don't know what information they had when they set sail. But I *suspect* they waited too long to abandon ship. Maybe there were no options to do so in calmer seas.

We really don't know, but I'm not going to criticize any of their decisions until the fact are out. I do reserve my right to think about it (for those who think we should not be considering what they should or should not have done).

**Ex-Calif** · 02-11-2012, 12:53

One mitigating factor in decision making is that HMS Bounty was a business. They had a schedule to keep, no doubt in my mind.

After weighing everything a pretty experienced captin decided to go. The airlines make similar decisions every day. Pressure to complete the mission are large.

I have not yet seen any credible source detail the sailing plan. Was it to head Northe East and go behind? When the pumps failed the plan changed?

Pleasure craft owners would be foolish to hae launched that day.

Perfect hinsight says the Bounty should have stayed in port. We all have perfect hindsight.

At some point the crew will start talking and then we will have another interesting array of opinions for my guess is even the crew will have conflict.

Celestialsailor · 02-11-2012, 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeehag

atoll--to answer the question you posed yesterday--no--i'd-a gone faaarr away. very far away--i dont like being inside furyycames--they are treacherous.
cs-you have no clue what i do and do not know and practice. this is an internet forum, not my parlor. some things folks happen to over worry about--like lightning--RODLMAO---like you are going to prevent it from hitting you?? minimze damage?? rodl

try light'ning up. that is best lightning info i can give...AS USUAL.

There should be a "Best of Cruisers & Sailing Forums". You'd be the Queen of the Fleet!

GaryMayo · 02-11-2012, 17:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

Well, I disagree on that. I don't think they should have been out there, but once they were, I think they may (may) have waited too long to throw in the towel. Given the ship they had, their experience, etc., even that is understandable.

I refuse to second-guess them about sailing. I don't know what information they had when they set sail. But I *suspect* they waited too long to abandon ship. Maybe there were no options to do so in calmer seas.

We really don't know, but I'm not going to criticize any of their decisions until the fact are out. I do reserve my right to think about it (for those who think we should not be considering what they should or should not have done).

Had they stayed in port as is nearly unanimously agreed by everyone from the former captain to little nobody's in Nebraska, the decision of when to jump ship would never have happened.

The crew should have been ordering pizza watching CNN, rather than ordering an abandon ship in 3 mile deep waters watching hurricane driven wind and rain.

Some of us are making the rounds from shocked, to saddened, to broken hearted, to just plain pissed off. I have been approaching the latter.

sabray · 02-11-2012, 17:46

Raku,

Waited to long to jump ship? What do you mean by that

Rakuflames · 02-11-2012, 17:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabray

Raku,

Waited to long to jump ship? What do you mean by that

I explained it in a previous post. I don't think they should have gone out either, but I wonder if they didn't wait too long to abandon ship, on top of everything else. As I said earlier, more than once we've seen posts here where people kind of sneered at folks who abandoned ship, only to have their boat survive whatever was going on.

But not always.

Did they expect 40 knot winds? The Bounty should have been able to handle 40 knot winds. I withhold judgment until the inquiry.

And my "waited too long" is based on how the two deaths occurred -- they fell into the water trying to get into the life raft. A third person also fell in but somehow managed to get into the raft, and he survived, but the skipper and the Christian woman were lost.

But maybe things got bad so quickly that they didn't have a safer window to abandon ship. We just don't know and won't know for some time. As someone pointed out, the reports from crew members will not be 100% in alignment either, so I will still withhold judgment if a few of them speak up, but I expect they've been asked to wait until the court of inquiry.

GaryMayo · 02-11-2012, 18:04

Next question would be, when will the public hear from the crew?

CaptLes · 02-11-2012, 18:15

50 years is old for a wood-planked sailing ship. My guess is that some planking came loose in the high seas due to aging (or rotten) fasteners and the Bounty started taking on water faster than the pumps could manage. The high water ultimately caused the pumps and engines to fail.

In good condition the Bounty should have had no problem weathering the storm. Still, the ship could have stayed in port a couple weeks and avoided all risk of a storm at sea.

downunder · 02-11-2012, 23:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptLes

50 years is old for a wood-planked sailing ship. My guess is that some planking came loose in the high seas due to aging (or rotten) fasteners and the Bounty started taking on water faster than the pumps could manage. The high water ultimately caused the pumps and engines to fail.

In good condition the Bounty should have had no problem weathering the storm. Still, the ship could have stayed in port a couple weeks and avoided all risk of a storm at sea.

And they did not have full time carpenters team and crew aboard as did the original Bounty.