S/V 'Panache' Crew Abandons Ship

[dana-tenacity]

This will probably upset someone, and the people involved have my sympathy - BUT- based on what I have read here they should have stayed on the boat.
It was afloat, the mast pointing up, the keel pointing down, it wasn't taking on water. It was capable of being sailed home.
Being rescued probably put them (and the child) at greater risk than staying put. It also put the rescuers at risk. And as pointed out earlier it puts up insurance premiums, and worse attracts the attention of brain dead politicians and bureaucrats.
If you sail out of sight of land you have a responsibility to all other cruisers to get yourself out of trouble if at all possible.

[CharlieCobra]

I hate to say it but I concur.

[donradcliffe]

Just going by my grib files, they would have called for help just before a front hit, with peak winds 35-40k plus gusts. My next grib at 0100 EST Monday shows winds down to 10-15k for the next 36 hours. Judging from the video, things had calmed down quite a bit by the time the calvary arrived.

[skipmac]

First my sympathies to the family. I cannot imagine the pain of losing your boat and life's dream like that.

But, am I the only one that is wondering about the wisdom of heading offshore this late in the year from the eastern seaboard? Maybe with a well found boat (seems like they had that), seasoned crew (some questions raised on this issue), no children on board and a really carefull check of the weather before departure.

Even with a forecast weather window I would plan on a high odds of hitting something rough before getting into the southern latitudes.

[skipmac]

After posting my two cents worth decided to look at the news reports on the rescue even though they were described as inaccurate (had the same experience with the news media myself several times over the years).

I was astonished to read that the mother jumped overboard with the child for rescue. Unless there were serious mitigating circumstances like injury or severe sea sickness and dehydration I think it was far more dangerous to jump into a stormy sea than to remain on board. Does no one remember what happened in the Fastnet race of 1979? Cannot remember the exact statistics but there were a number of sailors that drowned after abandoning their boats where the boat was found virtually undamaged and still afloat days later.

Rule #1, never abandon your boat until it sinks out from under your feet unless there is significant reason to do so.

- boat is on fire
- you are severely injured or ill and need urgent medical care.
- boat is sinking and cannot be salvaged and safe rescue is at hand
- boat is in imminent danger of grounding in a deadly situation

You may feel terrible, sea sick, battered, tired and more but that is better than drowning. Feeling bad goes away, drowning doesn't.

[BassAckwards]

Originally Posted by SilentOption

Since nobody perished I think we should present our best guess and see who comes closest to the truth.

Ok, I'll play.

I suspect the CG forced the decision for all to abandon the vessel.

ie. Boat contacts CG and advises that they are having problems, but do not need rescue and provides info pertaining to the crew; and child.

Or, the captain asks the CG to come and remove only the mother and child.

The CG tells captain that if they come out all have to abandon. The captain says hell no, he's not leaving his boat; But the CG urges them to consider abandoning ship for the child's sake. Advocating a worse case scenario that the father/captain (and mother) must consider; ie. the vessel may drift beyond the range of the rescue copter, or there is the possibility of deteriorating conditions.

The CG tells them its now or never. What would you do? Its a no brainer for any who have small children. (course those who have teenagers....)

Obviously the CG felt it imperative to conduct a night operation instead of waiting for daylight. I cant imagine the CG risking the political fall-out by not acting prudently when a child is at risk.

The abandonment of this vessel was due to the child being aboard.

[N.M.I.ke]

His name notwithstanding, I imagine BassAckwards has it correct

[Stillraining]

Originally Posted by CharlieCobra

Oh damn! I just noticed the laughing face for this thread. I hit the wrong one. It's supposed to be the sad face. Somebody losing a boat ain't funny at all.

ya ya ya bla bla bla..you insensitive twit....

[schoonerdog]

oops double post!

[schoonerdog]

Originally Posted by BassAckwards

Ok, I'll play.

I suspect the CG forced the decision for all to abandon the vessel.

ie. Boat contacts CG and advises that they are having problems, but do not need rescue and provides info pertaining to the crew; and child.

Or, the captain asks the CG to come and remove only the mother and child.

The CG tells captain that if they come out all have to abandon. The captain says hell no, he's not leaving his boat; But the CG urges them to consider abandoning ship for the child's sake. Advocating a worse case scenario that the father/captain (and mother) must consider; ie. the vessel may drift beyond the range of the rescue copter, or there is the possibility of deteriorating conditions.

The CG tells them its now or never. What would you do? Its a no brainer for any who have small children. (course those who have teenagers....)

Obviously the CG felt it imperative to conduct a night operation instead of waiting for daylight. I cant imagine the CG risking the political fall-out by not acting prudently when a child is at risk.

The abandonment of this vessel was due to the child being aboard.

BINGO, you win the prize. I am guessing you are a parent yourself

They did not know they would be asked to jump in the water. They were hoping to get lifted off the boat, but CG determined that was too risky to the chopper. So they sent a rescue diver/swimmer in the water and each crew member jumped into his arms as he helped them into the basket.

And yes, once you make the call (during the really BAD conditions that one doesn't see in the rescue video) then you just committed yourself to having the CG come out, even if conditions calm by the time they get there. And once the CG takes the time/ effort/ money/ risk to come out they are not going to ALLOW anyone stay behind.

If you have your baby on board you are not going to wait around to see if your boat if going to roll or pitch pole.

[SilentOption]

From the posts I assume we are still speculating here.

Originally Posted by schoonerdog

BINGO, you win the prize. I am guessing you are a parent yourself

They did not know they would be asked to jump in the water. They were hoping to get lifted off the boat, but CG determined that was too risky to the chopper. So they sent a rescue diver/swimmer in the water and each crew member jumped into his arms as he helped them into the basket.

And yes, once you make the call (during the really BAD conditions that one doesn't see in the rescue video) then you just committed yourself to having the CG come out, even if conditions calm by the time they get there. And once the CG takes the time/ effort/ money/ risk to come out they are not going to ALLOW anyone stay behind.

If you have your baby on board you are not going to wait around to see if your boat if going to roll or pitch pole.

One of my former wives was Assistant Chief of SAR for the Pacific while we were married. Prior to that she responded to many many calls off the Outer Banks. I remember several times when the CG was summoned then arrived to discover the crew had solved the problem or conditions had significantly changed or in some cases the individual had just changed their mind. The CG went away. The CG does not force people off the boat. They usually don't have the loiter time to hover and debate.
If the crew asked for just the mother and child to be removed and said the boat had been repaired to a point that it could make port I am sure our CG would have removed the mother and child bid the others good luck and left.
They most likely would be asked to report in on some schedule while making their way to the nearest port.
A few years ago I was on a boat that nearly sank off shore in winter conditions. While furiously working to solve the issue we called the CG and a helo was launched. We stopped the flooding and got an engine running just as they arrived. We said we were relatively sure we could make it. They were there and gone in seconds.
The CG responds when called and takes risks and expends time and money. Its what they do for a living. Situations change. They know that and they don't want derelict boats floating around the seas if it can be avoided.

[Vasco]

Originally Posted by SilentOption

The CG does not force people off the boat. They usually don't have the loiter time to hover and debate.
.

The CG does a wonderful job but I think the skipper of "Sartori", the Westsail that was abandoned and washed up on the Jersey shore in the "perfect storm" would vehemently disagree with you about being forced to get off the boat.

[Southern Star]

skipmac, this is one of the best times of the year in which to depart offshore from the US Eastern Seaboard to the Caribbean either direct, or via Bermuda. Hurricane season is for all practical purposes over, and there are also organized events for a large number of vessels that make this trek each year - NARC, the North Atlantic Rally to the Caribbean (via Bermuda) and the Caribbean 1500 direct.

So in terms of the efforts to criticize the unfortunate skipper and crew of the boat, this one is a non-starter.

Brad

[imagine2frolic]

Did the skipper of Satori simply comply with orders, or did they drag him off the boat? I forget the scenario of his departure.

[Vasco]

i2f,

You can read the complete story here.
The Rainbow Chaser: Diary
Makes very interesting reading and says a lot for not taking strangers on as crew.