Heedless Venture to Antarctica

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by doug86

1. Every State shall require the master of a ship flying its flag, in so far as he can do so without serious danger to the ship, the crew or the passengers:

...(b) to proceed with all possible speed to the rescue of persons in distress, if informed of their need of assistance, in so far as such action may reasonably be expected of him...

It doesn't say "without danger"; it says "without serious danger", meaning some risk is to be expected. For a coast guard cutter or naval vessel, "all possible speed" implies pounding into the seas, which while within the capabilities of the vessel, makes for a very unpleasant ride for the occupants.

Originally Posted by boatman61

What you have to remember is in 98% of cases these vessels are already out there and suffering the same conditions anyway...
If truth be told the NZ vessel would have suffered the same damage from the storm if he'd stayed in position...

The difference between "riding out a storm" and "bashing into a storm" is night and day - you don't knock off all your aerials going with the seas. Not to diminish the efforts of commercial or private sailors, but the professional SAR assets will tend to take on a larger measure of risk - taxpayers will pay for damages to the vessel, so "serious danger" to a CG or Navy captain starts applying at "potential loss of own ship."

[LakeSuperior]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

When a seaman puts out a mayday, other seamen WILL respond if there is any possibility they can help, putting their own equipment and lives at risk. It's the code of the sea. If you spend much time at sea or in the seafaring community you will appreciate and understand it.

To delay in the polar environment would make the whole rescue futile.

Originally Posted by estarzinger

Are you by chance a lawyer? What you cite is only the obligation under international treaty - seamen in fact will all go to much greater effort than this to help each other. The 'code' is to go and help when ever and were ever possible, even at additional risk of equipment and life. .

You assume much in both of the above posts. In response to my post, the first quote above, you seem to imply that I am inexperienced, unappreciative, and lack understanding. All three may be true but you would not know it because you don't know me.

Why not just stick to the discussion and avoid speculation about the participants.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

The difference between "riding out a storm" and "bashing into a storm" is night and day - you don't knock off all your aerials going with the seas. Not to diminish the efforts of commercial or private sailors, but the professional SAR assets will tend to take on a larger measure of risk - taxpayers will pay for damages to the vessel, so "serious danger" to a CG or Navy captain starts applying at "potential loss of own ship."

It was a long time ago...
but I seem to remember time in Navy ships where we headed F11/12's in the N Sea...
running before big seas is not a general safety measure of big boats...
also we used to carry out RAS's in f7/8's... just to stay on patrol... its a different ball game from our little dinky toys...
As for losing arials... seen worse than that go over the side including a 27ft whaler ripped of its davits...

[Ziggy]

Originally Posted by sinbad7

May I respectfully remind you that Norwegian Roald Amundsen was the first to set foot on the South Pole only 100 years ago and the first to survive a visit to the North Pole and also the first to sail through the North West Passage with his ships the Gjøa and the Fram.

It's interesting to note that Amundsen also sailed to Antarctica in secrecy, without the permission of the Norwegian government and the group that funded his voyage. His ostensible destination was the Arctic, but he changed plans to go after the South Pole. But Amundsen's expedition was remarkable for the meticulous planning and preparation, apparently in contrast to the "Berserks"

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by boatman61

running before big seas is not a general safety measure of big boats...

Perfectly acceptable course of action - so long as your speed isn't too close to the speed of the seas; so you can either go slowly into the seas, or with them very slow or fairly fast and minimize the risk of damage. The point being, you can choose the least damaging/most comfortable course and speed when you're riding out the mess, but if you're going to a ship in distress, your course is set for you and speed is as quick as can be.

As for losing arials... seen worse than that go over the side including a 27ft whaler ripped of its davits...

I can list off a whole load of impressive losses too, but that's not really the point - your whaler was hanging on the davits a couple feet above the weatherdeck - aerials tend to be mounted near the top of the ship; to have lost them meant they were going hard into the seas.

[boatman61]

Not as exposed as you think.... take a look... dunno about todays ships tho'....

[Lodesman]

I grant you that the Leanders had their boats well up there - but they're still lower than the aerials. I've heard they also roll a lot - any truth to that?

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by Brazil

Anyone know is it 45ft or 45 m boat?

If it was three guys trying to operate a 45 metre sailboat in an Antarctica storm, I think we can save money on the inquest.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

You assume . . . that I am inexperienced, . . .

Why not just stick to the discussion and avoid speculation about the participants.

Sorry. You are of course correct. I should have strictly kept speculation about posters out of my comments.

I have very strong feelings about this topic. It is sometimes hard for landsmen to understand the community and ethics of seaman, and I feel that unfortunately the landsmen (911) attitude is more and more getting carried to sea because it has become so much easier to go to sea without an 'apprenticeship'.

We do and will help each other however we can. But we also do expect other seamen will demonstrate prudence and respect.

There are some important and subtle issues here about adventure and freedom and responsibility.

It's been a good discussion, and I hope I have not caused offense.

[boatman61]

After serving on the 'Pellew' (my 1st commission).... everything else was solid as a rock in comparison,,

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by doug86

. . . How would you rate Scott's attempt to the Pole? With horses, no less? Horses was at least as stupid as ATVs. How about Shackleton's ego trip? He and other polar explorers left all manner of trash behind, thumbed their noses at the advice of so many who said they were fools to try it, broke many rules of safety and normally decency, and many folks ended up dead due to all this exploring.

I don't know much about Scott's venture, but it was in a different era and we know a lot better today than he did. Keeping the polar environments pristine was not recognized as any sort of objective then, and I suspect that he thought (incorrectly) that horses were the best approach.

We all make mistakes and luck sometimes turns against all of us. So, I do not criticise failure. But I do have a problem with a skipper intentionally casting aside and ignoring hard won knowledge and best practices as this one did repeatedly.

[DeepFrz]

It sure looked to me like the OP was calling for increased regulation. Perhaps I was wrong.

[matauwhi]

G'day, mates. I remember all kinds of "alarm bells" going of in my mind when we passed by the Beserk, seeing the quad bikies and all the gear on deck, as they were clearing out of Opua last year and I had no idea where they were heading at the time. I was even more gobsmacked when I discovered what their intentions were when we got ashore.

In regards to Mayday and "without serious danger" situations, here are a few of my thoughts as a member of the liveaboard, cruising community. Radios are one of my hobies. I almost (there is the odd occasion when I forget to turn it on) always have the VHF on and monitoring 16 when I am on board and not "off watch". I regularly particpate as a relay station with the Pacific Seafarers Net. I have assisted with radio comms on several Mayday calls.

On one specific Mayday situation 2 years ago, my wife and I were confronted 1st hand with the "without serious danger" situation during a stormy night. The first MayDay call from a yacht sinking on the rocks 2 miles from our mooring went unanswered by New Zealand Maritime Radio. I thought that was strange and immediately took the second call for help.

I was able to relay the MayDay call to Maritime Radio and when no response for assistance came forward, we made the decision to put our lives and boat in danger, depart our mooring and go to the help of these people. When we arrived on the scene a half hour later, the 2 people were in the water.

We knew, based on the wave and wind conditions around the rocks, that we could not launch our inflatable to rescue them without "serious danger" to ourselves and boat. The 2 people managed to get themselves onto the rocks. We advised Maritime radio that we would not be able to retrieve the 2 people from the rocks and requested a helicopter for assistance. The people were successfully rescued with minor injuries, the yacht broke up and sank. We safely returned to our mooring.

The VHF is still on monitoring 16. In responding to MayDay situations, this captain makes his own determination on the criteria for "without serious danger" and no one else. Nor do I place judgemet on what another captain's criteria is for "without serious danger". Cheers.

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by matauwhi

We knew, based on the wave and wind conditions around the rocks, that we could not launch our inflatable to rescue them without "serious danger" to ourselves and boat. The 2 people managed to get themselves onto the rocks. We advised Maritime radio that we would not be able to retrieve the 2 people from the rocks and requested a helicopter for assistance. The people were successfully rescued with minor injuries, the yacht broke up and sank. We safely returned to our mooring.

The VHF is still on monitoring 16. In responding to MayDay situations, this captain makes his own determination on the criteria for "without serious danger" and no one else. Nor do I place judgemet on what another captain's criteria is for "without serious danger". Cheers.

I'd say you made the right call on that one

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

The difference between "riding out a storm" and "bashing into a storm" is night and day - you don't knock off all your aerials going with the seas. Not to diminish the efforts of commercial or private sailors, but the professional SAR assets will tend to take on a larger measure of risk - taxpayers will pay for damages to the vessel, so "serious danger" to a CG or Navy captain starts applying at "potential loss of own ship."

I'd have to disagree on the statement that commercial mariners would not take on a greater measure of risk.
In responding to distress calls and pushing hard into a typhoon in the China sea, lost ship boats, rafts, hand rails etc.
I would not be concerned about the cost of damage, the underwriters pick up the tab, I'd be more concerned about the attitude of the marine community if I had not done all I could, than the owner of the vessel bemoaning the loss of the deductible.