Call for Help/ This American Life (Merged)

[hpeer]

Rebel,

Glad to see you back.

You've had a run of luck, bad then good.

Keep the faith.

[four winds]

RH, I feel for you, man.

Barely have a chance to respond to one person and the next one stands up to doubt your word.

I truly feel bad thinking about it.

[s/v 'Faith']

Originally Posted by rebel heart

We got broached and a subsequent larger breaking wave hit us while we were still beam to, I know the boom went in the water but I highly doubt the mast did.

We were broad reaching and our boom was 19' long, with maybe 12' of beam, so it was decently out there.

On a port tack we slept along the starboard side so there was no real people injuries. The boat was secured from missile hazards from weeks of bumpy seas prior to that.

I was actually in the companionway so fairly well braced. I held on tight, waited to get righted, then climbed over the plexiglass, clipped in, and started surveying damage.

We were dealing, I think, with where the easterly trades run into the equatorial counter current. That heaped the seas a bit and provided more than one swell direction.

Feel free to believe what you like.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I547 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Eric,

You did an excellent job with the interview mate, best of luck to you and your crew.

S/V Faith

[onestepcsy37]

thanks for coming on this forum, eric. i listened to the public radio broadcast today. first i have to say that both you and charlotte sound exactly as i'd imagined you would. i also believe your story exactly as you told it.

there are any number of armchair sailors and monday morning quarterbacks out there who would happily tell you what you should have done and what you should have had on board. but like my dad used to say, 'never argue with an idiot; people watching might not be able to tell the difference'.

i carry less gear than you do when offshore, although in truth i've never ventured as far offshore as you have. an iridium phone and an epirb are my connections with the outside world. and as you have proven, the only really vital piece of gear was the epirb. and it worked as advertised.

i am surprised at the damage done to the boat from the broach. scary to think that a boat as well made as that should suffer hull/deck separation.

here's hoping that you two can get your lives back on track quickly. fair winds and following seas...

[Andrew Troup]

I haven't followed it either, so I can only comment on how people are joining the dots as presented in this thread,

and on that basis I have to say that europaflyer's inferences

ON EDIT
and logic in general look sounder to me than MarkJ's .

rebel heart - good to have you back, sorry about your troubles.

[goboatingnow]

Forgive me , if I find some of this perplexing.

Firstly , there has been no mention in the blogs of a bad knockdown, mast in the water usually leaves the boat a mess. Often it causes injuries, most notably minor ones, bruises, bumps etc.

secondly the rescue boys were on board for serval days, yet the hull had separated from the deck and water was coming in. !!!!!

I have no skin in this game , but my experience is that post reconstructions of rescue events are never accurate, details are nuanced. Usually to demonstrate that the crew "had no choice" but to abandon. The boat is always the subject of the problem, the crew dynamics and mental states ( good, bad, or indifferent ) are never mentioned.

I respect Eric coming on here, its a brave thing to do. But I'm always interested in the inter crew dynamics in dramatic at-sea events. In my experience, these are far more significant then hardware failures. Its not a question of assigning blame, or scoring points, but the analysis is only useful if you can ascertain a reasonable perspective on events.


dave

[colemj]

Originally Posted by europaflyer

Blimey, on a Hans Christian. That's rough. That blows most of the 'why did they abandon' guff we've heard straight out of the window.

It seemingly also blows all of the "what makes a bluewater cruiser", "why catamarans are not ocean vessel" and "huntabentalina are not suitable ocean boats" threads straight out of the window.

Mark

[minaret]

Originally Posted by colemj

It seemingly also blows all of the "what makes a bluewater cruiser", "why catamarans are not ocean vessel" and "huntabentalina are not suitable ocean boats" threads straight out of the window.

Mark

Why? The hull/deck on the Union 36 is heavily overbuilt. The deck flange is 3/4" solid glass, the hull over 1" solid. It is bolted and then heavily glassed on the inside. If this joint failed, the event which caused that failure would have been catastrophic to a lighter built boat. This fact would seem to prove the point on those threads, rather than the opposite.


http://www.practical-sailor.com/issu...ew_5879-1.html

[colemj]

Originally Posted by minaret

Why? The hull/deck on the Union 36 is heavily overbuilt. The deck flange is 3/4" solid glass, the hull over 1" solid. It is bolted and then heavily glassed on the inside. If this joint failed, the event which caused that failure would have been catastrophic to a lighter built boat. This fact would seem to prove the point on those threads, rather than the opposite.

Ah, OK. Yes, there is a lot to be believed to reach that point. Both that the conditions to cause that happened (assuming the vessel was as sound as you say), as well as that those conditions would cause failures in the types of vessels I mentioned. It is difficult to picture our boom in the water in F5 conditions. In fact, we just did a marvelous overnight in F6 and I don't think our boom went any further than 5-10* closer to the water than upright.

Also, the conditions described, as well as a single knockdown (if that happened), has happened countless times on many boats not built to those scantlings with no structural damage. Google the internet for lightweight racing boats experiencing their mast in the water.

It is possible that other vessels may not have found themselves in that attitude in those conditions. Again, I know we would surely be lost if our mast was in the water. Are you saying that these were conditions that would capsize a multihull? Is Eric saying that?

Mark

[minaret]

Originally Posted by colemj

Ah, OK. Yes, there is a lot to be believed to reach that point. Both that the conditions to cause that happened (assuming the vessel was as sound as you say), as well as that those conditions would cause failures in the types of vessels I mentioned. It is difficult to picture our boom in the water in F5 conditions. In fact, we just did a marvelous overnight in F6 and I don't think our boom went any further than 5-10* closer to the water than upright.

Also, the conditions described, as well as a single knockdown (if that happened), has happened countless times on many boats not built to those scantlings with no structural damage. Google the internet for lightweight racing boats experiencing their mast in the water.

It is possible that other vessels may not have found themselves in that attitude in those conditions. Again, I know we would surely be lost if our mast was in the water. Are you saying that these were conditions that would capsize a multihull? Is Eric saying that?

Mark

Dunno, Eric hasn't said anything about conditions during this knockdown. All I know is that if that joint did indeed fail, the forces involved were astronomical.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by minaret

All I know is that if that joint did indeed fail, the forces involved were astronomical.

Or there was a problem with that particular joint. You seem to miss this point.

And don't get the wrong impression - I'm not saying that the boat was not suitable for ocean passaging (quite the opposite), I was pointing out that even a "blue water cruiser" can suffer those fates that are gleefully pasted on other "less-worthy" boats without thought.

Mark

[downunder]

Originally Posted by colemj

It seemingly also blows all of the "what makes a bluewater cruiser", "why catamarans are not ocean vessel" and "huntabentalina are not suitable ocean boats" threads straight out of the window.

Mark

Exactly what I was thinking Mark.

Sounds from Eric's comments they were battling uncomfortable conditions for some days.

Cheers

[colemj]

Originally Posted by downunder

Sounds from Eric's comments they were battling uncomfortable conditions for some days.

For their boat and their particular challenges, I agree.

Mark

[colemj]

Originally Posted by minaret

Dunno, Eric hasn't said anything about conditions during this knockdown. All I know is that if that joint did indeed fail, the forces involved were astronomical.

Being prolific bloggers, we had almost a blow-by-blow account of their passage. Seems like since they were noting when they had sex, they could have also thrown in a couple of words about being knocked down in horrific conditions. The two events were very close to each other in time...

So you are saying astronomical forces can cause failures of a "blue water cruiser" - then they could also cause failure for other not-so-bluewatery? Do you think all catamarans would have been flipped in these conditions? Are you saying that no huntabentalina could have survived the same conditions?

Because this one boat suffered, all others are less?

If you aren't saying this, then many of your (and other's) premises here have been scandalized.

Actually, you have said that if this boat's hull-deck joint failed, then the forces and conditions had to be astronomical. I find that disappointing reasoning of cause/effect from someone with your background. You have never seen a problem with a precious "blue water boat"?

Mark

[colemj]

Sorry I responded twice to your one post - somehow things got confused on the thread presentation and it presented that post again. I thought it was a new one and posted additional thoughts. I wasn't meaning to harp on it.

Mark