The (Official) "Lets Bash the Nina Thread" - sponsored by Bazzer :-)

[scoobert]

your probably right, its far less then 99%.
and death has no importance. life is important.

[BlueSun]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Am I being insensitive by using this language and perhaps should re-eduate myself to use "passed"?

Only you can answer this for yourself Wotname. You've acknowledged that many people prefer the term "passed" in this sensitive situation. The question is therefore whether you care enough about how they feel to modify your behaviour.

[MarkJ]

I thought it was a newish use of the word made popular by seances.

I dont use the word. As you are probably aware I am much more direct

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by BlueSun

Only you can answer this for yourself Wotname. You've acknowledged that many people prefer the term "passed" in this sensitive situation. The question is therefore whether you care enough about how they feel to modify your behaviour.

I guess I was speaking more in the abstract.

I am not sure where I acknowledged "that many people"; I think I referred to "one poster". Now I am trying to see if this is more common than I think.

And yes, I would not intentionally want to cause offence if I knew someone was offended by particular language. Likewise I know of people who find "passed" offensive - as always, clear and kind communication can be a minefield.

[bill352]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

This thread is getting ridiculous! How is it a family and friends have taken over a forum blindly trying to compel a reasoning thats far removed from reality?

Families must look at the facts and stop wasting money that can be spent on the education of children than casting to the winds on dead adults.

OK, I'll say it -

Mark, that is despicable. I can only assume it is the result of PWI, which explains but does not excuse it.

At least try to maintain the standards of common decency.

[SteveT]

Dead is dead. Call it as it is. The Nina has been missing now for a long time and given all the well re-hashed circumstances she has most likely foundered and lost with all hands.

When people say how can this happen in a modern world etc. I would point out that at the end of last year and the beginning of this in a space of 39 days 3 ships foundered with the loss of 44 lives. In 2 cases no wreckage was found. Of course these were commercial vessels crewed with 3rd worlders and not wealthy westerners so apart from a cursory SAR in the South China Sea nothing much was done or reported outside of the professional maritime press.

S@@t happens at sea.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

As you are probably aware I am much more direct

Yeah, there is that

[psneeld]

I find it interesting when people talk about rescue.

Rescue 30 miles off the Atlantic Coast of the USA is a bit different than rescue 300-500 miles off most coasts of the world. Not to say many countries don't have fantastic SAR capabilities...but few have more "saturated" SAR assets in a given area. If they do...again I apologize.

Rescue in tropical or Arctic conditions versus temperate conditions is also vastly different...as is to just time of year for areas with drastic clime changes.

So determining when to hit "the big red button" should be thought out with more than "I'm scared" in mind...when it goes from abandoning ship at ANY point (right away or sometime later) survival time is a big question.

Things like water if you don't have a watermaker come to mind..if you gut it out for a couple weeks and then the worst happens...now your position is even more unsure and your water now could be critical in a survival situation.

Just ONE of MANY points to consider. Hit the big red button and at least you might get a fixed wing overhead that will drop a radio and anything else handy in a survival situation...then you can tell everyone you are gonna keep trying...stay in touch...and if you don't mind..."which way is land again?"

While I certainly hope many of the thoughts that are posted are just snippets of many true cruisers "safety and seamanship" skills/knowledge...reading just short random thoughts of what they might or might not do is really scary.

[Mr B]

Dead is Dead, Not Passed, Passed, what is that, I really dont get that term,

They have not fired up their Epirb, They are sailors, So my money is on them being still alive. but in a very battered boat, Heading towards South America,

Thats the way the wind blows here,

They would have been found, if wrecked on the coast of NZ,

Water collection is easy if you have a bit of canvass, and they have had plenty of rain,

[JPA Cate]

Frankly, you guys,

Isn't a discussion of euphemism in modern life a bit off topic?

Ann

[captain58sailin]

The term "passed" used to be a euphemism for something coming out of your physical body, other than your spirit. IE passing a baby, etc...

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

Frankly, you guys,

Isn't a discussion of euphemism in modern life a bit off topic?

Ann

Not really, just exploring cultural differences and trying to understand whether there are different meanings to words - or some people are just being uber sensitive (even if understandably so).

Me tends towards the light hearted reference to people having fallen off the branch , that don't always go down so well - especially when the deceased was a lumberjack. and it was a workplace incident..........

[sabray]

I am trying to take something away from this but can't figure out **** from fact.1) Boat had a liferaft but it may not have been up to date on inspection. 2) A cruise ship at some point in time on some body of water went past a life raft but did not investigate. 3) They had a epirb but it was not hydrostatic. May not have been up to date. 4) They had sat comms but not ssb. 5) they did not have ais which is line of site and probably would have done jack at the distance offshore.6) the boat had an engine with sketchy fuel and water intakes. 6) the sails were not in good shape. 7) though no picture I can find shows the boat was hogged it is reported that there was hogging by bad source perhaps. 7) the boat had been glassed over. Should not see cracking at seems if it was really glassed. Think also that if glassing a old traditional hull was an option something went wrong that made this option look better then chucking in towel on her.
Maybe we could start by cleaning up the facts. I don't have any. So I can't learn. If I took the negative side of every point above I would say they were making choices on critical systems and were struggling to maintain a large old boat and keep food on the table. Unfair as I have no clew on real conditions.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by sabray

I am trying to take something away from this but can't figure out **** from fact.

1) Boat had a liferaft but it may not have been up to date on inspection - No hard info one way or another, but not read any reason to suppose it was not in date.
2) A cruise ship at some point in time on some body of water went past a life raft but did not investigate - different ocean.
3) They had a epirb but it was not hydrostatic - No hard info one way or another, presumed not as would be unusual.
3a) (EPIRB) May not have been up to date - not sure what that means?
4) They had sat comms but not ssb - believed correct.
5) they did not have ais which is line of site and probably would have done jack at the distance offshore - no AIS.
6) the boat had an engine with sketchy fuel and water intakes - recent engine install, engine running but not to full potential - updates to fuel system to be made in Oz
7) the sails were not in good shape. - no hard info, storm sail "blown out" could have been for any reason, that alone no indication of condition of other sails.
8) though no picture I can find shows the boat was hogged it is reported that there was hogging by bad source perhaps - no hard evidence to support the hogging theory.
9) the boat had been glassed over. Should not see cracking at seems if it was really glassed. Think also that if glassing a old traditional hull was an option something went wrong that made this option look better then chucking in towel on her - yes, hull glassed over. No info on when or how done.

My re-numbering

Just re-checked that I am in the right Nina thread for this discussion.........

......my main concern would be about the hull condition and when and how the fibreglass was done.

If done badly (which is the most common approach with old wooden boats) it is a temporary fix (wahoo! no leaks!) but actually accelerates the demise of the vessel by allowing the boat to rot away under the new skin...

..their was a boat over here a few years back which sailed in for some hull repairs (to replace some delaminated fibreglass skin) - once the boat yard hard started they realised the whole of the hull was rubbish and needed replacement......boat was scrapped I have also seen plenty of derelicts around here (tidal so boats dry out on legs) over the years where this cheap fix has been used and the boat(s) later abandoned to decay......learn a bit from poking around, and often from simply looking at changes over years.

The reason why that is the focus of my concern is that (apart from collision - where AIS or Radar would have been useful - if switched on and someone monitoring) should the hull fail in a storm the boat would have sunk quickly. very quickly - and leaving no debris field. A Boat coming off a wave puts an enormous amount of strain on the hull and it is not simply the planks that can fail it is also the ribs - and once one fails it increases the pressure on others, and can have zipper effect very quickly . Would also be of interested to know how she was planked, especially what nails were used and when last replaced - they either rust away (if iron, including galvanised) and get eaten chemically (if bronze or copper) by the wood, the sea and electrical charge, after 80 years she would have been re-nailed a couple of times - no matter how well constructed originally. and when the nails degrade it allows the planks and ribs / frames to work (move) which accelerates the problem of decay.......all that without the spectre of rot, which likes to hide in out of the way places.

Of course she could have come out of a top to bottom refit the week before departure - but as regular readers of CF will know, folks have varying ideas on what doing a job well actually consists of.......and that's only on plastic boats!, simply owning a wooden boat does not give the owner the wisdom of a time served shipwright. None of that is to decry the owner / Skipper of the Nina, but certainly thoughts to be mulled over if folks get to the stage of trying to guesstimate what happened (if they are not found then will never know for sure ).

I have now qualified for the MarkJ award for doom and gloom .

LATE EDIT: I did suggest in the "nice" Nina thread a while back that one of the friends / family (i.e. folks with first hand real world access to info) set up a website to separate fact from fiction from allegation from supposition as an easy point of reference for those concerned - plus details of what has been done to search and what is planned. Am not aware of anything having been set up.

[CPseudonym]

Originally Posted by psneeld

While I certainly hope many of the thoughts that are posted are just snippets of many true cruisers "safety and seamanship" skills/knowledge...reading just short random thoughts of what they might or might not do is really scary.

Having just read this thread for the first time today I'm in complete agreement with you. The macho bravado of those hardy souls who wouldn't consider "pushing the button until they where clinging to the top of the mast" have never been involved with a SAR situation. I wish their passengers and loved ones well.