Storm Sailing Advice

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Travelnik

I read "Heavy Weather Sailing" and "Fastnet Force 10" before I ever got on a sailboat.

Those books had me become a strong believer in self-reliance. I won't carry an EPIRB.

My decision, my risk, my choice. I don't want someone else, or perhaps several people, giving their lives to bail me out of a situation that I got myself into.

Great discussion!

I would carry an EPIRB. Geting caught in a storm isn't the only thing that can go wrong out there.

[Travelnik]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

I would carry an EPIRB. Geting caught in a storm isn't the only thing that can go wrong out there.

It's still my choice, and I choose to go without one.

So far, most of us here are free to make that choice, just like the choice of the boats we sail.

I will admit that I'll be carrying a handheld VHF and GPS. I'll also carry spares. I'm even looking at a cheap AIS transponder, but I probably won't get much more electronics onboard than that. Takes up too much room!

(BTW, I don't criticize or judge anyone on their "safety" choices. I was just stating my own personal choices.

)

.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Travelnik

It's still my choice, and I choose to go without one.

So far, most of us here are free to make that choice, just like the choice of the boats we sail.

I will admit that I'll be carrying a handheld VHF and GPS. I'll also carry spares. I'm even looking at a cheap AIS transponder, but I probably won't get much more electronics onboard than that. Takes up too much room!

(BTW, I don't criticize or judge anyone on their "safety" choices. I was just stating my own personal choices.

)

.

Well, here's my thinking. In the open ocean I would be on someone else's boat. I would be crew, not skipper. My life would depend on someone else's decisions. Slam dunk for me, personal EPIRB.

[Travelnik]

Originally Posted by Rakuflames

Well, here's my thinking. In the open ocean I would be on someone else's boat. I would be crew, not skipper. My life would depend on someone else's decisions. Slam dunk for me, personal EPIRB.

I would more than likely be single-handing, therefore, "It would be more seemly to drown like a gentleman."

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Travelnik

I would more than likely be single-handing, therefore, "It would be more seemly to drown like a gentleman."

I actually see your point, but what if you aren't in this predicament because of a storm, that you really didn't do anything wrong? Suppose your boat were rammed by a whale -- we know it's rare, but we also know it's happened -- you're in the water, clinging to whatever is left of your boat?

Why shouldn't you be rescued if you can? Nothing really dangerous about plucking you out of a calm sea.

I would not want to draw helicopters or other rescue craft to me -- risk other lives -- because I acted like an idiot and either didn't check the weather or ignored the obvious threat, but really ... other things happen.

[Weyalan]

Caveat: I am, relative to many posters here, inexperienced in storm sailing, I will offer the opinion that while many sailors have equipment and espouse techniques for heavy weather sailing, a large proportion of them rarely, if ever, get that gear out and practice with it... I hesitate to say this, but I sometimes think that they feel that the very possession of the gear has some sort of talismanic value.

I was helping a friend cart his destroyed mainsail to a dumpster the other day, and this was not the first time I had helped him with such an exercise, and I (cautiously) offered the opinion that he'd destroy less mainsails if he reefed earlier and more often. He protested that his crew don't have the skill to reef... but to me, if crew don't have skill in reefing, you teach them... and you teach them in relatively benign conditions, because when it starts to get serious, its not time to be teaching. Any member of our crew is competent to tuck-in and shake-out reefs. No question. We make a point of putting in reefs early, even if we don't strictly need them, precisely because it offers opportunities to learn / practice and get the process down pat, because if you can't put a reef in quickly and efficiently in 20 or 25 knots, how are you going to go in 50+ knots?

Also, many sailors I know choose not to have a 3rd deep reef in their main - justifying this by the possession of a storm trisail. Leaving aside the issue of whether or not they have ever hoisted the damn thing at all, let alone in storm conditions, very few of the boats I have seen who choose 2 reefs and a trisail have a separate track for the trisail so that, in the event that they wanted to "fly the tri", would have to fully remove the main luff from the mast in order to feed the trisail luff into the main luff groove... and this exercise would, apparently, be taking place in conditions where they had decided 2 reefs was sufficient?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that whatever safety gear that you choose to carry is of value only if you are comfortable and familiar with its correct use, because storm conditions are not the time to be trying things out.

P.S. I'm sure that I'm "preaching to the choir" for most people here

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Weyalan

Caveat: I am, relative to many posters here, inexperienced in storm sailing, I will offer the opinion that while many sailors have equipment and espouse techniques for heavy weather sailing, a large proportion of them rarely, if ever, get that gear out and practice with it... I hesitate to say this, but I sometimes think that they feel that the very possession of the gear has some sort of talismanic value.

I was helping a friend cart his destroyed mainsail to a dumpster the other day, and this was not the first time I had helped him with such an exercise, and I (cautiously) offered the opinion that he'd destroy less mainsails if he reefed earlier and more often. He protested that his crew don't have the skill to reef... but to me, if crew don't have skill in reefing, you teach them... and you teach them in relatively benign conditions, because when it starts to get serious, its not time to be teaching. Any member of our crew is competent to tuck-in and shake-out reefs. No question. We make a point of putting in reefs early, even if we don't strictly need them, precisely because it offers opportunities to learn / practice and get the process down pat, because if you can't put a reef in quickly and efficiently in 20 or 25 knots, how are you going to go in 50+ knots?

Also, many sailors I know choose not to have a 3rd deep reef in their main - justifying this by the possession of a storm trisail. Leaving aside the issue of whether or not they have ever hoisted the damn thing at all, let alone in storm conditions, very few of the boats I have seen who choose 2 reefs and a trisail have a separate track for the trisail so that, in the event that they wanted to "fly the tri", would have to fully remove the main luff from the mast in order to feed the trisail luff into the main luff groove... and this exercise would, apparently, be taking place in conditions where they had decided 2 reefs was sufficient?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that whatever safety gear that you choose to carry is of value only if you are comfortable and familiar with its correct use, because storm conditions are not the time to be trying things out.

P.S. I'm sure that I'm "preaching to the choir" for most people here

I think it's important to have an easy-to-use reefing system. Then print out the instructions and laminate them -- tape them to the side of the cabin where the helmsman can call the steps out. If it's EASY to put it in and shake it out, then you have no problem doing it before things get dicey.

My first boat came with a "reefing system" -- cringles in the sail, and two pieces of line. No kidding. We were supposed to put the line through the cringle and tie it on the bottom. That was the reefing system. My NA friend upgraded it for me.

When I bought this boat, it had an in-boom reefing system that didn't work. People take crazy risks. I know the man who owned the boat before me sailed the boat a lot and originally was planning on sailing it across the Gulf to Biloxi. With no reefing.

[Jammer Six]

It constantly amazes me that people who single hand think they are only risking their life.

To my mind, their life is one of the smaller things they are risking.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

It constantly amazes me that people who single hand think they are only risking their life.

To my mind, their life is one of the smaller things they are risking.

Care to illuminate?

[goboatingnow]

It constantly amazes me that people who single hand think they are only risking their life.

To my mind, their life is one of the smaller things they are risking.

I agree, one presumes they have loved ones , that would express a different view, then going down, doing a benny hill salute. ( not to mention there are few atheists in a fox hole)

[Caracal]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

( not to mention there are few atheists in a fox hole)

That's as nonsensical as saying there are no theists in hospitals.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Caracal

That's as nonsensical as saying there are no theists in hospitals.

You do understand the point of the quote, That I suspect those that might claim to " do the decent thing" may have a , quite understandable, change of heart, in extremis.

hat's as nonsensical as saying there are no theists in hospitals.

Now that is nonsensical. few believers I suspect become unbelievers in extermis or death, the opposite anecdotally, holds .

Dave

[Cavalier]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

there are few atheists in a fox hole)

off topic but:

I much prefer "in a storm at sea you'll find no atheists" as it's not ambiguous in cause and effect.

"there are few atheists in a fox hole" could be misconstrued as meaning that "the religious are warmongers" ..

[Caracal]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

You do understand the point of the quote, That I suspect those that might claim to " do the decent thing" may have a , quite understandable, change of heart, in extremis.

Yes, I understood the context.

Now that is nonsensical. few believers I suspect become unbelievers in extermis or death, the opposite anecdotally, holds .

The problem I have in general with that sentiment is that an atheist does not believe a god exist in the first place. At most you will get floundering theists affirm their, or a, belief. When I'm in trouble, I don't suddenly start to believe in a God, anymore than I start to believe in the pink invisible unicorn, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Santa Claus, or anything of the sort.

And the hospital equivalent is still a completely valid analogy, although it's rarely a panicky situation, believers all over the world chose to depend on secular means to save their lives, rather than clasping their hands in prayer.

I'm aware of "Christian Scientists" (LOL, there's an oxymoron), who notably let their kids die and does not seek help regardless. They are usually frowned upon - even by some of the most hardcore religious people. And they are notable because they actually rely on their beliefs instead of secular medicine.

[Caracal]

Originally Posted by Cavalier

"there are few atheists in a fox hole" could be misconstrued as meaning that "the religious are warmongers" ..

LOL, hadn't thought of that. But I figure that the soldiers are just people taking orders. It is not the people in the foxholes who makes the decisions.