Rebel Heart's Contribution to the Cruising Community

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by leightonyachts

My sentiments exactly! these people must think that we only pay the military when they go on a rescue mission! eeeesh we pay the military a fixed budget period, nothing more nothing less. I know because I was active duty and got a pay check every month no matter what I was doing!

You being active duty on a salary isn't proof that the Rebel Heart rescue was free. Sorry, but it's a fallacy. Even if you're on a salary, you are a cost. If you're plucking a sailor out of the Pacific, you're not doing something else.

Is it a big deal? No, but the fact is that there was a cost, even if you fail to appreciate it.

[robert sailor]

The Hydrovane is pretty bullet proof, I'd be interested in knowing if it really had a problem and what it was.

[JPA Cate]

For Mark J:

The utility of a windvane for a boat depends on a whole lot of different variables. If you regularly attain the 17 knots you mentioned once, a windvane would not suit the use of your vessel.

For those who do not surf readily (pulling the apparent wind so far forward the wind vane steers you down and you gybe), the wind vane can steer thousands of trouble free miles. And as a backup for a fast boat, it has use ON THE WIND, rather than off, for silent, non-electricity using steering.

On our first Insatiable, ours was homebuilt and an auxiliary rudder type. It steered us satisfactorily over 45,000 n. mi. We used the electronic a/p for light airs only. Did not have a genset. Lacking one on this boat, and also lacking a genset, we find sometimes we have to run the main engine to keep up with the battery drain of our a/p. Maybe some of these choices depend on where you feed in the food chain; we always tried to keep costs down.

I have seen wind steering used successfully on a number of circumnavigating boats, who did not use sextant navigation. Jeez.

Ann

[endoftheroad]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

Sorry, but using the fact that the government spends money to make the claim that any money spent isn't being taken from some worthwhile project isn't correct.

If you spend money on one thing, it's not being spent somewhere else. There is something, somewhere else, that isn't getting done. The military does a lot of stuff that isn't 'pretend'. Maybe there was another rescue that the unit couldn't help with. Maybe those people involved would have had a weekend off. Maybe they could have used the helicopter fuel to take the First Lady to visit Hollywood.

The Rebel Heart rescue wasn't free. Deal with it.

I think it was a worthwhile effort, but you shouldn't have to pretend to yourself that it was free in order to accept it.

Cheers to that!

[Viking Sailor]

Any debt that the Kaufman's owe for their rescue has been paid many times over. It was paid with the tears shed by the love ones of all who have lost their lives at sea. As animals, we can feel great loss and pain when one of us dies. As humans, we have the will and wherewithal to ensure that as few of us as possible come to harm. That is way we respect and honor those who choose to go in harms way by serving in our military. For they are our protectors and rescuers.

Don't think for one moment that the rescuers didn't get a bonus for their efforts. No, not a bigger check. They got to know that unique and very special feeling that their actions kept another human being alive. A baby! A baby who's parents and sister would have had to pay with their tears if these rescuers hadn't done their jobs very very well.

Eric has my sincerest and deepest respect as a captain, husband, and father. As a captain he got all of his crew to port safely. As a husband he stood by his wife so she wouldn't have to face the worst alone. As a father he put the safety of his daughter above all else. An example of truly selfless love!

Paul

[Delancey]

Agreed about autopilots. When you consider how much more expensive a wind vane is compared to electronic autopilot, even including the battery bank and means for electrical generation, I don't understand why these idiots are out there tinkering with their wind vanes. Not only is high tech better, it is cheaper and more reliable.

Besides, electronic autopilots rarely fail and if they do it is usually very easy to fix yourself or find someone who can do it for you inexpensively, people all over the world use electronics.

[Delancey]

Debating the cost of the rescue again? Really?

The rescuers are there to provide a combat support service. If a fighter or bomber crashes in the ocean, they want their expensive pilot back and they sure as hell want to know what happened to the expensive aircraft that was lost.

So if people don't like it that their taxes go to rescue civilians when the SAR services aren't chasing down lost servicemen, they should express their opinions to their elected officials and direct them to reduce defense budgets. In the meantime it's good practice.

One thing that I thought was of particular interest when watching the rescue crew's press conference was that the crew expressed how deeply rewarding it was for them to rescue actual Americans for a change.

Sounds like that particular air rescue wing from California covers all the way down to the equator and as far west as Hawaii.

In their own words, while they mostly save merchant mariners and fisherman of all nations, they RARELY ever have occasion to rescue people from the good old US of A.

I think in total that air wing said they have been on a thousand rescue missions so if they rarely actually rescues Americans, how many is that? A hundred out of a thousand? Less?

How do you tax weenies feel knowing that your tax dollars by and large are being spent to rescue citizens of our pacific rim neighbors who are busy robbing the oceans off our shores blind of their resources?

I believe Atoll had expressed concern about Taiwanese long liners in the area stripping Rebel Heart before it could be recovered. When those same long liners have troubles off our shore do you think they call the Taiwanese Air Force to save them? Ha

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

If you spend money on one thing, it's not being spent somewhere else. There is something, somewhere else, that isn't getting done. The military does a lot of stuff that isn't 'pretend'. Maybe there was another rescue that the unit couldn't help with. Maybe those people involved would have had a weekend off. Maybe they could have used the helicopter fuel to take the First Lady to visit Hollywood.

The Rebel Heart rescue wasn't free. Deal with it.

I think it was a worthwhile effort, but you shouldn't have to pretend to yourself that it was free in order to accept it.

Most of the time our military trains, or they "fill squares" to make all the paperwork right. But it's not like they are constantly rescuing people or doing actual missions so this rescue of the Kaufmanns took them away from performing some other valuable service. Most likely those involved in the Kaufmanns rescue would otherwise have been training, but I bet if you checked their paperwork during this period you would see that they logged just as many or more training events during the rescue than if they were back in San Diego. Yes, obviously it costs money to take aircraft and a ship 1200 miles out into the Pacific, but that money was already going to be spent on training missions so the net additional cost to the taxpayer was pretty close to $0. If, as you say, somebody missed a weekend off due to being at sea instead of in port, well that comes with the territory when you sign up to be in the military. Plus, they will get the time off once back in port. The cost is just not an issue any more than it would be if you had a car accident and a police officer had to direct traffic while your car was being towed from the scene.

[atoll]

When those same long liners have troubles off our shore do you think they call the Taiwanese Air Force to save them? Ha

generally they have a mother ship/factory ship in the area that they are working.
so it is really only in extreme cases where their own doctors onboard have to ask for a medevac.

[Delancey]

Well how about our Mexican neighbors then? I am only going off what the man said. He said they rarely rescued Americans so they must be rescuing someone. Or maybe the man doesn't know what he is talking about, seemed pretty sure of himself to me.

[atoll]

Originally Posted by Delancey

Well how about our Mexican neighbors then? I am only going off what the man said. He said they rarely rescued Americans so they must be rescuing someone. Or maybe the man doesn't know what he is talking about, seemed pretty sure of himself to me.

seems like there are a lot of mexican tax payers in the usa......
as there are korean,taiwanese,russian,chinese etc.
can we cut the jingoistic rhetoric.

the rescue services are in the rescue bussiness,thats what they do period.

[Delancey]

Ha ha, no comment there. This is a wholesome family sailing forum. Best leave that one to Fox News!

True about the factory ships though, btw. Might be interesting to see some real figures about the rescues as far as how many, who, what circumstances, etc. I have to imagine cruising sailors account for a statistically insignificant percentage. I could be wrong.

[Doodles]

Originally Posted by Delancey

I believe Atoll had expressed concern about Taiwanese long liners in the area stripping Rebel Heart before it could be recovered. When those same long liners have troubles off our shore do you think they call the Taiwanese Air Force to save them? Ha

What does this have to do with anything? Mexicans? Please take this crap some place else.

[SV Windrush II]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

You being active duty on a salary isn't proof that the Rebel Heart rescue was free. Sorry, but it's a fallacy. Even if you're on a salary, you are a cost. If you're plucking a sailor out of the Pacific, you're not doing something else.

Is it a big deal? No, but the fact is that there was a cost, even if you fail to appreciate it.

Whoooaaa, settle down here buddy, I didn't say there was not a cost. All I am saying is . the military will spend the money anyway. Yes I agree it would be used for something else they do. Like go rescue someone else, which I heard from their press conf, that most of everyone they rescue are not Americans. Or they will use it for training, which they also said that a real rescue is far better training than practice.

And I am not talking about just my salary. I remembered when we were training and did not use all of our ammunition, we were told to go out and waste it. (blow it up) because if we didn't we would not get so much the next time.
One way or another they will spend the entire budget

[Cuttyhunk]

I would be delighted if the money wasted on endless circling over my house of National Guard C-130s using up their monthly fuel allotment just "so they don't reduce it in the future" was reallocated to actual rescues. I wish they would fly out to sea, at least, instead of staying so close to base. And I bet they love it when they get to do something more useful, like rescue somebody.

The quote is from the father of one of the pilots, as reported to him by the son.