Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat
Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey
1) that OP was an idiot for setting off at that time of year - especially as bad weather
seems to have come as a surprise
(Cyclone or not).
2) that the boat was not suitable for the voyage (especially at that time of year).
3) that OP was correct to abandon ship - and for that I make no
criticism. As Skipper
you make the call, and then live with it - that's your job.
Not to say that most of the time couldn't have lucked through. But OP clearly didn't. You make your own luck - good and bad.
Some of the above may appear harsh, but bluntness used for clarity.
Perhaps the best lesson anyone can take from this thread is not to beleive the nonsense about a certain type of boat - as peddled for many years within this
sub-forum. Usually by folk with a financial interest in selling "the dream" (the fantasy?).......or who simply have a screw loose
Glad you are hanging onto my every word
.....even if my above post was snatched from another thread
.....I can't remember the actual name of that thread, was it summit like "Cat Sailor fails to commit Hari Kari"??
Anyway, seems to be very limited (written) info about these events
- I couldn't be bothered to watch the clips (any at sea rescue
action on them?), nor am I aware as to how wise that voyage was for the time of year......but I don't like to let minor stuff like that put me off adding my 2 cents
Although from the pic posted in this thread the boat does look "well used", that alone doesn't mean it was poorly maintained. The clues for me are "experiencing problems almost as soon as it left Puerto Vallarta on January 11, requiring numerous improvised fixes along the way"
plus the fact that the mast
broke / fell down.
IMO a mast
doesn't break or fall down of it's own accord (YMMV
), even when a torn sail involved.........it usually inolves getting hit by something (a flying whale?), "deferred" maintanence
and / or simply overpressing the boat in the conditions experianced. But my bet is mostly in deferred maintanence ("It hasn't fallen down for 25 years - must be ok").
A 38 foot boat (especially one with what looks like a fairly conservative design) should not have been overwhelmed by the reported conditions......even if seriously unpleasant.
Won't say my comments in the previous thread are exactly the same as my opinion on this one - but essentially the same. Just sounds like another case of someone "living da Dream", where hope and wishful thinking used to cover a shortfall in knowledge - IMO most of the reasons for the rescue
occured before even leaving port.
How many hulls doesn't really matter, nor what the chartplotter
The above may sound a bit (
) heartless - but we are on page 4 of the thread
.........and IMO no one is served by avoiding saying how things are or simply accepting the explanation of "bad luck" or claiming "it could happen to anyone" (Yeah, it could happen to anyone - if they went on a serious passage
with an ill prepared boat and / or crew
....even if for much of the time folk will luck through