Captain's Log, April 30, 2014 from the Rebel Heart Blog

[Coops]

Weavis, that is possibly THE best post I have seen on a forum anywhere.

Coops.

[boatman61]

Wow... high praise indeed Weavis..
But.. I agree.. good post mate.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by Coops

Weavis, that is possibly THE best post I have seen on a forum anywhere.

Coops.

+1. Great message

[Fog Bank]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Now that someone else has raised the issue, what is the current status of the Flyin' H?

I followed it on SA for a while, but I just can't stand all the BS there and gave it up. However, I must admit to morbid curiosity about the outcome, so have any of you, braver or more tolerant than I, kept up with the saga? I'd love to hear a synopsis.

Cheers,

Jim

It is still sitting in Richardson Bay, along with the Russian guy who wondered around the Pacific in the San Juan 24.

[Paul L]

Weavis,
Nice post and you captured the situation well. I like your life's rules, except this one

We need to be in FULL possession of ALL the facts before we can assess ANY situation

. We'd all be paralyzed, unable to make any decisions, at sea or on land, if we followed this one. You never have all the facts: the weather, the intentions of the other skipper, the likelihood of failure of a part, the actual risk of a rescue attempt, the recovery time of an infant, the time to stop a leak ..... As they say in business school, Management is decision making under uncertainty. You have to make your decision based on the facts you have and that includes making a decision not to make a decision.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Weavis,
Nice post and you captured the situation well. I like your life's rules, except this one. We'd all be paralyzed, unable to make any decisions, at sea or on land, if we followed this one. You never have all the facts: the weather, the intentions of the other skipper, the likelihood of failure of a part, the actual risk of a rescue attempt, the recovery time of an infant, the time to stop a leak ..... As they say in business school, Management is decision making under uncertainty. You have to make your decision based on the facts you have and that includes making a decision not to make a decision.

Hi Paul
Assessing a situation in this instance, is making a conclusion based on the facts of WHAT happened.

Its not quite the same as making a decision to do something.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by weavis

As a young physician in training, I was filled with a burning desire to change the world. 5 years on, and having worked with wiser experienced men and women, I came to understand a few immutable principles for living a life. And as an older physician now, the principles hold good.

• Every single person is entitled to respect. This means, as a friend, a parent, a spouse and as a stranger. We have to respect every one enough to let them live their own life. To make their own path, and to let them succeed or fail on their own terms.
• We need to be in FULL possession of ALL the facts before we can assess ANY situation.
• When an event happens, and its not a good outcome, we need to ask ourself, "Is it my job to fix this?"
• We need to see what help, if any, can be rendered in practical terms for people, if required to ensure they have lots of space to recover and regroup and regain heath or balance.
• We need to ask ourselves a number of questions privately, "What can I learn from this episode if I am faced with a similar situation?"
• "Would I have taken the route that was taken to arrive at the situation before me now?"
• Am I allowing personal, religious or that inner set of rules (that we all have), or the outcome itself to influence my analysis of the situation?

There appears to be a lot of rancour regarding this situation. It would appear some C.F'ers have issue with the personality of the man. Some have issue with decisions made regarding his wife and children, and some have issues with post scenario handling of money.

Life law: We need to be in FULL possession of ALL the facts before we can assess ANY situation.

Even without all the facts, we are faced with the other life Principles to consider:

The journey is over, the vessel is no more, and life has forever changed for this family.

It is not our job to fix this.

Ours is to reflect on the situation and decide for ourselves whether we would have, firstly undertaken the journey, and secondly, what bits we would have done differently. We have the unique perspective of being observers and learning without the pain of experiencing results of choices and circumstances.

Reality is that there is NOTHING we can do. President Kennedy was shot. World wars happened, our parents died, the Titanic sank, and Rebel Hearts journey concluded when it did in the manner it did as a culmination of all things that led to it.

We cannot change a thing. It happened.

Eric cant change what happened, because he would if he could. And all the people irritated or morally outraged that he took his children with him, cant change a thing. All the people aggravated at his personality and attitude who feel a sense of karma in this, well thats ok too, he that lives by the sword dies by the sword, but......... thats a different issue to the CHOICE you would have made in preparing for this trip, and that is all that matters.

We get one go at this life thing. Some of us approach it quietly and some announce it on the Radio.

We are owed nothing by Rebel Heart.

The C.F. community, comprises of all sorts of people who write for a variety of reasons, and if they trumpet and blow, and then the quiet descends, well that is all there is. We are not Erics Mom or Pop or someone owed money, we are just associates, we are not even real friends REGARDLESS of what you think. He has other things to work out and needs to find the best path to live with himself and continue this life.

There is also the 50-50-90 rule: anytime you have a 50-50 chance of getting something right, there's a 90% probability you'll get it wrong. There is no starting over, you just have to live with the mistakes you have made, and that what you consider mistakes are not what others might.

It would be nice if at some stage, the crew of Rebel Heart tell their story. But you know what? It wont matter to some people. There will be no change in their view or positional stance. It will only inflame them more to convince the world that they are correct in their assessment of everything that happened. And truth is, they might have parts of it right, maybe all of it, and it doesn’t change a thing to what has happened. It can only change what we do in our lives.

I think you make a lot of great points, but we may NEVER have all the facts of this.

We have more facts about this than the typical story that gets posted on CF. It's just a little more emotional because it's closer to home than most, I believe.

[captain58sailin]

Good post weavis, well thought out.

[SaltyMonkey]

@weavis +1

[mbianka]

Having followed the saga of Rebel Heart over the years here and elsewhere before and after it's sinking. I find people ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the cabin. Namely Eric forgot the sailor's adage of the bad luck that comes with having a woman on board. In Eric's case he had THREE! That's game, set and match in my book. Eric did fine when he sailing on his own. I rest my case. Though I did think the mouse that came on board was some type of Omen. Though not sure what it meant though.

Seriously, though I also think Weavis's post was spot on too. I too would still like to know more so I and others could learn more from the turn of events. More of the mechanical and technical things that went south. I also don't think I would have sunk the boat. There are to many reports of boats sailing/drifting on after crews abandon them. I can understand the hazard to navigation aspect but, also think that some of the items on board might have come in handy for some poor fisherman on one of the Pacific islands out there. I think the recycling potential appeals to me more than thinking about Rebel Heart sitting on the bottom of the ocean leaking diesel fuel. Though probably Eric thinks about that image everyday too.

[captain58sailin]

I would have been far more concerned about a mouse getting off the boat before I left. The fuel leakage is a non - issue, the amount is infinitesimal, it would evaporate long before reaching shore.

[SmartMove]

Great post Weavis, I'm with Coops this may be the best post ever on a forum.

Robyn

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Weavis,
Nice post and you captured the situation well. I like your life's rules, except this one.

We'd all be paralyzed, unable to make any decisions, at sea or on land, if we followed this one. You never have all the facts: the weather, the intentions of the other skipper, the likelihood of failure of a part, the actual risk of a rescue attempt, the recovery time of an infant, the time to stop a leak ..... As they say in business school, Management is decision making under uncertainty. You have to make your decision based on the facts you have and that includes making a decision not to make a decision.

Yup, that one if taken literally, precludes the possibility of rendering pretty much any assessment or takeaway from a wide variety of incidents...

The loss of RULE 62 and one of her crew in the Caribbean 1500 a few years ago is one of the better examples that comes to mind. Years later, and we have yet to learn much of anything beyond the initial published reports of that tragedy. Not so much as a peep has ever been heard publicly from the skipper, or other surviving crew, and a settlement was quietly reached with the surviving family of Laura Zekoll. The organizers of the 1500 never issued any sort of debrief or finding, they just wanted it forgotten. The Bahamian authorities, no investigation or official report issued that I'm aware of. Even the sailing rags remained surprisingly silent about that one, and to this day the only public airing of the incident pretty much remains confined to the archives of internet sailing forums... (I've always assumed the owner - an attorney from Atlanta - must have had some powerful influence or clout - even the Atlanta newspapers suddenly went virtually silent on the story, a relatively short time after the incident. Pure speculation on my part, of course)

Despite the absence of ALL of 'the facts', should that prevent one from voicing the opinion that the skipper's decision to attempt enter an unlit Bahamian cut at night, during a rage, was not an act of astonishingly poor seamanship? Or, that there might not be much to be gained, and valuable lessons learned, to an open discussion of such an incident, despite not having a first-hand account, or being in full possession of ALL of the facts?

I, for one, think not...

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Yup, that one if taken literally, precludes the possibility of rendering pretty much any assessment or takeaway from a wide variety of incidents...

The loss of RULE 62 and one of her crew in the Caribbean 1500 a few years ago is one of the better examples that comes to mind. Years later, and we have yet to learn much of anything beyond the initial published reports of that tragedy. Not so much as a peep has ever been heard publicly from the skipper, or other surviving crew, and a settlement was quietly reached with the surviving family of Laura Zekoll. The organizers of the 1500 never issued any sort of debrief or finding, they just wanted it forgotten. The Bahamian authorities, no investigation or official report issued that I'm aware of. Even the sailing rags remained surprisingly silent about that one, and to this day the only public airing of the incident pretty much remains confined to the archives of internet sailing forums... (I've always assumed the owner - an attorney from Atlanta - must have had some powerful influence or clout - even the Atlanta newspapers suddenly went virtually silent on the story, a relatively short time after the incident. Pure speculation on my part, of course)

Despite the absence of ALL of 'the facts', should that prevent one from voicing the opinion that the skipper's decision to attempt enter an unlit Bahamian cut at night, during a rage, was an act of astonishingly poor seamanship? Or, that there might not be much to be gained, and valuable lessons learned, to an open discussion of such an incident, despite not having a first-hand account, or being in full possession of ALL of the facts?

I, for one, think not...

What more is there to learn.. you've said it all..

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Yup, that one if taken literally, precludes the possibility of rendering pretty much any assessment or takeaway from a wide variety of incidents...

The loss of RULE 62 and one of her crew in the Caribbean 1500 a few years ago is one of the better examples that comes to mind. Years later, and we have yet to learn much of anything beyond the initial published reports of that tragedy. Not so much as a peep has ever been heard publicly from the skipper, or other surviving crew, and a settlement was quietly reached with the surviving family of Laura Zekoll. The organizers of the 1500 never issued any sort of debrief or finding, they just wanted it forgotten. The Bahamian authorities, no investigation or official report issued that I'm aware of. Even the sailing rags remained surprisingly silent about that one, and to this day the only public airing of the incident pretty much remains confined to the archives of internet sailing forums... (I've always assumed the owner - an attorney from Atlanta - must have had some powerful influence or clout - even the Atlanta newspapers suddenly went virtually silent on the story, a relatively short time after the incident. Pure speculation on my part, of course)

Despite the absence of ALL of 'the facts', should that prevent one from voicing the opinion that the skipper's decision to attempt enter an unlit Bahamian cut at night, during a rage, was not an act of astonishingly poor seamanship? Or, that there might not be much to be gained, and valuable lessons learned, to an open discussion of such an incident, despite not having a first-hand account, or being in full possession of ALL of the facts?

I, for one, think not...

I think both posters miss the point.
More facts ARE available in this case. They just have not been 'made' available yet.
Judgements are being made on personal opinion. I think most people are aware of the public reaction to certain aspects of this case.

Assessment CANNOT be made fully until ALL the particulars are on the table. Speculation and hearsay are a waste of time.

I remember one particular nasty incident I had with a lawyer.

"My clients mother has died, why is she dead?"

Me. "I dont know"

Him....... But you are a Dr! Why dont you know?! Surely you know something about this?!!"

Me. "Yes. I know Mrs xxx is dead,

Him......."You are being evasive!

Me... "No, why she is dead I have no clue. I prefer to leave the assessment based on sound medical and proven facts to the pathologist.

Him..."But you were treating her!!"

Me..... "I was part of a medical team following known protocol and proven medical procedures. Its not a guarantee for a succeful outcome in every circumstance. It is however the best available."

Him... "I want you to give a best guesstimate of why she died"

Me....."I dont want to waste my time or yours doing that. Firstly, I might well be wrong and secondly, you have no clue what do with the information I give you because you are not qualifed to assess it competently. I prefer to be sure."

Him....."but the patient is dead under your care!!!"

Me ......" we are both agreed that the patient is dead. The patient is not under my care because of that fact. The pathologist will determine why the patient could not remain under my care."

In the event, there was an underlying health condition unknown, undocumented and not detectable in any test she had ever had.

Im a firm believer that in medicine the two most revealing tests done are scans and autopsies.

So..... rather than split hairs over opinion here........ I will wait for comments from Rebel Heart to be placed on the dissection board for analysis if you dont mind.

It will be an autopsy.