Mutiny?

[Alan Wheeler]

Those are not big seas or high winds for a yacht,

For NZ conditions, that is quite a nice day. Honest, not trying to be smart mouthed. 20-25kts is an afternnon sea breaze here. OK, 3 metres is ruff, but is ruffer than a normal 25kt wind would produce, unless it is wind against tide. Which depending on exactly where they were, tide could quite possibly be a the cause. Which would mean that given enough time, they would be either out of the tidal area, or the tide would have turned. In what ever case, the skipper had a crew with little experiance and much less understanding of the coastline they were sailing. The crew certainly let the skipper down, but in the end, the skipper chose the crew. He chose badly and he has to take that responsability.

[Steve Pope]

They were 90 miles out well away from any tidal area, the wind was North East so the fetch was 90 miles, there may have been some swell from another quarter although the wind had been NE for several days. I'm unaware as to whether they sailed directly from Auckland or had harbour hopped up the east coast as most folks do. So if they had, their last port would have been Houhora, with a 25 mile sail to the top, 20 to 30 miles across the top depending whether they sailed inside or outside of Pandora bank. ( probably outside) then 90 miles in a Southerly direction. At the most they would have been 2 days or less (as long as the tides were in their favour) out from Houhora so apart from some seasickness they should have been in pretty good shape, (they should have taken some Pahia bombs, wouldn't have been sick then.) The other factor is the boat must have been sailed from Nelson to Auckland, probably up the east coast so it wasn't as though this was its (their) first ocean voyage, different crew perhaps.
So far no news of anyone trying to find it for salvage.
I have just read about another yacht in the US (I think ) that the 2 crew was washed overboard and were rescued by another yacht in he same race, they left an activated 406 epirb on it so they could find it again as it was tooo rough to get them back on board, seems a good idea even if it may have been against the coastguard rules.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Steve Pope

seems a good idea even if it may have been against the coastguard rules.

I think Coastguards around the world have to pull their fingers out of their .... and realise that boats are a substantial investment and not some toy the twits can sink for fun.

As for the cost of a rescue... they really are nothing because the crews are employed anyway, and the boats / planes aalready owned. Its just a good training bash under propper conditions and if the community can't afford a bit of fuel to save a large citizen investment we should

[seafox]

Originally Posted by Steve Pope

They were 90 miles out well away from any tidal area, the wind was North East so the fetch was 90 miles, there may have been some swell from another quarter although the wind had been NE for several days. I'm unaware as to whether they sailed directly from Auckland or had harbour hopped up the east coast as most folks do. So if they had, their last port would have been Houhora, with a 25 mile sail to the top, 20 to 30 miles across the top depending whether they sailed inside or outside of Pandora bank. ( probably outside) then 90 miles in a Southerly direction. At the most they would have been 2 days or less (as long as the tides were in their favour) out from Houhora so apart from some seasickness they should have been in pretty good shape, (they should have taken some Pahia bombs, wouldn't have been sick then.) The other factor is the boat must have been sailed from Nelson to Auckland, probably up the east coast so it wasn't as though this was its (their) first ocean voyage, different crew perhaps.
So far no news of anyone trying to find it for salvage.
I have just read about another yacht in the US (I think ) that the 2 crew was washed overboard and were rescued by another yacht in he same race, they left an activated 406 epirb on it so they could find it again as it was tooo rough to get them back on board, seems a good idea even if it may have been against the coastguard rules.

What are Pahia bombs?

[Pblais]

I think Coastguards around the world have to pull their fingers out of their .... and realise that boats are a substantial investment and not some toy the twits can sink for fun.

Any crew that was washed overboard probably isn't able to resume command of a boat. The process to transfer people to / from a boat in such weather is not without extreme risk. No coast guard officer is going to rescue someone and then put them back on the boat.

I suppose if they draw the line at saving your ass and are unwilling to save a boat that makes the problem part of their limitations but you still can be thought a twit.

As for the cost of a rescue... they really are nothing because the crews are employed anyway, and the boats / planes aalready owned. Its just a good training bash under propper conditions.

Considering the fuel and the wear and tear on the gear I'm not sure I would call it a training bash. Under proper conditions for training there isn't tremendous search operation.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by seafox

What are Pahia bombs?

A “Paihia bomb” is a seasick preventative.

[Alan Wheeler]

they really are nothing because the crews are employed anyway, and the boats / planes aalready owned. Its just a good training bash under propper conditions and if the community can't afford a bit of fuel to save a large citizen investment we should

Not here in NZ. We don't have any "proffesional" rescue orginisations. For instance, the "WestPac" Helicoptor mentioned in this story. This is funded by Donations from the public. Westpac is a Bank in NZ and it is the major finacial contributer and thus gets it's name on the chopper as a sponser. But the funding is not enough to keep the opteration going. So they ask for donations from the public as well. Every rescue they make, cost fuel and hrs on the chopper. All of which comes from the sponsership/donation pool. The further and longer the chopper fly's for on a rescue, the more funds are taken out of that financial pool. Several times over recent years, NZ has nearly lost the servic due to shortages in funds. It would be sad to see it gone.
Now if you think that the NZ Airforce is "paid", well yes they are, but they also have a yearly operating budget. When they go out on search and rescue, the Govt does not automaticly pick up the bill. It comes out of a very small and limited annual budget. Once the budget is gone, they can't do certain things. Now that does not mean they won't go on a rescue mission if needed, but it does mean some other activity may not go ahead. When the East Timour conflict errupted, the cost of that came out of there annual budget. The result was that they couldn't afford to have hold an Annual joint excersise for at least three years, it may have been longer, just because they didn't have the money. Interestingly, it seems that you here of the Airforce being involved in Search and rescue more and more. It seems to be that the public orginisations like Westpac are involved more an more.
The other helicopter that ended up carrying out the rescue we are discussing, was private and the cost will come out of the NZ search and Rescue organisations budget. Also limited and relies heavily on donations. And alos relies heavily on Volunteers doing the actual search and rescues.

[Steve Pope]

Pahia Bombs are as Gord says a seasickness preventative, very effective, made up of 2 capsules taken 1/2 an hour appart prior to sailing, good for 12 hours +. Available from Pahia Pharmacy, they take phone orders, around $3.00 per application.
The second helicopter used in the relief of the 3 wooses was (I think) the St Johns chopper it is considerably bigger that the Westpac one, they have 2 of the same model stationed at Whangarei St Johns base. (St Johns = semi voluntary ambulance service, paid staff in the urban areas and volunteers in the countryside) When the NZ government closed or reduced the services from smaller local hospitals they had to ensure that anyone was no more that 45 minutes away by ambulance from a base Hospital, this can't work in many cases hence the helicopters, there are areas that fall outside the coverage. In our area if the local ambulance is already on a call the next nearest takes over 1/2 an hour to reach our place and if that one is on a call well you can wait some considerable time ETC. ETC.

[hellosailor]

Dunno, Wheels, it sounds like SAR costs in NZ are similar to the way fire departments were funded in colonial New York. Ergh, Niue Amsterdam.

If you bought fire insurance, you got a brass plaque to put up on your fencepost. If your house caught on fire, competing fire companies would show up--and if you didn't have a plaque from one of them, you got to stand there and negotiate price and service with them, while your house was burning down.

Somewhere along the way, our government decided burning houses were a public danger and they decided to just tax everyone, and put out all fires equally.

Suppose they just stuck a 10% surcharge on all boat registrations, and gave the money to the SAR helo? Or, gave boaters a choice. Pay the money, get a decal, get one rescue free. No money? No decal, no SAR response--unless you agree to pay the bill.

Funding can be made to happen--if anyone really gives a damn.

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Suppose they just stuck a 10% surcharge on all boat registrations, and gave the money to the SAR helo?

Would give zero revenue here in NZ as no compulsory registration cost for boats so 10% of nothing is nothing and long may it stay that way .

But is not quite as bad as has been said in the thread. The helicopters are paid for the mission costs by whoever tasks them - so if it is a sea or land search and rescue it will be funded from the police budget, the health authority initiating a medivac, etc, etc.

In the case of accidents to persons, say a car accident or someone hit on the head by a boom, then the rescue is paid for by the NZ Accident Compensation Corporation (there is compulsory accident insurance for everyone in NZ, including visitors, paid for mainly by employers - in return for that there is no right to sue others for damages for personal accidents causing injury).

Military helicopters (as well as P-3 Orions & Herc's for longer range) are also used for SAR and also some privately owned and equipped, as are other aircraft used for medivac's, etc - a medivac here includes things like positioning a patient from one hospital to another specialising in the type of trauma, illness, etc and includes prem babies, etc.

This is a photo of one departing Ship Cove, Marlborough Sounds which we saw in February after it attended a patient on shore -


So as an example if that mission was to a tramper who broke his leg (even if a tourist) then the mission costs will be paid by the Accident Compensation Corporation. Generally the pilots and paramedics, etc get paid for the missions. We see them operating quite alot - this one came screaming down the Sound straight up to the grassy lawn on shore and buzzed up real close to chase people away from where they wanted to plonk it down.

So jumping back a bit after all that, in the main the rescue aircraft that are owned by trusts the trust has to mainly find just the capital cost of the aircraft and equipping it, as well as any operating costs which revenue from the missions does not cover. As Alan said there are major sponsors that pick up the main tabs for this (eg Westpac Bank) but money also comes from grants from the national lottery, charitable organisations, etc. But generally no direct funding from the government.

Not sure how the Coastguard is funded apart from members' subscriptions and donations but if they are tasked to a search and rescue mission then works the same as the helicopters, etc, the mission itself is paid for by the NZ Police (note in my couple of references to the police budget, that may have changed recently - NZRCC is now recently responsible for a wider range of land and marine S&R here than before and it may be they pick up the tabs, but in the end the mission gets paid for).

[sharkbait]

According to an article in Latitude 38 it was the Coast guard who placed the transmitter on the uncrewed boat,during the DH Faralones race

[Connemara]

Apparently, the three 'mutineers' -- and I use the word advisedly -- have stumped up to pay for the cost of the rescue.

Mutineer Sailors Pay - Rescuers Surprised


Connemara

[imagine2frolic]

The rescuers can have the crew, but if my boat, and or life is not in danger I would have sailed on alone.

[Hud3]

Originally Posted by imagine2frolic

The rescuers can have the crew, but if my boat, and or life is not in danger I would have sailed on alone.

I agree with that thought pattern! But I don't think that's an option.

It may be different in NZ, but once the decision is made to remove crew from a boat "in distress", my understanding is that the USCG's procedure is to take everyone off the boat.

[imagine2frolic]

Then they would have to board the boat, and drag me off. I wouldn't abandon my boat, because 3 idiots pushed a button. There sure are some crazy rules in life, and this is one of them.