The (Official) "Lets Bash the Nina Thread" - sponsored by Bazzer :-)

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

David the new engine WAS playing up! There is CLEAR evidence that was release by 'friends of Nina' that said the boat could only do 4-5 knots in flat water with the new engine.

At the risk of starting to point fingers, sounds like risks were taken that individually would have been fine but cumulatively were pushing luck (weak engine / questionable sails / time of year / elderly boat on a 10 yo sheathed bottom). Perhaps that sounds harsh, perhaps it is.......

......just because "You" do know what you are doing and have the knowledge and experience to assess risks do not mean the risks go away, that same ashore as afloat.

Methinks at some point lawyers will become involved, at least if insurance is (IMO rightly so if dependants involved, not to apportion blame or to punish anyone but to obtain cash for them - the price of that will be lots of finger pointing).

On a general note, anyone know if the US (and NZ?) have the equivalent of the UK MAIB? (so a fact finding (not blaming) report gets published in due course).

[bazzer]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

At the risk of starting to point fingers, sounds like risks were taken that individually would have been fine but cumulatively were pushing luck (weak engine / questionable sails / time of year / elderly boat on a 10 yo sheathed bottom). Perhaps that sounds harsh, perhaps it is.......

......just because "You" do know what you are doing and have the knowledge and experience to assess risks do not mean the risks go away, that same ashore as afloat.

Methinks at some point lawyers will become involved, at least if insurance is (IMO rightly so if dependants involved, not to apportion blame or to punish anyone but to obtain cash for them - the price of that will be lots of finger pointing).

Couldn't agree more!

[Boatguy30]

Has there been any news in the UK about the Green Party chap being declared dead at some point? Steve Fosset's wife had him declared dead something like a week after he went missing.

Really rather shocking the number if boats that have gene missing this year. Glad mine is safe and sound in my patio.

[s/v Jedi]

Like all boats that have been around for a while, Niña had old and new sails aboard. The storm sails were not so good anymore I think and that fits with the report of them being shredded by the storm. But after the storm, they would have had plenty of other sails to use. And I mean plenty.

I had lost hope of Niña still being afloat but now that it has come up that they have been taken into the South Pacific by the currents, I can see them floating around there de-masted and without power. I can believe their EPIRB battery was dead.

I am sure they can catch rain water and eat fish.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

Perhaps that sounds harsh, perhaps it is.......

Of course its not harsh! Its errant stupidity to not to consider those salient factors.

This is why I think the real lessons are being wasted on anyone by blaming EPIB's, Iridium and NZ SAR. They have nothing to do with it. What has to do with it is the facts as we already know them but are too blinkered to consider them.

None of the four or five boats lost in the Atlantic in the last 12 months have had such mind-numbing counter theories.

Even the floating sofa episode was stricken from Cruisers Forum until yesterday.


Mark

[Boatguy30]

The sofa is still out there. The lady domina is only a few days overdue on the oft speculated direct run to Norway.

[bazzer]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

Of course its not harsh! Its errant stupidity to not to consider those salient factors.

This is why I think the real lessons are being wasted on anyone by blaming EPIB's, Iridium and NZ SAR. They have nothing to do with it. What has to do with it is the facts as we already know them but are too blinkered to consider them.

None of the four or five boats lost in the Atlantic in the last 12 months have had such mind-numbing counter theories.

Even the floating sofa episode was stricken from Cruisers Forum until yesterday.

Mark

Yep, Nina is gone, and at best we can hope that the life raft is found with all alive and well. The raft will have flares, so a lookout by sharp eyed pilots and ships crews should spot them. My grab bag has a PLB as well as a handheld VHF. I hope they have the same.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by bazzer

Yep, Nina is gone, and at best we can hope that the life raft is found with all alive and well. The raft will have flares, so a lookout by sharp eyed pilots and ships crews should spot them. My grab bag has a PLB as well as a handheld VHF. I hope they have the same.

I'm sorry but that really doesn't fit the facts.

The facts for survivability in a life raft after 2 MONTHS are miniscule. To be expecting any seafarer on a ship with a brain to do more than he regularly does over a whole ocean is not going to happen.

Pilots can see nothing at their flight altitude. Also planes do not go that area. (Two pilots have confirmed it so why can't people believe it?) Planes physically can not do that route at low altitude as they will run out of fuel and crash.

Ships do not go in that area much either.

So we should be looking at intelligent estimates of survivability percentages.

If someone can come up with intelligent statistical analysis then it would go a long way to allowing the truths be understood. Its not cruel or harsh to be honest and truthful.

Any insurance actuaries out there?


Mark

[bazzer]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

I'm sorry but that really doesn't fit the facts.

The facts for survivability in a life raft after 2 MONTHS are miniscule. To be expecting any seafarer with a brain to do more than he regularly does over a whole ocean is not going to happen.

Pilots can see nothing at their flight altitude. Also planes do not go that area. (Two pilots have confirmed it so why can't people believe it?) Planes physically can not do that route at low altitude as they will run out of fuel and crash.

Ships do not go in that area much either.

So we should be looking at intelligent estimates of survivability percentages.

If someone can come up with intelligent statistical analysis then it would go a long way to allowing the truths be understood. Its not cruel or harsh to be honest and truthful.

Any insurance actuaries out there?


Mark

Hey Mark, I am trying to look on the bright side.
Flares and marker dyes can be seen from altitude but a aircrew has to be looking for them. I was aircrew I. The RAF so I might just know. But I'm going to put the question to a 767 pilot friend of mine and see what he says and report back. What is disconcerting is the recent report of a cruise ship sporting a liferaft and ignoring it.

[Astrid]

Typical cruise altitudes for a transoceanic flight are 30,000--37,000 feet where the plane encounters less drag and achieves best fuel economy. If the plane is in level flight you have to figure in slant range as well since your angles of vision are generally very restricted. From the cockpit, an object on the ocean will pass out of your view probably 50 miles out as you approached it. Next time one has a chance, take a look at a plane high enough to leave contrails behind it. Contrails start at between 18,000 and 20,000 feet. With the naked eye, one can barely make out the plane causing it. Now imagine someone in that plane looking down and trying to spot a VW sized life raft or a drifting boat the size of a tractor trailer rig.

[bazzer]

Originally Posted by Astrid

Typical cruise altitudes for a transoceanic flight are 30,000--37,000 feet where the plane encounters less drag and achieves best fuel economy. If the plane is in level flight you have to figure in slant range as well since your angles of vision are generally very restricted. From the cockpit, an object on the ocean will pass out of your view probably 50 miles out as you approached it. Next time one has a chance, take a look at a plane high enough to leave contrails behind it. Contrails start at between 18,000 and 20,000 feet. With the naked eye, one can barely make out the plane causing it. Now imagine someone in that plane looking down and trying to spot a VW sized life raft or a drifting boat the size of a tractor trailer rig.

Astrid, yep I was a RAF for a few years before I joined the army. Here's a quote from a senior airline pilot.

Uhm, possibly (though perhaps not if the sea was rough) and wherein one would be asking ones eye to provide a visual acuity of being able to see a 50ft target from (say) 41,000 ft (7.75 miles up)... and wherein, scaling that down, that'd be akin to being able to spot a basket ball (~1ft diameter) from about 820ft (~1/6th mile).

So, you see it is possible, 50ft can go much larger with a dye marker in the water, a flare, or the white water behind a boat.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by bazzer

So, you see it is possible, .

There is 'possible' and there is statistical analysis.

If we could calculate the stats you would see some 'possibilities' are just delusional.


Mark

[bazzer]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

There is 'possible' and there is statistical analysis.

If we could calculate the stats you would see some 'possibilities' are just delusional.


Mark

The human eyesight, coupled to the brain is quite remarkable . I. The military I shot open sights and could make a kill shot at 1000yards, if you look on the Internet you can find similar shooting at much longer range using black powder rifles. During WWII aircraft spotters could not only see high altitude aircraft but identify the type of aircraft. Lookouts on ships could spot submarines conning towers at considerable range. They had to since it could be a matter of life or death.

I personally think its highly unlikely that Nina or her crew will ever bee seen again, forget stats, it's still possible. I had a small "c" clip ping over the side of my boat a couple of days ago, I did not se where it went, my other half spent 20 mins searching for it with a drop magnet in 15ft of water and a silt bottom. I didn't give her a snowballs chance in hell of finding it. But she did through trying!

My last words on particular aspect of the search for Nina

[Pelorus32]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

[snip]

On a general note, anyone know if the US (and NZ?) have the equivalent of the UK MAIB? (so a fact finding (not blaming) report gets published in due course).

NZ has the TAIC and the US has the NTSB. AFAIK neither organisation will investigate a pleasure craft like Niña. I've been wrong before though.

[nova13]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/337129576416954/ one of the images found on the satellite pages from Aug 4 provided by tomnod.com for crowd resourced searching online. this woman is a friend who unpixillated the image using a Microsoft programme on her home computer. Apparently identifed as exactly the model carried by Nina. If any of you can help persuade NZ and Oz to send an Orion or two to help with the donation-funded twin engine Cessna searching off Norfolk Island ... compelling or what ?? Please help.