# 6 Americans, 1 Brit vanish at sea



## TropicCat

Six Americans have been missing at sea for more than three weeks after setting sail from New Zealand, officials said Thursday.

Three males -- aged 17, 28 and 58 -- and three women -- aged 18, 60 and 73 -- along a 35-year-old British man were aiming to sail the 70-foot schooner Nina to Newcastle, Australia.

A statement from Maritime New Zealand released early Thursday expressed "grave concerns" for the Nina's crew.

The vessel left the Bay of Islands area of northern New Zealand on May 29. It has not been heard from since June 4, when the ship was 370 miles west-north west of Cape Reinga in "very rough" conditions with winds gusting to 68 mph and 26-foot swells.

Authorities said the vessel's emergency beacon has not been activated. 
Rescue Coordination Centre New Zealand search and rescue mission coordinator Kevin Banaghan said that a military aircraft had covered a 160,000 square nautical mile search area on Tuesday, with an additional 324,000 square nautical miles examined on Wednesday.

"No sign of the vessel has been found," Banaghan said. "We do hold grave concerns for the Nina and her crew but remain hopeful of a positive outcome."

The huge search was launched after family and friends raised concerns about the crew's whereabouts.

The Nina was built in 1928. It is also equipped with a satellite phone and a spot beacon, which allows tracking signals to be sent manually.

6 Americans vanish at sea while sailing from New Zealand to Australia - World News


----------



## krisscross

That is a very rough stretch of water... I hope they make it...


----------



## JonEisberg

Damn, that's not good...

NINA was a legendary yacht, designed by Starling Burgess... She won the Transatlantic Race, then the Fastnet, the year she was launched... And, the Bermuda Race, 3 decades later...

Interestingly, she is featured in Chapter One - Trends in Yacht Design, 1920-1986 - by Olin Stephens in one of my favorite books, John Rousmaniere's DESIRABLE AND UNDESIRABLE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFSHORE YACHT:



> ...But there is no such thing as a free lunch in yacht design and construction, and the demerits of this type of boat quickly surfaced. After her first great summer, NINA was bought by Bobby Somerset, the English owner of the pilot cutter JOLIE BRISE and commodore of the Royal Ocean Racing Club, who took her out from New York under winter conditions. Her quick motion and general wetness on deck and below prompted him to sell her soon after. Later, under DeCoursey Fales, she had a long and successful life, winning the Bermuda Race in 1962, 34 years after her first summer...


Nice series of videos here:

Starling Burgess ?Nina?


----------



## downeast450

Very strange? Hard to imagine that some communication signal would not have been sent if a dire emergency was encountered. Also hard to believe they would not have been in contact if they are O.K. Such a capable vessel?

Down


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

> 6 Americans vanish at sea


I'm sorry but this thread title needs to be changed!

It reeks of Mark Twain:



> "Good gracious! anybody hurt?"
> "No'm. Killed a ni****."
> "Well, it's lucky; because sometimes people do get hurt.


Can we please change it to "7 People Vanish at Sea" or "6 Americans and 1 Brittsh Vanish at Sea"?

Mark


----------



## rockDAWG

downeast450 said:


> Very strange? Hard to imagine that some communication signal would not have been sent if a dire emergency was encountered. Also hard to believe they would not have been in contact if they are O.K. Such a capable vessel?
> 
> Down


X10,
SPOT, where is the last position?
EPIRB?
Sat Phone ?


----------



## svHyLyte

According to a report on CruisersForum, Australian SAR has reported contact with the boat, reportedly in the vicinity of Lord Howe (Sp?) Island, with no difficulty. While it may be nice to have frequent position up-dates via SPOT or other means, their sudden absence--even if caused by over-sight, failed batteries, or whatever--can heighten anxiety for friends and family of a cruiser unduly, doing more harm than good, eh?


----------



## Pcpk

Hope they're ok and just out of communication


----------



## JonEisberg

svHyLyte said:


> According to a report on CruisersForum, Australian SAR has reported contact with the boat, reportedly in the vicinity of Lord Howe (Sp?) Island, with no difficulty. While it may be nice to have frequent position up-dates via SPOT or other means, their sudden absence--even if caused by over-sight, failed batteries, or whatever--can heighten anxiety for friends and family of a cruiser unduly, doing more harm than good, eh?


Hopefully, that is the case...

Wouldn't be the first time, and it most certainly won't be the last...

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/1034404-post23.html


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

I do hope the family dont read this thread. I know they are reading others on the net. 

I have a rule which I hold very strongly and I offer it to those about to cruise as a rule they should set in stone. Everything about cruising, or sailing is pretty flexible really, do things the way you like and the way they work for you.... except this rule:

Only sail in the correct season.

I use the Pilot charts and basically only ever sail when there is a 1 or a 0 in the % Gale maps. The most I have ever sailed in was a 2 for about 100 nms.

I hope this incident works out and the boat arrives in harbour soon. However, there is some story to their long passage... and most likely related to their late departure. The late departure was due to replacing the engine. They should have waited till next season.


The Pilot below is June. Ninas course was from the east side of New Zealand, over the top and due west to Newcastle just north of Sydney.


Mark


----------



## Harborless

Im inclined to think that this boat being so long as well as old simply broke apart from serious wave actions. I read the boat was excellently maintained but its still 80a plus years old and i assume made of wood. All it takes is for a weak point to exist or develop. I think this boat was broken by a wave and sank in seconds or minutes. Its been over 3 weeks and they were in hurrican winds. The boat was too long for such an extended pounding and too old to be counted on to maintain structual inegrity for such a pronounced series of low pressure storm cells and hard wave action.

I get no joy from writing this but i do not think we will ever hear from this boat or crew again. Metal or fiberglass even after eighty years wear down. I think such a long wooden boat, a racing style no less, simply met her match and lost.

I hope im wrong.


----------



## TropicCat

The "biggest ever" search of the seas surrounding New Zealand turned up no sign of an American schooner that has been missing for more than three weeks, officials said Friday. 
Search and Rescue officer Neville Blakemore said the 70-foot vessel "probably had a catastrophic event" while traveling from New Zealand to Newcastle, Australia.

Missing American schooner 'probably had a catastrophic event'; 7 remain missing - World News


----------



## opusnz

Harborless said:


> Im inclined to think that this boat being so long as well as old simply broke apart from serious wave actions. I read the boat was excellently maintained but its still 80a plus years old and i assume made of wood. All it takes is for a weak point to exist or develop. I think this boat was broken by a wave and sank in seconds or minutes. Its been over 3 weeks and they were in hurrican winds. The boat was too long for such an extended pounding and too old to be counted on to maintain structual inegrity for such a pronounced series of low pressure storm cells and hard wave action.
> 
> I get no joy from writing this but i do not think we will ever hear from this boat or crew again. Metal or fiberglass even after eighty years wear down. I think such a long wooden boat, a racing style no less, simply met her match and lost.
> 
> I hope im wrong.


Wood is one of most fatigue resistant materials know to man. That is why trees can flex and bend many hundreds of years without breaking.

Everything points to Nina being well maintained. It is possible the owners missed something in an overhaul or haulout but that is true of any boat. As long as the fastenings are good and there is no rot and no termites, her being long or more than 80 years old means nothing.


----------



## Roger Long

It should be better appreciated by all sailors how vulnerable a vessel is to a knockdown/rollover by a freak wave once the average wave height approaches the beam of the vessel. It certainly sounds like she was in those conditions. Much of heavy weather vessel management is maintaining control and attitude to keep the vessel in the least vulnerable attitude. A small steering mistake or failure that the vessel would normally survive can be fatal if it happens at the wrong moment.

"Freak wave" is a poor term because there are probably two or three waves of the right size and shape at any one spot in severe conditions every day. The chances of a boat being at that spot are very low, however. People circumnavigate and never see one. 

Rig loss in such an event could quickly lead to sinking if the attached wreckage damaged the hull. The remaining hope, if she was rolled, is that all communications ability was lost and rescuers are looking for masts and overlooking the boat. It's a pretty grim and slim hope.

A ship strike would also be high on the list in those conditions. Lookout becomes difficult on both sides and there is a tendency for big ship lookouts to assume that no one would be out in such conditions anyway. I've seen that effect in coastal waters on nasty days.

A large piece of debris, just awash and invisible until one wave before.....

The sea is a dangerous place, even for the most experienced and competent.


----------



## Harborless

I hear you. Its not the wood by its self. Its the wood in conjuction with the length as well age.
you have surely seen long navy vessels twist up in hard seas. Same would have been occuring on nina.
i think she broke apart and sank before anyone had time or presence of mind to activate epird.


----------



## PacificSalt

Seems in those conditions any boat may have had a difficult time...sad news


----------



## Harborless

Okay at regular computer now. What I was trying to say is that yes you are correct with wood being very malleable however a tree and a wooden boat are much different. A tree is all the same piece of wood- a boat made of wood is hundreds or thousands of pieces of wood from different trees. Add the fact it was above 50 feet AND 80+ years old and you have a recipe for disaster. The long boat is the worst feature because after a certain age the structural integrity will weaken. It only needs to start with one board. Then you have the constant bending and turning of the wood in those big seas for days on end AND wood and fastenings over 80 years old and it all really seems to be the most likely scenario. This also explains why no emergency beacons have been activated.

It most likely would have broken around the middle where the most strain was meaning thousands of gallons would have entered every few seconds leaving only perhaps 2 minutes or even less to activate EPRIB and take to life rafts. Add the hurricane winds and 26' seas and this becomes impossible. It would take you at least 20 seconds to realize what the hell just happened and by that time your probably already going down since the waves and wind do not just stop. Once one board splinters the rest fail in rapid succession from the strain and pulling. This means that the boats crew would be swarmed with water while being thrown around by wave action trying to figure what the hell was going on- I think they sank before anything could be done to activate or take to life rafts. Its a terrible situation but the age of the boat, material of construction, and weather at sea ALL point to this event being the culprit. 

If the mast had come down or rigging failed the hull would still be intact at least a minute or two before a spar or something would hole the boat- this would only create a smaller hole and give them minutes not seconds to react and activate beacons. With so many people on board I do not see how someone would not have activated or made a may day call.

I think the boat broke apart and was flooded in seconds and went down in hardly any time at all leaving no one able to do anything except thank God for a life lived and pray for a quick death. Its incredibly sad but I do not see any other really plausible scenario that would not have left a 7 man crew able to hit an emergency activator button or make a mayday.

I still hope I am wrong- but science leads me to conclude I am not as well as going on four weeks with no word.


----------



## smurphny

I'd bet Roger Long's observations turn out to be correct. IF she went down it was probably because of some cascade of events caused by something out of the normal. This vessel should have been able to deal with the described sea conditions.


----------



## Omatako

Harborless said:


> Im inclined to think that this boat being so long as well as old simply broke apart from serious wave actions. I read the boat was excellently maintained but its still 80a plus years old and i assume made of wood.


Mmmmm - seems to me that wooden boats last longer than you think. Auckland has regular regattas for vessel that are well over a century old and are still stronger than the average Beneteau. There was very little carbon fibre to be found back then.

This one is about 80 years old - built in 1934 - although this picture is probably less than a year old










Comment on the website:

One of the original J Class trio, Endeavour like fellow yachts Shamrock V and Velsheda, is in continual development. The 77 year-old yacht was relaunched on 10 October 2011 having just undergone a major 18-month refit at New Zealand yard Yachting Developments, which included work to the yacht's interior, deck strengthening, a new winch package, a new mast and sails.

Hardly worth spending millions on a boat that has a short lifespan.

As far as news reports here in Auckland I don't believe that any reports have been received from the Nina but then maybe journos are keeping it quiet - why ruin a good story?


----------



## opusnz

Harborless,

I think you are just speculating and really don't understand wooden boats. The fact that she was over 80 years old probably means she was built out of better old growth timber and actually probably better construction than a new build.

I don't want to highjack the thread since anything could have happened. We could all speculate until the cows come home but I think suddenly breaking in two because she is long or old is probably one of the least likely scenarios.


----------



## Harborless

Do you understand physics? Might brush up.


----------



## opusnz

Sure do....

I also understand how wild speculation can hurt friends and relatives.


----------



## mark2gmtrans

Harborless said:


> Okay at regular computer now. What I was trying to say is that yes you are correct with wood being very malleable however a tree and a wooden boat are much different. A tree is all the same piece of wood- a boat made of wood is hundreds or thousands of pieces of wood from different trees. Add the fact it was above 50 feet AND 80+ years old and you have a recipe for disaster. The long boat is the worst feature because after a certain age the structural integrity will weaken. It only needs to start with one board. Then you have the constant bending and turning of the wood in those big seas for days on end AND wood and fastenings over 80 years old and it all really seems to be the most likely scenario. This also explains why no emergency beacons have been activated.
> 
> It most likely would have broken around the middle where the most strain was meaning thousands of gallons would have entered every few seconds leaving only perhaps 2 minutes or even less to activate EPRIB and take to life rafts. Add the hurricane winds and 26' seas and this becomes impossible. It would take you at least 20 seconds to realize what the hell just happened and by that time your probably already going down since the waves and wind do not just stop. Once one board splinters the rest fail in rapid succession from the strain and pulling. This means that the boats crew would be swarmed with water while being thrown around by wave action trying to figure what the hell was going on- I think they sank before anything could be done to activate or take to life rafts. Its a terrible situation but the age of the boat, material of construction, and weather at sea ALL point to this event being the culprit.
> 
> If the mast had come down or rigging failed the hull would still be intact at least a minute or two before a spar or something would hole the boat- this would only create a smaller hole and give them minutes not seconds to react and activate beacons. With so many people on board I do not see how someone would not have activated or made a may day call.
> 
> I think the boat broke apart and was flooded in seconds and went down in hardly any time at all leaving no one able to do anything except thank God for a life lived and pray for a quick death. Its incredibly sad but I do not see any other really plausible scenario that would not have left a 7 man crew able to hit an emergency activator button or make a mayday.
> 
> I still hope I am wrong- but science leads me to conclude I am not as well as going on four weeks with no word.


I hate to tell you this but you are quite wrong about wooden boats and the length of 54 feet being anything like a long length. The longest wooden sailing ships have been in excess of 350 feet and as long as the structure is designed to distribute loads properly the material is great for building boats.

The boat will flex some, but the flex will not be extreme, and when correctly joined and fastened the whole vessel becomes one piece in a structural sense of the word. The physics of it are fairly simple to comprehend once you understand that frame loads along the keel, which should run from stem to sterns are distributed evenly because of the longitudinal joining of the frames or ribs of the vessel. The only condition in which a vessel of wood or any other material starts to flex on its center axis is when weight is not distributed along the longitudinal axis evenly due to either overloading, or water intrusion into the forward and or aft sections without water intrusion into the midsection, or when the wave moment interval is able to lift the boat by the ends and middle which with a 54 foot vessel would be rare.

The fact is that age would not have been a huge issue as the vessel is known to be a very well maintained vessel, and the material would not be a big issue either. Her relatively small size may have had some bearing on the situation, and her low deck height may have played a roll as well, but I would be wrong to make a judgement on this without more evidence.


----------



## mark2gmtrans

Harborless said:


> Do you understand physics? Might brush up.


 See my post before you give physics lectures. You have need of the brush it would seem.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

opusnz said:


> Sure do....
> 
> I also understand how wild speculation can hurt friends and relatives.


Yes, but we sailors have to learn from these tragedies. This isnt a forum for the support of the families, as much as we wish them well, its a forum for support of sailors and getting combined wisdom to lessen the chances of these things happening to us.

We do have to make up different scenarios and discuss how we would save ourselves from each one. Our lives depend on it.

All the best

Mark


----------



## Roger Long

Harborless said:


> Do you understand physics? Might brush up.


As a designer of vessels who has done Load Line approvals for a large wooden schooner, designed one, performed ABS approved wave bending moment calculations for vessels up to 400 feet, been a consultant and witness for to the British government in the inquiry into the loss of a wooden school ship, founding Chairman of the ASTA Technical Committee, researched the hull failure of the _Titanic_ for the History Channel, etc., etc., etc., I thank you for the comic relief your speculations about wood have provided in this grim thread.

Instead of wasting all those words and time attempting to educate us about something you clearly know little about, I would suggest you ponder the question of wave knockdowns. It is especially applicable to shallow inlets with shoals on either side such as you were prepared to so blithely navigate after being unable to manage the rather easy and well marked crossing of the Saint John River in calm weather while not fatigued from a long day offshore.

Note that this wave is not particularly large:

http://www.travelchannel.com/video/massive-wave-capsizes-boat-12703


----------



## Harborless

cant defend from phone. Post later.


----------



## Roger Long

I'm glad four of you liked my last post enough to send thanks. Thanks. Why am I being so hard on him? Well, seamanship is as much about attitude as it is about knowledge and experience. Look at the _Bounty_, lots and lots of knowledge and experience undone by attitude and the decisions it led to.

I've enjoyed his posts and see in him the potential to be a good seaman if not undone by an attitude that is also evident.

Structural failure is always a prime suspect in the unexplained loss of a wooden sailing craft. All sorts of things can lurk undetected even in a carefully maintained boat. I even know of a wooden schooner, built to USCG approved plans, and with a USCG certificate, that sank in her first year when the garboards opened up due to a design defect.

Unlike metal vessels, in which a crack can propagate at the speed of sound, the failure of a wooden structure will usually be proceed by gradual loss of watertight integrity giving time for distress communication. The probable exceptions would be sudden heavy impact from knockdown or striking a floating object. If the boat were going to snap in two or fail catastrophically, it would have been working and leaking long enough that a seaman as competent as the master of the _Nina_ was would probably have put out a Pan Pan call. I can't say snapping in two suddenly absolutely couldn't have happened but I can't say she wasn't struck by a meteor or carried off by a UFO either.

Look at the last pictures of the _Bounty_, know known to have had numerous structural issues. Even awash with the tremendous stress of the seaway on her rig, she held together in similar conditions.

Even striking a container in a vessel this size would usually leave time to activate an EPIRB or make a radio call. An experience master would be doing that a few seconds after impact knowing that it was the only hope of the liferaft(s) being found.

A knockdown and resultant probable rig loss would instantly disable most communication and create enough chaos that the EPIRB might not be found.

I would hate to think that a ship could strike a vessel of this size and now know it but it has happened. A tanker once arrived in port with a good portion of the rig of a 100 foot schooner tangled in its anchors. The schooner was never identified.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Roger,

In putting some history together of this boat prior to the voyage... they replaced the engine and went to sea immediatly, much later in the year than they expected.

Therefor its an assumption the boat would have been out of the water for some considerable time... a few months in a NZ summer.

Could an old boat fully dry for the first time in many years have been a contributing factor in either popping a plank on a wave, or a catastrophic situation bordering on what Harborless opines?


Mark


----------



## Harborless

Okay- allow myself to defend my logic.
Here is the complete work up including designs, construction, and history of the Nina- it can be found here:
Sailing, Seamanship and Yacht Construction - Uffa Fox - Google Books

Martinez said the vintage schooner had survived storms before.

"That boat's taken a lot of damage, but it's always limped back to port," she said. "The thing is born to sail."

Blakemore said plane searches earlier this week covered a wide band of ocean between New Zealand and Australia. He said searchers were considering their options for the weekend.

He said the logical conclusion is that the boat sank rapidly, preventing the crew from activating the locator beacon or using other devices aboard, including a satellite phone and a spot beacon. He said that unlike many locator beacons, the one aboard the Nina is not activated by water pressure and wouldn't start automatically if the boat sank.

Surveyors have learned the hard way that surveying wood boats is very difficult and fraught with risks.

Wood is a natural, organic material that has no consistency from one species to another, or within a species. Each tree grows differently and yields different qualities of wood.

"Wind shakes" are a phenomenon caused when a tree is hit by high winds, causing the whole trunk to twist. This can damage the wood in ways that aren't easily detected. It causes minute splits in the fibers which will make the wood more porous and cause a plank cut from that tree to rot much quicker. This is why we often find just one plank on the whole vessel that rots badly with no apparent explanation for why.

Strength of Wood is degraded by a variety of factors: soaking in water for 10, 20, 30 or more years, micro-organisms, shipworms, ants, termites, the normal stresses imposed on the hull, sunlight, constant wetting and drying and chemicals introduced into the interior of the hull such as spilled battery acid, petrochemicals, detergents and chlorinated cleansers, etc.; all work to take their toll on wood. In other words, unlike materials such as fiberglass and aluminum, wood is degraded by a large variety factors.

On wooden boats, galvanism is rarely a factor except in small isolated areas.

Oxygen Starvation This is the primary cause of corrosion to hull fasteners, also known as crevice corrosion. What most surveyors have never understood is that this same phenomenon occurs with metal fasteners joining two pieces of wood together, or any other material for that matter.

Unfortunately, yet another factor gangs up on our poor fasteners: crevice corrosion. The water entrapped within the screw cavity or interface between the planks does not have a good oxygen source. i.e., air flow. The chemical reaction of oxidation of the metal robs the water of oxygen and turns the water to an acid.

Climate The effect of climate on wood vessels simply cannot be understated.

The other great enemy of wood are very damp and rainy climates, especially moderate and tropical climates.

Hull Stress The deep bilge of course is always the first place the surveyor looks for bad fasteners, for it is here where there is a constant source of water. Yet boats are not monolithic structures and they are subjected to stress and thus work and torque and wrack and twist in all directions. Often not enough to be visually detectable, but enough that all the seams and joints are indeed moving. Projected over thousands of cycles over the years, this creates the potential source for water entering virtually any seam in the hull bottom, not once but hundreds of times.

Any surveyor who has spent a significant part of his career surveying wood boats knows that, other than the garboards, wasted bottom fasteners can occur anywhere, and just about any point in the life span of the vessel.

Because a plank is no longer a living organism, it has lost much of its ability to transmit water along its length. Eventually it reaches what is known as equilibrium level and will absorb no more. Complete saturation of the open cells will only occur a short distance from the end grain unless rot sets in and then it will advance further.

When it comes to fasteners, the effect of this point should be rather obvious: fasteners near the ends of planks are the ones most vulnerable.

The most important thing to understand about wood hulls is that they are in no way similar to any other material as far as aging is concerned. As wood hulls age, they deteriorate and weaken generally. The constant destructive action of stress, working, weakening of the wood and corrosion of the fasteners means that the hull is getting weaker and all the connections looser and looser.

Now I will post the physics


----------



## Harborless

Many materials display linear elastic behavior, defined by a linear stress-strain relationship, as shown in the figure up to point 2, in which deformations are completely recoverable upon removal of the load; that is, a specimen loaded elastically in tension will elongate, but will return to its original shape and size when unloaded.

After the yield point, ductile metals will undergo a period of strain hardening, in which the stress increases again with increasing strain, and they begin to neck, as the cross-sectional area of the specimen decreases

The study of strength of materials often refers to various methods of calculating stresses in structural members, such as beams, columns and shafts. The methods employed to predict the response of a structure under loading and its susceptibility to various failure modes may take into account various properties of the materials other than material yield strength and ultimate strength; for example, failure by buckling is dependent on material stiffness and thus Young's Modulus.

n materials science, the strength of a material is its ability to withstand an applied stress without failure. The field of strength of materials deals with loads, deformations and the forces acting on a material. A load applied to a mechanical member will induce internal forces within the member called stresses. The stresses acting on the material cause deformation of the material. Deformation of the material is called strain, while the intensity of the internal forces is called stress

Transverse loading - Forces applied perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of a member. Transverse loading causes the member to bend and deflect from its original position, with internal tensile and compressive strains accompanying the change in curvature of the member.[1] Transverse loading also induces shear forces that cause shear deformation of the material and increase the transverse deflection of the member.
Axial loading - The applied forces are collinear with the longitudinal axis of the member. The forces cause the member to either stretch or shorten.[2]
Torsional loading - Twisting action caused by a pair of externally applied equal and oppositely directed force couples acting on parallel planes or by a single external couple applied to a member that has one end fixed against rotation.

\sigma=\frac{F}{A}, where F is the force [N] acting on an area A [m2].

Compressive stress (or compression) is the stress state caused by an applied load that acts to reduce the length of the material (compression member) in the axis of the applied load, in other words stress state caused by squeezing the material. A simple case of compression is the uniaxial compression induced by the action of opposite, pushing forces. Compressive strength for materials is generally higher than their tensile strength. However, structures loaded in compression are subject to additional failure modes dependent on geometry, such as buckling.

Tensile stress is the stress state caused by an applied load that tends to elongate the material in the axis of the applied load, in other words the stress caused by pulling the material. The strength of structures of equal cross sectional area loaded in tension is independent of shape of the cross section. Materials loaded in tension are susceptible to stress concentrations such as material defects or abrupt changes in geometry. However, materials exhibiting ductile behavior (most metals for example) can tolerate some defects while brittle materials (such as ceramics) can fail well below their ultimate material strength.

Shear stress is the stress state caused by the combined energy of a pair of opposing forces acting along parallel lines of action through the material, in other words the stress caused by faces of the material sliding relative to one another. An example is cutting paper with scissors[4] or stresses due to torsional loading.

A material's strength is dependent on its microstructure.

In materials science, fatigue is the progressive and localized structural damage that occurs when a material is subjected to cyclic loading.

Fatigue occurs when a material is subjected to repeated loading and unloading. If the loads are above a certain threshold, microscopic cracks will begin to form

Damage in wood is principally the result of fatigue. Fatigue is the process of progressive localised irreversible change in a material, and may culminate in cracks or complete fracture if conditions that initiated or propagated the process persist.

Although wood is the world's most widely used structural material, whether measured by volume consumed or value of finished construction, its behaviour is not well understood even by people who have spent their careers studying it.


----------



## Harborless

So- an 80+ year old wooden boat with a length of 60' LWL in 26' seas and hurricane strength winds for days as well as the fact the boat dried out while undergoing engine refit makes WOOD FAILURE the MOST LIKELY SCENARIO. 
Thank you come again.


----------



## Roger Long

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Could an old boat fully dry for the first time in many years have been a contributing factor in either popping a plank on a wave, or a catastrophic situation bordering on what Harborless opines?


Anything is possible. We're looking at probabilities here and the objective isn't to decide or guess what happened but what we can learn can make us safer.

I've never heard of a plank "popping" and a boat going down so quickly that there wasn't time to trip a manual EPIRB or make a radio call. Of course, we probably didn't hear about cases like that even if they happened.

A lot of wooden ships and boats have put to sea in truly atrocious condition over the centuries. Their sinking is usually proceeded by terrifying hours of pumping during which there is plenty of time in the modern world to call for help. The _Bounty_, which certainly was more prone to wracking and straining because of her size and nature of construction, is an excellent example.

A friend of mine hit something like a container and went down so fast that only he (singlehanded) and his dog made it into the dinghy. He still got off the radio call that prevented him from becoming one of those mysteries. No EPIRB because he was near coastal and it was before they were common.

One of the horrifying aspects of the _Bounty_ tragedy was the unforgivable delay in telling the Coast Guard about taking on water. When unexplained water starts coming in, or ingress due to normal working and infiltration below starts getting close to the capacity of the pumps, it's time to make a call so they are at least standing by and starting to think about options if you have to declare an emergency. I suspect Wallbridge put off that call because it meant admitting to himself what he had done. I can't imagine the _Nina's_ master not making a Pan Pan call if there was leakage that the pumps could not keep up with.

A dry hull may be more prone to spitting some caulking or simply leak a bit more than normal when working hard but, absent some other severe structural issue, would not be at significantly greater danger of a catastrophic hull breach.


----------



## Roger Long

Harborless said:


> Now I will post the physics


I rest my case


----------



## JonEisberg

Harborless said:


> So- an 80+ year old wooden boat with a length of 60' LWL in 26' seas and hurricane strength winds for days *as well as the fact the boat dried out while undergoing engine refit* makes WOOD FAILURE the MOST LIKELY SCENARIO.
> Thank you come again.


Might be best to actually establish _*the fact*_ that the engine swap was done with the boat on the hard, no?

A series of photos on Dyche's Facebook page documenting the removal of the old engine would appear to indicate otherwise, showing the boat in the water, at Town Centre in Whangarei...


----------



## smurphny

This does not look like a boat that came apart without some sort of catastrophic event!


----------



## JonEisberg

smurphny said:


> This does not look like a boat that came apart without some sort of catastrophic event!


Yup, every photo I've seen of her is a clear indication that she was magnificently maintained...

Here's something you don't see every day...


----------



## Harborless

You act like i want to be right. I said b4 i hoped i was wrong. I backed my logic. Stop being blockheads (yes thats a pun).


----------



## Shinook

JonEisberg said:


> Yup, every photo I've seen of her is a clear indication that she was magnificently maintained...
> 
> Here's something you don't see every day...


You can see the EPIRB secured in the background.

Would someone inform the ignorant of us about what the purpose of that crank in the photograph is?


----------



## Roger Long

Shinook said:


> Would someone inform the ignorant of us about what the purpose of that crank in the photograph is?


I think it opens the skylight.


----------



## mark2gmtrans

Shinook said:


> You can see the EPIRB secured in the background.
> 
> Would someone inform the ignorant of us about what the purpose of that crank in the photograph is?


It opens the skylight but more importantly it dogs it down tightly shut too.


----------



## Shinook

Roger Long said:


> I think it opens the skylight.


Oops  now I feel like a dinghy...

I guess I thought it was some strange wooden boat thing


----------



## Capt.aaron

I'll tell what I do know. Captain David Dyche III used to run the Tug I'm on now. He trained the Captain that is training me. I guess I'm twice removed from him in a way. We've been sitting around listening to stories about him for a few day's now. We all here have gone through the same training as far as safety goes as he did. I remember when he was redoing the teak decks up the Miami river. He spent $11,000 on the the wood. I know that the ocean will chew you up and swallow you. Right out infront of our house it destroyed the Phantom. The dang chewed up life rafts and debris washed up down the beach from us. My father in law was amongst the last people to see the captain and crew alive. Steel, cement wood and glass, when that ocean gets going in all directions and boil'n. Knocking you every way to side way's, there is little hope for any design regardless of the material. The Pride, the Bounty, the Phantom, and the Nina, all victims of bad descisions made by smart dudes. I know Capt. Dyche was trying to get that crossing out of the way so he could get back to work. I face the same dilema often when I do deliveries off hitch. I think people get complaicent on what their boat can handle after they handle some stuff. I know I do.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

These points arn't meant in a negative manner, but just stating things without guilding the lilly. And eyes finds as soon as we talk about wooden boats (Bounty before this) that lots of lillys is guilded cos of old fellers thoughts of prettiness.



Shinook said:


> You can see the EPIRB secured in the background.


If they couldnt grab that quick enough the boat must have gone down mighty quick. (Or the EPIRB didnt work)



> Would someone inform the ignorant of us about what the purpose of that crank in the photograph is?


Yes sailed on a boat with those sort of old windows... looks very pretty but I wonder whats safer? the type we use nowadays or those?
(By the way its not ignorant to ask for knowledge)



JonEisberg said:


> Yup, every photo I've seen of her is a clear indication that she was magnificently maintained...


But not including spending much money on her. Thats looks a very old engine as a replacement.

By the way, it was me who first sugested the boat would have been hauled to replace the engine. It wernt 'facts', it were conjecture. To clear up the doubt is great. 


MarkofSeaLife said:


> Therefor its an assumption the boat would have been out of the water for some considerable time... a few months in a NZ summer.


Note word: "assumption"


----------



## opusnz

I said it before but sailing in June is not that unusual. Cyclone season ends about April. You can try going in April and many do but you take the risk of a late season cyclone coming down from the tropics. There were a few this year. May would have been the preferred time to go but only if the weather was settled. June is normally OK but whatever month you go, you need to watch the systems and pick your opportunity. 

No time is without risk but having said that, the vast majority of boats go without a problem.
The storm that hit them was an intense depression that formed quickly, and moved fast. Even with the best weather forecasting, it could have caught them by surprise. The Tasman Sea and area around NZ can be nasty at any time of the year.


----------



## Capt.aaron

Scary irony. Capt. Dave got the money to buy the Nina from a settlement he recieved after his wife was hit and killed on her bicycle. He was bring'n one of our tugs in to Huston when the tragedy struck. He had to High tail it back to Miami but Alas was too late. She died while he was enroute. Sad, scary and weird.


----------



## JonEisberg

MarkofSeaLife said:


> These points arn't meant in a negative manner, but just stating things without guilding the lilly. And eyes finds as soon as we talk about wooden boats (Bounty before this) that lots of lillys is guilded cos of old fellers thoughts of prettiness.


Well, an 80+ year old woody certainly wouldn't be my first choice for sailing around the world, either... But I think some are simply trying to make the point that, absent of any further forthcoming information, we're all just speculating about whatever might have occurred... We don't have anything remotely akin to the amount of information we had about the demise of the BOUNTY, for example... As you well know, the possibilities of what can happen at sea are virtually limitless...

Most would agree, for example, few sailing yachts are more stoutly built than a Samuel Morse Bristol Channel cutter... One departed Japan recently in a voyage intended to bring attention to the victims of the tsunami...

She was under the command of a legally blind sailor... Yeah, I know, what could _POSSIBLY_ go wrong, right?

Latitude 38 - 'Lectronic Latitude








MarkofSeaLife said:


> Originally Posted by JonEisberg
> Yup, every photo I've seen of her is a clear indication that she was magnificently maintained...
> 
> 
> 
> But not including spending much money on her. Thats looks a very old engine as a replacement.
Click to expand...

The engine previously pictured is the one they pulled out...

This brand new Cummins was the replacement...












MarkofSeaLife said:


> By the way, it was me who first sugested the boat would have been hauled to replace the engine. It wernt 'facts', it were conjecture. To clear up the doubt is great.
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by MarkofSeaLife View Post
> Therefor its an assumption the boat would have been out of the water for some considerable time... a few months in a NZ summer.
> 
> 
> 
> Note word: "assumption"
Click to expand...

You'll note, as well, that my reply was in response to Harborless, for it was he who had assumed the drying-out of NINA to have been a "fact"...


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

JonEisberg said:


> The engine previously pictured is the one they pulled out...
> 
> This brand new Cummins was the replacement...
> .


Are you sure?

The TV detective in me looks at the photo of pulling the old engine out and wonders why they would have cleaned the engine bay under the engine after unbolting it from its mounts and before hoisting it? And where are the mounts? Took them off, cleaned it up and dropped the engine back in for a photo?

I must be getting far too cynical.


----------



## Roger Long

MarkofSeaLife said:


> I must be getting far too cynical.


I think so. I looked at some pictures on a Wooden Boat site and they support the sensible notion of moving the old engine somewhere inside the boat (explaining the removal of the heads to lighten it), doing the extensive engine bed work shown, and then taking the old out and putting the new in on the same day. There was probably quite a bit of work involved in opening up enough of the deck structure to move the engines in and out and no point in having the boat open for a long as the structural work took. There was a lot of other stuff done at the same time according to the pictures which show a new mast step so plenty of room to move the old engine.

BTW the structure in all the pictures looks remarkably clean and well cared for.


----------



## JonEisberg

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Are you sure?
> 
> The TV detective in me looks at the photo of pulling the old engine out and wonders why they would have cleaned the engine bay under the engine after unbolting it from its mounts and before hoisting it? And where are the mounts? Took them off, cleaned it up and dropped the engine back in for a photo?
> 
> I must be getting far too cynical.


Well, I wasn't there, of course...

But again, his Facebook page shows 4 different views of the new Cummins 150 HP, captioned "Sitting on blocks in Apoa NZ at Seapower waiting for my return."


----------



## mark2gmtrans

Roger Long said:


> I think so. I looked at some pictures on a Wooden Boat site and they support the sensible notion of moving the old engine somewhere inside the boat (explaining the removal of the heads to lighten it), doing the extensive engine bed work shown, and then taking the old out and putting the new in on the same day. There was probably quite a bit of work involved in opening up enough of the deck structure to move the engines in and out and no point in having the boat open for a long as the structural work took. There was a lot of other stuff done at the same time according to the pictures which show a new mast step so plenty of room to move the old engine.
> 
> BTW the structure in all the pictures looks remarkably clean and well cared for.


Seconded.

I know that anytime I have removed a powerplant from a boat I have redone the entire space. I have done all of the ones I did in my shop, but if I were alongside a dock and my new powerplant had not yet arrived I would put the old on to one side on blocks if I had the room and then do all the prep work and when the new one came I would lift out the exchange core engine to put back on the same truck that brought the new one. Just kind of makes sense when you think about it, and since he had the space, I figure that would be what he did, because they are not going to let him just put his old engine out there on the dock, and leave it there while he refinishes the engine spaces.

I know I saw someone on here who replaced an engine and they did a great clean up job before they put in the new one. I have no idea where the old engine was during all of that, but they were on the hard, so it was probably on the ground somewhere.


----------



## opusnz

Wow.... cynical is one word for it.

I suppose you also don't think the Apollo moon landings ever happened .


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

opusnz said:


> Wow.... cynical is one word for it.
> 
> I suppose you also don't think the Apollo moon landings ever happened .


Not at all! I think most happened! Elvis piloted one! He told me.

It certainly doesnt look like my engine bay


----------



## Harborless

Rouge wave or hull failure.
otherwise one of the seven would have activated.
went down in seconds.


----------



## Harborless

So she wasnt dry docked. You skip the other 8000 characters?


----------



## opusnz

>>>>>Rouge wave or hull failure.
otherwise one of the seven would have activated.
went down in seconds.


Most likely but also possibly a collision....freighters hit things but sometimes don't stop as a family in 1995 found out.

From the LA Times..

Collision With Freighter Sank Family's Yacht

Coast Guard: Report holds South Korean ship responsible for accident killing Santa Clarita residents.

April 27, 1996|ALAN ABRAHAMSON | TIMES STAFF WRITER


In a report filled with vivid details of disaster on the high seas, the U.S. Coast Guard said Friday that a South Korean freighter was responsible for ramming and sinking a Santa Clarita family's yacht last fall in the South Pacific, killing two children and their father.

Concluding an investigation that also involved maritime safety experts in New Zealand and South Korean police, the Coast Guard said the 27,000-ton log carrying ship was the "proximate cause" of the sinking of the 47-foot Melinda Lee on Nov. 24 off New Zealand's North Island.


In stormy seas and in the middle of the night, the Coast Guard said in a report obtained by The Times, the Pan Grace apparently failed to detect the Melinda Lee on radar. Nevertheless, just before impact, crewmen aboard the massive freighter saw a red light off its starboard bow--a sign that another vessel was nearby.

But, the Coast Guard said, the freighter's officer of the watch failed to slow down and turn away from the Melinda Lee--steps he should have taken immediately under internationally recognized "rules of the road" at sea.

Killed were Michael Sleavin, 42, and his children Benjamin, 9, and Anna, 7. Judith Ann Sleavin, 41, the sole survivor, washed ashore after clinging to a dinghy for 42 hours. The family was en route from Tonga to New Zealand, one leg of an around-the-world sailing adventure.

Relatives of the family declined to comment Friday.

Investigators in South Korea, New Zealand and the U.S. have long suspected the Pan Grace in the accident.

Earlier this month, in fact, South Korean police said the freighter was at fault after finding that streaks of blue paint visible on the freighter's orange hull matched the blue paint on the yacht's fiberglass hull. They added, according to an Associated Press dispatch, that the watch officer that night--Second Mate Han Sang-Yoon, 26--faced possible criminal charges.

The Coast Guard report, however, provides the most complete record yet of the accident. It is based on photos, log books and weather reports as well as the results of inquires by New Zealand and South Korean investigators.

It also sets forth new details of the crash:

On a rainy night, the 14-ton Melinda Lee was plowing along under sail--its engine turned off--at 5 or 6 knots, bound for New Zealand's Bay of Islands.

The yacht was equipped with a three-color light on its mast, 50 to 60 feet above the water line. Another vessel nearing the Melinda Lee would see a red light if it were off the yacht's port--or left--side. The green light would show if the other vessel were to the starboard--or right--side. Both lights could be seen if approaching head-on. A white light would be visible only from behind the yacht.

Judith Sleavin had taken the watch, beginning at 1 a.m.; the others were sleeping. She had tuned her radio to Channel 16, an all-purpose marine frequency. The rudder was under the control of an automatic steering device.

Apparently because of the heavy weather, the Sleavins were not maintaining a lookout--which the Coast Guard recommends at all times but especially during a storm.

The Pan Grace--en route from Tauranga, New Zealand, to Inchon, South Korea--had a lookout on the bridge, the Coast Guard said. Under international rules, according to the Coast Guard, a proper lookout in heavy weather and traffic would include a crewman farther forward.


----------



## Harborless

Sad.
doubtful. But possible.


----------



## tweitz

From CNN:

New Zealand's Rescue Coordination Centre released an undelivered text message found in the satellite phone system used by the schooner Nina. It's the last known message sent from the ship.

The message sent on June 4, but never delivered, reads: "THANKS STORM SAILS SHREDDED LAST NIGHT, NOW BARE POLES. GOINING 4KT 310DEG WILL UPDATE COURSE INFO @ 6PM."

The transmission is important because it gives search teams the approximate location and actual time of the last transmission, said Nigel Clifford, Maritime New Zealand's general manager safety and response services. Information can be used to help rescue teams plot search areas.


----------



## smurphny

It will also give them data to determine if any large ships were transiting the same area. The collision theory makes a lot of sense. Much more so than sinking because of the sea conditions.


----------



## tweitz

Also raises an interesting question of how a message received by the provider ended up undelivered from their system.


----------



## JonEisberg

smurphny said:


> It will also give them data to determine if any large ships were transiting the same area. The collision theory makes a lot of sense. Much more so than sinking because of the sea conditions.


Sorry, I'm not buying that one...

70' yachts getting run down by merchant ships are an extremely rare event... Here we have a boat that has already had its storm canvas destroyed, running off under bare poles before a storm, and you think it is still more plausible that they were sunk after colliding with a ship, rather than foundering due to storm-force conditions they had been battling?

anything's possible, of course, but I just don't see how the odds favor your scenario...


----------



## Classic30

There are all kinds of things to hit in the Tasman - it can be a pretty treacherous place to sail..

Sunfish, whales, shipping containers.. there's a range of things to choose from out there that the folks on board, no matter how experienced, would have absolutely no control over.

A case of wrong place, wrong time.


----------



## smurphny

JonEisberg said:


> Sorry, I'm not buying that one...
> 
> 70' yachts getting run down by merchant ships are an extremely rare event... Here we have a boat that has already had its storm canvas destroyed, running off under bare poles before a storm, and you think it is still more plausible that they were sunk after colliding with a ship, rather than foundering due to storm-force conditions they had been battling?
> 
> anything's possible, of course, but I just don't see how the odds favor your scenario...


Except for a huge wave which could have rolled or pitchpoled them, any other scenario would have allowed time to activate the EPIRB. Capsizing would have to have been a complete surprise to them in that case because if the general sea conditions were that bad as to make them worry about capsizing, they certainly would have had PFDs on and EPIRB and survival gear at the ready. Something happened that did not allow for the few seconds it takes to grab and switch the EPIRB on. On a boat that size, they likely have had personal locator beacons as well. Even if rolled by a "rogue" wave, this boat would not have gone down immediately, allowing crew to escape from below. Something must have happened that sank her in seconds. No crew was found in PFDs which may suggest they were either not overly concerned about the sea condition or that they were all below and were struck by something, going down immediately. They could have come down on a floating object and split open as well. Coming down on a whale or container could conceivably split open a hull and sink it immediately before anyone could react or get out from below and don a PFD.


----------



## Roger Long

From: AAP Breaking News
July 05, 20138:32PM

THE search has been called off for the American schooner Nina which went missing with seven people on board in the Tasman Sea. 


The 21m sailing vessel was travelling from Opua in the Bay of Islands to Newcastle in Australia on May 29 with six Americans and one British man aboard.
It struck winds up to 110km/h and 8m swells and has not been heard from since June 4.
Extensive searching over the past 11 days of an area more than eight times the size of New Zealand has failed to find any trace of the schooner.
No more searching is planned unless new information comes to light, Rescue Co-ordination Centre New Zealand operations manager John Seward said on Friday.
But radio broadcasts will continue to be made in New Zealand and Australia in the search for new information, he said.


----------



## hellosailor

I do so love the thread title, which I assume was taken directly from the Evening Nooze.

Seven crew missing! Good lord, this must be the Flying Dutchman, because no one mentions _a vessel is missing. _

Seven crew are _not _missing, a vessel with all souls on board is missing. There IS a big difference, because vessels have been found with no one onboard. "Vessel found at sea, seven crew missing with no trace!" would be bigger news.


----------



## CBinRI

hellosailor said:


> I do so love the thread title, which I assume was taken directly from the Evening Nooze.
> 
> Seven crew missing! Good lord, this must be the Flying Dutchman, because no one mentions _a vessel is missing. _
> 
> Seven crew are _not _missing, a vessel with all souls on board is missing. There IS a big difference, because vessels have been found with no one onboard. "Vessel found at sea, seven crew missing with no trace!" would be bigger news.


Not much to love in that thread title.


----------



## Harborless

I suppose the woodies here refuse to accept the MOST likely scenario of the boat failing and splitting up in seconds. Otherwise pfds or epirbs would have been activated.


----------



## tomandchris

Obviously, unless somebody survived and is found, we will never know. So, what in the hell is all the guesswork acheiving? Wood failing, containers, whales, Japanese Tsumani, whatever. People and a beautiful vessel seem to be lost. End of story unless you can prove something!


----------



## JonEisberg

smurphny said:


> Originally Posted by JonEisberg
> Sorry, I'm not buying that one...
> 
> 70' yachts getting run down by merchant ships are an extremely rare event... Here we have a boat that has already had its storm canvas destroyed, running off under bare poles before a storm, and you think it is still more plausible that they were sunk after colliding with a ship, rather than foundering due to storm-force conditions they had been battling?
> 
> anything's possible, of course, but I just don't see how the odds favor your scenario...
> 
> 
> 
> Except for a huge wave which could have rolled or pitchpoled them, any other scenario would have allowed time to activate the EPIRB. Capsizing would have to have been a complete surprise to them in that case because if the general sea conditions were that bad as to make them worry about capsizing, they certainly would have had PFDs on and EPIRB and survival gear at the ready. Something happened that did not allow for the few seconds it takes to grab and switch the EPIRB on.
Click to expand...




Harborless said:


> I suppose the woodies here refuse to accept the MOST likely scenario of the boat failing and splitting up in seconds. Otherwise pfds or epirbs would have been activated.


These arguments are largely based upon the assumption that EPIRBs never fail to activate, or the system is somehow immune to failure...

I believe that's a mistaken assumption...

EPIRBs Ain?t Necessarily EPIRB-ing » Maritime Accident Casebook


----------



## Roger Long

JonEisberg said:


> I believe that's a mistaken assumption...


Yes, and in four out of the five demonstrations of liferaft use by inflating just expired rafts for repack, the raft failed to inflate.

BTW, I'm getting kind of tired of the insistence by "Clueless" that we all recognize spontaneous disintegration of the old hull being *the* "most probable cause". All scenarios are possible and we won't know unless a survivor or definitive piece of debris shows up.

We can however, rank the probabilities even if roughly. That ranking will change with certain assumptions. If you assume that the EPIRB would work, as they usually do, things sudden and catastrophic move up the list.

Historically, speaking as one who has studied large sailing vessel losses fairly extensively over the years, structure failure due to normal wave action alone seldom happens suddenly enough in vessels of this size that a working EPIRB could not have been activated. It can't be ruled out but would be less likely in a vessel that has been maintained as well as it appears to have been than in many that have gone down slowly.

Even the infamous _Raw Faith_, built by a know nothing out of 8 foot pallet boards scabbed together with roofing tar, flooded and floated for hours gradually leaking until the crew were taken off in the chopper.


----------



## smurphny

JonEisberg said:


> These arguments are largely based upon the assumption that EPIRBs never fail to activate, or the system is somehow immune to failure...
> 
> I believe that's a mistaken assumption...
> 
> EPIRBs Ain?t Necessarily EPIRB-ing » Maritime Accident Casebook


This certainly could have been the case. An EPIRB that did not work would make a slow sinking scenario plausible. The only things I question in that case are what became of the liferaft? I assume they had one and why was no flotsam found? Maybe some will turn up but it is puzzling that in a full-scale search with a fair idea of position, nothing turned up. I don't know what kind of EPIRB they had but I am also assuming it was one which can be self-tested and that the captain did perform a recent test. This seems to have been a capable boat and crew, unlikely to have equipment neglect/failure of this nature.

We can only hope that the crew will be found floating in a liferaft with a malfunctioning EPIRB.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Lost Yacht Nina An Unsafe 'Lead Mine' - national | Stuff.co.nz

Posted on another forum (CF)


----------



## Brent Swain

When wooden boats sink, they sink very quickly, especialy if they hit something. That is why I would never go to sea in anything which is not made of steel.


----------



## mark2gmtrans

Brent Swain said:


> When wooden boats sink, they sink very quickly, especialy if they hit something. That is why I would never go to sea in anything which is not made of steel.


Titanic...enough said.


----------



## downeast450

MarkofSeaLife said:


> I do hope the family dont read this thread. I know they are reading others on the net.
> 
> I have a rule which I hold very strongly and I offer it to those about to cruise as a rule they should set in stone. Everything about cruising, or sailing is pretty flexible really, do things the way you like and the way they work for you.... except this rule:
> 
> Only sail in the correct season.
> 
> I use the Pilot charts and basically only ever sail when there is a 1 or a 0 in the % Gale maps. The most I have ever sailed in was a 2 for about 100 nms.
> 
> I hope this incident works out and the boat arrives in harbour soon. However, there is some story to their long passage... and most likely related to their late departure. The late departure was due to replacing the engine. They should have waited till next season.
> 
> The Pilot below is June. Ninas course was from the east side of New Zealand, over the top and due west to Newcastle just north of Sydney.
> 
> Mark


 Very sad! Serious EIJ! Mark is correct! Nuf said.

Down


----------



## mark2gmtrans

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Lost Yacht Nina An Unsafe 'Lead Mine' - national | Stuff.co.nz
> 
> Posted on another forum (CF)


I read the article, which seemed to me to be very snotty, especially in light of the several souls now presumed lost and most likely perished. It also seemed that whoever wrote it had no idea that "several tons" of lead in the keel is what keeps the boat upright, and will also return the boat to an upright position in the event of a knockdown.

We have all seen video of powerboats with no weighted keel turned turtle, but sailboats will roll, and then especially if dismasted, right themselves more often than not. I cannot speak to the accusations against the Captain/Owner of Nina having been negligent in his maintenance, though others here do know him and may be able to give firsthand accounts of his maintenance habits. I can say that those who continually state that wooden ships and especially very well built wooden yachts are somehow inferior to vessels using metal in their hulls are both disingenuous and dishonest. A well designed vessel using quality wood will in fact often outlast a metal hulled vessel. Period. Metal actually does suffer from micro-fractures caused by repeated stress and in every single case metal will eventually suffer to the point which it will become brittle and crack. Wood has its drawbacks, but stress fractures in quality timbers are far less likely than one might imagine. The reason for this is that metal molecules align themselves in the process of manufacture and cyclic loading and cause cracks to occur, as seen in the photo here:










Note how the image shows the material is striated and layered, when metal does this it will literally pull apart and tear, that is what a crack is, it is a tear that begins at the molecular level as the material is repeatedly compressed under loads. This is what metal fatigue looks like under a scanning electron microscope, and you can see that it is not a good thing.

Wood is a very different material,wood is the product of the metabolic and physiological activity of woody plants. Because of its function in live plants, wood must be mechanically resistant (it sustains the weight of the crown, leaves, water, wind, snow etc.) and at the same time it must be porous: photosynthesis in the leaves requires water and inorganic substances (sap) to pass through the wood from the ground. Both these functions, mechanical support and sap conduction, are supplied by cells. Wood is composed of cells which are characterized by a solid wall surrounding a lumen. The wood cells are fusiform and about 90% of the cells in the wood have a vertical orientation. The cell wall has a good mechanical resistance to traction and compression, and the cell lumen can be covered by the sap. When dried in a kiln wood still retains most of its original characteristics, and in fact it is never truly dry it retains a 6% to 15% moisture content by weight even when dried, this prevents honeycombing and collapse of the cell walls.

Because wood is an organic polymer it is extremely resilient and will bear a great deal more cyclic loading without damage than steel. A polymer is a large molecule formed from many smaller identical units called monomers linked together at the molecular level. This linking acts like a chain to hold the cells together, and is what makes wood the most widely used material in the world. It is strong yet flexible, and it is one of the most perfect materials from which to construct a boat.

Wood is a fiber woven together at the molecular level, it remains flexible yet retains its hardness, will retain the form it is shaped into and not loose its strength when formed correctly. Steel is made up of interlocked crystal lattices, carbon is used to harden the steel and keep the lattices interlocked, preventing the lattices from sliding over one another. This hardening also makes it more brittle, so either low carbon steel and it is too soft, or high carbon steel and it becomes more brittle. This also means that every single method of forming steel once it has cooled and is tempered will also damage the molecular structure and cause the lattices to begin sliding.

Wood is certainly damaged in forming it, but just like a polymer rope, the frayed ends can be kept from unraveling by applying heat, through sanding or polishing. It must be sealed and treated properly to maintain the proper level of moisture in the cell walls, and it must be maintained to keep the moisture level where it needs to be.

Personally, I would not go to sea in a metal boat.


----------



## tdw

As per usual Brent tends to go overboard with his pro steel ranting. We sailed a VDS 34 steeler for some six years and loved that old girl. I'd sail her anywhere, I'm sure her abilities far outweigh mine. We actually bought her because we liked the VDS34 not because she was steel. That said when we went up in size we ended up with glass, I'd sail her anywhere as well and again I'm sure her abilities outweigh mine.

I do wonder though whether or not the modern practice of putting high tech rigs and sails onto old timber boats is maybe putting too much stress on the hull. 

(apologies for repeating myself ... I think i mentioned all that on another thread quite recently)


----------



## jephotog

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Lost Yacht Nina An Unsafe 'Lead Mine' - national | Stuff.co.nz
> 
> Posted on another forum (CF)


I think this article brings new light to the event. How often should a wood boat be pulled out of water and inspected? I think this detail is even more important given the boats plan for an offshore voyage in the wrong season.


----------



## downeast450

jephotog said:


> I think this article brings new light to the event. How often should a wood boat be pulled out of water and inspected? I think this detail is even more important given the boats plan for an offshore voyage in the wrong season.


I agree. Inspections and maintaining a seaworthy craft are the bottom line. Any skipper / owner ignoring good engineering and maintenance practices is making _*the fundamental EIJ*_. Going to sea in a boat that shouldn't is unforgivable. Ignoring obvious weather avoidance safety precautions is another unforgivable mistake. If you are a solo sailor, you are betting yourself against old Mother Nature. O-well! If it endangers others.....

A lesson with implications for all kinds of adventurous pursuits.

Down


----------



## Roger Long

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Lost Yacht Nina An Unsafe 'Lead Mine' - national | Stuff.co.nz


The consensus on the Wooden Boat Forum, where one of the people has met the "Master Mariner", is that this article is complete horse pucky. From what I've seen of the structure around the engine in the repowering pictures and gleaned in general, it smells that way to me.

Most older wooden vessels are hogged to some degree. It is a gradual deformation of the entire structure and does not necessarily cause weakness of the kind that would be significant in this event.

WBF brings up another mystery. There was a SPOT Beacon on board which I use consistently and this has an EPIRB function. It is small enough to carry in a pocket. Coverage is pretty good in that part of the world.










They don't appear to have been using the tracking feature which would have narrowed the search area considerably even if they had not gotten off an emergency message. If they were alive and the SPOT beacon was in a pocket, one push of the button and searchers would know where they were to within about 100 feet. It's the first thing that will go in my pocket if I see water over the floorboards.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Roger Long said:


> It's the first thing that will go in my pocket if I see water over the floorboards.


There were three things of that category: Satellite phone; Spot; Epirb. None went off. I know people have mentioned that there's a chance the EPIRB malfunctioned (or not used as the boat is still afloat). However when you combine three things they didnt ALL malfunction. The only limiting factors to their use, as far as I can see, is that they could not be used. And one would think only a very fast catastrophe happened.

I know nothing about hogging on boats, nor wooden boats and have only sailed the Tasman sea where it laps up against Australia, so all I can think is that massive waves (They said 8 meters = 26 feet), not rogue waves as a breaking 26 footer is all it needs, and maybe assisted by even a minimum of hogging or other age related structural deficiency picked up in an 80 year hard racing life.


----------



## JonEisberg

Roger Long said:


> The consensus on the Wooden Boat Forum, where one of the people has met the "Master Mariner", is that this article is complete horse pucky. From what I've seen of the structure around the engine in the repowering pictures and gleaned in general, it smells that way to me.


What a pathetic embarrassment that 'article' is... The single "expert" the writer bothers to identify seems an ignorant tool, appearing to believe any ballasted yacht should be considered a "lead mine"... Here's the post you allude to regarding the "lifelong bluewater sailor" cited:



> To say I'm aghast at what that guy has said in a national paper would be a total understatement. He was a total sailing noob when I met him in the 90's, so I don't know where this' lifelong blue water sailor', 'master mariner' bull $%#@ comes from. Every boat with a 40% > thereabouts ballast ratio is unsafe? is going to sink? Well hello, checked the beneteau ballast ratio lately pal? Just ludicrous.


The ONLY reference I can find anywhere to this farmer/one-term mayor/lifelong bluewater sailor Russ Rimmington is an announcement he made almost a decade ago on some forum, that he had purchased an old 40' Albert Strange design that he was planning to rebuild after the completion of a circumnavigation aboard a different woodie... NOTHING since, I'll bet that boat still sits in this shed on his farm... One can only wonder what sort of ballast SHEILA II possessed, that prevents her from being classified as a "lead mine"...












> Nina, the 85-year-old American schooner presumed sunk in the Tasman with seven aboard, was unseaworthy and sailed by a traditionalist skipper who refused to have "gadgets" aboard, experts familiar with the boat say.
> 
> It had no long-range (SSB) radio and it appears its emergency locator beacon (Epirb) was not switched on.


Well, as the "expert" familiar with NINA is the owner of a 64' Sundeer, one can only imagine what his attitude towards the necessity of certain 'gadgets' might be... (grin)

Funny, the contemporary attitude seems to be moving toward sat phones as a legitimate replacement/alternative to SSB, but now the decision by Dyche to carry a sat phone & SPOT, and do without HF radio, is to be considered an example of NINA being "low on technology", huh? YCMTSU...

Really unfortunate, that many out there will consider this sort of second-guessing from a writer obviously lacking much familiarity with offshore sailing as being somehow authoritative...


----------



## jephotog

I keep checking into this thread hoping for a reason to celebrate.


----------



## Dauntless Brent

Wow! I can not believe the amount of engineers and wood scientists on this site. I am truly privileged to be here on the same site as you. Truth be told, this whole thread has ticked me off. The amount of speculation here is something to behold. Let's face the facts. NONE of us knows what happened to the Nina and her crew, other than she/they are missing. It's a sad story. What we all should be learning from this is that the sea can in fact be temperamental. No matter how well we prepare, no matter what type of boat/ship/yacht, how well outfitted, knowledgeable Captain, knowledgeable crew, bad things can in fact happen. There are inherent dangers involved, (hence, the songs, stories, poems) we see it all of the time. My heart goes out to the family and friends of the crew members on the Nina. I can not imagine how hard this must be on them. Please be kind enough to not start bashing me on here. I too have my opinion, however, I'm not about to get into a knock down drag out fight over what MAY have happened.


----------



## bljones

Harborless said:


> You act like i want to be right. I said b4 i hoped i was wrong. I backed my logic.


No, you didn't. 
You did, however, demonstrate a glaring lack of knowledge of the subject upon which you expounded.

I occasionally find Mr. Long egotistical, arrogant and argumentative, but he gets a pass because he is far more often right than wrong, and has the practical experience and credentials to back his play.
You, on the other hand...
Not so much.


----------



## smurphny

This article gives a little hope that they may yet be found.

Text Message Indicates US Schooner Nina Nearing Australia: Claim


----------



## Dauntless Brent

Lets hope that the info in the article is accurate. It would certainly explain why there has been no flotsam found. Also, if they don't fear that their lives are truly in danger, it would explain why no EPIRB was used.


----------



## JonEisberg

Dauntless Brent said:


> Lets hope that the info in the article is accurate. It would certainly explain why there has been no flotsam found. Also, if they don't fear that their lives are truly in danger, it would explain why no EPIRB was used.


Unfortunatey, that article is 3 days old, there is no 'new' information offered beyond the hope expressed by the father that NINA is still afloat...


----------



## smurphny

A nice write-up on the lost Nina:

SCHOONER NINA: Missing and Presumed Sunk | Sailfeed


----------



## JonEisberg

Some interesting and rather provocative observations/hypotheses from the legendary Warwick Tompkins, Jr, a guy who definitely knows wood boats, and was somewhat familiar with NINA...



> Two other Northern California sailors, 'Commodore' and Nancy Tompkins of the Mill Valley-based Wylie 38+ Flashgirl, also became friends with the Dyche family in New Zealand. Indeed, Commodore had a strong family connection with the 85-year-old schooner.
> 
> "When we got to Whangarei, I saw Niña - which, like Katherine Ross [who co-starred in the film The Graduate decades ago], is very distinctive - and immediately recognized her," says Commodore. "She was the schooner my father Warwick had navigated across the Atlantic Ocean to victory in 1929."
> 
> A narrow schooner with long overhangs, Niña was designed by the famed Starling Burgess and built by Ruben Bigelow on Monument Beach in Cape Cod in 1928. She was built specifically to win the 3,900-mile race from New York to Santander, Spain. And she did. When she arrived in Santander, a launch pulled alongside and a gentleman waved his cap and shouted, "Well sailed, Niña, I congratulate you. I am the King of Spain." Niña continued on to England where she became the first American vessel to win the prestigious 600-mile Fastnet Race.
> 
> "Here I am, 80 years old, walking around the interior of a boat that my father navigated across the Atlantic 85 years ago when he was just 30," says Commodore. "It was powerful experience." All the more so because Commodore is every bit his father's son.
> 
> "My father and I only really talked about the Niña once, and when we did, I came to the realization - as all sons must - that their fathers are not all-knowing. When I asked him how many degrees Niña tacked in, he said he didn't know. I found this astounding. Even though he hadn't sailed on the boat in more than 50 years, how could a vessel's navigator not remember how many degrees she tacked in? My father also wrote that 'Niña danced around like a dervish at sea.' He attributed this to the fact that she was cut away forward, whereas my father's Wanderbird, the former Elbe River pilot schooner that he sailed back and forth across the Atlantic and around Cape Horn, had a full forefoot."
> 
> Commodore is notorious for being critical of boats. "He can't help himself," explains his wife Nancy. For example, upon completing the delivery of our catamaran Profligate from Mexico to California some years ago, he wrote a single-spaced two-page letter listing the litany of reasons why we should sell the cat immediately.
> 
> *Based on an hour aboard Niña, dinner with the couple, and another meeting, Tompkins said it was clear that both David and Rosemary had "totally embraced the schooner." But to his very critical eye, the schooner looked "a bit rundown" and "like an old boat that was struggling to be kept going." We asked him for specifics. "I noticed that a couple of the turnbuckles were slightly deformed. These were very large bronze turnbuckles that might have been the first the Merriman Brothers ever made. They needed to be replaced. David also explained to me that they had rebuilt the foundation of the forward mast - without unstepping it. I don't see how that could be done properly without unstepping the mast. Thirdly, he told me that they had sheathed the entire hull, and I believe the keel, in a quarter inch of fiberglass. 'That's what enabled us to do this trip,' he told me. That suggests to me that the underlying 86-year-old hull was not in the best condition."
> 
> We asked Commodore to speculate on what might have gone wrong on the schooner.
> 
> "The first thing that occurs to me is that there was still something wrong with the base of the foremast, and that under the tremendous compression of heavy weather, it opened up the garboards. That would sink the boat in a hurry. The second thought is that maybe one of the deformed turnbuckles had failed, causing the big aluminum main mast to fall, fill with water and, still attached to the boat, ram a big hole in the hull. Or the butt could smash a large hole in the hull. A distant third possibility is that some of the fiberglass sheathing no longer adhered to the hull and led to some kind of hull failure."*
> 
> These theories are certainly plausible. For instance, about 25 years ago San Diego sailmakers Paul and Susan Mitchell took off across the Pacific aboard their 61-ft wood schooner White Cloud. Without warning, her hull opened up in moderate conditions in the Coral Sea, and she sank within minutes. They survived to buy a smaller aluminum sloop and cruise her for many years, and more recently have taken to cruising the canals of Europe.
> 
> When we suggested that Niña might have sunk as a result of a collision with a whale or container, Commodore dismissed the possibilities. "You have to be fatalistic about those things if you're going to go to sea, so it's counterproductive to think about them." We're perplexed by his reasoning.
> 
> Is there any hope for the crew of the Niña? It's true that the Tasman Sea is large and not home to many vessels. Indeed, one poster to a report on SFGate.com said he'd been on a fishing boat in the Tasman Sea that lost all power, and drifted helplessly for a month or so before being stumbled upon by a sailboat. Indeed, when we started Latitude in the late '70s, and when EPIRBs were much less common and reliable, it was not that rare for boats or crews of boats in liferafts to survive unheard of for a month or more.
> 
> The biggest mystery to us is why no EPIRB signal has been received. It suggests three possibilities: 1) There was some failure so catastrophic that nobody had time to get to the EPIRB, which had to be manually activated; 2) the EPIRB went down with the vessel so quickly that there was no time for the signal to get out; 3) the EPIRB battery was dead and/or there was some other problem with the EPIRB.
> 
> While the chances of the Niña or her crew being found are becoming more slim by the day, we, like the Dardens, continue to think positively.
> 
> - latitude / richard
> 
> Latitude 38 - 'Lectronic Latitude
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on this and other photos of Niña taken by Steve Darden, the schooner didn't appear ready for the front row at St. Tropez, but she looked better than a lot of wooden boats we've seen out cruising. The exterior, of course, only gives limited insight to the conditions of the structure of a vessel.
> © 2013 Steve Darden


----------



## hellosailor

"The biggest mystery to us is why no EPIRB signal has been received"
No mystery there, EPIRBs fail. There is the fmaous and well-documented case of ACR EPRIBs that did not transmit--even though the test light said they were working. And I've seen externally mounted EPRIBs on commercial vessels, hanging upside-down intheir cradles (which is normal) with WATER in the strobe capsule, indicating the interior and electronics probably were waterlogged and useless. Move the EPIRB below where it is safe and dry, and it may never surface to transmit.

All it would take is one rogue wave (I have no idea if there are rogues in the Tasman Sea but would expect so) to roll the boat, trapping all the electronics and crew in the hull.

""A ship in port is safe, but that's not what ships are built for."
_[Rear Admiral Grace Murray Hopper, USN]_


----------



## smurphny

Wow, those observations about the mast step deforming the hull enough to open the garboard seam is revealing. It suggests major structural problems with the backbone of this boat. Mast pressure should not be able to deflect the keel.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

The stupid thing about EPIRBs is they can't be tested except for once.

The test uses so much battery that it reduces its life. Every other bit fo safety kit you can test every trip (except flares)

The other problem is they are so expensive that the rip-off companies who make them are feathering their nests while we suffer.
They should eb $100 each and then we could have lots.

Finally, they are a waste of time being stuffed below attached to some wall or in the Nav station. They should be attached to each and every sailor.

I dont rely on one of anything.... except my EPIRB.


----------



## smurphny

MarkofSeaLife said:


> The stupid thing about EPIRBs is they can't be tested except for once.
> 
> The test uses so much battery that it reduces its life. Every other bit fo safety kit you can test every trip (except flares)
> 
> The other problem is they are so expensive that the rip-off companies who make them are feathering their nests while we suffer.
> They should eb $100 each and then we could have lots.
> 
> Finally, they are a waste of time being stuffed below attached to some wall or in the Nav station. They should be attached to each and every sailor.
> 
> I dont rely on one of anything.... except my EPIRB.


It's like so many things that stifle safety in favor of corporate profit. These companies think since we sail, we must have deep pockets. Not only should they be more affordable, they should be rechargeable or have simple battery replacement capability. Liferafts are the same story. I almost gagged when I got a quote on updating my raft cert. Safety comes second when these companies choose to rip off consumers. Capitalism at its best.


----------



## Roger Long

JonEisberg said:


> Some interesting and rather provocative observations/hypotheses from the legendary Warwick Tompkins, Jr, a guy who definitely knows wood boats, and was somewhat familiar with NINA...





> Thirdly, he told me that they had sheathed the entire hull, and I believe the keel, in a quarter inch of fiberglass. 'That's what enabled us to do this trip,' he told me. That suggests to me that the underlying 86-year-old hull was not in the best condition."


If this and the other things Tompkins said are true, and I have no reason to doubt them, I retract and rethink everything I have said about this event here.


----------



## hellosailor

"The stupid thing about EPIRBs is they can't be tested except for once."
Check again, the newer ones can be tested repeatedly. Yes, each test uses one burst of battery. A battery that is supposed to be making repeated bursts every minute for 48 hours. If the Wiki is right, they transmit once every 50 seconds, which would be some 3400+ transmissions in the course of 48 hours. So if you tested it once a month and consumed 24? 36? bursts? You'd still only be shaving 1% off the battery life.
You could, of course, also use a 406MHz receiver to monitor your own test of an old one, just do it in the basement of a room with a stamped-tin ceiling to keep the signal in. (No, actually, the USCG had promised to look into providing "casks" for that purpose in each district, but apparently dropped the ball.)
Actually...any "Class 1" cell phone or land-mobile radio service business, a place where they actually do real repairs not just swappie-swappie, has a room with copper-sheathed walls that they use for transmitter tests, you could always try to chase down one of those and offer some compensation as well.

Sheathing a wood boat in frg, dunno. I've heard folks with professional reputations say that's guaranteed to TRAP water and compromise what is left of the hull. And if the glass cracks for any reason, you're helixed. (PG-13 acronym.) Not to mention, unless they vacuum bagged the boat or rotated the hull upside down...really, glassing something that big while restraining gravity?? I think the phrase is "Yeah, but..."


----------



## smurphny

I've known three people who have completely sheathed a large boat in glass *but NOT with only 1/4"* which is totally insufficient. The entire hull was sheathed on these boats with enough glass to create a structural shell. This method works very well and can essentially build a hull around a hull, fastening the new glass hull with bronze ring nails after the first couple of layers spaced closely. If they did indeed put a thin layer of glass over a failing structure, it indicates there were huge structural problems. Maybe the keel was worm-eaten/soft which would coincide with the mast step problem. It would also explain a quick, catastrophic splitting apart of the hull.


----------



## tdw

I confess to limited experience here, but if I was to ever consider sheathing a timber hull in glass then I'd want to make damn sure the timber was good and dry with any areas of rot or worm excised. Surely (as noted by HS and Smurph) trapping an existing problem inside a fibreglass covering is bound to create ongoing problems, surely.


----------



## Roger Long

bljones said:


> I occasionally find Mr. Long egotistical, arrogant and argumentative, but he gets a pass because he is far more often right than wrong, and has the practical experience and credentials to back his play.


Thanks. Nicest thing anyone has said about me all day.


----------



## miatapaul

Roger Long said:


> If this and the other things Tompkins said are true, and I have no reason to doubt them, I retract and rethink everything I have said about this event here.


Very good of you! Not many people ever return to such a thread when "new" info comes up. It is hard to rethink things!



Roger Long said:


> Thanks. Nicest thing anyone has said about me all day.


Now this is funny!


----------



## Classic30

hellosailor said:


> Sheathing a wood boat in frg, dunno. I've heard folks with professional reputations say that's guaranteed to TRAP water and compromise what is left of the hull. And if the glass cracks for any reason, you're helixed. (PG-13 acronym.) Not to mention, unless they vacuum bagged the boat or rotated the hull upside down...really, glassing something that big while restraining gravity?? I think the phrase is "Yeah, but..."


TD's quite right - sheathing a wooden hull in fg is a last-ditch desperate measure to save a hull and can only be done after the boat is properly dried out, otherwise it simply peels off in sheets.

Maybe Nina wasn't in boat-show condition, but to counter the slightly alarmist view quoted by Jon, a couple of points here:

1. If the boat is bouncing off waves (and it would be) there is going to be plenty of pressure on the mast steps especially the foremast step... but I notice she had aluminium masts. If she was designed to carry timber masts, the original mast steps would be oversized for alloy ones. Assuming for a sec that the step did fail, in traditional boat design the piece of solid timber immediately under it is called the *keel* and runs the full length of the boat. ie. the mast isn't going anywhere. Sure, unfair pressure on the mast step/keel could cause the garboard seams to widen, but... hang on a sec.. this boat is sheathed!  Not likely, sorry. Will water rush in? Sure.. but slowly - meaning a boat that size won't sink instantly and, if the bilge pumps are working, might even stay afloat for a long time. Certainly more than long enough to trigger the EPIRB, use the Sat Phone and/or get into a liferaft. (Remember the "Bounty"?)

2. Being dismasted and holed by a mast is a more likely way to sink rapidly, but I notice from the photos that she's keel-stepped and these are aluminium masts. I've seen plenty of dismastings in my life and in all cases I've seen, keel-stepped alloy masts bend and snap - they don't "break off" and fall over the side like a timber mast might; not immediately in any case... and if she'd been holed and sunk in this way (known as a "loss of structural integrity"  ), there'd be wreckage floating around for the search parties to find.

You can get "rogue waves" in any ocean and most certainly in the Tasman - and common enough that they're almost an occupational hazard. I'd like to think she's been dismasted and blown far outside the search area, but it is quite possible she was simply overwhelmed by a rogue wave and went down in one piece. Perhaps time will tell..


----------



## tdw

Nina's , deckhouse , is a very similar in design to the Smeeton's Tzu Hang which was twice pitchpoled in the Pacific while attempting to round Cape Horn. On both occasions the structure was torn away and had it not been for John Guzzwell's intervention (he was crewing) the Tzu Hang would have probably gone down. I'm not saying that would have been a quick sinking but it shows how "easily" timber deck houses can be torn away.


----------



## Classic30

tdw said:


> Nina's , deckhouse , is a very similar in design to the Smeeton's Tzu Hang which was twice pitchpoled in the Pacific while attempting to round Cape Horn. On both occasions the structure was torn away and had it not been for John Guzzwell's intervention (he was crewing) the Tzu Hang would have probably gone down. I'm not saying that would have been a quick sinking but it shows how "easily" timber deck houses can be torn away.


..and if that happens during a knockdown the boat would certainly go down quickly.

But, again, you'd expect to find some wreckage (cabin cushions, life jackets, galleyware, that sort of floating stuff)..


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Roger Long said:


> If this and the other things Tompkins said are true, and I have no reason to doubt them, I retract and rethink everything I have said about this event here.


Well then would you and others like to re-visit my Post 48 where I said:



> Are you sure?
> 
> The TV detective in me looks at the photo of pulling the old engine out and wonders why they would have cleaned the engine bay under the engine after unbolting it from its mounts and before hoisting it? And where are the mounts? Took them off, cleaned it up and dropped the engine back in for a photo?
> 
> I must be getting far too cynical.


If they were hard pressed on the hull maintenance how can we be sure the engine was the brand new one shown in packing, or what looks like an old but rebuilt one in the clean engine room looking like its being put in, not taken out.

I'm not being accusatory... I just think the photo in Post 35 doesnt gell and need professional eyes to have a lookie 

Mark


----------



## Harborless

Roger Long said:


> Yes, and in four out of the five demonstrations of liferaft use by inflating just expired rafts for repack, the raft failed to inflate.
> 
> BTW, I'm getting kind of tired of the insistence by "Clueless" that we all recognize spontaneous disintegration of the old hull being *the* "most probable cause". All scenarios are possible and we won't know unless a survivor or definitive piece of debris shows up.
> 
> We can however, rank the probabilities even if roughly. That ranking will change with certain assumptions. If you assume that the EPIRB would work, as they usually do, things sudden and catastrophic move up the list.
> 
> Historically, speaking as one who has studied large sailing vessel losses fairly extensively over the years, structure failure due to normal wave action alone seldom happens suddenly enough in vessels of this size that a working EPIRB could not have been activated. It can't be ruled out but would be less likely in a vessel that has been maintained as well as it appears to have been than in many that have gone down slowly.
> 
> Even the infamous _Raw Faith_, built by a know nothing out of 8 foot pallet boards scabbed together with roofing tar, flooded and floated for hours gradually leaking until the crew were taken off in the chopper.


Clueless a? Well mr. Architect i took my opinions from peer reviewed articles dealing with the surveying and degradement of wooden boats. I believe a qoute was something like, "even surveyors with decades of experience cannot be certain of a wooden vessels structual integrity."

So we have either a rouge wave or hull failure. Otherwise explain to me why no flotsam has been found, no epirb was activated, and no mayday call was sounded. Even if you had 3 minutes with seven people im betting one would act in a life saving manner. Another poker with decades of experience who has become jaded to the backed up fact presenting of a youth. I backed up my opinions with science and speculation. I was only wrong on the haul out because i did not double check what another poster stated.

Clueless. Good one longwinded.


----------



## Classic30

Harborless said:


> Clueless a? Well mr. Architect i took my opinions from peer reviewed articles dealing with the surveying and degradement of wooden boats. I believe a qoute was something like, "even surveyors with decades of experience cannot be certain of a wooden vessels structual integrity."


Wow! That's a mighty broad ass-covering statement if ever there was one... and quoted by someone who himself states he has no experience in the subject he speaks about.

Jeepers!!


----------



## Harborless

Do you not understand what a peer reviwed article is? I did not say anything. Marine scientist, wood boat professional builders and surveyors and naval architects did.

Do some research, i did. Start with peer reviwed since you obviously have no idea what the words mean.


----------



## Harborless

Lol its really laughable. Qoutes by someone, meaning me, when i said it was from a PEER REVIWED ARTICLE. Seriosuly some of you and your abhorrence to young posters posting educated fact are really annoying. This is why i stay in off topic 90% of the time. Clean the termites out of your block head why dont you?


----------



## mark2gmtrans

Harborless said:


> Do you not understand what a peer reviwed article is? I did not say anything. Marine scientist, wood boat professional builders and surveyors and naval architects did.
> 
> Do some research, i did. Start with peer reviwed since you obviously have no idea what the words mean.


Harborless, google Roger Long Naval Architect, he may be one of those peers who do the reviewing. There are some people on here that you are not qualified to get into an argument with about boat design Roger Long, Bob Perry, and maybe a couple of others that do not put it out there quite as much. The best thing you could do is listen and learn. You know a little about a lot of things, and you are learning, but one learns more by listening than by getting into pissing matches with those who have the T-Shirt on a been there done that and got paid very very well for it basis.


----------



## JonEisberg

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Well then would you and others like to re-visit my Post 48 where I said:
> 
> If they were hard pressed on the hull maintenance how can we be sure the engine was the brand new one shown in packing, or what looks like an old but rebuilt one in the clean engine room looking like its being put in, not taken out.
> 
> I'm not being accusatory... I just think the photo in Post 35 doesnt gell and need professional eyes to have a lookie
> 
> Mark


I'm inclined to take Steve Darden's word for it... (although he does get the brand wrong, calling it a CAT instead of a Cummins, so I suppose you may still be entitled to your reasonable doubt (grin))

From the LATITUDE 38 article I cited:



> Steve and Dorothy Darden are former Tiburon residents who had the custom Morrelli & Melvin 52 catamaran Adagio built for them in New Zealand in 2000, and have been spending most of the time since cruising between Alaska and Tasmania. The Dardens became friends with the Dyches while in New Zealand last year, and were among the last to see them alive.
> 
> "When we arrived at Whangarei, New Zealand, from New Caledonia to have some work done, Niña was already there," remembers Dorothy Darden. "David, who runs a big vessel for the oil industry in I believe Brazil and works three months and then gets three month off, was at work at the time. But we became good friends with Rosemary and her son David Jr., 17, who were staying on the anchored-out schooner. They spent Christmas with us, came to my birthday party, and had dinner on our boat.
> 
> "David came back sometime in March," Dorothy continues, "and in March or April he and their crew set off for Australia. Unfortunately, Niña's engine broke down. So they returned to Opua, ordered a new engine, and David returned to work in Brazil. When David came back, the new Caterpillar engine was installed, and the boat prepared for sea. They would ultimately clear out of Opua for Newcastle, but the day before they left they drove down to Whangarei to say goodbye to us and others."


----------



## Harborless

Ugh im not trying to argue... much. Im simply backing up the second of really only two plausible options mark. Explain to me any other possibility besides rouge wave or hull failure. And even with a rouge wave mark they were in days of storms so i have to assume here the boat was pretty well latched and we both know wood is bouyant so in all likelyhood the rouge wave would have resulted in a roll over or in the very least a few minutes for water to intrude in seems and crevices to cause sinkage. The boat had to sink in seconds not minutes or a mayday call, epirb, liferaft, or flotsam would have been present.

I used multiple sources fro professionals that were peer reviewed and then physics from people a hell of a lot smarter than me.

Why is it im the no nothing? I only posted what other professional experts said and were reviwed about. Im only trying to defend logic based on science and multiple sources of decades of experience. Roger simply chose to insult my iltelligence instead of accept what others, not myself, said about wooden boat hulls.

Again, as if i want to be right about people drowning to death. Im not sick. I sinply see no other option for such a large well crewed boat to simply disapear without a trace. Do you???


----------



## Classic30

MarkofSeaLife said:


> If they were hard pressed on the hull maintenance how can we be sure the engine was the brand new one shown in packing, or what looks like an old but rebuilt one in the clean engine room looking like its being put in, not taken out.
> 
> I'm not being accusatory... I just think the photo in Post 35 doesnt gell and need professional eyes to have a lookie


Mark, "Hard-pressed on hull maintenance" might be a little hard on them. If you've any idea what it costs to sand and paint the hull of your boat, imagine what it costs (labour + paint) to do something the size of Nina?? They'd leave it until the next haul-out if they could.

Anyways, from what I see in that photo, I'd say they've lifted the engine and cleaned up/rebuilt underneath it. The mounts haven't been installed yet, but the bearers are there and primed ready to receive them.

I imagine the very next step would be fitting new mounts on the engine and marking the positions out on the bearers before the engine goes back down.

There could be a couple of reasons why the "old" engine is hanging there - but one possibility is that maybe they needed to hire a crane/hoist to shift it out of the engine bay. In this case, the logical thing is to pull the old one out and put the new one whilst you've got the gear on-site. No?

How can you be sure the "new" one in packing went in? Using those photos alone, you can't.

EDIT: Sorry, didn't see Jon's reply on the same topic. FWIW..


----------



## Roger Long

mark2gmtrans said:


> ... one learns more by listening than by getting into pissing matches with those who have the T-Shirt on a been there done that and got paid very very well for it basis.


Ha, ha. I wish the last part was as true as the first


----------



## Roger Long

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Well then would you and others like to re-visit my Post 48 where I said: "If they were hard pressed on the hull maintenance how can we be sure the engine was the brand new one shown in packing, ...


I feel on reason to doubt that the old engine seen was the one being removed for reasons stated earlier.

The wood structure visible in the engine photos is perhaps the best looking I've ever seen in a vessel of that age. However, we are seeing .05% of the hull. If they had reasons to completely glass the hull, it indicates a strong possibility of problems beyond their budget to address properly.

More significantly, the fiberglass could well hide the early warning of structural failure by preventing leaking from working. For other reasons I haven't got time to go into now, the fiberglass would increased the chances of sudden failure.


----------



## Harborless

Sudden hull failure.
well this is just hypocrtical now. Ive got work to do. After so long im learning less and less about sailing and more and more about , eh. Why bother? Im going to go read my new national geographuc over breakfast and start being productive. Something not possible here until im atleast 40 apparently.
enjoy your discussions.
out.


----------



## smurphny

It seems to me that Harborless had it right, although the assumption that this boat was in poor shape could have been completely wrong. From the pictures below decks, it looked like a well maintained old wood boat. I have owned a couple of these. They are as strong and seaworthy as any glass boat. They don't need a thin film of fg to keep the sea out! IMO, this boat must have had a soft, rotten or worm-eaten keel. It probably just split apart and went down in seconds. Once a wood boat loses its structural integrity, planking starts moving and loosening, butt blocks start falling off, garboard planks spit out caulking and start falling off. A thin layer of glass indicates that proper repairs were not done and the hull was in poor condition. Looking at the drawings of this boat in a previous post, it appears to be constructed in a non-standard configuration with the keel having many pieces and apparently becoming very thin toward the bow section. Its basic construction could have contributed to a catastrophic failure.


----------



## JonEisberg

Harborless said:


> Do you not understand what a peer reviwed article is? I did not say anything. Marine scientist, wood boat professional builders and surveyors and naval architects did.
> 
> Do some research, i did. Start with peer reviwed since you obviously have no idea what the words mean.


Hey, at least some of us blockheads know how to spell _'rogue'_...


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Thanks for the reviewed thoughts on the engine. I'll take it as read. Though I am stuffed if I know why anyone would spend $20,000 (remember its in NZ so very expensive) on a new engine but skimp on other things like the FG skinning. UNLESS the owner thought the FG and underlying hull was in good condition. I.e. if he was going a quick fix 'on the cheap' he wouldnt have put in a brand new donk.



Harborless said:


> Seriosuly some of you and your abhorrence to young posters posting educated fact are really annoying. This is why i stay in off topic 90% of the time. Clean the termites out of your block head why dont you?


Harborless: you come across as an A Grade a$$hole. Thats why you cop grief.
The content of your posts is usually good and your ideas excellent, but you always find the need to totally destroy the effects of your arguments by putting in some of the most demeaning and inflammatory statements directed to those whom you are trying to change minds.

I had a friend who did a Reality TV show and she decided she wanted to be the house *****. Then she wondered why everyone HATED her: the cast, crew and TV audience. It took ages to dawn on her that because she was acting a ***** people naturally thought she was a *****. So she stopped being a ***** and next episode her approval went up.

So stop playing the wanker and people will begin to respect your ideas.

Mark


----------



## Roger Long

Harborless said:


> i took my opinions from peer reviewed articles dealing with the surveying and degradement of wooden boats.


For the record: I have never, nor do I now, question your intelligence or your ability to cut and paste following a Google search. Keep it up with the searching, it is a useful skill although the paste part is often the least important.

It is your attitude which I question and I believe I have a little company here. I question it and tweak you about it only for your own sake as a fellow sailor. I was on the Internet before you were born and I have seen worse, believe me.


----------



## Roger Long

smurphny said:


> It seems to me that Harborless had it right,


How could he possibly be right? NONE of us here could be "right" with the information currently.

The process of speculation can contribute to the safety of all of us it done properly. However, the search for approval or getting the consensus of a forum align with your thinking is counter productive to that aim.


----------



## smurphny

Roger Long said:


> How could he possibly be right? NONE of us here could be "right" with the information currently.
> 
> The process of speculation can contribute to the safety of all of us it done properly. However, the search for approval or getting the consensus of a forum align with your thinking is counter productive to that aim.


Obviously, no one knows. That's why I said, "It seems..," translated as, "most likely." In this thread and in the ensuing research by posters, more information about the boat has emerged. The new information suggests that the hull was in questionable condition. Speculating on the most likely scenario based on unfolding facts is certainly a worthwhile exercise and one that serves to elicit knowledge that is the essence of these types of discussions. We could all be wrong. It's the exchange of ideas that counts. Digging one's heels in and personal attacks over speculative opinion is silly. From what has come forth, I believe at this point that the failing structure of this boat has become apparent and very likely had something to do with her loss... if indeed she IS lost, which is itself still speculation.


----------



## Harborless

Ill post one more time to this forum until the next time i have an actual question which cannot be answered by myself, my literature, my neighbors, or my abilities to cut and paste.


MAYBE the reason i come accross as an ******* is because the last two years posting here ive been treated like a dumb irresponsible young no nothing with no insight or intelligence worthy of being heard by ye old sailing masters.

Maybe all the disrespect, arrogance, know it all attitude and baseless assumptions have contributed to me having a built up defensive tone which comes accross as being an *******. 

Im an ******* on sailnet gen discuss because you all made me that way because i stopped caring months ago. Im simply a producut of my enviornment. This is why my inbox gets filled with all these thank yous and well dones and keep it ups bc i suppose others do not want the public ridicule while im still young and stubborn enough to say no, thats incorrect, and speak out.

What i dont know i ask, what i dont understand i research. Unlike many here that when confronted with fact and truths can only reply with atleast they can spell better than me.

Well congrat u frigginlations.well done. At least i am ALWAYS willing to learn anf change my opinions based on facts and logics not just beat out of my old tired and worn out corner.

Ill be an ******* and you all can be disrespectful, arrogant, and many times wrong. Seems we all enjoy it the most.

See you in a few months, or not, whatever.

Flame away. I wont be reading.

Out out out.


----------



## JonEisberg

Harborless said:


> Im an ******* on sailnet gen discuss because you all made me that way ...


This one deserves to be saved for posterity... (grin)

Time to go sailing, dude... Good luck to you...


----------



## tdw

Seems to me that way too often we insist on being CORRECT (he shouted). Yet so often it turns out, now this is a surprise, we are only partly so. Of course this applies to "we" as in everyone except me.


----------



## Classic30

tdw said:


> Seems to me that way too often we insist on being CORRECT (he shouted). Yet so often it turns out, now this is a surprise, we are only partly so. Of course this applies to "we" as in everyone except me.


Of course!.. I could be wrong, but Mods are ALWAYS right...  :laugher


----------



## Classic30

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Thanks for the reviewed thoughts on the engine. I'll take it as read. Though I am stuffed if I know why anyone would spend $20,000 (remember its in NZ so very expensive) on a new engine but skimp on other things like the FG skinning. UNLESS the owner thought the FG and underlying hull was in good condition. I.e. if he was going a quick fix 'on the cheap' he wouldnt have put in a brand new donk.


FG skinning is not necessarily 'a quick fix on the cheap' (it's neither quick nor cheap) - it's simply a more economical solution than having to replace all the planking on the entire boat which, on a boat like Nina, would make a $20,000 engine look like spare change. In many cases, even knowing it's a one-way street heading down-hill, it's the only way to ensure the boat stays around for just a little bit longer - years? decades? who knows? All things considered, it does seem that they all thought the FG and underlying hull was in good condition otherwise surely they would not have left in the first place.

I still think that if the sheath failed catastrophically, there'd be wreckage on the surface... but that doesn't mean to say some localised unseen and unreachable failure didn't send the yacht to the bottom quickly and in one piece...


----------



## mark2gmtrans

While I am certainly not anything like the type of expert that Bob Perry or Roger Long is, and I really am not certain at all of what may or may not have been the issue with the hull of the Nina, I would think that if the hull planking was unsound it could have been repaired for less than the FG wrap would have cost. I know that hull planks can be scarfed if only a portion is bad, and they can be replaced entirely if the whole plank is rotted. Obviously a wrap in FG is not going to fix a rotted and warped or sagging keel, in fact it might just make it worse by allowing water to become trapped behind the sheathing.

We may never know the whole story, and it would seem that some sort of enquiry into this should be done by those with far more knowledge of the actual situation than is available to most of us here on SN.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

I believe you've made a Double Clanger!



mark2gmtrans said:


> We may never know the whole story,


Unless the boat turns up with the crew we will _never_ know anything much of the story.



mark2gmtrans said:


> it would seem that some sort of enquiry into this should be done by those with far more knowledge of the actual situation than is available to most of us here on SN.


I most strongly disagree and point you to the Bounty thread on this forum which was writ by each of us numbskull cruisers but could have been the guideline of the Coast Guard inquiry hearings. We covered, investigated and exposed every salient point of that disaster, except maybe a few that would couldn't get without direct questioning of witnesses.

Don't dismiss the power if the brains of those on this forum! Don't dismiss the power of the internet. Dont relegate us to lower beings just because you dont personally know us. Further don't pedestal the 'authorities' or those interests of the families etc who have an agenda. We forumers have no agenda except to exercise the mind, pass the time and chew the fat...

Mark


----------



## mark2gmtrans

MarkofSeaLife said:


> I believe you've made a Double Clanger!
> 
> Unless the boat turns up with the crew we will _never_ know anything much of the story.
> 
> I most strongly disagree and point you to the Bounty thread on this forum which was writ by each of us numbskull cruisers but could have been the guideline of the Coast Guard inquiry hearings. We covered, investigated and exposed every salient point of that disaster, except maybe a few that would couldn't get without direct questioning of witnesses.
> 
> Don't dismiss the power if the brains of those on this forum! Don't dismiss the power of the internet. Dont relegate us to lower beings just because you dont personally know us. Further don't pedestal the 'authorities' or those interests of the families etc who have an agenda. We forumers have no agenda except to exercise the mind, pass the time and chew the fat...
> 
> Mark


Mark,

I am certainly not dismissing the brain power of the group here, and how you could even imagine that I would be relegating us to lower beings? I am one of the lower beings in that case, and I tend to (like most people do ) think highly of myself and my own opinions. What I am saying is that we do not have all of the information. We would, in the event we were to do a proper investigation of this matter, need to send people out to interview in person those who were aboard the vessel Nina shortly before her departure. We would need to investigate the claim that some have made about her engine replacement, in which outright speculation was that somehow Captain Dyche put a different engine aboard her than the one shown in the photos. We would need to interview the meteorologists, to get a full story on the weather that day, and many other things.

Now if you would like to fund this investigation, perhaps you would care to pay me to go down and investigate it, I would contract my brother who was an investigator for a sheriff's department here in the states for many years, and if we were well paid, we would be able to get a lot closer to the truth. If no one is willing to pay others to do the investigation, then it will either remain as pure speculation, conjecture, and theory, because without doing all of the background work you just cannot have more than that, things have to be done right or you have 1000's of people just guessing at what happened.

I have not read the Bounty story on here, so I cannot comment on that, but it does not surprise me that many would say that the forum here did a good job. There are a lot of very knowledgeable people here, all of us at times have some insight and working together we can accomplish much. What we cannot do seated here in front of our respective computers is go out on the docks where Nina was berthed and interview mechanics, yard workers, and others who were in physical contact with crew and vessel in the days before the vessel sailed out of port.

Now, we can come up with a lot of good theories, but we are a bit short of wreckage, debris, or other evidence that she even went down. I recall not long ago a jackass of a skipper who was sailing along without any radios or commo gear for something like three months while people looked high and low for him and the crew aboard the "missing" vessel. Then one day the goober sails into port and is surprised that people were looking for him, not that I am saying that is what happened here, but it would be better than the alternative. So, in the absence of debris, wreckage, or a survivor or seven to tell us what happened, indirect investigation answers nothing conclusively.

Mark


----------



## TakeFive

MarkofSeaLife said:


> ...I most strongly disagree and point you to the Bounty thread on this forum which was writ by each of us numbskull cruisers but could have been the guideline of the Coast Guard inquiry hearings. We covered, investigated and exposed every salient point of that disaster...


While I enjoyed the Bounty thread and learned a great deal from the what-if speculation, to characterize it as "investigation" is a real overreach. Most of it was speculation. Some of it was commentary on facts brought out by others who were doing the real investigation.

I'm not going to reread the thread to confirm this, but I cannot recall any actual _investigation_ done by Sailnetters. Aside from the occasional contributions from naval architects and delivery captains who had actually been aboard the boat, the vast majority of us lacked the first-hand observation and/or the qualifications to make any true investigative judgements on the Bounty case. Virtually all of it was reaction to news reports, which we all know can be unbalanced or flat-out inaccurate. There was no formal "coverage" or "exposé" of facts done by Sailnet - that was done by reporters who went to the scene, the team that held the hearings, and the film crews that broadcast the hearings. Sailnet members, by and large, merely provided commentary on the facts that others were uncovering (and that some - including I - were making up through their speculation).


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

TakeFive said:


> While I enjoyed the Bounty thread and learned a great deal from the what-if speculation, to characterize it as "investigation" is a real overreach.


I never said "investigation" I said "We covered, investigated and exposed"

Please read my posts more carefully


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

While some of you are sitting here saying there is nothing to investigate, nothing to think about, nothing to comment about... there is new information coming to light.

I dont like copy/pasting from another forum, but we cant discuss it there for fear of family hurt, so I post here a post of info released by a family member:



> For those interested regarding Nina's engine..
> 
> Hi Cherie,
> David had done a very good job on the install and had adhered to as much of
> the advice that we gave him as he was able to
> There was a few things such as the water intake that was not big enough to
> allow maximum water flow to the engine at full throttle
> Also the fuel lines were not of the correct size. These things would need to
> be rectified before the warranty was signed off
> The engine was quite capable of attaining full power however because of the
> drive line alignment issues david chose not to go any higher in the rpm
> On the sea trial the vessel motored at 6.5knots at 1600rpm. David was happy
> running at a lower rpm that gave them 4-5 knots.
> David was aware of the issues with the warranty and drive line and as he was
> out of time he decided to address these issues when the vessel was slipped
> in Australia
> The issues with the fuel lines and water intake would not have caused any
> problems at the lower rpm.
> I trust this will help
> Regards Bruce.


From Cruisersforum.com


----------



## TakeFive

MarkofSeaLife said:


> I never said "investigation" I said "We covered, investigated and exposed"
> 
> Please read my posts more carefully


Fine, I used the wrong form of the verb.

You said we investigated. I say we speculated and discussed things that the true investigators revealed - and lots of other things that were just made up.

You say we covered and exposed. I say we discussed the coverage that was provided by others, and things that were exposed by others. Nothing unique was ever revealed here, with the only exceptions being 2 or 3 times when people who were actually on the boat or had actually met the crew revealed some of their own personal observations. That's not a whole lot of investigative content contained in about 2300 posts spread over several threads.



MarkofSeaLife said:


> While some of you are sitting here saying there is nothing to investigate, nothing to think about, nothing to comment about...


I'm not aware of anyone saying any of this.

There's lots to investigate, but nobody with the time and resources to go down there and do it.

There's always lots to think about and comment about, and I haven't seen anything here that's trying to suppress that. Who are you accusing of this?

But don't go trying to suggest that thinking and commenting about things that news services uncover and others here speculate comes anywhere close to truly investigating. You can learn a lot from it, but it's basically as valuable as discussing hypothetical situations that someone proposes. To call it investigating is to fall into the trap of thinking something is true because enough people echoed what each other said.


----------



## smurphny

Speculation is an integral and necessary part of an investigation (a noun, the object of the preposition-of). Without an excellent ability to ask "what if," an investigator has nothing on which to hang subsequent facts. Considering all the possibilities of the story is really the basis for finding the eventual truth. While the speculation on these forums is in no way an official investigation carried out by people paid to find the real story, I would not be a bit surprised to hear that some of those officials had done searches for relevant information and had peeked at the discussion of sailing forums.


----------



## TakeFive

The dangerous part of speculating on internet forums is that the speculation gets repeated enough that people start to treat is as fact. I've seen numerous cases of that very thing happening here. I'm not suggesting that it should be suppressed, but it should also be treated with an appropriate grain of salt.

All information is potentially useful, but inaccurate information treated as fact is potentially dangerous. Fortunately, professional investigators are well trained to sort out the two. Amateur wannable investigators, not so much.


----------



## Classic30

Final Farewell For Nina As Legal Questions Asked | Stuff.co.nz

This article (and others like it) goes to show that not only can you not believe some of the rubbish that's typed up by armchair-sailors in threads like this one but that you can't believe the same rubbish when it's regurgitated by mainstream media either!..


----------



## smurphny

Hartley18 said:


> Final Farewell For Nina As Legal Questions Asked | Stuff.co.nz
> 
> This article (and others like it) goes to show that not only can you not believe some of the rubbish that's typed up by armchair-sailors in threads like this one but that you can't believe the same rubbish when it's regurgitated by mainstream media either!..


That's an interesting piece. It makes a lot of sense that any boat making long ocean passages should have redundant means of communication, a liferaft, SSB, ditch bag, etc. but inspecting every boat is problematic and would have to be done by some international agency. It also opens up a whole new opportunity for another government agency to get out of control.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Hartley18 said:


> Final Farewell For Nina As Legal Questions Asked | Stuff.co.nz
> 
> This article (and others like it) goes to show that not only can you not believe some of the rubbish that's typed up by armchair-sailors in threads like this one but that you can't believe the same rubbish when it's regurgitated by mainstream media either!..


What in the world is wrong with that article?????????????????????????????
It just tells the NZ law as it stands and the court case surrounding it. Whats bulltwadaddle about reporting a New Zealand law???????????

Whats wrong with the family having a memorial service? what? Tell me what?

So what are you complaining about in that article?


----------



## Classic30

MarkofSeaLife said:


> What in the world is wrong with that article?????????????????????????????
> It just tells the NZ law as it stands and the court case surrounding it. Whats bulltwadaddle about reporting a New Zealand law???????????
> 
> Whats wrong with the family having a memorial service? what? Tell me what?
> 
> So what are you complaining about in that article?


Oh, so you're an expert on NZ maritime law are you?? 

Try this bit - for starters: _"The Sunday Star-Times revealed last week the US flagged Nina was unseaworthy but because it was foreign flagged it was not required to have a "Cat-1" inspection. "_

Apart from being false and misleading, the author of that article (Michael Field) was also the author of the Sunday Star Times article he referred to that was full of "expert opinion" from CruisersForum.  

Given your statement above, I suppose you're also one of the pack who claims the Nina was unseaworthy simply because she was old??... Sheesh!!


----------



## tdw

I confess I find the debate that seems to inevitably arise in this type of thread somewhat bewildering. It appears that some folk believe that simply because a friend or family member of the crew might be reading this or any other forum it somehow follows we should hold our thoughts out of respect for the family.

Sorry but I call BS. (Personal speak here, not Mod speak). 

Something happens that concerns us all, and a boat going down with possibly all hands does concern each and every one of us yet for some reason we are not allowed to discuss it ? Bizarre. 

This incident has been all over the media. Family and friends would be far more likely to be upset over what they read in the press than what they might read here. 

Should we not discuss safety issues on AC boats cos Andrew Simpson was killed ? 

No, sorry, I think it is all being overly sensitive and that it doesn't make sense to me.

Then again, I could of course simply be one hard hearted bastard without a skerrick of empathy towards my fellow beings.


----------



## deniseO30

RIP .... a 

.............................................. moment

........................................................................... of

................................................................................................... silence.

thank you


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Hartley18 said:


> Given your statement above, I suppose you're also one of the pack who claims the Nina was unseaworthy simply because she was old??... Sheesh!!


Does insanity run in your family? Because you obviously got it from somewhere.


----------



## TakeFive

tdw said:


> ...It appears that some folk believe that simply because a friend or family member of the crew might be reading this or any other forum it somehow follows we should hold our thoughts out of respect for the family.
> 
> Sorry but I call BS. (Personal speak here, not Mod speak).
> 
> Something happens that concerns us all, and a boat going down with possibly all hands does concern each and every one of us yet for some reason we are not allowed to discuss it ? Bizarre...


OK, time for me to call BS on your statement. I have yet to see anyone give any reason why we should not discuss this. I'm interested in seeing people's speculation about what happened. Occasionally I might even see some facts. But even the speculation is educational - it's just not factual.


----------



## Classic30

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Does insanity run in your family? Because you obviously got it from somewhere.


Sorry. I must have mistaken you for somebody else..


----------



## tdw

TakeFive said:


> OK, time for me to call BS on your statement. I have yet to see anyone give any reason why we should not discuss this. I'm interested in seeing people's speculation about what happened. Occasionally I might even see some facts. But even the speculation is educational - it's just not factual.


Eh ? Seems to me that we are in agreement. I'm not too sure how we are at odds.

In case my meaning was unclear .... I was commenting on what I saw as unjustified attempts to throttle the discussion on the grounds that it might upset family and friends.

Presuming that it does not include claims that the skipper was fornicating with the ship's cat I see nothing wrong with speculation as to the possible cause(s) of the presumed loss of the Nina.


----------



## hellosailor

Hull failure: As is the Edmund Fitzgerald wasn't the first or last ship to go down from that? This is a documented failure mode, after all.

Fornication with the ship's cat: Brings to mind that wreck vaguely in the UK about fiv eyears ago, where someone had bought a brand new pricey yacht and ran it aground on the maiden voyage, while offwatch with his, ah, beloved, leaving the yacht to find it's own way onto the rocks.

Now, tdw, is your reservation about the fact that it was the ship's CAT, as opposed to other livestock? Or that a carnal act outside of the sanctity of marriage might be involved?

_"Senator, why did you beat your wife last night?"
I did not beat my wife, I have never struck my wife.
"Then who was that woman you were beating last night?"_


----------



## gmengg

Hope all they are at safe place. I pray for them.


----------



## JonEisberg

An update from LATITUDE 38:



> Search Continues for Niña and Crew
> 
> July 26, 2013 - Tasman Sea
> 
> Ricky and Robin Wright of Lousiana, the parents of Danielle Wright, 19, who has been missing for nearly two months after setting sail from Opua, New Zealand, for Newcastle, Australia, with six others aboard the 70-ft staysail schooner Niña, haven't given up hope that their daughter and the others can be still be found alive. They and others have hired Equusearch, a Texas firm, to try to figure out where the schooner and/or her survivors might be now.
> 
> In addition, family and friends of the Niña crew are pressing for the U.S. government to have the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), a part of the Defense Department that supposedly has the capability of working out exactly where Niña's satphone calls were made from, to try to help find the survivors. The NGA was instrumental in locating Osama bin Laden. On the other hand, the NGA doesn't have the best record on the water. It was the NGA that provided the erroneous digital maps that contributed to the nearly new 224-ft U.S. Navy vessel Guardian going up on Tubbataha Reef, a World Heritage Site in the Sulu Sea, on January 17 of this year. The NGA charts showed the reef to be seven miles from its actual position. The expensive ship had to be cut up into three pieces and destroyed.
> 
> Friends of the Niña base their continued hopes on the possibility that New Zealand SAR resources may have been searching the wrong area in what has been their biggest search ever. Two GPS positions from Niña's Iridium phone were 700 miles apart, even though the reports were sent within just seven minutes of each other. Clearly one or both of the positions was in error. Friends of the Niña crew believe the Kiwis may have focused their search on the wrong GPS coordinate, and have thus been looking close to 700 miles from where they should have focused their search.
> 
> Realistically, there is reason to doubt that the Niña crew may still be alive. Nothing has been heard from their VHF, SSB, Iridium or EPIRB in nearly two months. And no matter which of their last GPS positions was correct, they were in cold and often rough waters.
> 
> But based on history, there is a chance they are still alive. In 2006, three fishermen from San Blas, Mexico, drifted 5,000 miles in nine months before their 29-ft disabled panga was spotted by a fishing boat near the Marshall Islands. One of the crew had died. In 1942, Poon Lim, a Chinese seaman, was on a merchant ship torpedoed by the Nazis off South Africa. He survived for 133 days in remarkably good shape, having lost not much weight at all. In 1973, Brits Maurice and Marilyn Bailey had their sailboat holed by a whale while on their way from Panama to New Zealand. They survived in their liferaft for 117 days before being rescued in poor health by a Korean fishing vessel. And sailor Steve Callahan drifted almost all the way across the Atlantic in his liferaft after a whale holed his boat.
> 
> - latitude / richard
> 
> Latitude 38 - 'Lectronic Latitude


----------



## hellosailor

"Two GPS positions from Niña's Iridium phone were 700 miles apart, even though the reports were sent within just seven minutes of each other. "
Not necessarily a mystery. if the phone was taken out of a box after extended non-use and travel, the last sky sight position would still be in memory, and presumably transmitted with the first call. One or more minutes later, the GPS would have refreshed and updated the position, so presumably the second position would be more likely to be the real one.

But NGA considers themselves to be part of the intelligence community and deals with civilians only to the extent that they are forced to. There's also a big difference between monitoring satellite calls in real time, versus what may or may not have been logged two months ago. As to their competency and whether they put a ship on a reef...remember, this IS the military intelligence community. If someone says "oops, we make lousy maps" you need to remember that the Russian cartographers were the finest in the world under the Czars. Then the Soviets literally misdrew entire villages and rivers on their maps, to ensure invaders (Hi, JFK!) wouldn't be able to use those maps against them. Sure, our maps are no good. Or is that a convenient disinformation?

Either way, putting one's hopes in the NGA is probably worth less than consulting the Oracle of Delphi. Or asking the NSA to task satellite coverage in the area where a liferaft might be now.


----------



## tdw

hellosailor said:


> Hull failure: As is the Edmund Fitzgerald wasn't the first or last ship to go down from that? This is a documented failure mode, after all.
> 
> Fornication with the ship's cat: Brings to mind that wreck vaguely in the UK about fiv eyears ago, where someone had bought a brand new pricey yacht and ran it aground on the maiden voyage, while offwatch with his, ah, beloved, leaving the yacht to find it's own way onto the rocks.
> 
> Now, tdw, is your reservation about the fact that it was the ship's CAT, as opposed to other livestock? Or that a carnal act outside of the sanctity of marriage might be involved?
> 
> _"Senator, why did you beat your wife last night?"
> I did not beat my wife, I have never struck my wife.
> "Then who was that woman you were beating last night?"_


HS ... apologies for missing your post and for delayed reply but given my own (lack of) matrimonial status the sanctity thereof is of little concern to me and well, if the cat was willing then who am I to deny anyone a bit of tabby.

My only concern was that we don't accuse anyone of rooting the ship's cat without evidence. Cats after all are sensitive creatures.


----------



## blowinstink

tdw said:


> Cats after all are sensitive creatures.


As, obviously, are wombats . . .


----------



## tdw

blowinstink said:


> As, obviously, are wombats . . .


Not meaning to be insensitive though perhaps my attempt at levity was inappropriate. I was originally remarking that unless someone wants to speculate that some or all of the crew were guilty of personal misbehaviour, general speculation as to the possible fate of the ship is valid.


----------



## blowinstink

tdw said:


> Not meaning to be insensitive though perhaps my attempt at levity was inappropriate. I was originally remarking that unless someone wants to speculate that some or all of the crew were guilty of personal misbehaviour, general speculation as to the possible fate of the ship is valid.


Ohfortheloveofgawd (as Doc might say) you really are too sensitive! I was joking. I'll remember the emoticon next time! What a waste of my post #300 . . . .


----------



## tdw

blowinstink said:


> Ohfortheloveofgawd (as Doc might say) you really are too sensitive! I was joking. I'll remember the emoticon next time! What a waste of my post #300 . . . .


whoops .... looks like a certain Fuzzball left his sense of humour under the bed this morning.

Even so .... congrats on the #300


----------



## JonEisberg

The latest news:



> A new search is underway for a yacht thought lost at sea between Australia and New Zealand.
> 
> Six Americans and one Englishman were on-board vintage yacht The Nina when it disappeared on June 4 on its way to Newcastle in New South Wales - sparking a massive search covering an area four times the size of New Zealand.
> 
> The official search was called off in early July after no trace was found of the yacht, its lifeboat or crew.
> 
> But families of the missing crew maintained private search efforts and recruited followers on Facebook to scour satellite images for any sign of the 21-metre schooner.
> 
> *On Sunday afternoon, the crowd-sourced search appeared to find an orange/yellow object to the west of Norfolk island.
> 
> The Nina had an orange life-raft.
> 
> Using money raised and donated, the families launched a private Cessna F406 to fly over the area where the object was spotted.*
> 
> The twin-engine turbo-prop conducted a low-level search between Lord Howe Island, where it is based, and Norfolk Island before stopping at the second island to refuel.
> 
> It has not yet been able to search the area where the object was found.
> 
> Read more: The Nina: Fresh search for missing yacht


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

JonEisberg said:


> It has not yet been able to search the area where the object was found.


Ooops, I stuffed up my post.... miss-read "west of"

Mark


----------



## smurphny

Fingers crossed. We can only hope they are found alive. What a tremendous black eye in any scenario for NZ SAR if that is indeed their raft.


----------



## JonEisberg

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Originally Posted by JonEisberg
> It has not yet been able to search the area where the object was found
> 
> 
> 
> Ooops, I stuffed up my post.... miss-read "west of"
> 
> Mark
Click to expand...

A bit more information here:

Weather Prevents Nina Life-Raft Search - national | Stuff.co.nz

And, on the Facebook page devoted to the search...

https://www.facebook.com/ninarescue



> Weather looks good today for morning start to locate the yellow object found in an image taken August 3. Drift modelling has been done and a search area defined. Weather map for 11.30 local time Norfolk Island attached below. Norfolk is located at S29 E168 approx. At time of posting it is 0330 local time Norfolk Island.


----------



## HUGOSALT

Brief article on Nina's history.
Friend at work dropped off copy of October Yachting magazine at my office. 
(as he knows I would never see/buy)
Article by John Rousmaniere on history and owners of Nina. Pages (77-80)


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Well its 5 months now. Are we considering them, finally, to be 'lost at sea'?



Mark


----------



## wavedancer38

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Well its 5 months now. Are we considering them, finally, to be 'lost at sea'?
> 
> Mark


No, not at all. Here is an excerpt from a letter they are sending out to people:

Please help save 7 sailors. If they are afloat, and there is a good chance of that, they need immediate action! Other boats, including the Scotch Bonnet, abandoned near the last known position of the Nina, took many months to drift to shore.
When some of the families launched a private search the U.S. State Department placed barriers in their path. Instead of helping with the search, the Department of State asked for dental records, which is inappropriate while an active search is in progress! They also reportedly prevented cooperation by the U.S. Coast Guard in running search drift modeling and many other things.

The families are asking for support from the sailing community. They have filed a petition and ask your members to review and if in agreement, to sign this petition. We are trying to save 7 lives!

Without assistance, the Nina sailors will likely perish in the reverse circulating currents of the Tasman Sea.

Ricky Wright, father of crew member Danielle Wright, will deliver the petition in person. With him will be John Glennie, the world record holder for longest survival at sea in a small craft in cold climate. His trimaran, the Rose Noelle, capsized off the coast of New Zealand. He and three crew mates were at sea for 119 days.

Texas Equusearch, a non-profit. 100% volunteer organization, is advising the search. Since coming on board, the organization has made huge changes in search and rescue at sea, including better ways to run the drift modeling to determine where a yacht has drifted to over time and the tasking of satellites to search for the Nina in the Tasman Sea, a first ever for a private yacht. Because of their work, all sailors will be safer!

As a final note, we are also seeking volunteers to help us in the on-line Tomnod search of satellite images. The link to log on is included.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Tim Paynter Volunteer
720 951 1700

Petition: 
http://www.change.org/petitions/7-l...-help-save-nina-sailors-your-signature-counts

News: Text From Historic Schooner Nina Reignites Hope For 6 Americans, 1 Brit Lost At Sea Off New Zealand

Updates: EVXX.com

Donations: MY PRECIOUS DAUGHTER IS MISSING!!! by Robin Wright - GoFundMe

Find the Nina on Digital Globe Satellite Images: (Note, the Tomnod page goes down when they load images.) Tomnod

Facebook pages: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ninasearch/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/337129576416954/


----------



## capta

wavedancer38 said:


> No, not at all. Here is an excerpt from a letter they are sending out to people:
> 
> Please help save 7 sailors. If they are afloat, and there is a good chance of that, they need immediate action! Other boats, including the Scotch Bonnet, abandoned near the last known position of the Nina, took many months to drift to shore.
> When some of the families launched a private search the U.S. State Department placed barriers in their path. Instead of helping with the search, the Department of State asked for dental records, which is inappropriate while an active search is in progress! They also reportedly prevented cooperation by the U.S. Coast Guard in running search drift modeling and many other things.
> 
> The families are asking for support from the sailing community. They have filed a petition and ask your members to review and if in agreement, to sign this petition. We are trying to save 7 lives!
> 
> Without assistance, the Nina sailors will likely perish in the reverse circulating currents of the Tasman Sea.
> 
> Ricky Wright, father of crew member Danielle Wright, will deliver the petition in person. With him will be John Glennie, the world record holder for longest survival at sea in a small craft in cold climate. His trimaran, the Rose Noelle, capsized off the coast of New Zealand. He and three crew mates were at sea for 119 days.
> 
> Texas Equusearch, a non-profit. 100% volunteer organization, is advising the search. Since coming on board, the organization has made huge changes in search and rescue at sea, including better ways to run the drift modeling to determine where a yacht has drifted to over time and the tasking of satellites to search for the Nina in the Tasman Sea, a first ever for a private yacht. Because of their work, all sailors will be safer!
> 
> As a final note, we are also seeking volunteers to help us in the on-line Tomnod search of satellite images. The link to log on is included.
> 
> Thank you for your assistance.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Tim Paynter Volunteer
> 720 951 1700
> 
> Petition:
> http://www.change.org/petitions/7-l...-help-save-nina-sailors-your-signature-counts
> 
> News: Text From Historic Schooner Nina Reignites Hope For 6 Americans, 1 Brit Lost At Sea Off New Zealand
> 
> Updates: EVXX.com
> 
> Donations: MY PRECIOUS DAUGHTER IS MISSING!!! by Robin Wright - GoFundMe
> 
> Find the Nina on Digital Globe Satellite Images: (Note, the Tomnod page goes down when they load images.) Tomnod
> 
> Facebook pages: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ninasearch/
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/337129576416954/


I'm sorry but you are not equating apples with apples. Empty boats do not require food and water. Even on a 70' schooner, it is unlikely that there were provisions aboard for 7 people to survive on for 4 or 5 MONTHS.
The longest survival from a yacht sinking I know of was 117 days, and they (a couple) abandoned their boat in calm weather with plenty of time to load their liferaft AND an Avon inflatable with food, water and even sails, for shade.
I commend you on your efforts and hope, but at some point you must accept reality.
Sadly, I can see no way that anyone could survive the amount of time we are talking about in that part of the world.


----------



## wavedancer38

Hi,
I was merely passing along information and answering a question. I am not comparing apples or anything.


----------



## tdw

*Update*

interesting from my friends over at Sail-World .....

Sail-World.com : New thread of hope - is this a photo of drifting Nina?

Whether or not anything comes of it who knows but its an addition to the story.

btw .... the life raft pic (see the same SW story) proved to be nothing.


----------



## abrahamx

It was weird. Yesterday while cleaning out the spare room closet I came across a picture of the Nina that I had saved from a calender I had many years ago. I saved it because I have a friend in Conn. who did a atlantic crossing with them. I believe some of the folks on board were going to do another with him in his boat one of these years. His boat is the Poets Lounge. Really kind of struck me when I was like, whats this back here... and I pull out a pic of Nina.


----------



## jzk

Poon Lim survived 133 days on a raft after his ship was sunk by a Nazi sub.


----------



## lavidanueva

We really appreciate the support of all sailors. It is quite possible the sailors are alive on an upright Nina. Part of their longevity may be due in part to the stores on the Nina. However, John Glennie, whose trimaran, the Rose Noelle, capsized off the East coast of New Zealand is a testament to long term ability to survive at sea. He and three crew members survived 119 days and would have made it a lot longer. For water they captured rain water, a tactic many cruising sailors use every day. For food they fish.

You can help our effort by signing our petition to the US State Department for support; We also ask sailors to join our search of the Digital Globe images which are served on the Tomnod crowd sourcing site. As sailors, you will have a better time of recognizing the Nina.

Thank you for all of your support. The families remain hopeful, but the governments remain intransigent.

Sincerely,

Tim Paynter
Media Lead (volunteer)

SEARCH UPDATES: www.evxx.com

Blog: http://www.blogger.com/home

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ninasearch/


----------



## tdw

I confess I posted that info out of interest and not because I have any real belief that it is the Nina or that the crew are still alive. The Baileys held out for 117 days in an inflatable and Poon Lim as JZK mentions managed 133 days on a timber raft but there is also a case of three Mexican fisherman who survived for 10 months in their disabled 28' fishing boat. 
Jesús Vidaña - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So all hope is not lost but one has to have some understanding why the official search was called off as callous as that may sound.


----------



## smurphny

I don't mind spending a some time on the Tomnod site to help out. If it were my relative, I know there is no way I'd be giving up. Think I'd feel a bit like Ahab, refusing to help the Rachael if I didn't at least donate a little time.


----------



## lavidanueva

It is a huge help to have people looking for the Nina on the Tomnod site. It is urgent we review the satellite maps provided by Digital Globe as quickly as we can. As a fellow sailor, I hope they would do the same for me! As the technology develops, it stands to advance the way searches are done for missing sailors.

Thanks,

Tim


----------



## lavidanueva

We are fighting against basic ignorance about longevity at sea. John Glennie survived on the East side of New Zealand with three crew mates for 119 days. He says he would have made it a lot longer. There is a lot of rain in the spring in the Tasman, plus plenty of fish to catch. I don't want to imply survival is easy, but it is feasible. Sailing Savoir Faire: Ralph Baird Talks About Hopes For Nina on NZ National Radio


----------



## oceangirl

I agree, the survival rates in these situations, goes up not down as years go by as technology, education, better resources aboard increase. They may very well be alive, and until such evidence presents itself, we should assume they are.

I signed the petition. Let me know if there if a particular person I can write in the gov, chaps my hide they are giving you slack. Being found, after this time frame of being lost at sea, is not out of the realm of possibilities.

God bless


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Its one of those unusual situations where any discussion to the contrary appears disingenuous.


----------



## lavidanueva

Thanks, all for posting and commenting. Every one knows, including the families, that the sailors on the Nina are fighting long odds. However, those discussions do little to assist in the search process. There is a real possibility the Nina is afloat and the sailors alive. That is based upon facts not made clear in most of the press, as well as true histories of people who have survived New Zealand winters stranded on the sea.

Every sailor will benefit from the research being done in the search for the 7 sailors. Texas Equusearch has gathered an incredible team of volunteer NASA scientists, fluid hydrologists, geophysicists, computer scientists, and an army of volunteers to look for the Nina. Use of satellites to search for sailors places no lives at risk and could save huge dollars as the technology develops. Learning how to search for images, get photographs quickly, run accurate drift models is all part of the process. The various RCC organizations are strapped trying to keep up with their own workload, so the efforts by Equusearch are invaluable.

Your support of this effort, then, could save your life, or the lives of someone you know. It is a process, the answers are still being worked upon, but what a noble cause. We ask you to make positive comments and to support us in our quest to bring #s7s sailors home. The families do read the boards and say they are very grateful for your ideas and your help.

Tim


----------



## Dfok

oceangirl said:


> I signed the petition. Let me know if there if a particular person I can write in the gov, chaps my hide they are giving you slack. Being found, after this time frame of being lost at sea, is not out of the realm of possibilities.
> 
> God bless


 Once into the sea are you still American or Brit? When do you become a simple human in need of help? Should all technology be beamed to a splinter of a splinter of the oceans because Americans or Brits are lost? 300 African migrants died trying to reach Italy in the last week, 700 or 800 refugees ( as of 10/25/2013 - check in the morning) were rescued by the Italian Coast Guard. Broken up boatloads of Haitians are rescued or die almost daily off Florida. New Jersey fishermen and sailors have kept the local US Coast Guard bases busy. I suspect the CG has not had much of a break on any of the US coasts in recent times.
I support every effort made to rescue the wayward or hapless mariner within reason, but as a taxpayer it "chaps my hide" to chase apparent ghosts six months gone, especially when they are half a world away. 
If "God" were blessing every voyage would any boat go missing? 
"6 Americans, 1 Brit" = 7 more souls gone to the sea. 
Honor their path. If they come back celebrate their miracle.


----------



## lavidanueva

Thanks Dfok,

A lot of people don't know, the Nina 7, as some of us call them, are not millionaire sailors, but normal folk like you and me. Some of them are from humble means. Even the boat's owners worked for years, several months on and a few months off, living their cruising dreams.

Yes, of course, we grieve for the loss to of all life, including those desperate for the most basic of opportunities, to feed their starving families. Technology must be advanced by someone. It is the luck of the families and the skill of the team assembled, including Texas Equusearch, that places the Nina search at the forefront of this breaking technology. However, certainly, it will be applied to other searches, including searches for New Zealand sailors and sailors from many countries, including those from impoverished nations.

Satellite searches have been done before in the U.S. However, to our knowledge, never have they been done in the Tasman Sea for private boats. Hence, the significance is to sailors from that region who may brave one of the toughest stretches of water known to man. Ultimately, we hope the technology develops enough to be used around the world for all people.

Thanks for your points.

Tim


----------



## lavidanueva

Everyone is entitled to their point of view, brother. You make some great points which we should address. All of us, including ALL the people with Texas Equusearch, are unpaid volunteers. Our biggest expense is for search aircraft. No one is making any money on this effort and many have donated over 1,000 hours and a lot of money. Funds come from the community.

Digital Globe has trained satellites all over the world to help people in distress. They recently used the Tomnod program in the Colorado floods, but they also go to very remote places to help those in need. As I understand it, the satellites don't change orbit, they change angle of photography. They are not taking many pics of the Tasman Sea while flying over it. I can't think of a better use for these private (not government) satellites than saving lives.

I am a sailor with my own lost at sea story. When I got into trouble I really wanted someone to help, but far outside of radio range, and not willing to pop the EPIRB and lose the investment I worked my life to have, I stuck it out. For me, it was only 7 days. I was stuck there in gale conditions with a broken rudder and crew spaced out on sea sickness drugs. As a sailor I have learned I must do everything I can to save myself. However, if I were aboard the Nina, I would want everything possible done to help. This new technology will eventually make it more cost effective and not place lives at risk giving that help. This is simple common sense.

They held a eulogy for John Glennie. It is not for me to play God and declare people dead. 

Despite the most exhaustive search in the history of New Zealand, not one scrap of evidence was found showing the Nina sank. Extensive shore line searches were performed. There is a very strong possibility the Nina is up and the crew in good health. There is lots of rain water in the Tasman and lots of fish. Fortunately, in the search team, there is a lot of faith, as well.

Thanks for the comments, perhaps we can agree to disagree.

Tim


----------



## hellosailor

DigitalGlobe apparently bought up the Tomnod operation. They also list having 11 satellites, first listing says it has sub-meter resolution and repeats the entire planet every 3 days. (Which probably means the satellite is in a north-south polar orbit, and allowing the earth to slowly rotate under it, unlike the ISS or other spacecraft that are more or less orbiting over the equator and zipping around the earth all the time.)

Given that the Nina departed a known port at a known date, that should mean DG and Tomnod can start with that place and date, identify the boat, and unless cloud cover stops them, track it from there on until at some point it either disappears, or is located.

Not an _easy _job, but actually a fairly simple one given the resources they say they can provide. No need for government or military resources at all, when there are private ones of the same caliber.

Has such a project been started then? Or has any imagery of Nina before she left port been confirmed ?


----------



## lavidanueva

Good thinking! Yes, archival footage has been checked. Nothing has been found which tracks this boat. Unless specifically tasked, the satellites don't shoot photos.

I found a photo on Google Earth of what I think is the Nina in Whangerai, NZ in December, 2012.

I can't think of a better use of US government satellites than to help US and British sailors. One day, we hope governments strapped for cash will be able to request the same of the US government which will make all sailors safer.

We all understand the old thinking in SAR at SEA searches. After so much effort, you are on your own, unless you happen to be the son of a senator or high ranking politician, and then no holds are barred.

This technology promises great advances to give sailors every chance possible when all goes wrong no matter who they are. It takes a case like this to advance the way the technology is used, which is why the families and TES have assembled ALL VOLUNTEER NASA scientists, fluid hydrologists, geophysicists, computer scientists, media people (like me), SAR experts, satellite photo reviewers and many more. One day, that which is taking a league of people to do now can be done fast with image recognition and friendly cooperation by governments. Someone in the Sailnet community will benefit.

Right now, we need the support of the sailing community to help put pressure on the US State Department, which, rather than offering help, asked for dental records. If nothing else, I personally hope we can at least prevent this indignity while an active search is in process.

Thanks for making great points and thanks to this wonderful community for supporting the search for the American treasure, the 1928 schooner, Nina, and her crew.

The enclosed photo is from Google Earth, likely a digital globe photo, of what I think is the Nina in Whangarei, NZ in December of 2012. Our tomnod images are not generally as clear. You can help us search for the Nina HERE.


----------



## wavedancer38

Dfok said:


> Please Tim, do not thank me. Let us not misunderstand each other. I totally disagree with you and all you have posted thus far.
> US Government assets (if they exist in the Tasman Sea) should not be subverted for a private search.
> Texas Equusearch is a couple guys with horses (in Texas) and a PR team....what's up with the sudden concern about Texan's abroad and alost in boats?
> Would missing Oakies or Arkansans or Haitians or Libiyans merit changing the orbits of low level US satellites?
> Would you Texans demand swerving a satellite for a lost mariner in the Bronx? Off Massachusetts? Swivel a bit to cover Nova Scotia?
> I don't think so.
> Tim - in you I do not sense a sailor's soul. Sailors let the dead be dead, counsel families to be at peace.
> Some - not the sailors - will never let souls rest as long as there is a cent to be made from the memory or the bones ( or all the better - lack of bones!). Where once were persons today lies profit.
> Do not thank me, count me among the disgusted with your efforts.
> (and there I was trying to be so polite...)


Ouch. God forbid you ever need help in your life. You can count me out.


----------



## lavidanueva




----------



## smurphny

If it were my daughter lost on that ship I would not rest a second until enough time had passed that chances of survival were ZERO. It is not 0 yet. If our government has the ability to point a f%#^ing satellite or scan with some military equipment and refuses to do so, it is simply outrageous. These are Americans.


----------



## lavidanueva

Thank you Smurphy! If it were my daughter, especially this young dynamo, I would not rest one second until there was no hope. Right now there is great hope. John Glennie who survived 119 days in a capsized trimaran on the East side of New Zealand says we should keep going. It is easy to say, 'let them rest in peace' until you are in their shoes, either on an unstable deck of a damages Nina, rolling in the waves, or the families desperate to do whatever they can to find their loved ones. Please sign our petition and help bring these sailors home! http://tinyurl.com/lt6o9wv


----------



## hellosailor

" Unless specifically tasked, the satellites don't shoot photos."
Ah, that's very different from the inference of their web site, which is that they have SO much coverage. Traditionally, image banks with a historical coverage range have had enough value so that imagery was recorded and stored in the expectation that someone would buy it in the future. I can't see that it costs a lot (of money or consumables) to simply leave the cameras on, and file the images away. It isn't as if the electronics consume fuel, or film cartridges have to be dropped until the stocks are exhausted--the way it used to be.

"I can't think of a better use of US government satellites than to help US and British sailors. "
Oh, I don't know. Let's look at how those satellites get up there. We, the taxpeons, pay money to send them up. Eventually we spend billions of dollars sending them up and maintaining them. Now one of those purposes is defense and national security, and a legitimate case can be made that disclosing ANY information about the type, quality, frequency, etc. of the images compromises security. That's an old cat and mouse game, every player knows that you try to wait for a time when there are no satellites overhead before you shuffle your cards.
Now, let's say national security is no longer an issue. What is simpler, cheaper, and more responsible? To say that everyone in the country has to ante up fifty bucks into the pot, every year, to fund one satellite for some cheapass recreational sailing hobbyists? And yes, I can be a cheapass too, I'm only saying it was their decision to go when and as they did. 

Or, should we be cruelly adult about it, and say there are six crew on the boat, every one of them could damn well chip in the same fifty bucks themselves, and buy an EPIRB? Make some commitment themselves, to using the rescue satellite system that after all HAS already been bought and paid for, for their convenience?

I can't altogether disagree with some anonymous uniform who might be saying, right now, "Where were all these concerned people before Nina left port? Why weren't they all concerned enough to crowdsource a couple of EPIRBs and a satphone for that boat?"

And if we ignore that and move forward to say "What can we do to make sure this doesn't happen again?" the answer is really simple, every vessel that departs for open waters will be required to pay a communications rescue fee, which in turn will pay for them being issued communications devices. Cheapasses will be banned from putting to sea.

That's simply being blunt about it, not intending to be cruel. Reality bites.

"Right now, we need the support of the sailing community to help put pressure on the US State Department,..."
Where were you when Coyote was lost going trans-Atlantic? If you remember that at all, you'd rethink asking the sailing community to make a total waste of resources and needless waste of State Department time and temper. You will not get the highest levels of long-standing national security policies overruled in any short timeframe.


----------



## lavidanueva

There are some long term lessons to be learned from the Nina disappearance. One is to prevent the Department of State from requesting dental records while an active search is in process. It sends the wrong message.

A second may apply to EPIRBS. However, the crew of the Grain de Soleil that went missing in the Atlantic this year had an active EPIRB and they still could not find them. The Nina has an EPIRB abaord.

As a general rule, at least commercial satellites don't shoot a lot of open water. There is nothing to see. Hence, the lack of archival footage.

Nothing changes without effort, especially the tradition of leaving sailors to their own wits because of the limited resources or limited capability of the rescue services. The search team is breaking new ground in developing this technology. If they are successful, it will save countries millions of dollars and lives too, by obviating the need to send out aircraft to do what a satellite can do more quickly. The rescue personnel will still have to go, but it makes sense they spend their efforts on actual rescues rather than eternal searches.

Some of the sailors aboard the Nina had little experience including the ability to gauge adequate safety systems. I am not saying the Nina did or din't have these systems, I am saying some of the crew had no foundation to judge. These are not people who made a choice to take the risks most sailors accept.

It is easy to forsake lives when they are not your own, or people you care about. However, until each of us is faced with a difficult situation, like these sailors and their families, it is hard to know what each of us would really do. If you were on the Nina, seasick, hungry, thirsty, struggling for life, you might have a different point of view. If this was your son or daughter, you might have a different point of view.

Thanks for your points, yes, some changes need to be made. Right now, we are concentrating on finding the boat. Later, surely, efforts will be made to make constructive changes.



Tim


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

lavidanueva said:


> It is easy to forsake lives when they are not your own,...
> Tim


No, thats not it at all. Its reality. The boat is missing since June 4th or thereabouts. Survival for a whole winter off New Zealand is so ridiculously impossible it leads some to think the only reason to keep following that path is a lack of reality, or a clarity of financial advantage.


----------



## lavidanueva

John Glennie survived 119 days at sea on the overturned Rose Noelle. He was on the East side of New Zealand. His boat went over the same day of the year as the Nina went missing, June 4th. We consult with John frequently. He says, "don't give up". 

John lived in the space of a twin bed with 18 inches of headroom along with three other sailors. When one sailor turned over the other three had to turn over with him. The outside man could only stand to be on the outside for about 4 hours. They they had to shift positions. When they ran out of food, they fished. John says if the Nina survived the big storm then the crew is alive. Clearly, the longer they are out there the tougher it gets.

Despite the most thorough search in the history of New Zealand, no wreckage was found. They did an extensive shore line search, as well.

Texas Equusearch is 100% all volunteer. All of the people involved in this search are volunteers. There are expenses, the biggest in hiring private aircraft. We work hard because we can see if John Glennie survived, why this crew can survive.

The last message sent indicated they had shredded their sails on the Nina. They had limited supplies of motor fuel aboard. If you know about the Tasman Sea you know about the reverse circulating currents and how boats get spun around and around. The Scotch Bonnet, abandoned near the last know position of the Nina, was out there for nearly six months. It was only spotted once in all that time. She came ashore with her gangway hatch and forward hatch open.

I am convinced the Nina will wash up on an Australian beach. The question is, how many survivors will there be? We want to bring all 7 home and we thank the cruising community for their support in doing that. In the end, it will benefit all sailors.

Tim


----------



## Shinook

When loved ones are lost, logic goes out the window and you almost always want to do whatever it takes to bring them home, no matter how ridiculous it may seem. 

I'm reminded of a letter I found recently among some family things. The letter was from a mother who lost her son in a B17 crash over Germany during WWII. She knew the fate of her son, but she longed to simply bring "his precious bones" home. She also complained that the US government wasn't doing enough to help locate and bring his body home, she also said that she wished she could live out her days in Germany to find her son's body. She would have done anything simply to see her son's body. You could feel the grief coming off the pages. 

There are logical fallacies with her thought process too and with her anger at the government, but at the end of the day I don't think it matters. "It's the not knowing that gets to me", "it gets worse over time", and she would have done anything to bring his body home, no matter how ridiculous it seemed to anyone else. This coming from someone that knew her son was dead, just not how or where, yet the crew of the Nina could very well be alive right now, which is a nagging thought that will follow their families until they are found alive or dead, likely the rest of their life. 

This constant berating of their efforts is childish and futile, they will make every attempt to bring them home and just want to see their loved ones again. If you don't agree with what they are doing, then so be it, but why do you insist on arguing about it like a bunch of children?


----------



## Brent Swain

When an elderly wooden boat springs a plank , or hits a container, there may not be time to send a mayday. That is why I would only go to sea in a metal boat.


----------



## lavidanueva

The Nina is sheathed in fiberglass. David Dyche made this boat his life. He is a professional mariner and spent a lot of time working on the boat. The Nina has weathered tougher storms before. Steel and aluminum are good materials but they each have their problems in the corrosive salt water. The same circulating currents we suspect are trapping the Nina also trap ocean trash, shipping containers and other debris. A collision with these would certainly present problems with any boat the size of the Nina.

However, the scenario for the Nina is fairly simple. We know her sails were shredded. We know she was under power to be going 310 degrees in the teeth of a storm. With limited fuel, she would easily be entrapped by the currents.

While there is a great deal of speculation, no one knows what happened to the Nina. If she survived the storm she was in, then there is no reason she is not floating today. Some boats take a year to float to Australia after getting caught in the reverse circulating currents of the Tasman Sea. TA few float around for eternity then are grounded in New Zealand. However, the majority take a Northwest course for Australia. The families remain hopeful, but are realistic about prospects. 

Long term survival at sea is very realistic with:
1. Shelter
2. Water
3. Food

If the Nina remains afloat she is providing shelter; frequent rain in the Tasman Sea during winter/spring is common; the boat it'self becomes a floating reef attracting fish. All that being said, it is a harsh existence, all the more reason to effect rescue as quickly as possible. It costs nothing to sign our petition asking for support from the US government, and at least, silencing their request for dental records while an active search is in progress. This basic dignity is something every person lost at sea deserves.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Shinook said:


> If you don't agree with what they are doing, then so be it, but why do you insist on arguing about it like a bunch of children?


Because the wooman in your story didn't prey upon the sentimintalty (and time and money) of others like lavidanueva is doing.

And the thought of restricitng the inteligent expression of thought by others is part of it.

Mark


----------



## smurphny

I don't understand why there is resistance to supplying dental records. Isn't that a sign that some official action may be in the offing? It's probably just a procedural issue. If government resources are going to be used, they'd want to have the dental records to i.d. any bodies that are or are NOT the crew members.


----------



## lavidanueva

Thanks for your question. The request for dental records is a procedure undertaken by the office of overseas citizens services to help people bring back the deceased from a foreign land. It is an inappropriate request when an active search is in progress because it confuses the public and relatives. 

When the families asked the US Coat Guard to help run drift modeling using data supplied the private search by the RCC-NZ, the Coast Guard said it could not run the drift modeling because the Department of State would not let them. Instead, the Department of State insists the suspended search by the RCC-NZ means the sailors are lost at sea. They confused the term 'suspended search' with a 'closed search'. Instead of helping bring sailors back alive, the only interest the Department of State has exhibited is in requesting dental records and placing road block in the path of the private search.

The DoS is supposed to advocate for Americans, not reduce the chances of developing additional leads upon which the search could be un-suspended.

Now, the DoS says it has no power over the Coast Guard; the Coast Guard says it can't move without the blessing of the DoS and New Zealand says they can't do anything until the U.S. makes a formal request for them to search for the target located on satellite. This is an administrative snafu of epic proportions and seven sailors may pay with their lives.


----------



## sailpower

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Because the wooman in your story didn't prey upon the sentimintalty (and time and money) of others like lavidanueva is doing.
> 
> And the thought of restricitng the inteligent expression of thought by others is part of it.
> 
> Mark


Mark, it appears from several threads that you have been involved with on various sailing forums lately that you have a very high opinion of your own opinion.

It also seems that your definition of intelligent in the intelligent expression of thought is that expression of thought that agrees with you.

There are lots of shades of gray in this black and white world.


----------



## capta

I think what's got my dander up on this thread more than anything is to assume 7 people on a 71' vessel are just sitting out there waiting for rescue.
Even dismasted and rudderless, in 5 months one would think some sort of jury rig could have been developed. There are certainly many, many more stories of survival at sea with people who have made their own way to safety, than the few who have not, and were rescued. The book "Once is Enough" by Miles Smeeton, saved my life, the lives of my wife and daughter and a young man named Nick, after we were capsized 3 times in a hurricane on a 65', 65 year old wooden boat. After reading that book I knew exactly what to do to cover the holes left when the hatches were torn off by the sea.
To imagine that these 7 people did not try to jury rig something to get the boat underway, amazes me. A spinnaker/whisker pole or two, or a boom, and a sail from below, deck, even a pair of oars stuck up in the air with some bed sheets could propel the boat westward at a few miles a day. Something, anything.
I can only assume that after sailing half way around the world, the captain of the Nina was a pretty competent seaman and if he loves the sea and sea stories as I do, that he has read tales of survival in the days before there was anybody to call for help.
Has anyone even taken into account the fact that the Nina could be a hundred or more miles away from their last assumed position? How far from that position was the nearest land? Could they have made any landfall in the time they have been missing at 10 miles a day? At 25?


----------



## tdw

Folks, I think it's time we called a halt to the debate. Right now we are immersed in a he said she said ever diminishing circle that is beginning to look like a rectum up which we may all disappear.

The thread is not being taken down. Merely locked for the at least the time being.


----------

