# BFS Proponent Rescued at Sea



## camaraderie

This turkey punched his EPIRB and was just picked up. 
Here's what he said before he started his passage to Hawaii with NO experience at sea.

"I acknowledge that I am incredibly inexperienced, but I think I can do this. And for some reason, I feel very strongly about doing it single-handed. (At least to Hawaii, anyways) A friend of mine summed it up as "keep the heavy side down, keep the water on the outside, don't run into stuff, and reef early". That's pretty much my plan, to be honest.
My boat is a veteran cruising boat, *and I am sure that it is up to the task of crossing oceans*, even with me at the helm, alone. I know that I don't truly know what i'm up against, but I am used to identifying and solving problems as they occur, and this is the mindset that I am taking with me. Yes, i'm sure stuff will break. And i'll fix it to the best of my abilities. .... I am not cocky, I do not think this will be an easy trip, given my lack of experience and being alone, but I truly believe that I can do anything that I truly set my mind to. "
**************
The ACTUAL experience is a bit different than the dream. 
**************
RJ,
I hoisted the sails back up and started to get going, but I have no steering. the rudder post is broken. not the linkage, but the post. it is broken. if i turn the wheel, everything works, but you can see it turning on the rudder post. it sheared off. it was old, fatigued metal i guess. i dont know. i am on a boat, 700 miles from land, WITH NO STEERING. there is nothing that i can do. i am going to call mayday and try to get rescued. i am going to be activating my EPIRB with the Unique Identification Number 2DCC56C554FFBFF. notify the coast guard with that number, and let them know it is me. I am at 28*21' N, 129*44' W. No matter which way i turn the rudder, or how hard, I loko over the side, and it's staying same position. dead ahead. boat is just rocking too. fear its going to roll over in these seas, because i am beam on to the ocean. i need rescue. this is the lowest ive ever been. i am activating epirb soon. email me right back. call the coast guard. comm still works, so i can stay in touch and wait for rescue.
i am not prepared to drift and drift through hurricane alley until i hit land. the f*&^* rudder post sheared off. there is nothing that i can do. i almost rolled over. get me rescue asap.

ronnie
2:25 PDT- tried emailing you but it wouldnt work. i have called for a rescue. there is no turning back now.

-------------------------

I called the coast guard and gave them all the information, however, they were *Already in* contact with Ronnie. The Hawaii Coast Guard said Ronnie was getting beat up pretty good, but they were talking to him. I am now waiting on a call from the San Diego Coast Guard.

-RJ
 RONNIE ACTIVATED HIS EPIRB

*******************************
And finally:

Ronnie was picked up about 30 minutes ago by a frieght ship headed to Shanghi, China. He is in good spirits but very shaken. The steering on his vessel was destroyed and he was in 20 to 30 foot seas. The official wind report was 35 to 40 knots with gusts higher. The rescue ship ran into Ron's boat on the first attempt, dismasting and crushing the front of the boat. The second attempt they snatched him with a rope and pulled him up. His leg was injured in the hoist when his solar panels smashed him in between the two vessels. It is not broken, just bruised. He has all video in tact and his laptop, which is wet. He called me from a sat phone aboard the ship and was grateful to have been rescued. He is now heading to China, but the capatain is attempting to re-route to Hawaii. I will keep you posted. The journey is not over, but it has taken a twist. One site said that the trip was no longer "eco" friendly, this may be true, but this is just the first leg!
-RJ
Yes, there are small obstacles to him continuing, like, no boat, but were working on that...
He said the mast went under water four times, but his boat did not roll. He admits he was not mentally prepared for this and is happy to be alive.
*********************
That post was from his brother. Ronnie will be crossing the Pacific to Shanghai!

Full details of the continuing saga are on their blog:
Welcome to the Open Blue Horizon | Open Blue Horizon | His,

The boat was a 1961 Palmer Johnson Bounty II
A full keel model with:
Length 40 feet 10 inches
Water line: 28 feet
Beam: 10 feet 3 inches
Draft: 6 feet
Weight: 22,500 pounds
Ballast: 11,500 pounds
Purchased for $30k.


Read the blog. Compare with Zac Sunderland....nuff said.


----------



## ckgreenman

Sounds like he needed to watch Alex's Video

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/378288-post8.html


----------



## camaraderie

Here's the current wind/waves in the area he was in. Looks like 20ft seas and 30kt. winds








That's sea height in meters so the small tan area is 6-8 meters or 20-25ft.


----------



## Delirious

> No matter which way i turn the rudder, or how hard, I loko over the side, and it's staying same position. dead ahead.


 
Well heck, even us sweet-water puddle sailors know when it is immovable "dead ahead" that's the easiest to compensate with sail trim or drogues. It's when it's gone or jambed to one side it gets tough. ;-)

God bless the folks who rescue fools.


----------



## ckgreenman

camaraderie said:


> Here's the current wind/waves in the area he was in. Looks like 20ft seas and 30kt. winds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's sea height in meters so the small tan area is 6-8 meters or 20-25ft.


Ok so why was he trying this again?


----------



## CharlieCobra

and what in this unfortunate mess makes him a BFS proponent?


----------



## jrd22

I'm glad he was rescued, but in a way I'm also glad that he had to be rescued. Crossing oceans in little boats is not a small undertaking and if he had been successful he would have shown his films to a bunch of other young people and spread the belief that all you need is a positive attitude and you can do anything. A 1961 boat should have been disassembled and inspected prior to setting off on a major ocean crossing. I seriously doubt that they dropped the rudder or replaced all the through hulls or replaced the chain plates or a thousand other things that an experienced sailor would know to do, but I could be wrong. Like I said, I'm glad he is OK, and I'm glad he won't be sending the wrong message to thousands of other young dreamers.

John


----------



## camaraderie

Here's the latest from his brother:
"Ronnie says the trip is not over, all though the story has changed a slight amount, okay, it is completely different, he still wants to sail around the world. When he gets to Hawaii we plan on scrounging up a sail boat and crew and continuing the journey. There are allot of sites talking trash about how awesome of sailors they are and how much of an idiot Ron is for doing this. I believe he could have stuck it out and suffered much longer, putting him in a much worse situation, but he did what he felt he needed to do to see tomorrow. I don't think any less of him for doing so. He has been through allot in his short life and he had a dream of sailing around the world, sipping a beer and enjoying life. He expected the ocean to be rough, but had no idea. We all make mistakes this was a big one for him. He lost his life savings, all of his possessions, and the boat. This is not an easy lesson to soak up emotionally. If he had thought about only those things he may not have been with us anymore, and for everybody that has read from the beginning and knows Ronnie personally, you can't help but love the guy. This is just another reason why we love him. Who volunteers for the Marine infantry, gets blown up in Iraq, suffers through recovery, has their dad die, tries normal life for two years, has a dream, follows his dream at all costs, prepares for an ocean passage for six months, gets into the ocean, loses their kayak, douses their cabin with gasoline, bilge pump stops working now pumping water out hourly by hand, freshwater contaminated, steering breaks, 20 to 30 foot waves, gets hit by a merchant ship, gets rescued, and is now on their way to China? "
The Situation | Open Blue Horizon | His, Vote, Have, Ronnie,

By the way...I think I found the problem:
"I was going to get a survey with haul-out, but that costs too much money. Besides, from what i've seen, every boat constantly breaks anyways, I'll take my chances on not having a survey."
Wonder how he feels about that now?


----------



## CharlieCobra

Well, at least he was smart enough to get an EPIRB. All I gotta say is better luck next time.


----------



## chucklesR

Damn, I want to sail around the world. Send me money and I'll do it as soon as I'm ready.


----------



## Omatako

I haven't read the man's blog and frankly have no interest so I'm not supporting unskilled or unqualified people going to sea and maybe he is an idiot (Jody) but two things from this thread are clear:

If he had to do this, then it's better that he does it alone and risks only his own life
A broken rudder post can happen to anybody and it wasn't his inexperience to blame for that. The suggestions that he should have been able to sail the boat with a dead ahead rudder (Delirious) thru a 20 to 30ft sea and that he should have stripped and rebuilt the entire boat (JRD22) before leaving are nonsense. I wouldn't have and neither would 95% of sailors.
If there is other info in the blog that makes the above statements accurate then I apologise but I'm still not going to bother reading it.

And, not that I am religious but "God bless the folks who rescue anybody" (Delirious).


----------



## okawbow

It takes a lot of experience and wisdom to realize you really don't know much. He will learn. Everyone starts somewhere.


----------



## Omatako

chucklesR said:


> Damn, I want to sail around the world. Send me money and I'll do it as soon as I'm ready.


Trade your Gemini for a 1961 Palmer Johnson Bounty II and you'll probably have enough cash left over for a couple of years at sea. It's all about choices.


----------



## ckgreenman

camaraderie said:


> He expected the ocean to be rough, but had no idea. We all make mistakes this was a big one for him. He lost his life savings, all of his possessions, and the boat.


Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't it have made sense to try crossing the ocean a few times to get an idea how it is BEFORE trying to do it single handed? I know I sure as hell wouldn't try it.


----------



## genieskip

Omatako said:


> [*]A broken rudder post can happen to anybody and it wasn't his inexperience to blame for that. The suggestions that he should have been able to sail the boat with a dead ahead rudder (Delirious) thru a 20 to 30ft sea and that he should have stripped and rebuilt the entire boat (JRD22) before leaving are nonsense. I wouldn't have and neither would 95% of sailors.[/LIST]If there is other info in the blog that makes the above statements accurate then I apologise but I'm still not going to bother reading it.


I beg to differ. A broken rudder can happen to anybody - true - However experienced sailors going offshore consider that possibility and plan on how to deal with it before they take off. They also make dammed sure that all vital systems (and few are as vital as steering) are in tip top shape. Anyone who has spent any time on the water would know that a boat built in '61 is going to need a careful inspection and a lot of upgrading before being anywhere near seaworthy. He wasn't going across a few miles of sheltered water. He was setting out around the world.

I completely disagree with your statement that 95% of sailors would do the same. Just not true. I would say that 95+% of the sailors I know who were planning a trip of that magnitude would spend a lot of time and a lot of money making sure they had a chance of getting to where they were going. I can't think of a single person I have ever sailed with that would be foolish enough to take off around the world on a 47 year old boat that had not been surveyed and carefully upgraded.

I am all in favor of people who want "follow their bliss", as Joseph Campbell says, but there are easier ways to commit suicide, ways that don't endanger rescuers.


----------



## Boasun

When many people sailed before there was radios and EPIRBs. They had to fend for themselves. Jury-rigged a new rudder and head for the nearest port for repairs. 
Now if you are having trouble, you holler for someone to get you out of the hole that you have dug and fell into. 
Life may have been viewed easier in the old days. But it took a stronger minded person to survive those good old days.

Oh! When I used to teach sailing; near the end of the course I would disable the rudder and see if they could steer by using the sails. And come up with another means to steer by.

These thoughts are not to be taken as a put down on the lad. Just thoughts on comparing what was then and now. 
It is a good thing that we do have EPIRBs and Radios today... And the AIS is rapidly becoming a godsend.


----------



## smackdaddy

Oh Cam you rabble-rouser you! BFS "Proponent". So does this make you a BFS Opponent?

Look - here's what I said when you first posted this story in BFS:

_"Honestly, Cam. I'm looking through his website - and this guy has quite a story. And no one can say he ain't got follow through (i.e. - cajones). Fair winds RJ. Go, man, go!

Definitely BFS."_

And I'll stand by it.

Don't forget that *very* experienced sailor Skip Allan and Wildflower (in the first few pages of BFS). Rescued in roughly the same patch of water while single-handing in similar conditions. Complete polar opposites in terms of experience and knowledge - same result. Are you chumps going to call Skip Allan names?

So - give me a break on harshing this guy all over the place. Was he in over his head? Yeah, he admitted as much. (So was Skip in those conditions.) Should he have known more? Of course - who doesn't? Would I do it? Hell no - that scares the bajeepers out of me.

BUT - he did it. And he was prepared enough to survive it - just like Skip Allan. So just let the lessons stand without all this righteous indignation. You go out big when you feel you're ready to go out big. Sometimes you're right. Sometimes your wrong.

It's all still as subjective as it was before he cast off.

(BTW - you owe me 10 bucks for hi-jacking BFS. I own the trademark.)


----------



## Stillraining

I dont have much opinion one way or the other...I admire the spirit even though you can rightly argue the preperation.

A thought that comes to my mind often though is ...How many of this kind of attempts..aka. the tin can being another one or the bottle boat with a plane fuselage straped on, would *not* be attempted if it wernt for big brothers ability to come after you...or in other words your ace in the hole so to speak.

My guess is far fewer.


----------



## runner

Stuff happens and then you die. Never be afraid to dance, sing, or chase a dream. Only your spouse, partner, dog, or your children have more priority. Falling down is not the measure. Getting back up into the saddle is! Take no prisoners youngun!


----------



## sailortjk1

smackdaddy said:


> BUT - he did it. And he was prepared enough to survive it.


Smacky,
I guess I missed something in the translation.
He did not survive with out the assistance of some very brave souls who put their lives in jepordy to go out and get him back safe...........
And, he was not preppared.

I am not sure I understand your statement.


----------



## smackdaddy

My point is that the end result was exactly the same for a guy that was UBER prepared and experienced as it was for someone that jumped into it with (by his admission) far too little of these two. The kid at least had enough safety equipment/preparation/wherewithal to be able to call in a rescue and ride/wait it out just as Skip did. At the end of the day - very few people slam Skip. He "just got caught". My hunch is that this kid is going to take a pretty vicious beating (looks like he already is) - for the exact same outcome. Why is that?

As for the brave souls - absolutely no argument there. Period. Still is absolutely right. God bless them. But it goes both ways in both situations.


----------



## sailortjk1

> Why is that?


I would guess because one had experience and one had none.
Baby steps, You have to crawl before you can learn how to walk.

I have no problem with people wanting to jump right in a go sailing, (Thats how I learned, thats how many of us learned) but to say, I have no experience in sailing and I want to sail singlehanded around the world just does not make any sense.


----------



## smackdaddy

Okay - personally, I agree with your last point there. I'm sure as hell not going to try it (at least for a few more months until I get the new cushions in my C27). That's a big, big bite to take in my opinion. But I won't harsh this guy for his decision - just as I won't harsh Skip Allan's for his.

They both went for Big Freakin' Sails - and they both got slammed. It happens. And they both are going back at it. Good on 'em.


----------



## camaraderie

First...I respect this kid. He served his time in the Marines, was grievously wounded and I thank God for kids like him. He had/has a dream to sail around the world and do it singlehanded for at least major portions. He wanted to go now rather than later in life. No problem with that either. 

What I do NOT respect is his total lack of preparation and HIS lack of respect for the sea and what it takes to both prepare yourself and the boat. Remember...his first sail single handed was on a Hobie Cat in protected waters just 6 months ago. He disregarded all the standard advice about buying a boat and getting a survey. He never had the boat hauled and 3 days out on his maiden voyage to Hawaii no less, his self steering broke and he was complaining about 25 knots of wind being too much. 
He was simply unprepared for the voyage. You wanna sail around the world without any experience? Great...learn to sail. Get advice on your boat choice and have it checked out throroughly. Test yourself and the boat in discrete jumps...sail to Catalina, sail in a gale offshore, shakedown all your equipment, head down the coast to Baja and then back up to windward. Then plan your first REAL voyage on a reach...not a bash. Work up to it and then go once you are seasoned and know your boats capabilities. 
Sure, anyone can lose a rudder...but it is less likely when you get a survey and when you don't assume that a missing zinc simply needs to be replaced. 

I have no problem with his punching the EPIRB. Unlike some others, he EARNED the right to be rescued when he put his life on the line for us. 
I do wish he had had the sense to respect the sea and prepare himself better. This should serve as a cautionary tale for other dreamers... by all means, live your dream...but the sea does not suffer those who fail to prepare.


----------



## smackdaddy

You know. I think that was very well said. 

Lesson learned: Prepare as much as you possibly can and realize the sea is a very unforgiving place. And keep the EPIRB handy. Done.

Now can we get back to talking about how to prepare for and deal with BFS instead of belittling it? You're sucking precious views off my thread, dude. Think of my lost royalties.


----------



## AllThumbs

I wonder if he would have made it if his boat had not broken. He was sick of sailing by the 3rd day, while his boat was still working.

Eric


----------



## AllThumbs

Another question I have is are those conditions typical for that area, or extreme?


----------



## CharlieCobra

It depends on the time of year. That would be pretty normal for this time of year.


----------



## KeelHaulin

AllThumbs said:


> Another question I have is are those conditions typical for that area, or extreme?


Typical. Worse in the winter. Sailing in the protected waters SE of Pt Conception is benign in comparison to the offshore conditions that you will get to the West. Usually that sort of wind/wave condition is to the North of Baja but looks like it was further South this week.

I think the decisions made by this guy were just plain stupid. He deserves a nomination for the Darwin Award. When you decide to set sail around the world without even so much as hauling the boat out; that really says something about how many brain cells a person has. But even if he surveyed it the problem with the rudder might not be seen. Which is why MOST people who set off to sail across oceans usually drop their rudder and inspect or replace it (especially on a 47 year old boat); put in new thru-hulls, check water tanks for leaks, replace fuel tank, re-power, re-rig, new sails, check/inspect windvane, etc. etc. I have more respect for the guy who was rolled last year in the southern ocean (a little; not a lot).

While SimonV did not completely go through his boat before setting off to Australia; he made sure things were working well and went through the boat to check for anything that should be repaired/upgraded prior to setting off (replaced upper shrouds, added second fuel filter, tested windvane, added tow generator, practiced sailing singlehanded, etc.) and the boat he bought had recently been cruised to mexico, HI and back. So he could be reasonably confident that the steering systems were good.

To compare this guy with Skip Allan is absurd. Allan has made several passages from SF to HI and back in the singlehanded trans-pac on an extremely well prepared boat; and I'm sure he probably sailed it crewed prior to that. The conditions he got into were way more severe and he battled it for several days with the boat in full control before even considering abandoning. The wind/wave conditions were worse, and he was looking at 3 more days of it; in addition to the possible loss of control with only a tillerpilot to keep his much smaller craft in control (running under bare poles). The decision he made was based on availability of a rescue; not the outright need for it. His decision was a responsible one given the possibility that the boat might not hold together for another 3 days in detiorating conditions.


----------



## CharlieCobra

Two things, I'm dropping the rudder on Oh Joy just because I need to know it's kosher. I would NOT be sailing for Hawaii this late in the year. Remember folks, Hawaii doesn't have really big waves until the Winter comes. I don't think this kid checked the weather very well or he'd have seen that the Pacific low is further South than normal. That and there's a NASTY Hurricane off Baja right now. Not the time to sail SW from San Diego.


----------



## Giulietta

Well...I was going to say a few things..but I decided not to...

Once again, Larry the Cable guy takes to sea.....I don't care what he did before, he could even have saved his battalion in a war...I don't care....

many priests dress like priests, many rape young boys...the profession doesn't make one good or bad....

Let me just ask this...only because it goes in the minds of many mothers out there....

Let me ask you this...

Suppoose..just imagine for an instance....You are a father of a son, that chose to be a USCG diver, or Heli pilot.....

(Just wear the shoes of this father...if only for 3 minutes...)..

Your beloved son, goes to call a mayday by a BOZO like this....(yes BOZO..because even trying hard, a clown can't be that good)..and dies.....

What would you think??? what do you say???

I say..LET THEM DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These idiots don't deserve the bodies they occupy....God took Courtney from us..and spares this f***g IDIOT?????

There..I had more to say, but I don't.....


----------



## CharlieCobra

Jeez, tell us how ya REALLY feel.


----------



## bubb2

Alex, I don't understand most things anymore. What I don't understand the most about this guy is he was a Marine. He was trained that his life depended on his equipment and gear. You check your weapon everyday and the boat should have been checked that closely also. He took off with no survey or rebuild on a 47 year old boat.

I don't want to see people like this die for their stupidity. However, I do think it was justice the freighter hit his boat on the first pass. It will be some time before he goes to sea again.


----------



## sailaway21

smackdaddy said:


> You know. I think that was very well said.
> 
> Lesson learned: Prepare as much as you possibly can and realize the sea is a very unforgiving place. And keep the EPIRB handy. Done.
> 
> Now can we get back to talking about how to prepare for and deal with BFS instead of belittling it? You're sucking precious views off my thread, dude. Think of my lost royalties.


Therein the whole problem with BFS as I see it. What's this crap about keeping the EPIRB handy? Where's all that talk about the size of your stones? EPIRB emissions shrink stones. Wanna show some stones, leave the EPIRB on the dock and then prepare as if your life depended upon it.

Having an EPIRB on board doesn't make your boat safer, it just makes it easier to find you when either you, the boat, or both fall apart. This guy was using it like the Mommy button, push it for Mommy to make it better once you realize you're in over your head. BFS? Big ***** Stupid, in this case.

I am glad for this kid's service to our country but I'm not willing to cut him even the slack Cam does. This kid prepared as if he had a safety blanket wrapped around himself.


----------



## Rockter

Someone once said that success is 1/3 boat, 1/3 crew, and 1/3 luck.
A failed rudder certainly caught him with the worst of the show-stoppers. I would have checked the ship's rudder carefully. That one is a big priority.


----------



## sailordave

You know, I recall about a year ago people here (and other forums) were getting ripped b/c they were trash talking Heather for her plan to circumnavigate. And look how THAT turned out. In fact I heard she's gone back into the Real Estate business (unconfirmed).

This guy was just plain stupid. Who the hell thinks you can learn sailing on the job, so to speak?


----------



## AjariBonten

sailordave said:


> Who the hell thinks you can learn sailing on the job, so to speak?


Well, I think you CAN learn sailing "on the job" (in fact I think that is the only way you can learn it)

But my god, LEARN it!
I too plan on circumnavigating someday (don't we all, really?)

BUT prepare, learn, simple baby steps; and if you never progress to the stage where ALL the pieces are there, adjust the dream.

This guy was deaf, dumb and blind; or suicidal.

I learned more in my first two hours surfing this site than he seems to have learned in his 6 months of "preparation".


----------



## ckgreenman

sailordave said:


> Who the hell thinks you can learn sailing on the job, so to speak?


That's the best way to learn. However, single handed circumnavigating IS NOT the time to be learning.


----------



## camaraderie

His latest post:
Wednesday night at 11pm, 
my wind vane's rudder post broke, so I lost self-steering for good and hove to. In the morning, I 
attempted to get going again, but my boat's rudder post was broken. This is not a problem that my emergency 
tiller could have fixed. There was no way I could find to regain steerage of my boat, and I was 
effectively adrift in rough seas, over 800 miles from land in any direction. Alone. Winds were still 
30-35 knots with rough seas. My starboard spreader hit the water twice, and was ripped off by the freight ship later on.....
For more go here: Friday October 10, 2008- 1:52 PM not san diego time | Open B


----------



## TSOJOURNER

Cam, I completely agree I have been checking the Zac Sunderland blog daily and he is truly amazing and a very competent seaman, that pirate situation last week was pretty hairy.

Gui, didn't you make a video a while ago about steering with the sails? Joshua Slocum barely touched the helm on Spray, he would only hand steer when an emergency required him too. In fact he once 2,000 miles on a westward passage across the Pacific (the same passage this fool attempted) without touching the tiller. Granted in the fine fishing sloops of the history this was easier with huge long sail plans relative to the LOA, and long full keels. However every seaman should be able to steer with the sails. Infact, I think this guy had a long full keel in his boat.

Granted with motors, electronics, and all sorts of other modern contraptions, learning to steer with the sails is last on our list. However we are sailors, we need to learn all aspects and tenets of sailing first, and put the bloody rest of it second.

-Spencer


----------



## sailordave

ckgreenman said:


> That's the best way to learn. However, single handed circumnavigating IS NOT the time to be learning.


That is what I MEANT. Sorry for not making it a little more clear...

IOW get a hell of a lot of experience and GRADUALLY work your way up to the more difficult stuff.

You wouldn't go down a dbl Black Diamond slope the first time on skis would you? Or try to do a triple jump first time on skates?


----------



## jrd22

Omatako- IMHO preparing a boat for a circumnavigation should include going over every system on the boat and repairing/replacing as necessary. I don't think (hope) many would regard this as "nonsense". I believe the results of this failed attempt make my point.

John


----------



## dell30rb

His obvious disregard for the power of the elements is just due to his lack of experience. I took two friends who have only sunfish sailing experience on a trip up the ICW this summer. I scheduled extra time in the trip, and spent two days before we left port teaching them a couple knots, how to properly use a winch, tacking, gybing, reefing. I practically drilled and quizzed them on everything, and they had a little attitude of "Wtf, why are we doing all of this, the weather is supposed to be nice, lets just start the trip already". However we of course got caught in a couple nasty squalls... and they quickly learned why I insisted on them knowing all of these things. 

There is a scene in the movie "Wind" that I think applies to this. There is a skipper and an engineer arguing over a race boat design. The skipper wants the boat to be more stout and heavier, and the engineer wants lighter and faster. The engineer mocks the skipper saying "ooh... the wind is so strong and the waves are sooo big". I think the point of this is that there is no way someone can understand the power of the elements until they've had their boat blown around a couple times. Take someone who thinks otherwise and put them on a boat in a really nasty squall, and you'll change their mind real fast.


----------



## ckgreenman

sailordave said:


> That is what I MEANT. Sorry for not making it a little more clear...
> 
> IOW get a hell of a lot of experience and GRADUALLY work your way up to the more difficult stuff.
> 
> You wouldn't go down a dbl Black Diamond slope the first time on skis would you? Or try to do a triple jump first time on skates?


Damn straight.


----------



## sailaway21

When I was in my early twenties I owned a VW Beetle with bias ply tires that I regularly drove at it's terminal velocity, which was somewhere between 80-85 mph depending on meteorological factors. Experience has shown that what I was doing was risky alleviated only by the fact that the quick reaction timing of youth and the possibility of whatever broke might not be catastrophic in nature resulting only in walking home. I, like all youth, had no regard for what the actuarial tables expressed clearly. Should I encourage others to act as I did? Or should I acquaint them with what I now know so much better? You can make the sailing analogy all by yourselves.


----------



## hellosailor

Remember, Cam, they want to SELL THE ADVENTURE. And what could be more exciting a way to start, than total failures and a dramatic rescue at sea?

Oh, wait, excuse me, my cynical Evil Twin Brother posted that.

I was going to say, the gods protect madmen and fools. They had a little fun with this one, took some of his money, and then said "Too small, throw him back!"

I've done my share of foolish things, the gods have also been kind enough to let me live through 'em. I don't think I've ever quite tempted them on THAT scale, though.


----------



## Omatako

Some of this is tongue-in-cheek, some not. You figure it out which.

There is a perception here that when you drop the rudder and see nothing wrong with it and reinstall it that it will be kind and, knowing the trouble you've gone to, won't break. Rudders break on new boats too. This rudder probably never broke because of a structural defect, it probably broke because the sailor's inexperience allowed a wave to push the boat astern with an uncontrolled helm.

If you had to "usually drop their rudder and inspect or replace it (especially on a 47 year old boat); put in new thru-hulls, check water tanks for leaks, replace fuel tank, re-power, re- rig, new sails, check/inspect windvane, etc. etc." then one would assume that you've enough money to buy a better boat. This process is probably worth about 3 times what this man paid for the boat.

He did not survive with out the assistance of some very brave souls who put their lives in jepordy to go out and get him back safe........... Give me a break. A bloody great ship who diverted from their nearby passage, these guys probably saw this rescue as their comic relief to break the boredom of their trip. All credit to them for the job done but the above description contains huge poetic license. Nobody on this ship was in any form of danger at any time.

The preparation steps described that Simon V undertook (he probably did a bit more) are superficial at best. I'm driven to speculate whether, if he had been caught in a storm and lost his steering in very trying conditions and had to be rescued, he would still be held as the sailing hero that he is by many on this forum. Or would he have been classified as idiot, fool, lunatic and a range of other unfriendly expletives.

And I also wonder how many of the clever, sanctimonious responses in this thread come from people who have actually seen blue horizon for 360 degrees, i,e, sailed out of sight of land. Maybe there is enough fear out there to keep a whole lot of them in front of their keyboards spouting the vitriolic garbage seen in this thread. Oh no, that's right, I forgot, one of them is about to try his first ocean crossing. One of them is finally succumbing to the sense of adventure and sailing to a nearby island.

OK so the guy was very inexperienced and he stuffed up. There is a skilled sailor somewhere in the world just about every day that gets rescued. They're lauded here as heroes and everyone feels desperately sorry for them. But because this man is inexperienced, makes mistakes and does something that many in this thread wish they had the balls for, we have got down as far as *wishing him dead*!!!???!!!

I hope I never have to rely on you lot for SAR.


----------



## sailaway21

Omatako said:


> OK so the guy was very inexperienced and he stuffed up. There is a skilled sailor somewhere in the world just about every day that gets rescued. They're lauded here as heroes and everyone feels desperately sorry for them. But because this man is inexperienced, makes mistakes and does something that many in this thread wish they had the balls for, we have got down as far as *wishing him dead*!!!???!!!


I don't laud either class of sailor as heroes. But then, I'm rather sparing in my dispensing of that accolade. For instance, Courtney is a heroine because she had no choice in her situation and responded with valor, humility, and a concern for others first. These single-handers conducting oceanic passage-making are concerned with no one but themselves and their goals. That's fine as far as it goes but their status as heroic can be questioned when the advisability of their venture, a purely optional venture, is examined.

The difference between the two classes of sailor is that one was foolishly ignorant and the other took a calculated risk that failed; neither were heroic in any sense of the word. The only way that I might use the word heroic regarding these types of crossing might be in the case of the person who first attempted what appeared to be the impossible. Imitators since then all search for some new wrinkle that imparts that slight difference to their efforts implying the potential for heroic events. It's mostly balderdash.

I'll take the time to respond to the efforts of the merchant ship rescuing the young man. It's obvious that, like the reliance on an EPIRB, that the above poster has no conception of the economics of merchant ship operation. Once again, someone relied on the law of the sea for rescue, and while the risk to the ship as expressed may be hyperbole, the economic losses incurred were not. I suppose it would be bad form for the shipping company to forward an invoice for lost productivity in the amount of some tens of thousands of dollars. Not to ignore the fact that the merchant ship is not generally well equipped to conduct rescue at sea operations and there's always the potential for loss of life or injury when doing so.

I'm neither for, nor against, these passages being made. What repels me is the lack of self-sufficiency and the unwillingness to accept the fact that these people are willingly involving others in their efforts involuntarily and unknowingly. Why should I or others fund SAR efforts for an optional exercise?


----------



## Stillraining

Well said Andre


----------



## Omatako

sailaway21 said:


> These single-handers conducting oceanic passage-making are concerned with no one but themselves and their goals. That's fine as far as it goes but their status as heroic can be questioned when the advisability of their venture, a purely optional venture, is examined.


Sway, at no time did I or do I try to paint these cowboys as heroes, especially not the foolish ones and I don't for a moment classify the subject person as anything but foolish. I just take issue with the attitude expressed on this forum that berates anything other than copy-book process. "If you don't do it my way, then it's no damn good". And the invective disgorged in this thread is offensive to me.



sailaway21 said:


> It's obvious that, like the reliance on an EPIRB confused: ), that the above poster has no conception of the economics of merchant ship operation.


I am very aware of the costs involved but we're not talking of cost. We're talking of the danger to the ship and it's crew. If the captain of that vessel at any time thought the safety of his ship would be jeopordised by effecting the rescue, he would have switched his radio off and sailed on by. He went to the rescue because he could.

We all have an expectation that when things turn to custard we will have someone rescue us. If we didn't we wouldn't waste money on EPIRBs. But when someone responds to a rescue they don't first establish whether the people needing rescue were fools. Or whether they're wealthy enough to compensate for the costs. I wouldn't and I trust you wouldn't. If the crew of that freighter had their ship founder, they would also not expect their rescuer to levy a bill. Nor would they expect their potential rescuer to ask what went wrong before committing to the rescue. Why should anybody else, fool or no?


----------



## Delirious

Well, belive it or not even on the Greal Lakes 60 to 65% of the surface water is out of sight of land for 360º. And even relatively large, modern ships have problems (i.e. the 711 ft Edmund Fitzgerald in 1975). We can get waves that don't seem bad in the telling - 10 ft seas - but they may be only 60 ft between peaks with breakers out in the middle of nowhere. Try making an upwind trip with your bow buried up to the chainplates in the trough every 30 seconds, about stopping you dead, and your rudder half out of the water as you scend the peaks, or downwind with following breaking waves on you that fill the cockpit. We have different conditions - "smaller", but just as testing.

Bless his heart for being a marine; or any serviceman or woman for that matter. But if I showed up as a new recruit in his unit with a Hawaiian shirt and Tevas and started walking down the middle of Kyber St. in East Bug Nut, Afghanistan wouldn't he have konked me on the head with the butt of his rifle for endangering the whole unit by being a fool? And been rightly justified in doing so?

Yep. He went out and did it, or at least tried, and that's a good thing. But is he brave or just foolhardy? Is punching the "reset" button on the E.P.I.R.B. admitting defeat or just taking the easy out?

But I'll grant him credit that he did try. Teddy Roosevelt had some great thoughts on that:



> *"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checked by failure...than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."*





> *"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."*


----------



## sailaway21

Andre,
I'm advancing the notion that were not rescue something that these people think can be reliably counted upon, due to the use of EPIRB's and the fact that the law of the sea dictates that we not ignore their plight, fewer of them would take to the sea so unprepared or so cavalierly.

I question the glory of single-handing when it's largely a been there, done that field. I have this odd notion that a properly manned boat is safer than an undermanned boat. I'm not saying that single-handing is inherently unsafe, though it certainly can be and the young lad might be an example of it.

A previous poster advanced the idea that the rescuing ship and her crew might be at risk. My point was that they inherited an economic burden. What is true for both points is that the boat being rescued placed an unwitting second party in a position to sustain economic loss and potential human loss for exactly what? I call such actions irresponsible. I hold a measure of respect for the Pardey's since they acknowledge their actions by not carrying an EPIRB.

My point in this thread, and other's like it, is that the promotion of ideas that you'll have fall back options at sea is a dangerous one. And the idea that society is supposed to provide you with those options without prior consultation is rather presumptuous, don't you think? Perhaps there should be a life-saving and rescue insurance policy required for such voyages to defray the costs of those who get the privilege of bailing out such dilettantes. Certainly the premium of such a policy would be determined by the manning level, the route, the vessel, and the time of year of intended voyage.

We always responded to distress calls. Unfortunately the vast majority of them were the result of obvious stupidity on the rescued's part. "We knew we had a little problem with _fill in the blank_ before we left", is a common refrain.


----------



## jrd22

Omatako- Not really sure where you're coming from here. I don't think you really believe that someone should set out across the Pacific, alone, inexperienced, and in a 47 year old boat that isn't in the best of shape; that doesn't sound like you from your other posts.
I'm all for encouraging people to test their limits, but not in a foolhardy way that might get them and others killed. Everybody has a different idea about what the priorities are for preparing a boat for offshore use; some replace chainplates, standing rigging and thru hulls, others install a killer sound system, and others buy every piece of safety gear that's available. But wouldn't you agree that a young, inexperienced guy in an old boat that he probably didn't have a lot of money to spend on heading out in October across the Pacific is stacking the odds pretty heavily against success? In the US there has been a disturbing trend in the younger generation to "just do it", and in a lot of cases people get hurt, or worse, doing incredibly stupid things. Ronnie was planning to sell his film of his "adventure", and as far as I'm concerned it would have been the wrong message-"I didn't know what I was doing, bought a cheap old boat, headed out by myself for Hawaii, and you can do it too!". 
I have very limited blue water experience myself, but I've never felt that was a requirement for having some common sense.


----------



## camaraderie

Maybe we should have license requirements before you're allowed to buy an EPIRB?


----------



## sailaway21

camaraderie said:


> Maybe we should have license requirements before you're allowed to buy an EPIRB?


You know how far that one would go, don't you?

If we the sailing community think that an EPIRB makes a boat safer, what are we to expect the non-maritime community to think? We increasingly live in a world where we expect to conduct our lives in a government assured safe manner. We drive down the road in relative safety free to ignore the physics of what we're actually doing. And when something goes horribly wrong, and those physics reassert themselves in the most violent of fashions, we assume that someone or something must be to blame.

We take the same attitude with us on board our boats ignoring the fact that, as we venture offshore, we are increasingly in a world where mother nature sets the rules and dispenses here version of justice. People who do not take these risks seriously are of a type who think that viewing a polar bear within the confines of a zoo is the same as being with that same bear on an ice floe. I'm not at all sure why I should mourn their rapid educational experiences that result.


----------



## runner

To those that don't understand jumping, fully aware of the risk of losing bigtime, then by all means go to your rest having never jumped if that is your choice! Leave the rest of us alone when we do please. For the folks that are worried about the poor rescue folks, you make me laugh almost too hard to read or type. The rescue folks would have paid for the chance to try to rescue him. They aren't accountants either! 
If the choice is to dance or go home wishing you had danced to forever spend your days thinking about what might have been when you lay your head down at night, then I choose to dance. Yes, I fully expect to die dancing. That is the final victory. Going out doing the dream one way or another! The kid has some lumps and some questions now that an older hand can answer, but so far the dream is still alive! 
Do you realize that young boys are afraid to climb ladders and trees these days, and that the fear follows them into adult life? Kids can't fight at school anymore so they meet somewhere without supervision in packs later that evening and two of them die to keep some kid from losing a fight he may have started in a safe place with supervision right there! Some people are ignorant enough to call that progress!! There are hundreds of examples of where such thinking leads to. My best friends from school all met me while trying to tear each other down, and we laugh about it to this day!. To see such things lost to those worried about what might happen, but too blind to see the actual results is maybe the biggest crime ever perpetrated against the people of our nation. We all must live as sheep or we are crazy and must be stopped today! 
I spent some time walking the US when I was young with all my possesions in a bag. It was a glorious time. Got a few scars to show for it, and every single one is a treasured memory. Would I do it again looking back? Youy bet, and foir longer this time!
That youngum knows things he did not know before. He now has questions that the older folks can answer. Just because he learned those things some way other than in a book does not make him stupid, irresponsible, crazy, wrong, or any of the other negatives being thrown around here. It just means he chose to dance without lessons. Not much on training wheels myself! 
Stuff happens, but then you die. Sounds like learning to enjoy the stuff part is in order!


----------



## artbyjody

There is one woefully mis-guided fact here. The gent that went had money. Those HD cameras do not come cheap, and he has other toys galore etc - read his blog. The fact he did not get a survey, or do any real investigation on the mechanical systems / rigging of the boat was one of pure decision not due to lack of financial ability. As a matter of fact - look at the fact he had an EPIRB, SAT phone, etc. They are not exactly inexpensive. 

The "jumping analogy" - doesn't quite cut it here either. Prior to each jump there is a tremendous amount of checks and double checks performed on the equipment (consider that equipment the boat). You wouldn't willingly jump if you knew that the release was stuck or had not been inspected prior to your jump (by someone else as well as yourself). If something was to happen - what is the first thing investigators ask to see or inspect - the gear. Nor should one take a boat out for a trans-oceanic voyage without doing the same - that is just common sense, something lacking in this adventure all together.

This gent went out without the knowledge of even basing his start on the weather patterns and projected windows. He actually had the gear on board to get that information but like most of us that do have it, probably didn't really know what to do with it perhaps. In fact reading his launch blog - he left early because the tv crew had to go and if he wanted to be on the 7 oclock news...

Comparing him to Simon either is a no-go either. Simon if you recall - spent a heck of alot of time online here asking questions and refitting the boat. He tried out his back-ups I do believe - bought spares, and even delayed going to fix mechanical issues. Big difference in preparedness and that is 90% of the battle.

The good news out of this all, is that these EPIRBs do work (nice knowing as I have one as well), and it was not too long ago that there was a fiasco about whether or not they really do. 

Personally, I am all for EPIRBs. I have a mast mounted one as well as two personal - go anywhere ones on board. I do not believe they are "On Star" push button at any time type of gear. They are there for when all else absolutely dictates the need to save the life of the crew or myself. 

You know in a recent race , when I determined that we didn't have the level of crew to handle the 30+ knot winds and we doused the sails. I couldn't get the engine started without tinkering. It took no less than 15 minutes for one of my regular (still learning crew) to ask, "Can I call the Coast Guard". My answer was an emphatic NO, because we were not in a life threatening situation as we still could go by storm jib alone. This is relevant, because this is illustrates the mindset - do it and if it goes wrong, someone will get me. 

The only real pluses to this one was the fact this wasn't a advertised for donations kinda trip like that gal on the East coast did. None the less doesn't make it any different than that particular instance either.


----------



## jrd22

Runner- I'm having a hard time correlating your experience of walking around the country with going offshore with no experience. Most of us learn to walk at an early age so we are all fairly experienced at it. Sailing across oceans would seem to be in a slightly different category altogether. If someone had as many years of sailing experience as you had walking when you did your "dance" I wouldn't have a problem with them heading offshore . Sailing off like Ronnie did is no different than someone with a couple of sessions at a climbing gym attempting to solo El Capitan, and the chance of being successful are about the same. People do enough stupid things on their own, myself included, I don't see the need to advocate or promote it.

John


----------



## tenuki

Reading that blog link reminds me of a reviewer talking about the movie 'Kung Fu Panda'.

"The movie recommends believing, despite all evidence to the contrary."


----------



## runner

What you are having trouble with is the fact that someone did something in a different manner than you would have chosen. That is why I have problems with the attitudes displayed by many people here. 
No one is willing to get out of everyone else's way these days. I attribute peoples insistance on interfering in other peoples lives as a symptom of them having none of their own to become involved in. I also believe this is why so few people seem to understand "Dancing". Too few are ever placed in situations where they are forced to learn their own limits and become comfortable in situations where those limits may be tested again. I am a fighter. Spending time in a ring kicking my buddy in the head and being kicked back was and is "FUN". Of course I am at play in that situation. I have a preference for winning, but losing is ok also if I use my skills and lose trying. I don't think many folks ever test their own limits far enough to even understand being at play while trying to keep that 220 gorrilla from kicking your brains out!
Most of the responses here are from an activity level of work over shadowed by rules written by an insurance accountant. If I want to work, worry, or live risk free in a zero accident mentality culture while I drive from air conditioner to air conditioner in an air coinditioned car, I don't need an ocean or even a sailboat! 
The story here is a young man jumping and learning. Nothing more or less. While his head still has fresh lumps, he is teachable hopefully! To the person that said that I had been walking all my life, so I was ready for the walkabout challenge, I have no words to even express how wrong that is. I fully understand the perspective tho, since I believed pretty much the same thing before I ever camped for three days under an overpass in the middle of nowhere during crazy cold rains, before having been in places where I identified with the mice hiding in the walls hoping not to be caught by the monsters, and before being cornered by the monsters, and having to come out of the corner over them at whatever cost to survive.
Walkabout has shoals, pirates, hywaymen, and reefs also!


----------



## seabreeze_97

*Planning.*

I wonder, if there were no epirbs, and the only guarantee was that there would be no rescue, how many dreamers would actually try, and of them, how many would really plan properly. I mean, it's not like there's no information on the subject. This guy had (3) two-wheeled vehicles on a 41ft boat. It would appear he was more focused on not walking than not sinking.


----------



## Stillraining

Lots of good arguments here on both sides.

I was once told "Ignorance is curable stupidity is not"

I have been guilty of the former many times in my life.

If this young gent purchases another 50+- year old vessel and sets out exactly in the same manner of attitude of preparation then IMHO he falls in the latter category..until then in my book he is in good company with me in life learning as he goes..

I wish him well... and if I had to make an educated guess ..I'd bet his documentary if you would want to call it that of his forthcoming adventure will surly humbly expose his folly in not learning more and send the right message to future dreamers of the sea. Not the other way around.

I could be wrong , I hope not


----------



## seabreeze_97

I totally understand his folly on over-packing. I wrestle with packing even an overnight bag. There's always the "just-in-case" or "what if?" situation. Still, I hope he steps back and studies the other web pages and documentaries of those already in the "club" as well as those that failed.


----------



## Giulietta

While I am not against anyone wanting to pursue their dream or "jumping", I really wished the ones jumping, at least prepared minimally for the jump...at least see if there is water in the pool..

Runner, go look at the mothers, wives and children of the ones bellow...

Joao Trabuco, 43
Carlos Souza Pinto, 41
Alberto Pires Lopes,52
Fernanado Santos, 25
diamantino Lima, 37


yes..they paid.....as you say....they paid indeed.....more than you will ever can afford....or imagine

...the idiot they were saving survived...everyone told him not to do it....but no..he was a stubborn "jumper"...

I'm done here..I really am.....this place's not for me


----------



## tdw

I confess I find it hard to believe that anyone takes off across an ocean without first doing a fair bit of coastal stuff. I also do find it a bit odd that basic inspection of major components wasn't carried out before heading off.

Thing is when you look at the "old guys" who have become our legends many of them went out in much the same fashion in old leaky crates. The ones who made it back were lionised the ones who didn't were never heard of again. Even some of the greats , Slocum e.g., eventually went down.

EPIRBS changed everything. A whack job like Bullimore eg, would have drowned in the the middle of the Southern Ocean or slightly north thereof, if it hadn't been for his EPRIB but like this fella he had an EPIRB so SAR were duty bound to go and look for him.

To me that is the big difference from the old days and why everyone should be more careful and better prepared before they set out on some silly adventure. Oh and yes I do consider sailing alone or indeed in any short handed small craft across an ocean a silly adventure. Not a stupid adventure, not an irresponsible adventure but yeah, in the grand scheme of things, silly. I hope to do such a silly thing myself some day soon.

Hope I don't end up dishonourably mentioned in a thread such as this.


----------



## Stillraining

I was dishonorably discharged a couple weeks ago...youll be in good company...


----------



## tdw

Stillraining said:


> I was dishonorably discharged a couple weeks ago...youll be in good company...


I been called a dishonourable discharge ..


----------



## Stillraining

tdw said:


> I been called a dishonourable discharge ..


NOT YET...

I was referring to me...you ninny...


----------



## SEMIJim

runner said:


> What you are having trouble with is the fact that someone did something in a different manner than you would have chosen.


No, what some of us are having trouble with is that he chose to do it having no off-shore experience and apparently not making even a minimal effort to ensure his boat was in suitable condition. What some of us are having a problem with is his stupidity. Sure he could have been caught-out even if he'd been adequately prepared. But he wasn't adequately prepared and, even worse, he knew it before he left the dock.

Jim


----------



## camaraderie

Giulietta said:


> Well...I was going to say a few things..but I decided not to...
> 
> Once again, Larry the Cable guy takes to sea.....I don't care what he did before, he could even have saved his battalion in a war...I don't care....
> 
> many priests dress like priests, many rape young boys...the profession doesn't make one good or bad....
> 
> Let me just ask this...only because it goes in the minds of many mothers out there....
> 
> Let me ask you this...
> 
> Suppoose..just imagine for an instance....You are a father of a son, that chose to be a USCG diver, or Heli pilot.....
> 
> (Just wear the shoes of this father...if only for 3 minutes...)..
> 
> Your beloved son, goes to call a mayday by a BOZO like this....(yes BOZO..because even trying hard, a clown can't be that good)..and dies.....
> 
> What would you think??? what do you say???
> 
> I say..LET THEM DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> These idiots don't deserve the bodies they occupy....God took Courtney from us..and spares this ****** IDIOT?????
> 
> There..I had more to say, but I don't.....


Giu has asked me to jump in here with a bit more explanation about what he meant and where he is coming from on this issue. He has received some PM's that were highly critical of the "let them die" message and assumed things that were not true about his feelings. So...here goes my attempt to clarify. 
1. Giu supports open ocean voyaging and single handing by those who have competence and have taken care to prepare as best they can. No one can prepare for everything...but an effort should be made to minimize the risk in so far as is possible. 
2. This guy did very little to prepare his boat or himself for the voyage he contemplated. As such he had no respect for the sea and devalued his own life and the lives of others. 
3. Giu LOST three friends in 1991 to a similar incident. A sailor with similar lack of knowledge and preparation attempted to enter Lisbon harbor in a gale after being warned that the harbor was CLOSED. His boat capsized and Giu's friends went out to save him in a small boat and lost THEIR lives while the "captain" survived. 
4. It is in the context of #3 above that Giu says "let them die". Those who go to sea without respect and having been warned should be left to die or survive on their own before they are left to endanger the lives of others. 
5. An EPIRB is an easy "out" for these folks and even though no one risked their life in this instance due to a nearby ship...it could just have easily been a situation where someone else WAS placed in a situation where their life was at risk by this guy.

Giu does not say..."don't do rescues at sea"...just, don't rescue the idiots. 
Giu would require anyone going to sea to past competency standards as they do in Portugal. He makes the point that Americas lack of such standards results in a lot of these type voyages. 
*************
OK...I hope I have more accurately captured Giu's thoughts and intent here. If not, I'm sure he'll let me know!


----------



## Boasun

Well if you let them die at that early age. You will never be bothered by any children that he may have sired. For they would have inheired his propensity to do stupid things.


----------



## runner

So, some of his friends or aquaintances followed their own beliefs and rules. They tried to help someone and paid with their lives. 
You may have missed the fact that they did this because they believed it was the right thing to do. That they fell doing what they believed was correct and was required of themselves to lay their heads down on their pillows at night at peace with themselves. They were the jumpers in this story! 
The anquish and pain expressed here over the incident is a reflection of the pain of those that did not go with them, not their pain. They died dancing to a tune they believed in, and in my way of thinking, they should be celebrated and honored. My guess is that they would do it again, because that is what those who follow their beliefs do. I hope their loved ones find the peace they need to accept their choice. To blame the pilot of the boat in trouble is simply a reaction to their loss. It dishonors the fallen heros efforts making it appear that they died doing something frivolous or dumb. If you had asked them if they would risk their lives trying to save someone that did something dumb, likely they would have said yes, since that is what they did. All the noise here is second guessing how they lived and who they were in answer to living on without them. How do you dishonor their choices, attack others, and argue how they lived in an attempt to honor them? Grief twists things. Those who jump and die do so because of something inside them, and blaming others if they fall devalues their actions and says caring enough to jump is wrong.


----------



## sailortjk1

The very first word in your post is very demeaning to anybody who reads it.
You use the word "So" to start a post in a thread with such deep meaning?
Do you not realize that we are talking about people actually loosing their life? Do you not see that these men were Friends, Fathers, and Husbands? People that are not coming back ever.
So a couple of sailors died, big deal, right?

They did what they thought was right because some body else put them in that position. They were NOT the jumpers. They were the safety net.

That has been the whole point to most of this thread. People go out unprepared, jump in and when the chips are down and their life is in jeopardy............ they call for help and expect to recieve it.


----------



## Valiente

I was a natural gas installer. I believed it was the right thing to race from installation to installation at 140 km/h without my seatbelt because no one impinges on my freedom. I believed it was clever when I ran out of pipe dope to use chewing gum because flexible thinking and innovation are at the core of engineering. I believed I should test for leaks using a lighter, because a flare is unequivocal whereas gas detectors can break.

A fireman died pulling my broken corpse out of a destroyed house (there might have been children in there, too...I didn't check) but he knew the risks when he signed up for the gig. In the end, it's all about choices, really.

I believed in all these things, and at my funeral my friends said nice things about my carefree ways and entrepreneurial spirit. "Physics? Causation? Consequences? Let _others _worry about such things. A hero troubles himself not!" they cheered.

Then they drank to me until two of them died, but that is the price of freedom, I suppose.


----------



## Boasun

Why is it? That extreme Sports, the Max-X show and other programs along the same line, seem to have about 99.9% male participtants??
I may go single hand sailing every now and then. Or even ride a motorcycle... But not in such a dumb way or manner that it almost guarantees my burial.


----------



## runner

If my choice of words is all you can find to argue with, then please don't bother to respond to my posts!
So far there has not been even one thing mentioned about this incident that says the person they tried to rescue did even one thing wrong other than attempting to find shelter from troubled seas. If he was from that area, then I guess he had attended the class that some think is needed. If he wasn't from there, he may have never heard of a harbor being closed or have known it was closed. Every single post about the subject so far in this thread uses emotion over intelligence and logic as the standard for the argument expressed. E over I produces craziness. I over E is required for any intelligent rational thought at all. If a rational thought is ever expressed about the situation, then we will be getting somewhere. 
Expressing grief and horror over young lives lost is natural. Kind of like diving under the table if a gunman ran into the restuarant and opened fire. That is logic in action. If you are still sitting under the table 6 months later because it is safe under there, you need a mental health pro to talk with regularly. 
Reality bites sometimes, but you still have to live in it. Some good folks died being good folks and someone has to have a place to put the blame they feel fired by grief. Good for them, but don't expect me to agree. I will say a toast to the fallen in honor of their sacrifice and good hearts. I will continue to dive in myself when called on. If I pass doing so, please don't blame anyone else for my own choices!


----------



## sailortjk1

I guess I was reading something different from you.



> A sailor with similar lack of knowledge and preparation attempted to enter Lisbon harbor in a gale after being warned that the harbor was CLOSED.


This quote said he knew the harbor was closed and he lacked preperation.

You want to go out and put yourself in harms way, fine, do it. 
Just don't expect somebody to bail you out when you cry for help.


----------



## runner

And that report is from what official account of the situation written by what impartial observer?


----------



## sailingdog

I've been off this forum for a few days... but this thread is one I have to respond to.

*The subject of the OP is clearly a fool.* Timing his voyage's departure to make the news shows that very clearly. A haulout and survey would have cost far less than the satellite phone or an HD format video camera, yet those were more important to have aboard than having the survey done.

Those who laud his attempt and his "balls" for going out and doing something in the manner he did are also clearly idiots. He did nothing in terms of basic preparation for what is still today a fairly daunting voyage. IMHO, anyone who leaves on such a voyage without doing the proper preparations for it doesn't deserve rescuing-*no one is forcing him to go-there is nothing that requires that he leave UNPREPARED*.

As for the sailor mentioned by Cam, who attempted to enter a CLOSED HARBOR and his foolish actions resulted in the deaths of far more worthy people, who had the skills and courage to try and rescue him from his own stupidity-it was his lack of preparation and courage that put him in the situation where he had to attempt to enter a closed harbor. *Harbors are closed for a reason, and if you're not prepared to deal with that possibility, DON'T GO OUT.* If you don't know why harbors are closed, you really have NO BUSINESS BEING OUT THERE, and if you're too stupid to listen to them when they say DON'T TRY IT...you pretty much deserve whatever happens-after all, you were warned. Most boats can survive pretty brutal conditions, usually far more than the crews on them. However, boats lose their ability to survive when brought close to shore-they can't deal with land and its proximity. _Personally, if I can't make a harbor early enough to do so safely, I'd much rather head out where there's a lot less to hit and the boat can do far more to take care of me. _

*If a sailor doesn't respect the sea-why should those who do, and properly prepare for dealing with the worst the sea can deal out, risk their lives to try and attempt a rescue when the brown stuff hits the fan. *


----------



## travler37

*"BlownUp"*

"gets blown up in Iraq"
This young man was.......
Now considering that i have ben home from IRAQ for two months with a back injury not conected to being "BLOWN UP".But still have had the experence three times.Let me tell you all knowing gentlemen what it does to you.......anything from pisses you off to gives you the most horrifying dreams you can imagine.
By the way i drive a truck over there...yup...one of those truck drivers everybody is so afraid of.A DOD CONTRACTOR THAT FEALS HE NEEDS TO SUPPORT SAID FOOL.AND WILL BE GOING BACK AS SOON AS THE MEDICS CLEAR ME.
Having read most of this thread and the young mans blog i realy can understand why he did it.That might be because i have ben BLOWN UP one to many times...you have to experence it to realy know what i am saying...Yup,,he had a "MOMMY" switch.And used it.Remember that if you ever dial 911.
The men that anwser said switch know that by the time they finish there training,They will be saving fools.Same as the men that get BLOWN UP doing what there country asks of them.or worse..volunteer for.As we both have.
The way i see it the young man and i both have worked to save FOOLS.Same as the men that answer a 911 call.We just answer in force...grins.
Fools are a world wide problem.There is no answer besides understanding how they might of became fools and hoping they learn from said folish endevor.
Mark


----------



## runner

Show me the official report of where someone told him not to try it. Show me the official report detailing why he felt it nessassary to enter anyway. 
Sadly, the actual truth here is that some good folks jumped without proper preparation and with inadequate tools to do what they were attempting to do, but it wasn't the boat pilot. It was the well meaning people that tried to help. 
Take all the emotional BS out of the equation and look at who did what and who actually went out in conditions they were not prepared for. 
And let those that have never done something stupid for good reasons throw the first stone!


----------



## runner

Don't try to explain to these folks how the mind of a combat medic or support person thinks. They don't get it. If you get back over there, and the gunner on top of the humvee is named Chuck, say hello to my son for me!
I was an unarmed medic myself attached to a MASH unit. My life expectancy was 47 minutes if deployed in a combat situation. Most will never understand what taking such a job means. That is why they do not understand my reaction to the same input!


----------



## sailortjk1

But comparing your situation in combat is not the same as a sailor who goes out to sea. 

Its a little different putting your life on the line for a fallen mate shot to pieces on the front line than it is for someone that went out sailing and found himself beyond his abilities. Don't you think?


----------



## runner

Not in the least.


----------



## travler37

runner said:


> Don't try to explain to these folks how the mind of a combat medic or support person thinks. They don't get it. If you get back over there, and the gunner on top of the humvee is named Chuck, say hello to my son for me!
> I was an unarmed medic myself attached to a MASH unit. My life expectancy was 47 minutes if deployed in a combat situation. Most will never understand what taking such a job means. That is why they do not understand my reaction to the same input!


 Smiles,
Have said hi to many such men.Will look for Chuck when i get back.Wonders if the MEN here realy know what its like to have to get "small"...
Pours a morgan and coke cause the happy pills make him stupider than he normally is....
Mark


----------



## travler37

sailortjk1 said:


> But comparing your situation in combat is not the same as a sailor who goes out to sea.
> 
> Its a little different putting your life on the line for a fallen mate shot to pieces on the front line than it is for someone that went out sailing and found himself beyond his abilities. Don't you think?


 I put my life one the line supporting the men.
Not for a fallen mate.I make sure they have what they need to get the job done.I see not difference between this young mans lack of ability and that of someone driving in a blizzard and wreacking there car...then dialing 911 because they screwed up.

Having said that i belive all of us are rescuing FOOLS.The ones that sit behind a desk or in a cave and can not learn to get along.Just my opinion.
Mark


----------



## sailaway21

We've got an argument going here between people who know the sea as she is and those whom only know the sea as they want her to be. Ironically, the sea dispenses with both equally. The difference is that the former are generally wise enough to not tempt her. The latter never see the end coming yet somehow think they have a chance to win. If they live, they sometimes come to realize that there are no winners, just survivors.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

The water cares for you about as much as a bullet does the difference being that you can choose when to go to the water, you don't have a choice on when to go on a mission.

Any fool can buy a boat I know I sell them to quite a few (whitewater kayaks).


----------



## travler37

deepblueme said:


> The water cares for you about as much as a bullet does the difference being that you can choose when to go to the water, you don't have a choice on when to go on a mission.
> 
> Any fool can buy a boat I know I sell them to quite a few (whitewater kayaks).


 I agree about the water not caring,
Disagree about a choice to go on a mission.I never meet anyone there that did not know where they were going when they sighned up.Maybe not for a specific mission but knew they were going to theater.We all volintered to go.
And you can choose not to go on a specific mission.Just qiut and deal with what that entails.Push the "MOMY" switch.
Mark


----------



## sailingdog

Runner-
*
I'm going to have to call BS on you in this thread... given that your first post was in August of this year, and said:*



runner said:


> *I am completely new to sailing. I still have not been on the water. *I bought an old aluminum boat this weekend to restore. I am gonna be asking a lot of questions! Thanks in advance for any help provided!


I really don't think you've got the experience to say jack about what kind of preparation is required for a trans-oceanic sailing voyage. Given that, at most, you've got two months of sailing experience, most likely on small inland lakes.

Anyone who compares being a combat medic in a war zone to being a merchant marine sailor that is being asked to save a RECREATIONAL BOATER TOO IGNORANT AND ILL-PREPARED TO BE OUT THERE is ludicrous at best.

The combat medic is rescuing a colleague, and one who supposedly has at least a bare minimum of training (boot camp) and the proper equipment (rifle, flak jacket, helmet, etc) for what they're doing. The wounded soldier is also REQUIRED TO BE THERE-IT IS HIS JOB.

This idiot was not required to be sailing across an ocean, much less doing so with his head up his backside. The merchant marine sailors who went to rescue him aren't being paid to do so, and aren't trained specifically to do so.


----------



## camaraderie

Dawg...that is way out of line...he has at LEAST as much experience as the guy that left his boat out in the Pacific this week. All it takes is the right attitude and a set of big ones!


----------



## NCountry

I think I read it here somewhere. "There are two types of people, ones that wish they could and ones that already have". The second group used to be members of the first. Why do the members of the second group forget the time that they were members of the first group? We all have the same goals, some have managed to get farther along towards achieving those than others...............I'll make sure and have the "Mommy button" with me when I join group number 2!


----------



## sailingdog

ROFLMAO... Damn, nearly hurt myself laughing at that one... 


camaraderie said:


> Dawg...that is way out of line...he has at LEAST as much experience as the guy that left his boat out in the Pacific this week. All it takes is the right attitude and a set of big ones!


----------



## genieskip

No one is saying people shouldn't try dangerous things. if you want to ski a double diamond trail or solo climb El Cap no climber or skier would say you shouldn't. I don't know a single skier who would not think you a fool if, the first time you went skiing in your life, you strapped on wooden skies from the nineteen thirties and tackled an icy double diamond. And I don't know any climber who wouldn't be shaking his head if, totally innocent of climbing skills, you tackled a 10.+ alone wearing old running shoes and using a few hundred feet of clothesline for a toprope. 

This was a similar stunt. Someone doing any of the above might be considered as having "big ones" by the general public but would be thought a fool by those that have been there. Spirit and guts are great, but when you try something really hard (and really dangerous) a little preparation is not only helpful, it is essential.

One thread running through all these sports is respect for nature. That's what this guy was lacking.


----------



## genieskip

A better parallel scenario than the ones I made up in the previous post would be made using the Iraq war some cited in earlier posts. God knows all those that are serving there deserve our thanks and admiration, but the parallels that were made in earlier posts didn't really capture the situation. Of course you would go and help anyone there, but not all rescues are the same. 

Suppose some media type just got off a plane from the US, someone who had never served in the armed forces or had ever been in a war zone before and had no idea of what was going on. This person, after being warned by local commanders to stay away from a particularly dangerous area, ignored all advice and went there anyway, because that's where he thought he could get the "best story". Now you and your buddies have to go pull his a** out of the fire and engage in a nasty fire fight to do so. 

Do you still admire his spunk?


----------



## runner

Ok, you guys have the right of it! Anyone not doing it your way and to your approval needs to sink and no one should risk anything to rescue them! 
Please show me where sailing experience is needed to listen to a bunch of folks talking and acting like a bunch of gossipy little old ladies at the laundermat discussing everyone else's lives and how they should have done things. Pulease excuse me if I still jump in to save them if it becomes my turn again. Please do not blame that choice on the victim I am trying to save in anyway, whether or not I come back! I choose. Me. The people being used to support the idea that having to rescue folks is wrong in this thread evidently believed as I do, and I am very glad there are still folks out there that save the rest of us idiots when we do something stupid. BS dishonors their memory.
Like I said before, let the one that never did anything stupid please throw the first stone. 
By the way, I have my aluminum dinghy, a Puffer, and maybe a Y-flyer. I still have not sailed even once that I know of. I went and picked up the oars and mast for the Puffer today. I expect it's first time on the water with me in it will be a rowing/fishing day. I have to make a new boom and sails after repairing the hull completely. 
For the record, I would not try what this guy did in a boat I did not know by heart and trust completely without backup. I just don't insist that other folks do things my way. All I see is a youngun that stuck his neck out and got spanked. Now he will ask questions that some of you can answer, if you are willing. A lot of the time younguns can't accept the answers until they have seen the questions. Even a bigger percentage of the time when you are discussing a young man that has been trained to think and act depending on his own skills to survive. Seems some of you have forgotten youth and being bulletproof!


----------



## runner

I never said I admired anyone's spunk in the first place. 
In that situation I would discipline the person that was supposed to keep him and everyone else uninvited out of the area, but yes, I would jump to go pull his bacon out of the fire. The area commander would not like me much afterward tho! Rescues are almost always people that made some seemingly stupid mistake for whatever reason. Would I go risk my life to rescue people from their attics because they were too stupid to obey a manditory evacuation during a hurricane? Yep!
The sea has very little to do with this story except that it is what put the whuppin on the boy!


----------



## camaraderie

He ain't learned squat...now he's talking about taking your pay pal donations and buying a chinese junk. Sheesh.


----------



## Stillraining

OK I guess Im going to have to go read this guys web site now...


----------



## jaschrumpf

I think part of the reason unqualified people attempt circumnavigations is that the writings of those who have -- and who are super-qualified -- make it look easy. I found Joshua Slocum's "Sailing Alone Around the World" on line:

Sailing Alone Around the World, by Joshua Slocum, 1900

Though I don't really know if it's the full, unabridged version or not.

Anyway, when one reads passages like this:"...one day, well off the Patagonian coast, while the sloop was reaching under short sail, a tremendous wave, the culmination, it seemed, of many waves, rolled down upon her in a storm, roaring as it came. I had only a moment to get all sail down and myself up on the peak halliards, out of danger, when I saw the mighty crest towering masthead-high above me. The mountain of water submerged my vessel. She shook in every timber and reeled under the weight of the sea, but rose quickly out of it, and rode grandly over the rollers that followed. It may have been a minute that from my hold in the rigging I could see no part of the


> Spray's


 hull."​Slocum makes it sound almost routine. He sees the wave coming, drops sail and scampers into his rigging to get high above the deck and not be washed off. Easy, right?

Then there's this:"I had just finished reading some of the most interesting of the old voyages in woe-begone ships, and was already near Port Macquarie, on my own cruise, when I made out, May 13, a modern dandy craft in distress, anchored on the coast. Standing in for her, I found that she was the cutter-yacht


> Akbar


, which had sailed from Watson's Bay about three days ahead of the


> Spray


, and that she had run at once into trouble. No wonder she did so. It was a case of babes in the wood or butterflies at sea. Her owner, on his maiden voyage, was all duck trousers; the captain, distinguished for the enormous yachtsman's cap he wore, was a Murrumbidgee whaler before he took command of the


> Akbar


; and the navigating officer, poor fellow, was almost as deaf as a post, and nearly as stiff and immovable as a post in the ground. These three jolly tars comprised the crew. None of them knew more about the sea or about a vessel than a newly born babe knows about another world. They were bound for New Guinea, so they said; perhaps it was as well that three tenderfeet so tender as those never reached that destination.

"Up anchor," I shouted, "up anchor, and let me tow you into Port Macquarie, twelve miles north of this."

The trifling service proffered by the


> Spray


 would have saved their vessel.

"Report us," they cried, as I stood on--"report us with sails blown away, and that we don't care a dash and are not afraid."

"Then there is no hope for you," and again "Farewell."

It was about eighteen days before I heard of the


> Akbar


 again, which was on the 31st of May, when I reached Cooktown, on the Endeavor River, where I found this news:

_May 31, the yacht



Akbar

Click to expand...

, from Sydney for New Guinea, three hands on board, lost at Crescent Head; the crew saved. _

So it took them several days to lose the yacht, after all. ​* * *
Not much has changed, eh?


----------



## Shack

*Good Initiative, Bad Judgement*

This guy was no more heroic at this stunt than was George Armstong Custer. He also expected others to pay with their lives in return for his reckless, self driven choices. Sure! a little e'lan goes a long way, but only so much as its accompanied by proper planning, training, and equipment.

This guy set sail with little more than a great attitude, and expected that it was all he needed to accomplish any task! No one can say he did not have energetic initiative, but his misplaced judegement almost got himself killed and risked the lives of those reserved for "unintentional" emergencies. A Marine should know exacty what the proper mix of planning and execution is, but he screwed that one up. People like him tend to take uneccesary risks in combat, too, and it makes me wonder.

I can applaud his combat service and tenacity. But he may be failing to attribute the deliberate factors that attributed to his previous successes. His fellow Marines carefully *trained, prepared and planned *so that he and his buddies would not be a target, and let's not forget the Corpsman and Docs who *trained *and *prepared *to treat wounds like his. I doubt he would've wanted the guy who _"slept at a Holiday Inn last night"_ to heal his wounds no matter how much of a positive attitude the guy had.


----------



## tdw

Crescent Head is only 15 nms nth of Port Macquarie so they only managed to cover 27 nms in 18 days before they fetched up on the rocks at Crsecnt Head which does not have a port. 12nms Sth of PM is open roadstead. Urrkk. It's a wonder they got as far as they did.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

C'est la vie


----------



## ckgreenman

runner said:


> Like I said before, let the one that never did anything stupid please throw the first stone.


Doing something stupid is one thing. Doing something stupid while knowingly putting your own life at risk because you aren't prepared (and possibly risking others who have to rescure you) is something totally different. And by the way, nobody here is questioning the people who went to the rescue. They DID do the right thing. The person whose actions are in question is getting ready to do it again assuming we buy him a new boat.


----------



## runner

Still trying to buy my own boat. Can't afford one for him!


----------



## tdw

Bit of hypocrisy on my part as I have no qualifications whatsoever but I tend to agree with Alex re people going offshore unprepared personally. If we were not allowed to clear out without an offshore skipper certificate a lot of these types of incidents could be avoided. If not a certificate as such then at least we should be required to show that we have done the required number of coastal passages.

I don't think the boat problems were necessarily avoidable, ****e happens, but the fact that he didn't know what to do after his rudder broke was totally avoidable with the correct training. 

Quite frankly all this waffle about the guy being a marine is just that except that maybe just maybe this supposedly highly trained professional should have thought that he also needed some level of training in this new pursuit.


----------



## sailaway21

runner said:


> I never said I admired anyone's spunk in the first place.
> In that situation I would discipline the person that was supposed to keep him and everyone else uninvited out of the area, but yes, I would jump to go pull his bacon out of the fire. The area commander would not like me much afterward tho! Rescues are almost always people that made some seemingly stupid mistake for whatever reason. Would I go risk my life to rescue people from their attics because they were too stupid to obey a manditory evacuation during a hurricane? Yep!
> The sea has very little to do with this story except that it is what put the whuppin on the boy!


Actually, it has everything to do with the sea and very little else. My patience with those who've seen little of the sea is running a bit thin here, especially when they choose to challenge the reasonable advise of those who've pissed more salt water than they've sailed. Try to remember that this is supposed to be primarily an educational forum.


----------



## ckgreenman

sailaway21 said:


> Actually, it has everything to do with the sea and very little else. My patience with those who've seen little of the sea is running a bit thin here, especially when they choose to challenge the reasonable advise of those who've pissed more salt water than they've sailed. Try to remember that this is supposed to be primarily an educational forum.


Hell I have very little sea time and none under sail but I know damn good and well that I have no business trying to cross an ocean. I WILL NOT try it until I know I'm ready and even then only if I have a good reason and have made plenty of precautions.

In a nutshell, I have common sense.


----------



## Stillraining

I know this fellow will evoke a lot of emotion also...but one has to wonder if he would have even pressed the mommy button as some have apply called it even if he had one at the time.

I get the gut feeling of no...

WebbChiles

After reading a lot of his web site and watching a number of his videos
I hope our friend Ronnie takes just a few minutes to read how much worse things could still get before his next decision plays out whatever he decides to do.
If not... most of his circumnavigation may be aboard freighters I'm afraid.. and that would be sad indeed.


----------



## Valiente

It's been some time now.


----------



## erikdj

There is no doubt that the men and women who have volunteered to serve this country in times of peace as well as in times of war deserve our thanks and gratitude. There isn't a medal or a word of thanks that could ever make up for the horrors, tragedies and challenges each of them have faced. And we also honor those who have not returned or returned broken or injured as a result of the recent atrocities abroad.

But with that said, and having served with some of these men and women myself, let me suggest that we not allow our thanks and honor that we have for these men and women write a blank check to make foolish and puerile decisions! I doubt that many of us would be honoring or excusing this young man if he had pushed his EPIRB and the someone lost their life saving his. 

The Coast Guard and indeed many vessels under way provide assistance to strangers who are in need of help. And this young man was clearly in need of help--no one disputes that. But when a series of bad decisions lead up to a bad outcome, no one should be rewarded for that. Thankfully no one, including Ronnie was injured as a result. Losing a tangible and easily replaced object like a boat is nothing compared to a life.

If a pilot leaves an airport without conducting a pre-flight check (And I am a licensed pilot as well), and subsequently crashes as a result of a mechanical failure that could have been discovered had the proper checks been performed, would we similarly congratulate him for being so fearless? Did we honor John Kennedy Jr. for his brave and courageous decision to venture out on a moonless and foggy night in his airplane which resulted in his death? Is it different because he had two passengers and Ronnie was alone? Or what about John Denver who flew his plane until it ran out of gas resulting in a stall and spin that killed only himself? 

I understand that flying isn't romanced or revered with the same magnitude as sailing out into the great ocean to conquer one of the most challenging and exciting frontiers available to the common man. But surely you can draw some parallels between some of the tragedies that were a result of a series of poor decisions and inadequate preparation just like Ronnie. 

Erik


----------



## KeelHaulin

Someone should remind the guy that if you are rescued mid-passage and then are dropped in China (or Hawaii) it does not count as mileage for a circumnav - Go back to "GO" do not collect $200!  

The chinese Junk idea is just so wrong, I can't do anything but scratch head and wonder WTF he is now thinking (maybe the Chinese crew have got him thinking about this)??


----------



## Stillraining

Banstick


OH dear that bad aye... 

My apologies


----------



## sailingdog

runner said:


> Ok, you guys have the right of it! Anyone not doing it your way and to your approval needs to sink and no one should risk anything to rescue them!
> Please show me where sailing experience is needed to listen to a bunch of folks talking and acting like a bunch of gossipy little old ladies at the laundermat discussing everyone else's lives and how they should have done things. Pulease excuse me if I still jump in to save them if it becomes my turn again. Please do not blame that choice on the victim I am trying to save in anyway, whether or not I come back! I choose. Me. The people being used to support the idea that having to rescue folks is wrong in this thread evidently believed as I do, and I am very glad there are still folks out there that save the rest of us idiots when we do something stupid. BS dishonors their memory.


*No one here is saying that going to the rescue is a bad thing... just that it shouldn't have been necessary in the first place.* The subject of the OP had no business being out there at all-and_ you don't have the experience to speak about what they should and shouldn't have done IMHO._



> Like I said before, let the one that never did anything stupid please throw the first stone.


*
BTW, I've done plenty of stupid things, like trying to point out the error of your ways... but none of my mistakes have required me to ask someone else to risk themselves to bail me out-I did that all by myself. *


> By the way, I have my aluminum dinghy, a Puffer, and maybe a Y-flyer. I still have not sailed even once that I know of. I went and picked up the oars and mast for the Puffer today. I expect it's first time on the water with me in it will be a rowing/fishing day. I have to make a new boom and sails after repairing the hull completely.


*
So you have ZERO sailing experience to draw on to make your blanket statements.*



> For the record, I would not try what this guy did in a boat I did not know by heart and trust completely without backup. I just don't insist that other folks do things my way. All I see is a youngun that stuck his neck out and got spanked. Now he will ask questions that some of you can answer, if you are willing. A lot of the time younguns can't accept the answers until they have seen the questions. Even a bigger percentage of the time when you are discussing a young man that has been trained to think and act depending on his own skills to survive. Seems some of you have forgotten youth and being bulletproof!


*The biggest complaint I have with you and the BS you've been spouting in this thread is that you don't know ***** about sailing, have never done it, and yet, you're encouraging the stupid behavior of this idiot-which is likely the same behavior that will get sailing legislated by the nanny state that is government. *

Yes, you need to occasionally take risks when sailing...but you gotta know the rules before you can break them. Look at Webb Chiles, who Still points out.... I've had the pleasure of meeting Webb, as he lived up here in Beantown up until a few years ago. He's a gentleman, and no, I doubt he'd have pushed the button, but he wouldn't have done something so foolish IMHO either. He had been sailing for SIX YEARS before attempting his first circumnavigation.

You've got to remember that he sailed in several boats on his four circumnavigations... one was an Ericson that had a serious hull leak, one was actually two 18' Drascombe Lugger open sailing dinghies-the second being a replacement after the first was consfiscated in Egypt, and he did scuttle one boat, Resurgam, 12 miles or so off the coast of Florida, and ended up being rescued by a fishing boat.

The point about Joshua Slocum is not really all that accurate. Joshua Slocum made sailing around the world sound pretty simple, but he RE-BUILT SPRAY HIMSELF, from the bottom up. He had years of seagoing experience and forgot more about sailing than most of us will ever know.



Stillraining said:


> I know this fellow will evoke a lot of emotion also...but one has to wonder if he would have even pressed the mommy button as some have apply called it even if he had one at the time.
> 
> I get the gut feeling of no...
> 
> WebbChiles
> 
> After reading a lot of his web site and watching a number of his videos
> I hope our friend Ronnie takes just a few minutes to read how much worse things could still get before his next decision plays out whatever he decides to do.
> If not... most of his circumnavigation may be aboard freighters I'm afraid.. and that would be sad indeed.


----------



## sailingdog

erikdj said:


> There is no doubt that the men and women who have volunteered to serve this country in times of peace as well as in times of war deserve our thanks and gratitude. There isn't a medal or a word of thanks that could ever make up for the horrors, tragedies and challenges each of them have faced. And we also honor those who have not returned or returned broken or injured as a result of the recent atrocities abroad.
> 
> But with that said, and having served with some of these men and women myself, *let me suggest that we not allow our thanks and honor that we have for these men and women write a blank check to make foolish and puerile decisions!* I doubt that many of us would be honoring or excusing this young man if he had pushed his EPIRB and the someone lost their life saving his.


Well said.



> The Coast Guard and indeed many vessels under way provide assistance to strangers who are in need of help. And this young man was clearly in need of help--no one disputes that. But when a series of bad decisions lead up to a bad outcome, no one should be rewarded for that. Thankfully no one, including Ronnie was injured as a result. Losing a tangible and easily replaced object like a boat is nothing compared to a life.


Unfortunately, many people are too ignorant or stupid to learn anything from such an event, and only Darwin can truly teach them.



> If a pilot leaves an airport without conducting a pre-flight check (And I am a licensed pilot as well), and subsequently crashes as a result of a mechanical failure that could have been discovered had the proper checks been performed, would we similarly congratulate him for being so fearless? Did we honor Robert Kennedy for his brave and courageous decision to venture out on a moonless and foggy night in his airplane which resulted in his death? Is it different because he had two passengers and Ronnie was alone? Or what about John Denver who flew his plane until it ran out of gas resulting in a stall and spin that killed only himself?


Robert Kennedy was assassinated by Sirhan Sirhan in 1968.  It was John Kennedy Jr., and he did not have the requisite knowledge or experience to fly in those conditions IIRC. He was not instrument certified. Ronnie could have easily ended up the same as John Denver, and both qualify as idiots in my book. 



> I understand that flying isn't romanced or revered with the same magnitude as sailing out into the great ocean to conquer one of the most challenging and exciting frontiers available to the common man. But surely you can draw some parallels between some of the tragedies that were a result of a series of poor decisions and inadequate preparation just like Ronnie.
> 
> Erik


Actually, it is pretty comparable. Look at Amelia Earheart, and the other early great aviators. Pushing the limits is something that is common to both sailing and flying, as Steve Fossett proved in his life, and doing so really REQUIRES you to at least take the minimum precautions and preparations.


----------



## tdw

"I was born in the breezes, and I had studied the sea as perhaps few men have studied it, neglecting all else." -Joshua Slocum


----------



## bubb2

I just bought a airplane on ebay. Its a old Grumman built in the early 60's. I Didn't have it checked out, the guy that sold it to me said it was a good plane. Hell, I never have flown a plane. I going to pick it up today and fly it home. It has 4 seats. Who wants to come along with me. Maybe you runner?


----------



## ckgreenman

bubb2 said:


> I just bought a airplane on ebay. Its a old Grumman built in the early 60's. I Didn't have it checked out, the guy that sold it to me said it was a good plane. Hell, I never have flown a plane. I going to pick it up today and fly it home. It has 4 seats. Who wants to come along with me. Maybe you runner?


Oooh Oooh. I'll go. I've logged a couple hours on MS Flight Sim in case we get into trouble.


----------



## SEMIJim

runner said:


> Ok, you guys have the right of it! Anyone not doing it your way...


Where "our way" is defined has having made at least an _effort_ to understand the magnitude of the endeavor and at least having made an _effort_ to properly prepare for it: Most definitely yes. This guy did neither.



runner said:


> ...and to your approval needs to sink and no one should risk anything to rescue them!


In the instant case: Yeah. You keep ignoring (purposefully?) one big, massively glaring point: *He knew, before leaving the dock, that he was doing this woefully unprepared.*

One might wonder why you keep ignoring this point. It looks like the moderators figured it out.

Jim


----------



## erikdj

SEMIJim said:


> You keep ignoring (purposefully?) one big, massively glaring point: *He knew, before leaving the dock, that he was doing this woefully unprepared.*
> 
> One might wonder why you keep ignoring this point. It looks like the moderators figured it out.


Don't you think acknowledging that one is making a foolish, uninformed and uneducated decision _a priori_ make one a bigger fool than if one was simply ignorant? In other words, he knew he was unprepared. Frankly I think that makes him a bigger fool.

And moreover, I have seen some posts that basically said it was his choice. He was alone. Go kill himself if he wanted to. But that's not entirely true. When he pressed the button on that EPIRB, he instantly involved a lot of other people who would then risk their own property and souls to save his. Sounds selfish to me.


----------



## sailingdog

erikdj said:


> *Don't you think acknowledging that one is making a foolish, uninformed and uneducated decision a priori make one a bigger fool than if one was simply ignorant? In other words, he knew he was unprepared. Frankly I think that makes him a bigger fool.*


Gotta agree with you there... being ignorant of the risks is far different than knowing the risks and intentionally not making any preparations to deal with them.



> And moreover, I have seen some posts that basically said it was his choice. He was alone. Go kill himself if he wanted to. But that's not entirely true. *When he pressed the button on that EPIRB, he instantly involved a lot of other people who would then risk their own property and souls to save his. Sounds selfish to me.*


If you're going to be stupid and deal with the consequences yourself... I got no beef with you... but if you risk other people's lives because of your stupidity.... then that's a problem.


----------



## bubb2

bubb2 said:


> I just bought a airplane on ebay. Its a old Grumman built in the early 60's. I Didn't have it checked out, the guy that sold it to me said it was a good plane. Hell, I never have flown a plane. I going to pick it up today and fly it home. It has 4 seats. Who wants to come along with me. Maybe you runner?


The engine is firing on 4 but has 6. I had to pump up one tire twice. But I am ready to take off. Runner, I haven't heard from you. You're a jumper it will be alright. Lets dance!!!


----------



## TSOJOURNER

So what happens to the kid's boat? 

Does the Coast Guard use it for target practice to eliminate a navigational hazard? I got the impression it was still afloat after abandonment.


----------



## erikdj

As I recall from the excerpts from Ronnie's blog, the boat was essentially destroyed during the course of his rescue.


----------



## smackdaddy

bubb2 said:


> The engine is firing on 4 but has 6. I had to pump up one tire twice. But I am ready to take off. Runner, I haven't heard from you. You're a jumper it will be alright. Lets dance!!!


Ahm...Cam took Runner out and shot him (after baiting him into it, of course). Runner's in a shallow grave along with LaLeLu, ConcheyJoe, and others we may not know of yet.

So, don't hold your breath. Or disagree with Cam.


----------



## bubb2

smackdaddy said:


> Ahm...Cam took Runner out and shot him (after baiting him into it, of course). Runner's in a shallow grave along with LaLeLu, ConcheyJoe, and others we may not know of yet.
> 
> So, don't hold your breath. Or disagree with Cam.


smack, I did not know that runner was not with us any more. For your information I have gone nose to nose with Cam. He respects a point over an attitude.


----------



## sailingdog

Bubb-

You won't be hearing from runner... He got himself banned... permanently from what I understand. 


bubb2 said:


> The engine is firing on 4 but has 6. I had to pump up one tire twice. But I am ready to take off. Runner, I haven't heard from you. You're a jumper it will be alright. Lets dance!!!


When you hear the dueling banjos... cam's got his finger poised over the big red button. 



smackdaddy said:


> Ahm...Cam took Runner out and shot him (after baiting him into it, of course). Runner's in a shallow grave along with LaLeLu, ConcheyJoe, and others we may not know of yet.
> 
> So, don't hold your breath. Or disagree with Cam.


----------



## smackdaddy

bubb2 said:


> smack, I did not know that runner was not with us any more. For your information I have gone nose to nose with Cam. He respects a point over an attitude.


Fair enough. Then he should learn to make his point without the attitude. Jeff's a great example of someone that is able to do so.

Otherwise - he's just like me.


----------



## bubb2

smackdaddy;384111 he's just like me.[/quote said:


> Don't flatter yourself, Cam has been there and done that and has the t shirt.
> 
> While I am at it, Sway holds an unlimited Masters license. A graduate of the Merchant Marine Academy.
> 
> When they talk I listen, you would be well advised to do also.
> 
> But then again you are not here looking for sailing information..


----------



## chucklesR

bubb2 said:


> But then again you are not here looking for sailing information..


A lot of that going around lately, must be that virus I head about called wannabeasailorandhavenoclue.

Doesn't BFS stand for Being Freaking Stupid?


----------



## Omatako

sailingdog said:


> You won't be hearing from runner... He got himself banned... permanently from what I understand.


Geez, I'm pleased I pulled out of this bunfight early . . . .


----------



## smackdaddy

bubb2 said:


> Don't flatter yourself, Cam has been there and done that and has the t shirt.
> 
> While I am at it, Sway holds an unlimited Masters license. A graduate of the Merchant Marine Academy.
> 
> When they talk I listen, you would be well advised to do also.
> 
> But then again you are not here looking for sailing information..


Bubb and Chuckles....siiiiggggghhh. *Of course* I come here looking for sailing information. That's exactly what I've been asking for since I joined this damn community 2 months ago. Maybe not in the way you guys want me to ask - but I've asked. And maybe not about the things you want me to ask - but I've asked. And maybe not with the humble, reverent attitude you guys expect - but I've asked.

And I've gotten some great answers from some great sailors. And I've gotten a lot of crap from from lesser ones. And - okay - I've slung my fair share as well. All in good fun, boys.

Me, I'm not all that interested in whether Lewmar shackles are crap right now. I'll get to that elsewhere. I just want to know about difficult sailing - where the best lessons are always learned.

But there is sure a lot of resistance to talking about that around here. And this has just always seemed strange - being that this is supposed to be a Sailing website.

Thus far, no one yet has given a good explanation as to why that is.

BTW - I was insulting Cam - not complimenting myself. Anyway, I've seen his t-shirt.


----------



## TxLnghrn

*Joining this party late....*

But I couldn't let some of this sit.

I have spent most of my adult life being on the other side of that 911 sequence of digits. I can tell you with absolute certainty that when a rescuer is young/fresh and full of testosterone...there is no greater thrill than the act of the rescue. When new rescuers get trained, it is driven into them time and time again, the most important person in a rescue is yourself....the second most is your partner/crew and the victim falls way....way....way down on the list. In spite of that many rescuers do loose their lives, or become gravely injured saving others. It's a risk that is well known and to a certain point accepted. Wise rescuers as they mature learn how to weigh benefit/risk and this allows them to become wise *old* rescuers. 
There are very few things in this world that turn my stomach as much as those who are too stupid, stubborn and/or arrogant to heed advice and then expect teenagers and twenty-somethings to come bail them out. Slightly off topic, but Hurricane Ike demonstrated it again. Homeowners on the Bolivar Pennisula outside of Houston were told for days to get inland. Many refused, police in the area went as far as telling those insisting on staying to write their SS# on their arm to make body identification easier, but still they stayed. Then as the storm grew and the surge started coming in, many of these same people started calling for help, expecting helicopters to fly in and pull them off their roofs. 
As a society, we need to find a point of saying enough. 
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute and emergency on mine.

Michael


----------



## bubb2

smackdaddy said:


> Bubb and Chuckles....siiiiggggghhh. I just want to know about difficult sailing - where the best lessons are always learned.


Lets start. anybody can sail a boat in 20+ knots when there is wind to waste. Ever been racing when she blowing less than 5. There are always 1 or 2 boats moving and the rest of fleet is sitting still. Those would be the guys I would be talking to . they know sail trim. those lessons relate to 20+. "difficult sailing" try less than 5 and finish , not DNF or BFS.


----------



## chucklesR

The only thing I learned in the 35 kts when I had my lessons was a reefed mainsail drips on you and has too much weather helm, oh, and you can't hear crap with that wind in your ears.
Learning sailing is best at 10-12 knts of wind, calm decks and a steady voice, not panic stricken shouting where a wrong move means a shroud turns into a flail.

Two more things I learned while sailing about Annapolis in 35 kts, 1) we were the only boat out there because the school didn't give refunds, and 2) not to do it again unless I had to, and not on a 30 year school maintained boat for damn sure.


----------



## tenuki

bubb2 said:


> Lets start. anybody can sail a boat in 20+ knots when there is wind to waste. Ever been racing when she blowing less than 5. There are always 1 or 2 boats moving and the rest of fleet is sitting still. Those would be the guys I would be talking to . they know sail trim. those lessons relate to 20+. "difficult sailing" try less than 5 and finish , not DNF or BFS.


QFT. ..


----------



## bubb2

tenuki said:


> QFT. ..


Thanks, I guess you been there on both sides of the fence. less than 5 and over 35


----------



## CharlieCobra

If I have no where to go, I happen to like light air sailing. I take great pleasure in beating other supposedly faster boats by reading the puffs and zephyrs better than they do. I fondly recall spanking two gorgeous Solings on Lake Watcom with my raggedy old V-21, flying 32 year old rags, in light air, badly. Light air is ALL about proper trim and helming. However, if I'm headed to one of the islands, I prefer 15-20 so I can get up and boogie.


----------



## GBurton

chucklesR said:


> The only thing I learned in the 35 kts when I had my lessons was a reefed mainsail drips on you and has too much weather helm, oh, and you can't hear crap with that wind in your ears.
> Learning sailing is best at 10-12 knts of wind, calm decks and a steady voice, not panic stricken shouting where a wrong move means a shroud turns into a flail.
> 
> Two more things I learned while sailing about Annapolis in 35 kts, 1) we were the only boat out there because the school didn't give refunds, and 2) not to do it again unless I had to, and not on a 30 year school maintained boat for damn sure.


Ease out the main a bit for that weather helm.


----------



## tdw

Stillraining said:


> Banstick
> 
> OH dear that bad aye...
> 
> My apologies


lol.

I think it's more likely your post appeared in the wrong place at the wrong time RainDrop old friend.

Hey now....did I miss something ? Why was runner banned ? I know he was a waste of space but.....


----------



## erikdj

chucklesR said:


> Learning sailing is best at 10-12 knts of wind, calm decks and a steady voice, not panic stricken shouting where a wrong move means a shroud turns into a flail.


10-12 knots of wind is a typical summer morning in San Francisco. And 20-30 knots is a typical afternoon.  You get the best of both worlds. And since it's expected every single day, you get a steady voice free of panic stricken shouting.  Calm decks? Depends on the current in relation to the wind. 

I haven't seen it all, that's for sure, but learning to sail in the summer in San Francisco Bay is like learning to ride a bike without ever using the training wheels. You learn quick, stay sharp and develop an intuition. Or you end up cold, wet and panicking.


----------



## chucklesR

erikdj said:


> 10-12 knots of wind is a typical summer morning in San Francisco. And 20-30 knots is a typical afternoon.  You get the best of both worlds. And since it's expected every single day, you get a steady voice free of panic stricken shouting.  Calm decks? Depends on the current in relation to the wind.
> 
> I haven't seen it all, that's for sure, but learning to sail in the summer in San Francisco Bay is like learning to ride a bike without ever using the training wheels. You learn quick, stay sharp and develop an intuition. Or you end up cold, wet and panicking.


Then you learn in the mornings...duh.


----------



## sailingdog

Fuzzy-

Runner was banned for major pissy attitude to Cam and a few others in another thread.


tdw said:


> lol.
> 
> I think it's more likely your post appeared in the wrong place at the wrong time RainDrop old friend.
> 
> Hey now....did I miss something ? Why was runner banned ? I know he was a waste of space but.....


----------



## erikdj

chucklesR said:


> Then you learn in the mornings...duh.


Your insight is profound!


----------



## smackdaddy

GBurton said:


> Ease out the main a bit for that weather helm.


Dude - very cool! Who do you have to pay to get one of those red squares around here? That's cred!


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> Fuzzy-
> 
> Runner was banned for major pissy attitude to Cam and a few others in another thread.


Heh-heh. Yeah and it was just love and roses around here before that damn Runner, huh Dog/Cam?


----------



## sailingdog

Smack-

Don't think you can get a red square without mod intervention anymore... it requires you to effectively have a negative rep rate...like Gburton managed to get during his early days here...


----------



## GBurton

The dog, the cat and some others who couldnt take some of their own medicine and ganged up on me 

You used to be able to give others negative rep by clicking on the little scales at the top right of a post...now you can only give positive rep..... I think I used to have -15 points but its up to -5 woohoooo 



smackdaddy said:


> Dude - very cool! Who do you have to pay to get one of those red squares around here? That's cred!


----------



## Stillraining

TxLnghrn said:


> But I couldn't let some of this sit.
> 
> I have spent most of my adult life being on the other side of that 911 sequence of digits. I can tell you with absolute certainty that when a rescuer is young/fresh and full of testosterone...there is no greater thrill than the act of the rescue.


Personally I must have missed what all the fuss came about to the banning of Runner...He basicly had the same position as TxLngrh just confirmed here in his post and felt passionately about it..what did I miss? I'll have to go back but dont recall any personal attacks per say no more then some calling others stupid or idiots..

FWIW.. I liked his arguments and his referral to Jumpers..I thought that sumed it up quit nice....and I'm for one glad there are people like him willing to.........even for the Ronnies of the world.


----------



## camaraderie

He was banned for a post since deleted on another thread in violation of our rules. Nothing he said on this thread is at issue.


----------



## sailaway21

smackdaddy said:


> Ahm...Cam took Runner out and shot him (after baiting him into it, of course). Runner's in a shallow grave along with LaLeLu, ConcheyJoe, and others we may not know of yet.
> 
> So, don't hold your breath. Or disagree with Cam.


Smack,
I posted something with your name on it in AFOC. Do what you want with it, but the above just ain't right. It's mean, it's petty, and it isn't Cam. I'd like to see a retraction of it.


----------



## Stillraining

camaraderie said:


> He was banned for a post since deleted on another thread in violation of our rules. Nothing he said on this thread is at issue.


Ah...OK..Thanks Cam


----------



## tenuki

Yeah!!! I just found the ignore list function! That's soooo cool. I wish RL had such a feature...


----------



## farmboy

bubb2 said:


> Lets start. anybody can sail a boat in 20+ knots when there is wind to waste. Ever been racing when she blowing less than 5. There are always 1 or 2 boats moving and the rest of fleet is sitting still. Those would be the guys I would be talking to . they know sail trim. those lessons relate to 20+. "difficult sailing" try less than 5 and finish , not DNF or BFS.


Gotta disagree with you there, bubb. Like Charlie, I love sailing in very little wind. It's how I started helming simply because we had a run of very light wind when we got our boat. Had a great sailor come out with me and show me how it was done. After a few weeks of that I was out in winds that were gusting to 15 knots max and I was taking a little water into the cockpit, and stalling the boat. After having some more instruction in higher winds, I can sail with full sail to 20 knots and keep the boat moving well. I think that learning to sail involves learning to sail in light winds and strong winds. You do new sailors a disservice by telling them otherwise. There can be more than one type of difficult sailing. So anybody can sail in 20 knots? I couldn't do it well without instruction. Maybe you're just a natural born sailor.


----------



## Valiente

It does. It's called showing them your back and walking away. 

Better yet, sail away.


----------



## tenuki

Valiente said:


> It does. It's called showing them your back and walking away.
> 
> Better yet, sail away.


Heh, ya, but in sometimes I like staying at the party.  And for inlaws....


----------



## TxLnghrn

*Just to avoid confusion.*



Stillraining said:


> Personally I must have missed what all the fuss came about to the banning of Runner...He basicly had the same position as TxLngrh just confirmed here in his post and felt passionately about it..what did I miss? I'll have to go back but dont recall any personal attacks per say no more then some calling others stupid or idiots..
> 
> FWIW.. I liked his arguments and his referral to Jumpers..I thought that sumed it up quit nice....and I'm for one glad there are people like him willing to.........even for the Ronnies of the world.


I was not agreeing with Runner as the two quotes below from latter in my post demonstrate.

Wise rescuers as they mature learn how to weigh benefit/risk and this allows them to become wise *old* rescuers.

Lack of planning on your part does not constitute and emergency on mine.

 Michael


----------



## sailingdog

I think what Bubb was trying to say is that it is generally easier to sail in a decent amount of wind than it is to sail in zephyrs. Also, I'd point out, that if you're out cruising, the ability to get the boat moving in the lighter winds that you will see FAR MORE OFTEN is crucial to getting places.


----------



## bubb2

farmboy said:


> Gotta disagree with you there, bubb. Like Charlie, I love sailing in very little wind. It's how I started helming simply because we had a run of very light wind when we got our boat. Had a great sailor come out with me and show me how it was done. After a few weeks of that I was out in winds that were gusting to 15 knots max and I was taking a little water into the cockpit, and stalling the boat. After having some more instruction in higher winds, I can sail with full sail to 20 knots and keep the boat moving well. I think that learning to sail involves learning to sail in light winds and strong winds. You do new sailors a disservice by telling them otherwise. There can be more than one type of difficult sailing. So anybody can sail in 20 knots? I couldn't do it well without instruction. Maybe you're just a natural born sailor.


Farmboy, If you can stall a boat while it's blowing 15, you can certainly stall a boat when she blowing 5. It is the same mistake, just wind speed is the only difference. It is matter of scale. However, it is easer to get your boat speed back in 15 kts after stalling than it is after a stall in 5 kts. I stand behind what I said.


----------



## erikdj

Getting a boat moving and sail trim is still only part of the equation. I'm surprised that no one has mentioned current and for that matter, navigation. 

Great, I got my boat moving 3 knots in this 5 knot wind, with a 6 knot current and heading in the wrong direction.


----------



## farmboy

bubb,
Upon the further explanation of your point, I apologize for the sarcasm in the last sentence of my last post. It was uncalled for.



bubb2 said:


> anybody can sail a boat in 20+ knots when there is wind to waste.


Although the light wind technique relates, its not the whole story as I see it for 20 knots of breeze. Maybe I never got it right in light wind, but it wasn't until I got into stronger breezes that I learned the following lesson: Assuming constant wind direction, gusts move apparent wind aft. Therefore I had to learn to anticipate gusts with the helm by pointing up in order to maintain proper sail trim. In my learning experience, this was a big wind lesson. Your assertion that sail trim is the same issue at 5 knots and 15 knots makes sense to me. I will try to apply my big wind lessons to my almost no wind sailing.



bubb2 said:


> Farmboy, If you can stall a boat while it's blowing 15, you can certainly stall a boat when she blowing 5. It is the same mistake, just wind speed is the only difference. It is matter of scale. However, it is easer to get your boat speed back in 15 kts after stalling than it is after a stall in 5 kts. I stand behind what I said.


----------



## bubb2

Farmboy, Thank you!!

The same thing goes, What you do to "power up sails" in light air, you do the opposite to de-power them in heavy air.

By the way welcome to sailnet, if you are in the New York area please let me know. We can go out on my boat. I think we can both learn from each other because, as my wife will tell you, I don't know it all.


----------



## Stillraining

TxLnghrn said:


> I was not agreeing with Runner as the two quotes below from latter in my post demonstrate.
> 
> Wise rescuers as they mature learn how to weigh benefit/risk and this allows them to become wise *old* rescuers.
> 
> Lack of planning on your part does not constitute and emergency on mine.
> 
> Michael


Nope.. I didnt say you agreed with him...but just that you both had the same *insight *as to young rescures *WANTING* to jump...


----------



## sailaway21

Here's another one.
FOXNews.com - Sailor Stranded at Sea on Solo Cruise From Hawaii Rescued - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News
Your ample tax dollars at work.


----------



## Stillraining

Well if he was comming from Hawaii he almost made it anyway....Sway your having way to much fun with this....ya know... I bet your sheriff department is just as busy as ours pulling stranded water craft of all manner off 200 acre lakes too....

Point being stuff happens.


----------



## sailaway21

Stillraining said:


> Well if he was comming from Hawaii he almost made it anyway....Sway your having way to much fun with this....ya know... I bet your sheriff department is just as busy as ours pulling stranded water craft of all manner off 200 acre lakes too....
> 
> Point being stuff happens.


Your sheriff department does that? Our's just dives for the bodies.


----------



## camaraderie

If Towboat US had done the tow it would have been a hell of a bill!


----------



## sailaway21

camaraderie said:


> If Towboat US had done the tow it would have been a hell of a bill!


Because you and I paid for it makes it cheap? (g)


----------



## sailingdog

No, not any cheaper, just changes who paid it... 


sailaway21 said:


> Because you and I paid for it makes it cheap? (g)


----------



## SEMIJim

erikdj said:


> Don't you think acknowledging that one is making a foolish, uninformed and uneducated decision _a priori_ make one a bigger fool than if one was simply ignorant?


Yes--that was my primary point.

Jim


----------



## SEMIJim

smackdaddy said:


> Fair enough. Then he should learn to make his point without the attitude. Jeff's a great example of someone that is able to do so.


Damn straight! Mods have no business actually participating in the forums they moderate!

(The perceptive amongst the readership might detect a hint of sarcasm in the above. For the less-perceptive: Yes, that was sarcasm.)



smackdaddy said:


> Otherwise - he's just like me.


Cam? Just like you? Uhm... no, not really.

Not even close, in fact.

Jim


----------



## farmboy

bubb2 said:


> Farmboy, Thank you!!
> 
> The same thing goes, What you do to "power up sails" in light air, you do the opposite to de-power them in heavy air.
> 
> By the way welcome to sailnet, if you are in the New York area please let me know. We can go out on my boat. I think we can both learn from each other because, as my wife will tell you, I don't know it all.


Bubb, It may be a few years, but my better half and I will definitely be visiting New York. Several friends of ours have been there lately and have absolutely loved it. Of course, if you ever find yourself in Southeastern Ontario (unlikely, but who knows?), you are welcome on our boat.


----------



## bubb2

farmboy said:


> Bubb, It may be a few years, but my better half and I will definitely be visiting New York. Several friends of ours have been there lately and have absolutely loved it. Of course, if you ever find yourself in Southeastern Ontario (unlikely, but who knows?), you are welcome on our boat.


I have sailed my boat to Halifax, Was greeted with warm welcomes. I going back!!!!!


----------



## AdamLein

Okay, I give up. When you say "BFS", are you talking about breadth-first search, the well-known passage-making algorithm?


----------



## ckgreenman

Or is it Big Freakin Sails??


----------



## Delirious

Oh! All this time I thought we were talking about "Brain Fart Sailing"!


----------



## ckgreenman

Of course if you were to read some of the other threads on here, "Bovine Fornication Syndrome" would fit as well. But in the context here I think Brain Fart Sailing fits perfectly


----------



## Valiente

****** False Stories.


----------



## Boasun

The difference between a Fairy Tale and a Sea Tale is:
A Fairy Tale starts with; Once upon a time...
A Sea Tale starts with; This is no ****.....


----------



## bubb2

Boasun said:


> The difference between a Fairy Tale and a Sea Tale is:
> A Fairy Tale starts with; Once upon a time...
> A Sea Tale starts with; This is no ****.....


isn't that the truth LOL


----------



## CharlieCobra

Yep, that or "I **** you not..."



stoopid filter!


----------



## TxLnghrn

*Let us not forget....*

So there I was.....


----------



## chall03

Ok, Just read this entire thread and it's pretty much done my head in! 

Although it is very clear to me that Ronnie(subject of the OP) should have in no circumstances made such a voyage so unprepared, I am very interested in what the people strongly critical of him think of the voyages of folk like Tania Aebi and Robin Lee Graham? 

I am not asking to stir up the proverbial again, I am genuinely wondering as someone lacking experience, what makes the difference between 'calculated-risk' and 'idiot'??? 

Clearly in the case of Tania and Robin, they hadn't spent 5 years coastal cruising, did not have a RYA Yachtmaster's Cetificate, and neither did it in a Deerfoot with Radar and Watermaker...although im sure both at least probably did a haulout....


----------



## sailingdog

Chall-

IIRC, at least in Tania's case, her boat was brand new, purpose bought for her by her father in place of a college education. Her boat was also a very, very seaworthy Folkboat derivative that was capable of taking care of her and helping protect her from her mistakes. She also started by going to Bermuda, rather than trying to cross an entire ocean all at once. That said, she was also very lucky. 

I don't remember enough about Robin Graham's boat or situation to say one way or the other.


----------



## camaraderie

OK...that's two! Want me to name 3 that have been picked up or lost at sea in the last year? You hear about the ones who survive and write books. You don't hear much about those picked up or lost. How about this guy RIGHT NOW?

*suli<o></o>*
*Vessel_Description**: Rustler 31, white hull and white sails. Sloop. Aft cockpit. <o></o>*
*No bimini. Aries Windvane. Red Tinker Tramp dinghy. Blue dodgers.<o></o>*
*Communications : Marine VHF radio. <o></o>*
*Itinerary : Solo world circumnavigation.<o></o>*
*Last email sent from *<st1><st1:city>*Thursday Island*</st1:city>*, *<st1:country-region>*A*</st1:country-region></st1><st1><st1:country-region>*ustralia*</st1:country-region></st1> <st1><st1>*Possible*</st1> <st1>*destination*</st1><st1> *Cape*</st1></st1>* Town, <o></o>*
*possiblly** non-stop but no no ETA given. Have calculated very earliest ETA 06.10.2008.<o></o>*
*Persons_on_board** :** 1 male,44 years old.<o></o>*
*Reason : Vessel not heard from for 2 months now. Previous period of no <o></o>*
*contact** 5 weeks (Pacific crossing). Keen to ascertain helm safe and well.<o></o>*
*His name is *<st1:city><st1>*Lawrence*</st1> </st1:city><st1:city><st1>*Taylor*</st1></st1:city>*.

**********
*
I guess some people are lucky. I don't think you need to sail for 5 years...just go slowly and work your way up to it and realy know your boat and your own capabilities before setting off beyond any help.


----------



## sailingdog

well said rv boy.


----------



## hellosailor

Tania A's father did a lot of "considering", she was not on her own about making all the choices that went into her trip.

HOWEVER, as she herself wrote in her first articles, she couldn't figure out how to use her sextant and was seriously worried about missing Bermuda and being lost at sea. (No EPIRB, no SatPhone, a bigger ocean and a bigger world back then.)

Possibly her father thought she was smart enough to figure it out, possibly she was lucky and survived that with luck as much as skill. Either way--she herself said that she could have simply been lost at sea, that early on.

Was that just "adventure writing" so it would sell? Possibly that too.


----------



## sailingdog

IIRC, didn't Tania also have an RDF aboard. Also, IIRC, part of her problem with the sextant was that it was a plastic one, and she had left it out in the sun and it had warped...making taking accurate sites on it almost impossible. She got a Freiberger metal sextant later on and had much better results with that.


----------



## wardp

I read this thread from the beginning and it's made for interesting read. I guess I can be termed a newbie to sailing. Here above lat. 54 sailing is a seasonal sport, the rest of the time the only reason to be out at sea, is to make a living.

What all this is about is the acceptance of risk. When someone goes out for a BFS, the experienced have tried to alleviate risk. But, **** happens and without luck survival is nil. Ronnie was lucky to have that freighter close by. Sometimes help is not that close by.

His boat probably would have survived if he had been able to keep water out of it and the bow or stern into the seas. One thought would be in that situation, is to tie a line to the middle of a tore up sail, tie it off to the bow and throw it over the lee side. Then ride it out on the cabin floor. 

The video about steering with main was good but, at twenty knots a bit ify. I was taught this when I joined a sail club in down south and took the US Sailing cert. to bareboat. I rather enjoyed myself as I had never ran a vessel that was a responsive to the helm as those new boats.

What I would like to hear is what can be done when found in an "Oh S***" condition during a BFS. Has anyone lost a mast?


----------



## sailingdog

WardP-

You seem to be missing the point that Ronnie went out in a 47-year-old boat and attempted a Pacific crossing without having the boat surveyed or inspected to any degree.... *However, he did have the money to buy HD video cameras, so he could document his voyage, and yet didn't have the money to pay for survey or inspect the rudder.* That is not accepting risk, that's just foolish.



wardp said:


> I read this thread from the beginning and it's made for interesting read. I guess I can be termed a newbie to sailing. Here above lat. 54 sailing is a seasonal sport, the rest of the time the only reason to be out at sea, is to make a living.
> 
> What all this is about is the acceptance of risk. When someone goes out for a BFS, the experienced have tried to alleviate risk. But, **** happens and without luck survival is nil. Ronnie was lucky to have that freighter close by. Sometimes help is not that close by.
> 
> His boat probably would have survived if he had been able to keep water out of it and the bow or stern into the seas. One thought would be in that situation, is to tie a line to the middle of a tore up sail, tie it off to the bow and throw it over the lee side. Then ride it out on the cabin floor.
> 
> The video about steering with main was good but, at twenty knots a bit ify. I was taught this when I joined a sail club in down south and took the US Sailing cert. to bareboat. I rather enjoyed myself as I had never ran a vessel that was a responsive to the helm as those new boats.
> 
> What I would like to hear is what can be done when found in an "Oh S***" condition during a BFS. Has anyone lost a mast?


----------



## wardp

No, he did accept risk, just not level you or I as a students of the school of hard knocks would accept.

I go out in a 36' gillneter built in 1968, in 20-30 knots. Have I replaced and rebuilt most of it, hell yes. I also have suits, epirb and radios and experince. 

Would I go out in October? No. Did that in an 80' boat in the 70's and sweated that my welds would hold in gusts to 100+ knots.


----------



## smackdaddy

Chall,

Okay, so I was being a tiny bit sarcastic in my related post in the "...Yacht in distress" thread. As you may know, I happen to be one of those pesky "BFS Proponents" myself. What I found amusing in that thread is how - as you astutely point out - people around here seemed to give that guy a slide, when the OP of this thread and many others hammered the kid herein - for the same end results. Why? I think you'll find their answer to be that the Aussie sinker was experienced (had "been sailing since he was 12") and the kid was not. The sinker took a calculated risk. The kid was an idiot.

And now you bring up another couple of young, greenish sailors that went very big - and succeeded. How? Well, of course, it was "luck" - the only possible explanation. Then you get smacked down with another story of a missing 44-year-old soloist (and more if you want 'em) to once again make the point: Don't be an idiot newbie! 

The OP of this thread, and others, seem very eager to discredit the idea of and desire for Big Freakin' Sails. And it seems to me that they are tying to prove their point by going to the extreme and being somewhat hysterical about the whole affair. Maybe it's just election season. But, in my few months around Sailnet, I honestly have never understood the aggressive aversion to the idea of sailing hard. But it's here...for now.

The bottom line is that the second someone around here admits the fact that ANYONE AND EVERYONE (including seasoned salts) that partakes in a big sail in big water and big wind - and returns home safely is LUCKY, is when the "hierarchy" falls.

It has to always be about experience and knowledge - period. This allows the hierarchy. If there's anything else at all involved - it has to be luck - only luck. Because this keeps most people afraid and leads us back to the hierarchy. But in all this, the desire for adventure and excitement in sailing (the premise of your signature) is pretty much continually smothered.

The problem with this premise is that at the end of the day it's ALWAYS luck. Every time. No matter how "salty" you are. I mean we're dealing with weather, wind, and water here. Who controls those again? Then throw in a little piracy and impossible mechanical failures...you get the picture.

Every reasonably sane person out there knows that you obviously increase your odds by increasing your experience and knowledge (that's why we're all here and that's why we're all PRACTICING this craft we love) - but at the end of the day, it's still luck. In the end, to hammer the kid in this thread and give the sinker a pass is really pretty ridiculous. The outcome was the same - they both got caught - they both called in SAR.

But they have to call the kid an idiot. And they have to call the sinker unlucky. Otherwise, the hierarchy is in trouble. This despite the fact that no one here can quantify for you that actual amount of experience and knowledge that finally certifies you to "go big". It's just they won't call you an idiot if you get unlucky if they feel you got all the checks on the card.

At the end of the day, it will always be a personal choice. You will go big when you feel you are prepared to go big. And you will probably do it before you're really ready enough. That is, if your desire is still intact. I certainly intend mine to be when that time comes.

Then you'll either be lucky...and the one who took that "calculated risk". Or unlucky...and an "idiot".

Your only other choice is to be a day sailor in sheltered waters. And that's cool. It's pretty safe and doesn't require "as much luck". But it's not for everyone. Some aspire to BFS.

There are a few salty sailors on Sailnet that will encourage you in the desire to go big - and will do everything they can to help you prepare for it. They are GREAT fun to talk to and have some incredible stories that are sobering, informative, and freakin' exciting. They're not about attitude - they're about sailing. And that's really cool. You just won't find them in threads like this.


----------



## camaraderie

Ronnie is in Hong Kong looking for a new boat and directions for the best route and timing south and west to the Cape of Good Hope...a route that takes him clear of Pirates. Yeah...that's what he should be concerned about! 

Meanwhile 16 year old Zac Sunderland busted his tiller and busted his boom in the Indian ocean...made a jury rig and continued on to Cocos Keeling where he had new ones carved from wood as he makes his way towards the same destination. 
Yeah...everybody needs luck. Some make their own. Some talk a good game.


----------



## sailingdog

Of course, making the proper preparations, like inspecting the boat, means that you'll have a much higher chance of having "good luck"... don't make the proper preparations, you'll be amazed at how much "bad luck" you run into.


----------



## SEMIJim

smackdaddy said:


> But, in my few months around Sailnet, I honestly have never understood the aggressive aversion to the idea of sailing hard.


Yeah, that would explain all the interest in, and admiration of, SimonV for his single-handing his boat home from California. 



smackdaddy said:


> It has to always be about experience and knowledge - period.
> 
> Every reasonably sane person out there knows that you obviously increase your odds by increasing your experience and knowledge


Just contradicted yourself.



smackdaddy said:


> (that's why we're all here


Well, that's why _some_ of us, probably most of us, are here. Others, I wonder about.



smackdaddy said:


> But they have to call the kid an idiot.


That's because the kid _was_ an idiot. He set off inexperienced in off-shore sailing, in a old boat the condition of which he hadn't properly ascertained. He admitted these things That isn't ignorance. Ignorance can be excused. Ignorance can be cured. This was just plain old stupidity. It's not challenging sailing that's at issue, here, it is stupidity and other people risking their lives to save the purposefully stupid that's the issue. This point has been made to you repeatedly, but you keep ignoring it.

You are either exceedingly slow or a troll. I'm not absolutely certain which, but by the nature of your arguments, the nick you've chosen for yourself and your avatar, I strongly suspect the latter.

Jim


----------



## sailingdog

SemiJIm-

Very, very well said.



> That's because the kid _was_ an idiot. He set off inexperienced in off-shore sailing, in a old boat the condition of which he hadn't properly ascertained. He admitted these things That isn't ignorance. Ignorance can be excused. Ignorance can be cured. This was just plain old stupidity. It's not challenging sailing that's at issue, here, it is stupidity and other people risking their lives to save the purposefully stupid that's the issue. This point has been made to you repeatedly, but you keep ignoring it.
> 
> You are either exceedingly slow or a troll. I'm not absolutely certain which, but by the nature of your arguments, the nick you've chosen for yourself and your avatar, I strongly suspect the latter.


----------



## smackdaddy

Semi - look, I just disagree with you guys about the underlying argument you're making. That's all. I'm not calling anybody names. I'm not belittling anyone. I just don't think you guys are right. I don't think you guys are being objective. I think you guys are overblowing this whole thing - as shown in this thread. That's all.

Whether that makes me a troll I suppose is a matter of opinion.

It's inarguable that knowledge and experience are great, necessary things for success in any endeavor. Of course they are. It's just mystifying to me why you guys keep preaching this so hard (although inconsistently) using these extreme examples to make your point. A point that is really pretty obvious to most sane people.

And this especially when BFS was always about pushing *personal limits* - not sailing around the freaking world in a ferro-cement tug with a woven rug as a sail and a Toys-R-Us sextant on your first time in a boat. Not that there's anything wrong with that if you can pull it off.

BUT, when the "idiot" sermon is continually preached at the expense of the "calculated risk" discussion - it really gets old. Especially when luck brings us home in the end anyway.

That's all I'm saying. I just agree with your signature.


----------



## smackdaddy

So was the Aussie sinker a BFS Proponent? What's you guys' take on him?


----------



## smackdaddy

camaraderie said:


> Ronnie is in Hong Kong looking for a new boat and directions for the best route and timing south and west to the Cape of Good Hope...a route that takes him clear of Pirates. Yeah...that's what he should be concerned about!
> 
> Meanwhile 16 year old Zac Sunderland busted his tiller and busted his boom in the Indian ocean...made a jury rig and continued on to Cocos Keeling where he had new ones carved from wood as he makes his way towards the same destination.
> Yeah...everybody needs luck. Some make their own. Some talk a good game.


Go Zach! Definitely a BFS!


----------



## sailingdog

smackdaddy said:


> ....And this especially when BFS was always about pushing *personal limits* - not sailing around the freaking world in a ferro-cement tug with a woven rug as a sail and a Toys-R-Us sextant on your first time in a boat. Not that there's anything wrong with that if you can pull it off.


Exactly, how is setting off in a boat that is questionable going to push your personal limits. To push your personal limits, you need to have equipment that can let you reach those limits...a 47-year-old, uninspected boat is not going to let you test your limits.



> BUT, when the "idiot" sermon is continually preached at the expense of the "calculated risk" discussion - it really gets old. Especially when luck brings us home in the end anyway.


Luck doesn't bring you home in many cases. Look at Maude Fontenoy, who completed a circumnavigation a while back. She broke her mast 200 miles from her final destination or so... when she contacted her shore crew to tell them about it...they asked her if she needed assistance... she basically told them that she'd just be a little later than she had planned on and sailed the final 200 NM under a jury rig. *Exactly where is the luck there... jury-rigging the boat took SKILL, KNOWLEDGE, and EXPERIENCE.*


----------



## bubb2

sailingdog said:


> *Exactly where is the luck there... jury-rigging the boat took SKILL, KNOWLEDGE, and EXPERIENCE.*


Dog, Touché


----------



## KODAD

Luck prefers the prepared.


----------



## sailingdog

Thanks Bubb. 

I'd also point out that _*IF Ronnie had has some experience, he might have been able to jury rig a tiller on his boat.... *From all accounts, the rudder and rudder stock were INTACT. _ AFAICT, the thing that broke was the key locking the steering quadrant to the rudder stock. _*In fact, if he had done a proper preparation of the boat for a bluewater voyage, he would have had an emergency tiller for the rudder stock aboard and known how to use it... *_so jury-rigging a method to steer would have been minimal at most.


----------



## wardp

I agree, Ron made mistakes, but not with the boat.

I would sail to Hawaii in a 47 year old bounty, it was a good boat and with care it still is. I agree that he should have prepared better, but up until he got off the boat, the boat had not failed, it was still floating, even after it was run over. That is a good boat.

The only reason that Ron survived could be because he chose that boat. 

I have crawled in the bilges of a few boats in my search that are called bluewater and I wondered if I could make it back to the dock without getting wet.

We just had a vessel sink off the Aleutians last week. The boat failed. The ones survived were lucky, their raft didn't blow over more than once.


----------



## chall03

Thanks all for your thoughts and feedback.



sailingdog said:


> Chall-
> 
> IIRC, at least in Tania's case, her boat was brand new, purpose bought for her by her father in place of a college education. Her boat was also a very, very seaworthy Folkboat derivative that was capable of taking care of her and helping protect her from her mistakes. She also started by going to Bermuda, rather than trying to cross an entire ocean all at once. That said, she was also very lucky. .


SailingDog I take your point, I wasn't trying to make a direct comparison with Ronnie either, I put it out there as an example of equally ambitious but slightly more prepared voyage to find out what folk on here thought...

Thanks also Camaraderie, for addressing my queation so directly! My fear was that we did indeed only hear about the isolated few who succeed and that for every Tania Aebi/Robin Graham/Jesse Martin etc there are alot who don't get to write the book but alternatively get into/cause alot of trouble. I guess I don't ever want to be in that second category( for what it's worth I have no plans to write a book anytime soon either).

Smack Daddy, I get alot of what your saying, however I think the other differences between the 'sinker' mentioned in another thread and Ronnie, is that the sinker wasn't trying to sail to Hawaii in an unsurveyed ancient boat and didn't end up getting in trouble 600 miles from land. He was coastal sailing in a modern production boat, and was well and truly in sight of land, a couple of miles from a major boating hub and city, when he was 'rescued'. Yeah the media made it sound alot more sensational, but I think it was just a slow news day. Ok the sinker did head out in crappy weather....but I think port hopping up the coast in a 5 year old production yacht in bad weather, is different than sailing from San Diego to Hawaii off season....


----------



## sailingdog

WardP-

While the boat may have been a good choice...he did make the mistake of not inspecting or prepping the boat properly.


wardp said:


> I agree, Ron made mistakes, but not with the boat.
> 
> I would sail to Hawaii in a 47 year old bounty, it was a good boat and with care it still is. I agree that he should have prepared better, but up until he got off the boat, the boat had not failed, it was still floating, even after it was run over. That is a good boat.
> 
> The only reason that Ron survived could be because he chose that boat.
> 
> I have crawled in the bilges of a few boats in my search that are called bluewater and I wondered if I could make it back to the dock without getting wet.
> 
> We just had a vessel sink off the Aleutians last week. The boat failed. The ones survived were lucky, their raft didn't blow over more than once.


----------



## wardp

I agree. 

Winter is not the time to frolic in the Pacific.


----------



## sailaway21

smackdaddy said:


> Semi - look, I just disagree with you guys about the underlying argument you're making. That's all. I'm not calling anybody names. I'm not belittling anyone. I just don't think you guys are right. I don't think you guys are being objective. I think you guys are overblowing this whole thing - as shown in this thread. That's all.
> 
> Whether that makes me a troll I suppose is a matter of opinion.
> 
> It's inarguable that knowledge and experience are great, necessary things for success in any endeavor. Of course they are. It's just mystifying to me why you guys keep preaching this so hard (although inconsistently) using these extreme examples to make your point. A point that is really pretty obvious to most sane people.
> 
> And this especially when BFS was always about pushing *personal limits* - not sailing around the freaking world in a ferro-cement tug with a woven rug as a sail and a Toys-R-Us sextant on your first time in a boat. Not that there's anything wrong with that if you can pull it off.
> 
> BUT, when the "idiot" sermon is continually preached at the expense of the "calculated risk" discussion - it really gets old. Especially when luck brings us home in the end anyway.
> 
> That's all I'm saying. I just agree with your signature.


You don't think we're right. You don't think we're objective. How the heck would you know...you've never been out of sight of land! I've pissed more salt water than you've sailed. I've taught seamanship, navigation, and lifeboatman certification to men and women ranging from eighth grade educations to college students and what I most hoped to teach them was how to remain safe until they got enough knowledge and respect for the sea to do so on their own more thoroughly. Those students in pursuit of a Third Mate's license are weeded out ruthlessly for lack of ability or aptitude. Half the USCG license exam requires 90% as a passing grade, and that's just for the book learning aspect. I've fired men with genius IQ's and substandard judgment for taking unnecessary risks with the ship and the lives of their shipmates. There are no second chances. You don't get a do-over.

It's not about personal limits. It's about what the sea hands you. If you're lucky you'll have a bit of experience before the sea kills you. Even experience might not be enough. And none of us have the slightest idea as to what might be "enough" experience. We can only hope that when confronted with what the sea delivers, in extremis, that something we learned a long time ago subconsciously helps us to do the right thing at the right time. And 99.9% of that you will never learn on sailnet or in any book. While we may not be able to say what is enough experience, we certainly have some good, and valid, ideas on what is demonstrably not enough experience. There isn't enough luck in this whole world to keep you very safe for long at sea.

If you were being in the least way objective, you'd probably be marveling at all there is involved to going off to sea that you know nothing about, rather than lecturing those of us who know something about it. I've lost men at sea and I've classmates who will never be found. *And I take what I post on the Internet seriously because someone may rely on it in their decision-making to go offshore. And the only way I know to convey the concept of prudent seamanship is to encourage and promote the idea that the prudent seaman always has doubts and is always second guessing himself. He is under no illusions that the sea will honor his past experience.*


----------



## Valiente

Good post, Sway.


----------



## artbyjody

smackdaddy said:


> Whether that makes me a troll I suppose is a matter of opinion.
> 
> It's inarguable that knowledge and experience are great, necessary things for success in any endeavor. Of course they are. It's just mystifying to me why you guys keep preaching this so hard (although inconsistently) using these extreme examples to make your point. A point that is really pretty obvious to most sane people.


Well you end quote: "A point that is really pretty obvious to most sane people." - You assume that you are sane, when in fact we know that with belligerent and bombastic insistence that "Fight Club" and "BFS" and your lame attempt at "LFS" ... that if you - yourself had the kinda mind that wants to learn from other's mistakes, you might take heed of the comments given. You don't. You may be highly educated but I think you have what is often described as an engineers one track mind. In that - all you can see is what you think a outcome should be based on a definition of an experience based soley on what you have envisioned it to be according to how you would want it.

Good for you and hope it works out for you in that mini test lab you call a BFS lake.

Extreme examples do make a point because if you look at the relative data - unequivocally demonstrates the rate of success and failures, based upon:

wait for it...

Really - wait...

Wait for it...

Preparedness on all levels.

Just like a single wanna be playboy wants to score, the environment is chosen and the targets are acquisitioned in a dutiful manner. You wanna compare "luck" - luck is by design my friend. You do whatever you can do to make the outcome as close as what you want but you have to prepare. That dude that hasn't bathed in 3 months aint gonna be scoring just because he can drop 10K on HD video equipment. That whom maybe will kinda be in the gonna score category - has all the p's and q's addressed before he attempts because he knows - it is better to be over pre-pared than to be not.

You ridicule "extreme examples" - because you don't understand the importance of the lesson...A playboy knows how to deal with the type that suddenly exclaims holy murder I woke up with you...Mother nature actually isn't that kind because you can't exactly kick mother nature out the door when you don't feel like dealing with it...



smackdaddy said:


> And this especially when BFS was always about pushing *personal limits* - not sailing around the freaking world in a ferro-cement tug with a woven rug as a sail and a Toys-R-Us sextant on your first time in a boat. Not that there's anything wrong with that if you can pull it off.


Interesting you bash a ferro cement boat then counter with if you can pull it off. Again illustrating that you are a troll and that you truly do not get it...

Pushing personal limits requires three things:

1) Trust in your boat.
2) Trust in anyone on your boat.
3) Trust in yourself to make decision because you directely dictate the outcome of any dire circumstances for those listed above.

You just do not get it...


----------



## bubb2

Well said, Sway!!!


----------



## sailingdog

Jody, Sway-

Well said both of you...

CP-

Don't waste your time... he's not worth it... if he decides to go out on the ocean, the ocean will probably teach him...if it doesn't kill him. The ocean isn't very forgiving of fools most of the time. As Sway said... _*you generally don't get a do-over... *_


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> Exactly, how is setting off in a boat that is questionable going to push your personal limits. To push your personal limits, you need to have equipment that can let you reach those limits...a 47-year-old, uninspected boat is not going to let you test your limits.
> 
> Luck doesn't bring you home in many cases. Look at Maude Fontenoy, who completed a circumnavigation a while back. She broke her mast 200 miles from her final destination or so... when she contacted her shore crew to tell them about it...they asked her if she needed assistance... she basically told them that she'd just be a little later than she had planned on and sailed the final 200 NM under a jury rig. *Exactly where is the luck there... jury-rigging the boat took SKILL, KNOWLEDGE, and EXPERIENCE.*


Dog - it's simple, really. The luck was in the fact that all that happened in the event was a broken mast. She obviously didn't have control over what broke - she was just lucky enough that it was something that could be jury rigged and allow her to continue on. That particular part of the story (i.e. - the turning event) is luck. It has nothing to do with experience, knowledge or control. See what I mean?

Like Kodad said - luck prefers the prepared. But it's still luck doing the preferrin' isn't it?

And when I say "personal limits" regarding BFS - to me that includes everything in the sailor's equation (boat, equipment, etc. included). As a matter of fact, I didn't use "personal limits" in the OP of BFS. I said "sailing that pushes limits - whatever those limits may be". So we're getting into semantics here.

Bottom line, this is all such a squishy argument for you guys (or anyone else) to make. That's because you guys are trying to use these extreme examples to lay down hard and fast rules in an area where there just are none. As I've always held, it's subjective. And I think this is pretty evident by the varying treatment of various sailors when the end result was EXACTLY the same. You have to admit - this does raise questions, doesn't it?

And I'm actually intrigued as to why the OP here and you other guys are following this kid's journey so closely if he so thoroughly ticks you off. What are you trying to gain in that? I think the answer to this would be pretty fascinating.

I've said it before, and will say it again, as a newbie I personally have no desire to follow in his footsteps. As he has admitted - he wasn't prepared. I'm just saying he's not alone - because being prepared enough for a serious storm in the big briny is a very big, subjective thing isn't it? Personally, I will take my time and learn everything I can - while still personally maintaining that BFS is what it's all about.


----------



## smackdaddy

chall03 said:


> Smack Daddy, I get alot of what your saying, however I think the other differences between the 'sinker' mentioned in another thread and Ronnie, is that the sinker wasn't trying to sail to Hawaii in an unsurveyed ancient boat and didn't end up getting in trouble 600 miles from land. He was coastal sailing in a modern production boat, and was well and truly in sight of land, a couple of miles from a major boating hub and city, when he was 'rescued'. Yeah the media made it sound alot more sensational, but I think it was just a slow news day. Ok the sinker did head out in crappy weather....but I think port hopping up the coast in a 5 year old production yacht in bad weather, is different than sailing from San Diego to Hawaii off season....


Chall - Like I said above, and as many have pointed out, this is just a very slippery argument on either side of it. I actually drew the parallel here because if I recall the sinker did have plans to circumnavigate. And, according to the story, he was a very experienced and knowledgeable sailor that STILL got dunked just off shore in a boat he'd just purchased.

Compare all of these simple facts to the kid herein - and it's pretty similar. Then all that's left is the armchair quarterbacking which was very different in both cases. I just thought it worthy of discussion.


----------



## smackdaddy

sailaway21 said:


> You don't think we're right. You don't think we're objective. How the heck would you know...you've never been out of sight of land! I've pissed more salt water than you've sailed. I've taught seamanship, navigation, and lifeboatman certification to men and women ranging from eighth grade educations to college students and what I most hoped to teach them was how to remain safe until they got enough knowledge and respect for the sea to do so on their own more thoroughly. Those students in pursuit of a Third Mate's license are weeded out ruthlessly for lack of ability or aptitude. Half the USCG license exam requires 90% as a passing grade, and that's just for the book learning aspect. I've fired men with genius IQ's and substandard judgment for taking unnecessary risks with the ship and the lives of their shipmates. There are no second chances. You don't get a do-over.
> 
> It's not about personal limits. It's about what the sea hands you. If you're lucky you'll have a bit of experience before the sea kills you. Even experience might not be enough. And none of us have the slightest idea as to what might be "enough" experience. We can only hope that when confronted with what the sea delivers, in extremis, that something we learned a long time ago subconsciously helps us to do the right thing at the right time. And 99.9% of that you will never learn on sailnet or in any book. While we may not be able to say what is enough experience, we certainly have some good, and valid, ideas on what is demonstrably not enough experience. There isn't enough luck in this whole world to keep you very safe for long at sea.
> 
> If you were being in the least way objective, you'd probably be marveling at all there is involved to going off to sea that you know nothing about, rather than lecturing those of us who know something about it. I've lost men at sea and I've classmates who will never be found. And I take what I post on the Internet seriously because someone may rely on it in their decision-making to go offshore. And the only way I know to convey the concept of prudent seamanship is to encourage and promote the idea that the prudent seaman always has doubts and is always second guessing himself. He is under no illusions that the sea will honor his past experience


Sway, this is a very good post. And I think it's actually one of the more objective ones we've had in a while. Thanks. Seriously.

The statements in red align with the points I was making. So we are in agreement there. And I'm not lecturing anyone. I'm debating an issue of viewpoint and approach - not mechanics.

Also, I personally DO marvel at what is involved in going off to sea. That's why I haven't done it yet. I'm not nearly ready. And I would never do it solo. That's too big for me. Furthermore, I appreciate and respect your experience and knowledge - and have never held that it's not a critical component to BFS. But again, this is really about the philosophy/desire/merits of big sailing, not the mechanics. So this discussion doesn't require licensing. Just viewpoint.

So, I'm not sure we disagree about a whole lot here. If what you guys really want is to "encourage and promote prudent seamanship" - then who's going to argue with that? That's great! Do it!

But look at the title of this thread - and look at the comments herein. Is that what's going on? Not even close. Case in point, even the kid got a second chance. So, for better or worse, it does happen. One just has to be careful about these and other kinds of definitive statements seen in this thread if it's to be a true, encouraging discussion.

Finally, I've pissed more saltwater than I've sailed too. So we must agree that I know what I'm talking about.

Again. Thanks for the good post.


----------



## smackdaddy

cardiacpaul said:


> Theres a reason I put people on ignore.
> My personal ignoramus tolerance quotient is quite low.
> If the person wishes to take any of the advise freely asked for, and then given, then fine, all is well and good.
> When that same person then tries to justify their position based in no small part by bravado, testosterone, pussers, or by some other means other than experience, I quit. Bless his heart.
> They just don't know what they don't know.
> Its difficult to learn when you're speaking, and not listening.
> 
> One of my thoughts was that when we return to Central Texas next spring for an extended family visit, was to ask to go sailing on a particular Catalina 27, a boat I'm very familiar with. I'd ask to go on one of the 3 days of the year that the winds actually get above 10kts on that little lake.
> 
> I'd then ask to take the helm, and try my darndest to get up to "speed" in the available water. Put up as much BFS as possible. Tweak the Twist... Try to get the spreaders wet. Hopefully the pussers and twinkies would be rolling about on the cabin floor, but it is a Catalina 27.
> 
> After that spirited little sail, somehow, I'd suppress my desire to poke the twit in his chest while saying, "Now, do that without soiling yourself. Otherwise, sit down and shut the eff up, you might learn something."
> 
> Alas, that won't happen. I have nothing to prove. I'm not going to waste my energy.


Hey CP! Long time no post! It's great to hear from you - despite the ignoring! And you're always welcome to come sail my C27 any time. It would be an honor.


----------



## smackdaddy

Finally - you guys shouldn't get so bent out of shape. After all I was cordially invited by Cam, the OP of this intriguingly entitled thread, to come over and participate in a frank debate about the BFS philosophy and exactly what qualifies a person as a "BFS Proponent". I'm just obliging that invitation.


----------



## N0NJY

camaraderie said:


> Here's the latest from his brother:
> "Ronnie says the trip is not over, all though the story has changed a slight amount, okay, it is completely different, he still wants to sail around the world. When he gets to Hawaii we plan on scrounging up a sail boat *and crew* and continuing the journey.


Well... I see a shining ray of hope, and a blip of common sense there. Anyone else see it? (I highlighted in, in case folks missed it!)


----------



## sailingdog

A lot depends on what Ronnie considers qualified crew to be. Given his lack of inspection and preparation and his lack of anything resembling experience., his standards may not be at all realistic.


N0NJY said:


> Well... I see a shining ray of hope, and a blip of common sense there. Anyone else see it? (I highlighted in, in case folks missed it!)


----------



## bubb2

Ronnie please listen:

YouTube - Supertramp - Dreamer (live 1974)


----------



## SEMIJim

smackdaddy said:


> Semi - look, I just disagree with you guys about the underlying argument you're making.


Oh, so you *do* understand our issue is with people who haven't the faintest clue of what they're doing, using equipment in well-used and unknown condition, and *knowning* these things are so, taking off on a potentially hazardous venture? You understand that, and you're arguing doing so is not stupid, idiotic and careless, is that it?



smackdaddy said:


> BUT, when the "idiot" sermon is continually preached at the expense of the "calculated risk" discussion ...


How can somebody who doesn't know what they're doing calculate risk? The odds of failure could be infinitely small or approaching near certainty, and the clueless could never possibly know. Even after succeeding or failing, they'd _still_ never know whether they beat the odds or the odds won.

Jim


----------



## sailingdog

Bubb-

You're dating yourself by selecting that particular song...


----------



## bubb2

sailingdog said:


> Bubb-
> 
> You're dating yourself by selecting that particular song...


 Dog, I am so old I don't "date" anybody any more.


----------



## sailingdog

bubb2 said:


> Dog, I am so old I don't "date" anybody any more.


LOL... good reply...when I'm about your age, in twenty-five years or so...I'll have to start using it.


----------



## smackdaddy

Jody - I DO want to learn from other people's mistakes. I just think it's a little twisted to celebrate them with such glee.


----------



## smackdaddy

SEMIJim said:


> Oh, so you *do* understand our issue is with people who haven't the faintest clue of what they're doing, using equipment in well-used and unknown condition, and *knowning* these things are so, taking off on a potentially hazardous venture? You understand that, and you're arguing doing so is not stupid, idiotic and careless, is that it?


Ahm - no Jim. That's not it.

Even with this kid, your statement above doesn't completely hold water. Despite all his acknowledged shortcomings, you have to give him some amount of credit don't you? Someone who hasn't "the faintest clue of what they're doing" couldn't have possibly sailed ~600 NM for a week in the right direction and had an EPIRB at the ready for an emergency. Right? So it's not really an apples to apples argument you're making. It's not all or nothing. It's not the extreme you're trying to cast it in. It's subjective. That's all I've been saying.



SEMIJim said:


> How can somebody who doesn't know what they're doing calculate risk? The odds of failure could be infinitely small or approaching near certainty, and the clueless could never possibly know. Even after succeeding or failing, they'd _still_ never know whether they beat the odds or the odds won.


This is a good point. And this is why I think the "calculated risk" discussion is much more constructive than the "idiot" discussion. To that end, I have to go back to the Skip Allen story for comparison. He is inarguably one of the best sailors around. A seasoned salt for sure. So what's your take on his rescue purely in light of the facts of that particular sail?


----------



## sailingdog

Sailing 600 NM in the right direction isn't all that hard if the conditions are right. Doing so when the weather or seas are against you is another story.

The real test of how good a sailor is only comes when things start going wrong. Ronnie failed.

If he had lost the rudder, or the rudder stock had broken, that would have been a far different thing than what he actually had happen. From all accounts, the rudder didn't break, wasn't even damaged. The rudder stock wasn't broken either.

*The only thing that did break, according to everything I've read, was the rudder steering quadrant was no longer locked to the rudder stock-probably a broken key. * He could have used an emergency tiller... even if he had to fashion one out of a pair of vise grips and a boat hook. He didn't have the brains, skills or experience to think of doing that, much less make it a reality.


----------



## smackdaddy

Dog - I'll take your word on the ease of sailing. But I think the point still holds that he had at least a "faint clue" about it. Just trying to keep it a fair fight.

As for the rudder issue, I don't have a clue. I looked through several of his posts but couldn't find the diagnosis you point out above. Where is that info?


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> Despite all his acknowledged shortcomings, you have to give him some amount of credit don't you? Someone who hasn't "the faintest clue of what they're doing" couldn't have possibly sailed ~600 NM for a week in the right direction and had an EPIRB at the ready for an emergency. Right? So it's not really an apples to apples argument you're making. It's not all or nothing. It's not the extreme you're trying to cast it in. It's subjective. That's all I've been saying.


No; we don't have to give him credit. I would not set off for HI and beyond because I fully admit that I don't have the experience or a boat that is properly equipped at the moment to do it. I don't give him credit for trying; because he should not have tried to begin with. He did something completely foolish and now the sailing community has to take the blame for another goofball who was rescued while playing Christopher Columbus. Sailing 600 NM is not hard to do. Setting off an EPIRB or bringing one with you is a no-brainier if you "plan" on needing rescue. The EPIRB may have come with the boat so you can't even give credit for him preparing by buying it. The EPIRB is not an "I'm ready to be saved" device! It's a locater beacon for POTENTIAL RESCUE if another boat can safely do so and is in range.

His plan was an "all or nothing" attempt because he did not posses the experience or ability to effect his own rescue in the event of a failure of his steering, sails, or rig.



smackdaddy said:


> ...this is why I think the "calculated risk" discussion is much more constructive than the "idiot" discussion. To that end, I have to go back to the Skip Allen story for comparison. He is inarguably one of the best sailors around. A seasoned salt for sure. So what's your take on his rescue purely in light of the facts of that particular sail?


I don't think he did much calculating. If he had; then his assessment would have come up with the result that he had a near zero chance of making a sail around the world. With what we have seen/read about this guy we all tend to form a consensus of opinion among the forum members (high, moderate, low levels of experience) that the guy is an idiot. We all thought the same of Ken Barnes when he got rolled, dis-masted and was flailing about for a week in the southern ocean about a year ago; but at least he had some clue about how to sail (but not how to sail and maintain control in a storm). You see, idiots come and go by us all the time; when they survive there is a story to tell (and debate their merits), when they don't we never hear about them or their boat washes ashore somewhere and we all wonder what happened. But the people who know how to cross oceans safely are never heard about because there is no life/death story to tell. The best we can do is to point out those who have failed as "idiots" and warn others not to take the same path (repeat history). We can also encourage people who wish to set off across oceans to read books that discuss heavy weather and storm survival tactics; boat preparation, etc so they don't do the fool-hearty thing and set out in an ill equipped boat with little/no experience.

To compare him to Skip Allan is ridiculous. Lots of well known and well equipped sailors have both required rescue and/or had failures that were beyond their control to correct. The problem is that if a person with little experience goes out and gets in trouble, then people call into question everyone who has ever needed assistance; as a way of justifying the actions of a person who really should never have set out to sea. You really can't compare the two.

You MIGHT compare Ken Barnes to Ronnie but again I think that Ronnie had even less knowledge/experience than Ken. IIRC Ken spent over 2 years prepping his boat; at least he did something substantial along those lines. I don't know how much time/effort went into Ronnie's boat; but it looks like minimal preparation and mainly just wanting to do the circumnav as if nothing could or would go wrong.

Reading his bio it sounds like he was inspired by the writings of other solo circumnavigators but gave little if any respect for these people as lifelong sailors who had achieved the pinnacle of their sailing career by going around the globe solo. Today so many people treat sailing solo like it's an easy thing to do; but forget that there is so much technology that allows it now. As a result they shortcut the practice, competence and know-how needed to survive when systems fail (the technology that makes it "easy").



sailingdog said:


> He could have used an emergency tiller... even if he had to fashion one out of a pair of vise grips and a boat hook. He didn't have the brains, skills or experience to think of doing that, much less make it a reality.


Well said SD; but you assume that he HAD a pair of vice grips and a boat hook!


----------



## Omatako

To a certain extent I have to agree with Smack. The reason why this person had to be rescued is because the conditions reached a level that he and his vessel were inadequate. That point is waiting in the wings for every person and every boat that leaves on a voyage. His threshold was just artificially low because of some bad choices. It's really back to John Vigor's Black Box theory again.

Yes it is true that he was incompetent, yes it is true that his vessel was seemingly less than some of us would have accepted but if the weather had not exceeded his credits in the black box, if he had had the weather that I had between the US and the Marquesas, he probably would have completed his journey without falling off the end of our perfect earth. He has now done a voyage of 600nm, far more than many of his critics.

Somewhere earlier (this thread is now getting so long it's tiresome tracking down detail) someone compared Ronnie's voyage with that of SimonV. As it happened, SimonV also never pulled his rudder for x-rays and crack testing (or at least the reports that I read indicated that) and as luck would have it, he had a trouble free voyage. As did I when I covered the same ground and I never had NASA look at my rudder either. But he could have also hit weather that exceeded his competence or the ability of his vessel and he too would have had to be rescued, or died.

Ronnie will have learned a valuabe lesson from his experience. Whether we like to accept it or not, he is wiser than he was before he last set off. Someone earlier also said something like "Look, the clown is off again!" Maybe he is, I don't know or care. The next time he will be more competent and maybe in ten years time, he will post his experiences here to help other newbies. Assuming he survives  . And assuming he would *want* to help anybody on this forum  .

But guess what? He already has more experience than a lot of the critics in this thread. He already knows more about storms than most of the posters here. Now that's an interesting observation, isn't it?


----------



## tommays

I have a friend who did the big circle along time ago with his wife and two young children over a well planed 6 year period 


I shall not drop any names BUT and he ran a BIG boat yard and spent his working career in yacht repair and refit and now teaches safety at sea 


I have still always thought it was a heck of of risk to take with children and had it gone wrong what would we think of him now


----------



## smackdaddy

KeelHaulin said:


> No; we don't have to give him credit. I would not set off for HI and beyond because I fully admit that I don't have the experience or a boat that is properly equipped at the moment to do it. I don't give him credit for trying; because he should not have tried to begin with. He did something completely foolish and now the sailing community has to take the blame for another goofball who was rescued while playing Christopher Columbus. Sailing 600 NM is not hard to do. Setting off an EPIRB or bringing one with you is a no-brainier if you "plan" on needing rescue. The EPIRB may have come with the boat so you can't even give credit for him preparing by buying it. The EPIRB is not an "I'm ready to be saved" device! It's a locater beacon for POTENTIAL RESCUE if another boat can safely do so and is in range.
> 
> His plan was an "all or nothing" attempt because he did not posses the experience or ability to effect his own rescue in the event of a failure of his steering, sails, or rig.
> 
> I don't think he did much calculating. If he had; then his assessment would have come up with the result that he had a near zero chance of making a sail around the world. With what we have seen/read about this guy we all tend to form a consensus of opinion among the forum members (high, moderate, low levels of experience) that the guy is an idiot. We all thought the same of Ken Barnes when he got rolled, dis-masted and was flailing about for a week in the southern ocean about a year ago; but at least he had some clue about how to sail (but not how to sail and maintain control in a storm). You see, idiots come and go by us all the time; when they survive there is a story to tell (and debate their merits), when they don't we never hear about them or their boat washes ashore somewhere and we all wonder what happened. But the people who know how to cross oceans safely are never heard about because there is no life/death story to tell. The best we can do is to point out those who have failed as "idiots" and warn others not to take the same path (repeat history). We can also encourage people who wish to set off across oceans to read books that discuss heavy weather and storm survival tactics; boat preparation, etc so they don't do the fool-hearty thing and set out in an ill equipped boat with little/no experience.
> 
> To compare him to Skip Allan is ridiculous. Lots of well known and well equipped sailors have both required rescue and/or had failures that were beyond their control to correct. The problem is that if a person with little experience goes out and gets in trouble, then people call into question everyone who has ever needed assistance; as a way of justifying the actions of a person who really should never have set out to sea. You really can't compare the two.
> 
> You MIGHT compare Ken Barnes to Ronnie but again I think that Ronnie had even less knowledge/experience than Ken. IIRC Ken spent over 2 years prepping his boat; at least he did something substantial along those lines. I don't know how much time/effort went into Ronnie's boat; but it looks like minimal preparation and mainly just wanting to do the circumnav as if nothing could or would go wrong.
> 
> Reading his bio it sounds like he was inspired by the writings of other solo circumnavigators but gave little if any respect for these people as lifelong sailors who had achieved the pinnacle of their sailing career by going around the globe solo. Today so many people treat sailing solo like it's an easy thing to do; but forget that there is so much technology that allows it now. As a result they shortcut the practice, competence and know-how needed to survive when systems fail (the technology that makes it "easy").
> 
> Well said SD; but you assume that he HAD a pair of vice grips and a boat hook!


Keel - a lot of pretzel logic in this post, and I believe you have a couple of critical facts wrong according to what I see in his blog (e.g. - the EPIRB purchase). But at least you and Dog have now established that sailing solo for one week, covering 600 NM in the open ocean (specifically "Gale/Hurricane Alley") is "easy". Newbies take note.


----------



## smackdaddy

Omatako - I hadn't heard of the Black Box Theory before. Very cool! Kind of puts things into perspective for both sides of the argument.

And I think you've stated Ronnie's place in the big scheme about as well as it can be stated. Nicely done. Thanks.


----------



## poopdeckpappy

So, after 514 post and 24 pages, I have one question

WTF does BFS mean ????


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> Keel - a lot of pretzel logic in this post, and I believe you have a couple of critical facts wrong according to what I see in his blog (e.g. - the EPIRB purchase). But at least you and Dog have now established that sailing solo for one week, covering 600 NM in the open ocean (specifically "Gale/Hurricane Alley") is "easy". Newbies take note.


So we are supposed to consider him an expert sailor because he bought the damn EPIRB and used it a week later??!! Who f'ing cares if he bought it, he did not know what to do in his "emergency" other than call for help. Most boats with a helm are equipped with an emergency rudder for just the situation he was in; but he either did not know this or did not prepare by adding a way to attach an emergency rudder onto his rudder post. I think the same situation existed for Ken Barnes but he also had been dismasted, rolled, batteries hit the cieling because they were not tied down, engine damaged and unable to get started (because he had no battery power), etc. Everyone tore him a new a-hole for not preparing those secondary systems in the event of a roll; and not TRYING to jury rig the boat so it could be sailed to port and salvaged. So let's just say that someone like Ronnie is even lower on the list of respected sailors than Ken; his inexperience left him with little choice but to abandon.

My comment that sailing 600NM is easy was in terms of if weather is fair and seas are calm; anyone could do it. But when confronted with heavy WX and seas it's an entirely different situation. That's usually when systems that are weak or ready to fail due to a lack of maintenance do fail. There is a reason why it is important to have a good survey inspection prior to both purchase and sailing across oceans; because they tend to find problems that the prospective buyer or owner overlook. There is a reason that rudders are usually replaced or at least inspected before going on an offshore passage; to help minimize the chance of failure while at sea in heavy WX.

I was the person who mentioned SimonV. I sailed with him aboard Goodonya before he set out on his voyage. He is a great guy; but as I said before, if it were me I would have spent much more time going through the boat and prepping it for the trip back to OZ. His boat was well equipped, recently cruised and he did do lots of prep work including new upper shrouds; but if it were me I would have put a new rudder on it to be sure, and went through every system in detail.


----------



## KeelHaulin

> But guess what? He already has more experience than a lot of the critics in this thread. He already knows more about storms than most of the posters here. Now that's an interesting observation, isn't it?


For the cost of his boat, which was his equity in a home; he now knows how to:

Set sail for HI
Use sailmail
Lose his windvane.
Lose his steering.
Get seasick
Declare "game over" and call for help
Activate his EPIRB
Run into a freighter and get dismasted
Hitch a free ride to Shanghai (without getting "Shanghaied")

You call this experience??!! No thanks; I'd prefer to LEARN more about offshore sailing and sailboats than sail 600NM out and realize I'm in a life/death situation with no real experience and nobody aboard who knows how to fix a "fixable" problem. There are other things a sailor can do to gain experience than set out singlehanded; like crew on boats that are passagemaking, take offshore sailing classes, do some coastal sailing in heavier conditions, etc.

He now has experience than most of us here? If that's to be considered experience I'd hate to know what you think inexperienced is.


----------



## chall03

smackdaddy said:


> Jody - I DO want to learn from other people's mistakes. I just think it's a little twisted to celebrate them with such glee.


Smack I basically agree with you there, and get your point about people being very quick to jump and label folk giving BFS a go an 'idiot' if something doesn't work out perfectly.

However, I think in the case of Ronnie your logic is a little flawed. He wasn't a dreamer merely giving 'BFS' a Go. He was irresponsible.

Lets look at the analogy of the road. When i'm driving there is always the possibility that I could have a tragic accident, I could end up in a head on collision, I could lose concentration and end up around a telegraph pole. 
However If I was to hop in my car after having had 10 beers, and do twice the legal speed limit, Society tells me that rather than being unlucky, I am being irresponsible and criminally negligent. I should go to Jail.

I think the same is true of this case, Ronnie was not 'unlucky' he was irresponsible.

I am with you in defending people who are trying to get out there and give it a go, I have a special affinity for the young trying to do it now, and on a shoestring budget.....good on them.

Basically Smack, I think you make a good point in general, but I think in Ronnie's case your wrong, he wasn't a young dreamer getting out and giving it a go, he was irresponsible. Through the loss of his Vessel he has obviosly paid pretty heavily for it and so I agree, Im not personally going to sit on the side line saying I told you so...but there are lessons that we can learn from his mistakes.


----------



## sailingdog

Smack-

Just FYI, from Ronnie's blog.



> RJ, I hoisted the sails back up and started to get going, but I have no steering. the rudder post is broken. not the linkage, but the post. it is broken. *if i turn the wheel, everything works, but you can see it turning on the rudder post. it sheared off.* it was old, fatigued metal i guess. i dont know. i am on a boat, 700 miles from land, WITH NO STEERING. there is nothing that i can do. i am going to call mayday and try to get rescued. i am going to be activating my EPIRB with the Unique Identification Number 2DCC56C554FFBFF. notify the coast guard with that number, and let them know it is me. I am at 28*21' N, 129*44' W. *No matter which way i turn the rudder, or how hard, I loko over the side, and it's staying same position. dead ahead.* boat is just rocking too. fear its going to roll over in these seas, because i am beam on to the ocean. i need rescue. this is the lowest ive ever been. i am activating epirb soon. email me right back. call the coast guard. comm still works, so i can stay in touch and wait for rescue.


To me, the fact that the quadrant turns on the post indicates that the rudder stock/post is indeed intact as is the rudder. Most likely, the key holding the quadrant affixed to the rudder stock broke/sheared.

In fact, Ronnie says if he turns the rudder _(by which I am guessing he's talking about the wheel cause he's obviously not turning the damn rudder)_, the rudder stays in the same position-dead ahead. So he didn't lose the rudder. He doesn't even know the difference between turning the wheel and turning the rudder... he thinks they're the same thing... *

If he had a set of big VISE GRIPS or the emergency tiller, he could probably have rigged a steering system in a under an hour with out much difficulty-but only if he had the knowledge and skills to do so.

*As for SimonV and his trip to Oz... IIRC, he did have the boat surveyed and inspected at least. He also spent a fair bit of time going over the boat and prepping it...and had a bit more sailing experience than Ronnie to start with...so the two cases aren't really the same thing.


----------



## smackdaddy

chall03 said:


> Smack I basically agree with you there, and get your point about people being very quick to jump and label folk giving BFS a go an 'idiot' if something doesn't work out perfectly.
> 
> However, I think in the case of Ronnie your logic is a little flawed. He wasn't a dreamer merely giving 'BFS' a Go. He was irresponsible.
> 
> Lets look at the analogy of the road. When i'm driving there is always the possibility that I could have a tragic accident, I could end up in a head on collision, I could lose concentration and end up around a telegraph pole.
> However If I was to hop in my car after having had 10 beers, and do twice the legal speed limit, Society tells me that rather than being unlucky, I am being irresponsible and criminally negligent. I should go to Jail.
> 
> I think the same is true of this case, Ronnie was not 'unlucky' he was irresponsible.
> 
> I am with you in defending people who are trying to get out there and give it a go, I have a special affinity for the young trying to do it now, and on a shoestring budget.....good on them.
> 
> Basically Smack, I think you make a good point in general, but I think in Ronnie's case your wrong, he wasn't a young dreamer getting out and giving it a go, he was irresponsible. Through the loss of his Vessel he has obviosly paid pretty heavily for it and so I agree, Im not personally going to sit on the side line saying I told you so...but there are lessons that we can learn from his mistakes.


Chall - in the end, you're right. I don't "side" with this kid either per se. As I've said, and as he's admitted, he was not prepared. So, lesson learned. Why continually pick at the guy's bones and salivate over his next screw-up? The answer to THAT question is why I'm spending time here fighting it out. Not to specifically defend the kid's choices.

As discussed, this a slippery argument. The logic will never hold up on either side - because no absolute exists. And that's all I'm trying to illustrate. For example, had the weather been favorable, as Dog and Keel have said, it would have been so easy "anyone could have done it". Even an "idiot" "without the faintest clue" about how to sail a boat apparently. But this brings us back to my point about "luck" in that the weather became too much at that point in time. Which brings us back to the obviously poor decision to head into Gale Alley in October. Which brings us back to the bad "luck" of a steerage malfunction which may or may not could have been foreseen in a "standard" passage preparation. Which all brings us back to Omatako's point about Black Box Theory, etc.

So it really gets into a vicious circle. It becomes an "_I_ would have..." argument - which is really pointless in the end. For example, no one seems to want to touch the Skip Allan comparison in terms of the simple facts of the very similar _event/outcome_. They turn it into an attack on Skip's sailing honor/reputation (which it's not) instead of acknowledging that stuff like this happens to anyone/everyone (which could potentially give the kid a break). That's why I generally like the Black Box Theory.

So, a vicious circle yes, it's just a far bigger and more complicated circle than the very silent OP of this thread and the others herein want to allow. That's the real issue here in my opinion - not the kid. Because if the goal herein, as previously stated, is to "educate" sailors - this kind of vulturism is patently not the way to do it.


----------



## sailingdog

Smackdaddy-

Part of the problem is that he set out at a time of year where finding favorable weather would be less and less likely...

Yes, luck does play some part...but by intentionally setting out into the Pacific in October without a well-found boat, you're courting bad luck rather than good... The sea gods tend to punish fools and reward more prudent sailors.


----------



## farmboy

smackdaddy said:


> Chall - in the end, you're right. I don't "side" with this kid either per se. As I've said, and as he's admitted, he was not prepared. So, lesson learned. Why continually pick at the guy's bones and salivate over his next screw-up? The answer to THAT question is why I'm spending time here fighting it out. Not to specifically defend the kid's choices.
> 
> As discussed, this a slippery argument. The logic will never hold up on either side - because no absolute exists. And that's all I'm trying to illustrate. For example, had the weather been favorable, as Dog and Keel have said, it would have been so easy "anyone could have done it". Even an "idiot" "without the faintest clue" about how to sail a boat apparently. But this brings us back to my point about "luck" in that the weather became too much at that point in time. Which brings us back to the obviously poor decision to head into Gale Alley in October. Which brings us back to the bad "luck" of a steerage malfunction which may or may not could have been foreseen in a "standard" passage preparation. Which all brings us back to Omatako's point about Black Box Theory, etc.
> 
> So it really gets into a vicious circle. It becomes an "_I_ would have..." argument - which is really pointless in the end. For example, no one seems to want to touch the Skip Allan comparison in terms of the simple facts of the very similar _event/outcome_. They turn it into an attack on Skip's sailing honor/reputation (which it's not) instead of acknowledging that stuff like this happens to anyone/everyone (which could potentially give the kid a break). That's why I generally like the Black Box Theory.
> 
> So, a vicious circle yes, it's just a far bigger and more complicated circle than the very silent OP of this thread and the others herein want to allow. That's the real issue here in my opinion - not the kid. Because if the goal herein, as previously stated, is to "educate" sailors - this kind of vulturism is patently not the way to do it.


Smack,

Replying to the points in red.

I don't see how absolute certainty of an outcome is necessary in order to apply some logic. If I can greatly improve my odds of succeeding/living, is it not logical for me to do so? I think that requiring absolutes in order to apply logic stands on shaky ground.

As far as the Skip Allan comparison goes, I don't think that you can compare the 2 based on one sail each. I think that you have to look and the entire sailing careers of both sailors. Perhaps then you would draw different conclusions. I choose not to draw conclusions regarding this comparison, because I feel that I don't know enough Skip Allan, or about going to sea. I am simply suggesting a different basis for comparison.

I have not read the entire thread. I don't have time. But I think I have kept up with it enough to say this. Sometimes the language gets a little strong, but mybe this is because of the limits of online communication. We can't hear a serious tone of voice, nor see and intense facial expression. I think that a lot of the posters are actually worried that you or I might go out and do something stupid. I know that I have no business on the open Ocean (or on open Lake Ontario, for that matter). But do they know that I know that? Is this vulturism or genuine concern? I tend to see more concern.


----------



## smackdaddy

farmboy said:


> Smack,
> 
> Replying to the points in red.
> 
> I don't see how absolute certainty of an outcome is necessary in order to apply some logic. If I can greatly improve my odds of succeeding/living, is it not logical for me to do so? I think that requiring absolutes in order to apply logic stands on shaky ground.
> 
> As far as the Skip Allan comparison goes, I don't think that you can compare the 2 based on one sail each. I think that you have to look and the entire sailing careers of both sailors. Perhaps then you would draw different conclusions. I choose not to draw conclusions regarding this comparison, because I feel that I don't know enough Skip Allan, or about going to sea. I am simply suggesting a different basis for comparison.
> 
> I have not read the entire thread. I don't have time. But I think I have kept up with it enough to say this. Sometimes the language gets a little strong, but mybe this is because of the limits of online communication. We can't hear a serious tone of voice, nor see and intense facial expression. I think that a lot of the posters are actually worried that you or I might go out and do something stupid. I know that I have no business on the open Ocean (or on open Lake Ontario, for that matter). But do they know that I know that? Is this vulturism or genuine concern? I tend to see more concern.


Hey, Farmboy, sup? As for the logic issue, this thread started with an underlying agenda. And I'm just saying the "logic" won't support the "absolute" conclusions they are trying to draw to support that agenda. You're definitely right about the applications of the lessons learned - and the logic therein. So no argument there at all. They're just two different issues.

As for Skip, again, it's purely a comparison of the _event_ - which was that the conditions became too much for the sailor. It's not a slam on Skip at all - it's just a leveling of the playing field to allow for some perspective on Ronnie's story (or the sinker's, or SimonV, or whomever).

I'm pretty content to let Omatako's post be the word. He summed it up as well as it can be.

Anyway, I've got a lot of boning up to do for my own eventual BFS.

I hope you're right about the intentions around here. Maybe it just started off on the wrong foot with the original post.

Later.


----------



## tenuki

luck is when preparedness and opportunity meet, ie:

luck = preparedness + opportunity


If both preparedness and opportunity are negative, guess where your luck ends up....


----------



## smackdaddy

tenuki said:


> luck is when preparedness and opportunity meet, ie:
> 
> luck = preparedness + opportunity
> 
> If both preparedness and opportunity are negative, guess where your luck ends up....


Interesting. I thought weather was in the equation somewhere. Where do you sail again?


----------



## tommays

"As he prepared to leave the boat that had taken him more than 60,000 miles in the last 30+ years, Skip Allan's concern was for others. Instead of leaving Wildflower afloat to possibly be salvaged later, Skip scuttled her so she wouldn't be a hazard to navigation."



While this may just be writing how does he even get drug into this


----------



## sailingdog

Because some people have their heads up their rear ends and are using their stomach windows to see the computer screen and type...  Skip isn't even in the same ballpark as Ronnie.



tommays said:


> "As he prepared to leave the boat that had taken him more than 60,000 miles in the last 30+ years, Skip Allan's concern was for others. Instead of leaving Wildflower afloat to possibly be salvaged later, Skip scuttled her so she wouldn't be a hazard to navigation."
> 
> While this may just be writing how does he even get drug into this


----------



## CharlieCobra

Not to advert another site but if you guys wanna talk to Ronnie directly, see this thread:

Offshore Sailor Needs Advice - Cruisers & Sailing Forums

Interesting.


----------



## sailingdog

Does anyone really want to talk to ronnie, except maybe SmackDaddy.


----------



## CharlieCobra

Trust me, he's been battered somewhat over there. That site contains a large percentage of ACTIVE cruisers who are even more anal than some folks here. It comes with the territory I suppose.


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> Because some people have their heads up their rear ends and are using their stomach windows to see the computer screen and type...  Skip isn't even in the same ballpark as Ronnie.


Yeah, yeah. I'll go over this one more time - then I'll leave it to you guys to sculpt however you wish. Talk about repetition. Jeez.

What was the *outcome* of that particular sail for Skip? 
1. Overwhelming conditions (in Gale Alley) and questionable boat integrity (hatch boards)
2. Decision to punch the EPIRB
3. Rescue

What was the *outcome* of Ronnie's sail?
1. Overwhelming conditions (in Gale Alley) and questionable boat integrity (steerage)
2. Decision to punch the EPIRB
3. Rescue

If you look at these simple facts you see that all the knowledge and experience in the world didn't matter at that particular moment in that particular place. It doesn't denigrate Skip or his honor, reputation, or abilities. And it doesn't celebrate Ronnie or his poor choices. It just says something else is at work besides knowledge and experience. Call it luck, call it the Black Box, whatever.

But these are facts that are undeniable. They both ended up in the exact same stretch of water, in roughly the same time frame (Sep/Oct), in roughly the same conditions, with exactly the same outcome.

If people want to rabidly hound on the kid and all his poor choices and call him an idiot for getting into that situation, then apply the same acrimonious scrutiny to Skip and his decisions regarding course/timing, his choice in hatch boards, his choice to go solo, whatever. Or lighten up on the kid a bit and let the lessons stand on their own.

Either way - the final verdict is...

BFS: Still cool.


----------



## smackdaddy

Thanks for the link Charlie. Here's something very telling. This is from a *Moderator/Administrator* over there:

_*"Ronnie came to us, through his brother, as a sailor in grave circumstances, and needing advice.
Though shipwrecked, and currently boatless (like I & others), Ronnie remains a sailor. [once a sailor, always a sailor]

Are his sailing days over? This remains to be seen*; but he thinks not.
* Events will answer this question, as they actually unfold.

I see no useful point in debating the semantics of Ronnie's status, and hope we can return to the educational/informational thrust of this thread."*_

Hmmmm. Makes you wonder.


----------



## smackdaddy

poopdeckpappy said:


> So, after 514 post and 24 pages, I have one question
> 
> WTF does BFS mean ????


Sorry Pappy...I missed this one.

Here you go....BFS.


----------



## Cruisingdad

smackdaddy said:


> ...
> So, a vicious circle yes, it's just a far bigger and more complicated circle than the very silent OP of this thread and the others herein want to allow. That's the real issue here in my opinion - not the kid. Because if the goal herein, as previously stated, is to "educate" sailors - this kind of vulturism is patently not the way to do it.


I have just now read this thread, so late in the response. However, it seems to me that you are intentionally trying to irritate Cam. It is not the first time - even in this thread. I am curious why you would do that?

- CD


----------



## sailingdog

SmackDaddy-

One point... Skip made his choice to go based on his knowledge of his own skills and his boat and how it performed on over 60,000 nautical miles. This was a gamble on his part, but one based in knowledge and experience.

Ronnie made his decision to go based on his desire to make a documentary, timed his leaving the harbor to make the local news cast, and *didn't have the knowledge or experience of either sailing or his boat to make a reasonably informed decision*.


----------



## T34C

Wow, I too just finished reading this thread and have come to a couple of conclusions. 
1) I really would have been better off poking myself in the eye with a sharp stick.
2) Ronnie is not going to be the last idiot that needs to be rescued.
3) I'm not sure if anyone has asked the question that keeps sticking in my head. The boat wasn't sinking, he hadn't been gone for very long so presumably had pleanty of supplies, WHY PUNCH OUT?

Near as I can tell the real problem at the heart of all this is, HE WAS/IS WEAK! He could have been better prepared, yes. He could have done more inspections on the boat, yes. But, it didn't matter, the boat didn't sink. He was not in a survival situation why not just sit there on the boat, relax a bit, and try to figure out a solution? To BFS or not to BFS is kinda irrelevent. This guy didn't have the mental fortitude to complete a BFS if he wanted to. His preparations didn't fail him. His boat didn't fail him. HE failed.


----------



## Cruisingdad

Well, this turned into an interesting thread and its responses were not suprising.

For my opinion, if anyone is interested, I do not begrudge someone for adventure. I do not begrudge them for taking off and doing it without any preparation or knowledge. Maybe that in itself is part of the adventure? However, when your lack of preparation can (and will) risk the lives of others, that is not right. 

A more interesting question to ponder here might be what would have happened if he did NOT have an EPIRB to push? THey have not been around that long. COuld the argument be made that in the years not long past, they were better sailors because they were forced to have good seamanship (or die)? Could the argument be made that they prepared more before jumping out on the water because there was little chance of a rescue should things go wrong?

Has our technology given more men and women and children an opportunity to be sailors where otherwise they would not have? Or has it simply allowed others to go that WOULD NOT or SHOULD NOT have? My guess is the latter. 

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad

smackdaddy said:


> Thanks for the link Charlie. Here's something very telling. This is from a *Moderator/Administrator* over there:
> 
> _*"Ronnie came to us, through his brother, as a sailor in grave circumstances, and needing advice.
> Though shipwrecked, and currently boatless (like I & others), Ronnie remains a sailor. [once a sailor, always a sailor]
> 
> Are his sailing days over? This remains to be seen*; but he thinks not.
> * Events will answer this question, as they actually unfold.
> 
> I see no useful point in debating the semantics of Ronnie's status, and hope we can return to the educational/informational thrust of this thread."*_
> 
> Hmmmm. Makes you wonder.


What makes you wonder??? Gordon is trying to calm things down. What's to wonder??

- CD


----------



## smackdaddy

CD,

Well...Cam posted this thread with a fairly incendiary title - based on another thread I have an affinity for. So, I felt that set the tone for the discussion. And I felt that the target of the melee here was not really being given a fair shake. So, those two things taken into consideration, I felt it was okay to join in the discussion with the same passion for the other side of the issue. And with Cam being the OP - it seems he's part of that discussion. At least that's been my assumption.

In cases like this, I'm honestly not quite sure where that line between poster and moderator stops and starts, and where I as a member am supposed to back off or stand up in these kinds of heated debates. And, IMHO, it gets more gray with a thread like this - which has been a lot like the FightClub thread in terms of content.

I started the BFS thread in an honest attempt to change the tone that had been set by FC. I honestly just want to talk about big sailing. Always have.

So, just let me know what you want me to do here.

Smack


----------



## sailingdog

T34C-

I will disagree a bit... if Ronnie had had more sailing experience, and if he had had more confidence in his boat, it is possible....not likely...but at least possible, that he would have had the stones to stick it out, figure out a way to jury rig steering and continue his voyage.

As Fastnet '79 proved, the boats are usually stronger than their crews. If the boat hadn't be damaged during Ronnie's rescue, it is very likely that the boat might still be out there floating on its way to Hawaii. A few months ago, a 30' boat, was found fairly close to Hawaii, empty and partially damaged, but still afloat. It was originally from somewhere in So. California.

CD-

I think that technology is partially at fault. The skills sailors needed to cross oceans twenty years ago were a bit greater than they are today.

*How many sailors do you know that go out without much more than their chartplotter for navigation tools*-who have no idea how to dead reckon, or use a hand-bearing compass, or plot a position on a chart??

*How many sailors do you know that don't know how to convert a compass heading to a true heading??? *
*
How many sailors do you know that have no idea how to jury rig anything on their boat*-having paid for someone else to do all the work of maintaining it and repairing it.

*How many sailors do you know that don't realize that you can use stars to steer by???*


----------



## smackdaddy

Cruisingdad said:


> What makes you wonder??? Gordon is trying to calm things down. What's to wonder??
> 
> - CD


That's exactly what I like about it!


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> Yeah, yeah. I'll go over this one more time - then I'll leave it to you guys to sculpt however you wish. Talk about repetition. Jeez.


You know; your inept posts here are really pointing out how little you know about sailing; especially offshore sailing. Yes; I'm talking about YOU Smack not Ronnie.

If you want to compare facts; let's compare some REAL facts.

Skip Allan had over 30k miles aboard his boat. By comparison Ronnie had ~600 Miles.
Skip Allan built his boat from the ground up; rigged it for offshore sailing/racing, had already sailed single-handed from SF to HI and back (in multiple races), had raced aboard other boats in the Pacific Cup before setting off solo, WON the overall in the 2008 Single-handed TansPac. His getting caught in the gale was and unfortunate event for him; as his boat was primarily rigged for racing. Redundant systems on race boats while deemed necessary for some items usually are not wanted for others because of the weight factor which is paramount when it comes to racing long distances like to HI. The return trip to SF was a transport voyage; not setting off for a solo circumnavigation.

You say that they were in the same stretch of water. They were not. Skip was west of San Francisco; when the jet stream turned due south. This can happen at any time of the year and it is somewhat unpredictable. I have seen WX forecasts change completely in 24 hours when this happens. He had battled the conditions for 3 days prior to requesting assistance; with a prediction of deteriorating conditions and another 3+ days of increasingly heavy seas. Boats 2-300 miles west of his position were in rough conditions but nowhere near the survival conditions he was "caught" in.

Ronnie set off 700NM south of SF and was setting out into "hurricane alley"; the region between Baja and HI that is known for hurricanes in Sept/Oct. You can't set off for HI during this time of year without putting the boat at risk of encountering one. This is why the Baja Ha-Ha sets off for Cabo in early November. Even then there is some risk of a hurricane but it is much smaller than in early October.

Ronnie's boat was ill equipped but 10' longer in LOA and in lesser wind/wave conditions than skip's 28' Wylie. Heavier displacement, longer LOA boats usually are more seaworthy/sea-kindly in heavy seas than smaller boats.

Skips decision to abandon was a conscious and heavily considered one. While he did not HAVE to abandon he decided it was a better decision to be rescued and alive than be cocky and possibly dead. Ronnie's decision was based on fear, regret, anger over failed components, and outright need to be pulled from the craft because he did not have the skills to ride out the weather. BIG DIFFERENCE!



> If you look at these simple facts you see that all the knowledge and experience in the world didn't matter at that particular moment in that particular place. It doesn't denigrate Skip or his honor, reputation, or abilities. And it doesn't celebrate Ronnie or his poor choices. It just says something else is at work besides knowledge and experience. Call it luck, call it the Black Box, whatever.


This is a SERIOUS FLAW in logic. Remember, Skip has sailed over 30k miles; Ronnie has sailed 600. When he sets off again from China he will still have only sailed 600 miles; but 10,000 miles from where he started. THAT'S NOT A COMPLETED LEG OF A SOLO CIRCUMNAVIGATION (or any circumnav)!! If he really wants to do it and succeed; he should go home and start saving for another boat. By even comparing Skip to Ronnie it completely denigrates Skips honor, reputation, and abilities. But YOU KNOW BETTER. You think that what you are saying "are the undeniable facts". OK well I guess it's the "Smackdaddy Forum" and nobody else here has the ability to understand "the truth" (except that almost EVERYONE here disagrees with you).



> If people want to rabidly hound on the kid and all his poor choices and call him an idiot for getting into that situation, then apply the same acrimonious scrutiny to Skip and his decisions regarding course/timing, his choice in hatch boards, his choice to go solo, whatever. Or lighten up on the kid a bit and let the lessons stand on their own.


OK; again you are wrong. Remember, Skip was RETURNING from a completed race which he won from HI. He was 1300NM North of "Hurricane Alley"; he was beating to windward in relatively mild conditions when he got into a weather pattern that was first not predicted, and then under-predicted. His position did not give him a direction to "get away" from it; as he was already 1/2 way between the Pacific High and his destination (SF).

All boats have hatch boards, and are subject to failure; but in Skips case there are rules governing the strength and ability for the hatch to remain in place if the boat is rolled (to which his boat was compliant). His comments regarding the ingress of water was strictly to give some perspective on how heavy of a beating the boat was taking; not that the hatch boards were inadequate. There are so many rules regarding seaworthiness of a boat going on the Single-handed TransPac it takes them over 1 year to outfit these boats and they held seminars every 2-3 months that covered "how-to" on the major requirements. Did Ronnie do this? From what I gather; his boat was only suitable for coastal sailing in fair conditions; let alone storm conditions which you must always be prepared for when "circumnaviagting" (LOL).

PLEASE STOP with the rediculous comparisons of this 23 YO newbie fool with someone that has more than Ronnies lifetime in sailing experience! It only makes YOU look bad!

Here's a funny quote from good ol' Ronnie Simpson (Bart's long lost brother??):



RonnieSimpson said:


> as far as this just being a publicity stunt and trying to get money and fame out of this, you are absolutely right. this is a business venture for me. i have made this very clear from the beginning, as i hope to create revenue through freelance magazine writing, film work, a book deal and other avenues, as i hope to have my work fund my future journeys and endeavours. As a result of my "publicity stunt", even after losing my boat, I will still be able to continue as it looks like i will be obtaining enough funding to build another boat through advance royalties from a book deal. Thanks so much for your input.


So he plans to "get money" from people willing to buy his harrowing tale of how he crapped his pants and was pulled from a derelict boat (none of this was his fault) and returned safely to land 10k miles from where he nearly lost his precious life; so he could again be reunited with the beloved McDonalds happy meal. Cheeseburgers in paradise!! Keep dreamin Ronnie!! Maybe Oprah will step in and buy you a gleaming new Beneteau so you can go out and sink it!


----------



## Cruisingdad

smackdaddy said:


> CD,
> 
> Well...Cam posted this thread with a fairly incendiary title - based on another thread I have an affinity for. So, I felt that set the tone for the discussion. And I felt that the target of the melee here was not really being given a fair shake. So, those two things taken into consideration, I felt it was okay to join in the discussion with the same passion for the other side of the issue. And with Cam being the OP - it seems he's part of that discussion. At least that's been my assumption.
> 
> In cases like this, I'm honestly not quite sure where that line between poster and moderator stops and starts, and where I as a member am supposed to back off or stand up in these kinds of heated debates. And, IMHO, it gets more gray with a thread like this - which has been a lot like the FightClub thread in terms of content.
> 
> I started the BFS thread in an honest attempt to change the tone that had been set by FC. I honestly just want to talk about big sailing. Always have.
> 
> So, just let me know what you want me to do here.
> 
> Smack


That is the second well thought out, well meaning post. THere was another one in this thread several pages back. I mean to complement you on your approach.

THe line? When you figure it out, tell us. I find myself backing out of many threads that I would LOVE to partake in as I am passionate about them. We each have our own perceptions of what we should do or should not do in these circumstances. Cam's approach is that he has an opinion just like any member and has the right to present it. I respect that. Jeff just flat avoids Off Topic and other forums that would get him provoked. I go through all of them and try me best to play middle man and take no sides. I have few of them that will get me steaming - except Cuba and when people start beating up our country. I do my very best to avoid those threads. For the rest, I try to get somewheat involved without ticking off anyone. It would be hard for me to be perceived as non-biased if I adamantly take one side over the other. Cam has his own opinions.

What do you do? Just take the sides and not the person. I think even Gordon, who you referenced earlier, has a similar philosophy. I don't care what you believe, SmD, just be thoughtful in how you present the information. Also, keep it focused on the issues and not the person.

Believe me, there have been MANY people that have complete opposite views of me and Cam and we go crazy arguiing with them on this board. However, we have not and do not "ban them" unless they get personal - and that is for new and old posters alike. And, we almost always give more warnings that the situation warrants.

I hope that helps?

- CD


----------



## T34C

sailingdog said:


> T34C-
> 
> I will disagree a bit... if Ronnie had had more sailing experience, and if he had had more confidence in his boat, it is possible....not likely...but at least possible, that he would have had the stones to stick it out, figure out a way to jury rig steering and continue his voyage.
> 
> As Fastnet '79 proved, the boats are usually stronger than their crews. If the boat hadn't be damaged during Ronnie's rescue, it is very likely that the boat might still be out there floating on its way to Hawaii. A few months ago, a 30' boat, was found fairly close to Hawaii, empty and partially damaged, but still afloat. It was originally from somewhere in So. California.
> [/B]


That was kinda my point, but I know pleanty of people with experience in other fields that still would have been able to come up with a "bubble gum and bailin' wire" fix. Much of it is a mind set. Yes it can be a learned trait, gleaned through experience, but also an innate ability to save ones own arse. See also: Common sense.
From an example you posted earlier: If when you turn the wheel and the quadrant turns but not the rudder common sense should tell you that the two things should be hooked together and aren't. Sollution, hook them together.


----------



## sailingdog

Keel-

I would like to thank you for elaborating on the point I started earlier..


----------



## smackdaddy

It does CD - thanks. One thing's for sure, I wouldn't want your "job". You must be a pretty good dude to put up with all this.

BTW - Can I still be a sarcastic punk if I keep it really focused?


----------



## sailingdog

ROFLMAO... Ya think??? Unfortunately, a serious lack of common sense seems to be rampant, especially among younger people today, IMHO. 


T34C said:


> That was kinda my point, but I know pleanty of people with experience in other fields that still would have been able to come up with a "bubble gum and bailin' wire" fix. Much of it is a mind set. Yes it can be a learned trait, gleaned through experience, but also an innate ability to save ones own arse. See also: Common sense.
> From an example you posted earlier: *If when you turn the wheel and the quadrant turns but not the rudder common sense should tell you that the two things should be hooked together and aren't. Sollution, hook them together.*


----------



## chucklesR

Hang in there SmackDaddy. 

We disagree on a lot of things (including your slant in this thread) but I love having you around. 

It's sort of like watching a public whipping/hanging was a couple of hundred years ago, without the popcorn.


----------



## T34C

I think I may have to change my signature to :
Common Sense - Not so common. (If only I can find a way to make fun of CD- at the same time!)


----------



## xort

Comparing ronnie to Skip Allen is like comparing some kid just out of drivers training to Mario Andretti


----------



## Cruisingdad

smackdaddy said:


> It does CD - thanks. One thing's for sure, I wouldn't want your "job". You must be a pretty good dude to put up with all this.
> 
> BTW - Can I still be a sarcastic punk if I keep it really focused?


Will it make you any friends and do you care? If the answer is no to both, then, I would wonder why you are even at sailnet??

I will say this, you do know how to get people around here steamed up.

- CD


----------



## smackdaddy

xort said:


> Comparing ronnie to Skip Allen is like comparing some kid just out of drivers training to Mario Andretti


Only if they both wreck.


----------



## Cruisingdad

T34C said:


> I think I may have to change my signature to :
> Common Sense - Not so common. (If only I can find a way to make fun of CD- at the same time!)


I am sure you will find a way!

- CD


----------



## smackdaddy

Keel - won't it just suck if enough people buy his stuff to get him funded again? What's the world coming to?

Seems like you know a lot about it. Are you helping to keep the dream alive by patronizing his blog? Remember, advertising is always about eyeballs.


----------



## T34C

Cruisingdad said:


> I am sure you will find a way!
> 
> - CD


Hmmmm, could be.


----------



## T34C

smackdaddy said:


> Keel - won't it just suck if enough people buy his stuff to get him funded again? What's the world coming to?
> 
> Seems like you know a lot about it. Are you helping to keep the dream alive by patronizing his blog? Remember, advertising is always about eyeballs.


That would probably be a good thing. Might get to improve the gene pool before he reproduces.


----------



## smackdaddy

chucklesR said:


> Hang in there SmackDaddy.
> 
> We disagree on a lot of things (including your slant in this thread) but I love having you around.
> 
> It's sort of like watching a public whipping/hanging was a couple of hundred years ago, without the popcorn.


Heh-heh. Yeah, whatever, Chuckles. I still got your rep.


----------



## sailingdog

Nice Sig T34C...


----------



## KeelHaulin

Well if advertisers paid him $0.10 for the one time I went to his website; then I would say that it's worth the money to try and prevent others from trying to earn a Darwin Award (by using Ronnie's own words against him). But for that quote it was not a trip to his website; it was quoted text from CF where he was posting.

If he is trying to make money on the website hits; well he won't get much in comparison to the money he lost in his first attempted leg. He might convince someone to give him money to continue (book deal or something) but I doubt it. People tend to not throw good money after bad (since he already failed). In contrast; a sailor living in Idaho (IIRC) has offered for free another Wylie 28 to Skip Allan after reading the story about his loss of Wildflower. You see when someone like Skip loses his boat in a freak storm people are willing to help him recover his losses; because they understand that under ordinary circumstances he would not have been in that situation.


----------



## sailaway21

Cruisingdad said:


> That is the second well thought out, well meaning post. THere was another one in this thread several pages back. I mean to complement you on your approach.
> 
> THe line? When you figure it out, tell us. I find myself backing out of many threads that I would LOVE to partake in as I am passionate about them. We each have our own perceptions of what we should do or should not do in these circumstances. Cam's approach is that he has an opinion just like any member and has the right to present it. I respect that. Jeff just flat avoids Off Topic and other forums that would get him provoked. I go through all of them and try me best to play middle man and take no sides. I have few of them that will get me steaming - except Cuba and when people start beating up our country. I do my very best to avoid those threads. For the rest, I try to get somewheat involved without ticking off anyone. It would be hard for me to be perceived as non-biased if I adamantly take one side over the other. Cam has his own opinions.
> 
> What do you do? Just take the sides and not the person. I think even Gordon, who you referenced earlier, has a similar philosophy. I don't care what you believe, SmD, just be thoughtful in how you present the information. Also, keep it focused on the issues and not the person.
> 
> Believe me, there have been MANY people that have complete opposite views of me and Cam and we go crazy arguiing with them on this board. However, we have not and do not "ban them" unless they get personal - and that is for new and old posters alike. And, we almost always give more warnings that the situation warrants.
> 
> I hope that helps?
> 
> - CD


Ban this, CD!
BITE ME!!! (g)


----------



## smackdaddy

sailaway21 said:


> Ban this, CD!
> BITE ME!!! (g)


Wow! CD, can ALL of us members get away with this kind of mod bashing too? I mean, have you seen Giu's avatar tag? Seems to be all the rage these days.


----------



## sailortjk1

The Dock Monitor can take care of himself.


----------



## SEMIJim

tommays said:


> While this may just be writing how does he even get drug into this


Because smackdaddy apparently doesn't grok the difference between an experienced sailor in a well-found boat in good repair and an inexperienced sailor in a boat in unknown condition setting-out to single-hand across the open ocean. I've given up trying to explain it to him.

Jim


----------



## smackdaddy

SEMIJim said:


> Because smackdaddy apparently doesn't grok the difference between an experienced sailor in a well-found boat in good repair and an inexperienced sailor in a boat in unknown condition setting-out to single-hand across the open ocean. I've given up trying to explain it to him.
> 
> Jim


Dude, I grok. But thanks for finally giving up.


----------



## SEMIJim

smackdaddy said:


> Dude, I grok.


Then CD's question:



Cruisingdad said:


> ... I would wonder why you are even at sailnet??


is answered: You're trolling. So it follows that:



Cruisingdad said:


> ... you do know how to get people around here steamed up.


which is a troll's objective.

Jim


----------



## smackdaddy

And you, sir, are a very good, virtuous, and decent human being!

(Edit: ...that pays all his bills on time, supports the first amendment, and gets a bit "huggy" after a few snogs of rum at parties.)


----------



## Omatako

KeelHaulin said:


> People tend to not throw good money after bad (since he already failed).


Seems to have worked for Tony Bullimore  or was he just plain old rich?


----------



## sailingdog

The recent death and injury in the rescue of a Swan 44 is something to note here... *Pulling the tab on an EPIRB does put other people at risk.* The rescue swimmer who was injured, could have easily been killed instead. * If you do go out unprepared, be aware that if you do have to pull the tab, you are responsible for putting other people at risk. *

Two differences between this boat and Ronnie's. *This boat was actually sinking-Ronnie's was not.* The conditions that they were in were horrific-*40-50 knots of wind and 40-50' seas*-compared to the* 20-30 knots of wind, with gusts up to 45 knots and 20-30' *seas Ronnie was in.


----------



## CharlieCobra

Yeah, ya figure the sail number for that Swan (US 777) might have brought some luck. I reckon Mother Nature could give a crap about luck....


----------



## tenuki

man, would you guys quit quoting smackdaddy, you are busting my /ignore.


----------



## smackdaddy

Hey would somebody please quote me on this so that CP and Tenuki will be sure to see it:

You can run - but you can't hide.


----------



## hellosailor

SD-
"you are responsible for putting other people at risk. "
Yes and NO. First responders of all kinds are being taught these days that job #1 is to GO HOME AT THE END OF THE SHIFT. Safe and unharmed. The old gung-ho do-or-die training is best reserved for combat missions and the gummint, in all departments, is using the "new math", i.e. comparing the death tolls and dollar values. Suicide missions are reserved for combat operations, as part of a larger strategic picture.

You'll see this even at USCG boat stations at the NJ inlets. Once conditions deteriorate to a dangerous point--they simply don't go out. Killing four first responders in the effort to save four civilians is simply bad math, it means more civilians will die while the replacements are being trained, and more will die while someone is trying to get the budget to train those replacements.
Bottom line is that it may not be the "nobility of the sea" but it does make sense. You push it as far as you can, but when the back of your brain says "this is suicide" you turn back and say "We cannot reach you today."

Some of the most scatching--and underpublicized--results of the 9/11 after-action reports were from the NYFD itself. They finally acknoweldged that firefighters simply should never have been sent into the towers once the situation was known. The incoming firefighters simply blocked egress and ha no chance of putting out the fire. Net result? Sending the firefighters in resulted in additional victims AND dead firefighters. Keeping the OUT, and allowing for a higher egress rate, would have saved hundreds more lives, including some 300 highly trained (read: expensive) first responders.

Still, there are some gung-ho adrenalin junkies who need to be heroes, and they're going to go out no matter what it costs them. The modern trend is to pre-screen them out, and not hire them, because they will endanger others. 


Charlie-
"I reckon Mother Nature could give a crap about luck...."
Actually, Mother Nature's a *****, and she ALWAYS plays with loaded dice. Two good reasons never to get her PO'd, and never to shoot craps with her.


----------



## sailingdog

HS-

I am aware that they don't send first responders out if the conditions are that bad... but there is still a chance that someone who does go out in less than guaranteed death conditions can get injured or killed by a freak incident. Look at the rescue swimmer in the case of Freefall... the conditions were horrific, but they were out there, and one of them got injured and could have been killed. So, I stand by my statement-*you are putting others at risk if you pull the tab on an EPIRB. *


----------



## Omatako

sailingdog said:


> So, I stand by my statement-*you are putting others at risk if you pull the tab on an EPIRB. *


So, gentlemen, if your boat is sinking because you got it wrong, your thinking should be "No, screw the EPIRB, I'll just go down with the boat".

Oh, no, can't do that, first make sure the others that are sailing with you are safely in the life raft *then* you can go down with the boat.

I wonder why CG and FD folks do thier thankless jobs - surely they understand that we're all out to get them killed?


----------



## sailingdog

Andre-

I just want to make it clear that using an EPIRB is a decision that has consequences... if you're like Ronnie, setting out completely unprepared with a questionable boat... do you, ethically, have the right to put others at risk for your own foolishness.


----------



## bubb2

They do put themselves in as much pearl as the ones there are going after!!!!
Alaskan HH-3F Crash


----------



## sailingdog

That they do, bubb...that they do...


----------



## POLKA247

SD I agree whole heartedly with you about the EPIRB. You are definitely putting others at risk when you use it. I thank every Coasty I meet, even when they board the vessel for safety checks in the middle of the P-Sound. It's nice to know they are there. How ever I pride myself on being as informed as possible prior to any departure even for a day sail.


----------



## POLKA247

Edit add equipped as well.


----------



## smackdaddy

Omatako said:


> So, gentlemen, if your boat is sinking because you got it wrong, your thinking should be "No, screw the EPIRB, I'll just go down with the boat".
> 
> Oh, no, can't do that, first make sure the others that are sailing with you are safely in the life raft *then* you can go down with the boat.
> 
> I wonder why CG and FD folks do thier thankless jobs - surely they understand that we're all out to get them killed?


Save your breath Omatako. That makes sense - so it doesn't fit here. I wish we had some CGers around here. I'm curious if when they get the poor schmo into the chopper and they hear that schmo's life story about all his sailing experience and prowess they think:

"You know, it's an honor to have risked my life for you. You obviously know what you're doing."

or if they think:

"If you really know what you're doing - what the hell are we here for again?"

Those pesky EPIRBS. You have to EARN your right to pull that tab.


----------



## sailaway21

If one was actually interested in learning something instead of attempting to enlighten the sailing world as to one's more progressive views one might actually do some research into the history of offshore yachting. One might even start with the Pardey's; the advertisement for their website stares us in the face every day here and I think they've been out there something like twenty years or so now, sans EPIRB. Or one could look up what the Coastie's actually think; it's not like this forum is bereft of them. Or one could just continue to bloviate absent either experience or knowledge.


----------



## smackdaddy

Yeah, Dog, take that!

Sway, I'll work on that research. Could you put a link to that Pardey thing in your post - with this cool adblock gadget, I'm not seeing any ads whatsoever! Wiped this site clean as a baby's hiney! Sweet!

By the way, didn't Bucky's son just jump ship? Sorry, is that bloviation out of line?


----------



## GBurton

Yeah - and the Pardeys run around naked while cruising. How unseamanlike! How dare they!


----------



## CharlieCobra

I couldn't do that, too many things on the boat that BITE!


----------



## sailingdog

Smackdaddy-

Somehow, I get the feeling that Sway's post was not direct at MOI.


----------



## Cruisingdad

smackdaddy said:


> Save your breath Omatako. That makes sense - so it doesn't fit here. I wish we had some CGers around here. I'm curious if when they get the poor schmo into the chopper and they hear that schmo's life story about all his sailing experience and prowess they think:
> 
> "You know, it's an honor to have risked my life for you. You obviously know what you're doing."
> 
> or if they think:
> 
> "If you really know what you're doing - what the hell are we here for again?"
> 
> Those pesky EPIRBS. You have to EARN your right to pull that tab.


That is the biggest crock of crap yet. If you actually believe some of the sutff you are saying, you have issues.

THe problem did not start when he pulled that button. The problem started before he left the shore. When you leave, you go as prepared as you can. You make every effort to make sure your boat and your person are equipped for the trip. What the level of preparation is depends on the person, the boat, and the passage to be made. If you head off and have sincerely tried to do your best and you hit a wall, then when you punch the EPIRB, those who risk their lives to come after you have not done so 'needlessly'.

HOWEVER...

When you head out on some money grabbing, story-headline wanting, moncho trip that you woke up one morning and decided to do... and THEN hit the wall, they do risk their lives in 'needlessly'. Your dumb butt should have never been out there in the first place.

Now, will they come rescue you? Yes. Is it because you have or have not tried your best before leaving shore? No. They do it because they feel it is their calling, or for many other reasons. But when you push that button, you RISK THEIR LIVES to save your life. Period. End of story. It is a clear matter of being thoughtful enough of another's life over yourself that you prepare to the best of your abilities.

I would never advocate, no matter what their preparation before leaving, not pushing the EPIRB. That is what it is there for. As I said, my issue is not him hitting the button, it is him leaving the shore completely unprepared in any respect, then expecting someone to come rescue him when this turn bad. That is wrong.

My opinion... for everyone and anyone that has to use their EPERIB, I think they should be put infront of a review board that discusses whether or not they were prepared for the trip at hand and had thought it out appropriately. I think the rescuer(s) should get to be on that board too. If found negligent, I think he should be billed for the ENTIRE cost of the rescue. I think it should be taken from every asset he owns and every paycheck he earns until it is paid off. If found that he did prepare according to the trip at hand, then I guess just write it off to the goodwill of mankind. Would that stop the idiots from heading off? Maybe not. But it would certainly keep them from doing it twice. And at the very least, those who go to rescue them will know that the person they risk their lives for either prepared as best as they could for the trip at hand, or will be paying for it for a long time afterwards.

Some of us take going to sea seriously. SOme of us do not. And some of us are too dumb to know either way. It is the last two I have no time for.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad

A question to ponder: Would he have headed out to sea, would he have made that trip, if he had been required to have a license for boating?

- CD


----------



## sailingdog

Probably, since lack of a license doesn't seem to do much for driving, i don't see that changing just cause it is for a boat


Cruisingdad said:


> A question to ponder: Would he have headed out to sea, would he have made that trip, if he had been required to have a license for boating?
> 
> - CD


----------



## Cruisingdad

sailingdog said:


> Probably, since lack of a license doesn't seem to do much for driving, i don't see that changing just cause it is for a boat


I started a new thread on this. Let's discuss.

- CD


----------



## T34C

Better question would he have headed out if EPIRBS weren't available?


----------



## camaraderie

Cruisingdad said:


> I started a new thread on this. Let's discuss.
> 
> - CD


NOOOOOOOOOO....not AGAIN!!!
Let's talk about something non controversial like anchors, skeg or spade, mono or multi.


----------



## sww914

I have a simple racecar, a sportscar. I go through every system before every weekend of racing and I often find a problem. Not always, but there's usually something wrong.
If my racecar has something fail I don't end up on the bottom of the sea, I generally pull in to the pits and fix it or at worst I get towed in.
I'm never more than 1 mile from my truck full of tools and spares and I'm more thorough than this bonehead was. Everyone is. It seems dangerous, racing, but not quite as deadly as crossing an ocean with ill prepared gear.


----------



## sailaway21

Cruisingdad said:


> I started a new thread on this. Let's discuss.
> 
> - CD


It's ideas like this that make you such a popular request to serve as the AFOC pinata in Chicago. WHAT ARE YOU, NUTS?????????

Why don't you just bump the old thread on it from, what, two weeks ago, maybe last spring? Or is this the new solar world thread?

I'm calling the ILA in Houston. My advise to you would be to avoid the docks area at night! (g)


----------



## chucklesR

T34C said:


> Better question would he have headed out if EPIRBS weren't available?


Valid point, and good question, sorry no rep, says I have to spread some.


----------



## T34C

Thanks anyway. I think we could solve the whole problem much easier and skip CD's thread if we just out-lawed EPIRBS.


----------



## Omatako

T34C said:


> Better question would he have headed out if EPIRBS weren't available?


Ronnie went out there to prove something (rightly or wrongly, I'm not going back there again  ) and I think the fact that he had an EPIRB was not what motivated him. He would have gone anyway because he never saw the trip ending in disaster. None of us ever do.

Whilst I have one on board, I view my EPIRB as a waste of money because I do whatever I can to not have to use it. Would the absence of it stop me sailing? Heck no. I sailed offshore for 20 years before EPIRBs were invented.


----------



## Omatako

sailingdog said:


> Andre-
> 
> I just want to make it clear that using an EPIRB is a decision that has consequences... if you're like Ronnie, setting out completely unprepared with a questionable boat... do you, ethically, have the right to put others at risk for your own foolishness.


I hear you SD but you know what? I'm just a little tired of hearing how we're putting the SAR people thru hell. Here's what I think for, better or for worse:

Nobody used whips and cattle prods to coerce SAR people into their jobs
Nobody shackles them to their helos/CG cutters when there is a rescue to be done
Everybody in the civilised world gets to choose the jobs they *don't *want to do.
They do the jobs they do because they want to and with full understanding of the dangers that are involved. Just like firemen, paramedics, police officers and the soldiers working in a professional army (like yours), they sign up for the work they do. It isn't forced upon them. And if the truth be known, they enjoy the dangers associated with their jobs.
When it gets too dangerous, they wisely decide to ditch the rescue. Like me or you going to sea, if they don't then they go into it with their eyes wide open.
My taxes pay for an SAR service. When I need it, I would like it to be available.
I'm really sorry about the odd SAR person who gets hurt/killed doing their job. Truck drivers have been killed delivering our groceries to the local supermarket. I feel sorry for them too.
If there are no people to fill the SAR jobs because it's just too damn dangerous, then I will have no expectation of rescue, I will not have to pay those taxes and I will make some new arrangements for going to sea without SAR and it won't be for the first time.
I'm completely over feeling guilty about the prospect of having to invoke an SAR if I get into trouble at sea and I get a little irritated by the continuous reference to how I'm endangering others by being a sailor.

I apologise if this doesn't work for you.


----------



## artbyjody

Omatako said:


> I hear you SD but you know what? I'm just a little tired of hearing how we're putting the SAR people thru hell. Here's what I think for, better or for worse:
> Nobody used whips and cattle prods to coerce SAR people into their jobs
> Nobody shackles them to their helos/CG cutters when there is a rescue to be done
> Everybody in the civilised world gets to choose the jobs they *don't *want to do.
> They do the jobs they do because they want to and with full understanding of the dangers that are involved. Just like firemen, paramedics, police officers and the soldiers working in a professional army (like yours), they sign up for the work they do. It isn't forced upon them. And if the truth be known, they enjoy the dangers associated with their jobs.
> When it gets too dangerous, they wisely decide to ditch the rescue. Like me or you going to sea, if they don't then they go into it with their eyes wide open.
> My taxes pay for an SAR service. When I need it, I would like it to be available.
> I'm really sorry about the odd SAR person who gets hurt/killed doing their job. Truck drivers have been killed delivering our groceries to the local supermarket. I feel sorry for them too.
> If there are no people to fill the SAR jobs because it's just too damn dangerous, then I will have no expectation of rescue, I will not have to pay those taxes and I will make some new arrangements for going to sea without SAR and it won't be for the first time.
> I'm completely over feeling guilty about the prospect of having to invoke an SAR if I get into trouble at sea and I get a little irritated by the continuous reference to how I'm endangering others by being a sailor.
> 
> I apologise if this doesn't work for you.


I think you missed the intention of SD's post.



> I just want to make it clear that using an EPIRB is a decision that has consequences... if you're like Ronnie, setting out completely unprepared with a questionable boat... do you, ethically, have the right to put others at risk for your own foolishness.


Your taxes are my taxes as well. When someone like Ronnie goes out, that does not get a survey, and does not even learn how to do rig the emergency tiller system(much less stores gas in his v-berth the list goes on..). I have a problem with my tax dollars being spent to rescue a Darwin candidate. Much as I do oppose tax monies spent on someone running out of gas on the highway and a gifted amount of gas is given to the person that didn't think to fill up knowing (or not even bothering to think - dude needle on E and WTF) when it is 120 miles to the next station.

Firefighters, your country, state, providence etc - spend tons of dollars to EDUCATE you / us with how to be safe and so that you are not the one that has to place that call if it could be prevented.

And that is the keyword - prevention.

Any true salt worth saying they are salty makes a calculated risk that errors on the safest side of the equation. Sometimes **** happens though. To say someone like Ronnie, SARs should be dispatched without consequence to any outcome on the rescuers lives because they signed up for it - all due to one that headed out because he had a fricking TV special scheduled on his launch is - ridiculous. Yours and mine tax dollars should not pay for stupidity for those situations that literally can not be controlled due to mere lack of mental prudence in such a situation of such an individual that precludes greed over a calculated risk factor.

No one here, is stating that rescues shouldn't be done in terms of SARs etc - but we as sailors owe THEM the benefit of being the types that grocked what we will / are going through and WE made all proper changes, inspections, and fixes to potentially avoid the situations that WE end up placing them in to save our butts. When we pull the plug on the EPIRB for SARs - we should only do so knowing that all reasonable actions on our part have been taken to avoid such a situation prior, during and the moment we make that decision.

Perspective.

While most of us educate ourselves here... That Vanns guy - whom the credit I can give that he didn't try to make it happen against stupid odds and thankfully called it quits... That Barnes fellow - he was never on Sailnet or any other forum.. but you can read what he blogged... we know the outcome. We know the Canadian that went through years of outfitting and nominal press... he failed but he did enlightened...

The point is, it is one thing to do something because you dream of it and you are concerned how you can make it versus just doing it and throwing all caution in the wind. Sailing the open seas on a around the world adventure on a whim is not the same as deciding that today you will no longer be dateless and participate on every dating site known to man.

There is an alarming majority lately, that think they have a right to earn their millions by doing something because they are fools enough to cast lines off a pier. That 15 minutes of fame is worth someone elses life because a journey was supposed to be rosy and they couldn't deal with the basics of damage control on their own boat. The latter do not deserve my tax payer monies, unless they can put forth reasonable effort to ensure the seaworthiness of their boat and that they themselves can handle catastrophes that do not include "dude my beer is warm" or "I am frustrated"...

Please put things in context...Sd actually did.


----------



## camaraderie

Nice response Jody! And let us not forget Miss Heather and Donnna Lange in our recent halls of shame and fame!


----------



## smackdaddy

Omatako - you're arguing with a brick. This is the *Anti*-BFS thread. And they like it that way.

However, it sounds like you've been sailing long enough to actually have some Big Freakin' Sails of your own. Feel free to throw a few down over there.

Believe me, it's alot more refreshing than hearing otherwise sane people proudly declare that they would never deign to endanger our beloved SAR with some silly rescue and spend your Kiwi tax dollars here in the US doing it. Why, I'm sure Jody, Cam, Dog, et. al. have already dispensed with their own EPIRBS to ensure that they keep our coasties safe. Honorable fellows those. True sacrifice. We admire them. Leading by example if the best form of teaching, eh?

Can it actually get any more weird?


----------



## artbyjody

smackdaddy said:


> Omatako - you're arguing with a brick. This is the *Anti*-BFS thread. And they like it that way.
> 
> However, it sounds like you've been sailing long enough to actually have some Big Freakin' Sails of your own. Feel free to throw a few down over there.
> 
> Believe me, it's alot more refreshing than hearing otherwise sane people proudly declare that they would never deign to endanger our beloved SAR with some silly rescue and spend your Kiwi tax dollars doing it. Why, I'm sure Jody, Cam, Dog, et. al. have already dispensed with their own EPIRBS to ensure that they keep our coasties safe. Honorable fellows those. True sacrifice. We admire them.
> 
> Can it actually get any more weird?


And you wonder why we call you the troll. This kinda response. Soon as someone calls your crap you play nice doing that wordy nice thing that has some kind of backhanded compliment in it..

This is a perfect illustration why we do not like you (and I state that I do not - I tried to give benefit of doubt but this post - its solid there). I can guarantee you that I have way more experience on the waves and below them than you do soaking in your bubble baths conjuring your next article in "Bathtub Sailing Times"..

I have stated time and time again you do not get it.

Cam, Dog, myself and others do not advocate against having an EPRIB - but speaking soley for myself... I have it when not other other solution exists.

That part of "No other solution exists" for us means that we know our systems.

Do you know where every seacock is on your boat and in event of a flooding condition do you know everywhere to look for and have the right "wood" to seal such much less where or how to cut them off.

Do you actually lecture guests on usage of of a PFD - what to expect, and how and why to use a tether. Hasve you actually explained or even actually used a PFD for demonstration on what to expect?

Do you walk people through your safety gear - even though it will be a 1 knot day and all you want to do is just make it out on time. Do your guests have an idea where Fire extinguishers, bildge pumps, and how to kill the electrical system are?

Do you even know how to rig your emergency tiller, make a mayday call on your VHF, or even understand why you have advanced electronics gear on your boat to begin with other than to look cool.

Do you even have a lifesling or float able rope to tie to a pfd to work for a MOB. Have a 5:1 hoist to bring someone onboard or other methods you know you have practiced and it works...

EPRIBS are a last ditch situation device where life and safety of the crew (not the boat) is at peril...The determination of last ditch is preparedness of the skipper and most importantly the boat. Having fancy dancy gear doesn't make one safer just makes one more capable of the easy way out when they panic and have no idea how to control a situation. There is a reason why when you join the Navy - you have safety drills of all kinds, because the more you know beforehand when the real situation arises - the panic is out of the situation. And that is the key to survival - removing the panic and replacing the emotion with actual action.

You just do not get it and these kind of comments you continuously make (being snide or not) really illustrate my point - you may talk like an linguist and seem educated but lack all common sense...

Just because we have EPIRBS - notice not one of us have ever had to use them... They are above and beyond what all other gear and training we have. I noticed your sly comment on my Big Sail inventory - one thing I noted since you are as inquisitive as you are - what does a 38 foot sailboat do with 18 auto - top of line PFDs?

Wait for it

Because if we are ever in a rescue situation where our 3 Lifeslings are outnumbered by number we may have to pick up - we can toss PFDs and save more people... Bet you do not think about that nor the other aspects that when you take out on your boat - can and will eventually happen.

Don't mock those of us that actually know something about safety at "sea". As it truly demonstrates just what you are behind that cracked glasses of an avatar and the wordy "trolling - please I'll adjust attitude to reel you in" mentality you have... Ask anyone that I have sailed with or has sailed with me - there is no double standard in what I write, unlike your political style writing that is merely used to get you the attention you must so severely lack in real life.


----------



## sailingdog

Thank you Jody... Yes, Omatako did miss my entire point. I am talking about the ethical responsibilities a sailor has. If a sailor has a well-founded, seaworthy boat, and the experience and skills to handle her and is simply overmatched by conditions beyond their control it is one thing.... 

Please note, I'm not criticizing Skip Allan, who had 60,000 miles of experience with the particular boat he was in, and many successful ocean passages, the fact that he triggered his EPIRB. But there is a difference between what he did and what Ronnie did—in terms of preparation of the boat and himself. 

Also, note that I'm not criticizing the three people who were on the Swan 44 Freefall that had to trigger their EPIRB. A Swan 44 is a very seaworthy boat and Mr Rubridge was an OSTAR veteran IIRC...and the conditions under which they pulled the tab on their EPIRB were very different from what Ronnie was dealing with. In the case of Freefall, the boat was SINKING, their lives were in imminent danger, and the sea conditions were horriffic—40-50' seas, 40-50 knots of wind. Ronnie's case is totally different—he was incompetent and scared on a boat that was NOT SINKING, and the main reason he pulled the tab on his EPIRB was that he wanted off the boat he had failed to prepare properly. He was out in 20-30' seas and with winds only gusting to 45 knots—not exactly the same situation, as there was no imminent danger to his life IMHO.

And don't even get me started on Ms. Heather and her father...


----------



## smackdaddy

Fair enough guys. Then go over an rip that crew in the "Sinking" thread a new one. If you're this objective, there's plenty of the same general problems to hammer on over there. And this guy was apparently very experienced - and unfortunately got himself killed, caused a very, very expensive rescue and injured an SAR swimmer.

I'm just looking for some objectivity and even-handedness from you guys here.


----------



## smackdaddy

*BFS Proponents Knockroach on Lake Michigan*

This just in from "The SW Michigan Bugler". Cam, can you believe guys like this? They just don't learn!

November 24, 2008 - Though details are still sketchy, Coast Guard SAR personnel had a few tense moments last week as a world-renowned sailor and his mate sailed their 21-foot super-dinghy head-long into disaster.

Skipper Guy "Pipester" Sailaway and his first-mate Tim "TJ" Sailor braved the wintery elements to launch the 21-foot Cal Super-D into the furious waters of Lake Michigan. Winds were reportedly gusting to 20 knots and the waves were up to 2 feet in some places, with reported rogues of almost 4 feet. The two intrepid adventurers were assisted in their launch by an elderly Miami couple - Cameron and Jurdie Swaydosun. The Swaydosuns had long been mentored by Lord Sailaway and Lord Cameraderie and flew the long distance at the former's behest, and at their own expense, so they could "learn a thing or two from a real master seaman".

In fact, the "Crusty Cracker Cafe" near the boat ramp was packed to the gills by interested on-lookers, members of the press, and a small contingency of SAR personnel who'd been drawn to the event by the Pipester's prolific pre-sail boasting on various anti-sailing websites.

When asked by a concerned meteorologist whether it was really wise to insist on sailing in such adverse conditions, Pipester replied, "Heck yeah! The official Sway forecast calls for high pressure to dominate the region over the weekend. Northerly winds mean we'll beat up the lake and fly wing and wing home! What the temperature of those winds are is irrelevant to our purposes."

When the skipper's insouciance was questioned by this reporter, a young sailor name Ronnie J. vigorously defended the Pipester's flippancy, "Hey, he can call the weather any way he wants to. It's his boat and his chance at a BFS like mine. I can feel him. Go bro!"

The Pipester then "kicked his game up" another notch when a concerned moderator stated that he personally preferred safer, more temperate conditions. Pipester replied, "Cd, You better stay home...we may go sailing if there's open water! We wouldn't want to expose you to an untethered boat! Or fly into a US airport deiced with potash produced by innocent child labor. (g)"

This particular boast drew Cowboy's star Terrell Owens to the "Crusty Cracker Cafe" to watch as well. "If this cat can talk smack like that..._I'm _even impressed. That s*** makes no sense at all, man! Cred to the skipper. Now all he has to do is make the big play like T.O."

That's not exactly what happened. Though the timing of the events is still not quite clear, at one point the tiny boat and it's stellar crew were overcome by a particularly fresh gust. With the skipper losing complete control of the vessel, the boat careened into a nasty knockroach slamming the spar into the drink and extinguishing the Pipester's namesake (and reputation).

The SAR personnel in the "Crusty Cracker" were immediately suited up and ready to bravely jump into the dangerous waters to assist the two hapless and terrified sailors. But they were held back by the angry mob who insisted that the two deserved whatever fate befell them since they were so obviously unprepared and clueless - and that none of them as taxpayers were willing to foot the bill to rescue such "turkeys". Leading the mob was Lord Cameraderie, who reportedly had designs on Pipester's position as "Master Seaman". It was a scene that shall never leave this reporter's memory.

In the end, the little boat righted itself (thank goodness it knew how to sail) and the two yachtsmen made it back to the ramp with their foulies tucked between their legs.

Asked for comment as he angrily hobbled past the jeering crowd, Sway muttered, "I've pissed more saltwater than you've sailed. (vbf)"

Mr. Owens yelled, "Yeah, in your seaboot!"

Another in the crowd...a Mr. Smackdaddy shouted, "Yeah Sway and TJ! I knew you guys had a good BFS in you! Don't let these LFS chuckleheads get you down! I love you guys!"

It remains to be seen how much damage this disaster will do to the Easties in the 2008 BFS Cup standings. And it is rumored that Lord Sway is now considering obtaining a sailing license from the "CD Institute for Better Boating". Only time will tell.

Stay tuned for more details.


----------



## sailortjk1

Although loaded with BS, this was pretty funny.
The facts are not quite accurate starting with the fact that it was not on Lake Michigan.


----------



## btrayfors

Priceless 

Just two questions:

1. Knockroach ??? Kind of a knockdown/broach?

2. Were those Coasties which the crowd held back certified AJs (adrenaline junkies)?

Bill


----------



## smackdaddy

Hey - take it up with the Bugle, man.


----------



## sailingdog

Knockroach... a term invented by GUU...  Seems to change meaning every once in a while... but you're pretty close to the definition of it about 65% of the time.  


btrayfors said:


> Priceless
> 
> Just two questions:
> 
> 1. Knockroach ??? Kind of a knockdown/broach?
> 
> 2. Were those Coasties which the crowd held back certified AJs (adrenaline junkies)?
> 
> Bill


----------



## smackdaddy

As I suspected would happen, Lord Sailaway threw his first mate under the bus - essentially accusing TJ of being hysterical. Now you know who your friends are TJ. Oh the humanity.

Sway, dude, I ain't gonna mine your AFOC to help you claim a BFS. If you want it, post it.


----------



## chall03

*Ronnie Update*

An update on Ronnie, everyone's favourite attempted BFSer.

According to his blog, A freighter has now discovered his abandoned yacht drifting slowly in the direction of Hawaii.....Ronnie however appears to have moved on, while partying in Hong Kong he has bought a Bike( after unsuccessfully attempting to get sponsorship), and is going to cycle to Spain. Has this guy even looked at a map, and what is between Hong Kong and Spain?? The Mongolian desert for starters, Afghanistan potentially....A whole bunch of places I wouldn't be on a bike- Last I checked most bicycles aren't heated...

Anyway apparently the seas are safe from Ronnie until he gets to Europe. Where apparently he is going to again reboat and attempt the Atlantic....

I do admire the guys spirit, I admire his courage, he seems extremely likeable, but damn he doesn't seem to have learn't a thing.

I wonder where the best spot to tape a EPIRB onto a bike is 

His blog canbe found at Open Blue Horizon


----------



## sailingdog

Hmm... he abandoned ship how many weeks ago, and his boat is still afloat, heading for Hawaii without him or his assistance... I think that says a lot about how dire Ronnie's situation was when he pulled the tab on the EPIRB. His boat deserved a lot better than him IMHO.

Ronnie appears to have a serious lack of anything resembling a connection to reality. What he has in courage and spirit, he apparently lacks in common sense and intelligence.



chall03 said:


> An update on Ronnie, everyone's favourite attempted BFSer.
> 
> According to his blog, A freighter has now discovered his abandoned yacht drifting slowly in the direction of Hawaii.....Ronnie however appears to have moved on, while partying in Hong Kong he has bought a Bike( after unsuccessfully attempting to get sponsorship), and is going to cycle to Spain. Has this guy even looked at a map, and what is between Hong Kong and Spain?? The Mongolian desert for starters, Afghanistan potentially....A whole bunch of places I wouldn't be on a bike- Last I checked most bicycles aren't heated...
> 
> Anyway apparently the seas are safe from Ronnie until he gets to Europe. Where apparently he is going to again reboat and attempt the Atlantic....
> 
> I do admire the guys spirit, I admire his courage, he seems extremely likeable, but damn he doesn't seem to have learn't a thing.
> 
> I wonder where the best spot to tape a EPIRB onto a bike is
> 
> His blog canbe found at Open Blue Horizon


----------



## ckgreenman

Looks like his boat is more likely to have a BFS than he is. :laugher:

So what's going to happen to his boat. I assumed that since he abandoned ship it's fair game for salvage. Or does he still have rights to it?


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> Ronnie appears to have a serious lack of anything resembling a connection to reality. What he has in courage and spirit, he apparently lacks in common sense and intelligence.


Heh-heh, I love this kid. Motivated. Disciplined. Meticulous. Obsessive-Compulsive. Bipolar. Schizophrenic. My kind of guy.

I think what this really proves is that sailing through furious conditions in Hurricane Alley in the middle of winter is ALSO actually a cakewalk. Way easier than any of us thought. Hell the boats these days don't even need anyone at the helm to pull it off!

So exactly why again were you guys crying about the lack of preparation, the lack of sailing knowledge, the lack of a thorough survey, etc.? Who needs 'em? Just take a lot of food, booze, drammamine, and DVDs, and stay in the cabin. You'll be fine.

Now, Dog, as to the latter part of your quote above...we should always strive to ensure that the inverse is not true of us. Right?


----------



## sailingdog

My guess is that it is fair game, considering that he is in the Far East ATM. Technically, it has been abandoned and is now a hazard to shipping...so would qualify as a boat to be salvaged.


ckgreenman said:


> Looks like his boat is more likely to have a BFS than he is. :laugher:
> 
> So what's going to happen to his boat. I assumed that since he abandoned ship it's fair game for salvage. Or does he still have rights to it?


----------



## ckgreenman

sailingdog said:


> My guess is that it is fair game, considering that he is in the Far East ATM. Technically, it has been abandoned and is now a hazard to shipping...so would qualify as a boat to be salvaged.


I call dibs!!! HAHAHAHA


----------



## sailingdog

Calling dibs doesn't count for much... you need to get warm bodies out to the boat... 


ckgreenman said:


> I call dibs!!! HAHAHAHA


----------



## ckgreenman

Not likely that's gonna happen. Meh, It was worth a try


----------



## chall03

Salvage laws say she is fair game. He is very careful on his blog not to give the exact location......He also talks about sending his brother with a crew if it does get closer to Hawaii. 

Before we all head off , lets keep in mind the thing has no steering, had its rig damaged by the freighter when Ronnie triumphantly exited, and by now the food, booze, drammamine, and DVDs are probably experiencing some serious mould issues. 

Then again a few weeks sat on Waikiki with Mai Tai in hand, doing a bit of sightseeing on the beach, while waiting for her to pop up on the horizon doesn't sound like a bad way of spending the festive season.


----------



## ckgreenman

Well?? When are we going? hahaha. I'm sure we can hook up an emergency tiller or at least a motor or something.


----------



## sailingdog

Actually, it does have steering... according to Ronnie's reports, the rudder and rudder stock were fine. He just didn't have the brains to rig an emergency tiller.



chall03 said:


> Salvage laws say she is fair game. He is very careful on his blog not to give the exact location......He also talks about sending his brother with a crew if it does get closer to Hawaii.
> 
> Before we all head off , lets keep in mind the thing has no steering, had its rig damaged by the freighter when Ronnie triumphantly exited, and by now the food, booze, drammamine, and DVDs are probably experiencing some serious mould issues.
> 
> Then again a few weeks sat on Waikiki with Mai Tai in hand, doing a bit of sightseeing on the beach, while waiting for her to pop up on the horizon doesn't sound like a bad way of spending the festive season.


----------



## AdamLein

The comments on Ronnie's recent blog entry are just... they're just awesome. If you're feeling nostalgic for some good, old-fashioned forum etiquette, it's highly recommended reading.

And, "Scott", if you are on SailNet, I applaud your endurance.


----------



## sailingdog

Unfortunately, much of Ronnie's audience are his family and friends, and don't see that he did anything wrong. Scott's points on the latest blog entry about stepping up into a life raft are pretty much on point.


----------



## chall03

SD good point on the steering, I did forget the specifics.....
Scott does sound like A bit like a Sailnetter......I guess at least Ronnie is being honest enough to pretty much admit between the lines that he could of stayed on the boat and survived he just decided it was too unpleasant  

I also like that he appears to have his Macbook Pro with him in Hong Kong, which kinda suggests during the risky rescue onto the freighter he managed somehow to have his laptop under his arm??? If I was the Freighter Captain I know where I would of inserted his Macbook Pro when he came aboard


----------



## sailingdog

Wonder if he managed to save his HD camcorders too?


chall03 said:


> SD good point on the steering, I did forget the specifics.....
> Scott does sound like A bit like a Sailnetter......I guess at least Ronnie is being honest enough to pretty much admit between the lines that he could of stayed on the boat and survived he just decided it was too unpleasant
> 
> I also like that he appears to have his Macbook Pro with him in Hong Kong, which kinda suggests during the risky rescue onto the freighter he managed somehow to have his laptop under his arm??? If I was the Freighter Captain I know where I would of inserted his Macbook Pro when he came aboard


----------



## AdamLein

Apparently his laptops and a good amount of DVDs were recovered... I really really hope they get posted.

Speaking of video, apparently the M/V that picked him had video of the rescue (both attempts). I know it's beneath me, but I'm dying to see it.


----------



## Omatako

AdamLein said:


> Speaking of video, apparently the M/V that picked him had video of the rescue (both attempts). I know it's beneath me, but I'm dying to see it.


Unless you're not planning on going to sea, don't let it get too far beneath you. You may need to be rescued one day, perhaps for a whole different range of reasons. The video may just teach you something that would be useful in the future.

Remember, nobody is exempt from getting into trouble at sea.


----------



## Boasun

And remember that when you are far out to sea, the nearest point of land is STRAIGHT DOWN.


----------



## ckgreenman

Boasun said:


> And remember that when you are far out to sea, the nearest point of land is STRAIGHT DOWN.


Depends is you're over a trench or not


----------



## sailingdog

Even over the Marianas trench, you're probably closer to the bottom than to dry land anywhere nearby. 


ckgreenman said:


> Depends is you're over a trench or not


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Selfish use of EPIRBs*

This thread is interesting because people who have either great experience or knowledge, or both, are calling Skip Allen a hero and Ronnie an idiot for both using their EPIRB unnecessarily. I think both assessments are wrong. They were both tired of their circumstances and fearful for their future, but both were safe when they punched the button.

Skip Allen was a hero when he left port, and Ronnie was unprepared when he left port, that I believe. But when they punched the button they were the same.

We live in a world of disposable boats, safety nets, and the usual consequences of our actions are only monetary.

So it is interesting to see people who feel they have the credentials to be at least in the middle or better of the sailing world food chain suck up to Skip Allen. Because he has more experience and probably a better prepared boat than they do. He would have survived, don't you think? Don't you think you would have?

I am sure there are going to be a lot more SAR calls now that the experts have deemed it wise to scuttle a good boat.

I saw the pictures of him climbing up the side of the freighter in a magazine. What would you say about him if the mast of his boat had knocked him off the rope and he was never found? Would he have been an idiot for being tired of his circumstances? Shouldn't he have to pay the freighter line before someone who didn't have steerage, no matter what his McGiver quotient is?

Everyone here who leaves for a faraway port is somewhere between Skip Allen and Ronnie. And I hope you live to tell us about it.

My second point is that Skip Allen and Ronnie are different kind of people from me and I'll assume everyone else on SailNet. Transoceanic bad weather single handlers, please speak up. I'm glad they are both alive.

Dan


----------



## smackdaddy

RIGHT ON DAN! Man, I'm glad there are other sailors out there that get this. Preach on brother.

(And welcome to Sailnet dude.)


----------



## sailingdog

*I wouldn't equate them being the same when they pulled the tab on their EPIRB. * Skip had the experience and knowledge to determine he was truly at risk-_his was an informed decision to make the call before the situation got worse, and wanted to do so *before the weather became a real danger to those coming to his aid. *_He had had thousands of miles of experience in this boat and knew the capabilities of the boat inside and out. He based his decision to trip the EPIRB on his knowledge of the weather, his location, the condition of his boat.

Ronnie was on a _boat that wasn't properly prepared_-due to his own negligence-_didn't have the knowledge or experience to know whether the boat was going to survive_-it did btw-and _just wanted off because he couldn't handle the situation_-mostly due to his own negligence again. _*Ronnie's boat is almost to Hawaii by all accounts. He failed his boat. *_

*There is a serious difference between the two. * One was a skilled and experienced sailor on a well found and familiar boat with thousands of miles of bluewater experience to draw upon. The other was a novice sailor on a relatively unknown boat with almost no experience of any sort to draw upon. One knew his boat's capabilities and understood what the weather conditions were going to be like and made the choice to get rescued before the conditions posed a serious hazard to those rescuing him. The other wasn't in anything close to the the same conditions and was suffering from his own lack of proper preparations, and had little or no regard for what his rescuers would have to go through.  So, exactly how are they the same??


WaterHouse said:


> This thread is interesting because people who have either great experience or knowledge, or both, are calling Skip Allen a hero and Ronnie an idiot for both using their EPIRB unnecessarily. I think both assessments are wrong. They were both tired of their circumstances and fearful for their future, but both were safe when they punched the button.
> 
> Skip Allen was a hero when he left port, and Ronnie was unprepared when he left port, that I believe. But when they punched the button they were the same.
> 
> We live in a world of disposable boats, safety nets, and the usual consequences of our actions are only monetary.
> 
> So it is interesting to see people who feel they have the credentials to be at least in the middle or better of the sailing world food chain suck up to Skip Allen. Because he has more experience and probably a better prepared boat than they do. He would have survived, don't you think? Don't you think you would have?
> 
> I am sure there are going to be a lot more SAR calls now that the experts have deemed it wise to scuttle a good boat.
> 
> I saw the pictures of him climbing up the side of the freighter in a magazine. What would you say about him if the mast of his boat had knocked him off the rope and he was never found? Would he have been an idiot for being tired of his circumstances? Shouldn't he have to pay the freighter line before someone who didn't have steerage, no matter what his McGiver quotient is?
> 
> Everyone here who leaves for a faraway port is somewhere between Skip Allen and Ronnie. And I hope you live to tell us about it.
> 
> My second point is that Skip Allen and Ronnie are different kind of people from me and I'll assume everyone else on SailNet. Transoceanic bad weather single handlers, please speak up. I'm glad they are both alive.
> 
> Dan


----------



## tommays

Having read Skips account on SA he NEVER pushed the button BUT made SAT phone contact and setup a well planed rescue which included SINKING his boat so it would NOT be a hazzard to other shiping


----------



## sailingdog

My bad..but the point I'm making still stands. 


tommays said:


> Having read Skips account on SA he NEVER pushed the button BUT made SAT phone contact and setup a well planed rescue which included SINKING his boat so it would NOT be a hazzard to other shiping


----------



## knothead

sailingdog said:


> So, exactly how are they the same??


One way (perhaps the only way), they were the same is that they had both had had enough.
The sea will test everyone and everyone has their threshold.


----------



## TSOJOURNER

*Equal*

They were equal because they both cried uncle to Mother Nature before they had to.

You either want people to only use EPIRBs when necessary, or not.

If Ronnie could get through his storm and 1200 more nm with vice grips, a boat hook and his skillset, then Skip Allen's boat should be floating in San Francisco bay right now.

They are equal because Skip Allen failed his boat, only he killed it first. That may raise some feathers of the too comfortable, but it's the truth from my perspective. I think the ugly truth is that Skip Allen's age caught up to him, and all the preparation and experience in the world told him to cry uncle early. He chose not to *use* his experience from his earlier returns. I'm sure it was a good choice. But he definitely learned to leave his boat in Hawaii over winter now.

The fact that Skip Allen has the social network and reputation to be able to get a freighter identified and enlisted for help without CG help has nothing to do with what will happen when the rest of us get in that position. We will have to set off the EPIRB to get the same result as Skip Allen.

Shouldn't there be a rule that you don't put rescuers in danger unless you are in a liferaft. In 3+ days the storm would be gone and the rescue easy.

They are both equal because they both realized they were truly at risk. And because they were both rescued we will never know if their fears were unfounded. We just have to agree with their call that they needed help.

They are equals because only idiots want to fool with Mother Nature when the rest of us use weather windows or airplanes. They both chose to put themselves into a dangerous situation, which Skip Allen undoubtedly knew more than Ronnie. They both chose to leave port, because they both believed they would make port, just like every other idiot that has needed rescue.

They are both equal because neither had the skills or the equipment to feel safe from Mother Nature's wrath. They both thought their boats would be adequate. Obviously, Ronnie was not prepared, and should have lurked on SailNet longer, but few dreamers are as grounded in fear of the possible problem as us. Obviously, Skip Allen was not prepared for what he got into, even though he sure should have been. Didn't he have like three backup autotillers for such a voyage, or was he unprepared?

Again, they both failed their boats, which doesn't have to be such an insult to a newbie or someone who accepts their limitations.

But mainly they are equals because they left before they were perfectly prepared. The rest of us will putter around our boats preparing them for the dream we will never make happen, read the books of the lucky, and type on the keyboard more than we sail our boats.

Dan


----------



## smackdaddy

Tom - you're right on the EPIRB. He coordinated via ham radio and satphone. The CG actually told him not to trigger it.

Some other quick comparisons to note...

*Skip's conditions from his account: *

position: 35-17 x 126-38

"the wind was steady 30-35, w/ higher gusts and a confused wave train from the NW, N, and NE"

"There was no doubt that if WILDFLOWER's tiller pilot was lost that we would round up and be at the mercy of these breaking waves, some of which I estimated to be in the vicinity of 25-35 feet, and as big as I hadn't seen since the '79 Fastnet Race storm on IMP."

And his assessment and reasoning for the call...

"What followed ultimately played into the following day's events. During the long night, my third in this particular gale, breaking crests would poop the boat about every five minutes, filling the cockpit and surging against the companionway hatch boards. Even though I had gone to lengths for many years to insure fire hose watertight integrity of the companionway hatch, I found the power of the breaking wave crests slamming the boat would cause water to forcefully spray around the edges of the hatchboards and into the cabin.

During the long wait for daylight, I had more than enough time to ponder what might happen if the autopilot was damaged or was washed off its mount. I had two spare tiller pilots. But it would take several minutes, exposed in the cockpit, on my knees, to hook up a replacement in the cockpit, on a dark night, when the boat was being periodically knocked down and the cockpit swept."

*Ronnie's conditions:*

position: 28-21, 129-44

30 kt winds and 20'-25' seas. (According to Cam at the beginning of this post).

"The coast guard report says that the seas were 20 to 30 feet and 35 to 40 knot winds with gusts to 45" (According to Ronnie's blog)

"Wednesday night at 11pm, my wind vane's rudder post broke, so I lost self-steering for good and hove to. In the morning, I attempted to get going again, but my boat's rudder post was broken. This is not a problem that my emergency tiller could have fixed. There was no way I could find to regain steerage of my boat, and I was effectively adrift in rough seas, over 800 miles from land in any direction. Alone. Winds were still 30-35 knots with rough seas."

========

One thing of interest is that what Skip feared actually happened to Ronnie. I'm not real sure vice grips would have been the answer here. But that's Dog's horse to beat.

Preparation? Experience? Idiot? Legend?

Or other?


----------



## apieschel

Seadog, states "In the case of Freefall, the boat was SINKING, their lives were in imminent danger, and the sea conditions were horriffic—40-50' seas, 40-50 knots of wind". Most other reports say the same. However, if you watch the video of the rescue, advance to pass the night vision section to time 11:12:51. This becomes color. The seas are not big and the boat is definitely NOT SINKING. I find this very puzzling, possibly panic?. Art


----------



## chall03

hmmmm, very interesting observation man, I might go have a very close look!!! BTW 'Seadog' can get a little sensitive around here sometimes, probably one of those guys whose name its best to have second look at


----------



## smackdaddy

Actually, Seadog ain't bad. Beats Multimutt.


----------



## chall03

Ok here is your latest Ronnie update. As found on another forum, below is his response to criticism of his attempted voyage. Ronnie, if you read this it would swell of you to come on here and post as well. 


" lastly, I will address some of the criticism on this and other boards. While my boat may have been a bit under-prepared (it had all the gear, but was old and not up to the task in some ways), I was personally prepared. Someone on here said "bought a boat he didn't know how to drive", or something to that extent. While I have only been sailing for one year, and am still in a lot of ways inexperienced, I have dedicated myself to sailing and learning about sailing. Within 2 months of starting to sail, I was sailing IN AND OUT of the slip, solo, in a 41 foot, full keel boat, in a crowded San Diego marina. (could only sail OUT in an upwind slip, though. Had to motor out/ get a tow from the down wind slip) I was one of the only guys I knew that did this. I sailed it several times while the motor was at the shop being rebuilt. I used to sail to an anchorage, drop the hook, backwind the main to set it, and then bring it up and sail away the next day. Solo. Not trying to come off as arrogant, but I pride myself in having learned a lot about sailing in a short time. If anyone on this board ever took me on a boat with them, i'm sure that they would leave feeling that I was very knowledgeable and more than competent on a boat. (I still suck at knots.) I didn't merely buy a boat and go. I bought a boat, learned absolutely everything that I could, and then left. I will do things differently next time, but it kind of hurts when people act as if I know nothing about sailing, and I just set sail out of ignorance. I have worked hard to become, what I feel, a very competent sailor who knows a lot about the craft and the sport." - Ronnie Simpson.


----------



## dsmylie

What a DWEEB:laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher


----------



## sailingdog

Obviously didn't know enough to use an emergency tiller...


----------



## chall03

Apparently not.  Is it time yet to fly to Hawaii and salvage my new boat?

I do admire Ronnie's balls though. How is it that balls and brains rarely go hand in hand?


----------



## ckgreenman

Hey, he's a typical teenager. I know when i was his age I knew everything there was to know and nobody was gonna tell me different. As he grows up he'll learn but as of now, he sounds like nothing more than a typical know-it-all teenager.

My Nephew (16 years old) is exactly the same way. The only difference is his passion is music and not sailing.


----------



## sww914

A year is a larger percentage of one's personal experience at that age. At 18 it would be about 1/15th or 1/14th of everything that he can remember. He probably does feel that he has a ton of experience having spent 1 year studying. I was the same way about surfing at that age, after a year of surfing almost every day I thought I had it nailed. I paddled out on a day of 20'-25' faces. I caught the wave of my life, still. The next wave that I took off on nearly killed me. Lucky I didn't post it all over the internet.


----------



## smackdaddy

chall03 said:


> How is it that balls and brains rarely go hand in hand?


That's exactly the point, Chall. People always seem to employ one or the other.

And that, brings us to the Philosophy of Stones that kind of sums it up for me. What are "stones" really? Quite simply, it can all be broken down as follows:

1. One-Part Zest for Adventure and Excitement (left-hanging)
2. One-Part Desire to Push One's Self Beyond One's Limits (right-hanging)
3. One-Part Brain (just above and center)

When one employs the proper mixture of the three, you get epic voyages, great attitudes, great lessons, exciting sailors.

When, one relies only on 1-2, you get the inevitable SOS, next-of-kin notification, and the "I-told-you-so".

When one relies too much on 3, the 1-2s shrivel away to useless lumps. And that's definitely no fun.

So, it's always a balance.


----------



## AjariBonten

ckgreenman said:


> Hey, he's a typical teenager. I know when i was his age I knew everything there was to know and nobody was gonna tell me different. As he grows up he'll learn but as of now, he sounds like nothing more than a typical know-it-all teenager.
> 
> My Nephew (16 years old) is exactly the same way. The only difference is his passion is music and not sailing.


Hard, but not impossible, to kill yourself and others with music.


----------



## hellosailor

He still doesn't get it.
" I was personally prepared. ... learned absolutely everything that I could, and then left."
If he'd learned everything that he COULD have learned, he'd have learned to inspect the steering assembly along with everything else from stem to stern. It isn't hard to find people who'll suggest that as voyaging prep.


----------



## AjariBonten

hellosailor said:


> " I was personally prepared. ... learned absolutely everything that I could, and then left."


In other words, "Who, ME? It wasn't MY fault!"


----------



## Jeff_H

I am not sure that you folks understand what happened with Ronnies rudder. As he described it the rudder post was turning but the rudder wasn't. In other words, it sounds like he broke the rudder post and not the steering gear. Historically, in boats of that age and type, that was not all that unsual as boats were often thrown backward by waves and jambed the blade against the stops, damaging in either rudder post or the blade itself. Rudder posts of that era were typically bronze with bronze drifts tying the blade to the post. Rudder posts were designed for the torque of the rudder blades and so were able to be damaged when exposed to the kind of exceptional torque of a boat being thrown backward against the blade by a big wave. Over time the bronze was prone to fatigue further reducing the ability of the blade to stand up to that kind of abuse. 

Oddly, because the rudder post on a modern post hung rudders is designed to support both the torsional loads and the mush larger loads of supporting the rudder itself, this kind of failure had gotten to be less common. 

Now then you can argue that he should have had an emergency rudder that he could rig, and that he should have been able top deploy a drogue to keep the boat from lying sidewards to the waves which I would consider to be potentially be valid arguements about his seamanship, but not having been there, its hard to say what he tried and what did not work out for him. I will say these short waterline, comparatively short keel boats with attached rudders of that era were a real bear to steer in a breeze even with their rudders intact, tending to track poorly and develop a lot of weather helm. 

Still and all he should have been able to balance the sails as best he could and then rig some form of temporary steering. It would have been hard to do single-handed and probably should have been thought through back in post rather than when beeing rolled onto beams end. Then again, I wasn't there and for that matter neither were any of you.....

Jeff


----------



## AjariBonten

> Then again, I wasn't there and for that matter neither were any of you.....


That's about the gist of it, aint it?


----------



## smackdaddy

Right on Jeff.


----------



## camaraderie

Jeff...good analysis...but the main point is that HE was not ready for sea and neither was the boat, never having been surveyed. Didn't need to be there to draw those conclusions. Everything else that happened is a result of those two factors. If it wasn't that..it would have been something else.


----------



## smackdaddy

Hey dude, welcome back to On Topic! And thanks for going to the mat on the whole BFS thing over there. You're the man.


----------



## Jeff_H

George; (Cam),

I know that at some level you are right that this fellow sounded ill-equipped for this kind of offshore work, but as I sit here reading the criticisms of Ronnie, I have to think that it is at odds with much of the advice given on this forum to new sailors who want to go off cruising. 

But in a sense more general than suggested by your comments, as I parse this case in my mind, I think of all of the threads where some neophyte comes onto this forum with grand asperations and looking for boat advice to fulfill those asperation. My standard advice, buy something small and cheap and learn to sail really well and then you won't need our advise is at odds with the general recommendation to but the boat that neophyte will use for their voyage, fix it up and just go. At least Ronnie spent enough time sailing this boat that he had pretty good boat handling skills. He describes sailing into and out of slips and on and off the anchor, these are skills that requires one to understand a lot about how their boat will be behave. Its not the same as heavy weather skills but it shows an effort on Ronnie's part to learn how to sail his boat.

Then there is the boat. The Rhodes Bounty (I'm not sure where the Palmer Johnson name comes in since I belive that these boats were only built by Aeromarine, Colman and Pearson) were reasonably good CCA era racer-cruisers. They never were intended as offshore boats, but that said they have proven to be reasonably good boats as compared to many of the similar era designs. But these boats are 40 plus years old. Ignoring that for a moment, these were miserable designs for offshore work. They were designed to be raced on inshore courses and to cheat a racing rule that produced boats that were distorted in ways that were totally oput of line with all that yacht designers of that era knew and all that yacht designers of this era know about what it takes to design a boat optimized for offshore work. The hull and rig designs make no sense for offshore work, and yet over and over again, newbies are told that these are great offshore cruisers. 

But back to the age of the boat thing, No kidding the rudder post sheered. What do you expect from a nearly 50 year old bronze shaft and drift pins? Its easy to sit here and say, "What was he thinking?", Yet over and over again, people on this forum suggest that Triton's and Alberg 30's somehow make sense as offshore boats, dispite rudder posts of that same design and material and age. Why wouldn't he expect the rudder post to hold up when dozens of far more experienced sailors recommend similar boats without saying, "Pardon me you do know that if you buy one of these old girls and expect to take the boat offshore, you'll need to completely disassemble it and reinforce it and then you'll have a medocre offshore cruiser, but at least it will be capable of standing up to the rigours of going offshore." 

And you are right that the boat should have been surveyed. No Doubt, about it, but I seriously doubt that a survey would have actually found the rudderr post fatigued (I am guessing between the stuffing box and the bottom of the rudder shaft log.) where it is essentially invisible. Now would it have found the other issues that are likely to be problems with boats of this age, (Things like fatigued chainplates, abraded shaft and rudder poist logs, corroded keel bolts or delaminated membranes above the encapsulated keel, fatigued hull to deck joints, and so on). And while a cautious surveyor may in fact suggest that the boat be disassembled, these items inspected and replaced as necessary. But people who buy these old turkeys almost never do that kind of due dilligence. Instead they point to some sisterhip who sailed somewhere far away and say, "See, if he can do so can I." 

So while it is easy to throw stones at Ronnie, it seems harder for us to stop and realize that he is not all that different from many of us on this Forum. It makes sense to try to learn from what happened out there, (don't try to go offshore in a boat this old without a substantial rebuild, have a good temperary rudder system and learn to use in moderate conditions on up to more extreme conditions, learn to balance you sails so that you can roughly sail without a rudder and so on) but in the end, the sea does not have much of a sense of humor and even the best prepared and skilled sailor can get his head handed to him, and it seems unseamanlike for us to make fun of him for the poor hand that fate dealt him.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## KeelHaulin

An excerpt from Cruising World, published in 1999:



> Designers of that era had yet to be influenced by flocks of boat-show attendees and boat brokers plowing straight into the cabin without so much as a look around the decks. Consequently, the Bounty II is typical of successful, older, CCA era production boats, with a structurally sound and moderately proportioned hull designed to handle the rigors of ocean passage making, whether it be to Bermuda, on a Transpac race, or in the SORC-while being accommodating to the crew.
> 
> Despite her scant, 28-foot waterline and maximum beam of only 10 feet 3 inches, the Bounty Il's slab sides and full sections afford adequate usable volume below. Her moderate 5-foot 9-inch draft and long run of full keel are a traditionalist's dream come true.
> 
> Structure and stability are strong points in this vessel. Narrow beam and healthy ballast/displacement ratio mean she can recover from a deep capsize. Her thick-as-a-plank glass work has made the boat heavier than perhaps necessary, but the result, after 40 years, is that many of the early boats are still going strong and are worth refitting.


Article was here: BountyII

If the boat (and more importantly the sailor) were properly prepared it would have been fine for ocean passage...


----------



## chall03

:laugher :laugher Smack I just love "the Philosophy of Stones". :laugher :laugher 
There is a self help book in that for sure.

I get what your saying Jeff, I also have to question whether faced with the situation Ronnie found himself in, would I have done anything differently or better? 

Im some way's the poor guy was unlucky. He's picked himself up again and made the best of a bad situation however, best of luck to him.


----------



## knothead

Jeff_H said:


> So while it is easy to throw stones at Ronnie, it seems harder for us to stop and realize that he is not all that different from many of us on this Forum.
> Respectfully,
> Jeff


I am not worthy.









I mean that. Jeff.


----------



## hellosailor

Jeff-
I think many of us have said "There but for the grace of the gods go I" or words to similar effect. But how many of us have decided we're going to go from "landlubber" to circumnavigating AS A BUSINESS PROJECT in no time flat?

There have been enough threads, here and elsewhere, about the invisible failure modes for old rudders, that going offshore with a 20+ year old rudder which is uninspected, could be called wreckless. Just like going off with old uninspected rigging. The failures, the inspections, none of this is news or hard to learn about.

As to how his rudder failed--he was never clear about that, whether it was the post or the steering. When and if the boat washes ashore, maybe salvors will conduct a post mortem. 

I don't think any of us are saying we're "better" than him, just that we've been slower, more cautious, more respectful of the power of the sea and the frailty of boats. Especially, the vulnerability of going SOLO trans-Pacific, and doubly so in an OLD boat that hasn't been professionally inspected or outfitted. There's something to be said of the concept "If it was easy, everyone would be doing it." Everyone doesn't try to do what he did.

And I'm still wondering, if they were doing this as a business project, where are the videos?! A blog ain't enough.


----------



## sailingdog

Jeff—

IIRC, he said the rudder quadrant was turning, but the rudder was not... that indicated to me that the key that locked the quadrant to the stock had sheared, not that the stock had broken. If that was the case, an emergency tiller would have been a possible solution for the problem.


----------



## GeorgeB

Good grief! I thought we put Ronnie’s sorry little affair to bed a long time ago. Why is it so hard to believe that he was unsuccessful in a large degree to his own lack of knowledge, experience and judgment? His own words pretty much testified to that fact. His level of seamanship amounted to pretty much docking his boat and performing sea and anchor detail under sail. I don’t know about you guys, but this is pretty basic stuff where I come from (heck, I’ve been doing it since my banshee days.) And more telling, is that these harbor skills that he values so highly are never going to be used at sea. Out there, a very different paradigm is in effect. 

What got him into trouble was not recognizing situations as they developed. If you guys saw the GRIB files from when he abandoned, he was outside of the windy part of the gale. He was almost home free and if sailed a course a bit more southerly (instead of straight for Honolulu) he would have been in 10 -15 kt conditions within a day. His auto helm didn’t have the response time to sail in his wave conditions. You need the brain of a helmsman to keep the boat linear, not a drunken autohelm chasing the waves around. The autohelm will always be trying to keep up, never anticipating. He should have been hand steering. He should have used his vane steering to spell him (oops, never installed). His rudder broke for sure but it broke at the blade, leaving the stock in tack. It broke because of the lever forces put on it when it went to full stop one too many times while over correcting. Why do I know this? This is the cause of almost all rudder failures on Transpac and Pac Cup boats. If he was having problems steering, he should have slowed the boat down. Once broke, he should have deployed his drogue (oops, didn’t have one) or at least drag wraps. I give the kid a lot credit for hubris, but that’s all.

<OThe Rhodes Bounty is the exact opposite of an inshore racer. It rates a 164 PHRF compared to a Cal 40’s 114 (built as a racer). Heck, a Catalina 42 Rates a 102 and my 34 is a 147 and has a foot more water line to boot. This boat was not built to the IOR or SORC rules and the ketch rig would make it hard to sail to its 164 rating. It’s a cruiser, pure and simple. The narrow beam, full keel and major overhangs would make it track like it was on rails in a seaway. If you want squirrely, try helming an IOR or an open class design boat in those conditions. Those are not easy.<O

Of course Ronnie is going to defend himself justify what he did. He probably is tired of having his nose rubbed into it. Let’s give him some warm milk and a cookie and put him to bed once and for all.<O


----------



## smackdaddy

I wanted to post this in this illustrious thread to show what serious dedication to the dream of big sailing, in the face of lots of naysayers and hecklers, will get you:

*Ronnie Simpson Completes the SHTP*

The dude has a serious set of stones.

Congrats Ronnie. Be safe on the return.

(PS - I'm sure lots of you guys, OP included, are ready to congratulate "this turkey" now? With some "crow" maybe?)


----------



## sww914

That's better.


----------



## chall03

smackdaddy said:


> I wanted to post this in this illustrious thread to show what serious dedication to the dream of big sailing, in the face of lots of naysayers and hecklers, will get you:
> 
> *Ronnie Simpson Completes the SHTP*
> 
> The dude has a serious set of stones.
> 
> Congrats Ronnie. Be safe on the return.
> 
> (PS - I'm sure lots of you guys, OP included, are ready to congratulate "this turkey" now? With some "crow" maybe?)


Best of luck Smack getting a congrats on record from 'the original OP'  

There is probably as much chance of that as there is of the original OP, you and a Portagee sailing off arm in arm on a BFS in a Tartan....

For my part congrats Ronnie....... sorry but IMHO he's still a dick but a determined one at that.


----------



## cardiacpaul

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.


----------



## CharlieCobra

Or they learn something from their mistakes. Everybody makes 'em and if ya say ya don't, you're a bald face liar. It's just morons that make the same ones over again....


----------



## sailingdog

I'd point out that he had a boat given to him that was in great shape and not in need of survey or any major maintenance AFAIK.... and as for eating crow...there's no crow IMHO... Ronnie was a stupid jackass the first time he left and just because he's a lucky enough to have someone donate a boat for him to use doesn't mean a lot. Let's see what he does without the charity of a free boat to use.


----------



## smackdaddy

CharlieCobra said:


> Or they learn something from their mistakes. Everybody makes 'em and if ya say ya don't, you're a bald face liar. It's just morons that make the same ones over again....


+1.

The bottom line is he kept at it and achieved something in sailing that virtually none of the naysayers have ever done themselves. That deserves respect. And he did it far more quickly than any of those naysayers would have allowed for in their "advice" or their "process". They would have never let him leave the dock.

Ronnie pushed his limits, and he succeeded. Luck vs. success? A much more interesting argument now I'd say.

No I don't expect anything from the OP. My point has always been, from the beginning, that I personally celebrate effort, ambition, commitment, and success. That's what big sailing is all about.

This thread, and others like it in the past, celebrate failure...for some goofy-assed reason. (Although that seems to have changed of late. Thank goodness).

Many herein called him an idiot at the tops of their lungs...but that idiot just sailed circles around them. I'm just saying congratulations are in order...if you can get the words past the crow in your mouth. Heh-heh.


----------



## RTB

Check out the guy that "donated" his boat warriors_wish_bio

I think Don probably did a little more than give Ronnie the keys to the boat, pat him on the butt, and say "here kid, go do the Singlehanded Transpac"....

Maybe it takes a bit more than luck and a good little 30' boat to own a SHTP buckle at the age of 25? Besides, he pulled off a pretty nice finish.

It would have been easy for him to give up sailing 2 years ago. But instead, he'll be at the Awards Ceremony and Dinner in Hanalei tomorrow night. I say DUES PAID.


----------



## bubb2

If we did all the things we are capable of, we would literally astound ourselves. 
*Thomas A. Edison*


----------



## smackdaddy

bubb2 said:


> If we did all the things we are capable of, we would literally astound ourselves.
> *Thomas A. Edison*


+1, Bubb. +1.

Did Tommy E. BFS?


----------



## RTB

He makes a pretty killer video too. Should make his sponsor happy.

YouTube - 2010 Singlehanded Transpac Ronnie Simpson


----------



## smackdaddy

chall03 said:


> There is probably as much chance of that as there is of the original OP, you and a Portagee sailing off arm in arm on a BFS in a Tartan....


Hell, I'd do it. I could crack those guys up in a heartbeat. And I could learn a thing or two. So why not? It's just the internet for crying out loud.

Nice vid RTB. Thanks for the linky.


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> No I don't expect anything from the OP. My point has always been, from the beginning, that I personally celebrate effort, ambition, commitment, and success. That's what big sailing is all about.
> 
> This thread, and others like it in the past, celebrate failure...for some goofy-assed reason. (Although that seems to have changed of late. Thank goodness).
> 
> Many herein called him an idiot at the tops of their lungs...but that idiot just sailed circles around them. I'm just saying congratulations are in order...if you can get the words past the crow in your mouth. Heh-heh.


You know... I tried to keep my mouth shut on your other thread about Ronnie's SHTP attempt; but for this, I CAN'T. The only person on this board who should STFU (Shut The F**k Up) is you Smack. You really have no f'ing clue about what you are saying or what it really means to do a BFS as you call it.

The guy you hold up as a shining example of "success" was RESCUED due to his INEPT, and non-existent ability as a sailor two years ago. He bought a boat that was in need of total refit; and tried to sail it offshore with no preparation. When things got tough and his rudder failed he declared "game over" and popped his EPIRB. He put the lives of his rescuers at risk; only to find his way back to the USA to get his hands on another boat and "PROVE" that he could be a BF Sailor. Does that sort of ego give him much more respect from myself or other people on this forum? Absolutely not. Just because he made it does not make him more competent or any "better". When he exited SF Bay he had that fateful offshore trip, his qualifier cruise, and at most a year of weekend crew experience; which is literally nothing when it comes to preparing for a singlehanded ocean crossing. What does that tell me? It tells me he was just as fu**ing stupid and bull-headed as he was when he went offshore the first time.

What would you be saying if the guy had gotten rolled when sailing out the gate? Would you be so bold as to say that the guy died "living the dream" and we should respect him for that?

Take a long hard look at the list of people who sailed the SHTP; what the experience of each of those sailors is; and then COMPARE the average sailing experience of those people with Ronnie. What does that tell you about how ready to do it and how lucky he was?

His BIO in the June Latitude 38 was like a trailer for the movie "Forrest Gump"! I'm sorry; but to me it reads like he is suffering from some form of shell-shock or brain damage after the RPG shell in Iraq. And for that; I don't mean to pick on someone who has had a loss of faculties, but I surely don't want to glorify the actions of someone who quite possibly is insane.

I'm glad he finished without needing rescue this time; but I really don't think he had enough experience to go offshore single-handed when he entered. Abby Sunderland had WAY WAY more experience than Ronnie; and you know how most people felt about sending her offshore alone...


----------



## sailingdog

I'd point out that no one on this forum celebrates failure... I'd imagine that most of us see failure as warning of sorts. Being arrogant, vain and stupid is a really bad combination—one that Ronnie has in spades. Why else would he have spent the money on HD camera equipment but not on a survey??? The fact of the matter is, he was lucky and he was given a boat that had been prepared properly and was very seaworthy. I seriously doubt, left to his own devices, that he could have bought and prepped a boat of his own to do the SHTP. Good boats tend to take care of the people on them, even if they are fools...bad or neglected boats do not.


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> I'd point out that no one on this forum celebrates failure...


Though I do agree that things have improved quite a bit since this thread (a pretty hard piece of contrarian evidence in itself) started, I think your statement is highly debatable.

Actually, yours and keel's posts kind of exemplify the point.

I don't think there is any argument that what Ronnie just did (taking second in class in the SHTP) is a huge accomplishment in sailing. So what do you do with that? Congratulate him and say "well done"? Not you guys. You just can't do it. Instead you focus on his initial failure and/or diminish his accomplishment. Maybe that's not "celebrating" failure - but it sure is obsessing over it. Why?

Why can't you bring yourselves to congratulate someone's success? Is their accomplishment really only valid if they satisfy all your rules? It seems that way.

Didn't Ronnie satisfy the SSS's rules and quals to even enter the race? Are you guys saying you know better than them?



sailingdog said:


> I'd imagine that most of us see failure as warning of sorts.


A _warning_? Interesting word. A warning of what?

Look, there's no argument that he screwed up to a large degree the first go 'round (he's admitted that). BUT he didn't give up. He learned. He practiced. *He qualified.* He went big. And he was successful.

You guys just can't seem to deal with that. And that's really strange...and kind of sad.



KeelHaulin said:


> Take a long hard look at the list of people who sailed the SHTP; what the experience of each of those sailors is; and then COMPARE the average sailing experience of those people with Ronnie. What does that tell you about how ready to do it and how lucky he was?
> 
> I'm glad he finished without needing rescue this time; but I really don't think he had enough experience to go offshore single-handed when he entered. Abby Sunderland had WAY WAY more experience than Ronnie; and you know how most people felt about sending her offshore alone...


Back to the "luck" thing, huh? That's convenient. keel, I personally don't care one way or another if you respect the guy (he probably doesn't either). But he accomplished something only a small group of sailors has accomplished. Maybe you've got the SHTP buckle yourself and therefore have some real insight on it...I don't know. Regardless, I can virtually guarantee he received congratulations from each of the sailors in that race. And they're the ones that really count anyway.

As for Abby S. - dude, do some fact finding on that one. Seriously. Way, way off the reservation with your stats.



sailingdog said:


> Being arrogant, vain and stupid is a really bad combination...


Sure, but so is being arrogant, vain and "smart".



sailingdog said:


> I'd point out that he had a boat given to him that was in great shape and not in need of survey or any major maintenance AFAIK.... and as for eating crow...there's no crow IMHO... Ronnie was a stupid jackass the first time he left and just because he's a lucky enough to have someone donate a boat for him to use doesn't mean a lot. Let's see what he does without the charity of a free boat to use.


----------



## RTB

Sheeesh smack, no respect at all....shut the f**k up!!! I don't think you deserved that one.

I am a friend of Ronnie's, but won't defend him. He's a big boy and can take care of himself. But as a friend--I do support him, and would like to point out a few things.

Arrogont and vain...Yep! But he knows when he is outclassed-*[IBreeze ON. The breeze filled in yesterday at 3 pm and i've had it ever since. The grib files don't show it dying, in fact they show it being quite strong, which it has been all day. Stronger today than yesterday. Adrian amassed a 120 mile lead on me during the 3 days I had no breeze, and the lead stayed constant throughout the night, with him gaining 2 miles on me. But that was with me pushing hard throughout the night! Breeze or no breeze, that guy has sailed a kick ass race and has made things very difficult for me, so much respect to him. It looks like he will win our class, barring any problems, and it will be a deserved win.][/I]*

Stupid? No F**king way! He is not a stupid guy in any way. If you ever have a conversation with him, you will know that for yourself.

As to the preparation of the boat...check his blogs-Nov through Jan. He worked on the boat under Don's supervision. He also had some experience learning about the engine and auto pilot during his time in SF. He was not given a race-ready boat, and sent off with no work on his part. If you are going to post stuff like that, maybe you should first do some homework SD and Keel!

I am with Steve here obviously. You guys can't seem to give credit, where credit is due. Go ahead and live in the past if that's what you feel comfortable with. But don't ***** when someone like Ronnie comes along, get's his act together, and accomplishes his dream! You guys S**K! Be sure to pat yourself on the back when you look at yourself in the mirror, telling yourself what a badass sailor you are.

Ralph


----------



## hellosailor

A year or two of "just do it" can move someone quite a ways up the learning curve. From 10/2008 to 7/2010...time flies when you're having fun.


----------



## KeelHaulin

I'll make some comments later this week; I'm on my boat tonight and don't feel like getting into this on such a nice evening...


----------



## chall03

Damn what is it about this kid that polarizes opinions here so much????

Guys why can't both extremes here actually be true to a degree??? 

Ronnie was a dick, he made some dumb decisions that we all discussed here at ridiculously great lengths.

Even Smack......... yes even you, BFS touting or not have to admit that this kid was a dick..........I'm not saying we should of/or should now crucify him for being one, I'm not saying that he wasn't a well intentioned, Big Kahunaed, BFS seeking Dick.........I'm just saying that he was a Dick.

However clearly this dick has gone on and achieved something, ok maybe assisted/aided/funded..... maybe plain lucky but maybe otherwise. Either way he DID do it. 

Isn't sailing ever only a combination of Luck/preparation/sailing skill/boat ability?? Haven't we all gone and made errors, bad judgement calls, over estimated our talents, or underestimated the ocean? and hopefully learn't from it?
I know I have. Although I have never thrown as big a dice as Ronnie. 

Besides does how we all individually achieve our goals matter?? Some do it in little boats, some do it in big boats, some go with crew, some go with paid crew, some go with no crew, some of us like to go fast some go slow. Some with air con and some with bulldogs.  

To say what he did is not an achievement because he had a boat supplied to him is I think guys nonsense. By applying the same logic then non of the Volvo crews were ever really sailing either... If the kid had a boat given to him so what......To me it shows conviction and ingenuity that he was able to get someone to believe in him enough to help him out in such a manner. No one's given me a boat yet....  

So ok he won't be going up on my wall next to Joshua Slocum, but I think this is one of those really good tales where there is both great stupidity and arrogance but also a determination coupled with real bravery and the ability to learn from one's mistakes and pull something off....

RTB I have read Ronnie's Blogs, and followed his story, but I don't know him as a person. What I have said I have said in the context of this thread, based on what I have read and know of Ronnie through his blog, and other media outlets.


----------



## RTB

Chall,

I met Ronnie at a bike shop in San Antonio where we worked together for more than a year. We rode sportbikes together quite a bit. I used to own a Laguna 22 back in the 80's, and he had lots of questions about sailing. We talked about sailing allot. I found it kind of funny at the time that he would even be interested in sailing, since he was the kind of guy that hauled ass everywhere on his GSX-R750. He was one of those lunatics you see doing wheelies down the freeway. I might add, he could wreck anything with 2 wheels, and have seen him all busted up. It never stopped him though. 

He became obsessed with the idea of buying a boat and sailing around the world. He was 22 years old at that time. He sold his home here, bailed from school and the job, moved to CA, and bought the Bounty II. To this day, I have no idea why someone in San Diego didn't stop him from heading to Hawaii, unless they somehow thought he and the boat were ready? Obviously, neither were. But...that is history.

I followed his blog closely. We were all freaking out at work when he set off his EPIRB. Afterall, we were all friends so were very concerned for his safety. I think that many people learned from his experience, myself included. Thanks to Ronnie, I got re-energized about sailing and have now bought my boat, something I honestly never planned on doing before his little adventure.

Honestly, I was thinking the same as Keelhaulin in that I had my doubts about him being ready for the SHTP. I wondered why Don Gray, a previous (2008) SHTP veteran would put Ronnie in the boat to do the race. Hey, Don is 60 years old, and has quite a bit of sailing experience. I think he knew if Ronnie was ready, more than any of us would know. I was holding my breath when they started out in some pretty nasty weather. Once Ronnie made that first part, I knew he would be fine. And he obviously was prepared this time. I doubt seriously that he did as well as he did because of plain old luck. 

As we type these posts, he is preparing to bring the boat back doublehanded with Don, last I heard. So, he will gain even more experience. I'm happy for him. It will be interesting to see what his plans are for the future. I can only believe there will be a RTW trip at some point. We will have to wait and see.

Sorry for being a "DICK" myself. It's not my way....just don't pick on my friends.


----------



## smackdaddy

chall03 said:


> Damn what is it about this kid that polarizes opinions here so much????
> 
> .....
> 
> Even Smack......... yes even you, BFS touting or not have to admit that this kid was a dick..........I'm not saying we should of/or should now crucify him for being one, I'm not saying that he wasn't a well intentioned, Big Kahunaed, BFS seeking Dick.........I'm just saying that he was a Dick.


I wouldn't at all say that Ronnie is/was a dick. I don't know enough about the guy to make that call. To me he's just young...which brings along a lot of good and bad. More importantly, he's obviously been in extremely nasty situations and seen stuff via his military service that make sailing...and, yes, even ocean crossing, seem pretty damn tame in comparison. In that regard, he's got a pretty unique perspective on actual "danger".

So, why does he polarize so much? Simple. It's not Ronnie, per se, it's what he represents. He doesn't follow the "rules". He's not "afraid" enough. He doesn't heed the "warnings". He's got "an attitude".

And, as this thread clearly shows, that's all great when this results in failure. Failure provides the fear - which allows the OP and other dudes in this thread to maintain "control" of the conversation and substantiate their "rules" of what "makes a _real_ sailor". It's a club mentality.

The problem comes when one of these "idiots" or "dicks" succeeds. What do these people do then? Well, you see it above. His success removes some general fear and diminishes the need for their "rules". And they don't like this...to the point that they are utterly unable to congratulate the guy for obvious successes. They keep focusing on the failure. They need it. The idea of sailing big obviously threatens them. Hence the title of this thread. This weird obsession is what's so fascinating to me (has been from the FC days) - and it's why you see the polarization you do.

BFS is about sailing big - and the adventure, fun, adrenaline, education, and everything else that goes with it. But it's also about preparation, practice, experience, knowledge, being smart, etc. Without the latter, coming home safe from the former isn't always possible...and most people get this. So, these guys in this thread are not at all _wrong_ - they are just blind because they're too obsessed with the latter.

Ronnie did and still does certain things that I personally wouldn't do. I've been very clear from the beginning of this thread that I agree he wasn't well prepared the first time (luck notwithstanding). He's been clear about that as well. But does that make him a dick for trying? Hell no. And I personally have tremendous respect for the guy in that he didn't give up in the face of snarky dudes howling insults after that failure like some in this thread.

What's really important is that he's accomplished something that deserves respect. Period. Even from those same snarky dudes that don't agree with his methods. After all, how many belt buckles do they have?

If they can't offer that respect for a very clear success - you have to wonder if they're worth listening to at all.

(PS - +1 on the above Ralph)


----------



## chall03

RTB, Thanks for the background. Like I said I have continued to follow his story because I do find him a fairly likeable fellow and I would love to see him do a circumnavigation. I have I guess also learn't from his failings.....I was 22 once as well, it was in fact the age at which I bought my first boat, joined this site, and wanted to sail the world myself. Luckily I had the good fortune to be in a relationship with girl who was smart enough to stop me doing anything too rash, however I certainly had my fair share of idiotic, cocky sailing disasters.



smackdaddy said:


> I wouldn't at all say that Ronnie is/was a dick. I don't know enough about the guy to make that call. To me he's just young...which brings along a lot of good and bad.


[_"I acknowledge that I am incredibly inexperienced, but I think I can do this. And for some reason, I feel very strongly about doing it single-handed. (At least to Hawaii, anyways) A friend of mine summed it up as "keep the heavy side down, keep the water on the outside, don't run into stuff, and reef early". That's pretty much my plan, to be honest.
My boat is a veteran cruising boat, and I am sure that it is up to the task of crossing oceans, even with me at the helm, alone. I know that I don't truly know what i'm up against, but I am used to identifying and solving problems as they occur, and this is the mindset that I am taking with me. Yes, i'm sure stuff will break. And i'll fix it to the best of my abilities. .... I am not cocky, I do not think this will be an easy trip, given my lack of experience and being alone, but I truly believe that I can do anything that I truly set my mind to. "

"I was going to get a survey with haul-out, but that costs too much money. Besides, from what i've seen, every boat constantly breaks anyways, I'll take my chances on not having a survey."_

Smack your kidding me right?? .....Ronnie was a Dick. Hey he would probably tell you himself he was a dick. But in your need to push your BFS crap you feel the need to defend ?



smackdaddy said:


> So, why does he polarize so much? Simple. It's not Ronnie, per se, it's what he represents. He doesn't follow the "rules". He's not "afraid" enough. He doesn't heed the "warnings". He's got "an attitude".
> 
> And, as this thread clearly shows, that's all great when this results in failure. Failure provides the fear - which allows the OP and other dudes in this thread to maintain "control" of the conversation and substantiate their "rules" of what "makes a _real_ sailor". It's a club mentality.
> 
> The problem comes when one of these "idiots" or "dicks" succeeds. What do these people do then? Well, you see it above. His success removes some general fear and diminishes the need for their "rules". And they don't like this...to the point that they are utterly unable to congratulate the guy for obvious successes. They keep focusing on the failure. They need it. The idea of sailing big obviously threatens them. Hence the title of this thread. This weird obsession is what's so fascinating to me (has been from the FC days) - and it's why you see the polarization you do.
> 
> BFS is about sailing big - and the adventure, fun, adrenaline, education, and everything else that goes with it. But it's also about preparation, practice, experience, knowledge, being smart, etc. Without the latter, coming home safe from the former isn't always possible...and most people get this. So, these guys in this thread are not at all _wrong_ - they are just blind because they're too obsessed with the latter.


This Thread was, and has been many things Smack.....

I agree with your philosophies on BFS......largely. However like I said in my last post I just don't get the need here to pick an extreme..........I don't get why you need this kid to be your BFS posterboy and to try and have a little BFS victory dance all over this thread...........Ronnie doesn't necessarily represent sailing big, he's just a kid living his life, doing some really dumb things like we have all done, and learning and making good. He is not Luke friggin Skywalker in some twisted intergalactic battle of BFS ideals you are continuing with Cam might I add long after Cam has left the building......



smackdaddy said:


> Ronnie did and still does certain things that I personally wouldn't do. I've been very clear from the beginning of this thread that I agree he wasn't well prepared the first time (luck notwithstanding). He's been clear about that as well. But does that make him a dick for trying? Hell no


He could of died........his 'trying' resulted in others having to come to his rescue that in my books = Dick.


----------



## smackdaddy

chall03 said:


> But in your need to push your BFS crap you feel the need to defend ?


Okay - that was maybe a little below the belt - but I'll play.

It's not about the crap. It's about the philosophy - and it always has been. I like and admire big sailing. I like to talk about it. I like to read about it. I like to watch it. I like to do it (at the level I can right now). And I'm not alone.

I don't like focusing so much on the negatives of sailing that the positives are completely snuffed out by technicality and fear. That's me.



chall03 said:


> I agree with your philosophies on BFS......largely. However like I said in my last post I just don't get the need here to pick an extreme..........


This thread was started by a guy that was a freakin' SN _moderator_ at the time and named to point out and parade, through Ronnie's failure, the perceived negatives of wanting to sail big. Then, as people piled on, this thread became a victory dance over that failure. That set the extreme. If you can't see that - you need to read it again.

Now, I understand the OP didn't like me or BFS and was trying to lay some banning bait - there was an agenda here and that's fine and it's old news as you say. Sailnet has improved a lot since those days. But this thread is what it is...and it's a little bit personal to me...for obvious reasons.

So, when Ronnie succeeds, hell yes I'm going to defend him. And I'm going to do it in this thread. With a bit of a victory dance. Why?



chall03 said:


> Like I said I have continued to follow his story because I do find him a fairly likeable fellow and I would love to see him do a circumnavigation. I have I guess also learn't from his failings.....


That's why. What did you learn? What did he learn? To stay at the dock? To obsess about failure and death?

Look, I don't need Ronnie to be a poster boy. And I appreciate the tenuous position of holding a guy like him (with his kind of admitted personality) up as a hero. So I'm not doing that either. You're right - he's just a kid living his life.

But I sure as hell am going to give that unwitting "BFS Proponent" some props for doing some damn great sailing. He deserves it. Don't you think?

PS-



chall03 said:


> He could of died........his 'trying' resulted in others having to come to his rescue that in my books = Dick.


Skip Allan was not a dick. It happens. And we're all one failure away from being that "idiot" anyway. So be careful when you're throwing around the dick. Heh-heh.


----------



## smackdaddy

PS - In fairness, Cam did actually give one of the best defenses and explanations of BFS I've seen over at *stuff*:



camaraderie said:


> Day sailors? How about sailors who enjoy pushing their boats and their own limits and the thrill of sailing?
> Now I am a CRUISER...I don't push my boat or myself beyond the limits of what I consider good seamanship and prudence. But I would not call those that do "day sailors". The Vendee Globe folks are not day sailors.
> 
> Every once in a while mother nature conspires to provide a BFS to us all. Those who have done their homework and are prepared usually make it through. It is those that don't that end up more frequently with their Darwin awards.


So it's all good. Here's to you Cam...where ever you are...


----------



## chall03

Sorry Smack, when I said 'pushing your BFS crap' it was NOT mean't a slight at the BFS store at all, I mean't just pushing the philosophy of BFS.......

Which I do get, and believe in largely....

I guess then I just don't know who your trying to preach to here in this thread....


----------



## KeelHaulin

OK; I'm going to respond to this now. I'm not going to cut quotes and reply directly to the screwballs (you know who you are); I'm just going to say what I feel NEEDS to be said.

All of you BFS proponents need to take a good dose of Lithium or something that will bring you back to planet earth. We are not talking about going out and hitting some heavy air on an inland waterway or coastal daysail in protected waters here. Going out on a 3k mile voyage with little to no experience; regardless of how well prepared the boat is or if it was "approved of" by the boat owner is just plain nuts. I don't care if he made it; and I don't respect the guy for making it more. He is simply a novice sailor who was able to get his boat from here to there in one piece (this time). Boats that are well equipped and prepared are more than capable of sailing *WITH NOBODY ABOARD* for tens of thousands of miles. I'll cite the Olson 40 "Pterodactyl"; which had her crew washed overboard while crossing the SF Bar during a race two years ago. It was later found in-tact with shredded sails off the coast of JAPAN. My point is that if you can manage to stay aboard and keep the mast in the air; the boat can pretty much survive most anything without someone who is competent at the helm.

Does this mean it is wise go offshore as Ronnie did? ABSOLUTELY NOT. It's times when the s**t hits the fan and you need to rely on many years of experience to save the boat or yourself. It's not a matter of whether Ronnie was "Lucky"; it's the certainty that he has not had the practical knowledge or experience to attempt such a thing. I'll say it again. People who do things like Singlehanded racing (let alone ocean crossings); generally are those who have had a LIFETIME of experience sailing everything from El Toros and small keel boats, to CREWING on offshore racing boats BEFORE THEY START ENTERING SINGLEHANDED EVENTS. This is the common and accepted way of becoming a single-handed sailor. Most of the sailors who enter the SHTP have already sailed to HI on crewed racing or cruising boats; or sailed with crew on other offshore boats before attempting it singhlehanded. Those people have my respect; because they have done the necessary "training" to become a competent offshore sailor and make the passage with much, much less concern for the need of a rescure or assistance. As I said before; a well equipped/prepared boat can make it on it's own merits. But WHAT IF SOMETHING FAILS OR CONDITIONS ARE BEYOND THE COMPETENCE OF THE SAILOR?? That's where you really need to take a good hard look at this and ask yourself "who DESERVES my admiration and respect; and should serve as a role-model for the next generation of sailors"? Should it be the Abbies, Zacks, and Ronnies, of the world? Or should it be people who made their accomplishments with the proper amount of background experience to sail on offshore passages BEFORE attempting to do it alone?

I will cite one more example. Recently a Ranger 33 was lost outside of SF gate by a couple; the man had 25 years of sailing experience (I don't know what her's was). One report was from a friend who said that the owner was always safety conscious; knew what he was doing, and taught him how to sail 20 years ago aboard the Ranger 33. Sounds like they were competent, right?

There is another report to the story; and it goes like this. The owner of that Ranger 33 had never gone offshore; and this was their FIRST trip outside of SF Bay and down to Half Moon Bay on a trial cruise before going cruising down the California Coast and beyond. They did not know enough about offshore conditions to be out in rough seas; and they did not know how terribly bad the conditions on SF Bar get when there is an Ebb current and any significant swell is coming in.

My point is the following: If you do something stupid; you will likely pay with your life. Ronnie got EXTREMELY lucky the first time. He did not learn from that mistake, and got EXTREMELY lucky again when he chose to sail to HI on his own with no real offshore experience/training (because nothing critical on the boat failed). The fact that the owner is helping him sail the boat back to SF speaks volumes. Downwind sailing in most cases is a piece of cake compared to the 3k mile upwind bash.

Please don't hold guys like Ronnie up as "heroes" so others can follow in their footsteps. It undermines the very core beliefs of maritime tradition that you "earn" your way up the ladder to being a competent captain by way of passed down knowledge and hands-on seamanship training. These things take time to learn and process. It's not a Playstation game. You can't just hit the reset button and start again in most cases. But apparently Ronnie managed to do this after hitting the EPIRB button by smooth talking the owner of Warriors Wish into giving him another chance. I don't reward him for it with my admiration; I respect the fact that he made it across, but that's all.


----------



## sailingdog

Nicely said Keelhaulin.


----------



## Ajax_MD

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

You two are the product of our broken, risk averse nanny-state, which encourages bubble-wrap on everything and rubber bumpers on any structure with an angle of 90-degrees and warnings on hot coffee.

Ferdinand Magellan died at 41 years of age. Did he have a "lifetime" of experience at anything? Although he died in battle before his expedition completed the circumnavigation, he is the first European to have crossed all meridians, having traveled east towards Malaysia on an earlier voyage. Either way, his navigator Juan Elcano took command and did make the circumnavigation. Guess how old he lived to be? 40.

So these two gentlemen, with no experience in "transPac-ing" or "circumnavigating" embarked on journeys in vessels more fragile, and less equipped vessels than we have now. They had was _some_ blue-water sailing, sure, and who taught them? People who had also learned by tribal knowledge.

What if they'd been told "No one's ever sailed 'round the world! You shouldn't try it!" Worse...what if they'd listened to the wagging toungues of such old women?

I'm not discussing whether or not we should respect or admire Ronnie, only the fact that you bunch of Nancys are absolutely dead-set on crushing any remaining vestige of the human spirit that pushes us to risk, to explore. Oh that's right, the world has been mapped and explored, so the rest of us should sit in our armchairs or stay in the shallow end of the swimming pool, right?

Keel, you say that Ronnie was lucky twice. When is it NOT luck? How many successful trips will Ronnie take before you say "Well, yeah he seems to know how to sail now". None. You know why? Because you're disgusted with him, and you will never respect him because of his one failed trip. He didn't do things "your" way, the Sailnet way.

In the past, I've caught a lot of flak for just throwing myself out there on the water, in the winter, after reading a couple of books. Well I don't regret it and I'll keep expanding my circle of water as I learn, and it probably won't be in a manner that any of you ladies approve of. I'd rather die at sea or on my motorcycle, than in my livingroom or on my rocking chair down at the dock, just staring at my boat. "Yep, I'm a good seaman because I didn't risk anyone or anything."

There is _*ONE*_ critical difference, one thing that I abhor in Ronnie's and Sunderland's journeys though, which I must concede encourages stupidity at all of our expense: The EPIRB. It's like the EPIRB has become a license to be careless and stupid and risk other peoples' lives because they know someone's coming to bail them out.

All you Quakers will be glad to know that I won't endanger any rescuer's lives because I refuse to carry an EPIRB. My kids are grown, my family is small, and I carry sufficient insurance to protect them from my mistakes. As for me...I WANT to suffer the consequences of my mistakes, that's how I learn.

If one day, I make a mistake that I don't survive to learn from...so be it.


----------



## smackdaddy

sailingdog said:


> Nicely said (Bubblehead).


.....Hey - that rhymes.


----------



## smackdaddy

KeelHaulin said:


> We are not talking about going out and hitting some heavy air on an inland waterway or coastal daysail in protected waters here. Going out on a 3k mile voyage with little to no experience; regardless of how well prepared the boat is or if it was "approved of" by the boat owner is just plain nuts.
> 
> He was "approved" by the Singlehanded Sailing Society - San Francisco Shorthanded Racing. So they and the owner disagree with yours and dog's thesis.
> 
> I don't care if he made it; and I don't respect the guy for making it more. He is simply a novice sailor who was able to get his boat from here to there in one piece (this time).
> 
> Okay. Your choice. But the following logic you (and Dog I guess) are hanging your arguments on doesn't hold up...
> 
> Boats that are well equipped and prepared are more than capable of sailing *WITH NOBODY ABOARD* for tens of thousands of miles. I'll cite the Olson 40 "Pterodactyl"; which had her crew washed overboard while crossing the SF Bar during a race two years ago. It was later found in-tact with shredded sails off the coast of JAPAN. My point is that if you can manage to stay aboard and keep the mast in the air; the boat can pretty much survive most anything without someone who is competent at the helm.
> 
> Does this mean it is wise go offshore as Ronnie did? ABSOLUTELY NOT. It's times when the s**t hits the fan and you need to rely on many years of experience to save the boat or yourself.
> 
> So, wait, on the one hand you say that a good boat doesn't need any help by having someone competent at the helm. But when the s**t hits the fan it suddenly needs seasoned competency at the helm? Which one is it? Does this mean that Ronnie actually showed far more competence than the "Pterodactyl" crew by simply staying on his boat?
> 
> It's not a matter of whether Ronnie was "Lucky"; it's the certainty that he has not had the practical knowledge or experience to attempt such a thing.
> 
> Again, your opinion only. The boat's owner and the SSS disagree with it.
> 
> I'll say it again. People who do things like Singlehanded racing (let alone ocean crossings); generally are those who have had a LIFETIME of experience sailing everything from El Toros and small keel boats, to CREWING on offshore racing boats BEFORE THEY START ENTERING SINGLEHANDED EVENTS. *This is the common and accepted way of becoming a single-handed sailor.*
> 
> Again, your opinion only. The boat's owner and the SSS disagree with it.
> 
> Most of the sailors who enter the SHTP have already sailed to HI on crewed racing or cruising boats; or sailed with crew on other offshore boats before attempting it singhlehanded. Those people have my respect; because they have done the necessary "training" to become a competent offshore sailor and make the passage with much, much less concern for the need of a rescure or assistance.
> 
> Again, your opinion only. The boat's owner and the SSS disagree with it. Look, you're really starting to jump the shark here. Unfortunately, we're going to have to get into the Skip Allan argument again. Why? Because the same organization that deemed Skip (The General, etc.) "competent for the SHTP" - deemed Ronnie the same. If you don't like that - take it up with SSS. But that's the way it is. Therefore, your arguments are seriously hollow on this point.
> 
> As I said before; a well equipped/prepared boat can make it on it's own merits. But WHAT IF SOMETHING FAILS OR CONDITIONS ARE BEYOND THE COMPETENCE OF THE SAILOR??
> 
> Back to the Skip Allan story. I'm interested to hear your distinctions here. Another thing you need to remember is that the first 3 days of this year's SHTP were pretty damn rough. ALL the sailors were reporting serious seasickness, miserable conditions, broken gear, generally lots of fans covered in s**t. So it was no cakewalk at the start. And they all, even Ronnie, made it through (well a couple of the seasoned guys had to turn back or couldn't get out in the first place - but that's another story).
> 
> That's where you really need to take a good hard look at this and ask yourself "who DESERVES my admiration and respect; and should serve as a role-model for the next generation of sailors"? Should it be the Abbies, Zacks, and Ronnies, of the world? Or should it be people who made their accomplishments with the proper amount of background experience to sail on offshore passages BEFORE attempting to do it alone?
> 
> You've made it clear who deserves your admiration. I'm just saying that the standards you've set up for that admiration are somewhat flawed and seriously narrow. But, that's cool, they're your standards. They're just not universally held...even by very well regarded sailing organizations.
> 
> I will cite one more example. Recently a Ranger 33 was lost outside of SF gate by a couple; the man had 25 years of sailing experience (I don't know what her's was). One report was from a friend who said that the owner was always safety conscious; knew what he was doing, and taught him how to sail 20 years ago aboard the Ranger 33. Sounds like they were competent, right?
> 
> There is another report to the story; and it goes like this. The owner of that Ranger 33 had never gone offshore; and this was their FIRST trip outside of SF Bay and down to Half Moon Bay on a trial cruise before going cruising down the California Coast and beyond. They did not know enough about offshore conditions to be out in rough seas; and they did not know how terribly bad the conditions on SF Bar get when there is an Ebb current and any significant swell is coming in.
> 
> My point is the following: If you do something stupid; you will likely pay with your life.
> 
> To my knowledge - no one around here, even the pesky "BFS Proponents" have ever said different. Sail big - sail smart - sail home. What's not to like?
> 
> Ronnie got EXTREMELY lucky the first time. He did not learn from that mistake, and got EXTREMELY lucky again when he chose to sail to HI on his own with no real offshore experience/training (because nothing critical on the boat failed). The fact that the owner is helping him sail the boat back to SF speaks volumes. Downwind sailing in most cases is a piece of cake compared to the 3k mile upwind bash.
> 
> See, back to your impossible standards. The fact that the owner is joining Ronnie for the return both supports and crushes your logic. Yes, it's obviously much harder on the return. It was the return that got Skip Allan. However, the fact that the owner is joining Ronnie is a great sign. First, as pointed out ad nauseam, the owner and SSS were comfortable in Ronnie's abilities to do the race. Second, Ronnie is about to get some incredible training from a seasoned sailor in more difficult conditions that will give him 6K miles of ocean crossing under his SHTP beltbuckle. Yes - it all speaks volumes. It just doesn't say what you want it to say.
> 
> Please don't hold guys like Ronnie up as "heroes" so others can follow in their footsteps. It undermines the very core beliefs of maritime tradition that you "earn" your way up the ladder to being a competent captain by way of passed down knowledge and hands-on seamanship training.
> 
> First, I've said it many times; I don't hold him up as a hero. I just truly respect his accomplishment in the face of a lot of naysayers. I admire that kind of spirit. As for this maritime tradition ladder - it's _your_ ladder Keel, not the world's. It sounds like you should take this up with the SSS not BFS if you think differently. BFS didn't qualify him for the SHTP.
> 
> These things take time to learn and process. It's not a Playstation game. You can't just hit the reset button and start again in most cases. But apparently Ronnie managed to do this after hitting the EPIRB button by smooth talking the owner of Warriors Wish into giving him another chance. I don't reward him for it with my admiration;* I respect the fact that he made it across*, but that's all.
> 
> Well, I'd call that progress. Case closed.


Keel - in the end, 60% of what you're saying is right on the mark. No argument about the need for experience, competence, smarts, safety-consciousness, et. al. I too question the intelligence of single-handed ocean voyaging.

But I agree with Bubble - the other 40% is off-base simply because you personally can't stand what this guy (and I suppose by extension BFS) represents. His story is an affront to your idea of how things should be. Understood. But your crankiness is clouding your logic on this one.

Regardless, I actually respect you for being able to type that last sentence.


----------



## RTB

I guess you guys know where I hang out mostly? I asked Ronnie about what's next for him. Seems he has a plan and will be pretty busy for awhile.

_thanks for the nice comments. Ralph, where are you these days? are you in Hawaii.

no. wife, kids and house in the suburbs are nowhere on my short or long term list right now.

once I sail the boat back to Cali, I plan on putting together a book proposal and submitting it to my literary agent. When/ if the proposal gets sold, I will fix up my new (to me) cruising boat and head back to Hanalei Bay, Kauai to write the book.

I will also be working on starting a new wounded veteran related sailing non-profit, probably in Southern California, working with some existing organizations.

I will also be beginning work on a Mini Transat campaign, which will probably be preceded by a Singlehanded Transpac campaign in the Mini. This will require corporate sponsorship.

I also hope to compete in the Iditarod sled dog race sometime in the next few years, so i've got to journey to Alaska and learn something of sled dog racing over the next few winters.

In the immediate future, i've got some magazine articles and boat work lined up to get me by for a few months.

so yeah, next few years should be busy. 
_

I linked this thread to him, but don't think he cares to deal with this stuff anymore. You can't blame him.

He will sail Warrior's Wish back to Cali with a friend who is a delivery skipper, not the owner.

I wonder what most of us reading this will accomplish in the next few years? You have to admit, he is getting his dollar's worth out of life!

Ralph


----------



## smackdaddy

Thanks for the update Ralph. Yes indeed - he's doing some cool stuff.


----------



## Jeff_H

In what must be a near first, KeelHaulin and I are essentially in agreement. One of the good news-bad news realities of sailing offshore single-handed (or short-0handed) is that it really requires a wide range of knowledge and skill to do so with a reasonable level of risk management. Its not about being bubble-wrapped, it is about acting responsibly in life and with your life.

From the beginning of time, people were willing to go through an apprenticeship to learn life giving skills. It was obviously not called an apprenticeship, but even in traditional societies, parents passed along necessary life skills to their children in one form or another. 

But all of a sudden we are a society that wants to 'just do it' without putting in the time and effort to learn even rudimentary skills. We think that if we can buy something we can do whatever we feel like with it right now. You might be able to buy a boat, but you can't buy safety at sea in a small craft by yourself other than through taking the time to learn and practice. 

And for what it is worth, if we are going to banter about metaphors and anecdotes, lets be clear and accurate with our examples; Ferdinand Magellan and much of his crew did about as much of an apprenticeship as one could do in those days. Ferdinand Magellan first went to sea as a 25 year old, and over a 12 year period, working his way up through the naval ranks, including fighting in a number of naval battles and sailing more than half way around the world under Sequeira to Malacca in Indonesia and making a number of other major passages before leaving on his epic voyage. 

Even with that experience he left Spain with five ships and 250 experienced seaman. Only one ship with 18 seamen returned. He died partially of hubris, in an unnecessary battle he chose to fight was against overwhelming numbers. 

Had he done an apprenticeship of the native culture he was attacking; respecting the natives enough to have understood that this was not a handful of poorly armed savages, he and more of his men might have survived and would have better accomplished the mission that he set off to accomplish. 

And so while I agree that as a society we have perhaps sought reduce risk perhaps beyond a reasonable level, by the same token, expecting someone to spend enough time to develop skills before setting off is not about creating a nanny-state and all about expecting people to act with some reasonable level of responsibility. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## smackdaddy

Jeff_H said:


> But all of a sudden we are a society that wants to 'just do it' without putting in the time and effort to learn even rudimentary skills. We think that if we can buy something we can do whatever we feel like with it right now. You might be able to buy a boat, but you can't buy safety at sea in a small craft by yourself other than through taking the time to learn and practice.
> 
> And so while I agree that as a society we have perhaps sought reduce risk perhaps beyond a reasonable level, by the same token, expecting someone to spend enough time to develop skills before setting off is not about creating a nanny-state and all about expecting people to act with some reasonable level of responsibility.


Jeff, I think you've stated it pretty well. However, the straw man here is that the very idea of big sailing (BFS) is to do what you lay out in the first paragraph above. That's how this thread (and others herein) attempts to frame the argument, using Ronnie as an example. And, as I've stated exhaustively, that isn't the case at all.

The problem comes when someone arguing the "maritime ladder approach" cannot get past that straw man...to the point that they can't acknowledge "reasonable responsibility" as evidenced by a successful big sail. At that point they simply suck the life and adventure out of sailing through non-stop critique, even though the logic of what they're saying falls apart.

I'm just saying be objective. "Reasonable responsibility" is a very broad notion. And the truth, without doubt, lies somewhere between the extremes people try to establish here in this thread.


----------



## KeelHaulin

Again; I don't have time to get into it in detail, but rest assured I will respond to to the inaccuracies in this thread again. I hate to say this but you guys would be getting hammered big time on Anything Sailing. You know; the place where all of the old-salts that previously made massive contributions to this forum are hanging out now because they got tired arguing against this sort of B(f)S. You know... the place you got banned from Smack!

I'll invite you all to read the letters over on Latitude 38 written to Abby Sunderland. 90% of them are with disdain for her ill-fated attempt. Go check it out at Latitude 38 - The West's Leading Sailing and Marine Magazine ; select the e-book of the July issue and look for the article "Dear Abby"

So good of you Smack to compare a true offshore singlehanded sailor like Skip who has had multiple race crossings and won the SHTP before his loss of Wildflower to a goofball like Ronnie. Also nice of you to omit the facts of his experience and the situation that led to his stepping off of a boat that he kept seaworthy through several days of massive seas and storm force winds. THERE IS NO COMPARISON HERE

And the comparison of Magellan to Ronnie? Gimme a break. Magellan likely had more experience while in diapers than Ronnie does. You know; back then you had to EARN the position of Captain; let alone getting a commission to go out on an expedition. And that was on a SHIP; WITH 50+ CREW! What planet are you from dude??

Ronnie with a book deal; and a sponsorship for more BFS. That's very telling and pretty much proves my point (it's all about fame/fortune/"reality TV", etc)...


----------



## smackdaddy

KeelHaulin said:


> Again; I don't have time to get into it in detail, but rest assured I will respond to to the inaccuracies in this thread again. I hate to say this but you guys would be getting hammered big time on Anything Sailing. You know; the place where all of the old-salts that previously made massive contributions to this forum are hanging out now because they got tired arguing against this sort of B(f)S. You know... the place you got banned from Smack!


Now Keel, no reason to get mean. That's all old news and is (as always) a little pricklier than it appears on the surface. Anyway, tell Cam and Sway and those other salts over there hi for me.



KeelHaulin said:


> I'll invite you all to read the letters over on Latitude 38 written to Abby Sunderland. 90% of them are with disdain for her ill-fated attempt. Go check it out at Latitude 38 - The West's Leading Sailing and Marine Magazine ; select the e-book of the July issue and look for the article "Dear Abby"


I agree with the disdain BTW. I've never been a fan at all of this youngest solo thing. It's asinine. So we agree there.



KeelHaulin said:


> So good of you Smack to compare a true offshore singlehanded sailor like Skip who has had multiple race crossings and won the SHTP before his loss of Wildflower to a goofball like Ronnie. Also nice of you to omit the facts of his experience and the situation that led to his stepping off of a boat that he kept seaworthy through several days of massive seas and storm force winds. THERE IS NO COMPARISON HERE


I'm simply comparing outcomes - not individuals.


----------



## RTB

KeelHaulin said:


> I hate to say this but you guys would be getting hammered big time on Anything Sailing.


Maybe *you* would get hammered at Sailing Anarchy....If the most vulgar animals on sailing forums can give Ronnie a pat on the back, and there are some "old salts" over there, he has earned at least a wee bit of respect.

Maybe racing in an organized event such as the SHTP, is different from the normal single-handed offshore sailing? Check ins are required, a safe boat is required, and positions are known. Maybe racing involves a little different sailing mentality-like the BFS kind?


----------



## bubb2

LACK of experance never stoped my great ,great grandfather

*Howard Blackburn* (1859 - 1932) was a Gloucester, Massachusetts fisherman, born in Nova Scotia. Despite losing his fingers at sea in 1883, he prospered as a Gloucester businessman. Yearning for adventure, he twice sailed single-handed across the Atlantic Ocean, overcoming his disability and setting record times for the crossing.
</******>

*Howard Blackburn* was born in Nova Scotia in 1859. At the age of 18, he moved south to Massachusetts, seeking work as a fisherman, and became part of the Gloucester, Massachusetts fishing community.
Blackburn first rose to fame in 1883. While he was fishing on the schooner _Grace L. Fears_, a sudden winter storm caught him and a dorymate unprepared while they were in their banks dory, leaving them separated from the schooner. Blackburn began to row for shore, despite the loss of his mittens; he knew his hands would freeze, so he kept them in the hooked position that would allow him to row. He tried to save one hand with a sock and thus worsened his condition by freezing his toes and yet not being able to save his fingers. The crewmate gave up and laid down in the dory and died on the second day. Blackburn carried the body to shore for a proper grave.
After five days with virtually no food, water, or sleep, he made it to shore in Newfoundland; but his companion had died during the journey. Blackburn's hands were treated for frostbite, but could not be saved; he lost all his fingers, and many of his toes, and both thumbs to the first joint.
Blackburn returned to Gloucester a hero, and with the help of the town, managed to establish a successful saloon. Not content with this, he organised an expedition to the Klondike to join the gold rush; rather than go overland, he and his group sailed there, via Cape Horn. Howard, after a disagreement with his partners left the group in San Francisco after a short trip to Portland, Oregon to buy lumber to help finance the trip, and returned home never having panned for gold.
After the quest for gold failed, Blackburn turned his attention to a new challenge - to sail single-handed across the Atlantic Ocean. This had been done before, by Alfred "Centennial" Johnson in 1876, and Joshua Slocum had completed a single-handed circumnavigation in 1898; but for a man with no fingers to undertake such a voyage would be quite an accomplishment. He sailed from Gloucester in 1899, in the modified Gloucester Fishing Sloop, _Great Western_, and reached England after 62 days at sea.
Returning to Gloucester, Blackburn continued to prosper as a businessman; but he still hankered for adventure. In 1901, he sailed to Portugal in the twenty-five-foot Gloucester Fishing sloop _Great Republic_, making the trip in 39 days. In 1903 he again set out alone, this time in the sailing dory _America_, but was defeated by bad weather. Blackburn also circumnavigated the Eastern United States by going down the Mississippi River and back up the Eastern Seaboard. "Great Republic" may be seen at the Cape Ann Museum, in Gloucester.
Blackburn died in 1932; his funeral was attended by many of the people of Gloucester. He was buried in the Fishermen's Rest section of Beechgrove Cemetery.


----------



## smackdaddy

Holy crap!!!!!! Are you serious Bubb? That is absolutely amazing!!!!! 

Can I please steal that story for the BFS thread? That is freakin' legendary.


----------



## bubb2

Smack, I am serious. My Great, Great Grandfather on my Mom's side. You Can use what you wish as it is all public information.

Today, the Blackburn Challenge is held annually. It is a 20+ mile rowing race through open water around Cape Ann.

Those guys that row are men if you ask me.


----------



## smackdaddy

bubb2 said:


> Those guys that row are men if you ask me.


+1...


----------



## KeelHaulin

Again; we are comparing a person with a LIFETIME of experience to a person with VERY LITTLE. Every story is it's own; and has it's own merits. I am simply trying to say that true ability and seamanship it EARNED OVER TIME. Your GG Grandfather is an example of this. He earned his sea legs and learned to overcome and deal with the tragic loss of his hands. I also applaud his perseverance and ability to save his own and fellow fisherman's life in a survival situation. But that does not make it "OK" anyone to go offshore without the proper background. If it were there would be WAY WAY more loss of life out there and the CG would not be able to keep up with the numbers of people in distress. It's already bad enough here on SF Bay on the weekends; especially the holiday weekends. On the 4'th there were no less than 6 major distress calls here on SF Bay during the afternoon. That and was just in a few hours of the holiday weekend that I was listening to the radio.

In an earlier comment it was mentioned that there is a "nanny state" mentality here. That could not be further from the truth. If you want to go out there by yourself and risk your life doing something you probably should not be; that's your choice. But don't come crying to the "nanny state" looking for rescue and risking the lives of people who truly are putting themselves at risk to save your stupid ass when you get it in a sling.

I feel sorry for the SSA for having to "certify" people like Ronnie. They do their level best to convince inexperienced sailors not to go offshore and hope that the qualifier is enough to convince them to stay home. Unfortunately people like Ronnie will make it through and stay in for the race. You can't do much but shrug your shoulders and say "good luck". Hopefully this won't lead to a trend of fools and foolish people who will sponsor them by putting up the boat and equipment.


----------



## GeorgeB

Smack, this man-crush you have for Ronnie is getting a little embarassing and any more PDA and we’re going to have to ask you and Ronnie to rent a room…  To bad you didn’t revive this “Ronnie” thread earlier as unbeknownst to me, Ronnie and Wind Warrior were only two docks down from me in my own marina and I would have liked to meet the guy before he went off on the SHTP. One of my friends did meet him and thought that he was a “nice guy” albeit a bit “young and imature”. 

His two trips to Hawaii couldn’t be a bigger comparision in contrasts. As we all know, he was a bit cavilier (to say the least!) for his first attempt and he did the proper preparation that guarrentied his success on the second one. I understand that between the two attempts, he crewed on a Newport-Ensenada race as well as helped deliver a boat back from Mexico. He received a good deal of mentoring and practice on WW on the Bay as well as doing an impromptu Longpac this spring (400 NM offshore qualifying race, I’m not sure if he did the SH Farallone to qualify for the Longpac or if he qual’d via a different means). Sailing from SF to Hawaii is a seminal accomplishment and one he should be justly proud. I don’t know if you guys are aware of the fact that the halfway point (1,100 NM) is the furthest point away from land you can be in the northern hemisphere? (Trivia: do you know where “Point Nemo is?”) I say a hearty congratualtions and we welcome you to the trans-oceanic fraternity.

<ONow, before you get all emotional, and want to take a warm shower together,  let’s put a couple of things into perspective. First, WW was pretty much “race ready” as compared to the other first time boats. “All” they had to do was correct/fix things from the prior race rather than prepping a boat from scratch. I have been envolved in prepping two first time boats for Hawaii races and I can tell you it takes almost a year (working weekends mostly) to get the boat ready to pass the various inspections leaving precious little time to practice or even shake down the boat. It is expenseive too. Both first time campaigns ran into the five digits for the round trip. It is this conflict between cost and family obligations that keeps most of us close to shore. Somehow, Ronnie can find other people to pay for his adventures. He also has an inflated image of himself. Just because he has personally done something for the first time, doesn’t mean it is the first time for the rest of us. As you all recall from Ronnie’s first adventure, we were able to determine from the GRIB files that he was in a 30 - 40kt wind band when he developed his rudder issues. In his bio, he recounts this as a hurricane (there was a hurricane developing near the equator at the time but no where near him). Interestingly, he sailed through similar conditions at the start of the SHTP, but now in the company of other boats, no doubt, has tempered his sea story. WW had the fastest speed potential of all the monohulls, yet he turned in a somewhat pedistrian performance. Over-all, he was beaten by an eighty year old man and a wet-snail 32. His second place divisional finish was because the two “slower” boats restarted up to three days after he did. If you take the time to read the SSS bulletin board, you can see graphically his general lack of knowledge and seamanship. I got the impression that he possessed just enough knowledge and seamanship skills to get him there and not much more.

<OIt’s a shame that you focus all your attention on this one guy and completely ignore the true BFS sailors that participated in this race. Like General Ken Roper, 81 years old and has been single handing to Hawaii almost every year since his retirement. Or Adam Correa, who started sailing about the same time as Ronnie, who took a 26 foot lapstrake Folkboat, “turbo’d” it and raced it to Hawaii. For those of you that don’t know, the Folkboat allthough very seaworthy, is engineless and essentually a day sailer out here on the bay. The guy I really admire is Sam Burns, who bought a Catalina 309 to do the race in because he liked how the C28 he used to charter handled. Prepped it himself without the benefit of multible sponsers. Took time off from work, wife and daughter to do the race. On the first night, when he found out that his SSB installation wasn’t working, turned back, rented a Sat phone and restarted a day late. He won the Pererverence Trophy for being the last person to finish within the time limit. Then gave the trophy to Adam who finished after the race ended. That is sportsmanship that I admire and I like to buy that guy a drink at the bar

Interesting follow-up about Ronnie. I’m not quite sure that the Wounded Warrior foundation is going to pay his way for his future adventures (aren’t there other wounded vets out there?) And, I doubt seriously that “corporate sponsors” are lining up to pay for his fun. Not sure his story is all that compelling for a book or lecture circuit. As you can see from above, there are other equally or more compelling stories out there. Heck, there was even a blind person who single handed to Hawaii and a guy who did it in a West Wright Potter. Where is the note worthyness? I don’t see his book making it on Oprah’s reading list. Ronnie had some good times, but I think its time for him join the grown up world. Fonzie has jumped the shark tank.<O


----------



## smackdaddy

If George says it...it's good enough for me.






Back to your regularly scheduled BFSes.


----------



## imagine2frolic

GeorgeB,

Great call on it all. Over at stuffers I called Ronnie a liar for claiming he survived a hurricane. He had my respect until then. I give the man credit for getting back on the horse. Like you I believe he survived this, because he was gifted everything. I still think he doesn't know squat!.......*i2f*


----------



## smackdaddy

C'mon i2f - the thread is now closed.

Hey, where are you these days?


----------



## knothead

GeorgeB said:


> Smack, this man-crush you have for Ronnie is getting a little embarassing and any more PDA and we're going to have to ask you and Ronnie to rent a room&#8230;
> <o>Now, before you get all emotional, and want to take a warm shower together,  let's put a couple of things into perspective. <o><o>


You seem to have a hard time stating your opinion without adding juvenile digs. You lose credibility.

And Keel. That bit about AS was mean and petty. There is a lot more to that whole story than just Smack getting banned and I'm pretty sure you know that.

Smack revived this thread to point out the fact that Ronnie did just what everyone what everyone was complaining that he didn't do before the first voyage. He got some experience, he prepared, he was successful.
He is gaining more experience as we speak. 
What the hell more do you people want? 
I was totally against Abby and Jessica. Children shouldn't be sailing around the world alone. Period. But Ronnie's case is completely different. 
Look, he may be doing it for publicity, for money, or just for the sake of adventure. Who cares? He is an adult and can make his own decisions. If he wants to live his life on the edge, more power to him.

Frankly, you guys are sounding like you're jealous of him. Maybe you need to get out there and test yourselves. You're losing perspective. 
</o></o></o>


----------



## okawbow

Amen, Knothead! Finally some sensible words.


----------



## bubb2

*Let us remember that Joshua Slocum* after he gained his experance sailing single hand around the world was lost at sea in November 1909 sailing Spray. The same boat he took around the world. The sea is fickle and does not favor experance over inexperance.


----------



## imagine2frolic

We just returned from Las Perlas. We wnet down so we could scrub the bottom, and look for any damage from the telephone pole we ran over.

We are in Panama City Panama once again topping off tanks, pantry, and freezer. We will leave in the beginning of the week, so we can get around Puntas Mala, and head west...........*i2f*


----------



## GeorgeB

Knothead, chill dude! Aren’t emoticons supposed to denote humor? Why are you offended that I was teasing Smack in good nature? You really should re-read my note because Ronnie did a significant and seminal accomplishment and in my note, I publically congratulated him. I am just not drinking Smack’s kool-aid and believing is anything more than what it was. I chided Smack and his Ronniemania because there were a lot of other equally (or more) compelling stories out there if you bothered to look for them. As to my credibility, what exactly am I loosing? My national championship? Second place finish in the PacCup, my membership in SSS? I will go forth forever living in shame that I somehow don’t measure up to your standards. (note that this emoticom denotes humor and that you shouldn’t take it too literally.)


----------



## KeelHaulin

GeorgeB said:


> I am just not drinking Smack's kool-aid and believing is anything more than what it was.


My thoughts; also George. I respect the fact that he made the crossing; but I don't agree with the method of accomplishing it. I understand he did -some- offshore sailing; but that is very, very minimal when it comes to sailing to HI singlehanded (IMHO). That's all I was trying to get across to Smack, et.al. Just because he made it with his minimal experience in a boat that was pre-prepped does not mean that everyone should go do this or call him a shining example of good judgment and seamanship.



> I chided Smack and his Ronniemania because there were a lot of other equally (or more) compelling stories out there if you bothered to look for them.


I tried to point that out 3 pages ago. Lots of background experience and accomplishments in the other sailors who went this year; all people who did it on their own time and dime and put in the years of hard prep work, sailing experience, and expense getting ready. Guys who are going offshore alone in their late 60's to 80's and are still capable of prepping as well as sailing; in addition to younger and also very accomplished sailors.



> As to my credibility, what exactly am I loosing? My national championship? Second place finish in the PacCup, my membership in SSS? I will go forth forever living in shame that I somehow don't measure up to your standards. (note that this emoticom denotes humor and that you shouldn't take it too literally.)


Thanks for giving much more credibility to this argument George (as an accomplished SHTP sailor and guy who knows much more about sailing/racing/offshore than I do). I was not posting in "jealousy" I was trying to get the point across that you -hopefully- have made stick.

I'm glad Ronnie made it without need for rescue. I'm sure he learned quite a bit out there on his own; and hopefully he will learn more on his return trip from the delivery Captain. I'm sure he will turn out to be a fine sailor over time; and hopefully he won't do more "publicity-stunt" sailing before he takes some time to gain more offshore experience and time learning about sailboat systems.


----------



## KeelHaulin

bubb2 said:


> The sea is fickle and does not favor experance over inexperance.


Yes; but experience can outsmart the sea's ability to destroy a boat. Inexperience can't.

Do you really believe that inexperience is OK when it comes to setting off for a ocean crossing or circumnav? How'd that work out for Ronnie on his first try?

One of the primary reasons I have disdain for those who go offshore without experience and ability to cope is because the more people who are rescued for lack of experience; the more pressure that will come from activists who want restrictions and controls over those who now have the FREEDOM to go where they choose without being told "you can't do that". At some point "protection" laws will get passed and another chip of freedom will have been removed from the Statue of Liberty.

I can understand the philosophy held by the Pardeys. They don't carry an EPIRB. They believe that if they can't save their own skins; they deserve to die and don't want others to risk their lives to save theirs. While I don't feel that everyone should be this extreme; I also do believe that we should be able to do just that (save our own skins). Now before you throw the Skip Allan story in my face again; I'm going to say that he considered the result of his death (the impact on his family) and decided it was not worth the risk to continue when there was a single chance he could be picked up in front of him. The decision was made on behalf of the "bigger picture" not that he was unable to deal with the situation or keep his boat upright and seaworthy.

On the issue of Smack and AS; I don't know the details. I posted that to point out that Smack was booted from the place where all of the old salts who kicked around this board at one time went. I suspect that Smack stirred the pot over there (possibly with his BFS agenda) one too many times and Giu pulled the plug on him for it after being warned. If I'm wrong send me a PM, pointing me to the supporting threads. I will read them and if I am convinced Smack got a raw deal I will apologize for making the assumption he deserved to be banned.

Part of the reason for the formation of AS was that the founders of it were sick of the lack of respect here and the ability for people to argue their weak positions and make fiction into fact. When that split came; I decided that this board still needed a few voices of reason to help keep this board informative and balanced until other knowledgeable people find Sailnet and post; and I just don't have time to follow multiple sailing forums. As you all know I'm not just a dittohead for the "experts" here either. I have had disagreements with people like Jeff H (SUPER-Mod!!!), MaineSail, SailingDog, knothead, etc...


----------



## smackdaddy

KeelHaulin said:


> Just because he made it with his minimal experience in a boat that was pre-prepped does not mean that everyone should go do this or call him a shining example of good judgment and seamanship.


Show me where anyone said the above and I'll give you some cred. Otherwise, you've just shown why I've argued this point exhaustively in this thread. Until you can stop making extreme, hysterical statements, wild accusations, and/or can stop putting words in people's mouths, someone has to try to be a voice of reason.

George might see it as "kool-aid" - but it's not. It's just an effort to try to give the kid (and BFS) a fair shake from stuff like you just typed.

If people can be objective - I can respect them. That said you've at least said you respect his accomplishment twice now. That's good enough for me.



KeelHaulin said:


> Yes; but experience can outsmart the sea's ability to destroy a boat. Inexperience can't.


If there's hubris in this whole story, I think this is probably it. Good luck with that.


----------



## dhays

*The bliss of being graced with your presense...*



KeelHaulin said:


> I decided that this board still needed a few voices of reason to help keep this board informative and balanced until other knowledgeable people find Sailnet and post; and I just don't have time to follow multiple sailing forums. As you all know I'm not just a dittohead for the "experts" here either. I have had disagreements with people like Jeff H (SUPER-Mod!!!), MaineSail, SailingDog, knothead, etc...


I'm new here, but from your descriptions of yourself, it sounds as if I should genuflect every time I read one of your posts. Maybe it would help newbies like me if you provided a complete list of Sailnet posters you deem worthy?

Dave


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> Show me where anyone said the above and I'll give you some cred. Otherwise, you've just shown why I've argued this point exhaustively in this thread. Until you can stop making extreme, hysterical statements, wild accusations, and/or can stop putting words in people's mouths, someone has to try to be a voice of reason.


Here you go...



smackdaddy said:


> *This thread, and others like it in the past, celebrate failure...for some goofy-assed reason. (Although that seems to have changed of late. Thank goodness).
> 
> Many herein called him an idiot at the tops of their lungs...but that idiot just sailed circles around them. I'm just saying congratulations are in order...if you can get the words past the crow in your mouth. Heh-heh.*


So telling people that we "celebrate failure" here; and that Ronnie has sailed circles around people who have many, many more years and miles beneath their keels is somehow not putting him up on a pedestal? And somehow not "hysterical" in the sense that you are smitten with the guy? Personally I think you are the one who needs the attitude adjustment...



> George might see it as "kool-aid" - but it's not. It's just an effort to try to give the kid (and BFS) a fair shake from stuff like you just typed.


Did I say anything that is not true? Remember; GeorgeB also posted with regard to the prep of the boat and Ronnie's sailing performance...



> If people can be objective - I can respect them. That said you've at least said you respect his accomplishment twice now. That's good enough for me.


I respect the fact that he made the passage without incident; and that he accomplished his goal; however I don't respect the methods and I would not go offshore with him as a skipper of a crewed boat where survival conditions could be expected. He just has not had the years of experience needed to be anything but a danger to himself at this point in time.



> If there's hubris in this whole story, I think this is probably it. Good luck with that.


Go look at your own posts; there you will find the meaning of the word "hubris". You, a guy with less than 2 years of sailing experience and less as an owner (with over 5600 posts in said time) is now making calls on who should be eating crow on the subject of sailors who have already exercised poor judgment and repeated that cenario at the helm of OPB. You might want to re-think what you are saying about who is being arrogant here; and what you post in general...


----------



## KeelHaulin

dhays said:


> I'm new here, but from your descriptions of yourself, it sounds as if I should genuflect every time I read one of your posts. Maybe it would help newbies like me if you provided a complete list of Sailnet posters you deem worthy?


Dude; do you have any clue about what you are saying here? Did I not say that a large portion of those who were considered experts (and rightly so) here flat out walked away from this forum? I don't consider myself an expert; but I do feel that this forum would be lost without the few long time members that did stay and still post here regularly. I don't post excessively and I always try and give the best information I can on things that I actually know something about. I don't shoot off my mouth giving advice on things I don't know the answer to (like many do) and I try to give those seeking advice the best information I know or can find. There was a period of time where many posts were not getting answered here and those who were posting answers to questions were giving off the cuff, incorrect information. But you would not know that; because you have only been a member of this board for less than a month. I posted what I did to point out that there was a large group of really cool and knowledgeable people who left this forum partly because of the BS, inconsiderate, disrespectful, Sailing-Anarchy like posts that were going up on this board; and the few that stayed did so because they did not want to see this board disappear.

Think about it. Genuflect if you wish...


----------



## chall03

KeelHaulin said:


> Dude; do you have any clue about what you are saying here? Did I not say that a large portion of those who were considered experts (and rightly so) here flat out walked away from this forum? I don't consider myself an expert; but I do feel that this forum would be lost without the few long time members that did stay and still post here regularly. I don't post excessively and I always try and give the best information I can on things that I actually know something about. I don't shoot off my mouth giving advice on things I don't know the answer to (like many do) and I try to give those seeking advice the best information I know or can find. There was a period of time where many posts were not getting answered here and those who were posting answers to questions were giving off the cuff, incorrect information. But you would not know that; because you have only been a member of this board for less than a month. I posted what I did to point out that there was a large group of really cool and knowledgeable people who left this forum partly because of the BS, inconsiderate, disrespectful, Sailing-Anarchy like posts that were going up on this board; and the few that stayed did so because they did not want to see this board disappear.
> 
> Think about it. Genuflect if you wish...


ALL the experts walked from here??

I'm sorry but I disagree with that assesment. 
Yeah there were several issues, and some of what you say was part of it, but I don't believe it is the whole picture.

Might I point out that subsequently some of your so called 'experts' who walked from here have also walked from AS.....there was also alot more to Smacks departure there then the simplification you are pushing to try and make your point.

Is it necessary to go back and bring up inter board dirty laundry in this already questionable thread to make your point?? Is it necessary to bash new members like Dhays??

The point you are making stands fine without all of that.

Hey I understand your general distaste for BFS and Smack.......the guy is just like Justin Bieber, everywhere you turn there he is..... You hear his infectious, annoying melody, sometimes you end up singing along despite yourself and sometimes you wish you could just gag him.   

I do agree with your stance on Ronnie, but lets put the dirty laundry back away.

If you paid attention around here you might also spot some of the newer, none the less experienced, non jaded 'experts' who have since joined.......


----------



## KeelHaulin

Did I ever say "All"? I said "many". I don't know what the percentage was; but there were quite a few guys/gals who are no-longer here posting and they probably represented a majority of the daily traffic on this board. I'm not saying that there are/were not any good people left posting here; I'm only trying to say that there WAS a mass exodus partly due to the disrespect that they feel was given. I know there were many other reasons; and I am not at all saying smack was the sole cause.

I was simply trying to point out that if you put up inflammatory "in your face" type of posts (go back to the "eat crow" post) you are going to step on some toes. 

Yes; the board is coming back, despite the loss of members to AS. I agree and hope things continue to improve here.

I was not trying to drive dhays as a new member off of this board. But when someone twists my words they are gonna get a response. I thought I was showing quite a bit of restraint with that post...


----------



## chall03

I still miss some of those guys being around here as well.......the irony for me is that it was as I became more active here and realized what a good thing was going on was just about as it all started to crumble!!!!

What I guess I do also really miss is those with the REAL experience having enough Balls to not being afraid to stand up and call BS on that which is BS.

I actually don't care what Smack thinks or doesn't think of Ronnie......no more than people should care what I think..... I have a small boat that I cruise up and down a section of coast line. Smack sails on a lake. I AM interested in what people who have sailed to Hawaii and back think, what people who have faced 40/50/60 knots offshore do think.

Cantankerous or overwise the OP was someone who had just completed 6 years fulltime cruising.....whether I agree in the end or not his was a voice that I figured would at least be worth listening to.


----------



## tommays

The whole point of this thread was a child like POKE at smack

The Adults will not even speek to eack other and did a pretty good lord of the flys act when given there "freedom of speech" on the other sight

Boat prep for SH TransPac- Nov '09- Jan '10 | Open Blue Horizon

Like it or not ronnie was NOT handed a race ready boat it was pretty far gone


----------



## smackdaddy

Who the hell is Justin Bieber? Does he sail?


----------



## smackdaddy

KeelHaulin said:


> Here you go...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by smackdaddy
> *This thread, and others like it in the past, celebrate failure...for some goofy-assed reason. (Although that seems to have changed of late. Thank goodness).
> 
> Many herein called him an idiot at the tops of their lungs...but that idiot just sailed circles around them. I'm just saying congratulations are in order...if you can get the words past the crow in your mouth. Heh-heh.*
> 
> 
> 
> So telling people that we "celebrate failure" here; and that Ronnie has sailed circles around people who have many, many more years and miles beneath their keels is somehow not putting him up on a pedestal? And somehow not "hysterical" in the sense that you are smitten with the guy? Personally I think you are the one who needs the attitude adjustment...
Click to expand...

Oh that. No, you misunderstand. First, back to the point, no one anywhere ever said this guy was, in your words, "a shining example of good judgment and seamanship". Not even my red, bold quote says that. And that's what I mean about being a bit hysterical with your comments. (And I see how sensitive you get when you think someone is twisting your words - so I'm sure you understand.)

What it DOES say is that those who HOLD THEMSELVES up as shining examples of good judgment and seamanship - to the point that they feel comfortable hammering the failure of lesser beings who screw up - should be ready to congratulate those lesser beings when they accomplish something significant that most of those "immortals" most likely have never done themselves.

Don't you think that's reasonable?

If they can't - then there's something else going on. And it has nothing to do with good judgment and seamanship...but pettiness and arrogance.



KeelHaulin said:


> I respect the fact that he made the passage without incident; and that he accomplished his goal; however I don't respect the methods and I would not go offshore with him as a skipper of a crewed boat where survival conditions could be expected. He just has not had the years of experience needed....


This part sounds perfectly reasonable. I wouldn't go out with him in those conditions either.



KeelHaulin said:


> Go look at your own posts; there you will find the meaning of the word "hubris". You, a guy with less than 2 years of sailing experience and less as an owner (with over 5600 posts in said time) is now making calls on who should be eating crow on the subject of sailors who have already exercised poor judgment and repeated that cenario at the helm of OPB. You might want to re-think what you are saying about who is being arrogant here; and what you post in general...


What I'm calling out is behavior. It doesn't take an expert of any kind to judge arrogance and pettiness when the same people who trash a dude for his failings for pages and pages then refuse to give him credit for, as Knot so rightly pointed out a couple of pages ago, doing exactly the things he was supposed to do to prepare and then being successful in his attempt.

Keel, here it is in a nutshell:

1. Should a sailor desire to sail "big"? Absolutely. I am spot on on this point.

2. Should a sailor prepare himself and his boat before going for a big sail? Absolutely. You are spot on on this point.

3. Should that sailor take the advice of those that have more knowledge and experience? Absolutely. You are spot on on this point.

4. Should that sailor pick and choose who he listens to among those that have more knowledge and experience based on whether or not they are jerks? Absolutely. I am spot on on this point.

So see, it's a 50/50 proposition. We're both spot on.



KeelHaulin said:


> Dude; do you have any clue about what you are saying here?


In conclusion, the fact that you used the word "dude" means but one thing....all my hard work through almost 6K posts is paying off.


----------



## bubb2

I want to know who would go offshore with anyone where "survival conditions would be expected". A show of hands would be good.

I thought as prudent sailors we would try to avoid such conditions, not voluntary sail into them.


----------



## dhays

KeelHaulin said:


> I was not trying to drive dhays as a new member off of this board. But when someone twists my words they are gonna get a response. I thought I was showing quite a bit of restraint with that post...


Don't worry, I'm not driven off easily.

However, my earlier post was ill-considered and intemperate. I apologize.

Dave


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> Oh that. No, you misunderstand. First, back to the point, no one anywhere ever said this guy was, in your words, "a shining example of good judgment and seamanship". Not even my red, bold quote says that. And that's what I mean about being a bit hysterical with your comments. (And I see how sensitive you get when you think someone is twisting your words - so I'm sure you understand.)


You miss the point. If you give someone credit; you should also keep it in the context of what his actual experience and capabilities are. If you don't; people get the impression that said person is some sort of sailing god because they accomplished something that would normally be considered an impossible feat. Let's go back to the example of tourism on Everest. If you have the bucks and are reasonably fit you can go up there. The sherpas will provide you every bit of oxygen, haul most of your gear, and guide you to the top. Does that mean you did something as-significant as those who first climbed it or did it on their own? I don't think so; and many experienced climbers die because of the traffic jams of inexperienced climbers blocking the climbing route. Do I applaud those who did make it despite their inexperience? Absolutely not. I think it is reckless behavior that put others at risk in the pursuit of personal glory (vanity). I also feel the same about people who go on offshore passages without the proper preparation and sailing background. We all know that people who do have the proper background have gotten into situations where they needed rescue. What that tells me is that unless you have enough experience; you have no business going out there as a skipper of a crewed boat or a singlehander. Why? Because you put your crew in serious danger; and if you are alone you will more likely require assistance or rescue by the USCG or a passing ship.



> What it DOES say is that those who HOLD THEMSELVES up as shining examples of good judgment and seamanship - to the point that they feel comfortable hammering the failure of lesser beings who screw up - should be ready to congratulate those lesser beings when they accomplish something significant that most of those "immortals" most likely have never done themselves.


Again; you miss the point. The people like Cam who posted this originally are trying to give a good dose of reality to people who don't know anything about sailing and think they can just buy any old boat and go sailing to distant islands or destinations. The context was a guy who from what we understand knew little to nothing about sailing let alone going offshore at the time (kinda like you were back then smack). Cam was trying to give you and others a small dose of reality to open your eyes and help temper your desire to go out there for a BFS; and getting more than you bargained for. But you are so bull headed; you could not see that he was trying to help you understand that what you profess is not very practical; and he was putting Ronnie up as the poster boy of "what not to do" so others -like you- would change your pathway and make more grounded decisions.

We learn from our mistakes; and can learn from the mistakes of others. We hammered on Ronnie's case to try and prevent 100 other people from doing the same. The fact that he made it at a later date does not change this. His making it to HI does not make him "better" than those who have not; or it any less reckless of a decision (to go offshore singlehanded with less than 1 year of experience). But you smack, by dredging up this thread, insist that we as practical sailors give the guy more credit and respect than he deserves and back down on the position that it is inherently unsafe to do what he did (on both occasions). It ain't gonna happen.



> If they can't - then there's something else going on. And it has nothing to do with good judgment and seamanship...but pettiness and arrogance.


Again; it's more for the need to downplay the actions of those who have acted irresponsibly despite the fact that they "accomplished" their goal. I don't applaud Jessica Watson's solo semi-circumnav; despite the fact she made it. I don't applaud Zack's or Abby's either. All of them were done in an irresponsible way; some more so than others. If we do; then we encourage others to act or do the same or try something that is even lower on the scale of responsible behavior. It's not about being petty or arrogant; it's about fostering good judgment by not giving recognition to bad judgment (regardless of if there is a positive outcome).



> 4. Should that sailor pick and choose who he listens to among those that have more knowledge and experience based on whether or not they are jerks? Absolutely. I am spot on on this point.


I crewed for plenty of jerks over the years; but that does not mean they did not have a hell of a lot on offer to teach me. I learned what I needed to know despite the personality flaws; and I am a better sailor for it. You take the good and you live with the bad so you can learn what you need to so someday you can be competent on your own. The people who you may be pointing to as jerks; well they have pointed you in the right direction of gaining experience more slowly and taking the time to learn before getting in over your head. I have seen a change in your attitude since you joined Sailnet. Someday you will look back on all of the perceived abuse you took here and thank people like Cam for giving you some perspective via the misfortune of people like Ronnie (however harsh on him that might seem). People like Ronnie Simpson and Ken Barnes need to serve as an example of "what not to do" so others can learn from those mistakes and avoid making them.


----------



## RTB

dhays said:


> I'm new here, but from your descriptions of yourself, it sounds as if I should genuflect every time I read one of your posts. Maybe it would help newbies like me if you provided a complete list of Sailnet posters you deem worthy?
> 
> Dave


Perhaps the way you put it was not so kind, but actually a good point. Sometimes I think it is harder to learn who to listen to on the boards, than it is to learn how to sail.

I have sailed with two people that I met on sailing forums. The first seemed to be quite the sailor. Let's just say--he was not the "real deal". On the other hand, I just sailed about 1700 miles with the second one. What I learned, oh so much, was priceless.

If you really want to know about a particular person, read "threads by this person" and "threads started by this person". Yes, I mean read all of them. It is not a guarantee, but can be helpful.


----------



## KeelHaulin

bubb2 said:


> I want to know who would go offshore with anyone where "survival conditions would be expected". A show of hands would be good.
> 
> I thought as prudent sailors we would try to avoid such conditions, not voluntary sail into them.


Sorry; that was a poor choice of words. I was trying to make the point that by going far offshore you -may- be putting yourself in the situation where heavy conditions come down on you. The decisions of the skipper may determine if those conditions foster a survival situation or not. On a 2k mile crossing you are not going to have enough visibility of what the weather will do before you leave; and small sailboats generally can't outrun a storm system; thus putting larger responsibility on the skipper to know what to do in the event of heavy weather (or how to avoid it). Survival conditions exist at near-shore locations like Pt Conception, SF Bar, Columbia River Bar, and many, many others. If you don't know they exist or know well enough to avoid the time when the area is too rough to cross; you put yourself and your crew at great risk (by not knowing what to avoid).


----------



## KeelHaulin

dhays said:


> Don't worry, I'm not driven off easily.
> 
> However, my earlier post was ill-considered and intemperate. I apologize.
> 
> Dave


Thanks for the apology Dave; accepted!

Welcome to Sailnet! :thewave:


----------



## smackdaddy

KeelHaulin said:


> You miss the point. If you give someone credit; you should also keep it in the context of what his actual experience and capabilities are. If you don't; people get the impression that said person is some sort of sailing god because they accomplished something that would normally be considered an impossible feat. Let's go back to the example of tourism on Everest. If you have the bucks and are reasonably fit you can go up there. The sherpas will provide you every bit of oxygen, haul most of your gear, and guide you to the top. Does that mean you did something as-significant as those who first climbed it or did it on their own? I don't think so; and many experienced climbers die because of the traffic jams of inexperienced climbers blocking the climbing route. Do I applaud those who did make it despite their inexperience? Absolutely not. I think it is reckless behavior that put others at risk in the pursuit of personal glory (vanity). I also feel the same about people who go on offshore passages without the proper preparation and sailing background. We all know that people who do have the proper background have gotten into situations where they needed rescue. What that tells me is that unless you have enough experience; you have no business going out there as a skipper of a crewed boat or a singlehander. Why? Because you put your crew in serious danger; and if you are alone you will more likely require assistance or rescue by the USCG or a passing ship.
> 
> Again; you miss the point. The people like Cam who posted this originally are trying to give a good dose of reality to people who don't know anything about sailing and think they can just buy any old boat and go sailing to distant islands or destinations. The context was a guy who from what we understand knew little to nothing about sailing let alone going offshore at the time (kinda like you were back then smack). Cam was trying to give you and others a small dose of reality to open your eyes and help temper your desire to go out there for a BFS; and getting more than you bargained for. But you are so bull headed; you could not see that he was trying to help you understand that what you profess is not very practical; and he was putting Ronnie up as the poster boy of "what not to do" so others -like you- would change your pathway and make more grounded decisions.
> 
> We learn from our mistakes; and can learn from the mistakes of others. We hammered on Ronnie's case to try and prevent 100 other people from doing the same. The fact that he made it at a later date does not change this. His making it to HI does not make him "better" than those who have not; or it any less reckless of a decision (to go offshore singlehanded with less than 1 year of experience). But you smack, by dredging up this thread, insist that we as practical sailors give the guy more credit and respect than he deserves and back down on the position that it is inherently unsafe to do what he did (on both occasions). It ain't gonna happen.
> 
> Again; it's more for the need to downplay the actions of those who have acted irresponsibly despite the fact that they "accomplished" their goal. I don't applaud Jessica Watson's solo semi-circumnav; despite the fact she made it. I don't applaud Zack's or Abby's either. All of them were done in an irresponsible way; some more so than others. If we do; then we encourage others to act or do the same or try something that is even lower on the scale of responsible behavior. It's not about being petty or arrogant; it's about fostering good judgment by not giving recognition to bad judgment (regardless of if there is a positive outcome).
> 
> I crewed for plenty of jerks over the years; but that does not mean they did not have a hell of a lot on offer to teach me. I learned what I needed to know despite the personality flaws; and I am a better sailor for it. You take the good and you live with the bad so you can learn what you need to so someday you can be competent on your own. The people who you may be pointing to as jerks; well they have pointed you in the right direction of gaining experience more slowly and taking the time to learn before getting in over your head. I have seen a change in your attitude since you joined Sailnet. Someday you will look back on all of the perceived abuse you took here and thank people like Cam for giving you some perspective via the misfortune of people like Ronnie (however harsh on him that might seem). People like Ronnie Simpson and Ken Barnes need to serve as an example of "what not to do" so others can learn from those mistakes and avoid making them.


Okay - now you're starting to make a lot more sense.

For me, the key here is your admission that you guys have a need to "play up" the failures and "downplay" the successes of stuff like this *in order to protect newbies* with "reality". That's absolutely apparent - and somewhat understandable. And it's great that you acknowledge it.

The first problem with this, however, is that in doing so you take a somewhat extreme and dishonest stance over the long run. You may justify it by saying it's to protect the "hundreds of newbs" waiting follow in Ronnie's initial footsteps...but it's still dishonest at its core. It also assumes the majority of people out there are stupid (the genesis of comments like "you idiot", "you obviously have no clue", blah, blah). And it eventually puts you into the corner you're in now (playing down the successes).

The second problem is that you end up putting your own personal views of what's "practical" up as the gold standard of judging readiness or qualification. Of course, there's nothing wrong with holding those views yourself, but when you bind them on others it gets pretty sticky. This is especially true when other very apt sailors and/or organizations differ from your "gold standard" as in this case (e.g. - the SSS's qualifications).

It's both of these things together that make this particular thread so unique - and so ripe for critique. That's the "crow" I'm talking about.

As for why Cam started this thread, I definitely don't think it was out of some good-hearted effort to help me. And if you really believe that, then we'll just have to differ on this point. But that doesn't really matter. The most important thing is that good-hearted efforts to help guys like me *have and still do come from salts that are here*...CharlieCobra, GeorgeB, johnshasteen, CruisingDad, JRP, Omatako, Jeff_H, Knothead, Bubb2, and many, many others I'm forgetting off the top of my head.

The difference with these guys is this...they don't try to squelch the desire to sail big with intentionally sarcastic stories of failure and ridicule. They don't feel the need to put newbs down - they just help by actually talking about hairy situations they've been in and what they've learned - and they tell me _specifically_ what to look out for as I continue to prepare for big sailing. And, most importantly, they talk about how incredible those big sailing experiences were - even when they were scared out of their wits.

That's honesty. That's helpful. That's fun. And I have a lot of respect for that.

So, there is no doubt that it's a balance. It always is. And with the somewhat extreme stance you feel you need to take to inject "reality" into the conversation (and protect newbs), and the somewhat extreme stance I feel I need to take to inject "adventure" into the conversation (and battle prudes) - we are both tagged as extremists. And I am comfortable that most people, even newbs, are smart enough to understand the middle-ground.

As to our extremes, I'm obviously more fun to hang out with, but you're probably safer. Even so, I'd sail with you any day, Keel. I'd even let you drive.


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> The first problem with this, however, is that in doing so you take a somewhat extreme and dishonest stance over the long run. You may justify it by saying it's to protect the "hundreds of newbs" waiting follow in Ronnie's initial footsteps...but it's still dishonest at its core. It also assumes the majority of people out there are stupid (the genesis of comments like "you idiot", "you obviously have no clue", blah, blah). And it eventually puts you into the corner you're in now (playing down the successes).


I'm not quite sure where you come up with things being "dishonest". I never said anything in dishonesty; and as a group we are not downplaying achievements. As I said before; I am not going to applaud a guy who had such little offshore experience for "making it" to HI from SF. Lots of people can qualify for the SHTP and "make it". That does not mean they should. This is not a downplay of Ronnie's short-term success; and we all hope he has long-term success (as one should for all sailors). We don't revel in failure here; we analyze it and figure out what went wrong and why so we can learn and grow as sailors of our own boats. If that appears like we are picking on people; well I'm sorry, but with failure comes humility and some amount of humiliation.



> The second problem is that you end up putting your own personal views of what's "practical" up as the gold standard of judging readiness or qualification. Of course, there's nothing wrong with holding those views yourself, but when you bind them on others it gets pretty sticky. This is especially true when other very apt sailors and/or organizations differ from your "gold standard" as in this case (e.g. - the SSS's qualifications).


The SSS qualification, the LongPac, is minimal to be sure you can handle yourself in benign offshore conditions. It's in place to be sure they are not sending someone out alone on a cross-ocean race who has never been outside of the SF Gate before. The requirement is there for their own peace of mind and liability; not yours to yourself. Anyone can sail to HI on their own; you don't need the approval of the SSS; but again, you better be damn sure you know what you are doing. There is no gold standard; to each their own. But if it were me; I'd be doing a lot more offshore crewing/sailing/learning (than the 1 year Ronnie did) before setting out for a destination like HI.



> The most important thing is that good-hearted efforts to help guys like me *have and still do come from salts that are here*...CharlieCobra, GeorgeB, johnshasteen, CruisingDad, JRP, Omatako, Jeff_H, Knothead, Bubb2, and many, many others I'm forgetting off the top of my head. The difference with these guys is this...they don't try to squelch the desire to sail big with intentionally sarcastic stories of failure and ridicule. They don't feel the need to put newbs down - they just help by actually talking about hairy situations they've been in and what they've learned - and they tell me _specifically_ what to look out for as I continue to prepare for big sailing. And, most importantly, they talk about how incredible those big sailing experiences were - even when they were scared out of their wits.


I don't think people like Cam, or myself feel any need to "put newbs down". We feel the need to correct the errors in judgment we see that would otherwise set them up for various forms of failure resulting in loss of life or at the least vessel and equipment.



> That's honesty. That's helpful. That's fun. And I have a lot of respect for that.


There's sugar frosted honesty; and there is stark reality. And yes; there is sarcasm and ridicule when gross negligence or ignorance is the root cause. Get used to it Smack; if you can't take the heat here (which is a low simmer compared to SA), how are you going to cope with some stressful offshore situation or condition? If you look back to the time when this thread was started; you were 10x more cocky than you are now and you were stepping on toes left and right to build a name for yourself here. People either tried to take you under their wing (in a head-lock) or stayed away from the loose cannonball. Many of the people you point to as your mentors now were the latter. Many of the former have moved on to other forums. The title of this thread was pointed at you to try and get you to take notice and reel you in a bit. I don't think Cam was simply trying to get under your skin or ridicule you. He was pointing out that your philosophy if not tempered with experience can lead to a deadly situation; so you and other BFS proponents could avoid ending up in a similar fix.



> As to our extremes, I'm obviously more fun to hang out with, but you're probably safer. Even so, I'd sail with you any day, Keel. I'd even let you drive.


Do you really think so? We always take safety seriously; but that does not mean we sail with the 3'rd reef in at all times. We were hitting 9.5 kts under full sail in 25-30 on Saturday. The boat had a 4' wake forming off the stern...


----------



## smackdaddy

Heh-heh. Dude, I can take the heat. I'm still here aren't I?



KeelHaulin said:


> Do you really think so? We always take safety seriously; but that does not mean we sail with the 3'rd reef in at all times. We were hitting 9.5 kts under full sail in 25-30 on Saturday. The boat had a 4' wake forming off the stern...


Now you're talking. You sound like a BFS Proponent.


----------



## chall03

smackdaddy said:


> Who the hell is Justin Bieber? Does he sail?


Dude your out of touch.......ask your kids.


----------



## smackdaddy

Oh man, this story just gets better and better. Ronnie and Ed just sailed Warrior's Wish under the GGB. The amazing thing? The BFS Proponent that this thread slagged so hard sailed that boat the last several hundred miles WITH NO KEEL!!!!!!

You want to talk seamanship and stones? You want to talk skillz? Right here.

What a perfect ending to this lame thread. Ronnie Simpson is one Big Freakin' Sailor.

Congratulations Ronnie and Ed. Proud to have you guys as proponents. Absolutely amazing!


----------



## hellosailor

" sailed that boat the last several hundred miles WITH NO KEEL!!!!!!"
Sailed a keelboat several hundred miles without a keel? You're sure you got the facts 100% right on that?
It would take exceptional LUCK and flat water, and no wind from the beam, for most keelboats to stay upright without the keel. LUCK, more than skill. Of course it was Napolean who said he'd rather have a lucky general than a skilled one.


----------



## CapTim

Yeah, he's got the facts right, hellosailor. 

Why is it that every time this guy does something successfully, it's luck? 

The dude crossed an ocean on more than one occasion, sailed a heavily damaged boat back to port, and has waaaay more real life experience than I do. I say hats off to him, bfs proponent or not.


----------



## hellosailor

Let's see...maybe because, keels don't JUST FALL OFF?

It takes a lot of corrosion (which someone should be inspecting routinely) or a lot of force (gee, didn't feel anything go bump?) or extreme wx, or a major design failure, to lose a keel.

Losing a keel without warning or incident implies corrosion and neglect. So maybe the guy's a great sailing master but simply lacking in certain maintenance skills. Hey, sailing master is a harder title to earn than "mechanic".

But it takes A LOT OF LUCK to lose a keel and not lose the boat. And have wx good enough to sail it home in. How many monohulls do you know, that will stay upright in anything besides a dead calm if they lose the ballast?? If the boat has negative stability, it doesn't matter how lucky OR skillful you are, it is going to turn turtle and that's that.

Makes me wonder what kind of keel stub that boat has, that they can't tell where the bolts failed, and the ocean hasn't tried to sneak in.

The Boat | Open Blue Horizon

Halfway down the page, there's a picture of the boat being prepped for this race in 11/2009, and it looks very much like the keel was NOT AFFIXED TO THE HULL at that time. Unless that "pipe" is the oddest keel I've ever seen.


----------



## trailblazer1229

Good thing he didn't fall overboard on the transfer. Not sure he would have lasted long in those waters. Looks like his GPS coord. placed him smack dab in the "Great White Cafe."
Ocean Film Fest 2010: Where Do Great White Sharks Go? To The White Shark Cafe! (Video) : TreeHugger


----------



## GBurton

hellosailor said:


> Let's see...maybe because, keels don't JUST FALL OFF?
> 
> It takes a lot of corrosion (which someone should be inspecting routinely) or a lot of force (gee, didn't feel anything go bump?) or extreme wx, or a major design failure, to lose a keel.
> 
> Losing a keel without warning or incident implies corrosion and neglect. So maybe the guy's a great sailing master but simply lacking in certain maintenance skills. Hey, sailing master is a harder title to earn than "mechanic".
> 
> But it takes A LOT OF LUCK to lose a keel and not lose the boat. And have wx good enough to sail it home in. How many monohulls do you know, that will stay upright in anything besides a dead calm if they lose the ballast?? If the boat has negative stability, it doesn't matter how lucky OR skillful you are, it is going to turn turtle and that's that.
> 
> Makes me wonder what kind of keel stub that boat has, that they can't tell where the bolts failed, and the ocean hasn't tried to sneak in.
> 
> The Boat | Open Blue Horizon
> 
> Halfway down the page, there's a picture of the boat being prepped for this race in 11/2009, and it looks very much like the keel was NOT AFFIXED TO THE HULL at that time. Unless that "pipe" is the oddest keel I've ever seen.


I would have thought that an expert like you would have been able to recognise that the keel is the light grey piece. Not the pipe. Behind the pipe


----------



## RTB

Lat 38 has a short write-up and some pix. Latitude 38 - 'Lectronic Latitude


----------



## smackdaddy

CapTim said:


> Why is it that every time this guy does something successfully, it's luck?


Tim, take a look at my go-round with Keel on pages 43-46 for the answer to this (or the first several pages of this thread when discussing the Skip Allan comparison).

Ronnie didn't do it the "right way" (their way) - so it can ONLY be luck when he succeeds.

That's why this thread has been so stupid from day 1. According to their twisted logic...when Ronnie got bit the first time, it wasn't "bad luck" - it was stupidity. Then when he* pulls off an EXTREMELY rare feat in sailing....it wasn't seamanship - it was luck.

Those guys are just wrong. All the time. It's actually pretty impressive. If dudes can't give Ronnie some serious props at this point - they are serious boneheads.

Whaddayagonnado?

(*With serious props to Ed)


----------



## smackdaddy




----------



## CapTim

lol, that's just nuts. look at that water, though.. makes me want to jump in right now!


----------



## hellosailor

Smackdaddy, you sound like the tv nooze folks who are congratulating a pair of new pilots on their exceptional skills for safely crash landing their Cessna in a lake yesterday after it ran out of gas. And then they went on to say the guys went to an outstanding school, too. After all, they set the plane down and walked away from it with no injuries and no one injured on the ground.

Of course, no one is mentioning that THE PLANE RAN OUT OF GAS and that is PILOT ERROR and also the number one cause of light aircraft crashes.

Great skilled pilots, yes, they set it down intact. After they forgot the basic checklist, including PUT GAS IN THE TANK AND VERIFY THERE'S ENOUGH OF IT.

Having half a skill set, doesn't make you skilled. It means you might be _halfway_ to being skilled. Which is further than many and less than others.

Any Indy driver will tell you that all he does is drive the car--there's a crew chief who makes sure it is safe to run, and the driver damned sure gives the crew chief credit when the car works properly. Well...Maybe Ronnie's a great DRIVER but on small craft, YOU STILL NEED A CREW CHIEF. Chief engineer, whatever you want to call it.

Great sailor, but he only brought _half _the boat home. Or maybe, yeah, maybe it isn't his fault the keel broke off, maybe GREMLINS swam out and ate it. The same GREMLINS that ate his rudder post last time. Yeah, that's the ticket, he's a great sailor who just has been haunted by GREMLINS that couldn't have been avoided by any reasonably prudent inspection of the hardware.

Oh wait, no, that can't be it. Gremlins only eat AIRCRAFT parts, right?


----------



## RTB

Smack, you've just been promoted to TV News Reporter, besides being the SN Greeter, and one of the most avid sailing forum Posters of all time! :laugher

Seriously, you just sailed 2100+miles across the Pacific. Who checks for keel damage before the return trip? That is assuming you have not hit something along the way.

The boat had a new bottom job in January of this year. If there was a problem, it should have been discovered at that time. I do wonder if being trailered has anything to do with the keel's failure, in the end?

EDIT - this just in...Pressure Drop - Warriors Wish Keel Issue Revealed

Hmmm.....I don't think Ronnie welds. And probably not an expert on weld inspections.


----------



## hellosailor

" I do wonder if being trailered has anything to do with the keel's failure, in the end?"
No doubt the guy who bolted it on last year was from the same NASA team that lost a Mars lander because "Oh, did you say Newton Meters? We thought that torque spec was in INCH POUNDS."


----------



## RTB

Well.....that answers everything! Are YOU from another planet, or what?


----------



## SlowButSteady

Interesting. Can't really tell much from that one photo, but it doesn't look like that was a huge amount of corrosion. I doubt most surveyors, much less just about anyone on this board, would have caught it.

I will say, however, that really high aspect keels, particularly those with bulbs, have always made me a bit nervous. There's just too much of a lever-arm on too small a cross-section for my liking.


----------



## bob77903

I don't know about another planet Ralph, maybe something he's smokin.....


----------



## RTB

Good one Bob. 

The boat was built in 1999, and certainly has some miles on her. Happily, she gets a new keel and will sail again.  

Ralph


----------



## bob77903

I can only voice my opinion. I thought Ronnie went off a little ill prepared on his first voyage to put it mildly. But a wounded veteran always has my respect, and now having sailed the solo traspac, and brought the boat back the last 800 miles sans keel, he has impressed me.


----------



## smackdaddy

hellosailor said:


> Smackdaddy, you sound like the tv nooze folks who are congratulating a pair of new pilots on their exceptional skills for safely crash landing their Cessna in a lake yesterday after it ran out of gas. And then they went on to say the guys went to an outstanding school, too. After all, they set the plane down and walked away from it with no injuries and no one injured on the ground.
> 
> Of course, no one is mentioning that THE PLANE RAN OUT OF GAS and that is PILOT ERROR and also the number one cause of light aircraft crashes.
> 
> Great skilled pilots, yes, they set it down intact. After they forgot the basic checklist, including PUT GAS IN THE TANK AND VERIFY THERE'S ENOUGH OF IT.
> 
> Having half a skill set, doesn't make you skilled. It means you might be _halfway_ to being skilled. Which is further than many and less than others.
> 
> Any Indy driver will tell you that all he does is drive the car--there's a crew chief who makes sure it is safe to run, and the driver damned sure gives the crew chief credit when the car works properly. Well...Maybe Ronnie's a great DRIVER but on small craft, YOU STILL NEED A CREW CHIEF. Chief engineer, whatever you want to call it.
> 
> Great sailor, but he only brought _half _the boat home. Or maybe, yeah, maybe it isn't his fault the keel broke off, maybe GREMLINS swam out and ate it. The same GREMLINS that ate his rudder post last time. Yeah, that's the ticket, he's a great sailor who just has been haunted by GREMLINS that couldn't have been avoided by any reasonably prudent inspection of the hardware.
> 
> Oh wait, no, that can't be it. Gremlins only eat AIRCRAFT parts, right?


Well if nothing EVER breaks on your boat I'll have to give your assumption-filled hypothesis some credit. Otherwise...blah, blah, blah.

Signing off...Ron Burgandy, Anchorman.








hellosailor said:


> Great sailor, but he only brought _half _the boat home.


Actually, hello, he brought half-a-boat ALL the way home. Keep working that fuzzy math.


----------



## RTB

He has come far in 2 1/2 years (total sailing time). Sure, Ken Roper beat him on time, but has years of racing experience including 10 Trans Pacs, and sailed the same boat for 25 years and 100,000 miles! Mr. Roper also placed ahead of the 54' Trimaran on corrected time. It is racing experience, and sailing experience that placed him where he finished. It is hardly fair to say Ronnie was beat by an old 80 year old man, even if it is true. You really have to consider who that "old" man is. 

In the end, Ronnie came through and gained tons of experience. He fulfilled the dream of sailing to Hawaii, and as he said in a post elsewhere..."As you can see, on this day i'm happy to be alive and I just love everything and everyone".

And to answer some thoughts mentioned here, in a pretty humble post (at SA) IMO..."First off, i've got to make it very much publicly known that I probably could not (and would not) have done this without Ed McCoy. There is not a better bperson that I could have been on the boat with in such a ****ty situation. He is one of my best friends, and we got along better during and now after the ordeal than even before. He is a delivery skipper/ skilled racer/ general sailboat bad ass. I've been sailing for 2.5 years. That's it. Whenever you're new to a sport, you have to have a mentor and a role model and for me, it's Ed".


----------



## smackdaddy

bob77903 said:


> I can only voice my opinion. I thought Ronnie went off a little ill prepared on his first voyage to put it mildly. But a wounded veteran always has my respect, and now having sailed the solo traspac, and brought the boat back the last 800 miles sans keel, he has impressed me.


I'd say that's the perfect summation of it all.

+1 bob.


----------



## smackdaddy

Okay, first I have to say that I'm impressed that this thread was 7 pages deep in only 1 week. Holy crap! That's a lot of rockin' on SN!

Now to the good stuff. The winner of this year's SHTP, Adrian Johnson, will, in addition to Ronnie, disappoint many LFS Proponents that have piped up in this thread. Seems the only SH experience he had prior to this was the qualifying sail - and a few jaunts around Seattle.

The best part? This was his very first ocean passage.

Man, this blows the LFS Regs all to hell! Some of you LFS guys may want to pay special attention to his second statement (the experience and talent part versus the ego). Heh-heh.

Great job Adrian!

Here's a link to his interview with SA: Sailing Anarchy Home Page


----------



## CapTim

ok, dumb question.. what does 'lfs' stand for?

Local Fish Store
Legumes For Stew
Lovin' Feels Swell
Lucky F&*#^@ Sucker
Looking For Saturday

..?


----------



## smackdaddy

Oh - sorry Cap, it's a little involved - but a great part of SN lore.

Okay...let's see...I started the BFS thread to talk about big, exciting sailing adventures. Cam started this thread as a smack to the BFS ideal (it's his BFS=SAR thesis). So, in return, I started the LFS thread just to keep things fun:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener.../47948-lfs-proponents-have-lovely-outing.html

I think SN's come a long way since those early days. What a hoot.


----------



## smackdaddy

In my book - this is the final word on this goofy thread started almost 2 years ago:

*Skip Allan, THE Skip Allan, just gave "huge kudos" over at SA to Ronnie and Ed for getting WW back to port.*

That, my friends, is class. That's objectivity. That's honesty. That's fairness. That's what will draw the next generation to sailing.

That's everything this thread has lacked from the beginning. Time to let this thing sink. It never had a keel anyway.

Oh yeah...and I was right...as usual.

Later.


----------



## KeelHaulin

smackdaddy said:


> In my book - this is the final word on this goofy thread started almost 2 years ago:
> 
> *Skip Allan, THE Skip Allan, just gave "huge kudos" over at SA to Ronnie and Ed for getting WW back to port.*


So what's your point? You are pointing out that the rivalry that exists only in your head (imagined) between Skip and Ronnie has been ended by Skip cow-towing to Ronnie? Do you really expect us to keep drinking this flavor of kool-aid?

We ALL are glad they made it back safely. Some of us just don't drink kool-aid. For those who did not read the other thread here on SailNet; I'll point out again here that CONDITIONS, were a bigger factor in their safe return after loss of the keel (without loss of hull integrity); and a more experienced sailor onboard to help manage the boat.



> That, my friends, is class. That's objectivity. That's honesty. That's fairness. That's what will draw the next generation to sailing.
> 
> That's everything this thread has lacked from the beginning. Time to let this thing sink. It never had a keel anyway.
> 
> Oh yeah...and I was right...as usual.


There you go again... Spinning the truth to try and put this thread into another "win" for you and your kool-aid drinking beliefs. If you will recall, IN THE BEGINNING of this thread; Ronnie was rescued because he set out from LA with a boat that was old, tired, and in need of multiple refits. When his rudder became jammed due to sheared wedges (IIRC), likely due to sailing on a windvane with incorrect sail trim and old, fatigued components; he called "game over" and popped the EPIRB (mommy button in this case) and insisted that he be rescued from a boat that was not in imminent danger of sinking (while in moderate seas). I'm not saying his situation was good; but he was not in imminent danger of losing his life.

So what was so dishonest, non-objective, and unfair about our assessment of Ronnie? Please let us know oh wise man of the windless lake... :laugher

Yeah; we can let it sink, now that I have set things straight (again).

Oh wait... NO, you were not right; you were all tanked up on kool-aid.uke

There... NOW the thread can die.


----------



## sailingdog

KeelHaulin said:


> There you go again... Spinning the truth to try and put this thread into another "win" for you and your kool-aid drinking beliefs. If you will recall, IN THE BEGINNING of this thread; Ronnie was rescued because he set out from LA with a boat that was old, tired, and in need of multiple refits. When his rudder became jammed due to sheared wedges (IIRC), likely due to sailing on a windvane with incorrect sail trim and old, fatigued components; he called "game over" and popped the EPIRB (mommy button in this case) and insisted that he be rescued from a boat that was not in imminent danger of sinking (while in moderate seas). I'm not saying his situation was good; but he was not in imminent danger of losing his life.
> 
> So what was so dishonest, non-objective, and unfair about our assessment of Ronnie? Please let us know oh wise man of the windless lake... :laugher
> 
> Yeah; we can let it sink, now that I have set things straight (again).
> 
> Oh wait... NO, you were not right; you were all tanked up on kool-aid.uke
> 
> There... NOW the thread can die.


Don't forget that Ronnie did have the money to get the boat inspected, but *CHOSE TO BUY HD VIDEO EQUIPMENT WITH THE MONEY INSTEAD*. He also timed his departure to make the local news broadcast, which says a lot about his vanity and ego....


----------



## smackdaddy

Heh-heh. You guys crack me up. I'm at the ranch this weekend so no time to chat. I'll try to help you out again in a day or two. 

Later dudes.


----------



## tommays

na-na na-na boo-boo

na-na na-na boo-boo

na-na na-na boo-boo

na-na na-na boo-boo

na-na na-na boo-boo

na-na na-na boo-boo

na-na na-na boo-boo


----------



## duchess of montrose

sailingdog said:


> Smack-
> 
> Just FYI, from Ronnie's blog.
> 
> To me, the fact that the quadrant turns on the post indicates that the rudder stock/post is indeed intact as is the rudder. Most likely, the key holding the quadrant affixed to the rudder stock broke/sheared.
> 
> In fact, Ronnie says if he turns the rudder _(by which I am guessing he's talking about the wheel cause he's obviously not turning the damn rudder)_, the rudder stays in the same position-dead ahead. So he didn't lose the rudder. He doesn't even know the difference between turning the wheel and turning the rudder... he thinks they're the same thing... *
> 
> If he had a set of big VISE GRIPS or the emergency tiller, he could probably have rigged a steering system in a under an hour with out much difficulty-but only if he had the knowledge and skills to do so.
> 
> *As for SimonV and his trip to Oz... IIRC, he did have the boat surveyed and inspected at least. He also spent a fair bit of time going over the boat and prepping it...and had a bit more sailing experience than Ronnie to start with...so the two cases aren't really the same thing.


i know this is an old post and i know this is nitpicking but in certain cases turning the wheel is the same as turning the rudder shaft for example in the very first barquetine rigged boats where the rudder was a horizontal circle with spokes where crew would hold onto a spoke and walk around the rudder but im gusessing his boat was built after the 1500s so it was probably not build this way but i had to put that random useless bit of sailing lore out there and revive an old thread  i dont understand how anyone could set across a f**cking ocean with a wheel steering boat with no emergency tiller yes u can jury rig one but still thats insane im bringing an emergency tiller with me when i go to bermuda and my boat has tiller steering its for that very unlikely chance the teak snaps from too much force but then my plans are probably the opposite of his if u can do something with one system why not bring 4


----------



## smackdaddy

duchess of montrose said:


> i know this is an old post and i know this is nitpicking but in certain cases turning the wheel is the same as turning the rudder shaft for example in the very first barquetine rigged boats where the rudder was a horizontal circle with spokes where crew would hold onto a spoke and walk around the rudder but im gusessing his boat was built after the 1500s so it was probably not build this way but i had to put that random useless bit of sailing lore out there and revive an old thread  i dont understand how anyone could set across a f**cking ocean with a wheel steering boat with no emergency tiller yes u can jury rig one but still thats insane im bringing an emergency tiller with me when i go to bermuda and my boat has tiller steering its for that very unlikely chance the teak snaps from too much force but then my plans are probably the opposite of his if u can do something with one system why not bring 4


Actually I love to see this thread pop back up every once in a while. Sure, the kid who was the target of this pious thread made mistakes on his first attempt. But he has since turned out to be quite a rock-star in the sailing world with a podium in a TransPac, and a few other races - and the incredible feat of safely sailing a keel-less boat 800 miles (much to the chagrin of his critics herein)...

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener...d/65688-ronnie-simpson-giving-another-go.html

Go the Ronnie!

And duch, even with 4 of everything, just remember, you still won't have everything covered. So be ready. (See Skip Allan's story.)


----------



## SlowButSteady

Let me just add a couple of things to this "Zombie thread":

First, I'll repeat my year-old post to another thread, as I can't think of a better way to put it:



SlowButSteady said:


> Come on guys. Give the kid a break. He did make some mistakes in his first big sailing misadventure. But, he seems to have learned from those mistakes. He completed a SHTP, and nursed a very badly damaged boat (as in, "WTF happened to the keel!!!") across a whole lot of open ocean on the return trip. Why don't you just let the guy be, and stop sounding like whining armchair wannabes. Unless any of you have managed to pull off what he did last summer, without having made some seriously embarrassing mistakes along the way.


Second, RS appears to be signed up for another Single Handed TransPac, this time in a Moore 24. If he completes the race again that will give him two of these to toss on his dresser:










How many of the "experts" on this forum can boast having that sort of experience?


----------



## AllThumbs

duchess of montrose said:


> i know this is an old post and i know this is nitpicking but in certain cases turning the wheel is the same as turning the rudder shaft for example in the very first barquetine rigged boats where the rudder was a horizontal circle with spokes where crew would hold onto a spoke and walk around the rudder but im gusessing his boat was built after the 1500s so it was probably not build this way but i had to put that random useless bit of sailing lore out there and revive an old thread  i dont understand how anyone could set across a f**cking ocean with a wheel steering boat with no emergency tiller yes u can jury rig one but still thats insane im bringing an emergency tiller with me when i go to bermuda and my boat has tiller steering its for that very unlikely chance the teak snaps from too much force but then my plans are probably the opposite of his if u can do something with one system why not bring 4


----------



## smackdaddy

Can someone let Cam know that his BFS Proponent just won first in class in the Single-Handed Transpac?

Open Blue Horizon - Home

Ronnie Simpson - a freakin' legend.



camaraderie said:


> Compare with Zac Sunderland....nuff said.


Heh-heh. I love it.


----------



## smurphny

There are many ways to make a boat point in the general direction you want it to go if out far from shore. It's just the knowledge of how, the prep in *counting* on losing the rudder, and planning a bit ahead that was lacking in this case.

In addition to an emergency tiller (which should be a GIVEN), I have a set of pintles and gudgeons, a 2" piece of pipe that is drilled to accept an emergency rudder and a 3/4" plywood rudder that could be rigged up, hanging off the transom, if the need arose. It would be a poor substitute for a real rudder but would work without having to call for help. If going out of sight of land, you need to plan on more than having an EPIRB which IMO should be used only when it is obvious your boat is sinking. EPIRB use really should be as the absolute last option.


----------



## Barquito

Let me get this right. Ronnie has lost a rudder on one crossing and a KEEL on another crossing? _Mental note to self: do not loan Ronnie Simpson any equipment._


----------



## smackdaddy

Barquito said:


> Let me get this right. Ronnie has lost a rudder on one crossing and a KEEL on another crossing? _Mental note to self: do not loan Ronnie Simpson any equipment._


Heh-heh. You got it!

But you have to admit...he's getting better.


----------



## CapnBilll

If your a proponent of BFS or not, if you sail enough,...Someday you WILL experience it.

Just expect it, and be ready to put knuckles on the deck WHEN, not if it happens.


----------



## chall03

CapnBilll said:


> If your a proponent of BFS or not, if you sail enough,...Someday you WILL experience it.
> 
> Just expect it, and be ready to put knuckles on the deck WHEN, not if it happens.


But if haven't sailed enough and it happens?? and keeps happening??


----------



## RTB

Barquito said:


> Let me get this right. Ronnie has lost a rudder on one crossing and a KEEL on another crossing? _Mental note to self: do not loan Ronnie Simpson any equipment._


I might add that he lost 1 kayak, and 1 new (now inflated) life raft before being rescued on his first ill-fated crossing to Hawaii. :laugher He has since learned how to tie knots.

Ronnie is a friend, and I'm proud of him. He really has learned not to hang around most forums trying to defend himself from the bashing he takes. Sailing Anarchy seems to have noticed his accomplishments, so go pretty easy on him.

Yeah, he's come a long way in a short number of years. Happily, he lived through learning to sail across the Pacific to Hawaii. I've seen him all banged up from crashing his gixxer doing wheelies too. He just likes to learn stuff the hard way. Some people just think that way, mostly disregarding the consequences of failure.


----------



## hellosailor

Oh, come one now. Losing the keel is a honorable tradition among top-ranked sailors. The head of Hunter lost the keel first time out on Thursday's Child, custom built for his racing, maybe 20 years ago? And wasn't it Bertie Roos who borrowed spent uranium for his keel from South Africa for a Volvo? Cup race, who lost that expensive bit of gear in the Southern Ocean, maybe 10 years ago?


----------



## peterchech

smurphny said:


> There are many ways to make a boat point in the general direction you want it to go if out far from shore. It's just the knowledge of how, the prep in *counting* on losing the rudder, and planning a bit ahead that was lacking in this case.
> 
> In addition to an emergency tiller (which should be a GIVEN), I have a set of pintles and gudgeons, a 2" piece of pipe that is drilled to accept an emergency rudder and a 3/4" plywood rudder that could be rigged up, hanging off the transom, if the need arose. It would be a poor substitute for a real rudder but would work without having to call for help. If going out of sight of land, you need to plan on more than having an EPIRB which IMO should be used only when it is obvious your boat is sinking. EPIRB use really should be as the absolute last option.


Do you really think a rudder made out of 3/4" ply will steer a 35' boat? You should try it out before using it my friend, from personal experience I can tell you that is pretty weak unless it is seriously reinforced with carbon or something...


----------



## RTB

I would like to add a bit of news. Looks like Ronnie is working on his karma -

_The boat is now approaching the island of Maui. I want to be cryptic about it's position or whereabouts until we have possession of her, but in an effort to save the boat from being run aground, lost at sea or salvaged, the Singlehanded Transpac fleet has come together to save Bela. A very generous fleet member paid for the charter of a fishing boat and two other generous fleet members purchased plane tickets for Ruben Gabriel and myself to fly to Maui. Ruben is a great friend of mine. We double handed my Moore 24 around the Farallones this year and both recently sailed Moore 24's in the Singlehanded Transpac, so i'm really honored to be able to share this experience with Ruben and work to save Dirk's boat. Dirk lives aboard the boat, so this is someone's home that we're talking about. Having lost a boat at sea, that I lived on, this is very personal for me to try to help reclaim Dirk's home_

Open Blue Horizon - Home


----------



## smurphny

peterchech said:


> Do you really think a rudder made out of 3/4" ply will steer a 35' boat? You should try it out before using it my friend, from personal experience I can tell you that is pretty weak unless it is seriously reinforced with carbon or something...


Actually, it's two pieces of 3/4" ply that sandwich around and bolt through the 2" pipe with a row of 5/16" carriage bolts and then to each other, making the structure 1-1/2" of plywood--more than adequate. The pipe then has a 3/4" "tiller" to do the turning. I'm sure it is strong enough. The only difficulty may be that, being that far aft, it would likely pull out of the water at times on a wave crest. It is not meant to enable sailing anywhere near close on the wind. It's not big enough for that, probably half the size of an adequate rudder. You're right, I should try it out, but I'm pretty confident it would work in a pinch. I did not put on traditional pintle/gudgeon but have 1-1/2" s.s. straps made up as the gudgeons which fit around the 2" pipe, like pipe straps. The whole assembly would take some time to install and could not be done in any kind of heavy sea. It is not meant to be a quick emergency set-up but more a jury rig to limp in somewhere close enough to get towed. That was the point of much of the discussion: NOT having to activate an EPIRB.


----------



## smackdaddy

smurphny said:


> That was the point of much of the discussion: NOT having to activate an EPIRB.


So you've got an extra rudder. There's still a million other things that can get you.

Personally, I never like to use your line above. Too easy to become complacent.


----------



## smurphny

Probably at least a million. All you can do is try to think ahead so that when something unexpected happens, at least you may be able to deal with it. There things you are not going to be able to fix but plenty of things that you can without throwing in the towel and expecting to be airlifted off a boat that's still sailable. I'm always impressed by the solo circumnav of Jean de Sud in his A30 when he gets rolled multiple times in the 40s, running with 20' breaking seas at night, mast is ripped off, no one answers the EPIRB signal, radios trashed, so he dives in the water to retrieve what rigging he can, sets a jib sideways on a piece of mast that he jury rigs and sails the freaking thing back. No rescue necessary.

What I hopefully have are the components to rig up a temporary "rudder." They really do not take up all that much room, broken down, and could come in handy. Keeping spare rigging parts, a few swageless fittings, some simple wire clamps, etc., stuff so you can help yourself, makes a lot of sense to me.


----------



## GMFL

RTB said:


> I would like to add a bit of news. Looks like Ronnie is working on his karma -
> 
> _The boat is now approaching the island of Maui. I want to be cryptic about it's position or whereabouts until we have possession of her, but in an effort to save the boat from being run aground, lost at sea or salvaged, the Singlehanded Transpac fleet has come together to save Bela. A very generous fleet member paid for the charter of a fishing boat and two other generous fleet members purchased plane tickets for Ruben Gabriel and myself to fly to Maui. Ruben is a great friend of mine. We double handed my Moore 24 around the Farallones this year and both recently sailed Moore 24's in the Singlehanded Transpac, so i'm really honored to be able to share this experience with Ruben and work to save Dirk's boat. Dirk lives aboard the boat, so this is someone's home that we're talking about. Having lost a boat at sea, that I lived on, this is very personal for me to try to help reclaim Dirk's home_
> 
> Open Blue Horizon - Home


I don't know and have never met Ronnie, but I admire him. First I'de heard of him was from two years ago at the 2010 SHTP. Followed his race, read his history and was following his journey when he lost his keel on the way home. Thought he handled himself well.

Since I've never accomplished anything near what he has in regards to sailing, I can;t judge at all. Kind of wonder about those that do judge him. Have they had the success, journey, experience he has, at his age? I'm going to predict a "no" here. Of course I could be wrong.

Keep it going Ronnie!


----------



## SloopJonB

RTB said:


> I might add that he lost 1 kayak, and 1 new (now inflated) life raft before being rescued on his first ill-fated crossing to Hawaii. :laugher He has since learned how to tie knots.
> 
> Ronnie is a friend, and I'm proud of him. He really has learned not to hang around most forums trying to defend himself from the bashing he takes. Sailing Anarchy seems to have noticed his accomplishments, so go pretty easy on him.
> 
> Yeah, he's come a long way in a short number of years. Happily, he lived through learning to sail across the Pacific to Hawaii. I've seen him all banged up from crashing his gixxer doing wheelies too. He just likes to learn stuff the hard way. Some people just think that way, mostly disregarding the consequences of failure.


Did he pay the bill for his rescue or is the rest of America covering his "learning the hard way"?

Or his he "disregarding the consequences of failure"?


----------



## smackdaddy

SloopJonB said:


> Did he pay the bill for his rescue or is the rest of America covering his "learning the hard way"?
> 
> Or his he "disregarding the consequences of failure"?


Sloop - you should read this thread:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener...d/65688-ronnie-simpson-giving-another-go.html

Ronnie made up for the cost of the first rescue by _sailing a keel-less boat 800 miles _so he wouldn't have to call in a second. The consequences of failure.


----------



## SloopJonB

smackdaddy said:


> Sloop - you should read this thread:
> 
> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener...d/65688-ronnie-simpson-giving-another-go.html
> 
> Ronnie made up for the cost of the first rescue by _sailing a keel-less boat 800 miles _so he wouldn't have to call in a second. The consequences of failure.


So he had to be rescued from his own bad judgement once and he was lucky to survive a second time and we should admire him?

Granted sailing with no keel took a lot of skill but also a lot of luck.

Most people outgrow this kind of behaviour by the time they reach the age of majority - it's called growing up.


----------



## smackdaddy

SloopJonB said:


> So he had to be rescued from his own bad judgement once and he was lucky to survive a second time and we should admire him?
> 
> Granted sailing with no keel took a lot of skill but also a lot of luck.
> 
> Most people outgrow this kind of behaviour by the time they reach the age of majority - it's called growing up.


Is anyone ever rescued from their own _good_ judgement?

Judging by his accomplishments - I'd say he's growing up just fine. I certainly respect the guy.


----------



## GMFL

SloopJonB said:


> Most people outgrow this kind of behaviour by the time they reach the age of majority - it's called growing up.


Not sure what the age of majority is but I'm thinking he enjoys challenging himself, trying something new and pushing out his comfort zone.

That, I admire. I really see nothing wrong with it, not sure why other do.


----------



## WDS123

I discovered long ago that experienced sailors generally have a sense of 'really bad stuff happens' and are conservative about everything

The mad dog risk takers are usually those who are blissfully unaware of the real dangers since they are fully Certified having passed ASA 101, 102, AND 103. 

I must say, I envy those childlike adventurers. 

Sometimes I wish I didn't know what it is like having to 'lower' a Asym which got tangled in the main boom dragging the main in the water forcing the boat to broach, recover, broach, recover, broach, recover - with rudder completely overpowered - no moon, in a light rain - prayIng that jackline will actually hold fast, going to low side, with stanchions almost buried, green water starting to lap at companionway, jambed against stanchions with full force of water, reaching underwater to untangle the Asym sheet from the boom preventer....


----------



## peterchech

Too many people can _only_ learn the hard way, unfortunately. Seems to be a part of the human condition. You would think that evolution would have fixed that by now haha


----------



## SloopJonB

GMFL said:


> Not sure what the age of majority is


Adulthood - being old enough to drink, vote etc.

Also, in most cases, knowing better than to head across the Pacific in complete ignorance of sailing and in a worn out boat.


----------



## SloopJonB

smackdaddy said:


> Is anyone ever rescued from their own _good_ judgement?


Lots of times - $hit happens, even to the best prepared. There's a big difference between accidents and the consequences of foolhardiness.

Skiers break their legs sometimes but he's the equivalent of skiing out of bounds and breaking his leg.


----------



## smackdaddy

SloopJonB said:


> *Lots of times - $hit happens, even to the best prepared.* There's a big difference between accidents and the consequences of foolhardiness.


That's my point. But the bigger, and most critical difference is where one draws the "foolhardiness" line. The line that allows forgiveness for an "accident" versus scorn for an "inevitability".

For some, simply sailing at all is foolhardy. What if the wind dies and you can't make it back to shore?

Like I said, read the thread I linked above. I think most of these points were well-debated therein.

The great thing, though, is that the CG doesn't assess perceived "stupidity". They simply save lives. I don't mind paying for that.


----------



## RTB

SloopJonB said:


> Did he pay the bill for his rescue or is the rest of America covering his "learning the hard way"?


He was picked up by a foreign registered freighter bound for Shanghai, which is where he was taken. No US dollars spent. You really might want to do a little research before you type something like that next time?

Back to the karma regarding the rescue of Bela Bartok, Ronnie types on his blog - "Dirk lives aboard the boat, so this is someone's home that we're talking about. Having lost a boat at sea, that I lived on, this is very personal for me to try to help reclaim Dirk's home."

I think he is now at least a +1 on karma with that being accomplished successfully http://singlehandedtranspac.com/updates/, not to mention his work with wounded warriors - Hope

Ralph


----------



## SloopJonB

RTB said:


> He was picked up by a foreign registered freighter bound for Shanghai, which is where he was taken. No US dollars spent. You really might want to do a little research before you type something like that next time?
> 
> Back to the karma regarding the rescue of Bela Bartok, Ronnie types on his blog - "Dirk lives aboard the boat, so this is someone's home that we're talking about. Having lost a boat at sea, that I lived on, this is very personal for me to try to help reclaim Dirk's home."
> 
> I think he is now at least a +1 on karma with that being accomplished successfully Updates | Singlehanded Transpac | 34 years of racing history!, not to mention his work with wounded warriors - Hope
> 
> Ralph


I stand corrected, he's an adventurous hero.


----------



## RTB

SloopJonB said:


> I stand corrected, he's an adventurous hero.


Your words, not mine. Derk Wolmuth, who owned the boat that Ronnie and friends saved, might agree with the "adventurous hero" title.

The Coast Guard is on the job, and burning gas everyday. Whether they are rescuing a vessel in distress, or giving tickets out for some reason. The taxpayers are already paying, so why, when they are needed to actually save lives, and perform the duties of that job, why is that a problem? I just don't understand such posts as the one you made.


----------



## SloopJonB

RTB said:


> The Coast Guard is on the job, and burning gas everyday. Whether they are rescuing a vessel in distress, or giving tickets out for some reason. The taxpayers are already paying, so why, when they are needed to actually save lives, and perform the duties of that job, why is that a problem? I just don't understand such posts as the one you made.


Personal responsibility vs. irresponsible foolhardiness.

I also think skiers who go out of bounds and have to be rescued should have to pay the full cost of their rescue.


----------



## smurphny

SloopJonB said:


> Personal responsibility vs. irresponsible foolhardiness.
> 
> I also think skiers who go out of bounds and have to be rescued should have to pay the full cost of their rescue.


I was a professional ski patrolman for 12 years for NY State. You have no idea how many a-h skiiers I had to go out after AT NIGHT who would very likely have frozen to death because they were stupid enough to jump a rope late in the afternoon after a trail was closed and swept. People have jumped on ski lifts, going under ropes after they closed and have been found stiff in the morning. Irresponsibility abounds. When linked to pure ignorance of consequences, it can be a problem.


----------



## GMFL

smurphny said:


> People have jumped on ski lifts, going under ropes after they closed and have been found stiff in the morning.


I'm pretty sure Darwin has a saying for this.

Looks like Ronnie is surviving pretty well though. He just helped to save a guys home. I think that's awesome!


----------



## SloopJonB

smurphny said:


> I was a professional ski patrolman for 12 years for NY State. You have no idea how many a-h skiiers I had to go out after AT NIGHT who would very likely have frozen to death because they were stupid enough to jump a rope late in the afternoon after a trail was closed and swept. People have jumped on ski lifts, going under ropes after they closed and have been found stiff in the morning. Irresponsibility abounds. When linked to pure ignorance of consequences, it can be a problem.


Around here it takes teams, helicopters and everything - you can get fatally lost within sight of Vancouver. At Whistler it gets even more so - hundreds of miles of vertical wilderness in most directions.

They're virtually 100% young males as well.


----------



## smurphny

SloopJonB said:


> Around here it takes teams, helicopters and everything - you can get fatally lost within sight of Vancouver. At Whistler it gets even more so - hundreds of miles of vertical wilderness in most directions.
> 
> They're virtually 100% young males as well.


With us it was usually a call, initiated by a panicked relative, after sitting at the bar and having a couple of beers. Then it was back up on a cat with flashlights looking for tracks off into the woods. We had a couple of lifts at Gore that dead-ended so anyone in there after the lift operators were gone were screwed. (Once caught NYC judge--not all kids) Sometimes we'd tuck it back down from the summit in the dark. Now that was great fun!


----------



## smackdaddy

smurphny said:


> With us it was usually a call, initiated by a panicked relative, after sitting at the bar and having a couple of beers. Then it was back up on a cat with flashlights looking for tracks off into the woods. We had a couple of lifts at Gore that dead-ended so anyone in there after the lift operators were gone were screwed. (Once caught NYC judge--not all kids) Sometimes we'd tuck it back down from the summit in the dark. Now that was great fun!


I was just an instructor. But I always wanted to be patrol. You guys ruled.


----------



## smurphny

It's almost a given at every mountain that there's some sort of innate, visceral competition between patrols and ski schools. All healthy fun! Hey, some of my best friends were ski-schoolers.:laugher


----------



## JonEisberg

smurphny said:


> It's almost a given at every mountain that there's some sort of innate, visceral competition between patrols and ski schools. All healthy fun! Hey, some of my best friends were ski-schoolers.:laugher


My oldest nephew is on the Patrol out at Mammoth Mountain...

They refer to the instructors as _"POODLES"_... (grin)


----------



## jobberone

Well, that was illuminating.


----------



## smurphny

JonEisberg said:


> My oldest nephew is on the Patrol out at Mammoth Mountain...
> 
> They refer to the instructors as _"POODLES"_... (grin)


Ahhhh powder (and avalanche) country. Not much of that around here in the Adirondacks. Last winter there was virtually 0 natural snow, the previous winter, we were buried. It's always a crap shoot in the NE.


----------



## CapnBilll

Well, I'm the age of majority, and I should know better, but I still don't.

I know alchohol will kill me, but I still drink it. 

I know I will break a leg skiing, but I still challenge the black diamonds. 

I know sailing will kill me, but I still want to circumnavigate. 

And if none of THAT works, I still have the old standbyes, of high cholestral, high blood pressure, or plain old heart attack. 

Fact is; none of us are going to make it out of this alive. You can't live forever, and you can't take it with you. 

If I have to live my "mature years", wrapped up in a blanket, sitting on a rocker on my front porch, grazing on cardboard flavored "health food", I'd rather die.

If my ship smashes into an uncharted rock while rounding Cape Horn during a force 10, (in a cheap production Hunter), you can put on my tombstone, "he died living his dream".

At least I'll have died living, instead of lived dying.


----------



## TQA

BFS sticker earned again by Ronie with a class win in this years Singlehanded Transpac, sailing a Moore 24.

Keel has stayed on so far.


----------



## SloopJonB

CapnBilll said:


> Well, I'm the age of majority


Then you should have learned the difference between calculated risks and foolhardiness.

I skied the black diamonds from the second time I went skiing but I also stayed in bounds. I stayed near land until I learned how to sail - I didn't just buy an old boat and head across the Pacific.

Exercising adult judgement and personal responsibility doesn't require you to end up sitting in a rocker.

There's a reason the word begins with "fool".


----------



## jobberone

When I was young I was immortal. A child-man of strength and vigor ready to take on any challenge and defeat it. In my middle years I fought to retain that strength. I began to understand the words wisdom, discretion, and responsibility. Now I see my mortality and he is now my friend having accepted his ways. My strength is now in my children and grandchildren given wings by the love of family, friends and God above.

It would be a shame to have foolishly thrown that future away. Carpe diem is a wonderful way to live. Just do it reasonably. If it is the fate of the sea to make that final embrace let it be with regrets from a prepared mind.


----------



## smackdaddy

The world's most famous BFS Proponent just completed the Sydney-Hobart.

http://sailinganarchy.com/2014/01/01/the-hangover/

What do you need to prove the dock-hugging lamers wrong? Stones and grit.

RonnieS has both of those in spades. Congrats Ronnie.


----------



## chall03

smackdaddy said:


> The world's most famous BFS Proponent just completed the Sydney-Hobart.
> 
> the hangover | Sailing Anarchy
> 
> What do you need to prove the dock-hugging lamers wrong? Stones and grit.
> 
> RonnieS has both of those in spades. Congrats Ronnie.


I'm not sure that crewing on a Sydney to Hobart is _necessarily_ all that, although it is true though that this year was no fun run.

If he does the Vendee then I will maybe be a little bit impressed.

Either way he doesn't have to prove anything to anyone, anymore. 
He is doing plenty of sailing, the kind of sailing in fact he may of been better off starting with, safe within the special regs of ISAF 

He is having fun and giving it all a go. Good on him.


----------



## hellosailor

So, 5-1/4 years after his first call for rescue...he still hasn't learned to check the voltmeter and make sure the engine is charging once in a while? Enters a major event like the Sidney Hobart without checking the electrics are working beforehand?

it is so nice to know some things never change. I supposed Captain Kirk never poked his head around the antimatter reactors either, but small boat skippers usually don't have engineers to rely on, either.


----------



## chall03

hellosailor said:


> So, 5-1/4 years after his first call for rescue...he still hasn't learned to check the voltmeter and make sure the engine is charging once in a while? Enters a major event like the Sidney Hobart without checking the electrics are working beforehand?
> 
> it is so nice to know some things never change. I supposed Captain Kirk never poked his head around the antimatter reactors either, but small boat skippers usually don't have engineers to rely on, either.


FWIW Ronnie was not the skipper. 
He actually doesn't appear on the official crew list, my guess is he was a late addition, or even just there in a 'reporter onboard' capacity.


----------



## hellosailor

That's a relief. 2008...doesn't time fly when you're having fun?


----------



## SloopJonB

hellosailor said:


> So, 5-1/4 years after his first call for rescue...he still hasn't learned to check the voltmeter and make sure the engine is charging once in a while? Enters a major event like the Sidney Hobart without checking the electrics are working beforehand?
> 
> it is so nice to know some things never change. I supposed Captain Kirk never poked his head around the antimatter reactors either, but small boat skippers usually don't have engineers to rely on, either.


Makes you wonder how sailors got by in the days before electricity.


----------



## hellosailor

No wonder, but these days...it is required for nav lights and for the race communications checkins.

In "those" days, electricity wasn't required but then again, that's why whaling captain's houses had a "widows walk" around the top. The expectation of coming home was much lower. The expectation of consuming SAR resources was also zero.

And heads never clogged.


----------



## smackdaddy

hellosailor said:


> The expectation of consuming SAR resources was also zero.


Unless you're in a cruising rally. Heh.


----------



## chall03

Good on you Ronnie.

From Fallujah to Fiji | Cruising World


----------



## smackdaddy

chall03 said:


> Good on you Ronnie.
> 
> From Fallujah to Fiji | Cruising World


Aw man, that's freakin' awesome! Thanks for posting that Chall.

Oh hell yeah!!


----------



## krisscross

And.... horror of horrors... the voyage done on a Cal 2-27 without engine!


----------

