# Overboard: Laura Gainey's Death and the Picton Castle



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

The _Picton Castle_ is a former trawler converted to a three-masted sail training "adventure" ship. It is registered in the Cook Islands, but its home port is in Nova Scotia.

This documentary:

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/overboard/video.html

made me very angry. I hope the "captain" loses his ship over his heinous disregard for crew safety.

The parts where the skipper from better-run sail training ships remarks that he "would be fired for this' when reviewing video of deck operations on the Picton Castle is quite illuminating.

I believe the crewperson who was unnecessarily (in my opinion) drowned in this incident was the same young woman who sold me an oil lantern when my son and I toured the ship last year.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Val,
Christ, what a sad story. The thought I had as the story went on was of the specious "Crew Wanted" postings on this forum, CaptainKris and that TJK fellow in particular. The situation aboard the Picton Castle was similar to Kris's post in that you have a ship being overhauled by inexperienced crew on a vessel captained by someone you can imagine having appalling judgment. God, the arrogance of the skipper on the Picton Castle was just overhwelming in that video tape. You can smell in coming through the computer monitor. I think this shows that crewing on just any boat makes for a lottery kind of situation. If you win, then everything's wonderful. If not, you might very well die. I have two daughters, and seeing something like this makes me ache.
Sailhog


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Damn shame that they wouldn't take even the most basic precautions. I think the captain deserves to get his head handed to him on a stick. It is a pretty sad thing to see that my little 28' sailboat has better safety gear than the Picton Castle did on that cruise. If the Picton Castle is supposed to be a sail training ship, shouldn't she be properly equipped and teach the sailor-trainees on her how to use safety gear properly???


----------



## danjarch (Jun 18, 2007)

That boat had a bad name, even when I was crewing.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Sickening!!!

I made my kids watch it to show them what sort of vessel NEVER to sign aboard. 

Valiente, thank you for calling this to our attention. I only wish you had titled this thread "BOYCOTT Picton Castle" so that unsuspecting future recruits would come across it in their web searches and pause to consider before joining a voyage. Clearly there are better choices out there, such as the British-flagged vessel with the Irish captain that also appeared in the video.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Wow. What an amazing and sickening story. It would be interesting to ask a few of the people who sailed on her for that reality show what the safety precautions were at that time. I'll bet they hadn't changed even after just loosing a crew member overboard.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Thanks for posting this, Val. I missed it when it aired.

Sad story for sure... arrogance, bad practice and the chase of the almighty buck at the root of it all.

Really goes to show how risky signing on to an unknown situation can be. I've known people who walked into similar disasters-in-the-making, but luckily they were savvy enough to walk away before it was too late.

Our absent friend "Kacper" had a similar experience not too long ago... and was able to see the wrongs and walk away.


----------



## Hawkwind (Apr 25, 2006)

No life jackets, no safety harness. That one girl was even told she couldn't use a safety harness, after she had requested one. In my experience, many people resist putting on life jackets because they don't want to look wimpy. That's why the captain has to make it an order, especially with younger adults. 

The cover up was especially disgusting. How can people lie while being presented evidence that exposes the lie?


----------



## TrueBlue (Oct 11, 2004)

Does anyone know why the Piton Castle's hull was painted black during the Newport RI Tall Ships Event this past summer?

Here's a photo I took . . .


----------



## TrueBlue (Oct 11, 2004)

Stern view . . .


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

sailhog said:


> I have two daughters, and seeing something like this makes me ache.Sailhog


Yeah, Skip seems to be cooing the right tune, until you watch his eyes.

The thing is that Bob Gainey, the father, is a reasonably well-known ex-hockey player who became the general manager of the Montreal Canadians, and as such, is on a fairly rarefied level of celebrity in this country. I suspect the fact that our government is finally going to conduct an inquiry of its own (circumventing the "foreign" registry of the ship) is due to the fact that the father has a lot of friends in business, sports and politics.

If it wasn't the daughter of a well-connected guy who died, this may have been simply a marine footnote, and the Picton Castle (currently starring in a "reality" show) might sail on, bad habits intact.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

danjarch said:


> That boat had a bad name, even when I was crewing.


The thing is that it's a solid boat, and not even particularly old compared to some. It could be *made* safe (or safer) with some basic equipment changes and certainly better (or any) safety precautions.

I like the idea that sail training exists. I don't accept that it has to been as dangerous as what Eric Newby and Irving Johnson documented at the end of the age of commercial sail in the '20s and '30s.


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

A real tragedy and I feel for the Gainey family.

As someone who works in the video industry, I will say the truth lies somewhere that we won't know. Producers, reporters, editors and others have the goal of convincing the viewer that something sinister has happened. They succeeded. Whether the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth has been told will never be revealed.
Dateline, 20/20, 60 minutes, et al have been caught lieing through their teeth on similar stories.
It may well be that what you see here is what happened but you cannot rely on ONLY what you've seen on this program to discern the actual truth. 
Sorry, I don't want to go into a frame by frame analisys but repeatedly, I kept thinking "what are the leaving out" and all along I thought of plausable answers.
There probably was some blame to go to the captain but I have a suspicion that there was much left out on the other side of the coin.
Ask Dan Rather, not that you'd get an honest answer.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

TrueBlue said:


> Does anyone know why the Piton Castle's hull was painted black during the Newport RI Tall Ships Event this past summer?
> 
> Here's a photo I took . . .


Yes, it's because it's been made more "piratical" for this "Survivor"-type show:

http://piratemasterwiki.cbs.com/page/Pirate+Master:+The+Ship?t=anon

Shame the "contestants" can't view the footage I linked for a taste of old-fashioned, walk the plank, 18th-century working conditions.

So I can only hope that the money Moreland's made for renting out his ship as a stage set will go to a memorial fund after his ass is sued off in court.


----------



## sailhog (Dec 11, 2006)

Valiente said:


> Yes, it's because it's been made more "piratical" for this "Survivor"-type show:


If this is the case, which it would reasonably seem to be, it's disgusting.

TB,
Were people in Newport talking about this girl's death last summer at the time of the sail-in?


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

xort said:


> There probably was some blame to go to the captain but I have a suspicion that there was much left out on the other side of the coin.
> Ask Dan Rather, not that you'd get an honest answer.


Possibly.

I used to work as a video editor, so I know about what's possible. On the other hand, it's hard to argue with scenes from the unrelated program shot seven years ago showing crew with no PFDs and no harnesses and decks awash, trying to furl sail in what looks like a half-gale.

It's pretty simple to me: slack or absence safety practices seemed to be at work, due to disregard or perhaps to cheapness, and there was a "culture" at work that seemed, from the owner down, to play fast and loose with safety without a good reason to do so.


----------



## TrueBlue (Oct 11, 2004)

> TB,
> Were people in Newport talking about this girl's death last summer at the time of the sail-in?


Come to think of it SH, you're right - long day for me and the memory is running slow. After Val remarked about the Reality show - it all came back to me.


----------



## Diva27 (Nov 2, 2007)

*deja vu all over again*



Valiente said:


> Yes, it's because it's been made more "piratical" for this "Survivor"-type show:
> 
> http://piratemasterwiki.cbs.com/page/Pirate+Master:+The+Ship?t=anon
> 
> ...


This whole thing is giving me an extremely bad flashback. In the 1980s I was an editor at Canadian Yachting, and there was a tall ships rendezvous happening in Halifax. The participating ships were sailing there from Bermuda. We had a freelancer who loved the whole romance of these vessels and wanted to join in. We tried to get him a spot on a big Norwegian training ship, but he was afraid he'd miss the whole show and booked himself on a smaller vessel, the Marques. The confirmation for the Norwegian booking then came through, but by then he'd made his own arrangements and didn't want to change them. Long story short, the Marques got caught in a violent squall, capsized and sank and took about two dozen people to the bottom, including the writer. I was on the way home from a regatta when I heard the news on my car radio, and I never want to hear something like that again.
That ship was privately owned by a Brit, and had undergone modifications for film work (it portrayed the Beagle in a series about Darwin). Sound familiar? The effects on stability were predictable, but the British enquiry, despite all its damning evidence, decided the weather was to blame. I wrote a 2-part 10,000 word story about the loss of that ship, and the circumstances killed whatever romantic notions I had about sail training and tall ships. These vessels can be beautiful, and wonderful experiences for trainees, but the Gainey loss continues to underline a profound problem in ships and owners that operate according to their own rules, in a foggy world of regulation and inspection. Both my kids work in the summer as historical interpreters at Discovery Harbour in Penetanguine, Ontario, a provincial museum that features replica 19th century schooners. They no longer leave the dock, mainly because they can't get the liability insurance. A bloody shame, but every disaster like the Marques, Pride of Baltimore, and Picton Castle just tarnishes the whole world of "tall ships."


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Just a further comment on Gainey herself. She was no trainee, but I question whether getting your sea legs on a vessel like Picton Castle bore much relation to the sort of training most of us here would consider comprehensive or even adequate.

The first newspaper reports (having little else to write about during what would be a fruitless search) focused on how Laura Gainey getting involved in sail training had straightened her out and had given her focus and purpose. She wasn't super-experienced, but she had more than one extended voyage on the Picton Castle, including, if I recall, at least one circumnavigation.

This is why I say that if she didn't wear a harness or a PFD in such conditions, it's because 
a) she was never taught to do so, 
b) she was never censured for NOT doing so, or 
c) the use of such safety devices was actively discouraged by the officers on board...of which there didn't appear to be sufficient numbers when compared to the trainees.

Anyone can get washed off a ship's deck, but it takes a lot of avoidable errors in judgement to be washed _away_ from it with no PFD or signalling device, at least these days. Having had only one close call solo sailing incident in which I had to use extreme force to keep myself aboard, I take those simple precautions even when I could conceivably swim to shore. It's cheaper than a funeral.


----------



## SEMIJim (Jun 9, 2007)

Hawkwind said:


> In my experience, many people resist putting on life jackets because they don't want to look wimpy. That's why the captain has to make it an order, especially with younger adults.


My wife and I don ours before the boat leaves the slip. Ours are in our ditty bags, so that happens whether it's our boat or another. Of our regular husband-and-wife crew: The wife (now) does the same. The husband seems inclined to follow her example. He certainly did on our last race. (20-25 kt winds, gusting 25-30 kts.)

I think leading by example is prehaps one of the best things you can do.

Jim


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Let's perhaps differentiate here. Conventional Type 1 lifejackets are difficult at best to work in and using them for such also wears them out quickly, perhaps making them less suitable when actually needed. To the degree that suitable alternatives are made available they will be worn. In my experience it is much easier to get a man to wear a flotation work vest than a full lifejacket. The flat 'boogie board" foam jackets (if you can call them that) will interfere with such basic things as operation of lifeboat gravity davitts, leading to the odd scene of seamen removing lifejackets to launch a lifeboat and then re-don them once on board! The yachtsman has a much wider variety of jackets available, at a not insignificant price.

Regardless of the above I believe that lifejackets are a totally inadequate substitute for persons who should be tethered. In conditions where it is possible to go overboard a tether will prevent the occurence, a lifejacket will merely prolong the life of a usually unrecoverable person. If you're on a vessel the size of the Picton Castle and taking boarding seas it is highly unlikely that your body will be recovered, much less you alive. Jacklines and tethers are the way to go.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

*Tall Ships More Dangerous Than Yachts?*

Could it be that tall ships are actually more dangerous than yachts on the high seas?

I certainly can't cite any statistics to support this notion one way or another, but it surely seems that tall ships have more than their fair share of disasters....for all the reasons cited above.

Consider, for example, the book *Tall Ships Down*
by Daniel S. Parrott, Captain of the Pride of Baltimore II

Subtitled, "The Last Voyages of the Pamir, Albatross, Marques, Pride of Baltimore, and Maria Asumpta" Parrott describes the demise of five sail-training ships in the past 50 years.

Aside from these, off the top of my head I can think of other tall ships which have either been lost or have had a lethal event aboard, including Picton Castle (Laura Gainey), Yankee (lost on Raratonga), and Alexandria (lost off Cape Hatteras).

While a lot more yachts have been lost during the same time period, there are a lot more of them than there are tall ships. So, statistically, it may be safer to travel on a small yacht. After all, how many yachts have been lost over the years on the ARC TransAtlantic crossing or the annual Caribbean 1500 or even the grueling round-the-world races? Some, yes. And there have been others such as those chronicled on this and other Boards. Badly prepared, badly crewed, unlucky (hit or were hit by something, etc.). Dozens. But there are thousands of yachts out there, while only a relative handfull of tall ships.

Something to ponder...

Bill


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

I agree 100% with sailaway21 re: the mandatory use of harnesses and the problems with conventional lifejackets.

However, the new inflatable jackets are comfortable to wear and many models include an integral harness. One jacket. Lifejacket and harness. They're comfortable and effective. On a recent offshore voyage, my crew sometimes wore them even when below and off watch. See http://gallery.wdsg.com/Born-Free-Maine-Trip-2007/DSC_0265c?full=1

Further, from what we know the Picton Castle was in the warm water of the Gulf Stream, and the crew reportedly threw floation devices and "radar reflectors" into the water (see account below). In these conditions it's perfectly conceivable that she could have survived for several days had she been wearing a lifejacket.

From Wikipedia (yeah, I know...):

Quote On the night of Friday, December 8, 2006, as the ship was roughly 760 km south-east of Cape Cod, the ship encountered bad weather; a wave swamped the ship, sweeping one of the crew overboard. The person swept overboard was later identified as lead seaman Laura Gainey, daughter of Bob Gainey. She was not wearing a life jacket or a survival suit, but due to the warm water temperatures (22•C) and her excellent physical condition, she was expected to survive for up to 36 hours. She was able to call out while being swept overboard, and crew on the ship threw flotation devices and radar reflectors into the water to aid her and mark her position; subsequent searching was concentrated on this 'debris field'. However, the search was called off after 3 days when no trace of her had been found. The search was carried out by the Picton Castle, United States Coast Guard and Canadian Coast Guard aircraft, and merchant vessels. Unquote

Bill


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

While in no way disagreeing with Bill's point I do wish to further emphasize that it has been my unfortunate observation that people who go overboard in the types of seas that will sweep an untethered man away are rarely recovered. The recent posting here of the story of panic off Bermuda where the crew jumped overboard to be rescued by a car-carrier is illustrative-three were lost after being in plain sight of a hove-to ship of some size.

I am fully in favor of the type gear that Bill recommends with a preference for the auto-inflation models. The gear is pricey and is not maintenance free, but more than justifiable for the sailor operating offshore. In fact, why wouldn't you have one? I had a seaman go over the side, in the port of Santos, while tied up alongside. He drowned before we could rescue him-thumped his head on the way over and was known to have minimal swimming capability. A work vest, or the gear Bill cites, would likely have saved him.

While it is rare to recover a man overboard in any significant weather and sea, it does happen-though not always according to plan. I recently posted the strange story linked below in another thread. If you've ever wondered about matters of destiny or just plain old freak luck it may be of interest.

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38468&page=2&highlight=overboard


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Bill,
Your post No. 22 is of some interest. I would probably be inclined to think that it is the very nature of tall ships to be more hazardous than the cockpitted yacht. I'd further suspect that the loss of men would not be considered unusual by 19th century standards, although we can make the case that there are far fewer trained seamen today. Regardless of era, lack of proper procedures will make a possibly inherently risky occupation much more so. But even jacklines and harnesses can only go so far. It's a Hobbesian choice whether one would prefer drowning over the side to being pummeled to death against mast or yard swinging from a safety belt. I'd expect that were yachts to necessitate the going aloft required on square-rigged ships we'd see many more fatalities.

An interesting topic.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Yep. I agree.

But, then, there's also the question of seamanship. That little nagging thing which, like common sense, seems increasingly to be a rather scarce commodity.

Take the pioneer of sail training: Irving Johnson. Beginning in 1933 he'd take a crew of initiates aboard his schooner/brigantine (he had two ships in succession, both named Yankee). Leaving from Gloucester, he'd transit the Panama Canal, sail to the South Pacific, Southeast Asia, across the Indian Ocean to round Cape of Good Hope, then back to Gloucester in 18 months time, usually arriving at exactly the programmed time. Without incident. He did this seven times before World War II, his exploits chronicled in National Geographic and other media.

A superb seaman, by all accounts. As was his wife, Exy Johnson. All this before loran or satnav or GPS or chartplotters or many of the gadgets and appurtenances which long-distance sailors these days consider mandatory.

So what happened to (the second) Yankee? Her new owners didn't take long to pile her up on a reef in the South Pacific.

Harnesses? Yes. Tethers and jacklines? Yes. Comfortable auto-inflating lifejackets/harness combinations? Yes. EPIRBs? Yes. SSBs? Yes. All the other MOB stuff? Yes.

But....most important of all....*seamanship and leadership*. It appears than this was lacking on the Picton Castle's voyage from Hallifax (under another captain who wasn't heard from in the video), and it seems also to have been missing in the tragic case of the Albatross whose five crew jumped overboard in advancing darkness and 40' seas.

Bill


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Coincidentally, or perhaps providentially, CharlieCobra has just posted some rare filming on board such ships. Be sure to watch both, they're equally good. And Mr. Villiers does address the topic of safety within them as well.
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38941


----------



## danjarch (Jun 18, 2007)

A lot of good points have been made, but you fellas are missing a larger part of the picture. Tall ship crews are after that sense of danger and realism. How many cautious and normal young adults, do know that would work for little pay. Living in a walk-in closet sized cabin with four other people. Going with out showers, phones, Internet, video games, and all the other luxuries that modern society has come to know. I watched one sailor cross from the fore to the main via the saltwater stay, another used to like coming down from the cross trees via the boom lift. Then there was the time a sailor from another boat boarded us by crawling out the main boom and dropping into our jib net. And then there was... 

I could go on and on. The appeal of sheeting in a sail by grabbing hold of a line with four other people and pulling together in a big pile, is not something rational people find alluring. A captain I worked for used to say "You need two crews, one for the passengers, and one to sail the boat." If you get to picky with these people they leave and find other adventures. Getting better crews is doubly hard. The more professional the crew members are, the more they expect to get paid. These boats aren't swimming in money. The Picton Castle is no exception. In fact its in the lowest paying class. The funner the voyaging, the lower the pay. 

The best captain I sailed under is currently a dock master in Key West. For some very simple reasons: Health insurance, 401k plan, gets to go home every day. This is a man who has a 300 ton near coastal masters. I had the opportunity to get my 100 ton masters and captain a schooner in Key West but turned it down. Being a deck hand had been fun but I couldn't see my self doing this for much longer. It's not a career like tug boats or the shipping industry. The best captains go on to the aforementioned industries. Where they can make real money. Even the owners of these boats go to catamaran snorkel boats or power driven party boats if they want to make any money. I worked for one of the owners of the picton castle. I don't know if he still owns a part, but he would never have encouraged lax safety to increase revenue. He was pretty strict about safety on his other boats. 

Ironically, I also turned down a chance to work on the Picton Castle. Like I said before, it had a bad name. I choose to go out to Hawaii and work on the Tole Mour instead.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

As someone who sails singlehanded a lot... I can't emphasize how important it is to try and stay on the boat if at all possible. Tethers are worth more than PFDs IMHO, and a good PFD with integrated harness is really the best of both worlds, since it means you can put on one piece of gear and get clipped in, without having to adjust two separate pieces of gear. I use a Spinlock DeckWare Pro harness with integrated PFD.

Having a non-auto-inflating PFD is a waste of money IMHO. One of the more common causes of MOBs is a boom-related incident, where the MOB was hit, usually in the head, by the boom. If they are unconscious or even just stunned... a manual-inflation PFD may do them no good whatsover, as they may drown before they get a chance to inflate it.

Finally, as a reality check for friends a couple of years ago, a friend of mine prepared a couple of coconuts, and had us do MOB drills using them. A coconut is about the size and shape of a human head... and floats about as high as a person would without a PFD... and even in fairly calm conditions, you'd be amazed at how difficult it is to keep track of a coconut as a MOB target. He also had a "mannequin" MOB target that was weighted and in an autoinflating PFD with a water-activated strobe... That was still fairly difficult to recover, even at night....

The most important thing is to try and *STAY ON THE BOAT*. If they're not encouraging and promoting the proper use of safety gear to this end... they're doing something very wrong.


----------



## Jim H (Feb 18, 2006)

I agree with the original post-- the video makes me feel angry. 

Xort is correct to point out that it was edited to do so, especially near the end where the owner notes that harnesses/pfds are mandatory in the following conditions, but when shown a video of rough conditions he seems to backtrack on what is mandatory when. It's hard to say how this was filmed and edited to show such a severe reversal.

At the bottom of it, though, is a lack of harnesses and pfds as the crew does romantic-looking things like use the foot lines on the yards as they shake out sails or bring them in. The crappy thing seems to be that a crew decked out in brightly colored Baltic PFDs and harnesses (with internal strobes, etc.) and Aquafix personal EPIRBS would ruin the "traditional look" of what they are doing (and maybe "cost too much"). As noted, it would take an adult to push the necessity of the safety additions, since lives aren't quite so disposable in training crew situations as the "old days." 

Danjarch likely points out this point the best-- inexperienced crews could be led into believing a false premise that "take care of the boat, and she takes care of you, just like the old days" is all that matters. Maybe the pros in the old days could have decent careers doing the job with no PFDs or harnesses, but with sail trainees looking for an adventure the situation is different. 

Thanks for the link to the video-- it brings into solid focus what needs to be balanced between having an adventure and layering on sufficient safety procedures. There isn't a no-risk set of procedures, but when something falls so far below the current standards it is disturbing.

Jim H


----------



## RealityCheck (Jun 2, 2007)

xort said:


> A real tragedy and I feel for the Gainey family.
> 
> As someone who works in the video industry, I will say the truth lies somewhere that we won't know. Producers, reporters, editors and others have the goal of convincing the viewer that something sinister has happened. They succeeded. Whether the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth has been told will never be revealed.
> Dateline, 20/20, 60 minutes, et al have been caught lieing through their teeth on similar stories.
> ...


As I viewed the clip... it is obvious a tragedy had occurred but about 1/4 way in it was obvious an agenda from the producers may be taking place and taking place for other than an attempt to improve safety. Anyone can sell a point of view with selective editing and that feeling grew as the clip proceeded. None of us will ever know the truth... but it does show what MAY have occurred but probably not what DID occur. The clip was interesting and I'm sure drew much attention... some of it was probably good if it causes more people to use safety gear early.

While if do feel for the loss of this young woman, it appears to have been a preventable tragity... but from a long exposure to 20/20 type misdirections by edit and ambush... I can never take these Documentary Reports at face value. Facts just generally are not very interesting... they have to be pumped up to sell and get ratings. A little sea salt is often needed and you still never know where truth and fact meet and hype takes over.... and that is what the media industry is about. We have too many examples to take anything at face value.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Unfortunately, TV can both be used to expose or distort the truth. It is hard to say what the agenda of the producers of that segment were definitively. However, there is enough in that segment to seriously question what kind of safety practices were allowed and used on the Picton Castle at the time of Laura Gainey's death. Regardless of any bias, there are still some serious questions, especially, if as the video intimates, there was an attempt at covering up the true circumstances of Laura's death.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> If you're on a vessel the size of the Picton Castle and taking boarding seas it is highly unlikely that your body will be recovered, much less you alive. Jacklines and tethers are the way to go.


I would tend to agree with you in that tethers and harnesses (particularly of the thigh loop or "mountaineering" type) are both more practical and more logical when working such a vessel, particularly when transiting the main deck or when aloft.

However, I think there's a case for both in that the foam PFD vest *plus* the tether not only provides extra "float" time should you still manage to go over, but is a fairly effective "body armour" should you be flung onto bollard, binnacle or bulkhead. I myself have slipped in a cockpit in a bucking sailboat and had I not been wearing a foam vest PFD (which I wear solo sailing because if I am unconscious for whatever reason, it doesn't require a tab to be pulled), I would have certainly broken a few ribs.

Lastly, even if the crew of the main ship cannot, in heavy seas, get you aboard conventionally, I would rather be floating if there was an outside chance of a plane-launched raft or other rescue means being dropped near me. A large ship might be able to trail floating warps to which I could lash myself, and then simply be winched aboard.

Tethers and PFDs create chances. Going in "naked" creates very few.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> While it is rare to recover a man overboard in any significant weather and sea, it does happen-though not always according to plan. I recently posted the strange story linked below in another thread. If you've ever wondered about matters of destiny or just plain old freak luck it may be of interest


I'm pretty sure I have read more than one story of solo sailors in a knockdown or a complete capsize/roll, both tethered and untethered, who found themselves in the sea and then with the next wave found themselves back in the cockpit or gripping the deck!

But that guy found bobbing alone in the ocean takes the cake..."excuse me, would you mind terribly winching me aboard? Thanks so much!"


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Dan, can you please reconcile this statement for me:

"I worked for one of the owners of the picton castle... *he would never have encouraged lax safety to increase revenue. He was pretty strict about safety on his other boats. *

with this statement?

"Ironically, I also turned down a chance to work on the Picton Castle. *Like I said before, it had a bad name.*"

Why did the P.C. "have a bad name" if at least one of its owners was noted for being safety conscious?

It's like the story of Edward Smith, captain of _Titanic_: he was considered one of the most experienced skippers afloat, and yet there have always been questions about his use of watchkeepers and of running at 22 knots in suspected iceberg zones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Smith


----------



## danjarch (Jun 18, 2007)

Valiente, The first reconciliation is that Greg never own more then a minor interest in the Picton Castle. There were some attempts made to do some cosponsoring tie-ins. We would advertise them and such. My personal feeling is that his involvement was more of a financial angel. Loaning Moreland money at low or no interest in exchange for a small percentage of the company. 

I'll try to explain my self a little better. The tall ship industry is dieing. There are more or less three avenues that can be taken to keep a tall ship going. The first is though a foundation. These boats don't have to make any money. The second is though day sailing. This is what I spent most of my time doing. It's tough to make it though. The ships are expensive to operate and you got to compete against the catamarans and booze cruisers. The third is to do three or four day cruises ( usually with some day and dinner sailing as well.) This is the toughest category to take. There just aren't that many people out there who want to go for a three day cruise on an old ship.

The Picton Castle tried to reverse time and combine shipping, sail training and passenger service to produce a profitable scheme for the future of tall ships. A lot of people in the tall ship community were rooting for her. Greg being one of those contributed a lot of funds to try to help. 

Reality set in. Moreland never really had the money to make it work. She has always been patched and repaired instead of renovated. Looking back, I'd have to say that the only way you could possibly make the idea work would be to build a new boat. One that had the ability to take on at least the smallest commercial shipping container. One that had more modern sailing rigs, and took less crew. The reality of finding enough stuff that could be shipped by the Picton Castle for a profit, was poor at best. Finding enough people to cruise for three months at a time on a fairly primitive vessel was almost impossible. That only left paying sail trainees, and there wasn't enough of these. I'm reasonably sure that Greg sold or wrote of his investment in her back in 02, but can't confirm that. 

As to her having a bad name. Running short of money when she was originally being fitted out, they put a british surplus, WWII vintage generator on her. On her maiden voyage around the world. This generator fried out and took all the communications equipment with it. They were reduced to a couple of handhelds. They were down to they're last set of batteries when they made port. The coast guard had put them on the list of boats to look for and the families of her crew had been informed that she was lost. Then there was the constantly malfunctioning store and other really old equipment. There were reports of crew members having to pay for bus fair and other expenses that are usually provided. Then of course, there were plenty of rumors of crew going with out paychecks. 

One guy I met, who had crewed on her, had to have his parent wire him money so he could fly back from Hawaii. He hadn't gotten paid for two months. This is what I mean by saying she had a bad name. When I asked Greg if he could get me a job on the Picton Castle. He told me he could but didn't recommend that I take it. I thought at the time, that he was just trying to keep me on board the clipper. It was later that I began to hear that thing on board the Picton were getting worse. They still couldn't make enough to catch up on the deterierating vessel. 

It still remains a dream in the tall ship community. If some one could figure out how to make a ship profitable, while allowing it to go out for long voyages, they would become gods among men. Then new ships could be built. Old ones like the Peking. Now rusting beside the South Street Seaport museum in New York could be renovated and put back in service. To the old salts of this world, a ship isn't a ship if she never moves.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Val,
Briefly stated, I think you mis-read me. While in no way against lifejackets, and a proponent of working vests and better yet the inflatables mentioned by Bill, my point was that you're unlikely to be found to drop a raft to or any other rescue method. Lifejacket or not, go over the side in weather, off any vessel at sea, and you're most times lost forever. Fortunately for me I've never had to decide on whether to let the exposure work it's cure or make an attempt to bring on the drowning. I am though, little burdened with illusions of rescue. Edit: I in no way mean to imply I am against the efforts of rescue, and thorough efforts at that.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Thanks for the explanation, Dan. It does clear things up and tallies pretty closely with my impression of the Picton Castle when I was aboard her for a "deck-only" tour.

We have both the Empire Sandy and the Kajama as "tall ship" cruise boats here in Toronto, and both basically just motor in and out with some token canvas up. Apparently, you can rent them to do proper sailing, but whether this is feasible with their usual crew complements is unknown to me.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> Val,
> Briefly stated, I think you mis-read me. While in no way against lifejackets, and a proponent of working vests and better yet the inflatables mentioned by Bill, my point was that you're unlikely to be found to drop a raft to or any other rescue method. Lifejacket or not, go over the side in weather, off any vessel at sea, and you're most times lost forever. Fortunately for me I've never had to decide on whether to let the exposure work it's cure or make an attempt to bring on the drowning. I am though, little burdened with illusions of rescue. Edit: I in no way mean to imply I am against the efforts of rescue, and thorough efforts at that.


I agree that staying on or at least attached to the boat is very much to be desired, and I didn't presume you were anti-PFD at all.

Ending up in the water is not a death sentence, but in heavy weather it's pretty close to it, so staying tethered is a huge priority. But there are gadgets and techniques today that increase the odds that even someone chucked into high seas, if conscious and keeping their wits about them, can be retrieved.

I own a personal EPIRB now, for instance. I bought it because I was going to crew for Alex, but it strikes me as a handy thing to have even in Lake Ontario. I also have a couple of waterproof handheld VHFs. All of this stuff is light enough and small enough to clip onto myself without inhibiting movement. I do a fair bit of solo sailing, sometimes early and late in the year, and it's just a simple set of precautions to observe.

I have a waterproof light for my PFD (actually, I need a new one, as I gave my old one away!). I'm considering a "laser flare" before we go cruising ... and naturally I'll get a ship's EPIRB for the boat. Meanwhile, my wife and I practice COB drills each spring. The new boat has more freeboard, and it's more difficult to envision getting a body aboard that is unable to help themselves. We're working on this, conceptually.

Is this overkill? No, not if you got into cruising with the idea that you would attempt to be self-reliant first, and not expect to be trailed by a bunch of guys with a big net and hot toddies... I suspect the captain of the P.C., either of his own volition, or on the orders of Dan Moreland, pushed on into that gale for reasons that didn't include the ability of the crew to work the ship safely in such conditions. Most of us have boats "stronger" than we are in the sense that our animal bodies will fail or sustain injury before the boat itself breaks. This is why we have to decide to hove to or run off or just_ slow down_ in order to give the crew a break. This doesn't seem to have been standard practice on the P.C., and the sea took its payment.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

For a more nuanced and complete take on Picton Castle, her captain and her mission, read "A Fair Wind and Plenty of It", a book written by a crew member about a circumnavigation on the PC.

btw, I had problems accessing the video link in the original post; audio was fine, but no picture, only a green screen. I seem to remember that CBC streaming was not available to the US, but I see that plenty of other US locations on this thread seem to have had no problem. Anyone else get the green screen?


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Marc&#8230;..

Please guys, I hope no one gets mad with me for what I am going to say, ok?? (I know that someone will give me bad reps for this, so be gentle, ok??)

First of all I present my respects to the family on their loss. May God be with them and you.

Now....I am really mad with you guys&#8230;look the right way, please&#8230;.look the right way&#8230;

In my country we have two old sayings, that I will never forget as long as I live, and Fred already knows about, because I made sure he learnt them before&#8230;its my job as a father:

The first one:

*"Se vais vaguear pelo mar tem cuidado, pois podes perder o lugar"*

that translated to English says this:

*"If you wonder to the sea, be aware, that you may lose your place"*

and the second one:
*
"Há mar e mar, há ir e voltar!"*
*
"There are seas and seas, but there is also going and coming back"*

Basically they are old sayings that we are taught when young kids living in the ocean, like we do, that warn everyone that you go to sea, with the full understanding that you may not come back, and most important, it is YOUR responsibility to make sure you come back. If you can't understand or don't want to oblige by these, stay home and play playstation...don't go to sea...if you do, you're at its mercy, and you must fully understand the risks it provides and envolves....don't go if you don't understand that. If you go and die, that is it. The rules can't be simpler.

I go to the States a lot, and now Canada too, and I see how many laws are there to protect YOU from YOU...what I mean is that sometimes, the amount of laws and legislations and what not, that are created everyday to protect yourself from yourself, also contribute to making you numb about your responsibilities and the main and basic survival instincts that mother nature wants you to develop on your own to make sure you continue your gene pool. Its not a joke, but Darwinism comes to mind.

My point is that no matter how safe and how much the practices aboard any vessel are or are not, at the end of the day, IT IS YOUR REPONSABILITY to come back, guys.

Enforcing them is good, but it's *better to teach a hungry man to grow potatoes than to give him the potatoes.*

I or all that I know would never ever, ever, be in such seas in such boat without a tether and a life vest, never!! Please&#8230;.its basic stuff 1+1 = 2.

The poor girl disappeared, God keep her soul, because she was walking around in a storm without a tether&#8230;not because the boat is unsafe or the Captain said whatever.

Let the Captain or anyone else tell me not to tether in bad weather&#8230;I'd f**king kick his ball he would be chewing them for a week&#8230;bet your ass I would, and anyone I know that sailed at least 3 days&#8230;

The fact that there is no formal *SEA GOING EDUCATION *in your Countries is the problem, not the boat safety&#8230;the boat is still sailing isn't it??

Only there you can just jump on a boat and cross the Atlantic...onlçy there..so what are you expecting?? you are a victim of your own policies....

How many times have I seen some morons here on sailnet??? How many?? People that post stuff and I think to my self&#8230;this idiot is going to kill himself&#8230;SEE I AM MAD NOW: MAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You guys are giving potatoes instead of learning how to grow them&#8230;.

Any crew in my country in a commercial vessel needs to get a license for what they do, and that is done is schools&#8230;these kids board tall ships, for God sake, to learn ON THE GO!!!!! What the hell you guys expect???

If they are passengers, THEY BLOODY HELL STAY INSIDE IN STORMS AND HAVE THE LIFE VESTS EVEN TO GO IN THE SHOWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That girl died, because she had no formal proper sea going training, AS A CREW MEMBER and if she had it it was bad, and poor..

She dies because she lacked basic training on how to behave in a storm. TETHER!!!

You should go after the morons that allow kids to board boats with no formal experience or schooling..

That is your problem&#8230;but as always&#8230;the Houdini effect is in place&#8230;

The left hand steals&#8230;lets all look at the right hand..its the snake oils show boys&#8230;.

Blame it on boat safety&#8230;.Blame it on boat safety&#8230;.this girl died because she was not tethered, a PFD or a lamp would have not saved her either she drowned in less than 3 minutes, that **** boat couldn't turn around even if the wind wasn't blowing...

Many people sail with me, and while I am an easy going guy, and "excuse" many times the crew from life vests, ALL ARE INFORMED where they are, where is the EPIRB, and if conditions are such, you'd better be wearing them. And if you don't, a rope will be tied not to your neck, but to your balls. And if you are a girl, and have no balls, by the time I am done, you have developed a pair.

Now go ahead and give me the bad rep if you want&#8230;I am really, really mad with the stupidity. Sorry

Alex


----------



## rennisaint (Oct 25, 2007)

Giu,

To make several broad, sweeping, generalizations:
Saying that the government needs to mandate more licensure and more oversight is kinda going against the first part of your statement. That at sea you gotta watch out for yourself, because nobody else can. Furthermore, hearing anyone say that because somebody managed to off themselves doing something stupid means the government needs to make sure they wear their crash helmet grinds so hard against my moral compass that I almost start crying. This is a basic difference between the Federalists (left wing, right wing whatever you call them they all want more big government) and Libertarians. Yes, a commercial vessel (which this is) should have government rules. NO, the government should not be able to stop me sailing away into the North Atlantic in December in a fifty five gallon drum with a broomstick mast and an "Australia or bust" t-shirt for a sail.

Granted, they may after having to retrieve me from about 300 yards offshore and treat me for hypothermia take me to a hospital for a psych eval.... but that should be my choice and nobody else's.

Now, the argument would continue that I am endangering others lives, costing taxpayer dollars etc. etc. This is true, however, me and all my idiot friends are probably even on a bad year only going to cost in lives and money, half what a bloated governmental program that would likely end up like so many others snared in its' own red tape until it could no longer do anything effective. If you need an example go talk to someone in New Orleans about how effective FEMA is versus the Red Cross or Salvation Army.

And lets say that there was a big fat government training and oversight program for boating. I don't think this captain guy is the type that would be bright eyed and bushy tailed through the two hour seminar he'd be required to take every five years to renew his certification.

Worst of all though is that people were crazy enough to sign up for this carnival ride. I mean, come on! No shoes on deck, in a storm? Safety harnesses? How about fricking LIFE RAFTS! "Oh, well, we have these hundred year old wooden dinghies because if we brought along a real life raft or any other modern emergency gear whatsoever that would take away from the experience." You really don't need to be a sailor to figure out that when several tons of water wash over the deck you better damn well be attached to something or ready to go for a swim.

And btw Giu, I'm giving you plus rep because without differences of opinion and people to voice them, we would never make progress.


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Fare enough, and I am one for a healthy debate. So thank you for the use of fair game rules. I will do the same.

One of my problems is that altough you may believe I am able to comunicate with you in English and that I do good, I admit that many times (unless its sailing), I have problems in passing my message, and often, what I mean is not what I writte or vice-versa.

This is also a reason I only posted here now, and stay away from extensive debate. However, please allow me to say I agree with you and where I don't want to say I don't agree, but perhaps my message was not conveyed properly.

Please see my remarks in blue.



rennisaint said:


> Giu,
> 
> To make several broad, sweeping, generalizations:
> Saying that the government needs to mandate more licensure and more oversight is kinda going against the first part of your statement. That at sea you gotta watch out for yourself, because nobody else can.
> ...


----------



## billangiep (Dec 10, 2003)

A lot of very good points.....but bottom line isn't the "Captain" responsible for the ship and the "CREW" 
Bill,


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

billangiep said:


> A lot of very good points.....but bottom line isn't the "Captain" responsible for the ship and the "CREW"
> Bill,


That I agree 100%, but in the ocean, its one for each own...you know that...

Read what I said above in blue..he would be in deep trouble. Besides, the other Captain concured with that...listen to him say...he would get fired...

Fired would be the least of his worries in Europe...


----------



## danjarch (Jun 18, 2007)

Guys, I would like to remind you that the boat in question was registered in the Cook Islands. As such was not under Canadian or U.S. law. They're only requirement as to U.S. law was that they could not load or unload passengers or cargo with out going to a foreign port between the two. As far as the crew was concerned, there were few if any professionals. Most were there on a volunteer basis. They did not choose to work they're way up the ranks on any of the other tall ships that are registered in America or Canada. I feel sorry for the loss the family suffered, but she was the daughter of a reasonably well off man. This wasn't a poor single mother working for her children's future. Try to keep what happened in prospective. That the captain was an idiot but dreamers usually are a bit loose with they're safety. The only realist in the video was the guy who didn't go on the trip.


----------



## rennisaint (Oct 25, 2007)

Giu,

Sorry, you type english so well a lot of the time I forget you can't always get it perfect.  (Which is a compliment btw)

Dan,

You're right about the registration thing, it is a strange and old way of doing business, but many boats are registered in places they probably shouldn't be. I think it is interesting that after all this bad press etc. that the islands are still backing this guy, and even weirder that tv shows, which have to have insurance policies and such are signing on with this guy.

Has anyone seen any of the shows taped on the boat? Do the actors/actresses wear special safety equipment when going aloft?


----------



## AFNT (Dec 11, 2008)

Before everyone goes over the rail on this one someone should do a little in depth reading up on the Picton Castle. This is a ship that lives at sea and is fully equipped to do so. Knowing several members of the full time crew I doubt if a fair shake will ever given by the media especially our "Canadian" based CBC who in most cases (owned by the government) is unliable for most of what they spew.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

Are you from the crew of the PC? Also, "old thread", before SD gets here...


----------

