Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

PaulinVictoria

Team Vestas grounded

Recommended Posts

 

Since I don't have any nav software of my own - please can someone who does post a video capture in Adrena and/or Expedition, gradually zooming in on the archipelago until it appears?

 

That would be awesome...

 

I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res.

 

I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

 

Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts.

 

attachicon.gifMauritiusZoomedOut.jpg

 

attachicon.gifmidzoom.jpg

 

attachicon.gifZoomed.jpg

 

Relatively immaterial wrt digital or even paper charts.

 

I have raced extensively in different parts of the world and there are errors in both digital and paper charting in places you would expect to be better surveyed. I have experienced (and have made very careful personal notes) uncharted rocks, large rocks (more like small islands) a long way off reported position, and incorrect soundings....in Italy, France, UK, Caribbean and other regions.

 

Notes made in digital format in Expedition, and on some now very tatty paper charts (no - not corrected on newer editions) for future reference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Since I don't have any nav software of my own - please can someone who does post a video capture in Adrena and/or Expedition, gradually zooming in on the archipelago until it appears?

That would be awesome...

I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res.

 

I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

 

Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts.

 

attachicon.gifMauritiusZoomedOut.jpg

 

attachicon.gifmidzoom.jpg

 

attachicon.gifZoomed.jpg

Yeah - I think they must have a higher level of detail on board, as you say. If this is all they were getting, they'd all be aground.

Many thanks for posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Since I don't have any nav software of my own - please can someone who does post a video capture in Adrena and/or Expedition, gradually zooming in on the archipelago until it appears?

That would be awesome...

 

I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res.

 

I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

 

Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts.

 

attachicon.gifMauritiusZoomedOut.jpg

 

attachicon.gifmidzoom.jpg

 

attachicon.gifZoomed.jpg

Relatively immaterial wrt digital or even paper charts.

 

I have raced extensively in different parts of the world and there are errors in both digital and paper charting in places you would expect to be better surveyed. I have experienced (and have made very careful personal notes) uncharted rocks, large rocks (more like small islands) a long way off reported position, and incorrect soundings....in Italy, France, UK, Caribbean and other regions.

 

Notes made in digital format in Expedition, and on some now very tatty paper charts (no - not corrected on newer editions) for future reference.

You miss the point - the question doesnt relate to chart accuracy (and it's been estabished that contrary to the warnings, they're not that bad). The question raised here, is how far would they have needed to zoom in, before realising they're gonna need wheels. We're all used to charts which show shoal after shoal, all of which can be ignored, however - sometimes you zoom in and a whole load of crazy appears out of no-where.... Like a magic trick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the upside. They are all safe and at last the race is making the news.........................has been boring as fuck so far

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I don't have any nav software of my own - please can someone who does post a video capture in Adrena and/or Expedition, gradually zooming in on the archipelago until it appears?

That would be awesome...

 

A few snapshots from my screen:

post-115626-0-45783300-1417336519_thumb.jpg

post-115626-0-92632300-1417336538_thumb.jpg

post-115626-0-95090000-1417336943_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great interview with Will Oxley and Jack Lloyd

 

Long night for those guys on standby, Will sounds pretty wrecked. It would have been stressful motoring around trying to keep in contact and trying to not end up in the shit themselves. Hats off to Team Alvimedica.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the actual on-board chart from Alvimedica. Pretty clear and impossible to miss :P Note the dividers that Oxley used to keep clear of the western tip.

 

Something else must have happened to cause them to miss the rounding.

 

10624800_610556212381915_288282408741168

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fucking pros! Too stupid to do the very basics - skipper/watchcaptain and navigator should be sent back to school

I've been very careful to not get dragged into any tit for tat discussions on this forum, but you, sir, have no idea what you are talking about.

 

http://www.fieldyachting.com/2014/11/vor-3011-sad-event-for-yacht-racing.html

oh yeah?!?! I am pretty confident - it is an unbelievable mistake and should Not happen in a 100 years on a professinal boat and Team like This! I am really at a loss to read so much bullshit here. Normally the Forums are more eduated. It simply is a MUST to plot your postions every h on papercharts and to cross ccheck the Plotter with a redundant GPS pos. I had the unpleasure to Hit a reef in the biscay aß Child - navigator got confusednbetween ap Position and plotting pos in Chart. Never again. Watch captain or captain needs of course to recheck nav aß well.

 

Just imagine a commercial ship a passenger vessel or an atomic submarine to be navigated by the same aseholes....

 

Whyncant u accept that they fucked up? It happensnin life...In this Position aß a pro it should Not have happend...

 

Makes the vor unansurable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fucking pros! Too stupid to do the very basics - skipper/watchcaptain and navigator should be sent back to school

I've been very careful to not get dragged into any tit for tat discussions on this forum, but you, sir, have no idea what you are talking about.

 

http://www.fieldyachting.com/2014/11/vor-3011-sad-event-for-yacht-racing.html

oh yeah?!?! I am pretty confident - it is an unbelievable mistake and should Not happen in a 100 years on a professinal boat and Team like This! I am really at a loss to read so much bullshit here. Normally the Forums are more eduated. It simply is a MUST to plot your postions every h on papercharts and to cross ccheck the Plotter with a redundant GPS pos. I had the unpleasure to Hit a reef in the biscay aß Child - navigator got confusednbetween ap Position and plotting pos in Chart. Never again. Watch captain or captain needs of course to recheck nav aß well.

 

Just imagine a commercial ship a passenger vessel or an atomic submarine to be navigated by the same aseholes....

 

Whyncant u accept that they fucked up? It happensnin life...In this Position aß a pro it should Not have happend...

 

Makes the vor unansurable...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Fucking pros! Too stupid to do the very basics - skipper/watchcaptain and navigator should be sent back to school

I've been very careful to not get dragged into any tit for tat discussions on this forum, but you, sir, have no idea what you are talking about.

 

http://www.fieldyachting.com/2014/11/vor-3011-sad-event-for-yacht-racing.html

oh yeah?!?! I am pretty confident - it is an unbelievable mistake and should Not happen in a 100 years on a professinal boat and Team like This! I am really at a loss to read so much bullshit here. Normally the Forums are more eduated. It simply is a MUST to plot your postions every h on papercharts and to cross ccheck the Plotter with a redundant GPS pos. I had the unpleasure to Hit a reef in the biscay aß Child - navigator got confusednbetween ap Position and plotting pos in Chart. Never again. Watch captain or captain needs of course to recheck nav aß well.

 

Just imagine a commercial ship a passenger vessel or an atomic submarine to be navigated by the same aseholes....

 

Whyncant u accept that they fucked up? It happensnin life...In this Position aß a pro it should Not have happend...

 

Makes the vor unansurable...

 

"Normally the Forums are more eduated." If your navigation is anything like your spelling I'm shocked you manage to make it off the dock without hitting something!

 

Unless you were on the boat you have absolutely no idea what happened, and unfortunately the amount of respect for your opinions is likely to be zero. At this stage that is very little to do with the fact you're a noob and more that you've proven to be a bit of a jumped up arse.

 

Let he who has never scrapped the bottom cast the first stone. So you can put yours down for a start!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great interview with Will Oxley and Jack Lloyd

 

Long night for those guys on standby, Will sounds pretty wrecked. It would have been stressful motoring around trying to keep in contact and trying to not end up in the shit themselves. Hats off to Team Alvimedica.

 

Will Oxley was the navigator on Yendys back when the 80' Shockwave ran aground on Flinders Isle - when Andrew Short and Sal Gordon were killed. He co-ordinated the search and role call of yachts in the area. I'm sure one of the things that ran through his mind was "oh God, not again."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just imagine she would be a passenger vessel or an oiltanker.....i guess u guys would not be so relaxed saying: oh lets dont blame anybody it could be just bad luck...or the plotter had a bad time with the 12 v power or the poor navigator needed some sleep or whatever....an accident like this on a professional boat simply is not allowed to happen - if it does it really raises some questions about recklessness, poor seamanship, gross negligence, etc. its very sad and very costly...just luck nobody got hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just imagine she would be a passenger vessel or an oiltanker.....i guess u guys would not be so relaxed saying: oh lets dont blame anybody it could be just bad luck...or the plotter had a bad time with the 12 v power or the poor navigator needed some sleep or whatever....an accident like this on a professional boat simply is not allowed to happen - if it does it really raises some questions about recklessness, poor seamanship, gross negligence, etc. its very sad and very costly...just luck nobody got hurt.

 

Ever heard of shipping lanes and why they exist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry edouard - but thats about the dumpest answer i could imagine - are u saying u don not need to watch out cross check u systems etc - because u r in a shipping lane...:-)

 

that is actually funny - good idea - maybe they dont neeed anybody on the bridge then because the autopilot takes over -get real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't have the charts installed here, but it is quite easy for individual rocks. This is why many of us like the raster Bsb charting. This is somewhat bigger though.

 

That said and without knowing any details of the event, it might be more related to sailing these boats with only 8 people. We sailed the Whitbread 60s with 11 and then 12, which was two watches of 5 and a skipper and navigator floating.

 

We did a Transpac with 8 on the 52, which was 4 x2 on rotating watches and were under-manned. So navigation becomes less of a dedicated role.

 

The Volvo boats will be a lot more boat than a 52 and the race is more demanding that the Transpac, so ...

It is a very important point.

 

Knuts drive to make the event cheaper by reducing the head count may have just come back to bite him in the Arse.

 

See on board video from ADOR recently, Sifi is up trimming. Explain that.

This Navigator agrees. Crew number limits mean that navigators who trim and drive are in big demand in this race. That means risk to rheir Nav activity, plus an increased risk of sleep deprivation if they need to spend long hours concentrating off watch.. I usually do watches too when navigating, but if we're in a zone with lots of speed bumps I drop out of watches to stay focused on missing terra firma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just imagine she would be a passenger vessel or an oiltanker.....i guess u guys would not be so relaxed saying: oh lets dont blame anybody it could be just bad luck...or the plotter had a bad time with the 12 v power or the poor navigator needed some sleep or whatever....an accident like this on a professional boat simply is not allowed to happen - if it does it really raises some questions about recklessness, poor seamanship, gross negligence, etc. its very sad and very costly...just luck nobody got hurt.

 

well, to make an analogy, there is some difference between professional jobs, in:

  • being a professional rally driver (or a Dakar driver)
  • being a professional shipping truck driver
  • being a professional school bus driver

 

I guess the first would take a bit more risks than the second and the third, while driving.

We all want to know how it happened, and if there was negligence or mistakes; still there is no need to compare competitors of an extreme "round the world" to shipping companies or cruis ships that go through the oceans. There is no "Costa Concordia" here.

 

EDIT: and well, first I want to know if there is some chance to salvage the boat :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"There's some good points, whole lotta bad points." David Byrne.

 

Occasionally there's comments in threads that remind me why I've steered clear of forums the past few years. This and the leg 2 VOR thread remind me of that.

 

I like many am glad the crew is ok and won't pile on with arm chair speculation and baseless comments.

 

The hindsight point I'd like to bring up, which I admit is far fetched is why didn't the VOR build a spare boat? Hear me out, there are spares of all other parts and there's precedent for boats being lost and crew being rescued safe. Seems to me an additional million USD chipped in by each team could accomplish this, like the ultimate insurance policy. If the spare doesn't get used the VOR can sell the boat and reimburse the teams to defer the cost. If the boat does get used the team using it can pay off the other teams with their insurance. I'm not a legal or insurance expert, but I think this could be done.

 

Other benefits I see of a spare boat are taking corporate big wig sponsors on cruises, economies of scale by producing more boats, additional boat for training and research and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In order to build another boat for a million each. ...You first have to have an additional million each.

Budgets are tight and until their last moment entry Vestas was pretty much destined to be the spare boat. Similar story with MAPFRE which IIRC also entered late.

 

The interviews Mr.Clean did speak of serve budget differences between the teams.

How many full budged campaigns are there? Two, maybe three?

 

 

Anyway, from the Alvimedica video and pictures we know that Vestas squarely hit the reef where it was charted on the charts. Little room or need left for discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we will find out what truly happened for some time to come.

Pointing fingers at the navigator is always the first response but ultimately its the skipper and helmsman that have to make sure the set waypoints are properly navigated within decent margins.

These boats sail at 20 NMs an hour, gybing even 10mins too late can have big consequences.

 

If they can successfully pull it from the reef there might be a possibility for repair if they can reconstruct part of that hull in France and fly it out to Auckland?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Clean was talking to Knut he explicitly asked if they had built the eighth boat. The answer was "no". There was good reason to ask, as it appeared earlier that the VOR was going to. I suspect that a lot of components exist that were originally intended for boat 8. Probably filling out the spare parts inventory nicely. But there isn't a complete hull.

 

We can only hope they can get the boat off the reef before it breaks up. Then there may be a good chance of a viable repair. But it looks grim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they can successfully pull it from the reef there might be a possibility for repair if they can reconstruct part of that hull in France and fly it out to Auckland?

 

I had a feeling that some parts already exist - but that is just a very vague memory. There is no doubt that laying up some of the obvious hull areas as ready to use repairs would be a good idea. However I doubt they have a stern section like this. The obvious parts to lay up are those that take the hit on UFOs. (The hull parts would be coming from Persico in Italy.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe someone could have just paid attention which would have saved the first boat. This could have been prevented by anyone with a cellphone and the navionics app let alone the setup they had on board.

 

 

"There's some good points, whole lotta bad points." David Byrne.

Occasionally there's comments in threads that remind me why I've steered clear of forums the past few years. This and the leg 2 VOR thread remind me of that.

I like many am glad the crew is ok and won't pile on with arm chair speculation and baseless comments.

The hindsight point I'd like to bring up, which I admit is far fetched is why didn't the VOR build a spare boat? Hear me out, there are spares of all other parts and there's precedent for boats being lost and crew being rescued safe. Seems to me an additional million USD chipped in by each team could accomplish this, like the ultimate insurance policy. If the spare doesn't get used the VOR can sell the boat and reimburse the teams to defer the cost. If the boat does get used the team using it can pay off the other teams with their insurance. I'm not a legal or insurance expert, but I think this could be done.

Other benefits I see of a spare boat are taking corporate big wig sponsors on cruises, economies of scale by producing more boats, additional boat for training and research and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Since I don't have any nav software of my own - please can someone who does post a video capture in Adrena and/or Expedition, gradually zooming in on the archipelago until it appears?

That would be awesome...

A few snapshots from my screen:

Thanks for posting VESA - if that's the clarity the nav desk was seeing, then I find it much harder to understand what has gone on here. So won't speculate.

 

No doubt, time will tell.

 

BTW - at this time, it's customary for me to haze the newbie - however I wont right now - and, you've done me a favour....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So isn't that a Lighthouse there on CoCo Island? They sailed right by it or was their plan to pass East of the atoll?

That's what I was asking myself. I know that often times lights are not functioning and I'm assuming that to be the case. Seems that someone on-site would have commented about the light by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe someone could have just paid attention which would have saved the first boat. This could have been prevented by anyone with a cellphone and the navionics app let alone the setup they had on board.

 

Whale, submerged container, random act of god..... There's plenty of ways a boat can meet it's end racing around the world, all of which render a cellphone and Navtronics useless. But it's good to know you got it figured out, I'm looking forward to seeing how you do when you race around the world.

 

In order to build another boat for a million each. ...You first have to have an additional million each.

Budgets are tight and until their last moment entry Vestas was pretty much destined to be the spare boat. Similar story with MAPFRE which IIRC also entered late.

 

The interviews Mr.Clean did speak of serve budget differences between the teams.

How many full budged campaigns are there? Two, maybe three?

 

 

Anyway, from the Alvimedica video and pictures we know that Vestas squarely hit the reef where it was charted on the charts. Little room or need left for discussion.

Good points, I guess like with any insurance it seems like a waste of money, until you need it. The benefit of having an additional entry rather than a a spare boat makes more sense also. Sounds like the VOR was intending to have a spare boat anyways, perhaps next time. Hell, I wonder how quickly another boat could be cranked out? Probably not soon enough to make a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I am not competent enough to second guess the crew, there is a lot to learn from "events" such as this. In this case one of the root causes appears to be that the Nav software may have been underutilized or is lacking a feature.

 

Don't high end systems used on this race allow uses to set "hot zones" with a proximity alert? All Garmin products, even the basic Garmin 76 handheld allow the user to set a waypoint and then alert if the GPS was within "X" miles of the point.

 

To clarify, one would set a "hot zone" around any landmass, shoal, etc. and then a proximity alert when the vessel was within 10 miles of the hot zone. In a preponderance of caution a second alert could be set at 5 miles. These alerts, programmed before leaving the dock, would alert the crew on watch in time to alter course, or lower the landing gear.

 

Any insights into the software would be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now, was this a "whale, submerged container, or random act of god?" I don't think so.

 

This is a fuckup. And a fuckup by highly paid professionals. It is not acceptable. Thankfully the fuckup didn't get someone killed.

 

This is not a trial by jury, it is anarchy. Call shit for what it is. This is a fuckup.

 

 

 

Or maybe someone could have just paid attention which would have saved the first boat. This could have been prevented by anyone with a cellphone and the navionics app let alone the setup they had on board.


Whale, submerged container, random act of god..... There's plenty of ways a boat can meet it's end racing around the world, all of which render a cellphone and Navtronics useless. But it's good to know you got it figured out, I'm looking forward to seeing how you do when you race around the world.

>In order to build another boat for a million each. ...You first have to have an additional million each.
Budgets are tight and until their last moment entry Vestas was pretty much destined to be the spare boat. Similar story with MAPFRE which IIRC also entered late.

The interviews Mr.Clean did speak of serve budget differences between the teams.
How many full budged campaigns are there? Two, maybe three?


Anyway, from the Alvimedica video and pictures we know that Vestas squarely hit the reef where it was charted on the charts. Little room or need left for discussion.


Good points, I guess like with any insurance it seems like a waste of money, until you need it. The benefit of having an additional entry rather than a a spare boat makes more sense also. Sounds like the VOR was intending to have a spare boat anyways, perhaps next time. Hell, I wonder how quickly another boat could be cranked out? Probably not soon enough to make a difference.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I submit that you are very much competent enough to second guess the crew. Do you drive a car? When you drive a car, you pretty much have to be paying attention all the time, or you will run into shit. Like if you are looking down at your phone texting your girl, you could run into shit.

 

Navigating a vessel such as this to avoid charted islands and reefs takes far less effort. You can just look every ten minutes or so. Like I said, any smart phone and a $25.00 app has everything you need to avoid this situation. There is even a nice red line sticking out from your position straight ahead that you can see if you are headed towards any type of trouble.

 

I suspect most here do the very same thing on their phones when on other people's vessels just to be sure.

 

 

While I am not competent enough to second guess the crew, there is a lot to learn from "events" such as this. In this case one of the root causes appears to be that the Nav software may have been underutilized or is lacking a feature.

 

Don't high end systems used on this race allow uses to set "hot zones" with a proximity alert? All Garmin products, even the basic Garmin 76 handheld allow the user to set a waypoint and then alert if the GPS was within "X" miles of the point.

 

To clarify, one would set a "hot zone" around any landmass, shoal, etc. and then a proximity alert when the vessel was within 10 miles of the hot zone. In a preponderance of caution a second alert could be set at 5 miles. These alerts, programmed before leaving the dock, would alert the crew on watch in time to alter course, or lower the landing gear.

 

Any insights into the software would be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Team Vestas Wind have to accept that their vessel is GONE. Time to get back to their Families and leave the vessel where it is right now.

Really?? The least they and Volvo can do is clean up the mess quickly, how much diesel on board?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now, was this a "whale, submerged container, or random act of god?" I don't think so.

 

This is a fuckup. And a fuckup by highly paid professionals. It is not acceptable. Thankfully the fuckup didn't get someone killed.

 

This is not a trial by jury, it is anarchy. Call shit for what it is. This is a fuckup.

 

 

 

It is a relief to know that a boat cannot be lost if the crew doesn't make a mistake.

 

Sailors have been grounding on reefs for centuries and will probably for centuries to come.

 

You're probably right, they fucked up, they know it too. I'm pretty sure that makes those 9 guys even better than they already do knowing that there's people around the would like you are piling it on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! Now that doesn't mean that we should kick those that fuckup when they are down. But it is perfectly appropriate to discuss this incident without conducting a formal jury trial.

 

What would have been an "acceptable" cause of this? I can't think of any. Were they just struck by lightning causing every single piece of electronics to fail? Even then, you would think with all of the funding for this type of campaign, that someone would take over navigation with paper charts, etc.

 

 

@jzk absolutly right!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a big fuckup by highly paid professionals. The irony is that one markets a risk like vor to Potential underwriters that it is a better risk than amateur racing.

 

The risk of colissions or groundings is deemed to be lower than with amateur Crews or Single or Double handed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, some highly paid professional sailors fucked up royally costing serious financial damage not to mention putting lives in very serious risk. There is a certain amount of "feeling bad" that is appropriate here. Again, not kicking them when they are down, but call it what it is.

 

But instead of calling it a fuckup, there are those that scold the "newbs" for knowing enough to recognize the fuckup. Crazy.

 

Well now, was this a "whale, submerged container, or random act of god?" I don't think so.

This is a fuckup. And a fuckup by highly paid professionals. It is not acceptable. Thankfully the fuckup didn't get someone killed.

This is not a trial by jury, it is anarchy. Call shit for what it is. This is a fuckup.


It is a relief to know that a boat cannot be lost if the crew doesn't make a mistake.

Sailors have been grounding on reefs for centuries and will probably for centuries to come.

You're probably right, they fucked up, they know it too. I'm pretty sure that makes those 9 guys even better than they already do knowing that there's people around the would like you are piling it on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! Now that doesn't mean that we should kick those that fuckup when they are down. But it is perfectly appropriate to discuss this incident without conducting a formal jury trial.

 

What would have been an "acceptable" cause of this? I can't think of any. Were they just struck by lightning causing every single piece of electronics to fail? Even then, you would think with all of the funding for this type of campaign, that someone would take over navigation with paper charts, etc.

 

 

 

 

@jzk absolutly right!!

There is nothing acceptable about it, but these guys aren't accountable to you, unless you own Vestas.

 

I'm just pointing out your character flaw in the way you triumphantly point out that professional sailors are as fallible as the rest of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is where you are wrong, my friend. When you partake in a public event such as the Volvo Ocean Race, you are accountable to the viewing public. You can be pretty sure that if you fuckup and drive your million dollar boat into a reef, that some people somewhere on the internet might recognize it for the fuckup that it is. Ask Adrian Peterson to whom he is accountable.

 

Do you know how much these guys are pulling down? It is pretty substantial. I don't think it is too much to ask for a little care and seamanship.

 

If someone sailed their Mac 26 up on a breakwall and hurt someone, would you be saying the same sort of shit? "We don't know all of the facts, so we shouldn't speculate...."

 

 

 

Thanks! Now that doesn't mean that we should kick those that fuckup when they are down. But it is perfectly appropriate to discuss this incident without conducting a formal jury trial.

What would have been an "acceptable" cause of this? I can't think of any. Were they just struck by lightning causing every single piece of electronics to fail? Even then, you would think with all of the funding for this type of campaign, that someone would take over navigation with paper charts, etc.

@jzk absolutly right!!


Thee is nothing acceptable about it, but these guys aren't accountable to you, unless you own Vestas.

I'm just pointing out your character flaw in the way you triumphantly point out that professional sailors are as fallible as the rest of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Or maybe someone could have just paid attention which would have saved the first boat. This could have been prevented by anyone with a cellphone and the navionics app let alone the setup they had on board.

 

Whale, submerged container, random act of god..... There's plenty of ways a boat can meet it's end racing around the world, all of which render a cellphone and Navtronics useless. But it's good to know you got it figured out, I'm looking forward to seeing how you do when you race around the world.

 

>In order to build another boat for a million each. ...You first have to have an additional million each.

Budgets are tight and until their last moment entry Vestas was pretty much destined to be the spare boat. Similar story with MAPFRE which IIRC also entered late.

 

The interviews Mr.Clean did speak of serve budget differences between the teams.

How many full budged campaigns are there? Two, maybe three?

 

 

Anyway, from the Alvimedica video and pictures we know that Vestas squarely hit the reef where it was charted on the charts. Little room or need left for discussion.

Good points, I guess like with any insurance it seems like a waste of money, until you need it. The benefit of having an additional entry rather than a a spare boat makes more sense also. Sounds like the VOR was intending to have a spare boat anyways, perhaps next time. Hell, I wonder how quickly another boat could be cranked out? Probably not soon enough to make a difference.

 

Is someone suggesting that they should give this crew ANOTHER boat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hank

 

There is no light on the Navionics Chart of the reef that I can see (even zoomed right in, Pilot makes no mention of one and there is nothing in the 'List of Lights' - just makes them even more difficult to spot

 

ateam - thank you for making me laugh!!

 

Your comparison between the skipper and navigator of a racing boat, cold, wet, tired, bouncing around in a cramped area under the cockpit (yes I have been below on a VO65) and the Captain, First Officer, 4-6 watch officers, navigation officer (plus prob 2-3 assistants) in their pressed shirts in the comfortable, air-conditioned, control room standing their watch having had a good 4 hours off in starched sheets and risen to a hot shower and a full cooked breakfast on a submarine (nuclear or otherwise) and yes I have been down in a sub as well was - well amusing.

 

It would be difficult to imagine two such disparate situations.

 

One other point; I hardly think that making what, I am certain was, at worst an unforced human error, qualifies either Nico or Wouter to be classified as an 'asehole'. (Your spelling not mine)

 

Give the guys a break. No one knows better than them the unhapy situation they are in and the last thing they, the race or our sport requires right now is mindless epithets being thrown at 9 guys who, lets face it have just survived a traumatic experience.

 

See ya on the water


SS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So sad to see them out of the race, Nico's always been a favourite / hero of mine. They would all be gutted. Wouter and Nico must be totally devastated. Thank god everyone is safe and well.

 

I'm more than a bit puzzled by the zoom level comments from the boats...... Navionics clearly shows the reef wayyyy before bottom zoom level...... I can't imagine C-Map would be much different. I've been caught out by zoom level stuff before but it's more like a slight change in contour or depth that just gives you a bit of a fright. This is more a case of "Oh wow, there's a 25 mile long reef chain that wasn't there a few seconds ago!" I just can't see it happening at this level.

 

Nothing wrong with the software... all boats have Expedition as standard do they not? Here's the navionics charts...... http://webapp.navionics.com/?lang=en

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ those who set the threshold for second guessing a Volvo Race team at being able to drive a car- without knowing your credentials, I will just disagree. I know I can navigate with a compass and a watch. But there is a quantum difference between "get there" routing and "get there as quickly as possible while chasing best winds" routing- hence my hesitancy to second guess the team.

 

Question remains- does the Explorer or C-chart software support proximity alerts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be specific here. Navigating a successful Volvo Ocean Race team to victory is hard. Few here would know their ass from a hole in the ground with respect thereto. Navigating a Volvo Ocean race boat to avoid clearly marked reefs requires nothing more than $25.00 cell phone software and a semblance of paying attention not even required to drive a car.

 

Proximity alerts are really irrelevant. They are nice features, but this is a professional race team. Someone is supposed to be actively engaged 24/7.

 

Do you remember that family on the Lagoon 50 something that sailed into the reef somewhere in the south pacific? The parents were asleep in their cabin while the kids were watching a movie. They motor sailed right into a reef. The father lost a leg from a gash when the rigging broke free. It was a terrible, horrifying tragedy - no doubt. But there is nothing wrong with saying that perhaps the parents should not have just left the boat with no watch, etc.

 

@ those who set the threshold for second guessing a Volvo Race team at being able to drive a car- without knowing your credentials, I will just disagree. I know I can navigate with a compass and a watch. But there is a quantum difference between "get there" routing and "get there as quickly as possible while chasing best winds" routing- hence my hesitancy to second guess the team.

 

Question remains- does the Explorer or C-chart software support proximity alerts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ ss ok i get your point about the Crew and callimg them names. Agreed. But my point with a passenger vessel or suba,rine or something else - is just to Highlight that there are some Jobs where u simply are not allowed to make such a mistake! Under no circumstances and if there is a system in place with Checks and balances to avoid the worst.

 

Here this System failed and in my opinion i would think for the skipper and navigator it will be difficult to find a New job as ocean racers...

 

By the way i doubt wether we will hear the full truth - as insurers will try to not pay the claim - stating gross nrgligence...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the archipelago is visible on the navionics ipad charts, even zoomed out so that reunion is

on the bottom left + cargados is on top right of screen, i.e.over 250NM represented on screen

 

the light on isle du sud / cocos island is shown with a 12M range

< whether it is working or not is another story >

 

on attached images i took the co-ordinates off the VOR tracker + putting them as pins into

the ipad navionics app + then overlayed the image of the VOR tracker.

 

it correlates pretty closely + shows that dongfeng also appear to have cut it very fine passing by...

 

post-25944-0-06637000-1417361167_thumb.jpg

 

post-25944-0-22747200-1417361670_thumb.jpg

 

 

Hank

 

There is no light on the Navionics Chart of the reef that I can see (even zoomed right in, Pilot makes no mention of one and there is nothing in the 'List of Lights' - just makes them even more difficult to spot

 

ateam - thank you for making me laugh!!

 

Your comparison between the skipper and navigator of a racing boat, cold, wet, tired, bouncing around in a cramped area under the cockpit (yes I have been below on a VO65) and the Captain, First Officer, 4-6 watch officers, navigation officer (plus prob 2-3 assistants) in their pressed shirts in the comfortable, air-conditioned, control room standing their watch having had a good 4 hours off in starched sheets and risen to a hot shower and a full cooked breakfast on a submarine (nuclear or otherwise) and yes I have been down in a sub as well was - well amusing.

 

It would be difficult to imagine two such disparate situations.

 

One other point; I hardly think that making what, I am certain was, at worst an unforced human error, qualifies either Nico or Wouter to be classified as an 'asehole'. (Your spelling not mine)

 

Give the guys a break. No one knows better than them the unhapy situation they are in and the last thing they, the race or our sport requires right now is mindless epithets being thrown at 9 guys who, lets face it have just survived a traumatic experience.

 

See ya on the water


SS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rarely post to ORA but wish to here.

You guys who suggest that this sort of thing just pops up and/or smugly state that unless you've been there are comical.

When you sit down to do a planning session for ocean sailing you make a list. I don't care if you are on an Island Packet 30 or a balls out maxi boat. It is the same procedure. You identify characteristics and features on or near rhumb and/or intended course. From there you set up zones where you need to pay extra attention. Generally you might take notes of these zones if/as warranted.

As you work down this checklist while ticking off the miles, you tell the skipper and watch captains what is to be expected, keep an eye out for in the coming watch. You also tell them when you as navigator need to be awaken (if applicable... I also tell the cook if there is one. They also tend to think in frames of time) as you approach and the lead time required for you to get your bearings and work through the specifics. This really isn't something that should be up for debate as to how a solid navigator goes about their business. If a navigator hasn't sailed this leg, race or passage multiple times on paper before the actual sailing has started, something is awfully wrong.

Anyhow, that is my two cents.

 

One last item, not everything in the world is based on WGS 84. Having your equipment all set to the same datum, the datum the charts being used are based on, is a common mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing resembing "C-Chart" software per se. C-Map (owned by Jeppsen) or Navionics or others provides the charts which are then viewed on a charting software package. The ones in use for this race are Expedition and Adrena.

 

One thing interesting to note is the difference on what Lat 21 posted in post #100 versus the shots people have shown using Navionics charts. The level of detail he is showing in Expedition is the same as I can see in my instance of Expedition. And if you look at the top of the page Lat21 is using C-Map charts, which is what I am also using.

Two possible areas of inquiry:

  1. Each of these programs can source charts from a multitude of providers. And each provider might show features in a different way. Which could mean that Navionics shows the details of the shoal while C-Map does not, and that Vestas was using C-Map.
  2. The second area of inquiry is around licenses. You pay C-Map a licensing fee for the use of their charts in specific regions. I don't know about Lat21, but I have not paid for a license to use C-Maps charts in that particular Indian Ocean region since I never plan on sailing there. Using Expedition, you can usually see gross detail even without paying (for example i can see the land mass of nearby Mauritania and the depths leading up to the land mass. But you can't see the fine detail without paying the license fee and getting the unlock code. There is some small possibility that a budget constrained program did not bother to pay for a global license.

In the absence of any moon light, with a flatish sea that would offer no breakers with their noise and foam, it would be easy to run into a reef in the dead of night without charts. Yes, paper charts might have helped but the reality of these boats is that even if you are carrying paper charts as a back up, you rarely actually use them unless you have reason to doubt your electronics. They are backups, not another layer of primary navigation after electronic and visual references.

 

Both of the two charting issues above are credible theories, and both are an example of why it is silly to jump to conclusions and engage in finger pointing until facts come out. Facts, by the way, that may never get shared with the likes of us. So for those who are quick to jump on the Skipper or the Navigator, other than letting yourself feel smug about the superiority of your mother's basement, you are not really adding that much to the discussion.

 

Edit: No 6 raises a good point about the discipline of planning (and the datum issue). One of the things I like to do well in advance of the race or passage is plot the course in Expedition and then compare it to the paper based charts to see if there are any differences in the charts. Then note the electronic charts via Expedition if there are any differences to be on the look out for. That way I get to double check my work and the quality of the charts. But once I am underway, the paper charts are stowed and really only brought out if I am having an issue with the electronics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ those who set the threshold for second guessing a Volvo Race team at being able to drive a car- without knowing your credentials, I will just disagree. I know I can navigate with a compass and a watch. But there is a quantum difference between "get there" routing and "get there as quickly as possible while chasing best winds" routing- hence my hesitancy to second guess the team.

 

Question remains- does the Explorer or C-chart software support proximity alerts?

 

 

There are others who have stopped by this forum who know Expedition better than I do, but I am not aware of any proximity alarms in Expedition. The AIS and radar functions have "point of closest approach" logic, but nothing that resembles an alarm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So isn't that a Lighthouse there on CoCo Island? They sailed right by it or was their plan to pass East of the atoll?

 

 

Light houses are for countries that have established maritime authorities with budgets dedicated to building and maintaining things like lighthouses, bouys and other navigational aids. They are also typically called for in locations that have sufficient marine traffic to warrant the expense. I think this shoal is missing a number of those inputs.

 

There are lots of places in the world that don't have marine navigational aides. And when lightly or uninhabited, there won't be any other man-made source of light either. I am not just talking about the eastern coast of Africa either. You can sail down the entire length of the eastern side of the Bahamas and be hard pressed to find a bouy or light house. Having done it in the dark of a moonless night at a pretty high rate of noisy speed, I can tell you that the land is just a darker patch of black on a background of black.

 

Bottom line, visual navigation is important but not always available. So you better have confidence in your charting solution or be prepared to proceed with caution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I am not competent enough to second guess the crew.

All posts should just end here. The vestas crew just went through a traumatic incident which will follow them for years to come. We on sailing anarchy are in NO WAY QUALIFIED to pass judgement less than 24 hours after the incident. We will NEVER be able to know 100% what happened on the boat, what settings or software were being used, or any other of a plethora of things required to paint a full picture of the grounding. Stop searching for drama.

 

You're all adults, start acting like it. I can't believe I'm trying to be the voice of reason and I'm only 22. Shame on you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Stop searching for drama. "

 

Oh crap that is funny, considering the source.

In fact the entire post is comical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail meat, the cost of electronic charts for the entire race would not even cover the hotel bill for the team for a day! There is absolutely zero chance of even the most underfunded team heading out to sea without full detail electronic charts for the entire leg. Someone of Wouter's experience and expertise? Impossible!

 

The charts shown on LAT21's post #100 is the base level C-Map world chart that comes with Expedition. If you look at the screen captures of Will Oxley's (Alvimedica) nav screen you can see PLENTY of detail and I'd be willing to bet my left nut he's using C-Map. I'll bet my right nut Wouter was using C-map too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: No 6 raises a good point about the discipline of planning (and the datum issue). One of the things I like to do well in advance of the race or passage is plot the course in Expedition and then compare it to the paper based charts to see if there are any differences in the charts. Then note the electronic charts via Expedition if there are any differences to be on the look out for. That way I get to double check my work and the quality of the charts. But once I am underway, the paper charts are stowed and really only brought out if I am having an issue with the electronics.

Where as I do just the opposite on ocean passages. I do paper first. Lay out a plotting chart as it gives you a complete overview and gives you a solid spatial timeframe. In the absence of a printed plotting chart, I make one up on the back of another chart. Aside from logbook entries each hour or as necessary, I also tend to plot out position on that plotting chart. If all goes tits up the last thing a navigator needs to be doing is catch-up work. IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail meat, the cost of electronic charts for the entire race would not even cover the hotel bill for the team for a day! There is zero chance of even the most underfunded team heading out to sea without full detail electronic charts for the entire leg.

It may not be a function of money. Did a RTW thing years back. Boat I ended up skippering about half way around had no paper charts. Had to scrounge them up, or borrow and find a big copier. You know how hard that is mid-Pacific in the early 90's? LOL

 

My best guess is that this incident is a result of a cascade of events, not one single "asleep at the wheel" sort of moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail meat, the cost of electronic charts for the entire race would not even cover the hotel bill for the team for a day! There is zero chance of even the most underfunded team heading out to sea without full detail electronic charts for the entire leg.

...and paper charts, and Google Earth, and who knows how many other top secret navi goodies that are on board. I can see it on my IPhone!!! They simply screwed up and hit the largest reef in the Indian Ocean. Period. Some other teams screwed up too, but got lucky. AND some other teams carved that sucker like a slalom skier through the gates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no info..., no comment... (can't imagine what happened, do not have an explanation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail meat, the cost of electronic charts for the entire race would not even cover the hotel bill for the team for a day! There is zero chance of even the most underfunded team heading out to sea without full detail electronic charts for the entire leg.

 

You would think.... but stranger things have happened. I just checked the NT+/Max PC selector software from Jeppesen. The region that includes the charts for Cape Town extends up the eastern coast to just about the middle of the Mauritius, and the region that includes the UAE extends south along the eastern side of Africa to below the Mauritius. So either way, they should have been covered. As you say, Theory #2 seems far less likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most likely all that said has been done, even to: warn me at this latitude.
Something in the communication department must have gone wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Rail meat, the cost of electronic charts for the entire race would not even cover the hotel bill for the team for a day! There is zero chance of even the most underfunded team heading out to sea without full detail electronic charts for the entire leg.

...and paper charts, and Google Earth, and who knows how many other top secret navi goodies that are on board. I can see it on my IPhone!!! They simply screwed up and hit the largest reef in the Indian Ocean. Period. Some other teams screwed up too, but got lucky. AND some other teams carved that sucker like a slalom skier through the gates.

 

What makes you think they have or use Google Earth? And where do you get the idea that this is some sort of military operation with "top secret" "goodies" on board? This guys are using Expedition and Adrena. The one design spec extended down to the navigation tools, so what they have in the way of software tools is very well known. And its not as if they are pulling out their iPhones while on board. Furthermore, its not like there is a whole lot of "top secret navi goodies" out there in the world. When it comes to charting, the military's GPS units have a higher degree of precision and their charts (particularly underwater feature charts) might have more details but it ain't as if they are lending those tools out to a civilian project.

 

(This kind of blather is how you end up with Elvis living in south america and third gunmen on the grassy knoll)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't we missing the real issue here. None of the teams knew about the 50 mile land mass until they approached it. Blaming this entirely on the crew, navigator and charts doesn't seem reasonable.

 

If a race organization is responsible for organizing a race and setting the course, whether at the local yacht club or in an ocean race, aren't they also somewhat responsible for choosing the safest route and at best pointing out notable hazards along the way, including pirates, growlers and islands.

 

If you don't think it's the race committee responsibility, isn't it at least prudent to scrutinize the course in a team briefing prior to setting off? These guys weren't miles off course in unchartered waters. They were on course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Since I don't have any nav software of my own - please can someone who does post a video capture in Adrena and/or Expedition, gradually zooming in on the archipelago until it appears?

That would be awesome...

I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res.

 

I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

 

Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts.

 

attachicon.gifMauritiusZoomedOut.jpg

 

attachicon.gifmidzoom.jpg

 

attachicon.gifZoomed.jpg

Relatively immaterial wrt digital or even paper charts.

 

I have raced extensively in different parts of the world and there are errors in both digital and paper charting in places you would expect to be better surveyed. I have experienced (and have made very careful personal notes) uncharted rocks, large rocks (more like small islands) a long way off reported position, and incorrect soundings....in Italy, France, UK, Caribbean and other regions.

 

Notes made in digital format in Expedition, and on some now very tatty paper charts (no - not corrected on newer editions) for future reference.

You miss the point - the question doesnt relate to chart accuracy (and it's been estabished that contrary to the warnings, they're not that bad). The question raised here, is how far would they have needed to zoom in, before realising they're gonna need wheels. We're all used to charts which show shoal after shoal, all of which can be ignored, however - sometimes you zoom in and a whole load of crazy appears out of no-where.... Like a magic trick.

 

At what point did we decide the chart accuracy was "not that bad", the part where they took the soundings in 1846, or the part where the chart datum is "undetermined"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Edit: No 6 raises a good point about the discipline of planning (and the datum issue). One of the things I like to do well in advance of the race or passage is plot the course in Expedition and then compare it to the paper based charts to see if there are any differences in the charts. Then note the electronic charts via Expedition if there are any differences to be on the look out for. That way I get to double check my work and the quality of the charts. But once I am underway, the paper charts are stowed and really only brought out if I am having an issue with the electronics.

Where as I do just the opposite on ocean passages. I do paper first. Lay out a plotting chart as it gives you a complete overview and gives you a solid spatial timeframe. In the absence of a printed plotting chart, I make one up on the back of another chart. Aside from logbook entries each hour or as necessary, I also tend to plot out position on that plotting chart. If all goes tits up the last thing a navigator needs to be doing is catch-up work. IMHO.

 

 

Yeah, I start with electronic so I can commence weather down loads as early in the planning cycle as possible. My spatial reference abilities are pretty strong so I usually see the plotting chart in my head. When I get to putting it on paper, that then validates (or refutes) what I have been building up in my head and on the electronic chart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't we missing the real issue here. None of the teams knew about the 50 mile land mass until they approached it. Blaming this entirely on the crew, navigator and charts doesn't seem reasonable.

 

If a race organization is responsible for organizing a race and setting the course, whether at the local yacht club or in an ocean race, aren't they also somewhat responsible for choosing the safest route and at best pointing out notable hazards along the way, including pirates, growlers and islands.

 

If you don't think it's the race committee responsibility, isn't it at least prudent to scrutinize the course in a team briefing prior to setting off? These guys weren't miles off course in unchartered waters. They were on course.

 

Safety of navigation and everything else on the boat is one person's responsibility...the skipper's, as assisted by the Nav. Do you really think anything would have been different if there was a pre-brief that said "Oy...one other thing...don't hit the island!"...you're officially "that guy"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Rail meat, the cost of electronic charts for the entire race would not even cover the hotel bill for the team for a day! There is zero chance of even the most underfunded team heading out to sea without full detail electronic charts for the entire leg.

It may not be a function of money. Did a RTW thing years back. Boat I ended up skippering about half way around had no paper charts. Had to scrounge them up, or borrow and find a big copier. You know how hard that is mid-Pacific in the early 90's? LOL

 

My best guess is that this incident is a result of a cascade of events, not one single "asleep at the wheel" sort of moment.

 

I agree with that statement 100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Aren't we missing the real issue here. None of the teams knew about the 50 mile land mass until they approached it. Blaming this entirely on the crew, navigator and charts doesn't seem reasonable.

If a race organization is responsible for organizing a race and setting the course, whether at the local yacht club or in an ocean race, aren't they also somewhat responsible for choosing the safest route and at best pointing out notable hazards along the way, including pirates, growlers and islands.

If you don't think it's the race committee responsibility, isn't it at least prudent to scrutinize the course in a team briefing prior to setting off? These guys weren't miles off course in unchartered waters. They were on course.

Safety of navigation and everything else on the boat is one person's responsibility...the skipper's, as assisted by the Nav. Do you really think anything would have been different if there was a pre-brief that said "Oy...one other thing...don't hit the island!"...you're officially "that guy"

The skipper is responsible for a lot of things. But to say he is responsible for the safety of the entire campaign entry is absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Aren't we missing the real issue here. None of the teams knew about the 50 mile land mass until they approached it. Blaming this entirely on the crew, navigator and charts doesn't seem reasonable.

If a race organization is responsible for organizing a race and setting the course, whether at the local yacht club or in an ocean race, aren't they also somewhat responsible for choosing the safest route and at best pointing out notable hazards along the way, including pirates, growlers and islands.

If you don't think it's the race committee responsibility, isn't it at least prudent to scrutinize the course in a team briefing prior to setting off? These guys weren't miles off course in unchartered waters. They were on course.

Safety of navigation and everything else on the boat is one person's responsibility...the skipper's, as assisted by the Nav. Do you really think anything would have been different if there was a pre-brief that said "Oy...one other thing...don't hit the island!"...you're officially "that guy"

The skipper is responsible for a lot of things. But to say he is responsible for the safety of the entire campaign entry is absurd.

 

And I disagree with that. That is what is being a skipper is all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Aren't we missing the real issue here. None of the teams knew about the 50 mile land mass until they approached it. Blaming this entirely on the crew, navigator and charts doesn't seem reasonable.

If a race organization is responsible for organizing a race and setting the course, whether at the local yacht club or in an ocean race, aren't they also somewhat responsible for choosing the safest route and at best pointing out notable hazards along the way, including pirates, growlers and islands.

If you don't think it's the race committee responsibility, isn't it at least prudent to scrutinize the course in a team briefing prior to setting off? These guys weren't miles off course in unchartered waters. They were on course.

Safety of navigation and everything else on the boat is one person's responsibility...the skipper's, as assisted by the Nav. Do you really think anything would have been different if there was a pre-brief that said "Oy...one other thing...don't hit the island!"...you're officially "that guy"

The skipper is responsible for a lot of things. But to say he is responsible for the safety of the entire campaign entry is absurd.

 

And I disagree with that. That is what is being a skipper is all about.

 

The skipper is responsible. When there is a fuck up like this, it might be the skipper's own fuck up or a crew member's. Either way, the skipper is responsible. That is what vicarious liability is all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All about. Job One. Bring 'em back alive and boat intact.

A skipper can delegate a whole host of responsibilities but safety of crew and ship are ultimately his and his alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All about. Job One. Bring 'em back alive and boat intact.

A skipper can delegate a whole host of responsibilities but safety of crew and ship are ultimately his and his alone.

 

This thread better end soon... I don't think you or I have agreed on this much since the creation of SA. This could be a sign of the apocalypse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since I don't have any nav software of my own - please can someone who does post a video capture in Adrena and/or Expedition, gradually zooming in on the archipelago until it appears?

That would be awesome...

I can't recall which charts Expedition comes with, but you typically load higher res versions (usually Cmap) for the areas you are going to sail. My version was used for PacCup and we had higher res charts for the eastern Pacific, west coast and Hawaii. In my Expedition copy for the Mauritius area, it is covered by a very low res Background Cartridge WW-M000.01 v2.00. Not sure if I acquired that or it came with Expedition but I would expect the VOR teams to have a lot higher res.

 

I have run aground more than once and know that shit happens and that yes, it is usually human error compounded by some complicating circumstances (one time, I hit a coral head when the chart said we should have 18 feet, the boat draft was 6'). I wouldn't point the finger at anyone until the details are known. Thankfully, no one was hurt.

 

Below is what my version shows at increasing zoom levels. In the middle picture, the reef is on the right side. I included a piece of Madagascar to get a sense of scale. In the zoomed version, you can see a depth of 20 meters well south of the Cargados Carajos shoal. Zooming further does not show any additional definition to the Shoal. I would not sail through this area without a higher res chart and I am sure the VOR teams have far better charts.

 

attachicon.gifMauritiusZoomedOut.jpg

 

attachicon.gifmidzoom.jpg

 

attachicon.gifZoomed.jpg

Relatively immaterial wrt digital or even paper charts.

 

I have raced extensively in different parts of the world and there are errors in both digital and paper charting in places you would expect to be better surveyed. I have experienced (and have made very careful personal notes) uncharted rocks, large rocks (more like small islands) a long way off reported position, and incorrect soundings....in Italy, France, UK, Caribbean and other regions.

 

Notes made in digital format in Expedition, and on some now very tatty paper charts (no - not corrected on newer editions) for future reference.

You miss the point - the question doesnt relate to chart accuracy (and it's been estabished that contrary to the warnings, they're not that bad). The question raised here, is how far would they have needed to zoom in, before realising they're gonna need wheels. We're all used to charts which show shoal after shoal, all of which can be ignored, however - sometimes you zoom in and a whole load of crazy appears out of no-where.... Like a magic trick.

At what point did we decide the chart accuracy was "not that bad", the part where they took the soundings in 1846, or the part where the chart datum is "undetermined"?

The accuracy has ultimately been determined by 6 VOR competitors accurately shaving the archipelago (on either side) and the 7th accurately verifying the position - by force - slap bang in the middle. not only that- their point of foundering is accurately corroborated and verified by the charting. Suggest you flick back through this thread to see some pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aren't we missing the real issue here. None of the teams knew about the 50 mile land mass until they approached it. Blaming this entirely on the crew, navigator and charts doesn't seem reasonable.

If a race organization is responsible for organizing a race and setting the course, whether at the local yacht club or in an ocean race, aren't they also somewhat responsible for choosing the safest route and at best pointing out notable hazards along the way, including pirates, growlers and islands.

If you don't think it's the race committee responsibility, isn't it at least prudent to scrutinize the course in a team briefing prior to setting off? These guys weren't miles off course in unchartered waters. They were on course.

Safety of navigation and everything else on the boat is one person's responsibility...the skipper's, as assisted by the Nav. Do you really think anything would have been different if there was a pre-brief that said "Oy...one other thing...don't hit the island!"...you're officially "that guy"

The skipper is responsible for a lot of things. But to say he is responsible for the safety of the entire campaign entry is absurd.

And I disagree with that. That is what is being a skipper is all about.

The skipper is responsible. When there is a fuck up like this, it might be the skipper's own fuck up or a crew member's. Either way, the skipper is responsible. That is what vicarious liability is all about.

Of course the skipper is ultimately accountable. But in trying to understand what happened while tossing blame around, and for future reference in the race, other decision making processes have to be considered rather than just saying it was the navigators fault and the skipper should take the fall for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

All about. Job One. Bring 'em back alive and boat intact.

A skipper can delegate a whole host of responsibilities but safety of crew and ship are ultimately his and his alone.

This thread better end soon... I don't think you or I have agreed on this much since the creation of SA. This could be a sign of the apocalypse.

 

 

Well we can hold out hope seeing that I am a paper first guy and you are a gizmo first guy.

Clearly raised in different generations and mindsets there.

Besides, neither of us could be as big a dick as we think the other is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

All about. Job One. Bring 'em back alive and boat intact.

A skipper can delegate a whole host of responsibilities but safety of crew and ship are ultimately his and his alone.

This thread better end soon... I don't think you or I have agreed on this much since the creation of SA. This could be a sign of the apocalypse.

 

Well we can hold out hope seeing that I am a paper first guy and you are a gizmo first guy.

Clearly raised in different generations and mindsets there.

Besides, neither of us could be as big a dick as we think the other is.

 

Do't count me out. I can be a pretty huge dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The accuracy has ultimately been determined by 6 VOR competitors accurately shaving the archipelago (on either side) and the 7th accurately verifying the position - by force - slap bang in the middle. not only that- their point of foundering is accurately corroborated and verified by the charting. Suggest you flick back through this thread to see some pictures.

Well they certainly have provided a solid data point for any future datum corrections!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

All about. Job One. Bring 'em back alive and boat intact.

A skipper can delegate a whole host of responsibilities but safety of crew and ship are ultimately his and his alone.

This thread better end soon... I don't think you or I have agreed on this much since the creation of SA. This could be a sign of the apocalypse.

 

 

Well we can hold out hope seeing that I am a paper first guy and you are a gizmo first guy.

Clearly raised in different generations and mindsets there.

Besides, neither of us could be as big a dick as we think the other is.

 

 

Do't count me out. I can be a pretty huge dick.

 

 

Yes you can.......

(Bit of tongue in cheek there, me too!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two kinds of sailors;

 

The ones who have run aground,

 

And the ones who lie about it!

There is wandering into situations where you know you might stub a toe.

Then there is planting a boat and taking up farming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meat and 6 - I really appreciate your posts - but, routing in advance? - different wind conditions could easily have had them sail in completely different waters - how do you allow for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anyone who uses decreasing depth as a guide in any coral seas is a total fucktard.

An incredible number of strong opinions and pronouncements!

 

But folks who go offshore (and despite the name calling it strikes me that some of these folks may not actually go offshore?) use a depth sounder (and decreasing depth) all the time.

 

I often set a temporary "safety depth" of something like 100M or even 200M+ depending on planned routing on plotter. Then I confirm that planned routing doesn't intersect safety shading anywhere. That sets up an expectation - I should never see less than 200M on depthsounder. This is especially true in coral areas. You may not even want to go through a place at night or with sun low if it's shallowing up! This has saved me a few times, especially with newer crew, so I keep using it.

 

Navy guy earlier did make a good point about this. Not good for fine tuning position, but used as a box I find depth a good independent check on your (potentially wrong) estimate of where you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point did we decide the chart accuracy was "not that bad", the part where they took the soundings in 1846, or the part where the chart datum is "undetermined"?

 

Personally with the Alvimedia screenshot that showed Vestas on the rocks in the same position as the combination of tracker data and Google satellite images did hours before. Did a quick overlay and got 99% overlap without even trying

 

Could that be the result of some ad hoc corrections Alvimedica had to do? Maybe, but I think we would have heard about that since it changes the situation quite a bit.

 

Edit:

All that said I really hope that Vestas manages to return in a later leg. Sail Rocket blew up how many times?

post-106437-0-25948700-1417367698_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

meat and 6 - I really appreciate your posts - but, routing in advance? - different wind conditions could easily have had them sail in completely different waters - how do you allow for that?

Well sailboat racing is essentially about probabilities and percentages. So you lay out rhumb, shortest distance between two points usually. Research Pilot Charts for most likely wind direction(s). Then add notable current features that have an affect on set and drift. Last thing is weather because that is the most changeable aspect.

That said, early on you run through your mind some if-then stuff. Where a dome of high is likely to develop or sit. Where a low will come from and head to based on steering winds. Not so much black art, you craft a plan with contingencies. End of the day a plan is everything.... then sticking to it means very little as you react to situational changes and developments. All the homework gives you the background necessary to make decent choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to throw something out there. A lot of speculation about bad charts, total electronics failure etc.

 

If they were pushed onto the rocks by a pod of whales, if lighting blew out all their electronics, if they had to rescue a mermaid, if the charts were terrible, if their steering and backup steering broke, WE WOULD HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT. Seriously, these guys have sat phones, they can upload video and photos. If some incredible situation developed we would have heard it by now, it'd be a great story.

 

Instead silence. It's not unfair given that silence to wonder if a skipper is responsible for avoiding charted islands. And if the charts are inferior learning how to use them better or getting better charts. etc

 

Until then I'll go back to being called a newb, tool, fucktard and cock holster!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to throw something out there. A lot of speculation about bad charts, total electronics failure etc.

 

If they were pushed onto the rocks by a pod of whales, if lighting blew out all their electronics, if they had to rescue a mermaid, if the charts were terrible, if their steering and backup steering broke, WE WOULD HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT. Seriously, these guys have sat phones, they can upload video and photos. If some incredible situation developed we would have heard it by now, it'd be a great story.

 

Instead silence. It's not unfair given that silence to wonder if a skipper is responsible for avoiding charted islands. And if the charts are inferior learning how to use them better or getting better charts. etc

 

Until then I'll go back to being called a newb, tool, fucktard and cock holster!

THANK YOU!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

At what point did we decide the chart accuracy was "not that bad", the part where they took the soundings in 1846, or the part where the chart datum is "undetermined"?

Personally with the Alvimedia screenshot that showed Vestas on the rocks in the same position as the combination of tracker data and Google satellite images did hours before. Did a quick overlay and got 99% overlap without even trying

 

Could that be the result of some ad hoc corrections Alvimedica had to do? Maybe, but I think we would have heard about that since it changes the situation quite a bit.

 

Edit:

All that said I really hope that Vestas manages to return in a later leg. Sail Rocket blew up how many times?

2 completely different teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites