Peter Johnstone

PLEASE SAY A PRAYER FOR RAINMAKER'S CREW

Recommended Posts

Speaking of bow burying, is there any truth in the rumour that a longeron failure ( caused by repeatedly pitching the nose in) bought the rig down?

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If marketing material says averages of 14-20 are possible that is maybe a bit optimistic. A10 Kt average is realistic in rough conditions. You want enough speed to "sail" but not so much you're surfing wildly on every wave. The route planning didn't assume or demand 300-400 mile days. CB is smart enough to be realistic. I use 9 kts for passage planning. Can you do significantly better? Of course. Sometimes when the wave train is settled you can let her rip and see 300-400 mile days in big breeze. If they aren't seeing those speeds then it sounds like he got it right. The sail selection was appropriate to the circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of bow burying, is there any truth in the rumour that a longeron failure ( caused by repeatedly pitching the nose in) bought the rig down?

 

 

Great point to bring up overlay. I've looked closely at photos and videos of the boat under sail and that central longeron really does extend out well past the bows. When you say longeron failure you are really saying rig failure as that member is an intrinsic component of the rig. Looks like any failure of the longeron, seagull striker, or the two bridle wires going out to the hull about half way down would cause a total rig failure. Those 'waterwires have a pretty good angle on them due to the mount point almost to the chine and the height of the seagull striker. I don't see a waterstay at the tip of longeron where the Assym attach. Slapping down in the bottom of a big trough might break the longeron just fwd of the seagull striker and damage right there could bugger the seagull striker setting off a nasty chain reaction. I'm pretty sure that with the rig cutaway the longeron would now be dangling right down to the water and would be a real impendance under power. Just heaving two and then freeing the props and jury hoisting the longeron would help but the window before the next front would be pretty short.

 

I don't see any shroud tension adjusters in the photos. If these were spliced loop terminations on the shrouds in Spectra then could the further setting of splices and 'creep' let the rig pump back and forth. The Gold Coast and many other cats of this size have always had tackles going to the shroud about 9-10' up from the deck. The tackle can be fitted pulling aft to the rail to take up slack on the shroud and help minise the pumping. I've also seen the tension tackle led fwd which is nice in that it pulls the shroud fwd out of the belly of the mainsail. Good thread underway about stretch and creep on SA. Might be a factor here?

 

I worry with big multihull rigs when deeply reefed and the headboard gets well below the mast hounds. That load is usually above the hounds (or right at it under 1st or 2nd reef) which pulls the masthead aft and when that force is pulling aft well below the hounds then that is all opposite how things want to be and the mast can invert. Even with the main completely dropped that can let the mast pump against the jibstay and create a similar unintended loading. I think that is the one of the reasons that an early Corsair 36 tri dismasted in a nasty short sea in the Galveston-Veracruz race. I've always rigged a spare main halyard aft to a block as a backstay of sorts because that on a three wire fully battened ring, the mainsheet and leach ARE the backstay. The topping lift can serve this purpose to an extent but I like the redundancy of some of that stress relief that the halyard rigged aft would add. By the time a fully battened main is down to the third reef, the topping lift would likely have a fair lead to the mast crane and wouldn't chafe the main. I don't think that the Gunboat masts rotate which would only add to the rig loading issues.

 

Lots to learn from this sad affair, such a lovely boat.

'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If marketing material says averages of 14-20 are possible that is maybe a bit optimistic. <snip>

 

No, not marketing material, just my own experience (I won't bore anyone with that). And I don't think I said "24 hour average" either. But 14-20 knots (or more) for even 4-6 hours can get you a long way fast, literally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the IR portion of the CG video, the longeron appears to be present, though it's condition can't be discerned. I imagine the "rumor" is unfounded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Link for all directly involved in this debacle: https://give.coastguardfoundation.org/

 

Pony up.

Nice thought, but I've never needed a CG rescue in 50 years of sailing. Perhaps Mr Billionaire GB owner should make a generous donation.

 

I wonder if they tipped the CG crew when they got on the helicopter. Would be a nice gesture. Maybe chip in to buy some jet fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I love this part at :52...

 

"And catamarans particularly lend themselves to great sailing without the drama."

 

Ooohhh - and how about this one at 2:09:

 

"When you are actually out sailing, you have got authority in the water. It takes you where you want to go."

 

Welcome to the drama Mr. Investor Dude. You think you'll buy a chunk of Sikorsky now? That Jayhawk is some "disruptive technology" that will take you where you want to go - with authority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit. There is no excuse for what happened here. Lack of seamanship, plain and simple. Wannabes with endless resources who think that the ocean is going to be like a board meeting.

 

What is wrong with "Anarchy"?? This is the latest example of SA apologists making endless excuses for inexcusable f**kups (last one was Vestus). At the same time we have the congruence of the FH ("Anarchist" if ever there was one) being abandoned off the CA coast. Where are all of the tears and nuanced excuses for him? Let me see.... did FH get hit by a "micro burst", was it the fault of the "zoom"?

 

The GB f**kup is BIGGER than the FH disaster because of all of the money and resources involved. Do we give flashy boats and rich people a free pass for there monumental f**kups (and beat down on the less powerful) because..... why?

 

"Relevance"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there ways to tell squalls carrying a knockout punch from the more average squalls? I've read posts by several experienced cruisers who describe being surprised by downbursts or "walls of wind" from nastier than average squalls... any visual signs or tech on the way to help sailors predict which squalls require a more cautious sailplan?

 

I would have thought a triple reefed main and small jib was adequate precaution against the expected winds on a kick-ass 60' cat, but that shows what I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As I just noted in the other thread, based on what I've read of the Cohen's sailing resume, there seems a good chance this may have been his first ever offshore passage...

 

 

I'm not sure why you would think that. After all he had taken a Colgate sailing course down in the Florida Keys. That seems to be as much as most sailors have these days when they buy their first sailboat (typically a 55 footer).

 

Since when does a 'sailor' need that much info displayed in front of them? May as well just put it on autopilot and grab the fleshlight.

 

I have never had the experience of walking down the street and having people recognise me as boatless- maybe I look like a boat owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I love this part at :52...

 

"And catamarans particularly lend themselves to great sailing without the drama."

 

Ooohhh - and how about this one at 2:09:

 

"When you are actually out sailing, you have got authority in the water. It takes you where you want to go."

 

Welcome to the drama Mr. Investor Dude. You think you'll buy a chunk of Sikorsky now? That Jayhawk is some "disruptive technology" that will take you where you want to go - with authority.

 

Nah, you're just envious... One among "those countless wide-eyed faces..."

 

;-)

 

Being the honored owner of the very first GUNBOAT 55 comes with the great responsibility of sharing its luxury, speed and grace with whomever I could. The sailing world has forever changed!

 

On Father’s Day I took the first sail with my family on Long Island Sound and anchored in Huntington Harbor. If a sailing experience can be magical, this one was, and we all shared it together. We toasted the moment and then took turns at the wheel, sailing past every one, countless wide-eyed faces trying to figure out just exactly what it was that they were seeing.

 

http://sailinganarchy.com/tag/brian-cohen/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there ways to tell squalls carrying a knockout punch from the more average squalls? I've read posts by several experienced cruisers who describe being surprised by downbursts or "walls of wind" from nastier than average squalls... any visual signs or tech on the way to help sailors predict which squalls require a more cautious sailplan?

 

I would have thought a triple reefed main and small jib was adequate precaution against the expected winds on a kick-ass 60' cat, but that shows what I know.

Squalls are an indication of unstable weather. They can easily be stronger than expected. Racing, you'll push the boat and deal with them as they come. Cruising or delivery, no need to push... Just snug down, you're not in a hurry. IMO, the GB was maybe pushing a bit, but not excessively over-canvassed. Rig shouldn't have broken, but I don't know all the details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

As I just noted in the other thread, based on what I've read of the Cohen's sailing resume, there seems a good chance this may have been his first ever offshore passage...

 

 

I'm not sure why you would think that. After all he had taken a Colgate sailing course down in the Florida Keys. That seems to be as much as most sailors have these days when they buy their first sailboat (typically a 55 footer).

Since when does a 'sailor' need that much info displayed in front of them? May as well just put it on autopilot and grab the fleshlight.

 

I have never had the experience of walking down the street and having people recognise me as boatless- maybe I look like a boat owner.

My experience is that that much displayed in front of the helmsman is often a big distraction. IMO, better to keep info displayed to driver at the minimum he needs to drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

driver is probably the navigator, weather router, engineer, 1st mate, cook, cleaner & everything else on a delivery though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

As I just noted in the other thread, based on what I've read of the Cohen's sailing resume, there seems a good chance this may have been his first ever offshore passage...

 

I'm not sure why you would think that. After all he had taken a Colgate sailing course down in the Florida Keys. That seems to be as much as most sailors have these days when they buy their first sailboat (typically a 55 footer).

Since when does a 'sailor' need that much info displayed in front of them? May as well just put it on autopilot and grab the fleshlight.

 

I have never had the experience of walking down the street and having people recognise me as boatless- maybe I look like a boat owner.

My experience is that that much displayed in front of the helmsman is often a big distraction. IMO, better to keep info displayed to driver at the minimum he needs to drive.

 

I remember racing Etchells with an Australian old0-timer that had sailed the Olympics, done an AC and more and he told me that the best way to see how fast you were going was by looking at how much water was going past the boat.

I his 70s he was still winning races.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cruising or delivery, no need to push... Just snug down, you're not in a hurry. IMO, the GB was maybe pushing a bit [snip].

Does anybody think before they type anymore? The forecast for that area at the time is known and posted. The actual conditions they were sailing in are known and were posted (including by the USCG) and consistent w the forecast. Their location and departure time/location was posted and I think it may even have been you that noted average speeds in single digits. Given that, with a triple reefed main and storm jib I would say they were sailing pretty gosh darn conservatively. Even after being hit by sustained gusts (reported at 70 knots) of at least twice the continuous breeze, the boat was not capsized.

 

I have not sailed a Gunboat but have lots of time in larger cats and more often than not we were trying to slow down, not speed up and push it. There is no point in pushing it as the motion on these boats at over ten knots is very hard on the crew if any sea is running. We would aim for no more than 10 and plan around 8 or so.

 

Good grief. Not a good thing obviously but rigs do come down. That is no reason to say the crew was pushing it. I don't know, I wasn't there, but most everything I have seen posted suggests they were sailing prudently.

 

Honestly, have you ever owned or skippered a larger cat offshore? Even crewed one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been hit by these a few times. The first time the wind went from 15 to about 90 in the amount of time it took to get my PFD and it killed 2 people on the boat near us.

Outside of a sailors sense of weather, doppler radar can give some indication of wind speed. I have never seen a marine radar equiped that way.

Are there ways to tell squalls carrying a knockout punch from the more average squalls? I've read posts by several experienced cruisers who describe being surprised by downbursts or "walls of wind" from nastier than average squalls... any visual signs or tech on the way to help sailors predict which squalls require a more cautious sailplan?

 

I would have thought a triple reefed main and small jib was adequate precaution against the expected winds on a kick-ass 60' cat, but that shows what I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been hit by these a few times. The first time the wind went from 15 to about 90 in the amount of time it took to get my PFD and it killed 2 people on the boat near us.

Outside of a sailors sense of weather, doppler radar can give some indication of wind speed. I have never seen a marine radar equiped that way.

 

Sirius/XM weather gives you the NORAD doppler radar display, and in my experience it can help differentiate between squalls. It shows speed of cell advance, vertical development, and lightening strikes - all indications of intensity. Squalls that look the same to the eye on the horizon (and ships radar) will look different to the doppler radar.

 

And yes, it works where they were. I had coverage all the way from the Carolinas into the northern Bahamas. I wonder if Rainmaker had that, and if it was in use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a video of us sailing south from Newport in Nov a couple of years ago. Breeze was around 30, but it had been more in the previous 24hrs. The skipper of RM is on watch but all 5 of us were up and (really!) enjoying the conditions. My wife is narrating. I could always sleep well when CB was on watch. He knew when to throttle up and have fun, knew when to back off and be safe. He knows where the daggerboards and retractable rudders should be. We'd poured over GRIBs numerous times. He's been a professional racer but has also cruised extensively. He's a better sailor than most people in this thread, guaranteed.

 

 

When you're hired as a delivery skipper your responsibility is to the boat. When you're hired as a yacht skipper your responsibility is to the owner and his family first and foremost. The asset that needs protection is the boss. No marine insurance company wants to write a check for $2m boat. But similarly, no life insurance company wants to write a check for a billionaire and his son. As my old boss said, "you're hired to protect me from myself".

 

The metaphor that I keep going back to is chess. When the King is in "check" you have to remove the threat. That is exactly what he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a video of us sailing south from Newport in Nov a couple of years ago. Breeze was around 30, but it had been more in the previous 24hrs. The skipper of RM is on watch but all 5 of us were up and (really!) enjoying the conditions. My wife is narrating. I could always sleep well when CB was on watch. He knew when to throttle up and have fun, knew when to back off and be safe. He knows where the daggerboards and retractable rudders should be. We'd poured over GRIBs numerous times. He's been a professional racer but has also cruised extensively. He's a better sailor than most people in this thread, guaranteed.

 

 

When you're hired as a delivery skipper your responsibility is to the boat. When you're hired as a yacht skipper your responsibility is to the owner and his family first and foremost. The asset that needs protection is the boss. No marine insurance company wants to write a check for $2m boat. But similarly, no life insurance company wants to write a check for a billionaire and his son. As my old boss said, "you're hired to protect me from myself".

 

The metaphor that I keep going back to is chess. When the King is in "check" you have to remove the threat. That is exactly what he did.

you're spinning quite a paradox. Either a Gunboat is safe in 40knots, or its not. If it's perfectly safe, then no need to abandon, right? If the conditions were unsafe, putting owners life in danger, then they shouldn't have been out there to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Though it's still early in the investigation process here's a thought from Latitude 38.

 

http://www.latitude38.com/lectronic/lectronicday.lasso?date=2015-02-02#.VM_eKUY8KJI

 

An accomplished boatbuilder and racing friend tells me multihulls don't belong in open water unless racing and being tracked, particularly in the Noth Atlantic winter.

If "a wall of 70 mph wind" slammed Rainmaker they're lucky only the rig broke and they weren't capsized. A monohull would've had a severe knockdown, dumping the wind, and stood a better chance. There appears a great deal of hubris to go around between the builder and owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

An accomplished boatbuilder and racing friend tells me multihulls don't belong in open water unless racing and being tracked, particularly in the Noth Atlantic winter.

...

 

So all of us out there cruising across ocean's in our multi-hulls should just stop now? I happen to agree that the North Atlantic in winter is not somewhere I'd choose to go with any of the boats I have had and done ocean passages in (mono and multi hulls). However to suggest that multi-hulls in general should not venture offshore, except when racing and tracked, is a trifle extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though it's still early in the investigation process here's a thought from Latitude 38.

 

http://www.latitude38.com/lectronic/lectronicday.lasso?date=2015-02-02#.VM_eKUY8KJI

 

An accomplished boatbuilder and racing friend tells me multihulls don't belong in open water unless racing and being tracked, particularly in the Noth Atlantic winter.

If "a wall of 70 mph wind" slammed Rainmaker they're lucky only the rig broke and they weren't capsized. A monohull would've had a severe knockdown, dumping the wind, and stood a better chance. There appears a great deal of hubris to go around between the builder and owner.

When you have experience, offshore, on an ocean sailing multihull design, you will understand why, your boat builder buddy is incorrect.

 

Multihulls have very different handling techniques.

 

Many multihulls have extremely powerful rigs, and wind energy goes immediately into the structure, and when sailing, must be setup to be sailed to the strongest wind peak.

 

The extra attention that needs to be in place in unstable weather conditions, is exceptionally important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was out surfing in 35+ knot santa ana winds last week and seriously could barely walk back across the beach into the wind to get to my vehicle. I was thinking, the few times I've had to sail in exactly that kind of breeze was quite unpleasant, especially the gusty nature of the santa anas making it very nerve-wracking. 70 knots seems to me could tumbleweed just about any light multi. I can only take Soma's word for it that people actually go out looking for 35-40 knots of breeze for passagemaking in winter in the Alantic. One thought, they used to make a kite (maybe still do) to use in just such a situation. Seems like a perfect way to sail the boat when dismasted and motor issues. The stowed kite pretty light and sure would be handy if you needed it, plus flying it would be a nice way to while away the hours when on the run...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

random thoughts while grazin...north of 138

 

if I marry rich, does a rasta come with boat? would help in de islands, mann.

But were to put him, just 2 state rooms?

 

mainsail: how many reefs? just two??

can these floating party platforms set a trysail? Separate track for em?

were they actually using a storm jib as described in accts, or a reef in standard head sail if supplied per Gunboat website..."to reduce windage" ? OK!

 

i'm thinkin the big cat got a hull airborne and pants were soiled, then rig went bye bye

 

watched youtube videos of same yacht, looks great in 20-30 astern.... above that I'd want my ass in a well found monohull. Not a floating tennis court with lots of glass. And 20 feet or more to fall cross the big party room should she flip.

 

Don't think they may flip..... chk with Elvis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

An accomplished boatbuilder and racing friend tells me multihulls don't belong in open water unless racing and being tracked, particularly in the Noth Atlantic winter.

If "a wall of 70 mph wind" slammed Rainmaker they're lucky only the rig broke and they weren't capsized. A monohull would've had a severe knockdown, dumping the wind, and stood a better chance. There appears a great deal of hubris to go around between the builder and owner.

 

Man, I wish I talked to your accomplished friend 15 years ago before I started risking my life so needlessly. You mean this whole time I could have been with all the accomplished people on a monomaran, which I hear never ever lose there keels.

I feel mislead. It all Hobie Alta's fault really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd guess the accomplished boatbuilder is at least 70 years olde and fixed his opinions in concrete around about 1959. On another note, some bloke said that the seas 20 miles offshore in such conditions wouldn't be bad, I beg to differ. On this coast, you go out 20 miles in a 30-40 knot blow and the seas are gonna be quite significant and we aint got no gulfstream to add to it. If you don't believe me ask the guys that were in Avalon a few weeks ago. 22 miles of fetch, 30-40 knots of wind (and that only for a few hours) and the seas were enough to tear out big moorings, create utter havoc and sadly, death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though it's still early in the investigation process here's a thought from Latitude 38.

 

http://www.latitude38.com/lectronic/lectronicday.lasso?date=2015-02-02#.VM_eKUY8KJI

 

An accomplished boatbuilder and racing friend tells me multihulls don't belong in open water unless racing and being tracked, particularly in the Noth Atlantic winter.

If "a wall of 70 mph wind" slammed Rainmaker they're lucky only the rig broke and they weren't capsized. A monohull would've had a severe knockdown, dumping the wind, and stood a better chance. There appears a great deal of hubris to go around between the builder and owner.

 

Sounds like the hubris of one calling out the hubris of another.

 

Not many boats would survive 70 knots well if they were rigged for performance sailing in 30 to 40 knots, and I imagine none of us would want to test that theory if they truly saw 70 knots while being prepared for half of that.

 

There are plenty of stories from this year's Hobart and other races where keelboats have lost masts in lesser conditions. Rig failures do happen and while never good, they are better than the alternative in many cases and can reflect good design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd guess the accomplished boatbuilder is at least 70 years olde and fixed his opinions in concrete around about 1959. On another note, some bloke said that the seas 20 miles offshore in such conditions wouldn't be bad, I beg to differ. On this coast, you go out 20 miles in a 30-40 knot blow and the seas are gonna be quite significant and we aint got no gulfstream to add to it. If you don't believe me ask the guys that were in Avalon a few weeks ago. 22 miles of fetch, 30-40 knots of wind (and that only for a few hours) and the seas were enough to tear out big moorings, create utter havoc and sadly, death.

 

ocean_motion_fig01.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. 20 miles of fetch in 30 knot offshore wind conditions would be six foot waves, according to this chart. Bad in Avalon Harbor, sure, but on the open sea? Not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, and it was probably 6 foot breaking waves that were predominant in Avalon. But remember, that was only maybe 6 hours of 35 knot wind. Sustained 35-45 knots on 200 miles of fetch with current and cross swell, add some big gusts, must have been pretty challenging. Glad I was on my couch watching Judge Judy reruns. Fortunately, my beseeching was rewarded and Zeus intervened. As Socrates said on his deathbed, "I owe the gods a goat."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a video of us sailing south from Newport in Nov a couple of years ago. Breeze was around 30, but it had been more in the previous 24hrs. The skipper of RM is on watch but all 5 of us were up and (really!) enjoying the conditions. My wife is narrating. I could always sleep well when CB was on watch. He knew when to throttle up and have fun, knew when to back off and be safe. He knows where the daggerboards and retractable rudders should be. We'd poured over GRIBs numerous times. He's been a professional racer but has also cruised extensively. He's a better sailor than most people in this thread, guaranteed.

 

 

When you're hired as a delivery skipper your responsibility is to the boat. When you're hired as a yacht skipper your responsibility is to the owner and his family first and foremost. The asset that needs protection is the boss. No marine insurance company wants to write a check for $2m boat. But similarly, no life insurance company wants to write a check for a billionaire and his son. As my old boss said, "you're hired to protect me from myself".

 

The metaphor that I keep going back to is chess. When the King is in "check" you have to remove the threat. That is exactly what he did.

You called it!! That makes the captain a hero, Gunboat the dream boat(saved everyone's life) and the whole event "ONE GREAT ADVENTURE"!! Good for them!! Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can honestly say I'm not at all jealous of being pulled by the CG off a very expensive cat.

 

I can honestly say I won't be repainting my little tub to make it look like a Prevost motor home parked in a KOA Kampground near Branson, Missouri, either... ;-)

 

 

1871.jpg?a=1119025953362

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not one to second guess what happened out there, but if I was in the owners shoes with my kid onboard, I'd make a risk call. Risk to my kid of rescue, vs pulling up the boards and being a on a raft in a gale.

 

I'd probably ask to be off as well.

 

Now, I'd like to think that I wouldn't be there in the first place but if I had a skipper who had done this many times, I might be up for a sleigh ride as well. I'd likely leave the kid on the dock however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can honestly say I'm not at all jealous of being near Hatteras in a winter storm.

I can honestly say I'm not at all jealous of being pulled by the CG off a very expensive cat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice flat water video

NC = graveyard atlantic, read about, many good book, gulf stream not same florida north anywhere else, no where go if trouble, inlet close out, stream not survive

u learn if take boat out oregon inlet bad day when charter no go, u understand if survive

people no from nc no understand

gunboat no from nc prob no listen nc fishman

many captain take risk get lucky go by bad weather, some no get lucky, you want no get lucky?

pro job do not care owner, owner know nothing, pro job fight owner protect self crew, owner no like owner die with scab

pro make big window, no good weather, make new window. owner no like owner fuck self

many many captain not stand up owner take bad gamble everybody die many many book

pro hired make right decision not say yes

if rec captain profession, profession need ethic

 





When you're hired as a delivery skipper your responsibility is to the boat. When you're hired as a yacht skipper your responsibility is to the owner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What blows me away about this story is that the decision was made to fire off the EPIRB. Why on earth did the skipper do this? There was NO immediate risk to either the boat or the people. There was no lee shore. No injured crew. They had shelter, water food, power, etc. they were on a 50' absolutely safe "life raft". By calling for rescue, the person making that call enormously increased the likelihood of harm to both the crew AND the rescuers.

 

This I dont get!

 

Oh, and I'm no armchair admiral ... Currently circumnavigating on my own 55' catamaran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What blows me away about this story is that the decision was made to fire off the EPIRB. Why on earth did the skipper do this? There was NO immediate risk to either the boat or the people. There was no lee shore. No injured crew. They had shelter, water food, power, etc. they were on a 50' absolutely safe "life raft". By calling for rescue, the person making that call enormously increased the likelihood of harm to both the crew AND the rescuers.

 

It's like calling 911 because your car got a flat tire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you set off the EPIRB, and the CG later determines that it was altogether unnecessary under the circumstances, what then? And do we even know who decided to hit the panic button?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What blows me away about this story is that the decision was made to fire off the EPIRB. Why on earth did the skipper do this? There was NO immediate risk to either the boat or the people. There was no lee shore. No injured crew. They had shelter, water food, power, etc. they were on a 50' absolutely safe "life raft". By calling for rescue, the person making that call enormously increased the likelihood of harm to both the crew AND the rescuers.

 

It's like calling 911 because your car got a flat tire.

 

Perhaps the call went something like this?

 

;-)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What blows me away about this story is that the decision was made to fire off the EPIRB. Why on earth did the skipper do this? There was NO immediate risk to either the boat or the people. There was no lee shore. No injured crew. They had shelter, water food, power, etc. they were on a 50' absolutely safe "life raft". By calling for rescue, the person making that call enormously increased the likelihood of harm to both the crew AND the rescuers.

 

It's like calling 911 because your car got a flat tire.

 

 

are you sure there was no damage to the boat from the mast coming down?

 

we learned that there was some damage from contact to the freighter.., but there might have already been some damage.

 

i'm pretty sure that the USCG would agree that the mast down and the fouled prop add up to a pan pan given the conditions

 

i would probably wait to here more about the actual circumstances before i passed that kind of judgement - but maybe that's just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What blows me away about this story is that the decision was made to fire off the EPIRB. Why on earth did the skipper do this? There was NO immediate risk to either the boat or the people. There was no lee shore. No injured crew. They had shelter, water food, power, etc. they were on a 50' absolutely safe "life raft". By calling for rescue, the person making that call enormously increased the likelihood of harm to both the crew AND the rescuers.

 

It's like calling 911 because your car got a flat tire.

 

 

are you sure there was no damage to the boat from the mast coming down?

 

we learned that there was some damage from contact to the freighter.., but there might have already been some damage.

 

i'm pretty sure that the USCG would agree that the mast down and the fouled prop add up to a pan pan given the conditions

 

i would probably wait to here more about the actual circumstances before i passed that kind of judgement - but maybe that's just me.

 

Earlier on in either this thread or the other, one poster claimed to have heard "from the horse's mouth" (presumably, someone who was aboard, or one of the CG crew, perhaps?) that there was more to this incident than "just a dismasting", or words to that effect... Given the circumstances/conditions on scene, that would not surprise me in the least...

 

However, as I believe was noted by DDW, the decision to abandon would have already been taken prior to any additional damage incurred during the collision with the merchant vessel trying to assist...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, as I believe was noted by DDW, the decision to abandon would have already been taken prior to any additional damage incurred during the collision with the merchant vessel trying to assist...

 

 

of course!

 

i was just pointing out that we don't really know for sure what the condition of the boat was when they made that initial decision to contact the USCG, which if i understand correctly led to the freighter being diverted to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not one to second guess what happened out there, but if I was in the owners shoes with my kid onboard, I'd make a risk call. Risk to my kid of rescue, vs pulling up the boards and being a on a raft in a gale.

 

What of your kid was a chopper pilot for the USCG and was running the risk of flying out to pick up idiots off a motorhome? Would you be equally happy that the call was made then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, I wouldn't say I'm happy the call was made, but I understand it.

 

As to my kid piloting a chopper, I'd be pretty damn proud of her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as far as the speculation goes, if Peter Johnson can come on here and ask us to say prayers for a couple of cunts worried about getting their Gucci loafers wet when they have already been airlifted then he can just as easily come back on here and fill in some of the details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know they pitched the rig, the boat was not holed, the props were fouled and no one was hurt. We know they asked a freighter to pick them up, they collided with the freighter and subsequently asked to be airlifted. We know the crew was returned safely by the USCG and it's been reported the boat is being salvaged.

 

Beyond that we know shit... The rest is supposition...

 

 

 

 

 

However, as I believe was noted by DDW, the decision to abandon would have already been taken prior to any additional damage incurred during the collision with the merchant vessel trying to assist...

 

of course!

 

i was just pointing out that we don't really know for sure what the condition of the boat was when they made that initial decision to contact the USCG, which if i understand correctly led to the freighter being diverted to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rigs fall down. Of course it will be interesting to hear why this one did, and if it is a weakness in the design, GB will have to address it. But chances are that it was a one off failure, the other GB's might have had other failures.

 

And the decision to leave can be second guessed, especially by people sitting at home, after the fact. But the skipper and crew were purportedly pros, so I won't judge them until I hear from them.

 

However, I have to say I am tired of hearing about people getting off boats when the going gets tough. In this case, the chopper diverted on the way home because it was low on fuel. I guess we were closer to a much bigger tragedy, that which might have occurred if the chopper ditched after picking up people who wanted off what should have been a perfectly good boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image-6-gunboat.jpg

 

As fastyacht pointed out in the thread on this topic on the SA forum, the aft steps of Rainmaker are open to a very broad bridgedeck bound by high bulwarks. Since it was a squall that nailed them, you know the seas would be confused, plus it was NW winds against the stream. If the boat were dismasted, and the props fouled by lines, could they very quickly have been inundated by the 13 ft waves that were reported in the area? What stops entering water from getting trapped in the salon, and causing a free surface effect, possibly entering the hulls? Not to the point of flooding, but certainly making everything damp and getting into systems.

 

I know there are "windows" on the sides of the salon, but I don't know what they are made of, nor what "doors" protect the salon from the stern. On the GB website they are described as "semi-rigid". I could easily imagine those beautiful windows being stove in by the mast coming down in gale force winds, and I'm pretty sure waves breaking over the stern would smash "semi-rigid" construction, given the opportunity.

 

Imagine all that water on deck, sloshing around, possibly flushing items out the stern as it drains... Could be a terrifying "liferaft". You'd have to keep the hatches to the hulls closed constantly, so folks would have to decide whether to be below or in the semi-enclosed salon, no going back and forth.

 

Perhaps this design is more of a "coastal" type than a ocean going vessel, and the weather report should have been interpreted differently than aboard true ocean-going performance cats. The GB 60s at least have a pair of rigid doors between the water and the bridgedeck, and previous GB stern decks appear much more protected. Atlantic (CW) yachts have a beefy looking door with a raised sill off a rear porch, older ones have no stern door at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter Johnstone really needs to return to the thread (having started it) to answer some of the questions raised about the boat generally rather than the particular incident (unless he has more than mere speculation).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well........observing from Australia and not being familiar with a Gunboat or the people involved all I can say is it looks like a witch hunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well........observing from Australia and not being familiar with a Gunboat or the people involved all I can say is it looks like a witch hunt.

 

Its what SA does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the yacht have a life raft on board?

Or did capt N crew drink the Kool Aid and rely on the "super boat" MARKETING?

Some thing like "should the unthinkable happen she is unsinkable with water tight bulk heads and flotation from core."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13' waves... Seriously? Ya call for evac in that? REALLY???????? You've gotta be shitting me!

 

That's just getting to be great sailing.

 

I'm sorry. The more I read, the more I'm truly unimpressed -- and figure the CG should be sending a big fat bill to the owner.

 

<sheesh>

 

This whole thread is really getting me grumpy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im trying to posit why they made the decision to abandon. My theory is that it's not really an offshore yacht given the "semirigid" salon enclosure and large openings aft to the sea. If it were offshore capable, they should have felt safe to ride out the storm, even without power.

 

Gorgeous boat. Awesome performance, but perhaps best used as a coastal cruiser and racer. Slightly more caution advised offshore than boats designed with a different purpose in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think someone hit the nail on the head “this is nothing but a witch-hunt” If I was in marketing @ Gunboat not only would I no longer post here I would pull all advertisement.

 

Yes a rich guy bought an expensive boat and abandoned it sooner than most of you would have. He calculated the risk and made the choice.

 

Yes with my sailing experience I would not have made the choice to enter out in that weather forecast I know my limitations and for me personally I would have waited.

 

I personally would much rather read about a boat being prematurely abandoned then read about 5 dead sailors that could have been rescued but chose to stay so they would not be flamed on the internet by a bunch of keyboard sailors.

 

I have read from another news source that the salvage team that was contracted to retrieve her is in possession of rainmaker and making way back to port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think someone hit the nail on the head this is nothing but a witch-hunt If I was in marketing @ Gunboat not only would I no longer post here I would pull all advertisement.

 

Yes a rich guy bought an expensive boat and abandoned it sooner than most of you would have. He calculated the risk and made the choice.

 

Yes with my sailing experience I would not have made the choice to enter out in that weather forecast I know my limitations and for me personally I would have waited.

 

I personally would much rather read about a boat being prematurely abandoned then read about 5 dead sailors that could have been rescued but chose to stay so they would not be flamed on the internet by a bunch of keyboard sailors.

 

I have read from another news source that the salvage team that was contracted to retrieve her is in possession of rainmaker and making way back to port.

Is that you Peter J?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get what all the fuss is about.

 

Rigs fail. Rigs fail on every kind of boat I've ever sailed. Things tend to break more on higher tech boats (in my experience), as we strive for the performance that makes them great to sail. Every platform has failure in it's development process - planes, cars, boats... there simply is no avoiding it. You hope that there is no significant damage or loss of life (which is true in this case), and you learn from it. Engineering is intended to remove as much of this failure as possible, but it's not perfect.

 

Is the issue that it's a Gunboat? Or that the guy is rich? Or that he's visible and we all wish we owned his boat? Or that we pay too much in taxes? Given that there is going to be a big insurance play, don't expect much info till that's resolved...

 

Lots of vitriol for people who weren't there, don't have the facts and likely will never find themselves in that situation. Let's get the facts, then have the barbecue.

 

But - that's SA for you... armchair QB's welcomed.

 

Go Pats!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think someone hit the nail on the head this is nothing but a witch-hunt If I was in marketing @ Gunboat not only would I no longer post here I would pull all advertisement.

 

Yes a rich guy bought an expensive boat and abandoned it sooner than most of you would have. He calculated the risk and made the choice.

 

Yes with my sailing experience I would not have made the choice to enter out in that weather forecast I know my limitations and for me personally I would have waited.

 

I personally would much rather read about a boat being prematurely abandoned then read about 5 dead sailors that could have been rescued but chose to stay so they would not be flamed on the internet by a bunch of keyboard sailors.

 

I have read from another news source that the salvage team that was contracted to retrieve her is in possession of rainmaker and making way back to port.

Is that you Peter J?

 

thank you for the compliment

but No. I do not now nor have I ever worked for Peter or Gunboat I have actually never even met the man or touched a gunboat I did stay on a holiday in express once if that counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, rigs fail, but are you interested in why this crew decided to jump into the water rather than stay aboard? I am interested, and this is exactly the correct forum for these discussions. I've only done coastal sailing with short offshore runs, or inland bays. I can only dream of a boat this cool for my kind of sailing... Runs to Bermuda and the Caribbean would be awesome, given appropriate route planning and a decent weather window.

 

I'm just wondering if the "take the back end of a winter weather system for all its worth and beat the next one" sort of plan is too aggressive for the design. I do not know the answer, and do not pretend that I am an expert.

 

Way more nuanced than some barn-burning witch hunt.

 

GB marketing has decided it's customers are on SA, so they are here, showing the flag. Pretty arrogant if you think you know better saying they should bail. Gotta take this place warts & all. Leaving now would be weak and petty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious, I'm interested... but without information we are just guessing - which is a waste of time.

 

So far, I've heard there were experienced Captain and Crew aboard. At the level of sailor we are talking about, playing weather windows is normal, as is pushing the edge. Otherwise we would sail displacement cruisers.

 

But again - I have no idea what happened, and neither does anyone posting here!!!

 

I will say that it must have been really, really hard to abandon your new multi-million dollar baby... From all accounts, this guy loves his boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think someone hit the nail on the head this is nothing but a witch-hunt If I was in marketing @ Gunboat not only would I no longer post here I would pull all advertisement.

 

Yes a rich guy bought an expensive boat and abandoned it sooner than most of you would have. He calculated the risk and made the choice.

 

Yes with my sailing experience I would not have made the choice to enter out in that weather forecast I know my limitations and for me personally I would have waited.

 

I personally would much rather read about a boat being prematurely abandoned then read about 5 dead sailors that could have been rescued but chose to stay so they would not be flamed on the internet by a bunch of keyboard sailors.

 

I have read from another news source that the salvage team that was contracted to retrieve her is in possession of rainmaker and making way back to port.

Is that you Peter J?

 

thank you for the compliment

but No. I do not now nor have I ever worked for Peter or Gunboat I have actually never even met the man or touched a gunboat I did stay on a holiday in express once if that counts.

No it doesn't. Now FO or SUYWOGFTs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of vitriol for people who weren't there, don't have the facts and likely will never find themselves in that situation. Let's get the facts, then have the barbecue.

 

One thing that was really brought out in the wake of the loss of the Alpha 42 last January... It's one thing to question the passage itself, but it can be an entirely different matter to second-guess the decision to abandon... In the immediate aftermath, we often know far less about the details of what led to the latter, in comparison to the former... what might have been the nature of the communication with the CG, and so on...

 

I believe it was soma who put it best (my apologies if I have posters/threads confused) On a delivery, the skipper's primary responsibility is to the boat (and of course the crew, no question) But with the owner and his family aboard, their personal safety rises to the top of the skipper's concerns... In that regard, in this instance the skipper and crew did their job, everyone is safe...

 

With the abandonment of BE GOOD TOO, we had the benefit of Charlie Doane's very detailed and sober account of the situation in very short order. But it was the owner who made the final call to bail, and I have no doubt that had Hank and Charlie been on that boat alone, they would have at a minimum toughed it out longer, staying with the boat in an effort to make port on their own...

 

By all accounts I've seen, Chris Bailet has a stellar reputation, knows these boats as well as anyone, and is an extremely capable and experienced guy... Seems he deserves the benefit of the doubt at least until further details come to light, and I think we all probably know who aboard really made the call to get off that boat, anyway...

 

I have to believe they were likely dealing with some situation they deemed pretty threatening. Certainly, the decision to try to transfer to a merchant ship in those conditions is not one to be taken lightly, that maneuver is gonna present a level of risk FAR greater to the crew than a helo evacuation... One slip or misstep, someone could be crushed to death in an instant... I seem to recall Skip Allan saying that bringing WILDFLOWER alongside the merchant ship that came to his rescue, and making the leap to that rope ladder was the most terrifying experience he'd ever had at sea - and for a guy who was aboard IMP during the 79' Fastnet, that's saying something ;-) I can't imagine deciding to do that, myself, except in the most dire of circumstances... And for that reason, I'm inclined to think those aboard RAINMAKER just might have had good reason to worry that the boat may not have made it thru the night in those conditions...

 

So, although I wasn't paying attention to the weather along their route at the time of their departure, I think I can still say that I, personally, would probably not have left Hatteras when they did... However, whether I would, or would not have called in the cavalry - if serving as the skipper with the owner and his son aboard - is far less clear in my mind, especially given how little we really know at the moment...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get what all the fuss is about.

 

Rigs fail. Rigs fail on every kind of boat I've ever sailed. Things tend to break more on higher tech boats (in my experience), as we strive for the performance that makes them great to sail. Every platform has failure in it's development process - planes, cars, boats... there simply is no avoiding it. You hope that there is no significant damage or loss of life (which is true in this case), and you learn from it. Engineering is intended to remove as much of this failure as possible, but it's not perfect.

 

Is the issue that it's a Gunboat? Or that the guy is rich? Or that he's visible and we all wish we owned his boat? Or that we pay too much in taxes? Given that there is going to be a big insurance play, don't expect much info till that's resolved...

 

Lots of vitriol for people who weren't there, don't have the facts and likely will never find themselves in that situation. Let's get the facts, then have the barbecue.

 

But - that's SA for you... armchair QB's welcomed.

 

Go Pats!

+1

And as to all the "Peter should comment" demands, he did, and you guys speculated and twisted until you came up with a witchhunt that has no relation to the facts. He doesn't owe any of you anything unless you own or have a deposit on a Gunboat. What a bunch of sanctimonious twats. I doubt he has the time to reply to such bullshit, nor should he. That's why he owns Gunboat and you jealous assholes try to belittle it.

As Capt. Horizon always tells me when I get to wound up in something,"Go Sailing"...and I'll add to that if you have the ability. Sounds like a bunch don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um... the thread was "Please say a Prayer..."

+1

 

To you and Foghorn both. I don't think I have ever seen so much misinformation, speculation, outright BS and flaming in one place.

 

All this thread taugh anyone owning a large cat (or purchasing one) is a long list of names to avoid as delivery crew and no I don't mean the Gunboat skipper. Would sail with him in a heartbeat.

 

I have no affiliation to Gunboat or the skipper. Just decades of cruising and multihull experience including large cats.

 

Damn, the wheat to chafe ratio in this place is like 1:100. What a waste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't honestly expect them to head out in a winter weather, get dismasted, risk their lives trying to climb on a freighter, get a helo ride to shore, and then have salvagers chasing after the boat and get no epic thread going on here :rolleyes:

Um... the thread was "Please say a Prayer..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want your prayers answered go light a votive candle. If you DON'T want this discussed then DON'T start a thread on a forum that discusses these things.

 

 

Um... the thread was "Please say a Prayer..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sailracer.... that means nothing .... loads of motoring through the doldrums for most charter condomarans as far as I hear...

if you say.. it survived the double dammed ... it would actually mean something..lol

 

 

Anyhow.... Peter is probably busy right now, trying to salvage the boat .....

give him some time. I am sure he will openly discuss what went wrong, even if it hurts. And than, all current gunboats and all new ones will be updated and will be even better...... IF ( capital IF ) there is actually anything wrong with the boat to start out with .

 

thor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I have ever seen so much misinformation, speculation, outright BS and flaming in one place.

 

Really? With 2190 posts? Compared with some threads here this one is a shining example of restrain, consideration, and moderation :rolleyes: .

 

I'm guessing Peter posted here because he knew there was going to be a thread: might as well get on top of it. He has a business to run so you can't expect absolute stream of consciousness candor, but he has not been one to duck the hard questions in the past. I imagine we will hear more when the time comes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, makes me wonder if Peter designs boats with prayers, too. I mean really - at least you can get chocolate from the Easter Bunny, you don't get anything from prayers ...

 

What a fucking joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be nice if Clean could make a couple of calls and interview some of the crew. Maybe he's working on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems the modern day sailor with all their high tech equipment has less seamanship skills than the sailor of a bygone era.. I thought Gunboats were blue water boats, built to cross oceans. Are people heading out to sea in boats that are really only designed for coastal cruising? or are they lacking offshore equipment such as droges and sea anchors and the knowledge of how and when to use them?