Peter Johnstone

PLEASE SAY A PRAYER FOR RAINMAKER'S CREW

Recommended Posts

Anyone want to bet that the owner takes the insurance and walks away ?

 

would you? or buy a hinckley and keep the change? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clean...

I would stick with the Gunboat. After Rainmaker is recovered and brought back home the toughness and quality of the build will be demonstrated. Maybe the spar was not robust enough for the weight of the boat but I expect that boat will be ok minus the damage done by the freighter.

If I’d been onboard I’d have bailed too. There was nothing to prove and I wouldn’t have risked my son’s life to prove a point either.

I’d seriously consider buying a GB. Even more now after watching the Johnston’s response to the event.

I had a Hinckley SW 50 pull its hull deck joint apart while at sea. Shit happens...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Folks - I have no axe here. Boat building is a difficult business to begin with. Engineering a high performance cat meant for ocean passages is technically daunting to say the least. Gunboat builds beautiful boats and kudos to them and others who enter this business so we can all have fun with their creations. Here’s to hoping that all builders and designers may incorporate whatever lessons are learned from this episode into their future designs.
- Not pretending I weighed the boat, but apparently this boat was highly overweight – so much so that the originally contracted buyer walked
- No idea if the rig and fittings were ever re-engineered for the apparently (substantially) heavier boat
- The boat supposedly spent 3 months at GB in NC getting $$$’s of add’l work done – probable reason she hadn’t made it south earlier
- If there was no reengineering, it’s possible that the rigging was under spec’d vs the weight of the boat. If so this could have led to the rig failure
- Without the rig/forestay there would be no tension to support longeron, which would likely then be fairly loose and potentially pose a threat to the hulls
No idea what really happened out there on the water, but without a rig, a loose/threatening longeron and the possibility of swamped engines due to water ingress in the engine compartments I would most likely elect to abandon as well.

 

Is this speculation or posted somewhere else by someone reputable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clean...

I would stick with the Gunboat. After Rainmaker is recovered and brought back home the toughness and quality of the build will be demonstrated. Maybe the spar was not robust enough for the weight of the boat but I expect that boat will be ok minus the damage done by the freighter.

If I’d been onboard I’d have bailed too. There was nothing to prove and I wouldn’t have risked my son’s life to prove a point either.

I’d seriously consider buying a GB. Even more now after watching the Johnston’s response to the event.

I had a Hinckley SW 50 pull its hull deck joint apart while at sea. Shit happens...

 

Keeping it 100. Good answer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Boats can be very hard to locate. IIRC, & this was related to me by persons directly involved. A large (Deerfoot 65?) yacht was left adrift in the Atlantic, same region. USCG airlifted crew off, boat was left motoring under autopilot. Peolple involved with insurance & boat build chartered a lear jet & spent two full days searching for it. No luck. Vessel was abandoned because of seasickness(?) not any fault of the vessel. Never found.

 

Perhaps this incident will give some indication whether this system is really up to snuff?

 

http://www.marinelink.com/news/catamarans-security362102.aspx

 

Given the heavy weather in the immediate aftermath of the abandonment, I've felt all along that the odds of recovery might be a bit longer than many might have assumed... Even with the resources available to be thrown at it, it's got to be a VERY challenging assignment...

 

One of the more curious reports came from the initial write-up in YACHTING WORLD, that claimed that the CG had "placed a tracking device" aboard RAINMAKER... I can't recall that having been done before with a yacht being abandoned, and watching the rescue videos, it's obvious the rescue swimmer has higher priorities, and never appears to get close enough to the vessels to transfer a tracking device to anyone still aboard... Perhaps someone has better information re this?

 

In any event, it would certainly seem understandable if those involved in the search and recovery might choose to keep mum until the boat is back alongside a dock somewhere... Sure hope they manage to accomplish that, but given the recent history of yachts being abandoned offshore, it would be somewhat in the realm of a 'First'...

 

Didn't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yachting world?

 

:unsure:

 

YW might have misunderstood the facts, specifically that the CG was tracking Rainmaker via her EPIRB, and I believe she was issuing regular Pan Pan calls broadcasting the boat's location as a hazard to navigation. Maybe sending it out via NTM as well.

 

Or maybe the CG put some kind of private tracker aboard...but I doubt it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Boats can be very hard to locate. IIRC, & this was related to me by persons directly involved. A large (Deerfoot 65?) yacht was left adrift in the Atlantic, same region. USCG airlifted crew off, boat was left motoring under autopilot. Peolple involved with insurance & boat build chartered a lear jet & spent two full days searching for it. No luck. Vessel was abandoned because of seasickness(?) not any fault of the vessel. Never found.

 

Perhaps this incident will give some indication whether this system is really up to snuff?

 

http://www.marinelink.com/news/catamarans-security362102.aspx

 

Given the heavy weather in the immediate aftermath of the abandonment, I've felt all along that the odds of recovery might be a bit longer than many might have assumed... Even with the resources available to be thrown at it, it's got to be a VERY challenging assignment...

 

One of the more curious reports came from the initial write-up in YACHTING WORLD, that claimed that the CG had "placed a tracking device" aboard RAINMAKER... I can't recall that having been done before with a yacht being abandoned, and watching the rescue videos, it's obvious the rescue swimmer has higher priorities, and never appears to get close enough to the vessels to transfer a tracking device to anyone still aboard... Perhaps someone has better information re this?

 

In any event, it would certainly seem understandable if those involved in the search and recovery might choose to keep mum until the boat is back alongside a dock somewhere... Sure hope they manage to accomplish that, but given the recent history of yachts being abandoned offshore, it would be somewhat in the realm of a 'First'...

 

Didn't happen.

 

http://www.yachtingworld.com/news/first-gunboat-55-catamaran-rainmaker-dismasts-abandoned-atlantic-5-crewmembers-airlifted-safety-61674

 

 

The carbon mast and rigging was cut away without holing the boat and there were no reported injuries.

...
Johnstone said that the Gunboat 55 had no manoeuvrability due to sheets around her props and was ‘beaten up’ when the ship tried to come alongside. The crew thought they might get sucked under the ship he says.
It was then that the decision was taken to ask for a helicopter evacuation. The Gunboat is reportedly fine and was left ready to be towed. As this is being posted, a trawler is en route from North Carolina to try and salvage the stricken cat, but conditions are currently still bad, with up to 80-knot winds. The Coastguard helicopter crew put a 30-day tracking beacon aboard, so Johnstone remains confident they will retrieve RAINMAKER and get her back to the yard – “and hopefully back on the water again for the owner’s summer.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting. written as though it came from PJ, who it seems is no longer allowed to comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Boats can be very hard to locate. IIRC, & this was related to me by persons directly involved. A large (Deerfoot 65?) yacht was left adrift in the Atlantic, same region. USCG airlifted crew off, boat was left motoring under autopilot. Peolple involved with insurance & boat build chartered a lear jet & spent two full days searching for it. No luck. Vessel was abandoned because of seasickness(?) not any fault of the vessel. Never found.

 

Perhaps this incident will give some indication whether this system is really up to snuff?

 

http://www.marinelink.com/news/catamarans-security362102.aspx

 

Given the heavy weather in the immediate aftermath of the abandonment, I've felt all along that the odds of recovery might be a bit longer than many might have assumed... Even with the resources available to be thrown at it, it's got to be a VERY challenging assignment...

 

One of the more curious reports came from the initial write-up in YACHTING WORLD, that claimed that the CG had "placed a tracking device" aboard RAINMAKER... I can't recall that having been done before with a yacht being abandoned, and watching the rescue videos, it's obvious the rescue swimmer has higher priorities, and never appears to get close enough to the vessels to transfer a tracking device to anyone still aboard... Perhaps someone has better information re this?

 

In any event, it would certainly seem understandable if those involved in the search and recovery might choose to keep mum until the boat is back alongside a dock somewhere... Sure hope they manage to accomplish that, but given the recent history of yachts being abandoned offshore, it would be somewhat in the realm of a 'First'...

 

Didn't happen.

 

Thanks... Good to hear I guessed right, for once...

 

;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My obsidian blade is sharpened, my pyramid stands ready, if I could just find some virgins I would make an offering to Quetzlcuatl. Any volunteers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't berate somebody's skill level because of age. Soma and Pyrat are pros in my book, age doesnt mean anything. Knowledge of GunBoats can't be gained by any other means than sailing on one. I have been sailing for 55 years and recently sailed trans Atlantic on a Gunboat 66. It was far different than any other boat that I have sailed. After 5000 miles I was still learning the nuance of sailing the boat. Recalling a tight reach at 22 knots for mile after mile still makes the hair stand up on my arms. These guys know what they are talking about, unlike most of the speculating trolls that have been posting here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Spike I meant to type 62. And Soma thanks for your warm welcome. Here's my view right now; as I type this on the Soggy Dollar Wifi in Jost (no joke, suckers!!):

 

Shit. Oh well I'll send pics when get back to the ready world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we have here folks is a social phenomenon - this could be great for a SOC 101 case study.

 

Three monumental maritime screw-ups, all occurring within a couple of months requiring rescues at sea - Vestus, Rainmaker, and Flyin Hawaiian.

 

Vestus and Rainmaker feature multimillion dollar budgets, therefore their screw-ups are more surprising and magnitudes greater than the hapless and predictable FH disaster.

 

OK - so the social phenomenon part. Two of the screw-ups feature many well-connected folks, including many "experienced experts" and/or financial investment in SA. One has none of the above.

 

The well-connected and resourced get there egos and soft parts stroked on SA, and can essentially can do no wrong regardless of magnitude of maritime screw-up.

 

The hapless socially (and financially) unconnected are mercilessly mocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we have here folks is a social phenomenon - this could be great for a SOC 101 case study.

 

Three monumental maritime screw-ups, all occurring within a couple of months requiring rescues at sea - Vestus, Rainmaker, and Flyin Hawaiian.

 

Vestus and Rainmaker feature multimillion dollar budgets, therefore their screw-ups are more surprising and magnitudes greater than the hapless and predictable FH disaster.

 

OK - so the social phenomenon part. Two of the screw-ups feature many well-connected folks, including many "experienced experts" and/or financial investment in SA. One has none of the above.

 

The well-connected and resourced get there egos and soft parts stroked on SA, and can essentially can do no wrong regardless of magnitude of maritime screw-up.

 

The hapless socially (and financially) unconnected are mercilessly mocked.

 

Maybe you should take it to social phenomenon anarchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What we have here folks is a social phenomenon - this could be great for a SOC 101 case study.

 

Three monumental maritime screw-ups, all occurring within a couple of months requiring rescues at sea - Vestus, Rainmaker, and Flyin Hawaiian.

 

Vestus and Rainmaker feature multimillion dollar budgets, therefore their screw-ups are more surprising and magnitudes greater than the hapless and predictable FH disaster.

 

OK - so the social phenomenon part. Two of the screw-ups feature many well-connected folks, including many "experienced experts" and/or financial investment in SA. One has none of the above.

 

The well-connected and resourced get there egos and soft parts stroked on SA, and can essentially can do no wrong regardless of magnitude of maritime screw-up.

 

The hapless socially (and financially) unconnected are mercilessly mocked.

 

Maybe you should take it to social phenomenon anarchy.

Nah. These things always come in threes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we have here folks is a social phenomenon - this could be great for a SOC 101 case study.

 

Three monumental maritime screw-ups, all occurring within a couple of months requiring rescues at sea - Vestus, Rainmaker, and Flyin Hawaiian.

 

Vestus and Rainmaker feature multimillion dollar budgets, therefore their screw-ups are more surprising and magnitudes greater than the hapless and predictable FH disaster.

 

OK - so the social phenomenon part. Two of the screw-ups feature many well-connected folks, including many "experienced experts" and/or financial investment in SA. One has none of the above.

 

The well-connected and resourced get there egos and soft parts stroked on SA, and can essentially can do no wrong regardless of magnitude of maritime screw-up.

 

The hapless socially (and financially) unconnected are mercilessly mocked.

 

 

i don't agree that from what we have learned so far, the Rain Maker incident is a "monumental maritime screw-up"

 

their rig came down, which led to other problems...

 

if the rig hadn't come down.., they'd have completed their voyage

 

we don't know why the rig came down

 

was it a manufacturing problem with the boat or the rig? was it a design flaw with the boat or the rig? or maybe a lashing chafed through..

 

i don't see a monumental screw up at all - just the kind of stuff that occasionally happens offshore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also guessing that you will never "see" this as a monumental maritime screw-up regardless of what eventually emerges.

 

What bothers me is that there are no maritime screw-ups anymore if it involves carbon and someone famous and/or wealthy.

 

Real maritime screw-ups can only occur with outlier-idiots like Hotrod, Rimus or the skipper of the Bounty.

 

This apparent reality (read the above appeals in favor of GB, and then refer to the Vestus thread), means that your insurance WILL go up, that the general public will INCREASINGLY see sailors as entitled idiots, and these stupid "accidents" will continue to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also guessing that you will never "see" this as a monumental maritime screw-up regardless of what eventually emerges.

 

What bothers me is that there are no maritime screw-ups anymore if it involves carbon and someone famous and/or wealthy.

 

Real maritime screw-ups can only occur with outlier-idiots like Hotrod, Rimus or the skipper of the Bounty.

 

This apparent reality (read the above appeals in favor of GB, and then refer to the Vestus thread), means that your insurance WILL go up, that the general public will INCREASINGLY see sailors as entitled idiots, and these stupid "accidents" will continue to happen.

 

i haven't posted in either the rimas or the Flyin Hawaiian thread

 

i wil note that i was pretty quick to lay the blame for vestas on the navigator.., and not on the charts or anything else - and i have no problem calling that a monumental screw up

 

so i disagree with your assessment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a rig drop in a 70 kt gust is not a monumental screw up. Maybe it was a leap of faith in weather prediction being in that place at that time but weather routers don’t provide guarantees. If going to sea was a guaranteed safe endeavor we wouldn’t need life rafts or even PFD’s.

People who know the skipper of Rainmaker say he’s a top notch sailor and has much experience on Gunboats. Does anyone doubt that the boat is well designed and magnificently built ? Certainly I don’t. I’d love to own one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

us7070 and jhiller, you do realize that GB don't need YOU to fight the good fight for them? They have money, lawyers and the science of marketing to do that for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also guessing that you will never "see" this as a monumental maritime screw-up regardless of what eventually emerges.

 

What bothers me is that there are no maritime screw-ups anymore if it involves carbon and someone famous and/or wealthy.

 

Real maritime screw-ups can only occur with outlier-idiots like Hotrod, Rimus or the skipper of the Bounty.

 

This apparent reality (read the above appeals in favor of GB, and then refer to the Vestus thread), means that your insurance WILL go up, that the general public will INCREASINGLY see sailors as entitled idiots, and these stupid "accidents" will continue to happen.

 

I think you're right. There were several fuck-ups here that lead to the apparent loss of this boat. They may yet find and repair Rainmaker but the cost is very high on several levels, not limited to the owner's pocketbook or GB's reputation. The decision to be out there in that weather was taking an unnecessary risk, which they lost. Sure, this man can afford to play this expensive game and no lives were lost, but it still looks reckless. Being rich doesn't hide that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I think GB does need some of us to defend them and their product . Certainly from the absurd musings of dilettantes without any facts. Good boat + good crew still can equal shit happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Folks - I have no axe here. Boat building is a difficult business to begin with. Engineering a high performance cat meant for ocean passages is technically daunting to say the least. Gunboat builds beautiful boats and kudos to them and others who enter this business so we can all have fun with their creations. Here’s to hoping that all builders and designers may incorporate whatever lessons are learned from this episode into their future designs.
- Not pretending I weighed the boat, but apparently this boat was highly overweight – so much so that the originally contracted buyer walked
- No idea if the rig and fittings were ever re-engineered for the apparently (substantially) heavier boat
- The boat supposedly spent 3 months at GB in NC getting $$$’s of add’l work done – probable reason she hadn’t made it south earlier
- If there was no reengineering, it’s possible that the rigging was under spec’d vs the weight of the boat. If so this could have led to the rig failure
- Without the rig/forestay there would be no tension to support longeron, which would likely then be fairly loose and potentially pose a threat to the hulls
No idea what really happened out there on the water, but without a rig, a loose/threatening longeron and the possibility of swamped engines due to water ingress in the engine compartments I would most likely elect to abandon as well.

 

 

Why no yarn discussing the fact that in the CG video both sterns of Rainmaker are clearly partially submerged???

 

I've been repairing boats for 23yrs and when unfortunate things like this happens the earbashing blames the captain/owner, but in the end often its a simple parts malfunction

 

the marketing photos of rainmaker, both sailing and dock show transom steps easily out of the water. Without a mast Rainmaker should be even lighter....but in the vid the two hulls are partially submerged at the stern which means flooded with water, sorry chaps no other explanation

 

two holes or two thruhull failures possible but the builder says no holes, so I'd wager heaps and heaps of water over the transom...probabs leaking into the hulls from salon (swimming pool?) or if waves really big zonking the aft deck hatches - eventually kaputing the engine / batts

 

ok we're not as smart as you yanks but could you be skipping over the obvious???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am supposed to pray for some rich fucktard who thought sailing his sexy multimillion silver multihull in the dead of winter off the east coast of the US was a good idea?

 

The same idiot who sold/offered his name and boat to one of the most retarded advertisement videos ever? http://sailinganarchy.com/2014/11/21/stolen-dance/

 

I am told the crew is safe. Good, but I am sick and tired of these idiots who spend ten times more time trying to look cool in a video than looking at weather forecasts.

 

P.S: I am even more annoyed having enjoyed many northern winters in beautifull southern summers on catamarans, all that to see a couple of fifty year "youngs" ruin everything just because they believed some other idiot who told them they were young because ... they wore sun glasses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm also guessing that you will never "see" this as a monumental maritime screw-up regardless of what eventually emerges.

 

What bothers me is that there are no maritime screw-ups anymore if it involves carbon and someone famous and/or wealthy.

 

Real maritime screw-ups can only occur with outlier-idiots like Hotrod, Rimus or the skipper of the Bounty.

 

This apparent reality (read the above appeals in favor of GB, and then refer to the Vestus thread), means that your insurance WILL go up, that the general public will INCREASINGLY see sailors as entitled idiots, and these stupid "accidents" will continue to happen.

 

I think you're right. There were several fuck-ups here that lead to the apparent loss of this boat. They may yet find and repair Rainmaker but the cost is very high on several levels, not limited to the owner's pocketbook or GB's reputation. The decision to be out there in that weather was taking an unnecessary risk, which they lost. Sure, this man can afford to play this expensive game and no lives were lost, but it still looks reckless. Being rich doesn't hide that.

 

ok - "several fuck ups"

 

list them

 

i already said that the decision to depart was questionable - but i haven't seen the actual forecasts from the time of their departure, so i reserve judgement..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey boatfixer

Yankees suck. The baseball team mate.

Hey Edith...kinda tuff ?...

Are you a guy or gal?...just curious..

Mallory square mid 80s? Cat show?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Folks - I have no axe here. Boat building is a difficult business to begin with. Engineering a high performance cat meant for ocean passages is technically daunting to say the least. Gunboat builds beautiful boats and kudos to them and others who enter this business so we can all have fun with their creations. Here’s to hoping that all builders and designers may incorporate whatever lessons are learned from this episode into their future designs.
- Not pretending I weighed the boat, but apparently this boat was highly overweight – so much so that the originally contracted buyer walked
- No idea if the rig and fittings were ever re-engineered for the apparently (substantially) heavier boat
- The boat supposedly spent 3 months at GB in NC getting $$$’s of add’l work done – probable reason she hadn’t made it south earlier
- If there was no reengineering, it’s possible that the rigging was under spec’d vs the weight of the boat. If so this could have led to the rig failure
- Without the rig/forestay there would be no tension to support longeron, which would likely then be fairly loose and potentially pose a threat to the hulls
No idea what really happened out there on the water, but without a rig, a loose/threatening longeron and the possibility of swamped engines due to water ingress in the engine compartments I would most likely elect to abandon as well.

 

 

Why no yarn discussing the fact that in the CG video both sterns of Rainmaker are clearly partially submerged???

 

I've been repairing boats for 23yrs and when unfortunate things like this happens the earbashing blames the captain/owner, but in the end often its a simple parts malfunction

 

the marketing photos of rainmaker, both sailing and dock show transom steps easily out of the water. Without a mast Rainmaker should be even lighter....but in the vid the two hulls are partially submerged at the stern which means flooded with water, sorry chaps no other explanation

 

two holes or two thruhull failures possible but the builder says no holes, so I'd wager heaps and heaps of water over the transom...probabs leaking into the hulls from salon (swimming pool?) or if waves really big zonking the aft deck hatches - eventually kaputing the engine / batts

 

ok we're not as smart as you yanks but could you be skipping over the obvious???

 

there is a "rumor" that there was damage to the superstructure when the mast came down.., and that water began entering - possibly from waves washing over the boat - _before_ any damage from contact with the freighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am supposed to pray for some rich fucktard who thought sailing his sexy multimillion silver multihull in the dead of winter off the east coast of the US was a good idea?

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This came up on Mr Johnstone's Facebook page, a posting from Meagan Jones, and a pic of her posing with some assorted SAR equipment:

 

Joining Gunboat on a search and rescue mission to try to recover Vandal's sister ship "Rainmaker" - she is still out there floating in the Atlantic waiting to be located. We've kitted out the SAR plane with orange dye and strobes to try to drop if we spot it, satellite phone and all of the most powerful binos we could muster. Let's bring her home.

-From Dare County Airport

 

 

I take that to indicate that fancy GOST tracking/monitoring system isn't workng, and they're gonna be looking for a needle in a haystack...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

i already said that the decision to depart was questionable - but i haven't seen the actual forecasts from the time of their departure, so i reserve judgement..

 

Just out of curiosity, I re-ran the the 0000 UTC GFS model run from 29 January, which would have been the latest GFS forecast available before Rainmaker's 0600 UTC departure from the Gunboat yard.

 

I don't know what time Rainmaker was dismasted, but Peter Johnstone wrote his first post at around 2230 UTC on 30 January.

 

post-20582-0-77991800-1423359639_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-61200600-1423359660_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-68394700-1423359673_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-75078000-1423359685_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-53775900-1423359700_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-64020200-1423359711_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-08220600-1423359725_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-31958300-1423359736_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-79743000-1423359746_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-98586000-1423359758_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-94148900-1423359778_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-93257900-1423359791_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-61065200-1423359809_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-30837900-1423359827_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-26754200-1423359844_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-72698500-1423359861_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-58721700-1423359873_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-94426100-1423359886_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-27115200-1423359901_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-55205000-1423359916_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-27271400-1423359936_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-82999600-1423359952_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-07753900-1423359971_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-46848800-1423359989_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-55465800-1423360007_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-20560300-1423360022_thumb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The front looks like it was quite strong judging by the band of rain in front of it... Thunderstorms and violent squalls would not have been unusual.

 

post-20582-0-28467200-1423361654_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-06898200-1423361666_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-27502500-1423361678_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-65183900-1423361693_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-20302900-1423361710_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-52510600-1423361723_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-10286600-1423361737_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-45287300-1423361750_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-73616700-1423361763_thumb.pngpost-20582-0-25766000-1423361783_thumb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were they heading for Bermuda? Looking at the passageweather.com images posted above, I noticed Bermuda, then used it as a scale factor; it is 645 miles from Cape Hatteras lighthouse. The red "+" in the image below is placed 200 miles along the path between them:
rm_bermuda.png

Just a guess, of course, but gives some context relative to the weather.

Then created a couple of pages using the passageweather.com images with a slider that can be used for either "Position" or "Delay":

Keeping in mind that the boat was moving toward the 200 mile position for at least 24 hours (it was a light northerly Thursday afternoon), and that the Coastguard arrived at ~1700 local time (2200 UTC) Friday, it's interesting to note that the front passed through about twelve hours earlier, between ~10 UTC and 12 UTC (~5am to 7am local). The wind shifted ~35 degrees to the south for ~6 hours and strengthened from 15-20 knots to 25-30 knots, with squalls to 40+, followed by a ~90 degree swing back to northwest, according to these images.

 

Again, this is all guesswork, not a report of what actually happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think they were headed for the caribbean - but knowing that doesn't necessarily help define their route all that much...

 

it depends on conditions, forecast.., and personal preference

 

some will rhumb-line it.., some head east to cross the stream and then turn SE, and some go down inside the stream and cross it further S

 

i guess we heard that they were't planning on the last option..,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think they were headed for the caribbean - but knowing that doesn't necessarily help define their route all that much...

 

it depends on conditions, forecast.., and personal preference

 

some will rhumb-line it.., some head east to cross the stream and then turn SE, and some go down inside the stream and cross it further S

 

i guess we heard that they were't planning on the last option..,

 

Updated to show the rhumb line route to St. Martin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My obsidian blade is sharpened, my pyramid stands ready, if I could just find some virgins I would make an offering to Quetzlcuatl. Any volunteers?

quetzalcoatl_by_vampireprincess007-d2yd7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also guessing that you will never "see" this as a monumental maritime screw-up regardless of what eventually emerges.

 

I know I wrote multiple times on the front page that the Vestas grounding was a fuckup of massive proportions. Note: if you get all your 'information' from the forums, you are starting from retarded with nowhere to go but down. But also note: If you get no information from the forums, you don't have the whole picture either.

 

See how it works?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think they were headed for the caribbean - but knowing that doesn't necessarily help define their route all that much...

 

it depends on conditions, forecast.., and personal preference

 

some will rhumb-line it.., some head east to cross the stream and then turn SE, and some go down inside the stream and cross it further S

 

i guess we heard that they were't planning on the last option..,

 

BVI, once again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were they heading for Bermuda? Looking at the passageweather.com images posted above, I noticed Bermuda, then used it as a scale factor; it is 645 miles from Cape Hatteras lighthouse. The red "+" in the image below is placed 200 miles along the path between them:

rm_bermuda.png

 

Just a guess, of course, but gives some context relative to the weather.

 

Then created a couple of pages using the passageweather.com images with a slider that can be used for either "Position" or "Delay":

Keeping in mind that the boat was moving toward the 200 mile position for at least 24 hours (it was a light northerly Thursday afternoon), and that the Coastguard arrived at ~1700 local time (2200 UTC) Friday, it's interesting to note that the front passed through about twelve hours earlier, between ~10 UTC and 12 UTC (~5am to 7am local). The wind shifted ~35 degrees to the south for ~6 hours and strengthened from 15-20 knots to 25-30 knots, with squalls to 40+, followed by a ~90 degree swing back to northwest, according to these images.

 

Again, this is all guesswork, not a report of what actually happened.

What I garner from this is that the sea state was extremely confused, and driven by powerful winds. Combined with the GS current, I can only imagine the freakish wave conditions. All the more reason for a stout cabin that buttons up tight, can handle tons of water arriving from unpredictable directions, and for watch standing stations providing ample protection and handholds.

 

Note how little this describes Rainmaker. That vessel was designed for different conditions. EXCELLENT, even an amazing boat, mind you, but not the one I'd choose to ride out a gale in midwinter in the Gulf Stream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were they heading for Bermuda? Looking at the passageweather.com images posted above, I noticed Bermuda, then used it as a scale factor; it is 645 miles from Cape Hatteras lighthouse. The red "+" in the image below is placed 200 miles along the path between them:

 

In reality Bermuda is only 560 nautical miles from Cape Hatteras.

 

An easier way to measure out 200 miles would be to just use the latitude scale on the left side of the image.

 

200 nautical miles = 3.333 degrees of latitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From comments Gunboat facebook...

pissed former? employee??

 

Franklin Lewis reviewed GUNBOAT —

 

7 hrs ·

 

Rainmaker incident was Karmic payback for not paying me the full measure of what was owed to me re. earned vacation time.

 

GUNBOATBoating

 

5,772 likes

 

Like

 

Comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Were they heading for Bermuda? Looking at the passageweather.com images posted above, I noticed Bermuda, then used it as a scale factor; it is 645 miles from Cape Hatteras lighthouse. The red "+" in the image below is placed 200 miles along the path between them:

 

In reality Bermuda is only 560 nautical miles from Cape Hatteras.

 

An easier way to measure out 200 miles would be to just use the latitude scale on the left side of the image.

 

200 nautical miles = 3.333 degrees of latitude.

 

Thanks. I triple checked my work and found that I was using statute miles instead of nautical miles.

 

I used the Google Maps distance tool (right click on the map), which measures 645 "land miles" over a Great Circle route - that equals 560 nautical miles: http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/length/

 

Wikipedia says 640 miles (again, statute miles - I measured from the Hatteras lighthouse to a point one mile inland on Bermuda).

 

Using the same conversion tool, 200 nautical miles equals 230.2 statute miles, so I added a blue circle for nautical miles. That changes my estimated times and weather too, of course... but not by much. (I added some color to the "frame slider", in case anyone missed it.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Took me a while to read this thread, there's a few hours of my life I won't get back.

 

It appears that the summary of the thread is:

 

Thankfully (maybe due to all the prayers?) everyone got off the boat safely with no apparent injuries.

 

The boat probably shouldn't have been out there, and possibly isn't there any more. With that design in those conditions there must be water coming in everywhere, hope they left the bilge pumps running and had lots of battery capacity to keep them pumping!

 

Magnificent boat, but maybe not for those conditions, great crew and rich owner who has hopefully learned something about whether any boat will ever give you "authority over mother nature" (paraphrasing).

 

As to whether it is a monumental maritime screw up I'm not sure - masts do come down (I can vouch for that first hand) and often the problem is not caused by a monumental screw up but something much simpler. Gunboat as a company have nothing to be ashamed of and no need to defend themselves or rely on support from posters here. They have the runs on the board to show that they are very good at what they do. I wouldn't (and probably couldn't) buy one but there is a proven niche for these boats and the only people who really have to work out whether Gunboat as a company is somehow to blame for this incident are the small number of future Gunboat purchasers, not many of whom are probably reading this.

 

And I do recognise that my contribution to this thread, like virtually all of the previous posts, adds nothing of substance and only wastes more of other people's life reading it. Sorry about that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From comments Gunboat facebook...

pissed former? employee??

 

Franklin Lewis reviewed GUNBOAT

 

7 hrs ·

 

Rainmaker incident was Karmic payback for not paying me the full measure of what was owed to me re. earned vacation time.

 

GUNBOATBoating

 

5,772 likes

 

Like

 

Comment

Perhaps he worked for Rainmaker's owner?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Were they heading for Bermuda? Looking at the passageweather.com images posted above, I noticed Bermuda, then used it as a scale factor; it is 645 miles from Cape Hatteras lighthouse. The red "+" in the image below is placed 200 miles along the path between them:

rm_bermuda.png

 

Just a guess, of course, but gives some context relative to the weather.

 

Then created a couple of pages using the passageweather.com images with a slider that can be used for either "Position" or "Delay":

Keeping in mind that the boat was moving toward the 200 mile position for at least 24 hours (it was a light northerly Thursday afternoon), and that the Coastguard arrived at ~1700 local time (2200 UTC) Friday, it's interesting to note that the front passed through about twelve hours earlier, between ~10 UTC and 12 UTC (~5am to 7am local). The wind shifted ~35 degrees to the south for ~6 hours and strengthened from 15-20 knots to 25-30 knots, with squalls to 40+, followed by a ~90 degree swing back to northwest, according to these images.

 

Again, this is all guesswork, not a report of what actually happened.

What I garner from this is that the sea state was extremely confused, and driven by powerful winds. Combined with the GS current, I can only imagine the freakish wave conditions. All the more reason for a stout cabin that buttons up tight, can handle tons of water arriving from unpredictable directions, and for watch standing stations providing ample protection and handholds.

 

Note how little this describes Rainmaker. That vessel was designed for different conditions. EXCELLENT, even an amazing boat, mind you, but not the one I'd choose to ride out a gale in midwinter in the Gulf Stream.

Philly, Rainmaker was over 100 miles from the Gulf Stream. I don't think that the Gulf Stream had much affect on the waves, it may have affected the system moving offshore causing freakish conditions like a water spout which could have ripped off the mast. The boat can handle the 25 to 30 knots and even the squalls just fine, especially on a broad reach with limited sail up. The boat is moving with the waves and the helm station and line handling area forward of the helm are very secure. Moving about the salon may be a little tricky, but the motion of the boat is such that timing your move is important, and you get used to it pretty quickly, you don't spend much time standing around in the middle of the salon. Once the mast was gone I am sure that the motion was much different, but I don't know of many boats that are designed to be sea kindly while floundering after a dismasting. I have sailed through gales in the north Atlantic on monohulls and Gunboats, give me the flat ride in the protected salon over the heeled motion out in the elements any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

Ok, so should a "Category A" vessel adequately protect the crew, even after dismasting? I'd argue that they should, and that an uncomfortable ride is one thing, but a stern opening to the sea of Rainmaker size is a liability which would preclude such a designation being awarded to a boat of that design.

 

So, once you decide that the boat is a coastal cruiser, you make navigational choices based on that classification & not on the basis of the excellent reputation which Gunboat undoubtedly deserves, but was scant protection to the crew of RM after the rig came down.

 

If cats can slide backwards down waves sufficient to snap rudders, imagine the thousands of gallons entering the salon through the steps to the sea of RM after dismasting. That's not uncomfortable, that's a high risk of MOB and injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open sterns negate 'Category A"? Is this just special treatment for multihulls or do you plan on making sternless monohulls follow that rule also?

I guess haters gonna hate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

Ok, so should a "Category A" vessel adequately protect the crew, even after dismasting? I'd argue that they should, and that an uncomfortable ride is one thing, but a stern opening to the sea of Rainmaker size is a liability which would preclude such a designation being awarded to a boat of that design.

 

So, once you decide that the boat is a coastal cruiser, you make navigational choices based on that classification & not on the basis of the excellent reputation which Gunboat undoubtedly deserves, but was scant protection to the crew of RM after the rig came down.

 

If cats can slide backwards down waves sufficient to snap rudders, imagine the thousands of gallons entering the salon through the steps to the sea of RM after dismasting. That's not uncomfortable, that's a high risk of MOB and injury.

 

Amen

 

The first comment from somebody not brainwashed by the slick Gunboat marketing and PR. Waves crashing on a stern and into an open salon for hours will cause all sorts of unexpected problems and given this is the first boat out of a new yard the unexpected problems may have been more than anyone expected

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah well - I was hopeful there was something new about the boat or crew... I'll check back in again after I see something on the homepage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey boatfixer

Yankees suck. The baseball team mate.

Hey Edith...kinda tuff ?...

Are you a guy or gal?...just curious..

Mallory square mid 80s? Cat show?

Why? Looking for a roll in the hay? 😍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open sterns negate 'Category A"? Is this just special treatment for multihulls or do you plan on making sternless monohulls follow that rule also?

I guess haters gonna hate.

 

I guess I'd be reluctant to call those Bene "Sense" models with the huge cockpit leading down into the boat a viable candidate for Cat A on that criteria (amongst many others, to be sure.) I understand that racing boats frequently have open sterns, and that many production boats have followed their lead. I suppose by this criteria VOR60s are suspect, so the rule needs tweaking, but those are race boats crewed by professional half-man half-beasts who sail with hair afire while eating nails. (And their cockpit has many more handholds.) IMO, a family cat should really have more protection if intended for extended offshore use.

 

Not sure who is "hating"... I love Gunboats! I am not a pro or in the market for one, so my opinion doesn't mean a thing, but I am interested in how design choices should impact routing decisions. Compare the Atlantic yachts (or the GB60, or 66) with RM and pick which one you'd prefer for a crazy mid winter storm. It's a no-brainer.

 

But pick the one for 99% of the rest of sailing, and you would likely pick the GB 55. It's awesome for a group of friends, tearing around St Maarten during the 'round Island race, or screaming around the Chesapeake, out of Miami to the Bahamas. Phenomenal for 100% of the sailing I'd like to be doing right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So build your boat with a dismasting as a design priority? If the rig didn't break there would have been no problem. Simple as that. Why you need to make broad sweeping (incorrect) statements and then try to come up with rules based on your incorrect info, garnered from this thread I would venture, doesn't speak well to your knowledge of boat design or building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Open sterns negate 'Category A"? Is this just special treatment for multihulls or do you plan on making sternless monohulls follow that rule also?

I guess haters gonna hate.

 

I guess I'd be reluctant to call those Bene "Sense" models with the huge cockpit leading down into the boat a viable candidate for Cat A on that criteria (amongst many others, to be sure.) I understand that racing boats frequently have open sterns, and that many production boats have followed their lead. I suppose by this criteria VOR60s are suspect, so the rule needs tweaking, but those are race boats crewed by professional half-man half-beasts who sail with hair afire while eating nails. (And their cockpit has many more handholds.) IMO, a family cat should really have more protection if intended for extended offshore use.

 

Not sure who is "hating"... I love Gunboats! I am not a pro or in the market for one, so my opinion doesn't mean a thing, but I am interested in how design choices should impact routing decisions. Compare the Atlantic yachts (or the GB60, or 66) with RM and pick which one you'd prefer for a crazy mid winter storm. It's a no-brainer.

 

But pick the one for 99% of the rest of sailing, and you would likely pick the GB 55. It's awesome for a group of friends, tearing around St Maarten during the 'round Island race, or screaming around the Chesapeake, out of Miami to the Bahamas. Phenomenal for 100% of the sailing I'd like to be doing right now.

Philly, I guess that I really don't have a problem the routing decision. Rainmaker was moving along fine until hit by a freak storm and dismasted. If they had left and hour earlier, or an hour later, they would have missed that squall and would be drinking dark and stormies at the Soggy Dollar in Jost with Pyrat right now. It was not a design flaw, it was bad luck. I think that mother nature can conjur up something that will kick the shit out of any boat almost any place and leave it disabled. As captain Ron said, "If it is going to happen, it will happen out there." If you don't cast off your lines you will never go anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So build your boat with a dismasting as a design priority? If the rig didn't break there would have been no problem. Simple as that. Why you need to make broad sweeping (incorrect) statements and then try to come up with rules based on your incorrect info, garnered from this thread I would venture, doesn't speak well to your knowledge of boat design or building.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So build your boat with a dismasting as a design priority? If the rig didn't break there would have been no problem. Simple as that. Why you need to make broad sweeping (incorrect) statements and then try to come up with rules based on your incorrect info, garnered from this thread I would venture, doesn't speak well to your knowledge of boat design or building.

 

Foghorn: you are being needlessly dramatic.

 

Not dismasting as criteria, but yes to preferring substantial protection from astern in an offshore vessel. Yes, the GB 60,66 and the Atlantic yachts have these, and no the GB 55 doesn't. None of that is incorrect info. I've said I am not a pro, and that this is just my opinion. I'd also remind you that a boat need not be dismasted to slide backwards on a big wave, just being suddenly underpowered in a huge trough could do it, esp. having shortened sail to a minimum.

 

 

I'm writing here in order to gain knowledge of boat design and such, and to think about how design choices should impact routing decisions. I'm not in a position to make "rules," and no one would listen to any ones that I did make... this is just sailors bullshitting online, haven't you noticed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Open sterns negate 'Category A"? Is this just special treatment for multihulls or do you plan on making sternless monohulls follow that rule also?

I guess haters gonna hate.

 

I guess I'd be reluctant to call those Bene "Sense" models with the huge cockpit leading down into the boat a viable candidate for Cat A on that criteria (amongst many others, to be sure.) I understand that racing boats frequently have open sterns, and that many production boats have followed their lead. I suppose by this criteria VOR60s are suspect, so the rule needs tweaking, but those are race boats crewed by professional half-man half-beasts who sail with hair afire while eating nails. (And their cockpit has many more handholds.) IMO, a family cat should really have more protection if intended for extended offshore use.

 

Not sure who is "hating"... I love Gunboats! I am not a pro or in the market for one, so my opinion doesn't mean a thing, but I am interested in how design choices should impact routing decisions. Compare the Atlantic yachts (or the GB60, or 66) with RM and pick which one you'd prefer for a crazy mid winter storm. It's a no-brainer.

 

But pick the one for 99% of the rest of sailing, and you would likely pick the GB 55. It's awesome for a group of friends, tearing around St Maarten during the 'round Island race, or screaming around the Chesapeake, out of Miami to the Bahamas. Phenomenal for 100% of the sailing I'd like to be doing right now.

Philly, I guess that I really don't have a problem the routing decision. Rainmaker was moving along fine until hit by a freak storm and dismasted. If they had left and hour earlier, or an hour later, they would have missed that squall and would be drinking dark and stormies at the Soggy Dollar in Jost with Pyrat right now. It was not a design flaw, it was bad luck. I think that mother nature can conjur up something that will kick the shit out of any boat almost any place and leave it disabled. As captain Ron said, "If it is going to happen, it will happen out there." If you don't cast off your lines you will never go anywhere.

 

"Freak storm", huh? Yeah, probably the first time one of those has ever occurred 200 NM SE of Hatteras, in late January... ;-)

 

Sure, and if only that Alpha 42 last winter had been 100 meters to port, or starboard, when that 'rogue wave' came along, nothing else could have possibly gone amiss for the duration of that passage...

 

Certainly, Mother Nature can conjure up some nasty surprises anytime, anywhere... Seems to happen with a bit more regularity in the North Atlantic, in the dead of winter, however...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Awesome" "Great" "Amazing" and even "Magnificent" have been used on just one page to describe the design of the GB55.

 

But the first buyer walked away, and I've only heard rumours and one post in this th'd that touched on one of his rumoured reasons.

For all the building, design & technology skill it's still a glorified bridgedeck cat that lost a coin toss making a Stream crossing off Hatteras in winter.

 

If this was a Maine Cat the tenor would justifiably be different. Only the GB55 is one of the new wonder cats that has the mast in the salon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those suggesting that the cargo ship should/would launch a RIB: bigger merchant ships often have Lifeboats and Liferafts but they might not have Rescue Boats (A specific SOLAS type, usually a RIB). Lifeboats can be accepted as Rescue Boats, depending on their launching arrangements. So the cargo ship may not have had a RIB of any sort.

 

Various Coast Guards and Navies have a tough time launching and deploying RIBs in big seas without seriously endangering the crews. They typically will have a motion compensated crane on the beam with a load release hook or a stern ramp where the RIB can run up or be winched up. It's not a trivial exercise.

 

Now give your average Phillipino deck crew the task of launching a lifeboat to save you in big seas - it's no wonder the captain would prefer to put his ship alongside rather than risking his crew.

 

 

Sad but true fact: more people are killed in lifeboat drills than are saved by them in actual emergencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those suggesting that the cargo ship should/would launch a RIB: bigger merchant ships often have Lifeboats and Liferafts but they might not have Rescue Boats (A specific SOLAS type, usually a RIB). Lifeboats can be accepted as Rescue Boats, depending on their launching arrangements. So the cargo ship may not have had a RIB of any sort.

 

Various Coast Guards and Navies have a tough time launching and deploying RIBs in big seas without seriously endangering the crews. They typically will have a motion compensated crane on the beam with a load release hook or a stern ramp where the RIB can run up or be winched up. It's not a trivial exercise.

 

Now give your average Phillipino deck crew the task of launching a lifeboat to save you in big seas - it's no wonder the captain would prefer to put his ship alongside rather than risking his crew.

 

 

Sad but true fact: more people are killed in lifeboat drills than are saved by them in actual emergencies.

True this. Big ships seldom carry boats that can go two ways. Lifeboats are designed to get off a ship, not go back. Yes, it's done on occasion but talk about a major, Royal, pain in the ass. For starters, since they are designed to be released from both the fore and aft falls simultaneously wiht a lever, they then have to be hooked up simultaneously and have the lever thrown back to lock the falls. Too often, in a seaway, only one hook might re-engage at a time and it has to be released to try them both again. Now imagine the sea that lifted the boat up to catch the hook drops away with only one end engaged..... It's even worse if it's the after hook only that engaged....

 

Trust me, been there, done that!

 

You wanna get off on a commercial ship? It beats swimming or burning up but it's a trick and it gets your heartbeat up.

 

(btw, I went up and down pilot ladders for a living, from small boats --that were not disabled! and not offshore more than 20 or 30 miles)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So build your boat with a dismasting as a design priority? If the rig didn't break there would have been no problem. Simple as that. Why you need to make broad sweeping (incorrect) statements and then try to come up with rules based on your incorrect info, garnered from this thread I would venture, doesn't speak well to your knowledge of boat design or building.

 

Foghorn: you are being needlessly dramatic.

 

Not dismasting as criteria, but yes to preferring substantial protection from astern in an offshore vessel. Yes, the GB 60,66 and the Atlantic yachts have these, and no the GB 55 doesn't. None of that is incorrect info. I've said I am not a pro, and that this is just my opinion. I'd also remind you that a boat need not be dismasted to slide backwards on a big wave, just being suddenly underpowered in a huge trough could do it, esp. having shortened sail to a minimum.

 

 

I'm writing here in order to gain knowledge of boat design and such, and to think about how design choices should impact routing decisions. I'm not in a position to make "rules," and no one would listen to any ones that I did make... this is just sailors bullshitting online, haven't you noticed?

You've got the bullshitting down. The difference between the 55 and the 60/66 for "protection astern" is one 8" step. If it's being overly dramatic to call out your rule bullshit, what exactly is stating your rule bullshit and then crawfishing on that statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So build your boat with a dismasting as a design priority? If the rig didn't break there would have been no problem. Simple as that. Why you need to make broad sweeping (incorrect) statements and then try to come up with rules based on your incorrect info, garnered from this thread I would venture, doesn't speak well to your knowledge of boat design or building.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those suggesting that the cargo ship should/would launch a RIB: bigger merchant ships often have Lifeboats and Liferafts but they might not have Rescue Boats (A specific SOLAS type, usually a RIB). Lifeboats can be accepted as Rescue Boats, depending on their launching arrangements. So the cargo ship may not have had a RIB of any sort.

 

Various Coast Guards and Navies have a tough time launching and deploying RIBs in big seas without seriously endangering the crews. They typically will have a motion compensated crane on the beam with a load release hook or a stern ramp where the RIB can run up or be winched up. It's not a trivial exercise.

 

Now give your average Phillipino deck crew the task of launching a lifeboat to save you in big seas - it's no wonder the captain would prefer to put his ship alongside rather than risking his crew.

 

 

Sad but true fact: more people are killed in lifeboat drills than are saved by them in actual emergencies.

 

I don't recall anyone suggesting a boat to be launched from the ship... What Joli and I were referring to, was the potential use of RAINMAKER's tender to come alongside...

 

Looks like the OCEAN CRESCENT does have a smaller outboard-powered tender in addition to their one way lifeboat. However, any attempt to launch it from that position on the ship, in a seaway, would present a very high level of risk, and the possibility of being crushed beneath that stern quarter overhang with a large sea running...

 

If indeed RAINMAKER did come close to "getting sucked into the ship's prop", wouldn't be surprising if she suffered heavy additional damage due to a crushing blow from that stern quarter...

 

As you've said, it's completely unreasonable to expect the crew of such ships to put one of their own boats over the side. Those crews are simply not trained for such work... It's a bit different for a cruise ship like the NORWEGIAN GEM to launch one of their large shore tenders as was done in the rescue of the Beneteau SANCTUARY a few years ago, but that video I posted earlier clearly shows the extraordinary difficulty and danger involved in the recovery of the tender in a seaway...

 

There was a very lengthy and contentious thread on Sailnet a couple of years ago, surrounding the abandonment of the Gulfstar 50 TRIUMPH about 700 NM east of Cape Cod, and the rescue of the crew by the 900' KIM JACOB, a participant in the AMVER program... Absolutely amazing, how some folks were arguing that the crews of AMVER ships should undergo additional training, to be able to better assist yachties abandoning their boats at sea.... ;-)

 

 

1711893.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Philly, I guess that I really don't have a problem the routing decision. Rainmaker was moving along fine until hit by a freak storm and dismasted. If they had left and hour earlier, or an hour later, they would have missed that squall and would be drinking dark and stormies at the Soggy Dollar in Jost with Pyrat right now. It was not a design flaw, it was bad luck. I think that mother nature can conjur up something that will kick the shit out of any boat almost any place and leave it disabled. As captain Ron said, "If it is going to happen, it will happen out there." If you don't cast off your lines you will never go anywhere.

 

"Freak storm", huh? Yeah, probably the first time one of those has ever occurred 200 NM SE of Hatteras, in late January... ;-)

 

Sure, and if only that Alpha 42 last winter had been 100 meters to port, or starboard, when that 'rogue wave' came along, nothing else could have possibly gone amiss for the duration of that passage...

 

Certainly, Mother Nature can conjure up some nasty surprises anytime, anywhere... Seems to happen with a bit more regularity in the North Atlantic, in the dead of winter, however...

 

This^^

 

Bad weather was to be expected. And why did the mast come down? Something somewhere in the rig failed, so was some component underspecced in design? Some component was not built to spec? Boat was poorly handled? May never find out. Blaming a 'freak storm' and saying 'shit happens' seems a cop out to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you might find this instructive. The 'drogue' they are towing is a bight of line. Boat is a Leopard 39, apparently on a trip from Cape Town to Brisbane

 

 

 

Interview with the skipper (promotional from Leopard, but still instructive): http://www.leopardcatamarans.com/news-and-events/social-media/delivery-skippers-report-leopard-39-southern-ocean

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you might find this instructive. The 'drogue' they are towing is a bight of line. Boat is a Leopard 39, apparently on a trip from Cape Town to Brisbane

 

 

 

Interview with the skipper (promotional from Leopard, but still instructive): http://www.leopardcatamarans.com/news-and-events/social-media/delivery-skippers-report-leopard-39-southern-ocean

Those conditions look really heavy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You've got the bullshitting down. The difference between the 55 and the 60/66 for "protection astern" is one 8" step. If it's being overly dramatic to call out your rule bullshit, what exactly is stating your rule bullshit and then crawfishing on that statement.

Foggy: you're incorrect. The bigger GBs have a row of couches forming the base of a wall with glass above. Two solid-appearing doors are on centerline. The GB 55s are enclosed only by canvas and Eisenglass, a clear, flexible vinyl product which doesn't provide the same protection as a wall. Duh.

 

I have no problem with disagreement on the ramification of catamaran design on routing choices, but you are ignoring basic facts while trying to sound authoritative. It's annoying and really diminishes the value of a thread. But, please carry on and continue to sound like an idiot.

 

BTW: what does "what exactly is stating your rule bullshit and then crawfishing on that statement" mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Some of you might find this instructive. The 'drogue' they are towing is a bight of line. Boat is a Leopard 39, apparently on a trip from Cape Town to Brisbane

 

 

 

Interview with the skipper (promotional from Leopard, but still instructive): http://www.leopardcatamarans.com/news-and-events/social-media/delivery-skippers-report-leopard-39-southern-ocean

Those conditions look really heavy.

Wow! Bare poles, towing a warp, and still moving pretty fast. Thank you Jaybird. That is, indeed, instructive. And, IMO, that is one of the beauties of Multihulls. One can power them way down and still make good time in relative comfort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

You've got the bullshitting down. The difference between the 55 and the 60/66 for "protection astern" is one 8" step. If it's being overly dramatic to call out your rule bullshit, what exactly is stating your rule bullshit and then crawfishing on that statement.

Foggy: you're incorrect. The bigger GBs have a row of couches forming the base of a wall with glass above. Two solid-appearing doors are on centerline. The GB 55s are enclosed only by canvas and Eisenglass, a clear, flexible vinyl product which doesn't provide the same protection as a wall. Duh.

 

I have no problem with disagreement on the ramification of catamaran design on routing choices, but you are ignoring basic facts while trying to sound authoritative. It's annoying and really diminishes the value of a thread. But, please carry on and continue to sound like an idiot.

 

BTW: what does "what exactly is stating your rule bullshit and then crawfishing on that statement" mean?

Ok Phillydouche, You're way more in the know than me. I was referring to bridgedeck height. Please Continue to bless us with with your knowledgeable insight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You've got the bullshitting down. The difference between the 55 and the 60/66 for "protection astern" is one 8" step. If it's being overly dramatic to call out your rule bullshit, what exactly is stating your rule bullshit and then crawfishing on that statement.

Foggy: you're incorrect. The bigger GBs have a row of couches forming the base of a wall with glass above. Two solid-appearing doors are on centerline. The GB 55s are enclosed only by canvas and Eisenglass, a clear, flexible vinyl product which doesn't provide the same protection as a wall. Duh.

I have no problem with disagreement on the ramification of catamaran design on routing choices, but you are ignoring basic facts while trying to sound authoritative. It's annoying and really diminishes the value of a thread. But, please carry on and continue to sound like an idiot.

 

BTW: what does "what exactly is stating your rule bullshit and then crawfishing on that statement" mean?

Ok Phillydouche, You're way more in the know than me. I was referring to bridgedeck height. Please Continue to bless us with with your knowledgeable insight.
If you're going to respond like a dick, you may want to re-evaluate your writing style. What you wrote came across as dead fucking wrong, which I'll assume is the same way Philly read it. If you expect people to listen to what you mean, but not what you actually write, you're going to be disappointed in life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're going to respond like a dick, you may want to re-evaluate your writing style. What you wrote came across as dead fucking wrong, which I'll assume is the same way Philly read it. If you expect people to listen to what you mean, but not what you actually write, you're going to be disappointed in life.

 

I am a Dick. How else would I respond? Bridge deck height was one of the hot topics earlier on in the thread, thought that was what he was referring to. I'm on these boats everyday, I've got a pretty good grasp of how they're built.

Now I've got to go re-evaluate my writing style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Some of you might find this instructive. The 'drogue' they are towing is a bight of line. Boat is a Leopard 39, apparently on a trip from Cape Town to Brisbane

 

 

 

Interview with the skipper (promotional from Leopard, but still instructive): http://www.leopardcatamarans.com/news-and-events/social-media/delivery-skippers-report-leopard-39-southern-ocean

Those conditions look really heavy.

Wow! Bare poles, towing a warp, and still moving pretty fast. Thank you Jaybird. That is, indeed, instructive. And, IMO, that is one of the beauties of Multihulls. One can power them way down and still make good time in relative comfort.

 

i wonder at what windspeed they take the laundry down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Foghorn: Since you're experienced with these boats, could you please describe what one might expect aboard a GB55 which had no forward movement or steering (for whatever reason) in a sea state as described at the time of RM's dismasting? Lets just assume 10-15 ft waves, confused pattern, short period with storm winds. How might that differ from the same circumstances for the crew of an Atlantic Yacht or GB 60/66... would the difference be negligible, or might the hard enclosure make a big difference, especially to a short-handed or (ahem) a new owner more used to inshore sailing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been in that position so I'll refrain from guessing. When Clean's "innerview" comes out I expect your questions will be answered. Someone earlier in this thread pointed out the most likely presence of broken glass and hydraulic fluid. If I were a betting man I'd say that was a bigger determining factor than curtains vs. windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tough times for the Gunboat team, glad the crew is safe. Raises a lot of questions, all of which have been asked here but unfortunately remain unanswered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read through this forum and my immediate reactions are:

 

- Do many people actually pray anymore? And if they do, why for the rich guys the helicopters were already helping? Read a newspaper.

- It could well be an event brought about by the cascade of problems that can follow something as simple as a terminal failure, and thus involve no blame to GB or the crew.

- But it could also be an event that would have been much more benign with a different design. Bombastic and slick marketing don't change the obvious risks applying to many modern catamarans with big structures, big windows, exposed rudders, etc etc.

- Performance figures based on ideal passages, and marketing guff about safety, advertised to naiive but rich owners, could encourage them to be blase about weather risks and/or to keep pushing a boat under the believe that money buys invincibility. (I've never seen a GB in the flesh, but I've read the marketing and I think many noobs would get a mistaken impression about how they'd go uphill into the rough stuff, for example. and i'm guessing few would think about what they'd do if progress became impossible, if the rudders went, if the mast went, whatever. Hell, what if they got wet! Because on my reading of the guff, these boats are simply perfect, and you just sit and drink tea at 20k day and night, inside, while Giano Versace personally sews the buttons back on your shirt that were torn loose in the 50knot breeze you stood outside in while taking a pic of a wave.)

- And while I think of it, given I've never seen a GB, where have they clocked up their million miles or so? In the Caribbean in season mainly, I assume? It proves not much to nothing about a boat to do a tradewind rtw without serious structural failure.

- It's not good form to use comments in these forums over years as a trojan horse for marketing GB and then go silent at a time like this. Sure, lawyers, PR, etc, but something more will be known by now. If GB doesn't comment more fully now, then the apparent openness about the boats to date smacks of selective spin.

- And speaking of lawyers, some of the questions are just really basic, and should have answers out there. Eg the question whether the design is intended to lose the mast or tip over first. That should have an easy answer that should be out there. What is it?

- In terms of causes, it's much less interesting if it's skipper or crew error, I think. An inherent design issue has wider relevance than a fact-specific misjudgment that might at best remind us to 'check the weather forecast' or 'check for cracks in stainless fittings'. Generalised advice we already know. And we all make errors. I make heaps, all the time, and don't get excited by others doing so. And many of us leave with a less than perfect forecast, and I can understand there are times you do that too, if the boat's good.

 

Anyway, like many, I'll reserve judgment pending more facts, but I'm beginning to judge GB for not disclosing more facts, and I'm starting to sympathise with those posters who are jaded about rich guys who think carbon, sunglasses and some videos of GBs with midlifecrisis music in the background make them nearly as young as a porsche and a big moustache would have in 1985.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Anyway, like many, I'll reserve judgment pending more facts, but I'm beginning to judge GB for not disclosing more facts, and I'm starting to sympathise with those posters who are jaded about rich guys who think carbon, sunglasses and some videos of GBs with midlifecrisis music in the background make them nearly as young as a porsche and a big moustache would have in 1985. "

+2-3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what's wrong with Porsches and moustaches? Please say a prayer for Porsches and moustaches whilst listening to "Flight of the Valkyries" in your custom tailored Versace skivvies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think bigmarv is on to something.

 

I question the statement that the loaded condition appeared under engineered max full load. The boat was already 240 kg over the light ship design weight and then had more outfitting done at gunboat. I wonder how much additional gear/toys and provisions were actually loaded aboard for the planned tome to be spent in the Caribbean.

 

I don't recall anything about this yacht being built to any classification society rules such as ABS rules for building and classing high-speed craft because bridge deck clearance is a big factor on scantling requirements. In addition there would be a requirement to provide a safe operating envelope (SOE) in the craft operating manual. The SOE would require a reduction of speed based wave height and might have an additional statement like "The master must observe the speed with due caution to prevent continuous wave induced slamming and excessive accelerations, thereby limiting the effects of load peaks on the vessel's structure". In addition there would be a warning stating IF THE SEA STATE EXCEEDS A SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT OF X.X THE VESSEL SHOULD PROCEED AT SLOW SPEED TO THE NEAREST SAFE HAVEN.

 

Mr Rain Maker I am sure has rather large cojones and once becoming drunk with excitement, enjoyed those down wind speeds. After all wind speed over the deck may not be that great when sailing at speeds above 20 knts down wind and couldn't the great GB handle a full main in those conditions especially with those heavy sterns. This is why I don't buy the triple reef and when the smaller squalls hit just point it DDW and ride it out. As for the whiteout squall, good luck in the blinding condition negotiating that swell coming from the south and now you have the recipe for the perfect slam to take down the rig.

 

Once you have the rig down and cut away, what is holding the longeron up? It looks to me like the splayed out struts is now all there is and the load path carries into the main hull beam connection. I wonder if the designer considered the dynamic loads caused by the pitching and heaving that they were experiencing. Could have been some cracking noises happening in that region and why would PJ say they would bring her back better than new. Combined that with the seas trying to board from the stern because without the mast the boat will have more trim by the stern.

 

If there was no danger to life on this boat the Coast Guard normally would have sent a cutter to tow them back.

 

Where is this boat that we were told had a transponder?

 

Perhaps if towed back it has been hidden in shame or is it lost at sea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its funny that some of you seem to have a problem with rich guys ... jealous ?

there are people standing on the shore looking at the sailboats out there and think we are all rich guys ...

( and in some ways we are, as we all love the sailing , no matter if on a FD , McGregor or Melges or or or )

 

and hence ... even Gunboat owners who might or might not be rich are sailors ...

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

Nothing wrong with sending prayers ....

( again rich or poor don't matter to me, and includes the guys in the helicopter as well )

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

I am sure Peter will be open about this and will let us know, the minute he is allowed to speak freely. I am betting that he is burning up inside and somebody needs to watch his keyboard as he wants to jump right in .....

 

 

thor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that I've got more or less the whole story, I can start laughing at n00b conspiracy theories again. Hyperships, I think you should stick to coloring books.