Peter Johnstone

PLEASE SAY A PRAYER FOR RAINMAKER'S CREW

Recommended Posts

 

 

I am disregarding the comments of some centercockpit 4 knts going downwind only with looong keel loving traditionalists about the open transom...

nothing wrong when you like a double ender or centercockptit way up there away from the water, just please don't tell everybody an open transom is dangerous ..

 

waiting for Cleans write up

Can you elaborate? Does the safety of an open transom presume forward movement and that steering is always maintained? Are you considering the impact offatigue on shorthanded crews when saying open transoms are just fine?

 

Like I said previously, I'm more comfortable recognizing "category A" or offshore capable monohulls than multihulls. Just not sure what is required/recommended for cat design to make them suitable for mid-winter storms.

 

I'm not sure there is any great consensus on what makes a category A multi - there just isn't the great body of evidence to look at like there is with Monos. Scantlings are similar - I don't believe there are any standards for scantlings that are particularly applicable to fast sailing or racing multihulls.

Part of the reason may be the fracticious and anti-establishment mindset of a lot of multi sailors, hard enough to get them to join an association to race with, let alone have someone else tell them how to build or design their boats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

being written, then it will need to be edited.

 

...and a legal review? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...then it will need to be edited.

 

That stuff on the front page has been edited? Who woulda' guessed.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I am disregarding the comments of some centercockpit 4 knts going downwind only with looong keel loving traditionalists about the open transom...

nothing wrong when you like a double ender or centercockptit way up there away from the water, just please don't tell everybody an open transom is dangerous ..

 

waiting for Cleans write up

Can you elaborate? Does the safety of an open transom presume forward movement and that steering is always maintained? Are you considering the impact offatigue on shorthanded crews when saying open transoms are just fine?

 

Like I said previously, I'm more comfortable recognizing "category A" or offshore capable monohulls than multihulls. Just not sure what is required/recommended for cat design to make them suitable for mid-winter storms.

 

I'm not sure there is any great consensus on what makes a category A multi - there just isn't the great body of evidence to look at like there is with Monos. Scantlings are similar - I don't believe there are any standards for scantlings that are particularly applicable to fast sailing or racing multihulls.

Part of the reason may be the fracticious and anti-establishment mindset of a lot of multi sailors, hard enough to get them to join an association to race with, let alone have someone else tell them how to build or design their boats

 

Have you actually heard of L.Crowther??

 

Hint, hes from Aus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Be honest Clean... are the f’n Venusians behind this one too. Do we need to scour area 51 to learn the truth ?

 

BTW all cruising new boats are overweight. My 28,000 pound Tartan 4700 tipped the scales at launch at a svelte 33,000 empty !!!!!

 

Na JH, but as the skipper is a friend and because so many people are interested in the actual failure and the outcome, I want to make sure the story is presented as well as possible, which takes a bit. Plus I still have a fucking J/70 piece to finish, and a pregnant wife who makes me rub her feet four times a day and cook for her five times...

 

As for the second part of your post, I've corrected it.

 

150277_1228598205698_full.jpg

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Have you actually heard of L.Crowther??

 

Hint, hes from Aus.

 

I have heard of Lock. The point still remains, Yachting Australia recently removed all mention of scantling standards from the multihull OSR, as there are none suitable. Can you point one out to me? Can you name a good quality review of multihull safety features offshore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an empirical equation used for scantling calculations on multihulls that have merit.

 

3.5 Wet Deck or Cross Structure

The wet deck design pressure is to be determined by the following equations:

pwd = 30N1FDFI VVI (1 – 0.85ha/h1/3) kN/m2 (tf/m2 , psi)

where

N1 = 0.10 (0.010, 0.00442)

ha = vertical distance, in m (ft), from lightest draft waterline to underside of wet deck, at design point in question. ha is not to be greater than 1.176h1/3

FI = wet deck pressure distribution factor as given in 3-2-2/Figure 6

VI = relative impact velocity as given below:

= 4h 1/ 3/(L)^.5+1 m/s

= 7.24h1/3/(L)^.5+3.28 ft/s

V, h1/3 and FD are as defined in 3-2-2/1.1.

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

 

Rimas dosen't fit in this category he is a grifter or begger not unlike those with signs at street corners just a tad more sophisticated. Rimas does not own charts or any navigation instruments he relies on his gps communicator someone bought for him to find out where he is at from concerned fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an empirical equation used for scantling calculations on multihulls that have merit.

 

3.5 Wet Deck or Cross Structure

The wet deck design pressure is to be determined by the following equations:

pwd = 30N1FDFI VVI (1 – 0.85ha/h1/3) kN/m2 (tf/m2 , psi)

where

N1 = 0.10 (0.010, 0.00442)

ha = vertical distance, in m (ft), from lightest draft waterline to underside of wet deck, at design point in question. ha is not to be greater than 1.176h1/3

FI = wet deck pressure distribution factor as given in 3-2-2/Figure 6

VI = relative impact velocity as given below:

= 4h 1/ 3/(L)^.5+1 m/s

= 7.24h1/3/(L)^.5+3.28 ft/s

V, h1/3 and FD are as defined in 3-2-2/1.1.

 

 

That looks like the ABS Hi-Speed Rule.

HSC_Part_3_e-July14 Wet Deck Structure.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here is an empirical equation used for scantling calculations on multihulls that have merit.

 

3.5 Wet Deck or Cross Structure

The wet deck design pressure is to be determined by the following equations:

pwd = 30N1FDFI VVI (1 – 0.85ha/h1/3) kN/m2 (tf/m2 , psi)

where

N1 = 0.10 (0.010, 0.00442)

ha = vertical distance, in m (ft), from lightest draft waterline to underside of wet deck, at design point in question. ha is not to be greater than 1.176h1/3

FI = wet deck pressure distribution factor as given in 3-2-2/Figure 6

VI = relative impact velocity as given below:

= 4h 1/ 3/(L)^.5+1 m/s

= 7.24h1/3/(L)^.5+3.28 ft/s

V, h1/3 and FD are as defined in 3-2-2/1.1.

 

 

That looks like the ABS Hi-Speed Rule.

 

 

Nice one, Rasputin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clean: given that your writeup is taking time being manicured, can you at least give some indication of a few basic points, such as what first failed on the rig, whether hull integrity was breached and how etc? The contrast between this situation and the up-front candour of the Vestas guys is striking. Vestas were immediately open about causes, despite what must have been humiliation. GB's silence, and that of its friends who seem to know more, smells really bad. Is there a proper yachting journalist who is asking the crew, the owner, Johnstone, and probably most importantly the designer, for comment? Are they actually refusing to comment (other than whoever has spoken to you)?

 

Open transoms: agree, they can be fine on many designs. But seas can sweep up them, so what matters is what the wave meets after it sweeps up that transom. I've always wondered about big patio windows on a cat even with quite closed off stern areas. Those steps up the back of the GB look like a welcome matt for a big greenie. Pretty obvious area for concern, so what was GB's recommended storm tactic for this, with and without the rig? Seriously, all the choir boys who've praised them for so long must know what GB's plan was. There was a plan, right?

 

Small point: owner, son and three professional crew on a not very long passage. Johnstone implied the owner was skilled. Why 3 professional crew on a boat that can supposedly be sailed by Richard Branson wannabes with one hand, while the other hand holds the chardonnay or blogs selfies?

 

This design always looked to me like one that would need careful weather routing to avoid truly shitty weather. Not because they didn't build it well, but because the palatial condo on deck was too big, exposed and accessible to greenies to be safe in the shit. I personally have no problems with such designs, provided everybody's eyes are open to the limits of safe use. It's easier than ever to weather route. But a good professional crew decided it was better to face the risks to all of a long range helo rescue than to stay onboard, so there must have been real trouble beyond the missing mast. If GB can't bear to tell us what it is then I'm not sure I'd trust anything they say again.

 

If there isn't a viable contingency plan for the conditions the boat ended up in, then that should be made clear in marketing. If the deck structure and engine hatches etc are up to breaking seas, I'd love to hear about it, because the technology around all that glass must be amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey Marv,

 

thx nice post. spoke w a very well connected pro sailor , he said lots of broken glass and the pumps weren't keepin up.

 

didn't ask for more info. But I would think add some hydraulic fluid to the dance floor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small point: owner, son and three professional crew on a not very long passage.

Great post. Except for "not very long passage", unless they were headed for Bermuda first? 560 n.m vs St. Martin direct at 1,227 nautical miles (1,412 stature miles) - both are respectably long passages, I would say.

 

Winter on the Gulf Stream, Friday, Jan 30:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

<p>

 

Small point: owner, son and three professional crew on a not very long passage.

Great post. Except for "not very long passage", unless they were headed for Bermuda first? 560 n.m vs St. Martin direct at 1,227 nautical miles (1,412 stature miles) - both are respectably long passages, I would say.

 

Winter on the Gulf Stream, Friday, Jan 30:

That's only 2 or 4 days though. Is that a long passage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey Marv,

 

thx nice post. spoke w a very well connected pro sailor , he said lots of broken glass and the pumps weren't keepin up.

 

didn't ask for more info. But I would think add some hydraulic fluid to the dance floor

Not to mention the lack of handholds. Oh the humanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clean: given that your writeup is taking time being manicured, can you at least give some indication of a few basic points, such as what first failed on the rig, whether hull integrity was breached and how etc?

Personally, if I had the scoop on what had happened when nobody else had the story, I'd be very careful about diluting its impact by releasing core points before publication. I might release the occasional teaser, but that's all.

 

We'll just have to wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Clean: given that your writeup is taking time being manicured, can you at least give some indication of a few basic points, such as what first failed on the rig, whether hull integrity was breached and how etc?

Personally, if I had the scoop on what had happened when nobody else had the story, I'd be very careful about diluting its impact by releasing core points before publication. I might release the occasional teaser, but that's all.

 

We'll just have to wait.

 

 

Until after the Miami Show closes on Monday evening, would be my guess... ;-)

 

Yup, this is not exactly the Woodward/Bernstein approach, that's for sure...

 

;-)

 

Anyone who wants the details before I finish editing the story is free to PM me or email me at clean@sailinganarchy.com any time for more immediate answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

i have no information about it being rejected, but i have heard anecdotally that it was overweight. Unlikely to have been much of a factor in this case.

 

 

Overweight is generally a factor in a multi losing it's rig. The forces on the cap shroud in a gust are a lot about the wire trying to lift the windward hull up. If the hull is overweight for the design of the rig then it is going to overload the wire sooner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rainmaker had only one shroud on each side

 

If tripled reef what is more supporting the side force on the middle of the mast, the windward or leeward spreaders down there or something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The silence is deafening! Is it just me, or am I the only one thinking that there must have been a catastrophic failure? I'm even thinking that Gunboat must have paid everyone on the boat not to talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I learned the over loaded boat lesson back in the 80s after reassembling my 32 foot dihedral foil catamaran at Sausalito Multihulls and allowing Malcolm Tennant onboard for a shakedown sail prior to the 425 mile San Francisco to Catalina race. The original plan was for me and my racing crew of four along with my brother and his son to go out and test the boat; but when Malcolm Tennant happened be at the dock that day and asked if he could come along I felt honored that he was so interested in my unusual design and I allowed the extra weight. Every thing was fine until we rounded Yellow Bluff and got the full blast of wind coming through the gate because my Gudgeon wing mast look like a wet noodle. Needless to say we quickly turned around and headed back to the dock. After being the first to finish and first corrected multihull, racing against other multihulls including the great John Walton on his tricked out F-27. I received besides the two trophies the best prize ever, a hand held VHF radio donated by West Marine. That radio saved my life one year later when capsized twenty five miles off Pt. Ano Nuevo when I was able to contact the Coast Guard tower in Monterey. It took 45 minutes for the Coast Guard to fly out from SFO to snatch us from certain death.

 

Since we are all praying, please pray for the soul of a good friend and one of the best sailors I ever knew, Tommy Trento who helped me disassemble, reassemble my boat and win that race. I understand that he passed away several years ago.

 

Back to the over weight boat cap shroud issue at hand the loads are especially intensified when considering a full hoisted main combined with the LCG aft of the LCB when sailing down wind.

 

On a lighter note, perhaps Clean will finish that Big Gulp size cup of GB Kool-Aid and submit his report

 

Remember the truth shall set you free .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the one.

 

Rainmaker had only one shroud on each side

If tripled reef what is more supporting the side force on the middle of the mast, the windward or leeward spreaders down there or something else?

 

post-12175-0-39926400-1424082030_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The silence is deafening! Is it just me, or am I the only one thinking that there must have been a catastrophic failure? I'm even thinking that Gunboat must have paid everyone on the boat not to talk.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head

 

Gunboat, Rainmaker's owner and the crew are all running away with their tails between their legs... otherwise we'd have heard something by now.

 

It was either a catastrophic failure or a really bad lack of seamanship... or both...

 

The silence is just making it worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The silence is deafening! Is it just me, or am I the only one thinking that there must have been a catastrophic failure? I'm even thinking that Gunboat must have paid everyone on the boat not to talk.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head

 

Gunboat, Rainmaker's owner and the crew are all running away with their tails between their legs... otherwise we'd have heard something by now.

 

It was either a catastrophic failure or a really bad lack of seamanship... or both...

 

The silence is just making it worse.

 

 

 

I'll bet they are in communication with owners and potential owners who have questions..., maybe they just don't think it's that important to communicate with everyone else at this time - so what?

 

but - it's already been suggested on this thread.., and it's widely been circulated.., that when the rig came down, part of the superstructure was damaged.., and that this influenced the decision to get off the boat

 

maybe clean's report will confirm this

 

is it a "catastrophic failure? i guess you can decide for yourself

 

but i really think you need to get a grip - a pretty high performance boat loses a rig and everyone decides to get off - they all lived, and they probably would have all lived if they had not decided to get off - hardly one of the worst things to happen in sailing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has some wild speculation. We'd prefer that the Captain get his account written and out there. We led this story with as much information as we could glean with the goal to promote safety from the learnings.

 

Some clarifications to various speculation:

 

1) The longeron is held by the side-stays. It can only drop about 150mm from its tensioned position. Crew were able to walk on the nets and knock the forestay pin out. The longeron was not an issue during her brief time under power after the rig was cleared away.

2) The roof took the load of the boom and rig on it, including the leverage of the mast and sails in the water. There may have been damage, and one window broke, but it safely protected the five crew.

3) The open layout does not appear to be an issue in this incident. Water has not been mentioned as a contributing factor in any way.

4) Rainmaker was 240 kgs over her planned lightship of 12,500 kgs due to the original owners extensive additions. Her loaded displacement prior to passage appeared well under her designed full loaded displacement of 15,250 kgs. Her loaded displacement does not appear to be a contributing factor.

5) According to the Captain, rigging and attachment points were all intact after the incident.

 

In summary, a sizable weather event hit Rainmaker. It was either a microburst or a water spout. The crew saw 75+ knots but have no idea of top gusts. There was no visibility, just a complete white out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'll bet they are in communication with owners and potential owners who have questions..., maybe they just don't think it's that important to communicate with everyone else at this time - so what?

 

but - it's already been suggested on this thread.., and it's widely been circulated.., that when the rig came down, part of the superstructure was damaged.., and that this influenced the decision to get off the boat

 

maybe clean's report will confirm this

 

is it a "catastrophic failure? i guess you can decide for yourself

 

but i really think you need to get a grip - a pretty high performance boat loses a rig and everyone decides to get off - they all lived, and they probably would have all lived if they had not decided to get off - hardly one of the worst things to happen in sailing...

 

 

Why do I need to "get a grip"?... what did I do wrong?

 

I'm just saying that the lack of information probably means they are trying to find excuses, otherwise somebody would have said something by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'll bet they are in communication with owners and potential owners who have questions..., maybe they just don't think it's that important to communicate with everyone else at this time - so what?

 

but - it's already been suggested on this thread.., and it's widely been circulated.., that when the rig came down, part of the superstructure was damaged.., and that this influenced the decision to get off the boat

 

maybe clean's report will confirm this

 

is it a "catastrophic failure? i guess you can decide for yourself

 

but i really think you need to get a grip - a pretty high performance boat loses a rig and everyone decides to get off - they all lived, and they probably would have all lived if they had not decided to get off - hardly one of the worst things to happen in sailing...

 

 

Why do I need to "get a grip"?... what did I do wrong?

 

I'm just saying that the lack of information probably means they are trying to find excuses, otherwise somebody would have said something by now.

 

 

i guess i just don't feel the same sense of urgency that you do - what difference does it make if we find out what happened now, or in a month.., or two months..?

 

if they wait two months.., i don't see why that means they are looking for excuses..

 

anyway it seems PJ has answered some of the questions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The silence is deafening! Is it just me, or am I the only one thinking that there must have been a catastrophic failure? I'm even thinking that Gunboat must have paid everyone on the boat not to talk.

Is there really any meaningful chance that the Gunboat people would be silly enough to think that they could bury something like that? That sort of strategy usually backfires quite badly.

 

In Ireland, an incident like this would probably lead to an enquiry by the Marine Casualty Investigation Board (MCIB), who are very thorough. In the UK, an investigation would be conducted by the Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB), who are also very thorough.

 

What about the USA? I see that the NTSB investigates "significant accidents", which I guess wouldn't apply here. Will there be a Coast Guard enquiry?

 

 

 

Seems doubtful... Has anyone ever seen of heard of an official CG 'report' on the loss of the Alpha 42 last January, for instance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The silence is deafening! Is it just me, or am I the only one thinking that there must have been a catastrophic failure? I'm even thinking that Gunboat must have paid everyone on the boat not to talk.

Is there really any meaningful chance that the Gunboat people would be silly enough to think that they could bury something like that? That sort of strategy usually backfires quite badly.

 

In Ireland, an incident like this would probably lead to an enquiry by the Marine Casualty Investigation Board (MCIB), who are very thorough. In the UK, an investigation would be conducted by the Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB), who are also very thorough.

 

What about the USA? I see that the NTSB investigates "significant accidents", which I guess wouldn't apply here. Will there be a Coast Guard enquiry?

 

 

 

Seems doubtful... Has anyone ever seen of heard of an official CG 'report' on the loss of the Alpha 42 last January, for instance?

 

 

Do we even want it?

 

USCG investigations when a rig comes down.., and nobody is hurt?

 

I don't see any need for it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clean, how's the report going? Still embargoed?

 

Nope, and never has been. Probably have another two to four hours of editing to go before sending back to CB for his approval.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The silence is deafening! Is it just me, or am I the only one thinking that there must have been a catastrophic failure? I'm even thinking that Gunboat must have paid everyone on the boat not to talk.

 

I think you need to get back on your Zoloft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rainmaker had only one shroud on each side

 

If tripled reef what is more supporting the side force on the middle of the mast, the windward or leeward spreaders down there or something else?

 

One shroud on each side is the "standard" rig on catamarans, though there are exceptions. The mast is usually held in column by jumpers and diamond stays, hence transferring the loads to the shrouds and forestay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"This thread has some wild speculation."

 

A bit of an understatement Peter! :) Thanks for the update.

In the absence of information, people speculate. That's just how it goes, in any context.

 

Congrats to Peter for filling some of the vacuum

 

Speculation Anarchy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is speculation Peter because of the strange unified silence of everybody close to it.

 

I have to hand it to you though, the marketing of GB is very impressive. Put aside whether the suitability of the 55 for blue water was overstated, I just can't think of any similar situation where the entire crew, the builder, and the designer, just disappear so effectively. And where the various magazines that covered the 55 so well aren't now asking the hard questions. And on top of that, you come on only when the din of criticism gets really loud and answer your own selection of hard questions. Still, at least there are the choir boys who sing along and don't notice how many questions aren't being answered. I always thought the marketing was very slick, and your engagement on the forums nuanced and clever.

 

But Overlay is right, it's piss poor.

 

And before you repeat that you'd prefer to just await the captain's report, a bunch of questions for you, not him:

 

- you tell us the rigging and terminals were intact (why wait so long to say even that?). So the mast buckled, presumably. Theories? Insufficient support when deep reefed? That's the speculation of many so far, you avoid it.

- why was RM so slow before the event?

- why do these boats that don't need paid crew keep needing paid crew?

- your wording around water being an issue is perplexing. Are you saying that there was no water ingress?

- so why did they abandon ship? Seriously, if water wasn't an issue, why?

- you say it had time under power after the rig was cut away. so why did the props foul? or didn't they?

- people observe that the sterns looked low. Do you agree? Or not?

- have you asked the other crew not to comment?

- why is the owner silent?

- what does Irens think?

- are you revisiting your marketing around the ruggedness in blue water of this design?

- are you being consulted on the wording of the captain's account?

 

Sure, you don't have to answer any of this. But I guess that's the marketing challenge for you - you've struck such a good tone of apparent openness and responsiveness on these forums for years. To adopt an old fashioned product liability marketing strategy now really sticks out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has some wild speculation. We'd prefer that the Captain get his account written and out there. We led this story with as much information as we could glean with the goal to promote safety from the learnings.

 

Some clarifications to various speculation:

 

1) The longeron is held by the side-stays. It can only drop about 150mm from its tensioned position. Crew were able to walk on the nets and knock the forestay pin out. The longeron was not an issue during her brief time under power after the rig was cleared away.

2) The roof took the load of the boom and rig on it, including the leverage of the mast and sails in the water. There may have been damage, and one window broke, but it safely protected the five crew.

3) The open layout does not appear to be an issue in this incident. Water has not been mentioned as a contributing factor in any way.

4) Rainmaker was 240 kgs over her planned lightship of 12,500 kgs due to the original owners extensive additions. Her loaded displacement prior to passage appeared well under her designed full loaded displacement of 15,250 kgs. Her loaded displacement does not appear to be a contributing factor.

5) According to the Captain, rigging and attachment points were all intact after the incident.

 

In summary, a sizable weather event hit Rainmaker. It was either a microburst or a water spout. The crew saw 75+ knots but have no idea of top gusts. There was no visibility, just a complete white out.

 

What happened to the engines/drivetrain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is speculation Peter because of the strange unified silence of everybody close to it.

 

I have to hand it to you though, the marketing of GB is very impressive. Put aside whether the suitability of the 55 for blue water was overstated, I just can't think of any similar situation where the entire crew, the builder, and the designer, just disappear so effectively. And where the various magazines that covered the 55 so well aren't now asking the hard questions. And on top of that, you come on only when the din of criticism gets really loud and answer your own selection of hard questions. Still, at least there are the choir boys who sing along and don't notice how many questions aren't being answered. I always thought the marketing was very slick, and your engagement on the forums nuanced and clever.

 

But Overlay is right, it's piss poor.

 

And before you repeat that you'd prefer to just await the captain's report, a bunch of questions for you, not him:

 

- you tell us the rigging and terminals were intact (why wait so long to say even that?). So the mast buckled, presumably. Theories? Insufficient support when deep reefed? That's the speculation of many so far, you avoid it.

- why was RM so slow before the event?

- why do these boats that don't need paid crew keep needing paid crew?

- your wording around water being an issue is perplexing. Are you saying that there was no water ingress?

- so why did they abandon ship? Seriously, if water wasn't an issue, why?

- you say it had time under power after the rig was cut away. so why did the props foul? or didn't they?

- people observe that the sterns looked low. Do you agree? Or not?

- have you asked the other crew not to comment?

- why is the owner silent?

- what does Irens think?

- are you revisiting your marketing around the ruggedness in blue water of this design?

- are you being consulted on the wording of the captain's account?

 

Sure, you don't have to answer any of this. But I guess that's the marketing challenge for you - you've struck such a good tone of apparent openness and responsiveness on these forums for years. To adopt an old fashioned product liability marketing strategy now really sticks out.

 

oh come on, there is nothing strange in GB not taking care of their to-do-list #100+ item whis is responding to questions in this forum. good on them for doing it, but you can´t pretend them to engage here continuously. and yes the liability angle is higher up in the list, its reality. I would start calling it strange or intentional if we dont get the story after 6 months. or maybe more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if I get a couple more deposits then fck it off to Thailand

 

maybe shoulda stuck w Morelli, Mr. Morelli whatever his name is..... those HH boats look bad ass

finally added that spray strake thing a ma jig

nursing hang over s beach w the groovy girl, her hubby passed out at 9, partied late nite... on de beach babie

 

WOW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The silence is deafening! Is it just me, or am I the only one thinking that there must have been a catastrophic failure? I'm even thinking that Gunboat must have paid everyone on the boat not to talk.

I think you need to get back on your Zoloft

Hey, just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that everybody's not out to get me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone surprised that the "new sailing media" turns out to be the same as the old sailing magazines?

All the access in the world to the parties involved but no editorial content after how ever many days. Some nice fluff on the front page though.

I love Sailing Anarchy. But it is just "Sailing World" with swear words and boobs....which is fine I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone surprised that the "new sailing media" turns out to be the same as the old sailing magazines?

All the access in the world to the parties involved but no editorial content after how ever many days. Some nice fluff on the front page though.

I love Sailing Anarchy. But it is just "Sailing World" with swear words and boobs....which is fine I guess.

 

Yeah, where the status quo blows...

 

I feel a giant hunk of fluff about to hit the front page. Nice to pave the way with a GB "feel good" piece and a few stories of other boats having trouble in the Atlantic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone surprised that the "new sailing media" turns out to be the same as the old sailing magazines?

All the access in the world to the parties involved but no editorial content after how ever many days. Some nice fluff on the front page though.

I love Sailing Anarchy. But it is just "Sailing World" with swear words and boobs....which is fine I guess.

Yep. As always, follow the money.

 

Although I guess at least you get to read comment by some astute observers who aren't commercially compromised.

 

And it's sort of entertaining to see the shills pop up to post. And the contortions to avoid answering inconvenient questions are sometimes funny. until you remember it's done for money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This thread has some wild speculation. We'd prefer that the Captain get his account written and out there. We led this story with as much information as we could glean with the goal to promote safety from the learnings.

 

Some clarifications to various speculation:

 

1) The longeron is held by the side-stays. It can only drop about 150mm from its tensioned position. Crew were able to walk on the nets and knock the forestay pin out. The longeron was not an issue during her brief time under power after the rig was cleared away.

2) The roof took the load of the boom and rig on it, including the leverage of the mast and sails in the water. There may have been damage, and one window broke, but it safely protected the five crew.

3) The open layout does not appear to be an issue in this incident. Water has not been mentioned as a contributing factor in any way.

4) Rainmaker was 240 kgs over her planned lightship of 12,500 kgs due to the original owners extensive additions. Her loaded displacement prior to passage appeared well under her designed full loaded displacement of 15,250 kgs. Her loaded displacement does not appear to be a contributing factor.

5) According to the Captain, rigging and attachment points were all intact after the incident.

 

In summary, a sizable weather event hit Rainmaker. It was either a microburst or a water spout. The crew saw 75+ knots but have no idea of top gusts. There was no visibility, just a complete white out.

After all this time, after asking us all to pray, this is all you can add to the conversation ? Piss poor.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pyrat posting #378

 

Thanks for that posting Pyrat, a good believable analysis

...somehow I was not able to include his 'quote' ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Is anyone surprised that the "new sailing media" turns out to be the same as the old sailing magazines?

All the access in the world to the parties involved but no editorial content after how ever many days. Some nice fluff on the front page though.

I love Sailing Anarchy. But it is just "Sailing World" with swear words and boobs....which is fine I guess.

 

Yeah, where the status quo blows...

 

I feel a giant hunk of fluff about to hit the front page. Nice to pave the way with a GB "feel good" piece and a few stories of other boats having trouble in the Atlantic.

 

 

 

Hey Bob, ya know what?

 

Fuck you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK here's my thoughts PhillySailor, starting with a disclaimer: I have a background of almost exclusively monohulls 60-100ft, and do not profess to be a catamaran guru in any way - certainly not as experienced or knowledgeable as Soma, CB, or the other GB skippers on here. This is strictly my observation on what impressed me and what didn't about the two models - I've sailed a Generation 1 GB60, and on Rainmaker as delivery crew.

 

You raise valid points and concerns about the 55, a few of which I share.

 

-The low, open transoms, and 'convertible' salon ie. indoor/outdoor space left me feeling a bit vulnerable, which is ironic given that I have spent roughly 70,000 offshore miles on a very wet helm on the back of a monohull, much closer to the water. I think what was weird was that you felt like you were supposed to be inside, but always aware that inside could very quickly become 'on deck'. This left me wondering if inexperienced owners/crew would be less prone to gear up with foulies and pfds at appropriate times or conditions, and just how much weather would it take to make inside, outside. I think this is just a product of habit stemming from my background - when inside a mono your'e entirely secure and enclosed on all sides, and when you go on deck you prepare for battle and take every precaution.

 

-I noticed while sailing any faster than 11-12 knots that the transom steps showed a lot of squat - this may be due to the fact that Rainmaker came out a bit heavy due to aftermarket equipment upgrades, but nonetheless, 2 out of 3 steps up into the salon were almost constantly underwater, even in moderate conditions, including the horizontal lifting hatch/door into the engine space (which is well sealed, but still…) Don't know how those things look in heavy snot downwind. Presumably at 20+ you'd have a rooster-tail and the stern wave would be separated from the transom more so not as much of a problem? Cant vouch for that either way, can't see it being more than a nuisance really, even if you took a an occasional wave over the stern upon deceleration (typically downwind you'd be outrunning the waves anyways?) Don't know how it would effect a stalled-in-huge-seas situation, but since the boat cant' sink, presumably closing off the doors would leave you with wet feet in the salon and not too much more.

 

-The bridge deck clearance never gave reason for concern as far as handling waves. We did some reach and running through a fairly good seaway, 6-8 footers off the coast of Delaware. How this contributes to the overall stance, balance, and structural integrity I have no idea but I have never had or heard of any reason not to trust PJ and Gunboat or their designers (Nigel Irens in this case). I never noticed any bad slapping or pounding. Harping again on the level of the transom and salon from the waterline, I could maybe see a problem - if you were to flood the salon from a wave pooping from astern - that the scuppers located at the entrance of both hulls might be insufficient and therefore allow a bit of a waterfall down into the cabins. Closing the hull-doors would presumably prevent this, can't vouch on how it all seals and drains, but again, would probably chock that up to an inconvenience that you get your beds a bit wet and have to run the bilge pumps a bit. Lord knows monohulls leak from anywhere they can fucking leak, though typically not water falling in through the companionway unless due to a huge freak wave.

 

-As for the wide open spaces, handholds, etc I never found that to be a problem. The motion on the boat is quite smooth. Perhaps pounding upwind or in a serious beam on sea with a lot of sliding, yawing, hobby-horsing, etc you could make an argument there, but given that the boat doesn't heal, I never felt at lack for a grab rail. The bulkheads and combings are all tall and offer plenty of security from inside the salon so that you don't feel endanger of MOB. The only exception there in with the aft-deck 'doors' which are Eisenglass/plastic with zippers on both sides to complete the enclosure. I would like to have seen a more rigid door, gate, or any sort of security bar there because if you did happen to lose balance and fall through one of those, you'd be damn close to water on those transoms. The deck also offered a reasonable platform from which to work, at least as nice a one as I've seen on a cat (trampolines still fuck with my head and balance).

 

-The greatest reservation I had about the 55' was her sailing properties. This boat is an absolute freaking weapon. Very powerful, very fast, and scarier than fast, very quick to accelerate. While close-reaching down the Chesapeake with the screecher, she would jump from 10 knots to 18 in a couple of seconds. And if you missed a puff and got out of phase, she would decelerate just as quickly, loading up the sails and rig. The sail handling systems, running rigging layout, safety dumps (buttons for traveler and main on both sides of helm) all were terrifically laid out for easy and safe handling, and again, I have no doubt as to the design and construction quality of this or any Gunboat. The only part that is really left in question is driver's ability to handle a boat like that. The GunBoat captains seemed to show her a good bit of respect, and if highly experienced GB skippers have a learning curve on it, what then of a middle-age cruising couple who want to cut the cord with desk jobs and circumnavigate without crew? Maybe they've sailed lots of cats before - perhaps even some uber-fast CW style boats; maybe they know how to bear-away during rapid acceleration; or when a boat like that is over pressed; know how to manage foils in different conditions…. I don't know, and I won't speculate on the GB customer market or current owners - just saying that personally, I'd have had a steep learning curve taking command of her.

 

As for the 60', I have always liked those 1st generation models the best. They are perhaps a bit slower to get rolling, but super fast once they do. They look and feel sturdy and secure in every way, rewarding to drive, excellent forward cockpits, they require knowledge of fast cats for sure but don't seem quite as powered up or twitchy, and have racked up some orgasm-worthy 24 hour runs offshore.

Thanks Pyrat, a good believable analysis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. PJ's latest post contradicts an earlier statement of his about the longeron. In post #36, he says "Longeron would not be supported if the rig is cutaway". But above in #537 he's saying that it's supported by the sidestays and the crew was able to go out on the tramp and pull the headstay pin.

 

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.

 

 

That position you have placed them in is very nearly the one I found myself in during a BIG storm following my Christmas eva departure from the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay headed to the Virgins. Can't remember the exact year, but something like 78-79. We had to just surf seas that were as tall as our mast on a 41' foot wood ketch. Had to just go east with the 'flow' as turning south at that point was too dangerous.

 

At one point I decided to just go under bare poles as my little cutter staysail was getting beat up with all the slewing downwind. But we were getting blanketed by the wave tops and slowed down to much. Now the crest of the following waves were breaking over my stern and filling my cockpit/floor with water, ...and the cockpit had inadequate size drains (like many vessels), thus the sea water was leaking into my engine room,....over the top of my brand new diesel engine.

 

Decided it was time to regain some speed, so back up with that little staysail. That was another trick, since it meant climbing partially out on the 6 foot bowsprit, and holding on for dear life when we surfed into the back face of the wave at the trough. I was completely submerged in water and spray on at least two occasions while performing that trick.

 

It had to have been blowing over 50 knots for 2 days to have built up that big of a sea. I believe we (3 of us) heard that there was a small freighter and 2 other pleasure craft that were sunk in that storm,...and intense low pressure system that moved off the coast and combined with something else offshore,....can't remember all the details now,...age has caught up with me.

 

To top it off, we detected water coming up under the floorboards,....were we taking on water?...sure appeared to be so. This boat was tight, never took on much water at all. Turns out during the height of that storm there was so much noise onboard we never heard the fresh water running into our bilge from a tap that had gotten knocked open during the storm. So much for our fresh water supply,...all gone. We had to try and collect rain water for the remainder of the trip south,...once the storm abated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scenario: o dark thirty with broken window, mini maelstrom in cabin with hydraulic fluid on many surfaces. What do you throw down to improve footing? Assume no ready supply of kitty litter or oil dry, & no sand happens to be onboard. Would you sacrifice sheets and blankets to the briny deep after mopping up as much as possible, just use buckets of water?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well seeing as how the OP thread has been answered perhaps we should say a prayer for the poor gunboat itself. It was blowing NE40 plus aginst the stream out there yesterday. If no one has put a hook in it yet it could be anywhere.

Maybe it will end up in Russia like that Dick Newick trimaran did years ago when it got abandoned in the Gulf Stream, then subsequently picked up by a Russia freighter.

Was that Phil Weld's boat Gulf Streamer that got capsized out there during a transatlantic race??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This thread has some wild speculation. We'd prefer that the Captain get his account written and out there. We led this story with as much information as we could glean with the goal to promote safety from the learnings.

 

Some clarifications to various speculation:

 

1) The longeron is held by the side-stays. It can only drop about 150mm from its tensioned position. Crew were able to walk on the nets and knock the forestay pin out. The longeron was not an issue during her brief time under power after the rig was cleared away.

2) The roof took the load of the boom and rig on it, including the leverage of the mast and sails in the water. There may have been damage, and one window broke, but it safely protected the five crew.

3) The open layout does not appear to be an issue in this incident. Water has not been mentioned as a contributing factor in any way.

4) Rainmaker was 240 kgs over her planned lightship of 12,500 kgs due to the original owners extensive additions. Her loaded displacement prior to passage appeared well under her designed full loaded displacement of 15,250 kgs. Her loaded displacement does not appear to be a contributing factor.

5) According to the Captain, rigging and attachment points were all intact after the incident.

 

In summary, a sizable weather event hit Rainmaker. It was either a microburst or a water spout. The crew saw 75+ knots but have no idea of top gusts. There was no visibility, just a complete white out.

After all this time, after asking us all to pray, this is all you can add to the conversation ? Piss poor.

 

+1

 

What is it you build again?

 

Oh yea, I remember the videos.

 

Nevermind. Speaks for itself.

 

Think I'll wait to pass judgment until we heard from somebody who was actually there who has sailed one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. PJ's latest post contradicts an earlier statement of his about the longeron. In post #36, he says "Longeron would not be supported if the rig is cutaway". But above in #537 he's saying that it's supported by the sidestays and the crew was able to go out on the tramp and pull the headstay pin.

 

 

I think both statements are true. With rig tension, the longeron will not move. Sans rig, it is still supported laterally but that doesn't do much for the up/down component...probably the tramp hull and bridgedeck attachments do more. In any case, it must have been full pucker going out to spike the headstay pin.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The longeron was supported enough to not fall in the water, but it would have made motoring into any sea state a problem. I only know because that's the paragraph I just edited after breakfast. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well seeing as how the OP thread has been answered perhaps we should say a prayer for the poor gunboat itself. It was blowing NE40 plus aginst the stream out there yesterday. If no one has put a hook in it yet it could be anywhere.

Maybe it will end up in Russia like that Dick Newick trimaran did years ago when it got abandoned in the Gulf Stream, then subsequently picked up by a Russia freighter.

Was that Phil Weld's boat Gulf Streamer that got capsized out there during a transatlantic race??

 

 

Gulf Streamer, 27 April 1976, on the way to Portsmouth for the OSTAR race: (source)

 

he asked Dick Newick to design a boat that could win the 1976 Ostar. Larger than Trumpeter (which was 13.40m long), Gulfstreamer (in Airex sandwich) was built by Alan Vaites in Mattapoiset, Massachusetts. In four years on her board, Phil accumulated considerable racing experience, frantically sailing around Britain, in transatlantic convoys and the Bermuda race, until 27 April 1976. Halfway between Bermuda and Cape Hatteras, a low-pressure area centered on Nova Scotia swept across the Gulf Stream with 50-knot westerly winds, an erratic breaker struck the trimaran and capsized her during Bill Stephens’ watch! Six days later, the two men were rescued at sea. It wasn’t until much later that Phil learned from the press that a cargo vessel from Odessa (Russia) had salvaged Gulfstreamer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The longeron was supported enough to not fall in the water, but it would have made motoring into any sea state a problem. I only know because that's the paragraph I just edited after breakfast. :P

 

Yeah, I'm going to guess it was more than 150mm, as stated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The longeron was supported enough to not fall in the water, but it would have made motoring into any sea state a problem. I only know because that's the paragraph I just edited after breakfast. :P

 

Gotcha. Thanks for that Clean, look forward to the finished report.

 

This seems to point out a fundamental design flaw with this particular boat, yes? If you lose the rig, you also essentially lose the ability to motor thanks to that huge water scoop you now have between the bows, unless you also go out and cut away the longeron. Presumably there is going to be a sea state to contend with if you just lost the rig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a call from the White House looking for Clean's contact info. Seems they are having orgasms over there at the thought of Clean's new approach to journalism. The folks want to use their newly found executive powers to turn the whole media kabal over to Clean and SA. They are simply giddy at the thought of interviews and questions on touchy subjects when they are ready coupled with full and complete approval of any story. The NFL has been quoted as sayin... "this will be the new gold standard for getting our way".




Puff piece or fluff piece is an idiom for a journalistic form of puffery: an article or story of exaggerating praise that often ignores or downplays opposing viewpoints or evidence to the contrary.



Did that creature from Numbers eat SA's testicles? Or is it simple the yearning for more of the Gunboat ruhm tap...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone with hydraulics should know to carry one part brake cleaner for every ten parts of hydraulic oil on board.

 

Is that good for fine bright work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"My free shit isn't good enough!" "WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH"

 

 

fuck off.

 

 

said Brian Williams and that producer from 60 Minutes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Peter for the information - And thanks Clean for being a 'journalist' and doing some editing and fact checking to get the story right. What a concept. The journalists of this country should take note. And for all the assholes wanting info ASAP - have you put the deposit down on your GB yet? Didn't think so, so why should anyone give a shit what your opinion is on this matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moonduster can you elaborate on why you should have brake cleaner? Is that to clean up a mess?

Anyone with hydraulics should know to carry one part brake cleaner for every ten parts of hydraulic oil on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brake cleaner? That will take the finish off and then start in on the epoxy. Mineral spirits or just a good detergent or soap is all that is needed. I don't think I would want to use either in the middle of a storm while dealing with other problems.

 

I hope the long promised article addresses the far more interesting side to the story: the decision to get off on a freighter. The subsequent helicopter lift stems directly from that, the rig falling while newsworthy is not that unusual for the situation (new boat in bad conditions for the first time). No, the interesting part is the chain of decisions and conditions onboard driving them, between the time the mast was cut away and the call for the freighter. That's the part I want to hear the details on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Peter for the information - And thanks Clean for being a 'journalist' and doing some editing and fact checking to get the story right. What a concept. The journalists of this country should take note. And for all the assholes wanting info ASAP - have you put the deposit down on your GB yet? Didn't think so, so why should anyone give a shit what your opinion is on this matter.

 

People expect information from the media. It is suppose to be the function of the press. Ask the uncomfortable question from time to time. Separate yourself and your feeling from the story and tell the story in a timely fashion.

Maybe this site isn't the sailing press. In that case, my bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

People expect information from the media. It is suppose to be the function of the press. Ask the uncomfortable question from time to time. Separate yourself and your feeling from the story and tell the story in a timely fashion.

Maybe this site isn't the sailing press. In that case, my bad.

 

 

Thanks for your helpful information, though I think you meant 'supposed to be'. And there's nothing quite like supposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moonduster can you elaborate on why you should have brake cleaner? Is that to clean up a mess?

 

Anyone with hydraulics should know to carry one part brake cleaner for every ten parts of hydraulic oil on board.

 

You drink it mixed with a little ice and orange juice to kill yourself when you finally realize you bought a disruptive piece of

crap for $2.0m, shit your pants, and have to go home and explain to your wife how you almost killed her baby boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edi your makeup is awful but

 

 

Moonduster can you elaborate on why you should have brake cleaner? Is that to clean up a mess?



Anyone with hydraulics should know to carry one part brake cleaner for every ten parts of hydraulic oil on board.

 


You drink it mixed with a little ice and orange juice to kill yourself when you finally realize you bought a disruptive piece of
crap for $2.0m, shit your pants, and have to go home and explain to your wife how you almost killed her baby boy.

 

Edi your makeup is awful but that is hysterical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Moonduster can you elaborate on why you should have brake cleaner? Is that to clean up a mess?

 

Anyone with hydraulics should know to carry one part brake cleaner for every ten parts of hydraulic oil on board.

 

You drink it mixed with a little ice and orange juice to kill yourself when you finally realize you bought a disruptive piece of

crap for $2.0m, shit your pants, and have to go home and explain to your wife how you almost killed her baby boy.

 

 

“That unique Gunboat sense of community is important to us, and it’s one of the big reasons we bought the boat,” explained Carolyn. “From the beginning, we felt like part of a big, awesome family, welcomed by the high-caliber folks that make up the tribe of Gunboat owners, employees, skippers, and crews.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Moonduster can you elaborate on why you should have brake cleaner? Is that to clean up a mess?

 

Anyone with hydraulics should know to carry one part brake cleaner for every ten parts of hydraulic oil on board.

 

You drink it mixed with a little ice and orange juice to kill yourself when you finally realize you bought a disruptive piece of

crap for $2.0m, shit your pants, and have to go home and explain to your wife how you almost killed her baby boy.

 

 

“That unique Gunboat sense of community is important to us, and it’s one of the big reasons we bought the boat,” explained Carolyn. “From the beginning, we felt like part of a big, awesome family, welcomed by the high-caliber folks that make up the tribe of Gunboat owners, employees, skippers, and crews.”

 

Shouldn't this thread have begun when Rainmaker FIRST left port? I mean, the wx forecast was total shite, it seems to me that PJ should have been lighting candles at St. Agnes when these guys untied the lines.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brake cleaner? That will take the finish off and then start in on the epoxy. Mineral spirits or just a good detergent or soap is all that is needed. I don't think I would want to use either in the middle of a storm while dealing with other problems.

If you ever get diesel (or hydraulic oil) on the carpets, aerosol brake cleaner is the shiznet for getting that shit out.

 

I wouldn't use it anywhere near the boat though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the heyday of Stearns Hydraulics & IOR boats where lotsa cylinders was hip, ordinary coke did a good job of cutting hyd oil. No soap required! But maybe the bar was empty by then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does coke help? Spread the white powder around and hope it soaks up the oil? That's a pretty expensive cleanup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does coke help? Spread the white powder around and hope it soaks up the oil? That's a pretty expensive cleanup.

 

Not for a member of the unique and high caliber Gunboat family. The coke could be just what you need to keep believing the marketing. Always helped those chubby guys who thought buying a porsche made them sporty, but who couldn't run up a flight of stairs.

 

Because if you need three pro crew for short passage, "high caliber" doesn't mean "great sailor". It just means moneyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clean,

 

I'll PM this if you prefer that for questions, but I figure it's better here (let me know if not). I'm not sure whether there's significance in your point about whether or not you're a journalist, but I'd like to know a bit more about this article you've got in the works. Some questions that won't spoil the content:

 

- are you conveying the skipper's account or critiquing the events based on his account?

- who have you interviewed/questioned about it? Is it just skipper focused or will you be addressing the design issues and appropriateness of marketing issues that people have raised here and elsewhere? eg are you talking to the designer? Hall?

- what sort of communication have you had with Johnstone and GB since the event?

- are you consulting with anybody on the content of your draft before it goes out, and who?

- why are the players commenting to you and not elsewhere?

 

Genuinely interested in the answers. I know what sort of answers a journalist would give, but I am not sure what your approach is. And I'm interested in the silence of the players. The charitable view is that the silence is for legal reasons, but it doesn't really wash if they are talking to someone like you, or if Johnstone is chiming in selectively (as he has).

 

Look forward to your response to these quick and easy questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But what you have and foster here is an environment were you will never hear facts, have the opportunity to learn, or really where anyone on the short end of any stick would want to share.

 

That's idiotic Wess. The news almost always comes out here either from the horse's mouth, our editorial staff chasing it down, or one of the anarchists figuring it out. You just need a big dose of patience and the ability to drown out the clueless. Sure, there are a lot of them, but that's the same whether you're in here or on the street.

 

You know Clean, I didn't respond, but I hope I am right and it never appears here. I know you did the work and have the story but reading both threads again today, I honestly hope you don't post it.

 

It would do no good for anybody - and likely cause grief for the undeserving. Mud splatters everywhere when it drops; not just where it belongs. Those that can understand, have some context, and want to know, can know.

 

Heck, I enjoy SA for the fun shit stirring sometimes, but these threads take shit flinging to a whole different level.

 

Let it die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Peter for the information - And thanks Clean for being a 'journalist' and doing some editing and fact checking to get the story right. What a concept. The journalists of this country should take note. And for all the assholes wanting info ASAP - have you put the deposit down on your GB yet? Didn't think so, so why should anyone give a shit what your opinion is on this matter.

 

Don't think anyone will be putting a deposit down until they explain why the masts keep falling off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I asked before ..

competitor ?

 

usually that doesn't go over too well

 

thor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thanks Peter for the information - And thanks Clean for being a 'journalist' and doing some editing and fact checking to get the story right. What a concept. The journalists of this country should take note. And for all the assholes wanting info ASAP - have you put the deposit down on your GB yet? Didn't think so, so why should anyone give a shit what your opinion is on this matter.

 

Don't think anyone will be putting a deposit down until they explain why the masts keep falling off.

 

 

Jesus....exactly how many GB rigs have come down in the last 14 years? 2?

 

Clearly an epidemic....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Thanks Peter for the information - And thanks Clean for being a 'journalist' and doing some editing and fact checking to get the story right. What a concept. The journalists of this country should take note. And for all the assholes wanting info ASAP - have you put the deposit down on your GB yet? Didn't think so, so why should anyone give a shit what your opinion is on this matter.

 

Don't think anyone will be putting a deposit down until they explain why the masts keep falling off.

 

 

Jesus....exactly how many GB rigs have come down in the last 14 years? 2?

 

Clearly an epidemic....

 

 

 

Yeah everyone seems pretty cool with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Thanks Peter for the information - And thanks Clean for being a 'journalist' and doing some editing and fact checking to get the story right. What a concept. The journalists of this country should take note