Archived

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

johnnysaint

Something not right with this story.

Recommended Posts

A British couple who spent 40 days adrift in the Atlantic Ocean when their yacht broke down are grateful to be alive after "staring death in the face".

 

Stuart Armstrong, 51, and Andrea Davison, 48, were rescued by an Italian oil tanker at the weekend after it answered their distress call as the sailors drifted dangerously into storm-ravaged waters near the Bermuda Triangle, British newspapers report.

 

The pair, who set out to cross the Atlantic just after the New Year, ran into trouble on January 9 when their rudder became jammed in the starboard position and efforts to right the problem failed.

 

Mr Armstrong and Ms Davison deployed a druge — a parachute-like sail usually used to control yachts in high seas — but it did not counteract the effect of the rudder.

 

"In effect, we were sailing round and round in circles as the rudder was stuck all the way over," Mr Armstrong said to the Mail on Sunday.

 

The couple used their radio to call for help but both the British and United States coastguards said a rescue attempt would be impossible due to their remote location.

 

The pair said they were not too scared initially because they were both experienced sailors and had plenty of supplies on board, including water, pasta, rice and kidney beans.

 

But they ran into trouble about 10 days later when their alternator broke, leaving them without electricity and destroying their ability to purify sea water for drinking.

 

They stayed in radio contact using what little solar power they could muster, only speaking to their families once or twice a week to tell them they were OK.

 

As they continued to ration their water, the yacht drifted further towards the Caribbean and the legendary Bermuda Triangle where the encountered increasingly turbulent seas.

 

"One minute we were on the peak of a huge wave, the next we were down in a trough," Mr Armstrong recalled.

 

After repeated distress calls, the pair were finally rescued by the Italian tanker, Indian Point, which was en route from South America to the Netherlands.

 

The couple said the experience had brought them closer together.

 

Ms Davison said: "You do feel very isolated though and you do miss your family but it hasn't put either of us off sailing — it's just like riding a bike, when you fall off you just have to get back on again."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"In effect, we were sailing round and round in circles as the rudder was stuck all the way over," Mr Armstrong said to the Mail on Sunday.

 

I call BS. They did not sail around in a circle, it was more of a heart shape and their boat broke when they hit a freighter a thousand days ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little odd, I would think you could get the rudder to turn, I wonder how it jammed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're taking this story too literally... It's just a metaphor. He was describing his marriage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know that at low speeds (< 1 kt?) the rudder has little or no effect. It has to be moving through the water to be effective.

 

A drifting boat will move with the prevailing current, wind and tides.

 

Event with a jammed rudder, they should have been able to move in whatever direction they chose (albeit very slowly).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what's 'not right' about the story.. apart from the fact they couldn't get picked up for so long.

 

You do wonder what happened to the rudder.. but I know of situations with jammed rudders (bent stock etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anybody needs a bowman, I'm sure they're BOTH very good at tacking and gybing by now.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ms Davison said: "You do feel very isolated though and you do miss your family but it hasn't put either of us off sailing — it's just like riding a bike, when you fall off you just have to get back on again."

 

She got her metaphors mixed up. The bike metaphor is about not forgetting how to do something and the horse metaphor is about getting back on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the bearings got fucked, i supoose it could jam up real bad like that. I assume that when he said they were sailing around in circles he was referring to when they were still sailing, as opposed to drifting. Sails came down, they were drifting. I dont think that by trying to get someplace at 1kt so that the rudder would have minimal effect, would work in much more than lightish airs and flat seas...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the bearings got fucked, i supoose it could jam up real bad like that. I assume that when he said they were sailing around in circles he was referring to when they were still sailing, as opposed to drifting. Sails came down, they were drifting. I dont think that by trying to get someplace at 1kt so that the rudder would have minimal effect, would work in much more than lightish airs and flat seas...

But if you are ocean going, you should have a spare rudder.

 

Deploy the spare in a manner that counters the main rudder. Sure its huge amounts of drag, but there's no reason why you wouldn't be able to continue to control your direction.

 

Sure in big seas you would have to heave to but again, that's a couple of days, and then you are back to sailing.

 

The story seems plausible enough - just that it seems they were not sufficiently prepped for transAtlantic sailing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the bearings got fucked, i supoose it could jam up real bad like that. I assume that when he said they were sailing around in circles he was referring to when they were still sailing, as opposed to drifting. Sails came down, they were drifting. I dont think that by trying to get someplace at 1kt so that the rudder would have minimal effect, would work in much more than lightish airs and flat seas...

But if you are ocean going, you should have a spare rudder.

 

Deploy the spare in a manner that counters the main rudder. Sure its huge amounts of drag, but there's no reason why you wouldn't be able to continue to control your direction.

 

Sure in big seas you would have to heave to but again, that's a couple of days, and then you are back to sailing.

 

The story seems plausible enough - just that it seems they were not sufficiently prepped for transAtlantic sailing.

 

true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The couple used their radio to call for help but both the British and United States coastguards said a rescue attempt would be impossible due to their remote location..."

 

ummmmmm.......wow.

 

I guess there really is water on Mars...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have difficulty believing that for 40 days, in the Atlantic, with all the shipping about, nobody would or could come to their rescue. That just doesn't add up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have difficulty believing that for 40 days, in the Atlantic, with all the shipping about, nobody would or could come to their rescue. That just doesn't add up.

 

 

true

 

and personally i would use the solar power to charge the batteries as best as possible, or switch to an aux battery to get the desalinization working again, that would be priority number one. To be fair though, i'm not an ocean crosser, not even close, but i think they'd have more backup systems for something as valueable as water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A British couple who spent 40 days adrift in the Atlantic Ocean when their yacht broke down are grateful to be alive after "staring death in the face".

 

Stuart Armstrong, 51, and Andrea Davison, 48, were rescued by an Italian oil tanker at the weekend after it answered their distress call as the sailors drifted dangerously into storm-ravaged waters near the Bermuda Triangle, British newspapers report.

 

The pair, who set out to cross the Atlantic just after the New Year, ran into trouble on January 9 when their rudder became jammed in the starboard position and efforts to right the problem failed.

 

Mr Armstrong and Ms Davison deployed a druge — a parachute-like sail usually used to control yachts in high seas — but it did not counteract the effect of the rudder.

 

"In effect, we were sailing round and round in circles as the rudder was stuck all the way over," Mr Armstrong said to the Mail on Sunday.

 

The couple used their radio to call for help but both the British and United States coastguards said a rescue attempt would be impossible due to their remote location.

 

The pair said they were not too scared initially because they were both experienced sailors and had plenty of supplies on board, including water, pasta, rice and kidney beans.

 

But they ran into trouble about 10 days later when their alternator broke, leaving them without electricity and destroying their ability to purify sea water for drinking.

 

They stayed in radio contact using what little solar power they could muster, only speaking to their families once or twice a week to tell them they were OK.

 

As they continued to ration their water, the yacht drifted further towards the Caribbean and the legendary Bermuda Triangle where the encountered increasingly turbulent seas.

 

"One minute we were on the peak of a huge wave, the next we were down in a trough," Mr Armstrong recalled.

 

After repeated distress calls, the pair were finally rescued by the Italian tanker, Indian Point, which was en route from South America to the Netherlands.

 

The couple said the experience had brought them closer together.

 

Ms Davison said: "You do feel very isolated though and you do miss your family but it hasn't put either of us off sailing — it's just like riding a bike, when you fall off you just have to get back on again."

I'm bewildered at the "hocus-pocus" writing in the article. Bermuda Triangle???

Sounds like their mechanical skills could use a refresher.

Rudder problems?

This sounds like the rudder stop device was not correct or damaged, and the rudder became pinned against the hull. There are a couple mcguyver solutions that some boatyard experience might have enabled them to resolve, but most boat owners are not in that category.

I guess their boat is now drifting around...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm bewildered at the "hocus-pocus" writing in the article. Bermuda Triangle???

 

That's the sunday Mail for you... Quoting it ought to be a crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She got her metaphors mixed up. The bike metaphor is about not forgetting how to do something and the horse metaphor is about getting back on.

after 40 days at sea going around the atlantic to the right, I'm sure she's mixing a lot more than just metaphors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She got her metaphors mixed up. The bike metaphor is about not forgetting how to do something and the horse metaphor is about getting back on.
We need to cut her some slack.

 

They were not able to unstick a simple jammed rudder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have difficulty believing that for 40 days, in the Atlantic, with all the shipping about, nobody would or could come to their rescue. That just doesn't add up.

Add to that the number of sailors making transatlantic crossings this time of year on the same route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

per the front page article, Private Eye magazine has been alerted.

They do enjoy a pop at the Daily Mail

 

i've commented online to the Daily Mail as well.

more folks should do this too.

 

shite sensationalist journalism is rampant and getting worst.

 

for some reason, the Daily Mail is deemed a 'mainstream' rag, rather than the woman's comic that it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you cannot get the rudder to move as it is, you can at least jump into sea and saw just chunks of it away.

Start with the bit pressed hard against the hull, if not sufficient, just saw it off around the stock. If you can inflict enough damage, it will eventually work loose, and detach. No rudder is definately better than a jammed one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
per the front page article, Private Eye magazine has been alerted.

They do enjoy a pop at the Daily Mail

 

i've commented online to the Daily Mail as well.

more folks should do this too.

Good work. Both MRCCs are keen to have the real story spread around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She got her metaphors mixed up. The bike metaphor is about not forgetting how to do something and the horse metaphor is about getting back on.
We need to cut her some slack.

 

They were not able to unstick a simple jammed rudder...

 

Quite right. Cut them some slack. The "sailing in circles" may also be a poorly worded metaphor. Remind yourself that sailing is often dumbed-down for the mainstream media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Per the BYM story, they were in regular contact with US and UK Coast Guard. They requested a tow or repair assistance, but were told they could only abandon ship and get picked up by a merchant ship, which they declined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we do have to remember that this is the story, told by two probably fairly lucid individuals, was relayed to a spotty oik straight from the University of "i don't amount to much, but Daddy will get me a job at the Daily Mail" who then finger typed it on his Fisher Price spelling toy and mailed it to the sub-Editor's desk, who inserted it directly into the paper without reading, due to staff shortages and a lack of journalistic integrity.

 

I am fairly sure now that the article reads badly because the "infinite number of monkeys with typewriters" at the Daily Mail have yet to write Shakespeare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

I don't know what SA does where other sites are concerned, but BYM provides a feed for SA Sailing News, which - in my book - means it's fine for them to put part of a BYM story on the FP and link to the rest.

What bothers me most about this story is that two MRCCs, which have done a great deal in terms of rescuing both ocean racers and cruising folk, have - as a result of media 'couldn't care less about the facts' attitudes - been subjected to totally unfounded criticism by a gullible public that believes reported garbage. Read the comments on the Mail on Sunday link.

BYM News, in a short space of time, tracked down the real facts; don't just blame the Mail on Sunday, there is absolutely no excuse for so called top media across the globe who simply latched onto the sensational garbage and did not bother to dig deeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

I don't know what SA does where other sites are concerned, but BYM provides a feed for SA Sailing News, which - in my book - means it's fine for them to put part of a BYM story on the FP and link to the rest.

What bothers me most about this story is that two MRCCs, which have done a great deal in terms of rescuing both ocean racers and cruising folk, have - as a result of media 'couldn't care less about the facts' attitudes - been subjected to totally unfounded criticism by a gullible public that believes reported garbage. Read the comments on the Mail on Sunday link.

BYM News, in a short space of time, tracked down the real facts; don't just blame the Mail on Sunday, there is absolutely no excuse for so called top media across the globe who simply latched onto the sensational garbage and did not bother to dig deeper.

Marian, I agree that it is fine to feed the news, but the problem is that it is impossible to recognize that this was not a SA write up, unless you do some detective work.

If anyone posts something on their website, everyone will assume it is written by the person who posts it, unless it is clearly indicated that this is not the case (i.e. that someone else wrote the story).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

I don't know what SA does where other sites are concerned, but BYM provides a feed for SA Sailing News, which - in my book - means it's fine for them to put part of a BYM story on the FP and link to the rest.

What bothers me most about this story is that two MRCCs, which have done a great deal in terms of rescuing both ocean racers and cruising folk, have - as a result of media 'couldn't care less about the facts' attitudes - been subjected to totally unfounded criticism by a gullible public that believes reported garbage. Read the comments on the Mail on Sunday link.

BYM News, in a short space of time, tracked down the real facts; don't just blame the Mail on Sunday, there is absolutely no excuse for so called top media across the globe who simply latched onto the sensational garbage and did not bother to dig deeper.

Marian, I agree that it is fine to feed the news, but the problem is that it is impossible to recognize that this was not a SA write up, unless you do some detective work.

If anyone posts something on their website, everyone will assume it is written by the person who posts it, unless it is clearly indicated that this is not the case (i.e. that someone else wrote the story).

 

You might be refering to the first post. I made the error of not posting where I found it, which is something I usually do not do (forget to attribute it).

 

This is where I found it.... http://ninemsn.com.au/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

 

And half the news stories in the real papers are bought from Reuters etc.

Whats your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

I don't know what SA does where other sites are concerned, but BYM provides a feed for SA Sailing News, which - in my book - means it's fine for them to put part of a BYM story on the FP and link to the rest.

What bothers me most about this story is that two MRCCs, which have done a great deal in terms of rescuing both ocean racers and cruising folk, have - as a result of media 'couldn't care less about the facts' attitudes - been subjected to totally unfounded criticism by a gullible public that believes reported garbage. Read the comments on the Mail on Sunday link.

BYM News, in a short space of time, tracked down the real facts; don't just blame the Mail on Sunday, there is absolutely no excuse for so called top media across the globe who simply latched onto the sensational garbage and did not bother to dig deeper.

Marian, I agree that it is fine to feed the news, but the problem is that it is impossible to recognize that this was not a SA write up, unless you do some detective work.

If anyone posts something on their website, everyone will assume it is written by the person who posts it, unless it is clearly indicated that this is not the case (i.e. that someone else wrote the story).

 

You might be refering to the first post. I made the error of not posting where I found it, which is something I usually do not do (forget to attribute it).

 

This is where I found it.... http://ninemsn.com.au/

 

No not your post, but t he front page (yes, there is one).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

 

And half the news stories in the real papers are bought from Reuters etc.

Whats your point?

 

My point is that a news story that comes from Reuters will be attributed to Reuters.

At the SA front page we constantly read all kinds of stories that are simply copied and pasted from other sources. Yes at the bottom it links to the "rest of the story" but it does not state that what you just read was not written by the ED or Clean, or whichever hack is working for this site. Maybe I am not used to the internet yet, but it seems to me pretty straightforward to properly quote whoever (or whatever) you are quoting. SA imho fails at this.

I'm I the only one bothered by this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whatever the case, do any of you believe that you could drift about for 40 days and not have found a decent solution to your rudder woes?

40 days.... a fuckin month, a week and 3 days....

 

darwin shoots!......................................IT"S OFF THE POST!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we do have to remember that this is the story, told by two probably fairly lucid individuals, was relayed to a spotty oik straight from the University of "i don't amount to much, but Daddy will get me a job at the Daily Mail" who then finger typed it on his Fisher Price spelling toy and mailed it to the sub-Editor's desk, who inserted it directly into the paper without reading, due to staff shortages and a lack of journalistic integrity...

Best description of the modern press I've read lately.....whether discussing print, web, radio, or TV media (ignoring "staff shortages" excuses). Ask anyone who has been quoted by the press for any reason, on any topic, just once. "No comment" is the only statement the press can get right these days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comments section on the Mail site seems to have been taken down.

 

Shame - I imagine that they copped a lot of flak for the story (I for one wrote something pretty inflamatory there.....)

 

Worst paper in the world by a long way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Comments section on the Mail site seems to have been taken down.

 

Shame - I imagine that they copped a lot of flak for the story (I for one wrote something pretty inflamatory there.....)

 

Worst paper in the world by a long way...

 

 

as did i

 

never saw it, and comments are now down

 

 

i dont mind comments being removed / not posted for obscenity reasons etc, but "Edited Comments" is a bit Mugabe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What bothers me more than the bad reporting at the Daily Mail is the copy and paste work that the SA editors keep doing. I read the story on SA, then I click the linky to BYM and I read the same bloody lines once again.

To the SA Editors: IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INCLUDE A LINK, ALSO INCLUDE QUOTATION MARKS AND MAKE CLEAR THAT THESE ARE NOT YOUR WORDS, BUT SOMEONE ELSE'S.

If you fail to do that it is, in my book, just plagiarism.

It happens over and over again on this site, and it is fine to quote others, but don't present it as your own words and ideas if someone else did the journalism and writing for you.

 

And half the news stories in the real papers are bought from Reuters etc.

Whats your point?

 

My point is that a news story that comes from Reuters will be attributed to Reuters.

At the SA front page we constantly read all kinds of stories that are simply copied and pasted from other sources. Yes at the bottom it links to the "rest of the story" but it does not state that what you just read was not written by the ED or Clean, or whichever hack is working for this site. Maybe I am not used to the internet yet, but it seems to me pretty straightforward to properly quote whoever (or whatever) you are quoting. SA imho fails at this.

I'm I the only one bothered by this?

 

 

No, you're not the only one bothered by it.

 

If you didn't generate could you please cite the source?

 

Kinda misleading, d'ya think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if it looks like someone edited it and there's a 'read on' link, just take it as a hint the ed didnt write it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's amazing what steps some people will take to run out the clock on the statute of limitations..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites