Flying Pig News, late edition...
Larry
Not because of what happened, but because I just finished composing a
letter to the Log, which immediately disappeared into the ether. So,
ARGHHHH!! I say to you. :/
I wanted to say a few more things before we (hopefully) get wrapped up
tomorrow in trying to get back to living on our wonderful home, Flying
Pig.
We are so grateful for all your love and support, well wishes,
encouragement, and beautiful, warm emails. You have no idea how
sustaining they have been to us both.
There have been many, many offers of help, ranging from car loans, to
vacant boats to live on temporarily, to cash donations. I’m not able
to answer all those mails individually as yet, but I wanted to make
these blanket comments to those of you who have made offers.
There are some Angels out there, disguised as sailors, who have taken
steps to set up a means to make donations. (Email not posted here), aka
William V Hoyle Jr. has set up a Flying Pig Trust account, into which
some people have wished to contribute by snail mail. His address is:
10401 Warwick Blvd
Newport News, VA 23601
(Office phone not posted, either)
(another email deleted here) has also set up a PayPal account in which to
make
donations.
Having said that, I must also tell you that among the cruising
newsgroups, there has been some dialogue about whether or not we need
any financial help, and that perhaps we should have been consulted
first before Angels stepped in. These are my thoughts on this:
I am comfortable sharing with you that our boat was insured for $140K,
subject to the underlying mortgage of $64K. The salvage of Flying Pig
from the reef to Marathon, some 25 miles, which involved a 70’, 1000HP
landing craft, two SeaTow boats, a BoatUS boat, a ferry boat, 4
divers, 2 helpers and the salvage Captain, cost $30K of which $7K is
covered by insurance. Obviously there will be a shortfall. We
anticipate that all other repairs will be covered by insurance. Any
costs for living expenses incurred since the wreck, has been absorbed
by the Red Cross, to whom we’re very grateful, with the exception of
the car rental for a week. We had just gifted our van to a needy guy
in the old boat yard we left, the day before we departed. In truth,
he needed it more than we.
I will also tell you that while we don’t have the shortfall at hand,
we would be mortified and very uncomfortable if anyone out there were
to make donations based on anything other than desire and ability.
For those who have the ability and are not driven by desire, that’s
entirely OK by us. We don’t expect anything, and we wouldn’t have
felt either disappointed or abandoned if these Angels-posing-as-
sailors had never brought this subject up. So, for those of you who
want to help us financially, we thank you with all our hearts. For
those of you who can’t or don’t, we thank you too for following your
comfort level, as we would have done, I’m sure, were the shoe to be on
the other foot.
We are Pay Forward people, I think, and over and over, it has paid us
back. We carry spares for others that we know we would never use for
ourselves; in kind, we have received spares we needed from others we
didn’t have. This is part of the cruising mentality. And it’s
good.
However, we don’t expect anything; in return, it seems, we have
everything.
So, that’s that. I mean it.
As to the grounding …
There are some of you who might be sitting back, scratching your
heads, wondering if we were out there playing “silly buggars”, as my
British ex-husband would say. Well, we obviously weren’t adhering to
our own rules of safety.
1. We were exhausted and sleep deprived when we left.
2. When I got seasick on my second Scopalamine patch while I was on
watch, I didn’t wake Skip, knowing he badly needed rest, to get help.
As discussed in earlier log posts, I feel this really impacts your
judgement.
3. As a result of either the patch (which I’ve heard affects vision)
or just the rough seas and exhaustion, I didn’t focus well on pretty
much anything, including the instruments.
4. While we diligently checked the weather in St Pete and Marathon
before leaving, which looked very good for a downhill run, we weren’t
adequately prepared to hit surprise bad weather.
5. We were in a hurry to leave, to reach George Town, Exumas by 3/1
when my son and girlfriend were arriving by air to join us. I didn’t
want them arriving without us being there to greet them. Big no-no.
We live and learn
We were taken out for a wonderful dinner tonight by Jay and Diane,
more amazing people we’ve never met, who happened to be in a slip in
Key West and contacted us. We had a marvelous evening together.
We’re so grateful for them, and for all of you who have lent your
shoulders as props.
Stay tuned – this will be the last mail from me before we’re safely
back on the boat in the Keys Boat Yard, Marathon, which we anticipate
to be tomorrow. Yay for that – I’m ready to kick butt again
With love, Lydia (and Skip)
Olecapt
Helping them out simply helps them to kill themselves.
Why would you do that?
"Larry" <no...@home.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98D1F0B6E92...@208.49.80.253...
Bob
> OK - I will go for it. This couple seems unsuited for short handed sailing.
> Helping them out simply helps them to kill themselves.
>
> Why would you do that?
>
....and why help them out?
1) Tuition at the School of Hard Knocks is expensive at times, but the
education is priceless.
2) Learning aaint pretty.
3) Its the right thing to do.
Bob
Jere Lull
"Olecapt" <ole...@cox.net> wrote:
> OK - I will go for it. This couple seems unsuited for short handed sailing.
> Helping them out simply helps them to kill themselves.
>
> Why would you do that?
Evidently, you haven't been following them for very long.
As I see it, an understandable enthusiasm dulled their normal
cautiousness, compounded by the *many* dock mates wanting to say
farewell and the flurry of activity attending finally getting away
after so many years' hard work that we've been following, sometimes in
excruciating detail. They have many friends here.
I know they know the first rule of cruising: never sail to a "date", I
called them on it before they left the dock, but I can certainly
sympathize with a "just this one time".
Had they been in a similar situation after a week's settling in and
getting the watch schedules set, I'm sure they would have handled it
better.
--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's NEW Pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/
NE Sailboat
near where they are I would do whatever I could to help.
Why? Because this can happen to anyone. That's why. The best sailor on
earth has run aground.
I ran aground in New Bedford Mass once. That is not easy to do, I did it.
Sure enough if another sailor didn't help me get off the mud, give me a ride
to a coffee place, help me get set up at a marina .. and he was just doing
his thing.
I've never forgotten that man. He was Portuguese. I also remind every
Portuguese person I ever meet what great people they are.
It is the little things.. that is why folks help out.
ps:: this doesn't mean I would help out a nut job such as Ken Barnes, the
screwball with the beautiful people family.
Ya gotta draw the line somewhere.
ps ps ps .. not helping out Donna Lange either. She is another nut job, and
giving her something will only encourage her to go out and kill herself.
But with Flying Pig .. what you have as far as I can see from here is a
simple case of "oh shit".
You tell me the sailor who hasn't said "oh shit" and I will introduce you to
someone who has never taken the boat out of the marina.
-------------
"Olecapt" <ole...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:J5Uyh.1033$c%2....@newsfe12.phx...
> OK - I will go for it. This couple seems unsuited for short handed
> sailing. Helping them out simply helps them to kill themselves.
>
> Why would you do that?
>
>
> "Larry" <no...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns98D1F0B6E92...@208.49.80.253...
>> For the first time since this whole thing happened, Iâ?Tm really angry.
>> Not because of what happened, but because I just finished composing a
>> letter to the Log, which immediately disappeared into the ether. So,
>> ARGHHHH!! I say to you. :/
>>
>> I wanted to say a few more things before we (hopefully) get wrapped up
>> tomorrow in trying to get back to living on our wonderful home, Flying
>> Pig.
>>
>> We are so grateful for all your love and support, well wishes,
>> encouragement, and beautiful, warm emails. You have no idea how
>> sustaining they have been to us both.
>>
>> There have been many, many offers of help, ranging from car loans, to
>> vacant boats to live on temporarily, to cash donations. Iâ?Tm not able
>> to answer all those mails individually as yet, but I wanted to make
>> these blanket comments to those of you who have made offers.
>>
>> There are some Angels out there, disguised as sailors, who have taken
>> steps to set up a means to make donations. (Email not posted here), aka
>> William V Hoyle Jr. has set up a Flying Pig Trust account, into which
>> some people have wished to contribute by snail mail. His address is:
>>
>> 10401 Warwick Blvd
>> Newport News, VA 23601
>> (Office phone not posted, either)
>>
>> (another email deleted here) has also set up a PayPal account in which to
>> make
>> donations.
>>
>> Having said that, I must also tell you that among the cruising
>> newsgroups, there has been some dialogue about whether or not we need
>> any financial help, and that perhaps we should have been consulted
>> first before Angels stepped in. These are my thoughts on this:
>>
>> I am comfortable sharing with you that our boat was insured for $140K,
>> subject to the underlying mortgage of $64K. The salvage of Flying Pig
>> from the reef to Marathon, some 25 miles, which involved a 70â?T, 1000HP
>> landing craft, two SeaTow boats, a BoatUS boat, a ferry boat, 4
>> divers, 2 helpers and the salvage Captain, cost $30K of which $7K is
>> covered by insurance. Obviously there will be a shortfall. We
>> anticipate that all other repairs will be covered by insurance. Any
>> costs for living expenses incurred since the wreck, has been absorbed
>> by the Red Cross, to whom weâ?Tre very grateful, with the exception of
>> the car rental for a week. We had just gifted our van to a needy guy
>> in the old boat yard we left, the day before we departed. In truth,
>> he needed it more than we.
>>
>> I will also tell you that while we donâ?Tt have the shortfall at hand,
>> we would be mortified and very uncomfortable if anyone out there were
>> to make donations based on anything other than desire and ability.
>> For those who have the ability and are not driven by desire, thatâ?Ts
>> entirely OK by us. We donâ?Tt expect anything, and we wouldnâ?Tt have
>> felt either disappointed or abandoned if these Angels-posing-as-
>> sailors had never brought this subject up. So, for those of you who
>> want to help us financially, we thank you with all our hearts. For
>> those of you who canâ?Tt or donâ?Tt, we thank you too for following your
>> comfort level, as we would have done, Iâ?Tm sure, were the shoe to be on
>> the other foot.
>>
>> We are Pay Forward people, I think, and over and over, it has paid us
>> back. We carry spares for others that we know we would never use for
>> ourselves; in kind, we have received spares we needed from others we
>> didnâ?Tt have. This is part of the cruising mentality. And itâ?Ts
>> good.
>> However, we donâ?Tt expect anything; in return, it seems, we have
>> everything.
>>
>> So, thatâ?Ts that. I mean it.
>>
>> As to the grounding â?¦
>>
>> There are some of you who might be sitting back, scratching your
>> heads, wondering if we were out there playing â?osilly buggarsâ? , as my
>> British ex-husband would say. Well, we obviously werenâ?Tt adhering to
>> our own rules of safety.
>>
>> 1. We were exhausted and sleep deprived when we left.
>> 2. When I got seasick on my second Scopalamine patch while I was on
>> watch, I didnâ?Tt wake Skip, knowing he badly needed rest, to get help.
>> As discussed in earlier log posts, I feel this really impacts your
>> judgement.
>> 3. As a result of either the patch (which Iâ?Tve heard affects vision)
>> or just the rough seas and exhaustion, I didnâ?Tt focus well on pretty
>> much anything, including the instruments.
>> 4. While we diligently checked the weather in St Pete and Marathon
>> before leaving, which looked very good for a downhill run, we werenâ?Tt
>> adequately prepared to hit surprise bad weather.
>> 5. We were in a hurry to leave, to reach George Town, Exumas by 3/1
>> when my son and girlfriend were arriving by air to join us. I didnâ?Tt
>> want them arriving without us being there to greet them. Big no-no.
>>
>> We live and learn ï O
>>
>> We were taken out for a wonderful dinner tonight by Jay and Diane,
>> more amazing people weâ?Tve never met, who happened to be in a slip in
>> Key West and contacted us. We had a marvelous evening together.
>> Weâ?Tre so grateful for them, and for all of you who have lent your
>> shoulders as props.
>>
>> Stay tuned â?" this will be the last mail from me before weâ?Tre safely
>> back on the boat in the Keys Boat Yard, Marathon, which we anticipate
>> to be tomorrow. Yay for that â?" Iâ?Tm ready to kick butt again ï S
Wayne.B
wrote:
>You tell me the sailor who hasn't said "oh shit" and I will introduce you to
>someone who has never taken the boat out of the marina.
Can't remember exactly what I said when we were dismasted off the New
Jersey coast in 1987 but I'm pretty sure the "s" word was in there
someplace.
capt.bill11
Olecapt Wrote:
> OK - I will go for it. This couple seems unsuited for short handed
> sailing.
> Helping them out simply helps them to kill themselves.
>
> Why would you do that?
>
>
> stating quite a bit there.
--
capt.bill11
Dan Best
>> You tell me the sailor who hasn't said "oh shit" and I will introduce you to
>> someone who has never taken the boat out of the marina.
>
> Can't remember exactly what I said when we were dismasted off the New
> Jersey coast in 1987 but I'm pretty sure the "s" word was in there
> someplace.
As I recall, when we lost our backstay about 02:30 on our first night
out on the leg from Tonga to Hawaii last September, I used the "f" word
pretty vigorously.
I sympathize very strongly with Skip and Lydia. Especially so early in
their adventure that they haven't yet discovered their abilities and
limits, I can understand how it could happen.
Skip & I corresponded from before they even purchased the "Pig" (in
fact, I understand they used our boat evaluation form to assist them
during the search). I'm really not in a position to help them
financially unless they get desperate, and being on the left coast,
there's not a lot I can offer them in terms of physical aid, but Kathryn
and I are sure sending as many good thoughts their way as we can.
KLC Lewis
"Dan Best" <tricia...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:45ccc971$0$14099$742e...@news.sonic.net...
I can't help but be reminded of Jamie Bryson and his family's trip upon
first buying their Rawson 30. Between Cabo and Alaska they ran aground (with
damage to repair), were rammed by a fishing boat (with more damage to
repair) and were nearly sunk more than once. Either of those collisions
could have resulted in the totalling of their boat by an insurance companay,
yet they bounced back and completed a circumnavigation. Skip and Lydia have
been preparing for this new chapter in their lives for years -- I'm not
ready to close the book on them just yet.
NE Sailboat
====================================================
"KLC Lewis" <nos...@spamless.com> wrote in message
news:66udnXf1Q4bEUlHY...@centurytel.net...
Larry
news:c1aps2tjoaosr31g4...@4ax.com:
> I'm pretty sure the "s" word was in there
> someplace.
>
Not only the "s" word, but the "s", too, I suspect....(c;
Larry
--
VIRUS ALERT! VISTA has been released!
NOONE will be spared!
Olecapt
"Jere Lull" <jere...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:jerelull-6B4179...@news.bellatlantic.net...
You are all making excuses. If these folk are your friends I would think
counsel that they not go off shore without at least a third capable member
on board would be in order.
Skip regardless of his skills or abilities ended up with a lady made ditzy
by seasickness on the helm in dangerous conditions in dangerous waters.
How much more can one screw up?
From long experience one has to be very careful with those who have a sea
sickness proclivity. They can get totally out of it particularly if they
dehydrate.
Sure it was the start of the voyage. That is one of the standard times when
things go wrong.
And no I have never run into anything hard on a bad weather night on the
deep blue. If I ever do I think that will be it.
Sure I can get demasted. Or charged by a whale I suppose. Those however
are problems that were inflected on me. Completely different from those I
inflect on myself.
I would very strongly suggest this couple is unsuited for double handling
anything more than day runs. Other than that they should have a good third
crew.
.
Bob
> Stay tuned – this will be the last mail from me before we’re safely
> back on the boat in the Keys Boat Yard, Marathon, which we anticipate
> to be tomorrow. Yay for that – I’m ready to kick butt again
>
> With love, Lydia (and Skip)
I read in other post the weather that brought these two down was:
NE at 25 and seas of 7-8 feet.
Is that true?????
Bob
Larry
@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com:
> NE at 25 and seas of 7-8 feet.
>
> Is that true?????
> Bob
>
Yes
Rosalie B.
>On Feb 8, 8:39 pm, Larry <n...@home.com> wrote:
>
>> Stay tuned – this will be the last mail from me before we’re safely
>> back on the boat in the Keys Boat Yard, Marathon, which we anticipate
>> to be tomorrow. Yay for that – I’m ready to kick butt again ?
>>
>> With love, Lydia (and Skip)
>
>I read in other post the weather that brought these two down was:
>
>NE at 25 and seas of 7-8 feet.
>
>Is that true?????
>Bob
Sea height is VERY hard to estimate accurately, at least for me and I
suspect for other people as well. More important than just the height
is the wave period (that is how close together they are). Waves of
7-8 feet out in the Atlantic someplace are almost non-events. Waves
of 7-8 feet in the Chesapeake, and I suspect also along the Florida
Gulf Coast, and certainly in the Gulf Stream resulting from a NE wind
are entirely different and a MUCH worse problem, because they are
close enough together that the boat is burying the bow in the next
wave while still on the crest of the previous wave.
Bob
> >> back on the boat in the Keys Boat Yard, Marathon, which we anticipate
>
> >> With love, Lydia (and Skip)
>
> >I read in other post the weather that brought these two down was:
>
> >NE at 25 and seas of 7-8 feet.
>
> >Is that true?????
> >Bob
>
> Sea height is VERY hard to estimate accurately, at least for me and I
> suspect for other people as well. More important than just the height
> is the wave period (that is how close together they are). Waves of
> 7-8 feet out in the Atlantic someplace are almost non-events. Waves
> of 7-8 feet in the Chesapeake, and I suspect also along the Florida
> Gulf Coast, and certainly in the Gulf Stream resulting from a NE wind
> are entirely different and a MUCH worse problem, because they are
> close enough together that the boat is burying the bow in the next
> wave while still on the crest of the previous wave.
Good points you describe. I agree. But was that weather I read above
an operator observatoin or from NWS/OPC?
Bob
Rosalie B.
I don't know, but IME the wave heights reported by NOAA aren't very
accurate either. I don't really know how wave heights can be
accurately measured.
When I'm in our boat, I measure them against the topsides of the boat
if they are close enough and at an angle that I can do that. If the
wave is crashing down over the bow and green water rolling down the
deck of our boat, I know the waves are at least 10 feet.
From an airplane or from a large ship, it becomes more difficult,
because there's no scale to go by. (Unless as happened to Bob once,
the green water is crashing over the flight deck of the aircraft
carrier and then you know that the waves are probably 50 feet)
I'm not sure how they do the waves from the buoys, but there aren't
that many of those.
As far as weather forecasts go - more than once the forecast has been
15-20 decreasing during the day, and it has actually been 15-20
increasing to 25-30 with gusts to 50.
Bob
> I don't know, but IME the wave heights reported by NOAA aren't very
> accurate either. I don't really know how wave heights can be
> accurately measured.
> I'm not sure how they do the waves from the buoys, but there aren't
> that many of those.
Bouys, satellites, ship obsevations....
> As far as weather forecasts go - more than once the forecast has been
> 15-20 decreasing during the day, and it has actually been 15-20
> increasing to 25-30 with gusts to 50.
More important at the top of every Ocean Prediction Center weather fax
you'll read:
SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT IS SHOWN (THE AVERAGE HEIGHT OF THE HIGHEST
ONE-THIRD OF THE WAVES)
In other words, the forcasted/observed wave hight means you gonna see
lots bigger ones too. Average = mean.
Bob
Rick Morel
<gmbe...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>As far as weather forecasts go - more than once the forecast has been
>15-20 decreasing during the day, and it has actually been 15-20
>increasing to 25-30 with gusts to 50.
Amen to that! Once on the way from Dog Island to Anclote Key, leaving
with a forecast of 10-15 with 2 to 5 ft seas, we were in 30-40 with 15
ft seas. NOAA was still giving that same forecast/conditions that
night, but when the bouy (about 15 or 20 miles away) report came on it
agreed with what we were experiencing. Don't the NOAA folks check
their own bouy reports and listen to their own computer voice
forecasts? Believe the bad forecasts / don't believe the good.
Rick
Rosalie B.
>
>> I don't know, but IME the wave heights reported by NOAA aren't very
>> accurate either. I don't really know how wave heights can be
>> accurately measured.
>
>> I'm not sure how they do the waves from the buoys, but there aren't
>> that many of those.
>
>Bouys, satellites, ship obsevations....
>
It's the ship observations that I don't trust. We just got back from
a cruise and the wave heights that they reported were just
unbelievable to me. Either they said it was calm with no significant
waves when it was not, or they said that the waves were 7-8 (feet or
meters can't remember which) when there looked to me that there
weren't any to speak of.
>> As far as weather forecasts go - more than once the forecast has been
>> 15-20 decreasing during the day, and it has actually been 15-20
>> increasing to 25-30 with gusts to 50.
>
>More important at the top of every Ocean Prediction Center weather fax
>you'll read:
>SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT IS SHOWN (THE AVERAGE HEIGHT OF THE HIGHEST
>ONE-THIRD OF THE WAVES)
>
>In other words, the forcasted/observed wave hight means you gonna see
>lots bigger ones too. Average = mean.
>Bob
I know what average and mean are. But if it is the average tallest
1/3rd, I would expect to see more smaller ones (the other 2/3rds). (I
don't get weather faxes as a rule, so I would not have seen that)
When they report the weather at Thomas Point light, they say the same
thing about the wind speed and the waves there. And what they report
is sometimes significantly different from what we see at our boat even
though we are within sight of the light.
Also when we go past Cedar Point at the mouth of the Patuxent, the
wind there is often completely opposite of any other place on the
Chesapeake.
My point is that a lot of weather is really localized and broad
observations may not really reflect what is happening at a specific
boat.
capt.bill11
Rosalie B. Wrote:
> "Bob" frey...@yahoo.com wrote:
> -
> On Feb 8, 8:39*pm, Larry n...@home.com wrote:
> -
> Stay tuned – this will be the last mail from me before we’re safely
> back on the boat in the Keys Boat Yard, Marathon, which we anticipate
>
> With love, Lydia (and Skip)-
>
> I read in other post the weather that brought these two down was:
>
> NE at 25 and seas of 7-8 feet.
>
> Is that true?????
>
> Sea height is VERY hard to estimate accurately, at least for me and I
> suspect for other people as well. More important than just the height
> is the wave period (that is how close together they are). Waves of
> 7-8 feet out in the Atlantic someplace are almost non-events. Waves
> of 7-8 feet in the Chesapeake, and I suspect also along the Florida
> Gulf Coast, and certainly in the Gulf Stream resulting from a NE wind
> are entirely different and a MUCH worse problem, because they are
> close enough together that the boat is burying the bow in the next
> wave while still on the crest of the previous wave.
That is exactly what happens in the Gulf. Although, as I'm sure you
know, you are never in the Gulf Stream in that area of the Gulf.
And as you approach the Keys from the Gulf side it gets very shallow
well offshore of the Keys.
I'm not sure who's local knowledge Skip was relying on but I bet if
they real had made 200 deliveries to that area and known it was going
to be blowing 20-30 with 6-8 foot seas with a 6 1/2 draft vessel, they
would have told them to go to Key West and not try to get in Marathon
in those conditions. If they had to go.
The distance to Key West from the Tampa Bay sea buoy is in fact a few
miles less (as the crow flies) than if you go to Vaca Key (Marathon).
And the entrance to Key West in bad weather out of the North is much
better than Marathon to say the least.
Of course going to Key West adds distance to your trip to the Bahamas.
But at least you are going with the Gulf Stream on your way up and
over.
--
capt.bill11
Olecapt
and Lydia will see it?" Or is the subject simply too painful to raise.
That is how we avoid a lot of the truths in blue water sailing.
Bob
> Hmm silence. Is it the "we are not going to offer an opinion because Skip
> and Lydia will see it?" Or is the subject simply too painful to raise.
Maybe just too obvious. The mans boat was on the reef. What can you
say??
> That is how we avoid a lot of the truths in blue water sailing.- Hide quoted text -
Id say truth at times is very painful:
Kennedy.... Bay of Pigs............. origin of the term "Group Think"
Bush.........Iraq....... stay the course.
And many wont speak up for a varity of reasons. And those who do are
punnished with frowns for not being a team player or raining on
somebodies parade.
I was 17 years old when i saw my first crusing boat sanded in on a
beach. It think it was 1969 or so. Same story thats been repeated
countless times on every shore: Couple in their early 60s retire
early, sell everything to spend a their life in blissful cruising.
Never sailed much, physical conditioning??? Sailing is HARD work. In
my case they left southern CA late in October and headed north. Got
tossed around about Cape Blanco, Or. Got seasick-bounced and bruised
no longer able to sail the boat and ended up on the beach at Waldport,
OR. It happens way too often.
Bob
mr.b
<snip>
I guess you feel compelled to piss in these folks' corn flakes at this
time in an effort to be helpful. Just because we can say a thing, doesn't
mean we have to.
KLC Lewis
> Hmm silence. Is it the "we are not going to offer an opinion because
> Skip and Lydia will see it?" Or is the subject simply too painful to
> raise. That is how we avoid a lot of the truths in blue water sailing.
>
Do you really think there's anything to be said that Skip isn't already
saying to himself, in no uncertain terms?
Rosalie B.
>
>> Hmm silence. Is it the "we are not going to offer an opinion because Skip
>> and Lydia will see it?" Or is the subject simply too painful to raise.
>
>Maybe just too obvious. The mans boat was on the reef. What can you
>say??
Having read Skip's assessment of the situation, I'd say a lot of the
problem was the newness of the cruising experience, the inadequacy of
the weather reports, and, yes, the inexperience of Lydia.
Inexperience can be remedied. On our first cruises, I also had to
rely a lot on Bob even though I had taken some sailing lessons.
The part of Skip's story where he went forward to reef was similar to
something that happened to us, except that we didn't have jack lines,
and Bob had to do it twice (during the day, but we were not setting
off on a big cruise, we were just going down around the peninsula on a
day trip). I knew that if he fell overboard I would not be able to
retrieve him. Our experience was in April in the Chesapeake so cold
water would also have been a problem. Bob was very careful, and
obviously did NOT go overboard, and installed jacklines the very next
thing. (In our defense I have to say that he did have a harness, and
we had practiced retrieving each other from the water)
We've also been in a bad storm (right after Bob's heart attack) where
he didn't listen to the weather report and I let him persuade me to
leave. I was worried about his getting rest then too, as once out
there we had nowhere to go except to keep on going as we were doing.
But by that time (we'd been cruising for 2 years and we had been
married for 43 years), I was in charge of the route planning so we
both knew where we were (we could both read the charts and the radar),
and I let him stay at the wheel all night. After we made port the
next day I insisted that he take a nap and I made him go to bed early
the next night (which he didn't want to do).
Don White
>
> Do you really think there's anything to be said that Skip isn't already
> saying to himself, in no uncertain terms?
Good point! This isn't some kid with stars in his eyes... or some recently
retired baby boomer who bought his boat last month.....
Professional sailors have been known to run aground... the captain of
Bluenose II did it right in Halifax harbour.. during a clear day.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2001/04/16/ns_bluegrd010416.html
Bob
Dear mr.b:
As I said a few post ago.......................
"....And many wont speak up for a variety of reasons. And those who do
are
punished with frowns for not being a team player or raining on
somebodies parade....."
Or in this case where mr.b. said, "...I guess you feel compelled to
piss in these folks' corn flakes..." See how we punish the "Devils
Advocate." Another way we keep good info/intel from seeing the light
of day is, "...If you can not say anything good. Don't say anything
at all...." Or "there is no reson to be rude." Thats real common with
women, southerners, and the people over 60 generation. These are just
a few of several examples that tell people to keep your mouth shut
even if you know some one is about to FU or just FU. Very subtle how
we punish people back into line. Or as the many Asian cultures say,
"...the nail that stands up gets hammered down...." Personally I
recruit asshole opinion regularly just so I get EVERY option/opinion/
observation possible. Assholes have soemvery good advice at times and
are more than willing to share it. My advice: seek out assholes.
Did any of Skips so called friends stop and ask, "...when was the last
time you spent 2 consecutive nights at sea in small craft warnings? If
its been more than a year, why not go 50 miles out and sit in some
rough weather just to see how everything goes...." Did anybody say
that?!?!?! Why not?!? If not, you aint no friend! People who are truly
Good Friends wont let the people who they care about go diddy bopping
down the blissful trail of destruction.
I say we need more cornflake pissers, parade rainers, and you just
aint a team player types in our life.
Ya its a damn shame they ran their boat on reef. So give them a hug
and a helping hand. But NEVER avoid the reason how they got there.
Some reader hear might LEARN somthing!
Bob
Jere Lull
"KLC Lewis" <nos...@spamless.com> wrote:
That's certainly true.
Their plan was good, what I would have counseled, but then they made
slight adjustments that individually were minor, made sense even in
hindsight, and normally wouldn't have caused problems, except that they
added up the wrong way.
Ahhh, I see his "I learned about sailing from that" has finally shown up
here. I think we can all learn from that.
Bob
> Their plan was good,
> Jere Lull
Hello Jere:
This is where we disagree. After reading Skip's latest post crash
debrief his usual amazingly detailed description screams of a sequence
of pre-departure problems. And of even greater concern to me is that
he does not seem to recognize any and blames 1) faulty weather reports
and 2) his less than capable wife. My prayer for S&L and others is to
take a long hard look at the events that preceed their departure and
know that more of the same will only bring more of the same.
Bob
Dan Best
> I say we need more cornflake pissers, parade rainers, and you just
> aint a team player types in our life.
Bob,
Constructive criticism can be given in a positive manner. In the Pig's
case, mistakes were certainly made and Skip has been the first one to
admit that. In fact, he has bent over backwards to analyze everything
that happened while it is still fresh in his mind and share his
conclusions with us. He has been frank and open with the events that
led up to the grounding and the mistakes he sees that were made.
I've never been in a boat in that part of the world, so I refrain from
forming any opinions based on the local conditions, but I have done a
fair amount of double handed cruising (17,000+ miles in the last 2
years). From my perspective, the primary problem that led up to the
grounding was that Lydia was not yet a full partner in the team when it
came to running the boat. Specifically in her understanding of
navigating with the chart plotter. Skip, himself admits this.
> ...since she'd not been monitoring it,
> and making range adjustments to look ahead and also in detail at where we
> were headed by zooming in along the intended route - she really couldn't
> comprehend...
A major contributing factor seems to be a reluctance to get out of the
cockpit and reef the main. With more on-the-water experience, I suspect
it would have been reefed much earlier, thus allowing them to stay on a
more optimal course. By letting the boat stand more upright, it would
also have reduced the fatigue factor among the crew of the Pig.
I think that what this incident points up most of all is the need for
both members of a double handed crew to be comfortable performing all
tasks: navigating, reefing, trimming the sails, anchoring, avoiding
traffic, etc.. Further, they should be comfortable performing the
various evolutions on the boat in all conditions. The difficulty is in
acquiring these abilities without actually getting out there and doing it.
In retrospect, perhaps it would have been wise to take a few more baby
steps with the boat once it was finally ready (day sails, some easy
coastal cruising, etc.) before taking off on a multi-day leg in
challenging waters so early in the adventure.
We've all made mistakes and most of us have been lucky and gotten away
with them without major consequences. Skip and Lydia were not so
fortunate and their lessons came at a very expensive cost. I'm just
thankful no one was hurt.
- Dan
Wayne.B
>But NEVER avoid the reason how they got there.
>Some reader hear might LEARN somthing!
The lessons are there for all to see.
No need to belabor the obvious.
Wayne.B
>Their plan was good
On that point I disagree but will not discuss here.
Bob
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 19:13:21 GMT, Jere Lull <jerel...@mac.com> wrote:
> >Their plan was good.
>
> On that point I disagree but will not discuss here.
Hello Wayne:
I second your comment. And hope others will look closely to what
preceeded their departure.
Bob
mr.b
yadda, yadda, yadda
<snip>
psst Bob...switch to decaf, and take some time to look up the 'tact' in
the dictionary. Skip and Lydia drove their boat onto the rocks, not you
and the olecapt. The last thing they need right now is a couple of
armchair admirals telling them about their competence.
Grow a brain.
Jere Lull
Wayne.B <waynebatr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Their original plan was to do daylight-only, pulling in at night for
that stretch. That's pretty conservative and I think appropriate.
Larry
news:u6zzh.6037$_k....@newsfe07.phx:
> Hmm silence. Is it the "we are not going to offer an opinion
> because Skip and Lydia will see it?" Or is the subject simply too
> painful to raise. That is how we avoid a lot of the truths in blue
> water sailing.
>
As I was talking to Skip on Skype, I told him we don't take Lionheart
offshore to do anything serious without 6 sailors aboard, 2 per watch
section, 3 watch sections so you can get some REST under any conditions.
Most everyone out there trying to get away from humanity is sailing with
way too few actual sailors, not professionals but able hands strong
enough to haul in a fouled main tearing up in the wind at 2AM.
It's none of my business how others sail, but as we're talking about it,
I think an able man sailing with a wife who couldn't bring the boat
around and save his life if he simply fell overboard is really too
dangerous for all. Even if she doesn't get him back aboard, able or even
alive, what is she to do, stand and scream? She MUST be properly trained
and be able to handle the boat in fair, not just wonderful,
conditions....especially alone offshore.
You all know what I'm talking about.....It's not about Skip and Lydia.
How many of you have told your best sailing friends, "John, I don't think
you and Julie should go offshore by yourselves like you do."......do you?
Larry
news:66dus2l89rthh6ufr...@4ax.com:
> Inexperience can be remedied. On our first cruises, I also had to
> rely a lot on Bob even though I had taken some sailing lessons.
>
>
You are right...inexperience can be remedied. But, alas, ABILITY cannot.
A 40' cruising sailboat is a handful for a 250 pound, able male. I'm
sure glad I sail on one with roller furling main and mizzen. Sailing the
Endeavour in bad conditions where you had to take the main down and lash
it to the rolling, rocking boom was a handful for 2 big people, not one.
Lazy jacks are really nice until there's a gale. The finest thing about
Lionheart's roller furling mast is its GEARBOX. I can furl the main,
alone, hanging on for dear life strapped to the base of the mast cranking
in a sail at full load. Coming into the wind, possibly rolling over
because that's not necessarily coming into the wave train, isn't
necessary at all. Roller furling mains make sail handling for less
experienced hands just so simple. It's not necessary for them to figure
out which line reefs which section and how to set it under pressure.
Just roll the damned thing into the mast until what's left outside
relieves the pressure trying to rip it off the boat and that, although
not really "nautical" to brag about at the yacht club bar, way good
enough in 40 knots of wind and 12' seas. Try it sometime...even you
diehard traditionalists.
For a 120 pound female teacher who has had all the sailing classes in the
best schools in the nation....a 40' cruising sailboat in a gale is a
recipe for disaster. She's just not big enough, weighs enough and is
strong enough to do it. It's not politically correct, it's truth. Even
standing at the wheel, to say nothing of going forward to do anything
about reefing the main and furling the ripping jib, she won't be strong
enough for long. I'm 255 and moved pianos for a living for many years.
I'm not "physically fit", but I'm strong. Lifting an end to a 900 pound
piano became easy. I cannot haul the wheel back and forth fighting to
hold any kind of course with the swells against the rudder for hours and
hours to keep the boat off those reefs. My strong arms get so sore and
my back in so much pain, I'm sure glad there are 5 other big souls to
relieve me. What about the "cruising couple"? The man is totally
exhausted. His arms have given out. The 120 pound teacher must now
stand at the helm, hauling the wheel back and forth in a losing battle
with the rudder and course. She has no more relief aboard. She's
DOOMED! Face it...it's true!
But, every one of you know who the "dock hermits" are who go off way out
there for adventure, him and her, in their fancy sailing clothes and
bushy beards trying to look like sailors of 1852. They'd rather die
first than take some really strong 20-somethings with them who know how
to sail, for hours and hours if necessary....
The boat manufacturers are also to blame. We've no place to SLEEP those
boys on a 35' Endeavour, except on the cabin deck or that little cubby
hole of a quarterberth. Berths are ugly, especially berths that are
USEFUL rolling 35 degrees over so you don't get thrown out. That won't
do.....
Good enough? Amazing how many survive out of just luck.
Larry
@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> My prayer for S&L and others is to
> take a long hard look at the events that preceed their departure and
> know that more of the same will only bring more of the same.
> Bob
>
My analysis long before the event was that they HAD to be in the Bahamas
on a certain day to meet the kids. They "HAD to get there". I think
that is patently wrong on any sailboat that has less than a 1000 HP
engine.
No sailboat can be forced to "get there" on a certain day...sometimes
even a certain week! It's just not going to happen....safely. There's
way too many SUV drivers who are used to making Miami in 7.5 hours behind
that helm. We get there when we get there....and not a minute before we
get there. If we don't get there on schedule, we screwed up not because
we did it wrong....but because there was a schedule in the first place.
We left on schedule, no matter whether everything was running right and
everything was fixed.
We sailed on schedule, taking a chance heading into Marathon from the
wrong direction because the stupid Florida Keys are just AWFUL in a boat.
The schedule was the problem.
The solution is easy. You sail to the Bahamas, safely, no matter how
long it takes, even weeks. Isn't that great?! AFTER you've settled into
a slip or anchorage, THEN you call the kids and say, "We've arrived in
the Bahamas, safely, and will wait any length of time it takes for you to
get here and enjoy it with us!" There was no schedule to get there, no
timetable to disaster. There was no schedule for the kids to get there,
either, even though they are flying which is less of a schedule problem.
Damn everyone in a sailboat that's always in a HURRY! I sure hate to
sail with them. So doesn't my captain.... Becalmed 90 miles S of
Charleston on 80W in flat seas and NO WIND, he asked me what I thought.
"I think I'm going to get some sleep, how about you? The wind will come
up sometime this week, probably, maybe, enough to make it worth our while
to put the sails back out. I need to be home by November." (It was July
or something like that.) Isn't that why we took $400 in gourmet food
aboard and cases of beer? We weren't transporting them from Florida to
Charleston to resell..(c; "Hmm...which pate will we serve with cocktails
at happy hour this afternoon?....should we break out the sliced Salmon?"
Decisions, decisions..... "Hand me that half gallon of single malt
Scotch, will you? My glass has a leak.....God the stars are beautiful in
flat seas 90 miles out totally becalmed, laying here on the aft cabin on
my back looking straight up.....and it's SO PEACEFUL!" If it's like this
in the morning, we'll check the water in the batteries and pull that
cable for the XM antenna we forgot for the stereo.
Larry
RELAX-----WE'LL GET THERE--------------------SOME DAY!
Dan Best
> ....a 40' cruising sailboat in a gale is a
> recipe for disaster. She's just not big enough, weighs enough and is
> strong enough to do it.
Larry,
While I agree with your comments regarding a schedule, I'm not sure the
above is universally true. No doubt on some boats it is, but certainly
not all. Ours is a Tayana 37 with a 42' sail plan (5' bow sprit).
We've got no roller furling on either the main, jib or staysail, just
regular old hank on sails. While it's true that when it comes to some
jobs such as retensioning the main after reefing, I sure get it done a
lot faster than Kathryn (and probably a little tighter), but Kathryn is
certainly able to perform all of the sail handling tasks and does
perform them when she is on watch and I'm alseep (if I'm awake, I
usually offer to do the muscle jobs).
As to your comments on steering the boat, I've met very few cruisers who
routinely steer for hours on end in good weather, let alone when things
pick up. That's what the vane is for. Even if something were to happen
to the vane (and our wheel pilot and backup tiller pilot) and we had to
hand steer like that, if there's a lot of pressure on the helm, that's a
sure sign on our boat that we've got way too much sail up. Reduce sail,
let the boat stand upright and take the strain off everything. As far
as we are concerned, we aren't racing anybody. We are far better off
taking a bit longer to get there than to push things and break
something. Enough things break as it is. If all else fails and you've
got sea room, heave to until things settle down. If you haven't figured
out how to get your boat to heave to, then you're in too much of a hurry
(refer to your comments regarding schedules). Take the time to
experiment and figure these things out before your in a position such
that you really need it.
One of the legacies that my father left me with was the concept that
"Good Seamanship" means mostly never letting yourself get into a
situation that requires good seamanship to get safely out of it. In
other words, keep things under control at all times. Being even a
little bit out of control is a recipe for disaster. The sea holds no
animosity towards us, but it can be coldly unforgiving of any mistakes
we make.
gospel_truthy
thread in that I think Skip's account is a good first step.
Note that I picked up on it because we were ducking the issue. They should
not have gone as manned. The problem was that Lydia was not yet blooded.
She did not have the experience of hard weather and she was prone to sea
sickness. So Skip was in fact a single hander with an assistant, He failed
to behave as such and may have lost his boat as a result.
I don't believe the chant of both crew members can do everything. Almost
never happens. Sometimes the Lady is the Captain...but almost always the
guy is the muscle. The Ladies stand watch capably and that makes it all
work. Sure there are some couples were she is fully as capable as he...but
that is not the primary pattern.
And there is nothing wrong with only one muscle person. Works fine. You
set up for it. You go to sleep with a configuration that is almost certain
to let you get four hours and clear instructions to wake you if it ain't
working. In bad conditions you sleep in the cockpit a half hour at a time.
"mr.b" <mi...@b.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.02.1...@b.com...
KLC Lewis
"Larry" <no...@home.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98D4C47695D...@208.49.80.253...
Words of wisdom, Larry. Sailing to meet a schedule won't necessarily lead to
disaster, but it certainly increases the likelihood of it.
Bob
> "Bob" <freya...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1171228147.825891.228200
> @q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> > My prayer for S&L and others is to
> > take a long hard look at the events that preceed their departure and
> > know that more of the same will only bring more of the same.
> > Bob
> My analysis long before the event was that they HAD to be in the Bahamas
> on a certain day to meet the kids. They "HAD to get there". I think
> that is patently wrong on any sailboat that has less than a 1000 HP
> engine.
> The schedule was the problem.
> Larry
> RELAX-----WE'LL GET THERE--------------------SOME DAY!
Hi Larry, I must humbly agree. That is one of the most obvious red
flags about this terrible event. Another I noticed dovetails with the
schedule problem. Why so urgent to depart?
After a year living together with my hot 21 yo girlfriend she casually
mentions one afternoon what I thought about getting married. I said,
uhh.....oh.... ya, maybe we should start talking about that. A week
later she had the announcements mailed out.........WTF! I thought we
were just going to talk about it!?!?!?!? Next, came all the smiles,
congratulations, the way to go son comments from parents bosses,
teachers. I felt so trapped and there was no way I could call it off.
Too many people would be soo disappointed. The rest is history. Lesson
learned? When a huge group thinks you're going to do something there
is tremendous pressure to comply.
Braced for the inevitable flames, I'll venture another speculation
based on several of Skip's post dating back to his vessel search days.
This is yet another elephant sitting in the living room: the care-
taker relationship that seems to exist. And then there is the question
of maintenance medications. I am not pissing on any cornflakes here. I
simply posit the obvious. Yet others will consider these words simply
"too rude and insulting for decent people to talk about in public."
Personally I hang my laundry on my stays for all to see.
Rosalie B.
>"Olecapt" <ole...@cox.net> wrote in
>news:u6zzh.6037$_k....@newsfe07.phx:
>
>> Hmm silence. Is it the "we are not going to offer an opinion
>> because Skip and Lydia will see it?" Or is the subject simply too
>> painful to raise. That is how we avoid a lot of the truths in blue
>> water sailing.
>>
>
>As I was talking to Skip on Skype, I told him we don't take Lionheart
>offshore to do anything serious without 6 sailors aboard, 2 per watch
>section, 3 watch sections so you can get some REST under any conditions.
>Most everyone out there trying to get away from humanity is sailing with
>way too few actual sailors, not professionals but able hands strong
>enough to haul in a fouled main tearing up in the wind at 2AM.
>
This is what I would like. I would go to Bermuda or down to the
Caribbean with Bob, but NOT without at least one other able bodied
person aboard to stand the watches. And he won't do that. So we
don't go. He says I'm chicken.
Now he's talking about singlehanding, and that's crazy.
We do have all roller furling so that we can handle all the sails from
the cockpit and don't need to go on deck except to anchor or come in
to a dock.
Gordon
>
> Now he's talking about singlehanding, and that's crazy.
19 year old neighbor singlehanded a Columbia 28 to Maui last summer
to do a little surfing!
Gordon
Don W
I don't see what is the big deal about getting a
couple of crewmembers to go on the longer
passages. Worst case, you spend a little more on
the provisions.
Personally, I decided some time ago that to do the
Pacific I want at least four capable people on the
boat. This allows for 12 hour two-person shifts
at sea, as well as two people on the boat at all
times for anchor watch once you arrive. Only two
people on the boat is too much work for me. I'm
cruising to have fun!
Don W.
Rosalie B. wrote:
Rosalie B.
>Hi Rosie,
>
>I don't see what is the big deal about getting a
>couple of crewmembers to go on the longer
>passages. Worst case, you spend a little more on
>the provisions.
It isn't you I'm sailing with. You don't have to convince ME.
Rosalie B.
Yes but Bob is going to be 71 in March, he's had a heart attack, and
our boat is a CSY 44
grandma Rosalie
S/V RosalieAnn, Leonardtown, MD
CSY 44 WO #156
http://home.mindspring.com/~gmbeasley/id1.html
Gordon
That do make a difference!
g
Jere Lull
Larry <no...@home.com> wrote:
> "Bob" <frey...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1171228147.825891.228200
> @q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> > My prayer for S&L and others is to take a long hard look at the
> > events that preceed their departure and know that more of the same
> > will only bring more of the same. Bob
>
> My analysis long before the event was that they HAD to be in the
> Bahamas on a certain day to meet the kids. They "HAD to get there".
> I think that is patently wrong on any sailboat that has less than a
> 1000 HP engine.
I registered their sailing to a "date" as questionable before they left
their dock. That's a violation of the primary cruising rule.
Still, I can't say that I would have done anything different under the
conditions they found themselves at the time.
But, as objectionable as I find my next pronouncement to be, would they
have been so rushed to get out of Dodge if they hadn't just paid the
exorbitant FL taxes? Meeting the kids in Georgetown was easily within
their capabilities, and the date or place could easily have been
changed, but getting out of Florida by a date certain was their first
order of business at the time.
Sad to say, but what FL demanded of them was far less than they will
have to pay for trying to avoid FL's taxes.
Would I try the same? You Betcha! They didn't owe FL anything as they
never intended to be in FL any longer than absolutely necessary. Their
dream boat just happened to be stowed there.
Geoff Schultz
news:kARzh.62758$wc5....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net:
> Hi Rosie,
>
> I don't see what is the big deal about getting a
> couple of crewmembers to go on the longer
> passages. Worst case, you spend a little more on
> the provisions.
>
> Personally, I decided some time ago that to do the
> Pacific I want at least four capable people on the
> boat. This allows for 12 hour two-person shifts
> at sea, as well as two people on the boat at all
> times for anchor watch once you arrive. Only two
> people on the boat is too much work for me. I'm
> cruising to have fun!
If you think that 12 hour shifts are a good idea, then I never want to sail
with you! I personally think that 3 people crews work great. You get 4
on, 8 off. If there's a problem, then you've got 1 person who's been down
for at least 4 hours. Anything more than 4 hours at night is too long.
-- Geoff
NE Sailboat
Wait .. you can't do this ... what happened? Did you get married? Did it
end in divorce? Where is she now?
Gee ................
============
"Bob" <frey...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1171246804.2...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
KLC Lewis
"Jere Lull" <jere...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:jerelull-6A0CA7...@news.bellatlantic.net...
> But, as objectionable as I find my next pronouncement to be, would they
> have been so rushed to get out of Dodge if they hadn't just paid the
> exorbitant FL taxes? Meeting the kids in Georgetown was easily within
> their capabilities, and the date or place could easily have been
> changed, but getting out of Florida by a date certain was their first
> order of business at the time.
>
> Sad to say, but what FL demanded of them was far less than they will
> have to pay for trying to avoid FL's taxes.
>
> Would I try the same? You Betcha! They didn't owe FL anything as they
> never intended to be in FL any longer than absolutely necessary. Their
> dream boat just happened to be stowed there.
>
> --
> Jere Lull
> Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
> Xan's NEW Pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
> Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/
I've been thinking along the same lines, but a bit further: I'm afraid that
now, since they never left Florida and are stuck there indefinitely, those
taxes they wanted so much to avoid will be due anyway. Talk about adding
insult to injury.
Rosalie B.
Wayne.B
<geoff"at"@geoffschultz.org> wrote:
>Anything more than 4 hours at night is too long.
I agree. My wife and I usually change watches on a loose schedule
based on when we get tired or when we wake up. This usually works out
to be about 3 hours at night. If we are on a multi day passage I try
to get most of my sleep during day light hours.
One thing I'm meticulous about is leaving my wife with a clear course
line on both the Furuno chart plotter and Maptech OSN on a PC. I also
leave her with an easily read XTE (Cross Track Error) display and
instructions regarding circumstances where she should wake me up.
This would typically be something like a CPA (Closest Point of
Approach) of less than two miles on a radar target, or 1 hour from a
landfall, course change, etc.
I am always on deck for impending landfalls and course changes.
Fortunately my wife does not have sea sickness issues. If she did,
I'm not sure we could do the kind of cruising that we enjoy now.
Larry
> He says I'm chicken.
Nothing is "chicken" about being smart.
>
> Now he's talking about singlehanding, and that's crazy.
His IS crazy....you may quote me.
>
> We do have all roller furling so that we can handle all the sails from
> the cockpit and don't need to go on deck except to anchor or come in
> to a dock.
>
>
I never works that way....and shouldn't be PLANNED to work that way.
Lionheart's roller furling takes place at the bottom of the mast, not aft
in the cockpit. I don't think I'd want to do it any other way because
from the cockpit you can't see it's all going wrong before the damned
thing is jammed, which I can see from right under the roller before it
becomes a problem and can roll it back out to clear it.
Planning on worst case scenario, you must be setup to go forward in heavy
weather to clear the inevitable crash of these systems.
Rosalie is the smart one aboard....STAND Your ground, girl! You got it
right and SAFE!
Larry
> Yes but Bob is going to be 71 in March, he's had a heart attack, and
> our boat is a CSY 44
>
>
You two shouldn't even leave the slip without at LEAST TWO, Strong YOUNG
hands who know how to sail it without you.
Larry
$742e...@news.sonic.net:
> Take the time
That's the best advise to anyone under sail....
Larry
@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com:
> hot 21 yo girlfriend
If we had one of those, none of us would ever leave the slip and there'd
CERTAINLY be no schedule.....(c;
If she makes a lot of noise and gets embarrassed about it, I might make it
out to an anchorage some place....hee hee. They always look at you so
funny as you're walking down the dock towards the parking lot after keeping
the whole end of the dock awake with that screaming and yelling....hee hee.
432 lurkers and 22 posters are reading your post with GREEN
faces.....including mine.
One of my friends got into a similar marriage situation as you. When
anyone asks him when he's getting married, he tells them, "Oh, we're
already married. She just wants to have the wedding." It fun to time the
person he says that to to see how long it takes for its implications to
register..(c;
Larry
$0y4....@newsfe14.phx:
> And there is nothing wrong with only one muscle person.
I disagree, wholeheartedly. There must be at LEAST two muscle persons
aboard when that boat passes through the harbor entrance. If you sail
with one and one breaks a finger around a winch, you end up with ZERO and
sailing with ZERO muscle persons is just plain stupid.
TWO.....minimum.
Test it for yourself. Pick a relatively bad day...raining, 25 knots, >
4' seas increasing. Sit down in the cockpit and say to her, "I just
broke my leg when it got fouled in the jib sheet coming back aft from
shortening sail." From that point on, moan and groan and beg her to help
splint your leg and sail the boat as you are in agony.
Run the test for 6 hours to view the results. You're unconcious after
the first 30 minutes, so at that point SHUT UP and quit telling her what
to do and how to do it. Unconcious captains are really quiet, you know.
No frowning and motioning, either....NO CHEATING THE TEST.
No warnings before the test, either....it has to be totally unprepared
for out of your normal routine. Before the boat broaches or goes
aground, terminate the test and declare it a failure. No bitching or
pissing at her, it's YOUR FAULT for not preparing for this scenario, not
hers. YOU made this stupid decision to go out with one muscleman.
WHEN she starts looking at motorhomes, take that as a signal you'll be
soon singlehanding and needing a new MUSCLEMAN to sail with.....
Don W
A 12 hour two-person shift allows each person to
do 2 hours on, 2 hours off or 3 hours on, 3 hours
off with their companion crewperson, and then to
get up to 12 hours of uninterupted rest before
coming back on for another 12 hour two-person
shift. If there's a problem, you've got two
people who are on shift to take care of it without
waking the two who are off shift. Also, your 12
hour shift alway starts at the same time each day,
so you don't have to deal with upsetting your
sleep cycle.
If you think that this is a bad idea, I believe
you must still not quite understand how the
schedule works. It is much better than a 2-person
crew with 3 on / 3 off continuous, or your
3-person crew with 4 on / 8 off except in case of
need -- at least for me.
If you still think its a bad idea, I'd really like
to understand your objections.
Don W.
Don W
Wayne.B wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 05:38:00 -0600, Geoff Schultz
> <geoff"at"@geoffschultz.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Anything more than 4 hours at night is too long.
>
>
> I agree. My wife and I usually change watches on a loose schedule
> based on when we get tired or when we wake up. This usually works out
> to be about 3 hours at night.
Guy's,
I must not have explained it very well in the
other post.
Go back and look at what I wrote again. There are
_four_ people on the boat. During passages, there
are _two_ people "on" for 12 hours and then the
other two people take over for 12 hours. Each two
person team gets a full 12 hours off each 24 hours.
A typical scenario would be that Bob and Anne are
"on" from 3:00 PM to 3:00 AM. They can split that
twelve hours up any way they choose. If they want
to do 1, 2, 3, or 4 hour rotations during their
joint shift, they can. When Bob is at the helm,
Anne is available to make coffee and sandwiches,
or to help with a sail change, or to just hang out
in the cockpit and read a book.
Meanwhile Don and Nancy--who are "on" from 3:00AM
to 3:00 PM can sack out in the aft cabin together,
and know that they won't be disturbed unless there
is an "all hands" emergency. After ten hours of
sleep, they can get up, get cleaned up and
dressed, and then hang out for another hour before
they go "on" shift together.
Don W.
Rosalie B.
>Rosalie B. <gmbe...@mindspring.com> wrote in
>news:18svs2lbtlsegba03...@4ax.com:
>
>> Yes but Bob is going to be 71 in March, he's had a heart attack, and
>> our boat is a CSY 44
>>
>You two shouldn't even leave the slip without at LEAST TWO, Strong YOUNG
>hands who know how to sail it without you.
>
Well that's as may be.
Although I think I could run the boat by myself if I absolutely had to
(we have both been working out at the gym this winter, so I'm more fit
than I was), and especially I can motor, and work the autopilot and
all the communications stuff, get the weather and navigate. I can
also turn the engine on and I know how to anchor..
At the worst, I know how to call for help on the radio
Mostly I don't want Bob singlehanding, but if it comes to a point
where he is pigheaded enough to go without me when I don't think going
is safe then I will have a hard decision to make. Let him go and
perhaps die?
Rosalie B.
>Rosalie B. <gmbe...@mindspring.com> wrote in
>news:jojvs2lhm0cd0bpd4...@4ax.com:
>
>> He says I'm chicken.
>
>Nothing is "chicken" about being smart.
>>
>> Now he's talking about singlehanding, and that's crazy.
>
>His IS crazy....you may quote me.
>>
>> We do have all roller furling so that we can handle all the sails from
>> the cockpit and don't need to go on deck except to anchor or come in
>> to a dock.
>>
>I never works that way....and shouldn't be PLANNED to work that way.
>Lionheart's roller furling takes place at the bottom of the mast, not aft
The actual roller part of the main (it is behind the mast furling) is
right in front of the companionway to the forward cabin, so it is not
only in view, but Bob can reach the reel that winds up the line from
the cockpit. So it is almost in the cockpit.
Now the staysail and jib both have lines led back to the cockpit and
are farther forward.
>in the cockpit. I don't think I'd want to do it any other way because
>from the cockpit you can't see it's all going wrong before the damned
>thing is jammed, which I can see from right under the roller before it
>becomes a problem and can roll it back out to clear it.
>
Your roller must be placed differently than ours. We can see.
>Planning on worst case scenario, you must be setup to go forward in heavy
>weather to clear the inevitable crash of these systems.
>
We do have harnesses and jacklines, and we wear PFDs all the time when
underway (unless we are off watch asleep, when it is quite easy to
hand). That is Bob's rule for anyone on our boat. (He also makes me
wear shoes on deck.) Bob always clips onto the jacklines whenever the
weather is at all bumpy.
>Rosalie is the smart one aboard....STAND Your ground, girl! You got it
>right and SAFE!
>
>Larry
Well as I said before - most of the times we've gotten in trouble have
been when Bob persuaded me to go against my better judgment. But
let's face it - I can be as cautious as you like and still be wrong
about the weather or whatever the problem turns out to be. I use as
much information as I have available, but sometimes even that and
experience doesn't fully work to keep us out of trouble
We've just been fortunate in that when we've guessed wrong or made
mistakes that it didn't have a serious bad result. Mostly just some
paint scraped off the keel or something like that.
Dan Best
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 05:38:00 -0600, Geoff Schultz
> <geoff"at"@geoffschultz.org> wrote:
>
>> Anything more than 4 hours at night is too long.
>
> I agree.
Not necessarily. After much experimentation, we found that what works
best for my wife and I is that I go to bed at dusk, leaving her on watch
until midnight when we swap. I then take over until she wakes up
(usually shortly after dawn). During the day, we're less formal about
it, but generally switch back and forth every 3 hours or so. Obviously,
this won't work for everybody, but for us it does.
We tried all sorts of different systems before settling on this. I was
OK with just about any of them, but we found that unless she gets a long
uninterrupted break at night, after a few days the sleep deprivation
starts really getting to her. You don't want to be on the same boat as
my wife when she's sleep deprived. It ain't pretty.
krj
12 continuous hours on shift, which is almost impossible. 3 on, three
off for 12 hours is very doable.
krj
Rosalie B.
In our case it is the other way around. I can sleep almost any time
and anywhere but Bob can't. I can also pretty much can wake myself
every couple of hours, so I can also do the anchor watches.
That's one reason I won't go more than an overnight offshore. It is
possible that if we actually did a multi-day passage that he would
eventually conk out and go to sleep when he was off-watch, but I don't
want to count on it.
Normally for offshore (which we've done quite a bit off on the last
trip we did - Miami to Ft. Pierce, St. Mary's River to Charleston and
Charleston to Cape Fear River), I will take a nap in the morning and
then relieve Bob for a little bit, but he won't sleep. So I will make
lunch
He will make dinner which we eat together in the cockpit during the
daylight, and I will go to bed right afterwards. I wake up about 11
and then take over from him and he will try to sleep. He usually
gives up sometime during the night (I once remarked that he'd been to
the bathroom twice and he complained that I was checking up on him,
but as he turns on the light in the head at night, I could see it
shining from the porthole) and comes back up into the cockpit. But
sometimes I'm still there at sunrise. Otherwise he will come back up
around 2 or 3 and I will go take another nap.
If he wakes up and sees it is daylight he thinks he's overslept and we
should be there and he starts doing stuff like shaving and eating and
stuff like that, and getting the boat ready to come into the harbor.
Don W
Maybe you could find an acceptable compromise by
insisting that you would like to go along, but you
also want a third (or fourth) crew along as well.
I think there are quite a few unpaid
volunteers available if you look around far enough
in advance, and you can always hire a licensed
captain to accompany you if desperate. Some of
them are looking to build sea time, and are
available quite inexpensively. A lot of bareboat
charter companys maintain lists of independent
captains.
I am assuming that it is the passages that you are
most worried about, and not gunkholing around the
islands.
Don W.
Don W
krj wrote:
Ahh... I thought it must have come out a little
muddled.
Don W.
Rosalie B.
>Rosalie B. wrote:
>> Larry <no...@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Rosalie B. <gmbe...@mindspring.com> wrote in
>>>news:18svs2lbtlsegba03...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yes but Bob is going to be 71 in March, he's had a heart attack, and
>>>>our boat is a CSY 44
>>>>
>>>
>>>You two shouldn't even leave the slip without at LEAST TWO, Strong YOUNG
>>>hands who know how to sail it without you.
>>>
>>
>> Well that's as may be.
>>
>> Although I think I could run the boat by myself if I absolutely had to
>> (we have both been working out at the gym this winter, so I'm more fit
>> than I was), and especially I can motor, and work the autopilot and
>> all the communications stuff, get the weather and navigate. I can
>> also turn the engine on and I know how to anchor..
>>
>> At the worst, I know how to call for help on the radio
>>
>> Mostly I don't want Bob singlehanding, but if it comes to a point
>> where he is pigheaded enough to go without me when I don't think going
>> is safe then I will have a hard decision to make. Let him go and
>> perhaps die?
>
>Maybe you could find an acceptable compromise by
>insisting that you would like to go along, but you
>also want a third (or fourth) crew along as well.
Yes that has always been something that would work for me. But he
doesn't want to consider it. He just doesn't want anyone else but me
on the boat. If push came to shove, I don't know what I would do.
We had a couple go with us for 3 weeks on the ICW and I enjoyed that
so much. But they've got their own boat now - a smaller CSY. She
won't do ocean passages with him, and so he single hands and she meets
him in the ports. But I think he's a bit younger than Bob, and she's
much more of a chicken than I am.
> I think there are quite a few unpaid
>volunteers available if you look around far enough
>in advance, and you can always hire a licensed
>captain to accompany you if desperate. Some of
>them are looking to build sea time, and are
>available quite inexpensively. A lot of bareboat
>charter companys maintain lists of independent
>captains.
>
>I am assuming that it is the passages that you are
>most worried about, and not gunkholing around the
>islands.
>
We didn't take the boat out at all last summer because he was having
dental work done every week. So we will see how it goes this summer.
I'm perfectly happy gunkholing around in the Chesapeake for a couple
of weeks at a time.
He doesn't want to fly anywhere, so I guess if I'm going to travel at
all, I'll have to start taking my grandchildren with me. I'm going to
Ireland in June with the fourth oldest one (the first two are 26 and
24 years old respectively, and the third one died when he was 2.5)
KLC Lewis
If you have insurance, you might not have the option of sailing offshore
with the two of you (or only him, which you don't seem to want at all --
ammo on your side coming): Many insurance policies will REQUIRE the addition
of more crew for offshore sailing.
If yours doesn't, maybe it's time to find one that does? ;-)
"Rosalie B." <gmbe...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:ctm1t2tu6lvamavk7...@4ax.com...
Stephen Trapani
> "Olecapt" <ole...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:u6zzh.6037$_k....@newsfe07.phx...
>
>>Hmm silence. Is it the "we are not going to offer an opinion because
>>Skip and Lydia will see it?" Or is the subject simply too painful to
>>raise. That is how we avoid a lot of the truths in blue water sailing.
>>
>
>
> Do you really think there's anything to be said that Skip isn't already
> saying to himself, in no uncertain terms?
Well, he's saying they are too old to be cruising around as they are. I
don't think Skip believes that or he wouldn't be thinking of continuing
with his cruising. I'm not qualified to give an opinion, but I do think
it's valid topic for discussion and not out of line to talk about.
Stephen
Jere Lull
Larry <no...@home.com> wrote:
> Test it for yourself. Pick a relatively bad day...raining, 25 knots, >
> 4' seas increasing. Sit down in the cockpit and say to her, "I just
> broke my leg when it got fouled in the jib sheet coming back aft from
> shortening sail."
Doesn't have to be so dramatic. Every once in a while, I simply announce
I'm taking a nap and let her carry on however she wants to.
Key, though, is that I'm not influencing her decisions in any way. She
can't sail worth a darn if I'm looking over her shoulder, but is fairly
adequate if she has complete control.
Rosalie B.
>Rosalie,
>
>If you have insurance, you might not have the option of sailing offshore
>with the two of you (or only him, which you don't seem to want at all --
>ammo on your side coming): Many insurance policies will REQUIRE the addition
>of more crew for offshore sailing.
>
>If yours doesn't, maybe it's time to find one that does? ;-)
>
He has not (as yet) gotten insurance for that, but since the boat loan
is secured with the house, the bank isn't that interested in the
insurance - we mostly have it for ourselves and for the marina.
I guess if he changes the insurance to allow us to go
down island, then I should start getting concerned.
Larry
> Your roller must be placed differently than ours. We can see.
>
Yes, ours is only 15' from the bow as the Amel is a ketch. The deck-
stepped mizzen base is the aft bulkhead of the cockpit.
http://www.selfsteer.com/boats/photos/140-AMELSHARKI39/AmelSharki39-4-
2.jpg
This an actual picture of "Lionheart" back in the late 80's when she was
Xanareva in San Francisco. She was very primative back then in
instrumentation and electronics. If you look through her windscreen,
which is no longer fixed mounted plexiglass Geoffrey replaced with
openable Lexan windscreens for the South, you can see the deck-stepped
mast base forward of her main cabin skylight hatch. Furling is on the
forward side of that mast about 2' off the deck. There are 5 winches out
of the picture for all the various lines on her mast used to haul up more
rags. That awful Amel helmsman's seat that will kill your back and hiney
after an hour on it, has been replaced with a custom closed-cell foam
helmsman seat of my captain's design. Cockpit seating uses the same
closed cell foam custom soft seating with NO miserable sunbrella covers
to scrub. The surface of the foam has Lionheart's logo and blue
pinstripe trim. It wipes off very easily, usually with the ever-handy
tea towel, and is unaffected by stepping on it with shoes on.
That horrible-looking self steerer this webpage shows with its line or
chain to the port coaming I've never seen. Amel's analog autopilot was
chain driven behind the wheel over the galley sink. The cupboard behind
the wheel on the bulkhead is where lots of my electronic network toys and
main electrical DC panel is located...useless to the galley but it has
TONS of storage elsewhere so we don't miss it. Our Raymarine RL70CRC
color chart plotter-radar is where that big compass shows with an old
Garmin GPSmap 185 plotter/gps/sonar charter to the right under the bell.
The compass was moved behind the radar and up above it with a custom-made
binnacle in Cap'n Geoffrey's woodshop in Atlanta.
http://www.yachtsoffshore.com/images/amel.jpg
Here's an Amel Sharki undeway on a reach under 4 sails, including my
captain's beloved mizzen staysail. I think the picture's a fake. She's
too slow to make that much wake under these sails unless the picture was
taken in a full gale....hee hee. That's an awful small jib they have
there...storm jib? We leave a 150 Genoa on her roller furler, but don't
be impressed. It's so close from the mast to the bow a 150 Genoa isn't a
very big sail on this boat. You can see some of the many winches on the
mainmast. This is my favorite cruising boat of all I've been to sea on.
She's no race boat but you sit so deep in the cockpit you can just see
over the coaming and the ride is great in 6-8' seas with her hauling ass
as others are shortening up to weather it out. She's a real ocean
vessel.
http://www.moeck-yachtagentur.de/img_sonst_yachten/sharki_1_g.jpg
Here's one with our usual Genoa hanked on. The big, crank-adjustable-
jack mainmast backstay you see here is our HF antenna. I added another
cable to it and put two insulators in the triattic stay up top fed in the
middle of the triattic for a capacitor hat, which really improves
radiation below 7 Mhz, the backstay's natural resonant frequency. The
Icom AT-130 tuner for the M802 is bolted to the top of the aft deckhouse
just aft of the mizzen step and Cap'n Geoffrey and I compromised by
building a whiteboard table over it to hold the drinks of the folks in
folding seats sitting on the deckhouse on either side of the mizzen step
to put their bloody mary's into...(c; He tolerates my stainless feed
wire and the ground strap running down to the Perkins block under the
cockpit sole, the whole thing of which is a huge hatch to get into the
engine room.
Hey, we even made the list in the 2006 Gulfstreamer from Daytona Beach to
Charleston!....:
http://www.halifaxsailing.org/gulfstreamer.htm
That IS unusual....(c;
We usually come lumbering in after they've all packed up and gone
home.....sometimes on MONDAY!....(c; We pray it's ROUGH so we'll have
some POWER!
Larry
> We do have harnesses and jacklines, and we wear PFDs all the time when
> underway (unless we are off watch asleep, when it is quite easy to
> hand). That is Bob's rule for anyone on our boat. (He also makes me
> wear shoes on deck.) Bob always clips onto the jacklines whenever the
> weather is at all bumpy.
>
>
Us, too. Sospenders anchored to the jacklines at all times.
Larry
@news.bellatlantic.net:
> Doesn't have to be so dramatic. Every once in a while, I simply announce
> I'm taking a nap and let her carry on however she wants to.
>
>
But, I'd bet you DON'T do that in the conditions I've set for the test...
On a nice day the Amel will sail itself all day if you want to go in one
direction. My test specs are in NASTY weather when you'd break that leg.
Bob
> "Bob" <freya...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1171246804.293314.187660
> @s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com:
>
> > hot 21 yo girlfriend
>
> If we had one of those, none of us would ever leave the slip and there'd
> CERTAINLY be no schedule.....(c;
> --
> VIRUS ALERT! VISTA has been released!
> NOONE will be spared!
Hi All:
Sorry to get your interest up. Yes, she was 21 and way hot. A lanky 6'
00", big brown eyes..........................
But that was 24 years ago. We were married 11 years til my party girl
kept on partying with a capital "P." We had one child and I ended up
raising our daughter. But all is well. Daughter got a full ride
scholarship playing volleyball at a NCAA D1 school. The one thing that
my ex did well was be tall. My daugher leveld off at 6' 02." Yea !$!$!
$!$.
For years I was counting down the years til she gradated from
highschool so I could return to full time water activities. She left
in early August. I can not belive how much I miss her. A real punch in
the gut. One day when she ws 3 yo an old geezer told me to love her
every second cause she'll be gone soon. I did not believe him. Now
that I am there I know what the old geezer was talking about. Some
things are learned only by experince.
BOb
Jere Lull
Larry <no...@home.com> wrote:
> Jere Lull <jere...@mac.com> wrote in news:jerelull-6F5333.19110312022007
> @news.bellatlantic.net:
>
> > Doesn't have to be so dramatic. Every once in a while, I simply announce
> > I'm taking a nap and let her carry on however she wants to.
> >
> >
>
> But, I'd bet you DON'T do that in the conditions I've set for the test...
>
> On a nice day the Amel will sail itself all day if you want to go in one
> direction. My test specs are in NASTY weather when you'd break that leg.
I've found that because we drill fairly often in benign conditions, she
doesn't mind doing it. When the s..t hits the fan, she has always been
right there, anticipating my next move, and didn't get worried until the
flurry cleared.
Works for us. Making a big thing out of it doesn't.
Rosalie B.
>In article <Xns98D5DC82730...@208.49.80.253>,
> Larry <no...@home.com> wrote:
>
>> Jere Lull <jere...@mac.com> wrote in news:jerelull-6F5333.19110312022007
>> @news.bellatlantic.net:
>>
>> > Doesn't have to be so dramatic. Every once in a while, I simply announce
>> > I'm taking a nap and let her carry on however she wants to.
>> >
>> But, I'd bet you DON'T do that in the conditions I've set for the test...
>>
>> On a nice day the Amel will sail itself all day if you want to go in one
>> direction. My test specs are in NASTY weather when you'd break that leg.
>
>I've found that because we drill fairly often in benign conditions, she
>doesn't mind doing it. When the s..t hits the fan, she has always been
>right there, anticipating my next move, and didn't get worried until the
>flurry cleared.
>
>Works for us. Making a big thing out of it doesn't.
If you did that test on me, Larry, I'd throw you overboard. I'm a
partner in this enterprise, not a student - not a test subject, and
not a midshipmen.
Rick Morel
past and toward years of cruising. We got hit by lighting shortly
after embarking. Fried almost all the epensive new electronics, even
the Lectra/San and fridge. Not as tramatic nor as expensive, but we
certainly condidered buying a motorhome or a house in the desert. So I
know a little bit how you guys are feeling.
Re getting to Marathon. Did the hurricane(s) change things a bunch? We
did a follow-the-coast run down from Anchlote Key (Tarpon Springs) to
Marathon. Basically kept in about 20-ft of water along the coast and
anchoring out at the end of the day. Just didn't seem worth it to try
to make it to some pass or the other, then take all the time to run in
and find a spot. Nor to do the 24-hour watch bit. (We learned long ago
that if you're on a schedule, write said schedule down, then take it
on deck, rip it up vigoriously and toss it overboard.) Some of the
time, with very strong Easterly winds, it would have taken all night
to get it. We always figured if you're out there all day in the muck,
why not stay all night at anchor in the same stuff? Kind of the
reverse of the shrimp boats that anchor all day, then drag at night.
Made the run from Cape Sable to the light at Sawyer Bank, then right
there into Marathon. This with a 6-ft draft.
Many moons later did the same run in reverse, coming into the Gulf at
the 7-mile bridge, then to Sawyer and to Cape Sable. Incidently, I
wouldn't make that part of it at night unless you want to aquire
dozens of crab or lobster pots.
Did have an interesting experience just as we started to round up to
anchor off Cape Sable. The winds had been strong, I forget the
numbers, but we made the run from Marathon under working jib and
mizzen at hull speed plus. Just as we were fixing to get ready to
anhor we got hit by what must have been a microburst! All of a sudden
an ear-busting ROAR and the boat almost laid down. The jib literally
shattered into thousands, or at least hundreds, of pieces. Almost
before we realized what was going on it was over. We spent some
moments "discussing" this in loud shouts to be heard over the ringing
and temproary deafness.
Do NOT. I repeat DO NOT ever believe the NOAA weather forcasts and
even current conditions. Not anywhere in the Gulf of Mexico in the
winter and shortly before and after winter. Well in FL, AL, MS and LA
anyway. I don't know about TX. Expect everything from 5-kts and almost
calm to 65-kts and huge seas in any given 24-hour period.
I used to do the wait-for-hurricane-season-to-end bit. Not no mo'. I
do believe NOAA re tropical storms and hurricanes. That they do good!
It's a lot less trouble to keep an ear peeled and head for a hurricane
hole, but a heck of a lot more time is spent cruising in ideal
conditions rather than fighting the elements most of the time. Again
I'm speaking Gulf of Mexico.
Rick
Don W
Rosalie B. wrote:
Good thing I wasn't drinking my coffee... ROTFL.
Don W.