Dauphine Island Race

[Davidasailor26]

What I thought interesting is they watched as one boat broached twice and they just kept on going. Hmmm...

From the looks of it that crew had about all they could take to keep themselves upright going dead downwind. I can't blame them for not trying to go to assist. Even if they had gone over there, what would they have been able to accomplish in those conditions? They weren't going to be able to pick anyone out of the water, and could have made things worse for everyone by trying to avoid colliding with each other. The crew did say several minutes later that they were concerned about the other boat and that they should go back around after the storm blew out.

As for the decision to go out - reports in the thread above were that there was a 40% chance of storms. Can those second guessing the actions of these crews honestly say they've never gone out in a 40% chance of storms? I'm sure some of us would've stayed in that day, but it's not quite so open and shut of a decision that those who went out deserve ridicule.

Mistakes were made, particularly they delays in donning PFDs, but all in all I don't think this crew did too badly.

 

[Jackdaw]

I'm going to voice a sentiment that other have hinted at:

I HATE people the 2nd guess an RC/OCs decision to hold a race.

Race committees are typically volunteer positions. At a big race like this you have over 100 boats that came to race. Do you cancel? This was not in the 100% certainty cone of a next-day hurricane projection track. It was a thunderstorm warning. Cancel and you will piss of 100% of the people there. Who wants that? Again, that is what RSS 4 is for.

Unless the current or 99% projected conditions are unmanageable,

YOU HOLD THE RACE.

BOATS MAKE INDIVIDUAL DECISION TO RACE OR NOT.

This notion that the USCG is going to investigate the if the RC should have held the race is nanny state bullshit. It has a chilling effect on our sport, and people that are still left and willing to take on these roles.

 

[justsomeguy]

This notion that the USCG is going to investigate the if the RC should have held the race is nanny state bullshit. It has a chilling effect on our sport, and people that are still left and willing to take on these roles.

Thank you.

 

[KZW]

As for me, I resent, totally resent, that people went out knowing the conditions would deteriorate, and then putting Coast Guard and rescue personnel at risk. Further, they wasted my tax dollars doing something totally stupid.

It should not have happened and yes, the race organizers should have canceled.

If you want to do something stupid, fine by me, have at it. But please post a notice with the Coast Guard stating you don't want them to risk their lives and my tax money mounting a rescue.

 

[Kings Gambit]

As for me, I resent, totally resent, that people went out knowing the conditions would deteriorate, and then putting Coast Guard and rescue personnel at risk. Further, they wasted my tax dollars doing something totally stupid.

It should not have happened and yes, the race organizers should have canceled.

If you want to do something stupid, fine by me, have at it. But please post a notice with the Coast Guard stating you don't want them to risk their lives and my tax money mounting a rescue.

Well, if the USCG ever rescues you and your crew for doing something totally stupid, shall we resent it? If stupidity is defined by a lack of prescience then we're all doomed!! Everything having to do with risk is a judgement call. They were not stupid; only exercised poor judgement post hoc based on the outcome.

 

[KZW]

Well, if the USCG ever rescues you and your crew for doing something totally stupid, shall we resent it? If stupidity is defined by a lack of prescience then we're all doomed!!

Yes, you should. Why should I pay for your stupidity or you pay for mine?

Pre-essence? Not real hard when all the forecast and warning abound. It was stupidity. Pure and simple.

 

[Kings Gambit]

Yes, you should. Why should I pay for your stupidity or you pay for mine?

Pre-essence? Not real hard when all the forecast and warning abound. It was stupidity. Pure and simple.

B/c it's not stupidity--it's poor judgement as determined post hoc from the outcome of a risk taken. The USCG is like insurance-we all pay into it in the off chance that WE might need their help someday. If someone benefits from our collective efforts to protect even ourselves, then why resent it?

 

[Jackdaw]

Yes, you should. Why should I pay for your stupidity or you pay for mine?

Wow. I hope for your sake nothing ever happens to you, and then someone gets to publicly adjudicate your 'stupidity' level.

Stupidity is graded on a curve. One man's genus is another man's idiot.

 

[Gene Neill]

I'm going to voice a sentiment that other have hinted at:

I HATE people the 2nd guess an RC/OCs decision to hold a race.

Race committees are typically volunteer positions. At a big race like this you have over 100 boats that came to race. Do you cancel? This was not in the 100% certainty cone of a next-day hurricane projection track. It was a thunderstorm warning. Cancel and you will piss of 100% of the people there. Who wants that? Again, that is what RSS 4 is for.

Unless the current or 99% projected conditions are unmanageable,

YOU HOLD THE RACE.

BOATS MAKE INDIVIDUAL DECISION TO RACE OR NOT.

This notion that the USCG is going to investigate the if the RC should have held the race is nanny state bullshit. It has a chilling effect on our sport, and people that are still left and willing to take on these roles.

Well said, friend.

 

[zeehag]

it is not the chance of storms that was the problem but the front spawning em.

 

[KZW]

They knew or should have known about the impending storms. They were well publicized before the event. It was stupid, poor judgement, to go out in those conditions.

What gives those people the right to jeopardize the lives of Coast Guard personnel.

Being at sea and have a storm blow up is one thing. You have nowhere to go. Unforeseen breakdowns are another. But to knowingly sail into severe storm conditions, and then expect others to risk themselves rescuing you? No way. Inexcusable.

I've severed to protect your right to be stupid, among other rights. I don't expect people to risk their lives because you, or I, am being stupid.

Sorry folks that is the way it is. Get in front of a mirror and take a long hard look. What gives you the right to risk another's life? The answer is nothing. You have no such right. Period.

 

[Jackdaw]

Sorry folks that is the way it is. Get in front of a mirror and take a long hard look. What gives you the right to risk another's life? The answer is nothing. You have no such right. Period.

Sorry, but get real. You do this every day. When you drive to work there is a 1:10,000 chance that YOU will be at fault in an accident. If someone remotely determines that you were at fault, will they not send help for you? Will someone judge your decision to try to go to work that day? Stay in bed instead and there is a 1:10,000,000 chance that your house blows up from a natural gas explosion. How long has it been since your last appliance inspection? Guess what. Life is a long class in risk management that we all eventually lose.

You might as well LIVE. Our society at large expects that. It depends on it.

In hindsight everyone is a genius. At least they think that that are.

The world is for living, not 2nd guessing. And certainly not for 2nd guessing others. Don't think so? Stay in bed. Me? I'd rather go sailing.

 

[rockingham]

The San Juan 24 was covered in the latest Small Boat Journal Magazine. It looked pretty good for what you are considering, I think.

 

[Charlie Jones s/v Tehani]

Bear in mind please- according to reports, only THREE of the ten boats rescued were in the race. The rest were just sailing

 

[woodster]

They knew or should have known about the impending storms. They were well publicized before the event. It was stupid, poor judgement, to go out in those conditions.

What gives those people the right to jeopardize the lives of Coast Guard personnel.

Being at sea and have a storm blow up is one thing. You have nowhere to go. Unforeseen breakdowns are another. But to knowingly sail into severe storm conditions, and then expect others to risk themselves rescuing you? No way. Inexcusable.

I've severed to protect your right to be stupid, among other rights. I don't expect people to risk their lives because you, or I, am being stupid.

Sorry folks that is the way it is. Get in front of a mirror and take a long hard look. What gives you the right to risk another's life? The answer is nothing. You have no such right. Period.

let me see .....you go to the regatta and the weather report is for 40% chance of thunderstorms in the late evening or tomorrow .....it is nice and steady weather in the morning at the start of this event...you go out in the regatta and have a great time in the morning and up until about 3:30 / 4:00 pm and all the sudden a whopper of a storm blows in on you as the event is winding down ...so how is this a deliberate attempt to jeopardize the coast guard and the rescue workers on this otherwise fine day on the water ...i have been around water activity for about 60 years now and for the life of me i can't remember ever hearing anyone ever saying ...."gee i think i will go out and lure the coast guard into a bad storm front and see how they handle it" .....you may feel that was the case but in my eyes you are living in a state of self righteous indignation ...and i just hope that if you ever have to call them for help that you have made that call as if you were about to spend your last dime just like some old skinflint of a miser vacillating on spending the money.... but above all if you ever need help give them a call they will be there ....there is no telling how many calls they have made that bared no fruit...so in closing i will tell you this is how what you are saying looks to me......

 

[LittleCreek]

B/c it's not stupidity--it's poor judgement as determined post hoc from the outcome of a risk taken. The USCG is like insurance-we all pay into it in the off chance that WE might need their help someday. If someone benefits from our collective efforts to protect even ourselves, then why resent it?

When we make poor decisions that require USCG rescues, we also put the crew of the rescue teams in dangerous situations. We don't often hear about some Coast Guard person breaking a wrist, arm, leg, or other head injuries because it isn't exciting press. But it happens quite frequently when they have to go out after people who make bad decisions.

Not trying to argue, just adding a little perspective.

With that said, my heart goes out to all the people in the race.

 

[rockingham]

It is what it is. 20/20 hindsight is just that, always right, always after all the decisions have been made. In the best of all worlds no one makes mistakes that require others to step in to a dangerous developing situation. Personally, I do not thrust myself into situations with the thought that someone else will always be there to save me. Those types of situations are just unpleasant to experience in the first place, no matter the outcome. I have vacillated pushing the envelope of risk during my life but have always felt well prepared for reasonably expected conditions so if a "force major" situation develops, yes, I will be glad the CG is out there with me. They know what being in that service is all about and they are ok with that. One cannot always make the best choice but I think an individual seldom chooses to put himself in deadly situations.
Now, have I left out any platitudes?

 

[Daveinet]

How about the boats that were able to manage the conditions? What you are suggesting is that it is the race committee's responsibility to judge the skills of every single boat entering the race. Appearantly 97 boats survived. Not only that, but one of the boats was a victim of a crash, not specifically a loss of control.

If I would give the race organizers anything, one could enforce a pfd rule, were pfd's must be worn at all times.

 

[jibes138]

They knew or should have known about the impending storms. They were well publicized before the event. It was stupid, poor judgement, to go out in those conditions.

What gives those people the right to jeopardize the lives of Coast Guard personnel.

Being at sea and have a storm blow up is one thing. You have nowhere to go. Unforeseen breakdowns are another. But to knowingly sail into severe storm conditions, and then expect others to risk themselves rescuing you? No way. Inexcusable.

I've severed to protect your right to be stupid, among other rights. I don't expect people to risk their lives because you, or I, am being stupid.

Sorry folks that is the way it is. Get in front of a mirror and take a long hard look. What gives you the right to risk another's life? The answer is nothing. You have no such right. Period.

Using your logic the Coast Guard should not have gone out to rescue the people on the Bounty? The captain knowingly sailed a leaky and structurally suspect vessel into a hurricane. Or should the Coast Guard just try to rescue the innocent crew members and leave the stupid captain to his own devices? In the case of the Bounty an inexperienced crew went along with advice of the captain, should our Coast Guard just ignore their desperate calls for help?

 

[Gene Neill]

I for one would love to see the actual radar from Saturday. I have been unsuccessful with Google. Does anyone know where this data can be viewed?

I'd like to see what that squall actually looked like.