USCG Inquiry Begins - Bounty

[jibes138]

I still can't comprehend given their position why they didn't just head for shore at Beaufort? I was there during the storm and the winds were from the northeast so even under bare poles the wind and waves would have pushed them to shore. There are excellent rescue and salvage capabilities in the area including coast guard station fort Macon and towboat salvage boats that could have assisted. The seas were pretty rough but since the crystal coast was in the lee of the storm if they could have gotten inside cape lookout they would have had a much better chance. This guy seemed obsessed with fighting to the death even when motors were failing, pumps not working, and the ship taking on massive amounts of water.

For those that have been at sea for long periods I would wager a guess that sleep deprivation had a lot to do with it. His decision making was probably seriously impaired with lack of sleep effecting his judgement. Given the conditions for the whole trip I'll bet he didn't sleep at all for at least three days straight, maybe more. Probably wasn't eating or drinking much either as cooking in those conditions would be difficult.

 

[JohnS]

I will say it over and over. That ship never should have been on the open ocean let alone sailing into a hurricane. Ships should not have to rely on mechanical pumps, on a continuous basis, to remain afloat.

That pretty much sums it up for me, along with the fact that Waldridge knew there was rot in the framing, but didn't repair it. And I suspect the only way to determine how extensive the rot was would have been to strip off the planking, which wasn't done. (Did the crew members know about the extensiveness of the rot when they decided to stay on?) The Bounty didn't break apart, but I suspect with that amount of rot and with the bruising from the waves, seams probably opened up, increasing an already ridiculous rate of water ingress. Maybe it didn't happen that way, but when making the decision to sail into a hurricane, he had to know that was a strong likelihood. To proceed in the face of those facts was sheer recklessness.

 

[Gunni]

It is becoming increasingly apparent that, even apart from the decision to sail, the guy in charge of the ship (I refuse to dignify him with the title "master" or "captain" anymore) was just as leaky in his seamanship and common sense as the hull.

http://gcaptain.com/cost-bounty-hearings/

If you have the bandwidth (which I dearly wish I did) don't miss the live testimony of Dan Moreland and Jan Miles today.

http://www.wavy.com/generic/news/hms-bounty-hearings

Thanks Roger: Listening to the Inquiry right now on the WAVY.com link. Testimony of CAPT. Moreland S/V Picton Castle. Can't wait to hear Jan Miles testimony (next)

 

[Chris Patterson]

The reason that Walbridge didn't Pan Pan the C.G. earlier is, it didn't fit into the plan. The C.G. may have shown up with additional pumps, and saved the ship.

That was not his itinerary..

 

[anchorclanker]

The C.G. may have shown up with additional pumps, and saved the ship.

That was not his itinerary..

I feel likewise, and IMO there is enough circumstantial evidence to support the accusation. The next question then, is if the owner or any of the crew were in on it.

 

[MrBill_FLL]

some of the testimony is shocking.

-never testing safety equipment (backup pumps) to 'SAVE' it ? that and leaving the gas in the trash pump for almost 2 years, is almost as bad...

even I know better.

it does seem like this master had a terminal wish.

 

[Roger Long]

The reason that Walbridge didn't Pan Pan the C.G. earlier is, it didn't fit into the plan.

I may have said harsher things about the man than anyone on the Internet but I can't believe that this was an intentional act unless suicide / mass murder was part of the motivation. Everything I have heard about his character refutes that.

It would have been too easy for him to arrange the sinking and loss of the vessel in a safer way if insurance collection was the intention. If he intended it to sink in the hurricane and live to tell the tale, he would have had to live with the well deserved contempt that is being heaped upon his memory now. It's hard to believe he would have signed up for that just to line the owner's pockets. Besides, it sounds like they had a more secure future lined up for the vessel but it depended on getting south in time.

If it was an insurance job, it would have been too easy to do it right and no one knew the ship and her systems better. He would have needed to simply announce at the last feasible and safe moment that he was moving the ship to better shelter such as inside the New Bedford hurricane barrier or Boston. Then arrange for a power failure and fast leak. A "fuel additive" or "broken" F.O. return line over the engine would have taken care of the engines and it sounds like a butter knife would have taken been sufficient for the leak. The crew would have been taken off quickly and safely and the hurricane would have taken care of the ship before a tow could be arranged.

No, I can't see a shred of support for this being intentional, in a conscious way at least. I think there were deep and destructive psychological forces at work here that over came his common sense and seamanship. I believe it quite plausible that, as an outside observer of someone else making similar decisions, or perhaps at an earlier time in his life, his contempt and scorn would have been as strong as what we are seeing in the maritime community now.

The way in which people are able to rationalize actions and decisions which go directly against their deepest beliefs, training, and moral framework is vastly underestimated. Just look at what has been going on in the Catholic church with abuse by priests. There is a very dark heart to this tragedy which has nothing to do with fuel filters, sea state, or decayed wood.