Foolhardy? A Humble Remonstrance

[Grehan]

Slanging match

I'm very unhappy that what I thought was quite a serious initial questioning post, and a reasonable response from GoodMorrow has degenerated into a mindless slanging match.

"Shoal of rabid piranhas"
"How many . . . have the guts to address you face to face"
"Egotists like these overgrown sixth-formers can't hack being challenged"
"It is very difficult for them to sail a desk, even in the Solent"

Maybe GoodMorrow's trip did display seamanship and bravery (did it? - this was part of my original question) but what a pointless set of responses!

I don't think (most of) the original postings "laid into" GoodMorrow but they did join with me in at least questioning a judgement that led to 2 days (?)(whatever it was) solo without sleep in December in fairly arduous conditions off the western edge of Britain. Not a picnic, and Mr GoodMorrow and his incapacitated crew - however experienced and 'game' - are not single-handed transatlantic racers either.

Whether they were foolhardy or adventurous was an entirely legitimate question to ask.

As Mr Unecessary Rudeness rtboss himself says . . "At some time, all of us, who sail, have made a decision that with 20/20 hindsight , we would not make again "

And that's my point, too.



I'm in the phonebooth. It's the one across the Hall

 

[zefender]

Re: Slanging match

Agree entirely with the spirit of your post. Mindless name-calling is frequently used as a substitute for actually making a point. As others have said (and I have read) the article did give the impression that the skipper had less experience than he evidently has. It also made reference to his wife 's seasickness developing into hallucinations - which I would have thought is a very serious, deteriorating position. Rather than diverting the route, the skipper chose to press on solo, engaging in a very long passage, in busy waters. As skipper, that is his 'call'. However, supposing, the passage did end abruptly, in an accident. How might MAIB have interpreted the wisdom of that decision?

OK, the boat was up to the job. And the skipper was more experienced than the article implied.

But I would have diverted.

PS It's nice to see Steve and RTboss agreeing on something though

 

[halcyon]

Re: Emma goes storming on

Interesting question Bob, yesterday a 28 footer made the passage from Fowey to Falmouth, boat arrive less one crew, lost over board near Falmouth.


Brian

 

[Guest]

Re: Foolhardy? Well...

Hi Goodmorrow,

Congratulations on completing the passage without incident. The Dufour 38 is a fast, seaworthy and solid boat and you've obviously more experience and ability than was perhaps implied in the published (edited?) version of the article.

However, can I ask a couple of questions?

1) After how many hours without sleep do *you* feel your judgement starts to become noticeably impaired? I would tend to agree with many of the posters on these two threads who suggest that anything much beyond a day & a half without proper rest produces a worrying lack of mental acuity.

You talked about the adrenaline keeping you going, and how much you enjoyed the sail. That's good, however, that kind of adrenaline boosted performance is not an unending joyride... eventually a crash will come, at which point you are likely to find that you can no longer function at all. Wet & cold are only likely to hasten this and without the essential safety net of a watch system you are putting yourself, your crew and your boat in a position of unnecessary risk.

2) What is your crew's view of the events now? Would she have been capable of taking a watch in the event that you felt that you really needed some time below? Would she accompany you on a similar voyage (distance, weather conditions) again and would you consider a similar passage with her onboard now?

Regards,

Mike

 

[steve_cronin]

Patronising in the worst possible....

schoolmaster traditions.

If you think the guy was "foolhardy" why not just come out with it?

Steve Cronin



<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by kimhollamby on 22/10/2002 10:40 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[Guest]

Re: Patronising?

No... I don't see it that way. I just think that Good Morrow should consider the voyage from those two angles, rather than the 'mission accomplished, and what a ride' spin in the article.

If he felt safe at all times, and not sufficiently fatigued to have significant impairment of his judgement, then well done. But, for me, getting into day two would have meant a huge amount of work to keep fuelled up - buckets of coffee, etc. Some people are affected less by sleep deprivation than others, and as those Around Alone etc. competitors (and emergency/armed forces personnel) demonstrate, it's also possible to condition yourself against the effects. So I asked... how did he feel?

The other aspect is the condition of his crew. The statement "The worst two days of her life" does not make good reading, especially considering sailing is supposed to be something we do for pleasure. If the crew's condition was such that she could have taken a watch if required, then that negates the first point a little, but what's the longer term viewpoint? If the voyage has had the effect of re-inforcing her tendancy to sea-sickness, or even reduced her to day sailing (Good Morrow claimed to have done quite a bit of true singlehanding since the voyage) then that is a big price to pay to complete the trip in one leg! A 100k Duf 38 looks a far better investment with two happy sailors on it than with one singlehander aboard and one 'never again' stopping at home. So again, I asked...

For me, these seem like sensible questions, and they would have been foremost in my mind at the time. Whether it was foolhardy depends entirely upon Good Morrow's answers I'd say....

Regards,

Mike

 

[steve_cronin]

Re: Patronising?

They were not enquiring questions asked from a neutral standpoint. You already knew what sort of answers you thought should be given so again I say you were patronising.

Steve Cronin

 

[Guest]

Re: Patronising?

Steve,

I suppose that if you feel so, then that is your viewpoint to which you're perfectly entitled.

The questions for me were simply put to try and elicit some responses from Good Morrow in areas where I felt there was a lack of information to give us a complete picture.

My own viewpoint stated along with the questions is that of someone who considers themselves (and any seasick crew aboard) to be at the less, rather than more, capable end of the scale. I'm hardly preaching from a position of superiority, more advocating caution based on what I'd perhaps have felt in the circumstances.

I'm a cautious person, probably as a result of having had one very near scrape in my recreational activities a few years ago. On what basis would you deny me this viewpoint? I haven't stated that the voyage was foolhardy, claimed greater experience or otherwise rubbished Good Morrow's passage, just raised two queries that seemed obvious to me in my limited experience.

If this is patronising or condescending, then we may as well abandon all debate here, as no one can then express any opinion without coming in for such criticism!

Regards,

Mike

 

[steve_cronin]

Hmmnnnn.....

...We'll let it drop but the euphemistic implications of

"Congratulations....etc

However, can I ask a couple of questions?"

are all too obvious it seems to me?

Steve Cronin

 

[Mr Cassandra]

Re: Slanging match

Did your speach ,need the remark.Mr Unnessesary rudeness rtboss .In itself I find that remark Rude .
cheers bob t

Bob T

 

[Mr Cassandra]

Re: Emma goes storming on

Blinking hell ,are you trying to set me up ,you know what i think about smallish boats .I am very sorry to hear of any loss though, all the best cheers bob t

Bob T

 

[Grehan]

Re: Slanging match

OK
Apologies

I'm in the phonebooth. It's the one across the Hall

 

[Mr Cassandra]

Re: Slanging match

Accepted. and thank you
cheers bob t

Bob T

 

[halcyon]

Re: Emma goes storming on

Size was not the comment, it was being at sea in those conditions, being lost overboard is not size dependent. Chap was local, at the moment we still have to find out if we know him.

Brian

 

[GoodMorrow]

Re: Foolhardy? Well...

Hello
Despite my last posting (Another humble remonstrance) l've a few minutes before l get kicked off !
I find 30 hours no real problem however I spent many years in the army and that would have been a luxury only 30 !!!! Find that a second night is ok but its the following morning l find that l'm losing it so to speak. Fortunatley that doesn't happen very often! In the 3 years l've been sailing there have been only 2 two nighters

Lesley still thinks we made the right decision continuing to Falmouth.

We always sail together. My single handed trip to Dublin was a one off, had the time so went for it. Lesley was working out there so l sailed out to meet her.

During the Falmouth passage she could have given me a break if necessary. She has never really cracked the seasickness but it she is much better now. We do try to keep the passages below 18 hours max. She always says she loves "getting there" !

Sorry have to go time up!
Hope to catch you again sometime
Stan

 

[nicho]

Re: Foolhardy? Well...

Stan - Like pain, I guess everyone has different tiredness thresholds.... "I remember the time"(!!), when I was Motor Rallying in the 1970's, some UK events ran for three days and two nights virtually non stop, certainly with no time for sleep. It was extremely dangerous, and we used to get so tired it would actually physically hurt. However, we used to get through it (driving very powerful cars through the forests at speed generated enough adrenaline to see to that). Some however, took a drug called Benzedrine to keep them going, but I was one that could get by without such assistance. These days, all such events are strictly regulated to allow crews to sleep at night, and therefore dangers caused by extreme tiredness are avoided.

 

[Guest]

Re: Foolhardy? Well...

Thanks Goodmorrow....

Glad to hear that Lesley's still chipping away at the seasickness issue... and your army experience must really have helped in terms of knowing your position with regard to fatigue.

Regards,

Mike