Future WNSesses

Gigm

Thanks for your reply. I agree it shouldn't make any difference but it has recently occurred to me that some people might resent me putting them in a situation they object to by using the word 'you'. Hence the question.

Regarding your own WNS, it may be simple but it's not an uncommon situation. If you'd like to PM me, we could discuss dressing it up a bit (perhaps with rising wind in a rocky anchorage?) and use it as then next official WNS?

Best wishes
TJ
 
Except the serviceable plotter is where you can't see it if you're looking out for a casualty.

And as jfm pointed out, there's no info about how long it was since anyone saw the missing kid, which is pretty much how the real world works on boats.

If you read the MAIB reports, time and again you will see that a disaster is the culmination of a series of minor issues, which is what I tried to get into the rewritten scenario. The front comes through earlier than predicted - you react properly by setting off earlier, albeit accepting a little bit of wind over tide as a trade-off for getting home before the wind really picks up. The plotter goes partially AWOL, but you decide to carry on as you will be in familiar waters - a perfectly reasonable decision. A crew member gets uncharacteristically seasick and you send them below to make them more comfortable - maybe, just maybe, the H&S people should insist that you send a second crew member down with them, eh? But we'd all fight against that legislation. You take the reasonable decision to call it a day and run for shelter - even though that means an unfamiliar harbour in less than ideal conditions.

When it all goes tits up and the lad is missing, guess what? You were busy with the boat and actually, you didn't have your watch set to give you 5 minute reminders, so no, there's no certainty about when he was last seen.

I can't claim that this is a real event, but feels better thought through than the one that had us a mile inland at 20 knots. It took me about 15 minutes to think through in the car this morning. And as for the lack of complaints about the quality of WNS articles from magazine subscribers, well you just got one. And I've made the same comment to IPC staff.

As a leisure boater, if I can come up with the above in 15 minutes, you must be able to do better as a 'professional' writer with all your experience...
 
[ QUOTE ]
See my reply to hlb. I DID NOT SAY the boat had a problem.

[/ QUOTE ]
Neither did DAKA, Tony. Your article read "the weather turns a bit unpleasant. There’s now a F3/F4 on the nose against a 2kt flooding tide, it’s started to rain and the visibility is poor." Frankly, none of that would bother a 38ft flybridge - you'd just send everyone else downstairs out of the rain and put the heating on, and you'd drive from upstairs because the visibility is better. You may wish to bear in mind that DAKA and I both run 38 foot flybridge boats, so there is the outside possibility that we might know what we're talking about here...
 
It bothers some of the 40-50' flybridges who have posted on here in past about suitability of going to Poole from Solent in a forecast F3/4. When I got back from Poole in my 21'er, they were all lined up in Lymington. Swmbo'ds apparently didn't like anything above F0, and it wasn't even raining.
 
[ QUOTE ]
It took me about 15 minutes to think through in the car this morning.

[/ QUOTE ]

15 minutes is quite a long time in writing circles - I believe Elton John and Bernie Taupin had a rule that if a song took more than 15 minutes to write it wasn't going to be a hit. And who's to gainsay them, given their track record?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Your article read "the weather turns a bit unpleasant. There’s now a F3/F4 on the nose against a 2kt flooding tide, it’s started to rain and the visibility is poor." Frankly, none of that would bother a 38ft flybridge - you'd just send everyone else downstairs out of the rain and put the heating on, and you'd drive from upstairs because the visibility is better. You may wish to bear in mind that DAKA and I both run 38 foot flybridge boats, so there is the outside possibility that we might know what we're talking about here...

[/ QUOTE ]

Now this is the sort of thing that drives me mad. Someone who simply can't imagine that anyone else might do something different to what THEY would do. I.E: MY actions are correct; any other action is plain wrong. We've all met the type I'm sure.

Well, in this case the skipper decided NOT to huddle everyone downstairs. Perhaps he just didn't fancy getting wet and cold up on the flybridge and doesn't like driving from the saloon. Perhaps his partner gets sea sick down below when its even a bit rough. Perhaps they all just decided it would be better to go in before the weather got any worse. Who knows? But going in is what THIS skipper decided to do in THIS case. A perfectly viable and reasonable course of events for which I make absolutely no apologies.

End of rant.

TJ
 
[ QUOTE ]


There's no info about how long it was since anyone saw the missing kid, which is pretty much how the real world works on boats.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong again. You last saw the kid when he left the flybridge. Your partner went to look for him 5 minutes later. If you look back through the thread you will find posts that use this information to determine the size of the search area.

'Outside chance?' I agree.

TJ
 
actually, while it might not drive me mad, I was thinking that surely the idea of WNS is to offer scenarios and possible solutions. The fact that the situation wouldnt bother some of the more experienced skippers on the forum isnt really relevent, it seems to me. Surely they should be the ones best able to offer their seasoned advice.
But part of the problem with WNS is that it is commonly only the usual guys who participate, and so we end up with the monthly disagreement. I m with Brendan here, some people are more cautious (or like smoother seas, before being prepared to set off). And why not.. its their boat and their leisure time.
But it the end, the WNS skipper requires us on the forum to participate positvely, whereas, lets be honest, sometimes its more fun to shoot holes in the scenario !
 
Really, Tony? The passage of time is very subjective, and in the real world the 'outside chance' would be that you checked your watch and made a mental note of the time you sent the lad downstairs. The reality is that you realise 'some time later' and your best guess is that it was 5 minutes ago. It could have been a lot more than that if you have had your attention occupied by picking your way through a lumpy sea.

If you try to constrain the scenario by insisting on exactly 5 minutes, you start to force it into your preconceived notion of the solution (and don't try to tell me you didn't have one because in rewriting it I am very aware of the mental effort required to keep the thing open ended).

Enough, we shall just have to agree to disagree.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Enough, we shall just have to agree to disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess so. It seems to me we should be able to do so without rancour. Ideally, I would like you to continue lending your undoubted experience to WNS. I must confess to being puzzled as to why you get so het up and use words like farcical, rubbish, incompetent, etc, etc, when you disagree with some aspect of the original setup. But I also accept that some scenarios start with 'you' doing something that a more experienced skipper like yourself wouldn't be doing.

I will be framing future scenarios in the terms of 'this skipper finds himself in this situation. What has he done wrong - if anything, and what should he do know to deal with it?' Perhaps that will take some of the heat out things.

Best wishes
TJ
 
Gigm

Thank you! I couldn't possibly have put it better myself. Or as a certain Chief Executive at a board meeting is supposed to have said: 'Dead right Smith. In fact you couldn't be more right if you were me'.

Best wishes
TJ
 
[ QUOTE ]
PS: Don't be disheartened, it's a great idea, and just needs a little tweaking. Personally I think these senarious need more visual/graphical support with maps, diagrams, cartoons, etc. Text only is boring.

[/ QUOTE ]As I said in my posts above, stick with it, it just needs tweaking and it is a great way of stimulating "what if" thinking.
 
Thank you Ocean Froggie. Point taken about graphic support and I'll think how that might be incorporated. Of course, us writers feel we should be able to use words to paint a picture better than any graphic!

I won't be doing any more boat handling scenarios as I think they are best dealt with in print where there's room for plenty of diagrams. Unfortunately, the format of WNS in the mag (NOT my idea) is always to have one full page illustration and one page of text. It's a matter of 'style' I'm told. I've recently tried to put more contributions from the forum on that page, so I'm a bit pushed for space.

That said, many thanks for your encouragement. One tweak I'm going to try from next month is to drop the 'you' from the scenario and substitute 'him' or 'her'. Think I'll reserve 'her' for those situations in which something has gone really badly wrong. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Best wishes
TJ
 
[ QUOTE ]
One tweak I'm going to try from next month is to drop the 'you' from the scenario and substitute 'him' or 'her'.

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably best as folks can comment on the action of the skipper rather than how they would deal with it themselves.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Think I'll reserve 'her' for those situations in which something has gone really badly wrong. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Best wishes
TJ

[/ QUOTE ]

If that comment is a troll I am guilty of falling straight for it. It isn't funny, acceptable or appropriate and your use of /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif doesn't reduce the offensiveness of your comment. Racist comments are not acceptable on here and I'm really struggling to find a reason for sexist ones being any different. I don't believe for a minute that anyone with half a brain cell would actually believe the assumption behind this comment and therefore presume you don't either. I'm assuming you have betrayed your true thoughts about women and have inadvertently made yourself look ignorant in an attempt to appear flippant and humourous.
 
\"Not a sunbathing on the deck kind of girl\"

So, you actually meant "...kind of person", I guess?... /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Anne

Apologies if I have offended you, which I clearly have. The remark was intended as a joke and I thought the 'wink' smiley indicating 'don't take this seriously' and the context made that quite clear.

Unfortuntely, political correctness is making it virtually impossible to risk any humour that is at anyone's expense, however lighthearted.

Sincerely
TJ
 
I feel sorry for Anne, I have met her and she seemed quite normal, (for a woman) /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif however must have been effected by the envirolment she works in.

It's all so silly, just lighten up. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top