Missing yachtswoman in South west.

toad_oftoadhall said:
That article didn't mention an error of judgement. In fact as far as I can see there's no meaningful information in there are at.

1) Boat handling seems bad. So what? That doesn't mean she's going to stack it on rocks at sea.

2) She got milage wrong in conversation. So what? There's no reason to think that she used *that* milage for a passage plan or any other purpose. No doubt she got the dividers out before she left.

Perhaps the most useful bit on information was that it seems from the photo she was carrying a bit of weight. To a limited degree, adds to the chance of a medical problem IMV.

Personally I think that article tells us nothing, but as it's the mail I skim read it and may have missed something.
Click to expand...

OK, I get your drift, BUT I said "IF the article was correct" and it was my humble assessment that she made a c. error of judgement - based on the article's ?suggestions?
I do not profess to be an expert mariner, but I do sail solo, have a few miles "under my hull" and I sure as H*** wouldn't have undertaken that trip, given the purported information.

But thanks for your input/comment
 
Robert Wilson said:
OK, I get your drift, BUT I said "IF the article was correct" and it was my humble assessment that she made a c. error of judgement - based on the article's ?suggestions?
I do not profess to be an expert mariner, but I do sail solo, have a few miles "under my hull" and I sure as H*** wouldn't have undertaken that trip, given the purported information.

But thanks for your input/comment
Click to expand...

No problem at all, and thankyou for yours.
 
toad_oftoadhall said:
That article didn't mention an error of judgement. In fact as far as I can see there's no meaningful information in there at all.

1) Boat handling seems bad. So what? That doesn't mean she's going to stack it on rocks at sea.

2) She got milage wrong in conversation. So what? There's no reason to think that she used *that* milage for a passage plan or any other purpose. No doubt she got the dividers out before she left.

Perhaps the most useful bit on information was that it seems from the photo she was carrying a bit of weight. To a limited degree, adds to the chance of a medical problem IMV.

Personally I think that article tells us nothing, but as it's the mail I skim read it and may have missed something.
Click to expand...

You missed the fact that she may not have had any charts. If true, IMV dividers may have been useless.
 
A1Sailor said:
You missed the fact that she may not have had any charts. If true, IMV dividers may have been useless.
Click to expand...

I had missed that thanks for pointing it out.

Be interesting to see if it's ever confirmed that she was doing the trip without charts. Did she really did find her way to Mousehole to anchor without charts?

Anyone know if the MAIB will be investigating, or if there's a search with sonar for the rest of boat planned?
 
toad_oftoadhall said:
I had missed that thanks for pointing it out.

Be interesting to see if it's ever confirmed that she was doing the trip without charts. Did she really did find her way to Mousehole to anchor without charts?

Anyone know if the MAIB will be investigating, or if there's a search with sonar for the rest of boat planned?
Click to expand...

It ws reported in the press, whose coverage has bee sensationalist, that there were no charts on board when the boat was sold. That of course does not mean that charts were taken onboard by the lady, that she had handheld gps, and that she had a fully prepared passage plan.

I think in the case of suspected loss of life MAIB investigation is obligatory
 
maxi77 said:
It ws reported in the press, whose coverage has bee sensationalist, that there were no charts on board when the boat was sold. That of course does not mean that charts were taken onboard by the lady, that she had handheld gps, and that she had a fully prepared passage plan.

I think in the case of suspected loss of life MAIB investigation is obligatory
Click to expand...

I think only reporting is obligatory. It's not on the list of current investigations: http://www.maib.gov.uk/latest_news/current_investigations.cfm
 
Richard Shead said:
Its all in here, its in the mail so it must be true....


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-vanished--leaving-tantalising-mystery-.html
Click to expand...

Fascinating.

Although I have an instinctive distrust of the press, this does chime with #526. She was an accident waiting to happen.

If she really did have no charts, then she could not have made even a crude passage plan. She was, therefore, breaking the law. I wonder what would have happened had the coastguard been told about her lack of charts. Could she have been stopped and arrested for her own good?
 
franksingleton said:
If she really did have no charts, then she could not have made even a crude passage plan. She was, therefore, breaking the law. I wonder what would have happened had the coastguard been told about her lack of charts. Could she have been stopped and arrested for her own good?
Click to expand...

Sorry Frank, but I didn't realise that the law required the production of a passage plan before going to sea?

It seems I must be a serial offender:eek:
 
jimi said:
Here's a picture of the area taken from outside the Longships in good weather in August
8096680239_f2e544ea66_b.jpg
Click to expand...

Jimi,

what's your point ?

I think most people will agree, there's a lot more to this case; I even got the impression by certain media they were trying to imply a sort of 'Rebbeca' ( Daphne Du Maurier book & poorer film ) scenario !!!

It just seems a sad loss to me, though I suppose we are all supposed to hate this lady as she was labelled a millionairess, then people long afterwards said things like " I knew it was all wrong but let her go ! "

If I was in that situation - which I doubt ever happened - I'd like to think I'd 'grow a pair' and stop her going if that incompetent, or if really feeling guilty afterwards if she was that bad I might be inclined to keep my head down rather than pander to a few moments of media spotlight...

No Cornish sailor or fisherman of the many I have met would have failed to give polite and very good seamanlike advice in the circumstances, not the 'OO Ar Skipper, Shouldn't Be Going Thar ! ' beloved of things like the Daily Mail.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm I'm really not sure what point you are trying to make?


The point of this photo and the other by the other chap was to give a view of what the area looks like from a boat to those who are not familiar with the area. I am also sue that if you read the thread that I have been very keen on sticking to facts and stating that I thought the weather window and passage plan was OK.

Perhaps you have leapt up the ladder of inference yet again?

Oh I see you've edited your post to make it more reasonable, I'll remember to quote your posts in future.
 
Last edited:
Jimi,

no leaping up anything 'yet again' - and our paths have rarely crossed though I have seen your posts and disagreed re another ex-poster - I asked what was your point ?!

EDITED TO ADD ! - Is this bizarre treatment standard ?! I haven't edited anything to suit you, what the hell are you on about ?!

Please give an example so I can explain, otherwise I'm giving up on you.

P.S. Jimi,

this is purely explanation but I've had a hard day getting my and chums' boats out of the water, am tired and it's 00:06 in the Monday morning; please feel free to explain and I'll respond later but I can do without daft feuds, let's avoid that - suit yourself.
 
Last edited:
mikefleetwood said:
Sorry Frank, but I didn't realise that the law required the production of a passage plan before going to sea?

It seems I must be a serial offender:eek:
Click to expand...

Well, now you know. Merchant Shipping (Safety of Navigation) Regulations 2002. There was quite a hoo-ha about it a few years ago, though the fuss has since died down when nothing really changed on a day to day basis.

It does apply to private pleasure vessels, but the law is generally interpreted as not requiring the plan to be written down (this hasn't actually been tested in court as far as I know). So provided you know where you're going and have at least glanced at a forecast and a tide table (or determined that tide isn't relevant for your intended passage) then you're ok.

Pete
 
The loss of life is always a trajic event. Who has never made an error of judgment? A foolish desion? or taken a bit to much of a risk. whether by overconfidence lack of expierience or or just poor planning.

Most of us survive ours. hopefully we learn in this case everything just lined up right or wrong and she was lost. Her wealth or lack of it is irrelevent.

We have search and rescue services for the benefit of all. We take part in search and rescue in the hope if we were ever in need someone would do the same for us.

Sailing is a pastime we all enjoy. none of us are perfect
 
Seajet said:
I see, no answer at all, just a wind-up merchant.

Please will someone tell me how I use the 'ignore' function, had no need for it in nearly 10,000 posts but I reckon now is the time - seriously, please tell me the 'ignore' routine !
Click to expand...

Where do you get the "wind up merchant bit"? You posted at midnight, Jimi referred to a post he wrote a few moments before. You said you were tired and implied you were going to bed. Then, 2 hours later, you show up again and appear outraged that Jimi hasn't replied! Surely it's reasonable Jimi might just might be asleep?

In your post you also say that if you were in Mousehole/Falmouth, you would have had the balls to stop her from leaving, thus avoiding the tragedy. What, you mean physically restrain her, disable the boat, block the harbour or what? ooh, let's have new legislation that requires a pre-departure examination of boat and skipper shall we?? Doubtless an acreditated team of Health & Safety 'experts' in hi-vis jackets will need to be booked in advance for this purpose.

I've been a bit amazed at the extent of speculation (some of it wild) on this long and somewhat circular thread. Jimi has constantly dipped back in, posting pleas that forumites just concentrate on what is known - at the very least out of respect for a woman who has yet to be found and for the feelings of her family. It was not heavy weather, Mrs Unwin had already completed a passage to Mousehole and had the good sense to spend a day with a skipper on the boat before leaving. Whether this was enough, whether there was inadequate navigational and safety equipment on board, fallen overboard, whether a sea monster ate the boat whilst underway, is just guessing.

I suspects some facts may emerge, or at least some items of speculation disproved. Maybe not. I'd prefer to wait.
 
mikefleetwood said:
Sorry Frank, but I didn't realise that the law required the production of a passage plan before going to sea?

It seems I must be a serial offender:eek:
Click to expand...

Leisure vessels generally are now covered by SOLAS. The RYA and the MCA have issued guidance on the implications for the likes of you and me. It is accepted that a passage plan might just be some lines on a chart or, I suppose, a route saved on your chartplotter to show what you intend to do. Presumably, you would have to be able to show that you have studied the weather forecast. See http://weather.mailasail.com/Franks-Weather/Solas-Gmdss-And-Leisure-Sailors#gmdss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top