Spirit of Cardiff... Sunk but all Safe.

[Observer]

Re: Adventurous or reckless?

Notwithstanding Kim's comments above, there is, I think, a more general point to be considered: that is whether those who indulge in leisure activities which carry inherently more risk than other leisure activities should be required to make additional contributions (perhaps by way of some sort of 'mutual' fund?) to the overhead (if not direct costs) of search and rescue resources.

Such activities may include (or not): record breaking attempts or expeditions, ocean yacht racing, trans-oceanic crossings by small craft, diving etc., etc.

(The inclusion of diving is quite deliberate - I know you are a keen diver - it does seem to (I may be wrong) throw up a disproportionate number of 'incidents' - as a proportion of the number of participants.)



<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://aflcharters.co.uk>Dream Dancer</A>

 

[Mike21]

Re: Adventurous or reckless?

There was a report on Wave105 tonight saying that he had hit a submerged object.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Adventurous or reckless?

Where do you draw the line? I think the emergency services are happy helping out people like Alan, as they were well prepared for the situation, as many of their comments seem to suggest. It's the ones that go out to sea with no idea what they are doing that cause them to look like they just sucked a lemon.

Are my long distance forays in a 21' sportsboat foolhardy, and if so, should I pay more. How to police that sort of activity.

I think the status quo is fine as is. People need rescuing from time to time, and the services are there to provide that function. They either sign up as volunteers, or do it as a paid job paid by tax payers - so end of story as far as I'm concerned

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[alpha]

Re: Adventurous or reckless?

A couple of points:

First, when you upgrade your mobile phone, don't throw the old one away or give it back to the shop... If the battery is still OK, put it in the grab bag, and charge it REGULARLY. You can make emergency (999, 911, 112) calls on a mobile without a sim card or current subscription. I have a Nokia in the grab bag which will work like this, and close inshore (where a lot of problems occur) it's a valuable resource.

Second, as a 'safety specialist' and aviator, let's drop the 'helicopter running out of fuel' line, please. The SAR people do some incredible flying, and would not risk 'running out of fuel'. In the same way that the press (God bless them, they'll need all the help they can get one day) get things wrong about the Spirit (all in the name of a good story), they will embellish any hint of SAR challenges way beyond reality.

The SAR crews are very expert at risk assessment, management, and getting a challenging job done with a successful conclusion. They're not in the habit of risking running out of fuel. There will have been a plan, or several plans, possibly involving the RFA vessel, to ensure their safety and that of the casualties.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[DepSol]

I am up in Alderney at the mo and got a text from Alan the night it happened.

Will update you guys when I know more.

<hr width=100% size=1>Dom

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.soltron.co.uk>the website</A>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Adventurous or reckless?

SAR crews do regularly run the risk of running out of fuel, and take some desperate odds to complete missions. I can track down a few for you. I don't disparage them for doing so, and admire the way they think that that helping a crew of complete strangers is their lifes work. If they want to take those risks, them good on them,

I'd suggest that landing on an RN auxiliary vessel in rough conditions to refuel, suggests they had doubts they could make it home, otherwise they wouldn't have done it. Nothing suggests that they didn't plan this at some point.

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni