The Bermuda Race Organizing Committee, Cruising Club of America, and US Sailing, just published an excellent report on the loss of the 50-foot sloop Solution while on the return voyage from Bermuda after competing in the 2024 Newport Bermuda Race.
I strongly recommend reading the report (one of three). There are great lessons there for all of us from the deeply experienced panel, all of whom I know and respect.
That said, I think there is an important lesson that was not specifically highlighted in the report.
While investigating through public media outlets, why the Beneteau 523 “Time Aut” was abandoned, an associate send me a presentation on the “North Wall” effect. I am sure this is well known to regular sailors of these waters, but was new to me, although the wind over tide concept and dangerous overfalls are very common where I sail. Posted for anyone who may be interested. Note that the link will download the document after asking https://www.vos.noaa.gov/docs/north_wall.pps
I like your 2 and 25 rule, pragmatic. Apart from pilot guides, tidal atlases, are there any other resources, say from on line ocean buoys, that can advise of current strength and directions?
Hi Alastair,
Good slide stack. That said I would caution others that a yacht can be damaged any place in the Stream, or anywhere else, where the 2 and 25 rule gets broken.
As to information. The GS is one of the best imaged areas of the ocean in the world so there are plenty of graphic sources showing the currents (and waves) to a high degree of accuracy. Windy and Predict Wind are just two sources that reproduce this stuff. And the even better news is that buoys are no longer required to get accurate GS current and wave information. That is now produced with radar from satellites with amazing accuracy including a forecast for three days. Here’s an example: https://www.windy.com/-Menu/menu?currents,44.383,-64.515,5,i:pressure,p:favs
Thanks for the advice, appreciated. I subscribe to Predict Wind so will look at their data.
Sounds like a take-away from this for going offshore would be to polish the fuel, inspect the tank for gunk, and the fuel lines/filters etc..
Be wary of slamming. Dynamic loads can be brutal in slamming conditions. There are static equivalent design loads in some classification society rules, but an old wooden boat like Solution preceded such rules. Another lesson would be to be prudent in knowing the criteria to which the boat was designed. Avoid pounding if possible by changing course and slowing down.
My first Newport-Bermuda race in 1990 was rough, 25-35 on the nose in the stream, steep chop. J-44, going 7+ upwind into the chop. Lots of slamming. Thankfully there were no major gear failures. Upon thorough inspection of the boat after the finish revealed a forward transverse plywood support under the v-berth had damaged tabbing. Also, we routinely were getting significant water that had to be pumped out. We tracked down the leak to the rudder post- as a passing wave crest would come by the stern, we’d get a slosh of water squirting up the rudder tube. A lesson from this would be to go out in rough stuff before the passage, and inspect everything you can think of that might break or let sea water in, especially from below the waterline, and of critical systems.
Wooden hull construction, especially old wooden boats, is spooky in severe conditions. Structural behavior can be well off the assumed design strengths and behaviors. No structural behavior can be absolutely predicted, but an old wooden boat adds to the uncertainty. (I’m a retired structures nav. arch.)
Hi Robert and all,
Totally agree with polishing the fuel, especially if you can access the fuel below the pick-up tube: inspecting/cleaning the tank is far more difficult and very likely pretty much not going to happen: access challenges (see below for a suggestion). And the tank walls (again access) are where this gunk lives until it is knocked off by sloshing fuel in big seas.
I bought Alchemy after it had sat around for a while. The first boisterous outing the engine sputtered my way to the boat yard. The fuel filter was clogged with black gunk. We (the yard) emptied the tanks of the diesel and filled them: I think with a mixture of kerosene and some other stuff and sent me out on another bouncy day using fuel from a jerry can set-up. I got rid of the kerosene mixture and filled with diesel: all was good and has remained so.
I installed a dual Racor fuel system and a fuel polishing system to get fuel from below the fuel pick-up tube.
My plan for bad fuel: Keep the fuel clean and stabilized and BioBar’ed (or the like). I am fortunate to be able to have access to the bottom of my tank below the fuel pick-up allowing me access to where “gunk” would accumulate.
A dual Racor fuel filter with a vacuum gauge was installed and is checked hourly when motoring (when a regular eye-balling of the engine area takes place).
We have been to remote areas and get fuel when and where we can. So, I carry lots of Racor fuel filters (buy them by the dozen: they will get used eventually and were we to get a batch of bad fuel, cleaning by repeated changing of the fuel filters would be an expensive way to keep going, but likely worth it.)
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick,
I always did about the same: Biobor and lots of filters.
I remember an article years ago, possibly practical sailor, where a petroleum chemist recommended rotating fuel treatments through multiple brands of your choice. He indicated that the organisms that foul diesel fuel can be come resistant to a single treatment if the same product is consistently used in the same ecosystem.
Hi Carl,
Maybe. I have heard endless debate about this and for much of it I always wonder “how on earth do they know that”. All I know is that I have been using BioBor for some 25 years and have never had problems with the bugs in the fuel since I started using it, and that includes at least three occasions when I did not use the boat for over year, and just filled the tank and added BioBor.
I expect it’s not that they “Know” it’s that the bugs that live reproduce. Same as is happening with Covid, and Bird flu. Personally I don’t see how it would hurt.
Hi Ted,
Perhaps, but I ‘m of the if it’s not broken don’t fix school, so given my good experience with BioBor…
I had the “good luck” to have a corroded main 110 gallon diesel tank so after I removed it I installed a 20-ish gallon day tank that has a big cleanout port on the top. My engine ONLY drinks from this day tank and the tank get drained and cleaned annually and before any offshore sailing. Later I backed up the day tank with two larger secondary tanks — one a flexible bladder and the other a integral GRP tank I built into my hull/bilge — and I periodically transfer fuel from the two larger tanks into the day tank, through a Racor, which is located in an easy to reach location and where I can isolate it and change the filter easily. The day tank system work well in that I can alway rely on at least 20 gallons of pristine fuel, even if I should ever have to deal with gunked up fuel from the secondary tanks, which might happen with the bladder but will never happen with the GRP tank since it also has a cleanout port and gets cleaned annually. If I ever had to design another fuel system for a sailboat, it would always include a cleanable day tank good for 10 to 20 hours of full-bore run time.
Hi All,
My impression is that fuel polishing may be sometimes given more credit than it is due although I don’t have hard evidence of this. If anyone does know of true hard evidence around this subject, I would definitely be interested.
The typical 50hp diesel is already polishing the fuel tank at something like 10GPH. If you put on a decent number of hours and run the engine regularly, my guess is that you get much of the polishing benefit of a true polishing system simply by running your engine (and changing its filter a bit more often). If you don’t run the engine a lot or use a multi-tank system with tanks sitting, then I can certainly see how maintenance polishing makes a significant difference.
Having dealt with a few fouled tanks, I am very skeptical that a low flow fuel polishing system will do anything to help and Steve D’s article that John linked to certainly seems to agree. The polishing systems that I have seen used for commercial tanks are quite high flow and include returning the fuel through a wand so that they try to cover the different surfaces of the tank with enough flowrate to break stuff loose although I don’t know if these even work. The one thing that definitely does work once there is fouling is opening up the tank.
My hypothesis is that a boat that uses it engine a decent amount and has a single tank would be better served by good design/maintenance (making sure the vent can’t let water in, ensuring the fill doesn’t leak, watching filter to see if the tank needs to be opened, etc.), having a way to drain the very bottom of the tank regularly (which could be done with a polishing setup although most don’t do this) and running biobor or equivalent. I am not arguing against polishing, just that I have often seen it held up as the key to eliminating fuel problems which I am not convinced of.
Eric
Hi Eric,
I agree. Unless the tank can get agitated or the fuel can be taken from the bottom of the tank below the pick-up, I believe that fuel polishing will just do the filtering of largely clean fuel that the primary and secondary fuel filters are there for.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Eric,
Good point that a diesel engine is constantly polishing.
And I would agree. If the tanks are really gunked up there is nothing for it but to take the lids off and clean them, a polishing system won’t get the job done.
We did have a polishing system on the M&R 56 but it’s main use was to clean a new tank of fuel from a dodgy source which used to be common in the north, but less so now. The boat has two big tanks 145 US Gallons each, so if we were unsure of the source we would try to only fill one and then polish it (while under way in swell to agitate) before using. We could also cross pump between the tanks so the clean tank would in effect become a day tank.
That said, if building a boat I would think about a day tank, rather than bothering with polishing, although that’s not without its challenges too.
Hi Eric,
I agree. As I see it, most leisure boats have a flawed fuel delivery system, and fuel polishing systems are there as a band aid on that flaw. It’s better to remove the very simple flaw.
In the old days, boats didn’t have fuel filters. Instead, they let the water and gunk sink down in the tank and drained it out every day. The fuel pickup was placed a bit high, so it didn’t easily pick up the gunk. The engines were also simple and robust, so this worked well. Airplanes still use this system, but they do drain the bottom of the tanks every day.
Nowadays we all have water separators and filters, and most boats owners don’t even know how to drain gunk from their tanks. On the vast majority of leisure boats, it’s never done. Still, the fuel pickup to the engine is usually placed high, just because “that’s how it’s supposed to be”, no matter how dysfunctional it is. Effect: The tank has a pool of water and gunk at the bottom, always.
A polishing system with a pickup at the very deepest point of the tank can fix this. Still, the polishing system is the solution to a problem that shouldn’t have existed. If the fuel pickup was at the lowest point of the tank, everything would go to the filter without delay. With an elevated pickup it gathers until the gunk pool is high enough for the exactly same to happen, but sometimes as a big gulp of goop. Two different systems are mixed up and one of them is not used right, so it’s only sabotaging.
The right way to do this is:
– Fuel pickup at the lowest possible point in the tank. Then:
– Water separator with a sensor and alarm. Then:
– Coarse filter. Usually the one that needs to be replaced. Then:
– Fine filter. Catches the rest. Then:
– Low pressure sensor with alarm, to tell us when there’s too much resistance in the filters so we can remedy it before the feed pump gives up. We can keep the filters many times longer.
The tank stays clean. If it’s been left unused for years, we need to check more, and sometimes washing the interior of the tank is necessary, but with normal use and decent fuel, we don’t ever need to worry about the tank. I don’t have a low pressure sensor, will get it, but the rest has been in use for many years on my boats. I can easily inspect my tanks. Never anything there.
Hi Robert
Good point on the difficulty of being really sure of structural integrity on a wooden boat. This is one of the reasons I don’t recommend the material for most people: https://www.morganscloud.com/2024/10/06/hull-materials-which-is-best/
That said, as other comments show, there are many occasions when glass boats got damaged in the same sort of condition, just as the J44 you were on was, so we shall probably never know if it was a defect, or just being in the wrong place. Anyway, I think we can be reasonable sure that if she had not fallen off those vertical waves all would have been well.
I was doublehanding a Valiant 40 from Bermuda to Newport in a B1-2. Cold front passed with gale force NW wind against the GS. Very short period 10′ waves set up. Close reaching/beating with storm jib & triple reefed main. On windvane, the V40 leaped off these waves landing with a disturbing bang. I can attest the bulkhead tabbing on the lee side completely failed. I watched as the bottom edge of the bulkhead became visible above the tabbing as the boat went airborne and the hull sagged, only to watch the bulkhead smash into the hull upon landing.
We hand steered to maneuver through the waves and made it in to Newport OK. This was 1977 so no current guides and poor forecast detail.
Captain: what’s the anemometer say?
Crew: I don’t know, it only goes up to 60.
All of which is to say, yes I agree with your analysis regarding strong wind & counter current. This is up there with lee shores as things I really worry about.
Hi Whitall,
Good comparison. Exactly the two things I put at the top of my worry list.
Years of reports of yachts getting into trouble in wind-against-current situations have had an effect on training curricula.
Recognizing and avoiding such situations is brought up several times in the CanBoat / NautiSavoir curriculum (for which I am a volunteer instructor).
It’s also a point of emphasis in the latest version of RYA Yachtmaster Theory, which requires students to predict (using the tidal atlas or tidal diamonds plus a daily weather forecast) where and when wind-against-current situations will occur, and to select departure times and routings that avoid them.
Hi Matt,
Good to hear that these courses have specifically focused on predicting this danger.
I would argue that an “impeccably maintained” vessel would not head offshore without clean tanks, clean fuel, clean filters, ample spares and the ability to swap out fuel filters in all conditions. This task is always on my must-do maintenance list before an offshore passage. The failure of the fuel system (the engine did not fail, the fuel system did) seems to be one of the foundational causes for the eventual loss of the vessel and was easily avoidable with proper maintenance. It is easy to buy kit like redundant pumps, spare parts, etc but this is not the same (or as necessary) as thoughtful, consistent maintenance.
A working engine would also have supplied an emergency way to pump seawater out of the bilge, had the owner installed a diverter valve on his seawater intake and run a hose & well-screened pickup into his bilge sump. And, of course, kept his bilges clean enough that the pickup wouldn’t foul.
I really like your 2 & 25 rule; it is a clear and objective measure that takes the debate and guesswork out of a potentially dangerous situation. I’m going to incorporate it into my sailing routine from now on. Thanks for that.
Hi Shane,
I would likely consider another bilge pump over a diverter valve from the engine.
As John says, one’s engine is mission critical and there is too much chance of it being compromised pulling water out of the bilge, even with all the straining and the cleaning of the bilge you suggest. And, I suspect, a large bilge pump would move more water, especially if the engine was kept going to provide ample voltage from the batteries for all the de-watering pumps to work at peak efficiency.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick,
I would agree with that: https://www.morganscloud.com/2014/08/22/our-new-crash-pump/
John
An average 50 hp marine diesel will move approximately 1500 GPH in Ideal conditions. A 1 inch hole 3 feet below the surface will admit approximately 2500 gallons per hour. I think most boats are woefully under pumped and I would favor additional dedicated pumps(mounted and portable) over engine suction. Motor Vessels can move significantly more water through their engines but I still worry about compromising the engine. Segmented bilges and water tight hull sections seem the logical conclusion but are very rare in yachts. I don’t know why, but hen why do so few designs include a place for the life raft or engineered preventers as part stock the stock rig?
I wrote about this a few years ago as well: https://www.marine.marsh-design.com/content/breached-hulls-swamped-hulls-and-bilge-pumps
In short, no, the engine cooling impeller does not move nearly as much water as one might assume. And you risk killing the engine.
If you’re able to make AC power while underway, then a high capacity 120 V pump like https://www.princessauto.com/en/3-4-hp-grinder-sewage-pump/product/PA0008517799 (which can eat 1.5″ solids while pumping 70 gal/min) plus some flat-coil discharge hose is worth keeping in a locker. As a bonus, you can easily hang it over the side to use as a firefighting pump if necessary.
If you can’t make AC while underway, then a high flow 12V or 24V pump like the Rule 3700 or Rule Evacuator 8000 is a good choice.
Hi Matt,
Good point, on the pump. However, flat coil discharge hose does not generally work well with impeller pumps since the flattened hose tends to stop them priming to the point that in some cases flat hose has made the pump useless. In one case the user had the thread a piece of garden hose through the flat hose to get it going and even then the flow was much impeded.
More here on sump pumps and how I selected and tested one: https://www.morganscloud.com/2014/08/22/our-new-crash-pump/
Hello Dick,
After giving your comment and a few others below about 30 seconds of thought, I’m going to flip-flop on my position and take back my suggestion of a bilge pickup connected to the engine’s seawater pickup. It seemed a good idea at the time — especially as I marvel at how fast the raw water pump will suck down a 5 gallon bucket of fresh water as I rinse my engine — but I see that in the utter chaos of a potential sinking that the risks outweigh the rewards. I think keeping it simple and keeping the engine running along with another large bilge pump mounted somewhere above the primary pump sounds like a much better idea.
Shane
I think the moral of the story is to fix things when they break, if they are mission critical. Simply the loss of electrical generation would have been enough to throw off my decision-making in this situation. The filter needed to be changed immediately at 3:30a and how that would be done had to have been considered before leaving the dock
Case in point: We had just entered the Gulf Stream on a southbound trip with three aboard when I noticed that the sacrificial post to the paddle of the Monitor wind vane had bent. Despite sporty conditions in the stream I leaned over the stern to bring aboard the mangled assembly, set up the winch-top vice, hammered the bent post out of its fitting and installed the replacement post. The next day the newly installed engine did not start when we needed to charge and we had to go dark except for tricolor and vhf/AIS. The wind vane was crucial until the next morning when we found the corroded fuse to the starter.
My crew thought I was nuts, going through what I did. But mission critical items need to be fixed right away. With only two capable drivers onboard we would have had real hardship had I neglected that.
Walter Rush
s/v Gryphon, Morris Justine
Hi Shane,
I agree, there’s a lot that could have gone better if the engine had been running, particularly picking up the USCG pump which might have saved the boat.
Hi Shane,
In thinking about it, I think I will cut those words. Thanks.
Hi Shane,
Being able to reconsider a position is an important skill and I appreciate your acknowledging doing so. One hopes that this sort of planning ahead is like carrying an umbrella that one hopes to not be forced to use.
My best, Dick
Hi John,
I believe it is hard to imagine, ahead of time, how jarring it is to fall off a wave in the open ocean: or to describe the experience adequately. I usually resort to saying I worried about my fillings falling out. This usually comes up when I talk/write about the wisdom of “stuff on deck”, but also occasionally with the exponentially increased beating a boat must be able to endure when offshore vs coastal cruising.
There was at least a couple of other thoughts I had when I read the reports that may enhance safety: Early Warning Systems.
I doubt that high-water alarms would have saved any of the boats, but on two of the boats, an early warning of water ingress might have bought more time for considering remedies and/or for evacuation preparation.
The other early warning device that may have helped would be a dual fuel filter system with a vacuum gauge. Two of the lost boats had fuel filter issues. A system such as a dual Racor fuel filter assembly with a vacuum gauge (water in the fuel alarm is optional, I believe) allows for a quick change of filters with the flip of a valve. Then the changing of the fouled filter is relatively easy and far less messy.
The early warning aspect comes with a regular check on the vacuum gauge which should occur when the tanks get impressively shook up on an open ocean passage. Noticing increased pressure indicates the fuel being delivery channels becoming constricted. For those boats where the real estate for a dual Racor system (or the like) is hard to come by, installing a vacuum gauge on its own is wise (If memory serves, occasional contributor to AAC, Steve D’Antonio, has writing on the wisdom, interpreting and installation of vacuum gauges, articles likely to be found on his web site, https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/.)
More specifically, with regards to the report on Gunga Din: It was reported that there was a grounding. John, this may be an example of the issues with keel design and hull construction that you have flagged over the years.
The lever arm of a fin keel boat such as Gunga Din’s would localize the impact of running aground at or near where the mast is stepped, levered upward. This blow could cause delamination to the fiberglass around the keel step which might not be visually apparent and may not have shown itself in local sailing conditions.
Offshore conditions clearly might have further opened up the damaged area allowing water to seep and then flow through.
The above is further supported by the report that the shrouds and stays were coming loose and being tightened. The tightening could have exacerbated the damage by driving the mast down: pressurizing the mast step and the surrounding fiberglass.
It could also have been noted that repeated tightening of standing rigging could be a symptom of a problem that needs diagnosing.
The above seems like a possible explanation, perhaps a likely explanation. Needing to repeatedly tighten the standing rigging should have been a warning sign that something was amiss and, needed explaining. I saw no mention in the report of the loose and repeatedly tightened shrouds.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick,
Good points, but actually I’m not a fan of the Racor 500 system, particularly the duel ones, because I have found them prone to air leeks.
Hi John,
I had not heard that they allow air in. I have had good luck with them, both dual and single, over 4 decades.
Have you any idea where the design flaw is, where air was let in?
My best, Dick
Hi Dick,
I had problems in several places, mainly the gaskets that seal the lid. I think the problem is that they paint the surfaces the gasket mates to and over time the paint bubbles and that leaves tiny imperfections that allow air in. That said, maybe I just got unlucky since a lot of people like them. We also had very deep tanks on the M&R 56 so lot’s of vac at the filter to pull the fuel up against gravity.
I’ve used them for many years, easy to change, easy to check especially with a vacuum gauge.That said I believe the better solution, when there are deep (bilge) fuel tanks, is to have a proper day tank installed above the engine fuel pump. This solves lots of issues, think of failing feed pumps, removing air from gen fuel system after filter changes etc.
Hin Douwe,
I agree, day tanks can be a good solution to a lot of issues including vac leaks. That said, they are not without drawbacks the main one being use of space. That can usually be well managed on a new build, but hard to do well as a retrofit, which it would have been in our case. Here’s an example of a really good day tank installation on a custom Hutting: https://www.morganscloud.com/2009/12/18/diesel-fuel-day-tank/
OK John, here is a really technical question for you. Why is the sea state worse with 2kts of current against 25kts of wind rather than 0kts of current against 27kts of wind?
I can find a load of anecdotal / experiential accounts (and have experienced a few including in the 2024 Newport / Bermuda Race) but it is the physics behind this which evades me.
Can you accept the challenge?
Herbie
Hi Herbie,
I’m thinking its because water is about 830 times denser than air and then if we apply some math I think the answer comes out that the same volume of water moving at 2 knots has a bit over 5 times as much kinetic energy at air moving at 25 knots. Of course that’s gross over simplification, but it’s all I got.
Anyway, as you point out, we know boats get broken in those conditions, so that’s what matters.
That 25/2 27/0 is very different.
I do everything i can to avoid that. Same issue off the east cost of FL in the stream there, north wind – stay away. Super steep waves.
John, I love the energy calc, makes lot of sense (I am a chemical engineer and love the first principal thinking). I think you’re right.
Lots of boats and even cruise ships taking damage in those conditions. And the full disappearance of Little Harbor 54 Flying Colors somewhere off NE part of FL in 2007.
I got my butt kicked in Newport Bermuda transit (on the way to Tortola on my Swan 46 in 2012. Swore I would sell or scuttle the boat if i lived through it, falling off crazy waves.
After burger and beers in BDA, we rewrote history and journeyed on.
Speaking of Scuttling… I have wondered about that. If one abandons one’s ship, is it protocol to open the seacocks and scuttle it on the way out? Eliminate a hazard to navigation?
My buddies in Nova Scotia recovered the CNB 66 Escape after it was abandoned a few years ago in that horrible accident. Took them four days to find it. Not professional salvors, but super experienced sailors and fisherman.
This is my first comment but been reading AAC for about a year.
Nice work. Great technical analysis. I just upped my membership.
Hope to semi retire in a few years and build a new boat.
Still keeping the old 46 as well maintained as practical, in Jamestown RI, and staying coastal for now.
Hi Rob,
I agree, it would have been better to scuttle her, that said, with her half full of water, hard to do. Maybe at least turn the pumps off.
And yes, Phil and the guys did a great job: https://www.morganscloud.com/2022/09/18/an-amazing-salvage/
Herbie,
Essentially, what that boils down to is that currents are fairly localized compared to wave systems.
If you have a huge (say 1000 x 1000 miles) patch of water that is all moving at a uniform 2 knots northward, and you have a 20 knot north wind, then that is indistinguishable from a 22 knot wind blowing over stagnant water.
In reality, though, that rarely happens. The real-world situation has the wind blowing from the north over 900 miles of stagnant water. Then, the wave system produced by that wind encounters a 100 mile patch where there is a north-setting current.
We are not adding the wind speed to the drift of the current. Rather, we are taking a wave system that is already moving with a particular wavelength and velocity, and superimposing it on a current that is setting opposite the direction of wave motion.
Conservation of energy, combined with the equations governing wave motion, means that in this situation the wavelength must reduce and the wave height must increase.
That is what kills boats. Not wind against current, strictly speaking, but wind-driven waves encountering an opposing current that was not present where the waves first began to form.
perfect description.
Hi John, it is possible these old wooden boats are not as strong as they appear. Another example, the Winston Churchill in the 98 Hobart storm (also an example of storm force winds against strong setting current). WC was dumped on her side by a huge wave and basically caved in, all crew got into rafts but sadly 3 were lost. At the end of the day these old planked boats rely on a whole lot of friction points to hold them together and not much else.
cheers
Alan
Hi Alan,
Good point in general, but based on Don Jordan’s analysis of the Winston Churchill disaster I doubt that a boat of any material would have come out much better. Jordan calculated that she hit the bottom of that wave at about 50 MPH! https://jordanseriesdrogue.com/D_15.htm
Hi John,
Thanks for making us aware of this report. I just finished reading the report and have to agree with your conclusion that there was not nearly enough emphasis on the current aspect. It can be truly scary to enter a section of current whether it be a big ocean current or a localized one like a river entrance. We have a mooring across a bar and when the swell is up, the difference of 15 minutes at the change of tide can be the difference between a smooth trip across and a horribly dangerous one. I have been bitten in the gulf stream as well although it sounds like not nearly as bad as a few people on here.
Eric
It was just reported in SAIL that the captain received a seamanship medal from the CCA. I think we do the sailing community a disservice by commending his final decision but not looking at the decisions which led up to the situation in which abandoning ship was the only option. Neither SAIL nor the CCA challenge the Captain’s decision to postpone changing the fuel filter when he determined it was clogged. If he could do it in 20mins at the dock, could he have done it at sea if he had cracked off or hove to, and would it have made a difference, as subsequent dominoes fell, to have power generation and auxiliary propulsion. I also challenge the conclusion that the cause of the loss was being in the fastest flowing part of the Gulf Stream with a strong wind blowing against the current. While we cannot do anything about the sea state we’re in, we affect our fate by how we respond to it. Ironically, if he had saved his boat his story might not have been newsworthy and there would be no award for seamanship.
Hi Walter,
I agree that the award was misplaced.
But disagree that we can’t do anything about the sea state we are in, or that it was not the primary cause. If she had not fallen off those waves the pumps would not be required. Having crossed the Gulf Steam over 25 times in sailing boats (lost count) I assure you that we can indeed control that variable, particularly in these days of really good current measurement from satellites.
Another example is sailing around high tide flow area like the British Isles, the SW tip of Nova Scotia (Cape Sable), The Bay of Fundy, and down east Maine (I have experience of all of these areas) where if we don’t control the wind against current variable we will come to sticky end sooner rather than later. As the fishermen say in Scotland “fear God and the Pentland Firth”.
And while I agree that an attempts at changing the filter should have been made, I doubt that would have solved the problem for long since I have information that the tank had not been cleaned for some years, so a new filter would have blocked quickly, so I would put not cleaning the tanks higher up the cause tree, but still below getting into the wrong piece of ocean and compounding that be keeping driving into it.
What interests me is the mindfulness component of seaworthiness. Mindfulness is a concept from cognitive behavioral therapy in which the attention is brought to focus on the here and now. From the mindfulness perspective, once you are in a wind and wave situation, cognitive performance will be best if we can focus on the present and how the decisions we make now affect our fate. This is not the time worry about whether we properly interpreted the SST and altimetry data or to vow that next time we are going to polish the fuel.
There was a moment before the boat fell off the wave when he was in the storm. but it had not yet caused him to sink. At this point he was making decisions. Since these decisions could have changed the outcome, we cannot blame the loss on the wind and waves. What does become a factor is the mindset of a skipper and did that lead to the best decisions.
I have been intrigued by my own reaction to intense situations at sea. It has seemed that time slows and I just sit on the settee, walking thru the steps I could take, the risks and the consequences. I’ve heard others describe similar experiences. I suspect intensity of preparation, knowing your weather and studying your systems, prepares one to enter this mindset. I would be like to hear more discussion on that.
It is not a fast form of decision-making like we think about when athletes are in the zone, but there is an element of being in a zone. Maybe it is a cognitive zone. I think there is a bit of Tim Gallwey’s Inner Game but it is not the same as the automatic action of self 2.
I am not trying to find fault in this skipper. But how do we truly understand the experience of things going wrong at sea and how do we prepare for our adventures so that we can respond to situations appropriately? How do we learn from this skipper’s experience more than finding fault.
I have been across the Stream 15 times, six as a Bermuda 1-2 skipper, two singlehanded in the context of passage to and from the Caribbean. I joined the 1-2 as a means to learn how to singlehanded safely. I purchased my boat with the 1-2 in mind, but also as a boat to live aboard with wife and 2 kids which we accomplished 2019-20. I consider what I have done as a study in how to do all this safely and credit your website as part of my education.