Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Some had raised questions as to why countries were rescuing Miss Sunderland and not charging for it. This 1914 act passed because there were ships lights in view of the Titanic that did not respond to the distress calls of the sinking ship. And all countries should answer a call in a humanitarian way.
1 posted on 06/17/2010 5:27:33 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: DJ MacWoW; gatorgal; maica
I'd carve out an exception for Balloon Boy media-whore fame-grubbers who send their 16 year old daughter out into the Southern Ocean in wintertime.

There is a reason even professionally crewed, fully sponsored raceboats don't do the Southern Ocean in winter, it's the known frequency of gales, storms, and fatally dangerous waves. It's the same reason even professional mountain climbers don't do Everest or K2 in winter.

But Abbey's media-whore parents knew their grab for glory would expire when Abbey aged-out of her “youngest ever” record attempt. That's why the website splashed across her mainsail was “Abbey16.com”

Shameless media whores, who threw their gung-ho but foolish and unprepared daughter's life onto the craps table, do or die, in a grab for fame and money at any cost.

2 posted on 06/17/2010 5:33:06 AM PDT by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW

Yes, I believe it was the California which sat off of the Titanic and refused to acknowledge radio signals or respond to the distress flares fired by the Titanic. I have never read any where that the ship’s master had a plausible excuse for not going to the Titanic’s aid.


3 posted on 06/17/2010 5:36:52 AM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW

“They don’t understand that I’ve sailed my whole life and I do know what I’m doing out there.”

She is full of it. I’ll give her plenty of leeway because she’s 16, but she’s still full of it.

First: the winter crossing of the Southern Ocean was INSANE. Professionally crewed, multi-million dollar fully-sponsored raceboats don’t do it in winter, for the same reason mountain climbers don’t try Everest in January. So right there, “I know what I’m doing” rings the BS bell. She was out there in winter for one reason only: her age. Her website is Abby16.com for a reason. Next summer, she won’t win the prize for youngest. So her father decided to throw her life onto the craps table to exploit her for an age-record try.

Second: She didn’t have a wind vane. Two electrical autopilots only mean that if your power goes out (and it will!) you will only have two dead autopilots. A 40’ ocean sailor should, must also have a Monitor or Sailomat or similar quality wind vane self steerer. My Sailomat has steered my much bigger and heavier 48’ steel boat across oceans week after week, with no need for electricity. In the event Abby loses power, she loses auto-steering, and NO solo sailor can hand-steer a 40’er in the Southern Ocean for more than a half day. After that, fatigue takes you down, and you broach and roll and dismast. Which may have been the sequence of events.

Third: She didn’t cut away her rig, which is Voyaging 101, to prevent the rig from holing and sinking the yacht. After ditching the rig, the standard EXPECTED procedure of REAL SAILORS EVERYWHERE is to erect a jury rig and sail downwind to a safe port. In her case, Western Australia. Not to just push the EPIRB and scream to the world, “Mommy! I can’t hack it! I’m not a real sailor! Come and save me, because I can’t do it!”


4 posted on 06/17/2010 5:38:38 AM PDT by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW

Evidently ‘humanitarian’ is a dirty word to far too many folks.

For shame.


8 posted on 06/17/2010 5:41:55 AM PDT by Carley (For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW
there were ships lights in view of the Titanic that did not respond to the distress calls of the sinking ship.

The Carpathia saw the lights of the Titanic and her flares, but did not take that as distress sign. The Carpathia had stopped her engines and remained a drift for the night, out of fear of the reports of icebergs. They assumed the distant still lights were the lights of another ship that had made the same decision. They did not have a wireless watch during the night while still. Their decision was neither callous nor necessarily reprehensible.

In the case of Ms. Sunderland, she seems to have taken truly irresponsible risks and had neither the maturity nor experience to weigh risks and costs she was assuming, and not incidently exposing others to, including potential rescuers.

11 posted on 06/17/2010 5:44:07 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (The naked casuistry of the high priests of Warmism would make a Jesuit blush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW
*** This 1914 act passed because there were ships lights in view of the Titanic that did not respond to the distress calls of the sinking ship. And all countries should answer a call in a humanitarian way. ***

True. But a lot has changed since 1914.

Back then Travel by ship was the only means of crossing any large body of water (Sea or Ocean). And in 1914 the 'wireless' was just invented. Another reason that the Titanic didn't get more help sooner.

But back to 'today'. On an episode of NCIS a US Aircraft Carrier was diverted to aide some person whose sailboat was in danger of sinking. Now that was made up for the story line, but if the case arose for real, that would happen.

However, a US Carrier doesn't travel alone. It has a whole fleet (Battle Group) of support vessels wherever it goes, that's hundreds of millions to save some dolt who was trying to stroke his ego.

To paraphrase Dorothy, 'Toto, we aren't in 1914 anymore.'

(Just look back at the money 'we spent' searching for JFK Jr)

ps: This goes for all the egotistic fools: Mountain Climbers, Yuppies who get lost in the Forest while hiking, etc, etc, etc.

19 posted on 06/17/2010 5:53:46 AM PDT by Condor51 (SAT CONG!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW

This agreement makes sense for so many reasons. If you charge for rescues, you’ll have poor fishermen out there who will die when they might otherwise have called for a rescue. We grumble when the Richard Bransons and Abby Sunderlands need rescuing, but those who have the ability to participate in a rescue should do so, and without regard to assumption of risk and ability to pay.

While the Australians spent a lot of money for this rescue, they got training as a result, and their own people will benefit if they need assistance on the high seas.


73 posted on 06/17/2010 7:39:29 AM PDT by drb9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW
Countries paying teen's rescue cost defend sea law

As well they should. This time it was Sunderland who needed rescue but every ship who responded knows that next time it could be them.

You can be the best sailor in the world, with the best boat, the best crew but the sea never rests in it's quest to kill you.

Call it paying it forward. Call it harvest law. It is what should be.

124 posted on 06/17/2010 11:14:58 AM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (there are huge chunks of time...at night...where I'm just asleep...for hours...it's ridiculous....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DJ MacWoW

bump


160 posted on 06/17/2010 1:42:32 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson