Author: dockmaster

By now, you’ve probably heard about the two women who were sailing a yacht from Hawaii to Tahiti, and wound up at sea for five months before being rescued from their sailboat, the Sea Nymph.  They wound up much closer to Japan than their declared destination by the time they were approached by a tender from a US warship (video at end of post).

Here’s a happy moment after rescue.  Apparently, the surf’s up…

The voyage, as they reported it, sounded quite dramatic.  Soon after departure, they got caught in a tough storm that cost them their engine and compromised their rigging.  And then…

• They made distress calls for 98 days with no reply.
• Their water purification system failed, but they fixed it.
• They departed with a projected 1-year supply of food, but it was 90% gone by the time they abandoned the vessel.
• On at least two occasions, sharks showed up and attacked the boat.
• After being rescued, they said that that they believed they would have died within 24 hours of when the US Navy arrived.

But, it doesn’t add up.  Some of it seemed shaky to this writer when the story first broke, and more questions have surfaced since.

The rig looked fine.  The mast was intact, and the boom was attached with the main roughly secured on it.  Barring halyard failure, which wasn’t mentioned, there was no visible reason why the main couldn’t go up.  The headsail was smoothly furled up with waiting sheets.  The only specific indication in any news report was that there was spreader damage – but the spreaders looked perfect.  So, did they sail?  Also not mentioned in any news report we saw.

They said they were caught in a “Force 11” storm right after departure, with wave heights to 30 feet and winds to 60 knots – for three days.  Or was it more?  Depends who you listen to. 

“We had no way to realize we were about to enter a typhoon that had winds of 110-150 miles an hour and minimum wave heights of 40 foot in height.”

-from an interview on CNN, according to an article by NPR.

This supposedly cost them their engine, and possibly the proper functioning of their mast or attached rigging and electronics.  However, the National Weather Service says there was no “organized storm” activity near Hawaii at the time.  NASA satellite imagery confirms.  Kinda hard to miss a weather system of this magnitude.  (The NWS did issue a small craft advisory for some areas in Hawaiian waters on the day they departed, but that’s pretty f-in far from Force 11.)

The owner of the boat (one of the women on the voyage) claims to have added 6 tons of fiberglass to the 50-foot boat in order to beef it up.  Perhaps this was a misprint of some kind, but assuming any part of that was correctly reported by the news outlets – the number, the material, or the unit of measurement ton were correct – it still makes no sense.

Regarding sharks attacking the boat: one of the women said she could hear her own teeth rattle in her head when they rammed it, and they they all lay down together inside the boat and tried to be quiet.  She said the sharks could hear them breath, and smell them, and that they told their dogs not to bark.  Dog Whisperers?

A 50-foot vessel would be more than twice the length, and probably more than three times, of any sharks they might have encountered.  If they brushed up against the boat, or butted their heads against it, no doubt it would have frightened just about anyone.  But lets not blow it completely out of proportion.  Many sharks use contact to assess whether something is worthwhile (or actual) prey.  But even large species, including tiger sharks mentioned in the press, aren’t known to ram vessels far larger than themselves.  Sometimes they bite running engines, as the electrical field generated by them mimics that of living things they track and prey on.  But this engine was gone, and ostensibly, most of their electronics.

Apparently, that didn’t stop them from communicating near Tahiti, their stated destination, in June.  According to the Coast Guard, contact was made with a vessel called the Sea Nymph (same as the womens’ vessel).  The captain of the Sea Nymph said they were not in distress and that they intended to make landfall soon.   That begs the question of how they basically got to Tahiti, turned around, and then wound up most of the way to Japan.  The discrepancy is staggering: between 3,500 and 5,000 nautical miles.  This very rough estimate is due to secrecy of the US Navy on final position, which was approximately 900 miles from Japan.

They reported that they had six forms of communication when they departed, and that all failed.  That in itself is somewhat suspicious.  One was a cell phone that went overboard soon after departure.  Fair enough.  I didn’t see a list of all the others anywhere yet.  But the most interesting one of all was the EPIRB.  This didn’t actually fail.  TURNS OUT…  It was never used!  They didn’t mention having one in their initial interviews.  But when the Coast Guard got through with them (and perhaps they’re not yet), they said they had one and chose not to deploy it.  An EPIRB is a satellite based rescue beacon that is highly reliable, and would almost certainly have resulted in their position being known.  They said in retrospect that there were two occasions where they should probably have activated it.  The owner contradicted herself somewhat regarding EPIRB use.  On the one hand, she said in interviews that when they were found, they believed they wouldn’t have survived another 24 hours.  But she also told the Coast Guard that in her “experience” (her language), they shouldn’t be deployed unless death is imminent within 24 hours.

Speaking of this 24-hour threshold, it’s quite completely unclear why they felt they had only about 24 hours left to live.  Reports were somewhat conflicted, but according to ABC News, the owner said they could not speak on why they felt they only had 24 hours left.  She stated very specifically:

“I would love to answer that question now. I’m not actually allowed to answer that as long as we are on the vessel,” Appel said before going on to detail how their sailboat was damaged while it was being towed by the Taiwanese vessel.

“The pictures speak a thousand words. It is absolutely phenomenal the amount of damage that they did to the structure of that boat. So that kind of help speaks for itself.”

(They reported that they were first discovered by a Taiwanese fishing vessel, and that the owner swam from her vessel to this one to make a radio distress call.  (HEL-lo: sharks?????).  Sounds like they were taken in tow at some point for some undisclosed amount of time, and they make it sound like this damaged their vessel. )

Their two dogs and they looked surprisingly healthy upon rescue despite all this.

And now, the video clip we promised…

If/as more details come to light, we’ll report and poke around here.

Back to Basics…

It’s the name of a Cable TV show that NY Sailing Center was featured in once, and it’s also an internal mandate at the good old US Navy with the help of some Congressional pressure as well.

After several well publicized collisions in foreign waters, resulting in loss of life, the navy took stock.  The findings were basically this:

• watches (shifts on duty) were often too long;
• systematic evaluation of risk of collision wasn’t being done;
• stealthing (cloaking/hiding) were making it harder for other vessels to see warships

While vessels at war really don’t want to be seen until you’re sunk (or at least until they’ve fired at you), it’s becoming a problem in some heavily trafficked areas.  Most large vessels, recreational included, use electronic tracking (AIS) that broadcasts direction, speed, and vessel info to other vessels nearby.  This is the opposite of radar, where vessels look for others they don’t know about.  If both are used systematically, along with a well placed visual lookout, then there should never be any collisions.

Of course, it’s never as simple as that.  And in the case of warships, they are off the radar – literally, sometimes, as they’re designed to be poor ‘targets’ for it.  That means radar doesn’t easily pick up warships.  They’re built that way.  Warships also use fewer lights, and sometimes don’t use AIS.  When they do, they don’t always provide as much information as other vessels.

Senator John McCain recently took an Admiral to task over all this.  Coincidentally, the warship named after him was involved in a collision.  More on that in the article we link to below.

I’ve never used AIS, but have enough experience with radar both in ‘school’ and in real life to understand the difficulties involved.  Even if there’s a dedicated radar observer, it can be hard to identify things in the dark and be sure about what they’re doing.  Once a warship disables AIS, and visibility is poor, it’s risky business on the high seas.

The same re-focus on basics applies to navigation in the sense of getting from A to B without hitting C (the subtitle of our own coastal navigation text book).  The US Coast Guard routinely cites failure to keep a dead reckoning plot (speed, time, distance calculations) as a factor in groundings of commercial vessels.  All the bells and whistles don’t ring themselves.  That’s why courses on traditional methods of navigation are needed now more than ever, with everyone getting distracted with their gadgets.

Here’s a link to the New York Times article that reported on this recently, which has links to other previous articles that help complete the fuzzy radar picture…

“Navy Returns to Compasses and Pencils to Help Avoid Collisions at Sea”

The J Class is an awesome and venerable racing design.  They go back to at least 1929, with roots extending back to the origin of the America’s Cup. They were the stuff of inspiration for many a noted marine photographer (including Stanley Rosenfeld).

Now, they’re back!  Modern renditions of this traditional design are out shredding up the race course, so to speak.  To my delight, I saw that they are holding a world championship.

The J-Class design, sometimes called a J Boat, should not be confused with the modern designer and manufacturer J/Boats.  This very successful line of racers and racer/cruisers is altogether different.  The very popular J/24 is one of the most important sailing designs ever created due to how extensively it was raced, but it made a piss-poor learning platform.  It is still widely used for that due to the abundant availability of cheap older boats – not because they are well suited to teaching sailing.  There are over 5,500 of them around the world.

There are over 5,000 International Folkboats, too, and we have one – but wouldn’t use it for learn-to-sail instruction, and we wish people would steer clear of J/24’s for that purpose as well.  The Folkboat has very traditional lines that are reminiscent of J-Class yachts.

I was struck once again by the simple, elegant beauty of these large beasts of boats when I saw some pics by Ingrid Abery.  I’ve taken the liberty of pasting one of her copyrighted images here to tempt you to see more on her site.

Click the pic, or go here…

http://www.ingridabery.com/v/photos/81154bgd/C255365004

Also, check out the J-Class Association web site for more history, current events, photo galleries, etc…

http://www.jclassyachts.com/

What’s reefing?

It’s not running a boat onto a coral reef.  Some people do that of course, but that’s just called running a boat onto a coral reef.

“Reefing” is bypassing part of a sail so it’s temporarily smaller.  It’s done when a boat is overpowered, or about to be, by increasing wind.  It can be done with almost any mainsail, which is the one attached behind the mast, and some genoas, which attach to the front wire supporting the mast (headstay or forestay).

Here’s one of our Beneteau First 21 sloops sailing conservatively with a reef in the main, and the small jib (front sail that doesn’t pass the mast).  It was windy and gusty that morning as we prepared to be interviewed and filmed by Fox 5 News.  There’s a link below to the story and video on their site, which shows this reefed mainsail well…

The details differ, but the concept is the same.  Smaller sails equal less power.  Less power means the boat doesn’t lean (heel) to the side as much.  Too much healing to one side makes the boat try to turn the other way (due to buoyancy and deflection and other mumbo-jumbo), and there’s less control.  It’s also somewhat uncomfortable and potentially a little dangerous if people slide downhill, so to speak, when the boat heels too much.  Most people find heeling fun, but it can freak out beginners until their body accepts what their mind keeps telling them: sailboats are meant to heel, and it’s not inherently dangerous.

So, back to reefing.

It’s a powerful tool to reduce heeling, and not only gives the boat more control, but maintains its speed.  Yes, that’s right.  Less power can equal more speed.  Why?  Sailboats are less efficient moving through the water when heeled too much, and the turning effect causes the rudder (steering fin) to be held to one side just to go straight. That’s basically a brake.

Reef the mainsail, and it’s smaller.  Less power.  Less heeling.

But wait – there’s more!  (or is that less?)  The sail is also lower.  When it’s reefed, the bottom is bypassed, so the sail isn’t raised as high on the rig.  Less height equals less leverage.  Even less heeling.

But there’s a third benefit that’s less obvious.  Who can figure this one out?  If you learned to sail with us, you might remember this one.  Post a comment in reply to this if you think you have the answer!

Here’s a link to the Fox 5 News piece, “Closer Than You Think: City Island.”  Check out City Island’s nautical heritage; see us at NY Sailing Center – and take a good look or three at that reefed mainsail!..

http://www.fox5ny.com/news/267780267-story

“Closer Than You Think…”

“Much more like Cape Cod than New York City…”

“a taste of New England in the Northern Bronx.”

That’s the deal with City Island, which Fox 5 covered as part of an ongoing summer series.  They’re featuring places worth seeing in NYC that are, well… closer than you think.

Reporter Christal Young and crew swung by City Island recently to check out its maritime heritage and flavor.  They hit the Nautical Museum and visited us at NY Sailing Center as well.  Of course, we went for a sail.

How close is City Island?  As they say on Fox, Closer Than You Think. Want to drive from UWS or UES?  20-30 minutes if no traffic.  Taking public?  45′ to an hour and 20′ from UWS or UES depending on connections.  We can usually pick you up from Pelham Bay Park, where the 6 train ends (and when we drop you back off, there’s usually a 6 waiting for you to step aboard).  It’s also accessible by Metro North with a short taxi connection or again, us picking you up.  (About 30′ on Metro North from Grand Central to Pelham is typical.)  When we pick you up, you can shave 10-15′ off the travel time, too.

It takes less time to get to us from UES for example than it does to get to New Jersey, where several “NYC” schools actually make you come to sail their boats – including one school/club with “Manhattan” in it’s name!

Even if it takes longer for you to get to us, you get far better sailing.  Why save time to get to the Hudson River and New York Harbor, and basically waste the entire day dodging commercial shipping, ferries, strong currents, narrow passages, and wicked wind shears from tall buildings? Come to City Island, and the entire day on the water is productive and fun. Look out toward Hart Island, Long Island and the Sound, and it’s hard to believe you’re still in NYC.

Click the image above or the link below to see the video on Fox’s site or read the short print story.  See why Christal spoke what we show above in quotes.  Follow the link back to us (New York Sailing Center) if you’re stoked about seeing how we can get you sailing in Long Island Sound this summer or fall!

http://www.fox5ny.com/news/267780267-story

We’re overdue for a good old fashioned product review.  This one’s a Part II after a few solid years of use, and a little abuse.

Lifeproof is a well known and very popular manufacturer of water and shock resistant cases for phones and tablets.  They make sleek, form fitting products that are exactly customized to specific devices, and are generally well thought out to give full functionality so that the device can just stay in the case.

I’ve used their cases for iPhone 4 and 5 series phones.  I was stoked about them at first, until they seemed to wear out prematurely.  I’ll go on record right now as saying that I’m rough on gear.  So, when I had trouble with my iPhone 4 case wearing away and falling apart, I thought it was me, but I put in a warranty claim anyway, and, BAM.  New case for free.  Good customer service!

The only problem is that it kept happening.  First, the 4, and then with the 5.  On our last Instructional Sailing Vacation trip in the Virgin Islands, one of the new cases leaked while snorkeling and almost ruined my phone.  I saved it with fresh water and then electrical contact cleaner, but it malfunctioned for a week and caused me some trouble with calls.  (Yes, I did a proper water integrity test before putting the phone in.  And, yes – I got some really kewl video footage of marine life for you that’s on our Instagram.)

As well as the wearing-away issue and the leak, the buttons that control the volume on/off switch, and the microphone port sealing screw, failed on two different replacement cases.

The case comes with a mic/headset adaptor that seals the phone when using either.  That protects the phone if the connection gets wet, and only the mic/headset is at risk.  However, they never worked properly with any kind of headset.

In my humble opinion, my issues boil down to two things:

1. Lifeproof made an accessory called the Life Jacket for the 4 and 5 series phones.  It’s a bulky foam-rubber case that floats the device and also provides way more shock resistance.  It actually blocks wind noise for phones, too.  Unfortunately, the Life Jacket is very hard to get on and off the case, and wears it down quickly.  Must be done, as there’s no way to charge the phone with the Life Jacket on.  (Never got around to trying some Exacto-knife surgical modifications.)
2. Durability issue with original cases, compounded by poor quality control in manufacturing of replacements.  New cases had halves that didn’t line up well, were warped, broke easily without using the Life Jacket, and in one case arrived with a loose broken part that had nothing to do with packing and shipping.

Sure, the company gladly kept sending replacements, and they made an easy process easier.  (I had to wonder if that reflected growing problems with quality and higher return rates.)  However, when I got fed up and asked more questions about where they were made, and whether I could expect better quality replacements for later models (6 and 7 series phones), I got a meaningless first response and no answer to a follow up.

So, I’m stuck with kewl Life Jacket accessories and broken cases.

There’s growing competition for this style of drop & drink resistant case for mobile devices.  One manufacturer, who has been around for decades making similar products, is Pelican.  They now make an iPhone case for the iPhone 6 and 6plus series phones that looks very similar to the Lifeproof products.  I might have to give them a try despite the lack of Life Jacket and figure out a workaround.

At least one if not several companies make dedicated snorkeling cases for the iPhone as well.  One is the TAT7 iPhone Scuba Case.  It’s a simple, clear case that has three dedicated buttons: home screen, camera app, and shutter.  It’s rated for depths up to 100 feet.  Once the phone is in, all one can do is shoot and stop (and toggle between pic and video, apparently). It has a built in wrist strap, which the Pelican doesn’t appear to.  Looks worthy of consideration.  (Couldn’t find a dedicated web site so that might be a slight red flag, but they are in product reviews and on Amazon.)

Anyway, here are links to Lifeproof and Pelican so you can do your own research and make your own decisions…

http://www.lifeproof.com/

http://www.pelican.com/us/en/consumer/

Just got back from our first Virgin Islands (BVI) trip of this ‘off’ season, and are hitting the ground running with more BVI trips and coastal navigation courses. We did a lot of nav training on this trip…

We had a family of four all training and testing out for their cruising certifications, plus a couple who had been with us numerous times in BVI and in Greece who were there to just chill.  Everyone got what they went for.

It was a windy week.  Breezes were moderate as we started with upper teens the norm, but we wound up with 20-25 on the last two days with some higher gusts the last afternoon/evening with squally weather.  Not much of a problem on a well equipped 41-foot late model Beneteau.

As part of the family’s testing, we spent an extra night in Gorda Sound to get them out in pairs on a Rhodes 19 keel sloop.  I’d forgotten how fun these were despite owning one in the past.  They’re stable but fast and responsive, with a very unusual look and long bench seats.  Short and a little stubby, they’re beamy and have a pronounced flare to the bow.  It’s funny how some boats look like they can’t get out of their own way, but are better than most boats in their class designed since.

The Rhodes, as well as modified J-24’s and numerous dinghies, catamarans and sailboards, can be rented at Bitter End Yacht Club, which is basically lodging with a fleet of boats to play on.  Guests of the facility enjoy unlimited use of these and rental rates are not unaffordable for cruising yachties.

We had excellent snorkeling in several locations.  At Anegada we were treated to some sea turtles, a decent cuda, and a very decent sized shark (did not look like a nurse) that was simply sitting on the bottom breathing the current.  There was also a plethora of fish including some hard to spot species.

Our next trip?  Our inaugural Kid/Parent trip in mid February.  That’s booked.

Next after that?  Working on one to fall in the second half of March or early April.  CONTACT US if you’re interested as your vote for dates could clinch the trip for you.

Want to see more of the trip above?  Navigate to our Instagram page where we’ve photo-doc’d most of it and with more to come!

See more on Instagram

COASTAL NAV: next class starts on Wednesday in Manhattan!

We still have two spots left for our Start Navigating course (Coastal Nav, ASA 105).  This one starts on Wednesday evening, January 18, running for 4 consecutive Wednesday evenings.  Time is 6:30 to about 9:45 and location is on Upper West Side.  For more info, see our Start Navigating page or contact us.

Really, you say?  “That’s not what the book says…  in fact, that’s not what ANY book says.”

True.  Except, of course, for ours.  Yes, we have our own.  Our Director & Dockmaster,’ Captain Stephen Glenn Card, authored a coastal navigation textbook for the Sailing Center a long time ago.  More on that later.

‘Red, Right, Returning’ is a memorization aid for dealing with buoys and beacons in US Coastal Waters.  Basically, it’s a reference to something called the Lateral System, and the idea is that when returning from seaward and entering bays, harbors, etc, we should leave red buoys/beacons on the right side of our vessel (meaning we pass to the left of them).

It’s taught in sailing and boating courses nationwide, and was handed down to us by none other than the United States Coast Guard.  Below, I’ll even provide a link to their PDF about it.  So why I am I challenging it in any way?

Simple.  It’s an unnecessary, misleading oversimplification that often results in boaters running aground, and if you follow it, you’ll eventually run aground too. Here’s why…

• Well-defined channels with rows of green and red markers are uncommon;
• It’s often unclear when you’re ‘returning’ versus ‘leaving.’  Large bodies of water like Long Island Sound are often treated like ‘R,R,R’ channels, and back bay passages – especially with islands – are worse.
• It doesn’t help you when there’s no buoy or beacon for an underwater hazard (common enough in our waters, and routine in much of the world).
• Even when it’s set up as intended, it doesn’t show the safe approach to get to the first buoy or beacon marking your return.  Sometimes those navaids come AFTER the hazard they mark – and only a chart would reveal that!
• The world is broken down into two regions, A and B, and it only works in one (which sets you up to fail in the other).

It’s actually easier to just look at the chart.  (To their credit, the USCG does say you should do that.)  The chart has it all, and if you use it, you should never run aground.  Here’s why…

• Charts show the actual hazards and their risk to you;
• Charts show what, IF ANYTHING, marks those hazards;
• Charts show you ways to get around unmarked hazards;
• When a navaid is missing (it happens), you’ll know it, whereas without the chart, you never would.

So, in conclusion, Everyone advocates having proper charts.  R, R, R offers us nothing that charts don’t.  Charts supply everything.  Def need charts; def don’t need RRR.  It’s worse than useless.  Delete it from your memory and have a safe time boating with a proper chart.

Here’s the link to the USCG pamphlet in PDF on the lateral system of buoyage…

http://www.uscg.mil/d13/docs/usaidstonavigationsystembooklet23dec03.pdf

Now, about that book…

Navigation for Numbskulls, or “How to get from A to B without hitting C,” is our Coastal Navigation text book complete with practice problems and answers.  Captain Card begun this endeavor with nothing more in mind that writing a few supplements to the then current ASA text book on the subject.  Eventually, he toyed around with writing his own and began by writing a chapter here and there during Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays in Vermont, when he had the down time.  One thing led to another, and he got to the point where it was developing critical mass and a decision had to be made about whether to proceed to full fruition.  Yada, yada, yada… a book was born.  It’s available in print and as a PDF from us. Contact us to see an sample excerpt or to purchase.