Guest Rocket Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 not their best effort - quad bikes to the south pole - ummm you would be quite excited if they made 1400km on state highway 1. I am all for a bit of adventure but AC this is plain dumb. Other people then had to risk their lives to look for them and muggins the NZ taxpayer gets a large bill. As squid would (presumably) hold - if you are going to be adventurous don't take the EPIRB cos that is guaranteed to put others at risk. Link to post Share on other sites
Fogg 427 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Well we'll just have to disagree then won't we Rocket and Brucey. I happen to think the world needs people like the Berserk guys to make it a more colourful and interesting place by pushing the envelope. One person's adventure is another person's madness. I bet if Hillary had had a disaster at the last minute instead of conquering Everest you guys would be the first here prattling on about "Bad planning, dum idea, risking lives etc." And the cost? Well in the grand scheme of things I reckon the amount of my annual tax bill that could be attributed to NZ's S&R activities probably amounts to a few dollars and for this specific rescue just a few cents. Which I'm quite happy to pay, actually. If there were thousands of these happening each year and it was getting out of control then maybe it would be different. But it's not. Link to post Share on other sites
Steve Pope 243 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Aileys, have to agree, the navy was there anyway, sea shepherd was there as well. Just watched a totally over the top Target program re life jackets on under 6m fizzys, statistically in the drowning stakes they are way down the list, now if their efforts were towards getting some of the stupid rules that make the running and keeping open school pools so expensive that the schools are closing them as they can't afford the upkeep, I would support them to the hilt, in NZ kids need to be able to swim, many can't!! they want to save lives, start there. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brucey Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 It's a shame when the adventurous spirits get flak for doing something different and interesting. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4711647/Ice-adventurer-defends-doomed-expedition AC. while I am stoked that you have found this adventure "different and interesting" I suspect the missing mens partners, children, parents and siblings arnt as pleased that you have been entertained in this way. Frankly, yes in 1911 getting to the pole by boat, horse, dog ...... all the while dressed in oilskins and/or animal skins was a huge challenge and certainly an adventure if you survived to tell the story. But in this day and age with all that is known about the terain and conditions, the equiptment available , success or failure is far more dependant on preperation and work in research training and just hard graft to ensure adeqate funding and equiptment more than anything else. Yes the world needs "colourful and interesting people" not that there is any shortage, and its not about the money, (although I would rather see it going to CHCH than wasted looking for aparent half baked thrillseekers), but I sure would have been dark if one of our navy boys was lost in that severe storm, as the Viking mates seem to have been. Yup we disagree i guess. Link to post Share on other sites
Fogg 427 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 AC. while I am stoked that you have found this adventure "different and interesting" I suspect the missing mens partners, children, parents and siblings arnt as pleased that you have been entertained in this way. That's a gruesome distortion of the sentiment I expressed and you know it. You need to spend less time watching Campbell live. It's also another fact-free statement. How do you know what their families are thinking? Yes I am sure they are sad at the loss but for all we know they might be saying, "Well, at least they died doing the things they loved rather than commuting to/from an office all day and criticising other adventurers on the internet". For all you know their families might have been 100% supportive - so who are you to self-righteously point out that for the sake of their families, these guys should not have been doing this stuff? That is none of your freaking business. But in this day and age with all that is known about the terain and conditions and the equiptment available , success or failure is far more dependant on preperation, work in research, training and hard graft to ensure adeqate funding than anything else. You're right. There's no adventure left any more. And it's totally different because "preperation, work in research, training and hard graft to ensure adeqate funding" were totally irrelevant and not necessary in the past as they now are. And today it's easy cos reliable weather forecasts, GPS and high-tech clothing means nobody has been hurt or killed doing 'adventures' for decades now...... Did you spot the sarcasm? As for diverting this rescue money to Christchurch.... don't start that argument. Sure the EQ is terrible and C'church needs (and will get) tons of support but the world has to also go on and whilst 200-ish people have died in NZ around 1000 times that number died in the Haiti event - but I haven't seen you calling for funds to be diverted there, that I recall? And finally, the risk to servicemen out on the oceans. It's their choice to be doing that stuff. Again, did you ask them whether they would prefer to be focused on something constructive like a S&R activity (which the services often treat as safe training opportunities i.e. not in a war zone) or sitting in the mess playing cards? The common theme here, Brucey, is that you obviously have very strong opinions which you impose on the rest of the world and anyone who acts differently is a dumbarse idiot in your mind. You are the individual equivalent of a 'nanny-state' i.e. nobody should be doing anything different to what you would do or how you would do it. And if they do, then they get a neck-full of advice or (more usually) heavy criticism from you. Thank God you aren't running the country - we wouldn't be able to get out of bed for fear of Brucey's rules & laws on how to live our lives. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Rocket Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I have no problem with plonkers doing half baked things on their own time. But these guys took an epirb on a half baked adventure that has been done bloody decades ago. Utter plunkers in my book and it is crap that the navy were there anyway - they would have been tucked up somewhere safe! i would rather they were adventurous about how long they can hold their breath in the bath tub! We don't need this crap quad bikes in the Antarctic they barely made it to Scott base for goodness sake and they are repeat offenders- should hit their estate for the diesel bill Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brucey Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 AC you may see i wrote "I suspect the missing mens......" and all other comments were clearly just my opinion, and I certainly didnt advocate the world police intervening, did I? What I intended to suggest that there are unforgiving places where the prep and equiptment required is more than just a Viking Helmet, in case one of ya other mates was thinking of going on an adventure? Sorry if you didnt mean what you said, but you said it? But its ok we can disagree. Link to post Share on other sites
Fogg 427 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 But its ok we can disagree. Indeed. And that's fine. Same goes for Rocket. Link to post Share on other sites
Elenya 33 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 I remeber this chap when he was taking his small boat to antarctica when I was sailing a similar size vessel in the tropics. I admired his spirit and still do. Unfortunately this type of incident does make it harder for those that may wish to follow, but in a more conventional approved by authority fashion. I was a bit surprised he even had an EPIRB onboard given his nature. I saw the vessel in the viaduct prior to departure and had a chat with them. I did have my own thoughts on the state of the stability and the deck cargo security, but it looks like it got there. Given the amount of miles this chap covers, on minimal budget, off his own back and in areas that are not easy, he is probaly a very good seaman. I'm sure he'll pop up again, soon. Link to post Share on other sites
rigger 47 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 and it is crap that the navy were there anyway - they would have been tucked up somewhere safe! I heard the navy was down there patrolling and in particular on the lookout for vessels fishing illegally. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Unless they are fishing for whales, then they ignore them. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 You can't fish for whales. You fish for fish, not mammals. That's why whaling is called whaling and not fishing. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Rocket Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Supposedly happened during the worst antarctic storm in 20 years - so wouldn't have been any fishing going on. IMy quess is they would have been sheltering somewhere (the navy). Gotta say I was disturbed to see the shore party was the intrepid adventurer and an 18 year old kid. Not so clever. Link to post Share on other sites
Grinna 2 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 My quess is they would have been sheltering somewhere (the navy). Where the hell do you think you can shelter in the Southern Ocean???? Behind a wave?? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 These guys are clowns and I'm not sure what they were going to achieve but surely their boat must be reasonably sea worthy and have the appropriate safety gear or how else can they get the documentation to clear customs? and if anyone thought what they planned to do was un reasonable wouldn't they be stopped at customs or before departure by the relevant authorities? I mean I just cant leave for fiji in my race yacht its not that easy. Even if it does sound like a good idea. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Skinner, correct me if i'm wrong but as its not a NZ registered vessel, then customs have very limited powers to restrict them leaving. Your boat on the other hand is NZ registered....and would be far to bloody cold to take to Antarctica Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 that makes sense how they can leave here but what about the people that let it leave its country of origin eg their customs etc? Also another interesting thing that just came to mind is remember when booboos brothers were sailing their proa to new zealand? Wonder what the aussie inspectors and customs thought? Although they did let a kayaker go across the tasman so I guess anthing is acceptable. I just cant imagine some of our quality cat 1 inspectors saying all good ship shape good luck, to some of these adventures. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Probably just thought they were better in someone elses hair Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Skins - NZ is the only country I know of that has such limitations on its citizens leaving, though I'm not sure about France. Most other places you get ready and you go. Link to post Share on other sites
wheels 543 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 And Oz Squid. They have Cat requirements also. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.