Jump to content

Viking Detained

wheels

By wheels,
in MarineTalk

Recommended Posts

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Oops - that was me, I hit edit instead of quote , sorry. Not sure how to ressurect it.

 

 

Anyway, point is, even if he is a tosser, has he broken any laws. If being a tosser could get you arrested there's a whole lot of us could be in trouble.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Oops - that was me, I hit edit instead of quote , sorry. Not sure how to ressurect it.

 

 

Anyway, point is, even if he is a tosser, has he broken any laws. If being a tosser could get you arrested there's a whole lot of us could be in trouble.

Regardless of laws he has broken (and there are many covered in the Antarctic Treaty) the big questions that should be asked by all here are "what affects are his irresponsible actions having on the future freedom of true adventurers?" and "what responsibility are we as taxpayers prepared to accept to fund his lifestyle?"

As to the "handing over command" legitimacy- You can either be a skipper or an expedition leader in these sort of things. Abandoning your command to boodoggle off to the South Pole is not my idea of temporarily handing over command.

If Shackleton had acted the same way the viking tosser did he would have not had a 100% survival rate. The difference between a hero and a glory seeking w^&#$@r.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wheels

wheels 543

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Like I said above, NZ may not have asked for his dentention at all. That may well be just something he has suggested to the Media. We don't know, so take such a comment with a grain of salt. But as far as legality goes, you can't just leave a country or enter a country without proper "paperwork". Even worse, you can not make landfall just anywhere without the local authorities knowing. Viking may not be smuggling, but that is not to say others do not try and if you have a law for one, it is for all. You can't just break the Law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
If you are referring to picking up the rescue bill, you cant legislate against stupidity nor can you be selective about whom you decide to rescue if its in your capability to do so. Otherwise the moralisers would rescue no one deemed stupid or unworthy etc. Lets deal in facts, there was no rescue ( that I know of) so no cost to us.

Somebody else said it better than me

 

"According to NZ Customs, as reported by APNZ and the Norwegian NTB, this year's trip by Andhøy cost the New Zealand tax payers about 9000 New Zealand Dollars just for the search for the Nilaya, mostly in fuel for the P-3 Orion.

 

That comes on top of the cost borne by New Zealand and Sea Shepherd for the search for Berserk last year, ATV fuel spill clean-up, and the cost of Antarctic New Zealand sending Andhøy and Massie's gear back to New Zealand this year. If the Nilaya crew didn't collect their old fuel drums and food this year, that may have to be sent back by Antarctic New Zealand too. One presumes Andhøy will be able to pay these costs."

 

"So let me get this straight: They went late in the season - again - and don't have deicing equipment. They were gambling on finding depots which they before the trip said they weren't sure would be found? They lack fuel and food, but have an extra crew member, and didn't collect their fuel and food from Scott Base as they could have. And now they're going to try their luck with Argentina and Chile, lacking travel documents, with a vessel with an unclear flag state, and in violation of international treaties? Could they end up getting arrested by the Chilean armada?"

 

No mention in their many press dispatches if they managed to get fuel from the Chileans or Argentinians but they did announce they were out of fuel and needed help repairing their boom. Maybe the Chileans are just presenting them with the invoice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Apparently they're trying to sort out Busby Noble's status as well the boat's. It seems the viking tosser may have lied about the boat's name when contacted by the armada so they may have some issues there until documentation can be provided. AFAIK the vessel is being detained, not the crew.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fogg

Fogg 427

Posted
Posted

I am clearly a tosser by this definition then. A repeat offender. And most times I anchor in a bay I see other tossers around me.

 

Personally, I call it going ashore.

 

But apparently in Antartica "going ashore" becomes "abandoning your command".

 

Question: If anyone here went ashore for a few hours (or even a few days) and left 2-3 competent adults aboard and when you came back the boat had mysteriously disappeared - with the assumption of all lives lost - would you consider that "abandoning your command". Would you expect to be in trouble and blamed for their loss, in the absence of any info or evidence?

 

It's not the Royal Navy you know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wheels

wheels 543

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Busby Noble is being deported and has been placed or is being placed on the next flight out for NZ. Not sure if they have a direct flight or not. Guess who picks up the tab for that too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
and youre probably right that he is a serial masturbator.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Knot for long if he's flopping it out in Antarctica. The saying may change from being as cold as a Brass Monkey to being as cold as a Blue Balled Wannabe Viking :lol: :lol:

 

 

He's pissed off to many Govts for one knot to have a go. It may turn out he walks away with no penalty but then he may knot. It all seems a tad cloudy as to what the Govts want to go him for and how/where that is executed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
I am clearly a tosser by this definition then. A repeat offender. And most times I anchor in a bay I see other tossers around me.

 

Personally, I call it going ashore.

 

But apparently in Antartica "going ashore" becomes "abandoning your command".

 

Question: If anyone here went ashore for a few hours (or even a few days) and left 2-3 competent adults aboard and when you came back the boat had mysteriously disappeared - with the assumption of all lives lost - would you consider that "abandoning your command". Would you expect to be in trouble and blamed for their loss, in the absence of any info or evidence?

 

It's not the Royal Navy you know.

There's a huge difference in what you suggest and an expedition, which is what his first trip was (and possibly his second). In his first trip his aim was to burn up some hydrocarbons, fanging off to the pole on an ATV, it was not the sail down there that was the point of the trip. By appointing himself skipper as well as expedition leader he diluted the command, experience and responsibility.

He was skipper of the boat, therefore he decided where and when the expedition would depart. He chose an area that has no all weather anchorages (even without the ice issues in these anchorages), he chose to leave too late in the season and he chose to leave ill prepared in not having a competent skipper for the command if he or they encountered troubles. Therefore he is culpable for the deaths of those left on the boat because he abandoned his command to pursue the trip to the pole. To suggest any relationship to nipping ashore for a beer or a few days off the boat in a nice safe anchorage is facile.

Any idea why he chose McMurdo Sound??? Because the USAP had recently completed a nice smooth land traverse all the way to the South Pole. Amundsen followed a completely different route so there was no chance of re-enactment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...