Grinna 2 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I see Coastguard is calling for lifejackets to be worn at all times - again - after the collision yesterday. This is bollocks, you can't guard against every eventuality - it is more reasonable to weigh up the risks - which are minimal. How many wear lifejackets in their tenders ? Very few in my observation even though it is against the law. Wouldn't it be a better call to say "don't run into other boats and sink them" rather than "wear your lifejackets at all times in case someone runs inot your boat and sinks it"??? I really don't understand that statement from Coastguard. Link to post Share on other sites
w44vi 17 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I can under stand life jackets being compulsory on open boats under say 6m, but if they are going top make them compulsory were do you draw the limit 15m - 50m next you will need them getting on passenger ferries Link to post Share on other sites
ex Elly 197 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 The skipper of Beserk has made many successful trips to the ice: arctic, north west passage, antarctic peninsula. It was only the last one that went wrong. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 The skipper of Beserk has made many successful trips to the ice: arctic, north west passage, antarctic peninsula. It was only the last one that went wrong. Did he leave a trail of litter and fuel spills on those "successful" trips as well? I'm more concerned of the on shore impact of his glory seeking. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 pew, you really seem to have him convicted of glory seeking, is that a bad thing or part of the nature of these guys. Shackleton, Scott, Amunsdun- big egos and glory was certainly part of it. I dont have a position on whether its good or bad and I certainly wouldn't condemn him for it unless it justified expediency. Id also like to know how much litter, how much fuel and also what his impact on the environment was compared to McMurdo and other crews on the ice before I make any judgment. Scott was a tosser and glory seeker who killed his men because of his arrogance, Amundsen was a glory seeker who achieved his goal through intelligence and good practice, Shackleton was a glory seeker who failed to achieve his goal but in failing, achieved an even higher goal by demonstrating unbelievable leadership. I was also a glory seeker when I first went to the ice (and a bit of a tosser as my Antarctic met partner will attest) so I might be a reasonable judge of what happens down there. My father, who was down there 1956/57/58 was probably a glory seeking tosser as well but I would stand by his right to judge any that go after him. As for the per capita environmental impact, I would imagine it would be a hell of a lot higher with the viking, given his previous history in McMurdo but I stand to be corrected if he brings his sh*t home in a plastic bag and can account for every teaspoon of fuel he takes on the ice and can prove he didn't piss in any permanent ice or exposed rock. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crafty 1 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 pew, you really seem to have him convicted of glory seeking, is that a bad thing or part of the nature of these guys. Shackleton, Scott, Amunsdun- big egos and glory was certainly part of it. I dont have a position on whether its good or bad and I certainly wouldn't condemn him for it unless it justified expediency. Id also like to know how much litter, how much fuel and also what his impact on the environment was compared to McMurdo and other crews on the ice before I make any judgment. Scott was a tosser and glory seeker who killed his men because of his arrogance, Amundsen was a glory seeker who achieved his goal through intelligence and good practice, Shackleton was a glory seeker who failed to achieve his goal but in failing, achieved an even higher goal by demonstrating unbelievable leadership. I was also a glory seeker when I first went to the ice (and a bit of a tosser as my Antarctic met partner will attest) so I might be a reasonable judge of what happens down there. My father, who was down there 1956/57/58 was probably a glory seeking tosser as well but I would stand by his right to judge any that go after him. As for the per capita environmental impact, I would imagine it would be a hell of a lot higher with the viking, given his previous history in McMurdo but I stand to be corrected if he brings his sh*t home in a plastic bag and can account for every teaspoon of fuel he takes on the ice and can prove he didn't piss in any permanent ice or exposed rock. So impact is a problem? Pwederwel, do you have A desiel motor' batteries, oil in you motor, buyor dispose of plastic good.....? Do you know where your rubbish goes 100% of the time. You are judging a Guy one one past mistake, that he may be going to clean up. I hope you have never made a mess before Do you know where your rubbish goes 100% of the time. Your,e judging this guy on one mistake that he may be going to clean up. Link to post Share on other sites
Chewing Gum 17 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=10782520 Link to post Share on other sites
Marshy 30 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 So who was the NZer fixing the anchor? Bit of a weird situation? Link to post Share on other sites
Chewing Gum 17 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Isn't that KMs line of work ? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 So impact is a problem? Pwederwel, do you have A desiel motor' batteries, oil in you motor, buyor dispose of plastic good.....? Do you know where your rubbish goes 100% of the time. You are judging a Guy one one past mistake, that he may be going to clean up. I hope you have never made a mess before Do you know where your rubbish goes 100% of the time. Your,e judging this guy on one mistake that he may be going to clean up. Whatever troll Link to post Share on other sites
Bimini Babe 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Hmm, well I think we can safely assume he's planning to leave litter in the area. Mr Andhoey told Norwegian media that he planned to sail to McMurdo Sound to find out what happened to his three crew who died when the yacht Berserk sank last year. He wanted to leave a wreath and bottles with messages in them. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 A well written post from another forum I agree that it is unfortunate that rules and regulations are increasingly permeating the cruising/adventure world. It would be nice if we were ‘free’ and ‘unfettered’ by such rules and regulations. BUT If you are going to thumb your nose at the governments, and don’t want to be totally hypocritical, you need to be sure not to call on those same governments for help. Not fire off an emergency beacon when your vessel gets into trouble, not require an air-evac when your vessel sinks, not require medical attention for frostbite, not require refueling (in Cambridge bay and at the pole if they had made it) at the end of a long government supported and subsidized supply chain, not use government provided GPS services and government provided weather services and charts, not leaving behind trash that antarctic stations have to clean up. It is hypocritical to claim to be a ‘free Viking’, but then also take full advantage of all the government provided services and safety net. Jarle’s attitude and episodes have been hypocritical, claiming ‘freedom from government’ while taking full advantage of the services provided by those same governments. And the plain practical fact is that thumbing your nose at and publicly ignoring those rules will just make things worse for all of us. The regulatory response to that will always be even tighter rules with less flexibility. The best practical approach is to meet the rules as best as possible and show good faith and intentions to the administrators and then generally the rules and enforcement gradually become looser and more flexible. Jarle’s attitude and episodes have and will make things worse for the rest of us who want to cruise and adventure. That’s all true if he was alone. As expedition leader has further responsibilities to his crew. They are depending on his judgment – to pick a safe anchorage (which he did not do last year) – to make sure they do not end up with criminal records because of his conduct (which he has not done) – to make sure the expedition has the proper resources and backups (which he has not done). As expedition leader he is no longer alone with his choices but has serious responsibilities. He wants to say the crew signed on knowing his ‘viking approach’, but that’s BS. They are young and trusting and depending on his experience and judgment and he has let them down. He has led them to death and criminal records. The sad thing is that Jarle could have accomplished these expeditions without leaving behind the ill will and negative consequences. Many other cruising sailors and adventurers have. Just for example, we have good friends who just spent two winters (on a 30' wooden boat) in South Georgia. They have no money. But they worked with the officials to figure out how best to do it and made a fabulous adventure (more than anything Jarle has accomplished), and they left good friends and good will behind them. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 So who was the NZer fixing the anchor? Bit of a weird situation? It does indeed seem weird. The anchor on the boat when I last saw it, if busted, wasn't worth repairing as buying a new one would be heaps cheaper and safer. No it wasn't me. I have twice been offered a crewing position on boats heading way down there. Both times declined as the boats had issues I wasn't happy about. In one case a large glass hatch on the deck, one prone to copping large waves, had 2 huge cracks right thru it. The Skipper didn't see that as a concern so it left me wondering what else he wasn't concerned about. The other boat had a skipper I though was a peedyfile and bugger being stuck way down there with a freak like that. Both were European boats and skippers. Good post P. Check out this dude. http://www.heard-island-solo.com Another loopy is search of some adventure/ball shrinking place to visit. Similar to the Norwegian fruit-loops but in a way that won't piss lots of people off unnecessarily. I say 'loopy' purely as feck it's way cold down there and as much as I'd love to visit, it's still frecking freezing and I can think of many other ways to push boundaries but in warm climates. I do wish both outfits all the best but I still would have prefered the fruit-loops to have been better prepared and less moronic. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crafty 1 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Pwedrwell, Very mature calling someone a troll when you don,t agree with their and others OPINIONS. I am somewhat of a bulshitter myself, however i do enjoy an expert. Do carry on. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 He's a sex god?? http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6375797 ... lar-waters Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Rocket Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 What is with the question mark? Of course he is - all down to smell apparently And the NZer taken down there in error is apparently a 150kg tattooed early settler. He wasn't fixing the anchor - he hid in the anchor well. I guess it saves all that messy harpooning... Link to post Share on other sites
Fogg 427 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I believe there is way more to this story than we are being told (by all sides). As a result, I'm not jumping on the "he is a nutter let's lock him up" bandwagon until I get the chance to hear him tell his side of the story and the truth leaks out of the various authorities. He is obviously a colourful character and I can believe he is driven by a passion to finish last year's abandoned challenge. With a few tweaks to the story so far, this guy would be hailed "a herioic adventurer" rather than the "most wanted skipper in the southern hemisphere". We are a fickle bunch aren't we....? He is also obviously capable of rational thought, for example: "Andhoey told NRK the crew had chosen to sail without an emergency beacon on board, as they did not want to put others' lives at risk in the event of an accident." So I'm holding judgement until I hear more... http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6329044/NZer-unplanned-crew-member-on-rogue-boat I may be proved wrong but right now I stand by my original view. He's not everyone's cup of tea and has a style and a passion to do stuff that not many of us normal/boring people would ever consider. But he adds colour to the world and I still don't feel the need to label him the most hated man afloat quite yet. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crafty 1 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Don't be silly AC . According to Pwederell he is going to pollute the whole South pole, kill hs crew and others, compromise world travel, and cost more than the NZ welfare system to rescue All this from a 40' boat! At worst all this indivdual will do is create less pollution than a day's burning of fossil fuels by a Starlifter, kill less people than the Yanks CO2 emmisions kill on the planet in 5 minutes, and cost less to rescue than the poorly skilled, advised, and equiped sailors that leave our shores on a regular basis. (IE that tri that left Nelson for Aussie despite being advised he would be mad to take that trip... to name but one.) And if he does stuff up then he should feel the full force of every law!... and the law makers should not change the law for one persons mistake and ruin it for the rest. Just deal to the person concerned. Link to post Share on other sites
Grinna 2 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I don't know if you've noticed Crafty, but that's not how the politicians and law makers tend to work. You're kinda expecting them to apply logic and going from past experience that's probably not actually going to happen. I don't like restrictions placed on people and that means that I'm conflicted about this. Part of me is saying "Meh, if this guy wants to risk his life again to sail to Antarctica on some mission or other that really is only important to him, then good on him." But if it results in loss of life and/or more crap spread around down there then I'm against it because its grist for the beaureucrats mill. It just provides an excuse for more legislation adn more red tape and more hoops for everyone else to jump through. I'm sitting on the fence on this one. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crafty 1 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I don't know if you've noticed Crafty, but that's not how the politicians and law makers tend to work. You're kinda expecting them to apply logic and going from past experience that's probably not actually going to happen. I don't like restrictions placed on people and that means that I'm conflicted about this. Part of me is saying "Meh, if this guy wants to risk his life again to sail to Antarctica on some mission or other that really is only important to him, then good on him." But if it results in loss of life and/or more crap spread around down there then I'm against it because its grist for the beaureucrats mill. It just provides an excuse for more legislation adn more red tape and more hoops for everyone else to jump through. I'm sitting on the fence on this one. Agree and well said, But i feel some one has to ballance Pwederell's arguement so we can judge correctly. (not saying i am right) and defend our right to some freedom on the ocean. After all, the over zealous buaurecrats will make stupid rules anyway just to justify their jobs and pay packets. I say punish the man not the many! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.