Raw Faith

[jroe650]

I knew I'd be stirring the paint pot here... Damn, no paint.

There are no hatches or doors in the bulkheads, only oval openings for access between compartments. Most are located below the waterline.

Dan, if you read my post carefully, I never made a claim about the safety of the ship. That's the responsibility of those who sail on her. I'm not a designer, I don't know how big is big enough, so I wanted to give an accurate report of the interior and some construction details that have been lacking here.

Almost every large piece of wood (greater than 2x2) is laminated from smaller pieces, most are less than 1" thick and less than 10' long. I was unable to count the pieces in a lamination, or spacing of joints, but there are no scarphs to be found on the boat. Butts seem to be little more than 4' apart.

Frames are spaced about every two feet.

I didn't see the full steering setup. I did see two 3/8" lines running from the top of the rudder to to 3" blocks outboard at the transom, and then into the hull. In talking with the crew, they have been working on sail balance to minimize the helm effort.I'm uncertain if the lines are run to a drum on the wheel or are backups. I don't believe that there is sufficient space for a worm and quadrant in the wheelhouse.

The main anchor is 4x4x3/8" square steel stock, with flukes welded on and filled with concrete. It's about 6' high and 600#. The crew use two 8" sheet winches to haul the rode in. I suspect it's a 1" towing line or similar construction.

I did notice that the belaying pins are set into 1x4 boards in the handrails, which are then nailed/bolted to the hull.

The only opinion I'll toss out is that much of the hardware was sized for a 30' boat, not a galleon. Blocks, pins, steel plates all seem to be about 1/4 of the size seen on comparably built ships.

And nary a wheeled chair. Only the 30x20' center deck could be accessed, as the fore and after decks are raised about 3' The walkway on the dock and the boarding ramp are far from ADA compliant. Access to the cabin is via a steep ladder with alternating stairs and no handrails.

Hey, Robert Triggs- Small world. Christina and the boys are doing well, even if our situation has changed a bit. Bill needs to get out here for a few weeks in the summer, and get some salt in his underwear... Come find her and I if you ever make it over to the right coast. I can't believe how dumb I was to stay in Rochester for so long.

[Boston]

J Roe
you are a tower of neutrality
credit to an honest soul
please keep us informed
B

[BETTY-B]

jroe658,

You didnt have to. We all understand it loud and clear. "Things are good to go! Everyone celebrate the magnificent, child wheel chair accessible vessel built in the Loads own vision!" Beautiful, jroe650! I could not have said it any better myself.

DAN

[jroe650]

Yea, yea, I'm like little Switzerland here... You want some chocolate?

I'm looking at this a little differently- It's a big world, and I'm inclined to let people do what they want in their personal lives. Some are more risk tolerant, some are risk ignorant. I can't change either one.

I do see this ship as a really interesting example of how sometimes we want to leave a mark, and to complete one huge thing. (Can I admit that I liked the movie The Mosquito Coast??) I don't know if she'll end with a glug or a quiet sigh in the dunegrass, but RF is here, and her jarring appearance seems to be a good catalyst to discuss how and why boats work, and what will eventually happen to all of them.

Yes, the wanton use of thousands of board feet of wood is important. Risking the safety of others, the balance of stubbornness and vision, how we choose to interact with the rest of the boating world... Is RF just a hopped up, supermodulated magnification of how we live and sail?

[BETTY-B]

It's like a really drawn out murder/suicide. In front of everyone. While sucking koolaid down by the barrel full.

[Nicholas Carey]

Originally Posted by jroe650

There are no hatches or doors in the bulkheads, only oval openings for access between compartments. Most are located below the waterline.

So, not even water-resistant, much less water-tight compartments.

Originally Posted by jroe650

I didn't see the full steering setup. I did see two 3/8" lines running from the top of the rudder to to 3" blocks outboard at the transom, and then into the hull.

The other RF thread describes the steering gear a 3/8-1/2 rope. From the picture, it's laid line, not double braid or an exotic.

New England ropes specs out tensile strength for 1/2 rope (let's be generous) at 3800 pounds (Spun Classic) to 7500 pounds (laid polyester) to 9500 pounds (Stay-Set X).

For 3/8s rope, tensile strength seems to run in the 2500-5500 pound range.

New England Rope goes on to say, in declining to spec out a safe working load

SWL is a guideline for the use of a rope in good condition for non-critical applications and should be reduced where life, limb, or valuable property is involved, or in cases of exceptional service such as shock loading, sustained loading, severe vibration, etc. The Cordage Institute specifies that the SWL of a rope shall be determined by dividing the Minimum Tensile Strength of the rope by a safety factor. The safety factor ranges from 5 to 12 for non-critical uses and is typically set at 15 for life lines.

So...steering gear is a pretty critical item, but lets be generous and limit the safety factor to 10. That gives us an optimistic SWL of, at best, less than 1000 pounds. Don't forget the knot (sheep's shank?) thats apparent in the photo on the other thread -- that should be good for at least a 25% reduction in SWL.



That's all OK, because the steering lines won't get a chance to fail -- long before that, the pot metal pulleys will blow out or the lags attaching them to the transom will rip out and put paid to the notion of steerage.

[Boston]

please add any insight you folks may have to the thread
Acids and base's

http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/show...ht=acids+bases

it concerns the combination of white oak and concrete in a marine environment

[Steve Paskey]

Originally Posted by jroe650

I'm looking at this a little differently- It's a big world, and I'm inclined to let people do what they want in their personal lives. Some are more risk tolerant, some are risk ignorant. I can't change either one.... Yes, the wanton use of thousands of board feet of wood is important. Risking the safety of others, the balance of stubbornness and vision, how we choose to interact with the rest of the boating world... Is RF just a hopped up, supermodulated magnification of how we live and sail?

No, not at all. I'm surprised that you even suggest it. Most people conduct themselves within the bounds of reason most of the time, at least with regard to any danger to others. There are a few areas where risky behavior is common -- using cell phones while driving, for instance -- but nothing like this.

This isn't about changing or protecting the "captain." It's about protecting the lives of others, especially the well-intentioned but naive kids who are "sailing" with him. And it's not just his "personal life" ... it's not like all this is happening in his own back yard. It's happening on public waterways. When the thing becomes disabled again -- not if, but when -- it will cost the public tens of thousands, at a minimum, and the hulk may well become a hazard to navigation.
.

[P.L.Lenihan]

I suppose I'll never understand some folks. And that is perfectly alright. I'm not meant to understand ALL folks.

This Raw Faith adventure is what fills in all the spare time we have as a leisure society. It gives us something to chat about around the table,water cooler etc...it allows us to speculate,illuminate and pontificate amongst ourselves like the silly willy social creatures we are.

Oh yes, we fret over the lives of strangers who may come to be injured or killed if one of our worst case scenarios comes to be. We bemoan the costs any speculated rescue will cost"us" or the inconvenience occassioned on commercial interests, should yet another scenario play out, because of a hazard to navigation. Heaven forbid should we have to become better boaters just to properly avoid the new hazard while we are out there recreating ourselves with our toys.

I say, vive et laissez vive! If the captain of Raw Faith doesn't stand up to our standards, don't sail with him. If the boat doesn't meet our standards, don't get on it. If other people are compelled to sail on her,let them be. It's none of our business.

And should the worst of the worstest scenarios plays out; the boat sinks,becomes a hazard to navigation,lives are lost etc,etc,etc.... don't worry! This will just help us to continue filling up all that spare time we have chatting about new issues concerning the Coast Guard and that new hazard to navigation, the juicy lawsuits from agrieved families to keep the court hounds engaged and who the hell knows,maybe another Hollywood movie, a book deal or....a reality show! These sorts of programs are popular,are they not, down south of me? One thing is certain, there will be money to be made(and possibly lost).

Thanks to one mans' single-minded bit of creativity,"we" will continue to be entertained, as only we know how, for a fair stretch of time. I'd thank him in person, if I could, for keeping a small part of life from becoming too predictable, too sanitized and too safe. That's just too boring for words. We are "voyeurs par excellence" and thrive on this shit.......we just don't realize or admit it so easily.



O.K. Does this count as a "rant"? Sorta my first time and I kinda feel good writing what I just did despite not having the slightest idea why!


I best be getting back to amateur boatbuilding fun and other busy stuff....


Cheers!



Peter

[Paul Pless]

Originally Posted by P.L.Lenihan

O.K. Does this count as a "rant"? Sorta my first time and I kinda feel good writing what I just did despite not having the slightest idea why!

Eh?

linky

[James McMullen]

You bring up a good point, Peter. If boats as ill-concieved as Raw Faith and your own, local Steel Faith--or whatever it's called-- didn't exist as cautionary tales, life would be more boring. I hope that no innocents are harmed in the future voyages of either of these gems, but a good, entertaining, fiery wreck once in a while is the only thing that makes watching NASCAR worth watching too.

[BarnacleGrim]

Originally Posted by jroe650

Well, I was helping out at SailMaine Saturday, and spent some time aboard RF, and was treated to a belowdecks tour by the crew.

No pictures? I thought there would be pictures.

[StevenBauer]

This was posted on another thread:

"Have no fear for naive young sailors. No large strange wooden boats will be challenging the North Atlantic at least until good weather returns. The nature of the way I came by this information prevents me from being more specific."


Steven

[Steve Paskey]

Originally Posted by P.L.Lenihan

I say, vive et laissez vive! If the captain of Raw Faith doesn't stand up to our standards, don't sail with him. If the boat doesn't meet our standards, don't get on it. If other people are compelled to sail on her,let them be. It's none of our business.

... O.K. Does this count as a "rant"?

Yes, it does, and I'd like to disagree. Imagine this: Raw Faith sails for Brazil and is sunk in rough weather. Several of the young crew members are lost. The parents of these kids hire a lawyer and an investigator, and they discover that the thing was a maritime disaster waiting to happen.

Then imagine that those grieving parents are sitting in your living room. In response to their questions, you acknowledge that many people knew the boat was unseaworthy and dangerous. In reply, they ask you why no one did anything. Could you really look them in the eye and say: "I'm sorry for your loss, but it was none of our business"?

I couldn't do that. In my opinion, it is our business. But here's the thing: we should do more than just talk about it here. For starters, someone should contact the Portland paper ...

[StevenBauer]

Originally Posted by Steve Paskey

For starters, someone should contact the Portland paper ...

Done. I emailed the Portland Press Herald Blogger that had the blog entry about RF and expressed my dismay at the blog entry and suggested they check in here to see what the boating community thought about the whole thing.


Steven

[Steve Paskey]

Originally Posted by StevenBauer

Done. I emailed the Portland Press Herald Blogger that had the blog entry about RF and expressed my dismay at the blog entry and suggested they check in here to see what the boating community thought about the whole thing.


Steven

Fantastic, Steven. Thank you.

[pcford]

Originally Posted by StevenBauer

Done. I emailed the Portland Press Herald Blogger that had the blog entry about RF and expressed my dismay at the blog entry and suggested they check in here to see what the boating community thought about the whole thing.


Steven

This forum speaks for the boating community? I hope not.

[StevenBauer]

Originally Posted by pcford

This forum speaks for the boating community? I hope not.

Should I have directed them to the Sailing Anarchy thread?

Is there a thread on Boatdesign.net? Where would you send a reporter for info about the Raw Faith project, Pat?

Steven

[P.L.Lenihan]

Originally Posted by Steve Paskey

In response to their questions, you acknowledge that many people knew the boat was unseaworthy and dangerous. In reply, they ask you why no one did anything. Could you really look them in the eye and say: "I'm sorry for your loss, but it was none of our business"?
...

Thank you Steve for your reply and I'm happy to disagree with you.

I could certainly look them straight in the face and query them as to where were they when their late but so precious offspring decided to embark on such a vessel.Did their child not mention it to them? Were the parents no more curious than that about this wooden sailing vessel before their child left? I refuse to be accountable for the dis-functions,short comings and plain failures of any family other than my own. For you see, it really is none of my business how other family structures function. Sadly, in the example you offer, this particular family had some un-tidy business going on thus setting the stage for the scenario which played itself out.

However, not to appear as a heartless beast, I would certainly feel bad for them in pretty much the same way I felt bad for Bob Gainey when his daughter was swept away off the Picton Castle. A terrible loss,no doubt.


Cheers!


Peter

[Nicholas Carey]

Originally Posted by StevenBauer

Should I have directed them to the Sailing Anarchy thread?

Has anybody put something up on SA about Raw Faith...that should be fun

[BarnacleGrim]

McKay may be a pathological liar, but the state of Raw Faith speaks for itself. I wouldn't set foot on its deck without a 6-hour suit, an EPIRB and a life raft. If you get injured on Raw Faith it's clearly self-inflicted. If you get killed I don't see how it's a civil case, it should be a criminal case against McKay.

[KMacDonald]

Originally Posted by Bill R

Within the last couple weeks, someone had asked how she (it?) was doing.

Pics today from Rockland Harbor:

Looks like a leading contender for next years MASCF "Best in Show"

[Mike Vogdes]

If 6' seas intimidated this Captain and crew just imagine what 15' seas would be like for them. I get the impression there's few or no "experienced" sailing ship crewmen aboard, making this unseaworthy ship destined for trouble. Good move alerting the paper of differing point of views...

[Harbormaster]

The problem isn't as simple as live and let live or a bunch of guys sitting around and criticizing a man with a poorly formed dream gone bad.

If the USCG sits around and does next to nothing - the hands off a private vessel philosophy - then who takes the heat if something happens to the RF? Amateur boatbuilders will. Inevitably there will be new rules handed down as a reaction to the failings of the RF. All designs will have to be drawn by a licensed naval architect, or all wooden boatbuilders will need to be licensed or all plans will have to be approved by a bureaucrat in Washington.

It is best for all of us if the RF is prevented from leaving, any accident will have repercussions.

[peter radclyffe]

i realise this can be construed as incitement to save lives
but perhaps a group of well meaning folks could kidnap the crew , take them to the pub &
CHECKING ALL IS SAFE NEARBY
anchor it clear of danger
set the boat on fire for november the fifth,
other than take the boat ashore as a lesson in how not to build a boat, its hard to see what can be done

[P.L.Lenihan]

Originally Posted by Harbormaster

who takes the heat if something happens to the RF? Amateur boatbuilders will. Inevitably there will be new rules handed down as a reaction to the failings of the RF. All designs will have to be drawn by a licensed naval architect, or all wooden boatbuilders will need to be licensed or all plans will have to be approved by a bureaucrat in Washington.

It is best for all of us if the RF is prevented from leaving, any accident will have repercussions.

Harbormaster,
That first part is purely a bit of exciting speculation.Amateur boatbuilders are such a small group that it is difficult to imagine the US government blowing wads of cash to pass a ton of nitt-picking regulations....would they?.....no they couldn't ...could they?... Surely the fair citizens of your country are too smart to let that happen to them,no?

It all boils down to personal accountability. It is difficult for me to imagine in this day and age that anyone walking up to this boat will not right away see sum tings wong. The boat is tied up in a harbour, right near all sorts of other boats to compare with and the very quays any visitor must walk along to get to the boat are probably in better shape/condition than the boat.And there is the Internet

It is very unflattering toward your countrymen to suggest there may be folks so...aaa...er....ignorant as to not recognize the folly of this boat. There simply is no other excuse a person could invoke to explain or justify venturing out on this boat other than dum-assed ignorant. Thrill seekers on the other hand are excused as most have a rather keen grasp of the risks and what is at stake.

And, should I over-estimate the relative brilliance of the fine folks to the south of me, then roll the bones and let the big wheel of life carry around for another turn.



Cheers!


Peter

[P.L.Lenihan]

Originally Posted by Paul Pless

Eh?

linky

Ah Paul,trying to speak like a Canadian I see ......I never thought I'd witness the day when someone in Hell would even attempt it!

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding exactly what a rant is in the lingo of the internet. My take on it is simply a rambling raving lunatic collection of words assembled in such a way so as to suggest a differing of opinion..... The linky you provided is more a collection of pictures,with captions, followed by robust outbursts of humour,opinion and advice.


Or so that is how I see these two threads.Could just be a Canadian thing,eh?

Cheers!


Peter

[BarnacleGrim]

Originally Posted by P.L.Lenihan

Harbormaster,
That first part is purely a bit of exciting speculation.Amateur boatbuilders are such a small group that it is difficult to imagine the US government blowing wads of cash to pass a ton of nitt-picking regulations....would they?.....no they couldn't ...could they?... Surely the fair citizens of your country are too smart to let that happen to them,no?

In Europe we have those regulations, but the lawmakers were nice enough to exempt us amateurs from them. And what about compulsory boat registration in the US? It could be a slippery slope.

[P.L.Lenihan]

A slippin' and a sliddin' they'll go then, down that slippery slope, toward the nanny state Unless of course the people really put up a big stink about it...I guess.

But I shouldn't talk, being from Canada ......



Cheers!


Peter

P.S. Any work on the bowshed?

[Brian Palmer]

Originally Posted by P.L.Lenihan

Harbormaster,
That first part is purely a bit of exciting speculation.Amateur boatbuilders are such a small group that it is difficult to imagine the US government blowing wads of cash to pass a ton of nitt-picking regulations....would they?.....no they couldn't ...could they?... Surely the fair citizens of your country are too smart to let that happen to them,no?

****

And, should I over-estimate the relative brilliance of the fine folks to the south of me, then roll the bones and let the big wheel of life carry around for another turn.



Cheers!


Peter

Peter,

This nearly came to pass in the 1970s (?) when the USCG attempted to apply the same stability and flotation requirements to all boats. These requirements would have pretty much killed all traditional small watercraft, including small sailboats, rowboats, and canoes and kayaks. It was successfully fought by the likes of John Gardner and the folks at Mystic Seaport.

Perhaps others older than me (I was just a teenager at the time) can add some details.

Brian

[Steve Paskey]

Originally Posted by P.L.Lenihan

Thank you Steve for your reply and I'm happy to disagree with you.

I could respond, but I think we should just agree to disagree. I only wish disagreements down in the bilge were half as respectful. (If 30 tons of concrete in the bilge works for Raw Faith, perhaps we should try it here?)

Cheers,
Stephen

[sailboy3]

heres a video of Raw Faith sailing (luffing would be more descriptive) taken from the Isaac H Evans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICqszHEW2_s

[rbgarr]

PL,

I am concerned for some young person who takes a flyer and gets themselves to Rockland or Portland to join up on RF based on what they see and read on the RF website. They get here, having spent their last dime, and are welcomed aboard (which is nice in itself).

But they don't know about the relative safety of the boat and what they may be getting into. The owner is responsible in many ways and they are placing a significant amount of trust in his judgment.

I believe it's misplaced, that the owner knows a good bit about that by now and isn't telling potential crew about the risks.

There's a book called 'Albatross' written by the ex-wife of a very good friend. She's an experienced sailor and took a job on a delivery of a 58 foot ketch from Maine to the Caribbean at about this time of year. The captain took on two additional crew who had little experience. During a storm, the captain lost his nerve, got drunk and totally failed in his responsibilities. The boat sank after being rolled and the most inexperienced woman got flayed by broken standing rigging before she was hauled into the life raft. Her wounds became infected and she died. The other inexperienced crew became delirious from drinking seawater surrepticiously and swam off, thinking he was close to shore, never to return. The captain curled up in a ball and my friend's ex-wife was instrumental in getting them rescued. This all happened in four days time after the capsize.

No one deserves being drawn into an experience like that.

[StevenBauer]

The RF website has a copy of the Hold Harmless Agreement that all volunteer crew must sign: http://sites.google.com/site/rawfait...less-agreement

It also mentions that being able to swim is a plus.


Steven

[S/V Laura Ellen]

Originally Posted by StevenBauer

The RF website has a copy of the Hold Harmless Agreement that all volunteer crew must sign: http://sites.google.com/site/rawfait...less-agreement

It also mentions that being able to swim is a plus.


Steven

My understanding of these agreements is that they wont protect you if there is some degree of negligence involved. Remember, I'm not a lawyer, so I may be mistaken, but I was told this by my insurance company when I was teaching SCUBA.

[Boston]

I have looked at the web site and I dont see a way to send a letter of concern for the well-being of unsuspecting volunteers. Having followed the thread for a while now I wonder if any who understand the failed nature of this adventure are not in some way obligated to communicate that understanding directly to this owner.
He may not listen ( obviously ) buts isn't it kinda a responsibility of one person to say something to another person when that person is about to walk backwards off the edge of the world ( so to speak )
and take a few others with him

is there a way to write a letter of concern to this guy
anyone ?

my two cents is a link should be posted with each post giving readers an opportunity to express there opinions directly to the owner of this vessel

[P.L.Lenihan]

[quote=rbgarr;2378169]
They get here, having spent their last dime, and are welcomed aboard (which is nice in itself).
/quote]

I suspect, David, the young person who comes across the RF web site will be considerably more net savvy than I(most kids today are) and a bit of simple tooling around the net will drag up lots of stuff,even this discussion.

But that is besides the point I wish to make. Your scenario quoted above will be this kids ace-inna-hole. since the Raw Faith web site implies or suggests that folks wishing to join the boat must pay their own way,or something to that effect,no? I doubt the owner is interested in providing shelter for the destitute or broke.

I too have an anecdote to share; about 11 years ago, I was invited to be part of a delivery crew on board a custom 55' S&S design built out of Aluminium at Palmer Boat Works. I did a stretch along the St.Lawrence river from Montreal and later joined the boat in Halifax after getting the required time off work.This was at the end of October exactly during the time when hurricane Mitch was messing with Florida.The other member of the delivery crew(we were 4 souls aboard,the owner,his first mate,and two crew,myself and another) and myself had just caught the local news whiched mentioned Mitch had jumped Florida and was now headed into the Gulf of Mexico and that it had spawned a sub- tropical storm which was now heading up the Eastern seaboard.

Seeing this on the news, the two of us were rather convinced the"captain" won't be leaving any time soon. How wrong we were! The following day, at 05:00, he turns on the lights,begins rustling up breakfast and gets us all up.His private weather subscription service had just given him a 6 day window to get down and across the Gulf Stream and it was a go. The two of us who had seen the news the previous eveing talked about Mitch and the sub-tropical storm headed North. This was brushed off. Being adults, we coulda,shouda jumped ship right then and there but,in our ignorance, we chose to stay. We were on the brink of adventure!

To tidy up this story abit and make it brief, we had two over 90 degree broaches(once while in the cockpit) and the first mate was injured and rendered bed ridden during one of these broaches which almost flooded the boat. Most on board sytems were knocked out or destroyed during these events.Winds topped out at 79 knots and waves reached over 35 feet. U.S. Coast Guard in Norfolk Virginia had us on a 60 minute radio protocol with one aircraft on standby ready to come to our assistance should things worsen. The"captain" began liberating the bilge of the beer he had stored there.Even good old "Southbound" kept us lighted up as we got battered.

In the end, with the worst of the storm over, the other delivery crew and myself spent the next 73 hours straight doing 1 hour tricks at the helm while the other stood watch and kept warm in the shelter of what remained of the dodger.Did I mention it was near zero and wicked cold at night?We motor-limped out way back to Halifax using only the compass and the headings radioed to us by the US Coast guard, while the first mate slowly recovered down bellow and the "captain" stayed pickeled.

It could have been worse and most of my American friends,when told of the story upon my return, strongly suggested taking some sort of legal action against the owner. But I couldn't,in all good faith, do this. Why? I was still alive and had gotten the chance to experience something most wise pleasure boaters will never experience in a life time! It was the closest I've ever come to losing my life and it was,in retrospect, pretty damned exciting!

On the other hand, had I perished, what could possibly be done then? Would a lawsuit bring me back? Would stiffer government regs. bring me back? For that matter,would anything bring me back? Hardly. It was nothing but luck we didn't all die and sometimes I think it is nothing but luck I haven't been killed in a road accident or while crossing the street etc...

Who amongst us today has not recieved stern warnings or prohibitions against doing one thing or another and yet,despite them all, has gone on to do it anyway?(think;speeding,no seat belts,running stop signs, drinking and driving,smoking,drugs etc,etc,etc.....) Call it calculated risk, call it ignorance or call it blind luck, but the fact that we arrive unscathed afterward only serves to encourage us,if not make us realize how lucky we were.Usually too, as we age, our penchant for "thrills" or recklessness does diminish somewhat until we finally get to the point we never thought we'd see; we become like our parents and scoll folks for doing things we no longer do.

While I certainly wish no one harm,or worse, I also am certain about my not wishing to meddle too much with other peoples free will and dreams. I am not obliged to share the same dreams as others nor to engage in any of their chosen activities either and I feel comfortable with this approach. That others wish to exercise different approaches,different thoughts, is alright by me!

Vive la differance!


Cheers!


Peter

[P.L.Lenihan]

Originally Posted by Steve Paskey

I could respond, but I think we should just agree to disagree. I only wish disagreements down in the bilge were half as respectful. (If 30 tons of concrete in the bilge works for Raw Faith, perhaps we should try it here?)

Cheers,
Stephen

Fair enough with me Stephen. I tell ya what;I'll start mixing and you start pouring,the cement that is.......


Cheers!


Peter

[The549]

Peter, what a refreshingly needed perspective. RF is a great addition to life's possibilities.
Most people i know could care less about what kind of boat theyd take (err...NOT take) on open water let alone a rotting wooden hulk...ie i wont say any more on negligence than that.

Let it be....er, live and let die?

[rbgarr]

PL,

I don't think we really disagree, except in your case you had some skill and awareness to exercise to get yourself out of your jam at sea. It's those who don't and could end up drowned while trusting the skill of another that I worry about. I'm not suggesting legal action or outlawing or restricting another's freedom. I just wouldn't want anyone's son or daughter to unsuspectingly be put in that position. The woman who wrote the book I described suffered terribly from the experience of facing the family and friends of the two crew who died on her delivery trip. She, unlike you, suffered herself from a kind of survivor guilt for a long time.

I think I've said all I want to on the subject of Raw faith.

[Boston]

Ive always seen a pretty big difference it making my own dumb decisions and having someone else make em for me. If I get myself into trouble thats one thing but if some fool does it for me, and folks end up dead, thats a whole nother level of stupid that is and should be criminal.

[Tylerdurden]

It is wrong in my estimation to ask the state to step in as its been pointed out its a slippery slope for us all. If someone feels strongly enough to act themselves let them or make it a point to try an educate those intent to sail on this vessel. He has every right to do what he is doing and basically I think its a moral argument that young an inexperienced should be allowed to.

If we do anything we should stay on top of the most recent plans and step up when the time comes for them to board. Then we can try our best to convince the foolhardy of the danger involved.

[Steve Paskey]

Originally Posted by Boston

I have looked at the web site and I dont see a way to send a letter of concern for the well-being of unsuspecting volunteers. ... Is there a way to write a letter of concern to this guy anyone ?l

With any luck, he and his crew members (along with everyone else in Portland) will hear about it from the Portland Press Herald. Yesterday I sent an email to the reporter who wrote the story about RF's arrival in Portland. I summarized some of the concerns expressed here, and gave him a link to the thread.

[Bob Cleek]

Out here in CA, we just lost seven Coasties and a couple of Marines when a USCG C-130 collided mid-air with a USMC chopper off the coast of Southern CA. The Marines were on a training exercise. The Coastie C-130 was responding to a pleasure vessel's "SOS." As far as I'm concerned, the guys who have to risk their lives to save somebody else's have every right to keep people from doing stupid things that might get rescuers killed.

It's one thing to laugh and make fun of odd-balls like this "Raw Faith" guy, and quite another to watch husbands and fathers die attempting to rescue them from their folly. From what I've seen in this thread, "Raw Faith" needs to be condemned as a "hazard to navigation" and broken up at her owner's expense. She should NOT be allowed to leave port. Enough is enough.

[Boston]

I find myself compelled to second that

although life just wont be the same without being able to come home and read the funnies

[Candyfloss]

I get lost in this debate about why volunteer (or in the case of the USCG, professional) rescue organizations should risk the lives of their members going to the help of people they have told their venture is foolhardy. Even forbidden them to do it, but they do it anyway. For this reason, I'm glad I don't belong to such an organization. I'm sure I could not keep myself from thinking "Nah, bugger them. I told them not to do this. I'm not going out in that to rescue the silly bastards."

To Pat Ford.
If you are uneasy about this Forum being representative of the views of the boatbuilding community, perhaps you could lead the way by raising the tone of your own posts.

[peter radclyffe]

can someone hang an iraqi flag off the mast.
that should take care of it

[Tom3]

Advocating she not leave port now seems too late, she did leave Rockland and I've not read anything locally from the CG that they've broken any rules.

Frankly, having seen the drama that surrounds this boat and owner first hand, I'm afraid Portland may just turn into a replay of Rockland.

If it does, it'll go something like this. Once told he can't leave, then the drama begins.....it goes forever, we've seen it.

This boat has been trying to do something for years now and never seems to get anywhere. It floats,(it's proven that), can do some sailing (I've seen it do "some") and it has some sort of push boat to move it around a bit.

It doesn't need an engine. Sell that for needed funds.

It would be a job of course (is that the problem?), but why don't they continue a series of hops down the coast. Warmer weather alone could improve something for the captain.

Do it safely(row boats get up and down the coast safely with experienced people), whatever weather that requires, and learn how do get this boat to go somewhere.

It's in the 50's today with a light westerly wind on the coast of Maine, what could be better?

The fact is, you could have circumnavigated in a Tanzer 22 in the time the Raw Faith has been sitting on the coast of Maine.

[Tylerdurden]

She is going to take a pounding every time the ferry passes. I cannot imagine her sitting there all winter. She would have a better chance up at the commercial end by the airport. I assume they have some space up there since the lake barges are gone.
Does it not seem the welfare case is getting some advantage where we would not? I would love to keep Marla nearby overwinter but the costs to keep here in Portland is prohibitive. How can they afford to keep 80+ feet there?

I guess I should build a big POS and tell every one its for teaching unwed teen mothers how to sail because the lord told me too. Free rides depend on bullshite I guess?

[BETTY-B]

It's probably free or super cheap since they took the docks out, right Mark?

DAN