St David's rescue^

Places, technique, kayaks, safety, the sea...
User avatar
Oarsome
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:28 pm
Location: Greater Copenhagen

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Oarsome »

Fast Pat wrote:
Oarsome wrote:Yes, aren't we all above criticism. Noone is to blame for anything, and everything is always handled just perfectly. And, especially, if they post on these boards, obviously, they are perfect, and not a bad word about anything they did or say can ever be held into a bright light. Unless, of course, it is followed by a standing ovation.
FFS you go backwards and never see the view - you are in effect a glorified troll that no one takes seriously. You are after all an expert on web development and now 5* delivery - but know f all about sea kayaking -can you not troll a sailing forum instead?
I'm not an expert in sea kayaking, but like most sea kayakers I have experience in small boats in crappy weather. However, the point isn't about who's an expert, the point is that not only do they downplay the rescue by the RNLI, they even downplay the seriousness of having someone in the water and not able to handle it. Taran himself has a lot of excuses such as having to drag a boat and having a broken boat. Needless to say, the focus should be on getting the person in the water out and safe, but apparently staying with a borken boat and dragging another was more important than being responsible.

I realise that some people like to call others trolls. It makes it easier to dismiss the arguments at hand - easier to disregard valid points, and much easier for people who thinks that disagreement is evil.

And why would I go to a sailing forum? Oh, you have noticed I knew something about sailing, so you figure that's where my interest lies. Rowing a coastal row boat has little in common with sailing, though. Sea kayaking has a lot in common with coastal rowing. So, you see, I may not own a kayak, but I tend to go out in the same weather, the same places, pack similarly, and have somewhat the same safety concerns. Okay, I don't need to learn how to roll, nor do I climb into a closed cockpit (the boat is self bailing, so it's open), but it's a boat of similar length and weight with a bit more volume at the back.

User avatar
TechnoEngineer
Posts: 3353
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 7:47 pm
Location: Berks, Hants, Essex
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by TechnoEngineer »

The point is that you go over and over and over and over the same point over and over and over and over again.

Chill out. Drink some Chamomile tea. Pop some bubblewrap. Play with some velcro (quite calming for the soul).
XL-Burn-3 / Monstar / XPlore-X/ My Videos

User avatar
Kayaks'N'Beer
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:12 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Kayaks'N'Beer »

Oarsome wrote:
Fast Pat wrote:
Oarsome wrote: they even downplay the seriousness of having someone in the water and not able to handle it.
Maybe not everyone would agree that having someone in the water constitutes a serious situation. Maybe people running and participating in a course, one of the aspects of which is practising dealing with people falling in the water, would see this as anything other than serious.

As far as I'm aware (correct me if I'm wrong), all kayakers were safely ashore by the time the rescuers arrived on the scene. Call out aside, this suggests to me that the "having someone in the water" thing was handled more than adequately, albeit they were left split up and stranded on a couple of storm beaches, that's whole nother issue. Given that they were equipped with the usual safety kit, dry clothing, storm shelters, first aid equipment, etc.. (which, again, I have no reason to doubt) the party seems to have been in no more immediate danger than anyone else trapped on dry land by water conditions.

User avatar
Oarsome
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:28 pm
Location: Greater Copenhagen

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Oarsome »

Kayaks'N'Beer wrote:
Maybe not everyone would agree that having someone in the water constitutes a serious situation. Maybe people running and participating in a course, one of the aspects of which is practising dealing with people falling in the water, would see this as anything other than serious.
You obviously haven't read where the current took him and they weren't able to get to him, hence my "not able to handle it".
As far as I'm aware (correct me if I'm wrong), all kayakers were safely ashore by the time the rescuers arrived on the scene. Call out aside, this suggests to me that the "having someone in the water" thing was handled more than adequately, albeit they were left split up and stranded on a couple of storm beaches, that's whole nother issue. Given that they were equipped with the usual safety kit, dry clothing, storm shelters, first aid equipment, etc.. (which, again, I have no reason to doubt) the party seems to have been in no more immediate danger than anyone else trapped on dry land by water conditions.
Again, you seem to conveniently ignore the part where Taran went something like "If we had been closer to shore we wouldn't have had a problem".

It screams incompetence to me. Again, had this been 8-9 blokes out for a cruise and misjudging the weather etc., I would not think it was that bad. It would still be serious, but it would be a different story than what is actually is.

User avatar
PhilAyr
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:51 pm
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by PhilAyr »

Barry Shaw wrote :
After all he is guilty of making a MISTAKE and not dealing with it in the way you think he should have done. Unforgivable I say!!
It's a good job nobody waited to hear his side of things. We may all have been slightly dissappointed.
Fair comment. So I will ask again. Where and when is this report going to be made available ? Taran mentioned a website but which one ?

Phil

User avatar
Kayaks'N'Beer
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:12 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Kayaks'N'Beer »

Oarsome wrote:
Kayaks'N'Beer wrote:
Maybe not everyone would agree that having someone in the water constitutes a serious situation. Maybe people running and participating in a course, one of the aspects of which is practising dealing with people falling in the water, would see this as anything other than serious.
You obviously haven't read where the current took him and they weren't able to get to him, hence my "not able to handle it".
As far as I'm aware (correct me if I'm wrong), all kayakers were safely ashore by the time the rescuers arrived on the scene. Call out aside, this suggests to me that the "having someone in the water" thing was handled more than adequately, albeit they were left split up and stranded on a couple of storm beaches, that's whole nother issue. Given that they were equipped with the usual safety kit, dry clothing, storm shelters, first aid equipment, etc.. (which, again, I have no reason to doubt) the party seems to have been in no more immediate danger than anyone else trapped on dry land by water conditions.
Again, you seem to conveniently ignore the part where Taran went something like "If we had been closer to shore we wouldn't have had a problem".

It screams incompetence to me. Again, had this been 8-9 blokes out for a cruise and misjudging the weather etc., I would not think it was that bad. It would still be serious, but it would be a different story than what is actually is.
You obviously have a different impression of events (I said impression not opinion) than I have. This is what I was talking about when I said I prefer to assume innocent until proven guilty, especially when I'm running with significantly less than half the facts. We are both making a lot of assumptions here, that's something the human brain can't avoid doing, so I sure aint going to get on your back over it. You, however, are assuming the worst and that's proving to be counter productive regarding continued intelligent discourse on the subject.

User avatar
mduncombe
Posts: 141
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by mduncombe »

one thing I have noticed time and time again is complications occurring when groups get split. With one part of the group not knowing if the other group is OK or needs assistance. In such situations I don't think anyone could argue that its better to be safe than sorry and contact the CG if possible, even if its just to relay a message to confirm all involved are OK. Even if a mayday call is not appropriate it strikes me that you should use all methods at your disposal to ensure everybody in your group is OK especially if the conditions on the water are challenging, which they must be if the group has split.

if the group is at risk of or close to splitting then I would argue that is the point to be making decisions on whether it is a good idea to proceed, turn back,find an escape route or seek assistance, before the split occurs.

User avatar
Oarsome
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:28 pm
Location: Greater Copenhagen

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Oarsome »

mduncombe wrote:one thing I have noticed time and time again is complications occurring when groups get split. With one part of the group not knowing if the other group is OK or needs assistance. In such situations I don't think anyone could argue that its better to be safe than sorry and contact the CG if possible, even if its just to relay a message to confirm all involved are OK. Even if a mayday call is not appropriate it strikes me that you should use all methods at your disposal to ensure everybody in your group is OK especially if the conditions on the water are challenging, which they must be if the group has split.

if the group is at risk of or close to splitting then I would argue that is the point to be making decisions on whether it is a good idea to proceed, turn back,find an escape route or seek assistance, before the split occurs.
I completely agree.

Bards
Posts: 740
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 11:23 am
Location: Dorset
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Bards »

TechnoEngineer wrote: Play with some velcro.
Good shout; the thread may yet be saved :-)

Bards

User avatar
Oarsome
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:28 pm
Location: Greater Copenhagen

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Oarsome »

TechnoEngineer wrote:The point is that you go over and over and over and over the same point over and over and over and over again.
Of course I do, since some people seem to be dead set on misconstruing, misrepresenting what I say, and are more than willing not to understand the points made, but would rather rely on banalities and naivity than to rely on arguments.

Chill out. Drink some Chamomile tea. Pop some bubblewrap. Play with some velcro (quite calming for the soul).
Small minds, small distractions.

User avatar
TechnoEngineer
Posts: 3353
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 7:47 pm
Location: Berks, Hants, Essex
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by TechnoEngineer »

Oarsome wrote:Of course I do, since some people seem to be dead set on misconstruing, misrepresenting what I say, and are more than willing not to understand the points made, but would rather rely on banalities and naivity than to rely on arguments.
And you seem to be dead set on killing any useful outcomes from this discussion (and others) by obsessing over your petty sensibilities. With your intervention, the outcome of this discussion is that a number of people will no longer talk openly about their mistakes, and to me that is a *major* shame. Yes we all know you think Taran is being blase, we get it. No need to keep reminding us.

Person A voices his opinion
Person B voices his
End of story - let everyone else make up their own minds. Neither party needs to have the last word.

There's nothing to be gained by Person A and B repeatedly making the same arguments at each other ad-infinitum. Compare and constrast yourself against "Debbie". She made her point. Once. The essence of what she wrote is clear, because there is no argumentative noise to suppress the useful information.

It's said that "Arguing on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded".
XL-Burn-3 / Monstar / XPlore-X/ My Videos

User avatar
Jim
Posts: 14034
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2002 2:14 pm
Location: Dumbarton
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Jim »

Oarsome wrote: Needless to say, the focus should be on getting the person in the water out and safe, but apparently staying with a borken boat and dragging another was more important than being responsible.
Absolutely, but it does not require 7 people to get one out of the water. We consider losing a kayak (and/or paddle) a pretty serious situation in it's own right, so the correct normal practice is for someone to take charge and delegate others to round up the boat and paddle. The person in charge will normally be the one to go to the swimmer, but it is not necessarily so. Depending on conditions the PIC may then ask for others to come alongside (raft up) to help stabilise whoever is working with the swimmer and/or boat. If the rescue is drifting towards danger it might be necessary to deploy one or more of the group to attach towlines and at least hold station if not tow into safer water. As a small boat user you will understand that safer water can often be further from shore away from breaking waves and reflected waves (clapotis). Another thing that the PIC might reasonably do is instruct spare paddlers to raft up or at least group up together out of the way of the main rescue effort - each 5-6m pointy sea kayak weighs at least 100kg and could be up to 200kg if packed for an overnight trip, the fewer of them you have heaving and pitching in the work area the better, each one can deliver a serious whack, fingers can be trapped, ribs broken, teeth knocked out etc.

I have already offered my constructive criticism (I beleive it was taken that way) and will not bother to repeat it, I simply want people to understand that there are many possibilities in a kayakers rescue toolbox (one to one rescues being the default and most expedient when feasible) and whilst things did go quite badly wrong, to jump to the conclusion that the swimmer was left alone, or even to conclude that he was in the water the whole way is to my mind a pretty big leap. Kayakers do look out for their own, the person in the water is always top priority, I have read nothing that makes me think he wasn't.

We also have techniques to deal with multiple swimmers, even situations where everyone has capsized. Success is never guaranteed, but we have techniques for just about every possibility, and ingenuity to adapt to new possibilities.

Is there a parallel in the ocean rowing community?

User avatar
Kayaks'N'Beer
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:12 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Kayaks'N'Beer »

Jim wrote: Is there a parallel in the ocean rowing community?
Trolling kayaker forums, evidently

User avatar
Taran Tyla
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:22 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Taran Tyla »

PhilAyr wrote:Barry Shaw wrote :
After all he is guilty of making a MISTAKE and not dealing with it in the way you think he should have done. Unforgivable I say!!
It's a good job nobody waited to hear his side of things. We may all have been slightly dissappointed.
Fair comment. So I will ask again. Where and when is this report going to be made available ? Taran mentioned a website but which one ?

Phil
Hi Phil, I'll think you'll understand if I keep my mouth shut on that one.

User avatar
Oarsome
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 10:28 pm
Location: Greater Copenhagen

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Oarsome »

Wrt "sensibilites": It seems I'm not the one around here who are so sensitive that any criticism means that noone will respond, that criticism in general is considered harsh, and that criticism, even on things already said, is a no-go when it comes to criticism. "It's keeping people from posting".

Is there a similar thing for ocean rowing? See, the problem is that "ocean rowing" is technically the sport of crossing oceans in those horrendously heavy and bobbing bath tubs. Coastal rowing, or as it is called in the US, "Open Water" rowing is an entirely different sport.

Is there something similar to that then? No, it's not a big sport to be touring in these boats, whereas competitions are big (Italy, Germany etc.). The sort of thing I do, is more akin to sea kayaking, regardless of your unwillingness to grasp the concept.

As I have already explained, we don't need to crawl into a cockpit, we sit on top, the cockpit is self bailing, and the wider aft portion of the boat makes it possible to climb on without the aid of others. Of course, in some circumstances, it can be very similar: Such as using the oars as levers to step on to get in from the side and so one. Coastal rowing boats are very similar to sea kayaks in how they handle, unlike those sculling boats we all know (I call those "river boats").

Using VHF, PLB's, flares, not getting away from the boat, be carefull when landing on a beach and so on are very similar. My boat is wider, and the oars give it a wider spread, but the oars themselves weigh next to nothing, so you sometimes have to brace too, although the technique is slightly different because the oars are locked in a pivot (the gate).

User avatar
Kayaks'N'Beer
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:12 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Kayaks'N'Beer »

Oarsome wrote:Wrt "sensibilites": It seems I'm not the one around here who are so sensitive that any criticism means that noone will respond, that criticism in general is considered harsh, and that criticism, even on things already said, is a no-go when it comes to criticism. "It's keeping people from posting".
Criticism is fine, given that you're in full possession of the facts and have the required knowledge to form a reasonable, informed critique.

You would appear to have neither. With regard the facts, no one on this forum (with the possible exception of Taran) is in full possession of the facts. With regards knowledge you mentioned something earlier that made me think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Again, you seem to conveniently ignore the part where Taran went something like "If we had been closer to shore we wouldn't have had a problem".
Taran actually said the complete opposite, ie - he insinuated that if they hadn't been so close to the shore (in this case the headland) they wouldn't have had a problem. That made perfect sense to me, in the context of the discussion. Being close to the shore would, indeed have made matters much trickier and more urgent, for reasons I'll leave you to research on your own.

Mikers
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:00 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Mikers »

Taran Tyla wrote: Some fair points there, maybe I'm wrong but I assume the role of the guinea pig unless I'm asked to assist or take over the lead. It wasn't my turn leading at this time so I followed orders.
I'm a 4* paddler, WW not sea. But this is where I have an issue. As an experienced kayaker (paraglider pilot & caver) I believe I must speak up if I feel the group leader is permitting something too dangerous or challenging. It's hard, especially when the person leading is far better qualified than you.

Very easy to say with hindsight I know and I expect that it would have been a difficult call to make. However, I'd say that it is impossible to be a good leader without recognising that you have a responsibility to speak up whether or not you have the formal role of group leader.

Even harder is having a member of a party you're leading speak up, and listening to what they have to say!

User avatar
Kayaks'N'Beer
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:12 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Kayaks'N'Beer »

Mikers wrote:
Taran Tyla wrote: Some fair points there, maybe I'm wrong but I assume the role of the guinea pig unless I'm asked to assist or take over the lead. It wasn't my turn leading at this time so I followed orders.
I'm a 4* paddler, WW not sea. But this is where I have an issue. As an experienced kayaker (paraglider pilot & caver) I believe I must speak up if I feel the group leader is permitting something too dangerous or challenging. It's hard, especially when the person leading is far better qualified than you.

Very easy to say with hindsight I know and I expect that it would have been a difficult call to make. However, I'd say that it is impossible to be a good leader without recognising that you have a responsibility to speak up whether or not you have the formal role of group leader.

Even harder is having a member of a party you're leading speak up, and listening to what they have to say!
I rarely paddle in a Leader-follower set up, for the very reason that "leader" sets someone apart. If you're a team the whole thing still works but you don't look at someone to decide what to do. Someone falls in, it's first able to the wet guy that helps him out. If the swimmer is still with his boat then it's straightforward from there, no real need for leadership.

Paddler lets go his boat, same deal - nearest to the boat get the boat, nearest to the paddler, get the paddler. Everybody else, keep your eyes on the situation, communicate, we're in a rescue now, until the swimmer is back in a dry boat, nothing else needs concern us, other than the target objective. This still isn't striking me as a situation where having a Leader would benefit us much.

I can imagine a great many somethings occurring at this point which no amount of leadership or good decision making would help sort out. It is possible to do all the right things and still get into bother. Thing is, I'm pretty sure that in some (not all) Leader-based situations, valuable time may be wasted by people sitting with their finger up the proverbial, waiting for the okay to go ahead and do what he should have had just about finished by now.

I will always defer to experience, on the water, within limits but if you get into trouble and you're closest to me and I don't think I'll die trying to assist, where the guy right next to me is paddling in with a smile on his face, then there is no leader, neither present nor required. There is a wet guy and he's going back in his boat and that's the plan and I'm first on the scene. I'll shout "I'm on it!" and if the leader hears me, well, that'll be nice for him :P

User avatar
Jim
Posts: 14034
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2002 2:14 pm
Location: Dumbarton
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 63 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Jim »

Oarsome wrote:Is there a similar thing for ocean rowing? See, the problem is that "ocean rowing" is technically the sport of crossing oceans in those horrendously heavy and bobbing bath tubs. Coastal rowing, or as it is called in the US, "Open Water" rowing is an entirely different sport.
I hope you will forgive me for not doing my research since this is a kayaking forum and I mostly know about kayaks (I would quite like to learn to row whitewater, but that is a specialist branch of "river boats" using rafts or dories).
Oarsome wrote:Is there something similar to that then? No, it's not a big sport to be touring in these boats, whereas competitions are big (Italy, Germany etc.). The sort of thing I do, is more akin to sea kayaking, regardless of your unwillingness to grasp the concept.
Of course some of us do paddle solo, but the vast majority of sea kayaking is a group activity where we look after each other and practise various drills for rescue etc.

Have I understood correctly that there are not many of you? Do you row in a group or alone? If in groups do you have a plan for how to help each other in trouble, or some rescue drills you can fall back on?

I have never doubted that there are similarities, but occasionally the differences become obvious when you show a lack of understanding for kayaking with your comments. I love almost all small boats and have no problem with you hanging out here for cross discipline knowledge share, it's just that there are times when you tell us how it should be, without fully understanding how it is, and then the boys keep on wading in with more sustainence and it becomes an argument about who has the biggest rod or what a scarecrow is?

User avatar
MikeB
Posts: 8094
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 9:44 pm
Location: Scotland
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by MikeB »

Candidly, I really, really struggle to see how someone who rows a rowing boat is in a position to comment on how a sea kayak should be paddled, or how a group of sea kayakers should operate. Mike.

User avatar
Kayaks'N'Beer
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:12 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Kayaks'N'Beer »

MikeB wrote:Candidly, I really, really struggle to see how someone who rows a rowing boat is in a position to comment on how a sea kayak should be paddled, or how a group of sea kayakers should operate. Mike.
Shhhhh! We're doing it wrong. Let him tell us!

User avatar
Mark R
Posts: 24135
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 6:17 pm
Location: Dorset
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 15 times
Contact:

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Mark R »

MikeB wrote:Candidly, I really, really struggle to see how someone who rows a rowing boat is in a position to comment on how a sea kayak should be paddled, or how a group of sea kayakers should operate. Mike.
Agreed. I really, really struggle to see why people even take the bait and respond. A potentially informative/ constructive/ useful thread has been wrecked. Now, those who would prefer to keep professional coaching safety issues and incidents conveniently out of the public eye can tell themselves that such practice is justified because the internet is just full of uninformed ranters.
Mark Rainsley
FACEBOOK

gethroberts
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Sunny Anglesey
Contact:

Re: St David's rescue

Post by gethroberts »

Mark R wrote:
Bazza S wrote:he is guilty of making a MISTAKE
Barry, fair comments from you as always. Just a couple of points/ questions...

- Until very recent times, no one other than a closeknit community of professional coaches would have heard of this incident and it would have been quite deliberately kept that way, I'm sure you'll agree. Is this what you'd prefer?
Barry’s forum post, said with characteristic humour/sarcasm, was absolutely right in highlighting the unfair manner in which this 5* provider has been scrutinized on this thread. There are teachers, medics and other professionals on this thread who have completely lacked the empathy to put themselves in the coach’s position and see how damaging ill-informed scrutiny is. I would wish no one’s professional incidents to be discussed in this manner. Mark and Douglas - would you seriously wish your own professional incidents to be dealt with publicly and on record in this way?

Coaches are accountable to the Health and Safety at Work Act just like any other profession. Their livelihood is based on developing and maintaining a good reputation because they are often self-employed. Teachers and doctors have the luxury of employer disciplinary hearings. The only reason I can see for coaches to have the peer review system of their incidents is to protect themselves from the malice of trial by forum.

I have worked with many coaches and I soon decide, based on first impressions and recommendations from other clients, whether I trust them with my safety and getting the best out of me. I would definitely continue to trust this 5* provider on both accounts.

Echoing Richard Janes' comments I hope no one is put off by this thread in using the Coast Guard for passage plans and early reporting of incidents.

Geth.

User avatar
Mark R
Posts: 24135
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 6:17 pm
Location: Dorset
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 15 times
Contact:

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Mark R »

gethroberts wrote:Mark and Douglas - would you seriously wish your own professional incidents to be dealt with publicly and on record in this way?
If I put someone's life at risk at work, I would fully expect to appear on the evening news, followed by extended and very public legal proceedings, as an absolute minimum. What I would prefer to happen would be for the whole thing to be hushed up and go away. But in such circumstances, my preferences would be completely irrelevant, and rightly so.
gethroberts wrote:the malice of trial by forum.
I absolutely do not accept that my comments or Douglas' are malicious, simply because they are potentially embarrassing to some. If you or anyone can identify any factual inaccuracies in either of our observations, or for that matter in any other comments in this thread, please say so and I will either apologise myself, or encourage those involved to do the same.
Mark Rainsley
FACEBOOK

Chris Bolton
Posts: 3166
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:33 pm
Location: NW England
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 113 times

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Chris Bolton »

Bill Maisey wrote:...can anyone explain why the guinea pig's boat couldn't be towed (with the tidal flow)towards the guinea pig rather than the hideous looking, weather shore rock landing from hell ..? Then, the group would have remained together, the guinea pig could have been put back in his boat...
This question also ocurred to me, having once been involved in an incident where a decision was taken to split swimmer and boat. I didn't post the question as I've seen how easy it is for questions, genuinely seeking to understand what happened, to be taken as criticism. I'm in no position to criticise - I wasn't there and only know a fraction of the facts - I'm sure there were reasons for the decision but at the moment I don't understand what they were and I'd like to learn from them.

Chris

Bazza S
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 3:59 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Bazza S »

Hi Mark,
Mark R wrote:- Are this weekend's events the first and only time that assessors involved in the course have needed the assistance of emergency services during coaching courses...i.e. have made 'mistakes'? That is a serious question, I do not know the answer but hear innuendo - it would be helpful to know either way, in order to judge whether too much is being made of this weekend?
I honestly don't know the answer to that Mark as I don't know who was invloved. Debbie may be able to answer though.

Debbie, maybe you can back up the statement below which you made, with some examples(no names just places, dates and what the incident was).....
2. "There seems to exist an overdependence by some commercial operators on the Coast Guard. Some commercial operators seem to feel that it's okay to expect the Coast Guard to provide safety boat cover for their private business at taxpayers’ expense. This enables the coach to lead groups in rougher conditions than he ordinarily would have led them in".
(no names just places, dates and what the incident was).
Douglas Wilcox wrote:I have enjoyed about 30 days on coach led trips including one day with you and six days, I think, with one of the coaches that works for the company that may have been involved.
Hi Douglas, I hope your knee is doing ok these days. I remember the day well and a very enjoyable day it was too. That day I was acting more as a volunteer than professional.
Douglas Wilcox wrote:I fully understand your natural reaction to stand by a fellow professional who is going through a distressing time.
This line above here Douglas I don't think is very nice. My natural reaction is not stand by a fellow prfessional, it's to stand by and even help out a person who is going through a distressing time not try to make the distressing time worse. I reckon most of us have gone through a distressing time.

Barry Shaw

User avatar
Kayaks'N'Beer
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:12 pm

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Kayaks'N'Beer »

Chris Bolton wrote:
Bill Maisey wrote:...can anyone explain why the guinea pig's boat couldn't be towed (with the tidal flow)towards the guinea pig rather than the hideous looking, weather shore rock landing from hell ..? Then, the group would have remained together, the guinea pig could have been put back in his boat...
This question also ocurred to me, having once been involved in an incident where a decision was taken to split swimmer and boat. I didn't post the question as I've seen how easy it is for questions, genuinely seeking to understand what happened, to be taken as criticism. I'm in no position to criticise - I wasn't there and only know a fraction of the facts - I'm sure there were reasons for the decision but at the moment I don't understand what they were and I'd like to learn from them.

Chris
I hope that I've made it clear that I have no interest in calling anyone an idiot over this incident. There are questions gnawing at me, however, which, as a curious soul and one who never presumes to know all there is to know about rescue scenarios, I'd love these questions to be answered. Several things happened and, I have no doubt that finding out a bit more detail has the potential to benefit, not just me directly, but many of the people subscribed to this forum, if and when we were to be presented with a similar situation.

I'll totally understand, Taran, if you are reluctant to go into any more detail but I'm going to ask them anyway, just on the offchance that there's a chance of getting this cluster**** of a thread away from "well I never did" and back to pumping Taran for the kind of info that may potentially save a life or two somewhere down the road.

1) For me this scenario becomes interesting at the point you mentioned the casualty, paddling a swamped boat. Standard practice (I think) would be removing the water from the boat before breaking the raft. What factors prevented this?

2) The swimmers boat was towed away from the victim. Was this before or after the two paddlers had committed to following him? At which point was it decided that either the two rescuers could not get the swimmer back to the boat and, that the remaining party should put in rather than follow the swimmer and rescuers. What were the factors that led to both these decisions. What was the dialog, etc?

3) The big one - you get a rewind, go back, do it again. Which (if any) steps might have led to a swimmer being reunited with his boat. Could this have led to a non helicoptery resolution? Pure speculation but, if you were faced with the same scenario all over again do you have a better plan?

Like I said, I'll understand if you don't want to discuss this in front of the jackals but I'm sure I'm not the only one who would appreciate hearing your tale. Maybe I am the only one. PM me if you prefer - I will not share any information given to me in confidence.

User avatar
Douglas Wilcox
Posts: 3636
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:31 pm
Location: Glasgow
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 46 times
Contact:

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Douglas Wilcox »

Hi Barry,
Douglas Wilcox wrote:
I fully understand your natural reaction to stand by a fellow professional who is going through a distressing time.


This line above here Douglas I don't think is very nice. My natural reaction is not stand by a fellow prfessional, it's to stand by and even help out a person who is going through a distressing time not try to make the distressing time worse. I reckon most of us have gone through a distressing time.
I really didn't mean it in that way but reading it now... I agree with you. I am sorry. I much prefer the way you have written it, which shows what a decent person you are.

Douglas

Bazza S
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 3:59 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: St David's rescue

Post by Bazza S »

Cheers Douglas. No harm done.
Barry

Post Reply