Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sandy Sinks HMS Bounty, Knocks Off Gawker Websites

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the stormy-weather dept.

Earth 238

Black Parrot writes "Several news sites are reporting that the 1962 replica of the HMS bounty was lost at sea due to hurricane Sandy, about 90 miles off North Carolina. The latest news I find says 14 of 16 crew rescued, one drowned, and the Captain still missing." And on land, the combination of wind and water surges knocked off Gawker sites and the Huffington Post for a time, and forced the evacuation of NYU's Langone Medical Center. Did it affect you?

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Huffington Post (2)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#41817203)

And the Huffington Post is still down! I wonder what sea water flooding implies for the financial district.

Re:Huffington Post (2, Funny)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#41817225)

And the Huffington Post is still down!

Leading to the number of complaints about slowness and memory usage at Firefox's bugzilla to be _way_ down...

I wonder what sea water flooding implies for the financial district.

That today would be a great day to float your business on the stock exchange?

Re:Huffington Post (2, Funny)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#41817349)

No worries, Wall Street is replete with bailout packages. If you're a bank.

Re:Huffington Post (1)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#41817491)

I see, the flood on the Wall! Now even Google "502. That’s an error. The server encountered a temporary error and could not complete your request."

Re:Huffington Post (5, Funny)

M. Baranczak (726671) | about 2 years ago | (#41817347)

I wonder what sea water flooding implies for the financial district.

1. A brisk day of trading in derivatives based on underwater mortgages.

2. A vindication of the Saltwater school of economics.

Re:Huffington Post (2)

JazzHarper (745403) | about 2 years ago | (#41817405)

I wonder what sea water flooding implies for the financial district.

NASDAQ is testing their systems, now. The exchanges do not seem to have suffered significant damage. The problem is going to be transportation; the exchanges may open tomorrow, but the markets will not be able to function properly if people can't get to their jobs in the financial district.

Re:Huffington Post (0)

SydShamino (547793) | about 2 years ago | (#41817483)

I wonder what sea water flooding implies for the financial district.

All the Facebook millionaires spend another white-knuckle day waiting for their stocks to sell...

Re:Huffington Post (3, Insightful)

cruff (171569) | about 2 years ago | (#41817521)

And the Huffington Post is still down!

And nothing of any value will be missed while it remains down.

Re:Huffington Post (0)

Pope (17780) | about 2 years ago | (#41817757)

And nothing of value was lost.

Re:Huffington Post (4, Funny)

bluescrn (2120492) | about 2 years ago | (#41817921)

"I wonder what sea water flooding implies for the financial district."

Bankers need bailing out again...

Re:Huffington Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41818191)

Really? I thought it was left.

last post (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817205)

for the good cap'n.

but what they were doing bobbing around in the path of frankenstorm i don't know.

Re:last post (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#41817367)

probably trying to avoid the storm surge...

Re:last post (3, Informative)

CimmerianX (2478270) | about 2 years ago | (#41817403)

It's very dangerous for a ship to be in port for a storm like this. Getting out to sea and out of it's path is the proper course of action. It just couldn't get out from in front of it's path quickly enough. And unlike newer ships that can withstand storms, a tallship like that didn't stand a chance.

Re:last post (4, Insightful)

BenJury (977929) | about 2 years ago | (#41817611)

Safer for the ship to be at sea instead of docked, safer for the crew to be docked rather than at sea...

Re:last post (2)

v1 (525388) | about 2 years ago | (#41817585)

but what they were doing bobbing around in the path of frankenstorm i don't know.

You've got very little if any control over where your boat goes in a storm like that. If you're anywhere near the coast, there's very good odds you're going to end up on the rocks. (or in the street, or on top of the building, etc) Just look at the tsunami in japan, all the boats that were shoved inland.

Best thing they can do is get the boat out as far as possible away from anything it can get tossed into. But for a ship of that design, it's got such a high profile and poor waterproofing topside that it's also in serious danger from high winds and tall waves.

Anchored in port, it was a goner for sure. It at least had a (small) chance being out to sea. I don't understand why they didn't set sail sooner, even with a tow to speed it up.

Re:last post (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#41817901)

I don't understand why they didn't set sail sooner, even with a tow to speed it up.

This is what sunk them. Safest place to be when a hurricane smashes into your home port, is 500 miles away on a sunny beach sipping a margarita. Even just 150 miles off to the side in a really bad rainstorm is better than right in the path of the hurricane.

I've personally done this on a much smaller scale with thunderstorms on a sailboat. Both the distances and warning times are shorter by about the same fraction.

Re:last post (4, Informative)

Panaflex (13191) | about 2 years ago | (#41817925)

According to news reports, the engine broke down and they were not able to repair in time.

they cant say (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817217)

no power,no internet. how can they access slashdot?

Re:they cant say (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817307)

no power,no internet. how can they access slashdot?

Using IPoAC, of course.

Re:they cant say (1)

r1348 (2567295) | about 2 years ago | (#41817379)

IP over Air Currents?

Re:they cant say (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817511)

The throughput during a hurricane rocks!

It is horrible (4, Funny)

MyLongNickName (822545) | about 2 years ago | (#41817229)

I have no way of getting on the internet.

Re:It is horrible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817251)

*SMACK*

Re:It is horrible (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817373)

I have no way of getting on the internet.

*SMACK*

Low-flying "whoosh" misjudged its height and hit you in the face instead?

End climate silence (0, Offtopic)

FriendlyLurker (50431) | about 2 years ago | (#41817239)

The “Fossil-Fueled Storm” Calls for an Immediate Crash Course on Climate Change... http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/10/a-fossil-fueled-storm-calls-for-an-immediate-crash-course-on-climate-change.html [nakedcapitalism.com]

Re:End climate silence (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817357)

The “Fossil-Fueled Storm” Calls for an Immediate Crash Course on Climate Change...

Wasn't the storm powered by a combination of solar and hydro?

Re:End climate silence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817429)

I think the point being made is the absolute silence on the topic of climate change in the election debate...

Re:End climate silence (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 2 years ago | (#41817445)

That was caused by those crazy "green energy" nutjobs demanding that hurricanes be generated using entirely renewable energy (don't ignore wind as well as solar and hydro). They should have stuck with good old coal, oil, natural gas, or maybe nuclear power to create hurricanes.

Re:End climate silence (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41817551)

hydro didn't power it, the energy in the form of 'heat' powered it.
You're statement would be like saying Gas and roads power cars.

Re:End climate silence (3, Insightful)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 2 years ago | (#41817805)

So , man-made climate change was the cause of Hurricane Sandy? Are you kidding me?!!! Sandy is the 75 year cycle storm that was overdue, last one was in 1938. It's a natural weather phenomena, and has nothing to do with humanity's doings.

Re:End climate silence (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#41818009)

The Atlantic [theatlantic.com] is running an short article on some old newsreels from previous NE Hurricanes (1935, 1955 and 1969).

Most interesting....

Re:End climate silence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817721)

Humans are part of the equation, but there are much larger forces at work which we do not have the power to alter.

http://notrickszone.com/2011/09/12/manmade-co2-causing-atmospheric-changes-on-all-9-planets/ [notrickszone.com]

This is not an attempt to excuse psychopathic leadership of governments and corporations. They are criminals and we could be living far, far more effectively on our host planet. But we are not the prime cause of climate change. Ignoring this, pretending that we have more power than we really do is an anthropocentric evasion.

end panic driven hyperbole (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 years ago | (#41817825)

storms such as these are recurring phenomenon. in fact we were overdue for one like Sandy.

it has nothing to do with "climate change" nor anything to do with fossil fuel. It has to do with the star known as Sol....

Missing? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817271)

Yeah, sure, the Captain of the HMS Bounty is "missing" because of a "hurricane".

We've heard that one before.

Missing Captain (3, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 2 years ago | (#41817275)

and the Captain still missing.

You'll find him adrift on the ship's boat somewhere in the Pacific I expect.

Re:Missing Captain (1)

niado (1650369) | about 2 years ago | (#41817649)

Time for a Men Against the Sea movie reboot.

HMS Bounty (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 2 years ago | (#41817281)

The latest news I find says 14 of 16 crew rescued, one drowned, and the Captain still missing.

The captain is missing ... perhaps somebody mutinied?

Re:HMS Bounty (1)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#41817343)

The part of Fletcher Christian will now be played by Tom Hardy.

Re:HMS Bounty (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817705)

The woman who dies was decended from Fletcher Christian, and Capt. Robin still hasn't been found. Those of us who live and work on these boats are still hoping to find a long loved and respected member of our community. As far as the Captain's experience, the coast guard went to him for the sail training program for the Eagle.

Re:HMS Bounty (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817743)

The original only lasted six years: 1784 to 1790. The recreated Bounty lasted for 50 years, and died at sea. That is quite a resume for a working vessel.
    Due to Nordhoff and Hall, Bligh got first a terrible reputation, and then a heroic one. Both reputations are exaggerated. Bligh was a man of his times, and those times were cruel to both men and ships alike.
    Unlike a recent cruise ship captain that shall go unmentioned, this captain appears to have gone down with his ship. From all accounts, he was an amazing seaman, and a good person. He was no Bligh, but then again, neither was Bligh.
    RIP

Re:HMS Bounty (1)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#41817985)

The latest news I find says 14 of 16 crew rescued, one drowned, and the Captain still missing.

The captain is missing ... perhaps somebody mutinied?

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. The problem was Kirk self destructed the enterprise while the klingon boarding crew was aboard. The captain is in the volcano. Yes, if you look close as a joke the starfleet crew did rename the BoP "The Bounty". By far the strangest part of the movie plot was how starfleet kind of abandoned them on Vulcan. Sure you stole/borrowed and then destroyed a ship, then almost started a war, then hung around an exploding planet, then stole a klingon ship, then resurrected a dead starfleet officer, but aside from all that ya' all just take your shore leave on vulcan and head on home when ya see fit to come home. WTF?

dual story requires dual comment (0, Offtopic)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#41817301)

Did it affect you?

Huffington post being down? No. Nonstop coverage of something that doesn't affect me? Yes, because I couldn't watch real news. Last time power was out in my area for 1.5 days, I got a spare battery, 200W inverter, and watched TV while also operating my gaming laptop. Oh and I ate everything in the fridge, lol. Such excitement! Such drama! I'm surprised CNN didn't cover me, lol. Here in Wisconsin, we'd be outside tailgating in a class 1 storm. New York needs to get the hell over themselves and stop pretending the rest of the country cares that much about their weather.

As for the boat, I'm no sailing expert but don't you typically not take low tech replicas of old ships sailing in a hurricane?

Re:dual story requires dual comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817389)

If you live in Wisconsin, you've never experienced anything even remotely close to this. Trust me, aside from the occasional tornado, the weather in the upper midwest is about as tame as it is anywhere in the country. It's easy to be flippant about it when your home, job, and family are not being threatened. I'd suggest you need to get over yourself.

Re:dual story requires dual comment (1)

bondsbw (888959) | about 2 years ago | (#41817591)

It goes to show that these major broadcast networks prioritize their city or area.

They always have, but it is more noticeable when they call this "the Perfect Storm" or a "superhurricane" or whatever. Well... no, it's not. Perhaps it's the worst that NYC has seen in decades, but it was only a category 1.

Near the Gulf, we expect such a storm to directly impact us once every couple of years. The New York networks make mention of those storms during the weather segment, but then they'll go back and spend half an hour talking about Lady Gaga.

I have been watching Good Morning America this morning, and they haven't moved off the weather situation once. In Alabama, we had tornadoes last year that killed hundreds and destroyed thousands of homes, entire city blocks being leveled throughout the state. They talked about it for maybe 5 minutes, if that.

Re:dual story requires dual comment (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#41817615)

Nonstop coverage of something that doesn't affect me? Yes, because I couldn't watch real news.

By all means, please tell us what other news doesn't affect you, so we can remove it from the world's news post haste!

Here in Wisconsin, we'd be outside tailgating in a class 1 storm.

Yes, I imagine you get quite a few class 1 HURRICANES in Wisconsin, don't you? And the class just refers to the speed of the wind, not the size or how long it lasts. This is an extremely powerful storm, which would explain why all the weather forecasters say not to pay attention to what class this one is.

As for the boat, I'm no sailing expert but don't you typically not take low tech replicas of old ships sailing in a hurricane?

I'd hate to let the mere fact that you don't know anything about boats keep you from judging people who do, but maybe the fact that all the boat owners in the world didn't consult with you beforehand should be an indicator. As other slashdaughters have pointed out, keeping your boat in dock can be very dangerous. So many people took their boats out to sea to weather the storm. But this being a very powerful storm (see above), some didn't do so well. It could be have been worse in port though.

Re:dual story requires dual comment (2)

Molt (116343) | about 2 years ago | (#41817953)

It couldn't have been worse in port- the ship's been lost and at least one member of the crew has died. In port the ship could have been destroyed but the crew would have been on land, away from the ship, and safe.

Re:dual story requires dual comment (1)

compro01 (777531) | about 2 years ago | (#41817859)

As for the boat, I'm no sailing expert but don't you typically not take low tech replicas of old ships sailing in a hurricane?

When they set sail, this storm wasn't expected to be anywhere near them. It was expected to trash Cuba and Haiti, then wander off west into empty ocean.

It wasn't until Thursday that the forecast showed it headed for New Jersey.

Re:dual story requires dual comment (1)

compro01 (777531) | about 2 years ago | (#41817923)

Wander off east, rather.

Re:dual story requires dual comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41818043)

Uhh, we predicted the exact path of this storm last Monday, nearly a full week before it hit. As for the Bounty, reports are that something went wrong with the generators. They do have internal propulsion, but without power that was lost -- as well as the ability to pump water out.

Mighty Con Ed transformer explosion (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817311)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seMaLEqotUw [youtube.com] - Transformer explosion at Consolidated Edison, Manhattan.
Seems like the vid may be looping. One hell of a flash though.

Re:Mighty Con Ed transformer explosion (1)

FireFury03 (653718) | about 2 years ago | (#41817683)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seMaLEqotUw [youtube.com] - Transformer explosion at Consolidated Edison, Manhattan.

Seems like the vid may be looping. One hell of a flash though.

The BBC reported it as "a powerstation has exploded!"... Way to go for headline-grabbing misinformation (especially after the unfounded fearmongering over nuclear power stations potentially going to melt down that's been going on...)

WTF were they even doing at sea? (1, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#41817377)

The original HMS Bounty didn't have the benefit of knowing a week in advance when a hurricane was coming. This one did. WTF were they even at sea for? Unless this was a suicide run, that was pretty fucking stupid.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817481)

Safer for a ship to be at sea than in port where it will smashed against the dock and washed ashore. Ship like that however isn't very fast so even with warning they were still in danger.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 2 years ago | (#41817497)

This is what I came in here to say, too. They had lots of time to get the hell out of the whole damned region.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817503)

Their Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/HMSBounty says "A SHIP IS SAFER AT SEA THAN IN PORT!"

Hindsight is, of course, 20/20.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817527)

The original HMS Bounty didn't have the benefit of knowing a week in advance when a hurricane was coming. This one did. WTF were they even at sea for? Unless this was a suicide run, that was pretty fucking stupid.

Is it as stupid as some moron who merely knows how to use a computer thinking that he's qualified to give an opinion on how to run a ship? In any case, you could RTFA and your question would have been answered.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (1)

SydShamino (547793) | about 2 years ago | (#41817533)

Safer at sea than at port - though I saw mention that they were in dry dock very recently, which might be safer than either other option. The stupider part though was that they didn't sail due East to get away from the storm, but instead tried to sail South towards their destination in Florida (after going only a little bit East to try to avoid the storm).

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (2)

SydShamino (547793) | about 2 years ago | (#41817559)

Safer for the ship, of course, not the crew.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (1)

compro01 (777531) | about 2 years ago | (#41818053)

The stupider part though was that they didn't sail due East to get away from the storm, but instead tried to sail South towards their destination in Florida (after going only a little bit East to try to avoid the storm).

Until Thursday, the storm was expected to go East off into the Atlantic after wrecking Cuba and Haiti. It was until the 11am Thursday forecast that it was expected to make landfall in New Jersey. At the speed they would be going and given how damn big Sandy is, I don't think going East at that point would have made any difference except putting them further from help.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (3, Insightful)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about 2 years ago | (#41817547)

Ships are designed to be at sea, not alongside a dock. In severe storms, boats are often able to more easily weather a storm in the open water than at a dock or in shallow water, where they are likely to bump into things, which rarely ends well for the ship. From what I understand, the Bounty was out and trying to skirt along the edge of the storm, but the waves were so high that they took on too much water. The whole crew had on life jackets and survival suits, but the Captain and th sailor that drowned were swept overbaord while getting on a life raft. So they were prepared to ditch.

And for an example of why being at sea is better, Good Morning America showed footage this morning of a tanker that had been tied of at a dock in New York. The storm broke it free, carried it several miles, and beached it to where about half of it is on land. This was a modern ship with a metal hull, but it's safe to assume the hull took at least some damage when it beached. Now imagine what would have happened to a larg wooden hulled vessel that got smashed up against it's pier, or beached on some rocks.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (5, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | about 2 years ago | (#41817573)

The original bounty would have pumps that would have been operated manually by gangs of sailors. Wood hauled ships of that type are pretty much in a constant state of sinking, you must pump the bilge.

The replica bounty was equipped only with electric pumps They had some kind of generator failure and could not run them.

What were they doing at sea. Its pretty much SOP of an ocean going vessel of any significant size to put to see ahead of storm. I hope its obvious to you why being anchor in heavy sees would be a problem. Since you can't be tied up you don't want to be anywhere near shallow water or anything like pier, rock, other ship, etc you might be pushed against.

So what you generally do is you try to sail out into deep open water, and avoid the storm as much as possible. This is the safest thing to do for the ship. Obviously you don't head strait into the storm, but this thing was so big they could not easily avoid even the worst of it; given their best possible speed.

So yes the original HMS Bounty and her crew probably would have survived this storm, although its likely some top men would have been killed trying to reef sails in heavy wind and sea. The replica with her mechanical dependencies and crew we value more than the vessel was not up to it.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817577)

It was docked you maroon, where are you going to move a ship like that quickly anyway the other ports equally stricken on the Eastern seaboard?

All the men and material for maintaining the ship are in her home port, it's tragic that she's down for now but she'll be back.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (1)

jsh1972 (1095519) | about 2 years ago | (#41817621)

seagoing vessels are often safer at anchor than staying at the dock and being battered by the storm surge and left beached. I live in southeast texas, and i remember during hurricane rita seeing large 100 yard long barges on dry land 3/4 mile from the waterfont.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (3, Interesting)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#41817789)

WTF were they even at sea for?

Ships (usually) move a lot faster than houses, so you simply sail out of the way... unless you have an equipment failure during the escape. Then you sink/die of course, because suddenly you're stationary. Its almost impossible to sink a boat that's underway in the modern radio era, even if its an ancient replica. Safest place to be when a hurricane is on the way is on a ship, because in about 12 to 24 hours you'll be somewhere sunny and pleasant instead of in a hurricane, and if you get a couple days warning that is not too difficult to get 12 hours away... I used to get endless shit from landlubbers when I was serious contemplating doing the liveaboard sailboat thing about hurricanes "What'll you do when a hurricane hits your harbor" "Probably drinking a margarita sitting on a sunny beach 300 miles away, what are you going to be doing when a hurricane hits your home city?" "Grr..."

I was a real small time sailboat sailor but even I know their "killer" (literally) mistake was not traveling in a convoy. So the mainmast snaps off or you spring a hopeless leak, who cares, everyone move from boat #4 to boat #27 and we'll continue along the way. Its more fun to sail in a group of friends anyway. Probably they were too scared of low visibility to escape in a group, if the odds of collision are 2% in heavy seas and dense fog, and the odds of sinking are 0.001% then you go it alone. In slashdot IT terms this is a Redundant Array of Inexpensive (LOL) Sailboats, but if its foggy you'll get massive filesystem corruption.

In all honesty quite a few "killed by hurricane" stories are REALLY "killed during hurricane" stories that have nothing to do with the weather, they'd be just as dead without the storm. Very few sailors are killed by hurricanes compared to landlubbers I'd feel much safer on a boat than on land.

Until they come out with a formal report we won't know what happened, but I'm guessing they were doing a hell of a lot better than the landlubbers until something very critical failed in an unanticipated manner.

Re:WTF were they even doing at sea? (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | about 2 years ago | (#41817933)

During a storm, ships are far safer at sea than in port. However, it appears they went south/southwest trying to cut inside the storm's track... when they probably should have gone northeast. (But I don't know what may have been waiting for them in the North Atlantic. It can be nasty this time of year.)

The captain (1)

Deadstick (535032) | about 2 years ago | (#41817407)

...appears to have upheld the highest traditions of the sea. In the past couple of decades there have been at least two Mediterranean cruise ship skippers who can't say that.

Not a religious guy, but...

Hear us as we cry to thee,
For those in peril on the sea.

Knocks Off Gawker Websites? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817409)

Sandy knocked out the gawker websites? How is it that I have been thinking hurricanes are bad, for all these years?

The Daily Show (1)

Stele (9443) | about 2 years ago | (#41817425)

No Daily Show. Now how will I get my news?

Gawker offline? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817433)

Well, there's a bit of silver lining.

Why was boat out to sea (1)

ZombieBraintrust (1685608) | about 2 years ago | (#41817437)

Does anywone know why the boat was out? Seems like a bad time to sail in replica boat.

Re:Why was boat out to sea (1)

ZombieBraintrust (1685608) | about 2 years ago | (#41817499)

Nevermind, It looks like they were trying to save the ship by sailing it east St. Petersburg.

Bounty's current voyage is a calculated decision... NOT AT ALL... irresponsible or with a lack of foresight as some have suggested. The fact of the matter is... A SHIP IS SAFER AT SEA THAN IN PORT!

Safer for the ship. The dead crew would have been safer in their beds on land.

Re:Why was boat out to sea (1)

JustOK (667959) | about 2 years ago | (#41817949)

depends on where their beds were.

Re:Why was boat out to sea (1)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#41818051)

Safer for the ship. The dead crew would have been safer in their beds on land.

Nah, their beds would be underwater due to the surge and they'd be drowned. If you gotta evac one way or another, you should do what you do best, and what sailors do best is sail, so...

Re:Why was boat out to sea (1)

thestudio_bob (894258) | about 2 years ago | (#41817505)

I heard it was headed to Clearwater, FL where it spends its winters. Unfortunately, it's not a fast moving boat.

historically accurate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817473)

The HMS bounty is just a little bit more historically accurate now, that's all.

Huffington Post (3, Insightful)

Edzor (744072) | about 2 years ago | (#41817487)

I think the Huffington Post managers would be more worried if a real media website went down like the NYT. Where would they steal - sorry aggregate - their content from then!

I read the title and all I got to say... (1)

thestudio_bob (894258) | about 2 years ago | (#41817493)

I read the title and all I got to say is that its a damn shame about the HMS Bounty.

So where are all you idiots (2, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41817507)

that said this storm wasn't going to be anything and were criticizing people getting prepared in the 'Sandy' story the other day? hmm? I expect you are apologizing and have learned your lesson~

HMS Bounty missing (1)

CosaNostra Pizza Inc (1299163) | about 2 years ago | (#41817509)

"Several news sites are reporting that the 1962 replica of the HMS bounty was lost at sea due to hurricane Sandy, about 90 miles off North Carolina."

Are they certain this wasn't the result of a mutiny?

Knocks Off Gawker Websites (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817537)

Knocks Off Gawker Websites ... and nothing of value was lost.

Re:Knocks Off Gawker Websites (2)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 2 years ago | (#41818161)

Knocks Off Gawker Websites ... and nothing of value was lost.

Add the Huffington Post to your comment and you said exactly what I came here to say.

Mechanical problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817679)

I heard their plan was to outrun the storm and make it to Florida, but they had mechanical problems and were dead in the water waiting for a tow. Tough break, maybe something wasn't done correctly in dry dock. They must use my auto mechanic.

Re:Mechanical problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817899)

It's a sailing ship!

Re:Mechanical problems (1)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#41818139)

they had mechanical problems and were dead in the water waiting for a tow

Ouch, its almost impossible to sink a ship that at least has steerage, but out of control you're in deep trouble if you get broadside to the waves or a big wave over the stern and you're done. Boats, even antique replicas, can survive almost anything headon other than hitting a lighthouse but from the side or back they're toast.

Next oto nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817697)

Here we have some cloud and mild rain. Not exactly the end of days scenario we were told to expect.

Re:Next oto nothing (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#41818077)

Here we have some cloud and mild rain. Not exactly the end of days scenario we were told to expect.

Of course, you're in Seattle.

The ship was called "Bounty" not "HMS Bounty" (1)

dave420 (699308) | about 2 years ago | (#41817701)

It wasn't in the Royal Navy, and it was clearly registered as Bounty...

wrong, populary called HMS Bounty by millions (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 years ago | (#41817895)

it was a replica of the HMS Bounty, and is popularly called as such. the world doesn't care about royal navy registration and can put HMS in front of anything they please.

at sea because and NYSE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41817871)

They were at sea because ships generally tend to do better at sea during a storm of this magnitude than they do in port. Modern day ships can generally get underway and scoot out of the path of the main part of the storm pretty quickly. When I was in the Navy they would totally empty out the entire Norfolk Naval Station of all ships, boats, and submarines for a storm like this. It was called a "sortie."

On another topic, this being /. and all, why on EARTH did the Stock Exchange stay down for two days (or at ALL for that matter). Do their servers only reside in the New Jersey data center and/or on Wall street? Don't they have geographically isolated redundant backup? I mean after all, they are the freakin STOCK EXCHANGE! When a hurricane takes out Miami my little company stays online through it all. Phones get transferred to other offices to be answered or employees work from home (while the broadband lasts). Why would a storm take down the entire New york stock exchange for crying out loud?????

Trapped (1)

jjp9999 (2180664) | about 2 years ago | (#41817873)

I've been stuck in my apartment, constantly online, with blankets on my windows... actually, things aren't much different from every other day. Only when I peek outside, it's raining.

Re:Trapped (3, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#41818099)

Here then, look at this neat map [hint.fm] .

Kinda hypnotizing. (Wind map, in case anyone's scared to go there.)

Sad (1)

paiute (550198) | about 2 years ago | (#41817961)

I just took some pictures of her when she was hauled out of the water in Boothbay Harbor, a couple of weeks ago. I was joking that the modern sailor was spoiled, as there was no seat of ease visible at the bow.

Re:Sad (1)

DarkOx (621550) | about 2 years ago | (#41818211)

I got to see her when she was at Sample too, glad I got the oppertunity.

fiRrst post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41818007)

No (1)

Bender Unit 22 (216955) | about 2 years ago | (#41818055)

Not at all, this is the first I've heard of it. But I have also been working way to much the last few days to find time to browse news sites.

Best site backup plan? #Openthread (2)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 2 years ago | (#41818083)

Dear lifehacker readers - what is the best way you've found to make sure a site remains available during a natural disaster?
-Adam Pash

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?