La Vagabonde's crossing

[Macblaze]

Oh, and Nikki's latest post is up:

Day 10

We are on the move again. It has been a glorious day. The big purple spinnaker was flying all yesterday afternoon and into the night, and we dropped it as the wind increased around 2200. The boat has been soaring - absolutely sending it! 10-20 knots all day. Amazing. The hum as La Vagabonde starts to plane is a familiar feeling now - and as the sea state flattens we are going even faster.

We have played around with which tack to sail on - right now the wind is coming from exactly opposite where we want to go - we are sailing angles, rather than dead downwind, so the decision of whether to sail more east or more north of our rhumb line is our main challenge right now. We are heading east for now, due to its better VMG (velocity made good - the speed we are moving in the direction of Lisbon). We can only sail about 10-20 degrees course on the other tack.

Not only has the sailing been good - but so has the camaraderie. We cracked open the bottle of Macallan and had a small dram before dinner, as well as a much awaited bag of crisps (a high commodity onboard!) and sat around our dinner table listening to Elayna play the guitar and sing. She has a beautiful voice.

For me - the only Crew member with no family onboard - moments like this are particularly special - to feel the closeness and love of community.

It feels like a bit of a come down after a week of poring over a challenging weather forecast - lots of upwind sailing - careful positioning - slow progress - with a very windy front inevitably awaiting us. So relief was in the air - at least from Riley and myself. Relief but never total relaxation .. we are not even halfway if you count the miles - and I’m sure the North Atlantic will have another challenge to throw our way - so we are as ever - on watch! ... and awake at 0300am.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Taking unnecessary risks like out of season passage making is not good seamanship regardless of the course, this was a unnecessary voyage. A nice happy ending and a good story dosent make it a wise decision.

.

Dale has a valid point that does need to be said!

The talented crew on board are definitely "sailing influencers" with a penchant for real adventure and taking risks.

They probably dislike being put up on a pedestal, but they are!

So it is not a bad thing for someone to remind those less experienced that this untertaking on a production boat at this time of year, with vulnerable crew on board
.....is NOT recommended!.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by daletournier

What rubbish, the fact is on rather short notice they undertook a passage into a active hurricane zone, on a schedule that's just a fact , sugarcoat it all you want. As mentioned several times in this thread Hurricanes are unpredictable, it turns out this particular storm is co operating for them BUT there was always a good chance it wouldnt.

Taking unnecessary risks like out of season passage making is not good seamanship regardless of the course, this was a unnecessary voyage. A nice happy ending and a good story dosent make it a wise decision.

Cats as well as monos have been lost before doing this route at this time and were labelled foolish, somehow this is different.

I admire them as a young couple, but that dosent cloud my judgement just to get a warm fuzzy feeling. It's not a good example they are setting for the thousands that follow them, the thousands that have no idea what passage making is about.

Are you saying sailing in a active hurricane zone on a schedule with a very small child and a not so small child is wise? answer the question honestly.

I think that's a little harsh.


It's an adventurous and somewhat risky passage for sure, and I would not personally ever bring any child, much less a baby on such a passage.


But I might well be willing to do it myself, especially with pro crew and pro weather routing to hand.



Having spent 3 months working on my boat last year before going t to the Arctic, I could easily this year get her ready for such a passage within a week. I believe LV is pretty new and well maintained and well equipped.



As I've said, this is vastly different from the Rebel Heart fiasco, vastly different in terms of the skills of the crew, crew resources at hand, vessel, comms, preparation, etc.


I don't agree that making a passage in a less than ideal season is inheretly unseamanlike. There's no such thing as passagemaking without risks, especially interesting passagemaking. This is an adventurous and somewhat risky passage, but not a reckless one.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Cherod

Holy **** , if everyone took the feartie approach like you no one would ever do anything !! Was it a wise decision for the Portuguese fishermen to continue to push the envelope before they fell off the edge of the world , for Hillary to climb a mountain in the snow , omg , was it safe to go to the moon !!! Man up man

While your sitting at home in your armchair I'm actively crossing oceans so your "never do anything " response is mute.

My point is very simple, good seamanship is about making good decisions and minimizing risk, heading into the wrong ocean at the wrong time of year on a schedule when you dont have to is taking unnecessary risk. I'm all for adventure, been doing it for 10 years, would Riley of undertaken this passage if Greata wasnt involved, I doubt it.

The previous poster is correct, it's done, it's pointless debating the rights and wrongs, but I'd prefer that you and others would stop labeling those that have educated opinions that dont agree with yours as naysayers etc, are we calling you an ignorant fool?

I will be refraining from comment from here on, as I'm not helping which other wise is a good thread

[pellesand]

This is my first post in this forum even tough I am reading it from time to time. Swedish sailing magazine "På Kryss" published a quite informative piece about the background of the La Vagabond crossing. I have not seen anything about this elsewhere. I believe it might be interesting for some of you in this thread,

Original text in Swedish:
https://pakryss.se/darfor-seglar-gre...ots-katamaran/


Google Translate:
https://translate.google.com/transla...s-katamaran%2F

[Cherod]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

The last time the naysayers on CF got all het up was over an incident with Rebel Heart where a family set off across the Pacific and, because the baby got sick (and a bunch of mechanical stuff) they had to be rescued by the Navy and scuttled the boat. CF in general were pretty down on Eric (the captain and husband) in the first place and the incident provided ages of entertainment for the online crowd. Actually it provided ages of entertainment for the world in general as it became a pretty big news story with the more judgemental going nuts over the fat that anyone would dare endanger a baby on the ocean.

Personally I think taking your baby, infant, toddler etc. with you regardless of of the "danger" of life in general is still more admirable than stuffing them in a germ-infested daycare for 60% of their waking hours and then ignoring them when they get home.

Well said Mcblaze , what a fantastic start to a life . Bet she grows up to be a lot more interesting than some I can mention

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by Cherod

You like to keep harping on about some unfortunate couple and their baby ( whom I have tbh never heard of before ) despite the dissimilarity bing pointed out time and again ,,, have you ever heard of Rosie Swale ??

There's a big difference between adults choosing to have a potentially dangerous adventure such as extreme sky diving or mountain climbing tall peaks or crossing North Atlantic out of season but there's nothing brave or adventuresome about exposing a one year old baby to unnecessary danger. I'm all for cruising couples with kids and think it's a great lifestyle, but most experienced cruising couples I've met cut back on the more strenuous passages until their kids are a bit older and able to be more resilient if things go wrong. Crossing the Atlantic this time of year isn't something even more experienced cruising adults would attempt, they'd wait until conditions moderated in the late spring. I'm sure La Vagabonde is a great boat and extremely seaworthy, etc. etc. and after this they can brag it's even good for crossing the Atlantic in the winter, but exposing their one year old to the danger inherent in this voyage has lost them a LOT of credibility with me. It's not a sensible or seamanlike thing to do. I see it as a selfish attempt to garner even more notoriety and publicity by carrying on as if they hadn't just had a baby. That's pretty inconsiderate and self centered. They'd have impressed me a lot more by choosing to keep their search for $$$, fame, and notoriety in the back seat to their baby's safety, at least until it's old enough to have a fighting chance of survival in the event of an onboard emergency. I don't know what their motivation was for doing this voyage this time of year, but if you take their sponsorship and the press the young climate activists presence brings them, I can't imagine any experienced cruising couple choosing to take their baby out in this when they could have safely stayed on this side of this side of the Atlantic until spring and then enjoyed a much more pleasant and safer passage. I hope they make it safely across without too much discomfort, but I'll still think it was a very selfish and foolish thing to do with a one year old on board.

[atoll]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

The last time the naysayers on CF got all het up was over an incident with Rebel Heart where a family set off across the Pacific and, because the baby got sick (and a bunch of mechanical stuff) they had to be rescued by the Navy and scuttled the boat. CF in general were pretty down on Eric (the captain and husband) in the first place and the incident provided ages of entertainment for the online crowd. Actually it provided ages of entertainment for the world in general as it became a pretty big news story with the more judgemental going nuts over the fat that anyone would dare endanger a baby on the ocean.

Personally I think taking your baby, infant, toddler etc. with you regardless of of the "danger" of life in general is still more admirable than stuffing them in a germ-infested daycare for 60% of their waking hours and then ignoring them when they get home.

i think you might be mixing up an 11 month old baby that basically eats sleeps and feeds and is totaly reliant on its mother with a 20 month+ toddler,that is more or less able to feed itself,mobile and aware of its surroundings.
big difference.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by atoll

i think you might be mixing up an 11 month old baby that basically eats sleeps and feeds and is totaly reliant on its mother with a 20 month+ toddler,that is more or less able to feed itself,mobile and aware of its surroundings.
big difference.

Nope, not mixing up a thing. But let's end this here rather than wreck what has been an admirable thread. You are right in your mind, I am right in mine — c'est tout.

I have to say the big red wall of wind that predict wind shows right now is extremely intimidating...

[atoll]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

Nope, not mixing up a thing. But let's end this here rather than wreck what has been an admirable thread. You are right in your mind, I am right in mine — c'est tout.

I have to say the big red wall of wind that predict wind shows right now is extremely intimidating...

lets hope the babies partially formed soft cranium does not get bumped on the soft spot resulting in permernant brain damage.
or the mother becomes dehydrated and is unable to feed.

[HeinSdL]

It's a man's world! More on that in a minute. Without wishing to provoke in any way I think it's quite funny to see serious discussion ongoing when there are serious things to discuss (up to about 24 hours ago) and then the wind dies down and... then what? Well the trip seems to be going quite smoothly, in fact we're collectively jealous that it isn't us having a nice sail (well in any case, I am jealous) and we need something else to discuss. And away we go, no limits, even the mother's ability to feed her child gets a mention! As mentioned, and all said from a light-hearted perspective I promise, we men we really know it all! Luckily we're staying away from the climate!

[Cherod]

Originally Posted by daletournier

While your sitting at home in your armchair I'm actively crossing oceans so your "never do anything " response is mute.

My point is very simple, good seamanship is about making good decisions and minimizing risk, heading into the wrong ocean at the wrong time of year on a schedule when you dont have to is taking unnecessary risk. I'm all for adventure, been doing it for 10 years, would Riley of undertaken this passage if Greata wasnt involved, I doubt it.

The previous poster is correct, it's done, it's pointless debating the rights and wrongs, but I'd prefer that you and others would stop labeling those that have educated opinions that dont agree with yours as naysayers etc, are we calling you an ignorant fool?

I will be refraining from comment from here on, as I'm not helping which other wise is a good thread

Life is about risks , mitigating them and minimising them is what makes it interesting , just to say I only wish I was sitting in an armchair , I will beg to differ and leave it at that for the sake of an excellent thread

[Cherod]

Originally Posted by atoll

lets hope the babies partially formed soft cranium does not get bumped on the soft spot resulting in permernant brain damage.
or the mother becomes dehydrated and is unable to feed.

I am just wondering if you perhaps got a bump on yer heed when you was but a lad ??

[Wendi]

Originally Posted by sebbiep

As this thread has been debating (albeit from afar) the safety decisions made by the LaVag crew, here's a couple of small factual corrections to previous posts:

The LaVag team stated that they spent 7 days preparing the boat - i.e. not the 3 days being quoted throughout this thread. Even though she was already in good shape, agreed that everyone would want longer than this, but they worked long days - surprising how much you can get done with a deadline.

Secondly the little boy is 12 months old (or will be either days before or after landfall in Lisbon - 6th Dec), not the 5 months quoted throughout this thread. This doesn't hugely change the fundamentals of your debate, however he is neither a tiny baby nor is he thankfully yet fully able to toddle - so it improves the situation slightly.

Lenny has been walking for maybe a month. So this does make him a little more difficult to keep content I would think. They have put up gates and tethers.

[atoll]

Originally Posted by Cherod

I am just wondering if you perhaps got a bump on yer heed when you was but a lad ??

no but i did sail twice around the world with both of my kids from when they were born untill their early teens.

as a concerned parent i take issue about the prudence of sailing other than short coastal trips with babies under 18 months.