Moody 49 lost on bar at Bahia del Sol, El Salvador

[Kettlewell]

But? Who is responsible for the condition of the bar and for sharing that knowledge?
The mooring field owner?
The Hotel owner?
The local government?

Ultimately it is the skipper of the boat, and bars change all the time. If I wanted advice on the bar conditions I would try to call another cruising boat already inside.

[avant]

We arrived in El Salvador crossing the bar without incident in early 2018, and departed crossing the bar without incident in late 2020. (45’ sailboat, 8’ draft). I do not recall any boats touching bottom in the time we were there, and I think we met an talked to all of the arrivals and were avid listeners to the vhf for each arrival and departure (at an estimate that would have been some 40-50 boats and some 80-100 bar crossings inbound and outbound). Bar crossings were frequently described as ‘sporty’, but no one seems to have been in abject fear. Two boats did have rudder failures (one inbound, one outbound) and both were assisted to dock for repairs by the pilot boat without incident.

[BlueH2Obound]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Just because someone touches or even lays over, broaches, does not mean they reported it to the guy running the mooring field. I totally agree! That's why I stated whether Bill personally witnessed the "touchings", was informed of the "touchings", or that I didn't know if he had been informed or not.

That said my GUESS is that he likely had more inication something was not correct.

But? Who is responsible for the condition of the bar and for sharing that knowledge?
The mooring field owner?
The Hotel owner?
The local government?

I honestly don't think anyone is formally responsible for reporting the conditions of the bar, but from our research, Bill had appeared to be the most forthcoming and helpful with his information. Whether his information is correct or not is up to the individual to decide.

Let me note there that Bill and Jean appear to be wonderful people, who were extremely welcoming when we came into Bahia del Sol, and who regularly open their home to visiting cruisers. Providing better hospitality than they provided would be tough to do.

However that is not the current topic of discussion. We are just frustrated and concerned that we made an important decision (go/no go) on whether to risk our boat and our lives on information that appears now to not have been totally accurate.

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Just because someone touches or even lays over, broaches, does not mean they reported it to the guy running the mooring field.

That said my GUESS is that he likely had more inication something was not correct.

But? Who is responsible for the condition of the bar and for sharing that knowledge?
The mooring field owner?
The Hotel owner?
The local government?

I was on the Panama Posse call Muirgen references. There have been several people in the last few weeks who reported broach and/or touching bottom. BDS response that only 4 of 585 crossings simply does not have the ring of truth.

As far as who reports this stuff - it's the owner of the hotel/marina/mooring field. They are the ones who hire the pilot and guide visiting cruisers into their facilities. It is because of the pilot that Cruisers will consider BDS.

Clearly, the Hotel/Marina has a strong interest in reducing the volume and severity of incidents. Giving them the benefit of the doubt, they may feel that a spreaders-in-the-water broach is just normal so is not part of the four of 585 incidents.

Let's be clear: boats with insufficient boat speed to match the breaking waves are at risk of broach. Although the channel is supposedly 12-feet deep, there are numerous reports of touching or grounding temporarily. If you're okay with that, BDS is supposedly a really nice place for cruisers to hang out.

[hpeer]

I went on No Foreign Land and while there are reviews of the hotel and anchorage I saw no warnings or even comments on the bar crossing.

Are there any Active Captain notes on this inlet?

How about cruising guides?


Of this inlet is as bad as it sounds then we are a bunch of twits for not posting warnings.

Sure we cruisers are not responsible for the bar or the pilot, but we CAN use the resources available to warn others.

NOTE:

There is. Link to some pretty detailed crossing instructions but the link is buried in the Hotel link. But it does not sound like even is accurate. But good info.

MAYBE someone could make a more obvious link on the bar.

https://elsalvadorrally.com/Crossing_the_bar.html

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

Ultimately it is the skipper of the boat, and bars change all the time. If I wanted advice on the bar conditions I would try to call another cruising boat already inside.

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

Very sad story. It reinforces my belief to never, and I mean never, trust local knowledge...

Originally Posted by Kettlewell

The advice you receive on this forum is worth what you paid for it!

I have amnesia.
It’s the reason, I find these contributions consistently helpful.

[luckyone]

I crossed that bar last year. There is some apparent confusion regarding roles and responsibilities around the piloting operation. Bill isn’t the pilot and has no authority over the pilot, though his advice might be heeded. The pilot is employed by the hotel which has the marina attached to it. Bill runs an unrelated mooring field and offers various services, including amazing assistance and hospitality, to visitors. If Bill is aboard the pilot boat his role is to translate between the crossing vessel and the pilot using the radio and take the fabulous and frightening pictures of the crossing so many visitors have. I think when we hear “Pilot Boat” we are imagining some sort of governmental operation with big budget, safety culture and oversight. This pilot is not that. My opinion only, but while entering that estuary is a risky maneuver, I’m not sure it’s particularly risky in the context of cruising Central America. Or most of the less developed world for that matter. I think many fail to understand just how dangerous our lifestyle is. Probably a good thing.

[BlueH2Obound]

Originally Posted by luckyone

I crossed that bar last year. There is some apparent confusion regarding roles and responsibilities around the piloting operation. Bill isn’t the pilot and has no authority over the pilot, though his advice might be heeded. The pilot is employed by the hotel which has the marina attached to it. Bill runs an unrelated mooring field and offers various services, including amazing assistance and hospitality, to visitors. If Bill is aboard the pilot boat his role is to translate between the crossing vessel and the pilot using the radio and take the fabulous and frightening pictures of the crossing so many visitors have. I think when we hear “Pilot Boat” we are imagining some sort of governmental operation with big budget, safety culture and oversight. This pilot is not that.

luckyone,

Just a clarification. Since Bill is the one talking on the radio, and our ONLY interaction with the Pilot, or pilot boat, I am lumping Bill, the Pilot, and the panga the Pilot is in all together in the term "Pilot" or "Pilot Boat".
Attempting to define the Pilot as only the guy steering the outboard engine on the panga, and whom the "assisted boats" have absolutely no direct interaction is semantics at best, and misleading at worst IMHO.

[JPA Cate]

But don't lose sight of what the nature of the beast is: the fact that many skippers would hear "shall we send out the pilot boat to guide you in?" as meaning just what was mentioned above, a Pilot who has many professional qualifications, and a proper competent ocean going pilot boat.

When confronted by wanting to go in, but seeing some fellow with whom they cannot communicate directly in a panga, whom they are told is a "pilot", do they hear "Pilot?" or "pilot"?

It's just my opinion here, but it seems to me that it is a bit misleading of the hotel to call their local "expert" a "pilot," but it IS the job he tries to do.

I'll stick to my previous point of view: just don't follow pangas. If you can, scout all shallow areas by dinghy, and make waypoints to guide yourself in when you have to go in somewhere, and raise your own danger warnings for you as you imagine how something could go wrong and how you might address it. Or just go back to sea. Where there is unimpeded depth, there is safety. We've all gone without a good night's sleep sometime. We make do and catch up later. It takes courage to behave prudently when others are not. Your boat, your choice. We've never had hull insurance, and have always opted for the prudent, conservative approach.

Ann

[mvweebles]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

But don't lose sight of what the nature of the beast is: the fact that many skippers would hear "shall we send out the pilot boat to guide you in?" as meaning just what was mentioned above, a Pilot who has many professional qualifications, and a proper competent ocean going pilot boat.

When confronted by wanting to go in, but seeing some fellow with whom they cannot communicate directly in a panga, whom they are told is a "pilot", do they hear "Pilot?" or "pilot"?

It's just my opinion here, but it seems to me that it is a bit misleading of the hotel to call their local "expert" a "pilot," but it IS the job he tries to do.

I'll stick to my previous point of view: just don't follow pangas. If you can, scout all shallow areas by dinghy, and make waypoints to guide yourself in when you have to go in somewhere, and raise your own danger warnings for you as you imagine how something could go wrong and how you might address it. Or just go back to sea. Where there is unimpeded depth, there is safety. We've all gone without a good night's sleep sometime. We make do and catch up later. It takes courage to behave prudently when others are not. Your boat, your choice. We've never had hull insurance, and have always opted for the prudent, conservative approach.

Ann

You speak from a ton of experience in lessor developed areas. All I can relate is my impression and feelings from having decided to go into BDS before the Rum Truffle event woke me up.

I was under no illusion that a pilot in El Salvador would be anything other than a panga with a lifelong skipper at the helm. Perhaps it was my eagerness to visit BDS (it sounds wonderful once your inside) but it never occured to me to drill down on the capabilities and what it would take. I assumed you make contact with the marina or Bill for a reservation then work out a decent weather window from Chiapas (225 nms away) and plan to meet the pilot at the designated hi-tide time.

It just never occured to me that even if the swell was very modest as it was that day (2.6 feet per Bill) that it could still be dangerous. Never occured to me that the panga driver would be wrong about entering. Never occured to me there is a serious risk of broach. And frankly, never occured to me just how much trouble a broach can cause.

Since the loss of Rum Truffle a number of cruisers have come forward to tell of their bad experience. Why they didn't do it before is water under the bridge. But the experiences are now available for anyone who searches even a bit, and a warning on NoForeignLand.

It certainly got my attention to really take more control of the decision making.

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by mvweebles

You speak from a ton of experience in lessor developed areas. All I can relate is my impression and feelings from having decided to go into BDS before the Rum Truffle event woke me up.

I was under no illusion that a pilot in El Salvador would be anything other than a panga with a lifelong skipper at the helm. Perhaps it was my eagerness to visit BDS (it sounds wonderful once your inside) but it never occured to me to drill down on the capabilities and what it would take. I assumed you make contact with the marina or Bill for a reservation then work out a decent weather window from Chiapas (225 nms away) and plan to meet the pilot at the designated hi-tide time.

It just never occured to me that even if the swell was very modest as it was that day (2.6 feet per Bill) that it could still be dangerous. Never occured to me that the panga driver would be wrong about entering. Never occured to me there is a serious risk of broach. And frankly, never occured to me just how much trouble a broach can cause.

Since the loss of Rum Truffle a number of cruisers have come forward to tell of their bad experience. Why they didn't do it before is water under the bridge. But the experiences are now available for anyone who searches even a bit, and a warning on NoForeignLand.

It certainly got my attention to really take more control of the decision making.

It is a different sort of thing you're doing now, than a "routine" delivery over a known area. After you've been somewhere the first time, it is less threatening, if it is an okay place to go, of course.

You'll be safer for this tough lesson. It is things like what happened to Rum Truffle that taught us, too. Reading or hearing about someone else's misadventure, heeding the odd warning (like being aware of onshore sets, or what to expect when attempting a crossing through a pass in a coral reef). It isn't that we were born being conservative sailors, more that sailing without any insurance, spending what would have been insurance premiums on safety equipment, and being cautious (questioning, instead of assuming all will be well) is what's kept us safe all these years.* And also, sailboats often had motors that were not up to keeping one safe in a bar crossing situation, and a full suit of sail would have been too much, also.

*someone here was on my case the other day, because I recommended asking yourself, "what could possibly go wrong?", saying that it would freeze people and they'd never do anything. It hasn't worked that way for me, it actually became a sort of game, in which I worked out plans for handling unexpected or scary events. It is really important to not react too quickly, sometimes, and if you already have in mind a number of plans, it is easier to recall them, than invent them under pressure at least for me. Fortunately for me, my skipper has a very cool head in an emergency, better and more thoughtful than me by myself.

Ann

[BlueH2Obound]

[QUOTE=JPA Cate;3880764
*someone here was on my case the other day, because I recommended asking yourself, "what could possibly go wrong?", saying that it would freeze people and they'd never do anything. It hasn't worked that way for me, it actually became a sort of game, in which I worked out plans for handling unexpected or scary events. It is really important to not react too quickly, sometimes, and if you already have in mind a number of plans, it is easier to recall them, at least for me. Fortunately for me, my skipper has a very cool head in an emergency, better and more thoughtful than me by myself.

Ann[/QUOTE]


Ann, that question is the first step of any risk assessment, followed by:
What is the likelihood of that occurrence?
What can I do to mitigate the risks?
What is the likelihood of the occurrence after applying the mitigating factors?
Then asking yourself if the new likelihood is acceptable.
If so, then you apply the mitigating factors, monitor the risks, and drive on.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

But don't lose sight of what the nature of the beast is: the fact that many skippers would hear "shall we send out the pilot boat to guide you in?" as meaning just what was mentioned above, a Pilot who has many professional qualifications, and a proper competent ocean going pilot boat.

When confronted by wanting to go in, but seeing some fellow with whom they cannot communicate directly in a panga, whom they are told is a "pilot", do they hear "Pilot?" or "pilot"?

It's just my opinion here, but it seems to me that it is a bit misleading of the hotel to call their local "expert" a "pilot," but it IS the job he tries to do.

I'll stick to my previous point of view: just don't follow pangas. If you can, scout all shallow areas by dinghy, and make waypoints to guide yourself in when you have to go in somewhere, and raise your own danger warnings for you as you imagine how something could go wrong and how you might address it. Or just go back to sea. Where there is unimpeded depth, there is safety. We've all gone without a good night's sleep sometime. We make do and catch up later. It takes courage to behave prudently when others are not. Your boat, your choice. We've never had hull insurance, and have always opted for the prudent, conservative approach.

Ann

Ann, this bar is a special case where no one simply "follows a panga." There's a whole coordination involving tides and times, and the pilot comes out to guide the boat in. In our case, the pilot didn't lead the way so much as line us up and rally along the way, sometimes ahead, sometimes behind. His usefulness goes beyond just showing where the channel lies: he must position the boat in the right spot to await the correct wave set, and keep the boat in the right position in relation to the waves all the way in. It requires skill and good judgment on his part, plus a good bit of luck and a skipper who will be able to do as instructed and keep his nerve.
Bottom line: I wouldn't be the pilot at this bar for the world. But whomever he is, he's more than a random panga driver.

[JPA Cate]

Yes, I was thinking about it and I agree both with not wanting to be him, and dealing with so many skipper and boat combinations with which he is unfamiliar.

However, we've also seen many people come agley with their travels for relying on others when it is the boat owners who wind up dealing with disappointing outcomes. For that reason, we've never followed someone other than me following Jim (in the dinghy doing soundings) and me driving the mother boat. It simply eliminates someone else from being at fault for a poor outcome. Anyhow, that is why I felt safe with "never follow someone else, or never follow a panga".

I did not mean to disparage the chap who came out, but he's been given an impossible job unless he refuses to do it when tide and swell and breeze are imperfect. Damned hard job.

In addition, from our years of cruising, some of it in what Americans would call 3rd world countries, I have come to the opinion that Americans often have unrealistically high expectations of others, and compared to Canadians, French, and British. It may be a 1st world "entitlement" thing, I don't know.

Ann

[BlueH2Obound]

Using a dingy to guide us in would be an option in many locations, but the BDS bar, with breaking waves, and surf, would not be a place where I would want a dinghy scouting the way.
We fell into the trap of assuming:

• That the Panga/Pilot/Pilot boat knew where the deep water was
• That they had adequate equipment/technology on board the Pilot Boat to actually find the deep water, and to record where it was so it could be found again
• That they would adequately communicate the crossing procedures, and safe channel to us, the assisted boat
• And that they would be IN FRONT of us at all times so we could follow them in/out.

As with aircraft, the entire responsibility for the safety of craft and crew rests on the skipper of the craft (be it an aircraft, or a water craft.)

How could it be otherwise? Because if the boat doesn't get launched into the water, or leave the dock under the direction of the skipper, most accidents will never occur, will they?

That said, when a bar crossing is stated to be safe provided safe procedures are followed, when procedures are advertised as being in place, recommendations are made that you need to engage the assistance of the qualified, competent, and professional bar pilot, one tends to make the assumption that the aforementioned bar is safe and that the aforementioned bar pilot is indeed qualified, competent, and professional, with the tools at hand to safely guide boats across the bar.

In Long Windid's case, as well as well as with Rum Truffle, and many other boats, that assumption demonstrably led to numerous boats grounding, some with little or minor damage, others, as in the case of Rum Truffle resulting in the total loss of his vessel, all his belongings, and narrowly averting his loss of life.

So, yes, the ultimate fault lies with the operator of the boat . . . . .

However, it this case, extenuating circumstances definitely apply . . . .