Yes some say good navigating is about knowing where you are, and then confirming that with all means available, including paper and electronic charts, radar, depth soundings! They had radar too but weren’t using it…
I remember the navigator telling in an interview how stupid he felt when he got home and saw the shoal on his son's €20 IKEA world map, whilst having missed it on this high tech software
@@SailingTipsCa that navigator is done with sailing period. after that he probably bows out. sailing scene is brutal and the ridicule will be hard to bear with.
I was just telling guys sailing on my boat about this. Mistakes are easy to make. Even professionals make them. Learn from their mistakes. Also if professionals can run into a whole island, you shouldn't feel bad about your little mistake bumping that shoal or stump.
This is familiar. It’s called “Death by GPS”. I was one of 12 crew aboard the 100 foot maxi sloop ‘Christine’ when we hit a reef at 11 knots off the west end of Anacapa Island. Our navigator/owner was using a brand-new gps plotter on a computer screen; no more ‘obsolete’ charts for this newly-launched maxi. The scale was set small, so no reef could be seen. The owner thought we were safe with the new gps technology- actually, he was overconfident. He steered us near the shore, close-reaching with a spinnaker and mainsail. We slammed to a sudden stop; people were hurt badly and one had to be picked up by CG Helicopter. We eventually escaped the reef and made it back to harbor for repairs. Don’t rely on just the gps.
@@robertgregory8936You didn’t have a actual navigator, that’s the problem, just some screen watcher people called a navigator. There’s only one legitimate reason for hitting a reef at sea in the modern world, propulsion failure or storm. The rest of this is incompetence or arrogance, take your pick.
"....Paper charts, which generally show hazards at all levels of zoom." hahahhaha. This had me laughing. I have all the NOAA charts for my bay and normal sailing areas and whenever I'm bored, I study them.
They've changed the protocol for later versions of this event. The boats continue to be monitored 24/7 from a race control center in France. If the controllers see something like this about to happen they call the boat on the satphone and warn them (with no racing penalty IIRC).
You have to be joking aren’t you? Professional sailors just in these cases means they get paid nothing professional here. In my 9000 hours in command of commercial shipping never managed to hit a thing.
The electronic chart should of course show the minimum depth even when zoomed out. A small plane would never fly over mountains without knowing the maximum height of the peaks. It's pretty obvious logic. But if it says "shoal" on the chart, that should ring alarm bells for any navigator - if it's a shoal, the water is going to get shallower than 40m!
Happened to me in daylight. It was not fun. Once you realise your boat is stuck no matter what and you become a sitting duck at the mercy of the waves is terrifying.
Yes I’ve hit stuff too, in broad daylight, that I actually knew was there but made a last minute hasty course change. Fortunately I didn’t get stuck because being at the mercy of the waves would be horrible, especially in such a remote location as they were!
Great video. I disagree it was an example of group think though. Only one person was responsible for making the call and he botched it due to circumstances that set him up to be highly likely to fail.
There’s a good report on the incident that includes details of how different boats handled navigation responsibilities. Yes it was one person’s responsibility but other organizational structures may have been more successful in avoiding this. www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file
@@SailingTipsCa So what if other boats were lucky enough to have not had this gap. We don't live in the 50's. There is no reason why boats can't use live and accurate data to navigate. Especially when they're this high performance. It's silly to hold on to "traditions" of navigation while simultaneously allowing the spaceship like hull designs. The future is the future.
@@MrFerrariF360 Yes not allowing real-time satellite communications was an unfortunate and unnecessary limitation! I believe they will not allow “race command” to intervene if they suspect something like this happening again. At the same time Vestas wind did have two versions of accurate electronic charts available, one on a computer and one on a chart plotter near the companionway, as well as paper charts, but didn’t use them appropriately to notice the hazards.
To me the scary thing is the initial hit. I used to play a multiplayer sailing game and went near a bathymetry error. It was really, really eerie seeing the depth shoot up like that in the middle of the ocean. I can't even begin to imagine how scary it is to hit something in real life where there shouldn't be anything. Like, what could it be? A whale? A submarine? The Flying Dutchman? The Kraken!?
@@CristiNeagu Yes we had a similar experience once: We were in an offshore race, out of sight of land, flying a spinnaker at night in about 25 knots of wind, the boat fully powered up. Then there was a huge BANG, the boat shuddered, then everything felt and sounded different. I had the same thoughts about what it could be, did we hit a whale, a shipping container, is the boat going to sink?!?!? Thankfully we realized it was “just” a broken spinnaker halyard as the spinnaker floated down into the water. But those seconds of uncertainty were frightening!
Thanks - yes they were both unlucky to have had the accident but also extraordinary lucky to have emerged with only minor scrapes and bruises, and maybe some major bruised egos!
I know it’s a pretty amazing comeback story!!! I think the sponsors were supportive as well because they didn’t want it all to just end there on the atoll…
I am wondering about the aftermath procedure in these pro structures. What happens to the navigator after this kinda event? gets sacked or keep going with him for the rest of the race & never invite him again?
He was sacked by Vestas Wind following the grounding while the rest of the crew was retained for the rebuild and re-entry of the final two legs: www.yachtingworld.com/races/volvo-ocean-race-20142015/team-vestas-wind-navigator-wouter-verbraak-sacked-review-volvo-ocean-race-shipwreck-61527
It took that long to realize vector rendered charts lose detail when zoomed out. As a result, I have both raster and vector on display while navigating to reduce the potential of hitting submerged reef. All the tech in the world won't prevent humans from making mistakes. Just need the correct data points
@@SailingTipsCa I sail on ~50 sq.mile reservoir on edge of Rockies so slight canyon environment. We have a shallow spot called Lower Unit. 12ft of water peak of snow melt, 2 ft above the ice during winter. Unseen danger is a daily thing for me. Hopefully good practice when I venture to San Juan Islands and South Florida.
Maybe not lucky, they knew the reef was there, or they could see it... Sometimes there are signs of the shallows, like deeper or breaking waves, or change in sea color - easy to miss if you are not aware of the cause, and busy to manoeuvre the boat...
There are definitely lots of options for navigation software and charts. Interestingly many of the big brand chart plotters all use Navionics software and charts these days.
@@SailingTipsCa How about automatic shallow spot highlights in the software which should be better than paper maps with clever programming. Put it on a smartphone with notifications for collision warnings
@@glike2 There was a feature called "chart bounds" that was supposed to alert them of dangers like shallow waters and hazards so they zoom in but for some reason that didn't work as expected...
@@markthomasson5077 Yes the skipper also double-checked the route prior to the crash, but on the weather routing laptop that didn’t have the high-resolution chart dongle, which affirmed the group-think that there was a minimum water depth of 40 metres and nothing to worry about. The hazard was clearly visible on all paper charts but those weren’t checked by anyone…
No he was sacked from Vestas Wind while the rest of the team helped re-build the boat and went on to re-join the race without that particular navigator. Looks like he still sails periodically but his LinkedIn profile shows he has a day job too…
If i use commercial sat nav software will i avoid this? I currently use Navionics and iSailor on two ipads and my B&G Vulcan. If two of the three agree i go carefully, if all three agree i go confidently if all three say no i dont go My point is that now i dont think this is enough and i solo sail the oceans of the world. I started sailing in 2017 and completely missed this case. Have i been just lucky? Am i relying on things that will kill me?
Some say you should know where you are and the hazards around you and use the available technology to confirm and cross-check. Your strategy of three devices seems reasonable. Modern Navionics also does a better job of showing hazards at more levels of zoom than what these guys had. At the same time, the accuracy of electronic charts also depends on 1) the quality of the cartography i.e. when was the last survey done and by whom and 2) how accurate is the chart datum that connects real GPS locations to chart locations. In waters adjacent to first world countries these are both pretty accurate but can be hit and miss in the developing world, so there is a likelihood the electronic chart says the water is clear when it is not. This is where depth soundings and other forms of electronic input should be used to cross check what you’re seeing with your eyes with what is shown on the charts. In the case of Vestas Wind the hazard was on their charts they just didn’t use them appropriately. I think the key is really to use as much information as you have available and satellite communications and navigation definitely helps! Still be wary that the information you’re getting may not correspond with reality in the case of 1) and 2) above. Good luck!
Do not make the mistake of grouping "electronic charts" (generic term) with official "Electronic Navigation Charts" (specific name). ENC are produced by the world's national hydrographic offices and contain at least the same level as paper charts, and often much greater detail. Generic electronic charts are made to a price, gloss over detail, omit data quality information, and can interpolate between data points to give a misleading misrepresentation. The chart plotters used by Vestas Wind also performed poorly - while they might reveal detail correctly if a user zoomed in on a hazard, if the view planned across (such as when sailing along and not changing the viewing scale), they did not show the same necessary information. I was an expert consultant on the resulting investigation. Chart plotters are much better these days, but the best solution is to use one that can read official ENC.
@@mikeprince1769 Excellent points! Yes once upon a time I had a set of “raster charts” from my government chart authority that displayed the exact “official” paper charts on the electronic plotter. It worked pretty well except for some strange sewing of chart edges together from time to time. They were also quite expensive. And you’re absolutely right that the way the plotter itself behaved was part of the problem, and that both plotters and charts have come a long way since then!
Great video and explanation. I've known about this incident for years and have countlessly reiterated to my navigational officers to keep checking different levels of zoom on the ECDIS since. Thank you 🛥🏝
Yes I’m hoping electronic chart manufacturers will also learn from this and will hopefully make hazards more visible at all levels of zoom. That shoal is visible on a globe of the earth!
I’ve been trying to confirm which boat it was that passed so close however the official report into the incident just refers to it as “another boat” that passed very close for tactical reasons i.e. they did it purposefully.
I am amazed that the software didn't warn them about the shallow water. As in jaw-on-the-floor amazed. That is just ridiculous. It is a very easy function to implement, to check the current route for a certain minimum depth at high resolution. Their routing software does very complex optimizations with expected wind speeds and directions, there is no reason why it shouldn't check for minimum depth.
There was apparently a function called “chart bounds” in the software that was supposed to do this exact thing but appears to not have functioned as expected…
@@SailingTipsCa From the document I understand the "chart bounds" as only a function on the map that shows there is a more detailed map available for a certain area. I haven't read anything along the suggestion of the other poster that would automatically check for hazards along any plotted routes.
@@rogerwilco2 Yes it says "This feature is known to experienced navigators as a trigger that a larger scale chart is available and there are potential dangers worth investigating. Unfortunately this did not alert the navigator to the fact that there was large scale detailed chart data available covering the Cargados Carajos Shoals and he did not zoom in and so gain access to the large scale chart of the dangers." So there was definitely some sub-optimal behavior of both the software and the navigator! The boat's sonar-based depth alarm should have alerted them too but they either ignored that or had it turned off as they do give false positives when sailing fast.
No matter what way one looks at it, it was a spectacular failure of even basic navigation. Zooming in on digital charts to reveal detail is essential and one would hope commonplace. And a cursory glance at a chart would have given them the information the digital chart was hiding. No excuses.
Wow, I always thought these crews were made up of experience professionals. I'm just a novice sailor with a little 24ft sloop and even I know that you need to pan, zoom, and look closely for route planning. I can't believe buddy just said "should be good" and was too lazy to update their charts for the next day.
It’s especially easy to make mistakes when you’re tired! And Navionics is great - I use it natively on an iPad and lots of commercial plotters also use Navionics charts these days.
What bothers me is race organizers watched them do this in real time, yet didn’t have crews preparing for this mistake, or on hand for such an accident.
Seems like a certain amount of skill and determination was applied. I mean, to proper mariners, navigation comes naturally and is a hard trait to remove, but these guys managed...
I saw that reef on my $100 nav system on iPad using free maps, and would have had an alarm setup with ample warning, no excuse, always have a second set of eyes check the route, still I love the vestas team and so glad no physical permanent harm to the crew!
Its a fundamental mistake that should not have happened. Plan your route, zoom in to the appropriate detail and check it does not cross land!! Many routing software can be configured to check min depth, however even if the boat draws 4 mtrs, you certainly would not be wanting to sail into 10 mtrs out there. Noted is the significant underwater depth of 200 mtrs then zero!! Lucky they all survived.
I agree that this fundamental mistake should not have happened! They did sack the navigator after this crash while the remainder of the team re-built the boat and re-joined the final two legs of the race.
This is always a problem with topographic and bathymetric data. Widely available global topography, even only 35 years ago, was on a 30 minute grid. At 30 minute grid resolution, the "maximum" altitude on the planet is about 6500m if I recall correctly. All digital, gridded data suffers from this resolution/averaging problem. And for navigating shoals, it is critical. You need a different data format entirely to normal gridding, or some other way of preserving extreme and near extreme data values, or very high grid resolution (massive datasets).
One viewer mentioned they found the island hit by Vestas Wind on a globe so I dug through my boxes and found my childhood globe and it’s there! Now just need to get a carbon fibre version for light weight!
The irony is that they did have two kinds of electronic charts, and even paper charts on board that indicated the hazard, but didn’t reference them. The inquiry report made a number of recommendations for future races to improve safety: www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file
I haven’t been able to find a precise figure but the original build cost was about $6M and that was based on the one-design concept where they were making several identical boats. The fix would be a custom job so I wouldn’t be surprised if it was on the order of half of that…
@@yozegami Yes and they are typically only on hazards in the vicinity of shipping lanes, and I don’t believe there is much shipping in this part of the Indian Ocean…
@@ricmorris9758 No the skipper is technically responsible for everything that happens while the boat is underway, including hitting the shoal, yet he remained for the last leg. I’m sure there were more nuanced reasons for the navigator not joining for the final leg.
. that race upsets me .. too many lives have been lost in that race.. and until now the safety measures taken by officials to insure all skippers and crew to be safe has failed
There was an inquiry into this grounding which resulted in an 81 page report containing a number of recommendations which hopefully will make some of the future races a bit safer.
Very simple - unprofessional professionals. I spent 18 months sailing around. 6 months was in the Caribbean in the days when all you had was paper charts, RDF and a sextant. Didn't run into anything.
Yes I think paper charts and “traditional navigation” techniques were better for not creating the false sense of security and complacency that electronic charts tend to create!
@@SailingTipsCa That may also be because the other software we use for route planning takes many things into account -- like can a vehicle actually drive here. Apparently this charting / navigation software is not built to the same standard. I am a professional software developer, and I am appalled by the failure of the software provider to build in a simple function to check minimum depth along the whole route. They should be deeply ashamed of themselves.
@@TheEvertw There was apparently a feature called “chart bounds” to trigger an alert at a minimum depth but for some reason it didn’t function as expected. Fortunately charts and chart software have come a long ways in the past few years since this incident!
Terrible wreck, I'm glad no one got hurt. But I had to laugh when I heard you say that they were using Cmap. That's what I have in the Sea of Cortez and if I trusted it I would be on the rocks long ago. I use it to get to and from, but many times It shows that I'm anchoring up on land. At least half the time it's off by a 1/4 - 1/2 mile.
Yes there can be two problems with electronic charts 1) The quality of the cartography (i.e. maps, rocks, islands) varies greatly from one country to another, with waters adjacent to first world countries generally of high quality, but the developing world not so much and 2) the quality of the chart datum, which is the reference point that anchors the cartography to actual GPS locations on the globe. The latter is known to be somewhat out-of-whack in the waters adjacent to Mexico which is why it shows you sailing up in the mountains!
There’s a report with recommendations on the incident which is quite well written: www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file
I sailed a 3000mi ocean race with a terrible navigator. Not only did he not do his job well but he wouldn't take advice or recommendations. Fortunately we didn't hit any rocks.
It’s a bit weird that the one-design package only included one dongle although some teams purchased another. Vestas wind normally used the computer with the dongle for navigation and the other one for weather routing, however they did unfortunately also view charts on the weather routing computer without high-definition capabilities.
Having a dongle for this software is not a good idea as dongles (and the ports they connect to) are fragile, can be lost, get coffee spilled over them, etc. Weird solution, a company prioritizing profits over usability. I never use dongled software out of principle, the last time I used dongled software was in the previous millennium. I hated it, because when I needed the dongle I had to go and look for it. There are far better ways to secure software, and they have been around for a long time.
you need to read ( at least show evidence that you have read the board of enquiry report provided by RADM Chris Oxenbould - a specialist NAVY Navigator. he has totally different failure pyramid to the ones here
I read the inquiry report (www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file) several times and used it as the basis for my video. Is there something I missed or misrepresented?
LOL no mention of Navionics in the inquiry report: www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file They were allegedly using CMap on Expedition.
I’m not exactly sure of the precise ownership structure of the team, but I bet Vestas Wind got more “value” out of their sponsorship in terms of global awareness of their brand than had it not happened!
Um...reefs shown on charts are charted. Not sure that's a word in this context or any other, but if it means anything here, it means they're shown on charts. Unless there's a new commercial venture where reefs are "chartered" as in rented, or are chartered commercial enterprises, incorporated with a charter, they are no chartered reefs. Don't expect to be taken seriously by anyone with any real expertise with a ridiculous blunder like the one in the title. Yes, l'm a professional and professional or not, running onto a known reef at 14+ knots is an especially stupid blunder for a professional navigator. The reason is obvious. They were using an electronic chart on their GPS, set to a very small scale(large area). lf they'd switched to a larger scale, the reef would have been obvious. This guy was no Thomas Cook.
@@frankmiller95 LOL no worries - I’ve done that many times too! And I did double-check after your comment because it could have been entirely possible!
@@frankmiller95 That’s a good example of why everybody needs to use ALL information available to them when navigating a vessel and not just relying on a single source (e.g. somebody’s words). And if there’s an inconsistency to double-check. I’ve often dreamed of being a pilot but my life insurance policy explicitly excludes demise in a private plane as payable so like you I’ll continue to allow the experts to fly me around.
Yes navigation is a HUGE part of sailing and especially offshore in order to put the boat in the most favourable conditions for as much time as possible!
Unfortunately much of the media has become sensationalized in this manner! I'm not sure Vestas Wind intentionally crashed their yacht, but in retrospect they probably received FAR more publicity from the crash and subsequent rebuild than they would have from a "clean" race, unless they happened to win...
It's very easy using electronic charts to miss shallow water. I have seen many people do this across the Pacific and I know of at least five boats which have hit reefs which they had no idea were there. I have almost done it myself. It's something I am constantly woried about
@@deerfootnz Yes and especially easy to miss things when the quality of the electronic charts may be questionable in the first place, and also if the chart datum which anchors it to physical GPS locations is inaccurate, as it can be in many developing countries - that’s why you’re often seen anchoring up in the mountains of Baja!
It’s a multi-stage race series so more specifically they finished leg 1, got a DNF (did not finish) on leg 2 where they crashed, got DNS (did not start) for legs 3-7, and re-joined the series for legs 8 and 9. They got second in leg 8 but seventh (last) overall because of all the legs they missed.
Pro crew? Please. A great many, not all, racers are poor navigators. Shortest line to the next mark or tac is all they know, very good at that. Actually picking up the paper chart for familiarity with general hazards before voyage, in case of wind or current push or storm avoidance? Forget it. “GPS says course is X, now trim that sail for 0.1 knot.” Everybody that races knows these guys are out there. That no satellite data allowed rule in an ocean race was also a stunt only a race committee would pull. Will anybody change? What for? Owner throws down another $5M and round comes the freighter, a large, ocean going cargo freighter to pick it up, fix, new keel no problem, and on to the next blunder.
I’m pretty sure I said “British Indian Ocean Territory” which I probably should have just called Diego Garcia. Where did you hear me say “British Indian Ocean?”
A good reminder to look at the physical charts as well and not rely solely on software. Glad everyone was okay!
Yes some say good navigating is about knowing where you are, and then confirming that with all means available, including paper and electronic charts, radar, depth soundings! They had radar too but weren’t using it…
yes, as paper charts are being phased out....
@@spare9434 Maybe they will come back in style like vinyl records!
Actually the software needs to be modified.
@@mckenziekeith7434 Yes the software was certainly part of the problem! Thankfully improvements have been made since then.
I remember the navigator telling in an interview how stupid he felt when he got home and saw the shoal on his son's €20 IKEA world map, whilst having missed it on this high tech software
Yes I even found it on my childhood plastic globe of the world!!! Definitely a career limiting move…
I was going to say that navigator should be fired but I would be stating the obvious lol
@@undefined69695 I think they actually followed your advice! He didn’t re-join the team to assist with the repair or the final legs of the race.
@@SailingTipsCa that navigator is done with sailing period. after that he probably bows out. sailing scene is brutal and the ridicule will be hard to bear with.
I was just telling guys sailing on my boat about this. Mistakes are easy to make. Even professionals make them. Learn from their mistakes. Also if professionals can run into a whole island, you shouldn't feel bad about your little mistake bumping that shoal or stump.
Yes mistakes are easy to make! I’ve also bumped charted shoals, typically when I change my mind at the last minute!
This case was used a few years ago when I got navigation training
@@yerrie1908 It’s a great case study!
This is familiar. It’s called “Death by GPS”. I was one of 12 crew aboard the 100 foot maxi sloop ‘Christine’ when we hit a reef at 11 knots off the west end of Anacapa Island.
Our navigator/owner was using a brand-new gps plotter on a computer screen; no more ‘obsolete’ charts for this newly-launched maxi. The scale was set small, so no reef could be seen. The owner thought we were safe with the new gps technology- actually, he was overconfident. He steered us near the shore, close-reaching with a spinnaker and mainsail. We slammed to a sudden stop; people were hurt badly and one had to be picked up by CG Helicopter. We eventually escaped the reef and made it back to harbor for repairs. Don’t rely on just the gps.
@@robertgregory8936You didn’t have a actual navigator, that’s the problem, just some screen watcher people called a navigator. There’s only one legitimate reason for hitting a reef at sea in the modern world, propulsion failure or storm. The rest of this is incompetence or arrogance, take your pick.
"....Paper charts, which generally show hazards at all levels of zoom." hahahhaha. This had me laughing.
I have all the NOAA charts for my bay and normal sailing areas and whenever I'm bored, I study them.
LOL yes that is a benefit of paper charts! I’m also a map junkie and can spend hours studying charts and maps - glad there’s another one out there!
They've changed the protocol for later versions of this event. The boats continue to be monitored 24/7 from a race control center in France. If the controllers see something like this about to happen they call the boat on the satphone and warn them (with no racing penalty IIRC).
Yes there were several recommended improvements and this is a good one!
You have to be joking aren’t you? Professional sailors just in these cases means they get paid nothing professional here. In my 9000 hours in command of commercial shipping never managed to hit a thing.
@@stephenfraser2521 Yes one would hope the professional aspects regarding pay and seamanship would align as they have in your career!
@@stephenfraser2521 youre not competing in a race
@@rykehuss3435 what has that got to do with it? Stupidity is OK if your racing??
The electronic chart should of course show the minimum depth even when zoomed out. A small plane would never fly over mountains without knowing the maximum height of the peaks. It's pretty obvious logic. But if it says "shoal" on the chart, that should ring alarm bells for any navigator - if it's a shoal, the water is going to get shallower than 40m!
I completely agree that the software they were using was suboptimal in this regard!
it sounds like an obvious implementation mistake. when aggregating data the correct "function" should always be considered (min/max/avg/median/...)
Happened to me in daylight. It was not fun. Once you realise your boat is stuck no matter what and you become a sitting duck at the mercy of the waves is terrifying.
Yes I’ve hit stuff too, in broad daylight, that I actually knew was there but made a last minute hasty course change. Fortunately I didn’t get stuck because being at the mercy of the waves would be horrible, especially in such a remote location as they were!
Tough night, no injuries. Good lesson going to sea? Be prepared as much as humanly possible
@@michaelallen7155 Absolutely!
Great video. I disagree it was an example of group think though. Only one person was responsible for making the call and he botched it due to circumstances that set him up to be highly likely to fail.
There’s a good report on the incident that includes details of how different boats handled navigation responsibilities. Yes it was one person’s responsibility but other organizational structures may have been more successful in avoiding this. www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file
@@SailingTipsCa So what if other boats were lucky enough to have not had this gap. We don't live in the 50's. There is no reason why boats can't use live and accurate data to navigate. Especially when they're this high performance. It's silly to hold on to "traditions" of navigation while simultaneously allowing the spaceship like hull designs. The future is the future.
@@MrFerrariF360 Yes not allowing real-time satellite communications was an unfortunate and unnecessary limitation! I believe they will not allow “race command” to intervene if they suspect something like this happening again. At the same time Vestas wind did have two versions of accurate electronic charts available, one on a computer and one on a chart plotter near the companionway, as well as paper charts, but didn’t use them appropriately to notice the hazards.
Skipper had ultimate responsibility to ensure save protocol was followed
@@markguiltinan1140 I completely agree!!!
This is why I always make sure to have Raster charts as well as Vector charts on a chartplotter. Raster charts are straight copies of paper charts.
Yes raster charts tend to show hazards at all levels of “zoom”!
Never actually seen the inboard footage. That's so scary, getting throw around like the whilst stuck
I know - especially after thinking you’re in the middle of the ocean and now you’re somehow on the rocks!!
To me the scary thing is the initial hit. I used to play a multiplayer sailing game and went near a bathymetry error. It was really, really eerie seeing the depth shoot up like that in the middle of the ocean. I can't even begin to imagine how scary it is to hit something in real life where there shouldn't be anything. Like, what could it be? A whale? A submarine? The Flying Dutchman? The Kraken!?
@@CristiNeagu Yes we had a similar experience once: We were in an offshore race, out of sight of land, flying a spinnaker at night in about 25 knots of wind, the boat fully powered up. Then there was a huge BANG, the boat shuddered, then everything felt and sounded different. I had the same thoughts about what it could be, did we hit a whale, a shipping container, is the boat going to sink?!?!? Thankfully we realized it was “just” a broken spinnaker halyard as the spinnaker floated down into the water. But those seconds of uncertainty were frightening!
@@SailingTipsCa That's nightmare fuel right there...
Nice explanation, nice footage, terrifying… they were lucky and unlucky…
Thanks - yes they were both unlucky to have had the accident but also extraordinary lucky to have emerged with only minor scrapes and bruises, and maybe some major bruised egos!
That must have been the most terrifying experience in the dark on a reef getting the shit knocked out of ya . Good job staying alive !!
I agree it must have been terrifying, and the skipper did a great job managing the boat and crew through the rescue and recovery!
I’m amazed they could salvage and rebuild this boat 👍⛵️
I know it’s a pretty amazing comeback story!!! I think the sponsors were supportive as well because they didn’t want it all to just end there on the atoll…
I have heard that it was actually a new spare boat they had. I never cared to investigate so I don't know.
very informative, what a nightmare it must have been
Thanks! Can you just imagine thinking you’re in the middle of the ocean and suddenly CRASH you’re on the rocks!!!
during the night too!!@@SailingTipsCa
I am wondering about the aftermath procedure in these pro structures. What happens to the navigator after this kinda event? gets sacked or keep going with him for the rest of the race & never invite him again?
He was sacked by Vestas Wind following the grounding while the rest of the crew was retained for the rebuild and re-entry of the final two legs: www.yachtingworld.com/races/volvo-ocean-race-20142015/team-vestas-wind-navigator-wouter-verbraak-sacked-review-volvo-ocean-race-shipwreck-61527
It took that long to realize vector rendered charts lose detail when zoomed out. As a result, I have both raster and vector on display while navigating to reduce the potential of hitting submerged reef. All the tech in the world won't prevent humans from making mistakes. Just need the correct data points
That’s a good idea to have both on display at the same time!
Amazing demonstration of the limits of fancy new technology.
The irony is that they also had paper charts on board that showed the island but just didn’t look at them…
@@SailingTipsCa I sail on ~50 sq.mile reservoir on edge of Rockies so slight canyon environment. We have a shallow spot called Lower Unit. 12ft of water peak of snow melt, 2 ft above the ice during winter. Unseen danger is a daily thing for me. Hopefully good practice when I venture to San Juan Islands and South Florida.
@@artsmith103 Yes definitely good practice for the shallow waters off Florida!
The boat with the red line got pretty lucky !! He passed really close twice :O
Yes they did pass very close!!!
Maybe not lucky, they knew the reef was there, or they could see it...
Sometimes there are signs of the shallows, like deeper or breaking waves, or change in sea color - easy to miss if you are not aware of the cause, and busy to manoeuvre the boat...
Lame Dongle hobbled Nav software and a navigator failure is why they crashed. Open source software would be safer.
There are definitely lots of options for navigation software and charts. Interestingly many of the big brand chart plotters all use Navionics software and charts these days.
@@SailingTipsCa How about automatic shallow spot highlights in the software which should be better than paper maps with clever programming. Put it on a smartphone with notifications for collision warnings
@@glike2 There was a feature called "chart bounds" that was supposed to alert them of dangers like shallow waters and hazards so they zoom in but for some reason that didn't work as expected...
It is well known that you have to zoom in on e-charts to see many hazards.
The watch leader was primarily responsible
@@markthomasson5077 Yes the skipper also double-checked the route prior to the crash, but on the weather routing laptop that didn’t have the high-resolution chart dongle, which affirmed the group-think that there was a minimum water depth of 40 metres and nothing to worry about. The hazard was clearly visible on all paper charts but those weren’t checked by anyone…
What's with the software that lets you plot a route through rocks that reach the surface? Doesn't it give a warning?
Yes it should be simple to have the route line turn red or something if the entire route won’t satisfy the draft of the boat!
It also happened to the QE 2 in 1992 off Martha's Vineyard and there was an American pilot on board!
It definitely happens, often to the demise of the navigator’s career!
Sooo, was the original navigator still employed for the post grounding completion of the race?
No he was sacked from Vestas Wind while the rest of the team helped re-build the boat and went on to re-join the race without that particular navigator. Looks like he still sails periodically but his LinkedIn profile shows he has a day job too…
If i use commercial sat nav software will i avoid this?
I currently use Navionics and iSailor on two ipads and my B&G Vulcan. If two of the three agree i go carefully, if all three agree i go confidently if all three say no i dont go
My point is that now i dont think this is enough and i solo sail the oceans of the world. I started sailing in 2017 and completely missed this case.
Have i been just lucky? Am i relying on things that will kill me?
Some say you should know where you are and the hazards around you and use the available technology to confirm and cross-check. Your strategy of three devices seems reasonable. Modern Navionics also does a better job of showing hazards at more levels of zoom than what these guys had. At the same time, the accuracy of electronic charts also depends on 1) the quality of the cartography i.e. when was the last survey done and by whom and 2) how accurate is the chart datum that connects real GPS locations to chart locations. In waters adjacent to first world countries these are both pretty accurate but can be hit and miss in the developing world, so there is a likelihood the electronic chart says the water is clear when it is not. This is where depth soundings and other forms of electronic input should be used to cross check what you’re seeing with your eyes with what is shown on the charts. In the case of Vestas Wind the hazard was on their charts they just didn’t use them appropriately. I think the key is really to use as much information as you have available and satellite communications and navigation definitely helps! Still be wary that the information you’re getting may not correspond with reality in the case of 1) and 2) above. Good luck!
Do not make the mistake of grouping "electronic charts" (generic term) with official "Electronic Navigation Charts" (specific name). ENC are produced by the world's national hydrographic offices and contain at least the same level as paper charts, and often much greater detail. Generic electronic charts are made to a price, gloss over detail, omit data quality information, and can interpolate between data points to give a misleading misrepresentation. The chart plotters used by Vestas Wind also performed poorly - while they might reveal detail correctly if a user zoomed in on a hazard, if the view planned across (such as when sailing along and not changing the viewing scale), they did not show the same necessary information. I was an expert consultant on the resulting investigation. Chart plotters are much better these days, but the best solution is to use one that can read official ENC.
@@mikeprince1769 Excellent points! Yes once upon a time I had a set of “raster charts” from my government chart authority that displayed the exact “official” paper charts on the electronic plotter. It worked pretty well except for some strange sewing of chart edges together from time to time. They were also quite expensive. And you’re absolutely right that the way the plotter itself behaved was part of the problem, and that both plotters and charts have come a long way since then!
God that would have been a nightmare. Good to see they are ok.
Yes it must have been absolutely terrifying, especially being so far from everything and not knowing what was going on, at least initially!
Amazed they got her off. That must have been an impressive and exhausting task.
Yes truly impressive and in such a remote location!!!
My 12" globe shows this reef.
Need I say more?
LOL maybe a carbon fibre globe would have been the ticket!!!
Great video and explanation. I've known about this incident for years and have countlessly reiterated to my navigational officers to keep checking different levels of zoom on the ECDIS since. Thank you 🛥🏝
Yes I’m hoping electronic chart manufacturers will also learn from this and will hopefully make hazards more visible at all levels of zoom. That shoal is visible on a globe of the earth!
was it dongfeng which passed so close? that looks so scary aswell. but im sure they knew what were they doing
I’ve been trying to confirm which boat it was that passed so close however the official report into the incident just refers to it as “another boat” that passed very close for tactical reasons i.e. they did it purposefully.
@@SailingTipsCa ye, its alright. i mean its either dongfeng or mapfre by the color, but then they did purposefully. good for them :D
I am amazed that the software didn't warn them about the shallow water. As in jaw-on-the-floor amazed. That is just ridiculous. It is a very easy function to implement, to check the current route for a certain minimum depth at high resolution. Their routing software does very complex optimizations with expected wind speeds and directions, there is no reason why it shouldn't check for minimum depth.
There was apparently a function called “chart bounds” in the software that was supposed to do this exact thing but appears to not have functioned as expected…
@@SailingTipsCa From the document I understand the "chart bounds" as only a function on the map that shows there is a more detailed map available for a certain area.
I haven't read anything along the suggestion of the other poster that would automatically check for hazards along any plotted routes.
@@rogerwilco2 Yes it says "This feature is known to experienced navigators as a trigger that a larger scale chart is available and there are potential dangers worth investigating. Unfortunately this did not alert the navigator to the fact that there was large scale detailed chart data available covering the Cargados Carajos Shoals and he did not zoom in and so gain access to the large scale chart of the dangers." So there was definitely some sub-optimal behavior of both the software and the navigator! The boat's sonar-based depth alarm should have alerted them too but they either ignored that or had it turned off as they do give false positives when sailing fast.
Captain sir, navigator reports the island is in it's charted position. Verified by contact.
Yes the charts were absolutely accurate!!!
No matter what way one looks at it, it was a spectacular failure of even basic navigation.
Zooming in on digital charts to reveal detail is essential and one would hope commonplace.
And a cursory glance at a chart would have given them the information the digital chart was hiding.
No excuses.
I agree - it was a pretty spectacular failure!
Wow, I always thought these crews were made up of experience professionals. I'm just a novice sailor with a little 24ft sloop and even I know that you need to pan, zoom, and look closely for route planning. I can't believe buddy just said "should be good" and was too lazy to update their charts for the next day.
Yes it was definitely quite a rookie mistake! I’ve also made dumb mistakes at times but thankfully none this consequential…
you underestimate the evilness that is USB dongle licensing.
@@leudast1215 I know - I hate it! What if you have multiple redundant laptops but the dongle gets damaged?
I think we must just be happy there was no loss of life.
Yes absolutely and only minor injuries!!!
“ it’s a big rock mate “
😅scary sht
Yes big enough to appear on a plastic globe of the earth!
Great the way they bounced back
I know - they probably got more sponsor publicity for that than had they not hit the island in the first place and finished in the middle of the pack!
Alex Thomson's Hugo Boss in route du rhum also managed to hit rocks close to destination ... navionics costs 100 usd a year and has detailed maps.
It’s especially easy to make mistakes when you’re tired! And Navionics is great - I use it natively on an iPad and lots of commercial plotters also use Navionics charts these days.
navionics has tons of errors in their charts. Google "Navionics Boat hits reef"
What bothers me is race organizers watched them do this in real time, yet didn’t have crews preparing for this mistake, or on hand for such an accident.
Yes I believe one of the “improvements” is that race organizers can intervene if they see something like this unfolding.
Seems like a certain amount of skill and determination was applied. I mean, to proper mariners, navigation comes naturally and is a hard trait to remove, but these guys managed...
Yes the fact that it happened in the first place is questionable, but their response seemed pretty solid!
Crazy how they managed to salvage it, ship it back, fix it and get back to the race in 4 months!
Yes it turned into a pretty cool success story in the end!
Wonder how much that cost!
@@pbpx The boats apparently cost about $6M and 36,000 person-hours to build so I’d guess this repair was at least half of that!!!
If money is not an object ....
I saw that reef on my $100 nav system on iPad using free maps, and would have had an alarm setup with ample warning, no excuse, always have a second set of eyes check the route, still I love the vestas team and so glad no physical permanent harm to the crew!
Yes this reef is even on my plastic globe of the earth! Like you thankful nobody was hurt!
Its a fundamental mistake that should not have happened. Plan your route, zoom in to the appropriate detail and check it does not cross land!! Many routing software can be configured to check min depth, however even if the boat draws 4 mtrs, you certainly would not be wanting to sail into 10 mtrs out there. Noted is the significant underwater depth of 200 mtrs then zero!! Lucky they all survived.
I agree that this fundamental mistake should not have happened! They did sack the navigator after this crash while the remainder of the team re-built the boat and re-joined the final two legs of the race.
This is always a problem with topographic and bathymetric data. Widely available global topography, even only 35 years ago, was on a 30 minute grid. At 30 minute grid resolution, the "maximum" altitude on the planet is about 6500m if I recall correctly. All digital, gridded data suffers from this resolution/averaging problem. And for navigating shoals, it is critical. You need a different data format entirely to normal gridding, or some other way of preserving extreme and near extreme data values, or very high grid resolution (massive datasets).
Yes it’s important to use all the aids available to avoid shoals!
No mention of they replaced their navigator or not for the next race.
Good point - he was sacked after the collision while the rest of the team carried on.
And now you know why electronic navigation software has pages and pages and pages of legal disclaimers.
Yes a good reminder of that!
Paper charts ladies and gentlemen, back to the future 😁
Jokes aside. It does make a whole lot of sense to go through the route on paper again.
One viewer mentioned they found the island hit by Vestas Wind on a globe so I dug through my boxes and found my childhood globe and it’s there! Now just need to get a carbon fibre version for light weight!
I would not want to be in the navigator’s shoes…
Nope! They sacked him after the grounding while the rest of the team went on to complete the salvage, repair, and enter the final two legs!
When you rely on a single point you are more likely to fail. I hope the race planers change the requirements on navigation.
The irony is that they did have two kinds of electronic charts, and even paper charts on board that indicated the hazard, but didn’t reference them. The inquiry report made a number of recommendations for future races to improve safety: www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file
How much did it cost to repair it?
I haven’t been able to find a precise figure but the original build cost was about $6M and that was based on the one-design concept where they were making several identical boats. The fix would be a custom job so I wouldn’t be surprised if it was on the order of half of that…
Been sent down too many dead ends by Google maps to ever trust electronic navigation. I use it as the backup.
Some say it’s up to you to know where you are with the variety of means like charts and depth soundings to confirm!
Imagine sailing on a $5m boat, having a budget of $12m, and not buying a silly extra dongle...
I know right?!?!?
Me in 2024, unable to comprehend that pirates are still a thing 😖
Yes unfortunately in some parts of the world!
Wasn't there a lighthouse?
Just looking at the chart now and there doesn't appear to be: webapp.navionics.com/#boating@10&key=lmqeB%7BdkjJ
I disliked the video not because I didn't like it, but because you had an accident.@@SailingTipsCa Sail safety...
@@OwnerPlt Thanks for clarifying!!! And thanks for watching!!!
Putting a lighthouse on every random reef and rock out there is not feasible, that's why we have charts :)
@@yozegami Yes and they are typically only on hazards in the vicinity of shipping lanes, and I don’t believe there is much shipping in this part of the Indian Ocean…
In praise of actual paper charts!
Probably not a bad idea to even break out the high-level route-planning paper chart just to double-check for hazards!!!
The Dutch navigator was not on board and replaced for the last leg
Yes he was let go while the rest of the team salvaged and re-built the boat.
@@SailingTipsCawhich should not be taken as implying liability
@@ricmorris9758 No the skipper is technically responsible for everything that happens while the boat is underway, including hitting the shoal, yet he remained for the last leg. I’m sure there were more nuanced reasons for the navigator not joining for the final leg.
. that race upsets me .. too many lives have been lost in that race.. and until now the safety measures taken by officials to insure all skippers and crew to be safe has failed
There was an inquiry into this grounding which resulted in an 81 page report containing a number of recommendations which hopefully will make some of the future races a bit safer.
Very simple - unprofessional professionals.
I spent 18 months sailing around. 6 months was in the Caribbean in the days when all you had was paper charts, RDF and a sextant.
Didn't run into anything.
Yes I think paper charts and “traditional navigation” techniques were better for not creating the false sense of security and complacency that electronic charts tend to create!
@@SailingTipsCa That may also be because the other software we use for route planning takes many things into account -- like can a vehicle actually drive here. Apparently this charting / navigation software is not built to the same standard.
I am a professional software developer, and I am appalled by the failure of the software provider to build in a simple function to check minimum depth along the whole route. They should be deeply ashamed of themselves.
@@TheEvertw There was apparently a feature called “chart bounds” to trigger an alert at a minimum depth but for some reason it didn’t function as expected. Fortunately charts and chart software have come a long ways in the past few years since this incident!
Terrible wreck, I'm glad no one got hurt. But I had to laugh when I heard you say that they were using Cmap. That's what I have in the Sea of Cortez and if I trusted it I would be on the rocks long ago. I use it to get to and from, but many times It shows that I'm anchoring up on land. At least half the time it's off by a 1/4 - 1/2 mile.
Yes there can be two problems with electronic charts 1) The quality of the cartography (i.e. maps, rocks, islands) varies greatly from one country to another, with waters adjacent to first world countries generally of high quality, but the developing world not so much and 2) the quality of the chart datum, which is the reference point that anchors the cartography to actual GPS locations on the globe. The latter is known to be somewhat out-of-whack in the waters adjacent to Mexico which is why it shows you sailing up in the mountains!
@@SailingTipsCa
I jokingly say that's the only way to get a good night's sleep when it's rough anchorage.
@@MrM-hl1vp LOL yes leave the boat and go sleep somewhere else!!!
@@SailingTipsCa Paper charts were the same in Chile.
It's well known and discussed. No need to 'find out' in 'another video'.
There’s a report with recommendations on the incident which is quite well written: www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file
Paper Charts!!
Yes they had them on board, and they did show the island, but nobody checked them!
@@SailingTipsCa no navigator?
@@psystealth Yes he was down below sleeping at the time of the accident!
Not checking the paper charts..bad move..
Yes that would have been helpful!
I sailed a 3000mi ocean race with a terrible navigator. Not only did he not do his job well but he wouldn't take advice or recommendations. Fortunately we didn't hit any rocks.
That’s really the worst part - when people are closed off to recommendations!
Ridiculous accident in a boat full equiped with high tech tecnology. Missed the Whitbread times, realy sailors and navigators, not computer wizards.
I know - must have been incredibly embarrassing for everybody involved!
When you have more dollars than sense.
LOL that’s one way of putting it!
…because the sea was in the wrong place…
Yes who put that pesky island there?!?!?
only one navigator and a lot of idiots including the captain
I certainly would have been embarrassed to have been on that boat, regardless of my role, and especially as captain or navigator!
"Best equipment available"... one dongle for two computers
It’s a bit weird that the one-design package only included one dongle although some teams purchased another. Vestas wind normally used the computer with the dongle for navigation and the other one for weather routing, however they did unfortunately also view charts on the weather routing computer without high-definition capabilities.
Having a dongle for this software is not a good idea as dongles (and the ports they connect to) are fragile, can be lost, get coffee spilled over them, etc. Weird solution, a company prioritizing profits over usability.
I never use dongled software out of principle, the last time I used dongled software was in the previous millennium. I hated it, because when I needed the dongle I had to go and look for it. There are far better ways to secure software, and they have been around for a long time.
@@TheEvertw Yes I agree and also hate dongles and haven’t used software that requires them for the same reason for the past decade!
Leave nothing to chance
Exactly!
Embarrassing. No matter how you look at it.
I agree!!!
Wärtsillä charts on an iPad would have prevented this grounding.
Even the B&G chart plotter they had in the companionway would have helped but nobody checked it!
Wow
I know it’s a pretty wild story!!!
Probably RYA trained from a superyacht crew 🤣🤣😂
LOL like one of those certification “mills” in the Caribbean?
Imagine hitting a offshore wind turbine tower. We have a saying here on Lake Michigan directly to Vestas Wind. Keep your junk off our lake.
That won’t buff right out!
you need to read ( at least show evidence that you have read the board of enquiry report provided by RADM Chris Oxenbould - a specialist NAVY Navigator. he has totally different failure pyramid to the ones here
I read the inquiry report (www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file) several times and used it as the basis for my video. Is there something I missed or misrepresented?
WAFIs. That's how.
So...they forgot to renew the navionics subscription?
LOL no mention of Navionics in the inquiry report: www.orcv.org.au/docman-link/safety/3707-vestas-wind-volvo-ocean-race-report/file They were allegedly using CMap on Expedition.
What’s the bet the owner is not there he’ll be pissed of
I’m not exactly sure of the precise ownership structure of the team, but I bet Vestas Wind got more “value” out of their sponsorship in terms of global awareness of their brand than had it not happened!
Um...reefs shown on charts are charted. Not sure that's a word in this context or any other, but if it means anything here, it means they're shown on charts. Unless there's a new commercial venture where reefs are "chartered" as in rented, or are chartered commercial enterprises, incorporated with a charter, they are no chartered reefs. Don't expect to be taken seriously by anyone with any real expertise with a ridiculous blunder like the one in the title.
Yes, l'm a professional and professional or not, running onto a known reef at 14+ knots is an especially stupid blunder for a professional navigator. The reason is obvious. They were using an electronic chart on their GPS, set to a very small scale(large area). lf they'd switched to a larger scale, the reef would have been obvious. This guy was no Thomas Cook.
Yes the reef they hit is shown on a globe of the earth so definitely known and charted! Where are you seeing the word “chartered”?
Apparently only in my dyslexic brain. My mistake. Apologies. l could have sworn l saw "chartered." As they say down under, Eff me dead.🙃
@@frankmiller95 LOL no worries - I’ve done that many times too! And I did double-check after your comment because it could have been entirely possible!
@@frankmiller95 That’s a good example of why everybody needs to use ALL information available to them when navigating a vessel and not just relying on a single source (e.g. somebody’s words). And if there’s an inconsistency to double-check. I’ve often dreamed of being a pilot but my life insurance policy explicitly excludes demise in a private plane as payable so like you I’ll continue to allow the experts to fly me around.
If it’s chartered then there is NO excuse!
Omg the pathetic excuses. Sailing IS navigating. I could teach my dog to actually handle a boat.
Yes navigation is a HUGE part of sailing and especially offshore in order to put the boat in the most favourable conditions for as much time as possible!
The same way some dude jumps out of his airplane and intentionally crashes it. It sells commercials and stuff.
Unfortunately much of the media has become sensationalized in this manner! I'm not sure Vestas Wind intentionally crashed their yacht, but in retrospect they probably received FAR more publicity from the crash and subsequent rebuild than they would have from a "clean" race, unless they happened to win...
They would never have risked potential loss of life, with possible subsequent discovery @@SailingTipsCa
They definitely didn't do it deliberately. This incident ended the navigators career.
It's very easy using electronic charts to miss shallow water. I have seen many people do this across the Pacific and I know of at least five boats which have hit reefs which they had no idea were there. I have almost done it myself. It's something I am constantly woried about
@@deerfootnz Yes and especially easy to miss things when the quality of the electronic charts may be questionable in the first place, and also if the chart datum which anchors it to physical GPS locations is inaccurate, as it can be in many developing countries - that’s why you’re often seen anchoring up in the mountains of Baja!
You can't rejoin a race You missed two legs of and get second place, you can only finish. In place DNF
It’s a multi-stage race series so more specifically they finished leg 1, got a DNF (did not finish) on leg 2 where they crashed, got DNS (did not start) for legs 3-7, and re-joined the series for legs 8 and 9. They got second in leg 8 but seventh (last) overall because of all the legs they missed.
Pro crew? Please. A great many, not all, racers are poor navigators. Shortest line to the next mark or tac is all they know, very good at that. Actually picking up the paper chart for familiarity with general hazards before voyage, in case of wind or current push or storm avoidance? Forget it. “GPS says course is X, now trim that sail for 0.1 knot.” Everybody that races knows these guys are out there. That no satellite data allowed rule in an ocean race was also a stunt only a race committee would pull.
Will anybody change? What for? Owner throws down another $5M and round comes the freighter, a large, ocean going cargo freighter to pick it up, fix, new keel no problem, and on to the next blunder.
Well the pro navigator in this was not a pro any longer afterwards - they sacked him after the crash!
british indian ocean?? you truly are the only khunt to call it that. what a flop
I’m pretty sure I said “British Indian Ocean Territory” which I probably should have just called Diego Garcia. Where did you hear me say “British Indian Ocean?”
What a bunch of clowns
Yes that would have been rather embarrassing as professional sailors!
“Professionals”
Some of them may not be anymore!