Roger Long wrote:
NE Sailboat wrote:

Why don't you for once just admit you don't have any idea what
happened to Ken Barnes and his boat.

With pleasure. I'd don't know for sure what happened to his boat despite
figuring out what happened to boats and ships being one of my professional
functions.

I do know, via the Internet clips, what Ken Barnes says happens to his boat.
It is similar enough to what has happened to many previous vessels and what
is probably the primary hazard in deep water cruising that is is worth
discussing and thinking about. Having studied quite a few marine casualty
accounts and attempted to correlate them with other facts over the years it
wouldn't surprise me a bit if Ken Barnes doesn't even know what happened to
his boat but only thinks he does.

I'm not aware of any statement of mine that would make disagreeing with me
in any way relative to the question of being a "putterer".
People who disagee with me are my most valuable and respected professional
resource in things like my Titanic research. Puttering about in boats is a
perfectly respectable activity and probably a lot saner and, I believe
ultimately more rewarding, than making deep water voyages for their own sake
and seeing nothing but waves for weeks on end. It's just making judgements
about the ability of someone engaged in the later from the putterer's
perspective that I find a bit grating. It's sort of like hearing an avid
hiker of the New England woods (itself a perfectly respectable activity)
proclaim that someone who fell far up on the slopes of Mt. Everest must have
been clumsy.

--
Roger Long

In this video:

Why was his companionway open?

With no power and no way to sail out of the situation, wouldnt he have
been better to simply anchor? The anchor would have brought the bow to
the waves making him much less likely to roll over. Even then, the
breaking waves appear to be few so this would have given the rescuers
time to reach him.