http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,241358,00.html

Guess he'll have a good story to sell, assuming they are able to pluck him out of the Pacific.

fixed link

News blurb just reported that he has been rescued. Personally, I still don't understand how one can sail into the wind, seems like you would have to follow the winds wherever they want to blow you. Can you guess that I am a fair weather motor type???

I hope that just because someone wants to do something a little risky we don't vilify him. Same with the most recent mountaineering loss.
As long as people have made sufficient preparations and have the required skills all the more power to them.
It's quite a different matter if there are unprepared or unskilled and then put SAR at risk.
Lot's of people have done the around the world solo and succeeded.
Remember there will always be a leading cause of death.
While reducing loss of life is admirable, it can be pushed to the absurd. It's that kind of thinking that caused a meatpacking plant to band Swiss Army Knives. Remember all the Urban/Office people who can't have anything that MIGHT be considered dangerous.

The real danger is that we become so risk adverse that we can't live for fear of loss.

Amen. Doing something just because "it was there to do" should never be vilified or disdained. I can't hardly remember camping trips or other outdoor excursions that went without incident. I do, however, remember the ones where mild calamity struck - pouring down rain, a sudden bone-chilling cold front, a scrape with near-death on a large boulder or cliff face, skunks tearing into the food cache at night, etc. These make memories "memorable". Barnes will have memories of that trip forever.

Yup, on one of the bits about the Mt. Hood rescue attempt they said that most of the SAR people in that area are climbers. When asked if the SAR people should get reimbursed for their efforts the answer was that they wouldn't take money if it was offered to them; that the big reason they so the SAR is to maintain their own right to be on the mountain, to climb, and to put their lives a some level of risk in order to enjoy their lives. That is kind of the way of humankind, isn't it?

If you've ever driven on the Edens expressway in Chicago during rush hour you'll know that risk is a part of some peoples' everyday life. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

People have been sailing for centuries and many have died in storms like Ken Barnes survived. The Straits of Magellan at the southern tip of Chili are known for bad weather and even though it's summer there, storms happen. At the speed that ketch moved, he may have known that storm was coming and was unable to avoid it. He had survival gear and the Chileans were able to find him.

My only question is what did or will they do with the ketch? I hope they aren't going to leave it drifting. . .

I am a bit torn on the matter. On one hand, the adventurer's spirit is admirable, yet the selfishness is there too.

Oh well, glad he isnt dead and no one was hurt helping him out.

Latest info Barnes scuttled the ketch. 500 mi towing bill and all that body damage was just too much $$.

Well, he was just interviewed by the press live on TV after getting back to the U.S. just now. He stated his rescue was covered financially by the Chilean Government. He stated something to the effect that rescues everywhere are financially covered by the governments of the countries that carry them out.

I agree he was well equipped. Good thing he made it out. I think sailing around Cape Horn by yourself is a little too dangerous regardless of what he wanted to accomplish for himself.

http://www.nautica.it/charter/capehorn.htm

I don't think he would have been in any better position with more people aboard. They couldn't have solved the problems he had any more than he could alone.

Sue

That depends on what sort of sails you have and if you have a keelstone. You don't sail directly into the wind but you can angle into it. A properly designed sailing ship can get up to quite an acute angle. It's all a matter of transfering the kinetic energy transfered from the wind into the hull via the keelstone. I don't fully understand the physics of it. If we have any mariners on the forum perhaps they might be able to enlighten us?

I guess I am one of those who believe in holding people more accountable for their actions. Since it is my tax dollars (along with the vast majority, I'm not the only one to suffer the loss) that are going to fund these rescue missions, I'd just as soon that the person(s) daring to undertake unnecessary risks that cause agencies to deploy to rescue their butts ought not do it unless they have some means of remunerating the costs of said rescue ops. I just don't like the idea of paying good money to fund someone else's endeavors, when I am thus economically incapable of pursuing my own reckless (or maybe not so much, depending on your perspective) activities. It's one thing if they have some legitimate purpose behind their actions, some greater good that they are trying to serve; there's some justification in that I reckon, but to climb the mountain in the middle of winter just because it's there??? I say go for it only if you can afford to pay for the consequences of your actions. Take out insurance against such foolhardy activities and find out just what kind of economic effect it has before blindly going for it and counting on someone else to bail them out if TSHTF.

Kinda goes with my general philosophy about helping others who are not willing to help themselves I guess. It doesn't happen very often.

I guess I am too much the curmudgeon these days to tolerate someone else thinking they are just entitled to sticking their hand in my pocket anytime they feel the need. I got two daughters and a wife that do that often enough, thank you very much.

If he would have been knocked unconscious, he could have handled it better on his own then.

Here's an ARRL post regarding his ham communications. It appears his sat phone was sporadic, but this Californian ham was able to provide Barnes family with information via contact with the Chilean trawler that picked him up.

http://www.arrl.org/w1aw/2007-arlb002.html

Thanks for the link Beadles, I notice the U.S. Coast Guard had to guarantee to cover some expenses:

"The Chilean Navy coordinated the operation and recruited the Polar Pesca 1 to undertake the actual rescue, although Morales says the US Coast Guard agreed to cover the expense."

Now all I wonder is if the Chileans and the U.S. Coast Guard will end up billing anything to Ken Barnes? Kind of doubt it.