Officer: Replica ship's captain slow to respond during Sandy
By The Associated Press
Published: Tuesday, Feb. 12, 2013, 8:48 p.m.
PORTSMOUTH, Va. — The chief mate of a replica 18th-century sailing ship that sank off North Carolina during Hurricane Sandy told investigators on Tuesday that the ship's captain twice refused his pleas to order the crew to abandon ship.
It wasn't until he made a third plea that the captain gave the order — moments before the ship rolled and tossed the crew into the water.
One member of the HMS Bounty's 16-person-crew died, and the captain was never found once the ship sank 90 miles off Cape Hatteras during the October storm. The three-mast sailing ship was built for the 1962 film “Mutiny on the Bounty” starring Marlon Brando and was featured in several other films over the years, including one of the “Pirates of the Caribbean” movies.
A federal safety panel began hearing testimony in a Portsmouth hotel about what led to the sinking, with chief mate John Svendsen providing a detailed account of what happened in the days, hours and minutes leading up to the loss of the ship.
Svendsen said the ship was taking on water and had no power when it rolled over and sank. He also told investigators the captain didn't alert Coast Guard officials of the ship's deteriorating condition when he first suggested it, with Capt. Robin Walbridge choosing to focus on fixing failing generators instead. Svendsen disagreed with Walbridge on that decision, along with several others.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- 1986 Warhol self-portraits up for sale
- AC/DC not disbanding, lead singer Brian Johnson says
- Denver wife killed 12 minutes into 911 call, sparking inquiry
- Obama, House Republicans trade accusations in thwarting immigration reform
- US Airways’ pornographic tweet won’t cost anyone a job
- Federal judge strikes down North Dakota abortion ban
- Tea Party flap averted fraud probe by IRS, Justice, emails show
- Hoax bomb case causes concerns in Boston
- Census director defends changes, denies questions altered to inflate Obamacare success
- ‘Godfather’ of runaway salaries for elected officials sentenced in California
- Vermont Senate OKs GMO labels as industry insists genetically modified crops are safe