Update: Raw Faith Sinks – Crew Rescued

Raw Faith

Update: The three masted schooner Raw Faith is reported to now have sunk after the crew of two was rescued by the Coast Guard.

__________

Two men were rescued by the Coast Guard from Raw Faith, a home-built 118′ three masted schooner, one hundred miles south-east of  Nantucket today.    Reportedly the two had set sail from Salem, Massachusetts on December 4th bound for Bermuda.

Why anyone would set attempt to sail in December to Bermuda on a 118′ foot schooner with a crew of only two is unclear.  The rescue involved multiple aircraft and two Coast Guard cutters.

The Coast Guard responded  to an EPIRB distress signal and launched multiple aircraft from Cape Cod and Elizabeth City, NC, as well as dispatching two cutters the Tybee and Reliance. The Raw Faith was found to have limited safety gear aboard, reportedly consisting of two life rafts, one survival suit and a hand-held radio.   The Coast Guard provided the two men with additional immersion suits and evacuated them by helicopter.  According to the vessel’s web site: “The Coast Guard has boarded RawFaith and have reported structural damage. The CG crew who have returned to the cutter have recommended not taking her under tow and only removing the captain and crew.

Coast Guard responds to disabled sailing vessel 100 miles off Nantucket Tuesday

This was not the first time Raw Faith needed rescue. On Thanksgiving Day in 2004, the Coast Guard towed the sailing vessel to Rockland after it lost all three masts about 80 miles northeast of Portland.  One crew member was injured by falling rigging.

Coast Guard video of the rescue of the crew of the Raw Faith.

Comments

Update: Raw Faith Sinks – Crew Rescued — 13 Comments

  1. I remember when the windjammer folk in Penobscot Bay were all up in arms over this vessel being built with little to none of the advice and offerings of support from the Maine wooden boat building community.

    This do it alone attitude seems to finally have gotten Mr. McKay into a situation that might end this well intentioned but ill conceived venture.

    It is one thing to take every precaution against disaster at sea and then leave port but it is all together another to leave safe harbor completely unprepared and require that the USCG once again saves you from your own stupidity.

    I will be interested to know what safety equipment was onboard Raw Faith when she began taking on water.

  2. It goes without saying that risking one’s own life on such a foolish voyage is reckless but to risk the lives of so many others, who have to attempt to rescue you, is unconscionable.

  3. I saw this ship recently in Winthrop Ma. Having spent three years at sea,I had serious misgivings about it being out on the open seas and there is absolutely no way I would sail on this vessel.There should be some accountability here, both financially, and morally.

  4. Following the link it looks like the 118 feet is a sparred length. The article says the ship is “only” 88 feet long, which is probably on deck. Still, a crew of 2 is certainly barely adequate if not inadequate even if their seamanship is top notch.

    There’s a long tradition of people with more ambition than experience getting themselves into trouble on voyages like this. It has the unfortunate results mentioned in Rick’s post as well as others that are more long term: it fuels demands for fancier safety equipment that often later become required for everyone, not just those trying to go offshore or cross oceans.

    It is insufficient, or maybe even incorrect to focus on how many survival suits or liferafts the Raw Faith crew had. Their main problem was that the ship’s design/construction wasn’t adequate for high seas use. Even if they had all the stuff the CG recommends for winter high seas use, ships and planes would have had to go out to rescue them after the ship started sinking, risking the rescuers’ lives as well as the victims’, as Rick reminds us.

  5. Having recently been aboard and seeing no engine or machinery in general, and limited ballast, will this vessel even sink?

    DPK

  6. The really scary part of the story is that Raw Faith was intended to carry wheelchair-bound passengers even though the boat did not have any proper handicapped accommodations for them. Perhaps a far worse tragedy has been averted.

  7. I hope that no-one will assist this guy if he tries this again. I understand he has said the “dream is not dead” so fair warning to all who still think he is someone to be associated with.

  8. I spoke with the gentleman breifly in Maine (home) last summer. He seemed nice enough and I think he is well intentioned. But often condfidence trumps competence and mahem ensues. I don’t know if he is a man of faith (as I am) as the name might imply, but sometimes people feel that faith in God requires Him to bless their endeavors. Moses had faith in Him but wasn’t allowed to cross the river into the Promised Land. And he wrote the first five chapters of the Book! God honors, hard word AND the laws of physics.

  9. This craft is new to me. I’ve just been looking at the photographic log of her construction. Some odd choices of materials and techniques – and the claim that her hull design was based on English galleons… They predate her rig by a few centuries, so again an odd choice, even if the statementy is patently untrue.

    Why be an autodidact in an era when it is so easy to access proven information? I’ll Do It My Way, I suppose.

  10. The claims of historical accuracy appear to be as unlikely as suggestions that she was seaworthy. The best that can be said is that no one died and that she will no longer be a threat to the safety of others.