In message <1pqgm1.jb7.17.1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Gregory Hall
<greghall@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>
>"Steve Firth" <%steve%@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:1ifareq.ap9adi4vsz8nN%%steve%@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Gregory Hall <greghall@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>> In the meantime you Brit yachties should consider staying ashore. Many
of
>>> you need rescuing every other time you embark so why take the chance
of
>>> being on your own?
>>
>> <yawn>
>>
>> Your trolling would be of a higher standard if you had a clue what you
>> talking about.
>>
>> In the USA you have a clueless and largely ineffective Coastguard
>> attempting recues, when they attempt to recover someone from the water,
>> particularly using a highwire transer to a helicopter they look like,
>> and are, complete sodding amateurs. In the UK rescues are performed by
a
>> number of services, including the coastguard, RNLI, Navy and RAF. The
>> RNLI is almost 100% volunteer, and they make your coastguard look like
>> amateurs. With the RNLI to hand, no one need fear the consequences of a
>> coastguard strike/work to rule.
>
>
>Point well taken. But the sheer quantity and size of your rescue forces
for
>such a small kingdom indicates an amateur fleet of sailors with few or no
>offshore skills. Why else would there be a pressing need for myriad
rescue
>forces?
>
>But, I think your point is one most of the world is familiar with. Just
>about every real sailor has heard or read about the carnage that occurred
at
>the Fastnet race from a little old force 10 and your former colony isn't
far
>behind with their ineptitude as evidenced more than once in the
>Sydney-Hobart race series mass founderings.
>
>This kind of thing is unheard of in the United States of America where a
>need for such a mass rescue is unheard of. This all means superior
sailors
>easily get by with minimal rescue services.
>
>Gregory Hall
>
>
Plink - Hegory Gall follows various other jerk-offs (wankers in
English) into the kill-file.
--
Spike
|
