I read the report--thanks Kevin for the link--and I think that is is a very good read. The report states that the Captain had a type V PFD--However please remember that there are inflatable coats and jackets. Generally a type V hybrid will have 7.5 lb floatation of foam, but 22 Lbs of floatation with the bladder inflated. To me it sounds as if the Captain had a hybrid, and it failed to auto inflate--as designed. It is also possiable that he had a type V inflatable coat--which would have 35 lbs of floatation, when inflated. (There is nothing in the report which suggests which he was wearing a separate inflatable under a float coat). From NIOSH: "Type V hybrid (Figure 5) is an approved wearable device. It combines limited inherent bouyancy with an air bladder designed to be inflated by a CO2 cartridge or by mouth. Designed for people weighing more than 90 pounds, the Type V hybrid may be the most comfortable USCG-approved PFD to wear while working. " The report certainly does seem to condem the captain's decision to attempt to enter the harbor. The report also states that the captain had been told multiple times to not attempt to enter the bar, both by the Coast Guard, and by other charter boat/fishing boat captains who had gathered near the lookout tower. I know that Mike has run this bar many times. I have only gone across it twice, both times in calm conditions. The person who purchased my Cal 46 was the Marine Patrol officer for this harbor--and he had many stories of dangerous crossings of this bar. No question that the people on the boat should have been wearing life jackets. The motor life boat arrived on the scene very rapidly--and one would think that loss of life would have been minized if all had on life jackets when in the dangerous waters. Bob Austin

"Bob Austin" <thataway4@cox.net> At 12:15 AM 2/7/2006 -0600, you wrote: >No question that the people on the boat should have been wearing life jackets. >The motor life boat arrived on the scene very rapidly--and one would think >that loss of life would have been minized if all had on life jackets when in >the dangerous waters. Bob, I have said this before but it bears repeating. On this coast at these water temperatures, life jackets are a poor substitute for being in a boat. Neal Kennedy lost 2 men overboard at Columbia River in the late 70's. They were both recovered by him and his deckhand within minutes and both died, not of drowning, but heart attacks. I have personally pulled a man out of the water who was wearing a lifejacket. He had been in the water less than 20 minutes and he did not survive. People who are thrown into cold water with little warning and who are over about 60 or so, generally die within minutes, and not from drowning. A couple more points of clarification. The bar was not closed, it was restricted. Which is to say that it was passable, but the Coast Guard had it restricted in the case of uninspected passenger paying vessels and pleasure craft. Below what length I do not presently know. I have personally crossed the bars on this coast numerous times when the Coast Guard claimed that it was not passable. The Coast Guard is notorious for abusing their authority to restrict bar crossings. I can back this up with numerous incidents and detailed accounts. Regards, Mike Capt. Mike Maurice Tualatin(Portland), Oregon