Are these seats legal?

indaba1991 · 18 December 2012, 10:52

In a coded vessel passengers are required to have seats. Would these backward facing seats qualify?

SeaSkills · 18 December 2012, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by indaba1991

In a coded vessel passengers are required to have seats.

Are you sure? We have at least 20 coded boats in our fleet* which do not have seats for everyone

(*this comment is in the context of my "other" job, this is not the training boats at SeaSkills which do have seats for everyone)

indaba1991 · 18 December 2012, 12:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeaSkills

Are you sure? We have at least 20 coded boats in our fleet* which do not have seats for everyone

(*this comment is in the context of my "other" job, this is not the training boats at SeaSkills which do have seats for everyone)

My query stems from a MAIB report where someone was injured on a RIB - my understanding is that there is a move to regulate coded RIBS whereby all passengers will have to have a seat. I believe regulators would like everyone to have a a "Jockey Style" seat with a grab bar. My question is is this regulation in place yet?

The accident which prompted this is covered in the report (link here)

Marine Accident Investigation: Delta RIB

willk · 18 December 2012, 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by indaba1991

I believe regulators would like everyone to have a a "Jockey Style" seat with a grab bar.

Surely if this is the case, NONE of your seats would be acceptable?

I think you'll find that you have been misinformed. People have been injured on jockey seats too - some quite badly. The big concern in the industry is that Shock Mitigation will become mandatory. Ultimately if people get injured on a boat, the investigators will deem that it should have been avoided. If you get injured in a full suspension console wearing a four point harness and helmet - then it wasn't enough.

In the Republic of Ireland, all coded RIBs require a seat per passenger, with hand grips etc. The is currently no shock mitigation requirement.

indaba1991 · 18 December 2012, 14:35

I suppose the annomaly lies in the conclusion that was made that "occupants should be in appropriate seating". The MCA was supposed to have written an ammendment in MGN 280 and revised the codes for small commercial vessels with this in mind. However I can only see any references to "appropriate seating" - so one would have to assume then that this is still open to question.

indaba1991 · 18 December 2012, 15:49

My mate has suggest this solution as a retro fit! Er not sure...

Shockwave Seats ICE Integrated Control Environment Testing Compulation - YouTube

SeaSkills · 19 December 2012, 16:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by indaba1991

I suppose the annomaly lies in the conclusion that was made that "occupants should be in appropriate seating".

It will always be the driver's fault if someone gets hurt. We should look firstly to the driver, not the boat, to protect those on board. The equipment helps, but isn't the main thing

Once you put shock mitigation seating in, it will increase the driver's propensity to drive too fast, and the risk increases again if you don't drive to the conditions.

I usually find it more comfortable to stand when I'm driving - just a personal thing - and some will argue that standing allows you to take the shock through your legs. It doesn't. It's just a different way of delivering the shock to your spine.

If you absolutely have to go fast and hard, then some seating will allow you to go faster and harder in a greater degree of safety than others, but the better answer is simply not to go faster or harder than the boat, it's equipment, and it's passengers can reasonably and comfortably take. It's that old duty-of-care thing

C2 RIBS · 19 December 2012, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by indaba1991

I suppose the annomaly lies in the conclusion that was made that "occupants should be in appropriate seating". The MCA was supposed to have written an ammendment in MGN 280 and revised the codes for small commercial vessels with this in mind. However I can only see any references to "appropriate seating" - so one would have to assume then that this is still open to question.

Our guys from PCA have been at these consultations with MCA over changes to to MGN280 and it was expected but delayed so far.
You will find many RIBs are coded without seats presently- i.e Dive boats.

Most of the time you need your coding surveyor who will check and sign applications to be brought in early on discussions. It may depend on use and location to decide appropriate seating.

Shock reduction seating has been spoken about many times here, so check search on it. The legislation is already law for us as operators and I can only see an issue when there is a reported incident and an operator cannot show what they did to reduce shock.( i.e throttle/helm is the main one) You cannot in my opinion fit shock reduction to a boat to work commercially unless you fit all seats with a similar application. If you did fit helm /crew shocks and then had normal seating for clients or others aboard- I can hear lawyers banging on your door the moment an injury occurs.

C2 RIBS · 19 December 2012, 17:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by indaba1991

My query stems from a MAIB report where someone was injured on a RIB - my understanding is that there is a move to regulate coded RIBS whereby all passengers will have to have a seat. I believe regulators would like everyone to have a a "Jockey Style" seat with a grab bar. My question is is this regulation in place yet?

The accident which prompted this is covered in the report (link here)

Marine Accident Investigation: Delta RIB

During that accident many of us have queried why the injured party was allowed to have a rucksack on in such a manner which exagerated the injury chance, Ruck sack may have had a greater role in this and the front unpadded seat was unwise. Again 30knots is not slow so may be a helm issue as spoken in earlier posts

indaba1991 · 19 December 2012, 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by C2 RIBS

During that accident many of us have queried why the injured party was allowed to have a rucksack on in such a manner which exagerated the injury chance, Ruck sack may have had a greater role in this and the front unpadded seat was unwise. Again 30knots is not slow so may be a helm issue as spoken in earlier posts

I am sure I am not alone in feeling slightly uneasy as to the mechanism of how
"investigated incidents" suddenly create legislation. I am sure the MCA and MAIB have extremely qualified people who look at an accident liked this. On the other hand I am not sure these bodies spend enough time in consultation with operators of coded vessels who could offer good advice how to set changes that are realistic and related. I would agree wholeheartedly that correct helm / throttle control is probably a greater safeguard against injury than any fancy sprung seat. This would imply better training of people qualifying to drive passengers. Is there any case for graduated qualification of RIB type and engine size? This is not something that was introduced in motorcycle licensing?

Poly · 20 December 2012, 07:55

Roguewave must be offshore, so allow me to fill his role...

If you can't work out whether that (or any other) seat is appropriate for the type of passengers, the journey and conditions then should you be allowed to operate a commercial rib?

Quote:

I am sure I am not alone in feeling slightly uneasy as to the mechanism of how
"investigated incidents" suddenly create legislation.

Very often (and this is a case in point) what people on the internet start calling "illegal" is in fact just "bad practice". Its probably always been bad practice but now someone has clarified the issue. The problem with 'investigation' creating 'legislation' is very rarely true to be frank, Indaba, the real problem is people like yourself who are unable to separate the guidance, the law, and the recommendations of a report. The law applies to everyone, it is interpreted by the courts. The guidance applies in most situations in the broadest sense - but is interpreted by the regulators/inspectors etc; often there are different ways to show you comply. The accident report applies specifically to one incident but might include broad general suggestion how to prevent recurrance - and are interpreted by individual operators.

Quote:

Is there any case for graduated qualification of RIB type and engine size? This is not something that was introduced in motorcycle licensing?

or maybe a system which differentiates how far from shore, and the type of weather etc you are allowed out in? Eh... no hang on that would never work ;-)

indaba1991 · 20 December 2012, 08:26

Poly

A person who codes ribs has now advised me - but thank you for your considerate comment

Delta Rich · 20 December 2012, 08:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by C2 RIBS

During that accident many of us have queried why the injured party was allowed to have a rucksack on in such a manner which exagerated the injury chance, Ruck sack may have had a greater role in this and the front unpadded seat was unwise. Again 30knots is not slow so may be a helm issue as spoken in earlier posts

I must correct you on one point and that is quite simply that the Forward Locker that the occupant was sitting on was NOT intended as, marked as or to be used as a seat especially whilst the craft was in operation. It is and was marked as a Stowage Locker.

biffer · 20 December 2012, 08:58

Don't believe everything from the MAIB they can be lenient with the facts and massage figure with the best of them

C2 RIBS · 20 December 2012, 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta Rich

I must correct you on one point and that is quite simply that the Forward Locker that the occupant was sitting on was NOT intended as, marked as or to be used as a seat especially whilst the craft was in operation. It is and was marked as a Stowage Locker.

Stand corrected , unfortunate that he sat there then