View Poll Results: Compulsory licensing and mandatory kill cords with fines for non compliance?
Compulsory licensing and mandatory kill cords with fines for non compliance 130 22.15%
Keep the current unregulated system with an emphasis on education 457 77.85%
Voters: 587. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 
Old 09 May 2013, 10:11   #151
Member
 
chewy's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Up Norf
Make: Avon SR4,Tremlett 23
Length: 4m +
Engine: Yam 55, Volvo 200
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by abduls friend View Post
I'm not responding as an RNLI spokesperson, but my understanding is where fitted on RIBs SIBs with wheel steering, killcords are worn. Where tiller steering, if killcords fitted, they are worn. However, some engines used in smaller craft have tiller throttles which are designed to kill if released.
RNLI Atlantic's aren't fitted with killcords and the last time I was on a D class that wasn't.
__________________

__________________
chewy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 10:13   #152
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Sussex
Make: RIBTEC 655
Length: 6m +
Engine: Yam 150
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,157
We're all buggered then, although I do find myself slowing down when I see a sticker on a post saying '30' but I guess there are quite a few that don't.
__________________

__________________
thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 10:17   #153
Member
 
Cookee's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Salcombe, Devon, UK
Boat name: BananaShark
Make: BananaShark
Length: 10m +
Engine: 2xYanmar 260 diesels
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmarcello View Post
MPT uniquely solves the age-old challenge …. “having safety
without loss of performance” without a downside.

The marine industry has long believed that any prop guard type device causes drag and hinders performance. William C. Schultz and Terrence L. Smith set out to solve the above challenge in 2006 as a gift to the safe enjoyment of all boaters and passengers.

The smaller commercial and personal watercraft solution is the internationally patented main propulsion “Multi-Nozzle Venturi System.

• Brand named the Thrustor®

When scaled up to larger displacement hull ships the Schultz™ Nozzle solution can provide displacement hull ships with fuel-savings and improved sea keeping.

• Brand named the Schultz™ Nozzle

The US Navy’s Operational Proof: Four years of operations by the Navy’s HM14, anti-mine group, with MPT’s 19.5” Thrustors® on their fleet of 7m RHIB vessels, proved that MPT actually vastly improves all their vital performance and shock mitigation issues, without a downside, as fully detailed in (ret) Navy Chief BMC Matt Moore’s three year report of Oct 2011.

• No known downsides to the technology in five years of applications, including Navy missions.

The system consists of two or more hydro-dynamically engineered rigid nozzles, positioned around any vessel’s propeller. The Venturi ports between the nozzles draft outside water to the propeller, nearly eliminating cavitation-vibration while dramatically increasing thrust, power, and overall performance for all propeller-driven vessels. ©

Home Page
All absolutely fantastic - if it's such an obvious answer to the problems discussed in this thread why aren't any manufacturers taking it up, surely and increase in thrust, power, and overall performance for all propeller-driven vessels is exactly what every manufacturer wants?

Or maybe there's a cost/return issue?
__________________
Cookee
Originally Posted by Zippy
When a boat looks that good who needs tubes!!!
Cookee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 10:17   #154
Member
 
Anchorhandler's Avatar
 
Country: France
Town: Huisnes sur Mer
Boat name: Raufoss
Make: Avon
Length: 4m +
Engine: Mercury 50
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anchorhandler View Post
Hi Cookee

I'm quite convinced that its just scaremongering by people convinced that mandatory training is not required.

I'm reasonably well tuned into the French boating scene as not only do i spend all my time boating over here but the brother in law is also a crewmember for the SNSM.

There is a much bigger maritime police presence on the water over here than in the UK. A lot of French complain about the regulation and random stop-checks by the maritime patrols but at the end of the day you have to ask yourself this.....how many defects and issues would we find in the UK if random stop-checks were introduced? We (very) often hear about boats running around with no lifejackets on board, no (or defective) VHF, no flares etc....

A few month ago both myself and fellow Rib.net member Tonto were involved in quite a spirited discussion on the subject of mandatory regulation. We both spend a very large percentage of the year on the water and can see better than most the issues caused by a lack of training.
Last year i spent the hourly equivalent of roughly 7.5 months non stop in the waters of the Solent and can recount some truly dismal and ignarant boating behaviour. (I've posted pics of some of them).

Although i'm not in favour of a mandatory KC regulation i am and have been for some time now in favour of a mandatory minimum safety certificate which would need to be gained before anyone wishes to own a boat.

I would like to see it administered by the MCGA (Not the RYA) requireing only a day's classroom training but concentrating on basic safety at sea.

Sadly, from where i sit and with my viewpoint of the boating community, i believe we're losing the battle in trying to maintain or promote a safe boating mentality.

"Education not Legislation"?? OK, but i fear that more and more people nowadays are needing a gently regulatory "nudge" in order to get educated.

Simon
Here's how i would like to see things progress.....

The MCGA put into place a simple one day training course, as mentioned in my previous post. The curriculum would focus nearly purely on "safety at sea". Accidents like the Padstow incident could be discussed (along with many other accidents) to highlight the importance of KC's, lifejackets etc... The course would be funded nearly entirely by the governmen requireing only a minor contribution to be made by the attendee's. A certificate would be issued and the attendee's name entered onto a database.

The course would be voluntary for the first few years on the proviso that legislation will be introduced a few years later preventing the sale of any vessel (*), both new and used to any person not holding the MCGA safety certificate. The HIN nuber of the vessel sold would then also be entered into the MCGA database, cross referenced to the owners certificate number.

Pre-existing RYA certificate holders would be granted a "certificate of equal competency" status alowing them to purchase a boat based on their RYA quals.

A phase in period would be introduced on all used vessel being sold on the private market. this period would give time for owners to either attend the MCGA course or register their RYA quals along with their vessels HIN. At the end of the phase-in perios it would be an offence to own any vessel (*) without having attended the course.

This would allow a gradual "acceptance" of the regulation by both the boating industry and the public as a whole.

Enforcement could take place through several means ....HM's could request a copy of the certificate when dealing with berth bookings, Harbour authorities could perform random stop-checks and ask for a copy of the certificate (to be carried on board at all times by the boat owner) etc...

Penalty for non compliance would be a fine issues by the Harbour authority but capped at a maximum set by the MCGA.

It's not a perfect system and obviously would require some fine tuning but the wheels are already in motion for harbour authorities to issue fines so at least that's one things out the way.

One thing it would do though is very gradually educate people to the potential dangers of taking to sea.

Simon
__________________
C'est pas l'homme qui prend la mer, c'est la mer qui prend l'homme....
Anchorhandler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 10:28   #155
RIBnet admin team
 
Nos4r2's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: The wilds of Wiltshire
Boat name: WhiteNoise/Dominator
Make: Ballistic 7.8/SR5.4
Length: 7m +
Engine: Opti 225/Yam 85
MMSI: 235090687/235055163
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,645
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookee View Post
All absolutely fantastic - if it's such an obvious answer to the problems discussed in this thread why aren't any manufacturers taking it up, surely and increase in thrust, power, and overall performance for all propeller-driven vessels is exactly what every manufacturer wants?

Or maybe there's a cost/return issue?
Or maye he's a dealer trying to make a buck out of this.
__________________
Need spares,consoles,consumables,hire,training or even a new boat?

Please click HERE and HERE and support our Trade Members.

Join up as a Trade member or Supporter HERE
Nos4r2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 10:29   #156
RIBnet admin team
 
Nos4r2's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: The wilds of Wiltshire
Boat name: WhiteNoise/Dominator
Make: Ballistic 7.8/SR5.4
Length: 7m +
Engine: Opti 225/Yam 85
MMSI: 235090687/235055163
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,645
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anchorhandler View Post
Here's how i would like to see things progress.....

The MCGA put into place a simple one day training course, as mentioned in my previous post. The curriculum would focus nearly purely on "safety at sea". Accidents like the Padstow incident could be discussed (along with many other accidents) to highlight the importance of KC's, lifejackets etc... The course would be funded nearly entirely by the governmen requireing only a minor contribution to be made by the attendee's. A certificate would be issued and the attendee's name entered onto a database.

The course would be voluntary for the first few years on the proviso that legislation will be introduced a few years later preventing the sale of any vessel (*), both new and used to any person not holding the MCGA safety certificate. The HIN nuber of the vessel sold would then also be entered into the MCGA database, cross referenced to the owners certificate number.

Pre-existing RYA certificate holders would be granted a "certificate of equal competency" status alowing them to purchase a boat based on their RYA quals.

A phase in period would be introduced on all used vessel being sold on the private market. this period would give time for owners to either attend the MCGA course or register their RYA quals along with their vessels HIN. At the end of the phase-in perios it would be an offence to own any vessel (*) without having attended the course.

This would allow a gradual "acceptance" of the regulation by both the boating industry and the public as a whole.

Enforcement could take place through several means ....HM's could request a copy of the certificate when dealing with berth bookings, Harbour authorities could perform random stop-checks and ask for a copy of the certificate (to be carried on board at all times by the boat owner) etc...

Penalty for non compliance would be a fine issues by the Harbour authority but capped at a maximum set by the MCGA.

It's not a perfect system and obviously would require some fine tuning but the wheels are already in motion for harbour authorities to issue fines so at least that's one things out the way.

One thing it would do though is very gradually educate people to the potential dangers of taking to sea.

Simon
So, you'd like to see compulsory registration and so on as well?


I really fail to understand this 'need to progress' mentality. It aint broke. Don't fix it.
__________________
Need spares,consoles,consumables,hire,training or even a new boat?

Please click HERE and HERE and support our Trade Members.

Join up as a Trade member or Supporter HERE
Nos4r2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 10:38   #157
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Hamble
Length: 9m +
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nos4r2 View Post
So, you'd like to see compulsory registration and so on as well?
.
Certainly seems like it.

As a boatbuilder, that all sounds like a real crap idea, and I can't see how it would work. You surely can't be suggesting that you'd like to make it illegal to own a boat without the necessary paperwork.

It's a hard enough time to be selling boats at the moment, without some half arsed crackpot scheme being brought in to make it even more difficult. Besides, owning and operating are 2 entirely different things. I know several people who own very high performance craft, one of which is a 100+ mph powerboat, and he's never driven it, but is happy to be a passenger.
__________________
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt!
Dirk Diggler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 10:56   #158
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: stratford on avon
Boat name: not named yet
Make: mazury
Length: 5m +
Engine: f100detl
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 4
Bonkers

Lets ask ourselves . Would you give a F1 car to a learner driver?

If not then why can a novice pilot buy and use a V6 300 hp outboard without any training whatsoever?

It's not rocket science really is it ?
__________________
michael1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 11:11   #159
Member
 
demondesmond's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Blackpool
Boat name: Indigo
Make: Humber
Length: 5m +
Engine: Etec 60 Hp
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 57
Wow,
this is a good thread albeit in sad circumstances.........I am surprised at some of the opinions though!

I guess the big question is, "how do WE as leisure boaters try to stop this happening again?" Assuming no kill cord failure, I suppose to answer at least part of that question we have to ask "what is a kill cord for?" and, if the manufacturer fits one as a safety device "why would you not wear one?". If WE as the leisure boating community cannot self police the correct wearing of a kill cord then legislation has to happen. I grant that in these cash strapped times that there is no guarentee that there will be sufficient funds to provide effective policing but at least the framework would be in place to provide some deterrent.
As for compulsory training.......It always baffled me that you can go out and operate a potentialy lethal machine in close proximity to other people with no training whatsoever. Combine the above and, at present legislation would seem the obvious answer.

Des

PS.... If pure education/training is the answer then I see no harm in anyone producing a sticker with whatever organisations logo they want.....so long as it gets the message across. Wouldn't you say?
__________________
Blue is the new Orange!
demondesmond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09 May 2013, 11:11   #160
Member
 
Anchorhandler's Avatar
 
Country: France
Town: Huisnes sur Mer
Boat name: Raufoss
Make: Avon
Length: 4m +
Engine: Mercury 50
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nos4r2 View Post
So, you'd like to see compulsory registration and so on as well?


I really fail to understand this 'need to progress' mentality. It aint broke. Don't fix it.
Not broken?

As someone who spends a heck of a lot of time on "the front line" i would quite strenuously argue that it"s not quite as fine and dandy out there as you think it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Diggler View Post
Certainly seems like it.

As a boatbuilder, that all sounds like a real crap idea, and I can't see how it would work. You surely can't be suggesting that you'd like to make it illegal to own a boat without the necessary paperwork.

It's a hard enough time to be selling boats at the moment, without some half arsed crackpot scheme being brought in to make it even more difficult. Besides, owning and operating are 2 entirely different things. I know several people who own very high performance craft, one of which is a 100+ mph powerboat, and he's never driven it, but is happy to be a passenger.

With all due respect, your living in a dream world.... i suppose that people are discouraged to go out and buy a motorcycle because they have to do a seperate licence?

the "half arsed crackpot scheme" i mentioned would only cost a fraction of the cost of doing the CBT let alonr the full licence!

UK motorcycle sales show positive trend - Motorcycle news: Industry - Visordown

Wake up people.... things need to change and the sooner you all pull your heads out of that bucket of sand the sooner we can work towards a solution that is accepted by all party's involved.

Simon
__________________

__________________
C'est pas l'homme qui prend la mer, c'est la mer qui prend l'homme....
Anchorhandler is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 19:56.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.