Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 
Old 01 January 2013, 17:39   #21
RIBnet admin team
 
willk's Avatar
 
Country: Ireland
Make: Redbay Boats
Length: 9m +
Engine: 370hp
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 12,924
RIBase
Having thought about it some more - I think that some some of opt-out "waiver" for the agencies concerned might be a good idea. That way, people who want to conduct operations "outside the box" can be facilitated. A sort of DNR for water users...
__________________

__________________
willk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 January 2013, 18:04   #22
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 willk View Post
Having thought about it some more - I think that some some of opt-out "waiver" for the agencies concerned might be a good idea. That way, people who want to conduct operations "outside the box" can be facilitated. A sort of DNR for water users...
I rather like that idea.
__________________
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 01 January 2013, 18:04   #23
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Plymouth
Length: 6m +
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by willk View Post
Having thought about it some more - I think that some some of opt-out "waiver" for the agencies concerned might be a good idea. That way, people who want to conduct operations "outside the box" can be facilitated. A sort of DNR for water users...
Sorry but I don't buy into that, I'm sure had these chaps in the OP felt they were in any real danger at any point they'd have gladly accepted the assistance. I'm not sure they should be signing any "waiver" saying don't help if it later goes wrong.

There's a video on another post showing a sib and jetski in a force 7 last week, should they have had to sign the same disclaimer ? What if they then really did need the help, are the services really going to sit and watch then drown ?

I totally agree they should have been much better equipped though, maybe if a penalty charge was implemented for rescues where its later proven people were reckless or negligent would be a better way to go.

Peter @ Boatsandoutboards4sale ~ www.BoatsandOutboards4Sale.co.uk ~ 07930 421007
__________________
Boats&Outboards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 January 2013, 18:10   #24
RIBnet admin team
 
willk's Avatar
 
Country: Ireland
Make: Redbay Boats
Length: 9m +
Engine: 370hp
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 12,924
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boats&Outboards View Post
I totally agree they should have been much better equipped though
Just a touch - out after dark without lights, comms, flares, LJs and God knows what else in the path of an advancing Gale in a nasty stretch of water!

I don't think that the comparison with Whisper and MattH is a fair one either - I bet they (note two craft) were fully trained, informed and tooled up.
__________________
willk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 January 2013, 18:23   #25
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Plymouth
Length: 6m +
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by willk View Post

Just a touch - out after dark without lights, comms, flares, LJs and God knows what else in the path of an advancing Gale in a nasty stretch of water!

I don't think that the comparison with Whisper and MattH is a fair one either - I bet they (note two craft) were fully trained, informed and tooled up.
We don't know how experienced these chaps were, so its not fair to compare them. Clearly they were neglectful in going out without any equipment but like I said should that revoke any right to be saved in the event of a rescue being needed, even if they did refuse assistance initially. Im not saying Whisper/MattH were in the wrong for going out at all, far from it, my point is just if we start picking and choosing who to respond to were done for!

Another example. A 16 year old lad jumped (without question, wasn't pushed etc) from our Torpoint Ferry last night at 9:15pm, sadly he's still missing despite several searches etc. Should they not have bothered as by all accounts, it was his decision to jump ?

At the end of the day that's what the services are there for. They respond when needed. End of. Of course in an ideal world we'd all like better education, training etc to prevent instances like this but just like any other service (ambulances respond to speeding cars that crash etc) where people do stupid things but still deserve assistance.

Peter @ Boatsandoutboards4sale ~ www.BoatsandOutboards4Sale.co.uk ~ 07930 421007
__________________
Boats&Outboards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 January 2013, 18:54   #26
Member
 
kerny's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Ashton-under-Lyne Lancs
Boat name: IMOGEN
Make: Air-Craft 5.4
Length: 5m +
Engine: Etec 60
MMSI: 235087492
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,040
RIBase
Send a message via Skype™ to kerny
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boats&Outboards View Post
maybe if a penalty charge was implemented for rescues where its later proven people were reckless or negligent would be a better way to go.

Peter @ Boatsandoutboards4sale ~ BoatsandOutboards4Sale | Hand-picked boats & motors, fully tested, delivered nationwide. ~ 07930 421007
I will probably get slated for this but... the RNLi is a charity organisation money given freely by very kind people and the the organisation, does have plenty money to play with, so why should people reckless or not be charged for a mistake being it stupid or not.
__________________
Member of S.A.B.S. (Lancashire Division)
kerny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 January 2013, 18:57   #27
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Plymouth
Length: 6m +
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerny View Post

I will probably get slated for this but... the RNLi is a charity organisation money given freely by very kind people and the the organisation, does have plenty money to play with, so why should people reckless or not be charged for a mistake being it stupid or not.
As a way of educating them to prevent future call-outs where lives may be lost. Much like our so called fines for speeding

I just think if your going to do something its better that then playing god with who gets rescued, based on how stupid they've been

Peter @ Boatsandoutboards4sale ~ www.BoatsandOutboards4Sale.co.uk ~ 07930 421007
__________________
Boats&Outboards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 January 2013, 19:35   #28
Member
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Town: Inverness
Boat name: none
Make: none
Length: 5m +
Engine: none
MMSI: none
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,908
Any rescue organisation I have ever spoken to has never wanted charges, either monetary or otherwise, to be used to discourage idiots.

The reason being that rescues get harder the longer they are left before help is called for and lives will be lost as a result of delays while people think on whether it is bad enough to call for help.

I don't know the full circumstances on the incident in question so there is no point speculating too much on this specific incident. However the guys themselves didn't seem to think they were in danger and seemed to had headed back without any help or assistance. ergo there was no need to rescue them. (although they may not be so lucky again)

Be careful what you wish for though, "authority" deciding on what we can and cannot do at sea is asking for the restrictions being placed on everyone that are aimed at the (few) idiots out there.
There is such a thing as personal responsibility and it is not a bad thing that there are still some places where, even today, you can still do things and have some adventure without asking for permission as long as you understand the consequences.
These places are getting rarer.
__________________
BruceB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 January 2013, 20:30   #29
Dhf
Member
 
Dhf's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Wales
Length: no boat
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,012
There's only one person to sort of blame for this, and thats the person who reported the situation, but then you can't blame someone for thinking they where potentially saving lives, catch 22, because once the authorities have been notified its compulsory for them to act accordingly.
__________________
Dhf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02 January 2013, 04:33   #30
Member
 
Peter_C's Avatar
 
Country: USA
Boat name: Uh...a kayak?
Length: 4m +
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,485
Could it also be that the rescue team spent two enjoyable hours on the water hanging out?
__________________

__________________
Peter_C 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 05:37.


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