Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 
Old 01 July 2012, 12:47   #21
RIBnet admin team
 
willk's Avatar
 
Country: Ireland
Make: Redbay Boats
Length: 9m +
Engine: 370hp
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 12,926
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anchorhandler View Post
Many boat users who have voluntarily taken upon themselves to achieve some sort of higher qualification seem to feel it necessary to refute the idea of mandatory quals.....
ow ells wood wee fyel soupearier too de ovver nobburs?
__________________

__________________
willk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 July 2012, 13:08   #22
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Lymington
Boat name: Farfetched
Make: Solent
Length: 6m +
Engine: 150 Opti
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonto View Post
I am not arguing against safety rules, I am arguing that there should be some!
Presently there is nothing to stop a P***ed up idiot getting behind the wheel of a boat, with no training/insurance/safety equipment and doing himself and others real harm, and TBH I think there should be some rule against it.

I can not for the life of me understand why there should be any objection to having such a rule? and if i had to choose between having a law (standards/rule, call it whatever) about the colour of a sidelight, and one to make it an offence to drink and conn boat, I would definately choose the latter.
I'm pretty sure if you are pissed behind the wheel it is still illegal as skipper, just as it is to be pissed as skipper at anchor on a yacht...

Not enforced but still law...
__________________

__________________
Chris Hoy's thigh circumference is larger than Victoria Beckhams waist.

Upon exiting the boat please check the bilge for your valuables...
Josh_P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 July 2012, 13:13   #23
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Lymington
Boat name: Farfetched
Make: Solent
Length: 6m +
Engine: 150 Opti
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anchorhandler View Post

I find it ironic that this thread started off by debating the need for LED nav light standardisation when, if you spent as much time as me out on the water , you would soon conclude that the importance of debating the details of color, interference, reliability etc.. falls far behind the actual importance of having the f**king things actually switched on in the first place.

I still see on a regular basis people sailing/motoring at night with NO nav/running lights showing.

Simon
So so true especially little fishing boats out by the needle around sunset, they have nav lights on when moving but turn them off when fishing, i've nearly clove a few of them in two...

Has anyone seen the little (commercial) fishing dory that nets on theeastern side of Southampton Water at night with orange flashing construction lights all over it (most likely liberated from the sides of skips)... Beware though if you see one of those lights in the water at night don't investigate they're the markers for his nets...
__________________
Chris Hoy's thigh circumference is larger than Victoria Beckhams waist.

Upon exiting the boat please check the bilge for your valuables...
Josh_P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 July 2012, 13:13   #24
Member
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Town: Inverness
Boat name: none
Make: none
Length: 5m +
Engine: none
MMSI: none
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,908
I get enough b**shit at work complying with the law and regulation, screw having to do all that out on the water as well.
If someone does something particularly stupid then reckless endangerment is a good catch all.
How would you enforce drink regs against someone sitting on a yacht, anchored, sipping a few glasses of wine or something similiar where the qualified skipper was elsewhere, tied to a mooring or at a dock?
How would you police this anyway?
__________________
BruceB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 July 2012, 14:22   #25
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 Pikey Dave View Post
You're missing the point. Don't confuse standardisation of product with training people how to use it. Standards (as has already been said umpteen times) are there to ensure that manufacturers produce products that are fit to use. If you then place those products in the hands of a numpty, that's a different argument. When you put your dinner in the microwave, you don't have to attend a training course & pass an exam to do so. BUT, the manufacturer has to produce a machine that won't fry your head. He even has to take into account the infinite stupidity of the human race, by putting a warning in the instructions that the microwave isn't to be used for drying your pet chuhoohoo. Similarly, when did you last attend a telly watching course? No? But you know that you can sit infront of the telly, safe in the knowledge that it won't make your eyes bleed & turn you deaf... why is that....Standards dear boy, standards

"Standards (as has already been said umpteen times) are there to ensure that manufacturers produce products that are fit to use."

What does STCW stand for?...in particular the"S"???

The point 'that i am surely missing' is that for accountability (and insurance purposes) not only items have to comply with set standards. If you were able to take control of the said microwave or TV and operate it in a way that could cause harm to others then you can sure as hell bet that you would have to be trained and certified to operate it. Why?, because at some point someone will claim they "did'nt know" or were not trained properly and end up hurting an innocent by-stander.
What other vehicles/equipment can a person operate in public without having some form of certification?...certainly not many. Like the microwave manufacturer that has to prove that his equipment will not cause injury, we as vehicle/equipment operators also have to prove that we will also not cause harm. It reminds of the favorite American expression (which i fully agree with) "guns don't kill people, people kill people"....

The "S" in STCW means that a person achieving a certificate that meets STCW requirments has reached a minimum standard of training. This in turn means that he is deemed a lower risk to operate or help operate a type of vessel and therfore makes himself and the vessel more "insurable".

I fully appreciate your frustrations though, but sadly its the way things are going. In my line of work i have seen first hand how an increase in training and certification has made the industry a safer place....FACT.

There will always be that one idiot though who, no matter how much training and certification, will always manage to hurt himself or somone else.
I often wonder what Darwin would think if he could see society as it is now...What ever happened to "survival of the fittest" I'm sure he would see the HSE as being counter evolutionary for sure as i admit they seem to help the idiots in this world carry on breeding. If someone wants to remove the guard of a 9" angle grinder to bolt on a 12" circular saw wood blade then let them go ahead...but sadly when he injures himself its society that has to foot the financial bill for his stupidiness.

The point i was trying to make is that standards are there for a reason be it LED lighting or standards for training they all help to contribute to a safer society. In my case i am Pro mandatory certification for boat users.

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 01 July 2012, 14:27   #26
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 willk View Post
ow ells wood wee fyel soupearier too de ovver nobburs?


Oh dear, Is it time for me to hit the "smilley face hiding uder the chair" button again?

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 01 July 2012, 14:39   #27
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 Anchorhandler View Post
"Standards (as has already been said umpteen times) are there to ensure that manufacturers produce products that are fit to use."

What does STCW stand for?...in particular the"S"???

The point 'that i am surely missing' is that for accountability (and insurance purposes) not only items have to comply with set standards. If you were able to take control of the said microwave or TV and operate it in a way that could cause harm to others then you can sure as hell bet that you would have to be trained and certified to operate it. Why?, because at some point someone will claim they "did'nt know" or were not trained properly and end up hurting an innocent by-stander.
What other vehicles/equipment can a person operate in public without having some form of certification?...certainly not many. Like the microwave manufacturer that has to prove that his equipment will not cause injury, we as vehicle/equipment operators also have to prove that we will also not cause harm. It reminds of the favorite American expression (which i fully agree with) "guns don't kill people, people kill people"....

The "S" in STCW means that a person achieving a certificate that meets STCW requirments has reached a minimum standard of training. This in turn means that he is deemed a lower risk to operate or help operate a type of vessel and therfore makes himself and the vessel more "insurable".

I fully appreciate your frustrations though, but sadly its the way things are going. In my line of work i have seen first hand how an increase in training and certification has made the industry a safer place....FACT.

There will always be that one idiot though who, no matter how much training and certification, will always manage to hurt himself or somone else.
I often wonder what Darwin would think if he could see society as it is now...What ever happened to "survival of the fittest" I'm sure he would see the HSE as being counter evolutionary for sure as i admit they seem to help the idiots in this world carry on breeding. If someone wants to remove the guard of a 9" angle grinder to bolt on a 12" circular saw wood blade then let them go ahead...but sadly when he injures himself its society that has to foot the financial bill for his stupidiness.

The point i was trying to make is that standards are there for a reason be it LED lighting or standards for training they all help to contribute to a safer society. In my case i am Pro mandatory certification for boat users.

Simon
....Pikey
__________________
Member of S.A.B.S. (Lancashire Division)
kerny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01 July 2012, 20:29   #28
Member
 
tonto's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Zummerset
Boat name: irven arlyss
Make: Humber Oceanpro
Length: 6m +
Engine: evinrude 135hp
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anchorhandler View Post
"
The point i was trying to make is that standards are there for a reason be it LED lighting or standards for training they all help to contribute to a safer society. In my case i am Pro mandatory certification for boat users.

Simon
+1

In almost no other area are you allowed to use or operate machinery that is capable of killing you and others without some form of licensing and training (and thereby regulation)

Shall we abandon the MOT, driving test and all the other rules regarding driving, as they obviously interfere with the ability of people to drive what they want when they want?
How about aircraft? get rid of all the rules and regs about those as well as long as they are not comercial.
How about firearms control, great! get rid of that lot for sure!

At present there is still no law regarding drinking and boating, only local bylaws, not a national regulation, and my original point was why would the RYA oppose the intoduction of such a law if it were so concerned with safety?
Reckless endagerment is a US law, and not a UK offense, AFAIK (I will propbably be corrected!) and although there might be a similar offense in English law, it would require a person to endanger, or act in a manner that is wrong. The offense should be to be p***sed up whilst behind the wheel Full stop.

Yes it will lead to more enforcement, but if people are trained and have the correct equipment what is to fear? only those who would be doing something dodgy, or have unsafe craft/ no training or P***ed.
__________________
tonto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02 July 2012, 01:41   #29
Member
 
m chappelow's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: yorkshire
Boat name: little vicky
Make: avon ex RNLI
Length: 3m +
Engine: tohatsu
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,310
As a matter of intrest With regards to France in 6 months time All cars will have to have 1 electronic . Kit or 2 chemical type Breathalizer kits in the glove box . Law starts this week but has been given a 6 months grace owing to shortages .and supply .

Looking at some of the statistics with the yachting and sailing brigade it looks to me like an awfull lot of accidents on board sailing boats are down to crew members getting a clonk on the head with mast booms ,
why doesent the RYA make it mandatory to ban them or make it compulsory to wear a crash helmet whilst under sail

All this rules and regulations and training comes down to the same old story some where down the line it becomes a product to sell and make money .
__________________
m chappelow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02 July 2012, 03:39   #30
RIBnet supporter
 
Erin's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Channel Islands
Town: A large rock
Boat name: La Frette
Make: Osprey Vipermax
Length: 6m +
Engine: 200 Suzzy
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by willk

Surely that depends on if they have passengers? Or if another vessel is involved? Over the past few years I have read about far too many alcohol related leisure boating deaths/accidents. There's really no excuse for it.
I was maybe being a little bit flippant, but I stand by my assertion that nearly everyone drives or is within striking distance of a car every day of their life whereas those near a boat are significantly less. A matter of priorities for our Governments to decide.

What effect would this 'new' drink boating regulation have on your little jaunts to Islay or Jura I wonder?
Erin 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 12:16.


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