Tows, and legal/financial matters

[paulears]

Today, off Lowestoft there was an interesting conversation. A small boat had an engine failure off one of the two piers, about half a mile from the harbour. They called the Coastguard (Humber Radio). They were asked if life was at risk and did anyone onboard have medical conditions - the response was no. The Lowestoft Lifeboat was doing some exercises between the two piers. Humber Coastguard responded to the Pan Pan and got the Lifeboat to Channel 0 where they were told due to current policy, they were to hold off getting involved until responses from the radio calls were received. The stranded vessel dropped their anchor and were stable and not drifting. The lifeboat reported to Humber that they were 200yds away and able to assist. They were told to hold until permission to launch was received from the RNLI - odd as they were actually almost on-site. The radio operator on the lifeboat seemed somewhat peeved. Humber asked to speak to the Coxwain - he replied he was the Coxwain. The lifeboat talked to the stranded boat on 16 and offered a tow which was accepted, then told Humber they were responding and they concurred.

This seemed very strange for a number of reasons. A boat in need of a tow, had a tow capable vessel very close. That vessel was a lifeboat with crew on a training mission. Surely a real situation is an excellent training aid - especially as it would include a two rope fore and aft tow to get the engine out vessel into the Royal Norfolk and Suffolk Yacht club, just inside the harbour entrance. I found the reticence of the Coastguard in sanctioning the lifeboat's involvement odd, based on the circumstances. I've read the historical 'salvage' issues with tows, but lifeboats don't routinely press for this, do they? The other thing I (as a very green maritime person) wondered was if the RNLI can only get involved if tasked by the Coastguard? I thought they were independent?

The other strange thing was the lifeboat asked the stranded vessel to go to channel 31 - which of course is not a channel routinely found in Class D radios used by leisure boaters. They had to report they did not have channel 37 fitted and stayed on 16. even stranger - the lifeboat was not transmitting AIS data so did not show on the usual plotting websites. The delay wasn't much more than ten minutes, but left me wondering what on earth was going on.

Is this common? Somebody breaking down, declaring a PAN PAN and the coastguard trying to prevent the lifeboat getting involved, when they can see the vessel calling the request for help? Paul

 

[prv]

Does sound rather odd. The most charitable explanation I can come up with is that perhaps the Coastguard are having a push to get simple breakdown tows sorted without automatically calling out a lifeboat, which does make some sense, and then a junior watch officer inappropriately extended this to telling a lifeboat that was already handy not to get involved. Remember after the big reorganisation that gave us the Fareham call centre, most of the call handlers are relatively inexperienced.

Once upon a time lifeboat crews could and occasionally did claim salvage - if they chose to, they were deemed to be operating independently and had to pay the RNLI a charter fee for the use of the boat and fuel. But this hasn’t been the case for some decades, with crews officially waiving any potential salvage rights when they sign up.

As far as I know the RNLI are not required to get Coastguard authority to launch, though for clarity in managing emergencies I believe they’ve agreed that will be the normal procedure. They do have their own internal rule that the crew can’t launch on their own authority, it has to be approved by a designated person at the station - this is supposed to provide a measure of restraint against over-enthusiasm putting themselves in excessive danger. Though I haven’t heard of any cases of launch authority being denied on those grounds. In any case it doesn’t seem relevant to a lifeboat that’s already under way, where AFAIK the Coxwain is in total charge.

The Lifeboat probably asked the casualty to go to 31 to get away from the (to them) annoying Coastguard, forgetting that it’s an RNLI training channel only. I don’t know if they’d have been able to achieve the same thing by going to a standard ship-to-ship channel - the Coastguard don’t have dedicated antennas for those but they may still be able to access them.

Pete

 

[Sticky Fingers]

.deleted.

 

[paulears]

Cheers Pete - that does make sense. Appreciate the comments. The Coxwain was certainly a little 'agitated' by the frustration of being within shouting distance and being held off. As soon as he declared his intention, Humber concurred - but they tried very hard not to.

 

[Moodysailor]

An odd situation, but then we are in the "new normal" so I guess we have to accept that things are changing.

I totally agree that in this situation, this initially seems a bit bonkers. Take the word "lifeboat" off the side and you have a situation where one mariner is onsite and can assist another - conventional wisdom would dictate this requires no further thought.

But, looking at the wider issue - there is a increasing reliance (and expectation) on the RNLI to assist in non-life threatening situations, which is not what they are primarily there to do. I saw a post on a different forum recently where someone was shocked that a vessel was charged for a rescue in another country, and seemed to be under the impression that all rescues at sea should be free. We even had a post last week in a similar vein on this site.

Having worked in the marine industry all my career, and having worked in the marine industry in other countries, our RNLI is the exception, not the norm. The coverage, and capability they have is exceptional, and the people are great, brave people. They will always help when they can. But the bottom line is (and is clearly stated on their website) that their role is to save lives at sea. A broken down vessel where no lives are in danger is not an RNLI matter. If I look at the case above, the RNLI were out doing a job (training) - the CG might have asked them to stand off whilst they looked into a commercial tow available nearby, which would have enabled the RNLI crew to carry on with their work. Once other options are exhausted, they allowed the RNLI to assist.

Each case is unique, and stands on it's own. But I believe that, with the increase in boating numbers such actions like this may become more common-place. I also believe that this is no bad thing - the RNLI can focus on saving lives, tow operators can rescue vessels. And the rest of us can brush up on salvage law [Salvage]

 

[prv]

But, looking at the wider issue - there is a increasing reliance (and expectation) on the RNLI to assist in non-life threatening situations, which is not what they are primarily there to do.

I'm not sure such reliance is increasing. Listening to the normal run of minor dramas on any Solent weekend, the Coastguard now routinely put out a call for "any vessel able to assist with a tow...". Five years ago, they'd have launched a lifeboat every time. I think this is a positive direction, recognising that a breakdown isn't automatically a distress call.

Pete

 

[Moodysailor]

I'm not sure such reliance is increasing. Listening to the normal run of minor dramas on any Solent weekend, the Coastguard now routinely put out a call for "any vessel able to assist with a tow...". Five years ago, they'd have launched a lifeboat every time. I think this is a positive direction, recognising that a breakdown isn't automatically a distress call.

Pete

That's good to hear Pete. We're down in the West Country now, haven't cruised the Solent for many years but my memories are of the lifeboats being out constantly too.

Great to hear the CG taking pragmatic action ?

 

[paulears]

I noticed that our beach lifeguards now have their yellow and red clothing now sporting RNLI branding - I assume the local council now pays the RNLI rather than employing the young folk direct. Things are changing!

 

[Juan Twothree]

Agree with all the above comments. If there's another, more suitable vessel able to offer a tow, then it saves tying up a lifeboat for perhaps several hours.

Sounds a bit odd in this case though. As stated, the lifeboat can offer a tow without the authority of the CG, although it's best to keep everyone onside, and I'd always ask for our station duty launching authority to be informed as a matter of courtesy.

Don't get the bit about radio channels. Maybe they meant ch67? Or maybe they'd already put a crew member aboard, with a hand held radio on ch31?

 

[Laysula]

A different situation (Because the lifeboat was already at sea) but when the lifeboat get called out crew have to leave their jobs immediately and travel to the station and man the lifeboat. I'm sure employers are very understanding and happy for crews to do this in an emergency,but if crews are continually being called out to tow in breakdowns , particularly when other options are available then employers may start to think again. After all, they do have businesses to run.

 

[Bru]

I stand to be corrected by somebody with better knowledge but i believe that tasking a lifeboat is the responsibility of and requires authorising by the designated launch authority or his/ her deputy who are usually members of the station shore crew

My understanding is that the coxswain can normally only launch (and by inference accept a tasking when already on exercise) on his/ her own authority when there is an immediate risk to life

This may seem an unnecessary complication but (again my understanding) the system is designed to protect lifeboat crews by having the launch decision made by an appropriately experienced (usually ex-crew) person who isn't directly involved with carrying out the rescue

 

[Blue Sunray]

I stand to be corrected by somebody with better knowledge but i believe that tasking a lifeboat is the responsibility of and requires authorising by the designated launch authority or his/ her deputy who are usually members of the station shore crew

My understanding is that the coxswain can normally only launch (and by inference accept a tasking when already on exercise) on his/ her own authority when there is an immediate risk to life

This may seem an unnecessary complication but (again my understanding) the system is designed to protect lifeboat crews by having the launch decision made by an appropriately experienced (usually ex-crew) person who isn't directly involved with carrying out the rescue

Wasn't that (cox'n towing without appropriate authority) a key part of the Jersey shenanigans a few years back

 

[Juan Twothree]

I stand to be corrected by somebody with better knowledge but i believe that tasking a lifeboat is the responsibility of and requires authorising by the designated launch authority or his/ her deputy who are usually members of the station shore crew

My understanding is that the coxswain can normally only launch (and by inference accept a tasking when already on exercise) on his/ her own authority when there is an immediate risk to life

This may seem an unnecessary complication but (again my understanding) the system is designed to protect lifeboat crews by having the launch decision made by an appropriately experienced (usually ex-crew) person who isn't directly involved with carrying out the rescue

Very true, although when I phone the launching authority just before taking the boat on exercise, we discuss what will happen if we get a tasking, which is usually that I can accept the job at my discretion, as long as it's something fairly sensible and within the guidelines.

 

[Juan Twothree]

Wasn't that (cox'n towing without appropriate authority) a key part of the Jersey shenanigans a few years back

It was one of a number of things.

 

[Tranona]

I noticed that our beach lifeguards now have their yellow and red clothing now sporting RNLI branding - I assume the local council now pays the RNLI rather than employing the young folk direct. Things are changing!

Nothing new. The RNLI have been running lifeguard services under contract to councils for many years. Makes sense as they know what is required in terms of equipment and training, rather than each individual council having to develop that capability.

 

[dunedin]

Aren’t there rules about respecting confidentiality of transmissions on Ch 16, let alone listening in to Ch 0 ?

 

[ZBM2]

Aren’t there rules about respecting confidentiality of transmissions on Ch 16, let alone listening in to Ch 0 ?

Been here long? There's a thread almost every week with some old duffer repeating what he's heard on the VHF even before you count the ones about radio checks. Laws don't apply to the discerning middle class middle aged male if they find them inconvenient.

 

[penberth3]

I noticed that our beach lifeguards now have their yellow and red clothing now sporting RNLI branding - I assume the local council now pays the RNLI rather than employing the young folk direct. Things are changing!

Not always. Some authorities have offloaded the cost and responsibility of lifeguarding.

 

[superheat6k]

Aren’t there rules about respecting confidentiality of transmissions on Ch 16, let alone listening in to Ch 0 ?

It is not illegal to listen on Ch 16 or 0 (if you have a scanner it is easy to pick up). It is illegal to report what has been heard.

 

[prv]

It is not illegal to listen on Ch 16 or 0 (if you have a scanner it is easy to pick up). It is illegal to report what has been heard.

It’s illegal to listen to any radio transmission unless it’s intended for general reception (BBC, etc), on a license-exempt band (eg PMR446), or you have an appropriate license. Most here will have a ship station license allowing them to listen to ch16, but most of us are not licensed to receive ch0. The fact that it’s easy to do so doesn’t make it legal.

Pete