Are Day Skipper and YM theory courses worthwhile?

[petem]

Well I've done both and am not convinced (ignoring the fact that I don't currently own a boat). There's far too much focus on traditional navigation, especially at low speed for the raggies. There's far too little on electronic nav, particularly taking into account the demands for high speed navigation.

If you really want to learn how to be safe then pay an RYA instructor to train you and your wife on your own boat, for a weekend, and give you an ICC ticket at the end. If you want to be really serious then YM practical is the only exam worth doing.

Of course, doing the theory courses gives you something to do for a night a week in the winter and can be fun so I wouldn't criticise anyone doing it.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.FairlineOwnersClub.com>Fairline Owners Club</A>

 

[tripleace]

And in a storm, or with a crippled engine, or because somebody is hurt, thats the speed you will be doing and with a little theory you will know how to get all home in one piece.

Yes at 20 / 30 knots and all the electrics working who needs the exam at all... Its for when they don't work. With Water and electrics not mixing very well, I'm glad I've started my training.

I agree the course could be made more friendly though..... Maybe have two exams but I found that in a room of mixed boats, you could better understand the other boaters position.

If we had two exams we would never meet raggies, well only in Chichester when we create to much wash,,,,(only joking)

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boating-ads.co.uk> Boating Website</A>

 

[hlb]

We'd been tootling about betwen Wales Ireland and Scotland, Bristol chanel, CI and France for 6 or 7 years before we did Day Skipper. We hated every single second of it, it felt like total drudgery and torture. How we managed to endure the whole course, I dont know. What usefull things we learned could have been written on the back of a fag packet. Yes it has some relivance for raggie types. But I've never needed to study a tidal curve or work out with pen and paper the exact depth of water in some none standard port. When we did the course. Not that long ago. There was not one single reference to radar, deca, GPS, let alone chart plotters and auto pilots. If theres a chance that the GPS will fail, buy two.
The countless stories of highly experienced navigators, mistaking one headland for another, or this light house for that, are born out by the ship wrecks on the charts.
By the way, has enyone ever tried to take a fast planing boat, say 80 miles to the CI on dead reconning?? I mean, first time, no local knowledge or anything.

<hr width=100% size=1> <font color=blue>No one can force me to come here.<font color=red> I'm a volunteer!!.<font color=blue>

Haydn

 

[gjgm]

I ve just started the YM, and not the DS as mentioned elsewhere it looked a huge yawn. In the YM syllabus is stuff I dont yet know. I think the whole concept of all the courses is to improve safety at sea, through theory and practice. I agree that if you have years of experience then you probably have learned the theory in that way, but for many,such as myself, it s a question of learning the theory and then putting it into practice. IE my boating is restricted by the combined limits of my theoretical and practical experience- which i m trying to address.The argument about all this traditional charting etc is only partly in the case of all 4 of your gps going dead, but more that only through understanding traditional navigation can you understand what the data from gps really means. . Could you teach electronic navigation skills if the pupil doesnt understand navigation anyway?However, whether some of these courses could do with a major overhaul is probably a fair point....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ROCKETSHIP_11]

People are suggesting buy two gps sets or buy four, I seem to remember that during the gulf war the gps signal was only available when the jet fighters were in the air, as we all know this is not a commercial or civilian service, and anyway if you don't understand traditional navigation your gps will get you into trouble due to the need to interpret the information correctly, when I did my coastal skipper a powerboater who was having difficulty with the chartwork expressed to me that this is all old hat as he has two gps sets however on quizing him he did not seem to realise that in fog the gps would bring him back to this home port (he had his berth saved as his waypoint )through the nearest headland, The manufacturers are guilty of advertising their products as being all that you need to go offshore in safety, all boaters need to ask themselves should I be out here and can I find my way to my destination if my electronics fail !!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[hlb]

Theres nothing complicated about navigation. You do it every dat when going to work, by local knowledge, or if going further, by sign posts. The problem with navigating a planing boat by traditional methods is. Where as a yacht might deviate by say one knot an hour and course may stray two or three deg off course. A planing boat might deviate from theretical speed, up and down several times from say 8 knots to 25, dependant on conditions, A path through the waves at a steady 20 knots, can take you miles off course in no time. Even with a full time navigator, they would be hard pressed to take everything into account and plot it on a chart whilst every thing is bouncing around.

You could certainly teach some one to use a chart plotter a dam sight easier and more acurate than the pencil and paper method. I'm not saying that the ability to understand a chart and be able to chart a course from it, is not important, it is. The problem is the dogmatic approch by Day Skipper of understanding how wind and tide will affect direction, which is true at five knots, bears no resemblence to the factors affecting a boat doing 20-30 knots.

<hr width=100% size=1> <font color=blue>No one can force me to come here.<font color=red> I'm a volunteer!!.<font color=blue>

Haydn

 

[tcm]

um, erroneous use of gps will result in just as many problems as erroneous use of a paper chart. Anyone planning with waypoints inside a harbour is plain silly. All the more reason to teach proper use of these items.

Most certainly the RYA do not teach for high-speed powerboats even though they award YM (power) to people with minimla or no knowlegde of diesel engine maintenence, how and why a lookout dead ahead is vital on a planing boat where a pot marker will sink you in minutes, why bringing a chart on deck is a bit dodgy if you have no spare down below, how damaging to props it can be if the anchor isn't lashed on, and lots more.

But YM is at least a start. It's not "useless".


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Alistairr]

All this is making me confused,

Should I, Shouldn't I? Day Skipper Then YM Theory? or Bypass Day skipper go straight for Ym? Do i know enough to go straight to YM?

After doing our PB2 and getting an ICC, SWMBO and I were trying to deceide what sort of training to do next, And now after reading all these post i don't know what to do!!! Which is the best option?

We know very little about charts and navigation

I used to be indecisive, now i just don't know!!!!!!

/forums/images/icons/crazy.gif/forums/images/icons/crazy.gif



<hr width=100% size=1>

Petrol Rules..

 

[hlb]

We are not arguing the need to understand charts and navigation. We are argueing the relivant use of the day skipper courses as it applies to planing boats. Even experienced yacht skippers admit that they can be as much as ten miles out at land fall, using dead reconning. Ok they can heave to and wait for morning and recognise some features on the land. We've run out of fuel long before then. So it is very important to arrive dead on course as planned.

<hr width=100% size=1> <font color=blue>No one can force me to come here.<font color=red> I'm a volunteer!!.<font color=blue>

Haydn

 

[jimi]

Easy .. go straight for YM theory if you're at all numerate. Day skip & Ym theory cover much the same ground just a bit more detail and higher standard. Don't confuse them with the practicals of the same name. Theres a big difference there.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[hlb]

If you know nothing, do the day skipper. You nor I have the range in the boat for yacht master to be of any relivance. Day skipper will teach you to use charts and know about navigation marks, buoys and water depths ets. We are not saying dont do it. We are saying that much of the course is irelivant. But they miss out very important bits that are very different for planing boats. For instance, we spent weeks understanding compass deviation and variation. Not that it matters much with compass going round in circles!! But very little about the effects and Consequences of meeting overfalls.
Point is, when youve done day skipper. Theres more to learn that they have not taught you and alot of what they have taught you is useless.



<hr width=100% size=1> <font color=blue>No one can force me to come here.<font color=red> I'm a volunteer!!.<font color=blue>

Haydn

 

[Goodge]

The Ym theory is not just about traditional navigation, you are forgetting things like tidal height calculations. Ever tried to get out of a harbour without any water ?
Pretty essential stuff for passage planning whether mobo or raggie.
I have done YM theory , PB2 and ICC and would say that YM theory is very worth it. I also believe that you go into a lot more depth about other subjects such as colregs and weather.
You can skip straight to YM theory if you think your good enough but you may struggle early on.

Overall still think YM is worth it.




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Think that's the difference between theory and practical! Theory would say use the tide to advantage whereas in practice in a power boat you'd go for wind with tide no matter the tide direction.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Observer]

Agree with Jimi. YM shorebased will be a reasonably challenging but very achievable learning curve from your present experience, especially if you read up a bit on navigation theory beforehand.

If you start with DS you'll be way ahead at the start and bored senseless.

I did one evening DS and then switched to YM because I couldn't bear the snail pace.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

er, but in theory you'd go with wind and tide - as well as in practice.

In the YM theory you never die - in practice you have that risk, no?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[hlb]

Exactly. It is very important for a yacht to reach the right point at the right time, or find it's self going backwards. It matters little to us. We justwant the sea resonably smothish. Or behind us if possible. So some one doing Day skipper and taking it as gossple. Would be in a mess.

<hr width=100% size=1> <font color=blue>No one can force me to come here.<font color=red> I'm a volunteer!!.<font color=blue>

Haydn

 

[gjgm]

Re: alistair

only done one night, but if any insight, the tutor is stressing that if you are not up to Day skipper level, do not miss any classes, do all the homework, you cannot afford to slip behind or you wont catch up. I think it would also depend on the size of class and others in the class, which you dont have much influenece over. Get the DS and YM RYA syllabus booklets and see....First homework without any reminders is chart work with magnetic,true,tidal stream and tidal height questions.Dont think we re expected to get 100pct on first evening, but if you ve no idea whats going on, its DS for you !! Having said that, I think we are going to start at basic level, but we re expected to be up to DS level pretty quick. However, this college, you can just transfer to DS if its obvious you re in the wrong class.
Not promoting it, but theres a CD-rom by Longbow or something that has DS and YM on it which would give you a good idea of how much you know

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Observer]

I've done YM and think it is worthwhile but has limitations as Haydn expressed. My course was mostly raggies (at least 90%) for whom tidal vectors and tidal curve at primary/secondary port calculations are quite or very relevant. I've never done a precise tidal height calculation since and use of tidal vectors in passage planning on a 20kts+ boat is almost completely irrelevant. But, if the need did arise, I would be able to make a reasonable fist of a cross-channel passage plan for a yacht or a slow displacement mobo.

Whether to do DS first or straight into YM is down to the individual's learning capacity and previous experience.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[miket]

The RYA did say they were going to change the training syllabus to:
include electronic navigation aswell.
include reference to motorboat relevant navigation in addition to the sail biased type.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I did my YM theory and practical 10 yrs ago and I am appalled that the same comments about lack of relevance to motor boating still apply now as they did then but I suppose it just reflects the raggie bias of the RYA itself. Having said that, I still think it is critical to know how to do 'traditional' paper nav methods not only because you might be on a boat one day where the electronics fail but also because plotting a paper chart course is a necessary cross check to plotting an electronic one. I think understanding the minutiae of tidal curve calculations is less relevant though because in a motor boat you are always going to err on the safe side and in any case tidal depths can be easily affected by other factors. So, I think the twelfths rule is quite adequate
You are right that you will learn far more by paying a good instructor for a few days to give you one-on-one instruction. What no theory course can teach you is to apply common sense to your boating or how you will react under the pressure of a real life situation

<hr width=100% size=1>