GeorgeLlewellin
Member
If you have to change it then keep it short, keep it simple and make sure it defines what it is for and if possible have it backward compatable.
How about "SAR details - CG66"
How about "SAR details - CG66"
CG66 rename?
- Thread starter EastYachty
- Start date
prv
Well-known member
Because Searush's eBay Birmingham Navy don't know they need a radio license, or know but don't bother.
No harm in having a mention there as well, but that's why not just combine the two, and why promotion would still be needed in order to raise enrolment.
(This assumes raising enrolment is something worth doing, of course)
Pete
Rigger Mortice
N/A
Fair point!
I too have wondered if the CG66 really is much use, or is it just a bureaucratic attempt to build a database which is doomed to fail. Put another way; I wonder how many lives have really been saved as a result of the form?
I've got nothing against the form. I'm just not convinced that it is anything more than simply a good idea that has become an end in itself. With only 22k forms on the system odds are that only 10%? (a guess!) of the time there will be a form on file to assist in an emergency.
Before they go spending money on advertising and promotion I think they need to determine its real value.
Boathook
Well-known member
I ended up having to apply for a new licence to remove 'glitches' from the old one with help from ofcom. Due to the wording used on the VHF licence application form, I emailed the CG to ensure that my existing CG66 was not amended / altered as the info was better on this than the ofcom form. Ofcom seemed to imply on their from that data would be transfered to CG for SAR. Ofcom seem to have a form that is not fit for purpose IMHO.
Thistle
Well-known member
Got an e-mail just this morning "Voluntary Safety Identification Scheme (CG66): RENEWAL". Immediately obvious what it's about so no need to change.
Pity the e-mail started "<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN"> <HTML><HEAD></HEAD><BODY> <P align=right>MRCC FORTH<BR> FIFENESS<BR> CRAIL<BR> FIFE<BR> KY10 3XN<BR><BR> Tel: 01333 450666<BR> <BR> 03/02/2012<BR></P> <P>Mr Ian " and went on with more of the same. Further pity that it invited me to go to a page http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/cg66-online-form which has been moved (though I was redirected to the right one).
Message? Keep the name and description and full marks for keeping it up to date. But what impression does the presentation of the e-mail give me of the operation behind it?
Pity the e-mail started "<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN"> <HTML><HEAD></HEAD><BODY> <P align=right>MRCC FORTH<BR> FIFENESS<BR> CRAIL<BR> FIFE<BR> KY10 3XN<BR><BR> Tel: 01333 450666<BR> <BR> 03/02/2012<BR></P> <P>Mr Ian " and went on with more of the same. Further pity that it invited me to go to a page http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/cg66-online-form which has been moved (though I was redirected to the right one).
Message? Keep the name and description and full marks for keeping it up to date. But what impression does the presentation of the e-mail give me of the operation behind it?
Clyde_Wanderer
New member
Would sound better as The Vonuntary Identification Scheme - CG66
Incidently can I check online if mine is still in date?
C_W
Clyde_Wanderer
New member
sailor22
Member
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Scotty_Tradewind
Well-known member
Perfect title.... now advertise it more and it's a 'win win'.
Searush
New member
You haven't read the thread have you?
Only 22k boats registered on it. I'll bet there are more than that just on the Solent, then add in all the stuff that is trailered around - Mobos & yachts & if we assume 1m boats in the UK in total (a pure guess) then it only covers 2.2% of them - even if there only 500k boats it's still less than 5%.
So, if someone is in trouble & needs to be identified there is a less than 5% chance that their details are available to assist the search. It may not be "broke" as such, but it certainly isn't going to help SAR too often is it? Especially when you factor in the probability that the 22k who know about it & file their details are probably more likely to be the ones that don't get into trouble so often, & will probably generally manage to get themselves out of it if they do.
To be any use CG66 probably needs to reach around 80% of all boaters & most especially the newer ones.
dylanwinter
Active member
never heard of it
I had never heard of it until I saw what a long thread it was developing
but then I am new to sailing
just five decades
but I avoid unnecessary bureaucracy
so I am highly unlikely to seek it out a non complusory bit of paper
I have third party insurance and a radio license
never done a radio check or a sailing course either
Dylan
I had never heard of it until I saw what a long thread it was developing
but then I am new to sailing
just five decades
but I avoid unnecessary bureaucracy
so I am highly unlikely to seek it out a non complusory bit of paper
I have third party insurance and a radio license
never done a radio check or a sailing course either
Dylan
Scotty_Tradewind
Well-known member
The university of Experience?
Rigger Mortice
N/A
Exactly.
Which is why I was asking earlier if anyone knows how much real value the CG66 is. Before they go off spending a small fortune on advertising and promoting the scheme, I would prefer it if somebody can show that it really would be good value for the money rather than just another good idea that achieves little.
Ex-SolentBoy
New member
For your sort of sailing it is probably completely unneccessary, and thats also why the argument that it needs to reach 80% of boaters is also not valid.
The CG66 is useful though for people who sail out of sight of land, or on multi-day passages.
P.S. You should probably check your radio. After 50 years it may not be working.
Rigger Mortice
N/A
Is it? I suspect (but I have no figures) that many more lives are lost within sight of land than further out.
I thought that the real value of the CG66 was to help the SAR people to visually identify one particular boat from others that might be in the vicinity.
Searush
New member
That was my first thought, but then, as I posted, probably most SAR incidents are well inshore & for people who generally don't go far. Could do with some info from the OP really.
Scotty_Tradewind
Well-known member
Ah but that depends on how Dylan gets from back water to back water.
Wont you have to continue to go offshore now and again Dylan?
If so, for a freeby that may help you out in the Orkneys or Shetlands it could be worth a punt.
EastYachty
Member
The CG66 is suited to anyone who takes to the water in any type of vessel.
For example in the Ops room we take a call that someone has found an upturned vessel and the hull is red, straightaway we can search the system and start narrowing down some possibilities.
Last year I experienced a broken mayday, the vessel name wasn't clear and there were no further communications. From a search of CG66's we could narrow down the vessel name, see its home port, what area it frequented, how many people were likely to be involved and then contact the relevant harbour to confirm details. This resulted in a lot of time saved for, in a worst case scenario, someone is likely to be in the water. On this occasion the vessel was assisted back home.
Incidentally, the email renewal above is to do with how the recipient views their email and is designed to be in HTML format. Also the redirect is to do with the website linking with Dept for Transport website.
For example in the Ops room we take a call that someone has found an upturned vessel and the hull is red, straightaway we can search the system and start narrowing down some possibilities.
Last year I experienced a broken mayday, the vessel name wasn't clear and there were no further communications. From a search of CG66's we could narrow down the vessel name, see its home port, what area it frequented, how many people were likely to be involved and then contact the relevant harbour to confirm details. This resulted in a lot of time saved for, in a worst case scenario, someone is likely to be in the water. On this occasion the vessel was assisted back home.
Incidentally, the email renewal above is to do with how the recipient views their email and is designed to be in HTML format. Also the redirect is to do with the website linking with Dept for Transport website.
Scotty_Tradewind
Well-known member
great work!