CG66 rename?

Tidewaiter2 · 4 Feb 2012

Scotty_Tradewind said:
great work!

+1, and glad ours is up to date, could do with a few like that in my old job these days!

wadget · 4 Feb 2012

The title on the current form is "HM COASTGUARD SAFETY IDENTIFICATION SCHEME CG66"

Seems fairly self explanatory, maybe the full title just needs to be used more often.

Frankie-H · 5 Feb 2012

dylanwinter said:
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

Same sort of time saiing but I have done a yachtmaster course. I have read most of this post and I still don't know what a CG66 is.

Searush · 5 Feb 2012

Digbydog said:
Same sort of time saiing but I have done a yachtmaster course. I have read most of this post and I still don't know what a CG66 is.

Dear me.

It is a voluntary safety identification database. You fill in their CG66 form (on-line if you wish) to give them details of your boat & its appearance (with pic if possible). If someone (ie your designated shore based person) reports you are overdue, then the SAR people know what they are looking for. If you have filed a passage report, they will also know where to look.

The idea is you keep your mum, brother, wife or whoever, informed about what you are doing, where you are going & how long it should take. You update them with your progress &any changes with regular contact. If they don't hear from you as agreed, they can call the CG & they will start to look for you. They will usually start with the likely harbours on your route & have been known to find people in clubs/ pubs in the past. If that fails, they may then start a full scale search.

What's hard or intrusive about that? (not you DigbyD, the "fear of regulation" brigade)

dylanwinter · 5 Feb 2012

the flaw

Searush said:
Dear me.

It is a voluntary safety identification database. You fill in their form (on-line if you wish) to give them details of your boat & its appearance (with pic if possible). If someone (ie your designated shore based person) reports you are overdue, then the SAR people know what they are looking for. If you have filed a passage report, they will also know where to look.

The idea is you keep your mum, brother, wife or whoever, informed about what you are doing, where you are going & how long it should take. You update them with your progress &any changes with regular contact. If they don't hear from you as agreed, they can call the CG & they will start to look for you. They will usually start with the likely harbours on your route & have been nown to find people in clubs/ pubs in the past. If that fails, they may then start a full scale search.

What's hard or intrusive about that? (not you DigbyD, the "fear of regulation" brigade)

the flaw in the system is that my designated person already knows what the boat looks like, what colour it is, where I am likely to be

so still a bit confused as to what it is for

Dylan

Searush · 5 Feb 2012

dylanwinter said:
the flaw in the system is that my designated person already knows that the boat is, what colour it is, where I am likely to be

so still a bit confused as to what it is

Dylan

You are lucky, your lovely partner has sailed on your boat & probably could describe it to the CG. On the other hand, my Mum (bless her) might have struggled to remember SR was white. The fact that they have a pic & YOUR description saves the possibly stressed shore based person having to remember a detailed description. It can also be passed electronically to the Lifeboat/ SAR chopper without verbal descriptions & transcription errors.

Surely even you can see the potential value of that? If not, don't worry, it is only voluntary, you can continue to remain lost if SWMBO thinks you are in the slug, while you are actually in a pub with your girlfriend.

Sandy · 5 Feb 2012

dylanwinter said:
the flaw in the system is that my designated person already knows what the boat looks like, what colour it is, where I am likely to be

so still a bit confused as to what it is for

A long time ago when I was young I was a member of a mountain rescue team, we did the same sort of thing, get wet on pointy bits of land as RNLI do at sea.

Group of climbers overdue, designated person rings the plod, who call us out. What we needed was good reliable information about what kit the group of climbers had, what they were wearing, did they have a tent/shelter. CG66 does that for the RNLI and the wonderful Yellow Paraffin Budgies (RAF SAR Helicopters).

When we or the plod asked the questions the usual answer was 'I can't remember' as a stressful situation, OMG has hubby fallen to his death, the red mist sets in. (As it might have with the skipper of a big ship that went a wee bit too close to a small island off the coast of Italy a few weeks back.)

EastYachty · 5 Feb 2012

Searush said:
You are lucky, your lovely partner has sailed on your boat & probably could describe it to the CG. On the other hand, my Mum (bless her) might have struggled to remember SR was white. The fact that they have a pic & YOUR description saves the possibly stressed shore based person having to remember a detailed description. It can also be passed electronically to the Lifeboat/ SAR chopper without verbal descriptions & transcription errors.

Surely even you can see the potential value of that? If not, don't worry, it is only voluntary, you can continue to remain lost if SWMBO thinks you are in the slug, while you are actually in a pub with your girlfriend.

We don't pass details electronically to anyone.

Thistle · 5 Feb 2012

EastYachty said:
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.

Oh dear! It's the customer's fault! But no-one else sends me e-mails that look like this so ... ?? And it's the DoT's fault for moving their page rather than CG's fault for not testing/updating their link?

I am - still - a supporter of the CG and the CG66 scheme and apologise if my earlier post, which was intended to point out a couple of minor hiccups in an e-mail directly related to the thread, has caused the defensive hackles to rise. Just meant as a little bit of feedback on the scheme as seen Joe Public!

EastYachty · 6 Feb 2012

Thistle said:
Oh dear! It's the customer's fault! But no-one else sends me e-mails that look like this so ... ?? And it's the DoT's fault for moving their page rather than CG's fault for not testing/updating their link?

I am - still - a supporter of the CG and the CG66 scheme and apologise if my earlier post, which was intended to point out a couple of minor hiccups in an e-mail directly related to the thread, has caused the defensive hackles to rise. Just meant as a little bit of feedback on the scheme as seen Joe Public!

I apologise if it appeared my hackles were rising. Just to explain, on the whole the CG66's are administered by staff in the operations room, we try to do what we can with the tools that we have. When I have queried the email gobbledygook with our IT dept that was the reason I got. The re-direct I was led to believe was when we joined with the DfT website and I was informed that was the way to do the re-direct.

Please don't shoot the messengers we do try and get workarounds and help out where we can but with a lack of an upgrade or budget it is a difficult task sometimes.

Thistle · 6 Feb 2012

EastYachty said:
Please don't shoot the messengers we do try and get workarounds and help out where we can but with a lack of an upgrade or budget it is a difficult task sometimes.

No intention at all to shoot messengers! Just trying to give feedback on what I saw and my immediate reaction to it.

Daedelus · 6 Feb 2012

Coincidentally today I received an email asking me to update my CG66 details.

A couple of points which might help:

The email contained this:-

"If you are no longer the owner of the vessel identified above, we would be most grateful if you could let us know by responding to this e-mail. Yours Faithfully Paul Marlow CG66 Administrator **********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are private and intended solely for the use of the addressee. 
 
If you are not the intended recipient, the email and associated files have been transmitted to you in error: any copying, distribution or other use of the information contained in them is strictly prohibited. 
 
Nothing in this email may be interpreted as a contractual or other legal commitment on the part of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency unless confirmed by a communication signed by or on behalf of the Chief Executive. 
 
The MCA's computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes. 
 
If you are of the opinion that you have received this email in error, please contact postmaster@mcga.gov.uk ***********************************************************************************
 </BODY></HTML>
"

I think a little tweak might help here.

Secondly I couldn't upload a photo as requested. The system kept saying error try again give a file name. I had, repeatedly, but it wouldn't accept it.

Over to you. (I know it's not really anything to do with what you call it, but with that lot of electronic guff in the message I could think of a few names!

Searush · 6 Feb 2012

EastYachty said:
We don't pass details electronically to anyone.

Oh dear, budget contraints I guess. But it would be a neat to allow remote access to the database direct from hand held field units. Even an Ipad or android phone in the hands of a clifftop volunteer with access to the CG66 would be really useful - wouldn't it?

How much "Is it it this one here?" discussion do you actually get?
How often does the database help in a rescue?
How much more useful would it be if 80% of sea going boats used it?
Do any professionals (Fishermen, trip boats, divers etc) use it?

I think you need to consider the basics about how effective it is now & how much more effective it could be if more complete &/or more accessible to SAR units.

I sense the need for a business case to justify the time & effort now! Especially if you could show an improvement in efficiency & a reduction in costs. All very flavour of the month just now I expect.

EastYachty · 6 Feb 2012

Daedelus said:
Coincidentally today I received an email asking me to update my CG66 details.

A couple of points which might help:

The email contained this:-

"If you are no longer the owner of the vessel identified above, we would be most grateful if you could let us know by responding to this e-mail. Yours Faithfully Paul Marlow CG66 Administrator **********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are private and intended solely for the use of the addressee. 
 
If you are not the intended recipient, the email and associated files have been transmitted to you in error: any copying, distribution or other use of the information contained in them is strictly prohibited. 
 
Nothing in this email may be interpreted as a contractual or other legal commitment on the part of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency unless confirmed by a communication signed by or on behalf of the Chief Executive. 
 
The MCA's computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes. 
 
If you are of the opinion that you have received this email in error, please contact postmaster@mcga.gov.uk ***********************************************************************************
 </BODY></HTML>
"

I think a little tweak might help here.

Secondly I couldn't upload a photo as requested. The system kept saying error try again give a file name. I had, repeatedly, but it wouldn't accept it.

Over to you. (I know it's not really anything to do with what you call it, but with that lot of electronic guff in the message I could think of a few names!

If you would like to email me your photo I will attach it for you.

bev.allen@mcga.gov.uk

prv · 6 Feb 2012

Daedelus said:
Secondly I couldn't upload a photo as requested. The system kept saying error try again give a file name. I had, repeatedly, but it wouldn't accept it.

Seems to be the norm. Certainly I couldn't, and when I asked here, lots of people reported the same. The usual deal seems to be to wait until someone emails you (they seem to process the input manually) and reply to them attaching a photo.

The maximum allowed photo size is pretty tiny too.

I appreciate there are budget issues, but it would be nice to have a less amateurish upload site. The folks at gov.uk are trying to move government Web stuff on from its traditional "take ages, cost a fortune" approach; I wonder if they might be able to advise or even help directly with what is ultimately a pretty simple requirement.

Pete

EastYachty · 6 Feb 2012

Searush said:
Oh dear, budget contraints I guess. But it would be a neat to allow remote access to the database direct from hand held field units. Even an Ipad or android phone in the hands of a clifftop volunteer with access to the CG66 would be really useful - wouldn't it?

How much "Is it it this one here?" discussion do you actually get?
How often does the database help in a rescue?
How much more useful would it be if 80% of sea going boats used it?
Do any professionals (Fishermen, trip boats, divers etc) use it?

I think you need to consider the basics about how effective it is now & how much more effective it could be if more complete &/or more accessible to SAR units.

I sense the need for a business case to justify the time & effort now! Especially if you could show an improvement in efficiency & a reduction in costs. All very flavour of the month just now I expect.

The trouble with access to other units is data protection and we are very protective of peoples details

We don't get too much discussion after narrowing certain parameters down. The database helps no end in a rescue, for those that are on it - see previous example, it cuts down drastically on time narrowing down who or what we are looking for.

It would be very useful for more to be on the system. We do have all types of sea goers holding CG66's - divers, kayakers, jet skis etc etc

Scotty_Tradewind · 6 Feb 2012

http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/mcga07-home/emergencyresponse/mcga-searchandrescue/cg66.htm

Searush · 6 Feb 2012

EastYachty said:
The trouble with access to other units is data protection and we are very protective of peoples details

I'd rather you protected my life than my blinkin' data!

EastYachty said:
We don't get too much discussion after narrowing certain parameters down. The database helps no end in a rescue, for those that are on it - see previous example, it cuts down drastically on time narrowing down who or what we are looking for.

Fairy nuff, that's as should be. I reckon that there are so many different craft out there that (AWB's aside) they should be relatively easily distinguished once defined.

EastYachty said:
It would be very useful for more to be on the system. We do have all types of sea goers holding CG66's - divers, kayakers, jet skis etc etc

If you are covering so many different types of craft I would estimate/ guess you are reaching under 5% of the potential user group. That needs to be upped an awful lot! How does that estimate relate to the number of rescues where the database is employed?

The RNLI tried chatting to water users as they launched (OK some were a little OTT) but it will have increased awareness of their free safety check scheme. Perhaps your land based volunteers could try something similar, handing out a leaflet with form included? Needs to be done in a very low key way tho' wishing them a pleasant trip rather than a warning of doom!

EastYachty · 6 Feb 2012

Searush - we protect both! However peoples personal details are important.

Admittedly we encourage as many people as possible to partake, by meeting "casualties" as they are brought back and passing them a CG66 and explaining it's merits, providing hard copies to launch sites/marinas etc, contacting various websites for inclusion. One particular marina won't allow vessels to berth unless they have a current CG66! All these ways do not cost.

Stemar · 6 Feb 2012

Searush said:
If you are covering so many different types of craft I would estimate/ guess you are reaching under 5% of the potential user group. That needs to be upped an awful lot! How does that estimate relate to the number of rescues where the database is employed?

The RNLI tried chatting to water users as they launched (OK some were a little OTT) but it will have increased awareness of their free safety check scheme. Perhaps your land based volunteers could try something similar, handing out a leaflet with form included? Needs to be done in a very low key way tho' wishing them a pleasant trip rather than a warning of doom!

This occurred to me as well. One possibility would be a bit of joined up thinking with the Small Ships Registry. A tick-box on the SSR registration form (paper & on-line) that transfers details from the registry to the CG66.

Data protection isn't an issue - if it's legal to put a pre-ticked box so that "We can pass your details on to carefully selected companies (they're willing to pay us for our mailing list)who may have products of interest to you", it's certainly legal to do the same for "So we can pass your details on to someone who may save your life one day"

CG66 rename?

New member

New member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

New member

Member

Well-known member

Share this page