CG66 rename?

Rigger Mortice said:
Why not just combine the CG66 with our application for a Radio Licence? Much of the information is common to both.
It would be better than wasting money on advertising and promotion.
Click to expand...

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
 
prv said:
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
Rigger Mortice said:
Why not just combine the CG66 with our application for a Radio Licence? Much of the information is common to both.
It would be better than wasting money on advertising and promotion.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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?
 
sailor22 said:
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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
 
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
Click to expand...

The university of Experience?
 
Searush said:
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
SolentBoy said:
The CG66 is useful though for people who sail out of sight of land, or on multi-day passages.
Click to expand...

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.
 
SolentBoy said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
SolentBoy said:
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.
Click to expand...

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. :)
 
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.
 
EastYachty said:
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.
.
Click to expand...

great work!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top