Compulsory Training ?

[PaulGooch]

Insurance company's will normally ask for some form of training before they can take the boat out on their own, but there are a few still who do not stipulate this.

I've never been asked for any qualifications to get my insurance.

I've also only been asked to show my insurance once, by my current marina, when i first went there. Not been asked since.

 

[kcrane]

The two ends of the trip can be pretty tricky, but the bit in the middle tends to be straight lines and...

In defence of kcrane Rushie
I know we have to zig an zag an all that there in the Strait
If you leg off to Irleand from Caernarfon bar or to Douglas from Puffin say
It's as kcrane says
Straight lines till yer get there
In fact all straight from Puffin ter IOM @ Douglas innit!

Thank you K, happy to have you in my corner!

I was careful to say "straight lines" not "a straight line". You'll see what I mean if you come out with us Searush, we go in straight lines from one waypoint to another, avoiding the odd rock and sandy bit as we go. On the other hand there is fun to be had weaving between boats in the crowded Solent (at a respectful distance of course) but then I know where the hard bits are in that bit of water having sailed it with flappy bits often enough.

 

[Tranona]

Yep, I have to agree 100% with the first of your statements above. But not with the second.

See, the license exam actually doesn't have a pre-defined list of questions. There is a rather extensive program, which includes some things whose relevance is questionable to say the least, like great circle routes or celestial navigation.
But the examiners, which are normally retired Navy officers, can ask whatever they feel appropriate.
Now, of course any Navy officer with decades of experience can make questions whose only purpose is to make a candidate fail.
But what actually happened in the exam session I'm talking about is that they asked to a long-haul commercial pilot (who introduced himself as such, to start with...) which type of charts are used for great circle routes.
And not only he replied along the lines of "the usual charts, just on larger scale", but he afterwards justified his reply explaining that the computers take care of all that, anyway.
Actually, also the rest of the exam was not brilliant at all, but 'fiuaskme it wouldn't have been such a bad decision to deny the license to that gentleman for that reply alone, no matter how relevant the topic was for practical pleasure boating.
It's also a matter of attitude after all, innit?

What a splendid example of why we should never allow this sort of testing to become mandatory. How can it ever be objective if you allow some bored retired people to make up their own questions?

It is definitely a "matter of attitude" - and I definitely don't like that kind of attitude!.

BTW I spent half of my working life in a university dealing mainly with International affairs. We had relationships and collaborative courses with many universities all round the world, many of which I personally negotiated. The two countries we (along with most other unis in the UK) never managed to put things together with were Italy and Russia.

Your little story illustrates precisely the difficulties we faced with both countries!

 

[MapisM]

What a splendid example of why we should never allow this sort of testing to become mandatory. How can it ever be objective if you allow some bored retired people to make up their own questions?

It is definitely a "matter of attitude" - and I definitely don't like that kind of attitude!.

BTW I spent half of my working life in a university dealing mainly with International affairs. We had relationships and collaborative courses with many universities all round the world, many of which I personally negotiated. The two countries we (along with most other unis in the UK) never managed to put things together with were Italy and Russia.

Your little story illustrates precisely the difficulties we faced with both countries!

Huh? Tranona, are you for real?
How my story explains why you shouldn't have mandatory tests, or why you had problems with Italy and Russia, that's beyond me!?!
Maybe it can be used also to explain why the UK shouldn't join the Euro, or why imperial is better than metric... If you dig carefully between the lines of my post, you could even find some justifications for R/H drive on cars...

I can't see what's wrong with exams made by people making up their own questions, as long as they're competent on the subject and the questions are based on an official program.
That's exactly how it works also at the university, I reckon.
And mind, I know what I'm talking about, because the Italian uni where I graduated had (and still has) regular exchange programs with the LSE, and I did attend one of them in London (as some English students did in Milan).
I suppose that the person at LSE in charge of international affairs didn't have an axe to grind also with the Russian, because as I recall these programs were in place also with St.Petersburg...

 

[Tranona]

Huh? Tranona, are you for real?
How my story explains why you shouldn't have mandatory tests, or why you had problems with Italy and Russia, that's beyond me!?!
Maybe it can be used also to explain why the UK shouldn't join the Euro, or why imperial is better than metric... If you dig carefully between the lines of my post, you could even find some justifications for R/H drive on cars...

I can't see what's wrong with exams made by people making up their own questions, as long as they're competent on the subject and the questions are based on an official program.

Yes I am for real. You are describing an "exam" where the "examiners" can fail a person for not being able to answer a question about a subject that is largely irrelevant to the competence required. Similarly I expect you will find this process "passes" people who are not competent on the basis of the same kind of examination.

And if you think it is easy to deal with Russian Universities then you have suspend all notions of structure in relation to curriculum, assessment and responsibility. I spent 5 years negotiating with a major Russian University that was desparate to admit students into the final year of one of our degree programmes. Not unreasonably my university required some form of documentary evidence that students had successfully studied at a level equivalent to the first two years of our degree. Every time we asked we got different versions of courses, almost non-existent evidence that students had actually attended the courses and no indication of how well they had achieved - no marks, no academic references and those other boring details we needed. Very disappointing because there was enormous potential.

We had somewhat similar difficulties with a "good" Italian university that wanted to join one of our very successful joint university programmes, primarily because they were never able to produce documents to show what they did in their courses. This programme had 4 partners, two of which were among the oldest universities in Spain and France and the other a German institution. It ran successfully for over 10 years.

You have already said that there is a big difference between the basic licence and the 12 mile licence(never have seen the logic of 12 miles as that is outside territorial waters, and I fail to see the relevance to marina boat handling that started this thread) and that holders of the simple licence ignore the limitations anyway.

If you are going to have a compulsory testing system - first it has to solve a problem, then the test should be appropriate to problem and finally it needs to be assessed fairly and openly.

Not sure from anything you have said that your system meets these criteria.

 

[Davy_S]

MapisM and Tranona, come on guys! you both contribute to the forums, and always provide good input, stop the spat, chill out

 

[DIW]

Why do you think marinas should be responsible for this? They are commecial bodies that provide parking for boats. They require their customers to have insurance to avoid any liability themselves for damage caused by customers.

It is really stretching the imagination to think that they should also be responsible for checking the competence of their customers. The only responsibility for that is the customer himself as he alone has the responsibility for damage he inflicts on others. By insisting that customers insure against such damage solves the problem.

Why do you think there are so few problems? Firstly because there are so few incidents of incompetence because people take responsibility themselves, and secondly because if there is damage to third parties there is a perfectly adequate mechanism for resolving the issue - that is insurance.

You can of course find examples when these mechanisms are less than perfect - but it is a challenge (as we have seen in this thread) to suggest a better alternative.

You missed the point. I am not advocating a 'new' qualification administered by the Marina Owner. The existing RYA Certificate of Competence would suffice and a copy held on file in the Marina Office with the Insurance Documents.Of course it wouldn't stop accidents or incidents but would give a degree of 'comfort' to berth holders to know that a certain level of boat handling had been achieved. Happy Berth holders means happy Marina operators.
Berth holders are non too pleased when 'chummy' is bumping and scraping his way around because he doesn't know the basics. Please don't argue that is what insurance is for and it doesn't really matter if your pride and joy is 't' boned by 'chummy's' anchor.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

I have just watched a very experience boat owner, ram his yacht into the the harbour wall and then bounce off several pontoons.

This guy has been sailing for 50 years, so do you think he should have compulsory lessons?

 

[Searush]

If it's hyadn, definitley YES!



Sorry, guys, it was way tooo tempting, no way I could resist that!

 

[Davy_S]

If it's hyadn, definitley YES!



Sorry, guys, it was way tooo tempting, no way I could resist that!

Did you mean Haydn? sorry no way could i resist that!
Will get my coat!

 

[Solitaire]

Proof!

Just to confirm that insurance companies can and do ask for qualifications, the following are email communications which have taken place with us over the past two days. Names and certain other details have been removed to maintain client confidentiality.

"Dear ******

Please could you advise insurers that, pursuant to the conditions precedent contained within the above captioned policy, my instructors Mendez Marine are now happy that I command MY *****without the requirement to have one of their instructors present within Solent waters.

I have copied David Luetchford, Mendez senior instructor, into this note and suggest you liaise directly with him if you or insurers need confirmation."

This was the response from the insurance company/broker.

"Dear ********

We acknowledge receipt of your email dated the 31st August 2010, advising that your instructors Mendez Marine are now happy for you to take command of '*****'.

In order that we can obtain Underwriter's agreement, we would ask you please to obtain written confirmation from David Luetchford that you are now fully experienced in handling '*****' and forward copies of any qualifying certificates you may have obtained.

We note that you would like to extend the geographical limits to include Swanage to the West, Selsey and the Isle of Wight. We would advise that your current policy covers the vessel whilst cruising in "Inland and Coastal Waters of the UK, Eire and Continental Coastal Waters of Calais to La Rochelle" and therefore there is no need to extend the current Trading Warranties in the policy. These cruising limits are subject to Underwriter's approval of you taking command of '****' and in this respect we await the requested confirmation from Mendez Marine.

I am not going to post my response, but it does go to show that circumstances are checked and confirmation required. The boat in question is a large (> 40ft) motor cruiser and the client is very capable.

 

[Kawasaki]

I have just watched a very experience boat owner, ram his yacht into the the harbour wall and then bounce off several pontoons.

This guy has been sailing for 50 years, so do you think he should have compulsory lessons?

NO!
It's a beggar of a thing this Compulsory stuff
Yep, yer man needs help in berthing etc
Some peeps I have come across over the years are dam good Sailors/ Mobo handlers.
Out to Sea!
In close quarters some , like our friend are a bit iffy.
They just need a day or so on how to 'park'.
They don't need owt 'compulsory' just a hand off Mates an stuff to fine tune the parking
Some, like our friend maybe are a bit embarrased to ask or a bit too proud
Some tact is needed then!
Show him how to do it Major on a quiet day maybe?
I reiterate from a previous post.
Go climb a mountain
Go down a pot hole
Go hang gliding
Go kite boarding
Go buy an off road motorcycle an scare yerself
Go sea fishing, it's free an dangerous!
Fall off of a rock. like I saw a Bod in Llanddwyn today!!"
Get cut off by the tide as peeps do!
Go buy a model aircraft with a motor!
Get that wrong and maybe a window could be stuffed or the 'Operator' impaled!
So what?
All dangerous stuff you may add.

Out with peeps today on a 'Jolly' nice weather nice boat
'Yer gorra pay ter use the slip, have yer got insurance, have yer gorra sticker to say yer got permission ter use the slip an insurance, have yer got Yachtmasters , a degree in launching , a parkin permit, a place ter put the trailer out the way, look out someone else wants ter launch yer in the way'
Etc Etc.
Feck Me !

Twasn,t that bad actually, I enlarge a bit.
But yer see where I,m coming from?

IMHO, during the last 6 or so years I have been involved with helping and instructing peeps with stuff waterbased or shorebased
The Newbies are all for help an instuction.
Some
Who have had loads of years on the water
But need a 'Paper' (icc) or summat, as it were.
Are set in their ways (sometimes the wrong ways) are dam diffilcult to educate or help!
9 times out 10 however the self taught sort it out rapid like!

 

[hlb]

If it's hyadn, definitley YES!



Sorry, guys, it was way tooo tempting, no way I could resist that!

Oi, stop picking on me.

And no, i've never been trained, I'm not a bloody dog.

 

[MapisM]

Haaalloooooo? Do you hear me?

Not sure from anything you have said that your system meets these criteria.

The subject of my first reply to you in this thread was I neither need nor want to demonstrate anything!, in case you missed it.
It seems to me that you're the one who just wants to bash "my" system without suggesting anything else, aside from finding surrealistic justifications for a system which allows anyone to helm 24m boats with no training, no registration, no license and no insurance.
By chance, you're not Braithwaite or one of his customers, cleverly disguised as Tranona, are you?
Besides, why do you insist that an exam which is very much structured as any university exam (also in the UK!) is not appropriate, or not assessed fairly and openly? Just because you think that great circle routes are irrelevant, without knowing anything of the rest of its program? And even assuming that you're right, the logical conclusion should be that the content of the exam should be reviewed, or the examiners should be more qualified - whatever. Not that we should never allow this sort of testing to become mandatory - period.
Last but not least, you fail to see the relevance of my explanations (which I gave only in reply to another post), after having started an amazing thread drift, whose reasons I'm still struggling to understand, with your post #63.
Anyway. More than happy to leave it here, also because our inputs at the moment are nowhere as good as Davy_S kindly suggests...

 

[Tranona]

The subject of my first reply to you in this thread was I neither need nor want to demonstrate anything!, in case you missed it.
It seems to me that you're the one who just wants to bash "my" system without suggesting anything else, aside from finding surrealistic justifications for a system which allows anyone to helm 24m boats with no training, no registration, no license and no insurance.
By chance, you're not Braithwaite or one of his customers, cleverly disguised as Tranona, are you?
Besides, why do you insist that an exam which is very much structured as any university exam (also in the UK!) is not appropriate, or not assessed fairly and openly? Just because you think that great circle routes are irrelevant, without knowing anything of the rest of its program? And even assuming that you're right, the logical conclusion should be that the content of the exam should be reviewed, or the examiners should be more qualified - whatever. Not that we should never allow this sort of testing to become mandatory - period.
Last but not least, you fail to see the relevance of my explanations (which I gave only in reply to another post), after having started an amazing thread drift, whose reasons I'm still struggling to understand, with your post #63.
Anyway. More than happy to leave it here, also because our inputs at the moment are nowhere as good as Davy_S kindly suggests...

Sorry I seem to have upset you. Was not the intention. Simply pointing out that having a "testing" system in place does not solve the "problem" - if indeed it is a problem.

Look back over all the many threads on this subject and you will see the greatest concern is about the poor behaviour of people in small power boats and RIBS. This is reflected in the accident statistics where these types of boats feature frequently. When did you last hear of a serious ocean going boat, whether it be power or sail, get into trouble through skipper incompetence?

All I am saying is that some form of compulsory testing is not a solution to a problem that does not really exist. Having a "difficult" test to pass may seem re-assuring, but only if it focuses on the essentials and is not seen as a barrier to overcome. Particularly when people clearly ignore it anyway!

In my career as an educator, I have been part of the shift away from the approach that teaches and assesses what has always been taught and assessed (summarised by one of my colleagues as "I had to learn it - so should they") to an approach that focuses on identifying what people need to know for the purpose and the skills to make use of the knowledge.

This is essentially the RYA approach to training which concentrates on developing individual skills and knowledge appropriate to the level of engagement with the activity, rather than setting an arbitrary set of requirements determined by, for example HP of the motor or distance sailed from the shore - both convenient measures for bureaucrats but completely meaningless otherwise!

BTW I can see Robin's house from my bedroom window and I pass his various factories daily - but I have absolutely no connection - or real interest in that kind of boat - other than marvel at how he and other similar builders have managed to persuade people that type of boat is a good use of their hard earned cash!

 

[MapisM]

Sorry I seem to have upset you. Was not the intention.

Naah, not upset at all, don't worry. Life's too short - hence the smilies and the ironic comments!

 

[Wiggo]

This is essentially the RYA approach to training which concentrates on developing individual skills and knowledge appropriate to the level of engagement with the activity, rather than setting an arbitrary set of requirements determined by, for example HP of the motor or distance sailed from the shore - both convenient measures for bureaucrats but completely meaningless otherwise!

As it should be. The comment that summed it up for me was from an RYA YM examiner who remarked that the real test was, "Would I be happy letting you take my family out on your boat?"

But that only applies to those who voluntarily undertake that type of qualification. Plenty of people on the roads pass driving tests and then proceed to drive like complete tw@ts, so I don't see that any kind of training or requirement for training will get rid of this type of behaviour.

 

[timbartlett]

finding surrealistic justifications for a system which allows anyone to helm 24m boats with no training, no registration, no license and no insurance.

[/QUOTE]The present system works. That is the only justification it needs.

The only things that are "surreal" about this discussion is the assumption that there is a "problem" and the belief that government interference can "solve" it.

 

[MapisM]

The present system works. That is the only justification it needs.

The only things that are "surreal" about this discussion is the assumption that there is a "problem" and the belief that government interference can "solve" it.

And your point is?
I called surrealistic the justifications, not the system.
...though if it's so obvious that it works, you wouldn't be struggling to justify it, would you?
Besides, I never assumed what you're saying I'm assuming.
Hiding a tell-tale heart, Tim?

 

[tinkicker0]

The real problem is attitude, not training; and the stereotypical boat owner.

One type of owner is the professional person, engineer, lawyer etc that has to dot the I's and cross the T's, going to great lengths for accuracy.
He gets his first boat, say a small cuddy type, gets training and always tries to act in a professional manner out on the water. It is natural to him to behave like this, he is conservative and will err on the side of caution.He will eventually move up to a nice FL Targa or more likely a 40 footish flybridge.

The second type is the "self made man", the risk taker. He finds it stimulating to bet his shirt on the turn of a card or the risky deal.
He has made pots of money and decides to buy a boat.

He may get a jetski and have fun, but can't impress his buddies, he will get a RIB with the biggest engines he can and go everywhere flat out, the hairier the better.
He may end up with your archetypal FL Targa or Sunseeker Portafino, then run out of fuel mid channel and the RNLI on boarding finds he has no lifejackets or flares on board.
He won't take kindly to anyone telling him how to do it right, because that takes away the risk, so any training will be forgotten quickly as he does it his way or no way.

I'm sure Kwacker and the other instructors can tell tales of this type of boat owner.


Attitude to life is the key.