Deliveries: The Greater Debate

Re: the enema within ...

huge colonic shipment due soon ... keep your i's & t's dotted otherwise cross yer legs ...

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
G'day Marin,

First I have to admit I have not read all the posts, so apologise if I'm covering old ground.

It seems to me that much of the focus here is on regulation, and this is subject close to my heart.

I can not understand why on earth the majority of us have to abide by legislation that was put in place to protect the stupid minority.

For example, If decide to ride a motorcycle and do not put on a crash helmet, who am I endangering?

Will the fact that I have no stack hat on cause me to have an accident, cause some other person an injury; I think not, but the copper lurking down the road will impose a heavy fine.

So what does this, and similar regulation achieve........ Very little for the majority, protects a few idiots in the minority and, raises a fortune in revenue though fines.

I, and most on this forum will support any legislation or regulation, provided it has an outcome other than above, that protects no one but the idiot and causes the rest of us inconvenience and meaningless fines.

Meantime, Avagreatnewyear...



<hr width=100% size=1> Old Salt Oz /forums/images/icons/cool.gif Growing old is unavoidable. However, growing up is still optional.
 
Hi Brian:

Many on the forum are certainly showing that they are against legislation/regulation in any form, while others are showing nothing but contempt. That is their folly.

I am not seeking that the authorities move in and do things that will get up all our noses, it is totally to the contrary. What is being highlighted here is that a debate can be had to discuss the issues that only seem to come to light when something is well publicised. On one hand there has never been a formal overview of the delivery industry, but on the other hand, when a disaster strikes, the authorities will always scrutinise the cause and effect etc.

My approach may be subject to ridicule by some, but it is the best means to start self debate and involve those with a real interest in the delivery industry, allowing it to grow and then showing that we can have a logical and balanced discussion on the subject. The forum is the ideal stage for this and we are all aware that a forum is a public place, so the ripples will find those that have something to say and those that will take note. Those that write who believe that they are anonymous behind a browser must think again, because they're not.

Hope I have clarified a couple of things for you, but as you know, it is sometimes impossible to catch up on a long thread, especially when there are those that have just lost the plot.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.mpcee.co.uk/katoema'sworld.htm>http://www.mpcee.co.uk/katoema'sworld.htm</A>
 
>>> Many on the forum are certainly showing that they are against legislation/regulation in any form, while others are showing nothing but contempt. That is their folly.

>>> My approach may be subject to ridicule by some, but it is the best means to start self debate and involve those with a real interest in the delivery industry, allowing it to grow and then showing that we can have a logical and balanced discussion on the subject.

Martin,
You are having the debate you wanted! In various ways philmarks, tony brighton, MIrelle, peppermint, Chris_Robb, oldsaltoz, zephyrsailor and jmirvine have all asked what benefits you see in regulation. You have so far failed to respond, except to say that the regulation should not be heavy handed.

The Boatman has suggested that the real danger lies in unrealistic demands either in terms of cost or timescales made by yacht owners.

The debate you wanted is happening but you are showing no interest. Why is it folly to question an extension of regulations? An experienced sailor made a poor decision and in December in Biscay such a mistake can (and sadly did) cost lives. I'm guessing that most users of this forum have driving licences. Any of us could set of for work tomorrow and a moment's inattention, tiredness or a miscalculation could cost us our lives. That doesn't PROVE the need for "self debate" (do you mean "mass debate"?) about the adequacy of the driving test.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
With respect to you and those forumites that you quote. I have not indicated that I am for some form of regulation in totality as to what that may mean. Before I go further, it is my wish to open up this debate in whatever way it is possible, but I do have constraints to contend with, a little of which is being able to to sort out the ridicule from those that do take this seriously.

While I do have access to some very high echalons, this is in no way part of this, but I am using my knowledge and experience that disasters do insight scrutiny and, unfortunately, the delivery industry has never come under such scrutiny. For my part I am trying to bring out debate so that those that regulate can see that those within the delivery industry do take this seriously. Here I am giving through just this forum, the opportunity to undertake this. Fortunately, I am placed to monitor many aspects of specific problems around the globe, but if you believe that this is being undertaken off my back alone, you would be totally wrong. YBW are aware of what I am doing and at the point that the interest reaches certain requirements, then it may well take another role.

For the present, please bear with me as all the points that have been mentioned, along with the backgrounds of those making them are being noted. This is not big brother, just modern technology working to an advantage. I have responded where necessary, but certain remarks are close to becoming personal and that will be the point that that person will be barred from the use of any aspect of a forum. It is a very serious topic and again I personally respect your comments and those that have made a real effort to contribute to this. The idea, in part, is that the comments made by those you mention, should as far as possible be responded to by others. I am not qualified to respond to all aspects of the debate, as it is for all to do this. This is why that regulation should not be imposed because there are many aspects to deliveries that have yet to be discussed and for sure must be added to:

The standard of the vessel concerned etc.
The vessel's equipment.
Insurance.
Qualifications of the skipper and the limitations of his crew.
Yacht delivery as a profession.
Companies undertaking deliveries.
Contracts.
Present regulations - what they cover and what they do not.
Owners - much discussion about them and the pressures they place on skippers, for example.
The opportunity to bring the industry together.
What constitutes a legal delivery and how to define this.

This list will grow as there will be those that will bring in other elements.

Martin

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.mpcee.co.uk/katoema'sworld.htm>http://www.mpcee.co.uk/katoema'sworld.htm</A>
 
Re: Deliveries: The Greater Debate (no debate but LONG)

Agree wholeheartedly on the avoidance of legislation and rules. However, the drive towards legislation is often because of events that get publicity, which is strange because things normally don't get publicised unless they are rare or unusual in some way. So, things which hardly ever happen cause us have laws to stop it happening again while everyday things much more dangerous pass by without such interest.

Forumites may be interested in the following.

The current thread seems to be driven by a loss of a keel boat and some of its crew. However, that has had publicity because it was unusual or rare, and of course we are all sensitive to it because of our sport. But, keeping it all in perspective, drowning from keelboats is insignificant in the overall recreational drowning statistics. The following statistics are the case for here in New Zealand, using the figures over the last 20 years, for recreational drownings. While there will be differences between countries, I doubt whether they are great among westernised maritime countries.

Drownings off keelboats (offshore and not offshore) - 12% of all recreational boating drownings, 4% of all recreational watersports drownings, 2% of all drownings

Drownings from open boats - 85% of all recreational boating drownings, 30% of all recreational watersports drownings, 13% of all drownings

Interestingly, to me anyway, it appears that hardly anyone drowns off decked (ie big, not open,) recreational power boats here they contributing only 1% of all recreational boating drownings, only 0.4% of all recreational watersports drownings and only 0.2% of all drownings.

The boating statistics exclude windsurfers, surf boards and rafting.

All boating comprised 35% of all recreational water sports drownings, with swimming contributing 27%.

So, in the end legislation directed at controlling the activities of larger recreational boats (licencing, certification) in order to reduce loss of life is a waste of time. For the case of decked power boats one is totally wasting ones time doing so as there is hardly any loss of life at all off them.

Putting that into the boat delivery perspective, I can only imagine that the loss of life off yachts under a delivery contract is extremely small when compared to the loss off other vessels and is hardly worth pondering about by anyone (apart from delivery crews themselves) except those who have an interest in the irrelevant. For decked power boats I would have to wonder if there has ever been a loss of life off one while under a delivery contract - must be so rare as to be of no consequence to the wider scheme of things.

However, if it was made mandatory for everyone in the population to have a swimming licence and a registration sticker on their body attesting to the fact that they were fit enough and competent to swim 1 mile it may have some real effect in reducing loss of life in the water because not only would it reduce loss through swimming drowning it would also reduce the loss through boating drownings (on the safe assumption that good swimmers would have a better chance of surviviing a boating accident).

For those who then would argue that only those exposed to water sports should have to be so tested and stickered, the statistics here in NZ are that exactly the same percentage of people drown through unintentially ending up in the water through motor vehicle accidents as do through drowning while intentionally swimming for recreation! When one takes other drownings into account of people who never imagined that they would end up in the water or even anywhere close to it as well (but excluding suicides) the number is equivalent to approx 90% of all the recreational water sports drownings. That is, almost as many people who had no expectation of ending up in the water or having anything to do with the water drown as do through taking part in all recreational water sports.

In the end this sort of stuff is meaningless to politicians. In my experience, especially with interventionist governments of the social engineering kind, they are like the average Joe Bloggs and see that someone drowns off an expensive boat doing something they do not themselves have any experience in and react in a nonsensical way. Silly legislation is the result.

Here in NZ the approach has so far been one of education, not regulation, and so far we are blessed with little regulation at all. I can see that freedom being whittled away though as more have say and sway over things they know nothing about and from the joy of intervention.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: I used to be?

Brendan

That was what I was trying (badly) to say. On that trip I learnt a valuable lesson as a skipper.

NOW, if I'm skipper, no one will overide me or what I think is the right thing to do,

I would rather walk away from a moored boat than take it to sea in bad conditions and that even includes an owner saying that the boats fully insured.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: I used to be?

alant
I would fall into your catagory of "leisure professionals" although I gained my tickets first, whilst working at sea, I never the less didn't start doing deliveries until I was working full time in my own business. I did this to keep my level of competance up and give me the necessary sea miles to maintain my tickets. All my work came via word of mouth and I never ever advertised. I only ever did deliveries on a costs only basis + duty free. That was my perk.

The point I was trying to make was that the delivery industry has changed over the years, owners now expect more, insurance companies expect a level of competancy from the skipper.

Yes you should always get (expect) a higher level of service from a professional delivery company but that does not mean that a guy with a basic Day Skipper Ticket that is used to handling a 35' boat couldn't deliver a similar type of boat from, say the Medway to Flushing, providing he stayed within his limits.

I really am on the fence on this one because I believe that on the one hand you shouldn't have any regulation because as soon as you have one there will invariably be more to follow (the Bureaucrats can't help themselves), on the other hand, I also believe that you can't just let anybody take a boat to sea regardless of experience?

BTW, you say that commercial tickets are easy to come by these days, that me be true now but it certainly wasn't when I went from them. I can only say that when I sat my DTI (then BOT) boatmans licence it was far from easy and one hell of an experience that I will never forget. So much so that I like so many others that did the same ticket will easily remember the name of their examiner.

This post has also reminded me that my YM o/s with commercial endosement and my BM licence is up for renewal this year. TA, thanks for reminding me?

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Deliveries

Yesterday a lorry turned up outside full of posts for my fence. They were very long and a a lot of them. Problem was they did'nt have a pointy end .. what should I do with them?

<hr width=100% size=1>.. when's that again, but ..
 
Thought provoking stuff - scaling

It would be interesting to see the equivalent stats for other 'boating' nations to see whether the NZ pic can be extrapolated.

Also - sledgehammers and nuts - how many people are actually involved in the 'delivery industry'. In the low hundreds I suspect, for full time or quasi-full time professionals.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by Twister_Ken on 08/01/2004 09:51 (server time).</FONT></P>
 
A whole new government department is needed to get to grips with the situation,if the rest of British industry has to struggle under the weight of nanny state bureacracy then why should yacht delivery companies be exempt?

Firearms legislation worked well didnt it????

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: I used to be?

" but that does not mean that a guy with a basic Day Skipper Ticket that is used to handling a 35' boat couldn't deliver a similar type of boat from, say the Medway to Flushing, providing he stayed within his limits".

An unfortunate example to use.
A dayskipper (even with commercial endorsement), has a set limit of "within 3 miles of a nominated departure point" (category 6) - extended (having also a commercially endorsed DS theory) to " up to 20m from a nominated departure point in fine weather & daylight" (category 5)
Also, since the distance from eg Ramsgate to Flushing is about 85Nm, it would be difficult to complete this trip entirely in daylight other than mid-summer (sailing).
Even outside the limits for a Coastal Skipper, these limits being Category 3 & 4, " up to 20m from a safe haven"

The other categories are :
Cat 2 - Up to 60m from a safe haven, "YM Offshore + experienced mate, as nominated by skipper"
Cat 1 - Up to 150m from a safe haven, "YM Offshore + YM Coastal Skipper mate"
Cat 0 - Worldwide, " YM Ocean + YM Offshore mate"

These, are rarely checked, (1) unless asked for by an insurance company (2) after an event/disaster (3) by a reputable company (eg Challenge Business) (4) by MCA if spot checked when suspected of working for gain.

"I would fall into your catagory of "leisure professionals"" - hardly, with your experience! at least you have worked entirely at sea at some time in your career. But your deliveries have not been for gain. 'Leisure professionals' I classify as people who may be getting their income fulltime on shore, have learnt sailing part-time & then become "part-time sailing professionals" - working for wages. Some may have excellent sailing experience/skills. However, even in past days of 'the gentleman yachtsman', they recognised that their hired crew had to be full time professional seamen during the off season as well, rather than part-timers.

This 'experience' is probably more important than simply looking at pieces of paper, which is the first & easiest check for regulators of any kind. eg I (& many others) have a piece of paper which allows me to drive (for wages as well) a 7.5 tonne truck, on crowded streets day & night - without asking for any previous experience in such a vehicle! This is what a potentially dangerous regulation can arrive at. Unless properly debated, not simply a knee jerk reaction.



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: I used to be?

Alan
I think we are both starting to agree as to the difficulties in setting up "regulations" for this sort of area.
If we take my senario i.e R'gate to Flushing,
1. Owner with no experience can do it.
2. Owner + experienced crew can do it.
3. Owner can hand over the boat to experineced friend and let him do it.
4. Owner can pay experienced crew to do it.

The 2 limiting factors would be Insurance and the fact that money changes hands.
As far as insurance goes most marinas and yacht clubs insist on a boat being insured, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is? If money changes hands then there could be a form of contract that is deemed to exist.

I quite frankly can't see a way around the problem of a boat being delivered by a "friend" and proving whether or not money changed hands.

For the professional companies there should never be a problem as they will insist on a contract and supply the best crew possible.

There is also the problem of the definition of a "delivery" in the case of a new boat going from its yard to its new home port no questions, it's being delivered, but what about a boat leaving its home port for 2 weeks and then returning?
To the best of my knowledge there are an awful lot of racing boats where the owner races then gets off after the last race and lets the crew return the boat to its mooring. In my own expierince we have boats that race in the Cannon Ball Series in Holland and then the boats are returned to moorings in the Medway by the crews. Are these boats being delivered?

I think on reflection it's an impossible task to regulate.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: I used to be?

Does anyone have any real data on losses on sea deliveries - either vessel or crew?
If these, as I suspect, are minimal - from all scenarios 1,2,3 & 4 mentioned by TheBoatman - what would be the purpose of regulation? What will additional regulation guard against? Do we not enjoy 'sailing' simply to get away from the world of regulation ? We all have agendas which we would like to promote & get a result on.
If we are doing it for gain, surely there are already sufficient safeguards.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Deliveries

Well you obviously already know that they are all going to be buried in holes and you will have to dig those holes. So the point is that there is no point in them having er, a point! What probably is important though, is how strong are these stix - I mean posts? How many people will be able to sit on the fence when it's up, did you check? Alternatively you could take bolster and club hammer and make them all look like you want them to.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

B
boat brands - prejudice or reality
8 9 10
Replies
185
Views
6K
doug748
D
Goldie
iPad Charting Recommendations Please
2
Replies
20
Views
797
ylop
Y
geem
Cat A ocean standard need full revision
15 16 17
Replies
335
Views
8K
WindyWindyWindy
W
W
Training the wife
7 8 9
Replies
179
Views
4K
Wansworth
W
garymalmgren
Tokyo Bay at night (mare)
Replies
3
Views
239
garymalmgren
garymalmgren

Share this page

Top