Do I need a liferaft?

We at least need to consider staying!

Tranona said:
I assume you were otherwise why make the comment that the boat survived?

I was using as an example of how poorly the liferafts peformed, not about the decision whether to abandon or not. That issue was fully covered in the report.

I agree (from the sidelines!) that most of the accounts of abandon ship suggest staying with it might have been better. However, who are we who have never faced the situation to criticise those who were?
Click to expand...

Because I was using the example you posted to reinforce some basic facts, that perhaps the best liferaft is the mothership you might be abandoning.

eg - I delivered a yacht from Gibraltar to Poole, at beginning of March some years ago.
Weather - perfect sea conditions, but no wind, so we motored from Vigo past Finisterre across Biscay. Two weeks later, a Hamble based, well found yacht, was abandoned off Finisterre - horrendous conditions. During transfer to the liferaft, the skipper was unfortunately lost, due to winchman from Spanish helicopter capsizing raft before skipper was in it. Very sad event. The yacht they abandoned (think it was a 48' Rival Bowman) was again found relatively undamaged & was being resold in the Hamble a little later by Ancasta.

Were they right to abandon?
I don't know, because I wasn't there & not my decision & only those who were there could make that call.

However, it is still 'perhaps' an example of 'why leave the mother ship' when it hasn't yet been lost, to do something we rarely practice, which is getting into a fairly flimsy unstable rubber float.
 
This is turning a bit scuttlebutt-esque.

Do you need a liferaft. No. Is it a good idea. IMHO yes. If you don't want one - fine. I have one - also fine.

You all need to go and take your boats out and stop winding yourselves up!
 
Elessar said:
This is turning a bit scuttlebutt-esque.

Do you need a liferaft. No. Is it a good idea. IMHO yes. If you don't want one - fine. I have one - also fine.

You all need to go and take your boats out and stop winding yourselves up!
Click to expand...

Fair comment on some of the contributions, but others are simply trying to learn lessons & consider the issues. I'm sorry you don't approve of discussion, but it ain't going to stop is it?

I have been reminded of how often, in the dark, wind, waves & rain a boat can be a very unconfortable and frightening place. Add the fact of gear (perhaps structural) failures & it can seem that ANYTHING would be safer. Then take something called a "LIFERAFT" - that HAS to be a better option doesn't it? Well, yes & no - err, it depends doesn't it.

Liferafts are not necessarily safer or longer lasting than the mother boat. And that's a really important lesson we need to understand - and remember when it's our ass on the line. So sure, get yourself a liferaft (as I did recently) but don't for one minute think that it will always do exactly what you want it tod do or even always be safer than the boat you are leaving.

Make that judgement carefully as it may be the last thing you do, whichever way you decide.
 
Searush said:
Fair comment on some of the contributions, but others are simply trying to learn lessons & consider the issues. I'm sorry you don't approve of discussion, but it ain't going to stop is it?

I have been reminded of how often, in the dark, wind, waves & rain a boat can be a very unconfortable and frightening place. Add the fact of gear (perhaps structural) failures & it can seem that ANYTHING would be safer. Then take something called a "LIFERAFT" - that HAS to be a better option doesn't it? Well, yes & no - err, it depends doesn't it.

Liferafts are not necessarily safer or longer lasting than the mother boat. And that's a really important lesson we need to understand - and remember when it's our ass on the line. So sure, get yourself a liferaft (as I did recently) but don't for one minute think that it will always do exactly what you want it tod do or even always be safer than the boat you are leaving.

Make that judgement carefully as it may be the last thing you do, whichever way you decide.
Click to expand...

no I approve of discussion learning lessons and considering issues is what this is all about I thought.

It's just sometimes it descends to preaching then no one learns anything, indeed worse than that it harbours intransigence - that's what was making it all a bit pointless. Over reliance on one source of information stated as definitive fact for example (MAIB who only deal with heavy metal or fatalities), or OTT comments like "do you wear a helmet when driving"

I agree 100% with everything you say in your last 3 paragraphs. Good summary of a lot of learning and thought I suspect.
 
Elessar said:
Over reliance on one source of information stated as definitive fact for example (MAIB who only deal with heavy metal or fatalities

I agree 100% with everything you say in your last 3 paragraphs. Good summary of a lot of learning and thought I suspect.
Click to expand...

Problem is that there is no other reliable source of information and it has the advantage of being very thorough and consistent. Also I am not sure because of its wide remit that much of significance escapes its attention.

As I have often commented in relation to safety matters, what is missing is a good source of analysis of incidents that get resolved before they become "disasters" but from which much could be learned.
 
Tranona said:
Problem is that there is no other reliable source of information and it has the advantage of being very thorough and consistent. Also I am not sure because of its wide remit that much of significance escapes its attention.

As I have often commented in relation to safety matters, what is missing is a good source of analysis of incidents that get resolved before they become "disasters" but from which much could be learned.
Click to expand...

NOW, There's a useful "add-on" for the RNLI. Such a massive database of coastal (and some inland) incidents for analysis. Funny they don't bother isn't it? I wonder if thay have done it & realised that it is better to use fear for fundraising rather than the facts? :rolleyes:

Good PhD opportunity for a forumite's offspring?
 
"or OTT comments like "do you wear a helmet when driving""


OTT?

The question is about risk assesment.

If you think that the risk of death is higher, leisure boating, due to fire or sinking, than it is for a head injury whilst regular driving, then buy a liferaft.

I think the risk is higher in the car and I dont wear a helmet so I won't be buying a liferaft.

But if I was sailing across the atlantic I would.

The OP asked for an opinion I was suprised at how many people said he should. So was I hoping to add a bit of reality to the thread.
 
Thepipdoc said:
At first site the title of this thread might seem like a silly question but I'll ask it anyway!
(I say its a silly qustion but I think I know the answer even before I ask it!)

I don't currently have a life raft on board my new (to Me) Sealine F33 and and whilst most of our trips are costal, we do intend to make several trips to the channel islands and France in 2011.
The question is should I have a liferaft aboard?
Click to expand...

Wow!! Can't help wondering what sort of response I would have got if I'd asked "Do I need a Sunseeker"!

Thanks everyone. Just to give you an update, I bought and fitted a Seago 4 man ISO liferaft today.
 
Last edited:
Croak said:
"or OTT comments like "do you wear a helmet when driving""


OTT?

The question is about risk assesment.

If you think that the risk of death is higher, leisure boating, due to fire or sinking, than it is for a head injury whilst regular driving, then buy a liferaft.

I think the risk is higher in the car and I dont wear a helmet so I won't be buying a liferaft.

But if I was sailing across the atlantic I would.

The OP asked for an opinion I was suprised at how many people said he should. So was I hoping to add a bit of reality to the thread.
Click to expand...

"But if I was sailing across the atlantic I would."

And this is different, because?
 
Searush said:
NOW, There's a useful "add-on" for the RNLI. Such a massive database of coastal (and some inland) incidents for analysis. Funny they don't bother isn't it? I wonder if thay have done it & realised that it is better to use fear for fundraising rather than the facts? :rolleyes:

Good PhD opportunity for a forumite's offspring?
Click to expand...

I could dust it off and post it here, but when one retires from academic lfe one has to forgo such thoughts and waste time on the forum instead!

Seriously, the "statistics" produced by the RNLI are designed to show that they are an efficient use of resources and therefore concentrate on counting things in categories that they determine are useful, rather than collecting information about the causes of the incidents. The incident then gets defined by the category in the list that the person completing the form thinks most appropriate.

Very different from the approach in investigating incidents in the commercial shipping or aviation world where evidence based action is the underlying principle of safety development. MAIB uses the same approach, but of course on a very narrow range of incidents.
 
Croak said:
"or OTT comments like "do you wear a helmet when driving""


OTT?

The question is about risk assesment.

If you think that the risk of death is higher, leisure boating, due to fire or sinking, than it is for a head injury whilst regular driving, then buy a liferaft.

I think the risk is higher in the car and I dont wear a helmet so I won't be buying a liferaft.

But if I was sailing across the atlantic I would.

The OP asked for an opinion I was suprised at how many people said he should. So was I hoping to add a bit of reality to the thread.
Click to expand...

"So was I hoping to add a bit of reality to the thread."

And your level of expertise regarding Liferafts -------is?
 
alant said:
"But if I was sailing across the atlantic I would."

And this is different, because?
Click to expand...

Yes, of course it is, and if you can't see why i have explained it for you;

The opportunities for a short-term fix until rescued no longer exist - rescue in mid-ocean is likely to be days rather than hours away. Consequently, any short-term fix will not buy enough time & the liferaft will hopefully give you the couple of days you need. Pottering around the UK coast (other than in the Scottish islands) one is generally no more than a few hours from rescue, so keeping the boat afloat is more likely to be possible.
 
Searush said:
Yes, of course it is, and if you can't see why i have explained it for you;

The opportunities for a short-term fix until rescued no longer exist - rescue in mid-ocean is likely to be days rather than hours away. Consequently, any short-term fix will not buy enough time & the liferaft will hopefully give you the couple of days you need. Pottering around the UK coast (other than in the Scottish islands) one is generally no more than a few hours from rescue, so keeping the boat afloat is more likely to be possible.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that Searush, I would never have been able to considered those points by myself!

However, next time, could you please allow Croak to answer for himself, or at least put your hand up first!

PS,
Could you please advise how "keeping the boat afloat is more likely to be possible" if you are sinking/burning near the UK than further out?
Are you actually advocating that swimming in the sea (with or without LJ's), is preferable to sitting in a liferaft, awaiting rescue, just because land is closer?
 
The point I'm trying to make is that anything you do in a serious disaster situation is only likely to gain you some time. Rags/ sail/ ply patch over a hole will buy you a few hours extra, but probably not the weeks you would need to cross half an ocean.

I repeat that, close to UK (except Scottish Isles) you are within an hour or two of serious help so are likely to manage without a L/R. In an ocean, even with EPIRB, you need to stay afloat for a lot longer before a ship can be diverted to your position - planes can't help much as there are no seaplanes in service with the range since WW2 and Choppers don't have the range either.

Is that any clearer?

Fires are a bit of a special situation & your only chance is probably to deal with it VERY quickly before it gets a grip. Once it gets a grip, you may not even have time to deploy a L/R - if it isn't burnt or the other side of the fire to where you are!:eek:

If you don't agree with me that's fine. But I hope you can see the reasoning now.
 
Yes, you are acting a little like a teacher.

A. I would be a lot more likely to be cooking or repairing the boat on a longer cruise.

Plus, what he says above.

Thanks Searush,

Risk assesment.
 
Croak said:
Yes, you are acting a little like a teacher.

A. I would be a lot more likely to be cooking or repairing the boat on a longer cruise.

Plus, what he says above.

Thanks Searush,

Risk assesment.
Click to expand...

Which question is "A. I would be a lot more likely to be cooking or repairing the boat on a longer cruise." an answer too?

And the problem with teachers, is?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top