Do you always have a life raft for occasional cross channel trip ?

Dockhead said:
Best case for rescue assets being launched after an EPIRB/PLB call is probably five hours, according to these articles.
Click to expand...

Multiple recent UK and ROI examples (last five years) suggest the SAR asset will be with you within two hours (when say 10-20nm offshore) let alone launched to you if you fire a GPS PLB at sea. Read various accounts by MAIB and MCIB. Only last week there was a story here on YBW of the skipper of a coastal yacht (only about 4nm offshore IIRC) being taken off within an hour of firing his PLB, no other comma as vessel and VHF had capsized. Five hours to launch sounds like the expectation for non-GPS beacons to me, but whatever it is the figure is not in line with recent UK examples where the SAR response is much quicker.
 
Tranona said:
Suggest you read the many reports of yachts foundering that you will find on the MAIB and the Irish equivalent websites.
.
Click to expand...
I only asked you to name one - I guess you can't.

It is a matter of doing a reliable risk assessment. As I have said above, even without a liferaft the most risky part of a channel crossing is driving to the boat and I imagine you will find you are more likely to suffer from a heart attack so do you carry a defibrillator on the boat?

Being able to make a rational assessment of risk is an important skill in a skipper and I would seriously doubt the skills of anyone who says a liferaft is essential (or even important)
 
bedouin said:
It is a matter of doing a reliable risk assessment. As I have said above, even without a liferaft the most risky part of a channel crossing is driving to the boat and I imagine you will find you are more likely to suffer from a heart attack so do you carry a defibrillator on the boat?
Click to expand...

I have considerable doubts about the risk assessment skills of anyone who carries a liferaft for coastal sailing but who does not wear, and insist that his crew wear, hard hats on board.
 
bedouin said:
do you carry a defibrillator on the boat?
Click to expand...

Something I'm actively considering since I personally had a major heart attack on board last year, and this year one of my crew had to be landed for medical reasons and had to spend over a week in hospital. It's an age thing I suppose.
 
bedouin said:
I only asked you to name one - I guess you can't.

It is a matter of doing a reliable risk assessment. As I have said above, even without a liferaft the most risky part of a channel crossing is driving to the boat and I imagine you will find you are more likely to suffer from a heart attack so do you carry a defibrillator on the boat?

Being able to make a rational assessment of risk is an important skill in a skipper and I would seriously doubt the skills of anyone who says a liferaft is essential (or even important)
Click to expand...

Like insurance, a liferaft is a complete waste of money - until you need it.

I did an article in YM last year (May) about a French skipper who nearly died after a fire on his boat. It was in August and he was a few hours out of North Shields en route for the Netherlands. He was a very experienced skipper having twice circumnavigated Iceland solo and three times around the British Isles. Moreover he was a recently retired colonel of the French fire service.

While he was on deck the fire alarm went off and by the time he got back to the cockpit the interior was a blazing furnace and so he was unable to get to his vhf nor to spare extinguishers. He had two in a cockpit locker but the fire was too advanced for them to be effective. He was able to launch his liferaft because he had devised his own quick release system but then, although it was nearly new, it didn't inflate properly. This meant that it sagged and collected water which contributed to his hypothermy. The raft had a footpump but how are you supposed to use that in the circumstances?

Being a firefighter Daniel knew what was explosive and what was inflammable on board (some things you never would think about) and he said that it was only about 3 to 5 minutes after the start of the fire that the boat exploded bringing down the mast within feet of his raft.

He managed to get a mayday off with his cell phone and helicopter help came after about an hour. Despite being physically fit he was at the limit of his capacity to react to help - and this within 10 miles of the coast in August.

I would never tempt fate by undertaking a long trip without a liferaft and, in addition, I normally keep a fully inflated dinghy on the foredeck as a last ditch back-up.
 
Last edited:
I crossed the channel quite a few times in an Etap, reputed to be unsinkable. However I always carried a life raft, even an unsinkable boat could become untenable in a short time should it catch fire, something any boat can do. How quick can you inflate a dinghy whilst breathing in acrid smoke?

Life rafts are so cheap these days there is no excuse not to have one.
 
Sans Bateau said:
... Life rafts are so cheap these days there is no excuse not to have one.
Click to expand...

Yes there are excuses, or reasoned arguments. Whatever way you slice and dice it, you just don't need a liferaft as there is a very high probability, likely in excess of 99% that you will never need it. If you get into a situation that the vessel is foundering and a liferaft will be needed, it is highly likely that you will be rescued by using a EPIRB / PLB before your yacht actually founders. Incidents which cause rapid sinking are even rarer. That appears to be the excuse or gist of the arguments for not having one. Do you sail a safe boat, a well maintained boat, can you sail and navigate, do you have electronic navigation, they could also be reasonable excuses for not having one.
 
Sybarite said:
... he said that it was only about 3 to 5 minutes after the start of the fire that the boat exploded bringing down the mast within feet of his raft. ...
I would never tempt fate by undertaking a long trip without a liferaft ...
Click to expand...

If a fire can destroy your boat in 3 to 5 minutes, why don't you carry a liferaft on short trips?
 
For crossing the channel and trips to the west country I have my tinker rib inflated on the back deck. Not a liferaft, but it floats and works and for the numbers on board very suitable imho. As others have mentioned I fel that the most dangerous part of a trip is the drive down and back home.
 
Boathook said:
As others have mentioned I fel that the most dangerous part of a trip is the drive down and back home.
Click to expand...

True, and since 80% of all fatalities in cars arise from head injuries, anyone who thinks a liferaft is essential but who doesn't wear a crash helmet while driving has seriously screwed up perceptions of risk.
 
It's so hard to advise anyone as it all depends on the individuals perception of risk.
Some people will only cross a road at a crossing and when the green man is showing, I have no problem J walking.
In 30 years of channel crossing I didn't have a life raft. When I crossed Biscay solo I did, mainly because my perceived level of risk was higher as I would be spending time asleep.
If your not adverse to a bit of risk, carry a h/h vhf so you can ask the ship that runs you down to fish you out of the water :)
If you don't like risk, don't go!
 
Y
LadyInBed said:
It's so hard to advise anyone as it all depends on the individuals perception of risk.
Some people will only cross a road at a crossing and when the green man is showing, I have no problem J walking.
In 30 years of channel crossing I didn't have a life raft. When I crossed Biscay solo I did, mainly because my perceived level of risk was higher as I would be spending time asleep.
If your not adverse to a bit of risk, carry a h/h vhf so you can ask the ship that runs you down to fish you out of the water :)
If you don't like risk, don't go!
Click to expand...
:D
 
Robin said:
And as a fireman take steps to avoid the fire starting, what was the prime cause of the fire I wonder?
Click to expand...

He doesn't know for sure but could speculate on possible causes. What he did emphasize was the amount of combustible material inside a boat - as well as your own foulies. Another aspect was that he couldn't get to the gas cut-off in time and the severed gas hose was acting as a flame thrower.
 
pmagowan said:
I think there is plenty of evidence that people abandon ship to raft too early. Fastnet is one but the fact that so 'often' yachts are found afloat and the crew are never found. Bottom line is that there is very little evidence full stop. MAIB reports offer little with so few incidents that there is no statistically significant information. USA CG does better but still the results are not overly significant. All you can really conclude is that very few yachts sink. In most scenarios liferafts seem irrelevant. There are lots of reasons why a liferaft might, counterintuitively increase your risk including false sense of security, inappropriate use of limited safety funds, focus away from actual problem and many others including those we can't predict. It is the same as helmets in boxing and also helmets in cycling. Seems a great idea but the stats often show the opposite of what you expect.
Click to expand...

The MAIB and MCIB reports are the most complete record and record the majority of founderings in our waters. I have followed this subject fairly closely for the last 15 years and any incident that results in the loss of a boat and particularly loss of life will be reported in the press, either at the time or in a subsequent inquest. Most of them at least get referred to the MAIB, but not all result in a full report. Can't recall any incidents where a floating boat was discovered without its occupants.

There are of course many more cases if you widen the net to include ocean voyaging where there are cases of both boats disappearing completely or found drifting without crew. However, inevitably it is very difficult to determine what happened because there are no witnesses!

This thread (like many on the same subject) is about carrying a liferaft in our home waters and the MAIB reports are as comprehensive as you can get as a guide to the sort of incidents that occur.

There is not enough data to do any sort of statistical analysis other than counting the numbers, but even then there are so few to draw any trends. The only kind of analysis that makes any sense is to look for common themes, as I explained earlier. This shows, for example that fire is not a common cause of foundering at sea; that liferafts are unreliable or difficult to use, and that where a liferaft is used, casualties are picked up very quickly.

What is really missing is any kind of consistent data on the near misses - that is incidents that were developing but resolved through action by either the crew or third parties such as the RNLI. Unfortunately the data collected by coastguard and RNLI is mainly categorical using categories of their own construction. There have been attempts to collect richer data, most recently on drowning related to sailing.
 
Tranona said:
The MAIB and MCIB reports are the most complete record and record the majority of founderings in our waters. I have followed this subject fairly closely for the last 15 years and any incident that results in the loss of a boat and particularly loss of life will be reported in the press, either at the time or in a subsequent inquest. Most of them at least get referred to the MAIB, but not all result in a full report. Can't recall any incidents where a floating boat was discovered without its occupants.

There are of course many more cases if you widen the net to include ocean voyaging where there are cases of both boats disappearing completely or found drifting without crew. However, inevitably it is very difficult to determine what happened because there are no witnesses!

This thread (like many on the same subject) is about carrying a liferaft in our home waters and the MAIB reports are as comprehensive as you can get as a guide to the sort of incidents that occur.

There is not enough data to do any sort of statistical analysis other than counting the numbers, but even then there are so few to draw any trends. The only kind of analysis that makes any sense is to look for common themes, as I explained earlier. This shows, for example that fire is not a common cause of foundering at sea; that liferafts are unreliable or difficult to use, and that where a liferaft is used, casualties are picked up very quickly.

What is really missing is any kind of consistent data on the near misses - that is incidents that were developing but resolved through action by either the crew or third parties such as the RNLI. Unfortunately the data collected by coastguard and RNLI is mainly categorical using categories of their own construction. There have been attempts to collect richer data, most recently on drowning related to sailing.
Click to expand...

I looked on the MAIB site for info regarding the incident I mentionned above (Aug 2014) but it wasn't included. What are the criteria, UK waters and/or UK registered boat?
 
I go to sea for a living and have done since a billion tides ago. Every yacht I sail is properly equipped with safety gear including a liferaft and my crew are always properly briefed in its use and deployment.

What am I doing wrong? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top