Does RCD Category influence you when buying a boat

Would RCD category bother you

  • No. Would buy boat anyway

    Votes: 47 61.8%

  • Maybe - would want to pay less as resale would be hard

    Votes: 14 18.4%

  • Yes - would refuse to buy unless was certified at sellers expense

    Votes: 6 7.9%

  • Yes would walk away.

    Votes: 9 11.8%
  • Total voters
    76
Keith 66 said:
As far as i am concerned the RCD is responsible for the destruction of the British boatbuilding industry. It does absolutely nothing for safety & is solely there for large scale manufacturers. It is a prime example of a solution to a problem that didnt exist. The sooner it is abolished the better.
Click to expand...

There's a grain of truth in that; when a friend and I were considering putting the Anderson 22 back into production, we obviously would have had to gain a decent RCD category, as we felt one reflecting her abilities would be an important selling point, or quite possibly make the boat unattractive if we didn't bother with the tests etc.

In fact the RYA gave excellent help and guidance for free including where and how to do the tests; it would have been an expense we could have done without, but in relation to building new boats it wasn't that big a deal.

Whether the categories really reflect abilities is a different matter...anyway when we did our sums and realised the costs of low scale production in the UK - so the price we'd have had to charge per boat - we sadly had to walk away from the project, I think wisely and that was before the recession.

I still remember with gratitude the RYA help on RCD though; they may not get everything right but no-one could say they weren't doing their best to help UK boatbuilding.
 
JumbleDuck said:
Would you consider a boat with no category at all?
Click to expand...

My boat is pre-rcd so has no category but, as we all know, there's enough information available about Moody, Westerly, Swedish boats etc., to make a decision. I suspect many categories of rcd boat are built to the minimum required standards anyway as accountants rule.
 
Minchsailor said:
Not one iota, I don't even know what the rating for my boat is.

What I DO know is that it is well built, looks 'right', and is a proven design as a long established worldwide cruiser.
Click to expand...

I found out the rating for my boat (well, for later versions) after I bought her. It is of no importance to me at all.
 
Binman said:
As a newbie can you explain what these Cats are,or for?
Click to expand...

Sorry you've been ignored, Binman.
RCD stands for Recreational Craft Directive, which purports to set standards for seaworthiness and other issues (such as engine emissions). It's sort of a 'CE mark' for leisure boats. Craft built in or imported to the EEA (European Economic Area...sorry about all the acronyms) since 1998 need RCD certification to be sold or put into use (although there are several exceptions to this). Categories range from A (ocean) to D (sheltered waters).

Plenty of info on the RYA website. Useful summary here: http://www.marinesurveysltd.co.uk/recreational_craft_directive_summary.htm
 
My boat is to old to have a rating.

If I was going to the Southern Ocean I'd be looking for a boat with a RCD category, but I am an engneer and understand regulations and why they are there.
 
mainsail1 said:
I agree, it is just another piece of useless Euro legislation that was never needed in the first place.
Click to expand...

People forget that the RCD was an EU directive equalise trade by standardising the requirements imposed on boatbuilders by the different European countries. Prior to the RCD, manufacturers had to not only produce a different specification for Holland, Italy, Spain, etc, but had to pay for them to be approved and 'plated' in each country. There was certainly a suspicion that many of these 'requirements' were simply hurdles put up to protect domestic producers. The RCD ensured that an boat that was compliant in one country was compliant, and could be sold without any further bureaucracy at all.

Obviously the companies that sold boats in the most countries were the winners and were the biggest drivers for the directive. They were joined wholeheartedly by the big American powerboats companies who were constantly pissed off that the requirements vary considerably in the different parts of the Med.

The other 'driver', was that the American Bureau of Shipping ceased to do certification of the scantling standards for yachts. That left no easy way for race organisers and the buying public to at least have some reassurance that boats were built to any sort of quality standard, especially as boats became both lighter and faster.

To say the RCD killed the British boatbuilding industry is ludicrous. Why didn't it kill the boatbuilding business in the rest of Europe? The slow lingering death of the large scale building of 'regular' type boats in this country started long before the RCD was even conceived.

Whether the RCD has been a useful marketing tool is irrelevant. It's equalised trade within Europe and has ensured that boats of various types are built to at least a minimum standard.
 
Camelia said:
If I was going to the Southern Ocean I'd be looking for a boat with a RCD category
Click to expand...

Really? A 34-foot Beneteau designed for Med charter meets Cat A as far as I know, but nobody would deliberately choose it for the Southern Ocean.

Given that every plausible boat you might consider for that trip, and lots you wouldn't, are all lumped together in Cat A, how does the RCD help you decide?

Pete
 
I answered "Maybe" - but not for the reason given. I would not be even slightly bothered about an older boat not having and RCD category; indeed, my Moody 31 is too old to have one. However, I think few people would argue about the capability of a Moody of that era! So, in general, boat, designer and builder's reputation would carry more weight with me than the RCD. However, for a boat that was built in the RCD era, I think I might want to know it's RCD category as a guide to the standard to which it was built. Of course, if the boat was a home-build, then realistically the RCD category is meaningless, and you'd have to be considering other factors. But if it is a production boat, then a low RCD for a boat that looks more capable would have you asking questions about why it was a low RCD? The answer may be as for the Nauticat (which no-one doubts can cross oceans), that the builder decided that design features that mitigated against a higher rating were an essential part of the package they were selling. But it might be an indication of a boat that has been built "good enough" rather than "best".

Of course, the RCD category has in some cases been given too high for the vessel - there is an MAIB report for a small cruising yacht that was so badly built that it didn't meet the RCD rating it had. In that case, AFAIR the RCD rating had been correctly given if the boat was built as specified, but the builder had failed to meet the standard of build that was required to meet the RCD rating. I can't find it just now, but it has been mentioned on here.
 
prv said:
Really? A 34-foot Beneteau designed for Med charter meets Cat A as far as I know, but nobody would deliberately choose it for the Southern Ocean.

Given that every plausible boat you might consider for that trip, and lots you wouldn't, are all lumped together in Cat A, how does the RCD help you decide?

Pete
Click to expand...

I may well be wrong... but I sense that Camelia might have left out the rather important word, "not".
 
prv said:
Given that every plausible boat you might consider for that trip, and lots you wouldn't, are all lumped together in Cat A, how does the RCD help you decide?
Click to expand...
It is a guide, no more, no less. It demonstrates that the manufacture has fulfilled a basic tick list and has been awarded a Cat A. Indicating that the boat was not built by Bodge-it and Leg-it (Boatbuilders) Ltd out of fairy dust.

You then move onto the serious stuff of selecting a boat that best suits your needs and design requirements. Your example, a 34-foot Beneteau, fails my all design requirements.
 
Camelia said:
Your example, a 34-foot Beneteau, fails my all design requirements.
Click to expand...

I know, that was the point.

All the boats you would ever consider for the Southern Ocean will either be Cat A, or outside the system either due to age or location (I doubt Skip Novak's boats are RCD categorised). A Cat B boat is something like a Cornish Crabber or a Polish lake trailer-sailer; it's irrelevant to you.

Pete
 
JumbleDuck said:
Surely it arises every time someone is considering two boats which are in different categories?
Click to expand...

Read posts #1 and #3 together. That is not the question being asked.

Of course some buyers will be looking at boats on the margins between categories, where boats in either might be on a short list, or the boat in question is available in either.
 
AntarcticPilot said:
Of course, the RCD category has in some cases been given too high for the vessel - there is an MAIB report for a small cruising yacht that was so badly built that it didn't meet the RCD rating it had. In that case, AFAIR the RCD rating had been correctly given if the boat was built as specified, but the builder had failed to meet the standard of build that was required to meet the RCD rating. I can't find it just now, but it has been mentioned on here.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the capsize, resulting in two deaths, of the Mollyanna, off Puffin Island. From the summary at http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Mollyanna.pdf

The investigation highlighted a number of causal and contributory factors, including:
  • The dinghy could not be righted following capsize; it did not meet the stability and buoyancy requirements of EN ISO 12217-3 with respect to boat design category C.
  • Calculations undertaken in 2001 regarding the dinghy’s stability and buoyancy contained errors, and were possibly incomplete.
  • A Statement of Conformity with the essential requirements of the RCD was issued by a notified body on the basis of the results of the calculations made in 2001, despite no evidence of calculation being produced in respect of the required flotation tests.
  • Problems with the boat, such as its difficulty to right following capsize and water ingress into the flotation spaces between the dinghy’s deck and outer hull when swamped, were not identified during the stability and buoyancy tests conducted on the boat in 2001.
  • [...]
  • A number of departures from the requirements of the RCD by the manufacture were evident, including the failure to provide an owner’s manual.
  • The departures from the RCD were not recognised by the importer of the boat, or the dealer who sold the boat.
​

Although it's described as a dinghy, the "Bez 2" in question is one of these
588515.JPG

The report notes that the crew were inexperienced - I suspect that few experienced people woul dhave chosen to go out in one of these in F5/6 and 1.5m waves, which were the conditions when the accident occurred.
 
Last edited:
Camelia said:
My boat is to old to have a rating.

If I was going to the Southern Ocean I'd be looking for a boat with a RCD category, but I am an engneer and understand regulations and why they are there.
Click to expand...

The problem is that most mass-production 35-footers are already the highest RCD category A, yet are absolutely not designed for the Southern Ocean. My Jeanneau SO35 is Cat A and I'd be slightly nervous about a east-west transatlantic in it, though I might do it if I couldn't swap it for a nice She 36. I certainly would not take the SO35 to high latitudes. It is simply an excellent coastal cruiser. I know plenty of boats I would be happy to cross oceans in, but a lot of them have no RCD rating as they predate it.

I tend to the view that the RCD is a pretty pointless piece of legislation for the supposed purpose of indicating seaworthiness. It certainly makes life difficult for small low-volume builders. There is some merit in it for bigger boatbuilders selling outside their own country, but it has set the bars too low: I bet when it was being designed/implemented Jeanneau/Beneteau etc were VERY keen that all their main ranges got an 'A' and their views were taken in.
 
Depends what you mean by "bother you". If the boat legally should have RCD and didnt have, you would be a fool to buy it - when it came to selling not everyone will be as gullible. On the other hand if you are meaning from the point of view of seaworthyness then its only a factor and even then only in the sense that whilst a category A might not guarantee seaworthyness a category C certainly would say fit only for lakes and rivers.

There are too many cheap french boats limboed through the classifications to take them too seriously. Indeed from my own working experience of international standards you can be sure that RCD was devised to allow the manufacturers what they wanted.
 
Last edited:
birdseye said:
On the other hand if you are meaning from the point of view of seaworthyness then its only a factor and even then only in the sense that whilst a category A might not guarantee seaworthyness a category C certainly would say fit only for lakes and rivers.
Click to expand...

A Cornish Shrimper is Category C, as are a Nordic Folkboat and a Drascombe Lugger. I think all of these are fit for rather more than lakes and rivers. Did you mean Category D?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top