How could RYA training be improved?

[RJJ]

The Day Skipper is a basic sailing course, By it’s nature, it has to be quite generic, It’s intended as a starting point. Some people taking the course will be starting from scratch, others may have been sailing or boating in some other way for years.

Day skipper is not supposed to be "people starting from scratch". The expected pre-arrival level should be competent crew (whether certified or not).

Further to my earlier comment about "crew mastery". IMHO anyone not demonstrating crew mastery should be instantly kicked off any course including the title "skipper". Like, CS not knowing how to release or ease a winch under control, or how to tie a rolling hitch.

 

[goeasy123]

I'd do something like this. I'm sure it could be bettered?

• Modularise all the content. 1st aid and VHF SRO are already modules.
• Teach the purpose of but don't memory test anything that could and should committed to on board check lists and procedures. This would include lights, shapes, sounds, basic engine checks. But not ColRegs.
• Create new modules for selection, preparation and care of crew and boat for long passages.
• I might also consider modules on trade wind sailing and high latitudes.
• Create 2 levels of practical exam to test basic boat handling for ICC and YM qualification.

Have just 2 main qualifications, ICC and YM, choosing modules that external bodies require as proof of competency. A YM would be awarded with key tested models, the practical exam and the required sea time/experience.
Scrape the current Coastal, Offshore, Ocean etc. groupings and provide advice to students on what modules would be required and useful for what they want to do. For example, if one wanted to keep a boat in a Greek marina they would not need tides and streams for passage making.

The YM qualification could have endorsements. So it I wanted a competent professional to crew on my yacht a basic YM would do. If I wanted someone to skipper my brand new Lagoon to the St Lucia I'd want to know he/she might have a chance of fixing a few things, on the high seas, that the factory forgot to do.

 

[Praxinoscope]

Goeasy 123, looking at my YM certificate there is already a page devoted to endorsements.
Not sure I agree with you about dropping the memory bits by the time you have dived down below and identified that set of lights you have just seen or the sounds you have just heard it could very well be too late.
There are of course odd bits which one sees so rarely that you may need to use a reference, that’s why I carry a copy of the Admiralty Symbols and abréviations 5011 on board.

 

[[70521]]

• Teach the purpose of but don't memory test anything that could and should committed to on board check lists and procedures. This would include lights, shapes, sounds, basic engine checks. But not ColRegs.

Really! Not committing lights, shapes and sounds to memory! I want to instantly know what is going on around me. Without struggling to find the checklist to remind me that the big ship is turning to port, I do love checklists and they have their place, wasting say 2 minutes with a closing speed of 15 knots means I am 0.5 NM closer before starting a turn avoid a vessel that is restricted in its ability to manoeuvre.

 

[goeasy123]

Really! Not committing lights, shapes and sounds to memory! I want to instantly know what is going on around me. Without struggling to find the checklist to remind me that the big ship is turning to port, I do love checklists and they have their place, wasting say 2 minutes with a closing speed of 15 knots means I am 0.5 NM closer before starting a turn avoid a vessel that is restricted in its ability to manoeuvre.

I agree. But, after passing the exam and at sea few ab initio ICC holders can remember much past the lights on their on own boat, an upside down cone and ball and none of the sounds.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I agree. But, after passing the exam and at sea few ab initio ICC holder can remember much past the lights on their on own boat, an upside down cone and ball and none of the sounds.

I agree. The totally unsystematic nature of lights and sounds makes them very difficult to remember. I can't memorize things by rote if there isn't an underlying system, as there is for road signs. If I do manage to learn enough for a test, I'll certainly have forgotten it in a week or two. So in case of doubt, I'd always have to refer to a reference. I can manage the regular navigation lights! But I wish some genius like Jock Kinneir - Wikipedia and Margaret Calvert - Wikipedia would go over marine buoyage, lights and sounds! Buoyage isn't too bad, but I'm sure it could be better!

 

[Poignard]

I took a Day Skipper practical course ca 1997 with the late lamented John Goode's Southern Sailing School and I can't think of any way it could have been improved.

The instructor, Charles ----- (salutations if he reads this!), was brilliant and not a minute of the course was wasted. I really felt that I had got my money's worth.

 

[Daydream believer]

I’d agree, 45 minutes doesn’t seam right. Sounds a bit like fed paid rubber stamp applied. If both parties went away happy. Oh well. I guess they both got what they wanted.
lve read hear several times, if you do day skipper you automatically qualify for the ICC provided your a membership.
Sound like you contracted for a days instruction and got a days instruction presumably with the qualification of choice.

I was not asking for instruction. I wanted the certificate. He knew that I had done years of racing & 30 plus trips to Ostend long before GPS, many of them SH. All in my Stella. He asked me a few questions about my trips & why I did certain things, ie why I picked the route & times etc. So I think he really regarded the sailing etc as a formality. He saw no point in wasting time watching me berth a boat, although I did take the Sigma out easily enough & parked it spot on with a breezy cross wind. A boat I had never been on before.
Fortunately I managed not to sail it up the sea wall- The tide was out!!!

 

[Uricanejack]

I was not asking for instruction. I wanted the certificate. He knew that I had done years of racing & 30 plus trips to Ostend long before GPS, many of them SH. All in my Stella. He asked me a few questions about my trips & why I did certain things, ie why I picked the route & times etc. So I think he really regarded the sailing etc as a formality. He saw no point in wasting time watching me berth a boat, although I did take the Sigma out easily enough & parked it spot on with a breezy cross wind. A boat I had never been on before.
Fortunately I managed not to sail it up the sea wall- The tide was out!!!

Fair enough, it worked for you.

The RYA has a lot of options, which probably only fit the needs of most people. You cant please everyone all the time. At this time it doesn’t work for me. A combination of logistics, time and cost.
You could suggest there is a gap in their available options. For the sailor who has learned to sail through other means. Be it sailing with family friends or by themselves on their own boat.
The Various Yachtmaster. Options are to high and not relevant or required, by some.
The Day Skipper, is a course. Presumably the Day Skipper cannot be challenged.
If an experienced sailor is already at a level commensurate with Day Skipper. I can see a couple of reasons why taking the course might not work. Cost obviously, but probably for a lot of people, time would be a bigger issue.
This may not be a problem at all for sailing my own boat, particularly if I’m sailing where I live and this is not a requirement.

If however I wanted to go somewhere which required some form of qualification. eg Charter ect.

It appears the ICC is an option. It worked for you and a Antarctic Pilot.
In the UK. Who administers the ICC? Presumably the RYA.
So perhaps there is no gap.

How big a market exists for taking an ICC test or exam without having to complete a Day Skipper course? I imagine it’s small but may be growing as more people are contemplating charters in places where the ICC is required.

Maybe there is a market for a condensed Day Skipper/ICC course or exam?

 

[st599]

One problem with the ICC route is that hardly any countries actually signed up to the Treaty. It's not as International as people think. From the RYA website:
The ICC may be acceptable for visiting foreign flagged vessels, foreign flagged vessels being kept in the Coastal State and/or vessels flagged in the Coastal State. It should never be assumed that the ICC will be accepted as an alternative to the national qualification of the vessel's flag state. The onus is on ICC holders to determine its acceptability by foreign states, as the ICC was never intended to be an alternative to individual national qualification requirements.

And the RADAR course update that we were told about 3 years ago really needs to happen, with an update to the book.

 

[goeasy123]

One problem with the ICC route is that hardly any countries actually signed up to the Treaty. It's not as International as people think. From the RYA website:
The ICC may be acceptable for visiting foreign flagged vessels, foreign flagged vessels being kept in the Coastal State and/or vessels flagged in the Coastal State. It should never be assumed that the ICC will be accepted as an alternative to the national qualification of the vessel's flag state. The onus is on ICC holders to determine its acceptability by foreign states, as the ICC was never intended to be an alternative to individual national qualification requirements.

And the RADAR course update that we were told about 3 years ago really needs to happen, with an update to the book.

Is it not the case that the ICC and YM qualifications are more relevant as proof of competency for organizations such as charter and delivery companies than they are of interest to state authorities?

 

[Uricanejack]

I agree. The totally unsystematic nature of lights and sounds makes them very difficult to remember. I can't memorize things by rote if there isn't an underlying system, as there is for road signs. If I do manage to learn enough for a test, I'll certainly have forgotten it in a week or two. So in case of doubt, I'd always have to refer to a reference. I can manage the regular navigation lights! But I wish some genius like Jock Kinneir - Wikipedia and Margaret Calvert - Wikipedia would go over marine buoyage, lights and sounds! Buoyage isn't too bad, but I'm sure it could be better!

My piece of paper isn’t RYA and pree dates the MCA.
Even in the dark and distant past the D.O.T did not require memory by rote. And memory by rote was rather boring. I was never good at it.
Traditionally the this was considered a nice theory. It was not recommended for anyone attempting to prove it to a D.O.T examiner.
The truth I was never asked to regurgitate anything by rote. I actually almost dipped one because I annoyed the examiner by quoting a rule “like a parrot“ without understanding it.
What is required is a good working knowledge off.
This said.
The ability to accurately recognize, and define, what you are looking at, is critical to being able to determine, how the rules apply. To determine the best action to take.
Some of it, I committed to memory, not all of it,
If the MCA doesn’t require memory by rote, I don’t see why the RYA would.

What is being suggested by the OP is not an improvement. It’s a reduction of the standard of knowledge and understanding required.
For DS who cares? It apparently can be used to some minimal extent commercially.

The various levels of Yachtmaster can be used as commercial certificate.

The MCA set the requirements based on agreements at the IMO STCW 2010 Manila.
The RYA is delegated to administer the Yachtmaster on behalf of the MCA. along with some other organizations from Kelowna.

In order to be taken seriously as bone fide comercial certificate a professional level of knowledge and understanding is expected.
If the RYA does not maintain this, the YM will cease to be accepted and respected. As a commercial certificate.

There is no requirement for an armature sailor or yachtsman to purse a Yachtmaster. Some do and I am impressed by their interest and commitments.
An amateur can sail thier own boat where ever and as far as they like. Without a YM and can make thier own choices on what they think is worth while learning. If you don’t want to bother getting a deeper understanding of Nav Lights, Buoyage, Sextants or anything else you don’t have to.

If someone wants to become a Yachtmaster. They need to realize the level of knowledge required is the level expected by a professional.
Then they need to do the work and earn it.

As a professional cartographer, you probably have a much greater depth of knowledge on Charts and Chartwork than most mariners.

 

[goeasy123]

My piece of paper isn’t RYA and pree dates the MCA.
Even in the dark and distant past the D.O.T did not require memory by rote. And memory by rote was rather boring. I was never good at it.
Traditionally the this was considered a nice theory. It was not recommended for anyone attempting to prove it to a D.O.T examiner.
The truth I was never asked to regurgitate anything by rote. I actually almost dipped one because I annoyed the examiner by quoting a rule “like a parrot“ without understanding it.
What is required is a good working knowledge off.
This said.
The ability to accurately recognize, and define, what you are looking at, is critical to being able to determine, how the rules apply. To determine the best action to take.
Some of it, I committed to memory, not all of it,
If the MCA doesn’t require memory by rote, I don’t see why the RYA would.

What is being suggested by the OP is not an improvement. It’s a reduction of the standard of knowledge and understanding required.
For DS who cares? It apparently can be used to some minimal extent commercially.

The various levels of Yachtmaster can be used as commercial certificate.

The MCA set the requirements based on agreements at the IMO STCW 2010 Manila.
The RYA is delegated to administer the Yachtmaster on behalf of the MCA. along with some other organizations from Kelowna.

In order to be taken seriously as bone fide comercial certificate a professional level of knowledge and understanding is expected.
If the RYA does not maintain this, the YM will cease to be accepted and respected. As a commercial certificate.

There is no requirement for an armature sailor or yachtsman to purse a Yachtmaster. Some do and I am impressed by their interest and commitments.
An amateur can sail thier own boat where ever and as far as they like. Without a YM and can make thier own choices on what they think is worth while learning. If you don’t want to bother getting a deeper understanding of Nav Lights, Buoyage, Sextants or anything else you don’t have to.

If someone wants to become a Yachtmaster. They need to realize the level of knowledge required is the level expected by a professional.
Then they need to do the work and earn it.

As a professional cartographer, you probably have a much greater depth of knowledge on Charts and Chartwork than most mariners.

I've got to disagree with you. I'm probably a typical new-to-sailing candidate. I'm currently doing a YM OS and Ocean. I'm not finding it particularly challenging, relevant or complete. How would a shortfall be addressed?

 

[ctva]

"I'm currently doing a YM OS and Ocean. I'm not finding it particularly challenging...

ok, so you appear then to know the subject matter of the YM OS and Ocean, just do the exam.

"I'm not finding it particularly ... relevant...

so you have more understanding of what should be included than the internationally recognised organisations that administer the system.

"I'm not finding it particularly ... complete.

As is the case with a lot of learning these days, you need to self research. There is no time on any RYA course to cover everything in detail which is why there are three very distinct levels of teaching for each topic:

Can Do - you must demonstrate that you have understood and asymilated the knowledge and skill to perform the task
Understands - you must demonstrate that you have understood and asymilated the knowledge
Knowledge of - brief into to the subject with pointers as to where to gain more knowledge and experience

... How would a shortfall be addressed?

Own boat tuition!

113 posts in and an awful lot of replies from many that are obviously involved in the teaching from basic instructors to examiners and thoes outside they system and from other countries all with the basic message that any system has to work for the majority to achieve a goal. No system is perfect and can cater for the individual bespoke training you need... hang on a minute, the RYA does cater for this with Own Boat Tuition to the internationally recognised standards.

 

[st599]

Is it not the case that the ICC and YM qualifications are more relevant as proof of competency for organizations such as charter and delivery companies than they are of interest to state authorities?

Yes, that's the problem. In some states you have to have a proof of competence that the state recognises, and that isn't the ICC.

 

[RobbieW]

I've got to disagree with you. I'm probably a typical new-to-sailing candidate. I'm currently doing a YM OS and Ocean. I'm not finding it particularly challenging, relevant or complete. How would a shortfall be addressed?

From what I've read here I dont think you are a typical 'new to sailing' candidate. New to sailing, yes; typically those dont buy a boat, sail into the Med with plans for a transat (if I've remembered your position correctly). Some that do that will hire a pro skipper to get them as far as, say, Gib using that experience as a transfer of skills. After that, the coastal/offshore theory would help consolidate the knowledge - you'd have a better idea of what you wanted from the course. The practical, whether coastal or offshore, is then entirely a matter of choice. The idea of modularising might work but you'd need a good working knowledge of each module to know wheter you need it or not.

I think each of the theory courses are intended to provide a broad spectrum of knowledge to then be used practically as each individual gains experience. Personally, I did coastal/offshore theory in 1989 then went sailing a lot, eventually did the offshore practical in about 2001 just to see if I could pass. I also like to undestand the basics of a skill as that helps to utilise the various tools as they come along to make exercising that skill easier. For example I found the ocean theory much easier after realising that astro nav is an exercise in transferred position lines, just using different objects to take bearings from

 

[Praxinoscope]

I fully endorse the comments by Uricanejack #112 that it is not a matter of learning things by rote but understanding them beyond simply regurgitating them.
My YM also pre-dates the MCA and has the RYA/DOT signature, and it certainly required more than a bit of remembering things by rote, he examiner delved beyond words and made sure that I understood fully Hat the various rules and regs meant.
I must admit I am surprised that goeasy 123 who, admits to being a new comer to sailing is already doing the YM offshore and Ocean, and finding them easy, Inseem to remember it took me a lot of sailing hours in a variety of conditions as well as few years of shore based evening classes to follow the theory study to get my YM.

 

[Uricanejack]

I've got to disagree with you. I'm probably a typical new-to-sailing candidate. I'm currently doing a YM OS and Ocean. I'm not finding it particularly challenging, relevant or complete. How would a shortfall be addressed?

I can’t answer, I have never taken an RYA course, And don’t instruct for RYA certificates.
The problems you identify. specifically Identification of Nav lights, Is not an area to reduce the required knowledge. Other areas I would recommend not reduce requirements areas would be radar and if doing Ocean YM Astro.
it’s good you don’t find these to be a challenge. As to how complete the course and exam requirements are I don’t know.

As will be said by many people, You can sail round the world on your own boat without doing any of this.

As to why this knowledge is still required, I may well have very different opinions from some of the OYM and Instructors even an examiner on why this is still important. This might just be because I am an old navigator. Who still instructs or trains this stuff to would be professional navigators. So I still train the basics, when they go out into the real world, do they use it? Some do, Some don’t.
All I can say is they get taught or trained how, which includes very in depth understanding of all aspect of the collision regs and especially how to identify lights. How to do basic simple chart work, How to keep a look out, How to determine risk of collision visually before How to do manual radar plotting.

It might all seam to be old fashioned and out dated, A professional needs to know and understand how to do the basics so they can properly understand how their equipment works, so they can tell when there is a problem with the equipment.

As a basic principles. When possible never rely on a single source of position information, Electronic positions of any kind should be regularly confirmed by observation when possible. So to my way of thinking, I got no problem with someone using a GPS for a DR or even time check. Because it fits my principle of checking by observation to confirm you electronics are functioning correctly. The RYA might not like it from an examination perspective because the examination requires you to be able to use basic techniques.

If you want to sail an ocean going commercial voyage as Master. It’s a minimum basic requirement you are able to some astronavigation. Sun run to noon lat by reduction tables is a popular choice. Is the ability to do moon stars and planets required I couldn’t tell you.
Do they require more knowledge than simply plugging it in to a pro forma for the reduction tables, I don’t know.
Navigation is a subject you dive into deeper if you want. Or not.

At the end of the day. Any certificate requires the minimum amount of knowledge to be considered competent to take on the responsibility.
People with practical expierience ussualy gain a lot more than the minimums.

There is lots of areas for more knowledge, eg engines rigging, sails and the various systems on board.

There is an important difference, when you take on the responsibility for a paying passenger or paid crew member. The numbers don’t matter 1 or 1000, You are being paid to be responsible for someone else’s safety and well being.
If something goes wrong, you may be faced with some extremely difficult questions and have to justify you actions or lack of actions.
The MCA have been known to take this seriously,

The MCA gets to decide what the minimum requirements are. The RYA just administers the requirements and sailing schools provide the education and training.

So the best thing is to pick a good well reputed training provider.

 

[goeasy123]

I fully endorse the comments by Uricanejack #112 that it is not a matter of learning things by rote but understanding them beyond simply regurgitating them.
My YM also pre-dates the MCA and has the RYA/DOT signature, and it certainly required more than a bit of remembering things by rote, he examiner delved beyond words and made sure that I understood fully Hat the various rules and regs meant.
I must admit I am surprised that goeasy 123 who, admits to being a new comer to sailing is already doing the YM offshore and Ocean, and finding them easy, Inseem to remember it took me a lot of sailing hours in a variety of conditions as well as few years of shore based evening classes to follow the theory study to get my YM.

I consider myself a new comer, but not necessarily inexperienced. I note that many (all?) respondents reference long held experiences. Maybe things have changed recently, probably YouTube driven.

On our travels we've come across a lot of young couples and early retirees with a similar background to us. Like us many have had bad experiences with DS, think the YM is irrelevant and that it does not cover subjects they would value highly.

When I say similar background.... For example, we are virtual liveaboards and sail as a couple. We bought our 1st boat in January 2019. We have been sailing for only 3 years. Our first passage was a winter, night time channel crossing and we have never returned to any port of call. We have exceeded the qualifying sea time, by some margin for all, but the Ocean section of the YM.

Unlike the old days, when knowledge transfer was done face-to-face, much of the YM theory content can be studied and examined online. From the comments made by some of the long time served mariners in this thread this is clearly a significant retrograde step. Do I need to explain why?

W.r.t. to passing the practical, a YM instructor/examiner has tested me on my boat and told me that the YM has nothing to teach me and that he would teach me how to pass the test if I wanted to get the qualification.

I'm not asking anyone to defend or rationalize the current training. Maybe the solution would have nothing to do with the RYA. but how would an aspiring, new to sailing couple get the knowledge and support they need and would value to buy a boat and circumnavigate the world (or some other significant body of water)?

 

[lustyd]

Really! Not committing lights, shapes and sounds to memory! I want to instantly know what is going on around me. Without struggling to find the checklist to remind me that the big ship is turning to port, I do love checklists and they have their place, wasting say 2 minutes with a closing speed of 15 knots means I am 0.5 NM closer before starting a turn avoid a vessel that is restricted in its ability to manoeuvre.

Putting on a diversity and inclusion hat for a moment, it's not important how someone gets to the answer, it's important that they do and do so quickly. Learning by rote is only one option.