maxi77
Well-Known Member
But I certainly did not see carriage lauched boats in places where they would have been in the UK, they just kept normal boats in the marina, with up to a mile of sand between them and the see at low water
If I were an RNLI donor I would not be happy.
- Thread starter Sybarite
- Start date
But I certainly did not see carriage lauched boats in places where they would have been in the UK, they just kept normal boats in the marina, with up to a mile of sand between them and the see at low water
Sybarite
Well-Known Member
Where are you referring to? The only place that I know of where there is a tide like that is the Mont St Michel and frankly, boats dont go there.
In theory if there were to be an emegency in those conditions they would probably scramble a helicopter.
maxi77
Well-Known Member
Now does that mean they have lots of people who can afford to work for free, or are they run by a bunch of part timers who in reality cannot spend enough time on their charity work because they need to earn a living to support their families.
Sybarite
Well-Known Member
In my marina some of the staff are also lifeboat members. Directors seem to be retired naval officers. Fishermen also figure prominenetly.
Bajansailor
Well-Known Member
I read somewhere recently that the RNLI are planning on building future new lifeboats 'in house', in a new 'greenfield' site they will build on their property in Poole - has anybody got any more information about this?
I personally think that this is an excellent plan - and no doubt the various yards who have relied on RNLI new construction work for their bread and butter (or bagels with smoked salmon perhaps?
) will be aghast.
Rather than having hull and machinery overseers supervising construction of a boat in (say) Plymouth, and paying prices that include a reasonable profit (hopefully) for the builder, surely it should be more cost effective in the long run to build new boats in house (?).
BTW, I spent 5 years working in the RNLI design office in the early 90's. At the time pretty much all of us in the design office then could see that water jets were the way to go for the carriage launched boats, and there were excellent Hamilton jets available then, but the Operations Department were passionately against them.
I am glad to see that they have finally 'seen the light', re the new Shannon class FCB 2.
I personally think that this is an excellent plan - and no doubt the various yards who have relied on RNLI new construction work for their bread and butter (or bagels with smoked salmon perhaps?
) will be aghast. Rather than having hull and machinery overseers supervising construction of a boat in (say) Plymouth, and paying prices that include a reasonable profit (hopefully) for the builder, surely it should be more cost effective in the long run to build new boats in house (?).
BTW, I spent 5 years working in the RNLI design office in the early 90's. At the time pretty much all of us in the design office then could see that water jets were the way to go for the carriage launched boats, and there were excellent Hamilton jets available then, but the Operations Department were passionately against them.
I am glad to see that they have finally 'seen the light', re the new Shannon class FCB 2.
Neeves
Well-Known Member
Being Sydney based this thread makes interesting reading. Some people do not know when they are wll off.
I was invited on board Hoylake's Mersey Class and given a very thorough tour of all the vessel, its carriage and tractor. What struck me about her was that unlike the lifeboat on, say a cruise ship, this vessel was built to what seemed like warship specifications. Everything seemed oversize (except the anchors which looked a bit puny) and chunky. Against that I have been involved in Oz of reviews of fancy motor yachts and the contrast in construction is huge, one contains an enormous amout of metal (steel and alloy, and seat belts for each chair) and the other fibreglass and fancy, plastic, veneered thin ply. Yet the purchase figures for the fancy, up market, and similarly sized toy might not be that dissimilar to the robust Shannon. Frankly I am amazed that the RNLI can build their new vessel, if its built to the same robust standards as the Mersey, for the figures quoted. Which begs the question - to what standards are the French boats built - and this has not been forthcoming. Superficially the French and British lifeboats might be built to meet the same needs - but that does not mean they are built to the same specification and nor that they will last as long. It might be noted that the RNLI's vessels last, for ever - where do the French vessels fit in, how often do they need replacing. It might be that the RNLI could 'save' by buying to a design to the same spec as France, but if they only last 25% as long - where is the saving?
I was told, at the time, the cost of the submersible tractor (but cannot recall with accuracy) but it was not cheap. Frankly if I were a lifeboatman I'd rather take my chances to be launched off a beach in a Force 9 gale in something thats built like a tank, and cost the same as a tank (as in military vehicle), than wonder where the savings had been made to cost 66% less.
And on salaries I'm with Bilbo - to pay the CEO of an organisation involved in such a high risk activity at the monies quoted, you are very lucky!
And yes the RNLI, its vessels, its crews and its ability to raise funds is the envy of the world. We look at the facilities at their HQ with wonder, where else can you have a liferaft tested with a wave machine. (And frankly there would have been more complaints if the new HQ was not archiect designed). No-one ever quotes the French lifeboats organisation as a model to which to compare, or American, or Japanese. The standard is the UK (and Ireland). If anything this suggests they are getting it right.
It is correct to query but not to query with-out all the information.
I was invited on board Hoylake's Mersey Class and given a very thorough tour of all the vessel, its carriage and tractor. What struck me about her was that unlike the lifeboat on, say a cruise ship, this vessel was built to what seemed like warship specifications. Everything seemed oversize (except the anchors which looked a bit puny) and chunky. Against that I have been involved in Oz of reviews of fancy motor yachts and the contrast in construction is huge, one contains an enormous amout of metal (steel and alloy, and seat belts for each chair) and the other fibreglass and fancy, plastic, veneered thin ply. Yet the purchase figures for the fancy, up market, and similarly sized toy might not be that dissimilar to the robust Shannon. Frankly I am amazed that the RNLI can build their new vessel, if its built to the same robust standards as the Mersey, for the figures quoted. Which begs the question - to what standards are the French boats built - and this has not been forthcoming. Superficially the French and British lifeboats might be built to meet the same needs - but that does not mean they are built to the same specification and nor that they will last as long. It might be noted that the RNLI's vessels last, for ever - where do the French vessels fit in, how often do they need replacing. It might be that the RNLI could 'save' by buying to a design to the same spec as France, but if they only last 25% as long - where is the saving?
I was told, at the time, the cost of the submersible tractor (but cannot recall with accuracy) but it was not cheap. Frankly if I were a lifeboatman I'd rather take my chances to be launched off a beach in a Force 9 gale in something thats built like a tank, and cost the same as a tank (as in military vehicle), than wonder where the savings had been made to cost 66% less.
And on salaries I'm with Bilbo - to pay the CEO of an organisation involved in such a high risk activity at the monies quoted, you are very lucky!
And yes the RNLI, its vessels, its crews and its ability to raise funds is the envy of the world. We look at the facilities at their HQ with wonder, where else can you have a liferaft tested with a wave machine. (And frankly there would have been more complaints if the new HQ was not archiect designed). No-one ever quotes the French lifeboats organisation as a model to which to compare, or American, or Japanese. The standard is the UK (and Ireland). If anything this suggests they are getting it right.
It is correct to query but not to query with-out all the information.
Steve C Cronin
N/A
You know, If I were to be rescued or if one of MY sons were the member of a crew then I would want the VERY best of equipment available. They tried with the Brede class to adapt a commercially available hull and it was only partly sucessful. In the past on here some have criticised the apparent "over-engineering" to items like prop shafts with contributors suggesting that an oversize of 20% instead of 85% would be sufficient. How can you take such a stance and say to the volunteer crews "There you are, it SHOULD be safe"? They can't bring it back if it isn't.
So long as the funds are there, they should be spent upon what the donors intended - "The VERY Best Rescue Organisation in the World" and NOT let the accountants get their hands on the decision making.
Steve Cronin
Governor, Past Branch Chairman, Holder of "Certificate of Thanks"
Last edited:
CAPTAIN FANTASTIC
Well-Known Member
Overall, projects is the UK are two and three times the cost of the equivalent in France; mainly because the in the UK projects take much longer to complete from conception right through to delivery. Whether the project is a motorway, bridge, infrastructure, energy or a ministry of defence project, the cost is always higher due to time issues. I have undertaken many projects in France and the UK over the last 30 years, the French get on with things, cutting red tape, reducing times and hence costs.
The difference in costs between the two rescue boats could be for similar reasons.
The difference in costs between the two rescue boats could be for similar reasons.
Tomahawk
Well-Known Member
Reading this..
We have decided to change our will... we were going to leave the majority of the money to the lifeboat... I had the ocasion to need the services of the lifeboat a couple of times, once with an anchor warp foulled round the prop on a rising tide, the other when we hit a cargo net in the shipping lane without any wind...
When you call out the lifeboat, that big orange thing is the most beautiful sight in the world...
However, I am not interested in giving money to prop up a corporate egotrip..
We have decided to change our will... we were going to leave the majority of the money to the lifeboat... I had the ocasion to need the services of the lifeboat a couple of times, once with an anchor warp foulled round the prop on a rising tide, the other when we hit a cargo net in the shipping lane without any wind...
When you call out the lifeboat, that big orange thing is the most beautiful sight in the world...
However, I am not interested in giving money to prop up a corporate egotrip..
Litotes
Well-Known Member
Well, Sybarite, they'll rescue you anyway and never ask you for a penny, so why worry?
I have been a contributor for many years and I'm very happy. The people of the UK and Ireland continue to be willing to pay for top quality equipment and management for this organisation and it seems very odd to me to carp at that. In this age in which the commodification of everything is squeezing out human values at every turn and replacing them with "the cost of everything", this is a matter of great pride.
Not only does the RNLI give a superb service, but it symbolise for many the very ideal of selfless service and action by the people, independent of their government, to express a supreme shared value. And it offers opportunities for a huge range of people to get involved and espress those values at personal level - not just the crews and committees but the volunteer doctors, fundraisers etc.
As far as the salaries are concerned - the notion that people working for charities should work for peanuts is very flawed. The RNLI is a huge organisation managing a complex and highly technical "business". It needs the best people and the best facilities to do that. As a subscriber, I am glad to help pay for them. If some of them are earning more than you, so be it. Maybe their abilities and skills warrant it. I would think the need of an organisation like this for very substantial reserves should pretty obvious.
I don't doubt that the RNLI is open to criticism like any other big organisation, although I would need to know a lot more about its workings than I do (and, I suspect, more than you do too) to comment on that with any authority.
rhinorhino
Well-Known Member
In what possible way is a charity's money their own to spend as they want?
Neither legally nor morally is this true.
C
Chrusty 1
Guest
+1 Also with regard to Sybarite, I am reminded of the old saying, "He knows the cost of everything, but not the value of anything"
rhinorhino
Well-Known Member
Sorry, already happened, full time paid crews are now a fact.
rhinorhino
Well-Known Member
Having talked to quite a few many would agree and are feed up with the way the bosses spend the money
Ex-SolentBoy
Well-Known Member
Its all about degree though isn't it? Substantial perhpas, but their reserves are roughly equivalent to 4 years run-rate expenditure.
For an organisation that generates a healthy profit every year, despite huge capital expenditure (and its associated depreciation to the P&L), that is easy to view as extreme.
C
Chrusty 1
Guest
If so I am very saddened, can you tell me which stations have full time paid crews?
It doesn't change my view of the RNLI, I suppose I am comfortable with letting them get on with running their own organisation, they will certainly know how to do that better than me.
Searush
Well-Known Member
+25! Well put, Mr C.
rhinorhino
Well-Known Member
Well go away then and good riddance.......
rhinorhino
Well-Known Member
Thames
See here
http://www.thelifeboatfund.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/RNLI lifeboat on The Thames (2)(1).pdf
although they stress volunteers, if you dig down to page 2 you find three stations have full time paid crew.
Last edited:
C
Chrusty 1
Guest
That was a little uncalled for was it not?