Is the RLNI a breakdown service?

Not sure the Hm or the marina, have anything suitable to go to sea with.

But the whole point of making a call to the coast guards on chanel 16, is that thats the chanel every one is listening to and if anyone had been in the area, they would have offered asistance. Obviously there was no one in the area, or not listening to VHF. It's quite usual for the coast guards to ask for help from other boats in the area, they have far better equipment than the average boat and can be heard when a boats radio might not be heard from another boat. So they can co ordinate things.

The guy did the right thing, the fact that the CG sent the life boat, is there business. Maybe there was no one else.
 
[ QUOTE ]
That line of thought makes me think the RNLI should charge for the costs involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

Go on then let’s have some suggested charges - per life saved or maybe per mile towed or perhaps per fault found on the boat or maybe per foot length?

Barmy Barmy Barmy !!!

And anyway assuming that the RNLI are there just to pick people off the boat that’s in trouble and they do just that, what happens to the boat that left adrift or burning of whatever – it becomes a danger to navigation - the RNLI can’t leave behind even if they wanted to.
 
What would differentiate them from Seastart??

Well would Seastart risk their arses to come out to you in a force 10??? A 9?? An 8?? A 7??

Do Seastart have a prime objective to save lives at sea?? I think myself that the RNLI would do well to charge for coming out to numpties that had run out of fuel, or weren't carrying any tools to fix simple problems. They wont of course.

Tell you what, the next time you are sinking and drowning call Seastart! /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
What would differentiate them from Seastart??

Well would Seastart risk their arses to come out to you in a force 10??? A 9?? An 8?? A 7??

[/ QUOTE ]

Given that the discussion was about the RNLI charging for breakdown rescues, I think thats a pointless response.

But nonetheless, I got suckered into responding to the troll. Well done.
 
It wasn't a troll my friend, it was an honest response to the silly post you made that you have now deleted. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Kindest regards, Chrusty.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Not sure the Hm or the marina, have anything suitable to go to sea with.

(cut)

[/ QUOTE ]

HM has a stout workboat with an inboard diesel that would do the job a treat. I had to sail on to my mooring on year (gearbox failed on previous engine) I called them on Ch14 & they came out & escorted me to the mooring & even offered to pass me the pick-up buoy.
 
[ QUOTE ]
What would differentiate them from Seastart??

[/ QUOTE ]

About £150,000,000 in raised tax free voluntary income maybe! /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
 
Again the Devil's Advocate but...

It doesn't take many searches to reveal how many people don't monitor Ch 16 or refuse to use radio in any form and would miss the call from the CG requesting assistance from anyone who could offer a tow or indeed the initial 'help me!' call...

W.
 
There have been a lot of good and interesting responses to your post.

I would like to make a couple of points.

Firstly, it has been said that the RNLI is a rich charity. That point of view depends very much on just how you define "rich". Yes, it is certainly true that they have a lot of cash in the bank. But just how much do you think it takes to operate and maintain to professional standards the 230+ lifeboat stations, the boats and their equipment?

From their web site:[ QUOTE ]
The RNLI's running costs average around £339,000 (€440,700) a day.
RNLI Running Costs

[/ QUOTE ] That is £123,735,000 per year! To run that kind of operation it would need to have a lot of cash!!!

Secondly, the kind of operations that the RNLI are involved in are near the edge, or frequently over the edge, of safe operations for the equipment. Not that they are wreckless... the complete opposite in fact... but by definition, they go where others can't and in conditions where others won't. That requires regular and frequent practice and training. So they MUST train... regularly... at least weekly and in various condiitons if they are to remain effective when they are up against it in serious conditions. Now, this is where the clarity of thought is required... they can train when there is no one to assist, which they will certainly do to remain effective and safe, or they can take all opportunities to use a real situation to train and assist someone who is in need at the same time. That is what they do. Assisting people that are not in obvious and immediate danger, even though they may be in some kind of trouble, is an effect way to train. In fact it is a better than just training on its own. Assisting people in this way is very cost effective for the RNLI and is not at all a waste of money.

OK, I agree that there is clearly a limit to how cost effect it can be. Too many shouts for non-lifethreatening things would start to cost more than equivalent training but from what I understand from talking to the crews the situation is no where near that stage yet.

If someone is in trouble at sea then the offer of assistance by the RNLI serves many useful purposes... it helps train the crews in a cost effective manner, it prevents the situation from escalating into a truely life-threatening situation, it helps with education, PR and no doubt fundraising.

So, on the surface it may seem a waste of RNLI funds, but this is so not true. You have to look a little more closely at what they do, what they have to do to do it and what it costs overall to realise that it is not quite as they seem initially.

The RNLI will respond to anyone in trouble at sea or on beaches (lifeguards) whether an immediate emergncy or one that might become one. That is what they do... unpaid and far too under appreciated IMO by a lot of people.

PS I know a lot on this forum really do appreciate their work and contribute considerable sums.
 
Maybe, but not the point I was making. A call on 16 should alert every one. Including Conwy HM, if he bothered to listen.

It's the whole point of chanel 16. When I put a distress call out, I had boats round me in seconds. It does not have to be a life boat.

Only yesterday a boat called to say he had gear box problems. Only a little boat. Would not expect him to have a big anchor and chain, even if he knew it was a good idea.

He was about 50 yards behind me. So not to much hassle to make sure he got home safe.

Chanel 16 is the calling and distress chanel, it is one of the few chanels open to every one and certainly the one chanel that every one should be tuned to.

The fact that the CG sent out a life boat, is a different question.

In Ireland years ago, it was quite normal for folk to call the coastal radio stations, to say there outboard had broke and could some one tell his grandma that he would be late for tea. Also collect him on there way back to harbour. It's how the world used to be.
 
Really?

This is a big organisation... not a fly-by-night affair. It is run in the manner its size demands. That will result in a small amount of inefficiency but no more as far as I can see as any corporation of that size.

A lot of what people see and call "waste" is nothing of the sort. The crews are volunteers... I say this again because it is key... they are volunteers... they deserve the very best in equipment and training. Generally speaking, if they can do something cheaply or properly they will always do it properly but that costs money. Money well spent IMO and if you disagree then if you ever need them in bad whether, when your life is in real danger, then you might change your mind if you found out that they might not have the capability or equipment because they wanted to save money! I think in those circumstances I think you will want them to have the very best equiment money can buy and have been properly trained... that is what they try to offer to those in need.

This is not a commercial operation and cannot be run like one. You can apply normal business practice to some extent of course, to the business side, but when it comes to operational matters (and costs) the rules change considerably. Costs are still important but do not follow the normal rules that a commercial operation would follow. We should bear that in mind carefully when accusing them of wastage.
 
I regularly hear requests from the CG on 16 for vessels in the area of xxx to assist a boat with engine failure or some other problem. Heard one only yesterday... 14ft speedboat with engine failure near Falmouth... someone responded to the CG and went to assist. Problem solved.

I have heard this many times and ths clearly gives others nearby a chance to assist without RNLI involvement. If no one could assist and it because clear to the CG that immediate assistanc is needed then I am sure they would have requested launch from the RNLI.
 
As has been said already Ch16 is monitored by us all. There have been loads of times I`ve switched channels just to see what`s going on, where the vessel is and popped it on the chart plotter just to see if I could lend a hand.

On Sunday there was an incident in Alum Bay just as we were entering Yarmouth. Had we been 20 minutes later we would have diverted into the bay and rendered a tow into Yarmouth.

As we were in Poole harbour on Saturday there was a request from Portland coastguard to tow a small speed boat back in. In fact I think every time I`ve been to Poole I`ve heard a similar request. In each case the request has met with success and the RNLI haven`t had to get involved.

So please don`t let this thread put someone off calling up the coastguard as soon as something goes wrong. I would hate to hear of a death because someone was too embarrassed to radio their problems or didn`t want to trouble anyone.

It`s much more rewarding to tow a grateful boatload back into harbour and feel their warm embrace or firm handshake than it is to lay their lifeless bodies on the quayside and inform their waiting families who have congregated at the boat station.

A good training exercise for times when the weather isn`t so friendly.

Henry /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
henryf As has been said already Ch16 is monitored by us all.

Unfortunately it is NOT.

gjgm as regards beach lifeguards, do local councils pay?

Yes, they do.

W.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Not that they are wreckless... the complete opposite in fact...

[/ QUOTE ]

Errm... I think (hope) you meant reckless /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif Completely agree with you though. In a way the RNLI is a breakdown service sometimes because acting like one is the best way to remove someone from danger (or possibly because they're bored) but that's the only time.

The Seastart comment was interesting - I think the answer would be the prices are the difference. A tow from the RNLI would (or should) be much more expensive than one from Seastart. I'm not recommending charging in any way but it seems to have been reasonably successful in France for some years so it can't be impossible but would it affect their charitable status?

As for waste - I think the RNLI is one of the most efficient and transparent large charities there is, not that that's a high standard. Compared to Oxfam or the National Trust it's lean, mean and apolitical.
 
[ QUOTE ]
However I do see a lot of people, mostly motor boaters of one sort or another, heading out of the estuary without even a back up outboard. No single engined mobo should put to sea without some sort of back up propulsion, either an outboard or a wing engine.



[/ QUOTE ]

I see plenty of airplanes (including the RAF) take to the sky without a back up engine.

I see inshore lifeboats take to the seas without a backup engine.

What's your views on them, foolhardy? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top