Lifeboats .... Again

[Sybarite]

I find it difficult to believe that the SNSM would put a boat into service which potentially risked injuring the crew - and I think we would have heard about it.
Might be wrong but this quote may refer to the first FCB2 prototype used by the RNLI and rejected because of to much slamming in head seas, not the French boats. This delayed the project for some years and caused the RNLI to evaluate several commercial hulls including the French beak design and others.



The Dutch manage the problems of sand very well their boats are rarely off service.

This answers the what but not the how.

However I have made the points that I wanted to make; I'm just surprised that no one seems to want to challenge the status quo.

 

[chanelyacht]

This answers the what but not the how.

However I have made the points that I wanted to make; I'm just surprised that no one seems to want to challenge the status quo.

I think you'll find the RNLI's management, board, auditors, and the Charity Commission will challenge effective performance on a regular basis. In fact, I know they do.

You said earlier you're not an expert on lifeboats - fair enough, but in that case please listen to those on here who are.

There is a reason UK industry has all but disappeared - accountants. European industry lets accountants run the accountancy department, in the UK we let them run the business.

I really don't think your knowledge, albeit expert, of the car rental sector is relevant here. A sector renown for dodgy insurance claims, double (or more) charging for over estimated damage, etc. I'm not saying you did any of that, but it's not a sector to quote.

I also had a quick chat with my uncle, a coxn for SNSM at one of the harshest stations working regularly in some of the worst conditions the French coast can give. He'd have no problem running jets on the CTT at all.

Do you think we could embark on the next year-long refrain from RNLI knocking please?

 

[chewi]

Joining this thread late on, it amuses me how so many accountants want everyone else to follow what they think is best practise in their own world , regardless of the circumstances of others.

If concentrating on core business is the way to go, as many will advocate, the RNLI might stick to PR and fundraising,and outsource the operation of the boats.. who to? Atos? G4S? Serco. Thankfully not. It's not as if that worked well for our railways.

If the RNLI were to folow the practices of industry they would stay at home and adhere to H&S straitjackets, not set off in dangerous weather. Thankfully not.

If the RNLI are doubtful of the continuance of their income they might reasonably shift to a dependence on investment income, For that they need bigger reserves than they have, so they would have to build them up.

That's not an unreasonable strategy to support their core activity of providing lifeboats is it ?

 

[Sybarite]

I think you'll find the RNLI's management, board, auditors, and the Charity Commission will challenge effective performance on a regular basis. In fact, I know they do.

You said earlier you're not an expert on lifeboats - fair enough, but in that case please listen to those on here who are.

I don't think I was an expert in the activities of any of the businesses I audited, but that did not stop me interrogating top management to see what they understood of their own businesses - and compare that with what I had seen in similar industies or activities - or to see whether their explanations stood up to common sense. You would be surprised at how many got into deep water with structured questions. I feel I could have a field day with the RNLI.

There is a reason UK industry has all but disappeared - accountants. European industry lets accountants run the accountancy department, in the UK we let them run the business.

That is the typical remark of somebody who does not know what he is talking about. How do you know if a management decision is correct if you are incapable of measuring the result?

I really don't think your knowledge, albeit expert, of the car rental sector is relevant here. A sector renown for dodgy insurance claims, double (or more) charging for over estimated damage, etc. I'm not saying you did any of that, but it's not a sector to quote.

We self insured and so this would have been irrelevant for us.

I also had a quick chat with my uncle, a coxn for SNSM at one of the harshest stations working regularly in some of the worst conditions the French coast can give. He'd have no problem running jets on the CTT at all.

See my response to the previous poster.

Do you think we could embark on the next year-long refrain from RNLI knocking please?

Do you believe the RNLI to be above criticism? (Pension liabilities £279m net spend on boats £10m)

 

[Sybarite]

[/B]

Joining this thread late on, it amuses me how so many accountants want everyone else to follow what they think is best practise in their own world , regardless of the circumstances of others.

The first thing to do when auditing an activity is to understand its operations; an essential part of the conclusions is to give efficiency suggestions.

If the RNLI were to folow the practices of industry they would stay at home and adhere to H&S straitjackets, not set off in dangerous weather. Thankfully not.

As you are new to the thread you may not realize that I have never criticized the brave volunteers. I criticize what to my eyes is a top-heavy extravagant organization.

That's not an unreasonable strategy to support their core activity of providing lifeboats is it ?

I would have thought too that their core activity was providing boats but that is the last impression you would have after reading their accounts where their net investment in lifeboats was about a quarter of the increase in their reserves in 2012.

 

[chewi]

That is the typical remark of somebody who does not know what he is talking about. How do you know if a management decision is correct if you are incapable of measuring the result?

So if you can't improve anything without measuring it, how's your sex life? Do you ask your partner to complete a survey ? eg Strongly agreee...disagree on a scale of 1-10.

Some accounts think they know the cost of everything despite the (sometimes inevitable) weaknesses of their methods, yet no two would ever agree on the methods to apply, and still they know the value of nothing.

 

[Sybarite]

So if you can't improve anything without measuring it, how's your sex life? Do you ask your partner to complete a survey ? eg Strongly agreee...disagree on a scale of 1-10.

Some accounts think they know the cost of everything despite the (sometimes inevitable) weaknesses of their methods, yet no two would ever agree on the methods to apply, and still they know the value of nothing.

£613m reserves; Staff 1624 (France 70); Pension liabilities funded £279m; 37 people earning over £60k; net spend on boats £10m. Nothing strikes you about those numbers?

I won't bother commenting on your tired old accountants clichés other than to say that in General Motors, traditionally the N°1 man was always a finance person and the N° 2 an engineer.(PS this may now have changed.)


PPS Have a look at Six Sigma reporting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma

"Features that set Six Sigma apart from previous quality improvement initiatives include:
A clear focus on achieving measurable and quantifiable financial returns from any Six Sigma project.[5]"

 

[chewi]

£613m reserves; Staff 1624 (France 70); Pension liabilities funded £279m; 37 people earning over £60k; net spend on boats £10m. Nothing strikes you about those numbers?

I won't bother commenting on your tired old accountants clichés other than to say that in General Motors, traditionally the N°1 man was always a finance person and the N° 2 an engineer.(PS this may now have changed.)

and your point is?

 

[TimBennet]

In the previous thread i had originally suggested that the two appeared similar in terms of speed and size with the French boats having much greater range because they achieved the speed with smaller engines. When I visited this model it looked very comfortably appointed inside eg with respect to seat depths for example. I have also watched videos of their passage in heavy weather which looked particularly efficient. I find it difficult to believe that the SNSM would put a boat into service which potentially risked injuring the crew - and I think we would have heard about it.

Of course SNSM have put boats into service which have the potential to injure their crew. So have the RNLI, the Dutch lifeboat organisation, USCG and every pilot service in the world. If you go to windward in big waves at speed you will always have the potential to injure your crew. Full stop.

The 'holy grail' of fast powerboat design has been for over a century, to achieve high speeds, with the least power, for the greatest range and with the lowest accelerations. Raymond Hunt and Sonny Levi were the first to show low accelerations were the key to going fast in bad weather, but their deep-V hulls need a lot of power and have limited accommodation and range. Adrian Thompson's VSVs have remarkably low accelerations and can run at fantastic speeds in high waves, but everything else is compromised.

Since the warped hulls of the 'tooth filling rattling' MTBs of 60 years ago, most improvements in highspeed, rough weather powerboat performance has been incremental from design to design, with the occasional leap forward by inspired 'eureka' moments. With the Shannon, the RNLI had the resources to try and significantly improve the performance envelope of this type of vessel, by setting a range of design parameters that were unachievable by ANY existing hull in their entirety. It had the resources to do a design and evaluation process that I have never seen resourced outside of the military (and they haven't really been interested in high speed small boats since the 60s). And reports are, the Shannon is proving to be an improvement in rough weather, but unquestionably not without some penalties in cost, complexity and power requirement. Whether this improved package has been worth all the time and money, only time will tell.

But when you say the SNSM has a boat with the same speed, in the same conditions, with (you believe) the same accelerations, but with greater range, less powerful engines and being much, much CHEAPER - what you are in fact saying is that they have not only found the Holy Grail, but have discovered Eldorado, worked out the key to eternal youth and found a source of unlimited free top class champagne all in one design. All I can say, if this is the case, then the Naval Architects responsible have a Nobel Prize coming their way and every (and I mean EVERY) lifeboat organisation, every harbour pilot, every Navy and every pleasure boat company will be clamouring for their design and expertise. The Naval Architecture literature would be bursting with articles proclaiming the amazing breakthroughs made.

The reality is the French are not claiming that. Their architects are claiming they have a very competent rough weather hull that when appraised, may offer a package of advantages and compromises that could well suit a number of end users. They certainly are not claiming the world for their boat. Similarly, the RNLI is happy with the hull they have evolved as they think it best suits their priorities and they are happy with the compromises they have had to make to achieve these.

In Naval Architecture, you can't have everything.
Yet.
But we are working on it.

 

[Sybarite]

Of course SNSM have put boats into service which have the potential to injure their crew. So have the RNLI, the Dutch lifeboat organisation, USCG and every pilot service in the world. If you go to windward in big waves at speed you will always have the potential to injure your crew. Full stop.

The 'holy grail' of fast powerboat design has been for over a century, to achieve high speeds, with the least power, for the greatest range and with the lowest accelerations. Raymond Hunt and Sonny Levi were the first to show low accelerations were the key to going fast in bad weather, but their deep-V hulls need a lot of power and have limited accommodation and range. Adrian Thompson's VSVs have remarkably low accelerations and can run at fantastic speeds in high waves, but everything else is compromised.

Since the warped hulls of the 'tooth filling rattling' MTBs of 60 years ago, most improvements in highspeed, rough weather powerboat performance has been incremental from design to design, with the occasional leap forward by inspired 'eureka' moments. With the Shannon, the RNLI had the resources to try and significantly improve the performance envelope of this type of vessel, by setting a range of design parameters that were unachievable by ANY existing hull in their entirety. It had the resources to do a design and evaluation process that I have never seen resourced outside of the military (and they haven't really been interested in high speed small boats since the 60s). And reports are, the Shannon is proving to be an improvement in rough weather, but unquestionably not without some penalties in cost, complexity and power requirement. Whether this improved package has been worth all the time and money, only time will tell.

But when you say the SNSM has a boat with the same speed, in the same conditions, with (you believe) the same accelerations, but with greater range, less powerful engines and being much, much CHEAPER - what you are in fact saying is that they have not only found the Holy Grail, but have discovered Eldorado, worked out the key to eternal youth and found a source of unlimited free top class champagne all in one design. All I can say, if this is the case, then the Naval Architects responsible have a Nobel Prize coming their way and every (and I mean EVERY) lifeboat organisation, every harbour pilot, every Navy and every pleasure boat company will be clamouring for their design and expertise. The Naval Architecture literature would be bursting with articles proclaiming the amazing breakthroughs made.

The reality is the French are not claiming that. Their architects are claiming they have a very competent rough weather hull that when appraised, may offer a package of advantages and compromises that could well suit a number of end users. They certainly are not claiming the world for their boat. Similarly, the RNLI is happy with the hull they have evolved as they think it best suits their priorities and they are happy with the compromises they have had to make to achieve these.

In Naval Architecture, you can't have everything.
Yet.
But we are working on it.

Both organisations in their sites, outline the essential characteristics of their boats in terms of size, speed, HP, range and cost. That's where my information comes from or came from as I am relying on memory from a year ago.

 

[Sybarite]

and your point is?

I think you have just answered it.

 

[TimBennet]

Both organisations in their sites, outline the essential charcteristics of their boats in terms of size speed, HP range and cost. That's where my information comes from or came from as I am relying on memory fom a year ago.

Like so much in life, there's a bit more to it.
Membership of RINA or SNAME is a bit more involved than reading the press release from two websites.

 

[Sybarite]

Like so much in life, there's a bit more to it.
Membership of RINA or SNAME is a bit more involved than reading the press release from two websites.

No doubt. Iyo is either organisation falsifying its information?

Ps I really appreciate your dispassionate, informative and objective replies.

 

[TimBennet]

No doubt. Iyo is either organisation falsifying its information?

I doubt it. But without all the data (including the g-forces experienced at every crew station, for a given wave height, of a set period and steepness, etc), then no valid comparison is possible.

The full data set would still only represent our best efforts to communicate what is collectively known as 'sea keeping'. However, of the ten hulls tested (test tank and computer modelling), the Shannon hull showed significantly lower accelerations and the productions boats have proved to be markedly better than the prototype which was built on the best commercially available hull at the time.

 

[chanelyacht]

Do you believe the RNLI to be above criticism? (Pension liabilities £279m net spend on boats £10m)

Of course not - but no-one's appointed you to be the permanent critic - and the best critics listen to those telling them they may be wrong.

I don't understand where the £10m net spend on boats comes from - the current in-build programme exceeds that, let alone regular refits. Plus,of course, boats aren't everything, the current station build programme accounts for more than that.

I understand six sigma measurement - I'm a qualified LEAN practitioner. But financials aren't the only measurement - it is precisely the strangling of investment in favour of balance sheet that hurt British industry.

If you take the measurement as 24/7 availability to respond to distress situations, and come back safely with crew healthy , then as someone tasking them every day of my working life, I'd say they meet output criteria. What's more, their financial reserves tell me that they'll still be doing that in 10 years time.

 

[Sybarite]

Of course not - but no-one's appointed you to be the permanent critic - and the best critics listen to those telling them they may be wrong.

I don't understand where the £10m net spend on boats comes from - the current in-build programme exceeds that, let alone regular refits. Plus,of course, boats aren't everything, the current station build programme accounts for more than that.

I understand six sigma measurement - I'm a qualified LEAN practitioner. But financials aren't the only measurement - it is precisely the strangling of investment in favour of balance sheet that hurt British industry.

If you take the measurement as 24/7 availability to respond to distress situations, and come back safely with crew healthy , then as someone tasking them every day of my working life, I'd say they meet output criteria. What's more, their financial reserves tell me that they'll still be doing that in 10 years time.

If I'm wrong, challenge me with facts. I don't accept I'm wrong just because you say so. I may well be wrong but justify why.

£10m comes from Note 6 to the accounts, second column, page 32/44. Of course I accept that this figure varies from year to year. I would be interested to know how it has evolved over the last 5 to 10 years.

Off-loading balance sheets was the battle cry of every large corporation in order to improve their B/s gearing or leverage so they were in a position to attract outside capital.

Based on the balance sheet they can do it for the next 50 years, except that this figure is growing every year.

 

[Bru]

Oh damn and blast it! Trying to type a detailed and considered response on the mobile and just lost the lot

Suffice it to say that, at the risk of further accusations of playing the man rather than the ball, realising that the OP has a background in finance tells all as far as I'm concerned

quantity is valued above quality

cash must be spent not saved

costs must be cut and cut and cut again

the balance sheet rules over everything

everything is measurable

if it can't be measured it can't be counted

and ultimately the only thing that matters is the bottom line

It's a valid approach if all you care, or need to care, about is this year's dividends to share holders and bonuses to top management.

It's sounded the death knell of many a previously successful organisation

Now that is not to say that all is perfect in the RNLI, it would be a miracle if there was no room for improvement, but you need to get your nose out of the numbers and balance sheets and look at the bigger picture

Costs are being looked at, reducing the salary bill has been identified as a desirable goal where possible and its been acknowledged that the organisation could do with being a bit leaner and keener

All of that is subjective of course. There's no "costs must be reduced by £x" just a gentle push towards a slightly leaner culture

the very fact that RNLI continues to buck the trend towards a downturn in donation income is, by the way, some justification for the paid, and paid well, fund raising and publicity departments.

the OP claims experience in the charitable sector yet seems oddly reticent in agreeing with the fact that UK charities are subject to close and detailed scrutiny from the Charity Commission and particularly so in the matter of costs and reserves (two areas the Commission has been particularly hard nosed about for a long time now)

anyway, my battery is fading and so is my interest!

 

[DanWash]

I find it very difficult to put up with any sort of criticism of the RNLI, implied , veiled, or otherwise. Are they above criticism? Actually yes they are, go to Poole , look at the Memorial. If they want a jet boat they can have one, if they want to paint it pink with rainbow fairies, that's fine too.

 

[Keen_Ed]

Oh damn and blast it! Trying to type a detailed and considered response on the mobile and just lost the lot

Suffice it to say that, at the risk of further accusations of playing the man rather than the ball, realising that the OP has a background in finance tells all as far as I'm concerned

quantity is valued above quality

cash must be spent not saved

costs must be cut and cut and cut again

the balance sheet rules over everything

everything is measurable

if it can't be measured it can't be counted

and ultimately the only thing that matters is the bottom line

It's a valid approach if all you care, or need to care, about is this year's dividends to share holders and bonuses to top management.

It's sounded the death knell of many a previously successful organisation

Now that is not to say that all is perfect in the RNLI, it would be a miracle if there was no room for improvement, but you need to get your nose out of the numbers and balance sheets and look at the bigger picture

Costs are being looked at, reducing the salary bill has been identified as a desirable goal where possible and its been acknowledged that the organisation could do with being a bit leaner and keener

All of that is subjective of course. There's no "costs must be reduced by £x" just a gentle push towards a slightly leaner culture

the very fact that RNLI continues to buck the trend towards a downturn in donation income is, by the way, some justification for the paid, and paid well, fund raising and publicity departments.

the OP claims experience in the charitable sector yet seems oddly reticent in agreeing with the fact that UK charities are subject to close and detailed scrutiny from the Charity Commission and particularly so in the matter of costs and reserves (two areas the Commission has been particularly hard nosed about for a long time now)

well said. Little worse than the dead hand of accountants.

 

[jordanbasset]

On the one side you have the French life boat service which is 25% funded by central and local Government (tax payers), the rest made up of private donations and not inconsiderable charges to persons who are rescued.
On the other hand you have the RNLI which is 100% funded by donations and no charge for rescue.
Am sure any organisation can be improved but prefer the RNLI approach.