mainsail1
Well-Known Member
The risk assessments (yes, more than 1) didn't help there, did they?
QHM Portsmouth Requiring Risk Assessments from Sailing Clubs.
- Thread starter DJE
- Start date
The risk assessments (yes, more than 1) didn't help there, did they?
EdWingfield
Well-Known Member
Perhaps it was a risk assessment failure. The RA might include 'follow harbour by-laws.'
Daydream believer
Well-Known Member
Which goes to show why the "1 page" theory would not work. Having noted the bye laws the assessment should then assess the risks thus arising & coupled with the method statement should demonstrate how those risks are to be mitigated.
Just having 'follow harbour by-laws.' does not stand scrutiny
Babylon
Well-Known Member
You're right on both counts!
It is of course also common sense to allow for the fact that people who do normally have CS might sometimes mislay it temporarily.
Needless to say, it is patent CS to task someone with communication-skills CS to edit any risk-assessment document or pro-forma drafted by another person with CS skills related to assessing risks (but not necessarily to communication), so that the finished document is both effective and easily usable by its end audience.
CS has a long history of being codified, from Ancient Egypt and China through to Magna Carta. It also has a more recent history of being weaponised by reactionaries as an argument against eminently sensible and justifiable improvement.
duncan99210
Well-Known Member
I used to be a Subaqua Diving Supervisor under the Armed Forces Adventure Training Scheme. When I first qualified, we were not taught risk assessments and relied upon our much reknowned common sense to see things through.... A series of incidents occurred in the late 90s and early 2000s, which led to a fundamental review of how we were conducting business.
The HSE and the MODs own safety people crawled all over the whole of the subaqua diving regime, one of the end results of which was a requirement to produce a risk assessment for any diving activity. Cue much muttering and shimfing amongst the 'grown ups' about interference with their role and the 'extra' work.
By the time the new requirements had been in place for a year or so, no one had any further problems with it. Why? Because the need to sit down and actually examine what you intended to do meant that you actually eliminated many of the risk factors that didn't need to be there. Yes, doing it for the first time was a pain. Yes, policing it was a nuisance especially as I was by then working somewhere where I wound up reviewing about a third of the assessments submitted for funding and approval. But it cut down on the number if incidents requiring investigation and injuries to participants. So overall, a worthwhile step.
But the important thing to remember is that the risk assessment itself isn't what you expect participants to read and understand. Rather the assessment guides the organiser of the event in what safety instructions need to be issued and what measures need to be implemented on the day. And those instructions and measures may well be able to be reduced to the classic one side of A4, because that's what the participants need to know, not the whole process that lead to them.
The HSE and the MODs own safety people crawled all over the whole of the subaqua diving regime, one of the end results of which was a requirement to produce a risk assessment for any diving activity. Cue much muttering and shimfing amongst the 'grown ups' about interference with their role and the 'extra' work.
By the time the new requirements had been in place for a year or so, no one had any further problems with it. Why? Because the need to sit down and actually examine what you intended to do meant that you actually eliminated many of the risk factors that didn't need to be there. Yes, doing it for the first time was a pain. Yes, policing it was a nuisance especially as I was by then working somewhere where I wound up reviewing about a third of the assessments submitted for funding and approval. But it cut down on the number if incidents requiring investigation and injuries to participants. So overall, a worthwhile step.
But the important thing to remember is that the risk assessment itself isn't what you expect participants to read and understand. Rather the assessment guides the organiser of the event in what safety instructions need to be issued and what measures need to be implemented on the day. And those instructions and measures may well be able to be reduced to the classic one side of A4, because that's what the participants need to know, not the whole process that lead to them.
Babylon
Well-Known Member
Duncan, a very cogent and well-contextualised summary!
EdWingfield
Well-Known Member
You over-complicate things Mr Daydreamer. The yacht skipper need only monitor his radio, learn that Hanne Knutsen has an exclusion zone, and not sail directly into her. There is no need to refer to a risk assessment.
ps. It was reported that the skipper later explained 'I was a rabbit caught in the headlights.' This was before he was prosecuted. And rightly so.
ps. It was reported that the skipper later explained 'I was a rabbit caught in the headlights.' This was before he was prosecuted. And rightly so.
[70521]
Well-Known Member
Well said that man. My own ramblings have been typed up and deleted twice when I attempted to post something similar.
.
Daydream believer
Well-Known Member
It also proves that one cannot rely on common sense to operate either & that many do need to be told what to do. The problem is that so many clever b..gers think that they know better & do not need to be told. The comments on this forum shows that there are quite a few about who think that they are above reproach
The result can be seen so very often !!!!!
Last edited:
Blue Sunray
Well-Known Member
:encouragement:
EdWingfield
Well-Known Member
HASWA guidance says that employees/club members should participate in the drawing up of R.A.s so as they have 'ownership' of the document. I doubt this guidance is often followed. Most likely the club RA is produced by a Committee Member and is an adaptation of someone else's work. The result being that skippers may switch their brains off. As we see in Hanne K collision.
Daydream believer
Well-Known Member
deleted
Last edited:
DJE
Well-Known Member
The Hanne K collision had very little to do with the organisers. The RYA document on risk assessments https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/-/medi...vents-in-harbour-authority-areas.pdf?la=en-gb makes it clear that the primary responsibility for safety of the participants rests with the participants.
dunedin
Well-Known Member
If formal Risk Assessments were done, and scrutinised by sufficient bureaucrats and safety experts, for a fleet of 1,000 sailing boats zig zagging across a piece of shallow waterway with a narrow and twisting deep water channel, with some of the largest commercial and military ships going up and down, constrained by draft and containing various hazardous cargos ...........
...... would Cowes Week ever be allowed to run without an agreement to stop all large ship movements (which may be considered unlikely)?
Daverw
Well-Known Member
The fact that you have international agreed Colregs would mitigate and reduce risks being reviewed anyway, RAs are not about removing all chances of incidents but about practical methods and systems to reduce to a acceptable level. Stopping other shipping to allow cowes week would be overkill and completely unnecessary, this is one of the most understood reasons for doings RAs, about managing risk not removing it as with humans involved this can never be possible.
EdWingfield
Well-Known Member
I recall that 2 yacht crew had jumped over the side prior to collision. All crew were in extreme danger. But it doesn't seem to faze the other racers - they continue on to get a good finish. Even the race commentator only mentions the collision in passing, then gets back to the real story .... the race.
I'd've hoped that at least one of the racers would've turned into HK's wake to fish out survivors or bodies???
I'd've hoped that at least one of the racers would've turned into HK's wake to fish out survivors or bodies???
[70521]
Well-Known Member
There was a flotilla of boats with engines to do that.
Poignard
Well-Known Member
The greatest risk at most of the sailing events I have participated in has been getting pissed and falling off a pontoon.
mainsail1
Well-Known Member
Which kinda proves my point that QHM asking for risk assessments from sailing clubs, is a bureaucratic waste of everyone's time.
People around when you fall off the pontoon will know what to do without a risk assessment......laugh, then help you back onto the pontoon. No doubt a risk assessment should lead to action including no alcohol being sold, no fun and no pontoon which in turn leads in the end to no sailing club.
duncan99210
Well-Known Member
You have, I fear, missed the whole point of carrying out a risk assessment and then issuing guidance to participants. A Risk Assessment is aimed at identifying risks and putting measures in place to reduce (not eliminate) those risks to an acceptable level. The risk assessment itself doesn't remove all chance of mishap, as the Atalanta incident clearly demonstrates: there was a risk assessment in place for the event, guidance was issued in the race instructions all of which were obeyed by the majority of the fleet and disregarded by one idiot.
If, on the other hand, there had been no risk assessment completed and race instructions hadn't included the usual paragraphs about how to deal with shipping in the channel, then some blame could have been attached to the race organisers.
Turning to the drunk on the pontoon type incidents, any marina operator will have carried out a risk assessment for the use of their facilities. From that they will have produced series of measures to mitigate those risks. That might include signs, escape ladders, instructions in their terms and conditions about how to use the marina and guidance from marina staff who notice clients acting in an unsafe manner. Of course, none of that will prevent the drunk from falling in the water but that's not the point: the marina has thought about safe use of its facilities, it has reduced risks where possible by safe design and operating practices. Once those are in place it's down to individual customers to behave sensibly and in accordance with the policies of the marina: if they choose not to do so, the the fault lies with them, not the marina's risk assessment methodology.
Looking at the QHM requirements, they state quite clearly that for routine weekly racing, only one risk assessment is required on an annual basis: not that big an imposition. I am secretary of a gig club and we revisit our risk assessments on an annual basis for routine activity and conduct additional ones for any events we host. That's because we need to ensure safety for members and the general public who have access to the beaches we use. No one is telling us we have to do this, it's simply a responsible way to operate and, importantly, shows we have considered the risks involved in our activities and mitigated them as best we can so in the event of an incident we as a club can show we did our best to prevent it. I'd be wary of being involved in any event that didn't have a risk assessment and set of safety instructions in place, as it demonstrates that safety simply isn't very high on the organisers agenda.
Last edited: