R.Y.A Training - what do you thinlk of it?

[wotayottie]

As an (ex) instructor still on the mailing list I recently got an email from Richard Falk ( Director no less! ) asking me to fill in a survey. The email is lengthy so I summarise rather than quote the key bits. Please excuse the HR speak.

I wonder what your opinions are.

They would like to identify any unnecessary or inappropriate barriers to entry, particularly with regards to making activities more inclusive and more accessible to all who wish to become involved. They want to hear from people who wanted to progress along a pathway within the RYA Training schemes but for some reason (other than lack of experience) have been unable to do so.

What are your thoughts about the courses; opportunities, availability and relevance of training; instructor professional development and aspirations; instructor revalidation and update procedures .

Your participation is important in helping us maintain and improve the accessibility and inclusivity of our training. Ensuring currency of purpose, diversity, accessibility, and reduction of barriers is important to us in RYA Training

Seems to me that RYA training is important and worthwhile - the alternative of picking it up as you go along is risky both in safety terms and in picking up incorrect or incomplete information. But at the same time, it seems to me that RYA training has morphed from something done at clubs by enthusiasts to a formal system focussed on commercial organisations and income for the RYA. In the going it has become expensive for many people and less accessible outside the south coast.

It would seem from the email that the RYA is more concerned about inclusive diversified bums on seats than content, but then maybe I am just a grumpy old recidivist.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

The RYA has been pretty inclusive for a long time now through their disability programmes, gender specific programmes, disadvantaged and youth schemes, so in my opinion and experience, they are quite far ahead on the diversity and inclusiveness perspective.

What they have failed to do, or rather have not done well, is look after their cruising instructors. Cruising is the slightly piss smelling old men that everyone is embarrassed by, compared to the their young, fit, successful and beautiful racers.

I think they are beginning to wake up and smell the piss, that racing is not everyones bag and the big entry level elephant in the room, cruising instruction, has been neglected. It is interesting that adventure cruising - from down the estuary to Northern latitudes is fast growing in popularity. I think the RYA are trying to address this.

Of course my comments are a bit OTT to make a point, but the RYA have fiddled around with the syllabus and, if my colleagues/instructor acquaintances are to be believed, alienated some sailing schools. In the last three years I have heard of more formal complaints from instructors / schools to the RYA than before.

They do send out such stuff from time to time though, looking for opinion, so it could just be that, this is not the first communication seeking opinion.

 

[[3889]]

I'm not a great fan of the RYA but I think their training structure is pretty good. £5-600 for 5 days instruction using an expensive piece of kit is pretty good value. I completed the survey, which was aimed at evaluating accessibility, which is not an unreasonable objective. It doesn't mean that accessibility trumps all other considerations. I agree that the the S coast bias is becoming more evident, not so much in practical courses as it is where most people sail, but it is getting harder to do theory anywhere else in the country.

 

[TangaraToo]

Very much in two minds about RYA tuition. Just for reference I hold Dingy L1& L2, PBL2, Safety Boat, DS Theory and CS practical.
On one hand I do think the required pass standard is too low but then, when there is no legal requirement for any training, making it more demanding is likely to put people off.
It's a fine line they have to walk.

 

[jdc]

I share some reservations about the RYA with regard to their (lack of) focus on cruising compared to racing, but I think as far as formal training they have got it about right. The dilemma, as very well put by the OP, is between a commercial organisation providing training and clubs doing it in a less organised but possibly more cost effective way.

We can learn from some other sports I've been involved with over the years:

Scuba diving. The British diving operation, BSAC, was one of the best in the world and very well respected. It was and remains a decentralised club, with training done when individuals from particular branches can fit it in. To be fair to them they do a fantatstic job when they do help train new members, and the centre do make a good syllabus but being trained in so ad-hoc a manner simply doesn't work for most people's patterns of holiday or time off these days. The American operation PADI which trains people for money has utterly eclipsed BSAC in terms of number of courses taken, even in the UK! And in the rest of the world few places have heard of BSAC. It doesn't stop one diving as they can always look at your log-book but maybe the falling global influence of BSAC is a result of this miscalculation some years ago (and they we're expelled from the world underwater federation CMAS despite BSAC being one of the three founder organisations).

Radio amateurs. The RSGB is also a distributed club operation, and thus the standard is very 'spotty'. Some clubs are excellent and full of life, others are run by gimmers who never were any good anyway. The club structure makes it really hard to get a qualification if you have a job, or a family, as you have to turn up every other friday evening to a church hall somewhere miles from home and hang around all evening for ~10 mins of training by someone wholly without teaching qualifications. After some time, maybe 9 months, provided you've not missed too many sessions there'll be an exam. And the exam has to be multiple-guess because the local club 'teacher' won't be knowledgable enough to mark anything else and/or there's no central quality control of marking standards.

Both these point strongly to the sucess of the current RYA method I think. Hopefully others will have examples of the club structure working for achievemnt of national or international qualifications, but I think it's a bit like the keep Sunday special campaign; I take my hat off to them and wish they had succeeded, but I think it doomed. People are just too busy.

 

[laika]

RYA training has morphed from something done at clubs by enthusiasts to a formal system focussed on commercial organisations and income for the RYA. In the going it has become expensive for many people and less accessible outside the south coast.

I think that's a good thing for diversity. If you're from a place where no-one sails and you don't know anyone who does you aren't going to try and find a sailing club on the coast somewhere that's too far away to frequent and enquire about their arcane joining process, you're going to google a business that you can give money to in return for them giving you a course on a particular date. In the days when sailing was taught by parents, a kindly old uncle or the local sailing club a barber from barking or a machinist from moss side had no chance. Now for the price of a holiday they do. (and if that wasn't the case I personally wouldn't be sitting at my chart table typing this...)

 

[Iminei]

I agree to a point laika. Although after having done comp crew & day skipper I joined a club, which has been far & away the best thing in furthering my sailing "career". The club I joined didn't have an arcane joining process, and barbers & machinists would be welcome.

As for RYA training (from the perspective of a student starting the journey), practical very good IMO, maybe the theory needs to take more account of current technology. I'm booked onto a CS course in October - the school and an independent YM instructor both suggested it wasn't worth doing YM theory first.

 

[capnsensible]

As for RYA training (from the perspective of a student starting the journey), practical very good IMO, maybe the theory needs to take more account of current technology. I'm booked onto a CS course in October - the school and an independent YM instructor both suggested it wasn't worth doing YM theory first.

Very poor advice, in my opinion. Without that background knowledge, a lot of time is wasted on practical courses that should have been learnt easily, ashore.

 

[Iminei]

Noted & I must admit I was surprised. Although both bits of advice came completely separately & both could have "sold" me the theory course. This is just for coastal skipper btw.

 

[alant]

Very poor advice, in my opinion. Without that background knowledge, a lot of time is wasted on practical courses that should have been learnt easily, ashore.

+1

 

[awol]

Even the RYA who admittedly probably have a vested interest reckon you are better off with the theory.
"a) The Coastal Skipper course completion certificate, that is awarded by a training centre on successful completion of a five-day training course. This is very much hands-on with little time to teach navigation or other theoretical subjects. It is therefore recommended that you take the RYA Coastal Skipper shorebased course prior to your practical course so you can put those skills into practice on the water. "

 

[Bobc]

If the RYA want to be more "inclusive", they should focus on a few key areas, such as:-

1./ Drop their membership fees. They are too expensive and put a lot of people off (me included). If membership was about £25/year, they would have a lot more members.

2./ Do more easy-access training. Things like 1-day "learn to anchor", "learn to park short-handed", "learn to change fuel filters and bleed the engine" courses. Make them 1-day courses for about £50-£75.

3./ Stop acting so aloof as an organisation.

 

[jdc]

...to be more "inclusive", they should focus on a few key areas, such as... easy-access training. Things like 1-day "learn to anchor", "learn to park short-handed", "learn to change fuel filters and bleed the engine" courses. Make them 1-day courses for about £50-£75...

Good idea (at least to have these as well as the more standard courses). Do you think they'd have to be on-board practical courses, or entirely classroom (pub back-room or wherever). And where? Centralised or distributed around the country? If not afloat, would you put them in winter or in the season?

An idea I had for short courses was 'master classes' on specific subjects, like 'Sailing in the ITCZ' or dealing with katabatibc winds or... Suggestions welcome.

 

[Bobc]

Good idea (at least to have these as well as the more standard courses). Do you think they'd have to be on-board practical courses, or entirely classroom (pub back-room or wherever). And where? Centralised or distributed around the country? If not afloat, would you put them in winter or in the season?

An idea I had for short courses was 'master classes' on specific subjects, like 'Sailing in the ITCZ' or dealing with katabatibc winds or... Suggestions welcome.

A bit of both really. Some could be theory courses, done in a pub function room in an evening or during a day at a weekend in the winter. They could also be done at sailing clubs (which tend to be pretty un-used during the winter), which might also encourage people to join their local sailing club (which is another problem that the RYA are trying to tackle).

Others could be a 1-day practical (I would think it would be a good and easy way to fill gaps in training school boat use (take 8 people out somewhere and visit 2 or 3 bays and practice anchoring, or go to 2 or 3 marinas and practice lassooing using the midships cleat or springing-off).

These are the kind of skills that a lot of sailors are lacking in either the knowledge, experience, or confidence in.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

Very poor advice, in my opinion. Without that background knowledge, a lot of time is wasted on practical courses that should have been learnt easily, ashore.

It potentially places the student in a position where the certificate can not be issued. CS is the course where the focus is on managing the boat and crew safely away from the day skipper's "familiar boat in familiar waters' level of competence.

The ability to navigate with a plotter should be OK, but the CS should be able to navigate should a plotter not be available. Today, with plotter navigation ubiquitous, rightly so, the fundamental skills are not practised sufficiently on ds course. This is why theory is so important and the whole scheme should be considered in unison to get the most out of it. But, the scheme is devised such that you do not need to do theory classes because it recognises that skill and competency can be developed by individuals outside of the scheme.

It's not poor advice because it is a fact, it is correct, but if the advice was given without any context, then it may indeed be poor. The candidate may very well self study and be competent enough in the theory aspects without doing a shorebased course. This is in fact a measure of the flexibility built into the scheme, maybe actually an example of inclusiveness.

Whether sail or motor, the emphasis is on developing higher levels of independence. The training moves away from the shorter passages of Day Skipper and starts looking at passages that require watch-keeping routines, crew management and the ability to pilot a vessel both day and night. With longer passages it is less likely that you will be familiar with the sailing area, so a higher level of overall navigational and pilotage skill needs to be developed.

 

[Ravi]

The biggest discriminatory factor in RYA training is the British Weather. This limits the attraction of sailing to unhinged types who enjoy getting ice baths on cold August afternoons.

 

[GrahamM376]

The ability to navigate with a plotter should be OK, but the CS should be able to navigate should a plotter not be available.

When I did my CS practical & YM exam back in the '90s gps was switched off and all navigation was on paper so ability to navigate without a plotter was a must. Is that no longer the case?

 

[TangaraToo]

When I did my CS practical & YM exam back in the '90s gps was switched off and all navigation was on paper so ability to navigate without a plotter was a must. Is that no longer the case?

I did my CS Practical last year and the plotter was indeed switched off for the entire week apart from a few hours when we hit dense fog and decided on safety grounds to have AIS and radar overlay on plotter.
Blind nav exercise was at night up the Orwell.
I hadn't done the YM theory, just DS. I was booked on DS course. Both the other pupils were on CS. My theory knowledge and practical ability exceed those of the other candidates and as a result was awarded CS instead of DS. I did wonder during the course why I was doing all the CS exercise not DS.
That said I do like to know the theory stuff so had studied outside of the DS theory and been single handing own yacht for 3 years.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

When I did my CS practical & YM exam back in the '90s gps was switched off and all navigation was on paper so ability to navigate without a plotter was a must. Is that no longer the case?

Yes, it is still the case.

However, I need to qualify that. Navigation with electronic devices is now given greater emphasis and it is different from the 1990s to a point. The RYA is now far more aligned with real world navigation with plotters i.e. everyone uses one, most folks have access to other electronic devices that give position in addition to plotter, so there is focus on plotter navigation. The recommendation being made to sea schools now is that if they are changing plotters, then they are strongly advised to make sure it is radar compatible. I suspect that radar will become a standard feature, much like a plotter is, at some future point. There is a big difference in attitude to navigating with plotters in 2017 than 'back in the 1990s'.

The expectation is that people can navigate safely that includes both electronic and non-electronic. The emphasis on electronic navigation is important because it is easy to put the yacht and crew in danger with electronic navigation e.g. layers of information, waypoint collisions, running aground - all examples reported on these pages of electronic navigation assisted incidents. It's not a case of either or, it's both.

 

[Iminei]

It's not poor advice because it is a fact, it is correct, but if the advice was given without any context, then it may indeed be poor.

A can of worms that I wish I hadn't opened. Maybe the context is that my DS theory is still fresh and I'm very comfortable with chart based navigation. The advice was from people who know me & have sailed with me. I should have maybe qualified it better but it was not to never do YM theory, but that it wasn't a necessary prerequisite for them to feel happy with me taking CS. On my DS practical we didn't use the chart plotter once.

I already have enough qualifying passages, (incl as skipper and by the time of the CS course will have the miles) to go for YM offshore. That doesn't mean I'm anywhere near ready & I believe that the cruising scheme offers a logical progression, hence plan to follow it - even if one chunk of it is outside of the usual sequence. Having said all that I plan to do YM theory at some point so may just get on & do it!