Re: Boat Standards

[Sailfree]

Re: Boat Standards

I posted this on an older link discussing the Bavaria 42 keel attachment discussions.

I am repeating the main bit as the discussions raise the point of who is responsible for the approval has it fallen through the net with the CE mark and recreational craft directive?

If I buy a car I know it is type approved and many have been crashed to test them.

Its probably my ignorance but I assumed all electrical goods need to be approved to BSI and be safe BUT where do production boats come is it merely sale of goods act and fit for purpose?

Quote from previous post:-
"Who is responsible for monitoring the design & build quality of modern boats or can anyone set up "Davy Jones Boatbuilding" and providing they can sell them build boats that are so inferior they all sink.

For the UK didn't all designs and build quality have to be approved by Lloyds or was that only in the bad old days!

Who is responsible now? does anyone out there know? "

 

[Guest]

Re: Boat Standards

a) Commercial builds have NEVER been required to be Certified by Lloyds .... that has / is and always will be voluntary.
b) Such illustrious bodies as YDSA and other self-appointed groups have been given the task of assessing for RCD / CE ... /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
c) CE mark only certifies a sample boat supplied for assessment and does not constitute inspection or quality control of any subsequent build.
d) The system assumes Builder will conform to the standard assessed on the sample build FOR ALL subsequent builds.

Bit like ISO 9000 really - load of tosh - as it does NOT guarantee YOUR boat is up to standard - it assumes it is.

As to liability ... that is a grey area ... as yes Trading Standards say - Fit for purpose, merchantable quality etc.
Builder is supposed to supply good product.
Broker is not to sell knowingly poor product without notifying you of defects etc.

Trouble is YOU are required to show fault and also error on THEIR part .... not so easy .....

Final comment ... if anyone thinks that having a surveyor attend during building in a factory such as Bavaria / Legend etc. (I name them NOT to point AT THEM ... but just as examples of production lines) ... I am sure that nothing would be changed / corrected out of production sequence etc. Basically a wasted exercise ............... bit like the old story of wheels falling of the Leyland cars ... where the wheel nut guy ran out of time to fit the nuts ... so threw them into the car thinking someone later on would fit ... car finishes assembly line and rolls off to go to the field .... bang - wheels fall off ... despite the Production Line Inspector !!

I pity anyone who has a faulty new boat ........... I know a guy who has had his rudder shudder, vibrate since the boat was new .... dealer looks, has engineer ... did I say engineer ??? on it for an hour or so .... All fixed sir ........... next weekend judder judder judder ....

So ???? What to do >>>>>

 

[Blueboatman]

Re: Boat Standards

Didn't Lloyds used to offer a ''mould/hull release certificate'' ? . So at least you knew that the basic hull had been layed up correctly and without hanging around partially laminated for too long on the shop floor ...(maybe).
With todays high volume manufacturers ,then in theory at least and just as with the car analogy ,if the production run is long enough,the niggles and faults get sorted right out early on. Thus the severity of an issue like B42 keel attachment ...should be the extremely unfortunate exception .

Just One of many reasons why Halberg Rassys are so good is that they build a lot of them,in a very tightly organised way, with lots of quality control ,feedback and on the job experience and motivation ..Of course that is reflected in the price, which is why I ain't got one !

 

[Sailfree]

Re: Boat Standards

Thanks you have confirmed my fears!

I went and saw my current boat being built at Jeanneau and I thought their QC quite good. eg they batch up every layer of hull material, lay up hull, check OK by weighing. Therefore check on batching and operative should notice if any layers missing then final check is weight.

I did wonder how many QC checks builders carry out on materials as supplied and appreciate that it need not be as thorough as the Phamaceutical Industry that I am more familiar with but how quickly would a faulty batch of say resin be found?

Overall though your message for people like me that buys production boats is never buy early editions wait until any bugs reveal themselves and hope that the experience within the production builder prevents them stretching weight saving/cost savings or material strength too far!

I had previously decided only to buy a boat that already had a good production run but didn't quite appreciate how important that decision was.

 

[Guest]

Lloyds .....

Was and is still OPTIONAL ......

YOU as purchaser has option to have Lloyds attendance if you wish .... BUT YOU PAY not builder. You can have ANY surveyor attend if you want for as much or little as you decide .......... but YOU pay ...

 

[Guest]

Wait till bugs ironed out ???

Let me make one comment on that .....

Bavaria were rated as reasonable builds in early days ... later models got the slag off ... whether justified or not is not the issue .....

Now onto weighing as assessment of hull moulding .......... these days they (such as Bavaria) computer control the lay-up with precise amounts of resin / mat etc. I can't remember the figures and how much is spray resin / mat mix .... They have refined even further such practices as Halmatic etc. pioneered years ago ...

My question is .... have they successfully ironed out the problems that Halmatic and others had with this pioneering work etc. - I have my thoughts on it and I'm not so sure. Weighing a hull is great as long as all processes have gone exactly to plan ..... It is a quick and cheap way to check ... but is it foolproof or accurate ? My thoughts are that a better way should be developed such as Ultrasound etc. to actually check the hull in numerous areas ...

But these are now my thoughts and opinions - not scientific fact.

Production line boats are necessary to provide budget boats as people demand. It is nice to know and see that traditional and labour intensive boats are still constructed ... but then you pay for that building. Production line boats don't as I feel - have the same craftsmen running their hands over the hull - knowing every bump or nick .... and faring, smoothing etc. etc. The Production line boat is expected to be an exact clone of the first .... but Monday morning boats do get through sometimes ....

Please the above is musing and giving words to my thoughts .... I have no real evidence of it - just suspicions ...

We hear about a certain builder that claims quality build and then sikaflex's bulkheads in ...

I have aboat that is old, cheap and survived over 30 yrs - it has no stress cracks, it will get me to Cherbourg etc. I would like to have the dosh to get larger and more spacious ... but have a reservation about some ... so it would be a hard task for me to find the boat that I can buy and be really happy with .... after having battle tanks !!!!

/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[luddites]

Re: Boat Standards

"Such illustrious bodies as YDSA and other self-appointed groups have been given the task of assessing for RCD / CE"

The YDSA and others tried to exercise a sensible influence on a bunch of beurocrats but falied. In truth the RCD is guite good on systems etc but very woooly on essential construction and scantlings. In a fiercely competitive market from June 98 the Bavaria keel issue was inevitable, its just surprising its taken so long. Personally I think the RCD should now be investigated by a small group of independent highy qualified and experienced professionals who would inevitably condemn it for its inadequacies as far as structural strength, steering arrangements etc etc are concerned.
Presumably Bavaria will be sued under straigtforward "fitness for purpose" legislation, then Bav will sue their designers and consultants, who will then sue the German govt for introducing a flawed RCD which they worked to, then the German govt will appeal to the EU who will sack 3 junior clerks. Meanwhile the lawyers will all be getting fat and buying Hallberg Rassy's.

 

[Guest]

Years ago ...

There was heated discussion between myself and an RYA official who basically told me that the only body worth anything and able to 'police'/ sort RCD was YDSA ..........
He even said that RCD was based on THEIR - RYA + YDSA - advise and recommendations ...

So there we have 2 self appointed self governing bodies with actually no Official Govt duty..... supporting each other ... i have no beef with RYA .... we all have gripes about one thing or another - but at least they are there.
YDSA, YBDSA, YBSA ... wish they could decide what the hell they want to be called !! I am not so enamoured about ......

The idea of RCD and CE is good .... BUT like many Certificates gets quoted out of context and some expect more than its designed to give ... like ISO 9000 ....

Look at above posting about Lloyds ......... still the same old misunderstandings of Lloyds Certificates ....

 

[BobE]

Re: Years ago ...

When, back in the mid seventies, I worked for South Hants Engineering building the Shes, I remeber the Lloyds inspector appearing about once or twice a week and checking the laminations in the moulds. Also the hulls etc during fitting out ... All the boats were to Lloyds 100 A1 as I recall..

Don't modern builders have all their craft inspected automatically anymore ??
Was dear old Derek Fitzgerald an unusually caring builder??

Cheers Bob E..

 

[luddites]

Re: Years ago ...

thing is Nigel where does the yachting public go from here? Years ago if you bought a boat built to ABS or Lloyds 10A1 etc you knew what you were getting and paying for! (Not Lloyds hull certificate or release note, these only as good as the laminator was on that day and we all have bad days).

Problem is the RCD is the first set of standards to catergotically state what a yacht is capable of doing. We all know good seaman can and do survive sailing anything but the vast majority of buyers have less experience and are entitled to rely on what the little plaque says. We all know the RCD is fundamentally flawed, my own hobby horse being steering systems. There are plenty of "ocean rated" yachts out there with rudder tubes unsupported at the tops which flex all over the place when given a bit of work to do. Ocean? No thank you.......

 

[brianhumber]

Re: Lloyds ..... and BSI

Nige

I think you and I are both agreed the BSI route only really ensures a consistant standard. It does not ensure that the product will not fail because of design. Granted the latest standard of 9000 does introduce assessments of fit for design purpose and customer review/satisfaction so some light has fallen on someone somewhere.

I have allways taken the view that a good QS system only follows what a good company would do anyway and should be short and sweet. Volumes of paperwork equals no valve to anybody - but then I am a bit of a maverick so some of my assessments over the years have said

Brian

 

[Guest]

Where do we go ??

I haven't a clue ... the idea of the RCD / CE was good ... well CE is actually based for all products sold - not only boats ...

But like most things it is hard to control and implement as designed.

The days of Lloyds 100A1 is still possible and optional ... BUT expensive and most people have expected RCD to give that feeling of security ......... Yeh - really !!

Boats are moving into the Henry Ford arena ... of fast production lines - so how can you expect the quality control that was prevalent before ? Maybe one day they will do crash / destruction testing of boats ?? They do it for Ships Lifeboats ...

Difficult call .... Bavaria fiasco shows how difficult it is ...

 

[machurley22]

Re: Where do we go ??

Don't they do this sort of thing any more then? Apologies for the poor quality but I think it's a copy of a copy of a copy.

 

[Guest]

Re: Where do we go ??

Only on a sample build and then usually only the first or supplied one ... not random or through the life of the model ...

Thats my information anyway ...

 

[DRW]

Re: Boat Standards

I agree that there are definite benefits in having the boat built to an independent type approval. All merchant shippig work has a Class surveyor check out the construction and later repairs, be it BV, Lloyds or whoever.

However, and please forgive me if I am wrong as it may have changed on pleasure craft since I was involved, we used to draw up a hull spec to Lloyds scantlings, have it approved by Lloyds, then lay it up (which was subbed out to Halmatic to do on site,) and the surveyor came by to make sure that laminators were working and producing a laminated hull that they had approved the scantlings of. If the initial design was not up to spec, then Lloyds would decline to be involved. Thereafter the surveyor would come by at predetermined critical parts of construction which if approved would release funds from the buyer to the yard, and at impromptu times which were usually a surprise to us.

The ball started rolling at the initial design stage. Unless you can get the scantlings from Jenneau or whoever, alter them to conform to Lloyds, get the yard to agree to the alterations and you agree to the increased costs, then Lloyds don't come into the picture at all.

This was what I understood the EU cert was designed to cover, similar to the USCG approval system, where all boats had to built to a 'standard' or above. As you say, in this system, who inspects the inspectors? The Class inspectors are then inspected by the various national competent authorities, which in the UK is the surveying side of the MCA. I've been paid to sit on the laminators in yards, watch them work, ensure that the laminate design is good and the schedule is achievable. Certainly was a benefit in China and Taiwan for the owners, I haven't done it in Europe so can't say, other than I would like to see my hull being laid up if I could.

A problem with Approved Scantlings is that they tend to be much heavier than boat designers would prefer. Less material means lighter sailing craft and less cost.

 

[Guest]

Problem as I see it ...

Yes you can Have any surveyor or Lloyds cover the building of a yacht and issue certificate of Conformity etc. at completion.

BUT .... the number of builders still working by hand or flexible enough to accommodate changes or corrections during build are getting less every day. Boats are changing to car like production lines .......... Bavaria is a good example for this.

So if you have a production line of boats ... each person has a particular skill or function and a set time / amount of material to work with - how do you get what YOU require or the Surveyor requires on your behalf ??

If you want a true - built to exacting individual control etc. etc - modern production factorys may not be the best place to be ....

Let me make another point .... Merchant Ship Building has been hinted at a few times here .... Merchant Ships are often built to a Shipyards own design ... individual Company designed ships are few and far between nowadays ... and the act of building eg 10 sister ships .... that is actually not strictly true ...... each ship will have differences ... in tonnage, slight plating changes, accommodation layout etc. etc.

There are no true absolute 100% sisters ........ s the original design yacht used for RCD / CE mark may be actually different to the yacht that is put in your hands ............ BUT the Plaque is still on Builders wall !!

The thing people have to start to accept ... is RCD and CE are not supplying the quality control that a lot think it does ... it has been abused, side-lined, stepped around, shot full of holes etc. etc. and generally misunderstood anyway ... and in that I partly blame builders .... using the RCD and CE as indicators of superior quality etc. when in fact they are minimum req'ts forf given scope.

Again I use ISO 9000 as an indicator ............ Adverts, implied uses ISO 9000 as a tool to tell customers that their product is better and a non ISO 9000 company should be avoided .... rough wording - but you know what I mean ... WRONG ... ISO 9000 just shows that traceability of documentation and procedures have been followed ... the actual product has no bearing on ISO 9000 at all. Doesn't stop cleverly worded adverts etc. implying other though ...

So at end of day ... its up to buyer to make sure he is getting what he pays for and resort to Trading Standards if anything fails etc. RCD / CE do not help you at all.

That is my view based on my observations in the Marine Industry .....

 

[bob_tyler]

Re: Boat Standards

"Presumably Bavaria will be sued under straigtforward "fitness for purpose" legislation, then Bav will sue their designers and consultants, who will then sue the German govt for introducing a flawed RCD which they worked to, then the German govt will appeal to the EU who will sack 3 junior clerks."

Sorry but you have the EU reaction the wrong way round.

They will appoint a new minister and create a whole new administrative department costing us millions of Euros per annum to help with the unemployment figures!

 

[luddites]

Re: Boat Standards

Nice one Bob, shows my naivety. Got to go, have a letter of application to write for one of those nice admin posts in Sprouts.

 

[Guest]

Don\'t forget the price of the naming of the committee !!

Bugdet allocation ..... 90% for the 18 month commission to decide on the Name of the Committee, but then of course with Budget over-run and new committees checking political correctness of the first committee .... the whole thing will conclude with the French claiming that it's a ploy by the Brit's to undermine the CAP, the Germans will then claim its a ploy by the ailing Brit Boat-Building Industry to fault their very own Bavarian Enterprise ......
ending basically in a no-decision discussion document with it taking effect in 50 years from now ......

Who say's I have a strange view of EU ???

/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif