Regulation - A practical Demo

[Mike_Martin]

Hi Tom,

I agree entirely that we should be able to acquire a boat, launch it and drive it around without having a licence to do so, here. Of course other administrations don't agree but there you go.

Rather than compulsory testing and licensing, I would suggest that compulsory information is given to new owners when they acquire one. I have for several years been suggesting that a system could be put in place where the details are taken of new owners and they are sent out an information package (a conglomerate of all the individually existing ones) from the MCA telling them what they need to know about boating. There would be no further action taken once the package is despatched.

The problem with it is that it would be like introducing DVLA style registration of all boats and that is bound to cost money for the owner. However, the upside would be that they get a package that details the courses and issues that they should consider to enhance their and everyone else's safety and details any laws that may become applicable to them ie radio licensing.

In fact maybe a group like IPC could consider producing it and sending it out to the tens of thousands of readers that they have for their boating titles.

Just a thought!

Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>Manager,
Aeronautical & Maritime Services Section,
Radiocommunications Agency

 

[chriscallender]

Of course the coastguard will often ask to spell the vessels name phonetically, or for an international callsign if the caller doesn't seem to know what they are doing. So that everyone else can be entertained by the "S for Sugar, E for elephant etc ...." spelling of their vessel's name.


Chris

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

.> So that everyone else can be entertained by the "S for Sugar, E for elephant etc ...."<

Mmmm, that opens up all sorts of possibilites.

Hello this is the yacht Chit, that's C for Chit, H for Hit, I for It, T for two.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Birdseye]

Of course the license fee is about raising money. If it werent, then it wouldnt be an annual renewal. Like the driving license which is also required overseas, but lasts till you're 70.

And Mike hasnt commented on the lamentable level of enforcement in the marine area. The only conclusion I can come to, having seen the number of prosecutions, is that I am daft bothering to buy my license.




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[cgull]

Actually heard this last weekend.
Yacht called Falmouth CG to file passage plan, to...Helford River.
CG asked ETA. Pause. Replied 1 hr. CG asked wind strengh and direction, pause. Vessel replies "dont Know"

CG repeats local weather info, for strong E/SE. End of conv.
I was up the Fal, found it quite amusing


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[duncan]

I am sure IPC will consider your suggestion and comment in due course but it still seems to me that an enforcement campaign, based around the Solent, could be - self funding, drive up awareness, improve safety both as more people become educated and improper (as opposed to unlicenced) use is reduced and would be welcomed by many of the 63,000 licenced users as it would lead to a more useable VHF 'service'.
There is a certain irony in that the concern for the withdrawal of C16 monitoring is being expressed on behalf of people who currently don't monitor C16 because of the abuse etc.
?Question? Do the coastguard log vessel calls and are they compared to vessel licences at all?

Final question - different issue - but are you going to reduce the cost of licence applications renewal online to truly reflect the serviceing cost differentials? From my (related) experience that could bring them down to a fiver a year easily!
Keep up the good work

<hr width=100% size=1>