Requirements for passage plans, logs, notifying Coast Guard etc.

Aeolus

Aeolus

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 Aug 2004
Messages
1,026
Location
Sussex
Visit site
Apologies if this has been covered previously but what are the UK rules or guidance regarding maintaining passage plans and logs and notifying the Coast Guard (or anyone else) regarding planned trips? Couldn't find it on the MCGA web-site nor by searching the YBW forums.

Jonathan
 
Solas requires a passage plan, but the authorities have been very careful not to specify what that plan should consist of. There have also been several weasel worded answers about knowledge of area etc.

IMHO if you have lines on the chart/waypoints in the plotter, details of the tidal height and current, and knowledge of the weather for the next couple of days (Difficult as even met office doesnt seem to be able to work at more than couple of hours ahead with any accuracy), and details of the harbour that is your destination, then you have sufficient.
 
no need to apologise but there's no one answer........

passage plans are a requirement under SOLAS V if navigating outside sheltered waters (as defined) and can be read there, and discussed here ad nauseum. The consensus is that they do not need to be written down to constitute a passage plan but realistically you might as well! All ssorts of references to potential court cases highlighting the advantage of having done so etc Technically a trip to Studland Bay from Poole requires one but Cowes to Yarmouth doesn't. Pleasure boat guide to SOLAS V here and another one here
If you would like to go through a more structured/detailed
breakdown of SOLAS chapter V then start here
Logs are rather loosely defined but there is a thread on PBO curently that has uncovered the French directive that documents Log requirements - as good a place to start as any possibly.

There is no requirement to notify the CG at all. However most would start by recommending the complettion of the CG66 if you are a regular in UK covered waters which provides them with a reasonably comprehensive picture of your craft and equipement.
 
YM instructor once told me that if we don't have a passage plan and a properly filled log book with regular recorded nfo such as course, log, wind, tides, weather, position etc. then if an incident does occur it was not unheard of for insurance companies to wriggle out of paying up in full.
I agree with Talbot and Duncan and preparing a basic passage plan and gathering this info is part of good seamanship IMHO.
 
The insurance company can only wriggle out of paying up to the extent that the policy (or the law) expressly requires you to keep such records, and even then only if the accident could have been avoided if you HAD kept them up to date - quite a remote contingency I would say.
 
p.s. not that that wouldn't stop some insurance companies from TRYING to wriggle out of paying up, of course.
 
I think his main point was that if one should go aground, founder on rocks, collision etc. then it could be said that one contributed to one's own adversity through negligence and that could be grounds for part settlement.
 
Only if the failure to keep a record was an actual cause of the accident. It's called "contributory negligence", and the court gives it a percentage weighting according to how much you were at fault.

For example, your insurance policy may require you to change the rigging every few years. If you fail to do this, you have broken the terms of your insurance policy but it does not mean that the insurance company can wriggle out of paying, even in part, if the mast stays up but you're run down and sunk by a runaway cross-Channel ferry.

But, if the mast fell down and as a result you were unable to move out of the ferry's way, then it would be a different matter.
 
I should also say that,

for the insurance company to be able to reduce the amount they pay, not only must the failure to record have actually been a cause of the accident, but there must also have been either an express requirement written in the policy or in the law (in other words passage plans, but not log books) that the record should have been kept.

By the way, it would be theoretically possible, but not, I believe, normal, for marine policies to contain a payment reduction clause where there has been contributory negligence. There can't be many accidents at sea where there is not some kind of contributory negligence (see for example the COLREGS, which put everyone in the wrong if there's an accident) and such a policy would be pretty worthless. Similarly, it is normal for road insurance policies to cover you against your own negligence. This is a different thing from covering you for the consequences of your own criminal action - by law you CAN'T insure yourself against liabilities you may incur in committing a crime.
 
I don't think there is yet any official detailed set of requirements. The law/convention has been passed/activated etc. and we wait for the situation to be deciced by cout cases.
In the mean time its sensible to take the obvious sensible steps that might comply with the requirements.
Incidentally, one of the more or less requirements is to carry a radar reflector. Boats in the UK mostly do so but very few in the Baltic. A few more are doing so but awareness of SOLAS does not seem to be very great there either.
 
do the majority of MOBO's have Radar Reflectors? Cant say I noticed many.

The S/H boat I just bought doesn't have one and I cant see where one could go. It would have to be above the radar, and the boat sort of ends there with the light.
 
A lot of this has now been covered by others but the issue of notifying the CG is worth expanding on. This is a quaint British custom. Other Europeans don't make all those 'routine traffic' calls. Is there any point in making a RT call? The CG does not check for your safe arrival or 'hand you over' to the next area when you pass from one CG to another, or go foreign. You might just as well tell a trusted friend or relative when you expect to arrive and make sure that you always let them know immediately you do arrive, and under what circumstances they should report you as overdue.

The last time I made an RT call was when we sailed from UK to France with crew from Crewseekers aboard and I made that only for 'due diligence' because of the crew.

Having said that, I fully support the CG66 system and keep mine up to date....it is vital that SAR know as much as possible about the vessel.
 
On the issue of passage plans, it still makes sense to keep a log as simple as is consistent with the kind of sailing that we do. Apart from the obvious gains of having all relevant passage information and position updates on one page, it meets the SOLAS agenda.
 
I agree. Anyone who goes to sea without keeping some sort of 'log' isn't on my wavelength at all. My own log is nothing more than an A4 notebook into which I write the appropriate things; what is 'appropriate' depends on the passage and the circumstances but always includes details of tides, sunrise and sunset, fuel on board and the tank in use, VHF frequencies for marinas or harbours and at least an approximate plan of the passage, showing track required and distance for each leg. I don't know if that meets SOLAS, I've never checked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top