RNLI call out data from RYA

Halo

Well-Known Member
Joined
10 Nov 2009
Messages
2,045
Location
Wetherby
Visit site
A few people have been critical of the RYA on this forum. I am a member of the RYA and have just got the latest edition of the RYA magazine which contains information I think many serious practical boat owners would be interested in. The key bits for me are as follows

More that half of RNLI call outs 2017-2019 were for the same five reasons. These were

1. machinery failure 4125 call outs with common causes of engine overheat, contaminated fuel, faulty filters , blocked filters, faulty or bady tensioned belts

2. Equipment failure 1973 call outs with loss of power , haliard ,mast and shround failure, steering and rudder failure

3. Sranding or grounding 871 call outs - misread charts, missed tides, bad luck

4./ Human error 500 call outs - Nav error , bad planning, insufficient skill or experience for conditions

5. Sinking 200 call outs - propshaft coupling , stuffing box, deep sea seal, exhaust , skin fittings

I suggest the above should focus our attention on what is important in boat maintenance

I notice that if you lump together loss of power , fuel contamination and filter problems then this seem to be a real weakness and good fuel treatment should be a priority

There is no mention of sail drives but shaft drives seem to be the main cause of sinkings

Hope you find this useful !
 
I agree it provides a useful focus of general effort for maintenance.

I wouldn't put too much weight on the distinction between 'prop shaft' versus 'sail-drive', though, or 'Deep Sea Seal' versus any other brand or type of shaft seal.

You would need to know what categories were actually available for the crew to 'tick' to indicate the nature of the cause of the call-out, and how these categories were interpreted by the crew or whoever else notifies the cause of the call-out to head office.

I also think it very unlikely that a rescuing RNLI crew would know, for example, the particular brand of shaft seal fitted to a boat that had suffered a failure.
 
A few people have been critical of the RYA on this forum. I am a member of the RYA and have just got the latest edition of the RYA magazine which contains information I think many serious practical boat owners would be interested in. The key bits for me are as follows

More that half of RNLI call outs 2017-2019 were for the same five reasons. These were

Snipped

5. Sinking 200 call outs - propshaft coupling , stuffing box, deep sea seal, exhaust , skin fittings

I suggest the above should focus our attention on what is important in boat maintenance

I notice that if you lump together loss of power , fuel contamination and filter problems then this seem to be a real weakness and good fuel treatment should be a priority

There is no mention of sail drives but shaft drives seem to be the main cause of sinkings

Hope you find this useful !

I think you may be reading too much into para 5 - it is a general grouping that suggests water is entering the boat from beneath the waterline and from sources named and similar thereof to qualify being collected into a grouping. Other than that a deep dive into the detail would be needed to draw useful (and accurate) conclusions.
 
Some very odd categories in that list.

What is the difference between 1, 2 and 5 or 3 and 4?

It really needs to be re-analysed with some meaningful information coming from it.
 
Some very odd categories in that list.

What is the difference between 1, 2 and 5 or 3 and 4?

It really needs to be re-analysed with some meaningful information coming from it.

All seems clear to me. Main message to me: No1 is the simple stuff, so easily avoided.
 
Forget to wire rigging bottle-screw, mast falls down. Switch on engine, but splutters to a halt clogged with diesel bug. Boat drifts onto a sandbank. Pounding of the boat on the sand in the surf breaches the hull which fills with water as the tide comes in.

Et voila, a full house! - Human error, equipment failure, machinery failure, stranding or grounding, and sinking! :oops:

How does the RNLI record the resulting call-out? ;)
 
On at least 3+ occasions, I have informed the HMCG of a non dangerous situation, and they have, despite me explaining in words of one syllable there was no danger let alone distress, sent a multi-million pound all-weather lifeboat, manned by expensively trained volunteers each wearing two grand's worth of kit.
Once on my yacht, and more than twice on deliveries.
The trouble is that I would now be extremely reluctant to speak to HMCG about anything at all, until we were actually bobbing around in our lifejackets, on fire and bleeding to death.
What is the point of having coastguards, if they are office workers in a call centre in Fareham, with zero knowlege of the coast, ships, tides, and all the rest?
 
Forget to wire rigging bottle-screw, mast falls down. Switch on engine, but splutters to a halt clogged with diesel bug. Boat drifts onto a sandbank. Pounding of the boat on the sand in the surf breaches the hull which fills with water as the tide comes in.

Et voila, a full house! - Human error, equipment failure, machinery failure, stranding or grounding, and sinking! :oops:

How does the RNLI record the resulting call-out? ;)

Probably the last one.
The service return is completed on an online form. There's only one box we can tick. We also write a narrative of the rescue, but that wouldn't affect the figures.
 
Many lives saved! Send more donations...

One of the questions on the Return of Service form asks whether, in the opinion of the person in command, the lifeboat prevented any loss of life.
If we tick yes, then we have to provide a whole load of other information to justify that claim, such as the condition and situation of the casualty when we got there, what other rescue assets were on scene or on their way, etc etc
If the decision is no, then it goes in the "persons assisted" box, not "lives saved".
 
On at least 3+ occasions, I have informed the HMCG of a non dangerous situation, and they have, despite me explaining in words of one syllable there was no danger let alone distress, sent a multi-million pound all-weather lifeboat, manned by expensively trained volunteers each wearing two grand's worth of kit.
Once on my yacht, and more than twice on deliveries.
The trouble is that I would now be extremely reluctant to speak to HMCG about anything at all, until we were actually bobbing around in our lifejackets, on fire and bleeding to death.
What is the point of having coastguards, if they are office workers in a call centre in Fareham, with zero knowlege of the coast, ships, tides, and all the rest?
Heard they like getting some practice in when it's not full on.
 
On at least 3+ occasions, I have informed the HMCG of a non dangerous situation, and they have, despite me explaining in words of one syllable there was no danger let alone distress, sent a multi-million pound all-weather lifeboat, manned by expensively trained volunteers each wearing two grand's worth of kit.
Once on my yacht, and more than twice on deliveries.
The trouble is that I would now be extremely reluctant to speak to HMCG about anything at all, until we were actually bobbing around in our lifejackets, on fire and bleeding to death.
What is the point of having coastguards, if they are office workers in a call centre in Fareham, with zero knowlege of the coast, ships, tides, and all the rest?

Why did you call them in the first place?

My guess is that they realise that they never have a 100% unbiased, clear picture about what might or might not unfold, and they sometimes have to make a judgement over calling out assets based on what they do or don't know. Skippers don't always make the best call, especially when tired and stressed, and CG must know that. Unfortunately some will feel it is over cautious, but better that than lifeboats not being called out when people are at risk
 
Top