RNLI - commercialisation just around the corner?

[JumbleDuck]

Ok, so only non-good people get put off volunteering by extra overhead, but happily *everybody* is good.

I don't think we can safely make any assumptions about the quality of people deterred by training requirements.

My view is at one end of the scale would be zero hassle which I think would enable more people to volunteer but quality would be lower. At the other end of the scale would be (say) a requirement for a 40 year full time training course before volunteering which would attract almost no volunteers.

... and those you got might still not be any good.

In between is a curve with a sweetspot of number of volunteers relative to suitability somewhere along that curve.

I agree, sort of. The aim is to attract enough good people and not to waste too much time on those who'll never be any good.

The evidence the RNLI *think* they're not getting suitable volunteers is that they've implimented quite significant training starting from embarrassingly trival chartwork that wouldn't stetch a weekend sailor - and that they themselves thought it was worth pointing out how few seamen they get as volunteers.

Several non-sequiturs there. The RNLI position may be well be "We don't have to rely on professional seafarers for crew any more because, for example, we can cover all the chartwork required with a short training course." Has there been any statement from the RNLI lamenting the lack of professional seafarers or are they just saying that's how it is now?

Whether the RNLI *really* have a problem finding suitable volunteers is a different question and I suspect they don't. If your close handling skills aren't honed by a decade of picking up lobster pots in a swell that's ok - you won't lacerate anyone to death in a modern boat powered by a water jet. If you don't have intricate knowledge of all the local tidal oddities, that lack is more than offset by computer generated search patterns. If you haven't spent your working navigating in all weathers and visibility, finding your way home no matter how tired, then you can offset that lack of skill with a chart plotter, or even a Chart app on your phone.

That's all down to the Coxswain, isn't it, who is not a volunteer? How many people on a lifeboat actually have to helm it?

Edit: Can I say that I am enjoying your contributions and that none of the above should be taken at all personally. It's late, I've had a busy day and my writing may be getting unintentionally ratty.

 

[dom]

On the subject of seamanship this popped up on my FB feed a couple of days ago:

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/po...story_fbid=10156322167720890&id=118759930889&

Loading a battered climber in the swell at the foot of a cliff without jolting him too much can't have been easy.

Wow! Highly technical rescue across multiple dimensions as you say. But the CG team do appear to have left a critical rope seriously short; or is that just me with a phone pic?

 

[penberth3]

...The evidence the RNLI *think* they're not getting suitable volunteers is that they've implimented quite significant training starting from embarrassingly trival chartwork that wouldn't stetch a weekend sailor...

I've never had a problem with any training that starts right at the beginning - you might call it "embarrassingly trivial" but I guarantee everybody has forgotten something or gets something wrong, whatever their prior experience! Isn't it also part of team building - everybody starts at the same place and works through it together?

 

[Mark-1]

I've never had a problem with any training that starts right at the beginning - you might call it "embarrassingly trivial" but I guarantee everybody has forgotten something or gets something wrong, whatever their prior experience! Isn't it also part of team building - everybody starts at the same place and works through it together?

No problem whatsoever with the training - I was just pointing out that it was consistent with the RNLI's statement that 90pc of their volunteers aren't professional seamen.

 

[Blue Sunray]

a craft or person that a well-meaning member of the public ashore thought was in need of assistance, but has long since returned to shore.....the list goes on.

I was on the wrong end of one of these a few (well TBH more than a few) years ago. I was one of a group of people who had stepped off the back of a CH47 into the Solent, the intention being that were were to be picked up by some of Her Majesty's RIBs. However said RIBs were beaten to it one of the RNLI's finest who had been called out to a report from a member of the public to a crashing helicopter, they took some persuading that we were quite happy where we for the time being. All amicably resolved in the end but I imagine some LO somewhere got an interview without coffee.

 

[chanelyacht]

Wow! Highly technical rescue across multiple dimensions as you say. But the CG team do appear to have left a critical rope seriously short; or is that just me with a phone pic?

Neither!

CG rope systems are "top managed" - so in this case, the system (stretcher and handler) would be lowered from the top winches, on commands from the Tech on the cliff. It's not like an abseil where you need the rope to go to the bottom - all the "spare" rope is at the top of the system.

What you can see "dangling" is the handling tail - a non-critical part of the system which the boat crew would use to guid the stretcher and handler into the boat - similar to a highline on a helicopter winch.

A damn good job all round, but then the team at this location do a lot of these!

 

[dom]

Neither!

CG rope systems are "top managed" ................

A damn good job all round, but then the team at this location do a lot of these!

Aha, that makes complete sense. Top effort indeed, and a seriously technical and physical task if conducted on a blustery day!

 

[maxi77]

Obviously, if I was up to my neck in oggin, I wouldn't be questioning the coxswain about his equal rights views

With you on that, in that situation you would accept help from a serial killer. The problem they seem to being trying to address is that what is no considered unacceptable language/behaviour may well deflect possible funds givers to other charities which in the present fundraising environment could be bad. Just consider the problems Oxfam has today.