Sète's new lifeboat

Sybarite said:
I started off by simply presenting the lovely new boat. But then the knee-jerk reactions set in trying to show that it couldn't possibly be as good as the British boats.
.
Click to expand...
Hahaha! You simply started by trailing your coat by in the first two posts drawing unflattering comparisons with the RNLI boats, performance and cost, in order to start an argument with folk who, rightly or wrongly, mostly, unstintingly support the RNLI. In that regard you have enjoyed complete success.
 
fisherman said:
Hahaha! You simply started by trailing your coat by in the first two posts drawing unflattering comparisons with the RNLI boats, performance and cost, in order to start an argument with folk who, rightly or wrongly, mostly, unstintingly support the RNLI. In that regard you have enjoyed complete success.
Click to expand...

Yes he has, but it is the fault of those that respond. He is basically trolling. He knows he will get a response, and lots of opportunities to argue the toss. The answer is to simply not respond. His RNLI baiting posts will soon fall off the bottom of the page and he will eventually realise the futility in starting them.
 
CLB said:
Yes he has, but it is the fault of those that respond. He is basically trolling. He knows he will get a response,
Click to expand...

Actually he wasn't all that confident, he only waited 7 hours with no response before he caved in and gave us another prod, highlighting names and costs, then another 14 hours for any sort of a bite. Very slow start, we're obviously not as much fun as he expected.
 
CLB said:
Yes he has, but it is the fault of those that respond. He is basically trolling. He knows he will get a response, and lots of opportunities to argue the toss. The answer is to simply not respond. His RNLI baiting posts will soon fall off the bottom of the page and he will eventually realise the futility in starting them.
Click to expand...

What would be the fun in that? :D
 
Bru said:
What would be the fun in that? :D
Click to expand...

Am I the only one who is amazed by the numbers? For me the apathy goes a long way towards explaining why Brexit is happening. So many people would appear to have no concept either of value in the absolute or of relative value.

A Shannon plus launch trolley cost £3600k or €4000k.

To put this into some sort of perspective, here's what's available for approx the same money :

Boats

https://fr.topboats.com/barcos-ocasion/jongert-32t €3850k
https://fr.topboats.com/barcos-ocasion/dykstra-custom-sloop €3950k
https://fr.topboats.com/netherlands/gebruikte-boten-te-koop/sunreef-yachts-82-dd-double-deck €3850k

Châteaux (asking prices)

http://proprietes.lefigaro.fr/annonces/chateau-yvelines-ile+de+france-france/14243065/ €3980k
http://proprietes.lefigaro.fr/annonces/chateau-vaucluse-provence+alpes+cote+d+azur-france/13762175/ €4200k
http://properties.lefigaro.com/announces/chalet-savoie-rhone+alpes-france/168160-2/ €4000k
http://proprietes.lefigaro.fr/annonces/chateau-gers-midi+pyrenees-france/229312-8/ €4000k
http://properties.lefigaro.com/announces/chateau-yonne-bourgogne-france/12712371/ €4000k
http://proprietes.lefigaro.fr/annonces/chateau-herault-languedoc+roussillon-france/12496867/ €4000k
http://proprietes.lefigaro.fr/annonces/chateau-eure+et+loir-centre-france/407676-4/ €3990k

And before Bru, chanelyacht et al come back, I know you cant launch a chateau off a beach....
 
Last edited:
fisherman said:
Actually he wasn't all that confident, he only waited 7 hours with no response before he caved in and gave us another prod, highlighting names and costs, then another 14 hours for any sort of a bite. Very slow start, we're obviously not as much fun as he expected.
Click to expand...

Actually there are other things in life.
 
Sybarite said:
I think my final sentence covers this. At least I thought people would understand that.
Click to expand...

Your final sentence says it all. It's just the same old same old litany of comparing chalk with cheese, ignoring key operational differences, coming to dubious conclusions from limited data and making assumptions etc, etc.

You cannot, although I'm sure you'll keep doing so, ignore the beach launch/recovery requirement. It was and remains fundamental to the Shannon requirement

So your latest batch of numbers are, as usual, irrelevant and misleading

There is no apathy, at least not on my part (I've spent a silly amount of time countering your arguments!). I and many others simply do not agree with you that the cheaper Pantocarene designs would do the job the RNLI needed doing. And I and many others do not agree with you that Shannon and the SLS are excessively expensive. And I and many others do not agree with you that the RNLI should have outsourced the design and manufacture of the boats

Where Brexit comes into it I really don't know!
 
Bru said:
Your final sentence says it all. It's just the same old same old litany of comparing chalk with cheese, ignoring key operational differences, coming to dubious conclusions from limited data and making assumptions etc, etc.

You cannot, although I'm sure you'll keep doing so, ignore the beach launch/recovery requirement. It was and remains fundamental to the Shannon requirement

So your latest batch of numbers are, as usual, irrelevant and misleading

There is no apathy, at least not on my part (I've spent a silly amount of time countering your arguments!). I and many others simply do not agree with you that the cheaper Pantocarene designs would do the job the RNLI needed doing. And I and many others do not agree with you that Shannon and the SLS are excessively expensive. And I and many others do not agree with you that the RNLI should have outsourced the design and manufacture of the boats

Where Brexit comes into it I really don't know!
Click to expand...

There's none so blind....
 
If all the manufactures design criteria are ignored. If the RNLI go the cost of redesigning and rebuilding a lot of boat houses. If all of the outsourced costs are not added. If all the extra personnel that have to employed by other organisations to cover the shortfall are ignored. If the RNLI does not employ full time coxswain. If the fact that the French boat does not do what is required is ignored.

Then their running costs may come down and they could use the cheaper boats but they would probably need to employ a lot of accountants to make sure that every cost was kept down and only use the cheapest stuff that can be found.

So yes depending on what is wanted things could be changed.
 
fisherman said:
What do they cost?

Actually, what's that quote about the cost of everything and the value of nothing?
Click to expand...

That must be about the 50th time that that one has been quoted. (It was Oscar Wilde by the way.)

Cecil Graham: And a sentimentalist, my dear Darlington, is a man who sees an absurd value in everything and doesn’t know the market price of any single thing.”

In fact it appeared to me that nobody seemed to grasp what €4000k actually represented and so I gave a few pointers.

I did anticipate that some would come back with the observation that you could not use these to save lives at sea. It didn't take long.
 
Last edited:
Mister E said:
If all the manufactures design criteria are ignored. If the RNLI go the cost of redesigning and rebuilding a lot of boat houses. If all of the outsourced costs are not added. If all the extra personnel that have to employed by other organisations to cover the shortfall are ignored. If the RNLI does not employ full time coxswain. If the fact that the French boat does not do what is required is ignored.

Then their running costs may come down and they could use the cheaper boats but they would probably need to employ a lot of accountants to make sure that every cost was kept down and only use the cheapest stuff that can be found.

So yes depending on what is wanted things could be changed.
Click to expand...

Everybody who has reported on the new CTT has said that it is state of the art with the latest equipment. The coxwain of the first said that the architects and builders could not have built a better boat.

One year of studies by teams including architects, naval experts, crew members, builders etc. Then two more years to delivery at a price which reflects strict cost control.

Shannon : 13 years.
 
Last edited:
My employer drills deep water wells at $750k per day in 2008. Today my employer drills the same well at $300k per day. The bloat is obvious when your income gets slashed from $100/bbl to $50/bbl. The RNLI are wealthy, so I am told, perhaps they just can’t see the bloat.
 
Sybarite said:
Debate doesn't work with you when you ignore facts that are put in front of you. Waste of time.
Click to expand...

That's rich!

It's you that ignores the facts

It's you that is ignoring the fact that the ORC182 (the boat you say is suitable for use in place of Shannon) has a manufacturer stated operational limit of sea state 6, 4m significant wave height

It's you that persistently ignores the fundamental operational requirement for Shannon that it be capable of beach launch and recovery in order to avoid invalidating your claims that designs which are not suitable are comparable to Shannon

Sybarite said:
Everybody who has reported on the new CTT has said that it is state of the art with the latest equipment. The coxwain of the first said that the architects and builders could not have built a better boat. .
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that the new CTT is anything other than state of the art. It looks an excellent boat for the requirement for which it has been procured and at an excellent price. I am arguing, and will continue to argue, that it is not a suitable alternative to Shannon for the RNLI.

You simply cannot ignore the known facts, as above. No doubt you will though

I take it that you have no answer to the above points other than to ignore them then?
 
Bru said:
That's rich!

It's you that ignores the facts

It's you that is ignoring the fact that the ORC182 (the boat you say is suitable for use in place of Shannon) has a manufacturer stated operational limit of sea state 6, 4m significant wave height
Click to expand...


Let me ask you one simple question. Do you think that any state in its right mind would buy a 60' lifeboat if it couldn't go to sea in more than a F8?

Plain commonsense - as well as what is written in the description which you persistently ignore "all weather" ; Bureau Veritas "Unlimited navigation".


It's you that persistently ignores the fundamental operational requirement for Shannon that it be capable of beach launch and recovery in order to avoid invalidating your claims that designs which are not suitable are comparable to Shannon.
Click to expand...

I have never ignored the fundamental operational requirement for a Shannon. What I am saying is that that could in no way justify a multiple of 3 in its cost compared with the nearest sized Vedette V1 (which is actually slighly bigger).

Here is an article about the Norwegian pilot boat which is the same basic model as the Vedette N°1 :

http://www.bernard-naval.com/wa_files/HAMMERFEST_20HAVN_20KF_20_3A_20FRENCH_20TEMPTATION.pdf

It is not three times better; both boats share composite hull construction. Why the Shannon is three times more expensive is because it incurred 13 years of development costs and was built in a new facility which cost £24m (even though in 2012 it was announced at £11.2m - par for the course). What is the intended production run over which the building costs are to be amortized? And with a 25 year operational life for the boats, what is the yard then going to be doing?

How do they calculate that they will make a £3.7m pa saving by bringing construction in house? This was the announced saving when the yard was estimated to cost £11.2m; they are still using the same figure now even though the yard's cost has more than doubled since.

As I said before anybody who believes that will believe anything.

So over this period the Shannon has gone from £1.5m to £2.1m.
The trailer has gone from £800k to £1.5k
The yard has gone from £11.2m to £24m : all in a period when inflation was basically flat...!!!

Nuff said?
 
Last edited:
In Sybarites defence, the French could be using the old American Product Liability dodge, like Honda started in the early 70's with casting a minimum thickness on disc brake rotors.

If you went by Honda's reccomended thickness the rotors would last ten minutes.

The get out was, as no one changed them at Honda's reccomended thickness, if one failed and caused death or injury, Honda had it covered.

" Look-its too thin! Says so on the rotor! "

Perhaps that is the builders position.

But, I somehow doubt it.

Are the yard publishing conflicting information?

Anyone apart from Sybarite and Bru qualified to comment? I'm certainly not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top