Should regulations be introduced for masts and rigging in the leisure market?

[Concerto]

Just read this report in Boating Business (Boating Business | Regulations for masts? ).

Regulations probably should be introduced for masts and rigging in the leisure market.

That’s the opinion of marine consultant David Barrow who carries out surveys for MS Amlin and was director of Sparcraft for 20 years.

“I’ve seen many bent and broken masts over the years. There’s no real regulation of masts and rigging in the leisure sector,” he said. “There’s no specific rule to change a boat’s rigging after ten years.”

And he pointed out that while superyachts are regulated under MCA regs and boats that have done a circumnavigation usually have a survey carried out, when it comes to other boats, owners often don’t see the need.

If a boat had suffered a knock, this could affect the rigging without the owner knowing. If a boat was inspected (e)very few years, there would be more chances to look at the mast.

“It’s not the insurers’ job to regulate the rigging business; the insurer’s job is to behave according to the results of their surveys,” David says.

Maintenance

“There can be a mass of different reasons as to why masts fall down, but quite a few are because of maintenance issues.

“I’ve seen other masts where there have been technical issues with the masts themselves.”

This is particularly the case with carbon masts – a relatively new product when it comes to masts – where there could be gremlins within the manufacture and possible delamination.

“It’s pretty hard to get insurance for a carbon mast, especially in a race boat as insurers are not going to pay for their development any longer.

“Some insurers are calling for NDT inspections before the masts leave the factory.

“Regulations probably do need to come in.”

With many aluminium masts still in use after 50 years and current masts being thinner walled and with complex rigging, perhaps he has a point. It is interesting his comment about no rule for changing rigging at 10 years, recently I was chatting with an owner who was still using 40 year old rigging.

 

[Caraway]

Bloke's a knob. Regulations are the resort of tired leaders.

 

[penfold]

Man with vested interest in surveying things suggests more regulation requiring more surveying; colour me surprised.

 

[DJE]

With many aluminium masts still in use after 50 years.....

And thousands in use that are 20 to 30 years old, there don't seem to be many failures.

 

[nortada]

Another money making venture by suggested by interested parties based on JUST AND OPINION NO DEFINITIVE STATISTICS, RESEARCH OR STUDY.

In a industry that is facing very uncertain times, this could result in the law of unintended consequences. People unable to afford the extra expense, selling up or just walking away.

Another hammer blow to the sailing industry

 

[Blueboatman]

When the mast go Bong
The wind’s too strong

From the Art of Course Sailing iirc

 

[jwilson]

I replaced as a preecaution the original standing rigging on a coded Jeanneau AWB at 12 years: the coding surveyor was happy with that decision when I discussed it with him at the mythical "ten year rule" point. Shortly afterwards I was on a Westerly of similar size, displacement and slightly less sail area. The Westerly had 8mm and 10mm rigging wires - my Jeanneau had 6, 7 and 8mm wires.

 

[Tranona]

Exactly the same issue as with seacocks that certain surveyors got all hot and bothered about a few years ago. Vested interests trying to make a name for themselves. Of course both rigging and seacocks fail, but in numbers that are so tiny (unless any one has real statistics to the contrary) that there is no evidence that regulations would make any difference. He has more of a point with carbon masts where there has been a higher failure rate, but again what sort of regulation would change matters? If there was a way of reducing the failure rate, surely the makers would have discovered it.

The "10 year" rule is a crude measure with no bases in fact that allows insurers to place conditions on some boats if they are reluctant to insure. Not all insurers use it, nor is it applied universally.

 

[Stemar]

Short answer: No

How often do leisure sailor's masts come down? I know it does happen, but what are the actual numbers? Yes, a boisterous RTI will probably bring one or two down, but how many of those are actually over age? I reckon most are just badly set up.

I see people talking about a ten year life, but IIRC, it used to be 15 years, Why the change? Is it cost cutting by manufacturers, or is it that no one actually knows, and there are arses to be covered and money to be made?

 

[Supertramp]

Short answer: No

How often do leisure sailor's masts come down? I know it does happen, but what are the actual numbers? Yes, a boisterous RTI will probably bring one or two down, but how many of those are actually over age? I reckon most are just badly set up.

I see people talking about a ten year life, but IIRC, it used to be 15 years, Why the change? Is it cost cutting by manufacturers, or is it that no one actually knows, and there are arses to be covered and money to be made?

Like many infrequent failure events its easy to over react and create excessive precautions. It would be a lot more useful if the insurance companies collectively shared their decades of data on dismastings sorted by boat make and age, rig age, weather and sea state, location, racing or not, etc. Then a bit of analysis combined with survey information (on evident rig problems) would give informed guidelines which we could respect and believe. And perhaps the guidelines would differ for different boat sizes, types and use.

 

[Caraway]

When the mast go Bong
The wind’s too strong

From the Art of Course Sailing iirc

Just looked for it and their dismasting was more along these lines.

 

[lustyd]

no evidence that regulations would make any difference.

Even if there were, what's in it for society? If a seacock fails then the owner likely knew they were pushing their luck. If a rig fails over 10 years then probably the same story either due to condition of the rig or conditions on the day.
Let's say regulations are introduced, who do I sue if my rig fails at 6 years? The onus is and always will be on the owner, and regs won't change that aside from adding expense to an already expensive passtime.

 

[Graham376]

So far, my insurers (Premier & Y Yacht) haven't had a mandatory replacement period and have been happy with written rig inspection report.

 

[lustyd]

I feel insurance requirements are a different beast to regulation. If insurers want to require us to change sails once a year then they're free to do so and we're free to find their competition. Requiring every boat in the land to replace perfectly good rigging on a timetable is quite another thing. Sadly with the present establishment it wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

[Neeves]

I agree with Supertramp and those that have mentioned that there is arbitrary and changeable suggestions and rules over rigging life.

Insurance companies imply they have the data - but I'm sceptical. its is known that insurance companies demand new rigging at 10 years - so many will simply stop insuring their yacht - so the yachts that have rigging, 20, 30 or 40 years old are simply outside the statistics. The fact that some insurance companies have a more relaxxed attitude seems to contradict the 10 year rule.

By demanding the 10 year rule (or whatever) means the insurance companies have reduced claims (so make more money) and they have managed to get the 10 year rule to stick - without publishing any evidence to support their policies - and we of course pay. As long as the insurance companies stick to and agree the policy and as long as we pay then they reduce their claims but we pay for risks that, apparently, have disappeared (because we have new rigging0. Surveyors and riggers rub their hands with glee - and we continue to pay.

This could be a sailors lament

Rather than have the insurance companies reveal their data maybe its something for the various National organisation to look at - gouging of yacht owners.

Here in Oz we need an insurance policy to enter a marina, or third party cover. With an 11 year old yacht you need new rigging to enter a marina (or third party). Theoretically you need third party insurance to refuel as most refuelling facilities are shore side - in a marina. I do understand the need for 3rd party cover but given the cost of marina fuel - the marina could cover the damages with its own insurance.......

Take care, stay safe, keep smiling

Jonathan

 

[Lucy52]

Would a more frequent rig inspection by a qualified rigger be a better way to reduce the risk of a rigging failure? On the basis that a poorly set up or slack rig is more likely to fail.

 

[Baggywrinkle]

The insurance companies know exactly what the frequency of rig failures are, and as a result, depending on their own statistics, many ask for rigging inspections/survey no older than "x" years. Some don't and are happy to take the risk, and perhaps feel it gives them a competitive advantage - and they adjust their premiums accordingly.

While there is no appreciable cost to the health service or any other public body due to rig failures, there is no business case for the cost of creating and enforcing any legislation.

So why bother.

The system works fine as it is - leave it alone. It is in every yachtsmans interest to ensure his rig doesn't fall on his head - that is incentive enough IMO.

 

[lustyd]

Would a more frequent rig inspection by a qualified rigger be a better way to reduce the risk of a rigging failure? On the basis that a poorly set up or slack rig is more likely to fail.

Same issue, really. What you're suggesting is still a mandatory check and creation of a whole industry (training, certification, inspections, certificates, licensing) for almost zero benefit to anyone but the owner of the boat who is taking a risk with their own money.

I've had boat surveys, and frankly could have done a better job myself, and the same would eventually be true here. If you enforce checks, then more checks would be carried out but there is no guarantee of improved safety just because someone with a certificate looks at the rig. Remember this isn't like an MOT where faulty brakes could kill a child on the street. We're talking about something that almost never happens, and when it does it almost always only affects the boat owner's bank balance. Charter fleets already have to meet safety standards so will already be inspected.

 

[Caraway]

Here in Oz we need an insurance policy to enter a marina, or third party cover. With an 11 year old yacht you need new rigging to enter a marina (or third party). Theoretically you need third party insurance to refuel as most refuelling facilities are shore side - in a marina. I do understand the need for 3rd party cover but given the cost of marina fuel - the marina could cover the damages with its own insurance.......

Take care, stay safe, keep smiling

Jonathan

How are you defining insurance cover? In the UK 3rd party cover is insurance cover but only covers 3rd party claims.. Comprehensive cover includes your own vessel.

 

[robtoujours]

Around here a Contessa 32 snapped her mast in half and had to be towed in by the lifeboat just two days ago.

Cause: Rusted chainplate. So it’s not just rigging of course but also chainplates, tangs, and bottle screws.

An argument for unstayed rigs, or at least synthetic rigging, perhaps?

The current system may have worked well for decades. However, I am pessimistic. A decent proportion of the recent Youtoob generation of new sailors are so utterly clueless - and more importantly, unwilling or unable to learn - that they will cause more and more hassle and accidents over the coming years. Entirely due to a combination of laziness and narcissism.

This will force the authorities hand - to introduce boat licensing requirements as with cars, massively increased standards for insurance, restrictions everywhere, etc. There are now a frightening amount of sheep like idiots who believe they are going to be the next “La Vag” - and they will ultimately have to be protected from themselves.

mark my words..