The end of owner maintenance ...

[lw395]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

I think Flaming has got to the point that the other thread has largely missed.
All this is brought about by high profile cases in 'the Sailing Industry' where commercial operators are having accidents, some fatal, and the MCA et al are not getting the convictions they aim for under existing rules.

 

[mainsail1]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

Am I the only one left in Britain who thinks the MCA should keep their rules for Commercial operators and leave the Pleasure side to continue as they have for many years without intervention? Once a freedom is lost it seems to be lost forever.

 

[lw395]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

Am I the only one left in Britain who thinks the MCA should keep their rules for Commercial operators and leave the Pleasure side to continue as they have for many years without intervention? Once a freedom is lost it seems to be lost forever.

The problem is, we have a big pay'n'play/training industry blurring the distinction.
And yachts have a complex legal status as ships.

 

[scottie]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

A

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-yacht-and-powerboat-safety-at-sea

For anyone intesrested the MCA are now consulting on best practices in the areas of maintenace, groundings, liferaft stowage, preperations for ocean passages, rigging inspection and emergency equipment and use.

YM article here.

https://www.yachtingmonthly.com/new...CBT15q1v2s7Uo3unVRZ1-N2LTr6RjrXkI_He1WIfmmRO0

From no convictions on QR to jail for changing the prop on your RIB is a way over the top

3.5 Modifications to the structure, machinery, loading and trim, or propulsion system can have a substantial effect on the handling, performance, stability or structural integrity of a vessel. Examples of modifications and unintended outcomes are shown below but are not exhaustive;
3.5.1 Upgrading an engine on a RIB to a larger horsepower/engine or changing the propeller size/pitch will normally increase the speed of the vessel or thrust capability but could also affect the trim of the vessel and it may not turn or corner as the designer intended.
3.5.2 Adding a radar to the mast and changing to a larger furled headsail on a sailing vessel will have a negative effect on the stability of the vessel as the increased weight aloft will reduce the righting moment.
3.5.3 Adding a tender to the fly bridge of a motor vessel along with adding an extendable launching davit will raise the centre of gravity of the vessel and when launching the tender, will have a negative effect on the vessel stability.
3.5.4 If replacing an internal engine, that the new engine uses the same engine support mounts and through hull fittings for any piping. If incorrectly fitted/mounted, this could have a negative effect on the structural integrity of the vessel as well as the effective running of the engine.
It is an obvious ploy that if you put forward ridiculous proposals then reduce to less draconian you a still get a lot of petty rules established which can become basis for regulatory costs especially when it becomes an insurance minimum requirement

 

[Elessar]

Re: MGM. Safety at Sea.

This is already being discussed on here:-

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?522903-The-end-of-owner-maintenance

too much waffle there. It's like reading about salt in crevices......

I do wonder what problem they are trying to fix. They specifically mention yacht grounding - I suspect its fallout from Cheeki Rafiki. Which you could argue was covered by legislation anyway.

Got to hope the RYA fights our corner on this one. I for one couldn't afford to have my boat exclusively, professionally maintained. And fettling is a good part of my hobby,

 

[CLB]

Re: MGM. Safety at Sea.

And fettling is a good part of my hobby,

I'd go beyond that. Fettling, self servicing, and owner maintenance is vitally important to allow owners to diagnose and fix things out on the water. This legislation, if it becomes that, could have the opposite effect in the long run, with owners having no idea how to get out of a simple jam such as a shredded impeller, or a belt that has shed. I have broken down, or suffered some form of mechanical failure more times that I can remember, but fingers crossed and touch wood, I have always got myself out of the situation without external help using my spares, my tool kit and my mechanical knowledge.

 

[Polly's Kettle]

You are all up in arms about this proposal but i have just read the second document - maintenance etc-
can anyone tell me what is so wrong with that?

I have several parts that give me the willies, but I will reference just this one:
"Any damage to a vessel, regardless of the scale or location of that damage, should be fixed promptly, ideally before the next passage"
Read this in the context that each word included in a document is included for a reason and carries equal weight."

"…regardless of scale or location..."


This leaves no room - if you do not fix all damage, regardless of scale or location, then you are not complying with the guidelines. So that's any damage, anywhere, however small.

Now you can say "don't be silly, they don't mean that". But I can't see any other reason why you would so explicitly go to the trouble of including those words "regardless of scale or location" unless you intended them to be there, and that is certainly how a court or insurer would be entitled to read this document.


So to answer your question, there is one example amongst several of what I believe is wrong with this proposal. I'd add to that that I am have never commercially worked on engines, or gone on a diesel course. I read this document to mean that I should no longer service my engine. It makes no distinction on its guidelines between personal boats, and chartered boats with paying passengers.


Me no likey.

 

[langstonelayabout]

OK. I’d like to summarise what I’ve read so far on these draft documents as such:

1 You won’t be able to work on your boat’s rig at all – you MUST pay a marine professional to do it.
2 Had your engine changed for a nice new Beta? If you chose it and you aren’t a qualified professional designer, you could be liable for a fine or prison sentence.
3 Do you rig your 1972 wooden boat in accordance with the manufacturer’s operation and maintenance manual? No? Then you have departed from the regulations.
4 Have you bought and fitted a lovely Flexofold folding propeller to your boat? You’ve changed the machinery and you could be liable for a fine or prison sentence.
5 Sailing a boat with a radar reflector and/or radar up the mast? You do have permission from your boat’s manufacturer and/or designer showing that the change in the centre of gravity of your boat is still OK/safe, don’t you?
6 Did you fix your genoa furling yourself when it broke? You aren’t authorised to do so. You could be liable for a fine or prison sentence.

This is the stupidity that is contained within these documents.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE review them and respond to the MCA’s email address with something professional and critical of these proposals. Formally object to them.

Ask them to confirm that they have received your email and to keep you informed of the progress of these proposals.
This is the real thing. Don’t think there’s plenty of time because this is it.

Review them and object for the sake of your pocket, your safety and sanity.

 

[[70521]]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

Am I the only one left in Britain who thinks the MCA should keep their rules for Commercial operators and leave the Pleasure side to continue as they have for many years without intervention? Once a freedom is lost it seems to be lost forever.

Define pleasure? Clipper, is that pleasure or commercial?

 

[Daydream believer]

When I started my apprenticeship in the motor trade in the '60s, the only health advice I received was to clean the spoon in the foreman's tea. Joking apart, we had no formal H & S training whatsoever, learning was on the job.

Do you think that was a good or a bad thing?
personally, (having been brought up in the building trade and worked on site from the age of 12 years)i have seen some pretty bad accidents -- so i think is a bad thing- looking back i sometimes think that those supposed to do the "training" ie the craftsmen around the apprentices, were as dangerous, in many cases, as the youngsters they were supposed to be looking after.
practices then led to men with severe injuries in their early 40's due to shear ignorance not only by them but by their employers ( i say that even though my father employed many hundreds)

 

[CLB]

Do you think that was a good or a bad thing?
personally, (having been brought up in the building trade and worked on site from the age of 12 years)i have seen some pretty bad accidents -- so i think is a bad thing- looking back i sometimes think that those supposed to do the "training" ie the craftsmen around the apprentices, were as dangerous, in many cases, as the youngsters they were supposed to be looking after.
practices then led to men with severe injuries in their early 40's due to shear ignorance not only by them but by their employers ( i say that even though my father employed many hundreds)

I started working on building sites in the mid eighties. Hard hats were only worn on the rare occasion when we had a site visit from someone important. I am long out of that game, but nowadays, I get the feeling that you would be thrown off site if caught without one at any time. It didn't seem an issue at the time, but looking back I can see the error of our ways and am thankful that I escaped unharmed and that these rules are now enforced to protect the workers.

 

[Robert Wilson]

A few years back

(perhaps fifteen) ​

I was walking up beside the Gruinard River. There was an officer and a squad of men laying out some planks of wood on the grass, in a large open area, for why I know not.They were all wearing yellow construction-site type hard hats.
After chatting to them for a few minutes I asked the Officer the reason for the hard hats; surely nothing possibly could fall on their heads in the open, in the Highlands?
The Officer took me aside and said,
"F**K OFF".

I gained the impression he was not best pleased with me, or the regulations.

But come on! Soldiers, in the open, playing with planks of wood on the grass? Safety is important, but common sense must be used too.
Why not wear their service issue combat helmets?

 

[halcyon]

My side worry is that an exclusion appeared on this years company insurance, it excludes safety critical equipment, after much toing and froing I find out for marine use it is anything that may effect safe navigation. In this context it is the propulsion of the vessel, i.e. the engine, ut could also be sails, or come to it oars!!!!. So I cannot supply a panel that has a battery isolator switch, if it failed the engine would stop, therefore safety critical.

Makes design one big step harder for me, but if this becomes standard what happens to marine engineers or riggers ?

Brian

 

[Robert Wilson]

I can see it now.
I fitted a new Furlex and forestay in 2014 prior to sailing s/h round Britain.
Furler drum comes unstuck (as it did with me in May this year).

A split pin in a clevis pin had dropped out and then the clevis pin. Furler jammed and jib with it.
I effected a temporary repair, which is IMHO a lot stronger than the manufacturer's design.
Say I had lost sailing power and hit another boat, buoy or whatever and done damage (minor or major).
​

Insurance claim comes back refused because I'm not a qualified rigger with all the specific tools, either ashore or aboard (in the middle of The MInch).
I'm reported to the relevant authority and I'm facing a fine and/or prison.

Our world has gone mad.

 

[mainsail1]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

Define pleasure? Clipper, is that pleasure or commercial?

Pleasure is defined in the MCA documents.....in short, .muppets like me sailing on my own boat without paying guests except possible contribution to actual expenses incurred on the trip. Clipper is Commercial.

 

[zoidberg]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

These draft MGNs will certainly feed into the Reporting practices of yacht surveyors.... and their 'recommendations' to insurers.

For example, if/when my insurance company insists on a survey, and a qualified surveyor turns up and eyes my new lightweight Beta 14 engine, he's likely to remark that that will have an as-yet unknown effect on the Calculated Righting Moment as computed by the boat's designer on his analogue sliderule nearly 50 years ago. He'll then eye my shiny new twin furling head sails, and say the same. He'll then tell me that he - or someone similarly qualified - needs to be engaged to calculate a new Stability Certificate to replace the old one..... and then he'll confess he already knows the designer didn't publish such a calculation, 'cos it wasn't needed then..... for he'll otherwise need to make a costly Recommendation in his Survey Report, and my insurers will insist.

 

[scottie]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

I

Define pleasure? Clipper, is that pleasure or commercial?

According to recent MAIB definitely commercial and under scrutiny as we speak I suspect

 

[Wansworth]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

These draft MGNs will certainly feed into the Reporting practices of yacht surveyors.... and their 'recommendations' to insurers.

For example, if/when my insurance company insists on a survey, and a qualified surveyor turns up and eyes my new lightweight Beta 14 engine, he's likely to remark that that will have an as-yet unknown effect on the Calculated Righting Moment as computed by the boat's designer on his analogue sliderule nearly 50 years ago. He'll then eye my shiny new twin furling head sails, and say the same. He'll then tell me that he - or someone similarly qualified - needs to be engaged to calculate a new Stability Certificate to replace the old one..... and then he'll confess he already knows the designer didn't publish such a calculation, 'cos it wasn't needed then..... for he'll otherwise need to make a costly Recommendation in his Survey Report, and my insurers will insist.

Anything is possible,sadly

 

[rotrax]

Re: MCA consultation - in the wake of Cheeki Rafiki

If a Government Agency starts going down the road of trying to wreck the marine leisure boat industry there will be an outcry.

I'll lay a tenner with anyone that your project fear never materialises.

Commercial irresponsible operators and owners, probably a good thing to tighten up.

A couple of tragedies have shown that it is needed.

 

[Bigplumbs]

Whilst you are correct that these are not mandatory, if something was to happen, effectively they are, because if somethign goes wrong, you end up standing in front of a Jury, facing their lawyer armed with these notes, explaining that because you had done all your own maintenance over the winter that "the owner failed to comply with accepted best practice"

Say your engine breaks down coming in on a rough night, your boat is lost on rocks and your insurance company declines to pay because you have not followed accepted good practice and have done all the maintenance yourself for the last 30 years, instead of using a Marine Professional.

Or the rig comes down in a storm, even though inspected yearly and 7 years old, the instructions from the original builder state it shoudl be replaced every 5 years (the rig document here makes replacement in line with the builders instructions mandatory).

Etc etc etc ... while the general advice on the quality and integrity of repairs is good and sensible, the requirement that only a Marine Professional should carry out any work or inspection is onerous.

At the very least they should contain the phrase "Marine Professional or other Competent Person" at least then you are able to argue in front of a jury that you were competent to complete the task.

Total Twoddle I am afraid you obviously don’t understand that the law in this regard in the Uk does not stipulate who must do work only what must be done and to what standard.

This applies to cars and buildings in the main part which are far more numerous and dangerous than boats will ever be

Further more these are recommendations

Further more how do you define a marine professional for pity’s sake and what qualifications do you need

As I said total twoddle