The end of owner maintenance ...

Daydream believer said:
Perhaps the RYA should point out to the MCA that to many this is a "hobby" and as such many enjoy doing jobs on their boats. This can be seen by the numbers who spend weeks working on them and very little time actually sailing them.
accidents will always happen. All the regs in the world will not stop someone sailing onto rocks or sandbabks or falling overboard. Yachtsmen will still need help when entangled in pots and flotsam regardless of how well the boat was fitted out
As i said many get pleasure from working on their boats and this legislation may well stop that , depending on the view taken by the insurance industry. The simple fact is that most will just ignore it or be oblivious to its existence until a problem arises
Click to expand...

Sieze the moment then! Instead of complaining here, get stuck in with YOUR invitation to be part of it.
 
capnsensible said:
I'm trying to work out whether the degree of paranoia on this thread is laughable or worrying! :ambivalence:
Click to expand...

I agree, it's both.

If my engine failed to start in an emergency and it transpired that I had changed the oil, I am unlikely to go to prison. If my engine failed to start in an emergency and it transpired I had filled it with custard, I would expect some questions to be asked of me.

If I had experienced a serious grounding and hadn't checked the keel bolts and hull matrix then I would expect some questions to be asked of me. If I had removed the keel and put on a completely different keel (aka Hooligan V) and there was an incident, I would expect some questions to be asked. But if I changed my propeller for something sensible, or re-engined with a similar size and power output, no-one is going to mind. My reading of the MGN notices are advocating common sense (like, having personal flotation devices available for everyone on board, but not mandating their use at all times)
 
Poignard said:
I have been reading a bout H.W. Tilman. I wonder how he would have fared at the hands of an MCA inspector.
Click to expand...

The answer is right there:

Meantime we were being badgered by the Australian Shippng Board, who, with the professional distrust of amateurs, rather hoped to save us from our folly by preventing us from sailing at all...

 
RobF said:
I agree, it's both.

If my engine failed to start in an emergency and it transpired that I had changed the oil, I am unlikely to go to prison. If my engine failed to start in an emergency and it transpired I had filled it with custard, I would expect some questions to be asked of me.

If I had experienced a serious grounding and hadn't checked the keel bolts and hull matrix then I would expect some questions to be asked of me. If I had removed the keel and put on a completely different keel (aka Hooligan V) and there was an incident, I would expect some questions to be asked. But if I changed my propeller for something sensible, or re-engined with a similar size and power output, no-one is going to mind. My reading of the MGN notices are advocating common sense (like, having personal flotation devices available for everyone on board, but not mandating their use at all times)
Click to expand...

+1
 
Logic and righteous indignation are not going to save you IF the MCA gets its teeth into this. FV reg started with length, breadth, numbers on the side, then added flares, lights, etc etc until we have the scenarios in my previous posts above. Fair enough, FV casualties were more numerous, and many of these issues needed addressing, but given the numbers, 12000 commercial fisherman against ? how many leisure boaters, your current casualty rate is not high. Maybe man hours at sea would equal things up a bit. Trouble is with such % rate assessments, the low risk small % casualty may end up 100% dead, which is to be avoided.
 
Minn said:
The answer is right there:

Meantime we were being badgered by the Australian Shippng Board, who, with the professional distrust of amateurs, rather hoped to save us from our folly by preventing us from sailing at all...

Click to expand...


It could well be the precursor of compulsory inspection and qualifications that are now commonplace in other countries.

By the way which voyage and book is that taken from, I can't remember reading it and all my Tillman books are in Grenoble at the moment.
 
Last edited:
ghostlymoron said:
There's often remarks on here like " this will invalidate your boat insurance" .
Click to expand...

Yerbut, if the ins co says it will, then it will, and undoubtedly some will do just that, as did Coleman with mine. No problem, just another hoop to jump through.
Now, if they said 'this will reduce your premium'....that would be a choice.
I had a discount once when I fitted a non statutary bilge alarm, and some have received discounts for fitting engine room cctv systems.
 
capnsensible said:
I'm trying to work out whether the degree of paranoia on this thread is laughable or worrying! :ambivalence:
Click to expand...

That is your opinion. I may have the last laugh when you are heavily fined for some infringement of the advice that then became a regulation. Many of us have seen the step by step erosion of freedom in the name of safety. It is what governments and their servants do. It keeps them in a job and makes our lives more difficult for no good reason.
 
RobF said:
I agree, it's both.

If my engine failed to start in an emergency and it transpired that I had changed the oil, I am unlikely to go to prison. If my engine failed to start in an emergency and it transpired I had filled it with custard, I would expect some questions to be asked of me.

If I had experienced a serious grounding and hadn't checked the keel bolts and hull matrix then I would expect some questions to be asked of me. If I had removed the keel and put on a completely different keel (aka Hooligan V) and there was an incident, I would expect some questions to be asked. But if I changed my propeller for something sensible, or re-engined with a similar size and power output, no-one is going to mind. My reading of the MGN notices are advocating common sense (like, having personal flotation devices available for everyone on board, but not mandating their use at all times)
Click to expand...

At last - a fair summary of what it's all about.

We've had ACOPs alongside H&S legislation for decades - and these have been very helpful. It isn't an offence if you don't follow an ACOP but you must be able to justify your decision.

All it's doing is encouraging you to think what you're doing, because not everybody does.
 
Fr J Hackett said:
It could well be the precursor of compulsory inspection and qualifications that are now commonplace in other countries.

By the way which voyage and book is that taken from, I can't remember reading it and all my Tillman books are in Grenoble at the moment.
Click to expand...

Heard Island in ‘Patanela’, third part of ‘ Mostly Mischief’.

I seem to recall that the Patanela, an ordinary cray fishing schooner, has been preserved on the strength of this voyage.

The pages in the book covering preparation for the voyage show that HWT, with a crew of hard men climbers, was in fact insisting on a range of sensible safety precautions...
 
Last edited:
Two penny worth:

The MCA have been, and are being, clobbered by Brexit, with most real ships leaving the UK flag for sane regimes, so they have to find work for idle hands to do lest they be made redundant.

Hence the sudden interest in yottin.

Up to now we have all paid our RYA fees in order that the RYA can continue to do that which we pay them to do which is to preserve the right of all British citizens to go to sea however they like wherever they like and to drown themselves without Government interference.

So what are the RYA doing about shutting down this nonsense right now?

Americans have guns. We have boats.

Americans have the NRA; we have the RYA.

And yes, cold, dead, hands will come into it.
 
Last edited:
Minn said:
Two penny worth:

The MCA have been, and are being, clobbered by Brexit, with most real ships leaving the UK flag for sane regimes, so they have to find work for idle hands to do lest they be made redundant.

Hence the sudden interest in yottin.

Up to now we have all paid our RYA fees in order that the RYA can continue to do that which we pay them to do which is to preserve the right of all British citizens to go to sea however they like wherever they like and to drown themselves without Government interference.

So what are the RYA doing about shutting down this nonsense right now?

Americans have guns. We have boats.

Americans have the NRA; we have the RYA.

And yes, cold, dead, hands will come into it.
Click to expand...


Yes I have always subscribed to the maxim:

"Every Herring Should Hang by it's Own Tail" :encouragement:
 
Minn said:
Two penny worth:

The MCA have been, and are being, clobbered by Brexit, with most real ships leaving the UK flag for sane regimes, so they have to find work for idle hands to do lest they be made redundant.

Hence the sudden interest in yottin.

Up to now we have all paid our RYA fees in order that the RYA can continue to do that which we pay them to do which is to preserve the right of all British citizens to go to sea however they like wherever they like and to drown themselves without Government interference.

So what are the RYA doing about shutting down this nonsense right now?

Americans have guns. We have boats.

Americans have the NRA; we have the RYA.

And yes, cold, dead, hands will come into it.
Click to expand...

Hilarious
 
Elecglitch said:
Hilarious
Click to expand...

It is the potential thin end of a wedge that could lead to compulsory registration and qualification but if you don't value the ability of the freedom to navigate without state regulation then I suppose your comment is justified.
In saying that I do not imply that one should not have insurance or navigate in accordance with International rules.

See post# 155
 
Fr J Hackett said:
It is the potential thin end of a wedge that could lead to compulsory registration and qualification but if you don't value the ability of the freedom to navigate without state regulation then I suppose your comment is justified.
In saying that I do not imply that one should not have insurance or navigate in accordance with International rules.

See post# 155
Click to expand...

Well said.

I recently bought a boat from Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for Defence. A fellow forumite more learned in electrickery than I spent last week sorting out the wiring, accompanied with occasional polite expressions of surprise and disbelief. By way of example, the shore power system (no RCD..., etc) was lethal. I really do not want these people telling me how to maintain my boat, thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top