What makes a really good or really bad skipper?

[Langrick1]

Golly. Imagine sailing with someone who thinks everyone else on the boat is a subordinate. Can you imagine what such a person would be like on a camping holiday?

Overly sensitive I would suggest.

If you read the post I think you will see I was writing more of a mangerial situation than a sailing one. However, at the end of the day the crew are subordinate to the skipper.

Simple acceptance of that fact does not mean that the skipper becomes capn Bligh or the crew galley slaves. It is a simple indication of the relative responsibilities.

The skill is to lead so that others happily follow, without the resentment that you appear to have.

 

[JumbleDuck]

However, at the end of the day the crew are subordinate to the skipper.

I'm sorry, but I find that notion quite bizarre. On a destroyer - of course. On a ferry - naturally. But on a Westerly Centaur, it's a crazy idea. What, precisely, and under what law, can the skipper do if they order a crew member to harden in the jib sheet and the crew member says "no"? What if the crew member is the owner?

 

[Babylon]

Two thoughts come to mind:

* A good skipper (or team leader in any activity) is always learning, and should always be open to feedback from crew or team.

* A good skipper/leader should be experienced enough for the task in hand (this could either be a first crossing of the Solent in a family cruiser or a trans-Atlantic race) to inspire confidence in his crew/team.

These two qualities are not mutually exclusive.

A third thought: in an ideal world a good skipper would be lucky to have - or clever enough to choose - a good crew!

In this connection, last summer I had the son of an old friend aboard for a week's cruise, the third or fourth time he's been on board. He's a keen and bright youngster who is about to go to a leading university and already has DS Theory and Practical under his belt. He's ace at sail-trim, good at navigation, a natural helm, etc, and I gave him bucket-loads of these fun things to do. But when it came time for us to clean up and put my boat away, he complained about being asked to clean the loo, and later left without thanking me.

A good crew needs to be able to do as a competent and reasonable skipper asks him/her to do without whinging.

 

[xyachtdave]

The ability to refrain from retying all of the mooring warps in front of the crew and waiting until they've gone home before redoing them is desirable in a 'good' skipper.

 

[Langrick1]

I'm sorry, but I find that notion quite bizarre. On a destroyer - of course. On a ferry - naturally. But on a Westerly Centaur, it's a crazy idea. What, precisely, and under what law, can the skipper do if they order a crew member to harden in the jib sheet and the crew member says "no"? What if the crew member is the owner?

You seem set upon taking the most perverse view possible after taken things to the most extreme length possible so I will leave you and your inferiority complex to your own devices.

 

[JumbleDuck]

You seem set upon taking the most perverse view possible after taken things to the most extreme length possible so I will leave you and your inferiority complex to your own devices.

I am sorry you have felt the need to resort to personal insults, though I have to say that it make a pleasant change to be accused of nursing an inferiority complex.

I would genuinely like to know in what sense you think the crew is "subordinate to the skipper". Would you apply that notion to husband-and-wife crews?

 

[johnalison]

I would genuinely like to know in what sense you think the crew is "subservient to the skipper". Would you apply that notion to husband-and-wife crews?

I would suggest that he means that in agreeing to sail with a person as skipper, the crew have accepted that he will be the primary decision maker and that they will be receiving instructions from him. The legal situation does not need to be invoked.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I would suggest that he means that in agreeing to sail with a person as skipper, the crew have accepted that he will be the primary decision maker and that they will be receiving instructions from him. The legal situation does not need to be invoked.

In some cases I think you are right, but I think this whole business of "primary decision maker" is overplayed. Not least because there really is no legal basis for it. In fact, you could invert it and say that in inviting people to crew, the skipper is implicitly undertaking to make only decisions which suit the others. Unlike a destroyer or ferry, the crew are (in part) on a yacht to do the skipper a favour, which is completely the other way round. The crew are at perfect liberty to ignore the skipper or to abandon him and boat in port, and the wise skipper remembers that and doesn't believe that her crew should show subservience.

 

[Langrick1]

I am sorry you have felt the need to resort to personal insults, though I have to say that it make a pleasant change to be accused of nursing an inferiority complex.

I would genuinely like to know in what sense you think the crew is "subservient to the skipper". Would you apply that notion to husband-and-wife crews?

I suggest you re-read my post.
I did NOT say "subservient" the actual word I used was SUBORDINATE which has a somewhat different meaning - which a few moments with the dictionary will detail.

Let me ask you a question:-

You are skipper of your boat and go below for a sleep leaving a crew member on the helm.

The crew member is distracted and runs down a rubber dinghy with four small children in it.

All four subsequently drown.

Who will be charged with manslaughter?

 

[Tomahawk]

On board I am allowed to be in charge.

 

[westhinder]

A sign of a good skipper: when given the opportunity crew are happy to come and sail again

 

[JumbleDuck]

I suggest you re-read my post.
I did NOT say "subservient" the actual word I used was SUBORDINATE which has a somewhat different meaning - which a few moments with the dictionary will detail.

I do beg your pardon. You are quite right: "subservient" implies an attitude which they may well take and "subordinate" implies a position which they don't - legally - have. In other words the crew may be subservient, but they are not subordinate.

You are skipper of your boat and go below for a sleep leaving a crew member on the helm.

The crew member is distracted and runs down a rubber dinghy with four small children in it.

All four subsequently drown.

Who will be charged with manslaughter?

On a private, non-commercial pleasure boat? If anyone, the crew member. "Skipper" sounds awful good, but has no legal significance. Oh, and while we are at it, the log of a yacht is no more "a legal document" than my diary.

 

[John the kiwi]

There is no doubt that the "Skipper"(This is the word that is used) of even a small recreational craft has legally designated responsibilities in this Country( New Zealand) and this is explicitly stated in various water safety regulations.

I would be most surprised if the same did not apply in the UK? It is certainly implied on a quick read of the UK Government website on recreational boating safety..
When things go badly wrong the authorities will be looking for the person responsible, aka the Skipper.
At that point it would be preferable to have your ducks in a row, not jumbled.

 

[Daydream believer]

On a private, non-commercial pleasure boat? If anyone, the crew member. "Skipper" sounds awful good, but has no legal significance. Oh, and while we are at it, the log of a yacht is no more "a legal document" than my diary.

You clearly did not have to get past the customs officer at Burnham on Crouch 40 years ago

 

[JumbleDuck]

There is no doubt that the "Skipper"(This is the word that is used) of even a small recreational craft has legally designated responsibilities in this Country( New Zealand) and this is explicitly stated in various water safety regulations.

I would be most surprised if the same did not apply in the UK? It is certainly implied on a quick read of the UK Government website on recreational boating safety..

Luckily we have hardly any legislation controlling recreational boating here. In particular there is no need for anybody on board to have any qualifications or experience. Unlike "captain", skipper is a purely honorific title, which is probably why it's used.

There have been cases of the skippers of yachts being prosecuted - for example, for sailing the wrong way along traffic separation schemes. I wonder what they would do in a case like that if no-one aboard admitted to being skipper?

When things go badly wrong the authorities will be looking for the person responsible, aka the Skipper.

The person responsible need not necessarily be the skipper. In the example given, of a negligent helmsman who kills four children, I think it is a little far fetched to think he would be able to pass all blame onto someone who was sleeping at the time and whose sole qualification for being skipper is likely to be "could afford to buy boat"

 

[obmij]

On a private, non-commercial pleasure boat? If anyone, the crew member. "Skipper" sounds awful good, but has no legal significance. Oh, and while we are at it, the log of a yacht is no more "a legal document" than my diary.

Pedantry at best.

 

[Long John Silver]

Its my guess that JumbleDuck aint a very good skipper!

 

[JumbleDuck]

Its my guess that JumbleDuck aint a very good skipper!

I don't claim to be a good skipper. I sail mainly by myself or with a very small crew and to the best of my recollection I have only twice in my adult life sailed as crew in someone else's boat, so my experience both in managing crew and being crew is very limited. Or maybe you were just trying to be offensive in which case meh. I have better things to do than worry about online insults.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Pedantry at best.

I like to think of it as pedantry at its best, thank you very much.

However, I think there are some important and related issues. Lots of people think, incorrectly, that a yacht's log is a "a legal document" though they generally can't explain what "a legal document" is. We are astonishingly free from regulation in the UK, and for that to stay the case we have to resist any creeping tendency to officialise things which are, at the moment, cheerfully ad-hoc.

As for skipper's responsibility and accidents ... I would expect blame to attach to the person whose action or inaction caused the problem. If it's down to a bad decision, and the decision was taken by the skipper then of course the skipper will be blamed, and if the skipper takes most of the decisions then s/he will have most of the responsibility. If, however, an accident happens as a direct result of someone else's negligence, I'd expect them to carry the can. Is that very contentious?

 

[Buck Turgidson]

Luckily we have hardly any legislation controlling recreational boating here. In particular there is no need for anybody on board to have any qualifications or experience. Unlike "captain", skipper is a purely honorific title, which is probably why it's used.

There have been cases of the skippers of yachts being prosecuted - for example, for sailing the wrong way along traffic separation schemes. I wonder what they would do in a case like that if no-one aboard admitted to being skipper?



The person responsible need not necessarily be the skipper. In the example given, of a negligent helmsman who kills four children, I think it is a little far fetched to think he would be able to pass all blame onto someone who was sleeping at the time and whose sole qualification for being skipper is likely to be "could afford to buy boat"

For a small leisure craft there are no legal crewing requirements. However, that does not mean its every man for himself. In fact the opposite is true. Everyone on board has a duty of care commensurate with their experience. From an insurers point of view, they will probably hold a dim view of the owner who failed in his duty of care to the crew by leaving the boat in the hands of a crewman who wasn't capable of managing the situation. The courts would probably hold the same view. So the Helm would carry some responsibility but so would the owner or self declared Skipper.

Another situation might be, if the Skipper asked the crew to do something which was clearly dangerous and an experienced crew member who could see this was the case failed to act. Then the crewmember failed in his duty of care and would probably carry some of the responsibility.

A good Skipper would make sure everyone was aware of their responsibility to everyone else on board and to the safety of the craft.