Why do some of us expect the RNLI to act as a marine recovery service?

[OGITD]

IMHO the RNLI should only come to our assistance if there is a genuine risk to life or danger to shipping.
So what’s all this about the highest percentage of call-outs (shouts) being due to engine failure?
If you are a yacht sail.
If you are a MoBo you have two engines ….. and if you don’t then you will have an emergency / auxiliary engine...... won't you?
So why do we consider it standard practice to rely on the RNLI for what I would class as stupidity?

 

[NUTMEG]

I don't!

And I pay my Offshore subs by direct debit too.

 

[sailorman]

IMHO the RNLI should only come to our assistance if there is a genuine risk to life or danger to shipping.
So what’s all this about the highest percentage of call-outs (shouts) being due to engine failure?
If you are a yacht sail.
If you are a MoBo you have two engines ….. and if you don’t then you will have an emergency / auxiliary engine...... won't you?
So why do we consider it standard practice to rely on the RNLI for what I would class as stupidity?

The CG should arrange a commercial tow
But it suits both parties, builds the figures, builds the empire

 

[sailorman]

And I pay my Offshore subs by direct debit too.

does that cover for Home Start too

 

[OGITD]

As should we all

And I pay my Offshore subs by direct debit too.

Pay by DD to support our “world-class” organisation.

But to expect volunteer crews to attend for our failings when it’s not an emergency is just not acceptable.

 

[tcm]

hum, yeah, but they got just stacks and stacks of cash and so many volunteers they turn loads away, so it’s probably best that they get loads of practice going out for numpties - ready for when you callem, perhaps?

Alternative argument - messing about in pleasure boats is “just stupid” anyway - totally pointless other than for personal amusement. Hence the RNLI should only attend “serious” ie incidents involving commercial vessels

Alternative other argument : almost ALL incidents could be eventually bracketed under “stupid” - the ship could/should have held off departure, taken another route, woken the skipper, done something else other than that which led to the problem. Ergo, disband the RNLI and allow natural selection to elmininate the more useless skippers, instead of saving them to perhaps have more ad more incidents.

 

[HunterWanderer]

The RNLI do like rescuing people. Good for the statistics!

I was "rescued" when sailing a windsurfer. I wasn't very good so set off with a onshore breeze. pulled my back trying to get mast up after a splash. life guardnswam out and inshore life boat mobilised. Big discussion between them as to how to make a resue. In the end I was taken to the beach by the rib and the lifeguard sailed the windsurfer so they could both claim the rescue. We were nearly on the beach by the time they had agreed this.

I was grateful though and made a donation to both.

 

[sailorman]

hum, yeah, but they got just stacks and stacks of cash and so many volunteers they turn loads away, so it’s probably best that they get loads of practice going out for numpties - ready for when you callem, perhaps?

Alternative argument - messing about in pleasure boats is “just stupid” anyway - totally pointless other than for personal amusement. Hence the RNLI should only attend “serious” ie incidents involving commercial vessels

Alternative other argument : almost ALL incidents could be eventually bracketed under “stupid” - the ship could/should have held off departure, taken another route, woken the skipper, done something else other than that which led to the problem. Ergo, disband the RNLI and allow natural selection to elmininate the more useless skippers, instead of saving them to perhaps have more ad more incidents.

That could Costa more

 

[Ludd]

The answer is,iin my opinion, for an insurance claim to be made for vessel recovery,as oppsed to rescue of crew.
I know the argument about people then delaying a call for assistance because they don't HAVE insurance-----but maybe they should have.

 

[OGITD]

Simples!

The answer is,iin my opinion, for an insurance claim to be made for vessel recovery,as oppsed to rescue of crew.
I know the argument about people then delaying a call for assistance because they don't HAVE insurance-----but maybe they should have.

Experience and knowledge is such a grey area, but insurance can be made black & white.

Simples! …. if you are recovered without insurance then you forfeit your vessel

 

[snooks]

If you are a yacht sail.

Or if there is no wind anchor and wait for some

...or anchor and try to fix it....But obviously this is easier in the Solent than in Scotland

 

[Hugh Foulis]

Worked with the RNLI on a couple of big operations, participated in many exercises with the CG. Filling in the time between 03.30 and 06.00 we always seem to get on to this topic. There has never been anything other than the view that they would rather be turned out for whatever reason; false alarm, genuine life at risk and all points in between.
Engine failure may turn in to something much worse and too late to do anything, false alarm may have been genuine. In addition, they have to train and exercise so towing in an engine failure is just as good as any other non life saving launch.


HF

 

[Ex-SolentBoy]

Or if there is no wind anchor and wait for some

...or anchor and try to fix it....But obviously this is easier in the Solent than in Scotland

Not necessarily.

We had a steering failure within sight of Yarmouth Harbour once. Got swept very quickly towards Hurst. 60m of chain and a CQR and we still dragged.

Not the furthest Yarmouth lifeboat have been to make a rescue, but they seemed very pleased we had six onboard!

 

[oldharry]

Having been involved recently in a Mayday situation while out on someone elses MOBO (minor engine room fire, and flooding) it was very clear the Coast Guard reckoned we should have declared an emergency sooner than we did - in fact it was them who elevated to 'Mayday' status, and mobilised both the Helo and the RNLI. Skipper had put me on the radio while he concentrated on saving his boat, and he was lucky in being able to get the situation under control (due to prompt action, pre-planned emergency drills, and adequate on board safety gear) before anyone arrived.

Both he and I were brought up in the 'indpendent' school of thought where you sort your own problems out and only call for help if you really need it. An attitude of mind I think most experienced sailors will identify with.

But two things became clear during and after the incident: firstly, it was obvious from the questions CG were asking us that they were not assuming anything about our skills, or lack of them. They were working on the initial assumption we were novices - slightly irritating, but entirely understandable while there was still a chance we might have to abandon ship.

The second was an absolutely clear request from CG that they wanted to be informed as soon as we knew we might have a serious problem, and not wait until we had attempted to sort ourselves out. Not unreasonable given the time it takes to get help to a casualty at sea - they would much rather set out promptly and then stand down, than have to pick up bodies. .

There can be nothing worse than losing contact with people in a distress situation like ours before they can get help out. That was highlighted in the recent TV programme about the loss of the Penlee lifeboat. They played a recording of the last moments of Radio contact with the Lifeboat and casualty. Very sobering. That must be every CG Watch Officers nightmare scenario.

 

[awol]

Surely the question should be "Why do some of them expect the RNLI to act as a marine recovery service?". None of us would behave in such a manner.

The Coastguard performs triage on calls and it is their decision, or not, to task the RNLI. If the CG in the softer parts of the Kingdoms regularly task the RNLI for non-emergency situations, you can hardly blame the numpties for relying on the service. (Touching wood as I type!)

 

[snooks]

We had a steering failure within sight of Yarmouth Harbour once. Got swept very quickly towards Hurst. 60m of chain and a CQR and we still dragged.

At least your anchor touched the bottom

 

[[2068]]

There are situations that will disable a twin-engined mobo.
Rope or nets around outdrives, duff fuel, steering problems, etc.

And no, a 5hp two-stroke won't cause 5000kg of firebglass to make sensible progress against any kind of tide.

If people are paid-up offshore members, and the RNLI are happy to keep their "lives saved" stats up, then why not?

And, as I've said over and over and over again on these forums, but nobody seems to listen when I say it, I'll shout it out this time in caps:

IT'S NOT THE CASUALTY VESSEL THAT DECIDES WHICH RESCUE SERVICE GETS TASKED TO THEM.

Casualty vessel describes the problem to Coastie, Coastie decides what action to take.

 

[obmij]

What surprises me about these figures is that 50% of rescues are for commercial craft.

So perhaps the bumbling recreational sailor, unable to start the engine and afraid to get out the washing isn't the only one taxing the RNLI.

Perhaps, if you have gear failure and circumstance conspire against you, then you are stuffed regardless of bluster..

 

[oceanfroggie]

Any vessel rescued or crew rescued should be charged a fee which in turn would be paid by the vessels insurers (ie exactly the same way the fire and ambulance service charge). This would encourage better maintenance, better pre-trip inspections and less break downs. The rescue services should NOT be treated as a free AA service.

 

[Clyde_Wanderer]

OGITD, there have been known situations, where there was either not enough wind to gain control under sail or too much to wind to hoist sails, this combined with an engine failure and running out of sea room,is reason enough to call out the brigade and accept a tow.
C_W