Yachtmaster practical exam

[roaringgirl]

Having failed mine over a decade ago, there's an element of it that still bothers me. We were a few miles offshore, still in sight of the coast, the examiner drew a narrow channel on the chart and asked me to navigate through it, under sail, without using gps.

The only navigational cues I could find were hand-compass bearings to marks on the land, which were too distant to give fixes accurate enough for the size of the channel which had been drawn (in my opinion). Many years as a skipper and thousands of miles later, I still think that were I to encounter a gps failure while preparing for pilotage under similar circumstances (distance from landmarks, narrowness of channel), I'd be able to use my depth sounder, I'd drop the sails and motor, or even simply decide against entering and divert to a safer (and less contrived) harbour.

Could any qualified YMs comment on this?

 

[Slowboat35]

All of which sound like sound Captaincy decisions.
I think he was after getting you to use the depth sounder, I can't see how else you could do it but as you say, under sail - perhaps an unwise decision and I'd have said so.

What did you do, in the event?

 

[roaringgirl]

The depth sounder wasn't much good over a flat seabed.

 

[srm]

Sounds like a contrived situation.

However, as a pre-GPS YM Instructor (shore based and practical) I would be looking for clearing lines, preferably by transits but a pair of compass bearings would do, to mark the edges of the channel and identify safe water between them. Once clearing lines have been identified one can safely tack or otherwise faff around between them. In a real channel the echo sounder would also be used, indeed contour navigation for poor visibility was part of the RYA courses in those distant times. When teaching pilotage I used the quote from Mark Twain when a passenger told the river pilot "gee you know where all the rocks are" and he replied "No mam, I know where they aint".

In my own YM exam I had to sail through a gap in an underwater obstacle and was criticised for over use of the handbearing compass. In fact my own boat was steel so a HB compass was of no use there and I was enjoying the novelty of using one.

 

[roaringgirl]

Yes, it felt very contrived. I have managed ok without YM, but it still bugs me. Perhaps once I've finished my current circumnavigation [sic], I'll give it another go

 

[[70521]]

Having failed mine over a decade ago, there's an element of it that still bothers me. We were a few miles offshore, still in sight of the coast, the examiner drew a narrow channel on the chart and asked me to navigate through it, under sail, without using gps.

The only navigational cues I could find were hand-compass bearings to marks on the land, which were too distant to give fixes accurate enough for the size of the channel which had been drawn (in my opinion). Many years as a skipper and thousands of miles later, I still think that were I to encounter a gps failure while preparing for pilotage under similar circumstances (distance from landmarks, narrowness of channel), I'd be able to use my depth sounder, I'd drop the sails and motor, or even simply decide against entering and divert to a safer (and less contrived) harbour.

Have you crossed the Thames Estuary? It's quite interesting, narrow channels, wind farms and big ships.

He was testing that you had the confidence to sail without the 'security blanket' of the GPS, in other words could actually navigate using speed, direction and time. Goodness, dropping the sails and using the motor would be the last thing I would do on a sailing boat. If I wanted to use a motor I would have bought a motor boat. But I am an old fuddy duddy to does not need to know to the nearest hundredth of a minute were I am on the planet.

EDIT: A depth sounder is brilliant even over a flat seabed as it indicates that the water is not getting any shallower.

 

[roaringgirl]

Have you crossed the Thames Estuary? It's quite interesting, narrow channels, wind farms and big ships.

Yes, once just after buying our boat, on the delivery trip from Ipswich to Edinburgh, and again at night 3 days into our current circumnavigation. Both times, I used the chartplotter.

The pilotage I was asked to do on the exam was more akin to approaching the anchorage at Spanish point in Barbuda. The only way to get in there with any kind of keel is by looking for the rocks with polarized glasses.

He was testing that you had the confidence to sail without the 'security blanket' of the GPS, in other words could actually navigate using speed, direction and time. But I am an old fuddy duddy to does not need to know to the nearest hundredth of a minute were I am on the planet.

I can only assume that your log calibration and hand-bearing compass skills and accuracy surpass mine as it was over distances of 100m or so which is in the order of an 18th (or 5 hundredths) of a minute.

Goodness, dropping the sails and using the motor would be the last thing I would do on a sailing boat. If I wanted to use a motor I would have bought a motor boat.

You must be that guy I see sailing into his marina-berth all the time

EDIT: A depth sounder is brilliant even over a flat seabed as it indicates that the water is not getting any shallower.

 

[bedouin]

It is hard to say without seeing the passage drawn on the chart. I wouldn't have expected them to want anything more sophisticated than a transit or constant bearing (either forwards or back).

 

[roaringgirl]

It is hard to say without seeing the passage drawn on the chart. I wouldn't have expected them to want anything more sophisticated than a transit or constant bearing (either forwards or back).

As I remember it was a dog-leg

 

[Tamar]

Yes, it felt very contrived. I have managed ok without YM, but it still bugs me. Perhaps once I've finished my current circumnavigation [sic], I'll give it another go

Why do you need that piece of paper, you have already demonstrated what a great sailor you are.

 

[Wing Mark]

I'd be looking for transits?

 

[Poecheng]

I'd be looking for transits?

Agree, there must have been not only a means of achieving the instruction but also (I expect) a means of the examiner clearly knowing and pointing out whether you had achieved or failed the task. A very interesting post OP and if you could recreate the test for us, we could debate it for the next decade

 

[roaringgirl]

Why do you need that piece of paper, you have already demonstrated what a great sailor you are.

I didn't own a boat at the time, but had 15,000 miles under my belt. I arrogantly thought I could do it. It still irks me because I don't like failing - it's just my personality type. It would make 0 practical difference to me right now. I didn't fail on the pilotage by the way; the examiner failed me on picking up a mooring under sail, because he mistook my (single, successful) attempt at it for the other examinee's multiple attempts.

 

[IanR]

Did you not ask for feedback?

The examiner would normally have provided some.

This possibly sounds like a time and distance exercise for which a log and watch would have been used.
If you could narrow down the location we could also eliminate current

Having failed mine over a decade ago, there's an element of it that still bothers me. We were a few miles offshore, still in sight of the coast, the examiner drew a narrow channel on the chart and asked me to navigate through it, under sail, without using gps.

The only navigational cues I could find were hand-compass bearings to marks on the land, which were too distant to give fixes accurate enough for the size of the channel which had been drawn (in my opinion). Many years as a skipper and thousands of miles later, I still think that were I to encounter a gps failure while preparing for pilotage under similar circumstances (distance from landmarks, narrowness of channel), I'd be able to use my depth sounder, I'd drop the sails and motor, or even simply decide against entering and divert to a safer (and less contrived) harbour.

Could any qualified YMs comment on this?

 

[roaringgirl]

Did you not ask for feedback?

The examiner would normally have provided some.

This possibly sounds like a time and distance exercise for which a log and watch would have been used.
If you could narrow down the location we could also eliminate current

Feedback was that I took multiple attempts to pick up the mooring under sail (I didn't), therefore I failed. This was bullshit and addressed inadequately as a separate issue; but it's the pilotage exercise that bugs me, because I'm still not satisfied that it was even possible.

 

[bedouin]

Feedback was that I took multiple attempts to pick up the mooring under sail (I didn't), therefore I failed. This was bullshit and addressed inadequately as a separate issue; but it's the pilotage exercise that bugs me, because I'm still not satisfied that it was even possible.

Didn't you ask him afterwards? It is possible you missed a simple trick such as a transit, or that he didn't necessarily expect you to complete it exactly. If you didn't fail on it then it sounds as if you did okay.

 

[roaringgirl]

At the time I was more concerned about havimg failed for a manouvre I had done perfectly.

 

[bedouin]

At the time I was more concerned about havimg failed for a manouvre I had done perfectly.

Yes - I can see that would be a little annoying - was there really no way to get that corrected?

 

[roaringgirl]

The examiner wouldn't back down. The RYA offered me a re-take with another examiner. I properly failed that one, no arguments.

 

[Wing Mark]

The examiner wouldn't back down. The RYA offered me a re-take with another examiner. I properly failed that one, no arguments.

Sounds to me that the examiner just made a judgement over the whole period which was 'fail', and when pressed for feedback picked the wrong thing to justify his judgement?
The fact that you failed a subsequent exam kind of vindicates the examiner. I say that sympathetically as someone who failed two driving tests due to being focussed elsewhere as well as being young and a bit messed up.
It's not an exact science. No YM is perfect. If you're not ready to pass so be it. The exact standard is a grey area, so some people who pass won't be as good as some people who fail.

Don't forget, it's not just a bit of paper for amateur sailors, it's supposed to be a cert of competence to take care of members of the public at sea.
Luckily in the real world, employers tend not to take it at face value and want a ton of experience on top!