Meeting to tackle problems facing those who cruise yachts at sea

 

Conference of Yacht Cruising Clubs - 35^th Annual Meeting

 

Minutes of technical topics discussed at the meeting

 

Clive Scott, Clyde Cruising Club, chaired the meeting on Thursday 12 January 2006 at the Naval Club, 38 Hill Street , London.  Matters discussed were:

 

 

 

 

 

3.       Weather information to stay out of trouble until reaching safety

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex C) had called on CYCC to consider the desirable next steps for discussion with the MCA and other providers of weather information.

 

Frank Singleton opened with a summary of his views (fully set out at Annex D).  He pointed out that weather prediction is technically difficult and that the most useful approach is to seek to look forward two, three or four days.  Coastal cruisers are those most at risk from adverse weather and their best precaution is to compare and contrast forecasts in the days before making a passage, for example by listening to three or four BBC forecasts or NAVTEX 518kHz 3/5 day forecasts in succession.  The more these forecasts vary, the less certain is the weather.  He questioned the usefulness of actual reports from coastal stations and wondered how many sailors rely on these in reality.  He advised taking the forecasts as they come and not trying to second guess the forecasters, since they will always have better data at their disposal than the mariner.

 

RY (RNSA) considered that reports of actual weather at coastal stations are important as they give an indication of the speed at which fronts are passing through to compare with the forecasts. AM (RNSA) supported this viewpoint.  BW (RCC) seconded these opinions, noting that forecasts in 2005 had been inaccurate and his view, based on his experience as a professional pilot, is that reports of actual weather are essential.  BW went on to reiterate his long held view that the BBC should be approached to reinstate its actual reports from coastal stations.

 

FS replied by pointing out that it is very unlikely that the BBC, as one medium of actual reports, will revert to reports from coastal stations in its daytime forecasts.  SC accepted that there are two schools of thought about actuals but affirmed that the BBC will not extend its reporting of actuals.  He pointed out that the MCA had discussed during the year and is continuing to discuss with the BBC and that the MCA had asked its MSI stakeholders, including the RYA and CYCC, to leave the leadership of the discussions to the MCA, which they had agreed to do.  He noted that the BBC representative at the December meeting of the MCA’s MSI group had confirmed that the BBC would retain its shipping forecasts in substantially their present form, and that this should be considered a success.  FS and the Hon. Secretary, who had also attended both the MSI meetings in 2005, agreed with SC’s points.  The Hon. Secretary added that HMCG’s evident efforts, as described in his report on the December MSI meeting, to improve its VHF broadcast service were good evidence of the MCA’s commitment to listen to its stakeholders.

 

SC and the Hon. Secretary reminded the meeting that the MCA/Met Office experiment in summer 2005 with providing local weather forecasts in the Solent area had been inconclusive, largely because it had not been well enough marketed.  The MCA had agreed at the December 2005 MSI meeting to consider, subject to budget, further trials in summer 2006, probably over a three month period and covering a larger South Coast area.  If this goes ahead, particular attention will be given to proper marketing.

 

DS (BYCA) described suggestions by the Met Office that it might offer layered weather information through the whole range from the general situation down to information from weather buoys, with the idea of making differential charges for the various layers.  FS responded that the services to be offered by the Met Office remain unclear, since it is still getting to grips with its responsibilities as a commercial Government agency.  Ongoing discussions with the Met Office are essential.

 

Agreed

 

CYCC and the RYA will continue their productive dialogue with the MCA and the Met Office on broadcasts of weather forecasts.  Given the apparent interest in actual reports, FS will lead research into available sources of such reports and he will also review the specification and quality of available mobile phone and SMS weather information.  CYCC members are asked to carry on their reflection as to what weather forecasts they actually want.

 

 

4.       Machinery failure on leisure vessels as a perceived significant problem

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex E) had asked CYCC to consider the justification of the MCA’s perception that machinery failure is a real problem and to reflect on the implications.

 

AM presented his paper (at Annex F) prepared on behalf of the RNSA to illustrate concerns about the manner in which the MCA draft report had reached its conclusions.  He suggested that it is difficult to tell how seriously to take the MCA’s draft report given that the direction in which is leading is unclear as are the likely costs that could be triggered.  He is doubtful about the statistical basis asserted by the draft, and is disturbed about the focus on leisure vessels.  He accepted that such vessels do indeed breakdown, but not necessarily due to mechanical failure and probably less than commercial vessels, when the number of vessels is taken into account.  He considered that there is merit in looking at the problem and considering guidance, training and education of sailors.  Also, there may be benefit in suggesting that the British Marine Federation consider making a study on the design and installation of machinery in yachts  In any event, steps ought, in his view, be taken by the leisure sailing community, rather than being directed by the MCA.

 

KP (RCCPF) speculated whether an important underlying point for the MCA is that the leisure sector is wholly unregulated, whereas the commercial sector is highly regulated internally and by the MCA and its overseas peers.

 

BW (RCC) questioned the status of the draft report and called for the evidence on which it is based to be substantiated.  SC explained that the current draft is the second draft but is little changed from the first.  However, the MCA had now confirmed that it had never been its intention to lead on to regulation, but only to offer advice.  The report had been taken up by the Safety-at-Sea group of the National Water Safety Forum, chaired by the RNLI, on which RYA Training is represented and that the RYA was considering ongoing upgrades to its diesel course and publication.  The Hon. Secretary noted that the list of 30 initiatives suggested by the MCA and presented to the Safety-at-Sea group, summarised at Annex G, supported SC’s comment that the MCA appears at present to support self-regulation.

 

JB (RCC) considered that the driver behind the MCA’s report was a wish to reduce the costs of SAR and related services and therefore we should support the thrust of the report, subject to it being based on proper analysis.  RG (CA) called for reports from yachtsmen and pointed out that the CA has asked its members to inform it of its experiences (see also agenda item 6, below).

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs should watch developments and be prepared encourage members to pay attention to the issue, possibly by following the CA’s example.  The Hon. Secretary should report the progress of validating the report and recommendations for action.

 

 

5.       Reducing incidents caused by unmarked fishing gear and floats

 

AM and RY spoke to their paper (at Annex H) prepared on behalf of the RNSA to highlight the continuing and apparently growing problem of incidents caused by unmarked fishing gear and pointed out the seeming inability of the MCA or other UK authorities to take appropriate action.  They pointed out that efforts to attract the attention of the MCA over a number of years had been unsuccessful, with the MCA citing an absence of reported incidents as a reason for no change.  The MCA had produced a leaflet for fishermen a few years ago but this appears no longer to be distributed.  AM and RY thought that several European countries and, in respect of shipping lanes outside territorial waters, the European Commission are taking stronger lines.  They considered that the issue is not just one for the MCA as it appeared that some harbour authorities are not enforcing their own by-laws in respect of the placing of fishing gear, although the RYA had engaged in productive discussions with Southampton and Portsmouth harbour authorities.

 

They concluded that the problem is visually self-evident, each time a mariner goes to sea, regardless of the reported statistics.  Indeed it is changing attitudes: they were aware of motor yachtsmen who would no longer go to sea at night because they could only identify the increasingly numerous obstructions in daylight.  The question could reasonably be asked as to whether and how many injuries or fatalities are needed before official action is take.  They recommended more vigorously lobbying of the MCA and, if needed other authorities.  Evidence from reports nonetheless remained necessary to support lobbying.

 

SC reminded the meeting that the RYA had run a campaign over two years to encourage yachtsmen to report to CHIRP, but the responses had been too few to be helpful.  AM was concerned that further effort on reporting might not work so that stronger action is required, but statistics are nonetheless needed; in principle the RNLI should have good information, but had had to withdraw its SeaRem incident database due to flaws.

 

 

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs agreed that this issue remains on the agenda and that they would support practical but not confrontational means of convincing the authorities.  As noted in the next agenda item, further attempts to encourage yachtsmen to submit reports with a view to providing valid statistics need to be made, despite disappointing results thus far.

 

 

6.       Reporting of accidents, incidents and the use of reported statistics

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex I) had suggested that CYCC clubs might make a concerted effort to encourage their members to report incidents to CHIRP, not least because this is a highly effective way to persuade the authorities to take action on issues of concern to yachtsmen.

 

Discussion of agenda items four and five led logically to concerns that issues may be taken to the authorities, particularly the MCA, but the bureaucratic mind looks for evidence as well as arguments, and the most convincing evidence is likely to be statistics concerning the issue being raised.

 

SC confirmed the importance of CHIRP, on whose supervisory board he represents the RYA, and said that during the two years of CHIRP’s existence it had shown good ability to address issues where it felt it necessary, whether or not were they popular with the authorities.  CHIRP has recently received its next round of funding, so is well established to take action in the future.  The Hon. Secretary noted the view expressed to him by CHIRP’s directors that a report by CHIRP is invariably effective in introducing beneficial change.  The main issue for CHIRP at present is to encourage reporting.  SC thought that a renewed poster campaign to encourage reporting by RYA affiliated clubs might be worthwhile (and, after the meeting, he confirmed with the directors that CHIRP would be very willing to work on a campaign).

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs agreed that reporting to CHIRP should be promoted, albeit with some reticence as to whether it could be significantly increased in the short term.  The Hon. Secretary would discuss with the CHIRP directors and SC as to the best ways to achieve awareness of the need and willingness by yachtsmen to take part in the reporting scheme.

 

 

7.       Wind farm developments and other offshore renewable energy policies

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex J) had suggested that clubs need to be particularly alert to proposed developments in their sailing areas, since risks of losing sailing grounds and navigable channels and squeeze into commercial shipping lanes remain issues for each new development and are best attacked at the planning stage, especially given the willingness of the MCA to resist applications where it is not satisfied with the developers’ risk assessments of the dangers to navigation.

 

SC described briefly the success of the MCA in establishing the Nautical and Offshore Renewable Energy Committee (NOREL), on which the RYA is represented by Dr Susie Tomson, and the usefulness of the plan of cruising routes that had been established by the RYA with assistance from the CA.  He reminded the meeting of the RYA’s policy to persuade developers to take account of cruising routes and sailing grounds, build structures with appropriate air and sea draft, mark them properly, consider the impact on small craft navigation systems, provide an effective emergency response system and, finally, to remove the structures at the end of their life.

 

DS (BYCA) thought the main future of these OREI developments lies in wave and tidal arrays and noted the proposed developments off the North Cornwall Coast and Strangford Lough.  He understood that the economics of windfarms are under review, partly as a result of operating experience, but also due to price competition from the United States for windfarm equipment for the extensive farms planned in that country.  The Scarweather development has been put on hold for two years, apparently for these reasons.  He also pointed out that the developer of the Bristol Channel tidal generator had applied for an exclusion zone and that particular attention is needed, particularly in the light of recent experience with the developer of the Kentish Farm array.

 

KP (RCCPF) argued that we should not object to all renewable energy projects.  They are essential and we should encourage those which give the best returns for the lowest environmental impact.

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs took note of the issue and will continue, as they have up to the present, to keep a close eye on proposals for developments in their areas, especially for wave and tidal arrays, given that the proposed locations for Round One and Round Two windfarms are quite well known.  Clubs would inform the Hon. Secretary of specific concerns.

 

 

8.       UKHO, Civil Hydrography Programme & chart updating

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex K) had asked CYCC clubs to take note of the focus of UKHO and UK hydrographic survey on the needs of commercial shipping, with the consequence that the needs of small craft will probably continue to have a lesser priority, although the authorities will be sympathetic to requests, and accordingly suggested that clubs review their areas for coastal waters where they believed surveys should be updated.

 

Howard Easton’s report on the 2005 UKHO Small Craft User Group meeting (at Annex L) explained the evolution of UKHO’s current thinking and added correspondence from UKHO about the concern raised by the Scottish CYCC clubs about confusion due to the introduction of Gaelic names on charts.  Another regular question posed to UKHO is the status of WGS84 conversion, and the expectation at November 2005 is shown in the plan at Annex M.

 

The meeting of CYCC Pilot Guide Editors on the previous day, on 11 January, had considered the operation of the MCA’s Committee on Shipping Hydrography and the possible participation of CYCC, if CYCC decides that our presence would be useful in bringing to the attention of the MCA, UKHO and the Department of the Environment the perception by CYCC clubs that updated surveys may be needed in their areas and the discussion was therefore not brought back to the plenary meeting.

 

The Hon. Secretary reiterated the willingness of UKHO to listen to the concerns of small craft sailors and the MCA’s invitation to interested persons to request surveys or conduct surveys.  He summed this up by quoting a note sent to him by the Guernsey Harbourmaster, which he said:  “Regarding surveys, we did commission one of the St. Peter Port and St Sampson’s harbours and their entrances late this summer to assess the effects of the man made modifications to the coastline following the creation of the Longue Hougue reclamation area – and the draft proofs are on my desk for one of those elusive quiet moments when one can find to study them closely.  We have always worked freely, closely and directly with the UKHO regarding this aspect and they in turn do offer us a wonderful service.  When I’m happy with it, it will be duly forwarded.”

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs took note of the opportunities to bring matters forward to UKHO and the MCA.  Meanwhile, the Hon. Secretary should explore with the MCA the possibility of CYCC attending the annual meeting of the Committee on Shipping Hydrography.

 

 

9.       Automatic identification systems as a means of collision avoidance

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex N) highlighted that the use of AIS as a means of collision avoidance is considered within the maritime community as still being at a relatively early stage as an aid in collision avoidance, although its potential value is evident to those who have navigated with its help.  The issue paper therefore points out the need for yachtsmen to be particularly cautious in their encounters with commercial shipping.

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs took note of the point made

 

 

10.     AIS ‘B’ availability and operational dilemmas

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex O) advised that AIS ‘B’ sets, compliant with the now approved draft international standards, are now likely to become available on the market soon and clearly have a future as a valuable aid to navigation.  However, it advised that these sets give only a probability, but not a certainty that AIB ‘B’ transmissions will be observed by other ships.

 

AC and the Hon. Secretary drew attention to a similar conclusion in a paper presented to the Royal Institute of Navigation’s Nav05 conference by Professor Andy Norris of Nottingham University:  “As a result of the investigation the paper highlights the fact that Class ‘B’ users must not assume that their presence, in the form of Class ‘B’ transmissions, will be particularly visible on the bridge of many SOLAS vessels.  This will continue for many years into the future, until such vessels are mandated to carry radar with AIS target overlay capability.”

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs took note of the point made

 

 

11.     Calling on DSC VHF Channel 70 and other radio communications issues

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex P) pointed out the concern of the MCA to encourage all mariners, including recreational sailors, to initiate VHF radio traffic by sending a ‘wake-up’ call DSC VHF Channel 70 and suggested that CYCC clubs might encourage their members to do this.

 

The Hon. Secretary referred to the December 2005 minutes of the MCA’s Marine Radio Advisory and Technical Committee:

 

“2:       Members of the Committee commented that the lack of familiarity with DSC, especially among the leisure craft users, is a major factor in the equipment not being used.  It was felt that the current training given by the RYA was adequate and no reason for people not to be using the equipment.  It was felt that encouragement for users not only to use the DSC function in distress situations would aid familiarity leading to increased usage in the equipment.  Lack of knowledge of Coast Station MMSI was dismissed, amongst SOLAS vessels, as there is a requirement to carry ALRS Vol 5.

 

3:         Steve Huxley confirmed that Coastguard Stations are capable of taking an increase in DSC usage and already do so in mandatory MAREP reports.  In addition, Watch Officers are signing off transmission with the message to use DSC.

 

4.         Discussions concluded that there was a general consensus amongst the Committee that the use of DSC should be encouraged.  MCA would work with UKHO to progress changes in the publications giving formal instruction to use DSC for initial calls.”

 

The meeting expressed some scepticism about the likely success of these intentions, given that it remains quicker, easier and more certain of response to make initial calls on VHF Channel 16 and HMCG and most commercial shipping keep a listening watch on this channel.  Also, most yachtsmen are thought unlikely to buy new VHF sets with DSC as long as their existing VHF sets give satisfactory service.  On the other hand, the ability of a DSC equipped set to make an emergency alarm call is appreciated.

 

Agreed

 

CYCC clubs took note of the point made, but will await further developments in the general use of DSC by HMCG and commercial shipping before promoting action.

 

The issue paper also gave information about the very recent proposal by the UK and others to IMO to study the integration of electronic means of navigation and about the proposal to remove the MF GMDSS Sea Area 2.  Being for information only, no agreement was required.

 

 

12.     Global Navigation Satellite Systems, terrestrial back up and monitoring

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex Q) brought the meeting up to date about EGNOS, Galileo and Loran C and gave a reminder of the vulnerabilities of GNSS and the wisdom of not relying on a single source for position finding and navigation.  Being for information only and a recapitulation of previous CYCC papers, no agreement was required.

 

 

13.     Information updates on controlling the costs of the sport

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex R) brought CYCC clubs up to date on matters of information:

 

(a)        Light dues:  BG (RNYC) and AM (RNSA), who had worked hard on the campaign that led the Government to abandon its plan to levy light dues on leisure craft, at least for the 2005 budget year, reminded the meeting that this matter will go round and round as it has for several years.  The current position does not reflect an exemption for small craft so, maybe, a future ground for debate might be to relate any levy to the size of the vessel.

 

(b)        Crown Estates Ground Rent:  BG (RNYC) advised that Crown Estates has published its ground rents (fundus) for moorings, indeed he had provided a copy of rents then current for inclusion with the minutes of the CYCC’s 34^th Annual Meeting.  However, this had not been done for marinas, and one of his colleagues in the RYA’s Legal and Government Affairs Committee has been asked to follow this up, since the rents are recharged to marina berth-holders.

 

(c)        The derogation of duty on red diesel:  SC advised that the budget statement in December 2005 stated that the UK Government will support a continuing five-year derogation, which means that the views of the RYA, BMF and others have prevailed in this country.  The issue has therefore now moved to Brussels.  The RYA is currently trying through the European Boating Association to convince allied States to be effective in their support.  The outcome is still uncertain.

 

(d)        Free, lifetime licences for ship radios   Ofcom issued its policy statement on the reform of licensing of ships’ radios on 8 December 2005, which confirmed its intention to issue ship owners with free, lifetime ships’ radio licences by electronic means from 1 October 2006.  Marine radio operators’ licences will continue to be required and will be issued as they are at present.  The Hon. Secretary advised that the MCA has recently forewarded a consultative document from Ofcom proposing a fixed penalty regime of £100 fines for minor offences and he is studying it before sending a request for comment to CYCC clubs.  CYCC expects to agree with RYA a common position on the proposal before the 31 March end of the consultation.

 

 

14.       European and United Kingdom Maritime Policy

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex S) brought CYCC clubs up to date about progress with the current UK Marine Bill to “manage the sometimes conflicting demands for energy, aggregates, shipping and fishing whilst also ensuring that conservation objectives are achieved” and the European Commission’s intention to publish in Spring 2006 a green paper to create “an all-embracing maritime policy aimed at developing a thriving maritime economy and the full potential of sea-based activity in an environmentally sustainable manner.”  SC noted that he had seen an early draft of the Commission’s green paper and had responded in this new capacity as Secretary of the European Boating Association, but said that he had thought the document was very preliminary in form and presentation.

 

 

15.     Trinity House Strategy for marine aids to navigation

 

The agenda (issue paper at Annex T) recalled work done by Trinity House, the Northern Lighthouse Board and the Commissioners for Irish Lights to establish their policies towards 2020 and Trinity House’s response to CYCC’s letter of comments on Trinity House’s 2005 Aids-to-Navigation plan to implement those policies.

 

Mr Douglas Potter, Elder Brother, Mariner Assistant and Examiner of Trinity House led an entertaining debate in which he challenged CYCC clubs to look forward ten years to a world where position finding was guaranteed by the integration of several sources of GNSS and Loran C, radar gave impeccable fixes on Racons and charts had become much more accurate.  He successfully teased out of the clubs their wishes to be able to see some aids-to-navigation, particularly in port approaches, for the importance of coastal lights and for contingent systems to deal with the risk of equipment failures and other disasters.

 

DP also took the opportunity to reinforce CYCC’s awareness of the excellent work being done by Trinity House and its colleagues to protect mariners’ interests in respect of issues such as wind farms and to encourage both Government and the developers to rid themselves of ‘sea blindness’ and start appreciating the navigational impact of these structures.

 

The meeting thanked DP in good and due form.

 

 

16.     Any Other Business:  Collision Regulations and personal watercraft

 

a)         R. v. Goodwin in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

 

BG (RNYC) answered a question to bring CYCC up to date on this case arising from a serious accident between two personal watercraft.  Confusion has arisen in some people’s minds as to whether the riders of personal watercraft are bound by the Collision Regulations.  BG noted that the cause of the confusion was that Mr Goodwin had been prosecuted under legal provisions that appeared not to apply to the facts of the case.  Although an obiter dictum and thus not part of the judgement, the Lord Chief Justice give his view (in paragraph 45 of the judgment), where he said:

 

“It is clearly arguable that this extension of the ambit of the relevant section embraces breach of duty in relation to the navigation of a vessel, and Mr Teare so submitted.  This is not an issue that we have to resolve having regard to our finding that section 58 (the law under which the prosecution was brought) had no application to the facts of this case.  We would simply observe that failure to comply with the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collision at Sea is made an offence by the Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions) Regulations 1996 and that the offence carries the same maximum penalty as section 58.  Where allegations are made of conduct which infringes the Collision Regulations it would seem simpler and more appropriate to charge this offence rather than to allege breach of section 58.”

 

While not giving a formal opinion, BG said his instinct is that the Collision Regulations apply to personal watercraft as to other craft by the application of the definition in Collision Regulation 3(a), which says “The word ‘vessel’ includes every description of water craft, including non-displacement craft and seaplanes, used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water.”  There remain some drafting aspects that complicate the way the Collision Regulations are imported into UK law, but BG concluded that the Courts would seek a way to resolve these aspects if called upon to do so or, if the problem appeared insuperable, Parliament would do so.  Accordingly, there is a high probability that the Regulations do apply in cases such as the one under consideration.

 

b)         Time and date of next meeting

 

The meeting agreed that CYCC’s 36^th Annual Meeting will take place at the Naval Club on Thursday 11 January 2007, with the Pilot Guide Editors’ meeting taking place in the afternoon of the previous day.

 

 

DAVID DARBYSHIRE

Hon. Secretary of the Conference of Yacht Cruising Clubs

 

Annex A

 

Membership, activities and terms of reference of CYCC

 

What we are

 

A conference founded in 1973 of 16 major yacht cruising clubs in the United Kingdom and Ireland who meet to tackle problems facing those who cruise yachts at sea.

 

 

What we do

 

-           liaise on publications, arrange publicity and discounts for members;

-           liaise with navigational authorities, the RYA and RIN, but maintain independence;

-           provide web pages for member clubs to encourage those who enjoy cruising to join a club, and learn from, and enjoy the fellowship of, other cruising members.

 

Terms of reference, revised 15 January 1998

 

1.         Provide co-ordination between yacht clubs publishing Sailing Directions in order to (a) avoid duplication, (b) establish common standards where necessary, e.g. on electronic information transfer, (c) agree preferred common nautical terminology to facilitate electronic information retrieval.

 

2          Invite membership from major UK and Irish clubs with predominantly cruising interests to strengthen representation and increase coastal coverage.

 

3          Exchange information on pilotage, regulatory and environmental issues affecting UK, Irish and European Cruising.

 

4          Prepare an annual listing of members’ Sailing Directons together with addresses from which these may be obtained and any appropriate discounts.  Disseminate this information as widely as possible.

 

5          Provide liaison with Trinity House, Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses and Commissioners of Irish Lights, the Maritime & Coastguard Agency and the Hydrographic Office. Keep members informed, and invite their comments, on proposed changes to Aids to Navigation, chart production and developments in navigation.

 

6          Act as a conduit to the RYA to help to ensure that cruising interests are being addressed.  For example, to attempt to influence issues where another RYA group may have conflicting interests.  Maintain a strong liaison with the Royal Institute of Navigation.

 

7          To establish appropriate links with European and overseas clubs where common interests are concerned and need protection.

 

8          Representatives from member clubs will meet once per year during the London Boat Show, with ad-hoc meetings as required.

Annex C

 

Weather information needed to stay out of trouble until reaching a safe haven

 

The issue          Proper use of weather information is generally recognised to be a principle means of preventing accidents to mariners.  The Maritime & Coastguard Agency (MCA) has focused since early 2005 on its wish to improve the information available and has shown itself willing to listen to proposals, within the limits the limits of its responsibilities and of its resources and budgets.  The debate and MCA’s efforts to respond are ongoing, see Marine Guidance Note 44 at http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-guidance-regulation/.  Yachtsmen do, however, need encouraging to use effectively the available weather information from public and private sources and this is seen as a self-training and experience objective.

 

Analysis of  the issue   The main forecasts used by yachtsmen are those purchased by the MCA from the Met Office to meet the UK’s international obligations and provide twice a day the shipping forecast with a 24 hour outlook, gale and storm warnings, high seas forecasts and, also twice a day, inshore waters and strong winds forecasts.  Separately from the MCA and GMDSS, BBC Radio 4 broadcasts the shipping forecast four times a day, without the outlook, and an abbreviated inshore waters forecast twice a day.  All these forecasts are free-of-charge to the user.  Telephone and internet forecasts are increasingly available, but are typically for charge, unless accessed from official sources, notably US and German government agencies.  See www.franksingleton.clara.net for an inventory and assessment of offerings)

 

CYCC conducted an extensive survey in 2004/2005 of forecast provision and shared its findings with the RYA and RIN, working towards common positions.  Conclusions were that MCA and BBC forecasts met most needs, but there were weaknesses in broadcasting and more use should be made of developing Met Office capability.  Typical concerns were that more forecasting of the outlook up to three days ahead is essential for passage planning, forecasts tended to be stale when broadcast and timings were not respected.  Members felt that telephone forecasts are costly and often stale.  Strong regret was expressed by some that the BBC had reduced its inshore waters forecasts and coastal stations reports due to other pressures on broadcasting time.  Practical problems seem to flow from time constraints for the rather lengthy VHF broadcasts, a ten minute limitation on Navtex international 518 kHz transmissions, limited use of the Navtex 490 kHz national channel and lack of understanding that Navtex is designed for use at sea, not in port.  Others are due to old equipment inherited by the MCA from BT five years ago and lack of budgets for renewal.  Further, the same HM Coastguard officers broadcast the VHF forecasts as deal with distress working and the latter takes priority.  On the other hand, we gained an impression that many UK yachtsmen do not take advantage of available sources, notably Navtex, and may not listen routinely to the VHF broadcasts, relying heavily on BBC Radio 4.  We also found cultural resistance to internet sources, partly due access problems when at sea.

 

The MCA held the second meeting of its Maritime Safety Information stakeholders on 13 December 2005, attended by the Hon Secretary and Frank Singleton on behalf of CYCC.  As the CYCC report notes, the MCA had recognised points raised at the first meeting and HM Coastguard is exploring solutions.  Also, the BBC confirmed that Radio 4 broadcasts will continue in substantially their present form for the foreseeable future.

 

Suggested action to address the issue  CYCC clubs can now usefully consider the next steps for discussion with the MCA and other providers of weather information, knowing that the MCA will consider proposals seriously.  They could also reflect on how to encourage better awareness of weather information.

Annex D

 

Marine Weather Forecasts and the Yachtsman

 

Frank Singleton

 

Introduction    The MCA has set up a MSI Group, under the auspices of the UK Safety of Navigation (UKSON) Committee, for the purposes of:

 

Acting as the primary focal point between MCA, other government departments and external stakeholders to ensure that the range of MSI services provided meet stakeholder expectations.

 

Formulating a UK “line to take” on MSI-related issues at IMO and other international fora through the UKSON Committee.

 

Developing policies which take account of emerging technology which, potentially, impact upon efficient provision of MSI services.

 

Promoting better understanding and appreciation of the underlying components needed to produce MSI services for a wide range of maritime users.

 

Marine weather forecasts are a vital area of interest to the group, primarily, as a recognition that all those embarking on marine leisure activities, from swimming off the beach to crossing the oceans, are at risk. The chief instructor at the erstwhile National Sailing Centre, Cowes, used to say that sailing is a high risk sport, but that is true for all marine activities. There is a groundswell of opinion from leisure sailors that they do not receive an adequate service from the UK Met Office via the MCA.

 

This paper identifies the limitations and some of the reasons for them, of current marine weather forecasts and the manner in which they are used by sailors, mainly in the coastal cruising category. It is argued that sailors should take a more realistic approach to the use of weather information than some do at present; the emphasis should be on bad weather avoidance rather than optimum short term passage planning. Lessons can be learnt from blue water sailors and those who undertake extended cruising.

 

To understand what forecasts can and cannot do, it is helpful to know a little about the workings of the atmosphere and modern weather prediction. A very simplified description follows.

 

How the Atmosphere works  That the atmosphere is complex must be obvious to anyone who realises that it is a large heat engine driven by temperature differences. These arise from the earth being continually heated by the sun while losing heat to outer space. Climate change notwithstanding, there is a rough balance between heat input and output. The atmosphere can be regarded as a global air conditioning system that keeps hot areas from getting impossibly hot and cold areas becoming ever colder.

 

Different areas of the earth, such as deserts, oceans, forests, major conurbations, heat up and cool down at different rates. The resulting heating and cooling of the atmosphere by the earth leads to temperature differences which lead, in turn, to pressure gradients so causing air movement - wind.

 

Water from seas, lakes, rivers and vegetation evaporates into the air. When the air is cooled as it does when forced to rise, some of the water condenses out to form cloud and latent heat (of condensation) is released. If that water subsequently freezes, more latent heat (of fusion) is released. This heating, again, creates pressure changes which lead to wind changes. Depressions, whether tropical or extra tropical, gain much of their energy in this way, as do thunderstorms. The cloud, so formed, blocks incoming and outgoing radiation so, also, affects temperature.

 

Topography plays an important role on all scales, from friction and small scale turbulence, caused by trees and houses, right up to the continental scale. An obvious example of the latter is the existence of the Roaring Forties of the southern hemisphere.

 

Numerical Weather Prediction                       All these inter-acting physical effects can be expressed in mathematical terms and that is the basis of Numerical Weather Prediction. However, in practice, none can be measured or quantified accurately and NWP is based on many estimates and approximations. One very important approximation arises because the calculations cannot be made on the atmosphere as a continuum. They have to be made at points of a three dimensional grid. It would seem fairly obvious that. the smaller the grid length, the better will the model represent atmospheric and terrestrial topography. However, there are three constraints on the grid length.

 

First is computing power, still increasing and thus a diminishing factor. The second constraint is the meteorological data available to drive the model. Data gaps and inaccuracies make detailed analysis difficult, especially over the oceans. The third constraint is predictability. The smaller the size of weather feature, the shorter time ahead will it be predictable. Were it possible to measure the atmosphere on a 1 km grid, the detail that might be observed would be lost before the data could be collected and analysed, let alone a forecast produced.

 

The current UK Met Office global NWP model has a grid length of about 40 km. That model is good at predicting weather patterns over periods of up to a week ahead, but the smallest size feature, meteorological and topographic that it can represent currently is about 150 to 200 km,  ie between four and five times the grid length. The distance from the Needles to Cherbourg is about 120 km. The Dover Strait is about 45 km across. Clearly, this Global model will not cope well on these scales and detail has to be put subjectively into the Shipping or Inshore Waters forecasts.

 

The Met Office also uses a Meso-scale NWP model for the area 48 to 63 degrees N, 12 degrees W to 13 degrees E. This uses predictive output from the Global model and more data, especially topographic data, over the British Isles. The grid length is about 12 km. In a fast moving weather situation, the Meso-scale model will do a little better than the Global input, because of the better topographical representation but skill will depend largely on the Global model. In a slow moving situation, when topographic effects, such as sea breezes, acquire greater importance, then this model will do correspondingly better. However, the smallest scale feature that it can handle well is about 50 to 60 km. The Isle of Man, roughly 60 x 20 km will not be well represented. Torbay, 10 x 10 km will not be recognised at all.  Some limited skill cam be expected for weather features down to a scale of about 25 km. 

 

There are plans to introduce a grid length of 4 km. This should improve the representation of topographical features quite significantly. However, a major constraint will still be the quality of input from the Global model and the predictability of small scale features.

 

Combining forecast output with observations from radar, satellite, ground stations etc, can improve this a little over land, where rainfall can be well predicted for a few hours ahead. Given the lack of equivalent observational data for wind, a resolution of 20 km is the expected limit of capability over the sea. The issue of predictability, mentioned earlier, cannot be overemphasised. A yacht is very sensitive. to very small changes in wind that are well below anything that might be predictable even for very short periods ahead.

 

The Leisure Sailor      There are, basically, three types of sailing. At one extreme, there is day sailing, off the mooring and back within a few hours. This includes dinghy and “round the cans” yacht racing. They are usually within easy reach of their home port. At the other extreme, there is blue water, long distance cruising, with passage times measured in weeks or even months. Then there is coastal cruising, with passage time normally measured in hours, relatively infrequently one or two days, and rarely between about three and five days.

 

Day Sailing      Grid length limitations of the Meso-scale NWP model mean that there is little that can be done at present to improve services for day sailing. . The main input, used in conjunction with the most appropriate Inshore Waters forecast, will be, or should be, personal experience of what happens or can happen locally. For example, sailors out of the Dart always bear in mind what might happen around Start Point. They never know what will happen and no forecast system yet envisaged will give that level of detail. They are just on the look out for the need to put in a reef at short notice.

 

Books by David Houghton, Alan Watts and Chris Tibbs deal with local effects. Such knowledge is (or should be) part of dinghy courses. The thinking sailor, especially the racing sailor will, in any case, make sure that he knows about the behaviour of wind around coasts where he sails. He will be able to translate that knowledge to other areas.

 

No broadcasts of readily understandable text forecasts are likely to give more or better detail than at present, unless they are produced for smaller areas, say 30 – 40 km stretches of coast, and shorter time periods, say 6 - 12 hours. That then runs up against the cost and practicability, both of the forecast production and dissemination. Whether the recent short period forecast trial in the Solent will lead to a regular and useful service country wide, or even in some specific areas is a matter for conjecture at this stage. For the reasons outlined above, there must be doubts that the modelling and the data input will ever be able to generate predictions over a useful time span with a resolution of much less than 10 – 15 kms. Time will tell. Sailors may well find very short period forecasts useful, if not necessarily accurate. Accuracy and usefulness are not synonymous.

 

At some stage in the technological future, there could be a rather different scenario to the present. Were forecasts of wind, visibility and weather produced and made available on, say, a 5 or 10 km grid at 15 or 30 minute intervals, these could, in principle, be made available for downloading from the Internet to an on board computer using a mobile or satellite phone. The skipper would then be able to see detailed forecasts up to a few hours ahead (6 hours at the very most), as and when he wished. It is unlikely that many sailors, in the UK or elsewhere, would welcome such a concept at present. In ten years time when sailors generally are far more computer literate, than now and when the ruggedised hardware necessary could be produced cheaply, then perhaps. The learning curve would be too steep for many just now.

 

Blue Water Sailing      For very different reasons, it is unlikely that blue water sailors can be much better served than at present.. They plan on the basis of climatology, and when they are on passage, there is little that they can do to avoid bad weather. A vessel doing 110 miles or so a day cannot be weather-routed usefully; the boat is too slow and storm systems are too large, coupled with the inherent uncertainty in predicting the track of a storm.

 

The blue water sailor's boat is, or should be, rigged and equipped appropriately; storm sails, sea anchors, warps to trail astern; the boat should be able to take a knockdown. He should carry VHF, NAVTEX, MF/HF/SSB transceiver and/or INMARSAT-C,  plus, these days no doubt, a satellite phone. But, when the storm approaches, all he can do is batten down the hatches and ride it out.

 

Although forecasts and methods of dissemination could, no doubt be improved over the present GMDSS products, it is unlikely that there would or could be any real gain in terms of safety. The more knowledgeable blue water sailors study forecasts and charts while on passage in order to seek an optimum route. How effective they are is uncertain. Experience with weather routing ships showed that it was very difficult to provide useful advice to a ship doing 10 knots. A better service might help, if only psychologically, but, that is a long way from storm avoidance.

 

Coastal Cruising         The sailor most at risk is the coastal cruising sailor, typically making passages of less than 60 or 70 miles; not often over 100 miles; 300 to 500 miles at the most ie 3 to 5 days. He can be many hours from a safe haven; his boat is rarely equipped to ride out a storm, even if he had the sea room which he often will not. Therefore, he must seek to avoid bad weather. For him, the prime use of weather forecasts should be to keep out of trouble rather than, as a means of minimising passage times.

 

From meeting and talking to leisure sailors, it is clear that many are poor at knowing what information is available and how to use it.  There are those who have no concept of either the limitations or the strengths of forecasts. They seem to ignore the fact that the weather is almost always complex. It is a truism that the atmosphere does not know itself to within one Beaufort force and neither does the forecaster.

 

Many seem to think that it should be possible to be provided with a precise weather forecast in a few words, and at no cost. Despite their own experience in encountering significant changes in wind over short distances and times, they are critical of the fact that a sea or coastal area 24 hour forecast will rarely describe well the winds experienced on passage. They do not understand that there is real, and very positive, value in forecasts of general weather patterns for up to about 5 days ahead.

 

As a result, some sailors either use forecasts incorrectly, or not at all. This applies both to GMDSS forecasts and those many other services available, including those using HF/SSB radio and, increasingly, those available in voice, text or graphical form over a telephone link. These views have been reinforced by comments from two, non-British, blue water sailors. Both expressed some surprise at the poor use of weather information by some British sailors. One referred to them “…..seeming not to work as hard as some of us on collecting multiple long-range weather forecast products (and understanding them) before deciding to leap away. A single mobile call to the Met to pay for a 5-day forecast seemed cutting edge to many…………..”.  The other referred to ".... a failure to obtain weather information beyond the immediate 24 hour window."

 

Some sailors are content to take a single, brief 24 hour forecast with no other information, and use it entirely uncritically, and with no feel for the uncertainties that exist in any weather forecast. Others, place great store in their own ability to add value to a forecast using a few observations or their own experience. The information content in such observations is so small that any added value can only be in the very short term. If in mid Channel, the pressure starts falling or rising around 6 mb in
3 hours, then, fairly certainly, there will be a gale. That must be useful information, but the question must be asked, “Why was the sailor there in the first place?” Similarly for the value added in knowing, for example, that the wind has veered at Channel Light Vessel. Someone depending on such tiny morsels of information has no knowledge of the practice and principles of modern day weather prediction.

 

Bad Press       There is a body of opinion among sailors that has little faith in forecasts at all. In part, the various yachting magazines, including the RNLI publications, are at fault in perpetuating such misunderstandings. There have been many articles by people caught out in bad weather. Virtually invariably, the skipper is quoted as saying something like "The bad weather was not forecast." Many readers will nod wisely and say to themselves, "Ah, yes!" Such articles simply confirm the folklore that says forecasts are of no real use. Generally, the dates and times are not included in the articles, but, on the few occasions where it has been possible to check, or from other information, these statements have invariably been incorrect.

 

A recent occasion was one where a skipper said that he was surprised by the severity of the weather. He had left port on a two day passage. At his probable departure time, and certainly when he was still near a safe haven, the BBC Shipping Forecast talked about “gale 8, perhaps severe gale 9 later”, the two forecasts 6 and 12 hours earlier had said “7, perhaps gale 8 later.” The wind got up to F 10 to 11.  Perhaps he was right to be surprised, but he should not have been there to find out!

 

Such articles could be used to good advantage were they to include the GMDSS forecasts that were broadcast and could reasonably have been used. For passages around NW Europe lasting between one and five days, this could include the Marinecall planning forecasts. This should not be a naming and shaming exercise but an attempt to show readers that correct use of forecasts, although not a guarantee will generally help in avoiding being caught out in bad weather. It would be in the nature of “lessons learned.” Of course, this is a two edged weapon and on some occasions, the forecast may be wrong, or give a misleading impression.

 

The same argument can be applied to NAVTEX. There is much folklore that says that NAVTEX is not useful. Articles or letters in the yachting press about NAVTEX seem, again, to perpetuate myth and legend. Like any terrestrial based radio system, it has its problems with propagation. However, NAVTEX is the official method by which GMDSS forecasts are broadcast and its use should be promoted not denigrated  A responsible editor should wish to see his magazine acting in the cause of safety, and not pandering to his readers' misconceptions borne of ignorance.

 

Educating Sailors        The RYA syllabus for Yachtmaster (Offshore) includes knowledge of basic  terms, the Beaufort scale, air masses, cloud types, weather patterns, sources of weather forecasts, the ability to interpret a shipping forecast, weather fax, weather satellite information, land and sea breezes, sea fog, use of a barometer, sources of meteorological information. All this is very sensible and necessary.

 

However, in tests, the emphasis tends to be on the short term, local detail rather than on the longer term.. To maximise use of the strengths of forecasts, more emphasis should be on the use of forecasts for planning decisions in order "to avoid being in places that you do not want to be in, in weather that you do not want to go out in." In other words, getting sailors to look ahead beyond the immediacy of the 24 hour forecast and to use forecasts from different sources and from the same source at different times.

 

At the risk of unbalancing the whole course or making it longer, a concerted effort should be made to  educate sailors of the need to get longer forecasts than just the passage period. These would be such as the Marinecall planning forecast, the DWD 3 day forecast available on the Internet, the 5 day DWD forecast on RTTY, the US GRIB coded forecast available by email, the extended range forecast charts from the Met Office, the European Weather Centre, the US NWS and US Navy etc.

 

They should be encouraged to use MF/HF/SSB receivers (or NASA Weatherman), Internet access via GPRS or even GSM phone as well as Internet cafés (useful, but it can be a very wet walk to find one). For those going further afield, the idea of using marine HF and HAM radio should be encouraged as good and cost effective data sources to supplement the GMDSS services available via INMARSAT-C. Many blue water sailors use Winlink, via Marine HF or Ham radio, to access the Internet and for email weather services.

 

Using the information sources listed, sailors should be able to get some idea about the certainties or uncertainties in the weather, both over the first 24 hours and the next few days. Such an approach does mean some appreciable work by the user, and the reaction of some will be negative, but is it too much of a tall order? Weather is complex and a too simplistic approach hides that unpalatable fact. Much teaching of weather to yachtsmen, whether by professional meteorologists or not, tends to be too simplistic.

 

Recommendations      There is a need to review the ways in which forecasts are used and, most importantly, the need for better planning ahead. There is no point in having a good sail to, say, Cherbourg, if it results in being stuck there for the next few days in gale force NW winds. It might have been better to go direct to St Peter Port.

 

The MCA MSI Group must make suggestions on how better to make forecasts available to users, if that is technically and economically possible. But, representatives of the leisure sailing (including motor boat) community should also be addressing the question of content of the forecast where and when that can, meaningfully, be improved in the interests of safety. Emphasis should be put on the value of the 24 hours outlook of the NAVTEX Sea Areas forecast, the 3 to 5 day sea area outlook on 518 kHz and the 3 to 5 day Inshore Waters outlook on 490 kHz.

 

There should be more emphasis in courses for coastal sailors on the application of common sense and making considered decisions in the light of an assessment of all the meteorological information available and not just that for the first 24 hours or so. Weather is often indefinite, so will be the forecasts. There can be no short cuts and no easy answers. There is no one stop shop that will give all the answers in a brief, readily readable form.

 

Concluding remarks               Although written from a professional meteorological background, including ten years as a Senior Forecaster with the Met Office, the above is based largely on experience gained and lessons learned in over 35,000 miles coastal cruising mainly around western Europe and the Mediterranean. All planning decisions are made in the light of forecasts from the local GMDSS sources, the DWD RTTY broadcasts, US GRIB coded data and very occasional downloads of synoptic charts and Marinecall planning forecasts.

 

Little or no meteorological expertise is used for such planning. Indeed, it would be presumptuous to try and better the local Met service. They are the experts; they are using the latest numerical weather models, their own or that of a major Met Service eg the UK, US, Germany or the ECMWF, The sailor is not an expert. Even if he is a professional meteorologist, he will not have access to all the information used by the local, national Met service. Any sailor might improve upon a GMDSS forecast in the very short (a few hours, term). Most definitely, he cannot improve on the longer range forecasts that come direct from computer models.

 

It is suggested that sailors should not try to be amateur weather forecasters, but that they should concentrate their efforts on using, in a considered way, the output of the professionals who have the maximum amount of data and the most up to date weather prediction aids. The sailor should confine his input to the forecast to the short term, especially on those space-time scales which cannot be addressed through the application of NWP models and the use of conventional data.

 

Information on data from GMDSS sources, via the Internet and elsewhere can be found at www.franksingleton.clara.net which also has advice on using forecasts as well as much background information.

Annex E

 

Machinery failure on leisure vessels as a perceived significant problem

 

The issue                      The Maritime & Coastguard Agency (MCA) has a perception that safety at sea is being compromised by machinery failures and the consequent burden on search and rescue services thus created.  The MCA is seeking to stimulate a voluntary improvement in the situation.

 

Analysis of the issue                One target for 2005/2007 agreed between the MCA and the Minister for Transport is to “reduce the proportion of machinery failures on commercial ships and leisure craft in the United Kingdom by increasing prevention activities, working with other organisations.”  Among other considerations, “in the leisure sector, causes of machinery failure can lead to the deployment of considerable SAR resources, which costs time and money, and ties up resources which might be needed for more urgent or serious incidents.”  The MCA has so far undertaken research in mid-2005, proposed initiatives for the commercial, fishing and leisure sectors in December 2005 and must now show the Minister progress by March 2007.

 

The research project has led to a draft report on “Machinery failures in merchant ships and leisure craft.”  Data covering 1997 to 2004  from different sources and of varying quality was used to draw stronger, and possibly erroneous, conclusions than the data justifies (this issue is further discussed below).  Nonetheless, the conclusions in pages 41/42 of the 2 September 2005 draft of the report include:  “Machinery failure incidents are increasing in the leisure sector,” “machinery failure accidents are increasing as a percentage of total accidents,” and “of concern is the high number of persons at risk in the non-regulated leisure sector, and further work may provide re-assurance that the environment for this population is safe.”  Although the reality to support these conclusions can be challenged, the perception being created is that there is a problem justifying the MCA’s concern.

 

The MCA says:  “I stress that the MCA is not seeking to introduce a fresh range of regulatory or inspection based interventions;” however such wording normally implies a regulatory threat, if voluntary action appears insufficient.  A clue to the MCA’s thinking is its comment: “In the United States, greater emphasis is placed on the self-resolution of incidents by the recreational boater or by the encouragement of commercial tows for craft in peril.” The MCA has accordingly put forward thirty voluntary, non-regulatory initiatives for discussion with the relevant stakeholder group, the National Water Safety Forum (on which the RYA represents leisure boaters).  These focus mainly on education and training, ranging across quality of training, publications, face-to-face contact with the public, publicity for lessons learned, further research and attention to the validity of statistics and encouraging the use of private sector towage and other alternative methods of resolving incidents.

 

Yachtsmen have evident interest in supporting appropriate initiatives, whether for self-preservation, general concern for the safety of their fellows or to fend off unnecessary regulation.  The topic is, however, a broad one and it is easy to identify areas where action may be worthwhile, notably to do with fitness for purpose of machinery and service manuals, appropriate choice and installation, effective maintenance, mechanical & electrical training of yachtsmen, safe navigational margins and appropriate use of SAR services.

 

Suggested action to address the issue              CYCC clubs may well wish to consider with their members the extent, nature and results of mechanical failures, debate the implications and share their conclusions.  The CA, for example, launched a membership survey in its December 2005 edition of Cruising.

Annex F

 

Cautionary comments on MCA Draft Report on Machinery Failures

 

Alan Macnaughton for RNSA

 

 

1…This draft paper “Machinery Failure in Merchant Ships and Leisure Craft: An investigation into recorded machinery failure accidents from 1997 to 2004” appears to have been produced at something of a rush to meet a ministerial target to improve marine safety by  reducing marine accidents caused by machinery  failure and to produce an action plan by March 2007.

 

2…What we have presented here is an overview of fairly raw statistics, from a variety of sources and collected  for different purposes, which, as a result are unreliable in making comparisons between different classes of vessels or in assessing what they mean. There are clear contradictions in the statistics arising from the various sources, UK SAR, MAIB, Lloyds Register, RNLI, and Underwriters etc.. If, as is tacitly admitted in the draft Report , the data is suspect then it follows that the conclusions must be suspect. For example the apparent huge increase in reported “ accidents “ in the leisure craft segment in 2003/4 seems inexplicable unless some new virus has suddenly entered leisure craft machinery. Without proper substantiation the Report, as it stands, cannot reasonably be agreed to.

 

3.   Ostensibly there is meant to be no emphasis on any particular segment, but more careful study of the paper appears to have leisure craft much in its sights. For example the first paragraph of the Executive Summary refers to commercial ships first but thereafter in the list of risk segments and the tables which follow leisure craft are listed in prime position. There is emphasis specifically on the leisure sector with respect to SAR where machinery failures “cost time and money “, whereas this remark is not made for example towards commercial fishing vessels. A large part of these costs are carried by RNLI and there is no reference to costs attributable to assisting foreign flag vessels nor the consequences of pollution following groundings in which leisure craft scarcely ever figure. This does not appear balanced.   

 

4.   In the covering letter to the report MCA makes the categorical statement, “that the MCA is not seeking to introduce a fresh range of regulatory or inspection based interventions “ and for the time being that should be taken at face value. In the report it speaks of “ effective safety interventions “ and “productive preventive partnerships” the meaning of which is not explained. It should be understood that the MCA’s own suggested initiatives will incur costs and costs will also arise for the partners ( eg RYA ) referred to and this should appreciated ab initio. How long the Government Auditors and the Treasury will allow this exercise to continue without recovery of costs by charging the leisure sector is matter of conjecture but it should not be discounted if previous policy is noted. Collectively all leisure sailors are per se “rich “!

 

5.   An area of the report which can bear direct criticism is the lack of definitions. The main reference is to “machinery accidents “, but  “incidents “, and “events “ also appear with different usage from the different statistical sources. Are they meant to mean the same thing or not irrespective of definitive cause or seriousness? “Accident “, for example, would be an over-egging of a blocked fuel filter. In pie diagrams “fuel “and “engine “ are shown separately. At what point in the whole fuel system should this distinction be made when important parts of it are intrinsic to the engine? What is a “large yacht “?

 

6.   When studying the SAR Record Tables it is of interest to note that in absolute figures leisure craft account by far for the largest  number of so called“ accidents “. However in terms of the probable relative populations of leisure craft to commercial vessels at risk (not given) the incidence of machinery failure in commercial vessels must, perhaps surprisingly, based on the numbers and percentages quoted, actually be substantially higher. This leads to a significant conclusion which is perhaps not one popular to reach.

 

7.   When studying the commercial sectors it appears strange that no real distinction seems to be made between vessels falling under different statutory machinery survey regimes, e.g.; Passenger Vessels ( annual ), cargo vessels ( 5 yearly SAFCON ),fishing vessels 12 metres and over(  5 yearly ), fishing vessels less than 12 metres( nil ), and vessels under the Codes.  There is no sign of comparisons being made between the effectiveness of the delegated Classification Societies, i.e. LR, GL, ABS, DNV or BV. There is also no distinction made between vessels with manned compared to unmanned machinery spaces or type of machinery, or twin or single screw, water jet whatever. One would have expected all of these important aspects to be worthy of study in arriving at the corrective actions seemingly desired. (This seems to justify a suspected agenda aimed mainly at leisure craft).

 

8.   With regard to leisure craft the data does not reveal the effect of external causes of ostensible  “ machinery failure “ such as fouling on fishing gear and plastic flotsam and jetsom the hazards which MCA has not to date seriously recognised and with which we are all too familiar and for which the RYA may be able to produce evidence, or for which a reporting scheme may need to be set up for the coming season.

 

9.   As a matter of policy there may be no harm done in RYA agreeing, with CYCC support, to pursue improved voluntary training and guidance on machinery operation and maintenance for all types of leisure craft. As far as the recommended Initiatives are concerned it is for consideration how far RYA involvement should go and it is preferable to keep this subject “in house “. The majority of leisure sailors are operators  and maintainers, usually at a basic level, and cannot usually be made into professional marine engineers. There is in any case often a limit to what can be done when actually at sea and in the case of large powerful motor cruisers the scale of machinery is likely to be outwith amateur competence.

 

10.   The role of machinery material quality, designers, manufacturers, and installers is very important as many machinery problems can be attributed to failure in these quarters. It s