Too old to sail?

[Island Time 1,235]

...I think what this discussion has highlighted, is that the over the top requirements to meet Cat1...

Well, I disagree with that Wheels.

 

I think that any skipper that wishes to leave NZ (Or do a major coastal voyage around NZ) without a vessel that is up to Cat one standard does not have enough respect for the sea. IMO the regulations are more like a check list to make sure you have thought about the potential issues, and have the equipment to deal with them. A WOF if you like.

 

There are though, I accept, some things in the regs that are outdated and should be changed - like pyrotechnic flares for example. In my experience, if you have considered the regs, and decided not to do something, or carry something, or have an alternative, the inspectors will let you through, provided it is well considered - for YOUR vessel.

 

The rules are there after many years and thousands of voyages, incident investigations, and the resulting causes. NONE of us have as much experience as those combined in the regs.

[Black Panther 1,584]

And I'll disagree with IT.

 

Why should I need a pull down test or thousands of dollars of calculations to say my boat will right itself ? My flares expire the day I want to leave for a short shakedown, I think it makes greater sense to replace them just before I leave for the big trip. I have had a cat 1 med kit put together that was 30% the cost of the one in the regs.

 

Then get me started on the moronic conversation with the inspector who was trashing my boat over the phone coz he didn't like the designer.

 

And I don't buy the "oh but they are generally reasonable about it argument". If that's the case write the regulations to reflect that. I have no desire to put myself in a situation where I can be stopped from leaving by some bureaucrat.

[armchairadmiral 411]

OK...so that's the other side of the story...or is it ? We still don't know what went down ,only that one bureaucracy upheld the decision of another.Gee that's unusual.McCarthyism. Who is saving who from what? A few years ago we helped a foreign sailor preparing for his onward voyage to Chile.Boat was 8.5 metre bowsprit,bumpkin,no lifelines,no radio but reasonably well found.He packed empty plastic milk bottles in the quarter berths and well screwed down the bunktops.That was his 'liferaft'.YNZ wouldn't have cleared it for a voyage to Izzy Bay probably yet he had come from Europe.I get very uneasy about the 'we know what's best for you but I can't tell the detail for privacy reasons ' explanations....it might be my turn next !....

[Fish 0]

Love you cat photos Rigger.

 

Sorry I bored you Scottie, its difficult to entertain the facebook generation 

 

Wheels, I agree with everything you are saying. I just thought it would be fun to highlight the double standards of jumping to conclusions. Thanks for your help with that.

 

And I whole heartedly agree with an individuals right to do what they want. I have no problem with yachts like Berserk heading down to Antartica. If their boat sinks and they all drown (oh that's right), that is their problem. I see some parallels to this situation and Swirly World, who did some really amazing adventures in a little boat. I do note though that has Swirly World has twin hanked headsails on twin forestays, one large sail and one small sail. For the boat in question, I wouldn't take a single headsail on a furler to the Falklands via Cape Horn, but if he wants to that is his problem. I still think the set up looks like a gulf cruiser with a bunch of cat 1 gear onboard.

[B00B00 310]

Love you cat photos Rigger.

 

Sorry I bored you Scottie, its difficult to entertain the facebook generation 

 

Wheels, I agree with everything you are saying. I just thought it would be fun to highlight the double standards of jumping to conclusions. Thanks for your help with that.

 

And I whole heartedly agree with an individuals right to do what they want. I have no problem with yachts like Berserk heading down to Antartica. If their boat sinks and they all drown (oh that's right), that is their problem. I see some parallels to this situation and Swirly World, who did some really amazing adventures in a little boat. I do note though that has Swirly World has twin hanked headsails on twin forestays, one large sail and one small sail. For the boat in question, I wouldn't take a single headsail on a furler to the Falklands via Cape Horn, but if he wants to that is his problem. I still think the set up looks like a gulf cruiser with a bunch of cat 1 gear onboard.

Fish, what are you forgetting about in the Antarctica example is the potential environmental damage that can be caused. Where do you draw the line on what is acceptable and not. Is it ok for someone to take a huge poorly maintained, rusty old ship down there with 500tons of bunker oil on board because its a cool adventure? And then who cleans up the mess if something does go wrong.

This is the reason boats have to get permits go go down there.

[Fish 0]

Well based on the great outcry on this forum regarding the trampling of human rights and age discrimination, based on one line in a trade me add, it would appear the consensus is that if some guy wants to take a rusty hulk with 500 tones of bunker oil into the Southern Ocean / Antarctica / the Falklands, then that is his choice. But be careful, it sounds like you are putting a counter argument, and it might just have some logic behind it. Before you know it, you will demonstrate the practical need for permits and bureaucratic control.

[Steve Pope 243]

Tme add said that the boat had been up to cat 1 standard, that life raft was still in survey etc. etc. but was currently cat 2, and had apparently done a Stewart Island to Oamaru race recently. So I doubt that it was the boat that was found wanting.

I would have been very surprised it Maritime NZ would have gone against YNZ's findings even if they were on shaky ground, it would not have been a good look to overturn their decision.  If it is correct that the owner hasn't been able to access a copy of the report that surely must have been made, speaks volumes about the process.

As wheels says, coastal sailing poses far greater hazards than blue water sailing ever will is correct. The sea drowns people inshore, offshore, swimming, fishing, diving, it doesn't discriminate, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't go there.

[wheels 543]

Well, I disagree with that Wheels.

 

I think that any skipper that wishes to leave NZ (Or do a major coastal voyage around NZ) without a vessel that is up to Cat one standard does not have enough respect for the sea. IMO the regulations are more like a check list to make sure you have thought about the potential issues, and have the equipment to deal with them. A WOF if you like.

 

I think I need to get more sleep. Sorry yet again. I meant in relation to the fact that we can sail Coastal waters with no minimum requirement under YNZ or anyone else. To do so, yes I agree, is silly, but there is no requirement. Yet you have to have Cat1 to leave NZ waters and leaving NZ waters usually ends up taking you into easier sea states. So I feel Cat 1 is too stringent. I agree that sailing off shore and for that matter even long coastal passages, it's nice to have your boat upto a minimum standard. I try to have mine close to Cat1 and for that matter, close to survey, but I am not fully compliant, because one or two things I don't feel are needed for the sailing I do.

Anyway, my thinking wanders off on tangents......I am trying to convey the "hypocrisy"(*if that is the right word to use) in requirements to NZ vessels leaving, versus NZ Coastal sailing and Over Seas Visiting Vessels. If you can't cover the later two, why should the first be so stringent.

 

Oh yeah, and what BP said.

[wheels 543]

Wheels, I agree with everything you are saying. I just thought it would be fun to highlight the double standards of jumping to conclusions. Thanks for your help with that.

 

I don't think you were wrong in what you said. I for one tend to be one of those that will pull someone up on taking a single side of a subject. I got riled up on this subject simply because having experience with this particular bureaucracy re my FC boat(like BP's comment on pull down test)was judging someone based on age alone and didn't think.

[Black Panther 1,584]

Add to Partisan's gentleman the Hiscocks, the Pardeys, Bill Tilman, Robin Knox Johnson and god knows how many more who have made significant passages and would not have made cat 1

[curly12 1]

I am a regular reader of one sailor gentleman's website. He has circumnavigated the world five times, three of them solo. He carries no liferaft, no long distance radio, no epirb. By your definition, he does not respect the sea?

And he is about to head off again...

 

http://self-portraitinthepresentseajournal.blogspot.co.nz/

[Island Time 1,235]

I am a regular reader of one sailor gentleman's website. He has circumnavigated the world five times, three of them solo. He carries no liferaft, no long distance radio, no epirb. By your definition, he does not respect the sea?

Not at all. It is his decision not to carry the gear required for a rescue. He knows what's out there. That is different to boat gear and condition, IMO. In this case I bet the boat is in good order! If he wants to go, single handed, with no real chance of rescue, he should be allowed to, upon signing a search waiver.

What I'm really trying to say is that those who choose to leave in a boat in poor condition without spares (sails, tools, parts etc) should have no right to expect a rescue. But they do.

The issue for YNZ, is that in the event of a problem, it would be they, not he, who has to deal with the remaining family and the public wanting a search. Nothing is as easy dealing with the public.

[Island Time 1,235]

BP, there is discretion in the regs;

End of section 4 -

"The Inspector is required to use Category 1 standards,

where applicable"

and

However, a boat built to, for example a 1980 design that

has proven safe over time, will still be eligible to race if no

substantial modifications have been made.

Newly built yachts after 1st January 2010 that are cruising only

must comply with Cat 1 for going overseas. They will still have

to comply with the YNZ Safety Regulations of Sailing 2013-

2016 especially regarding welded keels. This keel requirement

also applies to existing cruising vessels with welded keels.

Conventional designs, e.g. Herreshoff, will have to be subject

to inspector discretion and guidelines from Maritime New

Zealand.

 

Finally, if you have a problem with a particular Inspector, then;

5.04 Yachting New Zealand will endeavour to provide a consulting

service to resolve any serious disagreements on technical

matters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Island Time 1,235]

And there are others. For a non race yacht, you should not normally have to do a pull down test;

 

STABILITY REQUIREMENTS:

For non racing yachts the inspectors may use

their discretion regarding stability,

providing that they are satisfied the vessel

is self righting from a knockdown that

submerges the masthead.

 

Another case of discretion. There are more. Written in the rules. If you have a particularly difficult inspector, then you should approach YNZ for help. Be reasonable, and try not to have a negative attitude will help. Remember the inspectors are volunteers.

 

Personally I have had a disagreement about Island Time with a cat one. with an inspector trying to tell me that the chainplate attachments were not up to spec. We did have a slightly heated discussion about that, and he elected to let the issue through, "on a historical basis" (as the boat had lots of miles with no issues). As far as I am concerned, there never was an issue....

Again, I have found most inspectors helpful and reasonable, as well as willing to listen to reason. I'd encourage anyone looking to go offshore to get the Inspector involved as early as possible so there is a good relationship and nothing comes out of the woodwork to bite you with little time to correct it before your leaving date. 

[darkside 61]

Agree with KM such a waiver is not workable in practice. 

I'm sure many have had run ins with Cat 1 inspectors over this or that.

We had one say in preliminary discussions that we had to lift our catamaran so he could inspect the keel/hull mounting. They were glued on and sacrificial in a decent bump. We could float and sail happily without them and I couldn't see what an inspection would achieve. So we sailed up to Opua and got signed off there without the haulout.

[Island Time 1,235]

Agreed guys, hence the requirements so there may be something to search for - life raft, flares, Epirb, radios etc etc. Skippers choice to use it or not, but it has to be carried. If the yacht is Nz registered.

[Black Panther 1,584]

It's that whole discretion thing I find objectionable. One dickhead could spoil a lifetime of plans.

[Island Time 1,235]

I guess that is why there is a review process. I understand what you are getting at though. Damn hard to write a set of rules that covers all boats, crews, and circumstances. Probably impossible. That's when the discretion comes in...

YNZ does not stop many vessels. I'll ask them if they will tell me how many...

[wheels 543]

Interesting comments IT. Have YNZ updated their information at some time. Because the rules didn't seem quite so accommodating when I looked at Cat1....yikes...14yrs ago.

[harrytom 642]

I rather silly back in 1986,took a hartley 16 from kawau to gt barrier,se 15/20 knots,no phone or rt had flares,i knew the risk and just went, if the ynz/maritime knew what i was doing could they stop me?? I do not see the need for cat1,you want to sail off fine with me but sign a affidavit first.  no difference to me racing and signing the form saying i conform to cat 3,only time i would get caught out is there was an inspection or possibly the sh@t hit the fan would the race authorities then be in the gun for accepting my entry??