MCA coding for Advanced Powerboat courses.

[dsgrnmcm]

Evening all,

Think I may have touched a nerve? Firstly this is just my limited opinion, by that I mean I'm not new to driving RIB's, but i am new to the RYA (just completed PPR 3 hours ago) and I'm a big fan of it as it is much more technical and in depth that all,military courses that I have undertaken. And I don't want to come across as a military "know it" all chopper.

While I personally feel they the commercial aspect is a move in the right direction, was anything wrong with the way it was done previously? Before we "had" to me commercially endorsed? (I only know this as I found an old copy of wave length in my desk)

Your not missing anything, we primarily teach out students / cadets to PB2 or intermediate, we have an allowance (financial & educational) to be funded up to APBI, which relates to our military training / experience for anyone billeted as river staff.

And it's good to see how other people teach.

24m RIB fair one, bu that I ment RHIB & displacement etc.

[PeterM]

I've read and re-read these posts....to pick up on Pauls mention of Steve..and me as an example.

Me -been on and off boats, ribs, yachts, dinghy sailing since age 14, had own boats for maybe 12 years...but not a boaty 'ticket' to my name except a very old VHF course.

Decided I really should sort that out - for no other reason than to maybe learn and prove to myself I have some 'clue'.

Did my PB2 - direct assesment with Brian...I was worried about that the night before! But with Brian being Brian he soon sussed out what I'd been driving and where..but he still made me tow a broken down boat home, put the boat all over the place and I still felt bad I didn't know where the isolated danger mark is in Christchurch .

Steve needed crew shortly after...luckily I wasnt 'working' so spent a season working for him, got to know he boat, its limits, spent time with him and his no1 skipper etc etc..then I thought ..hmm I could learn more..did the various other things.(some with Mr D Stormforce!) - up to and including comm endorsement of Adv PB (with Mr Glatzel indeed - a stupidly cold and icy January night it was !)

So technically I could go up to 24m...but had no intention of it ....ever. But spent days working for Steve over the last two years in all sorts of conditions..so when I was asked could I skipper a 56ft Princess out of Salterns for the airshow in Bouremouth in 2012 I said ' NO WAY ! ' ...I dont have the experiance.....

Would I take out a RIB) I hadn't helmed before --yep its within my ability and experiance...

I have seen, experianced, and been scared witless by what I would call 'big boat' skippers when let loose with a very quick and powerful RIB - having come off something that weighs 50 +tons...

Is it really that hard for an APBI to do a Comm endorsement ? I really really hope not !

I'd best go to bed now....

[SeaSkills]

Originally Posted by SW RIB Charter

I think that the 24m size should be reduced, as in my opinion it is not right that someone can take their exam in a 6m single engine RIB, then the next day commercially skipper a 24m twin engine motor cruiser.

I agree with you, and so does the MCA. There is an important point here, one which often gets overlooked, but it's something that any prudent employer should take account of even if it wasn't part of the manning requirements (see Annex 3 of MGN 280 and OAN 678)

The minimum qualification to skipper a coded boat is not limited simply to the Certificate of Competence. OAN 678 states that for a skipper working up to 3nm from safe haven with Advanced Powerboat there is a requirement for 12 months relevant experience, and to work up to 10nm from safe haven that increases to 2 years relevant experience. This is something like the HSE requirement when working ashore under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) for people operating equipment to be familiar with it, and makes a lot of sense

In my "day job" as training manager for a company employing hundreds of commercially qualified skippers this is something that we cannot ignore. We would never consider allowing someone with a commercially endorsed Advanced Powerboat certificate to simply take command of one of the boats in our fleet (we have over a hundred boats ranging in size from 6 metres to over 20). They must gain relevant experience and that for us means time in that class of boat.

[Steve_B]

The issue of any licence means that an individual has at least met the minimum standards required, on that particular day and in that particular vessel. (think driving test, how many idiots have you seen driving, who in your opinion should not be let loose on the streets!)

As has already been stated, it is then up to the owner/operator to assess and train that person to helm a particular vessel.

I think that this is a very positive step in the right direction for the industry.

Thanks Paul/Pete, this is indeed how we treat all our potential staff, skippers and crew. To often crew (if used) are overlooked as part of the safety of the whole operation.
We have refused to employ a couple of applicants who held a valid commercial tickets ...

Regards
Steve

[stew]

I think although it may cause some RTC a bit of bother short term. I believe the RYA is taking a step in the right direction, for all the reasons mentioned above as well as for the students knowledge.
I you were a student on your advanced powerboat course, with the intention of becoming a commercial RIB skipper. Being taught by an instructor who, yes is good at driving the boat and the background knowledge of nav ect, and was also skilled at the delivery of this knowledge. However has NO experience and has never operated commercially on vessels, I feel the student may lose out on some potential learning.

Stew

[wavelength]

NO experience and has never operated commercially on vessels

This may still be the case perhaps? Having a commercial endorsement doesnt mean you have used it but at least it means the instructor has been tested to an extent.
Anyone any idea of the effects on the commercial examiners who may have no commercial experience, and also own boat adv exams in non coded vessels? Say a candidate wants to use his own (or one that he has borowed from his mate) 6m rib which is nicely kitted out but not coded?
I can see that the RYA had absolutely no choice in the matter and from a SAR background I always thought that the course was an accident waiting to happen, particularly the suitability of some boats and equipment for the way it was taught mainly in winter at some venues when there were so many hours of darkness coupled with cold temperatures. However I am assuming (?) that this is to be in place for this season although I havent seen a date anywhere in which case a bit more notice would have been nice. It doesnt affect me much here as we are all so busy with commercial jobs that we have little time to give over to adv courses, but whilst "the writing has been on the wall" for a while re seating a bit more notice of the coding would surely have helped some centres if indeed it is to be mandatory for 2013. But again perhaps there was little choice in the matter.

[Tony Hill]

I thought long and hard whether to contribute to this thread initially. It may be a rod for my own back and I fully accept my views may not be shared by all. I am familiar with MGN 280
The moves put forward by MCA/RYA are indeed progress but one does wonder if they go far enough or perhaps if some criteria are too broad. I believe there is common ground between us and those who achieve Advanced Powerboat Commercial should have the basic principles behind operating a vessel safely, day or night in reasonable conditions.
I accept that the qualifications as they stand allow one to operate a vessel within the range size 6m to 24m. Perhaps the debate is whether this size range is too large. Consider the differences in handling characteristics particularly at close quarters and in a wind. Experience gained over how many years?
I think one must come away from the point that no responsible operator would just let someone loose in an unfamiliar boat. Most commercial operators are responsible. If a company has to ‘reject’ a skipper after familiarisation/onsite training one must ask the question why? Is there a gap between what is required within the exam and what is expected by the industry? We all require a start point and experience, the latter taking time but for some considerable onsite training does not appear to bring the required standard. It is easy to blame the commercial operator for poor training standards but not all RYA Advanced Instructors will have the relevant commercial experience. The commercial operator seeks someone who not only is able to learn but more importantly has the basic skill level. It appears some with the qualification are rejected from posts in a not too demanding boat in not too demanding conditions.
The insistence that those teaching an Advanced Powerboat Commercial should themselves be commercially endorsed is a positive step forward. RYA schools will supply instructors with relevant commercial experience. There are difficulties where those on the same course will have differing end expectations and these will have to be managed..
There are many contributing with a vast range of experience particularly from the teaching perspective. It does require all involved both instructional and boat operator to act responsibly. I am afraid I still believe the bar for commercial operation of vessels does require review and perhaps should be set higher or be more relevant. I try to keep abreast of issues within the industry but I may have missed any opportunities for input from the industry or bodies associated with the industry to the RYA.
For those within the RYA instructional field (and I am not trying to be provocative here) is there an easy guide to direct between RYA Advanced Powerboat and RYA Coastal Skipper when the requirement is to operate a Cat 3 vessel? I do appreciate that to head for Cat 2 it’s the Yachtmaster route.
I wish everyone safe boating for 2013 and look forward to the improved training

[Doug Stormforce]

Originally Posted by Tony Hill

For those within the RYA instructional field (and I am not trying to be provocative here) is there an easy guide to direct between RYA Advanced Powerboat and RYA Coastal Skipper when the requirement is to operate a Cat 3 vessel? I do appreciate that to head for Cat 2 it’s the Yachtmaster route.
I wish everyone safe boating for 2013 and look forward to the improved training

Within the letter of the law the Yachtmaster Coastal and the Advanced CoC provide the holder with broadly the same qualification.

The differences include

YM Coastal is required to have at least 50% of the pre required mileage and days in tidal waters where as adv. does not make a differentiation for tidal experience.

Adv CoC holders are specifically required to have gained their experience over 2 years before taking the exam, where as YM Coastal holders could ahve gained a comparable experience over a shorter time frame

Adv holders have to have 12 month or 2 yrs (depending on level of code they are operating under) of relevant experience where as YM Coastal only has to be experienced in the kind of vessel they are operating

Previously the assumed knowledge for Adv and the theory level that the exam is taken to was lower for the Adv exam. However from September the theory level is being brought in line with YM Coastal.

The Adv exam is shorter than the Coastal

The Adv exam should not be conducted with more than three candidates, the Coastal can take place with four

The requirements of the boats used for each exam are different. (i.e. one is one one has a "down below"

[Doug Stormforce]

All that aside I think I may be alone here but I do not want more regulation. I am saddened by the fact we live in a country where a huge amount of the population is constantly screaming that they want more legislation and more regulation. I comply with a huge number of regulations, coding laws, licensing issues in order to run my business and I am 100% convinced that many of them do not make us any safer as a company but do drive up red tape / admin and cost. IN fact I sometimes find people are so pre occupied chasing red tape regulations that they need bringing back to the real world and reminding of what we are actually trying to achieve.


One of the greatest successes of the RYA training scheme is the fact they they do not try to cover every eventuality, they do not create millions of endorsements to cover every specific kind of boat, but they try to encourage good seamanship and good practices.

I come across people every day who mis interpret HSE guidelines, apply ineffective safety systems to their operation and in fact often completly mis the point of what we are trying to do in the first place. Although not commercial I place a massive importance on the fact that the UK does not have compulsory licensing for leisure craft.

[Ribochet]

Originally Posted by Tony Hill

For those within the RYA instructional field (and I am not trying to be provocative here) is there an easy guide to direct between RYA Advanced Powerboat and RYA Coastal Skipper when the requirement is to operate a Cat 3 vessel? I do appreciate that to head for Cat 2 it’s the Yachtmaster route.

Hi Tony - also not wishing to be provocative - but an Advanced Powerboat Instuctor/Examiner can only work with the calibre of student that presents themselves to them and in my experience that is very often not great - and a lot of them are only there because they "have to be" and want the "piece of paper" in the easiest/quickest and in the case of some employers the cheapest way possible.

[Paul Glatzel]

Hi dsgrnmcm No nerves touched but I suspect your situation is pretty unusual. You mention that you are new to the RYA world so progressing to PBI and then APBI fairly soon thereafter probably means a fair few quals to acquire in a short period of time versus the norm which may spread it out over a longer period of time.

The change that has been announced though in this post doesn’t relate to the need for those seeking to be APBIs to pass their Advanced Commercial Exam as that came in about 18 months ago.

Regarding Stew’s point that the change “may cause some RTC a bit of bother short term” I think underestimates the change this will make. I think there are probably about 400+ schools with accreditation to teach the Advanced but probably only 50 or so running coded craft. I would be surprised if it makes economic sense for many of those 350 or so schools to code a craft (and many cant be coded anyway) as the advanced market is not huge and much of it runs through the larger commercial centres anyway. Therefore the number of centres around the world able to run the course is likely to be dramatically reduced.

Of course I have to highlight a vested interest here but the fact that the Advanced course would only then be run on well specced coded craft can only be a good thing for the scheme so long as the availability of courses remains.

One thing that hasn’t arisen here is the subject of ‘locally licenced’ craft. Given the stipulation that the craft are MCA coded vessels such as those operating in the Solent under local licencing would not fit the bill not least of all as I am led to believe that such licencing doesn’t cover night time operation anyway.

Whilst technically a person could become an APBI with no commercial experience the need for them to be commercially endorsed and therefore to undertake their PPR course means even if they don’t work commercially they will have a greater understanding of that environment and of course the school’s craft will be coded anyway.

Own boat training would not be affected. This situation already exists in the Yachtmaster scheme where the school’s craft is coded yet a client’s own boat for the training and exam may not be.

Regards, Paul

[dsgrnmcm]

Cheers Paul,

Integration or the accreditation of RYA qualifications for RN instructors is a bit hit and miss in the mob, due to time, money and justification.

Where I work we train the cadets to operate in a set area that is controlled by us (staff) with the classroom lessons from the college we can easaily award PB2, if anything by the time they pass out they are at a high level in terms of theory, practical & time on the water.

Our problem as staff is that we are billeted for 2 to maybe 3 years at the college, and by the time someone has completed all the courses up to APBI they will probably be half way through there draft (employment cycle) by that time an instructor will have taught 4 terms which is roughly 80 people up to twin screw (45ft displacement).

I agree that the CoC will give an instructor a better knowledge, and I also believe that you should be well qualified above the level your teaching, also the theory side should be aligned (power and sail)

One thing that interests me is the term commercial experience?

Is that the paperwork side of things? Admin? Or operations?

[Will75]

I have always been a great believer in the idea that boats used for pleasure should remain unregulated from a qualification point of view and for the most part I still hold this view.

On the other hand I find the 24 metre limit for the PB2 and APB to be way too high and now I am staggered that an APB instructor can currently operate without being commercially endorsed.

On the 24 metre limit issue, we all know many RIB skippers with PB2 tickets that are barely competent on a RIB let alone on 50 ton MFV for example.

I have always been surprised that the PB2 isn't limited to 12 metres, the APB to say 16 metres and the YM to 24m.

Let's face it there are some great PB2s, APBs and YMs out there but there are also plenty of rotten ones too. If operated commercially then I think things should be tougher so I support the commercial endorsement for APBIs.

[Doug Stormforce]

Originally Posted by dsgrnmcm

One thing that interests me is the term commercial experience?

Is that the paperwork side of things? Admin? Or operations?

I think the term "commercial experience" is a red herring.

The Adv PBI is there to teach safety, boat handling, nav/pilotage etc, in other words what is in the syllabus. Different adv PBIs have different backgrounds.

He is not teaching the inner workings of the offshore industry, in fact in many cases the students will come to the Instructor with considerable experience in his chosen area, if the instructor also has experience in this area greta, but if the instructor gained his experience in a different sector- so what, he is not there to teach pressing onto a wind turbine or anything specific to a particular operation.

[AMac]

Here's another slant on coded boats for training

Surely trainees have paid to be on the boats therefore all boats used should be coded as after all they are paying passengers

Comments???

[C2 RIBS]

Originally Posted by AMac

Here's another slant on coded boats for training

Surely trainees have paid to be on the boats therefore all boats used should be coded as after all they are paying passengers

Comments???

I think RYA had an exemption before on coding training boats.

[AMac]

That was quick!! ;-)

I looked at becoming an instructor last year and was told by a close friend about the RYA stance on seating so had to drop the idea as my boat is a Ribcraft with a stand behind helm sea safari setup

Statement 2 for comment !!
Dive schools use non coded boats for students to travel in should they not be coded or do all types of training establishments get exemptions ?

[Ribochet]

[QUOTE=AMac;508091]That was quick!! ;-)

I looked at becoming an instructor last year and was told by a close friend about the RYA stance on seating so had to drop the idea as my boat is a Ribcraft with a stand behind helm sea safari setup
QUOTE]

C2 RIBS is 100% -I think RYA had an exemption before on coding training boats.

However your close friend is only partially correct as the seating arrangement for RYA Powerboat Level 1, Powerboat level 2 and Safety Boat remains unchanged - the requirement for a minimum 4 forward-facing seats, abaft the console is only for Intermediate and Advanced powerboat courses

[Tony Hill]

Thanks for the attempt at explaining the difference between Coastal Skipper and Advanced Powerboat. The theory examinations required realigning. Two methods of obtaining a qualification for vessels to 24m is therefore only a candidate option as you state the end product is broadly the same qualification with the only apparent difference being one boat has a ‘below decks’, the other does not. A 24m boat is a big boat whether it has a below deck or not. My concern is the underlying principles of handling and operating a 6m vessel and a 24m vessel is too broad and the difference between Coastal Skipper and Advanced Powerboat too narrow and unclear.
One must differentiate between those who do their boating for leisure and those who do their boating as their livelihood. Over the past 20 years small boats used in the commercial sector have changed dramatically both in number and operational requirements. Boat design and equipment has also changed significantly. The implication from the RYA statement may, in part, be recognition that in the commercial sector the RYA scheme has not kept apace with these developments. The question being asked is do the changes truly reflect the full extent of these developments. There is no issue with paperwork and red tape, the discussion is the standard of the abilities and capabilities of those who in future will receive Advanced Powerboat Commercial.
There are comments on the forum regarding cases of ‘poor skippering’. Difficult to deal with but there is a method. Questions on the forum about the calibre of student being presented for commercial examination must be faced. Here education and the RYA training scheme may require attention.
There is always room for improvement. This also includes the standard of instructors at all levels but we are focussing on Advanced Commercial. The APBI for a commercial course/exam must surely have considerable experience in operating a boat in a commercial environment. He is there to educate and this must include skipper responsibilities and broad scenarios relevant to the commercial environment. The APBI should be able to refer to his commercial experience which can be encompassed within his teaching style. The teaching establishment and candidates recognising the scope of this experience. Someone who has just read the book, sat the exam and has undertaken limited commercial skippering is not ideally situated to offer opinion of what the candidate is likely to face when he steps to that first work position. The provision of specific onsite familiarisation and training from the employer is only valid if the candidate has the broad basic skills and some idea of what may be expected. The current implication being this may not currently be the case otherwise there would not have been changes.
If a boat is coded to Cat 3R then it has all facilities and equipment necessary for commercial work. Should boats for training and exams be coded for 12? It's suitability as a teaching vessel is under question. If, as is strongly suggested, there is onus on the employer to provide training on the vessel, if the vessel is deemed unsuitable for training purposes by the RYA should it also be unsuitable for the employer? A more sensible approach may include that all candidates must be deemed safe within the vessel, be able to receive instructions from the APBI whilst being able to see and operate all instruments. Four seats behind the wheel may be too restrictive. A more realistic and flexible solution is necessary.
The debate will, I am sure, continue. The changes may be the start to closing the gap. There are many vested interests from the teaching establishments who do not wish to see this market become more difficult to access(350+ without a coded vessel) or be placed under pressure to gain passes for its students to the employer who wishes all new employees to have every skill available. Where is the compromise? I am not sure we are there yet and possibly look forward to a gathering of minds between the industry, the RYA and the MCA.

[Tim M]

Originally Posted by Paul Glatzel

One thing that hasn’t arisen here is the subject of ‘locally licenced’ craft. Given the stipulation that the craft are MCA coded vessels such as those operating in the Solent under local licencing would not fit the bill not least of all as I am led to believe that such licencing doesn’t cover night time operation anyway.

You can operate in the Solent at night with the appropriate local area licence. Given that the local area licence requirements now largely follow MGN280 (with a few exceptions) it would seem a bit odd if this wasn't acceptable!