MCA coding for Advanced Powerboat courses.

[Solent Ranger]

Received a letter from HQ today. I suppose it was bound to happen.

[AMac]

Can you give more details?

[Solent Ranger]

Originally Posted by AMac

Can you give more details?

Too long to post all details here, but there are certain exemptions for Intermediate, but to run Advanced courses then the boat is likely to be over 6m with a minimum of 4 forward facing seat abaft of the console. Seating must have adequate handholds and individual back rests to allow each student and the instructor to sit correctly. The vessel must have a fixed echo sounder, fixed chart plotter/GPS and fixed VHF. Vessel must conform to MCA Code do Practice for Commercial Vessels for category 3 area of operation - Cat 5 + 3(R) or 4 + 3(R) for open ribs . Cat 3 for other planing and displacement vessels.

[C2 RIBS]

What date have they set for rules to change?

Also will mean instructor must be commercial endorsed to advanced as students wont be and MCA rules require qualified aboard

[Ribochet]

Originally Posted by C2 RIBS

What date have they set for rules to change?

Also will mean instructor must be commercial endorsed to advanced as students wont be and MCA rules require qualified aboard

The letter does not give a specific date but the implication is that it will be a specific requirement of any RYA Centre Inspection carried out in 2013 for centres wishing to teach Advanced Powerboat courses. All Centre Inspectors will be getting update training in the new year which I believe will be mandatory.

Yes API's must now be commercially endorsed.

Also the RYA has negotiated with the MCA a reduced coding specification for night-time operation for RIBS - OAN 678.

[C2 RIBS]

Originally Posted by Ribochet

Also the RYA has negotiated with the MCA a reduced coding specification for night-time operation for RIBS - OAN 678.

What does this mean? Either it is a coded RIB or just another RYA get out clause. Sorry coded vessel should be the same across all operators

[Ribochet]

Originally Posted by C2 RIBS

What does this mean? Either it is a coded RIB or just another RYA get out clause. Sorry coded vessel should be the same across all operators

Thought you might be interested - but do not shoot the messenger

[C2 RIBS]

Originally Posted by Ribochet

Thought you might be interested - but do not shoot the messenger

Yep been on messages with another training school and very interesting. RYA will annoy me if they water this down, not your fault but as I said either it is a coded vessel or it is not. This has been one of my reasons for selling a coded RIB we rented to RYA schools

[Solent Ranger]

Originally Posted by C2 RIBS

What does this mean? Either it is a coded RIB or just another RYA get out clause. Sorry coded vessel should be the same across all operators

Just been reading this OAN 678. It appears it relates to substantial enclosures for ribs operating in cat 3 areas. Entitled Alternative compliance standards for Rigid Inflatable Boats certified under the Small Commercial Vessels code of Practice wishing to operate outside the hours of daylight within area Category 3.

It is dated 5 March 2010, so I don't see this as anything radically new. And will not be a "watering" down as far as what goes on now is concerned.

[C2 RIBS]

Cheers for that, yes agreed if thats the case, we gain cat3 R by having a canopy cover to assist coding requirements

[Solent Ranger]

Plus it makes specific reference to use of dry suits etc after dark. Will need to concentrate on wording a bit more than I feel like doing tonight

[CJL]

So as an Advanced Powerboat Instructor I'll now need to become commercially endorsed?

So my next question is why should I not expect to get paid commercial skipper rates rather than instructor rates?

Chris

[C2 RIBS]

Originally Posted by Solent Ranger

Plus it makes specific reference to use of dry suits etc after dark. Will need to concentrate on wording a bit more than I feel like doing tonight

Reading this document OAN 678 does suggest a dry suit for all but if I recal this was for the open RIBS operating unrestricted and where we operate cat3R then suitable clothing MUST be worn which is accepted as proper waterproof for weather conditions expected.

I hope Duncan will be along shortly to discuss these coding issues.

[Tony Hill]

Whilst at last this is a step in the right direction for advanced powerboat commercial skippers and their training it appears there may still be significant gaps. One wonders whether the RYA will be open to debate and discussion as it appears they have ignored a significant section of the commercial RIB industry. I am sure there are persons on this forum who are in contact with the RYA.
Cat 3R is not an issue. Any RIB operating to Cat 3 R must have an appropriate operational section within their Ships Management Plan. This should be submitted by the surveyor to the coding body for approval. You have to work according to what is laid down. There is no grey area.
RIBs are used commercially for many purposes. A commercially coded RIB can carry up to 12 passengers therefore logic states your test should be on a RIB licenced for 12 passengers. It is easier to ‘step down in size and performance’ than to move up in size and responsibility. A 6m RIB with a single engine is a different tool to a 10m RIB with twin 250HP engines.
Within Scotland there is a large tourist industry based around RIBs and I am sure it is similar elsewhere. The majority of these RIBs are operated safely from a standing position at the rear of the RIB. This design has evolved in light of experience. Passengers are infront of the console where they can be observed. A driver’s seat in practical terms for these types of operations is seen as a hindrance to safe operation of the RIB. A helm safety rail is considered the norm.
I would imagine there are few RYA Schools who operate fully coded RIBs and even fewer who operate something in the region of 10/11m with twin engines as a large sector of the commercial world demands. With the increase in the use of RIBs as passenger transport for work is it not prudent the RYA consider these aspects.

[Doug Stormforce]

Originally Posted by Tony Hill

Whilst at last this is a step in the right direction for advanced powerboat commercial skippers and their training it appears there may still be significant gaps. One wonders whether the RYA will be open to debate and discussion as it appears they have ignored a significant section of the commercial RIB industry. I am sure there are persons on this forum who are in contact with the RYA.
Cat 3R is not an issue. Any RIB operating to Cat 3 R must have an appropriate operational section within their Ships Management Plan. This should be submitted by the surveyor to the coding body for approval. You have to work according to what is laid down. There is no grey area.
RIBs are used commercially for many purposes. A commercially coded RIB can carry up to 12 passengers therefore logic states your test should be on a RIB licenced for 12 passengers. It is easier to ‘step down in size and performance’ than to move up in size and responsibility. A 6m RIB with a single engine is a different tool to a 10m RIB with twin 250HP engines.
Within Scotland there is a large tourist industry based around RIBs and I am sure it is similar elsewhere. The majority of these RIBs are operated safely from a standing position at the rear of the RIB. This design has evolved in light of experience. Passengers are infront of the console where they can be observed. A driver’s seat in practical terms for these types of operations is seen as a hindrance to safe operation of the RIB. A helm safety rail is considered the norm.
I would imagine there are few RYA Schools who operate fully coded RIBs and even fewer who operate something in the region of 10/11m with twin engines as a large sector of the commercial world demands. With the increase in the use of RIBs as passenger transport for work is it not prudent the RYA consider these aspects.

The Adv COC qualifies the skipper up to 24m. If we therefore follow your logic, all candidates should be examined on board 24m craft!

[SW Boat Transport]

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.

[dsgrnmcm]

Hi just to add my 2 pence.

We had Rachel from the RYA pop down to our office to look at our training (I work at BRNC Dartmouth), 3 of us are going through to get our APBI'S,

We need the following:

APB
PBI
PPR
ML5 or ENG1
SRC
F.AID
STCW basically
Then a pre APBI assessment, then we can do the course & on completion get in commercially endorsed.

Seems a bit much for what we teach.

But I agree if your going to drive a 24m RIB, you should be taught in it.

[Paul Glatzel]

Hi, if I may throw in my two penneth worth here. Addressing a few points made in various posts.

One of the observations made was that as a good number of commercial skippers operating in some areas will helm craft with rear helm positions and coded for 12 passengers then so they should be taught/examined on such craft.

Whilst I understand the logic of wanting to train/examine people on exactly the craft they may work on, in practice it is simply impractical but also not the RYA’s job to do so.

The RYA/MCA Advanced exam tests an individual’s ability to skipper/navigate/manage and handle the craft they present for the exam in whatever conditions they face on the day. By passing the person the examiner is in effect saying they are safe on that craft at that time. From that point it becomes the Skippers responsibility and the operator of whatever coded craft they are employed on to ensure that they are capable of helming/managing that craft.

Take an example. Steve at Poole Sea Safari who frequents this forum runs a highly respected and professional operation. I don’t imagine for one second that just because an individual turns up with a suitable commercial qualification (even if gained on an identical craft to his own) he immediately lets them take the Parker out and take responsibility for his clients. I imagine he questions their experience, speaks to those that will have worked with them (if possible), inducts them in the procedures of his operation and undertakes a practical assessment of their ability to assess whether he wants to trust his business to them. He probably then allows them to work under his supervision to check they are safe before allowing them sole responsibility for the craft.

In undertaking such an approach he is simply doing both what is right and also required of him as a responsible operator.

There are so many craft that a skipper could helm, in so many different locations and where operating conditions will vary from place to place that it is simply an impossibility for the RYA system to ‘qualify’ people specifically against so many variables. The RYA system assesses/qualifies to a level then it is the operators responsibility beyond that point. If operators do their job properly then the system works fine.

Take two related examples.

1) When I did my Yachtmaster Offshore exam I passed it on a 11m twin outdrive motor cruiser. Last week I helmed commercially a 24m Sunseeker. Between those two points in time I accrued the experience to helm the 24m and the operator ensured that I had the required experience before they set me free on it.
2) When a PBI qualifies he/she typically comes from a background where they have acquired their experience in smaller RIB type vessels. More fool me if I hire them with such a background to teach on a 28ft 4 berth family cruiser the day after they have qualified. As the operator I must ensure the people I hire have the experience I need.

Another point raised (if I understood it correctly – apologies if not) questioned the logic of insisting “the boat……..a minimum of 4 forward facing seat abaft of the console.” Raising the valid point that many commercial craft are laid out with the helmsman at the stern.

The RYA’s rational with this will relate to the ability for the students being taught to be taught effectively. Unless they are situated behind the console with direct access to the electronics on board and in direct contact with the Instructor then it won’t work in an instructional sense.



Finally, a thought. If I ran an RYA centre in an area where there was a big demand for skippers helming 10/11m RIBs with rear helm positions then I would:

1) Run the advanced course and exam on whatever vessel I had available for the purpose
2) In conjunction with one or more local operators of such craft run a dedicated ‘12m RIB Skipper Course’ to ‘re-chip’ those holding the commercial endorsement onto those types of craft. This would be a non RYA course.


Hopefully I haven’t missed the point or misunderstood the posts.

Regards, Paul

[Solent Ranger]

Originally Posted by dsgrnmcm

Hi just to add my 2 pence.

We had Rachel from the RYA pop down to our office to look at our training (I work at BRNC Dartmouth), 3 of us are going through to get our APBI'S,

We need the following:

APB
PBI
PPR
ML5 or ENG1
SRC
F.AID
STCW basically
Then a pre APBI assessment, then we can do the course & on completion get in commercially endorsed.

Seems a bit much for what we teach.

But I agree if your going to drive a 24m RIB, you should be taught in it.

It s the APB certificate of competence that is commercially endorsable, nothing to do with being an ADPB instructor. It is really only the PPR and the sea survival that is extra as all the other qualifications you need to hold anyway.

I would not employ a Advanced PBI unless he/ she held the commercial endorsement anyway.

I would like to see a 24m rib

[Paul Glatzel]

Hi dsgrnmcm

But if you want to train people to the level of Advanced Powerboat (implicit if you are intending being a APBI) why shouldn't you have all of those qualifications - exactly why is it a 'bit much for what we teach'. Apologies if I am missing something.

Regards, Paul