Cat capsized in the gulf stream.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Polux

If a regulation is made by a government and is therefore a government regulation it is implied that the government can control it and can modify it. But no, the only a government can do and is obliged to do, is to enforce the RCD.

There is no European government but only countries governments. The directives come from the European parliament and that is not a government.

The RCD was made and is modified by an independent technical committee and then subjected to the European parliament for approval.

If approved all the EU governments will have a period of time to revert it to their national law. It is mandatory and they have no power to modify or not to accept it. They are obliged to enforce it.

Wow, that is some amazingly twisted logic to say the government isn't the government.

Of course, it's totally irrelevant to the point: The builder pursued and obtained an open ocean rating which is inconsistent with claims that the builder doesn't think it's capable of open ocean passages.

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by Davy J

So let me get this correct.

You have never sailed on a Gemini, nor have you owned one. But because you saw one, across from you on the dock, that doesn't seem to go anywhere, you are fully confident in your opinion that these boats are unfit to float in a bathtub...............

Wrong--I have been on one, and appreciate the living space and the motoring efficiency . I also said that I seriously considered buying one for use on protected waters.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Wow, that is some amazingly twisted logic to say the government isn't the government.

Of course, it's totally irrelevant to the point: The builder pursued and obtained an open ocean rating which is inconsistent with claims that the builder doesn't think it's capable of open ocean passages.

What can I say if you cannot see the differences? Namely regarding independence and control regarding RCD.

Also you seem not to understand that category A does not stand for Open ocean rating, it just stands for :designed for winds that may exceed wind force 8 (Beaufort scale) and significant wave height of 4 m and above but excluding abnormal conditions, such as storm, violent storm, hurricane, tornado and extreme sea conditions or rogue waves.

Not designed to withstand a storm and there is always the possibility of catching a storm on an Ocean passage, even if a small one if the passage is done on the better season.

Not all boats that are classified Category A have the same seaworthiness, some will not have any problem with a storm, those that are far away from the minimum requirements for class A, while on others, that are very close to those limits, like the 25ft Django 7.70 or a Gemini 35 it would be very dangerous to sail in one.

According to RCD boats like those above mentioned were not designed for it and in fact common good sense from someone that knows something about sailboats will tell you the same. Those boats can cross Oceans (and on the case of the Django 7.70 many hundreds of similar boats have done so) but they are not designed as Ocean boats. An Ocean boat is designed to face a storm, meaning F10 conditions, at least on my book.

[boatman61]

The RCD/CE is an industry created load of crap that was then pushed through Brussels.. protect their market back then when boats oversea's could be had for a song..
Bit like the US o fA protects its trade by dictating prices charged on products in the EU instead of allowing market forces to rule.
Governments actually have little say about what is decided in Brussels and palms are regularly greased by all and sundry..
Its about as relevant and reliable as 90% of CF posts on Global Warming..

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Factor

I am not joking. I am telling you the facts - not my opinion or what I have seen on the internet, just the facts, every single rescue of a mono I have been involved in - the boat was or had sunk, AGAIN not a criticism of the boat, almost always the operators fault. OK - clear enough for you.

There you go about personal experience that in this case is completely irrelevant.

In this case what count is statistics regarding the number of boats that are abandoned by the crews through a mayday versus the number of boats that are abandoned by the crews while sinking.

Both cases make the news so in this case information regarding the news (and internet is a great tool to access that) are far more important that any particular experience.

And what you can see on the news regarding maydays and rescue operations is that the vast majority are abandoning not boats that are sinking, but boats they they are afraid that will sink, boats that in most cases do not sink and stay around from months after being abandoned, some going ashore.

In fact that has been discussed on this forum since the Epirb and the easy way out when things got rough risk to turn out in a huge problem not only regarding prices of insurance but also regarding the costs of unjustified rescues and an eventual mandatory needed insurance regarding that.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by Polux

There you go about personal experience that in this case is completely irrelevant.

Yep I get that actual experience is irrelevant in your view

In this case what count is statistics regarding the number of boats that are abandoned by the crews through a mayday versus the number of boats that are abandoned by the crews while sinking.

May I have a reference to those statistics, where published and by whom.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by boatman61

The RCD/CE is an industry created load of crap that was then pushed through Brussels.. protect their market back then when boats oversea's could be had for a song..
Bit like the US o fA protects its trade by dictating prices charged on products in the EU instead of allowing market forces to rule.
Governments actually have little say about what is decided in Brussels and palms are regularly greased by all and sundry..
Its about as relevant and reliable as 90% of CF posts on Global Warming..

I agree that governments have no saying about that but I do not agree that RCD is irrelevant. It is a protection consumer measure to provide information about a product and it has provided positive effects.

It is good to remember that the decision to have such tool come after the Fastnet disaster of 1979 and that many of the boats there, particularly IOR designs would not pass the stability requirements for class A, that are really on the low side today.

The RCD had a positive effect in what regards safety, particularly in what regards final stability and is good to remember that the AVS of a Vailant, that was particularly good at the time, is pretty much the norm today and that boats with AVS near 100º, that would have an hard trouble on getting on their feet if capsized, disappeared all together in what regards cruising boats, since most are Class A boats.

If they go, as previewed, for a higher specification for a new class for Oceanic boats that will have a big benefice in what regards safety of future cruising boats since all will try to have the boats certified on the higher class and that will turn out in safer and more seaworthy cruising boats.

Yes, lobbies and installed interests of the bigger boat builders try sometimes to stall the process but till now the only thing they managed is to slow it down.

If the bigger boat builders can be interested in preventing the increasing of the specifications of sailboats (because that would make them more expensive) their interest is opposed by the one of many smaller shipyards that make already more expensive and higher specification sailboats that will already be inside more higher specifications and that would see the difference in price between their boats and mass production boats become smaller.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by boatman61

The RCD/CE is an industry created load of crap that was then pushed through Brussels.. protect their market back then when boats oversea's could be had for a song..
Bit like the US o fA protects its trade by dictating prices charged on products in the EU instead of allowing market forces to rule.
Governments actually have little say about what is decided in Brussels and palms are regularly greased by all and sundry..
Its about as relevant and reliable as 90% of CF posts on Global Warming..

Haaaa, true ........

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Factor

...
May I have a reference to those statistics, where published and by whom.

Do you read the news? or read this forum? Pretty much when a cruising sailboat is abandoned after a mayday, or because it sunk, somebody post it here.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Polux

I agree that governments have no saying about that but I do not agree that RCD is irrelevant. It is a protection consumer measure to provide information about a product and it has provided positive effects.

It is good to remember that the decision to have such tool come after the Fastnet disaster of 1979 and that many of the boats there, particularly IOR designs would not pass the stability requirements for class A, that are really on the low side today.

The RCD had a positive effect in what regards safety, particularly in what regards final stability and is good to remember that the AVS of a Vailant, that was particularly good at the time, is pretty much the norm today and that boats with AVS near 100º, that would have an hard trouble on getting on their feet if capsized, disappeared all together in what regards cruising boats, since most are Class A boats.

If they go, as previewed, for a higher specification for a new class for Oceanic boats that will have a big benefice in what regards safety of future cruising boats since all will try to have the boats certified on the higher class and that will turn out in safer and more seaworthy cruising boats.

Yes, lobbies and installed interests of the bigger boat builders try sometimes to stall the process but till now the only thing they managed is to slow it down.

If the bigger boat builders can be interested in preventing the increasing of the specifications of sailboats (because that would make them more expensive) their interest is opposed by the one of many smaller shipyards that make already more expensive and higher specification sailboats that will already be inside more higher specifications and that would see the difference in price between their boats and mass production boats become smaller.

I can pull up a number of boats built in the UK pre CE that would pass the CE test as they were built stock in the 70's..
But it'd still cost me ££££'sK to get the idiot stickers to conform..
The RCD does nothing to improve boat safety.. folk not buying a brand because they sink influences safety much more.. there are companies today that would be bust back then when quality ruled...
Today they just churn out the cheapest **** they can get away with..

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Polux

Quote:
Originally Posted by valhalla360
Wow, that is some amazingly twisted logic to say the government isn't the government.

Of course, it's totally irrelevant to the point: The builder pursued and obtained an open ocean rating which is inconsistent with claims that the builder doesn't think it's capable of open ocean passages.

What can I say if you cannot see the differences? Namely regarding independence and control regarding RCD.

Also you seem not to understand that category A does not stand for Open ocean rating, it just stands for :designed for winds that may exceed wind force 8 (Beaufort scale) and significant wave height of 4 m and above but excluding abnormal conditions, such as storm, violent storm, hurricane, tornado and extreme sea conditions or rogue waves.

And you cannot see that every countries RDC Regulations are Government Regulations legislated and enforced by governments.

Also, while your claim for what CAT A stands for may be true for RCD II which is just now coming into effect, it was not so for RCD I which was in effect at the time the builder obtained the "Cat A - Ocean" rating.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by Polux

Do you read the news? or read this forum? Pretty much when a cruising sailboat is abandoned after a mayday, or because it sunk, somebody post it here.

So the newspaper and CF is your statistical source. Fair enough

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by Factor

So the newspaper and CF is your statistical source. Fair enough

In this case, imagination is a 3rd credible source.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Davy J

A compromised through-hull fitting will provide problems for any and all boats. Maybe they left their A/C through-hull open and a hose slipped off......or an added generator valve........Who knows...... Gemini doesn't make through-hull fittings.

Any boat that has a breach, has a serious problem. There isn't any catamaran produced that would be better in this situation. An EPIRB, VHF radio and a life raft are the only solutions, and even then, you still need some luck.............

It would depend on the conditions.

I do know a cat which had large areas of the bows of both it's hulls ripped out, yet was able to motor for about 9 hours to safety.

See: http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ks-146748.html

This was in good weather. Maybe not possible in even moderate weather.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Factor

So the newspaper and CF is your statistical source. Fair enough

No internet is the best source for that, surely I will have there much more information regarding that compared with the one you will get personally making rescues on a particular part of the globe.