Certifications for a skipper

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by StuM

"If you drive a powered vessel for recreational purposes on NSW waters, at a speed of 10 knots (18.5 Kilometres per hour) or more, you must have a boat driving licence."

I can read

But what is a powered vessel?

Sail boat (without an engine) is wind powered. Row boat (without engine) is human powered. Both can exceed 10 kts. Power boat usually refers to a boat solely powered by an engine (steam, petrol, diesel, electric etc).

A sail boat using the engine for propulsion is considered to be power driven vessel as far as the COLREGS goes. Does it also mean that as far as NSW boat licence goes?

Is a sail boat with an engined fitted but not providing propulsion a "powered" vessel?

Does driving infer using the engine for propulsion? Is driving the same as sailing?

Details are important.

EDIT: I guess it is somewhat academic for me though, I haven't owned a boat capable of 10 kts for four decades now.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I can read

But what is a powered vessel?

Sail boat (without an engine) is wind powered. Row boat (without engine) is human powered. Both can exceed 10 kts. Power boat usually refers to a boat solely powered by an engine (steam, petrol, diesel, electric etc).

A sail boat using the engine for propulsion is considered to be power driven vessel as far as the COLREGS goes. Does it also mean that as far as NSW boat licence goes?

Is a sail boat with an engined fitted but not providing propulsion a "powered" vessel?

Does driving infer using the engine for propulsion? Is driving the same as sailing?

Details are important.

EDIT: I guess it is somewhat academic for me though, I haven't owned a boat capable of 10 kts for four decades now.

Both the Marine Safety Act and Marine Safety Regulations use the term "power-driven" vessel (as per COLREGs), not "powered vessel" in this context , but neither define it.

Common sense would dictate that it would equate to COLREGs "power-driven"
There is little doubt about it there
(b) The term “power-driven vessel” means any vessel propelled by machinery.
(c) The term “sailing vessel” means any vessel under sail provided that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used.

In fact, "power-driven" is also used in other places:
https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/licence/index.html
You must have a general boat driving licence if you operate a power-driven vessel for recreation on NSW waters, at a speed of 10 knots (18.5km/h) or more.

https://ablis.business.gov.au/servic...-licence/23761
You will require this licence if you intend to operate a power-driven recreational vessel in NSW waters, at a speed of 10 Knots (18.5km/h) or more.



As for the difference between "driving' and "sailing". The former implies you have full control over speed and direction. Not so the latter.

[SalingSue]

Originally Posted by Popeye46

In NSW Australia it is not the size of a private boat that requires the skipper “licensed” it is the speed. So one can build his/ her 60ft boat out of chipboard take his wife and 4 kids around the world as long as his/her boat is not capable of doing 10 knots. He is also referred to as “Captain” which suggests he knows what he is doing, yet he maybe be a moron endangering his and other peoples lives. To make matters worse if something went wrong the “captain” is not culpable, he can plead ignorance in his defense. This situation has repeated itself many times in the past.
When it comes to commercial vessels particularly ones that carry passengers different story, the skipper has a lot of hoops to jump through they are termed as “Master” of the vessel. The authorities ensure they are competent and they issue a ticket to say so. It called a Masters ticket, they give that out so they have someone to blame when the sh*t hits the fan and because he jumped through the hoops and proved that he was “competent” he cannot plead ignorance and can be jailed.
I’m not sure of the situation in the US, what is required to be a “captain” of a private boat.

Wow.

Well in the US you buy a boat and you can do with it as you please, now insurance might have some requirements if you choose to buy insurance, and of course you are responsible for your actions like any other grown up doing grown up things.

I really wouldn’t want the .gov that in my personal business, they can’t even fill in potholes correctly.

[StuM]

Additionally, the NSW Boat Licence Study Guide is quite clear:

Sailing vessel -
A vessel propelled only by sails; when a vessel is under sails but being propelled by engines it is classed as a power driven vessel

[StuM]

Originally Posted by SalingSue

Well in the US you buy a boat and you can do with it as you please

Another erroneous claim from you.


See

Boating Laws and boating license requirements by state


Select a state from the drop down list to see the mandatory requirements to operate a boat in each state.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by StuM

............

In fact, "power-driven" is also used in other places:
https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/maritime/licence/index.html
You must have a general boat driving licence if you operate a power-driven vessel for recreation on NSW waters, at a speed of 10 knots (18.5km/h) or more.

https://ablis.business.gov.au/servic...-licence/23761
You will require this licence if you intend to operate a power-driven recreational vessel in NSW waters, at a speed of 10 Knots (18.5km/h) or more.


.....

Thanks for finding the NSW links which use the term 'power-driven'. That is much clearer!

[Popeye46]

The early Polynesians did explore areas of the Pacific however they were confined to areas within the polynesian triangle. By night they would navigate by the moon and stars, by day, the sun. This novice sailors would be taught by the experienced sailors on how to navigate and sail. How many left their island home never to be seen again we will never know.
The European explorers figured that the world was not flat and there was no edge, however they did not pass on that knowledge. If they did it went against the teachings of the Catholic church and they would be “processed” by the inquisition, kind of like the Gestapo or locked up in a gated community like Gantamo Bay. If they went on a log voyage out of sight of land and returned safe everyone would say it was a miracle. The English however were not restricted by the inquisition so they passed on their knowledge which in effect were navigation courses to the Captains.
Their navigation skills quickly surpassed the Europeans. That is why the zero meridian passes through Greenwich England and a circle is 360 degrees. All this stuff was taught to make boating safer.
Just can’t help myself
We boldly go where no man has gone before

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Popeye46

The early Polynesians did explore areas of the Pacific however they were confined to areas within the polynesian triangle. By night they would navigate by the moon and stars, by day, the sun. This novice sailors would be taught by the experienced sailors on how to navigate and sail. How many left their island home never to be seen again we will never know.
The European explorers figured that the world was not flat and there was no edge, however they did not pass on that knowledge. If they did it went against the teachings of the Catholic church and they would be “processed” by the inquisition, kind of like the Gestapo or locked up in a gated community like Gantamo Bay. If they went on a log voyage out of sight of land and returned safe everyone would say it was a miracle. The English however were not restricted by the inquisition so they passed on their knowledge which in effect were navigation courses to the Captains.
Their navigation skills quickly surpassed the Europeans. That is why the zero meridian passes through Greenwich England and a circle is 360 degrees. All this stuff was taught to make boating safer.
Just can’t help myself
We boldly go where no man has gone before

I guess you know nothing about the history of Catholic Europe because if you did, you would not have posted such inaccuracies.

Here is as good a place as any to start.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tordesillas


TL;DR - Catholic Europe (i.e. the Pope) knew the earth was round and divided it up among between the super powers at the time (Spain and Portugal) a long time before the English got into the act.

[requiem]

Originally Posted by Popeye46

The European explorers figured that the world was not flat and there was no edge, however they did not pass on that knowledge.

Err, what? That the world was round was well-known since classical times; the later religious debates were around heliocentricity.

The idea of a flat earth belief is a modern invention, possibly in part a side effect of later debates around science vs. religion. (A reminder that in political debates, many arguments on both sides may be fallacious.)

[Popeye46]

I did not want to start a debate on whether or not the earth was a biscuit or an orange, suffice to say that when Galileo said that the earth went around the sun, he was declared a heretic and locked up by the Catholic inquisition until he decanted his theory. My point was that because the English navigators shared information as a whole they became better navigators. The power of education.
Live well and prosper

[Popeye46]

Sorry that’s a typo not “decanted” recanted his theory

[Popeye46]

Would you believe that there is a “flat earth society” registered in the UK. They believe the photos of a roundsome earth taken by the American astronauts were faked.

[chrisr]

one of the many annoying things about boating in Oz is that rules change from state to state

for instance, we do not need any licence to operate our cat or our tender in nsw, but when we go to queensland we do. however you cannot get a queensland licence unless you have a queensland address...

easiest answer is to just ignore it and hope fr the best !

cheers,

[muttnik]

Originally Posted by Popeye46

This situation has repeated itself many times in the past.

If you want to argue that certification requirements in Oz are inadequate and need tightening I think you need to provide more concrete figures to suggest that (a) there's a problem and (b) that is the way to solve it.

The UK has no licensing requirements for operators of non-commercial watercraft. The number of leisure boating fatalities are tiny. Carbon monoxide poisoning makes up a lot of those. I don't have a breakdown of the remainder but I'll wager that those attributable to ignorance of a skipper that would have been avoided by licensing is negligible. Fatalities can still happen on the best qualified skipper's boat and a licence does not prevent idiots from being idiots.

I'm a huge advocate of training and would advise anyone taking to the water to seek appropriate training. If the figures supported a case for compulsory licensing I wouldn't have an issue with it (I have a yachtmaster certificate by choice), but when we're talking about preventing fatalities amounting to less than 1 in 10 million population annually there are many better areas to expend government resources than compulsory licensing.

The UK is not Australia. We are relatively densely populated, well covered by the RNLI and in VHF range of the coastguard just about everywhere. UK arguments don't necessarily apply to the Australian coastline but the need to justify a call for increased legislation with actual figures is, I think, transferable.

[Popeye46]

In Australian waters, onboard a commercial vessel, all injuries sustained by anyone on board must be reported to the maritime authorities. The Masters report should include the name and address of the people affected and any witnesses. That includes a passenger sustaining an injury which only requires a bandaid.
If the master calls for assistance for whatever reason, that should also be reported and a marine inquiry may result. During a marine inquiry the crew and witnesses may be required to submit statements. All these incidents are recorded and are available, in fact a study of these incidents is included in the Maritime college courses for Masters.
As is the key issue of this discussion, the above rules do not apply to a private vessel unless someone dies, in that case it would be a coronial inquiry not a marine inquiry. If a private 55ft Riviera came in to a floating pontoon and the “captains” son jumped onto to the pontoon to secure a stern line and as the son is securing the line with his finger between the rope and the horn cleat, the “captain” becomes anxious about the duckboard hitting the pontoon astern and gives the 300hp engine a nudge forward causing the line to tighten on the sons finger crushing the bone and partially amputating said finger. This incident would not be made public.