Life raft regulations, Australia, New Zealand, South Pacific.

[Jim Cate]

So, can you elaborate? What is your country of registration? Do other countries have similar rules (certainly not NZ, where offshore sailing is clearly intended only for the wealthy). What do you carry instead? With no liferaft, do you bother with EPIRB?

Our boat is USA registry. I am not aware of any other country than NZ that requires their yotties to carry liferafts. Commercial vessels of most sorts are so required in most if not all nations.

We carry a 3.5 m RIB, not inflated and do not imagine that it is a substitute for a dedicated life raft. However, it will suffice in some circumstances and that meets our personal requirements.

Yes, we do carry an EPIRB, for they are required by some authorities and do serve a useful purpose, even without a liferaft.

Jim

[NevisDog]

Thanks Jim, much appreciated, that's really got me thinking again.
From MySailing.com.au:
"...For example, Victoria requires a life raft, or dingy, for 12 metre and upward recreational vessels operating more than two nautical miles from shore. South Australia requires life rafts for 15 metre and larger vessels that are operating more than 10 nautical miles offshore. New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania, West Australia and the Northern Territory don’t require them at all on offshore recreational vessels—apparently, they have better swimmers!" Or maybe the big 'salties' up north make liferafts redundant

Read more at Life rafts. AY puts them to the test - MySailing.com.au

[40 South]

In Victoia, Australia, vessels over 12m must carry a liferaft OR a dinghy when not in an estuary or bay.

https://transportsafety.vic.gov.au/_...k-2018-WEB.pdf

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by NevisDog

Thanks Jim, much appreciated, that's really got me thinking again.
From MySailing.com.au:
"...For example, Victoria requires a life raft, or dingy, for 12 metre and upward recreational vessels operating more than two nautical miles from shore. South Australia requires life rafts for 15 metre and larger vessels that are operating more than 10 nautical miles offshore. New South Wales, Queensland, Tasmania, West Australia and the Northern Territory don’t require them at all on offshore recreational vessels—apparently, they have better swimmers!" Or maybe the big 'salties' up north make liferafts redundant

Read more at Life rafts. AY puts them to the test - MySailing.com.au

I've never sailed in those states and stand corrected about the rules for them.

Kinda hard to justify requiring larger boats, usually considered more seaworthy than smaller ones, to carry liferafts where the smaller ones are not. What goes there?

But the dinghy as a substitute will get Matt off the hook, so he's not gonna be required to buy a LR if he does not wish to, and there will surely be no quibbling about size or certification.

Jim

[hzcruiser]

Originally Posted by GILow

Hi all,

Is anyone aware of any regulation hurdles I might run in if I were to go ahead with my plan to travel the South Pacific and maybe New Zealand if all goes well? Do the NZ authorities insist on a particular ISO certification? I guess I mention NZ because I have read a lot about their regulations and how/if they apply to foreign flagged vessels.

Matt

While you're at it, you might also double-check whether NZ still requires a sea anchor or drogue.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by hzcruiser

While you're at it, you might also double-check whether NZ still requires a sea anchor or drogue.

From the posts above it sounds like I don’t have to worry about what they want me to have, but good point all the same.


I have got a sea-brake. Very nicely suited to my canoe stern vessel. I’ve had a play with it and the boat behaved magnificently tho of course that was only 25 knots of wind. My stern has 1.4 meters of freeboard so I can take a hammering from that direction.

[GILow]

Regarding the whole Winston Churchill scenario...

I have read countless reports on that ill fated race. At one stage I had copies of the transcripts of the police interviews of various survivors, though I can’t find the backup that contains them at the moment . I was particularly interested in the race analysis because a Swanson 42 went down off Eden so I was anxious to learn as much as I could.

The whole thing with the raft from the Winston Churchill is much more complicated than that simple transcript referenced above.

I am not in any position to say what they should or could have done but no other transcript that I have read focussed on the raft coming apart, which is the theme of the linked transcript.

Most of what I read looked at the human responses and actions of the men entering the raft.

For instance, I am sure they mentioned that they tied the rafts together in one of the early interviews. My immediate thought was that this was a very “human” response, the desire to stay close to each other, but that this would have put ridiculous strain on the line and attachment points.

Their action of cutting a hole in the “roof” of the inverted raft was justified in one early interview as a need for replacing oxygen, but then they appear to have cut a hole big enough for a man to fall out. I wish I could find the articles dammit.

Anyway, I guess I am saying, take that link with a big grain of salt. It reeks of self justification in the wake of a shoddy life raft being dis-endorsed for reasons of construction quality, not a question of the suitability of the overall design.

[Tillsbury]

Originally Posted by NevisDog

Do other countries have similar rules (certainly not NZ, where offshore sailing is clearly intended only for the wealthy).

Re: the New Zealand regulations, they do make some sense when you think about it. NZ is unique among serious sailing nations in the there are no easy trips to another country. Everywhere is at least a week away with no trade winds, no back-up destinations, and a significant chance of serious weather developing during the passage that you weren’t aware of setting out. For a local boat, it makes sense that there are regulations regarding safety, particularly in a country where “she’ll be right” is a national attitude and bodged or poor workmanship is common.

Of course, a boat that’s arrived here has at the very least proved it can do the trip once successfully.

Coming from the UK, I personally think the list of requirements is an entirely reasonable one, particularly if you’re taking others. There’s an argument that a solo sailor should be able to do as he wishes, I guess.

[MLOI]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

I've never sailed in those states and stand corrected about the rules for them.

Jim

Never been to Refuge Cove or Deal Island?
Worth the detour sometime.
(you're probably in Vic waters once you pass Green Cape heading south as well, but that's being pedantic)

As for the liferaft question, we carry one but I really struggle to come up with a scenario where we would use it. In big breaking seas I'm not convinced that my crew of 2 adults, 2 kids would be able to launch and board anyway. If we did, I'd expect that we would still get tumbled in our 4 man life raft. In Australian waters I probably care more that everyone has a decent inflatable jacket with crotch strap and personal epirb attached.

Mike

[mowerandy]

Regarding the Winston Churchill, I am thinking that the main lesson I could take would be to ensure that there is enough stout line aboard the raft to make sure that everyone who makes it aboard can be firmly attached, to avoid separation and the inevitable tragedy that follows.

Maybe, if some are lashed securely to the raft, they could immediately bail out into the sea if someone gets separated, using their own bodies as drogues to the raft, to perhaps give the separated person a brief shot at getting back to the raft. No idea if this would work in full storm conditions, or just jeopardise the lives of the "drogue/s" - just some food for thought really.

They cut a hole for air when they couldn't right the raft. I cant tell if, or at what point that hole was enlarged, deliberately or otherwise, or if the lost went out through that hole or through the normal entry port, now under the raft. In a raft flipping over and over in a boiling break at night I daresay no one can answer that question - just that they went out somehow.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by mowerandy

Regarding the Winston Churchill, I am thinking that the main lesson I could take would be to ensure that there is enough stout line aboard the raft to make sure that everyone who makes it aboard can be firmly attached, to avoid separation and the inevitable tragedy that follows.



Maybe, if some are lashed securely to the raft, they could immediately bail out into the sea if someone gets separated, using their own bodies as drogues to the raft, to perhaps give the separated person a brief shot at getting back to the raft. No idea if this would work in full storm conditions, or just jeopardise the lives of the "drogue/s" - just some food for thought really.



They cut a hole for air when they couldn't right the raft. I cant tell if, or at what point that hole was enlarged, deliberately or otherwise, or if the lost went out through that hole or through the normal entry port, now under the raft. In a raft flipping over and over in a boiling break at night I daresay no one can answer that question - just that they went out somehow.

I too like the concept of being able to attach myself to the raft. One of the appeals of a raft with a roof is the sense that you could get, maybe, some rest without the fear of being tossed out.

I do wish I could find the transcript, I’ve got a strong recollection of one of the survivors stating that the lost crew members left the raft interior by intent, possibly to right the raft? I hope I’m not getting that wrong.

[GILow]

As an aside, I’m going to phone Great Circle tomorrow and get their take on the issue.

[Jim Cate]

Never been to Refuge Cove or Deal Island?
Worth the detour sometime.
(you're probably in Vic waters once you pass Green Cape heading south as well, but that's being pedantic)

Not Refuge, but yes to Deal Is (is Deal part of Vic? I'd have thought Tasmanian!) and some transits through Bass Strait. So, I guess that I've sailed through some Victorian waters, but never been ashore in mainland Vic nor felt the long arm of their regs! Not that they would apply to my USA registered vessel, but in general we do try to satisfy local rules... not to the point of buying a liferaft, though!

Jim

[Tillsbury]

Originally Posted by MLOI

As for the liferaft question, we carry one but I really struggle to come up with a scenario where we would use it. In big breaking seas I'm not convinced that my crew of 2 adults, 2 kids would be able to launch and board anyway.

Mike

I have had a life raft on board since I read “117 Days Adrift”. It’s not always in a storm that you need one. In fact, many would say that your boat is highly likely to survive a storm even if you’re very uncomfortable. Mine is for fire or the boat sinking for some unexpected reason.

[NevisDog]

Originally Posted by Tillsbury

I have had a life raft on board since I read “117 Days Adrift”. ...

If I recall correctly, their raft broke up over time and they only survived because they had a fi-glass dinghy tethered to the raft.