Maritime NZ report into the loss of the yacht Essence, October 2019

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by mglonnro

The recreational craft directive is superb. A great step in the right direction of making it easier for sailors to evaluate what they are actually buying. (Also, it is a good step towards having the industry make more ecologically sustainable products.)

Do you think new boat buyers are receiving value for money with the the €12,000 (if Boatie's estimation is in the right ball park) for the Class A certification?

[Anders]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Do you think new boat buyers are receiving value for money with the the €12,000 (if Boatie's estimation is in the right ball park) for the Class A certification?

Think his estimate is to low for a real post construction assessment but that is not relevant to new boats.
I do think new boat buyers benefits from the RCD requirements that guarantees a minimal standard not only on stability but also on things like gas and electric installation and it also guarantees that the boat can be sold anywhere in Europe without any local requirements.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Anders

Think his estimate is to low for a real post construction assessment but that is not relevant to new boats.
I do think new boat buyers benefits from the RCD requirements that guarantees a minimal standard not only on stability but also on things like gas and electric installation and it also guarantees that the boat can be sold anywhere in Europe without any local requirements.

That was what I was quoted back in 2005, today who knows.

[MJH]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Again people fail to realise the primary purpose behind the Recreational Craft Directive

The RCD was initially designed to harmonise boat standards across EU countries to prevent unfair competition , it was instigated largely by U.K. commercial Marine interests.

It was initially extremely scant on actual standards because no international/European standards existed covering all aspects of boat construction that were suitable for high volume series production

This is where the RCD came from. It’s primarily a trade barrier agreement

Over the years the RCD has been upgraded to take into account additional ISO standards on stability scantlings etc.

But it’s a minimum standard. It’s also not a classification standard or a quality standard.

Anyone buying a marked RCD class A yacht and thinking they have a bullet proof ( and idiot proof ) yacht capable of handling all sorts of crazy situations ( like repeated knockdowns ) is simply mad in the head. The RCD isn’t and was never intended to be a substitute for good yacht buying and use decisions.

It’s actually a tribute to many modern yachts ( and to weather forecasting ) that loads sail across oceans and dangerous sea areas every year.

Occasionally nature reminds us whose is the boss , it’s partially why we all like sailing.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It’s actually a tribute to many modern yachts ( and to weather forecasting ) that loads sail across oceans and dangerous sea areas every year."

If you think of the worst possible boat to cross an ocean in and give it the best (luckiest) weather conditions for the voyage it will most likely succeed but that success is not a worthwhile endorsement of that boat. Unfortunately, many sailors express that exact logic and I have read it many times in these CF posts.

Much of a successful ocean voyage depends on preparation and part of that preparation is selecting/outfitting a boat that can survive nature's worst elements with properly designed and manufactured elements...that does not include excessive large window areas. That feature is all marketing to ignorant buyers. And once purchased who wants to put boards over them. It doesn't make any sense.

~ ~ _/) ~ ~ MJH

[mglonnro]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Do you think new boat buyers are receiving value for money with the the €12,000 (if Boatie's estimation is in the right ball park) for the Class A certification?

Uhm ehm ... what cost is that? The certification of a particular model & model year?

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by mglonnro

Uhm ehm ... what cost is that? The certification of a particular model & model year?

The cost per boat.

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by MJH

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Much of a successful ocean voyage depends on preparation and part of that preparation is selecting/outfitting a boat that can survive nature's worst elements ...

~ ~ _/) ~ ~ MJH

sorry but must disagree with you here.

what so many tend (try ?) to forget is that the sea will always win. there will always be conditions that no craft can survive

i'm not saying don't set up the most seaworthy craft possible. just don't kid yourself that this is any guarantee of survival...irrespective of whatever certification or storm boards you may have.

experience & training is what makes the difference

cheers,

[mglonnro]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

The cost per boat.

Inconceivable!

I sent an email to IMCI asking for budgetary pricing for model certification (don't know whether anyone will ask). Another company talks about 4000-6000 eur for model certification but maybe including only one module (https://www.navalarc.fi/ce-certification/?lang=en).

Nobody in the business around? As far I've understood, the certification is a one-off project for a certain model and its model year, after which the manufacturer can produce zero or a thousand boats (of the same model and model year) using this same certification?

What does boatman's estimate include? Am I missing something? A PCA would be done per boat, at roughly that cost, but that's not relevant for new boats, right?

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by mglonnro

Inconceivable!

I sent an email to IMCI asking for budgetary pricing for model certification (don't know whether anyone will ask). Another company talks about 4000-6000 eur for model certification but maybe including only one module (https://www.navalarc.fi/ce-certification/?lang=en).

Thanks for sending the email and finding some information. Like most boat owners I have no idea of the true cost.

However, I suspect they are are only quoting the cost for the boatbuilder. Many (or most?) of the components used in construction such as seacocks and hatches require certification before they can be used by the boatbuilder. The cost for the testing and certification of these products will be paid by the seacock or hatch manufacturer rather than the boatbuilder, so have not been included in the €4000-€6000, but of course ultimately the consumer, you and I, are charged for these extra requirements.

It can be reasonably argued that seacocks and hatches are vital components for the seaworthiness of the vessel so these components should be independently certified. However, the standard has left us with seacocks made from brass and escape hatches for catamarans with lenses that have no mechanical securing system and so fall out leaving a large hole only just above the waterline. This is on a boat that is certified to the highest class A standard and can to operate in areas outside the range of normal rescue infrastructure.

There is a risk that reassured by the certification, consumers and even manufacturers may reduce their due diligence. "If the standard approves brass seacocks why not use them". So a weak standard can be counterproductive despite the cost.

I think it is time to make the standards achieve some good or scrap them completely.

Nevertheless, the question remains. If we use the figure you have quoted do you think new boat buyers are receiving value for money with the the €4,000-€6000 or whatever number you feel is realistic.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by mglonnro

Another company talks about 4000-6000 eur for model certification but maybe including only one module (https://www.navalarc.fi/ce-certification/?lang=en).

They are not on the list of notified bodies so who will they use for the actual certification and is that extra?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Do you think new boat buyers are receiving value for money with the the €12,000 (if Boatie's estimation is in the right ball park) for the Class A certification?

That’s the cost of post construction CE certification to RCD . It’s not really applicable to what we are talking about here.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Thanks for sending the email and finding some information. Like most boat owners I have no idea of the true cost.

However, I suspect they are are only quoting the cost for the boatbuilder. Many (or most?) of the components used in construction such as seacocks and hatches require certification before they can be used by the boatbuilder. The cost for the testing and certification of these products will be paid by the seacock or hatch manufacturer rather than the boatbuilder, so have not been included in the €4000-€6000, but of course ultimately the consumer, you and I, are charged for these extra requirements.

It can be reasonably argued that seacocks and hatches are vital components for the seaworthiness of the vessel so these components should be independently certified. However, the standard has left us with seacocks made from brass and escape hatches for catamarans with lenses that have no mechanical securing system and so fall out leaving a large hole only just above the waterline. This is on a boat that is certified to the highest class A standard and can to operate in areas outside the range of normal rescue infrastructure.

There is a risk that reassured by the certification, consumers and even manufacturers may reduce their due diligence. "If the standard approves brass seacocks why not use them". So a weak standard can be counterproductive despite the cost.

I think it is time to make the standards achieve some good or scrap them completely.

Nevertheless, the question remains. If we use the figure you have quoted do you think new boat buyers are receiving value for money with the the €4,000-€6000 or whatever number you feel is realistic.

Boris and bent bananas come to mind. The RCD merely specifies that the seacocks must survive 5 years without any visible deterioration. It does not specify brass etc

Most euro boats are using DNZ brass . These are lasting 15 years plus in the Med which is one of the saltiest seas in the world. Mine were changed after 16 years by the PO i saw samples of them , they were still fine

Stop making up stuff

The cost of series RCD compliance is largely on the costs incurred in designing in to compliance required. ( manufacturers would build below the specs of let to it )

The series RCD compliance process adds about €100,000 to the development of a new boat . For major manufacturers it’s a negligible cost. There is a limited annual compliance cost but in essence once the test boat is approved there is no significant further cost per boat.

There is NOT an inspection per boat.

This loss of the boat had nothing to do with RCD standards. Nor did the report criticise the RCD.

[malbert73]

So I looked at the report and the picture of the boat shows no hull windows like are so common today. The coach roof window blew out. They look no different than those on a Hylas. I wouldn’t fault this boat probably.

But, imagine same with large windows in flexible hulls like every production boat today….

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Stop making up stuff

Lets agree to disagree about the suitability or otherwise of brass seacocks.

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The series RCD compliance process adds about €100,000 to the development of a new boat .

A Google search indicates that Bavaria produced 25 Ocean 47 models. So if the development cost of certification is €4000 per boat. I disagree that there is "no significant further cost", but the question remains do you feel this represents value for money?

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

There is NOT an inspection per boat.

Surely this is a bad, not a good feature of the standard. The standard does not even attempt to detect manufacturing mistakes such as the Lagoon with only 2mm thick fibreglass over the sail drive recently reported on CF. This is the link, post#403:

https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...ml#post3454022

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

This loss of the boat had nothing to do with RCD standards.

I disagree. The loss of the boat and the skipper's life was due to loss of the main windows and/or the forward hatch. It is also suggested that flexing of the fibreglass structure was a contributing factor.

The Class A standard certifies the suitability of the window and hatch design, as well as the strength of the fibreglass structure. No matter what your interpretation of the major cause of the sinking, these are all areas that are covered by the standard. Clearly in this case one or more of these items certified by the standard failed.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Lets agree to disagree about the suitability or otherwise of brass seacocks.







A Google search indicates that Bavaria produced 25 Ocean 47 models. So if the development cost of certification is €4000 per boat. I disagree that is "no significant further cost", but the question remains do you feel this represents value for money?







Surely this is a bad, not a good feature of the standard. The standard does not even attempt to detect manufacturing mistakes such as the Lagoon with only 2mm thick fibreglass over the sail drive recently reported on CF. This is the link, post#403:



https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...ml#post3454022









I disagree. The loss of the boat and the skipper's life was due to loss of the main windows and/or the forward hatch. It is also suggested that flexing of the fibreglass structure was a contributing factor.



The Class A standard certifies the suitability of the window and hatch design, as well as the strength of the fibreglass structure. No matter what your interpretation of the major cause of the sinking, these are all areas that are covered by the standard. Clearly in this case one or more of these items certified by the standard failed.

The standard dues not encompass a situation where the conditions ( or the sailing decisions ) result in repeated knockdowns

Are boats good value !!!!!!! , of course not

Is the RCD fit for purpose , yes I believe it is. Is it perfect , of course not. It ensures that yachts are at least designed to be built to a consistent standard.

It’s a moving document also , improvements are made every few years.

No it’s not a quality control system per se. Should it be. Hard call as it requires a whole different approach to external validation.

If you want a DasNorskeVeritas or some such other classification I’m sure there are plenty of custom boat yards more then happy to build a yacht to whatever standard you desire.