Insurance--DIY fixes that your insurance might not like

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Looks like some ABYC standards are actually effectively law
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/....H-22.1986.pdf

Totally out of context !
Suggest you read Title 46, 182.500. This refers to commercial passenger carrying vessels only and states such vessels "may" use ABYC H-22 or one of the two ISO standards noted.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Paul L

Looks like some ABYC standards are actually effectively law
https://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/....H-22.1986.pdf

And why does ABYC refer to hose clamps as "noncorrosive, when what they mean is corrosion resistant? The former is bad English and it is contrary to the standard practice of standards organizations to used standard English whenever it serves the purpose.


[from Websters. Notice that it is even a US Navy definition!]

Definition of noncorrosive



: not corrosive : not having the power to corrode Fluxes are classified as noncorrosive, mildly corrosive, or corrosive, ranging from mild substances such as rosin to chemically active salts such as zinc chloride.— Bureau of Naval Personnel


Yes, a case of thread drift, but we are already far afield!

[john61ct]

nobody's perfect, better to let them know rather than posting about a nit pick here, so they correct the next revision

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by thinwater

And why does ABYC refer to hose clamps as "noncorrosive, when what they mean is corrosion resistant? The former is bad English and it is contrary to the standard practice of standards organizations to used standard English whenever it serves the purpose.


[from Websters. Notice that it is even a US Navy definition!]

Definition of noncorrosive



: not corrosive : not having the power to corrode Fluxes are classified as noncorrosive, mildly corrosive, or corrosive, ranging from mild substances such as rosin to chemically active salts such as zinc chloride.— Bureau of Naval Personnel


Yes, a case of thread drift, but we are already far afield!

Perhaps try reading the current standard rather than something from 1986.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

Totally out of context !
....

You need to apply to become a special moderator on CF in charge of context arbitration. To me the cover sheet was interestng and applicable to ABYC standards. If it isn't to you then ignore it.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Paul L

You need to apply to become a special moderator on CF in charge of context arbitration. To me the cover sheet was interestng and applicable to ABYC standards. If it isn't to you then ignore it.

Interesting ..... maybe.
Aplicable to ABYC .... I suppose
Don't you think, the members should know that it did not apply to their boats unless they are commercial, passenger carrying vessels ?

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

Perhaps try reading the current standard rather than something from 1986.

Has the language changed? I've read more recent excerpts, up to 2018, that use the same phrase. The few current ABYC standards do not use any variant of corrosion.


Id did notice that the same edition of the standard use the phrase "corrosion resistant" on an earlier page. Odd.



a.All materials shall be corrosion resistant or protected to resist corrosion and...

[waterman46]

Originally Posted by ferrailleur

a code inspection is required to protect your life at home.... why not on a boat?

I don't want or need your rules and codes to protect me, but I do need them as references of best practices. One of the best things about boating is we are relatively free of Big Brother.

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by waterman46

I don't want or need your rules and codes to protect me, but I do need them as references of best practices. One of the best things about boating is we are relatively free of Big Brother.

I agree. CG and ABYC suggestions are a good reference but there is no reason to mandate anything. People will have different priorities, usage patterns, risk tolerance, etc that will help them form their own opinions on how to do things. Americans love freedom of choice.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by kmacdonald

I agree. CG and ABYC suggestions are a good reference but there is no reason to mandate anything. People will have different priorities, usage patterns, risk tolerance, etc that will help them form their own opinions on how to do things. Americans love freedom of choice.

That is a really interesting starting point on its own.


I love rock and ice climbing, but I drive carefully. I want my climbing rope to be built to a high standard, with abundant QC, but I may climb without it some days. I write about tethers and jacklines, but I like sailing like a bat out of hell and hardly ever wear a PFD. But when I wear that PFD I expect it to function properly.


So I can see how ABYC guidance doesn't makes sense all of the time, particularly for simple day boats, but I would hate for a stupid wiring practice to burn her down; I've had two smoldering fires that resulted from PO wiring.


Freedom as an ideal is lovely, but it cuts both ways; we get to do what we want, but other people get to do it to us as well.

[john61ct]

You can't pick up one end of the stick without picking up the other

[sailorboy1]

Just a thought, but there are more “how to do” reference rules to work on my sailboat per ABYC than there was to work on the nuclear submarine I was on.

[Cheechako]

I have yet to own a ventilated battery compartment on a boat that I didn't install myself. They pretty much all come unventilated. And are mostly located where it would be hard to do so often also. The bottom line is insurance companies MAY use any excuse to not pay. Not that they all will.
BTW, do any boats come with the battery fuse requirement installed? I assume most do now? Most my boats were older but didnt have that from the factory.

[sailorboy1]

My 2001 hunter came with the batteries fused so I would bet that’s standard. But I wouldn’t call my battery boxes vented