Teadaemon

You would think so, but if you do the maths it rapidly becomes very obvious that even a small hole below the waterline (like say a 1.5" skin fitting) lets in more water than the bilge pumps on any boat can cope with, and the deeper the hole is, the more water it lets in. Not to mention that even if a bilge pump can cope with the ingress of water, it will only do so as long as it remains unblocked and has power.

They're your goods, so you might (and I stress 'might') owe a duty of care to anyone they come into contact with. Having said that, I think you could have a very good argument that it was not reasonably foreseeable that those goods would be stolen and dumped wherever they ended up, so the chances of you being liable for somebody tripping over them is low to nonexistent. Proving liability for tort (negligence) isn't as easy as the ambulance-chasers make it sound. Of course that doesn't stop them trying it on, and in a lot of cases it's cheaper for an insurance company to pay out (with or without an admission of liability, normally without) than it is to fight anything other than a very large claim.

Whilst you might well not have fixed ventilation on sea boats, there's nothing to stop you having closeable vents (indeed the BSS requirements for ventilation specifically address this situation), some of which are designed so that they can remain open in all but storm conditions (such as the 'Dorade box' designed by the late Olin Stephens and first installed on the racing yacht Dorade).

As I mentioned when I posted the article in another thread, whilst the BSS probably does not apply (although there are an increasing number of harbour authorities requiring it as a condition of taking up a permanent mooring), a small fishing boat like this one would be subject to the requirements of the MCGA Code of Practise for Small Commercial Vessels. In general these requirements are a lot more onerous than the BSS (covering stability, safety equipment, regular out of the water surveys, etc), but I don't know how strict they are on ventilation. Having said that, it's wrong to assume that having sufficient ventilation as specified by the BSS, the stove manufacturer, or anyone else would prevent this happening. The stove undoubtedly comes with a warning not to use it as a space heater and not to leave it unattended (which includes leaving it on whilst you're asleep). This is in part because the ventilation requirements are calculated on the assumption that somebody cooking at the stove is going to get hot, and probably open a window or door (at least that's what I was told by the tutor when I was studying such things).

Another incident, this time on a fishing boat in Whitby harbour: http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/local/update-boat-deaths-1-6374292 According to the article, the two people involved may have lit the gas oven before they went to bed, to provide extra heat. Now I know fishing boats aren't subject to the BSS, but they are certified under the MCGA codes of practise for small commercial vessels. As I don't do coding work, I'm not sure if these address ventilation in the same way that the BSS does (even if they did, it doesn't take into account misuse of appliances like this).

I could be interested in joining your crew, as this is an event I keep meaning to have a go at. I'll have to see if it clashes with the Three Rivers Race though, as I'm determined to enter that in my own boat this year (I crewed for a friend in 2011, but haven't been able to take part for the last two years, and now I have an unfathomable longing to spend the night drifting somewhere along the lower Bure, waiting for the wind). I wouldn't call myself an expert on the BCN, but I am a native Brummie, and have trodden quite a few of the towpaths in my youth.

I'm guessing this is the IIMS course in small craft surveying? I did a previous version of the course, qualifying in 2009 and starting my own surveying business in 2012, adding in BSS work from the start of 2013. I have to say that if you're already an experienced mechanic, and you'd like a job working with boats, then you'll make a lot more money a lot more easily as a mechanic than you will as a surveyor. (I'm not saying that as you'd be competition, as it'd be a rare job that'd get me to travel up to Manchester.)

Well I see local journalism is as accurate as ever (although to be fair they were probably going on a police officer's estimate). The boat is most definitely a Westerly 22, and as the name suggests it's 22 feet long, not 25. IIRC, it (or a very similar Westerly 22) has been on eBay a few times over the last few months. Given the legendary thickness and quality of those Westerly mouldings (below the waterline they're getting on for two inches thick), I wouldn't be surprised if there's anything other than minimal cosmetic damage to the boat.

I couldn't get the video to run (the perils of rural broadband), but I suspect this is a homebrew version of the burner found in Trangia camping stoves (and cheap Chinese knockoffs thereof). before I got my Origo I used one of said cheap Chinese meths stoves to brew the odd cup of tea whilst out and about (albeit moored up or on the mudweight). No problem with a bit of care (I set it up on a tile on the cockpit floor so it couldn't fall over), and one of the main advantages of meths as a fuel is that you put it out with water (something you're generally not short of on a boat) - I was about to suggest a bucket full, but as all you need to do is dilute it to less than 40%, a cup would probably be plenty given the small amount contained in the burner.

Have you seen the price of Spruce recently? A few years ago I was looking for a small yacht for myself, found one (a Newbridge Topaz) that had a rotten wooden mast for £600 with a good outboard and a trailer. Then I looked up the cost of materials for replacing the mast and discovered that the wood alone would be around £500 for Sitka Spruce. Given that a Waterwitch is never going to be a particularly high performance vessel, I'd be inclined to specify Douglas Fir for a wooden mast (much cheaper, albeit twice the density). Either way, it needs to be long lengths with clear, straight, grain. No knots or runout at all.

Obviously not having seen the mast itself I can't say for definite, but it sounds to me like a new mast might be the way to go. Using the repair method you propose might work, but it effectively puts an area into the mast that's stiffer than the rest of the structure, which puts extra stress on the areas where the sleeve ends. If there's any other damage to the mast at all (even seemingly minor dents or any cracks whatsoever) then it's definitely not worth wasting time and money on. New masts are expensive, probably the cheapest way to get hold of a rig might be to try to find a Waterwitch with terminal rot problems but a decent rig (of course you having different rig to that shown on the plans might complicate matters, but I suspect you aren't alone in having a deck-stepped mast.

I suspect a judge would ask why the boater had a problem signing a declaration to say that they were aware of the law and did not intend to break it. BSS examiners work for themselves, not the BSS. If people do not wish to comply with my terms & conditions (such as signed the above mentioned declaration), then I'm not required to do business with them. As it's my PI insurance (and £5,000 excess) that's on the line in the event of a civil claim, and my liberty and wallet at risk in the event of a criminal prosecution, I'm going to take such steps as I consider necessary to cover my own backside.

Also Gay's Staithe (by the entrance to Neatishead Dyke), Wayford Bridge, Dilham, Barton Turf, Irstead and Ludham Bridge. I have a feeling Traveller is somebody I've come across on another forum (there's a few of us that pop up here as well). I think when he talks about the BA removing 'wild moorings', what he's referring to is the BESL flood alleviation project, which is steadily working it's way around the Broads, removing old (often damaged and dangerous) piling, and replacing it with a sloped profile rhond (now there's a good Norfolk word), which is planted with reeds and over a year or two grows into a natural-looking reed bed. The bank ends up the same height as before, but it's much more resilient to wash or flooding (the earth gets washed out through gaps in piling, and if it gets overtopped by floods has a tendency to get washed away, forming a large breach). Unfortunately, this means that in areas where the bank has been reprofiled, it's not as easy to get ashore. It is still possible to lie alongside the reeds on a pair of mudweights, and a gangplank (strangely not normally part of the equipment for a Broads cruiser any more) could allow access to solid ground in a lot of places. Personally, I'm glad that the Ant above Ludham Bridge no longer has miles of river with big warning signs saying 'beware of submerged stakes', or that it's no longer common to come in to moor along some piling, have the skipper tell me to jump ashore, and look over to see that behind the piling (and out of view of the skipper) there's nothing but a big hole full of water and rusty steel ground anchors.

Actually, it's the result of the marine industry wanting a level playing field to sell their boats across Europe. The situation in the UK prior to the introduction of the RCD was actually quite unusual in that there was no regulation whatsoever (apart from the Sale of Goods Act). Most other countries in the EU had various standards that needed to be complied with (certainly in some it was actually illegal to use or sell a boat that hadn't had it's design signed off by a qualified naval architect), and anyone who wanted to sell boats in these countries had to make sure they complied with all of the various standards, some of which were quite different, if not actually mutually exclusive. Admittedly what we've ended up with isn't the greatest of systems, especially from the point of view of somebody who just wants to fit out a narrowboat, but it saves a lot of time and effort (and therefore money) for the larger boatbuilding companies like Beneteau or Sunseeker.

1) Ventilation is advisory, so not having enough will not prevent you getting a pass. Having said that, the examination report will definitely state that you did not pass an advisory check, which may be something that your insurance company is interested in, and if there were an incident, may affect your liability. 2) The relevant check is 2.10.3 Are all feed, return and on-engine pipes secure and in good condition? (Well actually as it's an appliance it'd be recorded as 8.1.1, but that just asks if the fuel supply to appliances meets the relevant part of the BSS, part 2 being the appropriate set of checks for diesel appliances.) If the pipe moves when light manual force is applied (this is defined as grasping the pipe with the thumb and forefinger and attempting to move it), then it's a fail.

As I said, there isn't a check that requires a BSS examiner to see such paperwork, so there's no reason why a BSS examiner should ask for it. You're correct, we're not allowed to accept a Landlord's Gas Safety Certificate as proof that the system is sound, although in the event that it's a hire boat or a liveaboard we are allowed to witness a Gas Safe registered person performing the soundness test.

Well work done on a liveaboard vessel by somebody who's not Gas Safe Registered might well mean that that person has broken the law, but that's not relevant to the question of whether or not it passes a BSS examination. I've posted a link to the BSS checks many times over the past year, so I won't bother doing so again (they're not exactly hard to find anyway). A fundamental principle of the BSS is that a boat passes the examination unless it fails. All of the checks are phrased as questions with yes or no answers, and a boat fails on a point if the answer to a question is 'no'. It's not the place of any BSS examiner to start adding their own checks, or interpreting them in a way that's different to the BSS office. Of course there's nothing to stop a BSS examiner offering advice if they feel they've spotted something that concerns them that's outside the remit of the BSS, but they can't insist that that advice is followed before they issue the examination report (assuming all of the checks as written are passed). I've said it before and doubtless I'll say it again, if you ever get told that something is needed for or banned by the BSS, ask whoever's telling you which check it fails, or go and look up the relevant section for yourself. I've come across numerous situations where people who should know better (like boatyard owners) tell boat owners stuff that either has no basis in fact, or is a gross distortion of the actual situation. One example was a boatyard owner and marine engineer who was telling a boat owner that carrying a spare battery was not permitted. In actual fact, as long as all of the relevant checks regarding it being secured, ventilated, and the terminals insulated are passed, there's no reason why this can't be done.

No they wouldn't, as the checks do not say that. All that a BSS examiner will (should) do, is apply the appropriate checks as they are written, no more and no less.

They also did a sequel, where they managed to drive an amphibious HiLux across the channel. Now if it had been a more serious program rather than a comedy, I reckon a HiLux would be a very good basis for an amphibious 4x4 akin to a smaller DUKW (which were very effective as amphibious trucks, even if they lack something as passenger vessels 70 years after they were built). Admittedly I'd probably start by building a new monocoque chassis/hull to transplant the engine and running gear on to (and also add a PTO to the drivetrain to drive a couple of water jets for propulsion in the water, and some big bilge pumps to keep it afloat).

You post on one (or more) of the Norfolk Broads forums, don't you? In which case I'm sure you're familiar with Griff taking Broad Ambition (a 40' wooden Jack Powles ex-hire cruiser) down to the Thames for the Diamond Jubilee pageant. He's also done the Great Yarmouth-Lowestoft trip (as a brief test of the boat before he took her down to London), and earlier this season did Lowestoft-Southwold and back, in company with several other boats, including one similar-sized centre cockpit Aquafibre cruiser. I know on the way back from the Thames, they got caught out by the weather a bit (despite having access to some of the most accurate forecasts available thanks to his contacts in the RN), but even then that just showed that the boat was capable of taking more than the crew could (the boat was fine, but at least one of the crew was incapacitated by seasickness). I know that in the past Richardson's have moved hire cruisers between the Broads and the Thames by water, though I'm not sure if they'd do so these days. There is one story I've heard from the 1950s or 1960s, where a small wooden hire cruiser went AWOL at the end of it's week on hire, and was discovered some days later, tied up to a pier in Kent. Mind you, all Broads Cruisers are not created equal - I probably wouldn't take an FB Wilds or Bounty forward steer bathtub to sea (especially not one with a big well in the bow), but something with a reasonably boat-shaped hull (like the many Bourne 40 based boats) and a well-maintained engine would probably cope as well with the conditions as a great many motor cruisers designed for seagoing use.

Boatbuilding (of which building inland waterways craft is a very small part) is one of the more successful manufacturing industries in this country, with an annual turnover of something like £3-4 billion a year. Having said that, there aren't many British firms competing in the smaller, high volume segment of the market. What we tend to have are either small firms making high quality small boats to order, or larger firms building bigger yachts and motor cruisers (for a long time it was difficult to find a British manufacturer of sailing yachts with a model under 40 feet LOA in their range. Moody now have a 36 foot model, but they're the only ones).

Ok, BSS examiners are mostly human (although anyone who's had the misfortune to meet me before I've had my first cup of coffee in the morning might disagree).

The checks of gas lockers are one of the areas where there were quite a lot of changes in the 2013 checks compared to previous versions, but the requirements for a drain haven't changed, which is why I'd be surprised if there wasn't one. As I do get clients who have no idea where there gas locker drain is (to be fair, on some cruisers it's not especially obvious, and can require quite a bit of contortion to see and check even when you know which of the half a dozen or so skin fittings it's connected to), I've learned a few tricks for finding them when I need to. Of course, it doesn't work if the drain is below the waterline (which is a fail), possibly due to changes in ballast, trim, or overplating. Except that one of the things that changes is the checks - assuming that the boat has been examined every fours years since the scheme came in, it's now on the fourth different set of checks (the original ones, 2002, 2005, and now the 2013 version). Also, BSS examiners are human, and therefore will not be 100% accurate 100% of the time (they may, indeed should, get close). I've not been a BSS examiner long enough to have examined a boat four years after I examined it previously, but I know plenty who have, and all of them have been in the situation of finding stuff that they know they should have spotted last time, but didn't. It's a bit embarrassing to admit our mistakes, but really, the only thing you can do in that situation is to 'fess up to the client that you got it wrong last time, and hope they take it with good grace.

Mike is correct, check 7.4.1 merely specifies that cylinders must not move so much that they could pull on pipes or hoses, or damage any other part of the gas system. You don't need a bubble tester if you have a test point to attach a manometer, but having a bubble tester allows you to test the system yourself, and some examiners give a small discount if you have one fitted, as it makes testing the system for soundness a fair bit quicker.

Wiring the bilge pump directly to the battery, providing it's protected by an appropriately rated inline fuse (in either positive or negative) is permitted (check 3.1.2). Batteries need to be secured against movement of more than 10mm in any direction (check 3.1.2), how you do this is up to you. Battery terminals need to be insulated (check 3.1.3), this is often achieved by having a lid on the battery box, but can also be done by insulating each individual terminal (appropriate plastic insulating boots are available for a few pounds on eBay, amongst other places). Gas lockers - the first relevant check is 7.1.1 Are all LPG cylinders and containers stored in a position where any leakage will be directed safely overboard? As you can see, it covers all gas cylinders present on board, whether they're connected or not, and the requirement is that all cylinders are stored either in a gas locker, or in an open location where any leaking LPG will flow overboard, and more than 1m from any source of ignition or opening to the interior of the vessel. I'd be surprised to see a gas locker that didn't have a drain at all, it might be worth having another look before you start installing another one. One idea might be to pour a gallon or two of water into the bottom of the locker, and see if it starts draining out of the side of the boat (bear in mind that the drain can be up to 25mm above the bottom of the locker). If you do need to install a drain, then it is acceptable to use two skin fittings and a length of pipe. That pipe and the associated skin fittings will need to be accessible for inspection as part of the BSS examination. I wouldn't like to get into the intricacies of whether a BSS failure can cancel a current BSS certificate (that's really a matter for the BSS office and the appropriate navigation authority), it would only normally become important if the failure was something that caused the boat to be immediately dangerous to those on board or people nearby.