RCD and RCA

[Peugeot 106]

1 hour ago, David Mack said:

Or that another equally qualified and competent PCA surveyor might not come to a different view about the OP's T stud.

And I would suggest that if chain was used a plain unreinforced 6mm steel edge might not last very long.

"Between 30 and 35 people were on the pier waiting for Star Clipper and other river services. As the vessel made the approach, her mate, standing at the port passenger entrance, passed the eye of a polypropylene berthing rope over a pier bollard and secured it loosely onto one of the vessel’s bollards. The captain manoeuvred Star Clipper to align with the pier and vessel passenger gates. When the vessel was about 1.5m from the pier, the rope was secured and slight ahead power maintained to bring her alongside.

Just prior to coming alongside, Star Clipper’s mooring bollard was torn from the deck and was catapulted over the 1.1m pier safety fence. It struck one of the waiting passengers, causing fatal injuries."

 

https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/547c70bce5274a42900000cb/Star_Clipper.pdf

 

I’m pretty sure my anchor chain wouldn’t do too much damage to the 6mm plate steel scuppers and in any case if I’m in tidal waters without an engine or tow point I probably wouldn’t be too fussy about minor damage. The chain will scratch the paint work in any case

 

The potential energy stored in stretched hawsers (wire or rope) should never be underestimated. On two occasions in the North Sea I’ve witnessed the energy released when something gives way

 

[matty40s]

We observed a PCA recently on an older boat with lots of modernisation.

2 stipulations stood out.

1 was the insistence that the stove should have a double skin flue, even though the flue was original and it's only a recommendation..

 

 

The other was that there should be a designated space on the roof for a life raft..

 

Yep

[Tony Brooks]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

I have read cases of the T studs paring company with the deck just like swan necks fall off. Not all welders are that good at welding a larger lump of steel rather than plate.

 

Especially as my stern T studs were cast, not forged or fabricated.

[IanD]

2 hours ago, Tonka said:

So you have paid £300 k for a boat with a dodgy RCD Certificate.  

What else on the boat is non compliant? 

One wonders

Who says it's dodgy, apart from you?

 

Are you suggesting that something like 99% of narrowboats on the canals which have a T-stud and no other anchor attachment point are non-compliant? Really?

Edited July 13 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

24 minutes ago, matty40s said:

We observed a PCA recently on an older boat with lots of modernisation.

2 stipulations stood out.

1 was the insistence that the stove should have a double skin flue, even though the flue was original and it's only a recommendation..

 

 

The other was that there should be a designated space on the roof for a life raft..

 

Yep

 

Well as daft as it may be it is an essential requirement  even on a cat D boat so the surveyor knew his job and the techincal requirements.

 

But it is 'just' a space - no provison of mountings or even a liferaft - just say that the 1mt x 1mt space infront of the slide is for lifeboat stowage.

 

3.7 Life raft stowage
All recreational craft of design categories A and B, and recreational craft of design categories C and D longer than 6 metres shall be provided with one or more stowage points for a life raft (life rafts) large enough to hold the number of persons the recreational craft was designed to carry as recom-mended by the manufacturer. Life raft stowage point(s) shall be readily accessible at all times.

[Tonka]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

Who says it's dodgy, apart from you?

 

Are you suggesting that something like 99% of narrowboats on the canals which have a T-stud and no other anchor attachment point are non-compliant? Really?

Boats built before the RCD came in don't have to be compliant.

[IanD]

39 minutes ago, Tonka said:

Boats built before the RCD came in don't have to be compliant.

OK -- are you suggesting that something like 99% of the many thousands of narrowboats on the canals built after the RCD came in which have a T-stud and no other anchor attachment point are non-compliant? Really?

Edited July 13 by IanD

[Tonka]

7 minutes ago, IanD said:

OK -- are you suggesting that something like 99% of the many thousands of narrowboats on the canals built after the RCD came in which have a T-stud and no other anchor attachment point are non-compliant? Really?

Hopefully you can get Finesse to remedy it by having an anchor point put on the boat.

[Alan de Enfield]

8 minutes ago, IanD said:

OK -- are you suggesting that something like 99% of the many thousands of narrowboats on the canals built after the RCD came in which have a T-stud and no other anchor attachment point are non-compliant? Really?

 

Have you got a designated storage area for your liferaft ? - NOW THAT IS a defined, qualified, essential requirement and a lack of which would be a non-compliance.

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Have you got a designated storage area for your liferaft ? - NOW THAT IS a defined, qualified, essential requirement and a lack of which would be a non-compliance.

Along with 99% of all post-RCD narrowboats on UK canals then? 😉 

16 minutes ago, Tonka said:

Hopefully you can get Finesse to remedy it by having an anchor point put on the boat.

Why would I?

Edited July 13 by IanD

[Tonka]

9 minutes ago, IanD said:

Along with 99% of all post-RCD narrowboats on UK canals then? 😉 

Why would I?

So as to comply with the RCD. Makes it easier to sell

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Tonka said:

So as to comply with the RCD. Makes it easier to sell

Don't want to sell it, don't care... 🙂 

 

To repeat the question -- are you seriously suggesting that many thousands of UK narrowboats are non-compliant because they have a T-stud as an anchor point?

 

Perhaps you should read Alan's quotation of the actual rule, which is that the anchor point should be "suitable" -- which no doubt many T-studs are, presumably including mine.

 

(and if some aren't because they're badly welded and old and rusty, that's still not my problem...)

[MtB]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

Don't want to sell it, don't care... 🙂 

 

To repeat the question -- are you seriously suggesting that many thousands of UK narrowboats are non-compliant because they have a T-stud as an anchor point?

 

Perhaps you should read Alan's quotation of the actual rule, which is that the anchor point should be "suitable" -- which no doubt many T-studs are, presumably including mine.

 

(and if some aren't because they're badly welded and old and rusty, that's still not my problem...)

 

This is a good example of how regulations are sometimes a matter of opinion, once you start picking apart the wording.

[Bee]

Stone the crows, virtually every mishap I have ever seen relating to boats has been caused by human error, none of which would have been prevented by yet more nit picking legislation. The times I have seen disasters avoided by the plethora of rules, regs, certificates and professionals I can count on the fingers of one hand.  (I am talking about inland waterways, not sea going stuff, Ro Ro ferries and the like)

[Tonka]

20 minutes ago, IanD said:

Don't want to sell it, don't care... 🙂 

 

To repeat the question -- are you seriously suggesting that many thousands of UK narrowboats are non-compliant because they have a T-stud as an anchor point?

 

Perhaps you should read Alan's quotation of the actual rule, which is that the anchor point should be "suitable" -- which no doubt many T-studs are, presumably including mine.

 

(and if some aren't because they're badly welded and old and rusty, that's still not my problem...)

You do know what presumably actually means. 

If your builder hasn't bothered to fit a separate anchor point, how do you know they have welded the T stud correctly. 

[Gybe Ho]

8 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

Once outside I found the T stud on the back had been pulled off the boat

 

 

Were you using proper twisted rope mooring line? Many leisure boaters think any old braided rope will do the job but braided ropes don't have enough stretch. Proper mooring warps are elastic.

 

Rectangular motorboats are particularly prone to shock loads on mooring lines because their hull shape leads to short fore/aft breast lines. Rubber anti snubbing devices are often used in this situation.

7 hours ago, Peugeot 106 said:

I think you should also consider the possibility of requiring a tow for example because of engine failure on tidal crossings eg Ribble Link. The tow line may be the wrong length and snatch which could put far more strain on the tee bar than anchoring ever would.

 

 

I am pleased someone had raised this point. Anchoring loads will be less than towing loads in the context of a Cat-D (rivers & estuary) vessel.

Edited July 13 by Gybe Ho

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, Tonka said:

You do know what presumably actually means. 

If your builder hasn't bothered to fit a separate anchor point, how do you know they have welded the T stud correctly. 

He has seen  all the NDT reports

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Bee said:

Stone the crows, virtually every mishap I have ever seen relating to boats has been caused by human error, none of which would have been prevented by yet more nit picking legislation. The times I have seen disasters avoided by the plethora of rules, regs, certificates and professionals I can count on the fingers of one hand.  (I am talking about inland waterways, not sea going stuff, Ro Ro ferries and the like)

 

Quite. And it was to have exactly this sort of pointless and interfering regulation got rid of that was promised as a benefit of leaving the EU. 

 

Thank God for Brexit, eh?

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, Gybe Ho said:

 

Were you using proper twisted rope mooring line? Many leisure boaters think any old braided rope will do the job but braided ropes don't have enough stretch. Proper mooring warps are elastic.

 

Rectangular motorboats are particularly prone to shock loads on mooring lines because their hull shape leads to short fore/aft breast lines. Rubber anti snubbing devices are often used in this situation.

 

I am pleased someone had raised this point. Anchoring loads will be less than towing loads in the context of a Cat-D (rivers & estuary) vessel.

 

There  is a huge difference in loads when carefully anchoring a boat 'under power' and motoring / drifting back and ensuing the hook sets, than when you have an engine failure & dropping an anchor overboard in a 3 knot current and expecting the anchoring 'system' to take the shock load of stopping a 20 ton boat in 10 feet of water - we are not talking about anchoring in the conventional sense.

[MtB]

5 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

There  is a huge difference in loads when carefully anchoring a boat 'under power' and motoring / drifting back and ensuing the hook sets, than when you have an engine failure & dropping an anchor overboard in a 3 knot current and expecting the anchoring 'system' to take the shock load of stopping a 20 ton boat in 10 feet of water - we are not talking about anchoring in the conventional sense.

 

Shock load?

 

i'd suggest as the catenary straightens, the load tension rises exponentially, the line stretches and the boat slows progressively. Rather than a sudden shock load changing the boat speed instantaneously from 3 knots to zero. 

 

[IanD]

1 hour ago, MtB said:

 

Shock load?

 

i'd suggest as the catenary straightens, the load tension rises exponentially, the line stretches and the boat slows progressively. Rather than a sudden shock load changing the boat speed instantaneously from 3 knots to zero. 

 

Precisely what I was referring to, but Alan keeps ignoring... 😉

 

Not to mention the fact that you should have at least 25m or so of nice stretchy nylon anchorplait to prevent such shock loads, as recommended by Alan... 🙂

Edited July 13 by IanD

[Peugeot 106]

I’m not near a river. 3 knot current is actually pretty  quick. Why doesn’t someone try eg on the Trent and report back. Suggest you have a strong crew to get everything back on board,

just get into the middle of the river, stick the engine in neutral and drop the hook and see what happens. If nothing happens and the experiment goes tits up just engage gear and pull everything back on board assuming nothing has snagged.  Best of all report back to the forum

suggest it would be best to be going downstream so you can try it out on weaker streams first. I.e. work up to trying it at Keadby!

[Alan de Enfield]

7 hours ago, Peugeot 106 said:

I’m not near a river. 3 knot current is actually pretty  quick. Why doesn’t someone try eg on the Trent and report back. Suggest you have a strong crew to get everything back on board,

just get into the middle of the river, stick the engine in neutral and drop the hook and see what happens. If nothing happens and the experiment goes tits up just engage gear and pull everything back on board assuming nothing has snagged.  Best of all report back to the forum

suggest it would be best to be going downstream so you can try it out on weaker streams first. I.e. work up to trying it at Keadby!

 

It was the Trent where we were based and did just that - yes there is a gradual tensioning/stretch of the anchor rope but there is a definite 'twang' (shock load) when there is no stretch left.

 

 

8 hours ago, IanD said:

Not to mention the fact that you should have at least 25m or so of nice stretchy nylon anchorplait to prevent such shock loads, as recommended by Alan... 🙂

 

As usual - you do me a diservice, you could at least mention that I'd have 15 or 20 mts of chain between the 'hook' and the anchorplait. But that wouldn't suit your version of facts would it.

 

We can all cherry pick details !

Edited July 14 by Alan de Enfield

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

You can read the OP’s opening post and take it a couple of ways, either worry that your boat will never comply with the RCD or have a chuckle and think “are they having a laugh?”
 Things like raise the weed hatch 30mm? Empty your fuel tank/fill your water tank will solve this one. Decrease the size of well deck scuppers? obviously loads of waves on the canals that could flood the boat through these, most narrowboats would be better off having larger ones to drain water away when too close to leaky top gates and filling the well deck. Fit a 30a RCD between shore power inlet and ISTransformer, wouldn’t 30a be too big? As the majority of shore bollards are 16ah, most inverters/electrical have 16a trip, so what use would a 30a  RCD be? As shore bollard and equipment should trip before it, it seems too high for a canal boat? Fitting shore power connect/disconnect instructions?

As the OP hints at they're quite laughable really or amusing as he says, not to mention the anchor points for boarding ladders and the already being discussed dedicated bow anchor point😂

 As @IanD says 99% of boats on the canals would not pass these requirements not even new builds. Surely the RYA and whoever advises them on RCD/RCA should realise offshore requirements are completely different to Canal Narrowboats, so they would be better off looking into different RCD/RCA’s appertaining to different craft and their purpose/use not just one rule/compliance for all.

 

Edited July 14 by BoatinglifeupNorth

[Tony Brooks]

30ah - what is that all about? Seems someone who likes to have ago at me for being a know all has just shown how little he knows. I suspect it was meant (by the OP) to be 30mA, which is the tripping current difference. If so, the talk about 16A (not 16ah) shore bollards shows a misunderstanding. The other possibility is that the OP was referring to a 30 amp RCBO which would be the tripping current, but always rated in amps, never Amp hours.

15 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

You can read the OP’s opening post and take it a couple of ways, either worry that your boat will never comply with the RCD or have a chuckle and think “are they having a laugh?”
 Things like raise the weed hatch 30mm? Empty your fuel tank/fill your water tank will solve this one. Decrease the size of well deck scuppers? obviously loads of waves on the canals that could flood the boat through these, most narrowboats would be better off having larger ones to drain water away when too close to leaky top gates and filling the well deck. Fit a 30ah RCD between shore power inlet and ISTransformer, wouldn’t 30ah be too big? As the majority of shore bollards are 16ah, most inverters/electrical have 16ah trip, so what use would a 30ah RCD be? As shore bollard and equipment should trip before it, it seems too high for a canal boat? Fitting shore power connect/disconnect instructions?

As the OP hints at they're quite laughable really or amusing as he says, not to mention the anchor points for boarding ladders and the already being discussed dedicated bow anchor point😂

 As @IanD says 99% of boats on the canals would not pass these requirements not even new builds. Surely the RYA and whoever advises them on RCD/RCA should realise offshore requirements are completely different to Canal Narrowboats, so they would be better off looking into different RCD/RCA’s appertaining to different craft and their purpose/use not just one rule/compliance for all.

 

 

30ah - what is that all about? Seems someone who likes to have ago at me for being a know all has just shown how little he knows. I suspect it was meant (by the OP) to be 30mA, which is the tripping current difference. If so, the talk about 16A (not 16ah) shore bollards shows a misunderstanding. The other possibility is that the OP was referring to a 30 amp RCBO which would be the tripping current, but always rated in amps, never Amp hours.