I Have been Deemed Not to Be A Continuous Cruiser

[Mike Todd]

Don't they do that with criminals?

Not all that different from a tachograph, surely?

[jenlyn]

Not all that different from a tachograph, surely?

Can't see the relevance at all to be honest. Why would you want a tacho on a boat that floats around the canal?

[Mike Todd]

 

Well if I haven't I am clearly earning a living under false pretences.

 

You have zero evidence of crap data, and in this case ample evidence of crap use of data.

I would suggest that the evidence indicates more than that.

 

An important principle of Human Factors & Systems (and has been for almost 40 years) is that there is a responsibility on systems designers to make it as hard as possible for users to make mistakes. One of the outcomes of investigations after accidents (aircraft, hospitals just to name two) is often that such changes re made. (I recall one fatal case in which an incorrect dsoe of something was administered with the wrong instrument iun the wrong part of the body. The change was to manufacture the different sized medications and the instruments such that the wrong combination was not possible)

 

The evidence to me suggests that in this instance we are dealing with a system that was not designed to handle the tasks currently asked of it, on a scale not hitherto seen. The enforcement regime and the under-pinning systems, have been ramped up substantially in response to growing concerns over mooring etc. All too frequently politicians or company leaders will promise changes without thinking through how long it will take to modify or develop systems to match. It often, if not always, comes as a surprise to be told how long and how much!

 

One contributor suggested that CaRT are developing a new system - probably necessitated by the growth of new functions. Let's hope that it has been well-specified, not just for the positive functions but also data validation. Good systems will often have more code devoted to data validation than in applying the accepted data to the database! It is always much cheaper (by at least one decimal order of magnitude) to prevent bad data being accepted than to correct it later. Like risk assessment, anticipating what errors might be made is much harder than specifying the direct functions.

[Mike Todd]

Can't see the relevance at all to be honest. Why would you want a tacho on a boat that floats around the canal?

It is oft indicated that having a recording of location would be an intrusion into privacy etc etc. I was merely pointing out that in the right circumstances, it is considered acceptable to be able to prove where you have been.

[cotswoldsman]

It is oft indicated that having a recording of location would be an intrusion into privacy etc etc. I was merely pointing out that in the right circumstances, it is considered acceptable to be able to prove where you have been.

i know that tachos have moved on since I was in the transport business do they now give location?

[MtB]

i know that tachos have moved on since I was in the transport business do they now give location?

 

I don't think so, but they still taste delicious with some chilli and sour cream.

[mayalld]

I would suggest that the evidence indicates more than that.

 

An important principle of Human Factors & Systems (and has been for almost 40 years) is that there is a responsibility on systems designers to make it as hard as possible for users to make mistakes. One of the outcomes of investigations after accidents (aircraft, hospitals just to name two) is often that such changes re made. (I recall one fatal case in which an incorrect dsoe of something was administered with the wrong instrument iun the wrong part of the body. The change was to manufacture the different sized medications and the instruments such that the wrong combination was not possible)

 

The evidence to me suggests that in this instance we are dealing with a system that was not designed to handle the tasks currently asked of it, on a scale not hitherto seen. The enforcement regime and the under-pinning systems, have been ramped up substantially in response to growing concerns over mooring etc. All too frequently politicians or company leaders will promise changes without thinking through how long it will take to modify or develop systems to match. It often, if not always, comes as a surprise to be told how long and how much!

 

One contributor suggested that CaRT are developing a new system - probably necessitated by the growth of new functions. Let's hope that it has been well-specified, not just for the positive functions but also data validation. Good systems will often have more code devoted to data validation than in applying the accepted data to the database! It is always much cheaper (by at least one decimal order of magnitude) to prevent bad data being accepted than to correct it later. Like risk assessment, anticipating what errors might be made is much harder than specifying the direct functions.

I can't argue with that.

 

In essence, the "system" adequately records data, but the "business process" is in need of work and having redesigned the process may well be that this Includes new systems

[Mike Todd]

i know that tachos have moved on since I was in the transport business do they now give location?

I wasn't suggesting that they were as comprehensive as might be needed to prove compliance but since they do record time and distance then a comparable device (which would probably need to be based on GPS to measure distance) then the privacy argument is what I was aiming at. They would need to be a bit more enhanced compared with tachos as the limit is not just on distance as it would be important to eliminate small shuffles to and from the same points.

[peterboat]

i know that tachos have moved on since I was in the transport business do they now give location?

Most modern vehicles have digicards installed these can be GPS based as well they are much more accurate than the old tachos and just have to be put in a computer/reader to find out what the driver has been doing and where he was at what time etc etc. Big brother is here

 

Peter

[PamP]

 

Why should they not be criticised in public? It's perfectly reasonable that any and all failings of a body charged with maintaining and administering our waterways should be held up to the closest possible scrutiny by us.

 

I seem to recall someone raising the question as to whether the logging system of CRT was fit for purpose or not recently.......

And from the screw-ups we are too frequently hearing of, it is not fit for purpose!

[kevinl]

I wasn't going to join in but hey ho. To be legit you have to satisfy "the Board" who are supplied with information which gives them the power of judge, jury and if it comes to it the crusher. Regrettably it would appear the Board are being supplied with incorrect information by it's own employees, a bit like the police turning up in a court of law with "inadmissible" evidence, so surely the issue is here is that the Board (or Court) should ensure anyone providing them with incorrect evidence need a good kick up the arse and told to do their job a little better.

If as has been said a boat is apparently "seen" by their staff miles away from where it actually was at the time what sanction does their employee face, written warning for incompetence that's what normally happens to incompetent staff either that or sack them.

Those in charge have a duty of care and blindly taking the word of their staff when time and time again they are shown to be wrong falls a bit short of that so the question is are the boat spotters or the Board to blame for this unprofessional, incompetent and unfit for purpose way of doing thing. If the Board are more interested in taking the lazy way out then what does that tell you about the future.

Too many civil servants and not enough professionals, no idea how to run a business and "if in doubt bully the customer", not a recipe for success.

K

[Tuscan]

I wasn't going to join in but hey ho. To be legit you have to satisfy "the Board" who are supplied with information which gives them the power of judge, jury and if it comes to it the crusher. Regrettably it would appear the Board are being supplied with incorrect information by it's own employees, a bit like the police turning up in a court of law with "inadmissible" evidence, so surely the issue is here is that the Board (or Court) should ensure anyone providing them with incorrect evidence need a good kick up the arse and told to do their job a little better.

If as has been said a boat is apparently "seen" by their staff miles away from where it actually was at the time what sanction does their employee face, written warning for incompetence that's what normally happens to incompetent staff either that or sack them.

Those in charge have a duty of care and blindly taking the word of their staff when time and time again they are shown to be wrong falls a bit short of that so the question is are the boat spotters or the Board to blame for this unprofessional, incompetent and unfit for purpose way of doing thing. If the Board are more interested in taking the lazy way out then what does that tell you about the future.

Too many civil servants and not enough professionals, no idea how to run a business and "if in doubt bully the customer", not a recipe for success.

K

No great consequence if you sack a volunteer .....

[Southern Star]

i know that tachos have moved on since I was in the transport business do they now give location?

No, and in fact the requirement to fill in start and finish locations which used to exist with waxed paper charts no longer exists, the only requirement is to enter the start and finish country, and even then only if you move from one country to another during the shift. Most trucks do have some type of GPS tracking fitted but this is entirely independent of the tacho.

[Naughty Cal]

No, and in fact the requirement to fill in start and finish locations which used to exist with waxed paper charts no longer exists, the only requirement is to enter the start and finish country, and even then only if you move from one country to another during the shift. Most trucks do have some type of GPS tracking fitted but this is entirely independent of the tacho.

Exactly. The technology exists and it isn't expensive. Fitting trackers to boats isn't beyond the realms of possibilities.

 

Fit them with a tamper proof seal and make it part of safety test to check it hasn't been tampered with for example. If it has no more licence.

 

Would stop a lot of these arguments and wouldn't cost the earth to implement.

[jenlyn]

Exactly. The technology exists and it isn't expensive. Fitting trackers to boats isn't beyond the realms of possibilities.

Fit them with a tamper proof seal and make it part of safety test to check it hasn't been tampered with for example. If it has no more licence.

Would stop a lot of these arguments and wouldn't cost the earth to implement.

The law does not allow CRT to do this.

[cotswoldsman]

Exactly. The technology exists and it isn't expensive. Fitting trackers to boats isn't beyond the realms of possibilities.

 

Fit them with a tamper proof seal and make it part of safety test to check it hasn't been tampered with for example. If it has no more licence.

 

Would stop a lot of these arguments and wouldn't cost the earth to implement.

Do they have tracker systems now that do not require power? or is there a battery that lasts for years and years or are CRT going to employ battery re placers

Even in the real world a court order is required to fit a tracker

Edited October 10, 2014 by cotswoldsman

[Mrs Trackman]

This has been, ( still is maybe ) a very interesting discussion. I have not got a boat yet. But when ( in the very near future ) I do, I will CC up and down the whole system. As someone that knows absolutely NOTHING about the canal licensing system. Could someone please try to educate me regarding what licence I will need to visit EVERYWHERE. I have seen something regarding the Gold Licence, Is that all I will need?

Or is it advisable to buy a licence for one network before moving on the next. To clarify, I fully intend to see absolutely everywhere that a 58` boat will go.

 

As a nod to this thread, I am not surprised at all,that an ex government controlled department can make such a cock up,and still not even notice it while they are trying to prosecute. Which typifies why I want to live off grid in the first tplace.

 

IS THERE ANYWHERE I CAN ESCAPE THIS BLOODY MADNESS.http://www.canalworld.net/forums//public/style_emoticons/def

 

 

 

It's a bit late to answer your question and others have probably covered this. I just wanted to warn you its not as simple as just getting a gold licence. Or it wasn't when we first had this boat back in 2006. E a don't do refunds and I think their annual licences all end at the end of the calendar year in December. As we moved on board at the end of September we bought an annual bw licence then got a refund on that in January and bought a gold licence. However I think the refund conditions on crt licences may be different.

I would also warn that a gold licence is very expensive. I seem to see far fewer in use lately. We found that, though we fully expected , (& still hope) to cruise the whole system, we really didn't get full value for it. As for the extras, Avon etc, just buy when you arrive, they are not cheap though

 

ault/wub.png

[Higgs]

Exactly. The technology exists and it isn't expensive. Fitting trackers to boats isn't beyond the realms of possibilities.

 

Fit them with a tamper proof seal and make it part of safety test to check it hasn't been tampered with for example. If it has no more licence.

 

Would stop a lot of these arguments and wouldn't cost the earth to implement.

 

A truck, a van, something that is an agent of a business might be suitable candidates for a tracker.

 

Regardless of wether it is cheap or would make life easier for CRT, it is still a step too far, as far as I'm concerned.

[Arthur Marshall]

You just need to make boating without a licence or breaking your T&Cs a criminal offence. Then just tie into the police database, . They know where we all are anyway, tracked by our mobile phones. And, of course, it's a safety requirement so the rescue services know where you are at any given moment - RCR could find you anywhere. Sorted.

Might be a bit of a shift in the boating ethos, of course...

[John V]

I can see what

 

Do they have tracker systems now that do not require power? or is there a battery that lasts for years and years or are CRT going to employ battery re placers

Even in the real world a court order is required to fit a tracker

 

This surely is irrelevant, any form of tracker would only need to use power when the vessel is underway. If it's not moving, no power required.

 

And as regards court order to fit a tracker....commercial sea boats (almost any size) need AIS which in effect is the same.

[Higgs]

You just need to make boating without a licence or breaking your T&Cs a criminal offence. Then just tie into the police database, . They know where we all are anyway, tracked by our mobile phones. And, of course, it's a safety requirement so the rescue services know where you are at any given moment - RCR could find you anywhere. Sorted.

Might be a bit of a shift in the boating ethos, of course...

 

Not if it's turned off.

I can see what

 

 

This surely is irrelevant, any form of tracker would only need to use power when the vessel is underway. If it's not moving, no power required.

 

And as regards court order to fit a tracker....commercial sea boats (almost any size) need AIS which in effect is the same.

 

 

May be the operative word.

[cotswoldsman]

I can see what

 

 

This surely is irrelevant, any form of tracker would only need to use power when the vessel is underway. If it's not moving, no power required.

 

And as regards court order to fit a tracker....commercial sea boats (almost any size) need AIS which in effect is the same.

So CRT would want to come on my boat to wire up this tracking system?

Not the same thing as the fitting of Tracking systems to commercial ships (boats are what you get into when the ship is sinking) is for reasons of safety and not snooping.

[Alan de Enfield]

Higgs, on 10 Oct 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

 

Not if it's turned off.

 

 

July 23rd 2013

 

On Monday, the Washington Post published a story focusing on how massively the NSA has grown since the 9/11 attacks. Buried within it, there was a small but striking detail: By September 2004, the NSA had developed a technique that was dubbed “The Find” by special operations officers. The technique, the Post reports, was used in Iraq and “enabled the agency to find cellphones even when they were turned off.” This helped identify “thousands of new targets, including members of a burgeoning al-Qaeda-sponsored insurgency in Iraq,” according to members of the special operations unit interviewed by the Post.

[Higgs]

 

July 23rd 2013

 

On Monday, the Washington Post published a story focusing on how massively the NSA has grown since the 9/11 attacks. Buried within it, there was a small but striking detail: By September 2004, the NSA had developed a technique that was dubbed “The Find” by special operations officers. The technique, the Post reports, was used in Iraq and “enabled the agency to find cellphones even when they were turned off.” This helped identify “thousands of new targets, including members of a burgeoning al-Qaeda-sponsored insurgency in Iraq,” according to members of the special operations unit interviewed by the Post.

 

 

Equipment, probably not available to CRT.

[Alan de Enfield]

 

 

Equipment, probably not available to CRT.

 

You are almost certainly correct - BUT - it can be done.