Discussion in 'Turquoise Yacht' started by discokachina, Feb 17, 2012.
1 and 2 together virtually assure the vessel's loss.
Sounds a bit like the Bertram SF that "hit a buoy" a few years ago and sank real quick, still a mystery I believe ??
Some of the posts above seem to imply that the insurance would not pay the claim in case of human error. I have no experience filing and dealing with claims but it seems to me that human error is covered. Illegal or fraudulent acts, no; gross negligence, no; but human error is covered.
On purpose hehehe Possibility 3 doesnt require a chain of events, it just requires....well, possiblity 3 itself... but in all honesty I'm kinda skeptical about 3... it wasnt a "stale" product (i.e. tried to sell and wasnt able, etc), I dont see a big reason? although its always a possiblity... likely there were easier/quicker bail-outs of the yacht than sinking her?
You said: Did you forget to put a smiley after that statement? in response to the "reputable yard" reference by 3ala2, unless i'm mistaken you were being sarcastic, i.e. imply what I interpreted as a questionable (not-reputable) yard? did I misunderstand the comment?
Alas we agree totally!
cheers and have a great weekend guys!
I have had a lot of experience with yacht insurance claims and, in most cases, claims based on human error. You are exactly correct that human error is covered. Run it up on the rocks at full throttle at night while making out with your secretary? Covered. Drill a bunch of holes in the hull and (when that doesn't sink it fast enough) cut the hoses on five raw water intakes? Not covered.
Yep...both of these are actual events.
Given this as a procedure when would you suggest that the crew actually gain practical experience?
Who would you suggest foots the bill for the cost of the courses and accommodation etc for the crew undertaking this training?
AIS only works within VHF range. Outside this the vessel will be invisible to PC based observers where the data is gathered from shore based VHF Antennas.
The loss of a vessel on the marine traffic website does not necessarily mean anything nasty or suspicious about the vessel or it's operation.
Watch ships crossing the Bay of Biscay - They will drop off the screen and reappear at the other side.
I did not mean that something nasty has happened and I think they were still in VHF range due to the fact that they were in a relatively small body of water doing a passage between islands. And I was referring to AIS data for time relation only, bacause I see that AIS will continue to work since other lights were on so it is not in any way related to the trouble they had.
For your previous post, and as an owner of two charter yachts, when the I did the employment I paid for the due cost, it made me sleep better and waste less money calling the sat phone after every bad dream, now both yachts are managed but I have also made the managing company agree to a deal, lets say we kind of split the costs. I also don't feel bad when a captain orders a simulation of a situation unlike some owners who don't allow testing the life boats after being packed in the canister for few years and past the suggested maintanence.
You have an interesting way of operating for an Owner, it's a shame more do not follow this philosophy.
I am yet to encounter a management co that will dip into their own coffers to fund anything to do with a Client's yacht or yachts. That is truly something out of the ordinary.
There are two problems that made the operators be like that:
1) Almost all consider yachting is like riding in a chauffeur driven luxury sedan while it is living within a small contained community. The least if one does not want to consider that this community is remote and self sufficent even when at dock.
2) No one really looks at it like a real business, it is actually your company and you are responsible of it; its assets, employees and clients. If yacht management companies spend the same percentage companies on dry land pay for saftey and security then the industry will be a role model for the planet, and I am not talking about the mandatory saftey regulations, I am talking about development and being ahead. I have learnt that after an unfortunate incident where a diabetic stewardess suffered a seizure and the other members thought she had just drank a bit too much, that lost life made me decide that not less of 10% of the crew should be certified EMS technician, even if I had to pay, it is nothing beside a lost life.
If only many of the yacht owners and charter management companies enjoy boating and try and be the crew for a day, the standards that we all set to our selves would be much higher.
May all sea farers be safe at sail or dock.
The following quotes make me very suspicious about veracity of the source:
Just because there are islands near a ship transmitting AIS data does not mean that anyone is receiving that data or sending it along to the internet. For the AIS information you see on the net to get to your computer, someone on one of those islands within VHF range has to purchase and install a receiver and interface that with a webserver.
That is a rash assumption. AIS and other safety radio equipment is not normally powered off the lighting circuits. It should have been powered by emergency batteries located near the wheelhouse but unless someone has data to show that occurred, even that is speculation.
This is akin to your car dealer sharing the cost of parking. Management companies don't "share" costs with owners, they are paid by owners to provide services which are either requested by the owner (or captain) or required by regulation. They are not in business to subsidize yacht ownership or share operating expenses.
?? If you really are the owner of charter yachts you - or your "management company" - would know that those rafts (lifeboats are another category altogether) require annual recertification. It is not a feel-good item or a choice left up to an enlightened owner. Just how big are your charter boats and where do they operate?
I totally agree on your point about the AIS, just thought it might get us any technical information from those specialized and apparently it did.
About the charter issue, I am sure that you are aware that owners assign their boats to charter to keep the boats in shape and generate money when not in use, in my case my boats operate on charter in all seasons but winter, and the charter manager gets the big slice of the charter income because of the services provided and liabilities held on their part. It is almost a subsidization!
The note I made about the canisters happened for real on a yacht that belongs to a friend of mine, it is private and not for charter and located in the guy's country where there is barley any regulation and the boat has barely done any serious hours away from dock, for him, if the valve is on green, then all is okay, for me, lots of other things can go wrong specially with plastic parts. On my boats, there are tons of paperwork and invoices of service and checkups that are in the ship ledger, and I am aware that this is mandatory for charter boats around the world.
Sorry if I misinterpited my self.
Who subsidises what exactly?
I am very involved in this business and as stated earlier have never seen or heard of a management co that shares any costs with the Owners.
As far as the AIS, pretending to be something you are not is hardly the way to obtain information. Most of us here have all the patience in the world for those who come here seeking information. Few of us have much regard or respect for those who come in attacking us or pretending to be something they are so obviously not.
Many people read this forum because it is widely recognized as a source of accurate and reliable information on yachts, large charter yachts in particular. There are many of us who work in the industry who have information that we can't always share but have insights that we do share and help make this a premier site for people who lack that kind of access.
When someone comes along and represents himself as an owner and even goes so far as to attack the credibility of someone like myself or as in post #134, accuses me of making statements that were never made, readers who are not aware that the source is fraudulent might rightly begin to question the veracity of all contributors.
I don't know who has been doing the censorship of recent posts but the fact that material such as in #134 is allowed to stand while a request to that poster to support his contentions with a reference or post number was deleted opens up a whole new area of concern.
They don't share anything, I did not say so, each boat has an open credit to cover its need, the services I pay for (from the revenue, not upfront), are everything from rations to major refits. They just keep the boat generating money to balance my accounts. I don't have time (or adequate experience) to manage the boats, so I get to comapnies that have knowledge and connections to keep the boats running, that is it, and for that they take their cut from the revenue in accordance to an agreement. I said almost a subsidization because eventhough I could, but am not having any time aboard the boats for my own, so as if I have my capital in a fund, it generates money and I can always cash out!
For a short moment there I thought I was reading the MANY posts of an experienced MARINER/CAPTAIN/ENGINEER or etc.
Now I realise, with your calrification, that it is none of those.
Cheers to you too
I am not pretending or anything, I do have a fair amount of information and a fair amount of experience, and like you said, I am here in this forum to accquire more professional information and insights, my previous dispute with you was because I felt some contradiction, maybe as you said I understood wrong, I will spend sometime reading everything in the thread again. About the post you are saying was deleted, you have to check with those incharge, my post was edited and I aknowledge the need.
Nevertheless, you don't have the right to call anyone fraudulent, I never intended to point to the fact the am a charter boat owner, it was related to something else, but this should only show why I care about this thread since it touches a sensitive issue of charter boat saftey, specially the saftey of those aboard. I did not intend to represent my self as an owner or anything, after all, am not here to prag about wealth or power, am here for knowledge, to GIVE and TAKE when ever possible.
Why do you always take word out of context!! Just tell me how many charter boats are YOU running in the med.? I do have the experience and CERTIFICATION as a captain. And atop, I don't have to prove anything to anyone, because I did not ask anyone to prove anything to me regarding their experience. I take everybody's word by good faith and if it holds water then it is right, if it is not then it is debatable, after all this is what a forum for.
Cheers to you too!
I edited the uncalled for comments from post #134, then I made the following post...
I failed to clarify my intentions in the quote above, so let me be specific...
Not only will aggressive remarks be removed, but remarks not pertaining to the thread will be removed as well. This includes antagonistic, belittling, demeaning and condescending comments that make YachtForums appear to be a hostile place, preventing others from participating because they fear being publically humiliated.
Just to add one more thing, you were reading my posts and apparently taking them into regards just because you ASSUMED they were right? Not because you technically think they are viable mr. "Senior Member"?!!