shaggybaxter forum posts in last 60 days

ACTAndy said..
Nowhere, just sat in the cockpit in Powder Hulk Bay.

Next weekend I aim to take her out for my first sail !!!

Wahoo! That's always a good day!

I upgraded the original 200AH house bank to 400AH when I added a windlass and hot water boiler on top of the keel ram. No solar, engine charge only.
The Indel fridge would last days if the only thing running. I found racing heavier for loads, you'd get a day and a half before needing a charge as normally theres half a dozen smart phones and all sorts of widgets plugged in being recharged as well as everything else electrical on.

Planter said..
? Prerequisite for Boat Rego -Third Party/Salvage Insurance ,as Green slip with a vehicle ?

$500/yr for 50 yo fibreglass yacht = cheaper than $30k+ to be skull dragged to the Tip !

Hi Planter,
In Qld, the rule states you must have pollution/wreck removal Insurance for boats over 15mtrs. For my 12.5 mtr, I had to have full comp insurance to cover wreck removal, third party/fire/theft didn't cover it.
I dunno the exact ruling when a Qld boat goes aground in NSW though, but you'd be a bit of a muppet to rely on that saving you from incurring costs .
This is from Maritime Safety Qld....

Ship insurance
All ships over 15m, including those visiting Queensland waters, must have insurance to cover potential pollution clean up, salvage and wreck removal. Find more information about ship insurance requirements in Queensland.

Linky here.... www.msq.qld.gov.au/registration

Hi BwB,
I haven't and I don't know any yacht that has. I'm not really sure what benefit it would give you.
Let's take the example from your link....ForwardScan generally offers a forward view of 4-5 times your current depth; for example in 3 metres (10 feet) of water, see the bottom 12-15 metres (40-50 feet) ahead. Under ideal conditions ForwardScan can see even further, looking ahead up to 8 times your current depth.

In 3mtrs of water, you can (allegedly) see 12-15 metres ahead.
At 6 knots, you're moving at approx 3mtrs per second. So you will have 4-5 seconds to do ...what exactly?
--Ain't no reverse on a sailboat, so that's out.
-- It's a 2d image, so which way is safe water besides behind?
--Crash tacking or a big bear away tends to get a bit spicy, and could add more problems than you fix .
-- Dump sails? Not in 5 seconds.
-- You're heeled at 20 degrees. The further out the scan range, and the deeper the water, the more windward bias it has, and you're making leeway. Calculating that hurts my brain.

I'd spend the money on an RYA Day Skipper/Coastal Skipper course. They are awesome fun, it will pay for itself every time you hoist a sail and reward you for years to come.
Take MB's comment about regular plots on a paper chart. That's excellent advice and is what professional training can bring you.

Question for you JohnE, are you opting for AIS receive only, or transmit and receive?

For RX only, there is no doubt that ICom are quality (see the M605Euro as a benchmark), and I'm not normally a fan boy for B@G, bit I do like the B@G V60 as a lower cost alternate VHF c/w AIS Receiver.

It does a lot of things right. I had a Navicom setup with a wireless remote handset that i found very useful, and the V60's wireless handset (H60) made my Navicom look like a toy, the H60 was a serious bit of kit.

Both units will comfortably get you to the horizon. The Icom shines in really highly saturated RF environments, so it comes down to how much money you want to throw at it.
Cheers!

julesmoto said..

shaggybaxter said..

woko said..
If the vessel that was being rescued was impounded instead of being moved on none of those lives would have been lost.

I believe in the idea of meeting a minimum standard for venturing offshore.
But, it is not uncommon, even on this forum, for loud protests to emerge against even the slightest hint of more regulatory oversight. (Example: the opposition to having to attend and pay for a 1 day course to get an SROCP license, despite it being informative, concise and an extremely valuable skill to everyone going offshore )
Yet we all agree that for modern society to function, there are laws and rules we need to abide by to accommodate the 1%'ers that will are incapable of 'doing the right thing'.

So, if we want to object to additional oversight, we have no right to bitch when peeps that are clearly unqualified get themselves into trouble, and increase the risk to rescue services, and others, in the process. The lesser the regulatory oversight, then greater the potent for these incidents to occur.
So which is it that we prefer ? The wild west where accident or death is a more common occurence but we're free to do what we want (until the 1%ers force an overreaction from authorities) , or we accept that additional oversight may be required to prevent acts of stupidity resulting in outcomes such as this?

Summary? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Pretty sad when we call freedom the Wild West in a derogatory way. Plenty of people die from bush walking in the Blue mountains. Do you want them to have to get a license to go on a bushwalk as well?

Bushwalking? Really? That's maybe reasonable if he was swimming, not piloting a vessel.
I'd posit soemone who can't drive behind the wheel of a 4wd if you want to attempt that analogy.

woko said..
If the vessel that was being rescued was impounded instead of being moved on none of those lives would have been lost.

I believe in the idea of meeting a minimum standard for venturing offshore.
But, it is not uncommon, even on this forum, for loud protests to emerge against even the slightest hint of more regulatory oversight. (Example: the opposition to having to attend and pay for a 1 day course to get an SROCP license, despite it being informative, concise and an extremely valuable skill to everyone going offshore )
Yet we all agree that for modern society to function, there are laws and rules we need to abide by to accommodate the 1%'ers that will are incapable of 'doing the right thing'.

So, if we want to object to additional oversight, we have no right to bitch when peeps that are clearly unqualified get themselves into trouble, and increase the risk to rescue services, and others, in the process. The lesser the regulatory oversight, then greater the potent for these incidents to occur.
So which is it that we prefer ? The wild west where accident or death is a more common occurence but we're free to do what we want (until the 1%ers force an overreaction from authorities) , or we accept that additional oversight may be required to prevent acts of stupidity resulting in outcomes such as this?

Summary? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Chris 249 said..

1- bowpeople, who are more at risk, go over surprisingly rarely. That’s not surprising in some ways - we are, after all, gods of the sport and examples of perfection in every way although perhaps I’m a tiny bit biased. But the serious thing is that bowpeople are chosen for their physical ability, often trained for it, in a way that the mid and afterguard often aren’t.

Word!!!!!

sydserge said..
I plan to go Pittwater to Whitsundays and back this season but still not sure re. the exact dates

There is a few boats I think leaving for the Whitsundays from Brisbane on the 4th July if you want to tag along!