Sailing without safety cover

Originally posted by Strawberry [I would suggest that someone who has spent years designing and building his own boats would have a much better impression of the limits of the boat, than a SMOD sailor who's sailing a boat which is INTENTIONALLY BUILT BADLY to comply with a licence.

Don't talk rubbish, manufacturers cannot risk putting out badly built anything these days.  They cannot risk having court cases / bad publicity, their products may not be the highest of quality but you can bet they're safe to use.  I would have more confidence going out in a force 8 in anything laser/topper/rs have made than anything in the uk cherub fleet!

Originally posted by allanorton Originally posted by Strawberry [I would suggest that someone who has spent years designing and building his own boats would have a much better impression of the limits of the boat, than a SMOD sailor who's sailing a boat which is INTENTIONALLY BUILT BADLY to comply with a licence. Don't talk rubbish, manufacturers cannot risk putting out badly built anything these days.  They cannot risk having court cases / bad publicity, their products may not be the highest of quality but you can bet they're safe to use.  I would have more confidence going out in a force 8 in anything laser/topper/rs have made than anything in the uk cherub fleet!

Quite - the CE mark and compiance with the RCD

http://www.ceproof.com/recreational_craft_directive_RCD.htm

Do actually stand for somthing ...

BTW ... many manufactures produce very high quality and specification products.

Rick

Originally posted by allanorton Originally posted by Strawberry [I would suggest that someone who has spent years designing and building his own boats would have a much better impression of the limits of the boat, than a SMOD sailor who's sailing a boat which is INTENTIONALLY BUILT BADLY to comply with a licence. Don't talk rubbish, manufacturers cannot risk putting out badly built anything these days.  They cannot risk having court cases / bad publicity, their products may not be the highest of quality but you can bet they're safe to use.  I would have more confidence going out in a force 8 in anything laser/topper/rs have made than anything in the uk cherub fleet!

True but there have been serious problems with the early RS600 masts breaking. Topper using the same rudder fittings on the Topaz race X as the topper which has been the cause of a large amount to breakages, Topper's use of dissimilar metal rivets in the topaz mast causing many to break in F1-2 conditions... to name a few.

Edited by m_liddell

Originally posted by Guest#260 Originally posted by Strawberry I believe "craft intended solely for racing" are excluded from the RCD. I am not sure that is correct - there are examptions from the RCD I believe for home built boats.

There are exemptions from the RCD for both home built boats and craft designed purely for racing. However if your home built boat isn't also in the "craft designed for racing" category there are some pretty draconian limitations about when and how you can sell it. But before taking any decisions consult a primary source, don't rely on what I say.

My somewhat controversial opinion is that like a lot of these EU things the main thing the RCD does is to make it difficult for one EU country to create regulations that put up barriers to importing things from other EU countries. It doesn't really do an awful lot for the end user other than putting the price of everything up.

On the other topic I've never noticed any particular correlation between the standard of maintenance of boats and whether that boat was orginally SMOD, pro built one design, home built or anything else. Nor, for that matter, have I noticed any great corrrelation between build source and poor design/choice of fittings. You notice poor decisions on SMODs more because all the boats have the same problem, whereas with multi builder boats (pro or home) its unlikely that everyone will make the same mistake.

The only thing is that the more complex a boat is then the more scope there is for maintenance related breakages.

Edited by JimC

Originally posted by Guest#260 Originally posted by Strawberry Originally posted by Guest#260 Originally posted by allanorton Originally posted by Strawberry [I would suggest that someone who has spent years designing and building his own boats would have a much better impression of the limits of the boat, than a SMOD sailor who's sailing a boat which is INTENTIONALLY BUILT BADLY to comply with a licence. Don't talk rubbish, manufacturers cannot risk putting out badly built anything these days.  They cannot risk having court cases / bad publicity, their products may not be the highest of quality but you can bet they're safe to use.  I would have more confidence going out in a force 8 in anything laser/topper/rs have made than anything in the uk cherub fleet! Quite - the CE mark and compiance with the RCD http://www.ceproof.com/recreational_craft_directive_RCD.htm Do actually stand for somthing ... BTW ... many manufactures produce very high quality and specification products. Rick I believe "craft intended solely for racing" are excluded from the RCD. I am not sure that is correct - there are examptions from the RCD I believe for home built boats. YOu should check with the RCD for the details as I am not an expert. Rick

May I suggest you check and fully understand your facts before relying on a directive in your argument, rather than tryin to shift the onus onto me to check it for you.

Edited by Strawberry