New member here interested in rowboats

Not everywhere.

There has been a concerted campaign to make buoyancy tanks compulsory
in all (Olympic style) rowing shells after the death of Leo Blockley in the UK.

However, FISA (the organizing body) is very slow to enforce the rules, e.g.
as of January 1st, 2015, "all boats used in World Rowing Championship,
Olympic, Paralympic, Youth Olympic and World Rowing Cup regattas shall
meet the flotation requirements specified in FISA's Minimum Guidelines
for the Safe Practice of Rowing" .

Even now, there are some unscrupulous builders who are making boats with
less than satisfactory chambers in an effort to keep costs down.

One day another kid will die and lawyers will have a field day suing
organisers and coaches for ignoring duty of care.

 

That is a dilemma.

The mermaid came with the boat. The boat builder explained the history for the mermaid and her location that makes me think the mermaid wasn't part of the Selway-Fisher plans. (Nor was the PicniK table.)







Besides, putting the mermaid in the traditional figurehead location (as found on clipper ships) would cause too much windage (due to the ta-ta's).

NOTE: I don't plan to attempt to row with the PicniK table in place. That would be a knucle buster.

 

What is "satisfactory chambers"?

I think that government law makers won''t be happy until boats are designed to a code that will keep the occupants safe, dry, alive and uninjured after a plunge over Niagara Falls.

Here's one that comes close, but it's missing seat belts and air bags.



And maybe the boat builders motivation is more than to keep down costs. Maybe it's to improve performance. I know my boat is a custom wooden lightweight, but compare my boat at 125 pounds vs. 200 pounds for the Tango 17. Look at the maximum speed of 5.5 mph for the Tango 17. I'm glad I don't own one of those. I've already hit 6.3 mph (Garmin GPS) and I'm not even an accomplished rower. 5.5 mph is routine for a burst of speed when I'm "feeling my oats". But my Mandarin 17 won't survive a plunge over Niagara Falls.

Of course the cost of the Tango 17 is high at approximately $10,000. I think PicniK Yachts would charge less than that for the Mandarin 17 which is a higher performance rowing skiff. But it is not "self rescuing".

Oops! I missed their 5.5 knots maximum speed. I thought it was mph. Anyhow, 5.5 knots = 6.3 mph, so I have no improved performance there, but I can do 6.3 mph with one rower. I assume the Tango 17 requires 2 rowers to get 6.3 mph.
.

 

We might be at cross purposes here. I am talking about competition
rowing shells, not the beefier type you use.

Some rowing shells are being equipped with one continuous internal
flotation chamber, instead of several non-communicating chambers.

In Nov. 2012 an eight crewed by juniors was holed, the boat sank,
and the crew had to swim to shore. Imagine that on a cold day on
the Thames!

This is not about government over-regulation, or an "Occ. Health and
Safety gone mad" type of argument, but about simple duty of care,
especially when assuming responsibility for children on dangerous
(e.g. cold) waters.

 

The crew had to swim to shore??? !
The organizers of this Nov. 2012 event, regatta, practice, whatever, should be held responsible for not providing adequate support boats for rescue of the entire crew in case of sinking.

Seems like they had a very cavalier disreguard for safety.
That sucks!

I think you referred to a drowning in a previous reply to this thread. Was that the Leo Blockley incident (Dec. 2000)? It seems as though the rower became separated from his boat and drowned. I don't think the boat sank in that incident.

 

I agree, SailorDon. As I said, one day lawyers are going to tear some
organisers to shreds for their disregard. In some countries they will go to jail;
in others they will pay a very heavy financial penalty.

Correct.
However, if the boat had sufficient buoyancy, he could have draped himself
over the upturned hull until help arrived.
That's the choice facing rowers in cold water: try to make it to shore? (risky
in some places) or stay with the boat hoping it will support them.
It's not that difficult to put separate chambers under each seat to provide
buoyancy.
It's also not that hard for coaches/organisers to check the boat before it
goes on the water to gauge its safety.

 

Without buoyancy a flooded small craft is very difficult to bail. Perhaps impossible in heavy weather. Give it a try...swamp your boat and start bailing

Buoyancy is good

 

With regard to buoyancy tanks & safety a UK slant on it! Ten years ago i was founder Chairman of a rowing club and did the job for 5 years. I got the club affiliated to British rowing & was club water safety adviser. At this time British rowing at least were starting to take safety seriously with much published advice & recomendations as laid out in their Row Safe manual.
Fine boats as "Racing & training rowing boats" are exempt from the RCD but its recomended that they carry enough buoyancy to support the crew.
The RCD requires tanks to be separate or subdivided so if one gets holed (or more likely someone borrows a drain bung) the boat will still float.
In the sailing world with training of kids lifejackets are mandatory & nobody even questions the wearing of them in that context.
Rowers on the other hand tend to be an ornery lot & there is huge resistance to wearing lifejackets. Its often required in coastal races that you carry them & they are under the seat. Not a lot of use if you turn the boat over!
Try putting one on then.

 

Good on you. I'm glad that you at least tried to bring some safety features into play.
The recommendations of British Rowing were wishy-washy crap, and some of
the responses by Stuart Ward (Chairman of the ARA Water Safety
Committee) to genuine concerns were bizarre, and showed a complete lack
of understanding of buoyancy and how it might be calculated, measured or
demonstrated. (And IIRC nobody from the Committee had the guts to meet
with the parents of the young man who drowned when the eight overturned.)

As far as I am concerned rowing shell builder and engineer Carl Douglas has
been the best advocate for rowing water safety in England, but he has
largely been dismissed by 2nd rate twerps with little understanding of the
physics involved. It will probably require a few more deaths for them to do
something useful. Like resign in disgrace.

 

Unfortunately this is true of all areas within the marine (& probably others) industry. Legislation is reactive, never proactive.

The "client" doesn't help in this regard. Offered 2 designs, one that "just" meets existing standards and another that "goes well beyond" and is a higher level of safety. Guess which costs more, and guess which the "client" will choose....same old story sadly.

 

I am building a four oared Gig at the moment for coastal racing, you can bet your *** she will have seperate bouyancy tanks & bags if necessary & despite being RCD exempt i will swamp test her. It would be foolish to sell such a boat without. As an aside i recently saw several other local Gigs all brand new & supplied with no buoyancy whatsover. Now they are intended for Club use & for young people.
From my experience with my old club people often inexperienced or over confident tended to push the boundaries & conditions where the boats were operated. There were several very close calls.
I would not want to be a club officer or builder / supplier if there were an accident.

 

Wise moves, and astute comments, Keith.
Adults can sometimes "sign away" some of their rights when they want to
undertake dangerous past-times. Children cannot, and nor can their parents
and guardians on their behalf.
After all the publicity, there is no rowing official who can claim that they
were not aware of buoyancy requirements and regulations. It's time to
unleash the lawyers on the irresponsible blighters

 

Its the builder or NAs who loose to the lawyers when clients insist on walking the fine line of best practice and things go wrong..

Builders and NAs know how to make a boat safe.

Always respect their advice.

 

I guess each person has to do their own thing, buoyancy bags offer the option of not destroying the looks of a nice boat. In all my boats I have used a lot of inbuilt air buoyancy, i guess because i am cautious. It has come in very handy when i had some issues with my first boat that had a structural failure, meant that i could bail as water was confined to a much smaller area, as opposed to sloshing around the lenght of an 18ft hull.

However if you can swim well, you dont take children with you, the weather is warm and you row in the river only 100 yards wide, i guess it might be ok to do without. Even a little bit helps, just keeps the boat awash vs the boat sinking to the bottom, might only take 20L, not enough to help with safety but may assist with avoiding the boat sinking to the seafloor. I think i have over 100 litres of air buoyancy in my 13ft rowboat, maybe quite a bit more, the forward and rear compartments are sealed in, also center thwart is enclosed, probably overkill, but it provides peace of mind when things get rough, and i enjoy going out when its a fraction rough as it gives me a little bit of a challenge. Rough in moderation of course.

You can buy 20L plastic barrels that you can store gear in, thats also an option.