.png.5ff10cca1d0967e44a17e4a2edde2a80.png)
teadaemon
-
Posts
277 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by teadaemon
-
-
Jim, were you present for the BSS examination?
You obviously knew about the cover allowing inspection of the vent pipe, did the examiner?
I'll admit that on at least one occasion, I've marked a pipe down as non-compliant because I couldn't see any markings on it when they were required (I checked along the whole length, and even used a mirror to try to see the back where I couldn't fit my head). In the end, the markings were found, but only after freeing one end of the pipe, allowing it to be twisted around.
If an examiner can't see the markings on a pipe, then they can't just guess or assume that it's compliant.
-
To be honest, I don't see a problem with this advert.
They've said 'status equivalent to a National Park', which is true, and they haven't said 'is a National Park', which isn't.
The salary actually seems to be a bit on the low side for this role, but not excessively so considering that they're likely to have no shortage of applicants.
Project management is an important job for somebody to be doing, it's what makes sure that projects take place on time and within budget, by making sure that everything that needs to happen happens at the right time and in the right order. It's quite plausible that whoever gets this job will pay for their own salary several times over by making sure that projects progress smoothly and without expensive delays.
-
It's still there but looking rough with tarps over it until i finish making the new canopy. I'll warn you that theres now 2 horses over the island and a length of rope across the bridge. Once you move the rope they're ready to run over the bridge.
Teadaemon: i know with my gas cans they go really cold to the touch when being used. I can see how a pan would blow it up though as theres an opening to see if the gas can is installed properly, but a large pan would cover the hole and heat the gas can at the point where it plugs into the cooker.
All this aside the op was about carbon monoxide on boats/ enclosed spaces and the fact is that if you run any fuel burning device (cooker, heater, generator) on a boat you need ventilation, professional fitting of the device and an alarm.
The gas cans go cold due to evaporative cooling (aka the Kelvin effect).
Even without a hole in the stove, a large pan deflecting hot gases from the burner over the area where the gas canister is will heat it up sufficiently to cause failure (as would placing one in a pan of boiling water, they really don't have to get very hot at all).
Sorry we do seem to have drifted a bit from CO, but to be honest, I don't think there's much to be gained from discussing hazards in isolation. Gas appliances (fixed or portable) bring potential hazards on board in the form of CO, leaking gas, and fire, and all of them are really bad things to have happen on your boat.
-
I'm not disagreeing with that constraint on testers TD, just saying that it's yet another clear example where some of the BSS stipulations are clearly wrong.
Why are they wrong?
-
The actual cooker would sit somewhere in the front cabin in its case and the gas cans will be in a dry bag next to the fuel tank in the self drain well. Before you say, the dry bag gets folded rather than sealed shut so it keeps the rain out but allows ventilation. I keep my wd, oils etc in it at the moment.
That's compliant with the BSS requirements (providing that the cooker doesn't have a gas canister installed - if it does it should be stored in the self-draining well with the spares).
I've been doing a bit of research into these stoves, and to be honest I'm amazed that they're considered safe to use anywhere. The canisters will fail if they reach a temperature of around 100 degrees C (the sources I found were American and gave a range of 200-225 degrees F), due to expansion of the contents. Some of them are designed in such a way that if they fail they release a relatively controlled stream of gas, producing a ball of flame around the stove that's about 18 inches in diameter and lasts for long enough to set fire to most things in the vicinity of the stove. The ones that don't have that safety feature fail catastrophically, causing what's known as a BLEVE (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion), which is a fireball about 8 feet in diameter, easily capable of causing second degree burns to any exposed skin and setting fire to clothing, etc (I've seen pictures of the aftermath of such an explosion, which caused both of those to occur).
Scarily enough, apparently one of the common causes of the installed canister getting hot enough to fail is using a pan larger than the burner, so that it overhangs the gas canister (like a large frying pan would). From some reports I've seen, it would appear that it only takes 5 or 6 minutes of using the stove in this manner to heat the canister to the point of failure.
This is a subject that has come up recently on a surveyor's discussion board I frequent, as a number of boatbuilders (although not any on the Broads as far as I'm aware) are supplying these portable stoves with new boats in order to get around the requirement for fixed gas systems to comply with the RCD (basically to comply with similar requirements to the BSS). The general consensus of all surveyors who commented was that if we saw one of these stoves on a boat during a survey, we would all be recommending it's removal.
-
I agree, Volvo Penta original parts probably do comply with the relevant standards, however unless they have the appropriate information written on them, or I see something in writing from Volvo Penta telling me that they definitely comply, I'm not allowed by the BSS to assume that they do. After all, I can't really take one engine manufacturer on trust and not trust another, even if the other is some fly by night outfit from China that I've never heard of before.
-
They were the original factory parts
If they were good enough for the designers at Volvo Penta, that's plenty good enough for me. The same goes for VP replacements. Clearly a bloke in a suit in an office in Watford knows more about these engines than the manufacturer ....
Considering that virtually all modern boat engines (apart from Yanmar) are marinised versions of engines designed for either automotive or industrial purposes, there's absolutely no guarantee that an engine designer had any inkling whatsoever that their design may end up installed in a boat, and that it would therefore need to comply with the various standards relating to such installations (such as ISO 7840). Whilst I agree, in most cases where fuel hoses are not marked, it is possible to confirm with the manufacturer that they do in fact comply, that is not true for all engines, and therefore in the absence of markings on the hoses or a declaration from the manufacturer, I as an examiner cannot assume compliance.
-
Four years ago I was advised that my (diesel) fuel hoses on my VP single cylinder engine 'were not compliant' because, although perfectly serviceable and the original equipment thy lacked ISO numbers. Interestingly replacement VP parts ALSO lacked the numbers so essential for the safety of me and others......
So, if they weren't marked with the required standard, how did you know that they actually met said standard (which IIRC requires them to resist a temperature of 600 degrees C for at least 2 minutes)?
-
A bss ?? do you know a diving bss examiner??
seroiusly though if the boat could be saved it would be a treat to see it restored , but time and cost will be as said a major factor and when you've finished is it really a classic??
Well technically if I did a risk assessment and considered it safe to get on board, and I was able to see everything I needed to see in order to perform the examination, then there's no reason why she couldn't pass a BSS examination whilst sat on the bottom. Of course in practice it's unlikely that the first two requirements would be met (barring a very, very low tide).
As to the question of "is she a classic?" I'd suggest that she's got better lines than a lot of similar Broads cruisers from that era, and were she in good condition then she'd definitely look the part, so I'd be tempted to say that yes, she is a classic. Whether somebody with the money and the desire to own a 40' wooden Broads cruiser thinks so is another matter. Given that she probably needs a full interior refit, new engine, etc, then any decent restoration is going to be expensive, even if most of her hull is sound, which is possible (she certainly looks like she's still got the right shape in some of the pictures I've seen of her floating, which suggests the hull is not too far gone).
-
It's stored at home under my bed so i should be alrite. Alot more convenient to use than collecting wood and starting a fire up . I wouldn't use it on the boat as i wouldn't use it in a tent. Common sense is the main approach.
That must make it quite hard to use when you're out on the boat, where does it live when you're aboard?
-
One of the main points reinforced to us when I did the BSS examiner training course was consistency - in theory it should make no difference which examiner does a BSS examination, we should all be using the same checks and should therefore reach the same conclusion as to whether a particular boat passes or fails. Indeed, it's not uncommon for me as a surveyor to find systems that will pass the BSS, but that I would be making recommendations to change if I were doing a survey on the boat in question.
Boats that have previously been used at sea, unless they've been coded under one of the MCA's codes for small commercial vessels, often need work to bring them up to the standards of the BSS (particularly when it comes to gas systems, but other areas can be a problem). Bear in mind that until 1998 there were no legally-binding standards for the manufacture of private leisure vessels in the UK. The reputation of the builder is completely irrelevant from a BSS point of view, as it's not a reliable way to tell that a particular boat has been built to a sufficient standard in all relevant areas.
-
I did go, and got some very useful bargains.
The Museum of the Broads have their fishing and boat jumble on Sunday 5th May 09:00-12:00, so there's still an opportunity to go and buy stuff you won't use for the boat. ;-)
-
You could always buy a pet canary for the boat, it'll sing away and when it stops and drops, you've got a gas leak
Turned out the deaths were caused by a dodgy generator they had on the boat to power a heater.
A week later and more people have died due to bad ventilation aboard. See link http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-22063269
Glad to hear people are buying the alarms but i think knowledge will make the biggest difference. I've avoided a big gas bottle on the boat opting for more blankets when it's cold and a camp stove for cooking on land at moorings. Small gas canisters with auto cut off.
I take it this camping stove is stored in a way that's compliant with the BSS* (and no I don't mean in the boot of the car while the examiner is watching)?
*Basically in a gas locker or other location where any leaking gas will be directed overboard and not into the interior of the boat, like an outboard well.
Personally, I'd avoid the portable gas stove on a boat if at all possible. I've spent two years without a stove on my boat (admittedly we've only daysailed on her so far) because of this, but lucked out last weekend and found a two burner Origo meths stove for £50. Now I just need to extend the galley in order to bolt it down.
-
Sunday there is boat jumble at the Showground ,lets hope that Broads Beat will be doing their checks as usual to ensure that only genuine goods are on sale.
The boat jumble was last Sunday.
I can confirm that the Broadsbeat team were out in force, and I expect every outboard there was checked against their list of stolen items.
-
Apart from bieng sentimental , the onl y place that belongs is in several skips, which begs the question who,ll end up paying for it to be removed!!
Looks can be deceiving.
Ok, I haven't surveyed her, but it's perfectly possible that she's in restorable condition if anyone wanted to go to the time, trouble and expense of doing so. I've seen boats that were in far worse condition brought back to their former glory.
-
You can add Womack to that list.
When I was moving my boat on to her new mooring yesterday I saw a police officer dusting a boat for fingerprints as they'd had a portable fuel tank stolen.
-
glad to hear it, is that even a bonding wire going up to the deck filler i can see there?
It should be, as if it's a petrol system a lack of earth bonding would be a failure point (checks 2.7.1 and 2.7.2).
Incidentally, I don't work for a yard or offer repairs myself, and I do free retests (at least for boats on the Broads). As far as whether a boat passes or fails, I've found that at least with the 2013 checks they're now written in a very clear and as far as possible unambiguous fashion. If I fail a boat on any point it'll be because I can show clearly that it does not comply with the check as they're written, and I'll be able to say what needs to change in order for it to be a pass.
If anyone does genuinely believe that an examiner has made a mistake or otherwise failed their boat when it should have passed, there is a right of appeal - if anyone wants to take this up I'd suggest they contact the BSS office ASAP after the examination in question.
-
Totally agree Andy. Ours has just failed on items that were deemed fine on the last inspection. It seems now the filler hoses and breather hoses also have to be compliant on a petrol boat as well as the fuel lines. The last test involved us having to change the fuel hoses from BMW manufactured flex wire armoured/crimped to ordinary hoses with jubileee clips with the correct numbering on them. Off the cuff, the examiner said that he had rendered our boat less safe that it was before....ridiculous. Not only that, when he returned to do the burner trials on our gas rings and hob, he'd left the grill turned on which nearly resulted in me blowing myself up!
Jim, I've just checked the 2005 checks (that your boat would have been examined to on the previous examination), and the requirements for markings on petrol filling and vent hoses are the same as the 2013 checks (which is what it has to comply with now). If it passed before (and there wasn't a declaration from the manufacturer stating compliance with ISO 7840 or equivalent, still an option with the current checks), then somebody has made a mistake. I can sympathise, as I've currently got an identical issue with the filling hose on a boat I examined recently. The owner and I are currently trying to talk to the manufacturer to see if they can provide a declaration of compliance.
The problem with unmarked armoured hose is that it's not possible to check the condition of the hose itself, as it's concealed by the armour.
As far as leaving a gas burner on, I have to say that everyone makes mistakes. I assume that the cooker was fitted before 2000? As if it were fitted after it would be required to have flame-failure devices on all of the burners to prevent precisely that problem.
-
You shouldn't dread a BSS examination, it's really fairly simple and straightforward.
There's a section on the BSS website explaining what you need to do to prepare for an examination here, and the current checks for private boats can be found here (large pdf file).
I've been able to offer BSS examinations on private boats since January this year (I took the course back in November, but as I was trained to the new checks I had to wait until they became valid to start doing examinations), and I know I'm one of the cheapest examiners in the area. If there's anything you want to know about the examination, or you'd like a quote, then feel free to get in touch.
Branden, from a BSS point of view, it doesn't matter who does the work, either the answer to all of the questions in the checks is yes and it passes, or the answer to one or more is no and it doesn't pass. I will admit, there are times when I have to remember whether I'm doing a survey or a BSS, as there are plenty of things that the BSS doesn't regard as important that I would as a surveyor. (Since all the BSS covers are the bare minimum requirements of the navigation authority, in this case the BA, in order for the boat to receive it's toll or licence.)
-
Admittedly I only ever did handovers of one boat with a bowthruster, but when I did I was always careful to explain to people that it only worked at low speeds, and that it wasn't an alternative to the rudder for normal cruising on the rivers.
I suspect part of the problem for novices is that using a bowthruster, the boat steers more like a car, and often there's less delay on steering. If they don't appreciate the disadvantages of using the bowthruster, and don't have confidence in the rudder (the delay in steering with a rudder is one of the things that novice helms used to driving a car find difficult to get used to), then it might seem like a good idea, even though it's not.
-
A very nice boat she is too.
I was on board at the weekend doing a BSS examination, and although I obviously haven't done a full out of the water survey I was generally very impressed with what I did see. I'd not been aboard a Four Winns before, and didn't really know much about them other than they're imports from across the pond, which can either be very good or very bad, with little in between. If anyone's in the market for a petrol-engined sports cruiser, this one's certainly worth a look.
-
I did consider if I could do anything with the Ludham site when it came up for lease, but there are a few issues.
1) Access - I don't know the details but I believe there are planning restrictions concerning vehicle access to the site. Certainly physical access is through Hunter's Yard's car park, which pretty much precludes getting boats to and from the site by land, or deliveries by large vehicles.
2) Parking - there isn't much, which is probably what scuppers it for either private moorings or a hire operation.
3) The boatshed isn't really high enough to deal with anything much bigger than the BA river launches, similarly the boat lift isn't really large enough for a lot of Broads motor cruisers.
On the plus side, if somebody did take it on, the office space on the first floor has great views over the marshes and the river.
Of course if somebody did want to take it on, and needed a surveyor/BSS examiner/project manager for their business, I'd definitely be interested in talking to them.
-
The logo next to the page title in the tab (which I'd guess is also the one referred to above as being in their favourites).
-
Am I right in saying they have to eat around 5 kilo of fish per day?
That would be around half it's bodyweight (normally 7-12kg), which is very high for a top predator eating a protein and energy rich diet.
One of the main reasons that Otters are doing so well at the moment is that the fish population is generally doing fairly well, providing them with enough food to live and produce offspring. If they were having a serious effect on the fish population, then that would be followed fairly quickly by starving Otters, and the whole situation would balance out again.
The dreaded BSS
in Broads Chat
Posted
Possibly the worst question I ever get asked as an examiner is 'it passed four years ago, why has it failed this time?' Especially when I know that it isn't because the checks have changed (as they did at the beginning of this year for private boats), or because something has deteriorated over time. Realistically, as examiners are human, they're not going to get everything right 100% of the time, though that is the standard we should be aiming for. I know from talking to other examiners that they're been in the situation of re-examining the same boat four years later, and spotted things that they missed on the first examination.
I know some examiners have prepared information for owners on what needs to be seen during an examination, when I get the chance I'm planning to write something like that myself, and would be happy to copy it to this forum. Basically it's the boat owner's responsibility to prepare the boat for examination, as it's the boat owner who's most likely to know where all the access panels, etc are. If I'm doing an examination without the owner present (or if the owner doesn't know their boat very well, which might be the case if they've only just bought it), then I can spend ages looking for inspection panels, emptying lockers to look for cable or pipe runs, taking up deck boards to check for bilge pumps and wiring in the bilges, etc.