Water Police unable to identify PFD1

[seatime]

PinHead

I tell my students their new boat licence is a licence to learn.

The education program doesn't end with getting a licence, it's only just the beginning of the learning process. As adult learners we are expected to seek out the available and relevant information. It's a dynamic, and often hostile environment when boating, and as responsible boaties we need to be prepared.
Apologies, off topic again, I understand where foxhat is coming from tho, education is the key.

cheers
Steve

[tigermullet]

I agree with you PinHead but would it not have been fair to spell out on the website what the new regulation and AS1512 (1996) contained? That was definitely not on the site until a few days ago and the notice that was there seemed only to indicate that lifejackets or PFD's must be carried and conform with AS1512. My old life jackets were stamped AS1512 and it was not until the article appeared in the newspaper that I became aware of the implications.

That is, the notice on MSQ website did not seem any different or to have changed all that much in a decade and apart from the spelling out of the requirements for some to wear life jackets in certain conditions.

Rules and regs are changing all the time in most aspects of the law and it is practically impossible for the average person to keep up. Hence the need for widespread notification and education.

That old "saw horse" of ignorance is no excuse is always trotted out by authorities too lazy to communicate and is intolerable in a free society, especially when it is used for the most obscure piece of legislation.

[seatime]

Maybe something along the lines of AMSA's Marine Notices. These are bulletins issued providing information and advise of significant changes that effect operators. They could be made a free email service similar to Notices to Mariners.

http://www.amsa.gov.au/shipping_safe...ices/index.asp

[rick k]

foxhat, I have one of those jackets.

I bought it hoping I would never need to use if offshore, and that if I did, it would turn me over and keep me face up if unconscious.

I have since decided that perhaps a SOLAS or Coastal may have been better for my purpose..... and maybe even a $15 cheapy.....of course the PFD1 is less uncomfortable to wear all day.

[Wear the fox hat]

Pinhead,
I'm afraid you have missed my point. To operate a boat you MUST HAVE a licence & you MUST HAVE lifejackets. That is why I feel we should have been notified. Other safety items like EPIRB's & radios can be optional depending on where you are going boating.

Rick K,
I have had a look at the coastal jackets (they were my second choice), but I was leaning towards the Hutchwilco because my family will be using them. We have life jackets on all the time when we are under way. Plus they would also offer a bit better protection against hypothermia.

WTFH

[rick k]

WTFH, ok. I was pretty disappointed that mine wouldn't turn me face up in calm water

[mickc]

Another solution to this maybe. If some officers who knew what they were talking about set up shop at various boat ramps and did some pre-launching inspections and instead of issueing fines ,issued defect notices it would have the the same effect with less agro. This would not be any different to the transport dept who issue us our rego's & licences . This I think is an other problem, there are too many players on the inspection side. Why do we need both water police & boating running around checking the same things & this based on the individuals interpretation of the law/ regulation.

[FNQCairns]

Well I am up for new ALL new jackets, all currently are in perfect condition and perfectly usable in any situation, the brand new child's jacket fails the test by 1mm in the PFD 1 writing, yep got the poops.

The next set will stay underdeck away from light will also stay in original plastic as I need to recoup some of the money stolen from me in regulation by time.

Each time I get screwed I lose respect for the law makers and enforcers, bottom feeders at this point for me, just more lawfull thuggery from thugs IMO, at least in an city alleyway a person has a fighting chance of holding onto their wallet.

Mick if they were to do that infringements issued would fall, the on paper and political need for extra staff and power funding would no longer be seen to be as needed, neither would further disenfranchising legislation to cover the compounding problems created. Every department must find/make reasons to continue to grow or risk unimportance or being combined etc.

That equation equals less power and control for the MSQ etc, now if a person were in authoritative government and as such free from near all lawfull principles the general population must abide by in the workplace why wouldn't a person feather their workplace security and even political futures nest as the only eye's watching are the government proper who want above all and sundry to slip as easily through their term as possible.

We have all simply just been screwed again, if there was actually a minimum they will do, it would be infinitesimal.



cheers fnq

[Wear the fox hat]

Rick K,
I see that you are banned now & no offence was intended by my last post, but it's interesting that you comment on the fact that you are saying that the Hutchwilco style of PFD1 wouldn't turn you face up in calm water. LIFE JACKETS (PFD1) are supposed to keep you face up in water compared to BUOYANCY VESTS (PFD2) which are supposed to to keep you buoyant in a vertical position in the water. Can anybody throw further light on this?

WTFH

[tigermullet]

Nope - cannot throw any light on that. My Hutchwilco PFD1 works exactly as it is supposed to. Experimentation reveals that it is almost impossible to submerge the head.

And, before anyone starts, I have heard every possible 'come back' from my wife and children.