| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Les Lampman
Dealer
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 779
City/Region: Whidbey Island
State or Province: WA
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 5:11 pm Post subject: The U.S. Coast Guard comes to visit |
 |
|
Dave and I spent Thursday afternoon with the boat builder compliance folks from the U.S. Coast Guard aboard the Marinaut.
The Marinaut aced it...no discrepancies. The fellow we were working with indicated that was a bit unusual and was very happy that all concerned had done their homework and produced such a nice boat (he really liked it on a personal basis).
Yay! 
_________________
Les
www.marinautboats.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wandering Sagebrush
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 2770
City/Region: Northeast Oregon
State or Province: OR
C-Dory Year: 2005
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Vessel Name: Constant Craving
Photos: Constant Craving
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
_________________
"And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." - Abraham Lincoln |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
c-ness
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 521
City/Region: Bellingham
State or Province: WA
C-Dory Year: 2002
C-Dory Model: 24 Tomcat
Vessel Name: C-weetness
Photos: C-weetness
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excellent!!
_________________
1990 Grand Banks 32 2012-
2002 Tomcat 24 2010-2012 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thataway
Joined: 02 Nov 2003
Posts: 20813
City/Region: Pensacola
State or Province: FL
C-Dory Year: 2007
C-Dory Model: 25 Cruiser
Vessel Name: thataway
Photos: Thataway
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Congratulations--but for some reason I am not at all surprised that you passed with flying colors! Way to go.
_________________
Bob Austin
Thataway
Thataway (Ex Seaweed) 2007 25 C Dory May 2018 to Oct. 2021
Thisaway 2006 22' CDory November 2011 to May 2018
Caracal 18 140 Suzuki 2007 to present
Thataway TomCat 255 150 Suzukis June 2006 thru August 2011
C Pelican; 1992, 22 Cruiser, 2002 thru 2006
Frequent Sea; 2003 C D 25, 2007 thru 2009
KA6PKB
Home port: Pensacola FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrentB
Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Posts: 4419
City/Region: Greenwood
State or Province: IN
Photos: BrentB
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Congratulations!
In addition Coast Guard regulations and inspections, what other rules are involved in boat building industry?
_________________
Brent Barrett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Les Lampman
Dealer
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 779
City/Region: Whidbey Island
State or Province: WA
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BrentB wrote: | Congratulations!
In addition Coast Guard regulations and inspections, what other rules are involved in boat building industry? |
Hi Brent,
Hmmm...simple question (and a good one) but not a simple answer.
In the most basic sense the only thing a pleasure boat maker has to do is affix a compliance sticker on the boat. And that's done on the honor system; the boat may or may not have ever been seen by the USCG. It's the builder that's certifying that the boat being offered meets USCG standards.
There are varying USCG standards based on whether the boat is a monohull or multihull (and a few more categories), whether or not its 20' or longer, and how it's powered (inboard, I/O, outboard, sail, etc).
As it turns out for a boat like the Marinaut (or CD22) that's a monohull over 20' long and powered by an outboard that the only two standards that need to be met are for lights and ventilation. Since the M215's fuel tanks are "in the open" (as are the CD22's) there is no ventilation requirement (or more technically correct the requirement is met). So, on this type of boat the only thing the boat builder has to do to meet USCG standards is to put on properly mounted USCG approved nav lights.
What's interesting is there are no USCG standards on an outboard powered over 20' monohull with regards to electrical or fuel systems. Nor flotation for that matter. Why? Because statistically those systems don't cause loss of life on boats over 20' long so the USCG didn't implement standards for those boats.
However...and it's a big one...unless you're going to hang it all out there on the line, as a builder you can't just build to the basic USCG standards. You'd get absolutely nailed in court in a liability suit because there are other fully accepted industry standards that are above and beyond USCG standards. Probably the most well known of these are the standards published by the ABYC (American Boat and Yacht Council). Any decent lawyer in a liability case is going to ask the builder if they met the ABYC standard when they built the boat in question, if the answer is "no" the builder has a lot of explaining to do.
I also feel strongly there's an ethical component too. There are a lot of builders that will build to minimum standards in order to keep the price low and sell in volume; they just do what is necessary to meet those standards. Probably their products are alright and don't cause a lot of trouble.
That's not an approach that I can related to. I think it's better (for the builder and the buyer) in the long run if you build to a much higher standard than is required in order to increase the quality, safety, and longevity of the product. That also should lend itself to increasing the overall satisfaction with the boat and happiness in using it which is also a very important factor.
What dictates what items are used and how things are installed in the M215 is what's going to make it a better boat for the customer. In every case we try to increase the quality of the components that make up the Marinaut to the point of diminishing returns. A more simplistic way of saying that is that we're looking for the biggest bang for the buck. Truly "cheap" stuff really has no place on the boat but there's also no reason to spend more than necessary just to be able to brag about it.
A good example is the hull. We thought the extra cost in going from a chopper gun hull to a hand laid hull was worth it because it yielded a stronger, lighter boat that would have payback for the customer (and theoretically would be safer). We didn't go for an "infused" hull because the cost was significantly higher (like $6000 more) and the numbers didn't show that it would result in any particular payback for our customers. It might be great for a racing sailboat or such but it just wasn't there for a boat like the M215.
The bottom line really is that meeting "standards" does not guarantee ending up with a "good" boat. Over and above any standard the builder has to want to build the best boat they can within the given design parameters and price point. Price point is a big deal; if the boat is too cheap it can't be built with quality components, if it's too expensive it won't sell. That leaves a narrow edge for the builder to walk on.
I could pull about $3,500 to $4,000 out of the M215 and still produce a decent boat but then I couldn't produce an outstanding boat. For me, that's not a compromise I'm willing to accept. Instead I have to accept that there may be some folks that don't purchase an M215 due to its higher cost. On the other hand I know those that do will receive a higher value.
So to get back to your original question: the only legal standards a boat builder has to meet are the ones set forth by the USCG and they're very basic. They're intended to reduce loss of life in areas where statistics indicated that was happening. They don't dictate the "quality" of any particular boat. All other standards (like ABYC & NMMA) are voluntary. Bottom line: it's the boat builder that determines the quality of the boat, no existing standard can ensure that.
Les |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
C-Gypsy
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 241
City/Region: Oriental
State or Province: NC
C-Dory Year: 2006
C-Dory Model: 22 Cruiser
Vessel Name: C-Gypsy
Photos: C-Gypsy
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Congratulations Les! 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrentB
Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Posts: 4419
City/Region: Greenwood
State or Province: IN
Photos: BrentB
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you, Les, for the very informative reply and comments
As I expected you always go the extra mile! and very exciting times, too!
Best |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Search
Private Messages
Profile
Log in
Register
Help
