Surveying Fiberglass Power Boats

Seaworthiness

Note that the three key words here are condition, safety and performance. You’ll probably also note that conspicuously absent from that definition is the word seaworthiness, and for good reason.

As defined by hundreds upon hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Admiralty court decisions, seaworthiness is a relative term.

It means that a vessel is suitably designed, constructed, equipped, maintained and manned in order to carry out a particular voyage safely. The neophyte surveyor should pay particular attention to these distinctions.

Seaworthiness is actually a legal doctrine that includes the experience and skill of the vessel operator and crew to safely operate the vessel.

It also means that a vessel is suitably designed for the particular voyage it is undertaking.

For example, a canoe may be seaworthy to cross a small inland lake, but not to cross a large lake many miles wide.

A small cabin cruiser might be considered seaworthy for Sunday sailing on the ocean within a few miles offshore; that same cruiser is probably not seaworthy for an open water passage of several hundred miles.

Similarly, a vessel that does not meet legislated safety requirements is equally unseaworthy.

The point here is that seaworthiness is a relative term.

In performing a pre-purchase survey, in most instances a surveyor would have no way of knowing whether the vessel is truly seaworthy simply because he does not, at that point, have sufficient information to make that determination; he does not know how it will be used or by whom.

Conversely, can a surveyor safely declare a vessel unseaworthy? Most definitely.

It may seem ironic that the surveyor can, in many situations, safely declare a vessel unseaworthy while not being able to declare the opposite.

This is because there are situations in which a vessel is not safe under any conditions.

Or, at best, it may become apparent that the vessel cannot safely perform its obviously intended function. A fiberglass cruiser with a crack in the hull would not be seaworthy to sit at the dock, yet alone go to sea.

We can conclude from these examples that the function of a pre-purchase survey is not to make a general assessment of a yacht’s seaworthiness.

We can assess its condition, the performance of its equipment and machinery, and even the overall performance characteristics of the vessel itself. But how it will be used, and who will be operating and crewing it, that we do not know.

Therefore, the word “seaworthiness” is best left out of our vocabulary unless we intend to use it strictly in the negative.

This issue will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter Three.

Among the prerequisites required for a solid surveying background is a good knowledge in basic engineering and design.

That does not mean that a surveyor should have a degree in engineering, but that he should be conversant with general design and the structural strength of materials and their proper use.

It is not unusual that yacht designers who have no formal training at all are capable of engineering a truly fine design.

They obtained their training through experience, just as most surveyors do. In fact, like boat builders, most surveyors do not have formal engineering training.

Therefore, we will be devoting considerable time on the subject of structural and systems design because design is the foundation on which all else rests.

What Does the Client Want?

The expectations of a client often exceed the ability of the surveyor to deliver. This is largely due to the client’s ignorance and so it becomes incumbent upon the surveyor to educate him.

This subject is dealt with further on in this, and the next chapter under the subject of Qualifying the Client.

Client expectations always have to be tempered against the very real physical and financial limitations of even the most thorough survey.

As indicated above, a fair definition of the purpose of the survey is to enable the client to make an informed purchase decision, but one tempered by the physical and economic limitations.

Obviously, destructive testing is a costly and risky option that is seldom done.

And while it’s possible to spend days or weeks conducting investigations and evaluations, is the client willing to pay the cost? In the vast majority of instances the answer is no; the client is willing only to pay the going rate and require what we might term the “average” survey.

Unless the surveyor can meet the client’s demands, or reconcile his desires against economic reality, the surveyor is headed for trouble.

For that reason alone, it is imperative that the surveyor makes sure that the client fully understands the scope of the service he offers.