C&C or Catalina

[bubb2]

new boats, used boats -- we''ve got your boat




home boats for sale boat loans insurance warranty services boat spec find a builder marine directory product store myboats



fishing power sailing








The Lloyds Standards
Understanding the Lloyds yacht rating systems

1998
by Chris Caswell



There is probably no nautical topic where more myth, fable and outright misrepresentation exists than in the "classification" of yachts. You''ve probably seen the advertisements that proudly state that a yacht is "Lloyd''s +100A1" or "ABS-classed," but even the owners of these yachts often don''t fully understand what it all means.

Lloyd''s (Lloyd''s Register of Shipping) and ABS (American Bureau of Shipping) are two of the most prominent of the dozen classification societies in the world. In essence, these societies are independent technical organizations that establish and administer standards for the design, construction and periodic re-survey of ships and other marine structures as diverse as oil rigs and bridges.

To fully understand what these societies provide and how they operate, you must understand that the terminology in this field is exacting, and not always what it may seem. First of all, classification of a yacht warrants that it has met all the standards of a society, both before, during and after construction as well as passed rigorous ongoing surveys during the life of the vessel. Other levels of approval are called certification, which involve fewer areas that are examined, or do not include ongoing surveys. Classification continues throughout the life of the yacht (unless it fails a survey), while certification attests to the condition only at the time of delivery.

Lloyd''s Register of Shipping is the oldest classification society in the world and, because it is usually referred to simply as Lloyd''s, is often confused with Lloyd''s of London or a variety of other financial institutions bearing the name Lloyd''s. It does share a common starting point with these others, however: the 18th century London coffeehouse owned by Edward Lloyd that became a gathering place for businessmen and shipowners who would arrange to independently insure cargoes and vessels against loss on the high seas. From these beginnings came the Lloyd''s of London insurance operation, but an entirely separate entity was Lloyd''s Register of Shipping, a classification society that set standards for ship construction to aid in the insurance process.

Founded in 1862, the American Bureau of Shipping is no newcomer and, though also founded to reassure insurance companies, it was originally intended only to promote "a high degree of efficiency and character" among the masters and officers of sailing ships. To that end, tests were developed and "commissions of competency" were issued by what was then called the American Shipmasters'' Association. Within a few years, however, the Association had adopted a system for rating, surveying and registering vessels to assure that they were structurally sound and mechanically fit to safely carry crew and cargo.

A classification society is, in essence, a professional third party that assures the owner or buyer of a yacht that the vessel is built to an accepted standard. Everyone else — seller, builder, designer, broker — has something to gain from the construction or sale of the yacht and, therefore, is not to be entirely trusted, particularly when it comes to betting your life at sea. "Regardless of the intended purpose for the yacht," says Bill Crawford of ABS, "we review the plans and survey the yacht with the 100-year-storm in mind."

Let''s look at classifications first, since these top ratings tend to be fairly similar regardless of the society, while the various certifications vary widely. A Lloyd''s classified yacht is said to be Maltese 100A1, which is usually written +100A1, while ABS offers two separate designations. An ABS-classified sailing yacht is ABS Maltese A1 (+A1) while a motoryacht is termed Maltese A1-AMS (+A1-AMS), the difference being the surveying of the main propulsion system on the motoryacht, or annual machinery survey (AMS).

Each of these classifications requires that a full set of plans be submitted for review and approval, and a surveyor is present during most of the construction process as well as for the sea trials. All material used in the boat is tested and, in the case of aluminum or steel yachts, each plate must have a society approval stamp and each welder must pass rigorous tests. During construction, samples of random welds will be X-rayed and, if a weld does not meet society approval, the plate is removed and a replacement is done correctly. For fiberglass yachts, the surveyor takes careful note of material storage methods, lay-up procedures, curing times, and then performs hardness tests on sample sections.

To keep a yacht "in classification," it must be inspected on a regular basis, usually annually, or whenever changes or damage to the yacht might affect the classification. For the yacht owner, it is a continuing assurance of compliance to standards and it serves as an independent check on his captain and crew, but it is not an inexpensive undertaking.

For owners who simply want to assure themselves that the yacht was properly designed and constructed, most societies offer lesser ratings.

The Lloyd''s "Building Certificate" and "Hull Construction Certificate" do not involve ongoing classification surveys. ABS, on the other hand, offers a "Hull Certificate" in which they duplicate the classification process up to the point of delivery, at which time ABS involvement ends. Unlike Lloyd''s, ABS also offers a "Plan Review" that takes the same hard look at the hull design and construction plans that they use for a full classification, but no construction surveys are performed and machinery systems are not included. All Sabre yachts have undergone ABS plan review, and several other builders have had plan review on selected production boats.

Lloyd''s does not offer approvals of any builder''s plant, while ABS will certify a builder to be "ABS-quality." Tillotson-Pearson, for example, is ABS certified, although the yachts they produce are still carefully monitored during construction before the ABS +A1 classifications are awarded. Christiensen Yachts is the only U.S. builder of megayachts to ABS classify every yacht (except one that went with Japanese NKK society classification to that country) and they keep a furnished office for the ABS surveyor who is almost constantly on hand. Dave Christiensen estimates that the added cost is about 3 percent of the total, and probably adds 300 to 400 manhours of engineering time to prepare extra drawings and plans.

A relative newcomer on the American yachting scene is Det Norske Veritas, a Norwegian classification society that has an extensive background in small pleasure boats in Scandinavia. Since 1969, the company has issued small craft type certificates, much like those provided by the American Boat & Yacht Council, in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland and Iceland. These certificates assure that the craft meets certain construction and design standards, as well as the legal requirements of the Scandinavian countries. More than 600,000 small craft have been type certified, involving 1,300 different models from 400 builders.

DNV offers the same full classification as Lloyd''s and ABS and, like ABS, they offer an "Approval In Principal" of plans, which is neither a classification or certification, but simply attests that the plans meet the DNV rules, a procedure that is growing popular in Australia.

The differences between the various societies in ships, where insurance is unavailable unless the vessel is classified, usually are minimal and shipowners often select their national society for ease of access and service. In yachts, however, the differences are not so clear and it usually boils down to which society will give you the best service.

One noted naval architect, who asked not to be mentioned by name for obvious reasons, said that ABS is easier to deal with than Lloyd''s if you want to try an unusual design or construction process. If you can back up your idea with facts and figures, ABS will approve it while Lloyd''s tends to take a more conservative view of any deviation from the norm. Part of this, of course, may be due to the distance involved, since all plans must be approved at the Lloyd''s offices in England, while ABS is based in New Jersey.

ABS has also made a concerted effort to reach the yachting market, and ABS representative Bob Curry worked extensively with the Offshore Racing Council''s Technical Committee and several naval architects, notably Gary Mull and Olin Stephens, to devise fair and realistic scantling rules for offshore racing yachts. The result is a comprehensive guide, "Building And Classing Offshore Racing Yachts," that is both up-to-date in terms of technology as well as in a simple engineering format for designers to use.

It''s obvious that the classification societies exist in the shipping industry for insurance purposes to provide a uniform worldwide standard, but why is this needed in yachts where a normal surveyor could provide much the same service at far lower cost? For one thing, yachts have become small ships with all the myriad systems and complexities that would be beyond the grasp of any single surveyor and, second, with the growing variety of materials and techniques, the societies provide an information service that shares the success of certain methods and remembers the failures of others.

Very few European large yachts are built without classification, simply because yacht buyers abroad are often involved in shipping, so classification is a way of life and they are comfortable with the procedures.

For that same reason, American builders have been slow to encourage the use of classifications because buyers aren''t familiar with them and, almost to a man, they all claim to build better boats than required by the societies. Whether that is true or not is just as debatable as whether a buyer would want a boat built to society standards. One well-known builder noted that it is impossible to build the high-speed motoryachts, now so popular, to classification because of the sacrifices necessary to keep the weight to a minimum. The societies, on the other hand, point out that they have been classing high-speed patrol craft and other speed-oriented vessels for many years, and suggest that the builder is probably cutting many corners in search of an extra knot or two.

Does a classification help sell or insure a yacht? Maybe and maybe not, depending upon the circumstances. One Florida yacht broker agreed that having a Lloyd''s- or ABS-classified yacht would encourage most insurance companies to offer lower rates but, at the same time, the owner would pay more than he saved in maintaining the classification and having the annual survey so the ultimate out-of-pocket expense would be higher.

At the same time, brokers seem divided on the resale value of a classification. "If I''ve got a yacht that is classified, then it''s a real important feature. But if the yacht I''m selling isn''t classified, then it doesn''t matter," one confided frankly. Several brokers, however, did point out that it''s very difficult to sell a large yacht in Europe without a classification or, at the very least, an original certification.

One area where a classification can be of real value is in a lawsuit or a dispute over insurance settlements. If you lose your yacht and it was classified, the courts tend to listen to the testimony of a centuries-old classification society that has been intimately familiar with the vessel from the plans stage, and which has surveyed it regularly.

Whether you need classification or not on your yacht will depend on your needs and budget. But knowing exactly what classification or certification means will keep you out of deep water, too

[WHOOSH]

Sigh...

Let me just try to clarify my view of the CE Rating system in ''real world'' terms:

I have taken a Hallberg Rassy offshore (5000 NM +/-) and would probably take ANY of their boats across an ocean. This is not because they are ''A'' rated but because of how they are designed and built, and because of how they sail. More importantly, I think the history of this brand demonstrates clearly that they would be building the same kind of boat if the CE Rating system did not exist.

I would not take a Catalina 350 (or one of the other B/C/H models discussed in this thread) offshore in confidence simply BECAUSE it was ''A'' rated, since the rating does not assure me of that kind of intended use. And this is my judgement (yes, my opinion...) because a) the standards don''t address all the issues relevant to offshore sailing, b) I don''t see the end product being suitable for that purpose (see my comments on berths, galley, head, etc.), and c) because in the anecdotal reports we have of these boats being used to cross an ocean suggest that they can have problems (see e.g. www.equipped.org/0698rescue.htm).

Just about any size and type of boat has been taken across an ocean so, in that sense, the CE rating will be seem validated over time by some boats having made some passages offshore. The overarching issue is whether a boat being ''A'' rated insures the owner it is suitable for that type of use. I''m sorry if TJR disapproved of the CE Rating System''s summary overview but that''s from the EU-authorized body developing the rating system we''re discussing. Welcome to the multi-lingual world of EU regulating, standarizing and administering. If reading that link leaves one underwhelmed,why would one find confidence in the rating generated by those guidelines?

''Nuf from me.

Jack

[tommyt]

Enough of the pissing contest. I think that Jeff and Jack have given a fair assesment of the ratings. Probably better as a marketing tool then as a recommendation to sail off into the open ocean.

I did not see where either of them suggested that they would be taking a Hunter or Catalina across the pond so do not know where that came from. As to the Hunter 306 not being a 30''6" boat I don;t find that strange at all. Just a quick look at literature shows the 350 in this discussion being 36''5", the Catalina 34 being 35''8", the Ben 331 33''11", and the Ben 373 36''11". As a Catalina and Beneteau fan I don''t find this an issue. However, I would not buy anything in these price ranges without a good understanding of it''s true spec''s so they can call it whatever they want. The ratings would be a nice to have for insurance purposes, but the boat still has to be designed for your purposes. When and if I ever decided to do off shore I would be looking for the HR for the comfort and safety.

[tommyt]

Enough of the pissing contest. I think that Jeff and Jack have given a fair assesment of the ratings. Probably better as a marketing tool then as a recommendation to sail off into the open ocean.

I did not see where either of them suggested that they would be taking a Hunter or Catalina across the pond so do not know where that came from. As to the Hunter 306 not being a 30''6" boat I don;t find that strange at all. Just a quick look at literature shows the 350 in this discussion being 36''5", the Catalina 34 being 35''8", the Ben 331 33''11", and the Ben 373 36''11". As a Catalina and Beneteau fan I don''t find this an issue. However, I would not buy anything in these price ranges without a good understanding of it''s true spec''s so they can call it whatever they want. The ratings would be a nice to have for insurance purposes, but the boat still has to be designed for your purposes. When and if I ever decided to do off shore I would be looking for the HR for the comfort and safety.

[Fishboat]

tjr3c,

I think Jack & Jeff have made a reasonable presentation here. You''ve put words in their mouths or misrepresented what they''ve said in the attempt to support your own opinions. Both of these fellows have a well known base of experience they pull from & offer it freely. Many benefit from their thoughts on various topics.

So far you''ve demonstrated you have a mouth and ample talent to reference marketeers as sources of truth. The success of the infomercials that fill the airwaves do not prove what they hawk are great products...rather their success fullfills H.L. Mencken''s view that "No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public." As a previous poster has asked...What is your experience in all things sailing? Do you just parrot marketeers or do you have some personal knowledge and insight here? Does your "game" go beyond your keyboard?

[Silmaril]

Ok, I''m not a naval archetect, but I have spent thousands of miles in the north atlantic, albeit on some pretty darn nice boats. Each one had its own characteristics, how it handled a blow, how it moved through the water and waves, how it handles a knockdown. The interior layouts either worked well for the ocean or didn''t. Most of my time was spent on the hoary old IOR boats of the 70''s, where broaching while running in a following sea was just another daily maneuver.

All things being equal, I bet with a little ingenuity I could modify a bathtub to pass the CE-A rating. It''s just a set of standards. It has nothing to do with the comfort of the boats motion in a seaway, how easy is it to set a reef, how dry is it going to weather. Are the bunks livable with proper lee cloths, can you use the galley during a storm. Are there handholds below that are strong enough to hang from and placed throughout the cabin. The list goes on and on.

I am amazed at the floating condos that are being mass produced by the industry today. I look at the aft cabin berths stuffed under the cockpit sole and wonder how they would be out at sea. With their placement out at the end of the boat, their movement would be much greater than those that would be situated in the cabin. And with all that space to roll around in, how comfortable would they be anyway? Where are the setees and pilot berths of old? The pilots have given way to entertainment centers. The setees are now unique dinettes for entertaining. Look around at the galley, where are the pad eyes for strapping yourself in. How about handholds, when at a boat show, I asked the sales rep about them, and he pointed out some delicate looking wood trim, when I tried to hang from them he asked that I please stop as I was bound to break them. Ever been below in 35 - 45 kts of wind and 15 - 20 foot waves? I have, and there are times when you were hanging on with all your weight from the handholds. And bulheads, doors and hardware should be able to stop an NFL linebacker without breaking apart. I was below when a boat I was on pitchpoled, I slammed into the salon''s forward bulkhead and door, ouch, but the thing is, it didn''t come apart. No splintered wood or twisted hinges, just a sore shoulder. I wonder at the small wood screws holding the bulkhead doors together on the big three boats I see at the shows.

So lets all get over the "Who''s boat is CE-A and did it first" stuff. Todays big three are building the boats that the majority of the new boat buyers want. They sail nicely for their intended purpose and will probably survive the occasional blow. You want a real world circumnavigator? They are out there, but just not at the price point that the big three are selling to. That is why the real ocean going boats are about two or three times the price of the same length boat built by the big three. That is the "Fringe market" as far as they are concerned. Not their focus.

Most buyers of today''s mass produced boats are looking for a little adventure, a nice place to hang out in over the weekend. I mean come on... cup holders in the cockpit? Get real...

[Silmaril]

Ok, I''m not a naval archetect, but I have spent thousands of miles in the north atlantic, albeit on some pretty darn nice boats. Each one had its own characteristics, how it handled a blow, how it moved through the water and waves, how it handles a knockdown. The interior layouts either worked well for the ocean or didn''t. Most of my time was spent on the hoary old IOR boats of the 70''s, where broaching while running in a following sea was just another daily maneuver.

All things being equal, I bet with a little ingenuity I could modify a bathtub to pass the CE-A rating. It''s just a set of standards. It has nothing to do with the comfort of the boats motion in a seaway, how easy is it to set a reef, how dry is it going to weather. Are the bunks livable with proper lee cloths, can you use the galley during a storm. Are there handholds below that are strong enough to hang from and placed throughout the cabin. The list goes on and on.

I am amazed at the floating condos that are being mass produced by the industry today. I look at the aft cabin berths stuffed under the cockpit sole and wonder how they would be out at sea. With their placement out at the end of the boat, their movement would be much greater than those that would be situated in the cabin. And with all that space to roll around in, how comfortable would they be anyway? Where are the setees and pilot berths of old? The pilots have given way to entertainment centers. The setees are now unique dinettes for entertaining. Look around at the galley, where are the pad eyes for strapping yourself in. How about handholds, when at a boat show, I asked the sales rep about them, and he pointed out some delicate looking wood trim, when I tried to hang from them he asked that I please stop as I was bound to break them. Ever been below in 35 - 45 kts of wind and 15 - 20 foot waves? I have, and there are times when you were hanging on with all your weight from the handholds. And bulheads, doors and hardware should be able to stop an NFL linebacker without breaking apart. I was below when a boat I was on pitchpoled, I slammed into the salon''s forward bulkhead and door, ouch, but the thing is, it didn''t come apart. No splintered wood or twisted hinges, just a sore shoulder. I wonder at the small wood screws holding the bulkhead doors together on the big three boats I see at the shows.

So lets all get over the "Who''s boat is CE-A and did it first" stuff. Todays big three are building the boats that the majority of the new boat buyers want. They sail nicely for their intended purpose and will probably survive the occasional blow. You want a real world circumnavigator? They are out there, but just not at the price point that the big three are selling to. That is why the real ocean going boats are about two or three times the price of the same length boat built by the big three. That is the "Fringe market" as far as they are concerned. Not their focus.

Most buyers of today''s mass produced boats are looking for a little adventure, a nice place to hang out in over the weekend. I mean come on... cup holders in the cockpit? Get real...

[Jeff_H]

Silmaril, I assume that I can take that to mean that you are in agreement with the point that Jack and I have been trying to make about the CE standards, which is, just having a CE Open Ocean rating does not mean that a boat is suitable to spend a lot of time out there.

Jeff

[Silmaril]

Jeff, EXACTLY my point...

[Sailormon6]

I think you are all missing a very important point, and I''ll admit that my knowledge of yacht design is somewhat limited, but I do have knowledge in a similar field, i.e., building construction standards. Uniform building codes have been developed to govern the construction standards for homes and commercial buildings. They have generally been adopted by each state, and usually modified somewhat from state-to-state (to meet local needs). However, they are understood to be the *minimum* acceptable standards for the construction of buildings that are safe and hygienic for people to occupy.

If you will inquire further into the origin of the CE Standards, I expect you will find that a bunch of yacht designers got together and formulated the CE standards as *minimum* standards for the construction of any yacht that was reasonably safe to go to sea. In other words, a yacht that meets those standards might not meet everybody''s notion of the perfect sea boat, but it is regarded by the experts who devised those standards to be at least nominally fit to go to sea. That is not to say that a boat cannot be built to higher standards. Needless to say, many yachts are built to higher standards than Catalinas and Hunters, but I haven''t heard either Jeff or Jack or any knowledgeable person, for that matter, suggest that anyone who puts to sea in a Catalina 36 or 38 or 42 or 47 has a death wish. If you folks don''t regard them as fit for sea, the yacht designers who formulated the *minimum* standards obviously disagree with you.

I don''t hear the Catalina owners claiming that their boats are ideal sea boats, but this constant drumbeat, suggesting that they are unfit, is unfair. The suggestion is chanted by the detracters of the big three that they are "built to a price point," as if that''s a bad thing. In truth, a company that can build a variety of boats, from dinghies to seagoing yachts, that are reasonably safe and that perform reasonably well, and that can market them at prices within the reach of a mass of people, is good for the industry generally, good for the sport of sailing, and it''s certainly good for the customers. I don''t hear Catalina owners suggesting that their boats are superior blue water boats, but a huge number of them, built over the past 25+ years, have been proven to be reasonably good, sound and durable boats, and it''s no wonder their owners resent their unfair denigration.