A large group of charter guests wants to be taken ashore together in one trip rather than two. The tender's certificated capacity is below the full group size. As the crew member assigned to drive the tender, how should you handle this?

A. TENDER CAPACITY — WHY IT MUST BE RESPECTED REGARDLESS OF GUEST PREFERENCE: A tender's certificated passenger capacity reflects its approved stability, freeboard and buoyancy margins for that specific vessel — exceeding it is not a minor convenience trade-off, it directly reduces the safety margin the tender was designed and certified around, in exactly the same way exceeding the mothership's 12-passenger Code limit would. CORRECT RESPONSE: (1) Politely but firmly explain the tender's capacity limit to the guests and that it cannot be exceeded for safety reasons; (2) Offer the practical alternative — a second trip, or splitting the group between the tender and any other available transport; (3) If a guest or owner's representative pressures the driver to take everyone in one trip regardless, this should be escalated to the Master/Chief Officer rather than the tender driver making a unilateral exception under social pressure; (4) The same authority principle already established for the mothership's passenger limit (the Master's authority over safety decisions cannot be overridden by commercial/owner pressure) applies at the tender level too — a crew member operating a tender has the same obligation to refuse an unsafe overload, not just the Master on the main vessel. THIS IS NOT A MINOR INFRINGEMENT: tender capacity overruns are a realistic, repeatedly-documented cause of swamping/capsize incidents in the wider recreational and charter boating sector — the consequence of getting this wrong is genuinely severe, not just a paperwork technicality.

B. Tender capacity limits are flexible for short trips in calm conditions, so a one-off overload to avoid a second trip is acceptable crew judgement.

C. The tender driver should comply with the guests' wishes since guest satisfaction takes priority over a capacity figure that is set conservatively anyway.

D. Capacity limits apply to the mothership only; tenders have no specific certificated capacity and are limited only by available seating.

A. TENDERS AND PWCs UNDER THE CODE — REGULATORY STATUS: Common Annexes to the REG Yacht Code (Annex K1 specifically addresses tenders) set requirements covering tender construction/suitability, launching and recovery arrangements (davits, cranes, garage doors), carriage limits, and operational procedures — tenders are not simply private recreational equipment outside the Code's scope. PRACTICAL REQUIREMENTS THIS DRIVES: (1) Tenders used to carry guests must be operated within their certificated/approved passenger capacity, not "however many fit comfortably"; (2) Launch/recovery equipment (davits, cranes) must be inspected, maintained, and operated by trained crew per the manufacturer's and the vessel's SMS procedures — davit failures during launch/recovery are a recognised yacht incident pattern; (3) PWCs (jet skis, etc.) carried for guest use fall under the vessel's safety management and crew supervision responsibilities, including fuel storage/handling on board the mothership; (4) A tender accident (capsize, collision, MOB from a tender) is a vessel safety event requiring the same incident reporting and SMS response as an event on the mothership itself, not a separate "off the books" activity. CREW IMPLICATION: tender operations are an extension of the yacht's safety management system, not an exception to it — informal "everyone knows how it works" practices around tender ops are a genuine compliance and safety gap.

B. Tenders and PWCs are entirely outside the scope of the Large Yacht Code / REG Yacht Code since they are not "the yacht" itself and have no carriage or operational limits.

C. Tender regulation under the Code applies only to tenders longer than 24 metres, so virtually no yacht tender is covered by any Code requirement.

D. PWC and tender safety is solely a matter for the manufacturer's user manual, with no requirement for crew training or SMS procedures under the Code.

A. DAVIT PRE-LAUNCH CHECKS — WHY A VISUAL-ONLY CHECK IS INSUFFICIENT: A proper pre-launch check of davit/crane tender-handling equipment should include: (1) Confirming the load limit is not exceeded by the tender plus fuel/equipment/passengers being loaded; (2) Checking wire/strop condition (not just "looks fine" — checking for fraying, corrosion, or kinking that a quick glance can miss); (3) Confirming the hook/release mechanism operates correctly and is not the source of a previous reported defect; (4) Confirming the operator has current training/familiarisation on that specific davit (davit controls and failure modes vary between manufacturers and even between sister yachts); (5) A communication check between the davit operator and anyone in/near the tender during the lift. "IT WAS FINE YESTERDAY" IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE: equipment can develop a defect overnight, a different crew member may load it differently, and load conditions (number of guests, fuel level, sea state alongside) change between uses — a genuine pre-use check is required each time, not a one-off assumption carried forward. The mooring/davit incident pattern across this product's own simulator content already demonstrates that "it worked last time" complacency is a recurring root cause in real equipment failures — the same principle applies directly to tender davits.

B. A visual check from a distance is sufficient for routine guest excursions; full checks are only required before the first use of the season.

C. Pre-launch checks are the responsibility of the tender's passengers, not the crew operating the davit.

D. Davit checks are unnecessary if the tender was successfully recovered without incident on its most recent use.