Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 
Old 19 May 2013, 16:41   #71
RIBnet admin team
 
Nos4r2's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: The wilds of Wiltshire
Boat name: WhiteNoise/Dominator
Make: Ballistic 7.8/SR5.4
Length: 7m +
Engine: Opti 225/Yam 85
MMSI: 235090687/235055163
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,645
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post

2. A truly idiot proof system installed in the accident boat would have saved lives.
There is no such thing as idiot proof. Make it idiot proof, and someone will breed a better idiot.

It's been proved time and time again.
__________________
Need spares,consoles,consumables,hire,training or even a new boat?

Please click HERE and HERE and support our Trade Members.

Join up as a Trade member or Supporter HERE
Nos4r2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 16:46   #72
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Bucks
Boat name: Spare Rib
Make: Zodiac/Bombard
Length: 6m +
Engine: 90hp Yamaha
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crusher View Post

If it truly is that easy then it would be done, truth of the matter IMO is that you will NEVER have an idiot proof system, you can't legislate or design out IDIOTS.

While this accident is incredibly emotive, and I really hope it changes the behaviour of many boaters, from the MIAB own statistics earlier in this thread, there were something like 19 preventable deaths by non use of the kill cord in the last 5 years (forgive me if I have that stat slightly wrong) however how many lives have been lost on our roads in the UK, in the same period of time?
If you have some clever ideas to get rid of , by design or legislation then can I be bold enough to suggest you make a much bigger impact and start on our roads instead of our waterways?
So, if I understand correctly, your position is:

- the existing technical solution can't be improved; or

- no improvement is needed because average ~4 preventable deaths per year is trivial/negligible/not worthy of consideration.

Is that it?
__________________

__________________
Tim Spring
Observer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 16:55   #73
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Bucks
Boat name: Spare Rib
Make: Zodiac/Bombard
Length: 6m +
Engine: 90hp Yamaha
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nos4r2 View Post

There is no such thing as idiot proof. Make it idiot proof, and someone will breed a better idiot.

It's been proved time and time again.
Yes accepted. But accepting that a perfect solution is unachievable doesn't excuse/justify failing to explore and pursue incremental improvements, particularly in the aftermath of an event that has highlighted the limitations of the existing safety model.

This is pretty obvious. Why the resistance?
__________________
Tim Spring
Observer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 16:56   #74
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Boat name: llyn raider
Make: xs
Length: 7m +
Engine: 1 200hp merc
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
So, if I understand correctly, your position is:

- the existing technical solution can't be improved; or

- no improvement is needed because average ~4 preventable deaths per year is trivial/negligible/not worthy of consideration.

Is that it?
I think you would be hard pushed to make a less idiot proof reliable system than a cord you attach to your self. An electrical system is a very complicated system and far less idiot proof and easier to forget, flat batterys it would have to have a bypass that people could activate. This is like seatbelts people dont wear them for one reason or another and die because of it just like killcords it dosnt take alot of education to say wear your killcord. Advertisment would be a far better use of money, just on the exits of marinas "WEAR YOUR KILLCORD" signs, on the slipways, park and launch facilites etc etc.
The limitations of the current model is people not clipping a peice of string to themselves. make the string longer with a bit more elasticity if you need to move further.
__________________
andyxs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 17:03   #75
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Plymouth
Length: 6m +
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post

So, if I understand correctly, your position is:

- the existing technical solution can't be improved; or

- no improvement is needed because average ~4 preventable deaths per year is trivial/negligible/not worthy of consideration.

Is that it?
Improvement is needed but efforts should be towards EDUCATION and Awareness rather than re-inventing the wheel. The mechanical system doesn't need improved, it works and rarely fails ie when the attached cord is pulled the engine stops - Its the way its used that fails ie if no cord is attached/pulled it obviously won't stop when needed to. Just like a car will stop when you hit the brake pedal, that doesn't stop people failing to push it.

My point was If you think people will be wanting to push a button every 1,3 or 5 mins your way off the mark. Would you equally accept having to push a button every mile travelled on the motorway, let's say if your speed has/hasn't changed by more than 5 mph - incase you've fallen asleep at the wheel ? And if you fail to do so the car comes to a stop, in the fast lane for example ?

www.BoatsandOutboards4Sale.co.uk
__________________
Boats&Outboards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 17:26   #76
RIBnet admin team
 
Nos4r2's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: The wilds of Wiltshire
Boat name: WhiteNoise/Dominator
Make: Ballistic 7.8/SR5.4
Length: 7m +
Engine: Opti 225/Yam 85
MMSI: 235090687/235055163
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,645
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
Yes accepted. But accepting that a perfect solution is unachievable doesn't excuse/justify failing to explore and pursue incremental improvements, particularly in the aftermath of an event that has highlighted the limitations of the existing safety model.

This is pretty obvious. Why the resistance?
It hasn't highlighted the limitations of the existing safety model, it's highlighted that someone didn't USE the existing safety model.

Every proposal so far (bar the very simple one I made a few pages back about the igniton switch which was ignored) has been overcomplicated, introduced many more potential fail points, utterly impractical and a total pain in the neck for the end user.
They sound like a 'bluesky thinking brainstorming solution' by salesmen who don't have any practical clue of how the actual system would work or any real idea of how people will respond to such a system.

All of which means there's more likelyhood of people trying even harder for a way to disable it-or simply eleminating any new sales of the motor if it was an OEM fitment.

You have to be realistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thetruthaboutcarswebsite
Former TVR owner Peter Wheeler used to explain the lack of airbags in his firm’s high-powered sportscars by arguing drivers would be safer if he installed a metal spike in the middle of each steering wheel.
The killcord is our metal spike. If people are too stupid to use it,then there really isn't much you can do.
__________________
Need spares,consoles,consumables,hire,training or even a new boat?

Please click HERE and HERE and support our Trade Members.

Join up as a Trade member or Supporter HERE
Nos4r2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 17:28   #77
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Bucks
Boat name: Spare Rib
Make: Zodiac/Bombard
Length: 6m +
Engine: 90hp Yamaha
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boats&Outboards View Post

Improvement is needed but efforts should be towards EDUCATION and Awareness rather than re-inventing the wheel. The mechanical system doesn't need improved, it works and rarely fails ie when the attached cord is pulled the engine stops - Its the way its used that fails ie if no cord is attached/pulled it obviously won't stop when needed to. Just like a car will stop when you hit the brake pedal, that doesn't stop people failing to push it.

My point was If you think people will be wanting to push a button every 1,3 or 5 mins your way off the mark. Would you equally accept having to push a button every mile travelled on the motorway, let's say if your speed has/hasn't changed by more than 5 mph - incase you've fallen asleep at the wheel ? And if you fail to do so the car comes to a stop, in the fast lane for example ?

www.BoatsandOutboards4Sale.co.uk
A different technical approach and additional education approach are not mutually exclusive.

It seems you refuse to even contemplate that a technical improvement MAY be possible? Remarkable!

Your car driving analogy is not well thought through. We can all see the obvious distinctions between boats and cars.

I don't claim that my idea is perfect but it has some merits and yes, I would be willing to use it on a RIB. I think you'll find it is similar in concept to the watch keeping system installed on some commercial vessels to address/combat watchkeeper fatigue. The affirmation interval would have to be short (maybe 1 minute) but if it is done by programmable logic then (for example) the interval could be inversely proportional to throttle setting.
__________________
Tim Spring
Observer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 17:37   #78
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Boat name: llyn raider
Make: xs
Length: 7m +
Engine: 1 200hp merc
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
A different technical approach and additional education approach are not mutually exclusive.

It seems you refuse to even contemplate that a technical improvement MAY be possible? Remarkable!

Your car driving analogy is not well thought through. We can all see the obvious distinctions between boats and cars.

I don't claim that my idea is perfect but it has some merits and yes, I would be willing to use it on a RIB. I think you'll find it is similar in concept to the watch keeping system installed on some commercial vessels to address/combat watchkeeper fatigue. The affirmation interval would have to be short (maybe 1 minute) but if it is done by programmable logic then (for example) the interval could be inversely proportional to throttle setting.
I would never want to take my hands off the throttle or wheel when driving fast especially if it is rough. I would have thought a better Idea would be to make the throttle spring loaded above 15mph so it returned to zero. Meaning you have to keep your hand on the throttle or it stops a high speed but not so much for low speed. But this would encourage people to stop using the killcord.
Driving a rib fast
__________________
andyxs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 18:06   #79
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Bucks
Boat name: Spare Rib
Make: Zodiac/Bombard
Length: 6m +
Engine: 90hp Yamaha
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyxs View Post
I would never want to take my hands off the throttle or wheel when driving fast especially if it is rough. I would have thought a better Idea would be to make the throttle spring loaded above 15mph so it returned to zero. Meaning you have to keep your hand on the throttle or it stops a high speed but not so much for low speed. But this would encourage people to stop using the killcord.
Driving a rib fast
The safety button could be on the throttle or on the steering wheel or close enough to either to be within fingertip reach.

I can't see how throttle friction can easily be made variable at different settings. In any event, it has already been stated and I agree that a low friction spring loaded throttle is not a great idea when running at speed (possibly not at all).

The safety button idea, if implemented as a logic solution, would be easily adaptable to have varying effects at different throttle settings.

And yes there is a risk that such a system would discourage use of a conventional kill cord. That would need some careful thought.
__________________
Tim Spring
Observer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 May 2013, 18:21   #80
RIBnet admin team
 
Poly's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Boat name: imposter
Make: FunYak
Length: 3m +
Engine: 2 stroke YAM 20 HP
MMSI: 235089819
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
The safety button could be on the throttle or on the steering wheel or close enough to either to be within fingertip reach.

I can't see how throttle friction can easily be made variable at different settings. In any event, it has already been stated and I agree that a low friction spring loaded throttle is not a great idea when running at speed (possibly not at all).

The safety button idea, if implemented as a logic solution, would be easily adaptable to have varying effects at different throttle settings.

And yes there is a risk that such a system would discourage use of a conventional kill cord. That would need some careful thought.
You could relatively cheaply impliment such a system. Why not do it to make your own boat safer and see if it catches on? I'm fairly sure it will be totally impractical and after a couple of trips you'll disable it. Happy to be proved wrong by anyone who puts their money where their mouth is.
__________________
Poly is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
aint broke dont fix it, autotether, coastkey, deranged, improved, keyfob, kill cord, killcord, lanyard, mob, ramblings, rfid, tag, unrealistic, wireless

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:10.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.