Overboard - Remote Control--Engine Off

[Daniel]

I could not agree with JW more.

We have fitted wireless kill cords to two vessels of this type which operate basically single handed. They have a conventional kill cord too. They have an override. Skipper takes his choice.

They are nothing more than a MOB alarm system (choose you're flavour) coupled with a relay into the kill cord circuit.

I too am interested to see what the OP comes up with.

[neil.mccrirrick]

Consider the humble corkscrew

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corkscrew

The first design was simple and elegant, it did the job. It's not stopped hundreds of new designs all attempting to improve that. Who knows one may 👍

[HughN]

Originally Posted by jwalker

Ah, well, consider this; you're single handed in your cabin rib... ...after epirbing the coastguard!

There was a young man from Nantucket,
Who fell out with some sh*t in a bucket,
Like a truly pro boater,
He hung on to a floater,
Who needs a kill cord? "Oh f**k it!"

[ShinyShoe]

But if you were thinking of re-designing a corkscrew, and posted a suggestion on a website would you want the collective community to all say...

"Oh yes sir, we really need a new cork removal device because I don't like the current ones" or would you rather they said "Actually sir, the bit that screws into the cork does not a a bad job but here are the things you could improve:

- you can over screw it and get floaters in the vino
- you can under screw it and it pulls out rather than pulling the cork out
- Sometimes pulling it out is really card work"

Or of course you could just buy wine with a screw top!

What the collective are saying is - if you spend the next few weeks/months designing, building and testing something even for your own use here are the things we think may be hard to replicate in an electronic setting that can be achieved with the current tech. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water and all that.

You may want to look at this thread on a WAFI forum:
YAPP idea - MOB alert system

(If you think this place is full of wierdo's its nothing compared to YBW! He ran into trouble with the site / others feeling that what he was doing was of a commercial nature. It probably wasn't but because there was money changing hands it looked like it was. But it was a low tech bluetooth system that created an alarm on loss of contact.)

[HughN]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

You may want to look at this thread on a WAFI forum:
YAPP idea - MOB alert system

A failure of such a system could conceivably lead to a loss of life and therefore should be designed, developed and tested accordingly. Would you be prepared to stake a life (yours or that of another party) on an open-source 'DIY' system that only costs a few quid? I wouldn't, nor would I tout any such design - the come-back of any failures could be huge. I haven't read the whole thread but for the prices quoted I can only imagine it to be a cheapo processor and one of the cheap Chinese bluetooth modules.

What about:

• Environmental tests (heat / water / vibration, etc.,)?
• Safety analyses? What if it doesn't work? What if it functions when not required? What if it functions incorrectly?
• Testing every possible decision that the software can make? Is the software deterministic?
• The effects of EMI on a boat or around other vessels (potentially with high power radio / radar, other bluetooth devices, etc.,)?
• Reliability of components?
• Are the cheapo modules all the same or are some poorly functioning rip-offs?
• Operation when adjacent to other vessels with identical/similar systems?
• Making sure it still all works when the 'open source' code is tinkered with?
• Do the terms of use of the components / software / software development environments allow their use for life-dependant functions (I bet they don't)?
• Who would do any repairs?

Hugh

[Poly]

Hugh, my gut feel to reading the OP was somewhat similar - however its worth considering the following points:

Originally Posted by HughN

A failure of such a system could conceivably lead to a loss of life

No it wouldn't. Falling overboard would lead to a loss of life. Anyone who relies on any device (whether a piece of curly red string or a fancy gizmo) to be 100% reliable is asking for trouble.

What about:

• Environmental tests (heat / water / vibration, etc.,)?
• Safety analyses? What if it doesn't work? What if it functions when not required? What if it functions incorrectly?
• Testing every possible decision that the software can make? Is the software deterministic?
• The effects of EMI on a boat or around other vessels (potentially with high power radio / radar, other bluetooth devices, etc.,)?
• Reliability of components?
• Are the cheapo modules all the same or are some poorly functioning rip-offs?
• Operation when adjacent to other vessels with identical/similar systems?
• Making sure it still all works when the 'open source' code is tinkered with?
• Do the terms of use of the components / software / software development environments allow their use for life-dependant functions (I bet they don't)?
  

• Whilst most of those points are perfectly valid, the point you seem to be making is a bold assumption that because there is a well known brand on the box any "professional" solution has 100% reliably been through the above sort of processes. Everyone knows real products DO fail in real life, and if that were to be at a critical moment your warranty is not going to be much use.
  

  Who would do any repairs?

  presumably with a very low cost device it could be throw away!

[ShinyShoe]

Originally Posted by HughN

A failure of such a system could conceivably lead to a loss of life and therefore should be designed, developed and tested accordingly. Would you be prepared to stake a life (yours or that of another party) on an open-source 'DIY' system that only costs a few quid?

My curly red cord cost a few quid. Should I go find a more expensive one?

I wouldn't, nor would I tout any such design - the come-back of any failures could be huge.

Not sure if you meant I was touting it or the YBW thread was. I'm not sure referring someone to a thread that both discusses pro's and con's of a system is touting it.

I haven't read the whole thread but for the prices quoted I can only imagine it to be a cheapo processor and one of the cheap Chinese bluetooth modules.

It uses a bluetooth module that is almost certainly made in China, and is probably cheap. I suspect so do a lot of things.
It uses an arduino processor. Your point is?

What about:[LIST][*]Environmental tests (heat / water / vibration, etc.,)?

So I believe they were planning to put it in some recognised IP rated enclosures. They were also looking at its use on a yacht, in a cabin where things were more protected than a RIB. And until a protype is built you'll never know...

[*]Safety analyses? What if it doesn't work? What if it functions when not required? What if it functions incorrectly?

Indeed - and had you read the thread you'd see they were proposing it as an alarm based system that may or may not have the ability to cut an engine off. Yachts travel at a lot slower speeds and far easier to loose someone overboard by accident.

So the fail safe as I understood it was loss of bluetooth signal from a unit generated an alarm. How you design that system to cope an alarm is up to you.

[*]Testing every possible decision that the software can make? Is the software deterministic?

The basic design as I understand it was lost signal generate alarm. That was it. There were people who wanted to advance that and kill the engine. If I was designing it on a yacht I'd want a delay from alarm to engine kill. So instantly alarm on loss of bluetooth connection. Wait 1 minute for an acknowledgement if none kill engine... something along those lines.
Plus the option to alarm from a button (being dragged along on a lifeline is a major concern of many yachties)

[*]The effects of EMI on a boat or around other vessels (potentially with high power radio / radar, other bluetooth devices, etc.,)?

Build it and test it - only way you'll know. But any proprietry solution will be no different. They'll have tested near some radar etc. But not your Radar, not you radar parked next to someone elses radar and 18 iPhones on the gin palace next door.

[*]Reliability of components?

If its designed to fail safe is it that big a deal? Low cost afterall.
How reliable are all the industry bits of kit? We see plenty of "my plotter broke, my VHF broke" posts on here

[*]Are the cheapo modules all the same or are some poorly functioning rip-offs?

Up to end user to test.

[*]Operation when adjacent to other vessels with identical/similar systems?

could be designed out very easily with a suitably unique serial number.

[*]Making sure it still all works when the 'open source' code is tinkered with?

The code on the device is stored. Once its on, its on. No-one can change that without plugging it back into a programmer.
So devise a test procedure (it shouldn't be that hard!) test it. Let people fiddle with the code online all they want, it wont affect your tested set up. Upload a new version of code - re-test.

[*]Do the terms of use of the components / software / software development environments allow their use for life-dependant functions (I bet they don't)?

Do I care? The components is about manufacturers not taking liability. The software - The GPL licence for software doesn't prevent their use.

[*] Who would do any repairs?

Whomever built it, or indeed unlike proprietry kit - anyone who has the documentation!

People need to UNDERSTAND the differences between DIY and proprietry, People need to UNDERSTAND that to market a DIY product into a proprietry will have a lot of costs over and above the cost of goods. (testing, quality assurance, marketing?, insurance, liability).

My point in linking the post was there has already been a fairly extensive discussion of some of these issues on that thread. The exact end user requirements are probably different, but maybe not 1million miles different to use it as a basis for working from?

Finally as poly says there are commercial solutions, but I've not seen one that would let me:

- switch between a SH and multi-user mode of operation where you want may different things to happen.
- activate a distress message (EPIRB, AIS, DSC) AND do something else on the boat like kill an engine
- make sure I had it in activated and in my pocket at the criticial time.

[jwalker]

Originally Posted by willk

JW, I'm hugely impressed with your ability to conjure up crazy imaginary scenarios....

At least I think it's imagined. Unfortunately I can't erase the mental imagery...

Well I usually only post about things I have experience or firsthand knowledge of.....I'll let you decide on this one! Hehe....

I actually started to build a unit similar to the OP's idea because I was mostly boating single handed or responsible for crew with limited ability, I got it working but something got in the way and I never turned it into a full boaty solution. I based it around a small device designed to let a parent know when a child had gone outwith a certain radius. It was intended to stop transmitting once in the water and a relay in the boat would trigger the diesel engine stop solenoid. A spare transmitter on board could be switched on and the boat engine would restart.

[jwalker]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

If I had a cabin RIB, I wouldn't be reduced to dropping the kids off into a bucket...........

You might be surprised how pleasant it is sitting out back of cabin surveying the scene for a while.....

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by jwalker

You might be surprised how pleasant it is sitting out back of cabin surveying the scene for a while.....

I find the space between the A frame & engine quite cosy, plus plenty of handholds😄

[jwalker]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

I find the space between the A frame & engine quite cosy, plus plenty of handholds😄

Mmm, yes I can see it could be nice and warm there....if a bit splashy.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by jwalker

...if a bit splashy.

Pikey dave's a bit posh - he likes a bidet.

[Nightfisher]

Hi all,

I don't monkey around when it comes to safety. Certainly not suggesting tossing the tether overboard. But, how often do we actually connect it when on the water?..I know I don't as often as I should -- that is - all the time.

My device, and I will post pictures and info for those who may be interested, will be designed to clip-on your belt or velcro'd to my life jacket.
SIBs just don't have much to grab onto should one lose their balance due to the low to water tubes.

Simply put, it will do two things. One, shut-down the outboard and turn-on an SOS strobe, to be located directly under the stern lamp and mount-pole.
I first went to see an engineer about the idea, for both Common Boaters and Large Fishing vessels, eg Crab Boats in Alaska. The Commercial use was for any crew member falling overboard where minutes is all he has before falling victim to exposure.

That unit would immediately send a warning to the captain in the bridge so there would be no time-delay between falling overboard and being noticed - missing by another crew member.
The engineering of the commercial unit alone was estimated at $ 54,000.00 dollars for 8-12 crew members. I'm looking for investors.

The unit for common boaters/fishermen, especially lone-fishermen will cost under 80.00.

[Pikey Dave]

A bit like this then?

[ShinyShoe]

Originally Posted by Nightfisher

My device, and I will post pictures and info for those who may be interested, will be designed to clip-on your belt or velcro'd to my life jacket.

You mean like this:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Gybe-Kill-...3D281854177130

The engineering of the commercial unit alone was estimated at $ 54,000.00 dollars for 8-12 crew members. I'm looking for investors.

The unit for common boaters/fishermen, especially lone-fishermen will cost under 80.00.

As Theo would say... You want me to invest how much of my children's inheritence? I'm Out!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoWDgg5Fhow

How many units would you need to sell to get your investment back? I know you aren't thinking £80 for the commercial unit. But what stops your commercial unit using your £80 jobs? Even if the investment for the "common" boater is only £5k, And 10% of your £80 is "profit" (you'll not find many investors keen to go for a price point of that, You need to sell 625 of them to break even. For £50 of my Child's Inheritance I want to get £100 back in 5 years... afterall I'm taking a risk with my money. So I need you to have sold 1300 of them in 5 years to give me my money back. But in addition to cost of goods, insurance, marketing etc I guess you want a wage from this? But your turnover will be less than £20k per year at that rate... Oh and I don't think you'll sell 60 of them without spending at least £5k a year on marketing etc...

As a home build - I dont think its crazy. To compete with the big boys - forget it...

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Nightfisher

I don't monkey around when it comes to safety. Certainly not suggesting tossing the tether overboard. But, how often do we actually connect it when on the water?..I know I don't as often as I should -- that is - all the time.

your first sentence and your last seem slightly contradictory. If you came to the UK and looked at competently trained skippers from the RYA I believe you would see kill cord use for 98+% of the time afloat (* arbitrary statistic based on guy feel).

My device, and I will post pictures and info for those who may be interested, will be designed to clip-on your belt or velcro'd to my life jacket.
SIBs just don't have much to grab onto should one lose their balance due to the low to water tubes.

Simply put, it will do two things. One, shut-down the outboard and turn-on an SOS strobe, to be located directly under the stern lamp and mount-pole.

Most SIBs won't have a light at all. I'm not trying to dismiss your solution but there really is little reason in a tiller steered SIB not to use the simple "tether" approach. There is one very simple trick to re-engineer this happening which I will explain below.

I first went to see an engineer about the idea, for both Common Boaters and Large Fishing vessels, eg Crab Boats in Alaska. The Commercial use was for any crew member falling overboard where minutes is all he has before falling victim to exposure.

That unit would immediately send a warning to the captain in the bridge so there would be no time-delay between falling overboard and being noticed - missing by another crew member.
The engineering of the commercial unit alone was estimated at $ 54,000.00 dollars for 8-12 crew members. I'm looking for investors.

The unit for common boaters/fishermen, especially lone-fishermen will cost under 80.00.

OK I think commercially you have a better opportunity in the "big boat" sector than the SIB/RIB market. However there are a small handful of established commercial vendors with proven solutions servicing this market - to the extent that the UK RNLI is no longer offering its own solution in a crowded market: http://rnli.org/safety/respect-the-w...Pages/MOB.aspx. The biggest issues you have with commercial boats is the "it wont happen to me" psychology.

Poly's rant on how to save lives at NO cost with kill cords tomorrow!
If your mission is to make better use of the existing low tech solution all it needs it a very simple change. Rather than sharing one kill cord between all drivers and disconnecting the "user" end to swap between drivers if you make the standard operating procedure that the KC remains "permanently" attached to trusted users PFD (you do wear a PFD don't you?) then the practice is to disconnect the ENGINE (or remote control) end of the cord every time you leave the console - either to go ashore, to swap drivers etc. That practice - which quickly becomes a "discipline" means that there is never a dangling cord not attached to anyone. The only time this sort of approach is unsuitable is in really dodgy conditions where you might not want to risk turning the engine off - I assume the skipper is competent to risk assess that and work around it appropriately.

[ShinyShoe]

Poly did you mean PLB or PFD?

If so yes I agree - everyone who is "authorised" to use the boat has their own KC attached to their own Bouyancy Aid/LifeJacket - in a fairly permanent way where it becomes easier to pull the KC than unclip the other end. In cases of helm change even if they don't do SOP and switch of and change the KC remains attached to someone (Padstow would have been far safer). If you really wanted to keep engine on (maybe its been having a temper tantrum on todays journey) but also wanted to change helm(maybe the guy who knows engines is on the helm) if you've got the right style of switch you can hold the plunger out while you hot swap connections... should something go wrong while hot swapping your fingers will no longer be on the plunger and so it will kill.

The issue is where people want to moor up, lift anchor, drop anchor, etc while the engine is on and they want to just slip off the red cord from their wrist for 5 minutes. As (?)another thread here mentioned very recently there are things that can be done the engineer many of those needs to leave the console away too...

[Poly]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

Poly did you mean PLB or PFD?

Of course I meant PDF / Lifejacket which is why I wrote that ;-) *


* at last the moderator "privilege" has a benefit!

[willk]

Originally Posted by Poly

* at last the moderator "privilege" has a benefit!

Indeed!

[Poly]

Originally Posted by willk

Indeed!

Is that what someone of no fixed adobe uses to stay afloat