High tech kill cords - the next generation?

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

Agreed, but you don't operate all of those while being subjected to a salt shower and if the batteries fail you don't have to change them while being thrown around.

My smoke alarms emit a warning tone when the battery is getting low on power, giving ample opportunity to replace before they fail.

[Nos4r2]

That'd be a hell of a loud warning tone to be heard over the wind/rain/outboard.

The point is, while your idea works in theory, in practice it'd be enough of a pain in the neck that people would just remove it.
The muppets who won't wear a lifejacket/killcord wouldn't pay to have it retrofitted -they don't think they need a killcord.

In order to get a motor manufacturer to supply it as OEM, they'd have to supply a standard helm unit or wheel with a new outboard.

[Nos4r2]

If I were to spec an alternative to a killcord, or improve the current system I'd be looking at this:-

• No harder to use than a killcord
• As few as possible potential fail points
• Must work immediately-no delay.
• Must not impair helmsman's operation of controls in any way

[simsy]

My old seadoo jet ski had a KC that had to be inserted just before you started it, if you did not start the motor within around 10 seconds you had to remove and refit the KC..... This way you cannot just insert and forget the KC...... You are touching the KC every time you start, might just remind you to clip it on....

[Nick Hearne]

I think people are trying to reinvent the wheel here, kill cords work well you just need to use them!
Simple in design & reliable in the harsh environment they operate in, you just have to remember to us them

[IanH]

I'm surprised quite how mechanical and how easy it is to override the kill cord or how it lacks the ability to do its job in the event of a fault.

If I was inventing a kill cord it would be very simple to existing kill cord but would contain a simple electrical wire circuit that looped the whole length of the cord and back which when broken (either by disconnection or cord failure) would prevent the engine from either raising above certain (idle) revs or being put in gear.

If kill cord circuit was broken, either by pulling out from connector or it breaking due to duff chord, then best engine would do was idle speed, or a speed set within parameters of engine, but only if engine was no more than idling. If engine was above idle speed wheel cord circuit was broken, then engine would cut.

To prevent kill cord being permanently left in place, it would be impossible to start engine after engine had been switched off for a period of time without the cord first being disconnected/reconnected.

This simple design would allow an engine to be started and left at idle to warm; would allow fishermen to fish at slow speed without being tethered to engine; would mean that an engine would not need to be stopped when changing helm but would enforce engine being put in idle/neutral; would prevent kill cord from being permanently tethered; would make every engine use above idle speed require a conscious decision to actively bypass use of kill cord; would mean that in event a kill cord failed it would still cut out engine.

[gotchiguy]

Originally Posted by IanH

To prevent kill cord being permanently left in place, it would be impossible to start engine after engine had been switched off for a period of time without the cord first being disconnected/reconnected.

Which goes back to ShinyShoe's suggestion that it needs to be taken off and refitted for the engine to start, forcing you to have to handle it

[ShinyShoe]

Originally Posted by IanH

If I was inventing a kill cord it would be very simple to existing kill cord but would contain a simple electrical wire circuit that looped the whole length of the cord and back

Remind me... ...do you take your boat anywhere where it might get wet? Connection is bound to get wet at some point and then the engine don't start.

This simple design would allow an engine to be started and left at idle to warm;

Like the current design does

would allow fishermen to fish at slow speed without being tethered to engine;

Never tried to swim after a 'slow speed' powerboat in oilies - but would prefer it stopped if a big fish tugged me over!

would mean that an engine would not need to be stopped when changing helm but would enforce engine being put in idle/neutral;

But people will just unclip the leg end?

would mean that in event a kill cord failed it would still cut out engine.

Would add a load of micro elecrtonics that might fail and not cut anything out at all.

[DGR]

Eh? For goodness sake - if it ain't broken, why fix it? A string and a switch is the most reliable, dependable, sensible way to do it - no electronics to get messed up by water/salt. How people sort out their kill-cords when their kids are learning/driving really isn't the issue (think about driving lessons?!) - so why are we worrying about it?

If the helm goes over the side - the boat needs to stop. Wear a killcord. It's not complicated - unless you're terminally stupid.

[ashbypower]

Originally Posted by DGR

Eh? For goodness sake - if it ain't broken, why fix it? A string and a switch is the most reliable, dependable, sensible way to do it - no electronics to get messed up by water/salt. How people sort out their kill-cords when their kids are learning/driving really isn't the issue (think about driving lessons?!) - so why are we worrying about it?

If the helm goes over the side - the boat needs to stop. Wear a killcord. It's not complicated - unless you're terminally stupid.

+1

[IanH]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

Remind me... ...do you take your boat anywhere where it might get wet? Connection is bound to get wet at some point and then the engine don't start.

Would add a load of micro elecrtonics that might fail and not cut anything out at all.

Ever heard of induction? Doesn't matter how wet things get, you still get an electrical connection.

I can start my outboard without kill cord, but cannot connect kill cord without stoping engine. Or I could just motor off without using kill cord or connect kill cord, start engine and have a senile moment and forget to attach to me.

A timer is a very basic circuit, hardly micro electronics. I am pretty sure that even the most basic of existing ecu's are far more complicated than a timer circuit and an outboard would be no less reliable with such a trivial circuit added.

If people are given freedom of use in a controlled manner, they are less likely to circumvent safety devices. People clearly want the ability to move away from the outboard under certain circumstances. Give them an opportunity to do so in a low risk environment but don't allow the low risk environment to turn into a high risk environment without use of appropriate safety device.

Why would someone disconnect device from their leg if it allowed them the freedom of movement to undertake their task by the even simpler action of disconnecting the device.

A device that is too restrictive or too easy to ignore/forget is less likely to be used than a device that is user friendly. A device that is used 99% of the time that prevents 99% of incidents is far more effective than a device that is used 40% of the time and catches 99.9% of incidents.

[thomas]

Originally Posted by DGR

Eh? For goodness sake - if it ain't broken, why fix it? A string and a switch is the most reliable, dependable, sensible way to do it - no electronics to get messed up by water/salt. How people sort out their kill-cords when their kids are learning/driving really isn't the issue (think about driving lessons?!) - so why are we worrying about it?

If the helm goes over the side - the boat needs to stop. Wear a killcord. It's not complicated - unless you're terminally stupid.

Blimey, common sense - yes, it really as as simple as that!

[ShinyShoe]

Originally Posted by IanH

Ever heard of induction? Doesn't matter how wet things get, you still get an electrical connection.

Yip. Clearly you don't understand the physics of induction!

So lets assume the live side of the inductive loop is connected to the engine as thats where you have a power source. You then induce a current in the kill cord. How will you know that you've induced that current? Or more importantly how will you know you've not because its broken or missing? You'd need to create a second induction back to the engine but make that sufficiently screened from the first induction which means you'll need it to be a distance away.

The alternative is to have power in the cord and just pick up induction once but now you've added the need for a power source in the KC.

Why would someone disconnect device from their leg if it allowed them the freedom of movement to undertake their task by the even simpler action of disconnecting the device.

Because that still slows down the boat to idle etc. From my experience most KC connections are underneath the throttle and not easy to actually see where you are plugging into with cold fingers etc. And coz people are people.

A device that is used 99% of the time that prevents 99% of incidents is far more effective than a device that is used 40% of the time and catches 99.9% of incidents.

But if you are the 1% that it failed for and you would have been wearing it in the other case you will be mighty pi$$ed. And you are being slightly optomistic that your tweak of the design will move from 40% (an underestimate IMHO) to 99%.

[ShinyShoe]

Originally Posted by DGR

Eh? For goodness sake - if it ain't broken, why fix it? A string and a switch is the most reliable, dependable, sensible way to do it - no electronics to get messed up by water/salt.

Spot on! But its reliant on a human remembering to attach to it because the existing technology allows you to forget to connect up. There are people on here who regulalry wear their KC but will admit to having disconnected their leg at some point to do something, sat back at the console and forgotten to hook on again.

How people sort out their kill-cords when their kids are learning/driving really isn't the issue (think about driving lessons?!) - so why are we worrying about it?

On what basis is it not an issue to worry about?

We don't know what happened in Padstow. But the MAIB message contains that reference to switching off the engine when changing helms. Not something that seems to feature in any message about kill cords I've seen before. That means there might be a hint that there was an issue around more than one person having been helming.

If the helm goes over the side - the boat needs to stop. Wear a killcord. It's not complicated - unless you're terminally stupid.

Thats the wording thats needed on the reminder sticker!
[/QUOTE]

[DGR]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

Spot on! But its reliant on a human remembering to attach to it because the existing technology allows you to forget to connect up. There are people on here who regulalry wear their KC but will admit to having disconnected their leg at some point to do something, sat back at the console and forgotten to hook on again.

Sometimes you DO have to. Just not when you are hoooning about at 40 kts. I have to disconnect to pick up my mooring. The boat is in neutral when I move away from the console - but the engine isn't off. If it was, by the time I restarted I'd be aground or caught up in the bridge - there's no other option. You just have to make sure that you DO reconnect.

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

On what basis is it not an issue to worry about?

My Dad taught me to drive in a standard car - no additional controls etc. I learnt to drive in stages, and I guess Dad took me out on the road when he felt I wasn't going to kill him. Same with all 3 of my brothers. Maybe the 'instructor' is more wary because he didn't have any other control (or kill cord) - or he just made sure that he was happy before we got ourselves into that position.

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

We don't know what happened in Padstow. But the MAIB message contains that reference to switching off the engine when changing helms. Not something that seems to feature in any message about kill cords I've seen before. That means there might be a hint that there was an issue around more than one person having been helming.

Thats the wording thats needed on the reminder sticker!

Indeed we don't - speculation not withstanding - but it's still down to the helm/owner - they are responsible for what happens on their boat - I know I am.

[mister p]

Originally Posted by NSS

I know, but would it work? If so, consider it my gift to the boating world

Sorry, sounded a bit smug, wasn't meant to. Would have helped if my smiley was a saddy.

[IanH]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

Yip. Clearly you don't understand the physics of induction!

So lets assume the live side of the inductive loop is connected to the engine as thats where you have a power source. You then induce a current in the kill cord. How will you know that you've induced that current? Or more importantly how will you know you've not because its broken or missing? You'd need to create a second induction back to the engine but make that sufficiently screened from the first induction which means you'll need it to be a distance away.

How can you say that I don't know physics of induction then go on to say one way how induction would work. I never gave details of the connector, how many connectors, size, method, strength of pull needed to seperate etc etc but by not doing so, you state that I know nothing about induction.

[Cookee]

I'm in the "it isn't broken why try and fix it with complicated stuff" camp - it would need industry wide adoption of a new system that would have to be designed test and built whereas education could start tomorrow.

By the way for racing everyone in the boat needs a kill cord - it's possible to fit any number to a boat - Yamaha ones are totally sealed and very reliable and can be fitted to any engine.

[Crusher]

Originally Posted by Cookee

I'm in the "it isn't broken why try and fix it with complicated stuff" camp

+1 Keep it simple ....

[Observer]

Originally Posted by Cookee

I'm in the "it isn't broken why try and fix it with complicated stuff" camp - it would need industry wide adoption of a new system that would have to be designed test and built whereas education could start tomorrow.

By the way for racing everyone in the boat needs a kill cord - it's possible to fit any number to a boat - Yamaha ones are totally sealed and very reliable and can be fitted to any engine.

But in this case an 'automatic' engine cut out would very likely have saved two lives, two serious injuries and immeasurable personal anguish, not to mention a substantial amount of public money. So there is at least a respectable argument for saying that the safety system is 'broken' or, at the very least, that there is room for improvement.

Just an idea, how about a system that requires a periodic (once a minute?) affirmative action, perhaps a push button, absent which the throttle is retarded to idle (or ignition cut completely).