High tech kill cords - the next generation?

[Nos4r2]

Again, overcomplicated, too many potential fail ponts and 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. You're not being.

I have an idea. Give me £500 and I'll do something to your boat that over time will really get up your nose, then I'll increase the possibility of your outboard not running.

Does that sound appealing? Didn't think so...

[NSS]

Originally Posted by 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.

As I mentioned previously, an audible/visual alarm.

Completely agree that any such system would not be retrofitted but neither were airbags or ABS or any of the other new technologies that have been introduced on cars. I'm not saying my suggestion is the answer, merely that there may be a better (in the sense of it not easily being ignored) solution than the current one.

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Lee argyle

Umm, crap idea! just cant see this working, Education, education and wear your KC!!

The engine manufacturer who's just offered me £100k to develop the idea obviously disagrees.







Only kidding

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by NSS

As I mentioned previously, an audible/visual alarm.

Completely agree that any such system would not be retrofitted but neither were airbags or ABS or any of the other new technologies that have been introduced on cars. I'm not saying my suggestion is the answer, merely that there may be a better (in the sense of it not easily being ignored) solution than the current one.

The way I see it is this.

The killcord is effectively your seatbelt. There's no realistic replacement for it apart from better materials for the cord and more reliable switches in the same way that there's no primary replacement for a seatbelt. There's variations (inertiareel, multipoint point harnesses, self tightening etc) but the basic concept is the same. It's a physical tether. Everything else is secondary.

So far nobody has suggested anything that isn't going to get on people's nerves or require extra input. You get in your car and the airbags don't annoy you by requiring extra input. ABS doesn't annoy you. Stability controls don't annoy you.

Now imagine you're driving a rally car fast over rough terrain and you have to press a button or hold the wheel in a particular way in order to keep the engine running. Or even, imagine you're doing 30 knots and it's a bit bouncy. Look down at the console to press a button or look at a light that's just come up.
Hurts doesn't it

[Boats&Outboards]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

The way I see it is this.

The killcord is effectively your seatbelt. There's no realistic replacement for it apart from better materials for the cord and more reliable switches in the same way that there's no primary replacement for a seatbelt. There's variations (inertiareel, multipoint point harnesses, self tightening etc) but the basic concept is the same. It's a physical tether. Everything else is secondary.

So far nobody has suggested anything that isn't going to get on people's nerves or require extra input. You get in your car and the airbags don't annoy you by requiring extra input. ABS doesn't annoy you. Stability controls don't annoy you.

Now imagine you're driving a rally car fast over rough terrain and you have to press a button or hold the wheel in a particular way in order to keep the engine running. Or even, imagine you're doing 30 knots and it's a bit bouncy. Look down at the console to press a button or look at a light that's just come up.
Hurts doesn't it

Exactly my point. +1 agreed

The audible beep or light idea isn't a bad one, let's say it comes on and or beeps up to 1,000 rpm. That way its enough of a warning without the annoyance factor ? Much like your seat belt warning light does on the car. That could have some mileage in it if we must have any improvement, although I still think the current system works just fine and I'd be spending the money (which is yet be to advised where's its coming from by the way) on education or awareness

www.BoatsandOutboards4Sale.co.uk

[Cookee]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

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.



The killcord is our metal spike. If people are too stupid to use it,then there really isn't much you can do.

I was going to think up a great reply to all of the ridiculous ideas but I can't beat the reply above - Thanks Nos!

Really? Press a button every minute?

[Chris Caton]

Originally Posted by Cookee

I was going to think up a great reply to all of the ridiculous ideas but I can't beat the reply above - Thanks Nos!

Really? Press a button every minute?

+1

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

The way I see it is this.

The killcord is effectively your seatbelt. There's no realistic replacement for it apart from better materials for the cord and more reliable switches in the same way that there's no primary replacement for a seatbelt. There's variations (inertiareel, multipoint point harnesses, self tightening etc) but the basic concept is the same. It's a physical tether. Everything else is secondary.

So far nobody has suggested anything that isn't going to get on people's nerves or require extra input. You get in your car and the airbags don't annoy you by requiring extra input. ABS doesn't annoy you. Stability controls don't annoy you.

Now imagine you're driving a rally car fast over rough terrain and you have to press a button or hold the wheel in a particular way in order to keep the engine running. Or even, imagine you're doing 30 knots and it's a bit bouncy. Look down at the console to press a button or look at a light that's just come up.
Hurts doesn't it

I'm not saying you're wrong but a seatbelt is no more use than a killcord if it's not worn, and after all these years there's still a significant number who won't wear a seatbelt. Technology evolves. My new car comes with lane departure warning, tiredness warning, post-collision braking and host of other safety features designed to reduce the risk to me, my passengers and other road users. It may be passive but it's also progress and all I'm suggesting is there may be a better or complimentary solution to the killcord.

As for rally drivers, they have a range of warning lights and gauges to monitor, and the only time they let go of the wheel is when they're about to impact a tree/wall/ditch/etc. I'm sure you glance at your gauges periodically, even at full chat.

[Leapy]

Originally Posted by Cookee

I was going to think up a great reply to all of the ridiculous ideas but I can't beat the reply above - Thanks Nos!

Really? Press a button every minute?

Originally Posted by Chris Caton

+1

And another +1

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by NSS

I'm not saying you're wrong but a seatbelt is no more use than a killcord if it's not worn, and after all these years there's still a significant number who won't wear a seatbelt. Technology evolves. My new car comes with lane departure warning, tiredness warning, post-collision braking and host of other safety features designed to reduce the risk to me, my passengers and other road users. It may be passive but it's also progress and all I'm suggesting is there may be a better or complimentary solution to the killcord.

There may well be a practical additional system that has yet to be designed, however it'd have to be something that requires no input from the helmsman.

Originally Posted by NSS

As for rally drivers, they have a range of warning lights and gauges to monitor, and the only time they let go of the wheel is when they're about to impact a tree/wall/ditch/etc. I'm sure you glance at your gauges periodically, even at full chat.

Yes,that's usually when my spine attempts to exit through the top of my head.
Rally drivers have a co-driver.

[ShinyShoe]

I think those of you in the 'it aint broke' camp are missing that errors happen because of intended and unintended actions.

They also happen because of lack of knowledge / education. Put that together an you get 4 sources of "error" which in the case of KCs we could describe as:

1. (Intentional System Failure) KC Used Correctly, but through manufacturer design was expected not to work. The only thing I can think of would be a crew member going overboard. As stated by the 'it aint broke' camp the KC works. Education about any known limitations would help.

2. (Unintentional System Failure) KC Used Correctly, but through desugn fault didn't do the job. This would be the case of someone going OB with the KC and the switch failing to switch the engine off. I'm sure there are cases where this happens, but they are fortunately rare and I suspect behind the scenes manufacturers have improved the switches since they first hit the market. I think a number of us have concerns that a more techy solution might increase the incidence of this. Education to test could reduce this. Education about hollow red plastic could reduce this.

3. (Intentional User Error) KC not used as intended - intentionally. The group of users who repeatedly refuse to wear a KC. Education may help, but people speed in cards and people still speed in cars after going on speed awareness courses (but a few will modift behaviour). Legislation may help but people still speed in cars (but less than if it wasnt illegal I guess). Design changes could help where people claim they "can't" use the KC because its so badly designed its impractical for them. I'm sure there are people who purposefully disable the seatbelt on sensor so they can drive without wearing it and without the anoying bleep. These are intentional errors. Short of telling people why thats a bad idea or punishing them for doing it (legislation) there isn't much you can do.

4. (Unintentional User Error). The user simply forgets to put the KC on. Yes education may help to raise it in their mind, but I think you can argue that there is a system failure that lets the user forget. I think the anolgy here is the bleep in the seatbelt when you haven't plugged in. I'm not convinced education will make much impact and legislation almost certainly none.

So for the it aint broke camp... you need to remember that while the tech works when used as intended people may either consciously or unconsciouly fail to use the tech in which case there is an arguement that the tech could be better designed.

That said... ...anyone who thinks a 1 minute switch is a good idea needs to look at those because it fails: 1 - it has bigger limitations (1 minute at 30kts = 0.5 kts of swimming back to your boat), 2 - the switch will be prone to faults as all are (switch jams on?), 3 - people will disconnect it because it stops them driving the boat how they want to and they are quite happy with the standard KC, 4 - holding the button down doesn't actually test if the KC is attached to person. If you've forgotten but as institutionalised to hold the button down or press it every time it bleeps or whatever you'll still do it and I doubt every time you do it you'll look at the KC...

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

there is an arguement that the tech could be better designed.

There's always the possibility that any tech could be better designed. However, 'better' doesn't equal more complicated, harder to use or with added bloatware.

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

There may well be a practical additional system that has yet to be designed, however it'd have to be something that requires no input from the helmsman.

Even a KC needs input from the helmsman - if only to remember to attach it.

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

Yes,that's usually when my spine attempts to exit through the top of my head.
Rally drivers have a co-driver.

F1 drivers don't

As I said originally, was happy to be shot down over my original idea (and no I wasn't talking about a swith that had to be pressed on the console every minute), but I maintain that there must be a way of introducing a more reliable failsafe than that which currently exists.

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by NSS

F1 drivers don't

F1 drivers have smooth track and a datalink

Are you going to suggest land based telemetry and a device to pour oil on the water ahead of the boat next?

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

.... and a device to pour oil on the water ahead of the boat next?

Great idea. Just off to buy some shares in Shell and BP

[Ribtecer]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

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.

+1

[willk]

Reading this thread, I can't help but think that some of the killcord "improvements" are being suggested by individuals who are, shall we say, exposed to that particular risk for, um, very limited periods annually...

[NSS]

Originally Posted by willk

Reading this thread, I can't help but think that some of the killcord "improvements" are being suggested by individuals who are, shall we say, exposed to that particular risk for, um, very limited periods annually...

Yep, and I definitely fall into that category. As such, my lack of experience probably means that I'm at greater risk of getting into a situation such as that which happened at Padstow, though that is probably mitigated by the fact that I'm less likely to be afloat in poor weather conditions, and less liable to being blasé about safety precautions.

Just because someone isn't a hardenned all-weather ribber, doesn't mean that they're not entitled to put forward a viewpoint or suggestion, does it?

In my experience, unrelated to boating of course, some of the best solutions often evolve from what at first seems to be a crap idea. If you discourage people from putting forward ideas then you suppress that possibility.

[willk]

Originally Posted by NSS

Just because someone isn't a hardenned all-weather ribber, doesn't mean that they're not entitled to put forward a viewpoint or suggestion, does it?

In my experience, unrelated to boating of course, some of the best solutions often evolve from what at first seems to be a crap idea. If you discourage people from putting forward ideas then you suppress that possibility.

There appears to be no shortage of space dedicated in this thread to bloody stupid Heath Robinson devices that are no replacement for a piece of stout cord, so I just thought I'd exercise my own right of reply. I can think of no reason to introduce complex failsafe systems into an already expensive boat. Frankly, if people can't manage to clip on a killcord, maybe they should investigate gardening - although it has it's own hazards if the statistics can be believed.

On your other point, I don't think rough weather is a major factor in propstrike incidents - on the contrary, if my memory serves me, they mostly appear to occur close to shore in calm water...

[Mollers]

Originally Posted by willk

There appears to be no shortage of space dedicated in this thread to bloody stupid Heath Robinson devices that are no replacement for a piece of stout cord....

Agreed. F'kin daft innit?