High tech kill cords - the next generation?

[PeterM]

So. ... In summary. ...

Kill cords work. ..If they are worn correctly.

The common point of failure of the current system is human one.

So people should just wear them. ..simples. ...

[NSS]

Oh well, if nothing else I've at least given you all something to moan about. Funny thing is I thought the idea of a forum was to facilitate discussion. Over and out.

[Leapy]

Originally Posted by PeterM

So. ... In summary. ...

Kill cords work. ..If they are worn correctly.

The common point of failure of the current system is human one.

So people should just wear them. ..simples. ...

Sounds good to me. Again.

[Leapy]

Originally Posted by NSS

Oh well, if nothing else I've at least given you all something to moan about. Funny thing is I thought the idea of a forum was to facilitate discussion. Over and out.

And discussion there has been. The forum also allows discussion by some who might not share your opinion.

[Rokraider]

Originally Posted by Observer

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.

This idea along with the spring loaded foot throttle and deadmans handle are IMHO a complete waste of time. The last thing I want to be doing when manouvering to fish someone out of the water on Chi Bar when it kicks off, is to be resetting a button, together with the possibililty that it cuts out the motor at a crucial moment, endangering everyone.
A proximity sensor would, in my view be a step in the right direction, if it could be done without needing batteries.
The kill cord works well. If you choose not to use it then the Darwin principle will catch up with you at some point and possibly innocent bystanders. I do not believe it can be made idiot proof.

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by Leapy

And discussion there has been. The forum also allows discussion by some who might not share your opinion.

I think there's a fairly standard progression that's happened here:-

• Put up an idea for public discussion
• Discussion ensues
• Assume that 'discussion' means everyone will agree and tell you what a top bloke you are
• If the majority disagree with your idea, refuse to acknowledge you might be wrong
  (Note, from this point onwards, the following is almost inevitable)
• Come up with more and more tenuous justification until the hole is so big it's impossible to get out of
• Refer to 'thought police' or
• Complain that your idea wasn't discussed properly because people disagreed with you
• Say something that either sounds petulant or final, then leave discussion
  

Nobody is immune from having unworkable ideas or from voicing them and they shouldn't be censored.Neither should the replies.
We've all done it at some point and been told we're being silly/unrealistic/shot down (search back for my rather dumb idea of turning an Avon Redcrest into a sailing dinghy...)

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

I think there's a fairly standard progression that's happened here:-

• Put up an idea for public discussion
• Discussion ensues
• Assume that 'discussion' means everyone will agree and tell you what a top bloke you are
• If the majority disagree with your idea, refuse to acknowledge you might be wrong
  (Note, from this point onwards, the following is almost inevitable)
• Come up with more and more tenuous justification until the hole is so big it's impossible to get out of
• Refer to 'thought police' or
• Complain that your idea wasn't discussed properly because people disagreed with you
• Say something that either sounds petulant or final, then leave discussion
  

Nobody is immune from having unworkable ideas or from voicing them and they shouldn't be censored.Neither should the replies.
We've all done it at some point and been told we're being silly/unrealistic/shot down (search back for my rather dumb idea of turning an Avon Redcrest into a sailing dinghy...)

Actually, I thought you and I had a sensible exchaange on it. You pointed out flaws, I suggested some potential remedies thereto. You (rightly) indicated that it was becoming more and more complex. As I said at the outset, I was happy to be shot down if the idea was crap. What I object to is when someone suggests that an idea is irrelevant simply because the person putting it forward has 'limited' exposure to ribbing.

There's an old saying - Familiarity breeds contempt.

[Rokraider]

Seems to me that most people are sheep and will invariably react to peer pressure or the common consensus. They do not like to go against the trend for fear of being ridiculed or bollocked. If there was a media campaign and signage reminding you to wear your killcord, so it becomes the norm, most people will obey. Maybe a push in that direction might help?

[willk]

Originally Posted by NSS

What I object to is when someone suggests that an idea is irrelevant simply because the person putting it forward has 'limited' exposure to ribbing.

I've pretty much been ignoring this thread until now. I spoke my mind because it had degenerated into fantasy talk. Wheel grips, push buttons, alarms, dead man brakes, the whole nine yards - right up there with putting parachutes on planes in case the engines die.

I think these ideas are pants. I think they're pants because they'd be AWFUL to work with on the water. I'd HATE to have to endure them on my boat. They are conceived to prevent numpties from hurting themselves. This could also be achieved by keeping the numpties on the beach. I think that suggesting these "solutions" indicates a lack of experience rather than a lack of intelligence.

Please don't take my comments as a personal attack on you - they were directed at a wide panel of posters.

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by NSS

Actually, I thought you and I had a sensible exchaange on it. You pointed out flaws, I suggested some potential remedies thereto. You (rightly) indicated that it was becoming more and more complex. As I said at the outset, I was happy to be shot down if the idea was crap. What I object to is when someone suggests that an idea is irrelevant simply because the person putting it forward has 'limited' exposure to ribbing.

There's an old saying - Familiarity breeds contempt.

I wasn't talking about you particularly and I was enjoying the discussion-though it did illustrate my point a bit up til you didn't properly flounce or lose your temper (that's what usually happens!)

For what it's worth, I did notice a bit of a correlation between the type of rib owned (which usually indicates the type of usage) and the opinion or ideas of the owner. The more' leisure orentated' the boat type, the more likely the owners seem to be to want something changed, or legislation.No comment on the amount of usage-I'm hardly qualified to comment as my Searider hasn't been used for 6 months because I've been spending every spare pound and minute working on the Ballistic.

[maxg]

[QUOTE=willk;539111]- right up there with putting parachutes on planes in case the engines die.


Ummm they do they are called "Ballistic Recovery Systems"

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by maxg

Ummm they do they are called "Ballistic Recovery Systems"

Damn, and I thought that was a winch, trailer and an auxiliary engine...

[Crusher]

Originally Posted by Observer

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?

- no, nowhere in my comment did I say the technical solution can't be improved

- no, no where in my comment did I say no improvement is needed.


Suggest you actually read what I did write again.
That's what happens when people (albeit often well meaning) go off with half baked ideas that quite simply won't work in the real world.

[willk]

Originally Posted by maxg

Ummm they do they are called "Ballistic Recovery Systems"

Yeah, that was kinda my point - they've hardly been widely adopted!

[Crusher]

Originally Posted by NSS

................ Over and out.

Just as part of our Ribnet ethos of sharing and coaching proper Radio procedure it's either

Over, (you then await a reply) OR
Out ,(no further reply expected)

NOT BOTH

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Crusher

Just as part of our Ribnet ethos of sharing and coaching proper Radio procedure it's either

Over, (you then await a reply) OR
Out ,(no further reply expected)

NOT BOTH

Darn, there I go showing my ineptitude again

[NSS]

Originally Posted by willk

I've pretty much been ignoring this thread until now. I spoke my mind because it had degenerated into fantasy talk. Wheel grips, push buttons, alarms, dead man brakes, the whole nine yards - right up there with putting parachutes on planes in case the engines die.

I think these ideas are pants. I think they're pants because they'd be AWFUL to work with on the water. I'd HATE to have to endure them on my boat. They are conceived to prevent numpties from hurting themselves. This could also be achieved by keeping the numpties on the beach. I think that suggesting these "solutions" indicates a lack of experience rather than a lack of intelligence.

Please don't take my comments as a personal attack on you - they were directed at a wide panel of posters.

Far more effective then if you'd spelled out your objections in practical terms, rather than suggesting the ideas are of no worth because originators are not serious/experienced ribbers.

[NSS]

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

I wasn't talking about you particularly and I was enjoying the discussion-though it did illustrate my point a bit up til you didn't properly flounce or lose your temper (that's what usually happens!)

For what it's worth, I did notice a bit of a correlation between the type of rib owned (which usually indicates the type of usage) and the opinion or ideas of the owner. The more' leisure orentated' the boat type, the more likely the owners seem to be to want something changed, or legislation.No comment on the amount of usage-I'm hardly qualified to comment as my Searider hasn't been used for 6 months because I've been spending every spare pound and minute working on the Ballistic.

Then at the risk of further ridicule, may I respectfully make another suggestion - Why not create a section for 'Leisure' users?

[Nos4r2]

Originally Posted by NSS

Then at the risk of further ridicule, may I respectfully make another suggestion - Why not create a section for 'Leisure' users?

You could ask JK. Personally I can't really see any benefit from it. Almost everything discussed outside the commercial section is relevant to leisure users.

[willk]

Originally Posted by NSS

Far more effective then if you'd spelled out your objections in practical terms...

Point taken, in future I'll spell it out for you