Boat Safety

[Vaughan]

Another possibility would be simply to have dual station boats fitted with the "side mount" control and not the "top mount".

On the side mount, you have to physically pull out a separate button to disengage the gears, so the risk of doing it by mistake, or by clumsy operation of the lever, is very much less.

[Vaughan]

5 minutes ago, FlyingFortress said:

So it can be done then. 

Anything can be done, technically, we all know that.

In this case it may not have been thought necessary before, so no-one has felt the need to think it through.

 

[FlyingFortress]

That is why outside professionals are brought in to make recommendations. 

To look at things from a different perspective. Never a bad thing for any industry. 

[grendel]

1 hour ago, FlyingFortress said:

That is why outside professionals are brought in to make recommendations. 

To look at things from a different perspective. Never a bad thing for any industry. 

the big issue with outside professionals, is that by their nature, if they come from outside the broads area they lack the knowledge to be classified as professionally qualified for the area, that said, a set of outside eyes looking at the issues might be an advantage, where someone who has worked the area for decades, might miss what they see as normal and mundane, the solution then is a team comprising a selection of members with the broads knowledge, combined with a few from similar professions outside of the broads, who might spot the things seen as normal, and question them, but local knowledge needs its share of representation, as an outsider might make a suggestion that seems perfectly reasonable at first glance, but that local knowledge might say has been tried before and found unworkable, or may have other safety implications on the broads.

the facts are that the broads are totally different in their scope and needs to other inland waterways (which are not tidal) and totally different from offshore (where they dont have low bridges as often.) so where do you find that outside professional, that both knows all of the issues relating to the broads, and can provide that fresh pair of eyes.

[OldBerkshireBoy]

Staying on the subject of upper and lower controls and interlocks then a mechanical/ electrical safety specialist would be a good start. 

They wouldnt need to know anything about water, tides or wind, finding such a person is a different matter.

Explain the problem to a F1 racing engineer and you might get a fly by wire system.  

[oldgregg]

Well this is it. There are electronic systems for use with mechanically-controlled engines, but they rely on electro-mechanical actuators which could fail and leave you with no throttle or gearchange at all.

And the fully-electonic systems would require modern engines with electronic injection, which you don't usually find on Broads boats as they're less hardy than the tractor lumps that Nanni and Beta provide.

[Vaughan]

The modern Morse changeover junction box already has an electric circuit which prevents the engine being started unless the two gear levers are in neutral.  This could easily be used for a servo mounted at the injector pump operated by a twist control on the dash, like a volume **** on a radio.  If you are not in neutral, there is no power to the circuit. If the circuit fails, then it fails safe.  The interaction between the servo and the accelerator cable at the injector pump can be done by using a slider against a return spring.  Exactly the same thing as on the old Ford 4D engines.  Nothing new!

[Vaughan]

for ****  read K N O B.

[FlyingFortress]

Grendel.

I think Vaughan has just answered your question above.

These outside professionals are not engineers they have the same qualifications as I do. I have actually interviewed for this job.

But

Give the problem to an engineer and hey presto you get an answer. From someone with extensive experience and knowledge of The Broads to boot.

[Cheesey69]

This is the essence of learning by mistakes and accidents. 
you inch forward by others misfortunes. 

[annv]

Hi Vaughan it can be done, i have this on my boat the Morse only controls the revs at both helms it then has a fly by wire control for proportional forward and reverse the change over switch is on the interior front helm dash, forward to operate the lower helm at front of boat and rear for upper rear helm with a neutral position in centar, i might add i do have Hydraulic drive that makes this easier to fit. John

[Vaughan]

2 hours ago, oldgregg said:

Well this is it. There are electronic systems for use with mechanically-controlled engines, but they rely on electro-mechanical actuators which could fail and leave you with no throttle or gearchange at all.

I have used this sort of control with Locaboat (again!) and you are quite right.  When you come to a helm station you have to "command" control by holding a button down until it beeps.  When you are using the lever, there is a delay of almost two seconds between selecting the gear and engaging it.  You also have to hold the revs at tickover while this is happening, or when you actually engage, it takes off like a bull at a gate!  The electronic interface between the wires to the controls and the cables to the engine, is a big black box which can only be set up right or adjusted by a trained technician.  And yes, they do fail fairly often.

In the circumstances we are talking of on the Broads, they would only make matters worse.

[WherryNice]

Would putting a stronger spring in the lever to make putting it into the neutral 'rev up' position harder do the job?

[Vaughan]

3 minutes ago, WherryNice said:

Would putting a stronger spring in the lever to make putting it into the neutral 'rev up' position harder do the job?

Possibly.  It is best done with both hands, as it is.  Trouble is, a hirer in a panic to go full astern quick, has a very strong arm!

[Vaughan]

22 hours ago, Vaughan said:

In this case it may not have been thought necessary before, so no-one has felt the need to think it through.

To be honest, I am not sure it is necessary even now.  You can't totally design out accidents. 

I say this on the anniversary of the Potters Bar rail crash.  When you consider the long and complex history of safety in operating railways, there are plenty who might say that couldn't have happened.

I am conscious that we are talking about hire boats, which have to be sturdy, simple, reliable and if possible, unbreakable.  Every time you add another gadget or widget, especially electric, you are just increasing the chance of something breaking down.

Morse/Teleflex controls have been with us for about 60 years of solid reliability.  Perhaps we should not be trying to "invent a better mousetrap".

[Smoggy]

15 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Every time you add another gadget or widget, especially electric, you are just increasing the chance of something breaking down.

And chances are it will happen somewhere near breydon or GYYS at the worst state of tide.

[grendel]

23 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Morse/Teleflex controls have been with us for about 60 years of solid reliability.  Perhaps we should not be trying to "invent a better mousetrap".

the trap that can be fallen into though is thinking that old and reliable cannot be bettered,  or that it has to be complex to work well, a new design could come about, that is both robust and simpler with fewer parts to break and to a better design, a better mousetrap can always be designed, but designing one that is both foolproof and reliable takes some doing. and unless you try you cannot find out.

technology can both help and hinder this process, most modern electrical switchgear has electrically operated interlocks to stop you for example putting a live cable to earth, this is a mechanical interlock system, that is operated electronically via remote fly by wire- but, if there is an issue the electrical interface can be unbolted and the switchgear operated manually.

mechanical interlocks are by far the best bet, but they can be operated electronically, as long as the manual option is retained. in case of emergency, and I think a similar thought process could be used in interlocking dual helms, with electronic systems to operate and a manual backup in case of electrical system failure.

[rightsaidfred]

Firstly let me say that while one fatality is one to many and the family have my deapest sympathy serious accidents and deaths occur every year and no amount of legislation will change that.

Personally I have always had severe reservations about that design of boat but there are now  to many being operated by most of the big yards for any retrospective action taken for their removal or major modifications being a realistic option, while some alterations may seem simple I can visualise the removal of one hazard creating a different one.

As all the modifications mentioned are only recommendations not a legal requirement it is hard to see where much will change unless the insurance companies get involved and refuse to cover these boats in their existing condition.

Not having any technical expertise I don't know what can be done, education of all hirers seems to be the main option but we all know how ineffectual that can be with some.

Fred 

[Mouldy]

19 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

To be honest, I am not sure it is necessary even now.  You can't totally design out accidents. 

I say this on the anniversary of the Potters Bar rail crash.  When you consider the long and complex history of safety in operating railways, there are plenty who might say that couldn't have happened.

Exactly what I’ve been saying.  Are we not creating a problem when there isn’t one?  Considering the number of first timers, forced to try a boating holiday for the first time by foreign travel restrictions imposed as the result of the pandemic, has there been an excessive amount of accidents in the big scheme of things?  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to say that the deaths were not tragic or regrettable, but all I can see coming out of this, if we’re not careful, is a whole bunch of new rules and regulations, written by folk who have little or no relevant knowledge of the area, forcing major and unworkable changes to the hireboat industry.

Maybe the design of new craft needs to be revisited.  I recall a couple of years ago a lengthy discussion on here about a new design of craft introduced by WRC, which featured patio doors at the stern, leading to a very small bathing platform, which was generally agreed to be unsafe.  Indeed, the design of many of the new breed of flybridge/dual helm cruisers seems to feature steep steps leading down to a narrow platform at the stern with no pushpit/safety rails to prevent an accidental dunking.

As far as I’m concerned, no amount of theoretical training will prepare a skipper for every eventuality.  The only way to gain knowledge is through practical experience and even that couldn’t be achieved in a one or two day course.  You may get an idea of how to react in a given situation, but how you react in a real life situation may be totally different when panic sets in.

The area that we love would be irrevocably changed by ill thought out legislation, imposed by individuals with little or no knowledge of the area or its economy.  Much has been said about compulsory training and testing to gain a licence before hiring a motor boat.  Adding cost to an already expensive holiday isn’t going to attract more visitors and it’s those visitors that make the area flourish.

I’ve said before, let’s be careful what we wish for.  Let’s hope that the authorities don’t use a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

[Maxwellian]

In a car an experienced driver will act almost subconsciously in a potential accident situation. An inexperienced one has to think through every step, often panics and makes bad choices or actions. This is the same in all things even boating. A hand over trial does not make an expert who will make the correct choices and not panic. Key training should always include preventive measures, the main issue is that these are often ignored. 

[Vaughan]

38 minutes ago, grendel said:

technology can both help and hinder this process, most modern electrical switchgear has electrically operated interlocks to stop you for example putting a live cable to earth, this is a mechanical interlock system, that is operated electronically via remote fly by wire- but, if there is an issue the electrical interface can be unbolted and the switchgear operated manually.

We have already agreed that technically, everything is possible. That's how we got the atom bomb, God help us.

What you describe is fine but it is not being used by holidaymakers.  It is not what we on the boatyards call "hirer proof".

[Vaughan]

36 minutes ago, Mouldy said:

The area that we love would be irrevocably changed by ill thought out legislation, imposed by individuals with little or no knowledge of the area or its economy.

Thank you for that.  I mentioned earlier that the first actual regulations for all boats on the Broads were written by the technical committee of Blakes in the late 70s and then accepted by the River Commissioners.  They were written by the boatyards in such a way that safety (which we knew was lacking) could be ensured without spending money on un-necessary changes whose cost would put us all out of business.

These regulations were soon accepted by all waterways of the then NRA and are now what we call the BSS.  It is very little altered from the original rules that we wrote and is indeed, a very good "mousetrap"!

Not forgetting that the BSS is a set of installation standards.  For design and construction standards, you need to look to ERCD, which all the same, is a sea standard.  There are still no design standards specific to inland waterways, here or in Europe.

Perhaps there should be, and should have been long ago?

[grendel]

27 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

We have already agreed that technically, everything is possible. That's how we got the atom bomb, God help us.

What you describe is fine but it is not being used by holidaymakers.  It is not what we on the boatyards call "hirer proof".

I grant you that, but we should at least be open to any possible improvements to the current systems, without unnecessarily dismissing them as unworkable (though I grant that many options offered could be over complex or unworkable.

say for example someone came up with a system to replace mechanical cable linkages with hydraulic linkages, with hydraulics interlocking might possibly be easier, but would it be more hirer friendly, or less prone to breakdown, I use this as an example because nowadays how many cars use cable systems for their main breaking power, its not a new technology, and could possibly be seen as more reliable than cable systems. I know some boats have hydraulic steering.

so what I am trying to say is that we can be open to new ideas, without becoming stuck with tried and tested, when we know that under certain circumstances even tried and tested can fail at the hands of hirers (and private boaters too if it comes to that)

[FlyingFortress]

A key recommendation has been made to improve the change over protocols on dual steer Hire boats and has not been accepted by The AIWA.

Our member who has extensive experience of running hire fleets has provided a workable solution.

[WherryNice]

18 hours ago, Vaughan said:

Possibly.  It is best done with both hands, as it is.  Trouble is, a hirer in a panic to go full astern quick, has a very strong arm!

I take your point about the 'strong arm' but my thinking was that it would prevent the incorrect helm being used to start with.