Girl, 15, dies in Southampton boat crash

[madabouttheboat]

What caused the catastrophic damage to her abdomen then, thrown onto the seats in front? These boats don't (can't I suppose), have safety belts?

I don't know any details, but having been on plenty of fast RIBs in my time I suspect it was the girl's grab handle. These often form part of the backrest of the seat in front and are made of stainless steel. They often form a loop that sticks out maybe 6 inches from the back rest and is large enough to grab with two hands. Getting thrown into one of these at 40 knots would almost certainly cause catastrophic chest/abdomen injuries. In fact if that's that case with this boat, it was lucky that there were not more deaths.

I wonder if the final report will recommend 3 point restraints on these kinds of boats? I fully expect so.

Edit:

I can't see the configuration of their boats clearly from any online images, but this still taken from a video onboard one of their boats may show what I am talking about. It actually looks lower than I expected, which may explain abdominal injuries, rather than chest injuries.

 

[penberth3]

There surely must be some reality here, if you go on a ‘thrill’ ride you must appreciate you have put yourself in harms way. While the operator has to mitigate as much danger as possible, the passengers are willing participants in a dangerous event. It’s akin to going to a cricket match and getting hit in the head by the ball. It’s an inherent risk. While no one deserves to die, the thrill comes from taking you to the edge.

Complete and utter bullshit, Mr Bouba.

 

[newtothis]

It’s akin to going to a cricket match and getting hit in the head by the ball. It’s an inherent risk. While no one deserves to die, the thrill comes from taking you to the edge.

I've always wondered how anyone could sit through a five-day test match. Now I know it's the buzz of waiting to be bonced by a ball it all makes sense.
The rest of you post doesn't.

 

[Greenheart]

Complete and utter bullshit, Mr Bouba.

Is it, though? I compared RIB rides with rollercoaster rides earlier because they both provide a thrill which a slow ride wouldn't...

...people enjoy the rush of speed but how separable is that thrill from the acute appreciation that it could also be dangerous? Accidents tend to be catastrophic but rare on rollercoasters, and not that common on speedboats. If it wasn't slightly scary because of the slight risk (which may be devastating if it's not your day), then people wouldn't enjoy it.

I don't enjoy rollercoasters or RIB rides, but I doubt it's possible to eradicate all potential danger without also ditching its appeal to fans.

 

[JumbleDuck]

...people enjoy the rush of speed but how separable is that thrill from the acute appreciation that it could also be dangerous?

I think that the point of rollercoasters (I've done a few) is that they are meantto feel dangerous, without actually being dangerous. By which I mean that we have evolved to respond to certain stimuli associated with danger in a way which makes us safer. So if we feel ourselves falling we reach for support and if we can see down a long way we back away. Rollercoasters have very carefully calculated acceleration, jerk and jounce[1] profiles to stimulate these responses, while glass floored bridge to the same thing rather simply.

In other words, rollercoasters don't feel dangerous; they feel like what dangerous would feel like, if you see what I mean. So we ride them and enjoy the thrill while deep down knowing that we are completely safe.

The same goes, or should go, for other thrill rides. As a customer I would expect a whizz around in a RIB to feel dangerous (air time over ferry wakes as if we were falling, close passes as if a sabre-toothed tiger was jumping past us) but I would not for one instant expect it actually to be dangerous. That would be like going to a conjuring performance assuming a slight possibility that real magic was involved.

If the advertising for those RIB trips had said "There is a significant chance that this ride will injure or kill you. What could be more thrilling than that?" I really don't think they would have received many customers. The lamentable standard of maintenance at fairgrounds puts me off rides; it does not make them more alluring.

[1] Jerk: rate of change of acceleration. Jounce (or snap): rate of change of jerk.

 

[boatiebert]

The knowledge that a ride is calculated to be safe kills all the fun of them for me. If you want that kind of fun for real, go buy a motorcycle.

Re: RIBS, it's a problem though because if you used 3 point harnesses & it flipped, you'd have a dozen civillians under a capsized boat attempting to disengage them and fight their way out. I am sorry but I think the whole thing is silliness & a waste of petrol.

It's certainly been proven that young adolescent/men's brains aren't property cooked & they lack an ability to predict danger. I think part of the problem is that people do perceive it as a funfair ride, instead of putting your life in someone else hands. Short of mechanical failure, which is unlikely, it's looking operator failure to me, a moment's distraction, as they had been aiming at the bouys to do their u-turns.

It's a little personal for me. When I was young the by-far-the-most-attractive & nicest girl in school died in a very similar accident. Some older guys taking her out in a speedboat to impress her. It flipped, she never came up again. I don't think they even found her body. Such a waste, for what? She had so much potential in life.

If you want to kill yourself with misadventure, I'm not entirely adverse to it. But you can never calculate the loss of taking someone else's life in your hands. And for the mothers ...

What would you do, & how would you feel, if you were the skipper now? Would you go back to work selling thrills and spills?

 

[Gary Fox]

I think that the point of rollercoasters (I've done a few) is that they are meantto feel dangerous, without actually being dangerous. By which I mean that we have evolved to respond to certain stimuli associated with danger in a way which makes us safer. So if we feel ourselves falling we reach for support and if we can see down a long way we back away. Rollercoasters have very carefully calculated acceleration, jerk and jounce[1] profiles to stimulate these responses, while glass floored bridge to the same thing rather simply.

In other words, rollercoasters don't feel dangerous; they feel like what dangerous would feel like, if you see what I mean. So we ride them and enjoy the thrill while deep down knowing that we are completely safe.

The same goes, or should go, for other thrill rides. As a customer I would expect a whizz around in a RIB to feel dangerous (air time over ferry wakes as if we were falling, close passes as if a sabre-toothed tiger was jumping past us) but I would not for one instant expect it actually to be dangerous. That would be like going to a conjuring performance assuming a slight possibility that real magic was involved.

If the advertising for those RIB trips had said "There is a significant chance that this ride will injure or kill you. What could be more thrilling than that?" I really don't think they would have received many customers. The lamentable standard of maintenance at fairgrounds puts me off rides; it does not make them more alluring.

[1] Jerk: rate of change of acceleration. Jounce (or snap): rate of change of jerk.

^A good description of the thrill/danger relationship, and such RIB rides are surely more risky than customers expect. We expect roller-coasters to be 99% risk free, and I suspect the RIB ride operators quietly let us imagine that the same is true of their offerings, when it isn't, and it couldn't possibly be.
This horrible crash ought to encourage introducing proper harnesses and strong seats, + maybe airbags, on RIB rides.
They could easily be arranged to auto-release if the boat was floating upside down.
( So is 'jounce' a real physics/engineering term, and what units are used? )

 

[Greenheart]

Jounce sounds like the hooded villain on stage in an old-time music hall.

 

[boatiebert]

They could easily be arranged to auto-release if the boat was floating upside down.

It's non-starter though, isn't it? A dozen unfit, non-sailors, dressed inappropriately, probably the first cold water shock of their lives, fighting their way out of harnesses, past grab rails & navigating a submerged RIB with already inflated life vests holding them under it?

To be safe, it would need to a fully enclosed, self-righting vessel with helmets & neck braces, like an offshore powerboat.

Or ejector seats. That would add to the thrill.

I still don't see the need factor except the 'need money' factor of the investors into the business. It's all a little gauche to me. Some kind of Rambo role play. I'm guess the vessels were original designed for the Marines or Special Forces. That, to me, is the training to qualify someone to play with such toys.

 

[Gary Fox]

It's non-starter though, isn't it? A dozen unfit, non-sailors, dressed inappropriately, probably the first cold water shock of their lives, fighting their way out of harnesses, past grab rails & navigating a submerged RIB with already inflated life vests holding them under it?

To be safe, it would need to a fully enclosed, self-righting vessel with helmets & neck braces, like an offshore powerboat.

Or ejector seats. That would add to the thrill.

I still don't see the need factor except the 'need money' factor of the investors into the business. It's all a little gauche to me. Some kind of Rambo role play. I'm guess the vessels were original designed for the Marines or Special Forces. That, to me, is the training to qualify someone to play with such toys.

Harnesses would quite probably saved a life and several nasty injuries in this case.
Humans need thrills, entrepreneurs provide them, sometimes tragedies prompt new risk reduction measures.

 

[Gary Fox]

Jounce sounds like the hooded villain on stage in an old-time music hall.

I was thinking maybe a gourmet cat food, but google says it's a real physics thing.

 

[Cloona]

no idea how these ridiculous "rides" get trading licences or whatever they need ..

not just dangerous but an anti - social disturbance to other leisure users of the water .

get rid of them all and limit all leisure powered craft to 6 knots in restricted waters

 

[Greenheart]

"Jumbleduck and Jounce" sounds like a comedic mismatched cartoon duo. Sorry Jumbly, but it does.

If the advertising for those RIB trips had said "There is a significant chance that this ride will injure or kill you. What could be more thrilling than that?" I really don't think they would have received many customers.

Perhaps that's just what the warning should be - or, the last ten years' worth of incidents could be listed for perspective.

I think there's a contented supposition among know-nothing passengers, that it's a thrill-ride where they're perfectly safe, otherwise the company wouldn't be allowed to offer it. Despite the fact that they've only gone there because the chap at the wheel is paid to make it exciting. How long would such companies continue to employ a driver who showed only caution and consideration?

Imagine if bus-drivers were paid not to keep soberly and steadily to a schedule and route, but to make it as exciting as possible for passengers.

 

[JumbleDuck]

( So is 'jounce' a real physics/engineering term, and what units are used? )

Metres per second per second per second per second. Or for Brexiteers, fathoms per fortnight per fortnight per fortnight per fortnight.

 

[savageseadog]

The worst visibilty zone is directly ahead in most boats other than those big enough to have a bridge. Just a thought.

 

[madabouttheboat]

no idea how these ridiculous "rides" get trading licences or whatever they need ..

not just dangerous but an anti - social disturbance to other leisure users of the water .

get rid of them all and limit all leisure powered craft to 6 knots in restricted waters

You don'y give up, do you. I suspect you have a sailing boat that does a maximum of, errr maybe 6 knots.

 

[JumbleDuck]

"Jumbleduck and Jounce" sounds like a comedic mismatched cartoon duo. Sorry Jumbly, but it does.

Can we have an arch-nemesis called "The Jerk"?

I think there's a contented supposition among know-nothing passengers, that it's a thrill-ride where they're perfectly safe, otherwise the company wouldn't be allowed to offer it. Despite the fact that they've only gone there because the chap at the wheel is paid to make it exciting. How long would such companies continue to employ a driver who showed only caution and consideration?

Aerobatic pilots (that dipstick at Shoreham aside) are experts at making things exciting while also showing extreme caution and consideration. The two approaches aren't exclusive. That was supposed to be the point of my long, rambling post: it's possible to trigger the evolved fear sensors without actually endangering people.

 

[penfold]

The worst visibilty zone is directly ahead in most boats other than those big enough to have a bridge. Just a thought.

It looks like the helm position has the helm standing up, possibly with a perch to lean on; there should be a clear view ahead although it is contingent on the height of the helm, cleanliness of the perspex screen and the relative position of the vertical stainless steel bar on the front of the helm console and the helm's eyes.

 

[Greenheart]

Aerobatic pilots (that dipstick at Shoreham aside) are experts at making things exciting while also showing extreme caution and consideration.

So, we return to the hollow principle that it's all as safe as we can ask it to be, as long as pilots/drivers/helmsmen are always 100% competent and duly attentive.

As long as the fast-moving object isn't on rails (and sometimes even when it is), it doesn't need much to go wrong, for it all to go bad.

I wonder what proportion of potentially calamitous circumstances actually end badly? It's pretty amazing when you see rotten driving, that accidents aren't more common than they are. I reckon our vehicles (floating, flying and on the road) are amazing. It's the witless, reckless or preoccupied creature in control that cocks it all up.

Let the passenger beware.

 

[newtothis]

Or for Brexiteers, fathoms per fortnight per fortnight per fortnight per fortnight.

That seems to be the rate at which we are heading back to the 1950s.