The most bizarre thing you've ever seen someone do on a boat.

[lustyd]

If your kill cord doesn't work you're doing it wrong.

Said by a person who has no understanding whatsoever of how a kill cord works. They are not fail safe in any way whatsoever, and relatively often will fail leaving the engine running. Ignoring the electrical workings of the things, it's entirely imaginable that a bit of friction will stop the thing from retracting and that's the simplest example of them failing to work. Friction could quite easily come from some salt water drying in the mechanism.

Kill cords and life jackets are both very good safety devices in the right circumstances, don't get me wrong. I use them both all the time. What worries me most is the people (as shown on this forum) who believe they are some kind of magic shield against harm. They are not. Learn how they work and plan around this information! Test things and weigh consequences. Sometimes you're safer without a kill cord or a life jacket, most of the time you're not. I'm happier knowing which is which than blindly loading myself up with safety gear talismans.

 

[lustyd]

A life jacket is designed to do one thing and only one thing:

Keep the airway of an unconscious casualty above the water.

​

I am one of those sad individuals who wears one all the time on the water.

An automatic LJ, yes. A manual one would let that person drown as if they were not wearing one. Racing crew on the foredeck (not to mention Lusty's in the Irish sea...) would be submerged often enough that they choose manual rather than auto. With experience comes wisdom, and many choices are not obvious to the inexperienced.

 

[lustyd]

I reckon the majority here are mainly concerned with chilly UK waters. But how about if you couldn't swim like a fish? Not everyone can. Let alone people who go overboard after being clobbered by the boom.

So you're saying no boom no LJ required? I see plenty of mobo people wearing them in poor conditions but almost none in flat calm waters...

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Sometimes you're safer without a kill cord or a life jacket, most of the time you're not. I'm happier knowing which is which than blindly loading myself up with safety gear talismans.

You gave an example earlier.....the problem of staying on the surface and not being able to get out of the way of a circling dinghy. (Which I don't fully agree with. You can swim on your back, though admittedly not easily). However, is that any worse then falling in the water and simply having no idea where the rogue boat is? You fall in, become disorientated, and at some stage you have to come to the surface. At that point you may find that the rogue boat whacks you on the back of the head.

 

[Greenheart]

So you're saying no boom no LJ required?

Jeez, Lusty. You seem to be wilfully drawing specific conclusions from what hasn't been said. I certainly didn't say that, and I doubt anyone else thought I had.

I mentioned the boom because it's one of many hazards on board, which might disable a person or trip them over the side, at which point they'd typically benefit from wearing a lifejacket. If, having consciously chosen not to wear a lifejacket, a person falls into cold deep water without prospect of immediate rescue, I reckon he'll spend some sober time alone later, accepting his nonchalance was mistaken. Possibly the reason we don't often hear such admissions, is that plenty of overboarders don't survive to learn the lesson.

You seem to like to play devil's advocate on every forum appearance, but I reckon you overdo it - hard to tell if your outlook is genuine when it's so predictably defiant.

That said, I generally enjoy the punctuating contra-commonsense input, so don't stop doing it. :encouragement:

I just heard on QI, that in the Baltic in winter, it's an offence to wear a seatbelt when driving on ice roads, lest you go through the ice and can't get out. But may we assume that the Baltic was not part of the seatbelt safety question we addressed earlier?

 

[lustyd]

JYou seem to like to play devil's advocate on every forum appearance,

This forum desperately needs a few devils advocates to counter act the various nonsense that becomes compulsory in every situation simply because it's a good idea in some situations, this thread being a great example. Too many people post things on here as absolute fact without fully thinking through - someone above thinking kill cords are fail safe is a great example of this.

You're right, I do sometimes think of things purely to counter an argument, but quite often I also genuinely disagree as well. In this case, I thought the people in the video in Bequia in very good conditions were absolutely fine without lifejackets but regardless my first reply was to Causeway who said they couldn't see a reason not to wear LJs at all times. I provided a short list of good reasons you might not want one on.

I rather suspect that I'm one of the few on this thread who not only wears a life jacket most of the time (with PLB attached for offshore sails) but also carried a spare life jacket and re-arming kits in case I have to use it. Too many boats I see have no way to re-arm their LJ after use. On the other hand, I rarely wear my LJ in flat calm when motoring in summer in the Solent, and almost never when on a motor boat.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Whether or not it was intended to be ironic, it's the assumption that it is some way wrong to not be wearing a lifejacket when the decision is a personal one.
That seems to make the assumption that everyone who does not wear one is either wrong, unaware or plain stupid.

I'm wholly of the "personal choice" party. However, since lifejackets nowadays are cheap, light and unobtrusive, I think there have to be pretty good reasons to make the personal choice not to wear one sensible.

 

[JumbleDuck]

You give the impression that you don't have much boating experience so are unaware of what happens to people when they go overboard. It's always helpful if people like you at least wear a non inflating lifejacket. The straps will make it easier for the RNLI to fish your corpse out of the water.

My standard briefing goes something like this: "Here is your harness. If you clip on it will keep you in the boat. It has a lifejacket built in. The lifejacket will make it easier to recover your body if you don't clip on."

 

[JumbleDuck]

Kill cords and life jackets are both very good safety devices in the right circumstances, don't get me wrong. I use them both all the time. What worries me most is the people (as shown on this forum) who believe they are some kind of magic shield against harm.

I've not seen any of those. I've seen plenty of people who seem to believe that racing makes them immortal.

 

[lustyd]

I'm wholly of the "personal choice" party. However, since lifejackets nowadays are cheap, light and unobtrusive, I think there have to be pretty good reasons to make the personal choice not to wear one sensible.

Sounds like you think personal choice is OK as long as people choose your approved choice. Where do you draw the line, I quite often swim off my boat so should I put a life jacket on as soon as I get back on board in case I fall back in to the water I was just safely swimming in? If I motor through a busy anchorage on a sunny day in flat calm conditions with no sail up what exactly is it that will suddenly make me fall into this dangerous liquid surrounding my boat?

 

[JumbleDuck]

Sounds like you think personal choice is OK as long as people choose your approved choice.

Nope. I just think that "wearing a lifejacket" should be the default. I don't always wear one myself.

 

[lustyd]

Nope. I just think that "wearing a lifejacket" should be the default. I don't always wear one myself.

Which is essentially what I've been saying

 

[Greenheart]

I reckon Jumbleduck hit the nail on the head, it's the smart default choice - the sensible, invariable, unthinking habit if you aren't 100% confident it's unnecessary, or if you have other things of rivalling importance to consider - as is usually the case under way.

As I never feel like spending more time unnecessarily analysing potential risk than I would have taken donning the lifejacket, I always take the effortless precaution of wearing it. Only if you're acutely conscious that you really won't need it, should it not be worn.

So, coffee in the cockpit at anchor on a calm morning? Of course not. But most time on deck is much more active and far less predictable than that. So why take a chance?

 

[jimi]

Most bizarre thing I've seen was:

Woken up about 1am by a boat rafting onto us with a loud thump in Brixham, went up to help them secure their lines. Their (20ish yo)daughter was standing on the stern waving a cat above head screaming "I'm going to drown the fekker unless you feed me now!".

I retreated to the safety of my bunk. In the morning they were gone leaving me with 2 bent stanchions, no contact details or apology.

 

[Lakesailor]

I'm wholly of the "personal choice" party. However, since lifejackets nowadays are cheap, light and unobtrusive, I think there have to be pretty good reasons to make the personal choice not to wear one sensible.

Sounds like you think personal choice is OK as long as people choose your approved choice. Where do you draw the line, I quite often swim off my boat so should I put a life jacket on as soon as I get back on board in case I fall back in to the water I was just safely swimming in? If I motor through a busy anchorage on a sunny day in flat calm conditions with no sail up what exactly is it that will suddenly make me fall into this dangerous liquid surrounding my boat?

Nope. I just think that "wearing a lifejacket" should be the default. I don't always wear one myself.

Yes Ian, you don't seem to grasp the concept of personal choice, unless it's for yourself.

Fine if you want to wear one in certain circumastances and not in others. But that doesn't mean that I or lustyd are wrong if our appraisal of risk is different from yours.
The BBC with their over-enthusiastic wearing of LJs if within 5 metres of water have given the impression to the casual viewer that an LJ is some kind of requirement.
The constant haranguing by the RNLI makes it seem that non-wearing is a crime against humanity.

If cyclists reserve the right not to wear helmets or Hi Viz, I will reserve the right to choose when I were an LJ (or buoyancy aid). I often do, but often don't. My choice. I am not wrong. Neither are you. Just different.

 

[lustyd]

I reckon Jumbleduck hit the nail on the head, it's the smart default choice - the sensible, invariable, unthinking habit if you aren't 100% confident it's unnecessary, or if you have other things of rivalling importance to consider - as is usually the case under way.

As I never feel like spending more time unnecessarily analysing potential risk than I would have taken donning the lifejacket, I always take the effortless precaution of wearing it. Only if you're acutely conscious that you really won't need it, should it not be worn.

So, coffee in the cockpit at anchor on a calm morning? Of course not. But most time on deck is much more active and far less predictable than that. So why take a chance?

I don't sit there analysing risk before putting it on, it's just something I do in the same way as I decide whether or not to put on a rain coat. I certainly don't automatically wear a rain coat to ensure I don't forget when it rains, I put one on when there is a chance it will and my life jacket is the same - if there is any possibility I might have a problem then I wear one.

 

[jimi]

I don't sit there analysing risk before putting it on, it's just something I do in the same way as I decide whether or not to put on a rain coat. I certainly don't automatically wear a rain coat to ensure I don't forget when it rains, I put one on when there is a chance it will and my life jacket is the same - if there is any possibility I might have a problem then I wear one.

and in both cases if you get it wrong you get wet, only in one case possibly a bit more terminally than the other.

I'm with Dan on this, I find it easier to make it a habit rather than a constant subliminal evaluation;. Thats all he's saying, I think.

 

[Greenheart]

I'm sure that's the point - seat-belts, life-jackets and, for less grave reasons, raincoats are all available to protect one from unforeseen necessity - but only if you wear them.

As soon as you make it a decision rather than an invariable habit, you'd better be dead certain of not needing it, or of possibly getting wet. Or dead!

 

[lustyd]

and in both cases if you get it wrong you get wet, only in one case possibly a bit more terminally than the other.

I'm with Dan on this, I find it easier to make it a habit rather than a constant subliminal evaluation;. Thats all he's saying, I think.

And I'm happy for you guys to do that. I'm also happy that I can cope with the decision on a case by case basis without undue risk.

 

[Greenheart]

I reckon we're all happy then. Good luck Lusty, may your decision always be a sound one. :encouragement:

I'll just offload the need to decide, and wear a life-jacket.