Fatal accident at Alrewas, not new, but.......... Options

[Amicus]

This is not new but I dont think I've seen this on forum.
Certainly worth a read


http://www.awcc.org.uk/images/fatal.pdf

Apologies if this has been raised before.

p.s. the link is to a PDF file

This post has been edited by Amicus: Sep 16 2006, 03:41 PM

[DHutch]

Ouch!

My condolences to all involved.

[nigel carton]

Yeah I read this a while back on NB world, not nice, thankfully as the report says, this is a rare occurance.

[alan_fincher]

Truly awful.....

We were well aware of not just this, but another recent canal death too, when we set of on our main holidays, although this is the first time I've seen this report on it.

Not pleasant reading, but despite the sensible recommendations, it's not at all obvious that anything could have been done to save this poor individual, once he had tipped in with the engine (presumably) running quite hard.

It's a strong warning to us all, NEVER to be complacent.

Fortunately, as Nigel says, it's seldom quite this catastrophic - but makes you think....

[bottle]

. Although guard rails are not required on narrow boats, where they are fitted, they should be of an appropriate height to prevent people from falling overboard near the propeller.

This is why I will not have a cruiser stern.

In this case, I summise, that had the rail not been there

a. he would not have fallen.

or

b. he would have been able to 'jump' and get away from the prop.
.

[arlow11]

you would think they would make a deadmans switch for the tiller,if you fell engine would cut out
not nice to have to cut loved ones off the prop mkaes you think

[DHutch]

you would think they would make a deadmans switch for the tiller

Yeah, that deffornalty would be possable, the use of a killcord is standard practice with powerboats.

[DaveR]

I see that as part of their report the MAIB say that the man was not wearing a life jacket. I would question, in this case, if it would have made any difference.

With our lifeboats onboard ships or rigs etc. to avoid this (and for other reasons) the propeller is encased in a Kort nozzle.

Kort Nozzle

Has anyone thought about fitting one of these to a narrow boat ? They increase speed for slower vessels but more important could save people from injury should they be in the water.

[Breals]

I suppose when you are reversing at high revs, the prop is at its most dangerous. If you fall in behind it, it will suck you in. I don't see any logic in saying that a guard rail makes matters worse as there are probably times when it will prevent you falling over the side. But if it's too low, as in this case, it may simply turn you upside down as you fall in which would be more likely to cause a fatality.

[John Orentas]

I see that as part of their report the MAIB say that the man was not wearing a life jacket. I would question, in this case, if it would have made any difference.

With our lifeboats onboard ships or rigs etc. to avoid this (and for other reasons) the propeller is encased in a Kort nozzle.

Kort Nozzle

Has anyone thought about fitting one of these to a narrow boat ? They increase speed for slower vessels but more important could save people from injury should they be in the water.

Comes up very regularly Dave, they have been tried on narrowboats but the problem with these and other contraptions is that when fouled up they are impossible to clear from a weed-hatch.

This post has been edited by John Orentas: Sep 18 2006, 11:19 AM

[blackrose]

This is why I will not have a cruiser stern.

In this case, I summise, that had the rail not been there

a. he would not have fallen.

or

b. he would have been able to 'jump' and get away from the prop.
.

It's the height of the rail that's in question here, not the type of stern. It's just as easy to fall from a trad stern if there's nothing to hold onto or what's there is too low.

My cruiser stern has a 4ft high guard rail all the way around. If you look at the picture in the original message, I don't quite understand how the guy fell over that rail unless he was standing on the bench to get a better view ahead. That's something I sometimes do, although my bench is a foot and a half lower than the rail. Anyway, I will take a bit more care after hearing this.

This post has been edited by blackrose: Sep 18 2006, 11:44 AM

[AllanW]

The report states that the boat made contact with the bank at the time the man was seen to tip overboard...

Obviously I don't know for certain, but It's quite possible that the rudder was knocked causing the tiller to kick across.

This is where good practice comes in by ensuring that the steerer is *always* positioned in front of the tiller

And that's why I sudder when I see folks sitting on cruiser stern rails while steering in reverse - If that tiller kicks with 17 ton of boat behind it, you are not going to stop it from throwing you over the rail or cracking ribs!

It's sad to think that this man died a horrible death which was so easily preventable

I'm sure I speak for many here when I say our condolences and thoughts are with his loved ones

[bottle]

It's the height of the rail that's in question here, not the type of stern. It's just as easy to fall from a trad stern if there's nothing to hold onto or what's there is too low.

I agree but your rail is unusally high in my experience.

Whenever I have hired, it is usually a 'cruiser stern' (not from choice) and I have always thought the rail to low.

As Breals says it will probably cause you to go in head first as opposed to horizontal or feet first.

I always ensure that I do not get between the tiller and the rail, forwards or backwards.

This post has been edited by bottle: Sep 18 2006, 02:30 PM

[howardang]

I see that as part of their report the MAIB say that the man was not wearing a life jacket. I would question, in this case, if it would have made any difference.

With our lifeboats onboard ships or rigs etc. to avoid this (and for other reasons) the propeller is encased in a Kort nozzle.

Kort Nozzle

Has anyone thought about fitting one of these to a narrow boat ? They increase speed for slower vessels but more important could save people from injury should they be in the water.

Dave, unfortunately fitting a Kort nozzle wouldn't stop anyone getting sucked into the prop. One of the many reasons why they are not fitted to narrowboats in such shallow water conditions as canals is that they are more likely to attract debris and if large enough - such as bits of timber or other solid objects - they can, and do, jam up solid. The same thing could happen to a person who has fallen into the wter.

Howard Anguish

[tony collins]

Dave, unfortunately fitting a Kort nozzle wouldn't stop anyone getting sucked into the prop. One of the many reasons why they are not fitted to narrowboats in such shallow water conditions as canals is that they are more likely to attract debris and if large enough - such as bits of timber or other solid objects - they can, and do, jam up solid. The same thing could happen to a person who has fallen into the wter.

Howard Anguish

I seem to remember, donkey's years ago. There was a report of a device similar to this being fitted to a narrow boat. The report was in WW (before it became an A4 publication, which will indicate how long ago it was!) It was quite complicated as it hinged with the rudder. Apparently steering was great in reverse!. I never saw another one reported at all. I guess for the reasons given above, it was impracticable.

Tony

[howardang]

I seem to remember, donkey's years ago. There was a report of a device similar to this being fitted to a narrow boat. The report was in WW (before it became an A4 publication, which will indicate how long ago it was!) It was quite complicated as it hinged with the rudder. Apparently steering was great in reverse!. I never saw another one reported at all. I guess for the reasons given above, it was impracticable.

Tony

Hi Tony,
I think I remember the article you mention.

There are two ways to fit a Kort Nozzle. The sinplest is to have a fixed nozzle around a conventional propeller. This is particularly beneficial for increasing thrust and therefore is the type that is fitted, for example, in tugs to give a greater bollard pull. It has the downside of reducing transverse thrust (prop walk) and needs a conventional rudder to be fitted directly behind the nozzle. The second is a steerable kort nozzle, which is a nozzle and propeller unit conbined which eliminates the need for an searate rudder but means that the transmission from the engine to the propeller is more complicated. This type is very good for steering and is sometimes fitted to ships lifeboats which is what I think Dave was referring to in his posting.


Howard Anguish

[DHutch]

But you still get sucked into the prop, espcailly if it is a rudder-less nossle.

[howardang]

But you still get sucked into the prop, espcailly if it is a rudder-less nossle.

I think you'll find that that is exactly what I said in my first reply.

Howard Anguish

[blackrose]

I agree but your rail is unusally high in my experience.

Whenever I have hired, it is usually a 'cruiser stern' (not from choice) and I have always thought the rail to low.

Yes you're right it's more like 3ft high not 4ft.



http://uk.msnusers.com/7kkj4ha9b91rajtslpc...es/Scan0005.jpg

I'm going out on deck to see if the tiller handle could knock me over the rail. This had never occured to me before reading this thread.

I sometimes stand on that bench to guide the boat slowly through bridge holes (obviously never in astern) - it's much easier than trying to look down one side, but from now on I'll be much more aware of the danger involved.

I've never hired a boat but I've often wondered what sort of safety training hirers get for what can be an inherently dangerous pastime for the unwary.

PS) Why don't my posted images ever appear?

This post has been edited by blackrose: Sep 19 2006, 11:40 AM

[DHutch]

You requre a password to get to them, which we dont know.

Rehost them with imageshack http://imageshack.us/