Subj : Re: tragedy in Iowa. To : rec.sport.rowing From : carl Date : Wed Apr 07 2021 10:58 pm On 07/04/2021 20:09, bnw...@gmail.com wrote: > On Wednesday, April 7, 2021 at 8:57:57 AM UTC-4, carl wrote: >> On 07/04/2021 10:29, Peter wrote: >>> On Tuesday, 6 April 2021 at 20:10:28 UTC+1, carl wrote: >>>> On 06/04/2021 18:02, don Vickers wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, April 1, 2021 at 2:44:35 PM UTC-4, carl wrote: >>>>>> On 01/04/2021 17:44, Henry Law wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 01 Apr 2021 07:05:07 -0700, Robin Harries wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This thread has just been posted on r/rowing. It's impossible to verify, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A great deal of uninformed speculation about the cause of the Iowa >>>>>>> incident, which is unfortunate, but lots of first-time experience of >>>>>>> other incidents in similar conditions which (for those of us who've been >>>>>>> even near one) have the ring of truth about them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I hope to find that the assertion that two of the four were first-time >>>>>>> novices, afloat without a safety launch in wintery conditions, is false. >>>>>>> It had better be; otherwise there's a valid charge of gross negligence. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Our club is having a drive on heel release cord length at the moment; the >>>>>>> emphasis should be there all the time, granted, but it's timely >>>>>>> nevertheless. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Henry - >>>>>> Thanks for your measured comments. I heard about this tragedy very soon >>>>>> after it had happened, and of course the reportage was awash with >>>>>> ill-informed comments. >>>>>> >>>>>> The stuff about heel restraints, which a reddit poster describes as >>>>>> "these peices of string (normally a shoelace) that keep your heels in >>>>>> the boat, and don't let the shoes lift up too far" is possibly >>>>>> misinformed (see later) but sadly typifies the despicable attitudes >>>>>> towards rower safety whereby a bootlace of indeterminate length is >>>>>> broadly considered a safety device. Would trust your life to a shoe-lace?? >>>>>> >>>>>> Most disturbing is the usual presumption of a capsize - "for how else do >>>>>> rowers end up swimming?" What a pity folk can't stop idly speculating. >>>>>> >>>>>> I deplore the knee-jerk resort to typical "blame culture" reaction, but >>>>>> I do favour a careful listing of the possibilities in order of >>>>>> probability. Let's explore just a little way, then await further & >>>>>> better information - what do we know so far? >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. It seems to have been a 4+ as 5 people were immersed & 2 died. >>>>>> 2. This was on a lake, measuring about 1000m x 1700m, set in open, flat >>>>>> country with very little natural shelter. >>>>>> 3. The wind was variously described as blowing at 20-25mph or 9-11m/sec >>>>>> 4. The lake is relatively shallow - a depression left by a former glacier. >>>>>> 5. The water temperature has been variously given as 37-40F or 3-4.5C, >>>>>> & there had until recently been freezing conditions. >>>>>> >>>>>> So the water would have been cold & rough. Crew shells are not fit for >>>>>> wave heights as little as 20cm/8". If you take a fetch of 1.5km & a >>>>>> wind speed of 10m/sec, expect a significant wave height of around 20cm. >>>>>> At 12m/sec wind speed it might be 24cm waves. But wind is rarely >>>>>> steady, & wave heights are never uniform but form a spectrum with >>>>>> occasional "rogue" waves rather larger than those around them (up to 30 >>>>>> - 50% higher). These will rapidly fill a shell by slopping over the >>>>>> sides. The next issue is that the shape of the lake, & depth >>>>>> variations, can create areas of increased wave height. >>>>>> >>>>>> The first question to ask is: did the boat actually capsize (possible >>>>>> but less usual) or was it swamped & sank below the water surface? >>>>>> >>>>>> In rough conditions an inexperienced crew could indeed capsize, but lay >>>>>> people love to jump to ignorant conclusions. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, there are no excuses for under-buoyant shells. We fought that >>>>>> battle in the UK for 10 years (against unprincipled UK officialdom) from >>>>>> 2000 until FISA mandated full shell buoyancy, but I know that very many >>>>>> shells in the USA have never been assessed for adequate buoyancy & still >>>>>> lack the fully-enclosed under-seat compartments which would a) provide >>>>>> up to 40kg of added buoyancy per seat (making eights and fours fully >>>>>> buoyant such that they remain safely rowable when swamped) & b) prevent >>>>>> water already in the boat from rushing to & depressing the least buoyant >>>>>> end. >>>>>> >>>>>> A further question concerns type of shell: we think it was a coxed >>>>>> four, but was it bow steers or stern? With bow steers you have rather >>>>>> more open volume for water to fill, & it is significantly harder for cox >>>>>> to extract themselves if the boat is swamped or inverted, especially if >>>>>> wearing bulky clothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Other questions include: presence or otherwise of a capable launch, >>>>>> adequacy of clothing (multilayer, close-fitting kit is a life-saver in >>>>>> cold immersion as it keeps an insulating layer of non-flowing water >>>>>> close to the body), self-rescue instructions, supervision, skill levels >>>>>> & prior assessment of conditions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Finally, at those indicated water temperatures to have lost 2 out of 5 >>>>>> after sudden & prolonged immersion is an unsurprising result - the loss >>>>>> of limb strength through automatic restriction of blood circulation when >>>>>> chilled can be rapid, rendering a person unable to swim within minutes. >>>>>> >>>>>> One can understand that young people, after many months of Covid >>>>>> restrictions, might tend to throw caution to the winds, but this was a >>>>>> devastating & probably preventable outcome. One of my colleagues is a >>>>>> volunteer with the RNLI on the R Thames & is aghast at the inane >>>>>> behaviour of so many "de-mob happy" boaters following the end of the >>>>>> English Covid lock-down. >>>>>> >>>>>> Finally, while no one meant this to happen, the blame game (& with it >>>>>> the denial of blame) may well take precedence over the careful learning >>>>>> of lessons & proper support for the bereaved. If people messed up, then >>>>>> it will be far more useful to all if they can be allowed to admit this >>>>>> without having to go into denial mode in order to defend their doubtless >>>>>> inadvertent errors. >>>>>> >>>>>> Our thoughts go to all affected - >>>>>> Carl >>>>>> >>>>> There is an update to this tragedy: Iowa State Crew Club president said lake was 'like glass' before deadly accident >>>>> >>>>> The club president was the coxswain in what the article indicates was a stern loader. The club doesn't have a launch; or a dock. The club doesn't require swimming tests. The article indicates the boat did actually did actually capsize while perpendicular to the wind. >>>>> >>>>> As any experienced rower knows, the wave through and peaks while the boat is parallel to the wave motion makes the boat very unstable and requires good blade control. >>>>> >>>> Thank you, Don. >>>> >>>> So capsize it was (not a common event), & a stern coxed 4. Avoiding >>>> capsize is feasible in similar conditions, provided the crew sit still & >>>> keep oars perpendicular to the boat, but that may require a level of >>>> calm & awareness beyond an inexperienced crew in such conditions. One >>>> would want to turn quickly to get end-on to the waves, which may have >>>> unduly exposed them those beam waves. >>>> >>>> On a wide lake squalls can arrive largely unseen & unsuspected as >>>> precursors of a coming gale. The crew boated at ~08:30, the 06:30 >>>> forecast having been for winds 11-14mph, increasing to 17mph by 11:00. >>>> (Earlier reports suggested winds of 20-25mph, which would have >>>> corresponded well enough with 1ft waves). Steady wind speed predictions >>>> often ignore tendency for gusts. I note there was a rule about not >>>> boating in winds >14mph. >>>> >>>> The commentary on USRowing rules is interesting, in having no quoted >>>> mention of full shell buoyancy (a FISA standard) but with advice to >>>> carry PFDs in the boat. Effective PFDs do exist which do _not_ >>>> incommode rowers, & IMHO they should be mandatory wear when water >>>> temperatures fall below certain limits. >>>> >>>> As indicated in the latest report, the crew tried to swim ashore. We >>>> don't know the distance but, if the water was as cold as previously >>>> suggested, & if that swim took over a minute in normal temperatures, >>>> then it was almost certain that some would lose all swimming ability & >>>> drown long before reaching safety. If the boat was also not fully >>>> buoyant, swimming away is the more understandable as it would then seem >>>> to offer little support & the crew in the water would already be >>>> suffering from the cold & consequent failing grip strength. >>>> >>>> Hindsight is a terrible thing. Worse still would be litigation over >>>> this. One must hope that lawyers do not get involved as nothing they >>>> might do will bring back the dead. The vital thing is for all of rowing >>>> to learn from this dreadful accident & do those simple things which, >>>> without impairing the sport, can make rowing that much safer. Sadly, we >>>> seem too often to ignore warnings & precedents, as a result repeating >>>> the same old mistakes. >>>> Carl >>>> -- >> >>> >>> I read the linked articles as stating that the crew had passed swim tests and that water temp was 40F and that the boat was pependicular to the waves when a large one swamped them. >>> The unknowns in this tragedy are really down to the experience of the crew. Passing a swim test isn't the same as confidence and ability in water and also how fit the crew was and their boat experience and how wet and cold they might have got before the boat went down. The suggestion being that all less experienced crews need to be accompanied by THEIR OWN safety launch. >>> A wooden boat, however swamped would still have some bouyancy but does that apply to more recent resin constructions? >>> >>> pgk >>> >> Hi Peter - >> >> Good points, but may I clarify a couple of them? >> >> My understanding is that the boat was parallel with the advancing >> wave-fronts when rolled over? Certainly a more plausible scenario. >> >> A wooden boat is no more buoyant than a honeycomb/synthetic fibre >> composite. The buoyancy comes from volumetric displacement of water, >> and a ~2mm thick laminated wood hull is thinner, & thus displaces less >> water per unit of hull area, than a composite hull perhaps 5mm thick & >> of similar areal mass. But, in reality, the crucial element of the >> shell's buoyancy is provided by the sum of all enclosed volumes that lie >> below the existing waterline (whether in normal or swamped condition). >> >> When swamped, the hull skin's thickness x area contributes but a part of >> this displacement while major contributions come from the fully-enclosed >> bow & stern compartments &, most importantly, from the other enclosed >> volumes including, in particular, those easily enclosable (but still too >> often left open, due sadly to institutional ignorance & neglect) volumes >> of the spaces below the slide beds which can contribute ~40kg of added >> flotation capacity/uplift per person. >> >> An additional contribution to flotation for a swamped shell comes from >> the partial immersion of the legs and buttocks of the seated crew. Yes, >> that water may be cold, but it is far better to have cold legs than to >> chill the torso by quitting an otherwise floating shell and attempting >> to swim. >> >> Unfortunately, it seems the Iowa crew was thrown from the boat as it >> rolled over & thus had severely limited options. Which is where >> personal flotation devices (which really need not incommode rowers in >> modern designs) would have been so helpful. >> Carl >> > This whole event is so unfortunate, but seemingly avoidable, if only with less severe consequences. > Carl, you mention specific PFD's that do not negatively affect the rowers. Can you elaborate/recommend, if not for a specific make/model, but maybe key bullet points for which we should look when seeking these out for ourselves or crew members? > Thanks in advance as always... > You might want to look into this: https://rowsafeusa.org/pfds/ and for comparison into this: https://www.britishrowing.org/sites/default/files/rowsafe/2-1-SafetyAids-v1.pdf this might give some helpful info: https://camprandallrc.org/faqs/tips-info/boathouse-rules/ There has been interest in rowable PFDs in Germany. Maybe one of our German correspondents (e.g. Henning Lippke) may have something to contribute on that? Also: https://www.lifejackets.co.uk/Lifejackets-Rowing.htm https://www.rowperfect.co.uk/product/rowing-life-jacket/ I hope that will be enough get started on? Cheers - Carl -- Carl Douglas Racing Shells - Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf Email: carl@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682 URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2) .