TWL: RE: TWL:DDEC Electronic Controls
At 04:22 PM 5/23/02, you wrote:
Some years back (say about 30 or 40) people involved with
the marine world have laughed you off if you had predicted
the technologies in stuff we have on boats today, yet, as a
whole we thrive. There are lots of "black boxes" on our
boats we can't/won't dig into, but we keep on sailing our
vessels in relative safety. Why? I'd suggest that the
I just finished 3 weeks prepping a 30 year old wooden hulled boat built in
Mexico.
The boat was full of stuff that was unsafe, and I over and over again I
kept hearing from the seller and others,
"but it has been operating just fine for 30 years this way".
Garbage. The people who think that unsafe stuff has been operating ok, are
repeating things about which they know nothing. How could they know. They
did not operate the boat over the 30 years, they have no idea what kinds of
problems the installation has had and they have no FIRST hand knowledge of
such, unless they were in fact there.
There is one single criteria which can be used to describe the folks who
will come around and tell you things like this when in fact they have no
first hand knowledge. That criteria is in-experience!
First they do not know and second they do not know that they do not know.
Oh, don't get me wrong. It's not that they could not possibly be right.
It's just that they have no real basis in fact for their assumptions.
Try chewing on that for a while.
In the case of the boat above, the fuel lines had been reversed and the
system had been operated for some time in this manner. The only reason the
engine ran was because the fuel flowed out of the bottom of the tanks and
into a manifold that the return line from the engine also fed into.
Meanwhile the fuel system return line was overpressured to about 50 PSI and
was repeatedly leaking small amounts of fuel by the gaskets, because it was
pumping backwards thru the Racor filter.
Every boat is loaded with similar mistakes, some more, some less.
The accidents that do happen, happen for reasons. The devil is in the
details. Most accidents are an accumulation of small mistakes and
oversights that have left somethings undone or not correctly installed or
maintained.
The fellow next door whose boat blew up, was just fine until it blew up and
it probably had never given him any trouble. If you like playing the odds
and ignoring them, then just keep on listening to the folks that believe
that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I am not proposing wholesale
paranoia, just pay attention to your own knitting, and don't assume that
just because it doesn't appear to be causing trouble, doesn't mean it isn't
out to get you.
Since I have been around boats and the repair end of things for 40 years, I
can say with some basis in fact that the level of expertise has not
improved a great deal, at least in the majority of people who do repair
work. How anyone expects increasing complexity to be maintained by this
crowd is more than I can fathom.
For instance, at least 1/4 of the boats with complicated electronic
interfacing of the radar/gps/compass, etc. have serious problems and can
not be relied upon. And in many cases these are "well maintained" boats. Of
the remaining 3/4 at least 1/2 of them have some problems which make the
use of the equipment problematic.
90% of ALL boats have major mistakes with their grounding systems, and if
exposed to the right situation will experience severe electrolysis
problems. It is only the fact that they have not been exposed to the "right
situation" that is saving most owners. In the meantime minor electrolysis
is at work doing damage you will not notice for years and which will result
in a major expenses. But that won't be apparent for years. But, it will do
you almost no good to hire someone to fix this stuff, because not one
"expert" in a hundred really knows what they are doing.
And before you come launching mortar fire on my position, go try to find
that someone.
Regards,
Mike
Capt. Mike Maurice
Near Portland Oregon.
Rich Gano wrote a good piece about conservatism and technological progress.
This is a subject that has interesteed me for a long time. We have also
discussed it from time to time on this list.
Whereas most people do not give a second thought to driving modern cars
controlled by computers, they balk at having the same technology on board
their boats. The most often cited excuse being; if the car stops, you can
always pull over to the side of the road; not so in a boat.
I have travelled in some very inhospitable terrain, far from the nearest human
dwelling or phone line. In fact I was out of cellular range in most places.
Does it make a difference if your car dies in blazing desert heat, or arctic
freezing cold up in the mountains, compared to having a boat engine dies and
having to anchor.
People have died trying to walk to safety after a car breakdown, just as
people have suffered when their boat flooded and sank.
To my mind, the perception of danger and risk is more a mental state of mind
than a reality. Rich is right about the key being risk management.
But risk management requires information and factual basis for making
decisions.To what extent do we let emotion over rule reason because of built
in biases?
Do we have an innate distrust of things we cannot see and touch like we can a
mechancial control? I feel naked without a meter at hand. When examining
a circuit, the current paths are clearly marked paths in my mind'e eye. I built
my own TV from scraps when I was 15. Consequently electrical systems are
familiar territory to me. I realize this is not the case with everyone. My own
mother refused to even change a fuse.
The most frequent solution to a potential failure is redundancy. ie add a
second unit. Yet each layer of redundancy adds complexicity and cost.
At the same time, the redundancy also breeds complacency precisely
because we figure there is always a back-up.
Sometimes this complacency even leads to neglecting the required
maintenance. Ever hear of someone with both banks of batteries dried out
and under charged?
Is an electric or hydraulic anchor winch inherently less safe than a
mechanical winch? Is a diesel inherently less reliable than sails and cordage
and masts? Is steel or fibreglass inherently less safe than wooded hulls?
How about electric lights compared to kerosene lamps? And the list goes on.
Did you ever worry about using an elevator? How many of our list members
worry about flying or taking a train or bus? I'm sure that some people do and
may even refuse to use certain technology.
It is mostly a matter of perception.
Cheers
Arild
Concerning increased complexity of electronic engine
controls, Mike says, "If my complaint is not clear enough it
is this: I see no reason to think that these systems can be
maintained by the general run of people who are presently
maintaining them.
So, who is going to train them to be effective? The
manufacturer? The Coast
Guard? The ABYC?...."
Some years back (say about 30 or 40) people involved with
the marine world have laughed you off if you had predicted
the technologies in stuff we have on boats today, yet, as a
whole we thrive. There are lots of "black boxes" on our
boats we can't/won't dig into, but we keep on sailing our
vessels in relative safety. Why? I'd suggest that the
incremental nature of boating equipment evolution forced by
the innate conservatism of the marine world is the reason.
Lots of us like the golly gee whiz stuff, but we won't trust
our lives and boats to it. We have learned to manage the
risk with back up strategies and/or equipment, and
manufacturers know it. The conservatism of Mike and others
like him who encounter these engine control problems may
well eventually force the manufacturers into some redesign
keeping in mind the risks involved with non-technical
maintainers. Again, the key is adequate risk management so
that we are able to control the situation resulting from a
black box failure. It will be interesting to see how
somebody figures out how to strike a balance with these new
type engine controls to our collective satisfaction.
We have all seen discussions of or participated in equipment
changes that involve new technologies on boats. I think the
shift from whatever to LORAN and the ongoing shift from
LORAN to GPS and thence to plotters are good examples.
Many of us conservatives have managed the perceived risk in
the shift to GPS by keeping old LORAN units handy after
installing GPS (maintenance of traditional methods of
determining position is a given here). I am sure we can all
think of more examples.
Once in a while somebody like the Navy pushes a technology
(example: a whole class of reliable gas turbine-powered
destroyers) and it works, and sometimes an innovation like a
completely submersible Navy just won't. And now we have
electronic engine controls. Innovation with the concomitant
increased complexity will remain with us, and we cannot be
Luddites. We have to make the technology work for us, not
the other way around.
For now, I am glad I don't face the choice of whether to
have electronic engine controls or not, and I am going below
right now to recheck the physical connections of my engines'
control push-pull cables!
Rich Gano
CALYPSO (GB42-295)
Homeport Southport, FL
I'd rather be cruisin'
At 09:49 PM 5/23/02, you wrote:
We have that someone and it is Arild.
Richard
Not Arild. He uses 16" shells.
Capt. Mike Maurice
Near Portland Oregon.
And before you come launching mortar fire on my position, go try to find
that someone.
We have that someone and it is Arild.
Richard
Keith wrote:
Frankly, I don't think that's a fair comparison. First of all, when you
say the car is "controlled by computers", I would say that two of the
three basic operations - stopping and steering - may be enhanced by
computers, but they certainly have mechanical backups.
REPLY
The comparison is appropriate since nearly all engines used in boats today
are derived from automotive or truck designs.
It is also a fact that it is the EPA regulations which have been applied to the
automotive and trucking world that is now forcing manufacturers to adopt this
same technology to boats.
Your reference to rust spots etc, goes way beyond the topic which was
from the beginning the digital controls on Detroit diesels.
Need I point out that Detroit is the home town of the automotive industry and
Detroit Diesels made their name in trucks. < G >
The technology being discussed is the computerized control of the engine,
and coincidentally this control technology may be applied to some other
equipment on board.
The concern focusses on how reliable this electronic control is and whether
or not it would place the user at risk when on a boat.
Here I made the comparison with a car which is driven in remote regions.
In extreme weather conditions such as desert heat or arctic chill, it is just as
easy to die from exposure as it is from drowning.
The bottom line is, do not venture far from civilization unless you are
prepared to deal with emergencies and have contingency plans.
This might include a hand crank for your Model A ford or a spare ECM for
your DDEC in your Nordhavn 62. Each is appropriate for the vehicle it fits.
My father told me no sane motorist would travel without several spare tires in
the boot since flat tires was a fact of life. I wore out several sets of tires on
two or three different cars without once having to use the spare.
Other than the Baja 1000 competitors do you know who carry more than one
spare wheel?
It wasn't that long ago that no self respecting sailor would be caught without a
palm and needle in his kit bag, or for that matter a marlinspike.
Have you got yours? < G>
Risk assessment does not mean you have to be a computer wiz to determine
the level of risk involved. We all know electric connections corrode when
exposed to salt water or even moist air.
Take a look under the hood of a five year old car. Open up one of the
connectors on the fuel injection system. Note the silicone rubber bellows seal,
look at the positive lock which prevents the connector from shaking apart as
the car vibrates. Have a look at the back of the same connector and note the
rubber seal which prevents dust and water from getting in.
Use a magnifying lens if you have to while looking for any sign of dirt or
moisture ingress to the inner contact pins.
Now go aboard a boat which doesn't have a computer controlled engine.
Look at the push on spade connectors used on all the oil and temp senders,
examine the push on connectors used in the starter switch circuit or for than
matter any part of the ignition system on a gasoline engine.
On diesels it is common practice to energize the alternator field by passing
the current through an oil pressure switch. This disconnects the circuit when
the engine is stopped. Have a look at the flimsy connection. If that connection
fails, so will the charging circuit and now you end up with a flat battery.
This is the standard arrangement on the much beloved Ford Lehman diesel.
No one is asking the small boat builder to have deep pockets or a full time
R&D department. All it takes is going outside to the parking lot and opening
the hood of any car less than five years old. Steal every good idea you see.
The OEM supply industry will inundate you with brochures and descrtiptive
literature on what the other guys are already using. Just call them and ask.
Last winter at IBEX I actually declined offers of free samples of all sorts of
things because I didn't have room to carry it back on the plane with me.
As it was I brought back about 30 pounds of literature and a box full of
samples. Many more arrived free in the mail as a result of requesting them
from the vendors at their displays.
The marine industry hitched its fortunes to the automotive world a long time
ago. What engine manufacturer of purely marine engines still remain in
business? I cannot think of any. Buchanan, Kermath, Gardner, Stirling and
even Seagull have all disappeared.
Cheers
Arild
(SNIP) Frankly, I don't think that's a fair comparison. First of all,
when you
say the car is "controlled by computers", I would say that two of the
three basic operations - stopping and steering - may be enhanced by
computers, but they certainly have mechanical backups. One of the more
amusing questions in the PC computer questions is, "would you trust your
car's braking to Microsoft Windows (pick your version)?" <g>
Actually, I've had Windows XP Pro up on both navigation computers for
over a year as well as my boat server and, based on experience, I'd
certainly consider an XP managed braking system. I'd also hazard a
guess WINTEL is managing a lot of our every day interactions we'd
consider "mission critical".
If I had to single hand my trawler from RI to Key West without "The
CAP'N", I can assure you I would have had some interesting times. Using
my machines, I had zero stress and none of the "confusing moments" one
might expect with triangles and dividers. My neo-luddite perspective
only comes out in the back-up arena. I do carry a complete set of paper
charts from Maine to Florida "just in case".
Regards....
Phil Rosch
M/V "Curmudgeon" Marine Trader 44 TC
Currently Moored in Back Creek, Annapolis, MD.
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you
didn't
do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away
from
the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream.
Discover." - Mark Twain
-----Original Message-----
From: trawler-world-list-admin@lists.samurai.com
[mailto:trawler-world-list-admin@lists.samurai.com] On Behalf Of Keith
Pleas
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 8:33 AM
To: 'TrawlerWorld'
Subject: TWL: RE: conservatism or luddism ( was: DDEC Electronic
Controls)
Arild:
Whereas most people do not give a second thought to driving modern
cars
controlled by computers, they balk at having the same technology on
board
their boats.
Frankly, I don't think that's a fair comparison. First of all, when you
say the car is "controlled by computers", I would say that two of the
three basic operations - stopping and steering - may be enhanced by
computers, but they certainly have mechanical backups. One of the more
amusing questions in the PC computer questions is, "would you trust your
car's braking to Microsoft Windows (pick your version)?" <g>
Another difference is the nature of auto industry compared to boating.
The auto industry is dominated by major corporations doing thousands of
repetitive operations involving parts that have been made thousands - if
not millions - of times. Every boat is pretty much a one-off affair with
just a few well-known components. And after it's sold, well, all bets
are off as to what happens from that point on.
Certainly all car manufacturers have "deep pockets". They have more to
lose with poor quality, which is easier to spot over thousands of
samples. They provide extensive, rigorous testing. They generally
require servicing by qualified specialists. They are closely connected
to their insurance industry and even to governmental regulators. Look at
the changes in the auto industry: they are all so incrementally small
that consumers see almost zero innovation over time.
In contrast, boat manufactures are tiny in comparison, produce very few
units that are geographically dispersed, get their product "serviced" by
clearly unqualified people (including "owners"), and have essentially no
connections to the outside world. The closest they come to being
"controlled" are perhaps the ABYC and Coast Guard. Hard to compare that
to the auto insurance industry, DOT, NHTSA, state inspections, and so
on.
And then there's the difference in environment, life expectancy, and so
on. Maybe you can't get to all the inner surface areas of your car to
check the condition of the body - boats have lots of hidden areas as
well - but the effect of a rust hole on a car can't really be compared
to a hole in the boat's hull, right? <g>
Keith
http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/trawler-world-list
Arild:
Whereas most people do not give a second thought to driving modern
cars
controlled by computers, they balk at having the same technology on
board
their boats.
Frankly, I don't think that's a fair comparison. First of all, when you
say the car is "controlled by computers", I would say that two of the
three basic operations - stopping and steering - may be enhanced by
computers, but they certainly have mechanical backups. One of the more
amusing questions in the PC computer questions is, "would you trust your
car's braking to Microsoft Windows (pick your version)?" <g>
Another difference is the nature of auto industry compared to boating.
The auto industry is dominated by major corporations doing thousands of
repetitive operations involving parts that have been made thousands - if
not millions - of times. Every boat is pretty much a one-off affair with
just a few well-known components. And after it's sold, well, all bets
are off as to what happens from that point on.
Certainly all car manufacturers have "deep pockets". They have more to
lose with poor quality, which is easier to spot over thousands of
samples. They provide extensive, rigorous testing. They generally
require servicing by qualified specialists. They are closely connected
to their insurance industry and even to governmental regulators. Look at
the changes in the auto industry: they are all so incrementally small
that consumers see almost zero innovation over time.
In contrast, boat manufactures are tiny in comparison, produce very few
units that are geographically dispersed, get their product "serviced" by
clearly unqualified people (including "owners"), and have essentially no
connections to the outside world. The closest they come to being
"controlled" are perhaps the ABYC and Coast Guard. Hard to compare that
to the auto insurance industry, DOT, NHTSA, state inspections, and so
on.
And then there's the difference in environment, life expectancy, and so
on. Maybe you can't get to all the inner surface areas of your car to
check the condition of the body - boats have lots of hidden areas as
well - but the effect of a rust hole on a car can't really be compared
to a hole in the boat's hull, right? <g>
Keith
I never said or intended to intimate the word "unsafe" in my comments. I
was simply referring to items that are safe but which we cannot do
maintenance on.
Your fine example of a mess is just that, a mess, and not what I was talking
about. I hope you didn't take that thing to sea!
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Maurice [mailto:mikem@yachtsdelivered.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 11:11 AM
To: Rich Gano
Cc: trawler-world-list@samurai.com
Subject: Re: TWL: RE: TWL:DDEC Electronic Controls
At 04:22 PM 5/23/02, you wrote:
Some years back (say about 30 or 40) people involved with
the marine world have laughed you off if you had predicted
the technologies in stuff we have on boats today, yet, as a
whole we thrive. There are lots of "black boxes" on our
boats we can't/won't dig into, but we keep on sailing our
vessels in relative safety. Why? I'd suggest that the
I just finished 3 weeks prepping a 30 year old wooden hulled boat built in
Mexico.
The boat was full of stuff that was unsafe, and I over and over again I
kept hearing from the seller and others,
"but it has been operating just fine for 30 years this way".
Garbage. The people who think that unsafe stuff has been operating ok, are
repeating things about which they know nothing. How could they know. They
did not operate the boat over the 30 years, they have no idea what kinds of
problems the installation has had and they have no FIRST hand knowledge of
such, unless they were in fact there.
There is one single criteria which can be used to describe the folks who
will come around and tell you things like this when in fact they have no
first hand knowledge. That criteria is in-experience!
First they do not know and second they do not know that they do not know.
Oh, don't get me wrong. It's not that they could not possibly be right.
It's just that they have no real basis in fact for their assumptions.
Try chewing on that for a while.
In the case of the boat above, the fuel lines had been reversed and the
system had been operated for some time in this manner. The only reason the
engine ran was because the fuel flowed out of the bottom of the tanks and
into a manifold that the return line from the engine also fed into.
Meanwhile the fuel system return line was overpressured to about 50 PSI and
was repeatedly leaking small amounts of fuel by the gaskets, because it was
pumping backwards thru the Racor filter.
Every boat is loaded with similar mistakes, some more, some less.
The accidents that do happen, happen for reasons. The devil is in the
details. Most accidents are an accumulation of small mistakes and
oversights that have left somethings undone or not correctly installed or
maintained.
The fellow next door whose boat blew up, was just fine until it blew up and
it probably had never given him any trouble. If you like playing the odds
and ignoring them, then just keep on listening to the folks that believe
that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I am not proposing wholesale
paranoia, just pay attention to your own knitting, and don't assume that
just because it doesn't appear to be causing trouble, doesn't mean it isn't
out to get you.
Since I have been around boats and the repair end of things for 40 years, I
can say with some basis in fact that the level of expertise has not
improved a great deal, at least in the majority of people who do repair
work. How anyone expects increasing complexity to be maintained by this
crowd is more than I can fathom.
For instance, at least 1/4 of the boats with complicated electronic
interfacing of the radar/gps/compass, etc. have serious problems and can
not be relied upon. And in many cases these are "well maintained" boats. Of
the remaining 3/4 at least 1/2 of them have some problems which make the
use of the equipment problematic.
90% of ALL boats have major mistakes with their grounding systems, and if
exposed to the right situation will experience severe electrolysis
problems. It is only the fact that they have not been exposed to the "right
situation" that is saving most owners. In the meantime minor electrolysis
is at work doing damage you will not notice for years and which will result
in a major expenses. But that won't be apparent for years. But, it will do
you almost no good to hire someone to fix this stuff, because not one
"expert" in a hundred really knows what they are doing.
And before you come launching mortar fire on my position, go try to find
that someone.
Regards,
Mike
Capt. Mike Maurice
Near Portland Oregon.
Your reference to rust spots etc, goes way beyond the topic which was
from the beginning the digital controls on Detroit diesels.
Gee, and I thought the topic was "conservatism or luddism". <g> Anyway,
the rust was just an analogy and I think everyone agrees that the issue
is broader than digital controls on Detroit diesels. Even if you just
consider that single application, many of the things that I talked about
certainly are factors in forming people's opinions about something as
specific as your control issue. And, after all, you were talking about
their perceptions rather than any kind of statistical reliability,
right?
Need I point out that Detroit is the home town of the automotive
industry and Detroit Diesels made their name in trucks.
OTOH, I have a Volvo and I feel compelled to point out that Volvo sold
off their car division to Ford (keeping the trucks). Actually, I'm not
sure exactly what that proves. <g>
The bottom line is, do not venture far from civilization unless you
are
prepared to deal with emergencies and have contingency plans.
Hard to argue with a bromide like that!
Other than the Baja 1000 competitors do you know who carry more than
one
spare wheel?
My old '62 Land Rover had one on the hood and one on the rear door. But
I get your point.
It wasn't that long ago that no self respecting sailor would be caught
without a palm and needle in his kit bag, or for that matter a
marlinspike.
Have you got yours? < G>
Actually, yes, I do. But I haven't done any marlinspike work in years...
Take a look under the hood of a five year old car...
And a 10 year old computer, which had everything socketed so they both
worked their way out of the sockets and corroded as the machines were
heated and cooled.
Now go aboard a boat which doesn't have a computer controlled engine.
Look at the push on spade connectors used on all the oil and temp
senders,
examine the push on connectors used in the starter switch circuit or for
than matter any part of the ignition system on a gasoline engine.
Actually, I think you're reinforcing the point I made. The boats we all
own are all - even the ones from the major boat manufacturers - are
essentially custom jobs by generally unqualified people that are - and
this is probably more important - being supervised by non-professional
managers. OK, I saw a lot of professional stuff at the large workboat
show in New Orleans this winter. The 44' Coast Guard boat was absolutely
mind-boggling. But it was probably well over a million dollars too.
Keith