Re: Idiotic Post on RowingIllustrated.com

Carl Douglas wrote:
causticmeatloaf@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 30, 1:41 am, Eberhard Nabel <ebna...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 30 Mai, 01:47, causticmeatl...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:



Seeing as I am considered an ignoramus here, I suppose I should
present myself directly for ridicule.
...............Yes, statistically -
I do understand probability, greater than you.
The uninformed or the ignorant always speak on probability, whereas
the informed assess the risks of rowing. Risk assessment of rowing
says that we have to avoid fatalities BY ALL MEANS. I write that under
the impression, that we in Germany had seven rowing fatalities since
Sept 2005. And we had a swamping on the River Rhine in April, where
all made it out within minutes due to the fact that everybody had a
lifejacket on during rowing.

Eberhard
I guess all engineers are both unformed and ignorant then! Good to
know that it was engineers who designed your car.

As an engineer, "by all means" can be highly inclusive. Should we take
into account possible dinosaur attacks? Meteor strikes? Insane
people? Naval warfare? If we must avoid fatalities by all means,
then perhaps we should encase all of us in highly impact resistant,
buoyant, and resistive enclosures (but with ample air passage) to
ensure that no one gets hurt by anything, ever.

Engineers like to call it "risk assessment". You set up a probability
matrix to determine, based on the probability of individual events,
the likelihood of a convergence of independent events. If they are not
wholly independent, then you determine the probability of events based
on the degree of co-dependance. Finally, you can output a number that
expresses the probability of a possible event happening. The nice
thing about this is that you get a number that is wholly objective &
based on actual data, not an argument that's based on anecdote,
hearsay, and lore.

Right now, no engineer has done as risk assessment. No one at all,
engineer, boat maker, general technical person, even a half-qualified
person has done anything but appeal to emotion to determine the
solution to this. No logic has really been applied. Can anyone here
honestly show me some numbers they used to determine the risk involved
with a swamping DEATH, based on real-world data? I would hazard a
guess and say, probably (pun intended) not.



Apparently my being a Chartered Engineer with 2 degrees & a lifetime spent in several fields of engineering, plus a designer & builder of a range of high-performance & recreational shells, all of which floated & performed exactly to plan, counts for nothing in the eyes of this clever-***?

Must go & retrain -
carl


Small essential correction:
The curse of the quick edit - I written "high-performance & recreational sailboats, launches & canoes as well as racing shells", but I carelessly zapped out the middle bit. I've never designed or built a recreational shell - yet.

I may also have designed & made 1 or 2 other modestly technical items relevant to rowing performance & to rowing safety, & had the odd patent or 2. But clearly I know nothing when compared with old meatloaf there.

Carl

--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: http://tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)
.

Loading