- July 03, 2013 - 15:17
After the Ocean Ranger loss, I considered the concept of a double shell sphere can could survive a fall and impact from a rig when released, and survive for a couple of days below the sea with the occupants, and then be retrieved after the monstrous sea had settled. I had an association with Vibron Ltd in Toronto who had worked on vibration issues with the CN tower and other projects. Vibron said the concept was feasible. I sent correspondence to Mobil Oil as to their interest. I got no reply. So I let it go.
- Stephen d Redgrave
- July 02, 2013 - 06:42
What John is trying to say has very little to do with bureaucratic SAR policy and more to do with good old fashion civic planning for worker safety. The systems are so simple to build yet so hard to get approval and funding it's ridiculous. I remember Ocean Ranger. This will happen again if all parties don't get together and put the great ideas into practical use as standard, mandatory equipment suitable to the situation. There are dozens of brilliant ideas for catasrophic failures of all description that are not being used or implimented. As john said ---the buck keeps on being passed around. If the average person were to see what is on the drawing board for safety at sea and in the air, their first impression would be "why aren't we using this "!!. I'm behind Paul Johnson 100%
- Ron Tizzard
- June 30, 2013 - 07:17
Point made, Corporate Psycho. Now are you prepared to do something 'positive' to change things...or, are you just available as a lurking, empty critic! And, I very much remember Burton Wintes, and have long ago shared my voice concerning related SAR mandates. Share, copy here what you have independently sent off to the Feds re: SAR matters; re: Burton Wintes.
- Corporate Psycho
- June 29, 2013 - 13:08
Seems to me it's your federal conservatives are the ones who ignore their SAR responsibilities. Remember Burton Winters?