Best Sling?

[Gcosloy]

>If you need sponsons to reenter the boat you'd be better not

>to be out on the water alone in the first place. This seems

>like going too far to accomodate the lone paddler's

>limitations and places them at risk, rather than making them

>safer. The appearance of safety against the actual risk is

>perhaps the source of some of the negative feelings. After

>all, we all still like Brian...

I did not say I need to rely on sponsons as a "lone paddler", nor would I encourage lone paddling regardless the skill level of the paddler. Recent events off Plum Island this Spring sort of reinforce that wisdom.

Your general point regarding confusing a source of safety with risk assessment is a good one. Similar to driving a large SUV which allows you to ignore risk because of the perceived increase in passive as opposed to active safety.

My sponsons are there like my VHF radio. I don't intend to call the CG until other skills have been tried and failed. Same with my sponsons. Their existence has not limited my interest and learning as many rescue techniques that I can learn. By the way your nose plugs have been lucky for me. Rolled about 50 times since you gave them me. They are now at the bottom of Walden Pond. Hope my luck doesn't run out!

[Bill Gwynn]

>Not true. It works fine with a paddle float for self-rescue,

>too.

Interesting, I have never tried or even thought of using the heel hook/Leg up method for self rescue with a paddle float. Guess I'll have to give that a try.

[Gillian]

Billy, just remember it's feet first, not head first . . . the goal is to get the feet in the cockpit - if you put your head in first it makes it harder to turn around once you're weged all the way in.

[Bill Gwynn]

Maybe if I go in head first, I can learn to paddle with my legs with my feet holding the paddle. I could cut in a little periscope to see where i'm going.

[jason]

You need to also think of a way to get air once you put the spray skirt on.

[Brian Nystrom]

...it seems that you have "drank the Kool-Aid" when it comes to sponsons. Most of what Tim claims is out-and-out lies. The Coast Guard report has nothing to do with kayaks (it's about their inflatable rescue boats). His "voodoo science" about stability and rescues is pure hogwash. He never addresses issues with rough water and all of his pictures are of people on placid ponds in obviously warm water and weather conditions. It's a whole different world when it's windy, the water is rough, the temp is cool and water is cold.

Since you've never used you sponsons in rough conditions, you can't be sure whether:

A) You'll be able to deploy them or not. It will be an interesting trick to hold onto your boat and paddle while attempting to clip on and inflate sponsons on both sides. This is also one reason that paddle float rescues are ineffective in rough conditions.

You'll be able to re-enter or not. The cowboy re-entry is another technique that looks good on a pond but doesn't work well in rough water. Since you cannot control the direction of the boat relative to the waves, you will end up broached. Sponsons will make the boat pitch more as the waves strike from the beam, making it more likely that you will simply be dumped off the downwave side as you try to make your way forward.

C) They will keep your boat upright or not. In beam seas, they will prevent you from leaning into waves, dramatically increasing the likelihood that you will be capsized again downwave. When that happens, you're then in the water with an inverted boat, with the sponsons making it more difficult to right it.

Other disadvantages of Tim's sponsons are:

1- The boat must be specifically rigged for them, so you cannot share them with other paddlers unless their boats are also rigged for them.

2- They must be inflated. Each sponson has considerably more volume than a paddle float, which means it will take at least 3-4 times as long to inflate them. Hanging around in cold water for that long is not a good idea. Yeah, I know that Timmy claims that you can carry them inflated, but that's so inconvenient that no one is going to do it.

3- They're expensive. This is certainly not the overriding consideration, but there are better investments in safely that could be made with the money, such as a rescue course where you would be taught multiple USEFUL techniques.

4- You're supporting an absolute whackjob with an insane vendetta against the kayak industry, based entirely on lies. He rants against PROVEN safety and rescue tecniques and exploits the deaths of children in order to line his pockets with your money. He is a very sick, twisted individual and I find him and his tactics utterly dispicable. BTW, according to Tim, I'm a "Nazi and a baby killer", among other things.

Since you already have sponsons, I'm not going to suggest that you throw them away or anything like that. Just please don't be taken in by the illusion of safety that Tim claims. I can see uses for them, specifically for fishing, where they would provide additional stability (though they may be vulnerable to damage). As with a paddle float, a sponson could be inflated partially and used as an emergency back band in a kayak. I'm sure there are other ways they can be useful, too.

---------

The bottom line of this discussion is that there are no shortcuts to safety and rescues. You can't buy your way to it. One needs to put effort into learning techniques that are viable in a variety of conditions. It takes time and practice. I'm not insinuating that anyone here is unwilling to make the committment, but IMO slings and sponsons are just dead-ends that distract people from focussing on the techniques that are proven to work.

[Gcosloy]

>...it seems that you have "drank the Kool-Aid" when it comes

>to sponsons. Most of what Tim claims is out-and-out lies.

>The Coast Guard report has nothing to do with kayaks (it's

>about their inflatable rescue boats).

Jeeez Brian-" I think you have drank the Kool-Aid" and "with all due respect" are somewhat mutually exclusive. But that's Ok I hear and respect most of your good points. My only point was not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. If Tim is a nut and generally abusive in his rancor against the kayak industry, I don't think I'll invite him over for drinks any time soon. However, I've read the CG report that I referred to and they did review the efficacy of Kayak Sponsons and did give them an A-OK as a useful addition to ones bag of tricks. I think that many of your valid points made against sponsons could equally be made against the use of the paddle float, and yet most of us never leave shore without one. I think it was Matt Boze who gets the credit for first employing and recomending them. Matt must be a very nice guy, since hoards of negative criticism doesn't rain down on most of us who use (not rely) on paddle floats.

Since weather forecasting is not an exact science and even then the weather can change instantly on the open water, none of us can with any degree of confidence say we are prepared enough and skilled enough for anything. The carrying on deck of a paddle float or sling, or set of sponsons does not exclude my ability to brace and roll if need be. Why must you conclude that the existence of one always precludes the other?

Another thing which is perhaps as useful in the kayak as skill is good judgement. If we could always rely on perfect judgement, there would be no need for VHF radios.

When and if I ever get into deep trouble and after everything else fails me including my sponsons, it will be a terrible failure of judgement that's at fault, not technique nor skill, not even sponsons.

[Brian Nystrom]

>>...it seems that you have "drank the Kool-Aid" when it comes

>>to sponsons. Most of what Tim claims is out-and-out lies.

>>The Coast Guard report has nothing to do with kayaks (it's

>>about their inflatable rescue boats).

>

>Jeeez Brian-" I think you have drank the Kool-Aid" and "with

>all due respect" are somewhat mutually exclusive. But that's

>Ok I hear and respect most of your good points.

I don't mean any disrespect, Gene. Taken in isolation, Tim's arguments can seem compelling, but all it takes is a bit of research to uncover his deceit.

>My only

>point was not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. If

>Tim is a nut and generally abusive in his rancor against the

>kayak industry, I don't think I'll invite him over for

>drinks any time soon.

It's way more than that, Gene. He is an extremely sick and IMO evil individual. The fact that he constantly uses the deaths of children, in combination with his lies, to sell a product shows how truly disturbed he is. It really sickens me to the core. In his bizarre world, the kayak industry, the ACA and anyone who teaches kayaking skills are the enemy - who are all conspiring against him, BTW - and he viciously vilifies them and anyone who disagrees with him. I don't understand how anyone could support his actions by buying his products. Perhaps you simply haven't seen the worst of his writings, but I have and I've been one of his targets. Trust me, it's not pretty. Maybe you can laugh it off as the harmless rantings of a lunatic, but as far as I'm concerned, the guy should be institutionalized before he hurts someone. If you want to see exactly what you've inadvertently bought into, I'll gladly forward you some typical Timmy rantings.

If someone wants sponsons, there are other companies selling better systems than Tim's (Voyageur, for example), so you don't have to contribute to supporting Tim's warped, twisted agenda and heinous marketing in order to have sponsons for your kayak.

>However, I've read the CG report that

>I referred to and they did review the efficacy of Kayak

>Sponsons and did give them an A-OK as a useful addition to

>ones bag of tricks.

I don't disagree with that, but that's not the way Tim sells them. He claims that they are the ultimate solution and strongly implies that all you need are his airbags and you're perfectly safe in your kayak or canoe. Again, it's extremely deceptive and dangerous marketing, particulary to the beginner audience he targets.

>I think that many of your valid points

>made against sponsons could equally be made against the use

>of the paddle float, and yet most of us never leave shore

>without one.

You're absolutely correct that paddle floats suffer from many of the same disadvantages and I don't recommend having only paddle floats rescues in one's arsenal of skills. I do carry a paddle float, but primarily because it has other uses, similar to those for sponsons (and at a fraction of the cost). The only time it's ever used for rescues is if I'm demonstrating it for someone.

>I think it was Matt Boze who gets the credit for first employing and recomending them.

Perhaps so. (BTW, it's "Broze".)

>Matt must be a

>very nice guy, since hoards of negative criticism doesn't

>rain down on most of us who use (not rely) on paddle floats.

That likely has nothing to do with it. If you read any of the Broze brothers' writings, you'll find that they're well reasoned and based on sound science and experience. One may not agree with their conclusions, but you have to respect their logic and integrity. Essentially, they're everything that Tim isn't.

>Since weather forecasting is not an exact science and even

>then the weather can change instantly on the open water,

>none of us can with any degree of confidence say we are

>prepared enough and skilled enough for anything.

Of course not.

>The carrying on deck of a paddle float or sling, or set of

>sponsons does not exclude my ability to brace and roll if

>need be. Why must you conclude that the existence of one

>always precludes the other?

I didn't. However, these products are often marketed as a single safety solution that obviates the need for skills. They are least useful when you need them the most. If you can brace and roll well, why would you feel the need to carry all this stuff on-deck, especially since it just gets in the way? FWIW, the only rescue gear I carry on deck is a contact tow. The rest (actually, just a pump and paddle float) is stowed securely in the cockpit where I can access it from either side of the boat. Since you don't need any of it unless you're out of the boat, there's no need to keep in on deck.

>Another thing which is perhaps as useful in the kayak as

>skill is good judgement.

I would say that it's far more useful/important than any other skill or gear.

>If we could always rely on perfect

>judgement, there would be no need for VHF radios.

When you get right down to it, all rescue gear and skills are simply hedges against poor judgement and accidents that are beyond our control.

>When and if I ever get into deep trouble and after

>everything else fails me including my sponsons, it will be a

>terrible failure of judgement that's at fault, not technique

>nor skill, not even sponsons.

That would more than likely be the case...for any of us. However, it's important to understand the limitations of safety gear and not be taken in by slick marketing or maniacal rants and lies.