Brian Nystrom

While I honestly hope that he's come up with a "better mousetrap", I really don't like the approach he's taken. All helmet designs are compromizes. All of them will fail to protect paddlers in some situations. His helmet is no different in that regard. Eventually, someone will die while wearing his helmet, too. That's the nature of the products and the sports(s) they're designed for. It will be interesting to see how he handles it when he ultimately gets sued for over-promoting the protective capabilities of his helmet.

>See the recall info on the foundation's website:

>http://www.whitewaterhelmet.com/helmet_recall.html

This is the personal vendetta I spoke of. It's a one-man campaign. It reminds me too much of Tim Ingram's crusade to have sponsons on all kayaks.

>Seems that the Protec's design with one strap attaching the

>helmet would be at a disadvantage in preventing rolling

>(fore and aft) on the head.

That would vary from one person to the next, depending on their head and facial structure. For some, it may not work, for others, it may work perfectly. The downside is that it lacks adjustability, but that's where proper fitting comes in. If it doesn't fit, don't buy it. A helmet with a multi-strap system won't work any better if it's not fitted and adjusted correctly. When I recently purchased a new cycling helmet, I must have tried 20 different model/size combination to find the right fit and spent nearly an hour fine-tuning the strap adjustments.

Paddlers also have the additional consideration of being able to fit a hood under the helmet for use in cold water. The result is either a helmet that's too tight with a hood under it or too loose without one, unless you're willing to buy and carry two helmets. Hoods with visors may create a problem, too. I haven't seen any paddling helmets that have quickly adjustable fitting systems like most current model bike helmets do. These systems make it easy to adjust the helmet to accommodate a hat or headband underneath without compromising safety. Are there any paddling helmets on the market like that?

>Hadn't thought of the disadvantage of a visor in ripping the

>helmet off the forehead. Sea kayakers rolled in surf, rock

>gardens or currents may experience the same forces.

>Something to think about.

That is a good point. It also makes you wonder about helmets with built-in visors, ironically, like the WRSI helmet Gil Turner is selling. Notice that all the "fire hose" testing touted in the Johns Hopkins article was done on a prototype that didn't have a visor. Hmmm.

>Also, the EVA foam liner rather then hard foam may withstand

>repeated impacts better: literature with most hard foam

>liners (e.g. bicycle helmets) suggests you replace the

>helmet after an accident.

Bike helmets are a one-use item with a crushable liner, like motorsports helmets. Kayaking helmets must be multi-impact, due both to the nature of the sport and financial considerations. Unfortunately, that means that they are inherently less protective, since multi-impact foams cannot absorb as much energy as single-impact, crushable foams.

>Speaking of bike helmets, many if not the majority of bike

>helmets are probably not fitted properly. It breaks my

>heart to see young kids wearing helmets with loose straps as

>the helmet is essentially useless.

It's just as prevalent among adults. I wish I had a buck for every person I've seen riding along with their helmet on the back of their head like a yarmulke.

>What is really needed is objective testing by an independent

>entity to find out what designs give what kinds of protection.

True. The organizations exist (Snell, ASTM, CE, etc.), but the paddling industry doesn't take advantage of them to the extent that they could. Interestingly, the current Pro-Tec helmets are CE certified, but WRSI helmet apparently are not.

Unfortunately, Gil Turner has chosen to adopt the misleading name "Whitewater Reasearch and Safety Institute" for his company, creating the illusion that it's some kind of standards organization, which it's not. Between that and his attacks on Pro-Tec, it gives me a bad feeling about dealing with him or his company. Its a shame, as the product looks like it may be pretty good.

Whitewater being the risky endeavor that it is, it's just a matter of time until someone is severely injured or killed while wearing a WRSI helmet and he faces the same type of assault that he has launched against Pro-Tec. I imagine that he'll have to adopt the same position, too, that no helmet can protect paddlers from every type of impact.

There is so much variation in paddler's head and facial dimensions for any one helmet to fit everyone perfectly. It's up to every paddler to find a helmet that fits well enough to stay in position. It's also up to the paddler to adjust and wear the helmet correctly. No manufacturer can be held responsible for someone not fitting, adjusting or wearing a helmet correctly. While there are definitely differences in protection among helmets, a well fitted low-end helmet may provide better protection than the best helmet on the market that's not fitted or worn correctly.

...is to carry out his personal vendetta against Pro-Tec, but the resulting helmet looks OK. For those who are interested, you can see/order it at:

http://www.whitewaterhelmet.com

Did I say anything that was offensive or untrue?

"go find some rough water to play in......."

Hopefully, on Sunday with Nigel.

Patrick is considering building a more mainstream, "Explorer-esque" sea kayak, but his company is essentially a one-man operation and he has a new baby and other projects in the works. One can only imagine what the result of the right design combined with Tideline's layup, a 40 pound kayak that handles rough water like a champ and bounces off rocks like a plastic boat.

Peter Orton, the new president of Valley Sea Kayaks, was at P&H for 13 years. Another key member of the new team (who's name escapes me) also came from P&H. I've had a few email conversations with Peter and he's obviously very customer oriented and quality conscious, and I get the impression that he understands what VSK needs to do to be a major player in the US market. The company has been making smart moves for the past few years and Peter seems to be accellerating the pace of progress.

I agree about NDK, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to get it together. Their problems are obviously at the top and it will take new management - or at the very least, a new management philosophy - to turn things around. Perhaps the best thing would be for them to finally go "belly up" and sell the molds to a company that actually knows how to build quality kayaks.

I agree with you completely, Nick. That said, I feel it's important to note that VCP boats have varied in their layups over the years. Older boats are as you describe, CSM with tinted resin on the inside layer of Diolene, though there have been several variations (My '98 Anas Acuta had clear resin inside with a thick cloth/CSM/Diolene layup but my '01 AA has tinted resin over a thinner CSM/Diolene layup). Later model boats I've seen have clear resin and woven cloth inside, though CSM is still used. The current layups from VSK (Valley Canoe Products has recently become Valley Sea Kayaks) are woven cloth with CSM only in areas where its ability to conform to tight curves is beneficial. Specifically, the deck fittings, compass recesses and such are CSM. It may be used in other areas as well, but I don't have any details on that. Although their standard fiberglass layup is still done by hand, their higher-end layups are now vacuum resin-infused. It appears that Valley has made significant improvements to their layups in recent years and the current products should equal the major North American brands in layup quality.

It's available at:

http://wavelengthmagazine.com/2005/AS05.pdf

I don't know what Nigel's leg length is, but I can't even get fully into Linda's Rumour, due to the bulkhead location. The way we have the underside of the deck padded for Linda, Nigel may not like it, since he'd have to paddled straight-legged. Perhaps we should give him a Greenland stick to use as well. Hmmm, wouldn't it be something if we could turn Nigel to the "dark side"... ;-)

While it would certainly be interesting to see Nigel in the Rumour, I think we should probably have a backup plan for that backup plan.

The products you want are on page 458. Either the Gel Paste or the Finish (waxed) Gelcoat will do the job.

- The Gel Paste is great for areas that need significant buildup, since it doesn't run. This can be very convenient, but it's more difficult to spread it evenly. It's neutral colored (translucent clear), so you'll need to buy tint to mix into it.

- The Finish Gelcoat is white, so no tinting is necessary as long as you're working on a white hull. It's not as thick as the paste (more like a thick paint), so you may need to build it up in layers, depending on the nature of the repair.

The manufacturer of these products informed me that the Gel Paste is stronger than the Finish Gelcoat, but I've never had a problem with either one. They also stated that the Finish Gelcoat can be buffed to a higher gloss, but I haven't noticed any difference between them. IMO, the products are essentially interchangeable.

It wasn't staged, it was faked. The kayaks were added to existing whale footage. If you look closely at the water and the kayaks, their motions don't jive.

What the heck, let's have some fun with this! I'll get it started:

- It's a pretty good paperweight.

- If you throw it at someone, it might get their attention.

- The constant shipping back and forth to the S.H. warranty department is a good way to test whether UPS, FedEx or the USPS has better service to the west coast.

- It can be used to teach product designers how NOT to build a waterproof radio.

- You can clean your ears with the antenna.

- The antenna also makes a good coffee stirrer...if you wipe off the ear wax first.

- It makes a passable tent stake hammer.

Lessons are much more easily learned when presented so graphically. I'm glad to here that everything worked out well.

If I may make a few suggestions:

- A clean deck is a happy deck. Pumps, paddle floats, water bottles and such stored on deck are a nuisance at best and a liability at worst. Keeping them on-deck makes it more likely that they'll get lost during a capsize and rescue (the classic "yard sale") or simply get in the way. There are few things in kayaking more frustrating that trying to get back into your boat and getting hung up on your own gear while doing it. Stowing the pump and paddle float inside the cockpit keeps the deck clear and they're readily accessible in the event of a wet exit. While there is a reasonable argument to be made for keeping a pump accessible without opening one's spray skirt, for assisting other paddlers in pumping out their boat, the small likelihood of needing to do this isn't worth the hassle of keeping a pump on-deck, IMO.

- Your radio belongs on your body, not on your deck, which is true of other signalling devices (horn/whistle, signal mirror, flares). If you wet exit and lose your boat, you'll need these to summon help.

- Think about what you actually NEED on deck. Is it really necessary to have food, sun blocker and a towel on-deck? That's what day hatches and PFD pockets are for.

- Using a small (1.5 liter or less) hydration pack on the back of your PFD makes staying hydrated more convenient and gets one more loose object off your deck. The first time you have to fumble with a water bottle while paddling in rough conditions should be enough to convince you that there must be a better way.

- Your swimming experience mirrors my own; it's MUCH harder to swim with a kayak in rough water than it sounds and you can't count on the water to move you quickly. Under ideal conditions, one can swim pretty effectively while towing a kayak, but you could also re-enter easily. Swimming with a kayak in rough water is strenuous, frustrating and dangerous and should be considered a last resort.

- Don't paddle rough water alone. Had you simply waited for your companion before exiting the cove, you probably would have been back in your boat quickly. Then again, you might have missed a valuable learning experience.

Many, if not most of us, have had similar eye-opening experiences. Fortunately, we've lived to learn from them and share them with others. Thanks again for being willing to share.

We did not discuss the Board size specifically at the last meeting (where the "retirees" were announced), but we need a minimum of 9 members. That means that we have two slots that must be filled and five "optional" slots. Anyone who is interested in serving is welcome to submit their name.

On another note, I would like the thank the outgoing members for their service to the club. Well done!

It appears that the biggest difference between the lower end M2A/M32 and the higher end M1V/M88, aside from size differences, is the battery pack. The M2A/M32 come with NiCd batteries that are rated for 7.5 hours of use per charge. The Lithium ion batteries in the M1V/M88 are rated for double that. The M2a comes with an alkaline battery tray that's optional on the M32. Although the Icom literature doesn't specifically state it, typically alkaline battery trays are NOT waterproof, so they have limited utility for kayaking other than as an emergency backup. West Marine offers an exclusive - and interesting - M32LI model that comes with a lithium ion battery.

It's worth noting that the M1V and M88 are both Mil-spec radios designed for rough handling and harsh environmental conditions. I believe that they're the only two VHF handhelds on the market to meet military standards. The spec is way too complex to get into, but suffice it to say that it looks to be very stringent.

The differences in price between models are not all that large. The M88 can often be found for $225-$240 and Icom frequently offers a $50 rebate on them, bringing the net price down to under $200. The M1V can be found on sale for ~$170, which is about the same price as the M2A. The M32LI is on sale at West Marine for $159.95, a mere $10 more than the M32, which makes it a very good buy. Considering all this, it makes sense to buy one of the lithium battery models, since there is no price penalty.

I hope this helps you with your decision.

...simply take a pair of large beach towels and sew them together on three sides, leaving openings for your head and arms.

The club is blessed to have people like you who do so much for so many.

Let's just agree to disagree and move on. I apologize for letting this get personal.

At this point my PADI card isn't worth the plastic it's printed on. However, if I wanted to, I could present it to a dive guide, sign up for a trip and potentially put myself - and more importantly, other people - in danger. It seems wrong to rely on a system with such an obvious flaw.

It seems to me that periodic recertification the only way to ensure that a certification has real meaning.

I daresay the same thing is true of organizations that certify paddlers. For example, if an ACA, BCU or other certification was only good for 2 years (just an arbitrary number) after which paddlers either had to assess for a higher rating, re-assess for the same one or something to that effect, the rating would be far more useful. If someone tells you that they've had certification "X" for five years and it's CURRENT, it would give you a higher degree of confidence in their ability, since you know that they've been tested more than once and that they're active enough to want to maintain their certification.

I really don't know what your problem is Ken, but you're not going to pin it on me or blame me for everything you see as a deficiency within the club. No individual in the club has the degree of influence you attempt to ascribe to me. NO ONE! I agree with Carl that it's a shame that several of the more experienced paddlers have left the club, but it's got absolutely nothing to do with anything I've said. I'm afraid you'll have to go elsewhere to find a scapegoat.

As for your contention that the NSPN is "BCU-free", that's obviously absolutely false. There are plenty of active members with a variety of BCU certs and many more that are working on them. I haven't seen ANY decline in interest in BCU training among club members. Where do you get these ideas? It seems that when it comes to the NSPN, you see only what you want to see.

I encourage other paddlers to get training from ANY source, as it all has value. Skilled paddlers are better, safer paddlers, which is a philosophy that the NSPN has always supported, as have I. What, if any, training organization people choose or whether they want to be assessed or not is their personal choice. I have no vested interest one way or the other, since it's not my time or my money involved. Just to make my position absolutely clear, let me reiterate: TRAINING IS GOOD! Got it?

Skilled paddlers have left the club for a variety of reasons. A few have left because of political wrangling, which is truly unfortunate, but the majority have left because there are few, if any, club activities that that challenge or interest them. Unless one is interested in coaching/teaching less experienced paddlers, the number of opportunities for an advanced paddler to expand or test their abilities on club activities is, admittedly, limited. While no one wants to see this happening, to a certain extent it's "natural attrition". Advanced paddlers tend to paddle with others interested in the same types of activities, typically outside of the club. If you're out to push your limits, it's easier to call or email a few paddling friends of known skill than to post a trip on the NSPN site and potentially have to deal with unqualified paddlers responding. When pushing the envelope of skill and safety, this is arguably the most responsible thing to do.

The club is primarily geared toward beginner-intermediate paddlers. We don't typically organize trips or activities that would be classified as "advanced" because of the high liability concerns they raise. Ironically, it was some of the more advanced paddlers in the club that complained the loudest when we last had a "rough water" workshop and demanded that we not do them anymore. Equally as ironic, in some cases these same people later left the club because they perceived that there was nothing in it for them. Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways.

You have a great deal of skill and a lot that you could contribute to the club. Rather than complaining and fostering divisiveness, why not channel your energy in a positive direction and run a trip/workshop in Woods Hole or one of your other favorite paddling playgrounds? That would be interesting to the more advanced paddlers in the club and help keep them involved. That's what you want, isn't it?

I'll be there for the meeting and the paddle. I'll assist if you need me to.

...points out the basic failing of such participant ratings systems; they are a snapshot in time that may have no bearing on the present. What a rating tells you is that on a particular date under particular conditions, a person was capable of performing to a specified standard. That's it. It says nothing about the person's ability today under whatever conditions are present. Using myself as an example, I'm a PADI-Certified Open Water Diver. I can get my tanks filled and hit the water any time I want to. From the certification alone, there's no way to tell what I've been up to since I recieved my certification in 1988. The truth is that I haven't been diving in at least 10 years and I'm nowhere near competent to do so, but I can any time I like. Would YOU want to trust me with your safety on a dive? Don't worry, I wouldn't even consider it until I've gone through a refresher course, but that's just me.

Kayaker rating systems are no different. While perhaps one can assume a certain level of competence if someone has passed BCU 4* or 5*, there are still no guarantees. There's no way to know what a person with a 3* rating is actually capable of, since it's a flatwater, basic skills rating. Please don't think I'm trying to denegrate people who've acheived these BCU certifications; on the contrary, I applaud your dedication and initiative and you should be proud of what you've accomplished. I'm just pointing out a serious flaw in the way these certification systems work. The equally flawed PADI system is far more egregious IMO, since the risks for divers are even higher than for kayakers.

I'm certainly not suggesting that training isn't important (it definitely IS) and that certifications are not worthwhile if for no other reason than that they may serve as an incentive for people to get training, but using paddler certifications as a means of screening people for trips and such is essentially worthless. It would be different if it were more like coaching certifications, which require people to periodically update and test their skills, but that's not the way the system works. Additionally, there are many people like me who are reasonably competent paddlers, but have no interest in certifications. If you were a trip leader or guide running a level 3 trip, who would you rather have along, an experienced but uncertified paddler or a relative newbie that just did a 2/3* training/assessment over a weekend?

Lest people think I'm just picking on certification, asking someone how long they've been paddling can be equally worthless. I've met clueless people who've been paddling for 20+ years, but have watched others go from zero to substantial skills in a year or so (whether they've gotten any certifications along the way or not). It's a matter of dedication, not time. Someone who's been paddling for decades may well be an excellent source of local knowledge, but it doesn't make them a skilled paddler.

Assessing someone's judgement is even more nebulous. I guess the bottom line is that you never know what someone is capable of until you paddle with them.

Thanks Tim.

I had only seen the term used in relation to fishing weirs, but you're right, both definitions are listed in good 'ole Webster's Dictionary, which is where I found out there was more than one meaning.