Talk:Personal flotation device
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Kayaking WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Kayaking. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
Contents |
[edit] lifejacket vs pfd
My contributions to this article are taken from the node I wrote (of the same name) on Everything2. My homenode is here.
I made some corrections in this update. The previous version was incorrect in stating that survival suits are designated as PFDs by the USCG, and also misclassified type 5 PFDs as inflatables only.
This page lumps together most flotation devices as "lifejackets". As I understand it, this term should only be used when the device in question has been proven to turn an unconscious wearer face-up, plus some other requirements. Most other things, particularly the foam vests used for dinghy sailing, waterskiing, etc, are "bouyancy aids". PeteVerdon 22:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
-
- I very much agree with PeteVerdon and the two are very different. Perhaps someone could help out creating a different article? I would do it but I am flat out getting the Kayaking WikiProject on the way. Bennyboyz3000 10:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Actually from what I have been reading in various forums, the USCG is coming around to the viewpoint that PFDs should be called lifejackets again if for no reason than name recognition. As an example, see the table at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/mse4/mse4home.htm where PFDs are in parenthesis and Life jacket is the main item.--- Safemariner 21:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Sinking lifejackets?
I have heard an urban legend that the "old" lifejackets made of cork or kapok used to lose buoyancy after being immersed in water for a long (many hours?) period of time? Can anyone confirm or deny this? Mieciu K 14:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Naming? (more on lifejacket vs pfd)
Recently, I was leading on a camp in Bairnsdale, Victoria, not too far from Melbourne. We went into the canoe, and the leaders in charge stressed that we not tell the kids to put their "life jackets on", but to put their "PFD's on, or their BV's, because apparently they're not allowed to call them "life jackets" anymore, becuase they dont have a 100% chance of saving your life.. They do however have a 100% chance of keeping you floating, or buoyant.. Anyone know about this outside Victoria? --Deon555talkReview 03:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I am an Australian (Melbourne bred) living in New Zealand. I can tell you that the PFDs in question must have been, specifically, Buoyancy aids, made for kayaking or canoeing. I am a whitewater kayaking instructor and all instructors will stress their difference for safety reasons. They will not save your life neither should they be relied on absolutely to keep one afloat, hence the name "Buoyancy aid" (i.e they are to aid buoyancy, not ensure it - they DO NOT have a 100% chance of keeping you bouyant). Bennyboyz3000 10:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Nothing is 100% except death and taxes and every sane person knows this. The Type I vests are intended to "usually" turn an unconscious person face up. I would say "usually" means approximately greater than 50% of the time for people with ordinary proportions and weight. Whether or not they will remain face up is unknown. Whether or not this includes extreme water conditions is unknown. Even wearing scuba gear cannot guarantee 100%.
[edit] redirect collision; alternate life preserver def
I just finished reading a Sherlock Holmes story, the Case of the Bruce-Partington Plans. A character in the story uses a weapon called a "life-preserver" to kill someone; from context it seems likely to mean a short club or billy stick of some sort, but might also be a sap. this should probably be researched, and the life preserver redirect changed to a disambig. -- Akb4 01:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
