back to article Hobbyist killed by home-made hovercraft

A 40-year-old New Zealand man has been killed by a blade from a home-made hovercraft. Police have said the blade came loose and struck Alastair Senior in the back of the head (the accident was originally reported to have decapitated the victim). Senior had “spent years” building the device in his garage, according to the New …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
    Big Brother

    That's pretty sad

    Man puts good time into his hobby, accident occurs. No-one deserves to be killed by his creation. Though I make an exception for the creature from Jekyll Island.

    How is that different from falling off a ladder while painting the house, pray tell?

    Also, is regulation now so pervasive that it's noteworthy that something isn't regulated?

  2. Chronigan

    A swamp boat is not a hovercraft.

    It doesn't use an air cushion.

    1. Captain TickTock
      Headmaster

      A swamp boat is not a hovercraft...

      That's right, but the part of the design they're referring to is the propulsion. which is the same in this case..

      1. Paul RND*1000
        Coat

        So?

        "the part of the design they're referring to is the propulsion. which is the same in this case"

        The Wright Flyer used rear-mounted props in a pusher configuration too. I don't hear anyone accusing *that* of being a hovercraft just because it happens to share a similar propulsion design.

      2. cptskippy

        A swamp boat is not a hovercraft...

        I don't recall ever seeing a hovercraft that using anything but this manner of propulsion.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Facepalm

    back of the head?

    So he was either standing behind the hovercraft with his back to it, or the prop was spinning in reverse?

    1. Captain TickTock
      Headmaster

      back of the head?...

      no. Structural failure caused the blade to fly off the shaft. Could go in any direction, depending on loads of factors.

      1. Grease Monkey Silver badge

        A Frame

        Depends how you read it. It says the A frame supporting the prop failed. That being the case he would presumably have to be in the drivers seat as the prop would come forwards when the A frame failed.

        The moral of the story? Don't build something potentially dangerous unless you are very confident of your frabrication skills and get somebody else to check it and test it before you use it.

        I'm not saying that this guy would have been as dumb as some I've come across, but I knew a bloke who built his own automotive space frame and suspension arms with zero welding experience. I pulled one of his welded joints appart by hand. Imagine if that thing had got as far as the road.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Agred

        Obviously so, but it seems to me that the cage that should have been around the fan blades either didn't exist, or wasn't substantial enough to deal with the forces requested of it. There would be considerable kinetic energy in those rotating blades.

        I rather suspect that the protection he put around the fan assembly was inadequate.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hovercrafts on public roads?

    "According to Sergeant Nutall, no license is required to build or operate hovercraft unless they’re used on public roads."

    Are you really allowed to operate hovercrafts on public roads in NZ?

    That is like allowing drunks on pogosticks to motorways. A strong wing gust will push it anywhere. Out of all things humans have made, the only transport less operable is a hot air balloon.

    1. Captain Scarlet Silver badge
      WTF?

      hmm

      Unless its like a hovercraft that can then put down a set of wheels I'm also puzzles as to how it would be safe to have a hovercraft on the mainroad.

      Hmm http://www.smartsrus.com/images/other/Smart-Hovercraft.jpg

    2. Andus McCoatover
      Windows

      "only transport less operable is a hot air balloon."

      Disagree. My friend's husband makes his living flying these, and he can put it down on a sixpence.

      But Your quote "allowing drunks on pogosticks to motorways" had me rolling about again. Ta muchly!

  5. Asgard
    Unhappy

    Very sad news.

    That is really sad news. He sounded like a really good guy. Apparently his partner and neighbour witnessed the incident and as he was only 40 when he died, I guess his 3 kids are still young, which is so bad for them to loose their father as well so soon. That is such a sad story. :(

    Hovercraft are a lot of fun and it sounded like he was very unlucky after a structural failure. Its obviously easy to say in hindsight, but I guess he was having so much fun driving it for the first time, that he didn't stop to see how it was holding up. I suppose at least it can be said he died doing what he loved doing so much, but its really sad for his family. My sincere condolences to his family. He sounded like a good person to know. :(

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I've heard this on TV many times

    Don't try this at home.

  7. scarshapedstar
    Headmaster

    Swamp boat ain't a hovercraft

    It's just a boat with a big ol' fan on the back instead of a propeller. Or you could think of it as simply an air propeller, sure. The point is that the fan is can push it over shallow water, logs, alligators, etc. without breaking or getting stuck the way an outboard motor would.

    But it doesn't hover.

  8. Magani
    Boffin

    Which one?

    It's either a 'swamp boat" or a hovercraft. It can't be both, unless the now-ex-inventor came up with a unique design.

    The NZ Herald's article is less than clear and their photo is from a photo library, but with the report saying,

    "...when the propeller came loose. It fell and the blade struck him on the back of the head.",

    I'd suspect it's more like a Florida swamp boat than a hovercraft. Hovercraft float on air; air boats float on water.

    Regardless of the above, it's a loss when someone shuffles off their mortal coil while pursuing a dream.

    Icon to tell social column / police beat reporters to stop reporting on technical subjects beyond their ken.

    1. Jimbo 6

      Oh for chuff's sake

      Please google* 'swamp boat images' and 'hovercraft images' and compare.

      All swamp boats and most hovercraft have a huge fan (sometimes two) in the same place on the vehicle.

      It's like saying that a Robin Reliant has a one-wheel-at-front-two-wheels-at-back configuration, just like a jet aircraft. It's not like saying that a Robin Reliant IS a jet aircraft, so please stop looking for technical mistakes where none exist.

      *other search engines do exist.

      1. Geoff Mackenzie

        Just to be pedantic

        It's Reliant Robin, not Robin Reliant, unless I drive a Civic Honda.

        1. Jimbo 6
          Thumb Up

          Hahahaha

          You are indeed correct sir. I doff my cap to your pedantic accuracy.

        2. The Indomitable Gall
          Joke

          Geoff Mackenzie

          " It's Reliant Robin, not Robin Reliant, unless I drive a Civic Honda. "

          Do you work for the mayor...?

          Do you use one of the pool cars...?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Pool cars?

            Nice way to get back on topic.

  9. Mark 78

    "No license is required to build or operate hovercraft unless they’re used on public roads."

    Wow, I'd love to see someone trying to control a hovercraft on the roads. I'd have thought it would have been illegal to take them on the road rather than needing a licence.

    1. BenDwire Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Then take a look at my brother-in-law... (Pic #4)

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/6910533.stm

      1. Jerome 0

        Hovercraft on the roads?

        I'm pretty sure we can make an exception to the rule when the road in question is under three feet of water.

  10. Andus McCoatover
    Windows

    "My hovercraft is full of eels"

    -sprang to mind. However, when I flew microlights years ago, you wouldn't start the thing if spectators were in direct line (i,e. 90 degrees) from the prop, which was wooden (I kid you not!). There was always the risk one of the two bades would shear, or throw some stones at the onlookers.

    I'm just a bit confused how the blade came forward, and not out of the side.

    1. pepper

      wondering

      The article doesnt make a lot of sense, But I presume he is either standing on the side of the rotating propellor and it comes of, goes through the gaurd and strikes him in the head. Or he is standing in front of the rotating propellor and it ricochets of the gaurd into the poor fella's back. Or, he propellor wasnt moving, he was ducked underneath it and it fell on the back of his head.

      And this presumes it is a airboat instead of a hovercraft.

      1. No, I will not fix your computer
        Unhappy

        The "A" frame failed

        Which probably means it "broke", perhaps in such a way that it (due to twisting forces?) collapsed and turned through 90 degrees, perhaps even twisting part of the "A" frame into the blades, if there was a guard perhaps it twisted out of the way or ripped open.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        FAIL

        wondering

        If you know that the opposite of ON is OFF.

        1. Andus McCoatover
          Windows

          YOU'RE retarded, not YOUR retarded.

          Please, get it right. My grandparents afforded me a place at a "Grammar" school. Therefore, I worked hard at my English, as I now am doing with my Finnish.

          I know people have trouble with "their", "there" and "the're".

          But getting it wrong is like being interviewed for a senior position wearing a baseball cap pointing backwards. It just says "Numpty"

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Happy

            Nope

            I think I know what my name is.

            And I agree with you. I went to a Grammar school too.

            See http://forums.theregister.co.uk/post/1138086

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Trollface

              It still astounds me.

              Obvious Troll is obvious.

            2. Andus McCoatover
              Windows

              Okay, Okay...I admit defeat.

              ...But as my grandparents sent me, would that be a "grannie" school? ;-) Leamington College for Boys (Now Binswood Hall), which I really want to refer to on a CV as "Bugger Hall" and see who reads the thing.

              Did a report once, where I said...we used a CMD57 (Rohde and Swarz measuring tool) , and a P2C2E....

              In the vocabulary of the report, I had to explain all the abbreviations I used. Then the document was reviewed. Nokia way.

              P2C2E? "Process Too Complex To Explain"*

              From the reviewers (20 or so) only one person picked it up..Review process practically worthless.

              *(Salman Rushdie - "Haroun and the Sea of Stories". One for your kids, it's well written, good reading, and damn funny)

              1. Just Thinking

                Angus McCoatup not Andus McCoatover

                You don't know you're name either...

                1. Andus McCoatover
                  Windows

                  "You don't know you're name either.."

                  You don't know "Your from You're either". Gotcha.

                2. Andus McCoatover
                  Windows

                  Angus McCoatup is someone else, mimicking my nick.

                  Must've been chatting to my Indian mate, Mahatma Kote.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I think it's fairly clear

    "The hovercraft’s design apparently imitates what’s called a 'swamp boat' in the USA, with a propeller attached to an A-frame at the rear of the boat"

    It's a hovercraft unless everyone's got a fundamental part of the story wrong.

    Its propulsion, rather than multiple fans or ducting, is a single fan on a A-frame reminiscent of a swamp boat.

  12. Ian Davies
    Unhappy

    Fan guard?

    Where he was positioned in relation to the fan is almost immaterial. My first reaction was, how did the fan blade get past the guard? I mean, the fan *was* enclosed by a guard, right?

    Either way, very sad to be killed by something like that, especially leaving behind a wife and kids.

    1. Captain TickTock
      Headmaster

      Fan guard..

      is designed to stop you getting near the fan, not vice versa.

      It's not supposed to compensate for the propeller coming off.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Are you sure?

        I'm sure elf 'n safety would have something to say about that.

  13. Telecide
    Stop

    Regulation-haters

    Some may howl at the suggestion that a personal hobby such as this should be covered by regulation, but laws are there not to protect us from ourselves but from others. The blade could have easily hit someone else, possibly an innocent member of the public. Its like the 'why should I be forced by law to wear a helmet while on my motorbike' argument. If you kill yourself thats up to you, but what about others, and the extra burden you unnecessarily put on the health service?

    1. Am
      Flame

      erm

      If I kill myself having an accident whilst riding a motorbike without a lid, assuming I die before the ambulance arrives, surely I'm putting less of a strain on the health service than if I am wearing a lid and have an accident and subsequently need lots of medical attention due to injuries?

      (I am deliberately ignoring the effects either may have on friends and family, but I can think of siutuations where dying would place less burden on them than surviving, depending on the personalities of the people involved)

      1. Geoff Mackenzie

        Lidless bikers

        I read somewhere (in 'Superfreakonomics' I think) that where helmets are not mandatory on motorcycles, there are more healthy organs available for transplant, so not only do lidless bikers put less of a load on the health service, they're actually quite helpful.

        Arguably, riding without a lid might make accidents more likely - I haven't seen any statistics but it's pretty distracting hitting a large insect (like a wasp or a bee) with a lid on, let alone without one. I suppose that might be offset by the 'wasp stuck in helmet' risk though; I'd be interested to see the numbers.

        Well, not that interested to be completely honest. But I'd wear a lid on my bike whether or not it was a legal requirement, and I suspect most bikers would do the same.

        1. Anomalous Cowturd
          Facepalm

          @ Geoff Re: Lidless bikers

          I once copped a large bumble bee in the eye at about 50 mph with my visor up.

          I couldn't open my eye for about fifteen minutes, and it was streaming like a bastard.

          I ended up with a lovely shiner, (black eye), and considerable respect for bees! Ah, the joys of youth. ;o)

          ^^^^^ That was me!

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Wasp

            I got a wasp at 40mph or so on the way to work this morning. Luckilly I wear glasses, but I know where you're coming from.

            Oh, on the subject of compulsion...

            We all know that in the UK is it complusory to wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle on a public road. What is less well understood is that this extends to riding in any public place. Obviously you can go helmetless on private land. I wasn't entirely clear on this until some numpty got nicked for riding his bike on the public playing fields near my house. The charge sheet included driving an unregistered vehicle, driving without licence, MOT or insurance, riding without a helmet and god knows what else. He tried to argue that none of this applied because he was not on a public road, but apparently much of the RTA and associated legislation applies in any public place.

    2. BatCat
      Go

      No helmet...

      ...probably means there's less burden on the health service as you're more likely to be killed in an accident than survive it but with life-changing injuries.

      I don't see how forcing bikers to wear helmets protects anyone else, other than maybe from the financial implications of losing the family bread-winner.

      Stick to horse riding, no nanny-state regulations in play there unless you're in certain organised competitions....

      1. David Barrett

        only if...

        ... you're over 14 if your under 14 then it is a legal requirement that you wear a helmet.

        1. BatCat
          Happy

          True...

          ... forgot about that. And that is definitely a self-protection rule as at 14 it's unlikely that you'd have any dependants to burden the state with if you were killed.

          Then again I'd most likely be dead or brain damaged if I'd not been wearing a helmet when some twat knocked me off my push-bike one time - and there's no legal obligation to wear bike helmets at any age...

          1. Magani
            Stop

            @BatCat

            "- and there's no legal obligation to wear bike helmets at any age..."

            Depends where you are. In the Greater Antipodes (and AFAIK, the Lesser Antipodes also) wearing a bike helmet is compulsory if you're on your Deadly Treadly in a public place.

      2. Andus McCoatover
        Windows

        "Stick to horse riding",

        Even for that, you'd be daft not to wear a (reinforced) riding hat.

        Same as riding a bike. Helmet. It may not look cool, but sitting in a hospital chair, dribbling, while a nurse tries to spoon-feed you doesn't either.

        1. BatCat
          Happy

          Riding hats...

          ...can look pretty cool I think. I always wear one, just pointing out that if you want a dangerous hobby with little H&S interference, horse riding is a pretty good one.

          Tally Ho!

    3. Ru
      FAIL

      Re: Regulation-haters

      "Could have easily hit someone else", you say? Based on what evidence?

      There are already plenty of legal frameworks across the world for dealing with situations where an idiot puts other people at risk. I don't recall any suggestion that he was doing so here. I'm sure you'd love to live in the sort of nanny state that forbids all activities except those expressly defined as safe and acceptable, but a combination of a compensation culture and removing people's personal responsibility does no-one any good in the long run.

  14. mark 63 Silver badge
    Angel

    sympathy

    It makes a refreshing change to see some sympathy coming from reg readers , not not a load of 'fkin idiot' / darwin type comments. well done everyone :)

    re the hovercraft / swamp boat debate :

    Hovercraft do have propellers on the back too!!! , so there is nothing in the story to indicate one way or the other.

  15. deshepherd

    its a hovercraft

    If you go to the original NZ articles then it seems clear it is a hovercraft ... mentions of him test hovering it at home, comments on building hovercraft kits from person from NZ hovercraft club. Also the article suggests that the accident was caused by a failure on the bolts that held the frame containing the propulsion fan to the body of the hovercraft ... assume if this happend when fan was running then the frame would have moved forward at speed (propelled by the fan) hitting the unfortunate pilot standing/sitting in front - probably was killed by the frame etc hitting him rather than the fan itself.

    1. Olafthemighty
      Pint

      @ deshepherd

      Thanks for that - I was starting to think I was the only person who'd bothered to read the original!

      <-- Not while operating heavy machinery though.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    (untitled)

    I think there's more sympathy because what he was doing wasn't particularly stupid. Ok, maybe someone more expert could have checked things over, but generally speaking he is a victim of an unfortunate accident.

  17. Dave 32
    WTF?

    Drunks on Pogosticks

    Do drunks riding pogosticks require a license there? How about if the pogosticks are gasoline (or Propane) powered?

    As for helmets, I'm still looking for a motorcycle helmet in pickelhaub style:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picklehaub

    Dave

  18. TimeMaster T
    IT Angle

    I have to ask ...

    How many people have died in hobby built hovercraft related accidents in the past 100 years?

    Tragic?, yes. News worthy?, maybe on a really slow day.

  19. Arbuthnot Darjeeling
    Facepalm

    the fact that

    el reg commentards can't work out how the accident happened from the story is utterly irrelevant.

    this is a story in an online it journal, not an accident investigation report to the nz coroner (who you should approach for more detailed information).

    jeez i'm glad i don't work with summa youse guys

  20. Christopher E. Stith
    Big Brother

    allow no helmet, but require eye protection

    In the US state of Illinois it is legal for those 18 years and older to decide not to wear a helmet on a motorcycle. It is still required by law to wear eye protection consisting of goggles, safety glasses, or sunglasses capable of deflecting insects, dust, etc. from the eyes without breaking and coming apart into the eyes. This is in the same state that recently expanded front-seat seatbelt laws to include all seats in the car, and that is the last US state not to have some sort of concealed handgun permit. So maybe there's something to this particular personal freedom.

    There are actually arguments against helmets. One is that in lower-speed accidents unlikely to cause serious head injuries the extra weight can compound neck injuries. Another is that most helmets obstruct part of your vision or hearing so that you're more likely to be in an accident in the first place.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like