Inventor Creates Flotation Device Bazooka

Projectile? by Reilaos · 2010-10-06 05:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Hitting the water activates an expanding foam unit..."

What about hitting a drowning human?

Re:Projectile? by rubycodez · 2010-10-06 05:40 · Score: 5, Funny

you'll be delighted to know that the impacted human will not have drowning as their cause of death
Re:Projectile? by AnonymousClown · 2010-10-06 05:40 · Score: 1

"Hitting the water activates an expanding foam unit..."
What about hitting a drowning human?
The unit will still expand upon impact.
Why? Is that a concern?

--
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
Re:Projectile? by Farmer+Tim · 2010-10-06 05:48 · Score: 5, Funny

What about hitting a drowning human?
Not as easy as hitting the water, but worth more points.

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Projectile? by fahrbot-bot · 2010-10-06 06:08 · Score: 2, Funny

What about hitting a drowning human?

Oh, it's not so hard. You just don't lead them as much.
- Gunner, Full Metal Jacket

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Re:Projectile? by Ihmhi · 2010-10-06 07:33 · Score: 1

A "BONK!" graphic appears above their head, at which point you may opt to say "DOOOWN TOWN!" in your best Brooklyn accent.
(Sorry, been playing a lot of TF2 lately...)

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:Projectile? by Migraineman · 2010-10-06 07:34 · Score: 4, Funny

When the first one hits the water and inflates, you can use it as a shield.

Sailor1:"Damn, I missed."
Sailor2:"Shoot him again."
Sailor1:"This isn't a video game, I'm trying to save the guy."
Sailor2:"You'd better hurry, he's gonna camp behind the first one."
Sailor1: *foomp*
Re:Projectile? by Wraithlyn · 2010-10-06 07:40 · Score: 1

Well clearly it wouldn't expand then. Can't you read?

--
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Re:Projectile? by Zilvreen · 2010-10-06 10:46 · Score: 1

Well, a drowning human is composed of around 80% water or something like that... More if they've consumed large amounts of seawater.
Re:Projectile? by davester666 · 2010-10-06 17:26 · Score: 1

Bonus points if the victim dies of suffocation from the expanding foam, doubled if any bones are broken due to the impact of the device hitting said target..er....victim.

--
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Re:Projectile? by Farmer+Tim · 2010-10-06 17:38 · Score: 1

Combo multiplier if you can take out a seagull with the same shot.

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Projectile? by boule75 · 2010-10-07 05:58 · Score: 1

A human is 80% water anyway. So it produces only 80% of the nominal foam quantity.

--
I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
Re:Projectile? by JavaBear · 2010-10-13 00:55 · Score: 1

What about adding heat seeking tracking to the grenade, and have it splash down x meters from the heat signature closest to it's original target range?
Then you a) don't inadvertently kill the person you want to save, and b) even a drunk idiot should have a chance to get the flotation device land within a "useful" range of the victim.
Re:Projectile? by hedwards · 2010-10-15 10:59 · Score: 1

Probably because people have a nasty habit of drowning when knocked out.

Er.. by iONiUM · 2010-10-06 05:39 · Score: 3, Insightful

So uh, what happens when your aim is a little too good, and you beam someone in the water with this 3.5kg thing? It's hard to swim when you're unconscious..

Re:Er.. by Faatal · 2010-10-06 05:44 · Score: 3, Informative

Probably takes some training to be good at shooting it accurately. For example I worked as a lifeguard for several summers when I was in high school. When we threw rescue tubes (those red foam things), we were taught to always overthrow the target and then pull the tube back toward the victim so they can latch on easily.
Re:Er.. by rakuen · 2010-10-06 06:17 · Score: 1

From my understanding, the launcher is 3.5 kg, which means the buoy it's firing probably weighs less than that. It'd still be a problem, but it'd certainly hurt less.
Re:Er.. by loafula · 2010-10-06 06:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

If I'd have to make a wager, I'd say the risk of hitting a person in the head with the projectile is much less than the risk of that person having to swim 150m through rough seas to get to a raft dropped off the side of a boat.

--
FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
Re:Er.. by nuckfuts · 2010-10-06 06:31 · Score: 1

I read it as the entire device (launcher and projectile) weighing 3.5 kg, not the projectile itself.
Re:Er.. by nospam007 · 2010-10-06 08:13 · Score: 1

"Probably takes some training to be good at shooting it accurately."
It's a fucking T-shirt cannon, how hard can it be?
Re:Er.. by mabhatter654 · 2010-10-06 11:05 · Score: 1

no, you're not using enough 3D models and technobabble. He's probably got a patent pending on this and will sue all mascots when he finds out!
But yeah, it's a FANCY Tee Shirt cannon, but it shoots 150 meters.... You'd have a hard time getting something as light as a flotation device shot that far without compressing it somehow.
Re:Er.. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 12:55 · Score: 0

What happens when you do this deliberately at point blank range, then pretend you were trying to save them? I can think of any numer of irritating fools at public pools I'd like to do this to, and no witness would say otherwise, especially their parents.
Re:Er.. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-07 04:56 · Score: 0

If I'd have to make a wager, I'd say the risk of hitting a person in the head with the projectile is much less than the risk of that person having to swim 150m through rough seas to get to a raft dropped off the side of a boat.
Not sure you want to make that wager... In the Flying Lifeguard episode of Prototype This, the build team built an automated mortar version of this device. I don't think it's shown in the linked clip, but in the full episode, while testing, they actually hit a camera man downrange!
Re:Er.. by tsotha · 2010-10-07 22:22 · Score: 1

You're probably right, but life being what it is the very first time this thing is actually used they're gonna nail the swimmer right between the eyes.
Re:Er.. by afxgrin · 2010-10-10 14:59 · Score: 1

A refinement to the device would be a range finder, with programmable deployment pod. Instead you fire it over their head, so when the floatation projectile reaches the specified distance, it suddenly expands and drops instead of beaning the drowning person in the head. This would probably push the price up a bit, but makes it particularly cool.
Re:Er.. by Neil+Boekend · 2010-10-10 21:49 · Score: 1

it depends: if you bet on it to do so it won't. If you bet on it to miss it'll hit.

--
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
Re:Er.. by iamhassi · 2010-10-11 13:05 · Score: 1

"what happens when your aim is a little too good, and you beam someone in the water with this 3.5kg thing?"

considering it's not designed for accuracy I doubt anyone will hit anyone at 150 meters (1.5 football fields).

It takes top atheletes nearly 30 seconds to swim 50 meters, and average swimmers at least double that, meaning a minute and a half to 3 minutes for someone to reach you 150 meters away. It's very easy to be very dead after 3 minutes in the water making this invention is genius, wonder why no one thought of this before?

My only issue is the expanding foam, how long does it take to reach full size?

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Re:Er.. by iamhassi · 2010-10-11 13:16 · Score: 1

ah nevermind, seems delivering life vests by rocket has existed for awhile

--
my karma will be here long after I'm gone

Up to 150m you say? by blair1q · 2010-10-06 05:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

So someone 60m from the boat will only have to swim another 90m away from the boat to get their floatie, when the jackass firing the thing misreads the directions.

And then there's the chance someone will just toss the whole unit into the drink, thinking it's the flotation device.

Here's my invention: in situations where people are likely to go overboard, require them to wear flotation vests.

Re:Up to 150m you say? by aquila.solo · 2010-10-06 05:51 · Score: 3, Informative

See, the problem with your invention is that it doesn't involve shooting a floaty-grenade launcher. Back to the drawing board with you!

;-)
Re:Up to 150m you say? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 05:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

What do you not understand about "up to" 150m? If you fire it into the water it's not going to go much farther.
Re:Up to 150m you say? by blair1q · 2010-10-06 06:31 · Score: 1

You've already gotten to yell "Man Overboard!" what more do you need?
Re:Up to 150m you say? by Lumpy · 2010-10-06 06:33 · Score: 1, Offtopic

Are you Insane??
Require them to wear life saving gear??!?!
Actually, current safety gear for a motorcycle, if worn by the driver can walk away with only minor bruises from a 100mph crash. Unfortunately most Motorcycle riders are too stupid to buy and use said gear.
I get a kick out of the complete morons riding their crotch rocket in flip flops, shorts and a t-shirt... They advertise to the world "I AM A COMPLETE IDIOT" even a 1 Gram insect at highway speeds will knock the wind out of you and leave a bruise the size of a tennisball.
Disclaimer: I Ride, I ride a LOT, I'm just not stupid and ride without safety gear. It's a choice I make. and I support the choice of the idiots that choose not to, IT means I get to buy their bike for parts from their next of kin for almost nothing.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:Up to 150m you say? by srussia · 2010-10-06 06:40 · Score: 2, Funny

Actually, current safety gear for a motorcycle, if worn by the driver can walk away with only minor bruises from a 100mph crash. Unfortunately most Motorcycle riders are too stupid to buy and use said gear.
This "safety gear" you refer to is called a "car".

--
Set your phasers on "funky"!
Re:Up to 150m you say? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 06:47 · Score: 0

Yes, because a car renders you completely invulnerable.
Thinking like that is why people like us should always wear gear.
Re:Up to 150m you say? by TheLink · 2010-10-06 07:26 · Score: 1

Uh how did you come to such a conclusion from his post? Maybe you should have used a better helmet ;).

His post was in reply to someone claiming that motorcycle safety gear can allow drivers to "walk away with only minor bruises from a 100mph crash".

Which is harder to achieve than with a "car" scenario.

From what I see the main reason why motorcycle riders in official races walk away after crashes and the ones on the street don't is because on a certified race circuit when "stuff happens" riders usually get to slide a great distance without anything impaling or dismembering or squishing them.

In contrast on the street, all that fancy bike gear isn't going to save you if you smack into a tree or vehicle at 100mph. Or a truck rolls over you.

Most normal cars don't do well against a fair sized tree at such speeds.

So it'll be very very impressive to see a bike suit that can effectively protect a rider in such scenarios. I'm not sure if that "inflatable airbag" suit thing would be significantly better in this case. Better perhaps, but good enough?
--
- Too many replies beneath your current threshold
Re:Up to 150m you say? by geekoid · 2010-10-06 07:47 · Score: 1

A) Launch a second one if you miss.
B) This is for people trained to use.
C) In some some seas, a simple life jacket isn't enough.
D) What cruise line is going to make all their passengers wear a life jacket all the time?
E) What about beach goers?
F) Giving someone in a bad water situation something to hold onto with their hands makes it easier for a rescue person to control the person.
It is a good idea, you just seem to gt self fulfillment from making bullshit reason why something is bad. You are being a sad human being.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:Up to 150m you say? by blair1q · 2010-10-06 08:24 · Score: 1

at 100 mph the car becomes your killer. it rolls and instead of being a nice little roller skate it's a lumpy mass of razor blades.
you're right about bike accidents at 100 mph at the track; and anything at the track that could be unyielding at those speeds is buried in straw or tires or foam
if full body armor was actuarily significant street accidents, you'd see motorcycle cops wearing it
Re:Up to 150m you say? by Lumpy · 2010-10-07 01:59 · Score: 1

You do see cops wearing it. All over europe and in California Cops on bikes wear armor.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:Up to 150m you say? by arivanov · 2010-10-08 04:17 · Score: 1

Yeah, and everyone on the beach wearing one.
You obviously never had to deal with a rip current. It is not funny. You just see the shore going away at a speed that can make even an experienced swimmer panic on the spot and try to fight the current instead of getting out of it.

--
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Re:Up to 150m you say? by underqualified · 2010-10-14 18:50 · Score: 1

bazooka-propelled life vests!

Scrubs, anyone? by Dan+Dankleton · 2010-10-06 05:43 · Score: 4, Funny

A floatation device bazooka sounds like something that The Janitor from Scrubs would create

Re:Scrubs, anyone? by kalirion · 2010-10-06 09:23 · Score: 1

I don't think it could coexist very well with the KnifeWrench.
Re:Scrubs, anyone? by mr_mischief · 2010-10-13 05:06 · Score: 1

You need to also get the SheathHammer.

200 year old technology by vlm · 2010-10-06 05:43 · Score: 5, Interesting

That tech is about 200 years old. No kidding. 1st documented rescue rocket rescue 18 February 1808.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~dodd/gail/publications/trengrouse/Essay.html

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger

Re:200 year old technology by itsme1234 · 2010-10-06 06:42 · Score: 1

THIS is why I love slashdot. It "just happened" that some user knew there was already somebody using freaking rockets for maritime rescue. AND has a link well prepared for people who aren't ready to dig through 200 years old diaries they can't access anyway, with nice pictures to boot.
Thank you!
Re:200 year old technology by ginbot462 · 2010-10-06 06:51 · Score: 1

Yea it's a dupe. I read it on slashdot back then too. Course then we called "Ye Bellman Boarde". I had a 2 digit id back then as well (everyone did, the hundreds place hadn't been invented yet), but when the community did away with florins -- I swore I wouldn't come back and went to a pig trough called Digge'. I finally came back to slashdot when the swine flu came around in the 70s (the board at that time was called Static Track. The moderator was, of course, Clu Gulager).
Keep on Truckin!

--
Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
Re:200 year old technology by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 07:11 · Score: 0

There was a show called Prototype This! One of their projects was to have protection on a beach that had no lifeguard. You wore a GPS device about the size of a watch and hit the panic button. The device on shore shot a tube that hit the water and a piece of material dissolved in the water then causing the raft to inflate. It was a very cool solution although not super practical since you had to wear the GPS. But to the point below...maybe in a situation of an aircraft carrier where it would be somewhat realistic to have crew wearing a gps device and the need for automation is real given the ship can't easily turn and you only have a few seconds to react...could be cool.
But how this guy is getting credit for something that seems to have been done already a few times doesn't make sense to me....
Re:200 year old technology by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 07:19 · Score: 0

Disregard that, it's written in comic sans.
Re:200 year old technology by Ihmhi · 2010-10-06 07:35 · Score: 2, Funny

Is that website 200 years old as well?

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:200 year old technology by neongrau · 2010-10-06 08:49 · Score: 1

not sure if that was the same show i saw. but that's what i was thinking when i read that. they had 2 or 3 teams, one used a remote controlled model airplane to carry the life buoy to the person, another team built some kind of mortar which was in fact a t-shirt cannon. after tweaking targetting with a computer to assist against wind they successfully delivered the life buoy within a few metres to the person in the water.
Re:200 year old technology by Patch86 · 2010-10-06 09:10 · Score: 1

This one appears to work very well. Perfection rather than innovation I guess.
Appropriately, it has won the James Dyson Award. Dyson didn't invent the vacuum cleaner, just made better ones.
Re:200 year old technology by way2trivial · 2010-10-06 09:46 · Score: 1

If you don't have comic sans on your computer- you'll never know
alternatively- you can put a substitution preference into your browser

--
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Re:200 year old technology by inKubus · 2010-10-06 12:28 · Score: 1

This was on Prototype This a LONG time ago. It's in the Flying Life Guard episode, and they shoot an inflating life preserver out of a canon. Actually, theirs is even better because the stranded person has a little box that transmits their location to the gun and it puts the life jacket within 10 feet of them. Good show, by the way, and Season One is available on netflix streaming..

--
Cool! Amazing Toys.
Re:200 year old technology by Muad'Dave · 2010-10-07 04:57 · Score: 1

Well, I just happen to have this nugget of knowledge rattling around in my brain: Lyle Guns were used long ago to shoot lines to ships in distress along the US coasts by the US Lifesaving Service.

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Re:200 year old technology by TenDollarMan · 2010-10-20 01:46 · Score: 1

Came here to say this.
It was used in Australia in a place called Robe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robe,_South_Australia
I can imagine that drowning mariners would have been disheartened to find people on the shore firing rockets at them...
What happens if you accidentally drop the bazooka in the water?

--
I hate my flatmate

aiming method?? by magarity · 2010-10-06 05:43 · Score: 1

There doesn't seem to be much in the way of aiming assistance from the graphic. If there's enough force to shoot the payload 150M then I'd prefer it land a few meters near to me but not on my head if I were in need of its help. Aiming as shown could put the thing 100M away.

Re:aiming method?? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 06:06 · Score: 0

If it is as easy to use and as accurate as the AT4 anti tank weapon then aiming should not be a problem.
With the specified distance of 150m I would expect to be able to place the flotation device within 1m from the target.
Re:aiming method?? by zelbinion · 2010-10-06 07:08 · Score: 1

Ah, yes, well... I guess you'll just have to wait until next year when the Human Homing Emergency Life-Preserver Munition Emitter (HHELP-ME) is available. Until then, I guess you can sink 'em or save 'em (or both) with the same weapon, er, um, life saving bazooka...
I wonder when someone will build a mod to put one of these in a first person shooter? BFG? Naw, give me the LPB!

Boom. Headshot. by Drakkenmensch · 2010-10-06 05:47 · Score: 2, Funny

A bazooka that saves lives by shooting people in the face. Safety has never been so cool!

Re:Boom. Headshot. by lancelotlink · 2010-10-06 05:51 · Score: 1

So does that mean Dick Cheney can finally shoot people in the face and more easily get away with it claiming that "I was just trying to save the guy"?
Re:Boom. Headshot. by Drakkenmensch · 2010-10-06 06:06 · Score: 1

So does that mean Dick Cheney can finally shoot people in the face and more easily get away with it claiming that "I was just trying to save the guy"?
Or that he'll keep using shotguns and claim that he thought it was the liferaft shooter he was using.
Re:Boom. Headshot. by Drakkenmensch · 2010-10-06 06:09 · Score: 1

So... just read back your comment and realized I misread what you meant to say there. Sorry about duplicating your post!
Re:Boom. Headshot. by drc003 · 2010-10-06 06:18 · Score: 1

Yet both of your posts were modded higher than the original. Wow.

I personally think this is indeed the sweetest raft ever! Love the great orange color so no cops mistake it for a bazooka and let off three clips of ammo into your chest. :)
Re:Boom. Headshot. by badboy_tw2002 · 2010-10-06 07:16 · Score: 1

Dick Cheney doesn't need to make excuses, nor does Dick Cheney make mistakes. If Dick Cheney shot you in the face, you deserved it, and he'll do it again, and he wont' say sorry!
Re:Boom. Headshot. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 10:07 · Score: 0

Do you always speak about yourself in the third-person?
Re:Boom. Headshot. by Neil+Boekend · 2010-10-10 22:05 · Score: 1

Next step is to paint a real bazooka orange so the cops will think it's a lifesaving device!

--
Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
Re:Boom. Headshot. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-11 12:48 · Score: 0

Bob Dole doesn't think you're funny.

Oh easy to make by Tragedy4u · 2010-10-06 05:50 · Score: 1

Take any ol' t-shirt cannon or spud gun and shove a life jacket into it done!

Re:Oh easy to make by countSudoku() · 2010-10-06 05:57 · Score: 1

Sweet! I'm going to modify it to shoot grenades!
I got to fire a real grenade launcher in the '80s, and it IS as good as it sounds! Hit the side of a rusted out tank with a non-explosive round. Good times!

--
This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
Re:Oh easy to make by DriveDog · 2010-10-07 02:05 · Score: 1

"...drowned body of John Doe found today wearing a tshirt that reads 'I was expecting a flotation device but all I got was this stupid tshirt.'"

If you have quad damage by Ukab+the+Great · 2010-10-06 05:52 · Score: 2, Funny

Do you save four times as many people?

Re:If you have quad damage by tacarat · 2010-10-06 05:56 · Score: 2, Funny

Of course, but you do have to be mindful of splash damage.

--
"Common sense will be the death of us all"
Re:If you have quad damage by aquila.solo · 2010-10-06 07:05 · Score: 1

Of course, but you do have to be mindful of splash damage.
I see what you did there.
Re:If you have quad damage by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 07:35 · Score: 0

It shoots life preservers, so I'd say it does 100 armor per hit on quad.

Beach balls at sporting events? by zero_out · 2010-10-06 05:53 · Score: 1

I'd like to see this retrofitted to fire beach balls from the turf at sporting events, up to the fans in the upper decks. It would have to inflate just before hitting it's destination, of course. As an extra bonus, a cheerleader could fire this thing at unruly fans that are closer than 150m, and say "oops, my aim was off" when the fan gets smashed in the face by the deflated projectile. Cool, huh?

Re:Beach balls at sporting events? by smooth+wombat · 2010-10-06 06:13 · Score: 3, Funny

and say "oops, my aim was off" when the fan gets smashed in the face by the deflated projectile. Cool, huh?

Just ask Maude Flanders how cool that is.

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower

No no... not the same... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 05:56 · Score: 0

This one you use to rocket jump your way out of the water!

It needs... by John+Hasler · 2010-10-06 05:59 · Score: 1

...a laser target designator.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.

Re:It needs... by nitehawk214 · 2010-10-06 07:20 · Score: 1

...a laser target designator.
So we can blind the person before hitting them in the head with a raft. They will never see it coming!

--
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Re:It needs... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 08:12 · Score: 0

Do not look at life preserver with remaining eye?
Re:It needs... by rossdee · 2010-10-06 09:32 · Score: 1

Generally laser target designators use infrared wavelengths. Apparantly blinding someone is against the geneva convention, plus you don't want to (in war) give away your position in visible light.
Re:It needs... by Obfuscant · 2010-10-06 10:44 · Score: 2, Insightful

Generally laser target designators use infrared wavelengths.
Infrared lasers can blind you, too, and since you can't see the infrared you don't have the normal blink reflex to protect you.
Apparently this is a problem with some (many) of the newer green laser pointers that operate by doubling an IR laser to get to green.
Re:It needs... by petermgreen · 2010-10-06 10:47 · Score: 1

I thought for a given power IR lasers were more dangerous than visible because of the lack of a blink reflex.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register

Not to be confused with... by mikerowave · 2010-10-06 06:11 · Score: 1

Rocket propelled chainsaw! http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080418002617/uncyclopedia/images/d/d1/ImageC.jpg

Nice, but ... by PinkyGigglebrain · 2010-10-06 06:16 · Score: 1

As others have mentioned what if you hit someone? Yes, unlikely given the range/size/area involved but it still needs to be asked.

Also, how the hell do you aim this thing? If it can go 150m hod do you aim at that little speck of a person 75m away? And compensating for wind/current drift.

Over all a good idea and Kudos to the creator, it does still need a little work. Maybe Laser guided with a ballistic flight path and a bit of "no_hit_person" code in the guidance module so it lands near, but not on the designated target.

Re:Nice, but ... by Vectormatic · 2010-10-06 07:13 · Score: 1

Maybe Laser guided with a ballistic flight path and a bit of "no_hit_person" code in the guidance module so it lands near, but not on the designated target.
this thing (probably) is purely balistic, so once it is fired, there is no way to compensate for sudden wind-gusts or anything, putting actual guidance electronics on it and some method of course correction probably makes this way to advanced/complex
if they can package this into the standard 40mm grenade launcher cartridge, you could just take one of those revolver things and pump out six of those life-rafts in quick succesion, or better yet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HK_GMG

--
People, what a bunch of bastards
Re:Nice, but ... by PinkyGigglebrain · 2010-10-06 07:50 · Score: 1

Sorry, I goofed and should have said "high ballistic arch". I was thinking rather than a shallow arch like it appears to use in the vid it could be launched really steep angle and would come down almost vertical to the water. More like a mortar than a bazooka as shown.

As to guidance, its not new tech and would not be hard, or prohibitively expensive, to add to these projectiles. Raytheon make a laser guidance kit you can bolt onto a standard "dumb" bomb, the "brains" in those LGB kits are smaller than a cell phone, for this application could be even smaller (I worked in the industry, I know).

I like you idea of using a 40mm form factor (HK totally ROCKS!, thnx for the lnk). You might have to make the float ring smaller, maybe even just a tube like the ones you see kids play with at pools. In fact the smaller version could be used by life guards at lakes or close to shore.

I can see possibilities for variants of this device being made for many environments.
Re:Nice, but ... by Vectormatic · 2010-10-06 19:02 · Score: 1

i realize the electronics are pretty small for a laser guidance kit, but the hardware to actually alter its course i think would be pretty serious, especially if you want to change course/compensate for a large gust within 150 meters.
and i think the 40mm form factor would be awesome, you could make standard sized munitions and every soldiers could carry one rescue-round when in theaters where water is a-plenty

--
People, what a bunch of bastards
Re:Nice, but ... by PinkyGigglebrain · 2010-10-07 06:03 · Score: 1

If you take into account that the launcher itself could have already compensated for distance and initial wind drift the projectile would only need to make minor adjustments, mostly not to hit the exact point the laser was on, ie the person.

Now that I think about it, if the launcher does all the initial wind compensation putting extra hardware in the projectile becomes less important, even if a big gust did knock it way off course it would be easy to just launch another, or a barrage as you suggested earlier.

I foresee a great number of variants of this if it catches on. The 2 shot "Bazooka" style for smaller boats, a hard mounted 10+ shot pod with targeting for larger rescue vessels, the 40mm version you advocate (perfect for lake/close shore), maybe even a 81mm round for conventional mortar tubes (yeah, overkill but fun).

_

Existing patents on the same by prakslash · 2010-10-06 06:18 · Score: 1

Inflatable life buoy launcher gun
Inflatable and recoverable lifesaving projectile apparatus

The above don't use foam though.

Re:Existing patents on the same by geekoid · 2010-10-06 08:20 · Score: 1

What people don't get about patents, it's general not an idea. It's a specific way to do something.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

No thanks. by sunking2 · 2010-10-06 06:19 · Score: 1

I'll hold out for Pam Anderson to get to me.

Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 06:26 · Score: 0

Sorry, she has had her "flotation devices" removed.

This would be really awesome... by r00tyroot · 2010-10-06 06:30 · Score: 1

at the office. Suck it, nerf guns!

that's a leader line by YesIAmAScript · 2010-10-06 06:34 · Score: 1

The device described just runs out a leader line and you then come out in a boat on that line hand over hand.

This is a device that lets you shoot a life preserver out and the person saves himself.

In addition, this is designed to be shot to a person, not to the deck of a ship.

So they're in the same family I guess, but this is not the same. I doubt this one is really the first of its kind either, but the most important thing is that it work well and become available. Let's hope for the best.

--
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95

Re:that's a leader line by enjerth · 2010-10-06 09:52 · Score: 1

Modernization is all about making things smaller and more expensive.
Re:that's a leader line by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 09:59 · Score: 0

Like the half-gallon ice cream is now 1.5 quarts and costs 20% more than it did 3 years ago.
Re:that's a leader line by mr_mischief · 2010-10-13 05:07 · Score: 1

Yet it is still advertised as a half-gallon as often as not. What say we file a class action?

150m isn't that far by dondelelcaro · 2010-10-06 06:37 · Score: 2, Interesting

Assuming this is designed for use on large ships where MOB is a distinct problem (consider how difficult it is to stop and turn around an aircraft carrier or container ship), at 20 knots, you'd have to notice the man overboard and fire the device within 15 seconds. At a carrier's max speed of 35 knots, you have less than 9 seconds. While it's certainly an improvement over hand thrown projectiles, it doesn't have enough distance to handle likely scenarios.

echo -e '150 m / 20 knots\ns'|units -t1 if you want to play with the conversion yourself.

--
http://www.donarmstrong.com

Re:150m isn't that far by opentunings · 2010-10-06 06:47 · Score: 1

Most ships wouldn't turn. But they would send out a rescue helicopter. My guess is that the 'copter crews will see this as a great new tool.
Re:150m isn't that far by Ihmhi · 2010-10-06 07:37 · Score: 1

Wouldn't this be more for beaches? 150m is about as far out as most people would go on a beach AFAIK.

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:150m isn't that far by Man+Eating+Duck · 2010-10-06 07:41 · Score: 2, Informative

Most ships wouldn't turn.
I was sonar operator on a frigate when in the navy. We sonar guys had a secondary role as crew of the dinghy. In a MOB situation we would get into survival suits and launch immediately, while the ship turned and cut engines after doing 180 degrees, ending up in roughly the same area as the man went overboard. Our target time was four minutes from MOB alarm until the man was safely aboard the dinghy. In realistic unannounced exercises we usually beat that time by a few seconds.
We didn't have a chopper, but we were told that most ships would follow this procedure anyway, simply because more eyeballs is better if the unlucky man isn't found immediately and a search is necessary. In addition the return is shorter for the dinghy, which is good when you have a freezing crew member on board.
On a side note a buddy of mine was stationed on a submarine. A popular prank whenever they got fresh crew on board was to sound a MOB alarm, then command one of the noobs to don a diving suit and exit via a torpedo tube to search for the victim. They got every reaction from "Stop shitting with me" to frantic fumbling with diving suits and tube doors :)

--
Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
Re:150m isn't that far by dondelelcaro · 2010-10-06 08:15 · Score: 1

Wouldn't this be more for beaches? 150m is about as far out as most people would go on a beach AFAIK.
In my experience, once people get into trouble on a beach, they tend to be unable to swim or be in waves, which makes lifesaving devices pretty much useless. You have to actually go out and get them by swimming or using a boat.

--
http://www.donarmstrong.com
Re:150m isn't that far by dondelelcaro · 2010-10-06 08:20 · Score: 1

In a MOB situation we would get into survival suits and launch immediately, while the ship turned and cut engines after doing 180 degrees, ending up in roughly the same area as the man went overboard.
Were you guys using davits or a chute? 4 minutes is very impressive with davits with any signficant freeboard.

--
http://www.donarmstrong.com
Re:150m isn't that far by qc_dk · 2010-10-06 08:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

I've a reasonable fraction of my life along the northwestern coast of Denmark, which has some very tricky beaches. The most dangerous places can be those without waves, especially if it's windy. An area with no waves in strong winds is a sign of very strong undertows. The locals learn to read the waves, but tourist think "what a lovely calm piece of water, I'll swim there". They then get dragged out to sea, and even the strongest swimmers can't fight the currents. Many drown not from being overwhelmed by waves but from exhaustion fighting the currents. A flotation device would be perfect in those cases. They'll be able to keep themselves afloat and much easier to spot and retrieve by boat or helicopter, because there is no way anyone sane would be swimming out after them.
Re:150m isn't that far by the+cheong · 2010-10-06 09:07 · Score: 1

Plus if you're shooting opposite to the direction you're moving... relative velocity.
Re:150m isn't that far by dondelelcaro · 2010-10-06 09:40 · Score: 1

A flotation device would be perfect in those cases.
If the currents were faster than swimmers could swim, then I'd expect you to quickly outdistance 150m. Though even in those cases, if you got close enough into the same current, it'd probably be close enough to be useful.
Of course, people will still find all kinds of innovative ways to drown themselves...

--
http://www.donarmstrong.com
Re:150m isn't that far by Man+Eating+Duck · 2010-10-06 09:59 · Score: 1

Were you guys using davits or a chute?
Hydraulic davits, but they had some kind of clutch and brakes for speedy descent. Our freeboard was about 11 meters, still the descent was *very* quick with a good winch operator, and we launched at speed if necessary. It helped that our "dinghy" was one of these jet-propulsed devil-may-care babies. I called it a dinghy for lack of a better word, its speed and maneuverability is unbelievable even in rough seas (weight is 3000 Kg, not pounds as in the google translation. Why the heck do they translate *only* the unit Kg to pounds anyway?).
And of course we had to be good at it, even four minutes is a very long time indeed if you're immersed in seawater at -1 degrees C :)

--
Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
Re:150m isn't that far by natehoy · 2010-10-06 10:15 · Score: 1

So now imagine one of these on board.
You hear MOB, you get out a floatie gun or two and shoot it off in the person's general direction. If the person is within 50 yards of the landing point, there's a decent chance they can swim to it. If not, at least you have an extra "beacon" on the water to tell you the general vicinity of the person (especially if the device has a small sea anchor to keep it from blowing in the wind too terribly fast).
If you can get it close enough to the victim so they can swim to it and get out of the cold water, you've just bought yourself a bunch of time for the rescue. If not, you've got a bit of flotsam you need to pick up after the rescue is over (fail or succeed).
I'm sure the launcher could be ramped WAY up from 150 meters and the accuracy could be improved considerably if this were a permanent emplacement on the stern of a ship that thought it might have a fairly regular use for such a device (military/Coast Guard ship, cruise ship, etc).

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:150m isn't that far by SheeEttin · 2010-10-06 10:16 · Score: 1

Surely the vessel has smaller craft that can be launched... Even a lifeboat will do. Just slow down the big boat while the little boat zips over and picks up the guy.
(In the case of an aircraft carrier, it's likely that you'd have aircraft on board, so you could potentially launch one or more to assist in location or recovery.)
Re:150m isn't that far by natehoy · 2010-10-06 10:18 · Score: 1

Integrate some form of sea anchor on the flotation device, so at least the floatie is being pulled by the same currents as the swimmer. It's still up to the swimmer to cover the distance, but at least they aren't fighting a current trying to reach a floatie that's being blown in some other direction by the wind.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:150m isn't that far by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 10:37 · Score: 0

actually, in this case, a sea anchor will drag them out to sea with the rip.
Re:150m isn't that far by Man+Eating+Duck · 2010-10-06 11:57 · Score: 1

You hear MOB, you get out a floatie gun or two and shoot it off in the person's general direction.
We *always* had three lookouts on duty, including an aft lookout. Of course their instructions was to trow a lifebuoy with an automatic homing light if someone went for a swim. You're right though, they could probably get closer with something like this, especially when we're steaming at 27 knots :)

If you can get it close enough to the victim so they can swim to it and get out of the cold water
Irrelevant to your point and a minor nitpick, but you don't get clear of the cold water... you stay afloat without exhausting yourself. Without a flotation device in rough seas and freezing water you'll not die of exposure, you'll drown when your muscles stop working (probably less than 15 minutes at best, depending on your clothing). If you're not exhausting yourself you might survive more than 45 minutes in water at 0 degrees C.

--
Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
Re:150m isn't that far by Ihmhi · 2010-10-06 14:23 · Score: 1

I've also vacationed in Baltimore's Inner Harbor. They have tons of life preservers strewn about in cases that sound an alarm when you open it. Those things have MAYBE a 20 foot range if you get a good throw. If someone is in trouble from the coastline you'd better hope that an Olympic discus champion sees you in the water...

--
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Re:150m isn't that far by dbIII · 2010-10-06 15:42 · Score: 1

What about getting caught in a rip? That is a frequent problem. People can still swim and stay afloat but the strong current is stopping them from getting back to the beach.
Re:150m isn't that far by elynnia · 2010-10-06 23:40 · Score: 1

Bingo, that's pretty much what this thing's built for. Over here in Aussieland we call them 'rips', schoolchildren are taught about them, and they're pretty much the reason that surf lifesavers (who the device is intended for, as TFA states) exist in the first place. Warning: Rips are faster than a human can swim and WILL drag you out to the deep stuff in no time unless you get out of it by swimming sideways.

But... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 06:45 · Score: 0

is it BS&P Approved?

+1 Funny by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 07:06 · Score: 0

Where's my mod points when I need them?

Top 5 weapon-inspired life-saving devices by srussia · 2010-10-06 07:10 · Score: 1

5. Bazooka-fired flotation device

4. Bazooka-fired MREs

3. Bazooka-fired fire extinguisher

2. Bazooka-fired first aid kit

1. Bazooka!

--
Set your phasers on "funky"!

Re:Top 5 weapon-inspired life-saving devices by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 07:39 · Score: 0

You forgot the bazooka-fired bazooka: you fire the bazooka to someone in need, who can then use the bazooka in self-defense.
Re:Top 5 weapon-inspired life-saving devices by geekoid · 2010-10-06 08:21 · Score: 1

If only I could get some sort of gum~

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:Top 5 weapon-inspired life-saving devices by Dekker3D · 2010-10-06 08:43 · Score: 1

The bazooka-fired first aid kit would be a fun addition to many games, anyway. Since you usually don't even need to do anything to pick up items in your path, a first aid kit to the face (fired by a bazooka) would actually heal you.
Awesome.
Re:Top 5 weapon-inspired life-saving devices by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 08:58 · Score: 0

When I first saw the post, I immediately thought that this was like a flotation device that could also be used as a bazooka to take down ships. This would be great self-defense for downed carrier jockeys.
And not orange! Orange is definitely the wrong color. Should be camo.

Santos-Dumont invented this. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 07:24 · Score: 0

A cannon to shoot a personal buoy from the beach to people drowning... can't find the citation now.

Brilliant minds always reach similar conclusions.

Was I the only one to read this incorrectly? by StickInTheMud94 · 2010-10-06 07:31 · Score: 1

When I first read the subject, I thought this was a flotation device that doubled as a bazooka. You know...for all those times you've been floating in the water wishing you could blow someone else up....

Question by KneelBeforeZod · 2010-10-06 07:48 · Score: 1

Does this foam chemically react to the water or is there some sort of floater switch that activates the foam? Because if the foam chemically reacts to the water, then there could be long term storage problems if these projectiles are stored in a humid environment.

Just wondering.

Other Fun Uses by davegravy · 2010-10-06 08:10 · Score: 2, Funny

Am I evil for thinking this would fun to shoot into the open windows of passing cars that play tasteless music too loudly?

Re:Other Fun Uses by IBitOBear · 2010-10-06 09:08 · Score: 1

sure... but how do you fill the passing car with water first?
Filling a passing car with water, _that's_ what I would like to have a gun do.

--
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
Re:Other Fun Uses by onkelonkel · 2010-10-06 10:31 · Score: 1

No, not evil, just not thinking it all the way through. We first build a passive sonar targetting system. Set the discriminator circuit to only target vehicles emitting sound in excess of 110dB (BOOMP BOOMP BOOMP BOOMP....target locked) . A secondary optical targetting system verifies the target (16 inch chrome wheels with spinners...fire). Oh and the lifejacket, replace it with 5 kg of metal augmented thermobaric explosive.

--
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
Re:Other Fun Uses by ColdWetDog · 2010-10-06 11:17 · Score: 1

Am I evil for thinking this would fun to shoot into the open windows of passing cars that play tasteless music too loudly?

Evil? No. Evil is using a real bazooka on those jackasses. I really do wish it were easier to obtain significant ordinance here in the US. Assault rifles really don't make the kind of impression that you often need with these jerkoffs.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:Other Fun Uses by TheVelvetFlamebait · 2010-10-06 19:27 · Score: 1

Filling a passing car with water, _that's_ what I would like to have a gun do.
I'd look into your local fire department. ;-)

--
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Re:Other Fun Uses by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-18 02:40 · Score: 0

Well, it says "expands on contact with water" so chances are it wouldn't be nearly as funny as you hope.

That's what you get for drowning by VIPERsssss · 2010-10-06 08:12 · Score: 1

Stupid swimmer.

--
We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion.

The verb you are looking for is "bean" not "beam" by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 08:21 · Score: 0

The more you know...

Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 08:43 · Score: 0

Megabyte already beat him to it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW4QrHTgQvU#t=01m51s

And this exact idea is two years old: by Mr+44 · 2010-10-06 11:17 · Score: 1

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/prototype-this-flying-lifeguard.html

Prototype This by tru3ntropy · 2010-10-06 13:07 · Score: 1

Prototype This! did something similar. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPxrtVxqIgk

--
In Google we trust.

Just another design wank? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-06 18:05 · Score: 0

Is there an actual device? or is this another one of those design competitions, where presentation is more important than device even being possible, let alone working as intended.

See also:
Gravity Powered Light: http://dansdata.blogsome.com/2008/03/03/stop-press-pixie-dust-unsuitable-for-household-lighting/

This is clever by DaMattster · 2010-10-11 05:52 · Score: 1

This is a great idea worthy of world wide recognition! I can see this device as perfect for people engaged in occupations like fishing. If someone gets swept overboard in a storm, a life saving raft can be literally launched out to them. It gives the would-be rescuer another option when it may be too difficult or dangerous to reach the person right away - after all, you don't want a one many rescue situation turning into two.

What's next? by schizz69 · 2010-10-11 21:20 · Score: 1

Rocket propelled food drops?

Slashdot Mirror

Inventor Creates Flotation Device Bazooka

144 comments