Safety Checks using SI

[HOCOLITEoffline]

Stodge have checked our events in last two years no record of number. Possibly Nottingham High School they have their own cards, I think they were at the event. Although it does look like a gliche.

[stodge]

OK

have downloaded both clear boxes and both check boxes
No 24197 found

looks like a one off wierdy
Ill put it to bed and get on with some work...

[Guest]

Still got to be worth asking the 4 people (2 x HOC, 1 x POTOC, 1 x IND) who started immediately afterwards what they recall...

... someone starting
... a start official demonstrating to novices
... something else passing which might have some form of electromagnetic field
... poltergeist
... etc

Presumably none of them read nopesport

[the eye]

did you get a result with the "it could have been one of the four people who 'didn't' punch the start" line of enquiry?

exciting stuff..........

[Guest]

1 of them definitely does

[Porky on the train home]

Oooo this is so exciting - our first nopesport whodunnit

Sounds like "Orienteering Cluedo"....it was Gross, in the BOF office, with the Emit brick....let's not go there

[FatBoy]

did you get a result with the "it could have been one of the four people who 'didn't' punch the start" line of enquiry?

Been delayed by other work, not getting the files, then finding out they're not the right format hence having to write a new routine, etc etc etc

The last person who was credited with a check punch as a start time (due to having no start time on the card) was at 11:18:09 - some 30 mins before our phantom puncher. There were actually 6 people who didn't punch the start!

[Mrs H.]

Gosh Porky - it's very echoey on that train of yours - are you going through a tunnel?

Astonishingly I can vouch for Gross as I was talking to him in the car park at Kyloe at roughly that time - not even his trusty Ryanair could have got him to Birches Valley to be mischievious. Unless.....UNLESS...

Has there been a diamond robbery anywhere recently

[Attack Point]

Yup the SI card handed in was me... Seem to have a habit losing the damn things at the moment. This is a rare post for me so here goes...

I certainly dont think we went overboard on the safety check process. To me there are two issues:

1) Safety of competitors
2) Liability - sad to say but important nether the less.

Having learnt from the experience yesterday I would reccomend that all clubs draw up a policy stating what checks should be made in the event of someone not finishing (even if we suspect the SI card is phantom). It makes it easier to follow to some form of procedure rather than reacting to circumstances (if the policy is checked by a Search and Resue team beforehand/ endorsed by some form of public body it also makes liability claims/prosecutions harder to enforce). I know each circumstance is going to be different but I would think at least some form of basic rules can be applied to most conditions.

Supposing there had still been someone out on the course? Is there the neccessary equipment to do a night search? Would volunteers that were left at the event centre be comfortable to do a night search? Would those that are able to navigate in the dark know how to perform a search (its harder than people would give credit). What about the safety of the searchers? What about contacting/co-ordinating the various searchers - are there mobile phones? Do clubs have a nominated standby 'safety' team? None of this is a criticism of any club, but just some ideas that I have picked up whilst doing my British Hill Walking Leaders course.

Going back to Stodge's original post I think we did no more or no less than what should be required. First we tried to establish who the competitor was. We tried to find out what course the person was on and how long they have been out. We then tried to establish whereabouts on the course they were likely to be. We then did a manual sweep of that part of the course. We also checked cars registrations as best we could. We also did a number of other checks which I wont bore your with. I'm not sure but there was also talk of informing the local police (seems a bit silly now, but only now it looks like a phantom competitor), just in case anyone rings them saying that someone has not returned home.

[stodge]

did you get a result with the "it could have been one of the four people who 'didn't' punch the start" line of enquiry?

exciting stuff..........

All punched the check box earlier than Ghost .....
another dead end

Thanks to Fatboy for checking this one

[ian]

I was on the 1147hrs start, and there was only 3 people in the box (including myself), didn't check behind me- had other things to think about


edit:- we were on 1 min intervals.


edit 2:- Just a theory but could this be caused by some electromagnetic interference, such as a mobile phone. As mine played havoc with the CRO in my last Lab.

[stodge]

I think im nearly there....

Stodgetta is just checking a clue with a family at WCH training tonight and if confirmed we have a mystery solved.

If its right the chances of it happening again are very very small indeed

Ill leave you in suspense till about 9pm when stodgetta gets home.............

Just like the best whodunnits

[stodge]

The mystery solved

A young orienteer went to the start on a strange route that led her and her family back through the start box and start lanes.
Confused by the start layout and with her brand new, never been used before si card she punched the start box thinking she was clearing.
Thanks to Jean Rostron for my first clue in spotting this activity.

She then cleared, checked, started and finished normally.

The fact that it was a brand new card that had not seen a clear station is the key.
Had she had data on her card it would not have taken a start punch, if she had cleared it would have punched normally.

Thankyou to Mark Hawker Alan Hartley (both having developed download software) for confirming the following.

When a brand new card is dibbed without clearing for the first time it can knock off, it seems, its first digit. After the first clear the problem does not exist.
Ill leave the techie explanation about how to Fatboy if he wants

The new SI Card was 224197 hence the 24197

Elementary my dear Watson.

Thanks to all our amateur sleuths, maybe Ill get some work done tomorrow.

[FatBoy]

Thanks go to Mark Hawker really.

What I did know is new SI card 5's come clear but with the start number programmed as the last 5 digits of the card number (actually it's the part of the number represented by the bytes CN0 and CN1 if you want to get techie).

What I didn't know but have just proved by a little test is that if a Card 5 has a start number programmed onto it (regardless of whether that number is or isn't the number from the factory) - it writes that number to the start box, and indeed to a check box, a control and to the finish!

While it's possible somebody could program their own start number in an confuse everybody the only time it's likely to happen is with new cards. People buying their own cards will chances are know they have to clear first. So the moral of the story is clear all of your new hire cards when you get them!

[SIman]

Stodge, Alan and Mark,
thanks for the explanation - I can sleep easier now; I didn't like the idea of ghosts in the forest SI is a wonderful system, it is just the users that find ways of messing things up

The discussion has thrown up some interesting points about registration and safety procedures which might be worth following up - in another thread perhaps or even a dedicated SI forum. I know that Stodge has proposed a real face to face forum, but that seems unlikely.