Carrying flares

[Tranona]

Don't you sail a Bavaria?

Indeed I do, but fortunately it is extremely well built and the keel is very firmly attached - unlike the two boats that flaming was referring to - both splendid examples of how not to build boats. Read the reports in full for further information.

 

[Buck Turgidson]

I've tried it from the cockpit of a yacht and found it practically no help at all, because light scattered back from the boat completely drowned out the much weaker light reflected back from what I was pointing it at. Rain makes it much worse. If I had a nice cosy wheelhouse with the searchlight mounted on top I imagine it could be easier, but as things stand a searchlight is pretty useless (for me) at anything other than very short range.

Well I guess it depends on the searchlight in question.

Memory fading but it was several million candles and we had a minimum speed and maximum time for it to be on so as not to melt the lens!!

 

[Bru]

You do know that those laser flares are powered by lithium batteries don't you? ?
View attachment 117676

I'll get my coat...

Do get your coat because they don't!

My Ocean Rescue Laser flare uses bog standard AA batteries

 

[Iliade]

Do get your coat because they don't!

My Ocean Rescue Laser flare uses bog standard AA batteries

In which case I would change to lithium AA well before the bog standard ones' expiry date. They have better shelf life and continue to work well in low temperatures. I'd also consider silicone* grease on the terminals.

*Or whatever is considered best nowadays.

 

[Capt Popeye]

Personally, it's the views of the frontline rescue services I want to hear...

That won't be the RNLI then, on this particular question..unless a lifeboat happens to be the first to receive your distress call, or to see your flare.
I want to hear the views of the people who called in the distress. Everyone else, including HMCG is downstream of that event, unless they actually took a VHF distress first.

Guess that FLARES can and maybe are mostly seen by those Outside the resue services so any figues about the FIRST call in plus how they became aware of a distress signal

Guess that CGuard , Lifeboats, Shore Stations are spaced so so so far from the actual scene that they cannot see a FLARE anymore, might not be still able to recognise one ? might ask are these Flares , burning tar drums, actually on a Proffesional Lifesavers agenda anymore ?

But what these reports suggest is thae the Pro lifesaving institutions are really monitoring the Airwaves, not looking Out to Sea, so beware

Guess that our PUBLIC are used to flares but not other ways to observe a Diress signal ?

 

[Capt Popeye]

Re the is 'anyone looking for flares these days' might mention that in these days probably more Cliff, Shore Way walkers that ever there used to be , its big business, many many more walkers and ramblers that used to be, all out enjoying the scenery and fresh air, plus alert and scanning the horizons for the views; so guess that these days many more 'eyes' searching the horizons plus views

 

[Sandy]

Again, like Gary's incident a one off. It is not clear whether the flare was the only indication that the boat was in trouble as later on there is a comment that the crew had been out of radio contact for an hour. It may well be that the initial call was by radio.

The problem with using videos (and incidents) like this is that they do not tell the whole story and people tend to pick up the bits that support their arguments. For example note that flares were not used to locate either the boat or the person in the water, whereas many supporters of the use of flares claim this is one of their big advantages.

When I asked for evidence I don't necessarily mean individual examples, but statistical analysis that shows for example the proportion of emergency calls that came as a result of sighting of a flare or the proportion of times a rescuer cited a flare as the only way a casualty could be located. Realistically it is impossible to collect such data so we tend to fall back on individual examples that support our position and reject any other singular examples that indicate the opposite.

If a visual indicator is useful then the secondary question is whether pyrotechnics are the best or are there alternatives. There is some support for LEDs as an alternative and also that PLBs and EPIRBs if with the casualty are an accurate indicator of position.

The whole argument about pyrotechnic flares is that the growth in other methods of communication between rescuers and casualty has made them increasingly irrelevant to the point where their usefulness is outweighed by their downsides.

I don't expect that anybody could get the funding to research the question you ask.

In my original post I statement that I would not be throwing my pyrotechnics away as it is another tool in the toolkit to assist a rescue 'asset' over that last few miles.

An PLB, AIS MOB locator, EPIRB, and VHF DSC position request will guide a lifeboat and helicopter to a location, but when you get close the Mark I eyeball takes over. I make this comment as an ex-member of a Mountain Rescue Team. Having an orange smoke or red flare pop up really, really does help.

When in the MRT we had several training exercises with helicopters and talking to pilots was interesting. On one exercise we had a chap sit on a large orange polly bag with a radio. The helicopter flew over him four times before he got worried about pub closing time got on the radio and guided them in. There were the crew and two of our team working as spotters in the back. On another occasion we popped up a flare (white in this case) when the helicopter was 5 miles away. The comment from the pilot was, 'That made my life easy', it also saved the RAF about 2 hours worth of fuel had we not had a flare.

 

[Praxinoscope]

A thought has occurred to me, as search and rescue often use heat seeking technology as well as visual and various radio frequencies, wouldn't it be an idea for the electronic flare manufacturers to consider installing an infra red emitting LED into their devices alongside the visual, as this would register on heat sealing kit?

 

[Tranona]

I don't expect that anybody could get the funding to research the question you ask.

In my original post I statement that I would not be throwing my pyrotechnics away as it is another tool in the toolkit to assist a rescue 'asset' over that last few miles.

An PLB, AIS MOB locator, EPIRB, and VHF DSC position request will guide a lifeboat and helicopter to a location, but when you get close the Mark I eyeball takes over. I make this comment as an ex-member of a Mountain Rescue Team. Having an orange smoke or red flare pop up really, really does help.

Not really disputing that. My question is how many times does that really happen in practice? The prior question of course is how many times does the situation arise where final identification of the casualty is problematic. The video you linked to really did not say much about flares except the brief mention at the beginning. Neither casualty was located by flares (and according to a later post the RNLI have now introduced PLBs for all crew).

The next question is would LED "flares" be equally effective such situations?

I used the phrase "everybody knows" earlier to describe how ideas of what is effective and what is not get established, and stay often through policy decisions despite there being little concrete evidence of effectiveness. It is I think well established now that flares are no longer a common means of first contact leaving direct signalling perhaps the only practical use. While there is good data to support the first contact issue (the coastguard collect and publish data on means of contact), perhaps there does need to be more work done on the importance of signalling, particularly whether the no pyro substitutes are effective.

 

[flaming]

Yes, good examples of extreme situations. both, though raise the question whether LED signals could have performed equally well, (given that one of the objections to pyros is safety of stowage and operation plus unreliability). So carrying a substitute (as I do) fills that hole to my satisfaction. however that does not change the fact that the chances of me, or any other leisure sailor ever getting into such a situation is vanishingly small.

In the Hooligan incident, no. It was the rocket flares that grabbed the attention of the nearby ships and got them looking for someone in distress. There is no current laser flare that would have done that job to alert a ship that wasn't already looking for them. The argument by those who consider flares to be redundant is that the PLB or EPIRB is the replacement for the rocket flare, in bringing the rescuers in close enough to then use a laser flare to pinpoint. It's a decent point, but.... My argument here is that the reaction time to a PLB activation demonstrated by the Rambler incident, which itself was speeded up by the quick thinking of Leopard's nav in a way that would not have happened for Hooligan that night, would have been too slow for the skipper. By the time the coastguard had received the notification of activation, discounted a false alarm and alerted the nearby ships it would have been too late for him, even if they could then have found the liferaft quickly in the way that the flares allowed them to do. The rocket flares alerting the very people needed to save his life, and the pinpoint flares guiding the ship right to them, was the key factor in getting him out of the cold in time.
Remember the Hooligan crew were rescued 63 minutes after the boat turned over. On a dark night in February. Rambler's PLB signal wasn't even received by the Irish authorities for 50 minutes. It was 1 hour 45 minutes before a Mayday was declared.

There is always a danger of carrying over from one environment to another - what might be relevant in sailing extreme racing boats in extreme weather has little relevance to family cruisers.

Just to be clear, neither of these events was in extreme weather. Neither was over a F5. I can also think of a dozen incidents that might pitch the crew of a family cruiser into the water, or a liferaft, with no time to make a mayday, just hopefully grab the grab bag and its contents. None very likely at all. But all possible. Your acceptance of risk may of course differ from mine.

This does not, by the way, mean that I don't think that PLBs, DSV VHF, EPIRBs, etc, etc, aren't excellent tools that deserve a place on board. Of course they do. And in summoning help the DSC VHF is always, always going to be the number one option. But, currently, the demonstrated reaction time to PLB/EPIRB activations is to my mind too slow to be relied upon as the only available means of summoning help in the event of a sudden event that has pitched the crew into the liferaft, or worse the sea, at small notice. Plus of course the issue that these (brilliant) devices don't communicate with those who are closest to you and most able to offer help immediately. Only VHF and flares do that job. And flares aren't relying on electrons, and they aren't relying on the nearest ship having it turned on and being monitored. If you've ever seen a parachute flare you'll know just how it grabs the eye, even if you're not looking that way, especially at night. Again the Hooligan incident is absolute proof that banging off parachute flares in coastal waters is a very good way of getting help quickly when the effluent has well and truly hit the fan.

 

[Mark-1]

A thought has occurred to me, as search and rescue often use heat seeking technology as well as visual and various radio frequencies, wouldn't't it be an idea for the electronic flare manufacturers to consider installing an infra red emitting LED into their devices alongside the visual, as this would register on heat sealing kit?

I'm supposed to be staying away from this thread but this was such a great post I had to do a quick qoogle and it turns out "IR Illuminators" are already a thing.

So literally the only thing a flare does that electric devices don't is to be *very* bright. (But a bog standard 300 lumen torch is visible > 5 miles.)


"The argument by those who consider flares to be redundant is that the PLB or EPIRB is the replacement for the rocket flare, "

Or VHF or mobile phone. I trust a ship to have half an ear on his Ch16 far more than I trust a ship to be keeping a *perfect* lookout. And if the ship misses the VHF transmission someone else may still pick it up and relay it.

(Damn, these threads are addictive.)

 

[flaming]

"The argument by those who consider flares to be redundant is that the PLB or EPIRB is the replacement for the rocket flare, "

Or VHF or mobile phone. I trust a ship to have half an ear on his Ch16 far more than I trust a ship to be keeping a *perfect* lookout. And if the ship misses the VHF transmission someone else may still pick it up and relay it.

(Damn, these threads are addictive.)

If you've ever seen a flare you realise you don't have to be keeping a lookout at all really to have your eye drawn to it, especially at night. I used to live in a flat in Ocean Village. On 3 occasions I called the coastguard to report parachute flares. I wasn't exactly staring out of the window keeping a perfect watch. They just draw the eye.

The point of the flare isn't to be a replacement for the VHF. The VHF is obviously the number one choice. The point is that it's your very last line of defence for incidents like the ones I have categorised. Where your VHF is not functioning and a catastrophic event has dumped you in the water, or hopefully liferaft, with next to no notice. In that case a PLB on your lifejacket or EPIRB in the grab bag is a great thing to have. Of course. And can get you help if there isn't anyone close by, although that will, as documented, take some time. They also, as the Rambler incident shows, work.
But a flare will alert the guy who's right there, right now, as the Hooligan incident shows.

And that is the difference.

 

[Mark-1]

If you've ever seen a flare you realise you don't have to be keeping a lookout at all really to have your eye drawn to it, especially at night. I used to live in a flat in Ocean Village. On 3 occasions I called the coastguard to report parachute flares. I wasn't exactly staring out of the window keeping a perfect watch. They just draw the eye.

The point of the flare isn't to be a replacement for the VHF. The VHF is obviously the number one choice. The point is that it's your very last line of defence for incidents like the ones I have categorised. Where your VHF is not functioning and a catastrophic event has dumped you in the water, or hopefully liferaft, with next to no notice. In that case a PLB on your lifejacket or EPIRB in the grab bag is a great thing to have. Of course. And can get you help if there isn't anyone close by, although that will, as documented, take some time. They also, as the Rambler incident shows, work.
But a flare will alert the guy who's right there, right now, as the Hooligan incident shows.

And that is the difference.

The point of my post was this:

"The argument by those who consider flares to be redundant is that the PLB or EPIRB is the replacement for the rocket flare, "

Or VHF or mobile phone.

You'd forgotten two commonly used Comms methods, neither of which suffer from the significant delay you described. I was merely reminding you.

 

[JumbleDuck]

So literally the only thing a flare does that electric devices don't is to be *very* bright. (But a bog standard 300 lumen torch is visible > 5 miles.)

Over what angle? You don't have to aim a handheld red at a bridge window 5 miles away of whose existence let alone position you may not be certain.

 

[flaming]

The point of my post was this:

"The argument by those who consider flares to be redundant is that the PLB or EPIRB is the replacement for the rocket flare, "

Or VHF or mobile phone.

You'd forgotten two commonly used Comms methods, neither of which suffer from the significant delay you described. I was merely reminding you.

No I hadn't. Can I suggest re-reading the post where I quite clearly reference VHF?

The point with flares is NOT that they replace the VHF. The point of them is that they are available, as PLB and EPIRB are, when your main VHF set is slipping beneath the waves and a handheld in a liferaft (if you had one in your grab bag, and managed to grab it) has a 3 mile range if you're lucky... And of course requires you to know your position to broadcast. Did your GPS also make it into the liferaft? And your mobile may, or may not, have a signal at wave height in a liferaft. You'd need to be in very coastal waters for that to be the case. It certainly wouldn't have been the case in the middle of Lyme bay for Hooligan for example.

VHF and Flares have different, and usually complimentary, roles to play in distress situations. You are very much missing the point of what the various means of summoning help actually do if you think that their roles are interchangeable.

 

[Sandy]

Not really disputing that. My question is how many times does that really happen in practice? The prior question of course is how many times does the situation arise where final identification of the casualty is problematic. The video you linked to really did not say much about flares except the brief mention at the beginning. Neither casualty was located by flares (and according to a later post the RNLI have now introduced PLBs for all crew).

The next question is would LED "flares" be equally effective such situations?

I used the phrase "everybody knows" earlier to describe how ideas of what is effective and what is not get established, and stay often through policy decisions despite there being little concrete evidence of effectiveness. It is I think well established now that flares are no longer a common means of first contact leaving direct signalling perhaps the only practical use. While there is good data to support the first contact issue (the coastguard collect and publish data on means of contact), perhaps there does need to be more work done on the importance of signalling, particularly whether the no pyro substitutes are effective.

The answer is nobody knows.

The TV programme is exactly that a TV programme, they tell a story, Joe Public is not interested in the detail.

For your question about LED 'flares' I've no idea. I've never seen one used.

I spent last night trundling round Plymouth Sound doing some night navigation. Should I had seen a red pyrotechnic it would have grabbed my attention, they do have a WOW factor, and instinctively reached for the VHF and called Falmouth Coastguard. I am not sure if I could recognize a LED flare and if I did I'd be checking the chart to check if there was a buoy there.

 

[Mark-1]

Over what angle? You don't have to aim a handheld red at a bridge window 5 miles away of whose existence let alone position you may not be certain.

Agree. See post 40. Anything remotely directional is not gonna work as a substitute for flares. Apart from anything else you can't just tape it to something and carry on managing the situation.

My point was if my reception class son's head torch can been seen five miles away, LED flares are likely to be adequately bright, although nothing electric will compare with the hyper brightness of a pyro. None the less it probably supports a 'no' to Tranona's second question.

 

[Mark-1]

No I hadn't.

I meant forgotten from the context of your "delay" point, and your list of alternatives. Not forgotten altogether. Sorry I didn't make it clearer.

 

[flaming]

I meant forgotten from the context of your "delay" point, and your list of alternatives. Not forgotten altogether. Sorry I didn't make it clearer.

Thanks, and apologies if I hadn't made it clear I was starting from a point where the main VHF was unavailable and you maybe have the contents of your grab bag, exactly as in the Hooligan and Rambler examples.

 

[Mark-1]

Thanks, and apologies if I hadn't made it clear I was starting from a point where the main VHF was unavailable and you maybe have the contents of your grab bag, exactly as in the Hooligan and Rambler examples.

Sorry, when I said VHF didn't mean to exclude handhelds, I should have made that clearer.