CG66 Voluntary safety scheme

[prv]

by prior arrangement he would (in theory!) have pressed the panic button if he hadn't heard from us by the appropriate time

However, that was very reliant on being able to get a mobile signal - as it happened we always could but I could envisage lobbing up somewhere where the local mast was off line and not being able to make contact

That makes me wonder whether I shouldn't have logged our passage plan with the CG

Be aware that the Coastguard don't actually do anything if you report your intentions and then don't report your arrival. The stated purpose of the reports is that if your non-sailing mate gets worried and phones them to say you didn't turn up to the pub as planned, they have a better idea than he is likely to of when exactly you set off and where you were planning to go. But they won't make the first move, somebody has to report you missing before they will act.

On that basis, my mother is a better bet than the coastguard for keeping track of me (Ru88ell will confirm that I report in with her before and after long passages)

Pete

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

A common attitude but as the CG themselves put out messages asking you to do so, why not?

The only reason I've ever heard not to has already been stated by prv:

they don't do anything with them unless someone reports you overdue, and anyone likely to report me overdue would know more about my plans than what the Coastguard record.

 

[Bru]

Be aware that the Coastguard don't actually do anything if you report your intentions and then don't report your arrival.

Ah, right

Well in that case my current system is a better bet anyway as a failure to communicate will generate the required finger on the panic button by our shore contact and in the unlikely event that I can't get a mobile signal (in our normal cruising grounds that would be very unusual) I can always call the CG on the VHF and advise them we're safe

 

[jwilson]

A common attitude but as the CG themselves put out messages asking you to do so, why not? You say it as if it were a virtue. Do you never make long passages? Do you not want assistance if you get in trouble?

The CG officer who ran a DSC course I attended some years ago said that they very definitely did NOT want to be told everyones passage plans. They do though want you to have a CG66 on file and to have someone else tell them only if you are overdue between X and Y.

Where have you seen CG putting out messages asking people to file passage plans?

 

[chanelyacht]

The CG officer who ran a DSC course I attended some years ago said that they very definitely did NOT want to be told everyones passage plans. They do though want you to have a CG66 on file and to have someone else tell them only if you are overdue between X and Y.

Where have you seen CG putting out messages asking people to file passage plans?

We quite often do, at boat shows, etc. It's part of our accident prevention strategy.

We never treat passage plans as a pain in the *rs*. We have local rowing boats that contact us when they're only rowing in the bay, and people who pass international passage plans. If you feel safer by telling us, we'll happily take the information.

But some common sense would have to caveat that - Solent really couldn't cope with 1200 passage plans on a summers day, all of which going for 5 miles! So I guess if you can use a reliable alternative, do so, but never feel your trip isn't "worthy" of us being told.

It is true we don't automatically instigate anything for overdues, but it does significantly help us if we already have the details when your shore contact expresses concern.

 

[Allan]

I am CG66 registered but this is the first time I have heard about adding a picture or updating. I report long single handed passages and have always got the impression that, after they ask me to spell my boat name, they have details on the screen in front of them.
I need to look at the website.
Allan

 

[chanelyacht]

I am CG66 registered but this is the first time I have heard about adding a picture or updating. I report long single handed passages and have always got the impression that, after they ask me to spell my boat name, they have details on the screen in front of them.
I need to look at the website.
Allan

Hi Allan,

It doesn't work quite like that.

Your passage plan that you pass is logged in the station's working log - this is visible to its pair (e.g. Falmouth can read Brixham's in real time). CG66 is a seperate database which is a little slower to load, so we don't normally run it unless we need to loom up a vessel. 66 is viewable nationally irrespective of the station you're registered with.

What is does mean is when you call in, we're happy with just knowing your callsign when you call us, rather than repeatedly asking for a vessel description. Plus, of course, simple things like if we're acting on an overdue, having your home port and even berth number means a quick phone call to a marina, rather than getting CG teams out to check wider areas.

 

[Allan]

I've just been on the site and I can see what people mean. I couldn't just view my entry. I had to add what information I have at home. Do I now have two entries? One filled out fully and one not?
It is far from what one expects from websites these days.
Allan

 

[Captain Haddock]

As a follow on from an earlier thread, and purely as a straw poll, I'd be interested in seeing how many people are already using HMCGs CG66 - and if you don't, I'd be interested in knowing why.
Nothing official about this, but if there are some barriers to people using the scheme, it would be useful to know what they are.

Nothing to do with this thread but just a thought... Why not update your signature on here with a link the CG66 site? When you post it may remind people to enter their details.

Carry on all.

 

[Coaster]

It is true we don't automatically instigate anything for overdues, but it does significantly help us if we already have the details when your shore contact expresses concern.

So if we don't have a 'shore contact' the CG66 system is irrelevant?

I have completed entries for our previous and current boats as it seemed to be sensible. However I'm now unclear as to how the system would benefit us.

We have never spoken by radio to the coastguard and have never given the coastguard a passage plan. There didn't seem to be any compelling reason to. I've always regarded the coastguard as an organisation that should only be contacted in an emergency.

 

[Blue5]

But some common sense would have to caveat that - Solent really couldn't cope with 1200 passage plans on a summers day, all of which going for 5 miles! So I guess if you can use a reliable alternative, do so, but never feel your trip isn't "worthy" of us being told.

It is true we don't automatically instigate anything for overdues, but it does significantly help us if we already have the details when your shore contact expresses concern.

It is the Forum!! common sense!!

This has been a worthwhile thread and its nice to have a CG contact on board and taking an interest.

In aviation if you file a passage plan you have to close it but I can see the dilemma with boats, I did not realise nothing is done for overdues and personally if I have filed a plan I will phone and close it I just hope the revelation here will not encourage peeps not to bother.

 

[A1Sailor]

So if we don't have a 'shore contact' the CG66 system is irrelevant?

If I ever have the misfortune to require assistance, I think it would useful for the coastguard to have information about my boat, so that they can give the SAR helicopter crew details about what to look for. So I consider CG66 to be relevant.

 

[[70521]]

So if we don't have a 'shore contact' the CG66 system is irrelevant?

Having been a member of a Mountain Rescue Team I dissagree. When somebody hits the big red button marked "PANIC" when you are overdue all of the details about your boat are at hand. When the red mist of panic sets in people forget detail. In the past I've spent ages trying to tease information out of family about colour of kit and tents for missing hill walkers. At least the CG can now tell the RNLI what they are looking for.

 

[damsis44]

We log passage plans with CG when we go outside the Clyde or do night passages, but not for local cruising. We don't have a local shore contact, so CG are unlikely to get called if we are late. But we log anyway so that someone knows we are sailing and, God forbid, we get into trouble, if we only manage to get a mayday and our vessel name out before losing contact, the CG would at least know roughly where we should be, ie between A & B and roughly how far along the route.
And yes, we do have a CG66 entry recently updated.

This has gotten me thinking though that I should tell my friend when we are actually sailing (rather than just saying 'we're at the boat this weekend'), when to expect us back, and more importantly what to do if we don't turn up.

 

[chanelyacht]

So if we don't have a 'shore contact' the CG66 system is irrelevant?

I have completed entries for our previous and current boats as it seemed to be sensible. However I'm now unclear as to how the system would benefit us.

We have never spoken by radio to the coastguard and have never given the coastguard a passage plan. There didn't seem to be any compelling reason to. I've always regarded the coastguard as an organisation that should only be contacted in an emergency.

You will always have some sort of shore contact - even if it is yourself.

The logic of this being if your boat is found somewhere, we know who to contact to verify, if nothing else, that you weren't aboard it at the time. If we can ring you at home and you tell us it should be in the marina / mooring / etc, it (a) enables us to reunite you with the boat, and (b) prevents us from launching a major SAR operation looking for you!

Passage plans are different from CG66, they can work together or seperately.

 

[jwilson]

We quite often do, at boat shows, etc. It's part of our accident prevention strategy.

We never treat passage plans as a pain in the *rs*. We have local rowing boats that contact us when they're only rowing in the bay, and people who pass international passage plans. If you feel safer by telling us, we'll happily take the information.

But some common sense would have to caveat that - Solent really couldn't cope with 1200 passage plans on a summers day, all of which going for 5 miles! So I guess if you can use a reliable alternative, do so, but never feel your trip isn't "worthy" of us being told.

It is true we don't automatically instigate anything for overdues, but it does significantly help us if we already have the details when your shore contact expresses concern.

OK - I still won't clutter up the air with passage plans or radio checks, but if the CG really want this from others let them do so by all means.

 

[snowleopard]

Where have you seen CG putting out messages asking people to file passage plans?

As I mentioned previously, Brixham & Falmouth announced during every maritime safety information broadcast last summer words to the effect of 'Yachts making an international passage are advised to report their plans to the CG'.

 

[Gordonmc]

So if we don't have a 'shore contact' the CG66 system is irrelevant?

Not so.
I am registered.
Not so long ago I was briefly ashore with the boat at anchor.
I was on the way back to the boat when the CG called my mobile to tell me the boat had been reported dragging.
As it happened I was back on board shortly after and the anchor had reset itself. At the very least it avoided the CG and other emergency services wasting resources tracing the owner.
I registered because I frequently sail single handed through the winter months when there are not many boats around but I don't file passage plans.

 

[Coaster]

Thanks for your comments A1Sailor, Camelia, ChannelYacht and Gordonmc. I will keep my CG66 record up to date.

 

[A1Sailor]

Thanks for your comments A1Sailor, Camelia, ChannelYacht and Gordonmc. I will keep my CG66 record up to date.

I once met an RNLI SeaCheck Officer, who had a stall set up beside the Crinan Canal while I was transiting - beside lock 2 for those who know it. He seemed impressed that we all had autogas lifejackets on, complete with crotch straps. When he asked if the horseshoe lifebuoys had the boat's name on them, I had to admit that no; I'd always considered it a bit naff!
When he pointed out that if one was lost overboard, even if the boat was unattended, it could raise concern when found that somebody was/had been in trouble. If it was identifiable, it would be easier for the Coastguard/RNLI to check with the owner that that wasn't the case and possibly save an unnecessary alert.
The indelible marker pen was swiftly put to good use - marking them on the inside of the horseshoe where it could be easily found but wasn't too obvious. I didn't want them to be too naff!