DSC or Voice calls to HM Coastguard?

l'escargot said:
And in that respect is a waste of time...


And I'll continue to disagree - a passage plan that won't be looked at offers no security and still looks like a waste of time to me. It is only as good as the shore contact, an unreliable one is a waste of time too, a reliable one will have an updated plan and actually cause a search to be initiated - a far better outcome. Perhaps I'll stick my own rider on for the hard of understanding - they are a waste of time without a reliable shore contact. How's that?
Click to expand...

southseaian said:
I'm certainly not suggesting HM look at passage plan in normal routine. They are kept on file (also recorded) and referred such they be needed.
What you must try to understand is the value to the CG of having a passage plan when a boats is 'overdue'.
Both I and the other person who has worked with overdue boats has pointed this out to you.
Filing passage plans either with a responsible person or HMCG is clearly not a waste of time.
Click to expand...
Southseajan you have failed to read the post ( in blue ) correctly
 
Personally I always give a passage plan to CG.
Plus points being.
Gives practice in DSC and communication on VHF and let's you know equipment working okay.Let's CG know of your approx position should they need service of someone in the area. Should the worse happen the CG can arrange a better SAR. It's a free service.
Negative points. Can't think of any.
 
l'escargot said:
If it makes you feel better to let the Coastguard know your plans, do so, but it is only giving you a false sense of security if you think anyone will come looking for you...
Click to expand...

I say again.
A passsage plan left with the CG or responsible person ashore is "not a waste of time," nor should it "give a false sense of security".
As i said originally where a boat is reported overdue or missing then knowing where that boat intended to go is a great help in the following search.
It should be simple to understand. This is not a matter of my or any other persons opinion.
I'm not suggesting any great qualification or experience to state this. It's just common sense.
 
southseaian said:
I say again.
A passsage plan left with the CG or responsible person ashore is "not a waste of time," nor should it "give a false sense of security".
As i said originally where a boat is reported overdue or missing then knowing where that boat intended to go is a great help in the following search.
It should be simple to understand. This is not a matter of my or any other persons opinion.
I'm not suggesting any great qualification or experience to state this. It's just common sense.
Click to expand...

And what you don't seem to grasp is the fact that it all revolves around someone reporting the boat missing or overdue - which was the original point.. If that doesn't happen, the passage plan remains "on file" and offers no value or security to the missing person. It only becomes of value when it is looked at - the trigger and the action that places value on the passage plan is the shore contact or other person reporting the boat missing and without that trigger it remains a worthless bit of information cluttering up a log...

You really do need to go back and read my early posts and try to understand what I am saying rather than what you seem to think that I have said...
 
Last edited:
l'escargot said:
Both recent CG members have actually had to agree with my posts - through gritted teeth admittedly...;) but have then had to go on and introduce their own "interpretations" of what I've said just to argue against them. - there's arrogance for you. If you want to go back and look at my early posts I've said most of what they said before they have... :encouragement:
Click to expand...

Lol im agreeing with you. Whats your issue? As you and others have said it all relys on someone reporting an overdue or a concern for a vessel!
 
lionelz said:
Lol im agreeing with you. Whats your issue? As you and others have said it all relys on someone reporting an overdue or a concern for a vessel!
Click to expand...

Not taking any issue at all, I'm glad someone was able to see the wood for the trees. :encouragement: I couldn't see what they were arguing about either, as I said they were actually agreeing with me. ;)
 
l'escargot said:
Nothing to do with knowledge, experience or even superiority, ..
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not, but I do know I have to bow to your superiority.
I have to agree, you are right, your knowledge is greater than mine and I can only hope to reach your level of expert knowledge one day.
I don't wish to be verbally abused anymore. I give in, your are the top dog, I apologise.
 
southseaian said:
Maybe, maybe not, but I do know I have to bow to your superiority.
I have to agree, you are right, your knowledge is greater than mine and I can only hope to reach your level of expert knowledge one day.
I don't wish to be verbally abused anymore. I give in, your are the top dog, I apologise.
Click to expand...
:D
 
southseaian said:
Maybe, maybe not, but I do know I have to bow to your superiority.
I have to agree, you are right, your knowledge is greater than mine and I can only hope to reach your level of expert knowledge one day.
I don't wish to be verbally abused anymore. I give in, your are the top dog, I apologise.
Click to expand...
Such a silly post - but probably says more about you than it does me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

T
Notices to Mariners - Week 4
Replies
0
Views
500
tillergirl
T
T
Notices to Mariners - Week 3
Replies
0
Views
626
tillergirl
T

Share this page

Top