EPIRB vs Sat Phone

[Rich_F]

If you could have only one, which would you go for?

Strikes me that you should be able to raise help as easily with a Satellite Phone as with an EPIRB, except in a major disaster (eg sinking within seconds).

An EPIRB is useful when the emergency services get close, but so would be a (much cheaper) SART.

And a phone is so much better for ordering a take away. /forums/images/icons/crazy.gif

Rich

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[alex_rogers]

An EPIRB :

1. It's waterproof and will work for 48 hours continously.
2. It's registered so they know the details of the yacht and who to contact.
3. It's completely automatic.
4. The office can't call me on an EPIRB.

Having said that, it would be nice to have both.


<hr width=100% size=1>Alex Rogers
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.YachtsAtSea.com> www.YachtsAtSea.com </A>

 

[Guest]

Post deleted by danfoley

 

[NDG]

No contest - Epirb every time.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

Rather like the VHF/Mobile debate.

EPIRBS give an automatic indication of position - they include a homing signal, and if it is activated, Falmouth will always be involved in the rescue.

Epirbs are also waterproof, can run for 48hrs continuously and can be set to be automatically activated.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

They're not really comparable - in either cost or efficiency terms.

Certainly, if someone else was paying I'd go for the satellite phone.

Now which system would you be looking at? Iridium? Inmarsat (which system).

Do elucidate and I can do some comparisons for you.

I'm just great at squaring circles!!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Your assumptions about

satellite phones are erroneous.

On all the Inmarsat systems you can feed in, and contiuously update, your GPS position via NMEA 83, additionally, as with DSC, you can press the panic button and have the whole shebang sent automatically.

The positioning, under those circumstances, are to within 100m, whereas with the 406 EPIRB your first pass position is likely to be <8M and by the 3rd pass it's down to >3M.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Well now - here we see the triumph of the short-sighted in the kingdom of the blind.
Could I suggest all the posters do some research into the relative merits of both, or, perhaps do the Restricted Wireless Operator training course.
Current opinions are - to put it mildly - uninformed.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Well now - here we see the triumph of the short-sighted in the kingdom of the blind.
Could I suggest all the posters do some research into the relative merits of both, or, perhaps, do the Restricted Wireless Operator training course.
Current opinions are - to put it mildly - uninformed.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Guest]

Post deleted by danfoley

 

[Rich_F]

I don't know what sort of Satellite phone I'd be looking at. If I was relying on it as a lifeline, I'd want something that could quickly and reliably get a connection when needed.

I'm also not sure about the costs of satellite phones. I'd probably be looking for one with low cost of ownership, rather than low call costs, or sexy handset.

Can they all get reliable connections, using their internal aerials? And what phone number would you ring in the event of an emergency at sea?

Rich

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[HaraldS]

Quite a difference in price on the satellite phones. But I think none really ideal for mainly emergency.
On Iridium you's have to pay the monthly fee of about $15-$20, to have any service when you need it. Unlike the GSM I don't think they support emerengy calls for non-registered phones, at least my phone would sign on to the network, until the registration was processed.
On Inmarsat you have no monthly charge, but the devices are more expensive than an EPIRB and are not suitable to take to the life raft.
When you say phone I presume you mean something you can use for 'talking' over. In that case you would even need a tracking antenna for Inmarsat.
I'm quite sure an Iridium phone in a water-tight bag will go along way, especially if you have a few charged batteries, but certainly not as reliable as an EPIRB.
I think however that there are cases of emergency when a sat-phone is more useful than an EPIRB, say for medical advice as an example.
There are times where one can substitute the other, but not always, so having both increases saftey in my mind.
I think the question is along the line of many other things like: Liferaft vs. dinghy, GSM-phone vs. VHF, engine vs. sail....

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.taniwani.de>http://www.taniwani.de</A>

 

[alex_rogers]

If you can point me in the direction of a fully waterproof and fully automatic satelite phone which can transmit my location and act as a homing beacon for 48 hours, for less than £600 with no rental charges, I'd appreciate it.

In the absense of one of these, I'll stick with an EPIRB ( in my un-informed opinion! ).

<hr width=100% size=1>Alex Rogers
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.YachtsAtSea.com> www.YachtsAtSea.com </A>

 

[Dave99]

I say EPIRB, you can use your mobile to phone for your takeaway since your unlikely to have one mid-atlantic, much cheaper calls too!!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bedouin]

Re: Your assumptions about

Are you sure about your assumptions re: EPIRBs?

Many now include GPS receivers and so can give very accurate fixes immediately

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[NDG]

You're being a bit patronising about everyone else's knowledge, in my humble un-informed opinion.

Re. your other post about accuracy of EPIRB - you dont get a fix to 8 miles with an EPIRB on first pass if its got an integral GPS - you get a fix to normal GPS tolerances almost immediately.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

The international Inmarsat system has been around a long time and is proven - the other two satellite providers have got going but one has already been wound up and its assets purchased and the other is struggling to break-even.
Your cheapest apparatus, Inmarsat C, works out at about £2500 and needs to be fitted by an expert as the dish has to track the satellite.
You then have to pay the service provider - if UK it used to be £20/month plus traffic tariff, which was fairly cheap.
Inmarsat C allows no real-time conversation but sends out a very effective squawk.
Inmarsat B allows real time calls, and is the little dish you see on superyachts, equipment fitted is about £10K and call-time is pricey at $10/minute.
Inmarsat A is for big ships only.
I believe that another service for yotties, E, was being proposed but don't know whether it's got beyond the whoffle-stage.

Of the two other satellite systems, Iridium has already gone bankrupt and been reformed, the equipment was slightly more expensive than Inmarsat C, membership about $20/month and call-charge about $8 minute.
I did my original homework 3 years ago and decided that satellite phones were great for war correspondents and mega-corporate executives, but far too high-tech, high-priced and high-falutin' for a cruising lifestyle.
For this reason I carry a 406/121.5 EPIRB, and a 121.5 personal one - the two cost me <£500 and have no maintenance costs.

So, as with everything. you pays your money and takes your pick.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

The international Inmarsat system has been around a long time and is proven - the other two satellite providers have got going but one has already been wound up and its assets purchased and the other is struggling to break-even.
Your cheapest apparatus, Inmarsat C, works out at about £2500 and needs to be fitted by an expert as the dish has to track the satellite.
You then have to pay the service provider - if UK it used to be £20/month plus traffic tariff, which was fairly cheap.
Inmarsat C allows no real-time conversation but sends out a very effective squawk.
Inmarsat B allows real time calls, and is the little dish you see on superyachts, equipment fitted is about £10K and call-time is pricey at $10/minute.
Inmarsat A is for big ships only.
I believe that another service for yotties, E, was being proposed but don't know whether it's got beyond the whoffle-stage.

Of the two other satellite systems, Iridium has already gone bankrupt and been reformed, the equipment was slightly more expensive than Inmarsat C, membership about $20/month and call-charge about $8 minute.
I did my original homework 3 years ago and decided that satellite phones were great for war correspondents and mega-corporate executives, but far too high-tech, high-priced and high-falutin' for a cruising lifestyle.
For this reason I carry a 406/121.5 EPIRB, and a 121.5 personal one - the two cost me <£500 and have no maintenance costs.

So, as with everything, you pays your money and takes your pick.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Re: Your assumptions about

Yes they do - however the delay/inaccuracy is not just down to the triangulation, but also to the limited tracking time for the ground stations getting the message.

Moreover the EPIRB is purely a Mayday signalling tracking device - any 2-way communication has to be via SSB or handheld vhf when the rescue services get within range.

It only performs half the task.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Re: Your assumptions about

As with everything there are two sides to any story - perhaps enthusiasm has reduced your perception of the benefits of the other system.

Firstly the assumtion that the only form of emergency is a sinking - whilst the starkest, it probably accounts for no more than 50% of Mayday situations.

The satellite phone not only allows announcement of the Mayday situation it allows you to brief the authorities and to recieve information back from them as well as a Pan-Pan.

If you had suggested the use of a 406 EPIRB with an SSB radio I might have been more sympathetic to your case, as it is you are proposing a half-solution.

Have I made my position more clear?

<hr width=100% size=1>