EPIRB vs Sat Phone

[bedouin]

Re: Your assumptions about

Obviously both are ideal - but if I could only have one it would be the EPIRB (which is in fact all I have).

I must admit my comments were more aimed at the IRIDIUM type satelite phones rather than the vastly more expensive, but more appropriate, INMARSAT ones.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Charles

I didnt recall a dish being installed with Sat C - the aerial looks more solid state than dish.

In non sinking conditions, I think I'd take Sat C over an EPIRB (due to the two way comms), and maybe carry an inexpensive 121.5 for homing. As I recall SatC reaches the MRCC slightly quicker than a 406, and miles quicker than 121.5

Iridium, globalstar et al are replacements for a GSM, not for GMDSS working at all, in my view - but an alternative combo might well be a 406 EPIRB, and a domestic sat phone (suited to you operating area) to give the two way comms. This would quite possibly be cheaper, and possibly more functional than SatC, as you would have a speech circuit - not just telex/email. I've got the older technology, and am quite happy with it - but then I was brought in the Hasler school of thought - that 'yachtsmen in distrees should die like gentlemen, and not bother the rescue services'. My old man never carried a radio (except when we sailed the Atlantic - and that was to file stories with The Telegraph), and would only carry white flares. Apart from one trip in F 14, I don't ever recall too many dramas.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

Satellite phones

My position is stated above.

I don't think Iridium or t'other are a substitute for a good mayday device, any more than Citizens' band is a substitute for a marine vhf.

But it is important, in my opinion to weigh the facts and not to jump to conclusions or to overstate the case on either side.

Before I set out, 3 years ago, I did a fairly detailed study of Mayday alternatives and came down to DSC vhf for Cat 1 areas and EPIRB and SSB for Category 2/3.

All the automatic systems have drawbacks, but the EPIRB has more than most.

The first problem is a human one - with 1:2 DSC calls being in error and half that many 406 alerts - MRSCC's could understandably be becoming overly familiar with false alarms.

All an EPIRB does is to pass a digital SrNo signal and a position to a satellite and thence to the GTS.
It gives no information as to the nature of the mayday, and until the databases are consulted, the identity of the vessel.
Around the British Isles we are overgifted with "free" rescue services - lots of stations, no charge to the taxpayer if the RNLI launches (an Arun costs £26/hr for fuel alone).
Our MRSCC are happy to search at the drop of a bleep.

Elsewhere in the world it's a different matter - the taxpayer pays, and there is a reluctance to commit to expense over an unknown - person, vessel or emergency.
The other missing factor is the feedback - has the instrument worked and has it been heard.

I know that for a vhf PanPan last spring it took 53 minutes for Cap Gard CROSS to acknowledge and I was quite convinced I'd not been heard and had made adequate alternative arrangements


So I'd admit an EPIRB is better than nothing, but so is a satellite phone. Both have advantages one over the other and, certainly if my pocket were not a concern, for ocean crossings I'd rate an Inmarsat C over an EPIRB.

The question was a straight one - for which would I go if t'other was out.

Personally I just don't believe in putting all my eggs in 1 basket.



<hr width=100% size=1>