First Pan Pan experience

jonjo5 said:
He was not in distress at the time of the Pan-Pan call. I don't think he was asking for assistance.
Click to expand...

Which is why he didn't use a distress call - he (correctly) used an urgency call. There is only one "distress" call - mayday (which, if he'd used in this instance, I'd be right alongside you in saying was wrong)

From his OP -

At this stage I decided I needed some help - not immediately then, but when we got into the Solent and possibly before
Click to expand...

So yes, he was asking for assistance - a pan call does not require that assistance to be immediate, So, again, the correct action.
 
The RYA's website has this as a guide to deciding on using Pan Pan -

'Using a Pan-Pan

Maybe you’ve broken down and have been left floating aimlessly, or have suffered significant structural damage to your boat that means its progress has been severely impeded. Maybe someone on board has been taken ill but their condition is not immediately life threatening. These are the kinds of incidents to use a Pan-Pan call.

Repeating Pan-Pan three times says ‘it’s serious, we need help but there isn’t a grave and imminent danger to the boat or anyone on board.’ '


Personally, whilst progress was being made by sail, a Pan Pan is probably not justified, particularly as it is aimed at 'all stations'. Would the OP have needed help from a passing ship? A routine call to the coastguard is another matter.
 
chanelyacht said:
Which is why he didn't use a distress call - he (correctly) used an urgency call. There is only one "distress" call - mayday (which, if he'd used in this instance, I'd be right alongside you in saying was wrong)
Click to expand...
The British Government contradicts your own definition of a distress call and confirms mine. I have highlighted the key words to assist you.

https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/how-call-help-emergency-sea

How to call for help in an emergency at sea

Sending a distress alert using VHF radio when inshore

In an emergency, send a voice Mayday or Pan-Pan message on VHF channel 16.
Click to expand...
It cannot be stated more simply or clearly, a Pan-Pan call is an emergency distress call of a lower urgency than a Mayday.

I do not believe the OP faced an emergency situation or believed he was making a distress call when he contacted Solent CG, he was just following convention that he would have heard over and over on the Solent Channel 16 comedy show.
 
Last edited:
jonjo5 said:
The British Government disputes your own definition of a distress call and confirms mine. I have highlighted the key words to assist you.

https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/how-call-help-emergency-sea
Click to expand...
Isn't it lucky that the British Govt isn't the definitive source of the relevant definitions then!

Pan-Pan is an Urgency call; end of. Could the OP have used a call to Ch67 as an alternative; Yes. Was the Pan-Pan unreasonable; No.

I won't add fuel to inflame this conversation any more, but there are some pretty petty comments from what appear to be uniformed quarters.
 
I had a similar experience to the OP. Having crossed the channel towards Calais and heading towards Dunkerque under engine as there was no wind, we felt/heard a slight bump, and engine revs and speed dropped. No obvious mechanical problems, but the drop in speed meant we wouldn't get to Dunkerque before the tide changed against us (and therefore we wouldn't get in to Dunkerque). Turning back towards Calais didn't help much either - we were barely stemming the tide. Given that we didn't know the waters and I had no idea of the problem or if the engine would keep running I called a Pan Pan, pending any other bright ideas. Both UK and French coastguards responded quickly and I explained the problem, and then a nearby Dutch yacht offered to give us a tow to Dunkerque, which we gratefully accepted - the extra couple of knots they gave us meant we managed to get to Dunkerque just as the tide turned and we got in OK. Problem turned out to be a ball of thin rope around the prop - the rope cutter had done its job in cutting the rope so the prop could still turn, but there was so much of it wrapped around the prop in a ball that we had very little drive - it probably didn't help the prop to unfeather either. In retrospect I have deliberated whether a Pan Pan was appropriate. The main advantage of calling the Pan Pan was that other users (ie the Dutch yacht) probably paid more attention to my conversation with the coastguard and therefore were minded to offer to help - without the Pan Pan, perhaps they would have missed the conversation completely. In the end I was happy with the decision I made.
 
No and I've never claimed to be so no need to be insulting! I hope in real life you are a more pleasant individual than you come across on this forum.
 
Hacker said:
No and I've never claimed to be so no need to be insulting! I hope in real life you are a more pleasant individual than you come across on this forum.
Click to expand...
If you engage in ridicule of someone posting a link to an authoritative government web site that was an attempt to settle a dispute then have the decency to substantiate your ridicule. And if you don't want to be described as "Hacker" why choose that username?
 
chanelyacht said:
So you're relying on a 17 year old article with a press officer's error in it as your backup?

I'll stick with ITU and IAMSAR, thanks.

It's called "distress, urgency and safety" calling for a reason.
Click to expand...
Will you be writing to the author of the GOV.UK site to inform them of their confusion?
 
chanelyacht said:
No, it's one of the least errors I've seen from that site.
Click to expand...
So the Government is wrong and we have to take it on faith that you are the forums principal oracle on all matters of VHF procedure. This despite the fact that another 6 contributors to this thread complimented the OP on his resolution of the problem but queried whether the situation warranted a Pan-Pan call.

You in contrast are 100% sure that Pan-Pan was the right call. To support this view you poured oil on the smoldering confusion by introducing "breakdown" as the discriminator factor. As I hope I have demonstrated a breakdown has little influence on the correct VHF call to make. What really matters is the gravity of the situation being experienced onboard, the potential for the situation to escalate and whether human life is in imminent danger.

I am still not clear why a yacht proceeding under sail, in fair summer weather in daylight needs to issue a Pan-Pan call in order to discuss options for assistance that might be needed 4 to 6 hours in the future should the skipper not elect to choose a safer alternative destination. Until you can prove otherwise I will choose to believe the only authoritative Government source of info that defines a Pan-Pan call as a distress call made due to an emergency onboard.

chanelyacht said:
Remind us all when you received your ITU GMDSS CSOC certificate?
Click to expand...
I have some sort of VHF competency certificate issued by a UK authority in about 1990.

Despite the age of the certificate so far this season I have successfully rescued a jetskier who was adrift in the big ship channel at West Bamble later passing him over to the RNLI via Solent CG and I have helped a confused Falmouth CG officer pin down the location of a thoroughly lost motorboat.
 
Last edited:
jonjo5 said:
So the Government is wrong and we have to take it on faith that you are the forums principal oracle on all matters of VHF procedure.
Click to expand...

No, I've quoted the sources (which are not me) - ITU and IAMSAR. I've never said I'm an oracle, I've merely pointed people to the correct references.

You in contrast are 100% sure that Pan-Pan was the right call. To support this view you poured oil on the smoldering confusion by introducing "breakdown" as the discriminator factor. As I hope I have demonstrated a breakdown has little influence on the correct VHF call to make. What really matters is the gravity of the situation being experienced onboard, the potential for the situation to escalate and whether human life is in imminent danger.
Click to expand...

I've used the OP's description, the fact that he, as the only one of us on the ground at the time, determined that assistance would be needed and that it warranted a pan call. Given the circs he describes, I'm happy with his judgement call.

Until you can prove otherwise I will choose to believe the only authoritative Government source of info that defines a Pan-Pan call as a distress call made due to an emergency onboard.
Click to expand...

I already have.


I have some sort of VHF competency certificate issued by a UK authority in about 1990.

Despite the age of the certificate so far this season I have successfully rescued a jetskier who was adrift in the big ship channel at West Bamble later passing him over to the RNLI via Solent CG and I have helped a confused Falmouth CG officer pin down the location of a thoroughly lost motorboat.
Click to expand...

Congratulations in both incidents, by neither qualifies you to coordinate SAR. I have no idea what your career / profession is, but whatever it is, I would respect your experience and qualifications to speak on that subject. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the same back from you.

Plus, of course, it may not have been a Falmouth CG officer who was confused - it could well have been Brixham using the aerial and hence the callsign :)
 
My recent experience of Pan Pan or not...
Having sailed across Lyme Bay I was coming close into Chesil Cove under Fortuneswell to anchor and await the tide to round Portland Bill. The sea was smooth with very little swell and the winds, although from the west, were F1 at the most. It was midnight.
As luck would have it I managed to pick up 2 lobster pots around the prop. This immediately stalled the engine. I could restart the engine in neutral and set the anchor in 6m depth.
I appraised the situation - although only 25m off the shore - there was little chance of going aground in the current conditions, but this also meant that I stood no chance of sailing out of the situation if I could get free. I decided to place a routine call to Solent CG to appraise them of the situation.
Solent were very professional in their response and accepted that I'd call them again at first light with an update and did not request constant updates which were of no value.
In the end I was able to dive under the boat with knife in hand and cut free the 2 pots and most of the line. After only a few minutes the cold got the better of me and the wetsuit. So I called in to Solent and advised them that I'd cut off as much as I could, but could not do any more due to the cold and risk to me. I also advised them that I'd tried the engine and it still stalled immediately. Solent offered to contact Portland Harbourmaster to organise a tow around the Bill, but I declined that saying I'd coordinate myself. However, I was appreciative of the offer.
After warning up and recovering I tried the engine once again and eventually it went into gear and the prop spun the remaining rope free and we were able to get round the Bill in absolutely perfect conditions.
Would I have called a Pan Pan for this in hindsight. No. In different conditions with a risk to the boat and crew (I would not have been at that location, but if I was) then yes or even a Mayday.
I think the lesson to be passed on from those that have really experienced a serious problem is that you call it as you see it at the time and are grateful for the professional response you receive in response to your call, be it from GG, RNLI or fellow sailors.
 
I appreciate everyone's comments - and as I've already stated, I accept a routing Ch 67 coastguard call was a valid option and with hindsight, given I did resolve the situation and all seems well, it was perhaps the better option. Having had this experience now, I may well take that option if something similar were to happen again as I could always escalate to a PP.

That said, I do not regret making the PP call and believe that also was a valid option given the situation as others have indicated.

I was very grateful for the response and support and the CG who in no way queried the call and were happy when I resolved the situation.
 
You're the Skipper, it's your call! No-one died and the vessel wasn't lost. It's a result! Everything else should be lost in the noise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

Barton Seagoon
Containers fallen into the Solent
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
wonkywinch
wonkywinch
R
Moving on.
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Greg2
Greg2
R
Brokers.
Replies
6
Views
471
Irish Rover
Irish Rover
S
Amiable demands for money!
Replies
15
Views
823
penberth3
P

Share this page

Top