Flares and france

[Roberto]

The French regulations as currently written require "Trois feux rouges à main".
No other flares of any kind are required. No connection with having or not VHF or VHF with DSC. [ For instance for the category "cotier", less than 6nm from a safe haven, the flares are required but not VHF is required ].

You are right I was not aware of this last modification of Division 240, with the earlier version of the rules the VHF was not mandatory so there was the obligation of parachute/smoke, recently the vhf became mandatory so parachute/smoke are not required any more.

 

[Sandy]

You are always on about what you used to do for a living - I was an academic and learned to question things rather than accept what other people say about a subject.

I'm just passionate about stuff.

 

[Tranona]

I'm just passionate about stuff.

I know - as am I but not to the point of rejecting or denying sound reasoning!

 

[Tranona]

Actually OP was instigator of the dangerous aspect ...

Yes, sort of skipped that because it was not the substantive question just in the same way as mentioning what other gear he carries.

Yes they are dangerous if you try to use them, but not just buying them and carrying them aboard to comply with a regulation!

 

[Refueler]

Tragic indeed....yet they seem perfectly safe when used by 90,000 football fans

And French Protestors .... maybe they are using all the expired flares french police take from UK boats ??

 

[Refueler]

No they are not regarded as safe at football stadiums.
THE DANGERS OF PYROTECHNICS AT FOOTBALL MATCHES

In the official recognised distress list (col regs annexe) you still have a burning barrel of tar, firing your shotgun, and star shells from your cannon. The RYA seem to now advise not to use pyrotechnics , and the US coastguard allow electronic flares. Time adn technology moves on. I love one of the quotes in the YM article, 'Flares didn’t work for the Titanic and they don’t work for us'

How old is your annex ?

 

[westernman]

No requirements for boats owned by non-French residents. As a curiosity, if one has a vhf DSC radio then French regulations require only hand flares (not smoke nor parachute).

Not exactly right.

The French regulations require three hand held red flares. End of.
No connection with VHF or VHF DSC.

Indeed for Cotier (up to 6nm from safe haven), you are required to have the flares, but not required to have a VHF.

 

[boomerangben]

A couple of points regarding various posts…..

The USCG have an approved on specific model of electronic flare for use at night. They sell a flag to comply with the regulations during the day. Clearly electronic flares are considered unsuitable by day, which is when most of us sail.

Flares are safe, or at least safe enough to be in a pocket on an aircraft. (No not for passengers, I agree).

We are only going to be using them when in intimate proximity of worlds biggest fire extinguisher.

Those of us on this forum who have worked in emergency services in remote and hostile environments mostly consider flares to be the dogs cahooners when people are in desperate need.

We all get to decide what we carry/don’t carry based on our own risk assessment (unless of course required by other states). Each to their own. But those of us who defend flares do so following experiences that perhaps others have not even dreamed of. I’m sure those involved hadnt dreamed of their predicament either. But of course we have to remember that being in the emergency services expose us to more nasty situations which might skew our view of underlying stats.

I can’t find it (it was posted by the MCA on FB) but a couple of months ago 3 (iirc) fisherman were rescued from a life raft by the Newquay SAR helicopter by day and they were more easily spotted because they used a flare.

 

[Tranona]

A couple of points regarding various posts…..

The USCG have an approved on specific model of electronic flare for use at night. They sell a flag to comply with the regulations during the day. Clearly electronic flares are considered unsuitable by day, which is when most of us sail.

Flares are safe, or at least safe enough to be in a pocket on an aircraft. (No not for passengers, I agree).

We are only going to be using them when in intimate proximity of worlds biggest fire extinguisher.

Those of us on this forum who have worked in emergency services in remote and hostile environments mostly consider flares to be the dogs cahooners when people are in desperate need.

We all get to decide what we carry/don’t carry based on our own risk assessment (unless of course required by other states). Each to their own. But those of us who defend flares do so following experiences that perhaps others have not even dreamed of. I’m sure those involved hadnt dreamed of their predicament either. But of course we have to remember that being in the emergency services expose us to more nasty situations which might skew our view of underlying stats.

I can’t find it (it was posted by the MCA on FB) but a couple of months ago 3 (iirc) fisherman were rescued from a life raft by the Newquay SAR helicopter by day and they were more easily spotted because they used a flare.

You are exactly right - you are viewing it from a different perspective because you only see the "outliers" - that is the extreme cases. For the rest of us we will never get into that sort of situation because our strategy is to avoid them. As I pointed out earlier if one then chooses to go into places and into weather where such situations become more likely then you adjust your equipment requirement to deal with the different and greater risks.

The problem with stats is that the number of cases of outliers is so small and the detail of the events is so varied that you can't get any statistical analysis even if you can get enough data to make any meaningful comparisons. So the only thing you can do is to find common themes from what data you have. I reported on her a few years ago an analysis of every MAIB report of foundering of yachts over a 15 year period (less than 20 from memory) and the only common themes were collisions, mechanical failure and extreme weather. So if you have a sound boat, keep away from other vessels and avoid extreme weather ten your chances of needing rescue (and therefore using flares!) are pretty close to zero.

Since then as I noted earlier we have AIS, sounder and more capable boats and forecasting that enables us to avoid extreme weather. Add to that vastly improved means of communicating with rescue services. Consequently I can't recall the last case of a yacht foundering with loss of life in UK waters.

It is also a mistake to refer to fishing boats and use them as any comparator to yachting except to learn from equipment (liferaft, communications, nav equipment etc) failures. They are very different boats and different usage patterns and if you do the same thematic analysis you come up with a very different set of themes. Extreme weather is of course there, but net fouling and capsizing are common, neither of which apply to yachts.

 

[boomerangben]

You are exactly right - you are viewing it from a different perspective because you only see the "outliers" - that is the extreme cases. For the rest of us we will never get into that sort of situation because our strategy is to avoid them. As I pointed out earlier if one then chooses to go into places and into weather where such situations become more likely then you adjust your equipment requirement to deal with the different and greater risks.

The problem with stats is that the number of cases of outliers is so small and the detail of the events is so varied that you can't get any statistical analysis even if you can get enough data to make any meaningful comparisons. So the only thing you can do is to find common themes from what data you have. I reported on her a few years ago an analysis of every MAIB report of foundering of yachts over a 15 year period (less than 20 from memory) and the only common themes were collisions, mechanical failure and extreme weather. So if you have a sound boat, keep away from other vessels and avoid extreme weather ten your chances of needing rescue (and therefore using flares!) are pretty close to zero.

Since then as I noted earlier we have AIS, sounder and more capable boats and forecasting that enables us to avoid extreme weather. Add to that vastly improved means of communicating with rescue services. Consequently I can't recall the last case of a yacht foundering with loss of life in UK waters.

It is also a mistake to refer to fishing boats and use them as any comparator to yachting except to learn from equipment (liferaft, communications, nav equipment etc) failures. They are very different boats and different usage patterns and if you do the same thematic analysis you come up with a very different set of themes. Extreme weather is of course there, but net fouling and capsizing are common, neither of which apply to yachts.

But not every rescue results in a MAIB report and there are plenty of instances where flares weren’t used, but would have made the search so much easier.

As you say, equip for the conditions and risk. If you don’t think you will ever need rescuing, there’s no need to spend money on flares, pyro or electronic.

 

[Stemar]

As you say, equip for the conditions and risk. If you don’t think you will ever need rescuing, there’s no need to spend money on flares, pyro or electronic.

Absolutely. When you get it wrong or something vital breaks, you should "drown like a gentleman" rather than seek help.

Well, I'd be all for that, but Madame doesn't agree for some reason, so my apologies in advance if I don't comply...

 

[boomerangben]

Absolutely. When you get it wrong or something vital breaks, you should "drown like a gentleman" rather than seek help.

Well, I'd be all for that, but Madame doesn't agree for some reason, so my apologies in advance if I don't comply...

I wasn’t recommending that as a course of action at all. Just merely pointing out that we all get to choose what we carried based on our own risk assessment. I carry a flare and a PLB in my life jacket

 

[Tranona]

But not every rescue results in a MAIB report and there are plenty of instances where flares weren’t used, but would have made the search so much easier.

As you say, equip for the conditions and risk. If you don’t think you will ever need rescuing, there’s no need to spend money on flares, pyro or electronic.

That says a lot for the impact of modern electronics and communications systems. Many peoples' mindset is stuck in what I call Grace Darling mode - heroic rescues with burning tyre barrels, locals on the top of cliffs spotting 3 masted schooners running onto rocks and so on. Nothing is further from current reality. The fact that so few incidents involving yachts result in an MAIB report compared with 20 years ago despite the increase in activity shows the progress made.

I was "rescued" 3 years ago, and flares would have been no benefit. Call to the coastguard, position given from the chart plotter, explanation of what the problem was (pot line around the keel and rudder) and 45 minutes later the Atlantic and its crew were alongside to cut me free. Total time before I was on my way again less than an hour and a half. OK, so I was less than 2 miles off the entrance to Poole harbour on a sunny Saturday afternoon, but I would suggest this is closer to the norm than a small yacht battling the stormy seas in the middle of the night in winter.

Pity the data on rescue operations is so poor, but pretty sure if more detail were available it would show the extreme rescue situations rarely involve yachts. Better data is available in the US because it is compulsory to report incidents. I have not looked at it for a few years, but when I did it was striking how few incidents involved yachts in coastal waters compared with for example power boats on inland waters.

One of the truisms in the social sciences is "a way of seeing is a way of not seeing". So concentrating on the tiny number of extreme examples ignores all those events that occur without any problems - they are simply not interesting. The value of extreme incidents is understanding what happened to make them thus, and that is often lost in the headline picture of the helicopter hovering above or the lifeboat crashing through heavy seas. The lessons mostly come from the events leading up to the rescue rather than the rescue itself. That is the value of the MAIB reports and lost from those incidents that don't result in a report.

 

[Refueler]

Sorry Tranona .... your 'pot line' example is in the realm of my 'rescue' outside Bembridge hbr when my forestay gave way in strong winds rising to near gale ...

Being within "WORKING" VHF range and easily passed location info ... that really negates the need for other locator items.

But Flares were intended as a means to alert any other vessel in range of seeing the flare (parachute flare note gives a significant increase to visual range) .. and assistance in location .. wherever .. near or offshore ... particularly when VHF / other comms are not available.

People tend to not appreciate the use of Parachute flare and then hand held ... Parachute flare to get other vessel to proceed toward you ... then Hand held to identify you when they are closer.

Its a system ... not just a flare in hand or a Parachute flare fired on their own.

As to person on cliff or beach ... sorry - but I suggest to you that most people do appreciate what a red flare out at sea means ...

I for one appreciate modern tech can be used and can have advantages - but also that traditional pyrotechnic flares STILL have a definite place on board. I am a great believer in all means I can have to use ... why restrict what you have ??

 

[Tranona]

Sorry Tranona .... your 'pot line' example is in the realm of my 'rescue' outside Bembridge hbr when my forestay gave way in strong winds rising to near gale ...

Being within "WORKING" VHF range and easily passed location info ... that really negates the need for other locator items.

But Flares were intended as a means to alert any other vessel in range of seeing the flare (parachute flare note gives a significant increase to visual range) .. and assistance in location .. wherever .. near or offshore ... particularly when VHF / other comms are not available.

People tend to not appreciate the use of Parachute flare and then hand held ... Parachute flare to get other vessel to proceed toward you ... then Hand held to identify you when they are closer.

Its a system ... not just a flare in hand or a Parachute flare fired on their own.

As to person on cliff or beach ... sorry - but I suggest to you that most people do appreciate what a red flare out at sea means ...

I for one appreciate modern tech can be used and can have advantages - but also that traditional pyrotechnic flares STILL have a definite place on board. I am a great believer in all means I can have to use ... why restrict what you have ??

I know - pretty ordinary - that is my point - more representative of the typical "rescue" than the extreme cases that some people concentrate on.

If you read what I have written (can understand if you have not a explaining things often takes a lot of words) I have always said that it is different once you get out of range of our excellent comms systems and that if I was going offshore or ocean sailing I would take a different approach. Even using flares to alert other ships is less relevant now with DSC calling.

What I question is the need to carry all the gear for leisure sailing in N European coastal waters. People seem addicted to loading themselves up with too much gear to deal with events that will never happen.

 

[westernman]

If you are out of range for VHF communications, you are out of range for a flare being visible.

 

[Refueler]

C'mon T .... we all do it ... loading up with too much gear. Whether its too many sails ... clothes .... or flares etc.

Never too much Beer / Wine of course.

Sorry but regardless of inshore or offshore ... I believe in non tech as well as tech solutions.

So not far off beach / coast ... well within VHF or Mobile phone range .... water coming on board .. electrics failed ... mobile was in pocket and is now dead from getting wet ... you are abandoning to Liferaft ... HH VHF is down somewhere in boat that's sinking ... BUT you have flares in your Liferaft .... WOW !!

 

[Refueler]

If you are out of range for VHF communications, you are out of range for a flare being visible.

??? So what about other boats that may be out there ? Lets hope you got your Mayday or DSC out ... then another boat wants to find you ... you are in your Liferaft ... no VHF ... what are you going to do then ?

My whole point is to not put faith in ONE system ... especially if it relies on 'electrons' .....

A wet flare still works....

 

[Tranona]

??? So what about other boats that may be out there ? Lets hope you got your Mayday or DSC out ... then another boat wants to find you ... you are in your Liferaft ... no VHF ... what are you going to do then ?

My whole point is to not put faith in ONE system ... especially if it relies on 'electrons' .....

A wet flare still works....

But I am not in my liferaft! You seem only to read bits of what i write - I made it very clear that once out of the range of good comms, the strategy would be different - and I would carry flares.

The number of reported incidents of liferafts being deployed by yachts in the last 25 years or so in UK waters is less than one a year and in most recent years zero.

Is it so difficult to make an effort to deal with reality rather than hypothesise about things that will never happen to you?

BTW it is not just one system. VHF, mobile phones and AIS as position fixers - not all necessarily available at any one time, nor everywhere around the UK but pretty good in the most heavily travelled areas. Mobile phones are far and away the most common means of communication with the coastguard both from land and sea. Flares do not even make the table of first means of communication.

 

[boomerangben]

The primary scenario that comes to my mind in the risk assessment is MOB, which is a relatively common occurrence. We are also seeing (according to the Saving Lives at Sea series on TV) an increase in emergencies arising from small personal craft (paddle boards, kayaks etc). Mostly by day. Thankfully most have happy endings. Note the unhappy endings rarely if ever get televised. To me, PLB gets the professionals involved. great. But the most likely and quickest form of rescue might come from a more proximate boat which won't have received the 406 signal. I might use an AIS beacon, but that relies on the other vessel having AIS. But a small day night gives you two chances of being seen by day.

Modern tech invariably assumes that your best (closest) means of rescue has corresponding tech, knows how to use it and has it switched on. Flares also require someone to observe it, but they are another basket for your eggs or perhaps Mars Easter eggs!!