Flares - what is the latest theory?

[Searush]

I see you display a complete lack of knowledge about a fast boat. We are discussing use of flares, so lets assume we are in open water. Chances are, nearest boat is at least a mile away- and I did just say I saw virtually no boats in several weeks. So, to be approaching me from my stern, you will need to be travelling at 50 knots + to catch me in, say, five minutes. 70 knots+ if I am really motoring. That suggests to me, most vessels behind me, I will have passed during the passage. Not altogether amazing to discover that most of the time I am concentrating on in front and to the side of me. I am coming up on 5 knot sailing boats very fast. Most vessels are out of sight behind me pretty quickly. I suggest the VHF ch 16 is a good use of effort, and AIS helps too.
Since I travel quite quickly I probably make far more sweeps of the horizon than most sailing boats do at 5 knots. I need to know what is around me.
In crowded waters, of course I look behind me more. The sailing boat in front is probably about to tack right across in front of me without even looking.

Did I upset you then? I'm sorry, I didn't mean to. The assumption of open water is a new addition to the argument that I shall ignore. But you are (more dangerously) assuming that no-one will go faster than you - that's a really dangerous assumption, fast cat ferries, ribs & other MoBo's could all be faster than you. Plus you should also keep an eye on the impact of any wash on the small boats you pass.

The behaviour of sailing boats is generally quite predictable - if you know where the channel is & what the wind & tide are doing - but I suspect that you pay as little attention to wind & tide as you do to other water users.

Your apparent arrogance doesn't surprise me, but it does worry me.

 

[gjgm]

Your apparent arrogance doesn't surprise me, but it does worry me.

You really are foolishly pompous, Searush.
The very fact I travel faster than most boat users mean I have to be more aware of them. I dont assume that I am the fastest vessel on the water, but given that I know where I am and where I am going, it seems highly likely I would know if I am going to come across a high speed ferry. And as I indicated, a vessel would have to be travelling at 60 -70 knots to come up behind me without my noticing within a five minute period or so, hence the main focus on being what is ahead or to the side. It all depends on location, as i suggested, and you chose to ignore. I'm delighted to hear you are scanning 360 degrees even more frequently than I am.
I run up and down Southampton water every time I boat, meaning the fast ferries and I are closing at 75 knots or so,requiring a level of concentration possibly unknown to you at 5 knots.
So,please go back to your grandstanding and set preconceptions about power and sail. It seems you are only making a fool of yourself.

 

[oceanfroggie]

Putting what is in effect an explosive device in the hands of somebody who has never be trained how to deploy it seems more a safety risk than a help. Bourne out by the number of flare accidents. Electronics are safer. Lighting fires is so 19th century.

 

[Assassin]

Read an interesting article which i will share the edited highlights of:

Pyrotechnic flares will remain as the only viable option for marine distress use for the forseeable future due to several isues arising from electronic replacements.
The main issues are perception as every experienced mariner will clearly identify a distress flare fired into the air as these are distinct from other pyrotechnic charge such as fireworks. Pyrotechnic rockets have an average visibility of 27 miles in average conditions, therefore alerting other vessels in the vicinity, or further afield as well as local residents of coastal or near coastal locations.
Electronic replacements cannot attain anywhere near this level of visibility, range, and identification from experienced mariners or others living in the vicinity of a coastal region.

Considered expertise has concluded it would be foolish for insurers to recommend that pyrotechnic flares be removed from any craft and replaced with electronic replacements. Such actions would or could involve considerable litigation from serious injuries or fatalities which would inevitably increase if electronic replacements are recommended.
Pyrotechnic flares are used as a last resort when other forms of communication may be damaged or destroyed during an incident, thus not allowing person/s any other form of communicating a dangerous incident or ocurance, so should not be removed as a "stipulated" condition of insurance.


They might not have let me have a full copy of the document for publication, but they could not stop me reading it and taking notes.

 

[Doghousekeeper]

Bourne out by the number of flare accidents. Electronics are safer.

All the statistics I've seen suggest that there are considerably more electronic failures than flare accidents (which are very rare). Electric and electronic failures may lead to fire - at which point, with no ship's power left, I think most people would be quite happy to turn to the flare box. I accept that an EPIRB would be a reasonable alternative in those circumstances, but even if I'd activated the EPIRB I'd still be thinking about using the flares as well. Belt-and-braces seems like a good idea when you need help quickly

I think we're still a long way from a reliable and effective alternative to pyrotechnics and until one comes along that has the approval of the authorities and the insurers ... I'll continue to carry flares

 

[oceanfroggie]

Flares have proveb safe and effective in the hands of professionals, commercial users, military and experienced leisure yachtsmen, BUT have proven less successfull and even dangerous in the hands of inexperienced leisure users and day trippers (ie burn and eye injuries, even fatalities, and boat fires).

 

[Assassin]

I think there is a moral here, anyone concerned about using pyrotechnics should go along to one of the numerous manufacturers courses where they can learn how to use pyrotechnic rockets and flares safely. I attended one several years ago, and as someone who has used a number of pyrotechnics, i still learned a few useful things.

Searush:

If i see you i will wave.

 

[Swagman]

I've only ever once seen flares set off at sea by a boat in distress. We eventually found them 8 miles away - probably over our original horizon. I question if we'd have seen any laser type device at that range.
So I am another who is sticking with the regular devices - plus EPIRB.
John

 

[dt4134]

Read an interesting article which i will share the edited highlights of:

Pyrotechnic flares will remain as the only viable option for marine distress use for the forseeable future due to several isues arising from electronic replacements.
The main issues are perception as every experienced mariner will clearly identify a distress flare fired into the air as these are distinct from other pyrotechnic charge such as fireworks. Pyrotechnic rockets have an average visibility of 27 miles in average conditions, therefore alerting other vessels in the vicinity, or further afield as well as local residents of coastal or near coastal locations.
Electronic replacements cannot attain anywhere near this level of visibility, range, and identification from experienced mariners or others living in the vicinity of a coastal region.

Considered expertise has concluded it would be foolish for insurers to recommend that pyrotechnic flares be removed from any craft and replaced with electronic replacements. Such actions would or could involve considerable litigation from serious injuries or fatalities which would inevitably increase if electronic replacements are recommended.
Pyrotechnic flares are used as a last resort when other forms of communication may be damaged or destroyed during an incident, thus not allowing person/s any other form of communicating a dangerous incident or ocurance, so should not be removed as a "stipulated" condition of insurance.


They might not have let me have a full copy of the document for publication, but they could not stop me reading it and taking notes.

That sounds like a very sensible view.


Where's the risk in having pyrotechnics on board unused? You don't have to use them if you don't want to, if you think using them is risky. It depends upon how much distress you're in at the time.

 

[Searush]

(snip)
Searush:

If i see you i will wave.

Sadly, I fear you will need to turn round as I shall be left some way behind you.

Actually, it isn't sad at all! I much prefer my sedate pace, there is already far too much rush & dash in life today. I want to take my time & enjoy the scenery & wildlife. Charging round at high speed is just too stressful, I could do that ashore if I really wanted to.