Flares

[Sans Bateau]

To carry an EPIRB plus orange smoke and red HH instead of a flare pack is not a cost saving. You seem to miss the point, some of us will not carry flares or use them because of the questionable safety aspect, nothing else. Others are searching for and suggesting an alternative, an alternative that sure enough one day will be accepted.

 

[nct1]

In 30 years time, we will not be launching pyrotechnics as a means of communication. Health and safety will have outlawed them by then, other than usage by fully trained people. The reluctance to dispose of flares is a clear indication of this.

It was a good mechanism in the 19th centuary, and in many cases the only mechanism, but we have moved on, we have a number of better alternatives, that involve talking to someone that can help rather than relying on the "hope" that someone was looking at the right time in your direction.

My option of last resort is the liferaft /EPRIB, and would much prefer that, to hoping I could fire a rocket that someone might or might not see.

I do not critisize sailors who wish to retain the flare option, but I think it is unfair to critisize sailors who are prepared to invest in better, safer, reliable and testable technologies as an alternative option.

 

[Twister_Ken]

I repeat something I said earlier. A flare elicits an immediate response. An epirb response is delayed at least 30 minutes. Half an hour is easily long enough to die of hypothermia.

Also, an epirb signal goes half way around the globe without being received by a vessel 5 miles away that could be with you in minutes. A flare is seen by most in the vicinity.

I've seen flares twice when sailing. In both cases they resulted in Mayday relays before I could even get to the VHF.

 

[ShipsWoofy]

[ QUOTE ]
I do not <u>criticise</u> sailors who wish to retain the flare option, but I think it is unfair to <u>criticise</u> sailors who are prepared to invest in better, safer, reliable and testable technologies as an alternative option.

[/ QUOTE ]Do you believe that I carry flares and nothing else aboard, do you really think this or are you trolling?

The last person who used to believe you could buy safety was an idiot though he is now banned from this forum. Your statement is rather smug, it reads like, poor people rely on flares, I can afford better. You are not listening to what people are saying.

 

[gavin_lacey]

I do not belive that the new technologies provide an alternative option. They provide an additional option. I do criticise sailors who try and save money and thus increase the risk to thier crews should problems arise. If you sail singlehanded then I have no problem if you set out with no safety equipment at all. I carry flares as well as VHF, mobile phone, epirb, spotlight, liferaft etc. Different situations could require different responses. NB DSC VHF is of very limited use if you do not speak the local language.

 

[dt4134]

I accept there's a risk in using flares, but I don't think that risk is as big as you seem to think. After all you're only going to use a distress flare in a life threatening situation.

In terms of the distress capability, it is to my mind beyond question that flares add to the range of options sufficiently to justify carrying them. You can decide whether using the flare is worth it at the time.

I did think a bit about whether it was worth carrying anti-collision flares. In the end I decided that if I did need to use one it would be a bit awkward to nip down the chandlers qnd get one, so I bought a couple.

I wouldn't worry too much just yet about what distress mechanisms will be the most appropriate in thirty years time. Thirty years ago I was assured by one of my teachers that in thirty years time no one would need to work and we'd all be living a life of leisure.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

[ QUOTE ]

I've seen flares twice when sailing. In both cases they resulted in Mayday relays before I could even get to the VHF.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've had the exact opposite experience. I've seen a red flare launched in daylight in the busy solent. Out of maybe 200 boats only four reported it, none gave a decent position. If it didn't work there christ knows where it would work. Also around 7pm on 'Firework Saturday' 2008 two red flares were let off around Fareham. Neither were reported by VHF. I was about all night and no RNLI/GAFIR/Police boats went up there to investigate. Same happened in 2007 but I'd need to look at the log book for more detail. Finally I heard a second hand report of a guy who said that back in the days when the Coast Guard kept a watch he let of loads of flares off on a busy Sunday off Anvil Point/Poole area and got no response at all. I can recal two news stories of boats who failed to alert attention following releasing flares - one fire a rocket right at a fishing boat's bridge - still no response. They eventually got help via their mobile phone - on the last bar of battery.

That's before resorting to the countless tales in books of unseen flares.

So no, flares are not a reliable method of communicating the fact you're in distress and your position.

VHF/EPRIB/Mobile Phone/Handheld VHF do the job of parachute flares - only better.

Electric lights do the job of handheld flares - only better.

The IRPCS define plenty of daylight signals. However I think few would dispute that a smoke flare's are pretty decent kit, so maybe that's worth carrying.

Funny how it's deemed irresponsible to go sailing without flares and get people hot under the collar whereas sailing without an EPRIB and Handheld VHF is deemed fine. Completely illogical.

Anyway, I've read every post and nobody's convinced me of a function (except smoke) that flares do better than the safer alternatives. I think six totally indepentent methods of emergency communication is enough. If someone thinks I need seven let's hear what their seven are!

 

[Twister_Ken]

"Electric lights do the job of handheld flares - only better."

Now that is cobblers!

 

[ShipsWoofy]

 

[nct1]

I'm with you TOTH

I started this debate with a pack of flares, torches, VHF, mobile, fog horns and a hand held, but as the debate went on it became clear that the modern communication mechanisms will in my case make the flares redundant. I need to invest in DSC and EPRIB something I had been mulling over.

Ultimately I would much prefer to be talking directly to those that can manage my rescue and/or having an electronic tag to help pinpoint my position, than relying on pyrotechnics.

That is my decision, and I do not criticize anyone who want's to retain the flare option, but I would be an "idiot" if I based my thinking on the fear of name calling instead of reasoned argument /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Some including TK have plugged away with reasoned arguments for flares, and TK may well have persuaded others that flares are still a necesary option, that is the beauty of the forum, you can garner a number of arguments to help you make these kind of decisions. He certainly has a point respecting close quarters orange smoke.

One final point, the Titanic sinking gave a number of lessons, including that flares are not always acted upon. At least one other ship saw their flares, but assumed that it was passengers letting off fireworks. The rescue was summoned by the radio transmission and those who stayed afloat were rescued because of the radio, not flares.

I do not conclude that flares are useless from this, but that electronic conversations were and are a better communication method, and those that have a life raft as their last resort fare better than those who do not.

 

[maxi77]

A few observations.

Firstly basing ones views on just one peculiar sea are is probably foolish, the Solent is not the whole world.

Do people not carry their mobile phones because you don't always get coverag?

Yes there are potential dangers with flares, so they need handling with care, but the same applies to many other things in boats, fuel, gas, batteries, electricity and so on.

In many parts of the UK search and rescue operations are still frequently initiated from visual reports so being able to attract attention visually may have real virtue.

The reliability of electrics and electronics have improved dramatically in recent years, but electricity and sea water make bad bedfellows still so nothing electrical can be rated as 100% releiable either.

We have the freedom to choose what kit we carry, but does that alone justify divesting ones self ot a means of alerting and helping potential rescuers. I know what my choice is

 

[stevepick]

Peter

You highlight some important points about the reliability of communication methods,. Its not just the fact of wether ot not your radio will work, its wether you will be heard at all. Two years ago sailing towards Tarbert loch fyne we heard an immaculate mayday relay relayed by a yachtsman somewhere IIRC near arran. For the life of me I have googled for a report of this. I remember 2 people were involved and thier (fishing?) boat was flooding.It was sometime in may 2007 I think. I can't remember if they had sent thier call by HH or by flare. If it was by HH then the CC hadn't recieved it - totally possible up the west coast of scotland given numerous areas of bad vhf reception. In those circumstances ( mayday sent , but no response from SAR services) then I am going to start fireing flares pdq!

Steve

 

[Twister_Ken]

One last attempt:

A red para has a huge range of visibility, is unmistakable, and will elicit an immediate response, including from those who may be closer to you than dedicated rescue assets. Of course you should press the tits on the epirb and the DSC VHF, but is there any good reason not to fire off flares as well? It may not be first choice mid-ocean, but for the sort of quasi coastal sailing most of us do it will be effective unless weather conditions are exceptionally murky.

 

[Twister_Ken]

One other thought. Things go seriously pear-shaped. Someone drowns because help didn't arrive in time. You are standing in front of a coroner's inquest. You are asked if you had flares aboard. You suddenly start to feel very inadequate.

 

[flaming]

That's always been my thought process when making any safety related decision.
And while the RNLI, RYA, MCA, RORC etc all say you should carry Flares who's the coroner going to believe?

 

[Danny Jo]

[ QUOTE ]
And while the RNLI, RYA, MCA, RORC etc all say you should carry Flares who's the coroner going to believe?

[/ QUOTE ] Why, a Scuttlebutt forumite, of course! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Twister_Ken]

And another thing!

I've also seen a h/held flare being used in the Solent to signal to a helo which (of hundreds) white hulled yacht with white sails the casualty was on. No flares, what are you going to do, throw your epirb at him?

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

[ QUOTE ]
And another thing!

I've also seen a h/held flare being used in the Solent to signal to a helo which (of hundreds) white hulled yacht with white sails the casualty was on. No flares, what are you going to do, throw your epirb at him?

[/ QUOTE ]

At night flash you nav lights on and off or turn on a LJ strobe, in daylight use any of the daylight signals prescribed by the IRPCS. It's not rocket science.

 

[Twister_Ken]

"in daylight use any of the daylight signals prescribed by the IRPCS."

(a) a gun or other explosive signal fired at intervals of about a minute - maybe not

(b) a continuous sounding with any fog-signalling apparatus - no use to a helo

(c) rockets or shells, throwing red stars fired one at a time at short intervals; - that's a flare

(d) a signal made by radiotelegraphy or by any other signalling method consisting of the group ...---... (SOS) in the Morse Code - OK if you've got a bright signalling lamp with a morse trigger

(e) a signal sent by radiotelephony consisting of the spoken word “Mayday”; - not directional amongst other boats

(f) the International Code Signal of distress indicated by NC; - hands up if you have signal flags big enough to be seen from a helo?

(g) a signal consisting of a square flag having above or below it a ball or anything resembling a ball - ditto

(h) flames on the vessel (as from a burning tar barrel, oil barrel, etc) - pretty much last resort

(i) a rocket parachute flare or a hand flare showing a red light; - another flare

(j) a smoke signal giving off orange-coloured smoke - granted, but it's another form of pyrotechnic

(k) slowly and repeatedly raising and lowering arms outstretched to each side - and everybody will wave back

(l) the radiotelegraph alarm signal; non directional

(m) signals transmitted by emergency position-indicating radio beacons;(see GMDSS) - non directional

approved signals transmitted by radiocommunication systems, including survival craft radar transponders. (see GMDSS) - OK, if you have a SART

Oh, and parachute flares are rocket science (baboom)

 

[maxi77]

Neither is using a flare or smoke, and they will be the easiest for him to see. Also apart from the burning tar barrel which I believe you also do not approve of both of those signals will give the pilot good indication of the local wind where you are, helps him make a quick operation, and probably speed is to your advantage, of course if you want to make it as difficult as you can for him that is your choice.