Incident in the Twizzle Yesterday

[johnalison]

They will want lat/long - for the reason that the person handling the call may be at Thames Barrier (in your Tower Bridge scenario) but equally could now be at Dover, Falmouth, Stornoway, Lerwick....

This is the "benefit" of the national network - incidents can go to the quietest station, which in theory is good for workload planning, but there will be zero local knowledge. The CG will be able to see the range of aerials picking up the call, but there is no DF - and the op will not know if there is one, or seven, Tower Bridges in that area - and to be fair to them, it that scenario, I wouldn't want them googling and guessing, I've seen that go horribly wrong before.

I can see the reason for precision, but some percentage or other of their calls will be from people calling in from their mobile phones, from land or boat, giving local references only. The system has to take this into account or it is a failure.

 

[dolabriform]

I can see the reason for precision, but some percentage or other of their calls will be from people calling in from their mobile phones, from land or boat, giving local references only. The system has to take this into account or it is a failure.

I wonder if they have the technology to get a fix from the mobile phone signal?

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I wonder if they have the technology to get a fix from the mobile phone signal?

It can be done, but not in real time - you need access to records from the relevant cell equipment.

All this is simply amplifying what many of us feared when the Coastguard was centralized - that the loss of local knowledge would increase response times and lead to increased bureaucracy.

 

[Tomahawk]

There won't be one. There will be the incident checklist from OMS/ViSion, but because the "risk" of a vessel on fire isn't a risk to MCA personnel, there won't be an assessment of it.

Except that the HSAWA covers it by way of requiring an employer to demonstrate s duty of care to people who are not GC staff.

It was used by the HSE to prosecute the plod after they killed De Meneszez on the underground as well as prosecute Maldon DC when a chap was drowned in the Prom lake. The charge was failing to carry out adequate risk assessment. In both cases the HSE won.

 

[dolabriform]

It can be done, but not in real time - you need access to records from the relevant cell equipment.

Thinking about it, a quick google tells me that it is possible, and anyone can use the service for a fee!

 

[dolabriform]

Thinking about it, a quick google tells me that it is possible, and anyone can use the service for a fee!

 

[AntarcticPilot]

View attachment 95955

They all appear to request location data from the phone; the only one that doesn't (the first) only seems to give historical data. All can be blocked by permissions on the phone itself; my phone would, for example, notify me if something was requesting location data.

 

[dolabriform]

They all appear to request location data from the phone; the only one that doesn't (the first) only seems to give historical data. All can be blocked by permissions on the phone itself; my phone would, for example, notify me if something was requesting location data.

Out of curiosity, I wonder if that can be blocked at a system level? Apple has "find my phone", I wonder if they and the cell providers have a back door

Any how, it's academic and fred drift has appeared

 

[chanelyacht]

Except that the HSAWA covers it by way of requiring an employer to demonstrate s duty of care to people who are not GC staff.

It was used by the HSE to prosecute the plod after they killed De Meneszez on the underground as well as prosecute Maldon DC when a chap was drowned in the Prom lake. The charge was failing to carry out adequate risk assessment. In both cases the HSE won.

Not quite. De Meneszez was because the Met Police's employees were carrying out the "dangerous" action, and the lake was the council's own asset so therefore they had a duty to assess any risk that it might pose - the same rationale the RNLI used to scare landowners into buying their lifeguard services.

The HSAWA applies to the CG coast teams, for example, because they are doing something - and there are risk assessments for example for cliff rescue, mud rescue, etc. It is possible that the MCA could be prosecuted for an error during a search, or a delay in launching a response due to incompetence, but sadly just having a system that is slow in information gathering wouldn't do it. I know - we tried that during the FCG "reforms" and union legal advice was there's not a cat in hell's chance of success.

 

[Dan Tribe]

We heard an incident with a capsized dinghy in the Twizzle on the squawk box yesterday and well done to all involved.

My non sailing friend with me could not believe the side of the conversation coming from the coastguard.

Even he as someone who has only spent a little time around boats understood what a dinghy was and what was going on.

Quite shocked TBH.

We heard an incident with a capsized dinghy in the Twizzle on the squawk box yesterday and well done to all involved.

My non sailing friend with me could not believe the side of the conversation coming from the coastguard.

Even he as someone who has only spent a little time around boats understood what a dinghy was and what was going on.

Quite shocked TBH.

It must be very difficult to design a system that will cover all eventualities.
I recently heard a Pan Pan Relay about a broken down yacht in the Ray Sand Channel so we were getting all the questions and replies in duplicate, it seemed to go on for ages. All the Burnham lifeboat really needed to know was " disabled yacht in Raysn"
It turned out that they had a split exhaust hose but all they knew was that there was smoke and water coming from the engine space, a bit worrying at the time.
At the other end of the spectrum, I heard a Mayday late one flat calm night while we were anchored in Pyefleet. The casualty was enroute Bradwell to Brightlingsea and it soon became clear that he had run aground on Cocum Hills at low water, but it took the CG an hour to work that out. My favourite bit was when the CG asked if he could see any features which could identify his location, e.g nuclear power station, navigation marks etc?
The reply " yes, there is a full moon dead astern of us".
Well that narrows it down a bit!

 

[Biggles Wader]

Conversely a few years ago I heard a mayday called by a somewhat panicy dive boat off Folkestone. A diver had failed to suface and the position was given as near to a named wrecksite. The operation was taken over within seconds by Dover port control who diverted a pilot launch to search. A ferry approaching Dover diverted itself and the lifeboat was tasked. The diver was located and retrieved alive and well in a few minutes and before the lifeboat had left its berth. A thoroughly professional operation carried out by locals who knew what they were doing.

 

[Tomahawk]

Dan,
That is Darwin in action...

Government cannot be expected to legislate for stupid.

 

[LONG_KEELER]

Perhaps we should be monitoring Chanel 16 more than we do.

Probable that we might know where the casualty is and get there first.

After the risk assessment of course.

 

[Plum]

Perhaps we should be monitoring Chanel 16 more than we do.

Probable that we might know where the casualty is and get there first.

After the risk assessment of course.

Quite right! Even if the rescue services do their best, in most cases the closest help is another boat but with more people not monitoring ch16 if you need help those close boats won't know you are in trouble.

Www.solocoastalsailing.co.uk

 

[Cantata]

I have always understood that we should all monitor Ch16 when we're afloat. Goes without saying on our boat. Over the years we've heard several maydays and did respond to one nearby, although the lifeboat got there before we did.

 

[LittleSister]

I have always understood that we should all monitor Ch16 when we're afloat.

Indeed, and I always used to, but I now sometimes find the amount of inane chatter, radio checks, etc. unbearable.

It doesn't help that my hearing has deteriorated, so the radio volume required is higher, and even when I am trying to listen I often can't make out all that is being said. I am hoping new speakers for the radio will improve matters.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Perhaps we should be monitoring Chanel 16 more than we do.

Probable that we might know where the casualty is and get there first.

After the risk assessment of course.

I know that many people don't, for reasons that seem good to them. But the ITU regulations for Marine VHF state that if a VHF is fitted, it should be monitored (Channel 70 , the DSC channel, at least; Channel 16 not required but a good idea!) while at sea, and even if the regulations didn't specify it, I'd regard it as good seamanship; after all, it might be me that needs someone to be listening one day! It's an absolute requirement for GMDSS regulated ships; I think it's merely a (strong) recommendation for the rest of us.

I came to the East Coast from the Clyde and the West of Scotland, and I do notice a difference in attitude. On the West Coast of Scotland, there are few lifeboat assets, spaced very widely apart. It's also an area where there are, in places, very strong tidal currents. In many areas, a disabled vessel is going to be on the rocks long before a lifeboat or other asset could be on the scene - providing that the assets aren't already dealing with another incident! So it was taken for granted that if you heard a distress call, you checked if it was near you and would respond if you could give practical help without endangering yourself. The coastguard themselves would often put out calls along the lines of "Will any vessel in the vicinity of ...." I've heard it for motor boats that have lost power. Obviously, if the problem is one that requires specialist help, such as a Medevac, they don't do that - but I'd hope that any off-duty medic in the area would hear and respond to a relevant distress call.

There does seem to be an attitude "darn sarf" that rescue is only the business of the "professionals"; the very fact that the incident that started the discussion is noteworthy indicates that! I think that in areas less well served by the rescue services, it would be just another day's work. But the point is that we ALL have an obligation to respond to a distress call - a very long-standing obligation, as the example of Captain Stanley Lord demonstrates - he was ostracized because he failed to come to the rescue of the Titanic! Obviously, in most cases, our response will be either that we're too far away or that we can't give meaningful help, but as the original posting shows, we can sometimes be in a better position than the Coastguard or the RNLI to respond to an incident.

 

[dolabriform]

There does seem to be an attitude "darn sarf" that rescue is only the business of the "professionals"; the very fact that the incident that started the discussion is noteworthy indicates that!

I'd just like to clarify that there were plenty of vessels standing by on scene and that they had called the CG to advise them of the situation in case assets were needed. I apologise if gave the impression that people were taking a hands off approach and expecting the professionals ( & volunteers ) to deal with it, from what I heard on the squawk box the opposite was true.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I'd just like to clarify that there were plenty of vessels standing by on scene and that they had called the CG to advise them of the situation in case assets were needed. I apologise if gave the impression that people were taking a hands off approach and expecting the professionals ( & volunteers ) to deal with it, from what I heard on the squawk box the opposite was true.

Sorry - I didn't mean to imply that people aware of an incident near them weren't likely to respond; I was intending to comment that there seems to be a greater expectation (by both CG and leisure sailors) that rescue is the business of "professionals", as exemplified by the comments about the communications from the coastguard, and by the very fact that this incident is unusual enough to require comment. Not defending the CG; but in Scottish waters, the CG would simply keep a listening watch once they had been informed that another vessel capable of dealing with the situation was on the scene, with a closing report from the attending vessel once the situation was under control.

I must admit that several times I've kept an eye on dinghy sailors who seemed to me to be out in marginal conditions!

 

[chanelyacht]

or the RNLI to respond to an incident.

Or the 90+ independent lifeboats around the UK