Although in today's hi-tech world of mobile phones, satellite phones, 406 epirbs etc, I wouldn't expect to be in a liferaft as long these days compared to a few years ago, so comfort is not so important perhaps. Not totally discounting it, just pointing out that the liferaft should be more "shortstay" than before.
With a 406MHz EPIRB alert most rescues in NAVAREA IV (New Zealand's which extends from mid Tasman halfway across the Pacific to South America, North to the equator and South to Antarctica and is one of the largest in the world) are completed within 24 - 36 hours in all areas frequented by cruising yachts - generally an hour until the first reasonable fix, then only the time for nearest ship to steam to the position if oceanic. I know it is the same for that administered for Australia. The number of rescues that are not actually completed before the yacht has actually sunk is miniscule.
I would always carry a 406 MHz EPIRB as first priority and only expect to then be in a liferaft for a couple of hours if within helicopter distance for rescue and much less than 12 hours if otherwise coastal in New Zealand. In UK/Europe region I would expect most places one would be plucked from the water within minutes of the fix being confirmed from COSPAS/SARSAT.
We have a canister liferaft mounted on the pushpit.
It's an 8 man raft, but we often sail 2 up and rarely more than 5. It's quite heavy, but easily pitched into the sea from its bracket. Some might say that it's too big for 2 people.
On the other hand, I suppose it would give us space to indulge in activities such as a bit of light jogging whilst waiting for the rescue. SWMBO likes to dance, so I guess we've covered all our bases!
I can understand that argument too. However the liferaft is (hopefully) a long term investment, so is bought to cover future possible as well as current known needs, ie it may be used in areas well away from quick rescue. Also as one who comes in 'economy' size and suffers agonisingly on long airline flights where occasionally at least you can still get up and move around, the thought of being in a 4 man raft with 4 people, bundled up in oilies, lifejacket etc for any time at all is frightening! Having looked at the 'space' in standard rafts I decided on one size larger to allow for enough horizontal space for each person (especially valuable if one might be injured), plus room for the grab bag, water containers and any other gear taken off the sinking vessel. This is a personal judgement and I sincerely hope I well never ever have to put it to the test!
<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>
Depends where you are, or intend going. Epirb in the middle of the channel and you should not be there very long! however middle of the pacific is a different matter. In those conditions, it is probable that even with a 49 hr epirb, the search would not get there before the attery runs out. dependent on the conditions and the available search equipment, it could be days before you are found even with the latest gizmos, therefore planning must take that into account. Personnally I would be a lot happier if the only time the liferaft is deployed is during the services! /forums/images/icons/smile.gif
Same here. IMHO the 2 main scenarios where a liferaft is most likely to be deployed is 1)fire 2)collision where speed of deployment is essential and bigger the better!
Anywhere in the Pacific Ocean with 406 EPIRB and you are likely to be retrieved within the day (500 miles steaming for a 20 knot ship) and probably at worst 36 hours (750 miles steaming for a 20 knot ship). You are also likely to have an Orion or other aircraft over you within hours if anywhere except the part of SW Pacific outside of long endurance aircraft range from Chile or New Zealand.
If the battery in the EPIRB is in condition, the EPIRB will almost certainly still be going when you are rescued. In fact, in almost every rescue the boat is still afloat too /forums/images/icons/crazy.gif.
In the Southern Ocean it may be different, but a surprising number of ships down there and one would probably not venture there without some extra precautions. However, both the Australian and Chilean Navies have had lots of practice recovering distressed Englishmen from there /forums/images/icons/smile.gif.
A ship's master friend of mine likes to tell the story of how some years ago they were asked to look for a distressed yacht in the vicinity of Cape Horn. The weather was bad with very poor visibility and they thought they had no show of finding the yacht at all. Early in the search it was getting dark and he was in the mess; he happened to glance out the port and there on a big wave beside the ship was the yacht - they had almost run it down and the watch on the bridge had not even seen it in the conditions. The crew were taken off safely.
Don't forget the advice that with the exception af a boat fire, always step UP into a liferaft. There have been many instances of crews taking to their liferafts too soon and have perished, where their "sinking" boat has been found intact several days later.
I recently read an article in Cruisng World about some of the rescue services which ignore EPIRB rescue calls because at least 2/3 are false alarms and they simply cannot afford to send out the services for leisure yachties who may/probably are not in any trouble. Madagascar for example, whose economy is very poor.
Also, in terms of long term cruising in remote areas (compared to the Channel), I have a lot of sympathy with the position that no-one asked us to go and we should aim for as much self-sufficiency as possible. So, for long term blue-water cruising, I would not base my liferaft decision on not expecting to be in it for long.
It's rather like those grab-bag contents lists - which will vary depending on where you are and what you are doing.