McMurdo PLB battery replacement....

[photodog]

Ive got a McMurdo Fast Find PLB... the original one... and its battery... whilst still displaying life... needs replacing.

Apparently this needs to be done by a authorised service center...

Anyone had it done?
How much?

Ta

 

[GrahamM376]

Contact Sartech for quote - http://www.sartech.com/

 

[V1701]

I hate it when they do this, I have the 210. The new ones with user replaceable battery are asking £65 for the battery, so it's going to be £70, £80, £90, who knows. One of my dive computers originally marketed as user replaceable battery and supplied with a spare gasket they subsequently made non-user replaceable battery, now they refuse to sell me a gasket so I can change the battery myself...

 

[gregcope]

Contact Sartech for quote - http://www.sartech.com/

Sartech have been helpfull to me with free advice and their prices seem reasonable.

 

[photodog]

Thanks!

 

[Talulah]

I hate it when they do this, I have the 210. The new ones with user replaceable battery are asking £65 for the battery, so it's going to be £70, £80, £90, who knows. One of my dive computers originally marketed as user replaceable battery and supplied with a spare gasket they subsequently made non-user replaceable battery, now they refuse to sell me a gasket so I can change the battery myself...

On one hand I can see why they want the batteries replaced by a service centre to check it's done properly and to look at the general condition of the unit.
Equally they will refuse to service units over a certain age. (14 years with one manufacturer.) This means the battery can only be replaced twice.
However, on the flip side by having this policy it could 'cost lives'. Not as many units get sold because of the limited life and the cost of servicing. Not as many units are kept with current batteries due to the hassle and cost of sending units away.
The 'limited' service life is little known by consumers. I doubt many resellers could answer the question on what that life period is and what the overall cost of a unit is over that life.
Due to how long these EPIRBS have been around and the general take up of them this issue hasn't yet really raised its head but will do as these EPIRBS start to get rejected by service centres.

 

[Tranona]

Then there is the question of whether they have any value in the UK (or N European coastal) waters. The last year of records (2009) there were less than a handful of real life activations in these areas, and none by a UK yacht. At a quick count landbased and aircraft related activations are more common that marine, and more in the thinly populated southern hemisphere. Unsurprising that many EPIRBs are Australian.

They have their place - particularly in areas of the world where there is no VHF coverage and no huge fleet of lifeboats and choppers ready to come to your aid (even when you don't really need it!).

 

[Simondjuk]

Out of interest, why do you have an anti-EPIRB/PLB agenda, Tranona?

 

[Colvic Watson]

It cost me £154 new. Statistically that investment will never be used in anger and I may as well leave the liferaft open as a paddling pool in the back garden for all the statistical chance it has of being deployed. But I get huge personal reassurance from carrying both, they cost me £600 all up and it's worth every penny.

 

[Tranona]

Out of interest, why do you have an anti-EPIRB/PLB agenda, Tranona?

I don't have any agenda. Just pointing out the facts which are usually hidden or ignored.

Guess coming from a background that values evidence rather than beliefs may have some influence as it leads me to ask questions that maybe others don't ask.

Would you rather not know that there is limited evidence on the value of these devices in the context so that you can make up your own mind - or do you prefer to be told they are "essential" when they clearly are not?

I am not saying you should not buy one - just be aware of the facts. Of course, the facts may change in the future, but on the evidence of the recent past that is unlikely in my view, given the low level of need and the proven alternatives.

Just to make things absolutely clear, if I were going offshore I would have one (and do) - also if I wandered off into the Australian bush, or went climbing mountains in remote places and so on, I would have one. Why? because the dangers are greater and there is no viable alternative way of summoning help if I get into trouble.

Something like horses for courses covers it.

 

[LadyInBed]

The 'limited' service life is little known by consumers.

Mine is about 84 years on current stats

 

[GrahamM376]

I don't have any agenda. Just pointing out the facts which are usually hidden or ignored.

Guess coming from a background that values evidence rather than beliefs may have some influence as it leads me to ask questions that maybe others don't ask.

Would you rather not know that there is limited evidence on the value of these devices in the context so that you can make up your own mind - or do you prefer to be told they are "essential" when they clearly are not?

I am not saying you should not buy one - just be aware of the facts. Of course, the facts may change in the future, but on the evidence of the recent past that is unlikely in my view, given the low level of need and the proven alternatives.

Just to make things absolutely clear, if I were going offshore I would have one (and do) - also if I wandered off into the Australian bush, or went climbing mountains in remote places and so on, I would have one. Why? because the dangers are greater and there is no viable alternative way of summoning help if I get into trouble.

Something like horses for courses covers it.

Ok, so very few crews have to take to life rafts or, use an EPIRB so you think that for the majority of people they're not necessary. Some people also thnk most dangers are far offshore, whereas statistics show more people drown near the coast. If the boat's flooding and the batteries are dead, I would rather have as many aids to survival as I can sensibly afford.

Bearing in mind that the majority of car drivers will not have a serious accident, would you advocate that seat belts are of little importance? I doubt it.

 

[fireball]

Out of interest, why do you have an anti-EPIRB/PLB agenda, Tranona?

A few years back I was admonished for not carrying a liferaft let alone an EPIRB ... which goes against the evidence of statistical usefulness of both devices.

We do now have a liferaft and an (elderly) EPIRB, but only because they came with the boat ... we may have bought a LR, purely because the cost of one is quite small these days, but probably wouldn't have bothered with an EPIRB ... not when the VHF is always in range of a CG station ...

Even the LR is questionable as to it's usefulness .. my crew have no intention on doing long journeys and the most we go is ~35Nm from land, we don't race or go out in dodgy conditions. The biggest hazards we have are other vessels and the obvious "fire" ...

As for a PLB - I can see the advantage of these - as they stay on your person it's much easier (I believe) for the rescue services to locate you ...

 

[Simondjuk]

So until you happened to end up with a liferaft and EPIRB, you were happy with the possibility that you and your crew may have had to step off the boat into the cold water, 35 miles offshore with no help on the way because at that distance you may well have been out of fixed, and most certainly were out of handheld, VHF range?

What would you have done next?

 

[Talulah]

A few years back I was admonished for not carrying a liferaft let alone an EPIRB ... which goes against the evidence of statistical usefulness of both devices.

We do now have a liferaft and an (elderly) EPIRB, but only because they came with the boat ... we may have bought a LR, purely because the cost of one is quite small these days, but probably wouldn't have bothered with an EPIRB ... not when the VHF is always in range of a CG station ...

Even the LR is questionable as to it's usefulness .. my crew have no intention on doing long journeys and the most we go is ~35Nm from land, we don't race or go out in dodgy conditions. The biggest hazards we have are other vessels and the obvious "fire" ...

As for a PLB - I can see the advantage of these - as they stay on your person it's much easier (I believe) for the rescue services to locate you ...

Have to say if it was just me and regulations didn't get in the way I wouldn't bother with any of the safety stuff.
Out with the liferaft, epirb, danbouy, liferings, lifejackets, flares, handheld vhf, grab bag, numerous fire extinguishers, fire blanket, gas alarm. I would keep a harness and safety line and that's about it.

 

[Simondjuk]

Would you wear your seatbelt whilst driving if the law didn't call for it?

 

[Talulah]

Would you wear your seatbelt whilst driving if the law didn't call for it?

In most cases "Yes" but not always. Bear in mind this is the current situation in a lot of cars where only the front seat occupants are wearing seat belts and the rear aren't even though the law calls for it.
In my list above some items are statistically neutral or no good if 'it were just me'.

 

[Simondjuk]

If, even on occasion, you'd willingly not wear a seatbelt in a motor vehicle, which could well result in you being killed in a 30mph collision rather than walking away from it shaken and bruised, you have an attitude to risk which I don't understand.

Of your list, only the liferings and danbuoy are no good to a singlehander. The liferaft, EPIRB, lifejackets, flares, handheld VHF, grab bag, fire extinguishers, fire blanket and gas alarm could all be life savers. Why would you choose not to have them?

 

[Sailfree]

Would you wear your seatbelt whilst driving if the law didn't call for it?

You seem to be fixated by safety features and IMHO need to stand back and look at expenditure v safety considering the risk element.

For many on a limited budget it might be more important to replace some fittings and lower the risk of a problem on the boat than buy an EPIRB.

WRT your question I drive a motorcycle in traffic and complete 20,000mls per yr. I do wear a crash helmet and protective clothing but can do little else to lower the risk. Reluctantly I think my risk factor to my well being on a motorcycle is probably so high that the yes/no wearing of seatbelts when in the car probably only affects my risk factor by 0.000001%.

I do though as its no problem and its the law and likewise I have all the safety kit on the boat including mini flares for each person when night sailing or X channel but I respectfully suggest that the biggest safety factor is the awareness and evaluation of risks and your attitude to being as safe as you can be and not just buying every safety gadget. Perhaps without the safety gadgets some people would not set sail in bad conditions.

There is an argument that if everyone had a spike pointing at their chest in the middle of the steering wheel they would drive more carefully and there would be less accidents and less injuries. I don't believe it but its food for thought.

Please encourage everyone to consider the risks but please also let everyone make their own decisions on what aspects of sailing spending their money will result in being safer - there is never any absolute safety no matter how much you spend.

PS I feel just as strongly about H & S legislation that forces UK companies to increase their costs by £1000's for what is little to zero risk.

 

[Talulah]

If, even on occasion, you'd willingly not wear a seatbelt in a motor vehicle, which could well result in you being killed in a 30mph collision rather than walking away from it shaken and bruised, you have an attitude to risk which I don't understand.

Of your list, only the liferings and danbuoy are no good to a singlehander. The liferaft, EPIRB, lifejackets, flares, handheld VHF, grab bag, fire extinguishers, fire blanket and gas alarm could all be life savers. Why would you choose not to have them?

Because either the risks are so low or they can be substituted by other means.
In the cases they can't be substituted the risk factor becomes even lower.
I could even get rid of the safety line on the basis that on the very few occasions I would need one it could be substitued with a bit or rope.
For example the lady who fell overboard on a 'toilet break' was saved by her mobile phone.
Yet why isn't this an emergency requirement when in all probability it could save more lifes than the rest of the safety gear all put together. (My guess on probability.)