McMurdo PLB battery replacement....

[fireball]

What would have been more likely to save the lives of the Ouzo's crew than a PLB do you suppose? Perhaps they even considered one at sometime but decided against it due to reading comments suggesting they were superfluous, statistically irrelevant even, to those cruising the UK's coastal waters.

There's any number of possibilities - we don't know exactly what happened with the Ouzo - why they didn't/couldn't press the DSC button - if it was the ferry that ran into them then it raises the question on why they didn't/couldn't get out of the way.

If they were run down then personal mini flares may have saved them, as could PLBs, EPIRB, Hydrostatic liferaft or just a mobile phone in a waterproof pouch. The thing is - we just don't know.

Considering a safety device is fine - but we have to know why we're buying the kit and what it is safe guarding us against.
I know that an EPIRB going off in Cowes did alert the CG, but they didn't send emergency services straight away - they tried to raise the vessel on VHF first - they suspected and subsequently confirmed that the alarm was a false one.

I was down to take my boat on an overnight trip from the Solent to Dartmouth this year - safety gear didn't include PLB - because the risk of being run down is very low, I have radar & AIS (receiver) and in the case of collision risk I'll err on the side of safety.

Twice I've encountered ships in the dark that were of concern... the first one was a ferry and I was under sail ... although we weren't on a collision course I was set to cross his path either infront or behind - so the motor went on, steaming light lit up the genoa and the ferry made it clear that they would let me go in front.
The second encounter was a large commercial coming out of the Solent as we were motoring in. I knew I was outside the normal path - but I kept a close eye on the rate of turn info from AIS - she did turn as expected and we carried on unabated. Had the rate of turn stopped then I would've taken massive evasive action and lit up the main with a torch - well, probably, I wasn't skipper - he was down below!
Both instances were close to shore where the other vessels course isn't steady - both times I've either taken steps, or been prepared to make myself more visible.
At no time did I wish I had a PLB or even an EPIRB on me - I didn't feel the vessel was at significant risk or her safety was at the mercy of a 3rd party - If unlucky to get to the point that a collision was inevitable I hope I'd have presence of mind to press the red button (in the cockpit) before it occurs - at least that way the alarm would've been sounded ...

That said - if I sailed more at night then I would revise the safety kit available - it makes sense to have the appropriate kit available as and when required.

 

[Sailfree]

If by winter tyres you mean tyres that give better performance in snow,you are very much mistaken about their summer performance. .....

Contary to your view IIRC recent reviews in Auto express and What car expressed the opinion that overall, considering the UK average temps, if only one type of tyres fit Winter Tyres.

View supported by RAC and British Tyre Manufacturers Association with exception if you mostly do mainly motorway driving in the summer but a definate for rural car owners as its the only way to keep mobile

 

[Tranona]

Tranona,

Facts and statistics are rather different animals, and statistics are what you are basing your opinion on.

By all accounts, Ouzo was a well found boat with an experienced crew, sailing in benign conditions and certainly not " in areas where the risk of getting into a life threatening situation is high and the means of communication with outsiders is low". Yet the three crew members died. They died because, statistics be damned, they did find themselves in the water and they couldn't summon help. At the time PLBs were rather more expensive than they are now, but had each, or perhaps even just one of them, been carrying one, it's more than likely that they'd be alive today. As it was, as soon as they were in the water, just five miles from shore, their fate was all but sealed.


Comments which may steer people away from considering a safety device, any safety device, on its own merits being randomly thrown into threads simply because the author holds a certain opinion based on nothing more than loose interpretation of a few statistics sit badly with me. What would have been more likely to save the lives of the Ouzo's crew than a PLB do you suppose? Perhaps they even considered one at sometime but decided against it due to reading comments suggesting they were superfluous, statistically irrelevant even, to those cruising the UK's coastal waters.

Well, no, I am not using "statistics" - only facts about the number of incidents and drawing some conclusions. Facts is Facts. Could try and do a statistical analysis if you want but it won't tell you anything. I have not used an hypothesis and then looked for evidence to support it, but looked at the data and drawn conclusions from it. If you do that you have to come to the conclusion that EPIRBs are not used in the context of this discussion. This might well cause you to ask questions as to why - and I have suggested some pretty strong reasons, based on the available data.

Ouzo is, indeed, one of the cases where you could argue that an EPIRB (or PLBs) might have been useful as the casualties survived in the water for some time, and if found within that time might have been saved. However, the enquiry did not draw this conclusion, limiting its suggestion to a hydrostatic release liferaft.

If anybody is guilty of "randomly throwing in" anything it might be yourself by the spurious "what if" type comments that you have made. What I am expressing is not an "opinion based on nothing more than a loose interpretation of a few statistics" but just stating facts that are in the public domain. People can choose to make their own interpretation - as you seem to do by dismissing them as not being relevant.

Would be delighted to hear documented details of real live situations from the environment under discussion where there is evidence that the outcome of the incident might have been different if the casualty had used one of these devices. Imagination of situations where they might be useful is not really helpful. Knowledge of their usefulness in other situations and environments has some use if they can be translated to our environment, but need to be considered as a whole and not just taken out of context.

 

[rotrax]

Contary to your view IIRC recent reviews in Auto express and What car expressed the opinion that overall, considering the UK average temps, if only one type of tyres fit Winter Tyres.

View supported by RAC and British Tyre Manufacturers Association with exception if you mostly do mainly motorway driving in the summer but a definate for rural car owners as its the only way to keep mobile

Well I am surprised.I like to think I keep up to speed with goings on in the automotive world but this is news to me. I see you have now qualified your statement that it is of more benifit to rural drivers. I would also think that the British Tyre Manufactureres Assoc. may be recomending them for different reasons. Cynical perhaps but not an unreasonable assumption in my experience. Tyres are always going to be a compromise. What works well on mud and snow will be noisy and harsh on dry roads. Modern low profile wide tyres that look like rubber bands on the rims will be **** in mud and snow. I only recently stopped travelling all over Europe as a semi-pro motorcycle racer,covering thousands of miles in short timescales. What was then,and is now essential in my less frantic motoring is a good performance in the widest variety of conditions at the best possible price. I have covered the 180 KMS from Pardubice to the border crossing at Rozvadov in the Czech Republic in REALLY heavy snow in a 1700cc diesel Fiat Uno, and the same trip in an old Hyundai 1300cc hatchback. Normal tyres, neither gave me or my passenger any cause for concern except when the CV joint boot was torn by a jagged pile of ice thrown up by a snowplough on the Hyundai, causing the steering to go very stiff when water and grit got in the joint. The trick of snow and ice driving is to do everything gently and smoothly and use the brakes as little as possible. You probably use similar tecniques on your bike in adverse conditions. As I said,I would be pleased to hear exactly what tyres the RAC et al are suggesting because tyres like those are beyond my experience.

 

[Finbar]

Thanks for the info on batttery replacement. Mine has 11 months left, but I suppose I had better go the official route for replacement.

For the rest who are busy having a row, the first and I think only notification to the Irish Coastguard when Rambler 100 lost her keel and overturned off the Fastnet this summer was from a PLB carried by a crew member. She turned over very quickly, but did not sink, so no DSC message or EPIRB actification. 21 crew saved, including 5 who were seperated from the hull, one with severe hypothermia. Whatever about the 16 on the hull, the 5 in the water would most probably have died without the PLB distress message. RTE broadcast a special on the story, may still be available on RTE Player.

I will definitely continue to carry my PLB.

 

[Tranona]

To counter that, in a similar capsize of another (unseaworthy?) racing yacht south of the IOW a couple of years ago the mounties were summoned by mobile phone and all the crew rescued.

The reality is that there are very few incidents where existing methods of summoning help are ineffective, and many of those could have been resolved if the basic equipment was in good shape. If there is an increase in the use of EPIRB/PLB it is likely to be as a substitute for other methods, particularly DSC/VHF.

This of course only applies where VHF is viable, which is most of our coastal waters.

 

[Simondjuk]

Tranona,

I'm aware of the sources of your information.

Indeed, it was me that pointed you to the COSPAS-SARSAT statistics. You'll note that they themselves call them statistics, and not facts.

I also pointed out to you that one of your other sources, the MAIB website, is not particularly useful as resource for a discussion of this nature since they do not as a rule investigate non-commercial accidents. Of all the reports published on the website, only one or two relate to accidents involving leisure only craft.

So what you've provided is opinion based on flawed conclusions drawn from statistical or incomplete data, not facts.


Fireball,

How they got in the water is irrelevant. They did and they died because of it. How they could have got out before they died is relevant. Given the choice of mini flares, a phone in a bag, and a PLB, I'd take the one that's truly waterproof, gives me more than 18 seconds of hope, doesn't rely on a signal which may or may not be present, won't run out of battery before I run out of resilience, and tells people exactly where I am to within a few metres.

 

[LadyInBed]

I will definitely continue to carry my PLB.

and maybe check that your keel is on securely

 

[Finbar]

Yes, that too. Rambler 100 cost megabucks and was pretty new, so the court case about the keel falling off will be interesting. The PLB/no PLB argument is probably valid in the Solent, or the channel, but off the West of Ireland and out of VHF land station range I will carry a PLB or EPIRB. The PLB is also somewhat comforting if singlehanded.

 

[Tranona]

Tranona,

I'm aware of the sources of your information.

Indeed, it was me that pointed you to the COSPAS-SARSAT statistics. You'll note that they themselves call them statistics, and not facts.

I also pointed out to you that one of your other sources, the MAIB website, is not particularly useful as resource for a discussion of this nature since they do not as a rule investigate non-commercial accidents. Of all the reports published on the website, only one or two relate to accidents involving leisure only craft.

So what you've provided is opinion based on flawed conclusions drawn from statistical or incomplete data, not facts.

I am not responsible for other peoples' sloppiness in the use of terms. The COSPAS_SARSAT report is a list of FACTS - that is reports of individual events. That is there is no attempt to even count them, never mind group them into categories, which is what is needed to turn them into descriptive statistics. That would have given more information such as where the events occurred, the type of event, whether it was successful or not - or any other grouping that might add some explanation.

You could, if you had the full series of data carry out some analysis to "prove" something using techniques that test the significance of the series of events (and the categories) - this is called inferential statistics, and needs a great deal of care to avoid misleading conclusions.

In the current debate, all this is unnecessary. The list of events show quite clearly that very few of the events (activation of EPIRBs) occur among leisure sailors in N european coastal waters. All you can do is look at each individual event and consider the circumstances surrounding it. It is quite possible in the future that the number of events may increase and you could establish a pattern, either descriptively or through statistical testing.

With regard to the other data, this too is very sparse, not through lack of reporting, but because the number of events is very small if you confine the analysis to cases of foundering of yachts (and there are more reported than you suggest - if I had time to waste I could count them for you, but you can do that yourself). As I think I said before there are only a small number of cases - 3 or 4 of which Ouzo was one, where the outcome might have been different if there had been an EPIRB activation. However, this is only an opinion based on the facts of each case as reported.

Where statistics, in the sense that I am using the word, would be useful is in analysing the use of the various means of communicating with others in cases of emergency. We know what the main means are - VHF/DSC, flares, third party observation and phones (including mobiles) EPIRBs - there may be others. What would be useful is an analysis of the frequency of use of these different means, but the data is not available to do this - except we know that EPIRBs do not feature. So in the absence of any other data one can only draw the conclusion that there is no "gap" that needs to be filled.

If you want to continue to believe that anything called "safety" is a good thing and its use should not be questioned, that is fine - but it is only your belief, because the available evidence does not support your belief.

 

[fireball]

How they got in the water is irrelevant.

No it isn't!

If you can remove the possibility of going in the water then you don't need safety devices for being in the water - otherwise we'd have to walk down the road with lifejackets on the whole time.

You've said yourself that you don't always wear your lifejacket - yet that is a primary bit of safety kit you'd need if you ended up in the drink. The fact that you're not wearing it all the time means you've evaluated the usefulness vs inconvenience of wearing it and decided to accept the risk of not having it on.
The same evaluation should take place with all kit - safety or otherwise. Just because I (or my crew) don't have a PLB doesn't mean I'm not safe -it just means that I need to be more aware of the risk and taking suitable action to minimise the chance of needing a PLB.

I read above that the report into the Ouzo suggested a hydrostatic released liferaft could've helped - as could a myriad of other things - Brighter lights, AIS, Radar, AIS Transponder, Seeme, Better radar reflector, anything that would've helped them get out of the way, better lookouts on whatever ran them down (assuming that that is what happened).

Once you're in the water your time is limited - so preventing that case must be No 1 priority. This isn't to say a PLB is worthless - but it is very much a last resort device so putting an emphasis on this as a "must have" safety device detracts from others that would negate the need for it in the first place.

Please stop reading my posts as though I'm anti PLB/EPIRB - I'm not - but consideration must be made as to why you'd need one and I suggest that in many cases, money would be better spent in alternative safety kit prior to these.

 

[Sailfree]

Can I draw some conclusions to benefit the majority (not the Antartic skippers!!) from this thread.

In order of easy to do and cheap.

1. Consider conditions before setting sail preferably by monitoring potential condition over 7 day lead up.

2. Wear LJ unless its getting in the way of a suntan and you really are tempted to go for a swim round the boat.

3. Buy a waterproof pouch for you mobile phone - if nothing else it will protect it from the rain! Be aware that text messages can be sent from a greater range than voice and have a speed dial number of someone who can organise help from a text message.

4. Get a HH waterproof VHF

5. Get a personal ERIPB with GPS

6. Get a life raft with hydrostatic release

Conclusion - if you get 1. right you will probably find the rest are a waste of money.

wrt Car - I am monitoring temps and when it gets to being mostly below 10 deg C in the day I will put on my winter tyres/steel wheels. Lets be clear I am only talking about winter compound not block tread or studded tyres. They are adequate for most UK and Europe roads until the snow drifts too high!!

wrt M/C I monitor the weather and do my usual 150mls per day commute except when there is the risk of rain and freezing conditions or snow.

If you listen to some on here you would not venture out of your bed without lots of safety features. Be sensible but most of all live and enjoy life to the full.

 

[Simondjuk]

Fireball,

I concede, it's not irrelevant if you can remove the possibility of people going into the water. That's quite some 'if' though.

Until such time as the miracles of the utterly infallible person and entirely unsinkable and MOB proof boat are created, people will end up in the drink. When they do, the only thing of relevance is the best means by which to expedite their location and recovery. It's too late for all the rest.


Tranona,

It is my belief that people should investigate the use of safety devices on the merits of the devices themselves. Comments such as "there is the question of whether they have any value in the UK (or N European coastal) waters." and "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", may be taken as coming from an authorative source and lead people to summarily discount such devices as being inappropriate to their location and activities.

Why you felt the need to throw opinion questioning the validity of PLBs into a thread relating to simply replacing the battery on such a device, I've no idea. Personally, if I were anti lifejacket, radar, or liferaft, I'd probably not wade into a thread discussing the servicing of such items with comments questioning their usefulness, for fear that someone might just listen to my prejudice, decide to go without and wind up dead as a consequence.

You hold the opinion that PLBs are of limited value whereas I'm inclined to the opposite, so it seems we're bound to disagree. It's beyond reasonable doubt that people have died in the water when carrying a PLB would have saved them. If no more are to do so, perhaps I shall come round to your way of thinking. On the other hand, if events should lead you to my way of thinking, I sincerely hope that those events are not further deaths, but lives saved.

.

 

[fireball]

I concede, it's not irrelevant if you can remove the possibility of people going into the water. That's quite some 'if' though.
.

And your chances of being hit by a bolt of lightning ... or a miriad of other things - at least the chance of going overboard is largely in your own control...

IF you want to guarantee that you won't ever fall overboard and drown you better not go afloat ... otherwise there is always a chance ... how small though?

And your chances of winning the lottery are ....

 

[Simondjuk]

Oh come now, fireball!

You're really not daft enough to imagine that the odds of falling off a boat are as small as those of being hit by lightning or winning the lottery, are you?

The gear on your pushpit is one clue to the contrary, the possibility that even you have practiced MOB recovery under sail is another. There are many more, but I shan't waste your time with them in case you're too busy discussing the investment of your inevitable lottery win with your financial advisor and rehearsing the emergency donning procedure of your anti-lightning hat.

 

[Talulah]

Oh come now, fireball!

You're really not daft enough to imagine that the odds of falling off a boat are as small as those of being hit by lightning or winning the lottery, are you?

The gear on your pushpit is one clue to the contrary, the possibility that even you have practiced MOB recovery under sail is another. There are many more, but I shan't waste your time with them in case you're too busy discussing the investment of your inevitable lottery win with your financial advisor and rehearsing the emergency donning procedure of your anti-lightning hat.

I know more people who have had their boat hit by lightning (inc Fireball I believe) than those who have fallen overboard. In some areas the possibility of lightning strikes is taken very seriously. Meanwhile our planning laws require buildings to have lightning protection. The risk of being hit by lightning is on a par with being lost at sea.

http://www.moonraker.com.au/techni/lightning-marine.htm

 

[Simondjuk]

Are you for real?

 

[Talulah]

Are you for real?

The thing is the odds of falling off a boat are not static. Likewise the odds of being hit by lightning or drowning in a car are not static. As we move around these odds are constantly changing.
I don't have anything against PLB's, Liferafts, Fire blankets per se but when people give the impression they are a 'must have' I take exception.

 

[fireball]

I know more people who have had their boat hit by lightening (inc Fireball I believe)

You are correct - our boat has been struck - luckily it was only a side strike and nobody was onboard anyway. I have yet to fall overboard (touch wood) - although I have lost (and recovered) a shoe.

I have ended up over the side several times when in a racing dinghy - but that's a different ballgame - I'm wearing a buoyancy aid (a requirement when racing), dressed for getting wet and the "accident" is when I'm pushing the boundary...

I have sailed the racing dinghy with another adult in normal clothing - with a young child - again, in normal clothing - neither had floatation. Was I reckless? No - it was a calculated risk, low wind, the adult is SWMBO, we can both swim well, the boat floats and we haven't accidentally capsized in quite a few years - the chances of something "going wrong" were arguably higher than being struck by lightning - but still tiny.

Statistically, EPIRBS in UK waters are not worth the expense - neither are liferafts. It would appear that Flares and Lifejackets do see more use. That isn't to say you shouldn't have any of the above kit - but you should kit your boat for the worst conditions you expect to sail in. That last bit is important ...

How many of us have dedicated storm sails? You wouldn't see me out in conditions that require them ... and although forecasts are just forecasts you'd be pretty unfortunate to end up needing the storm sails - either that or you haven't read and understood the forecasts...
How many of us have hydrostatic release liferafts ... mine's in a locker ..
Do you need an EPIRB? That's a difficult question to answer and not one that has a right or wrong answer - if you don't have one then you cannot use it ... where as if you do have one it is available - but the question for many of us is what DON'T you buy in order to afford one of these - and in that case I would seriously suggest that perhaps other forms of (safety) kit may be of higher priority.

It seems to be that Simondjuk (and many others no doubt) wants us to prepare for the worst case scenario come what may ... whereas I'd rather mitigate the chances of getting to worst case in the first place. IMHO It is rather foolish to kit your boat out for blue water cruising when all you intend to do is day sail when it's F3 and sunny.

 

[fireball]

but when people give the impression they are a 'must have' I take exception.

+1 ... but with an added bit ..

when people give the impression they are a 'must NOT have' I would also take exception ...

Right kit for the right job ...