What to put in your grab bag?

Oh no, not another one. Let me know when you crash in the jungle in your yacht. But sounds like you are just trolling as you are talking about the 1980's when the Cospas/Sarsat Agreement was not signed until 1988.

I repeat again (seems some slow learners out there?) this is an international system not under the control of any third world country. For most of us the alert will be sent to the country your EPIRB is registered in as well as the responsible RCC - if you live in a country that will just ignore you (ie in UK you believe that the MCA will ignore the alert and not act upon it no matter where you are, then that is your own country's problem, nothing to do with the third world). This is providing your country has advised Cospas/Sarsat that it requires a Notification of Country Registration for alerts from beacons on its register - most countries have done that (for common countries for forumites, UK, USA, NZ, Australia, Canada, Holland, France, etc all have).

So if you are sailing in the Southern Ocean (or anywhere else) and your EPIRB is registered in the UK (or one of the other countries that use the UK register), for example, the alert message will be sent to both the MCC and RCC for the region the alert has been initiated in, and to the UK MCC who alert the MCA Falmouth they being the register holders for maritime (the UK aviation register is held in Moray). If for some rare reason the location of the 406 beacon is not resolved, then the register from the EPIRB's transmitted country code will be advised of the alert and the beacon's MMSI/Serial identifying the vessel regardless of whether they normally require to be advised.

If the RCC for the region your alert comes from cannot or will not respond (in the last case it would be removed from the system) then a neigbouring, or any other, RCC will take over. Rescues have been coordinated from RCC's completely geographically removed from the area the distress is in.

That is not just government agency stuff, it is actually how it works. However, the marina mythmakers and sceptics will continue to have their say, no doubt.

An area where the system can fall down is if the 406 EPIRB registration information has not been kept up to date by the owner or there has been an unnotified change of ownership and so become incorrect.

I have, in one case, come across an EPIRB which was incorrectly coded.

Again, anyone who has any doubts only has to talk to the people who run the system - I have given plenty of contact details. It is clear that some are confused by the old 121 Mhz EPIRB's and another now even trolls with talk of CH16 and yachts crashing in third world jungles all over 25 years ago discrediting a system that did not come into wide operation until well after then /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif.

John
 
what an ignorant man you are, you tell other posters that they are talking a load of bollox, you dont read mine properly and sound off about how clever you are.
you dont look very clever from where i am sitting.
stu
 
Having dipped in and out of this thread, and having admittedly not read all of the posts, I wonder whether Ships Cat and Micheal E might not be talking at cross-purposes. As I understand it from SC, the 406 EPIRB signal will result in an immediate response from the home country of registration (let's say UK), and they will co-ordinate the response with locals in the area. I do not think ME disputes this.

However, ME seems to be saying that locals in the area might not, in fact, have the resources or infrastructure to effect a rescue, or might delay in doing so (due to resources/infrastructure).

I can accept both of these positions and don't see that they conflict. It would not surprise me to learn that if I set off a 406 signal in the Irish Sea, it might be received at the same time as a signal let off simultaneously in the Southern Ocean. However, I would also expect to get a quicker (and perhaps more professional) response in Europe than near some third world countries.
 
However, ME seems to be saying that locals in the area might not, in fact, have the resources or infrastructure to effect a rescue, or might delay in doing so (due to resources/infrastructure).

The regional RCC's are required to have the resources to manage the rescue. As I said in one of my posts if they are unable to manage the rescue then it is handed to another RCC.

I think some are thinking that any non participating RCC in each nearby country manages the rescue and that it also provides the physical resources (UK forumites may be conditioned to that by RCC Falmouth being run by MCA). That is not the case - for example, most of the Caribbean is covered by RCC Miami and a rescue will be handled by whatever resources are closest to the vessel, not a resource "owned" by RCC Miami. Here in NZ (which Michael has indicated is one of the nations well covered) the RCC (which covers other nations as well) has no physical resources at all and all rescues are conducted by other parties but managed by the RCC. For example, if it is a local coastal rescue it may be conducted by any of the police, a private rescue helicopter (which are available around the country for response to both marine and land emergencies), the Volunteer Coastguard (somewhat the same as your RNLI), or a commercial or private vessel if they happen to be the closest. For an oceanic rescue it is normally a diverted ship with assistance, if necessary, from a long range aircraft such as an Orion which may determine the exact conditions of the emergency by VHF and/or visually by overflying the yacht/raft. Those rescues are often made thousands of miles from land of any consequence or close to island nations not having the resources to react themselves, and are usually made by resources not owned by NZ.

What has been said is that third world countries are likely to not respond to a 406 EPIRB alert because of a lack of resources or organisation - the delay bit you refer to. That is not the case because they are unlikely to be involved in the first place if they do not have the resources to effect the rescue, and for those that have a participating RCC, if the RCC does not respond to the alert from Cospas/Sarsat(very unlikely) then that in the country ones EPIRB is registered in will (assuming it is a country that requires notification of all alerts from EPIRB's on its register) directly or seeing that another RCC picks it up.

The only difficulty is one of remoteness from resources for the physical rescue and sea conditions allowing the rescue. But remoteness is much less of an issue than many imagine. One only has to look at how far a ship can steam in 24 hours and consider the number of ships out there to see that in most cases there will be a ship alongside you within less than a day and usually much sooner. That even when the nearest country is a third world one. Here in the wider Pacific, which is probably one of the lowest shipping density areas, the crews of most yachts initiating a 406 EPIRB alert are off the boat before it sinks (but like many yacht evacuations it turns out that the boat doesn't sink and turns up later) and within a day.

It has been said in the past by one of our same pratagonists that ships do not respond to RCC requests to standby a rescue - I think the disgusted responses from some seafaring forumites (and I know from my seafaring associates) put that claim to rest. The vast majority will respond and an indication of that is that a surprising number of rescues are conducted by ocean going fishing vessels who I would have thought most likely to jsut want to not be involved.

Of course, if one is in unfriendly territorial waters of a nation unwilling to allow a foreign vessel in to make the rescue and has not got or will not allow its own physical resources to be used in those teritorial waters then there is a problem. But there are very few nations where that would be the case and I suspect the other risks to yachtsmen in entering those waters is far greater than the getting rescued one and they don't bother entering them (Somalia comes to mind).

All the above is with respect to a 406 EPIRB alert and maybe some are confused by how other methods of alert may be handled. One poster has mentioned CH16 - if one calls for assistance on VHF (or flares, or whatever) then one is entirely at the whim of whomsoever picks up the call. If you are making a near coastal passage along a third world country coast and your VHF is picked up by the local SAR peeps, then you are entirely at their mercy as to how quickly they react and as to the resouces they may have or be prepared to ask for to rescue you. that problem does not apply to 406 EPIRB's.

I am not saying EPIRB's are infallible they occasionally don't work (and as I said I have found one incorrecty programmed and incomplete registration will compromise the rapidity of a response), and as the yacht found near Africa (see Stingo's post) the EPIRB may be damaged or become unavailable for some reason. But there again, rafts don't always work, etc, etc.

Anyways, I am off to the boat for a couple of days then of to a third world country with poor communications to work so unlikely to be here for a while /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif. Anyone with any constructive thoughts would appreciate hearing them, a PM will still get me.

John
 
Hi Stu

I actually thought you must have been on the turps when you wrote your last post - I assume that you must still be so.

If you know I am wrong and that I don't know what I am talking about, pour out some facts - not just opinion based on apparant little understanding of the system.

What I have said may be contested by those relying on myths created in marinas and by bored bluewater cruisers who have little understanding of how the system works and little care if their misinformation discourages those who may otherwise decide to carry a 406 EPIRB.

But I think you will be very hard pressed to find anything I have said does not stand up to scrutiny when it comes to the real live world as to how it actually happens.

John
 
Very quickly as I am in London -- bbg speaks exactly my opinion... Of course lots of the poorer countries which have signed up will tell you they have all the facilities and S&R equipment and resources.. And the minister will believe it - sort of - But once you are actually on the ground (or in this case water) in these areas the reality bears no resemblance to the promise - theory - signature on a bit of paper... Do not want to go on and on but unless you have visited - done business in most of the Arab, Muslim, Indian world you simply cannot know what I am talking about....

Just like the epirb - message received and understood and we will re-act immediately - I have spoken to my boss, had tea/prayers. found out if there is any fuel available, or just wait for somebody senior to make a decision - tomorrow.... or give a small present to ease the way....
Michael

reg
 
[ QUOTE ]

What has been said is that third world countries are likely to not respond to a 406 EPIRB alert because of a lack of resources or organisation - the delay bit you refer to. That is not the case because they are unlikely to be involved in the first place if they do not have the resources to effect the rescue ...


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the point that MichaelE was trying to make. I take your point that, if local dedicated resources are not available, the RCC will seek other resources - e.g. commercial shipping. But would it be fair to say that one might expect to receive a different response in / near a country with no / limited dedicated SAR resources than one that has such resources?
 
again bbg talks sense except the further problem is twofold... The countries that do not in fact have sufficient resources frequently will not admit it.. rather report bland phrases like 'the appropriate action was taken'.. which could mean anything.

The other major problem with the system is it's own efficiency. Do not know what the percentage is for the last couple of years but before that the 'false alarm' rate was 87%. Now that is world wide.. For some contributing countries that percentage of false alarms is so high many controllers assume it is a false alarm (Egyptian ferry 7 hours delay) and who can blame them when resources are limited?

There are vast areas of the oceans where immediate and extensive rescue operations in response to a 406 transmission are by no means guaranteed. Communications with fellow cruisers via SSB is probably more reliable.
Michael
 
but that's the point.

They will alert the relevant authority in the relevant sea area and that authority will be responsible for the S&R. Not Falmouth... or Norfolk or any other of the major signal receiving areas. the info is passed to the area responsible.... so if the responsible area does rather less than the UK, USA or Australasia would do - who is to know?
Falmouth is directly responsible for only its sea area.
Michael.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

T
Notices to Mariners - Week 50
Replies
2
Views
763
tillergirl
T

Share this page

Top