Visit our Popular Forums

mbianka · 26-02-2013, 04:44

"The San Francisco Chronicle identified those believed to have been on board the boat as a man, a woman, their 4-year-old son and his cousin, who was under age 8.

The caller maintained near constant radio contact with the Coast Guard between his first and last distress calls, Lutz said. Much of the contact was inaudible, though, making it difficult to be certain of the boat's name.

"Right now, we're really trying to get information about the people on board that were missing," Lutz said. He said officials have been unable to find neighbors, relatives or friends who know the four. The Coast Guard has been unable to find a boat registered under the name Charmblow."

This is starting to smell like a hoax.
No boat found with that name.
Parent(s) of the cousin on board have not come forward.
Nobody else seems to know of this boat
Or the idiot(s) who would head 65 miles offshore without a liferaft or EPIRB.

barnakiel · 26-02-2013, 06:00

Quote:

(...) the idiot(s) who would head 65 miles offshore without a liferaft or EPIRB.

It is fine to have them, but some elect to go without.

b.

**David M** · 26-02-2013, 06:04

Sounds more and more like a hoax given by now nobody has come forward to report missing family or friends.

Blue Crab · 26-02-2013, 06:23

Yes... but. Didn't they ascertain that the signal was from 60+ miles from shore. Is there a way to fake that?

**David M** · 26-02-2013, 06:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

Yes... but. Didn't they ascertain that the signal was from 60+ miles from shore. Is there a way to fake that?

No way to fake it given the Coast Guard has radio direction finders. It is possible that only one Coast Guard RDF antenna received the distress call. In that case if only one antenna receives it then they could get a direction somewhere along a single LOP, but not a range or position. If the call is received by two or more RDF antennas then they can get a position where the two or more LOP's intersect, and therefore a range.

This is how they determine many hoax calls, when the RDF position and the described position are grossly different. Hoaxers are too stupid to understand how it works.

**s/v Jedi** · 26-02-2013, 06:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

Yes... but. Didn't they ascertain that the signal was from 60+ miles from shore. Is there a way to fake that?

I don't understand this. On the North Sea, as soon as you key your mike the coastguard operator sees your position on their radar-plotter and you don't even have to tell them your position, speed or anything.

I'm still not convinced it is a hoax... but I'm sure happy that we decided not to sail back up north because I really don't want to sail where some can consider this hoax mayday thing entertaining. I would be willing to put them in the mayday position that they claimed to be in and then ignore their calls... or give hoax answers like "we'll be there in 10 minutes" and then after 10 minutes "gotcha, we're not coming, funny huh!"

What a world... looks like it will become like in the movie Waterworld after all.

LJH · 26-02-2013, 06:43

What sort of VHF coverage does the CG have 65 miles out? They could have had some ducting, but unless they had a position (DSC?) they would have a larger primary search area if they only have one DF bearing.

Tony B · 26-02-2013, 06:45

I find it completely mind blowing that so many on here cannot imagine the CG receiving a signal 65 miles from land. For those of you that plan on venturing out there some day, VHF is 'line of sight' transmission. The line actual distance of line of sight is determined by 'height of eye' - your eye to the target. The higher the antennas, the further they can 'see' because their horizon or height of eye is further out. The CG usually has very high antennas.
I wouldn't count on this to save my life, but it is a fact. On the negative side of distance, is the relative low power of VHF Radios.

**David M** · 26-02-2013, 06:52

Along the California coast the Coast Guard has antennas sitting up on mountains. So receiving calls at 60 miles is quite possible. They also have plenty of repeaters on 16. I suspect many of the Coast Guards VHF's have more than 25 watts of power. Sometimes they come blasting through when everyone else's transmissions are relatively weak. It would make some sense for their radios to be greater than 25 watts, especially on 16. In my experience marine band VHF is a little bit more than line of sight, there is a little bit of bending over the horizon.

category4jay · 26-02-2013, 07:00

I've heard the radio call. I'm not hearing Charm Blow. I think its something different the guy is saying. I also did not hear any sense of urgency in his voice. Curious. Also I just have to wonder exactly how long this vessel was without power. Maybe it drifted 60 miles out to the west or to within 60 miles from farther out. Maybe he's been drifting for a LONG time. I still hope its a hoax. And if it is a hoax I hope they fine the guy 250K and lock him up.

**s/v Jedi** · 26-02-2013, 07:06

Radio Saba in the Caribbean used to serve the whole Eastern Caribbean, without repeaters! It is a matter of antenna height indeed. Your EPIRB uses 406MHz, UHF which is more difficult than VHF and at low power but still manages many thousands of miles distance.

DeepFrz · 26-02-2013, 08:18

They could have been in transit from one area to another. Maybe Canadians heading to Mexico. That could count for no one coming forth in the local area.

fstbttms · 26-02-2013, 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

They could have been in transit from one area to another. Maybe Canadians heading to Mexico. That could count for no one coming forth in the local area.

The Coasties are contacting marinas in California, Washington, BC and Hawaii. So far, nobody has been able to identify the boat. Further, this is international news now. Seems pretty unlikely that whoever the loved ones of these mystery sailors are, that they wouldn't know about this and have come forward.