Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 16-05-2012, 12:23   #466
Lt.
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wasilla AK
Posts: 181
Point taken, so I'll add the " missile laden cockpit" to my, "do abandon ship" situations list. I'm serious.
I suppose it make sense to jump into a raft of its unsafe (completely unsafe, things flying, big heavy or Sharp things, and you can't find a way to stay on deck anywhere) Inside, but without a raft. I do think you would have to find a way to tough it out in this situation.
__________________

__________________
Lt. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2014, 09:08   #467
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manila, California
Boat: Cape George pilothouse 36 and a Cape Dory 25
Posts: 233
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

I have only had those things on my current boat that we have had for a year. A week after I bought my boat I was a hundred miles west of Neah Bay, Washington in sustained 50 knot winds and gusts much higher, and every sea was breaking. I don't have a clue how high they were as it was nearly pitch black and I couldn't wear my glasses, and so was pretty blind. We were trying to beat the winter weather, unsuccessfully it turned out, so we left in a boat that was untested by me. It was a great comfort to have the liferaft and EPIRB aboard. Now we are heading to Chile and rescue would likely take a long time and I am glad we have these devices aboard. I seriously don't think I will ever use them. I have never been saved by a seatbelt or an airbag either though. I believe my boat is very strong and seaworthy, and we have prepared her for this trip for a year, I have owned sailboats for 40 years and was raised with dingheys, kayaks and cabin cruisers before that. But, anything can go wrong anywhere, so we are glad to have these things and they will let me worry about the task at hand should we ever be in a survival situation, and not have to worry about how I am going to abandon ship. That is my take on it. Peace of mind knowing we covered as many bases as possible.
__________________

__________________
fatherchronica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2014, 11:56   #468
Registered User
 
susanna reiter's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: New Mexico and our S/V is in Fort Pierce..hope to be there soon and sailing.
Boat: S/V"KAREN", Pearson Alberg 35. an achilles dingy, 2 kyaks.
Posts: 202
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

So right. If you have them aboard you rarely have to use them. But it just makes good sense to prepare for that possibility .

Sent from my SM-G900T using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app
__________________
susanna reiter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2014, 18:56   #469
Registered User
 
Jimbo485's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: some ocean down under
Boat: Kelsall Suncat 40
Posts: 1,247
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

An extremely thorough, logical analysis and discussion from Beth and Evans which I pulled from their website:

"This is an example of a fundamental disagreement we have with the safety experts' approach to safety. We do not like to rely on 'single-purpose, untestable, magic boxes' and have not carried a liferaft on either of our voyages/boats. People say, "Well, I may need a raft and there is no harm in putting one on board." I think both elements of that statement reflect poor logic. Having the raft aboard does bring significant downsides and the likelihood the raft will be useful is much smaller than many other very low risks that we all just let go by in our lives without undue concern or special precaution. (note: there is an excellent essay 'The psychology of security", directly useful when considering safety equipment and procedures.) Also useful and related is this article on safety and back-up planning, about the Japanese Nuclear problem, but can be related to our cruising safety and planning. And a third interesting article on safety psychology, particularly in complex systems (And how adding safety equipment might not make you safer).

Downside analysis: The core downside is that if you don't have a raft you will be much more focused and intent on saving the boat, and at least to us, that is important. We are willing to make the trade-off involved, of a higher likelihood of saving the boat with also a higher chance of dying if we fail to save the boat. I think that many people in their hearts don't believe they need to make this trade-off, that they can have it both ways - an initial complete commitment to saving the boat and then the raft as a backup if they fail. However, I think they are fooling themselves - they will in fact give the situation more effort and focus if they feel they have no choice/no raft, and give up more quickly with less effort if they have the raft. In the pre-raft days, people made some pretty impressive repairs when they had no choice - Tzu Hang is perhaps the best documented but there were many many others.

Beyond that the raft may prevent you from saving your boat if the boat starts taking on water. Below I relate one example but we know at least three first hand cases where it was impossible to find the source of incoming water because people took the time to launch their rafts rather than immediately going below to save the boat. It's almost impossible to find the source of inrushing water once there is 2' of water in the boat. Secondarily, you could have taken that money and effort and put in a watertight bulkhead or foam filled crash box or stronger rudder, or fire-proofed your interior or pulled/refit all your thru-hulls and stuffing box, etc. Finally, no matter how often people are coached to 'only get in the raft when you have to step up to it' that's simply not how the psychology of emergencies work. People panic and they are not thinking clearly and history has clearly shown, given the option, they often leave perfectly good boats for the less good raft.

Upside analysis: The real frequency of well-found boats sinking rapidly at sea (hitting whales and containers, etc. and going down so quickly they can not be saved by a diligent crew) are very, very rare (rudders and dagger boards are lost with some frequency but do not usually result in rapid sinking). The likelihood is certainly less than that you will be hit by lightning. Secondly, if you end up in one of those rare cases, our (admittedly small sample) data suggests that only about 1 time out of 3 will the raft actually work (even if it's 50% it's not so good). Finally, if you are in one of those rare cases and the raft does works, much of the time it will not protect you very well (big seas and/or cold water) or it will not help because you are in a part of the ocean with low vessel traffic/no rescue capability. So, it certainly happens occasionally but the odds the thing will actually save your life are really, really low - probably lower than your winning the jackpot lottery. That's the upside.

As one thinks of the few cases where the raft was in fact essential to a well found boat, you should not forget the other cases where people have gotten in the raft when they should not have, and the cases when the boat could have been saved if they had not fussed with the raft first, and the cases where the raft resources and effort would have been better directed elsewhere. You can't have the first cases without the others cases. The important thing is to see if the net balance is positive or negative, and we believe the facts suggest its pretty clearly the latter.

In additional detail:

First, liferafts, like much of the available 'safety equipment', especially the single purpose 'sealed magic boxes' do not work very well. In NZ about 20 cruising boats got together to get their rafts repacked. Before repacking they all pulled their inflation cords and about 1/3 did not inflate, 1/3 inflated but promptly deflated and only 1/3 inflated and stayed inflated (this after the rafts were on average only two years at sea). More recently, the Concordia launched 4 rafts and one failed (tube burst). That's a 25% failure rate for commercial SOLAS grade, annually serviced and inspected, rafts. Even when the rafts inflate properly, they are dangerous at sea. In each of the well-documented storms - the Fastnet, the Sydney to Hobart, and the Queen's Birthday storm - crew would have been much safer staying with their boats than getting in their rafts. A high fraction of those getting in rafts were injured or died while 80% of the abandoned boats were later found floating perfectly safely. Rafts are often hard to deploy. Many are simply too heavy and difficult for a single person to quickly get over the side, and many are mounted near propane tanks and gasoline jugs, which will destroy the raft in case of fire or explosion - one common case for abandoning ship, and the one where the raft is most critical to survival. Finally, in the cold waters where Hawk has predominately been cruising, we are almost certain to die of hypothermia in a raft before being rescued.

Second we are committed to saving our boat and sailing her home. We believe that even if the raft works it actually reduces overall vessel safety. Quite a high fraction of the 20% of boats that are not later found after being abandoned could have been saved if the crew had stayed on board. A classic example is a boat we knew that was rapidly taking on water - through a blown stuffing box seal but they did not know it at the time. They looked down below, saw water rising and took time to inflate the raft as a precaution. By the time they got below to try to find the leak there was so much water they could not locate the inrush and the boat sank, fortunately in shallow water. It was salvaged and the cause was determined to be the blown stuffing box, which would have been easy to locate and fix if they had done it immediately and not been distracted by the raft. We feel we are much more likely to be safe and save the boat if we are fully committed to saving the boat than if we have half our attention focusing on a raft.

Third, purely from an 'investment' point of view there are tools with much more bang for the buck in keeping us and the boat safe - bigger anchors, stronger hull, watertight bulkheads fore and aft, tools and materials to effect repair (rigging, rudder and hull skin especially), fire retardant materials in the boat and hull, sealed locker not only for propane but also for outboard and outboard gas and for any paint/solvents, easy to use boom preventers and pole control gear, proper charts of all potential back-up landfalls, extensive medical kit, weather forecasting equipment and knowledge, sat phone, etc. Perhaps most importantly, we believe that multiple ways to minimize fatigue (ranging from a hard dodger for less fatiguing watch keeping to improved sleep cycles practice/knowledge to amphetamines for short intense periods like making landfall after several days of gales) is critical to our safety. Fatigue is the number one contributing factor in bad situations and the number one hindrance in effectively resolving them when they occur. Even if you do believe a raft will actually be effective, risk-based analysis says you should fully implement all these areas before the raft becomes a priority. (Note there has not ever been a case of any vessel in the history of either the Bermuda or Transpac races sinking and requiring the use of a raft to wait for rescue *footnote below* - so no use in several thousand hard-sailed ocean passages).

We do carry two dry suits (and an inflatable dinghy), which we primarily use for hull/prop/zinc maintenance and for helming in truly foul weather. But in addition to these uses would also be much more effective for temporarily 'abandoning ship' (say to get to shore from a burning boat in a remote anchorage - which happened to friends of ours in Chile) than a raft. They require no inflation, offer better protection from hypothermia, and are stowed away from propane and dinghy gas, etc. This sort of dual purpose equipment, which we can regularly use, inspect and maintain is a significantly better approach in our opinion than essentially sealed magic boxes that we can only hope will work when we need them. I was talking with the skipper of a Transpac race boat about safety issues and stunned to discover that, in order to save weight, the only tools they carried were the bow men's two leathermen (and a required spar banding tool) and they had no spare screws/bolts/plywood. This inability to repair even small defects seems unseaman-like in the extreme, but I acknowledge it may be necessary to be competitive in that elite racing environment.

On a related topic, regarding harnesses: It is the case that the vast majority of really experienced bluewater sailors don't wear harnesses/pfd's that much. These folks have well developed 'sealegs' and know how to move and work on the vessel in a stable position. They also know when they need to clip in (although we all make mistakes, the vastly experienced as well as the inexperienced). If you study the record of MOB situations, the vast majority of MOB have been from #1 situations where the crew was standing working with both hands (usually with his hands over his waist) and knocked by a sail, boom, pole, wave or sudden lurch. Or #2 when at a work station (winching or hiking out) and a solid green wave hits them and washes them overboard. In both of these situations it makes sense to have a short strop (just long enough to allow the necessary work but not long enough to go overboard) attached to a near centerline deck hard point (padeye), which will simply not allow you to reach overboard at any angle and always there ready to clip on. We are not a big fan of using jacklines for normal movement up and down the deck or for work station use - because (a) in typical designs they don't prevent you from going over the side (too long), (b) we believe a crewman should be able to move up and down the deck safely (in typical conditions) with one hand for the ship and one hand for himself (good non-skid and toerail and handgrips are important elements of vessel design to help this), and (c) it unnecessarily restricts free and fast movement on deck. Being able to speedily move around the deck and quickly resolve potential problems before they become too large will stop the 'cascade of failures' often seen in major incidents. It should be noted that kneeling or sitting is more stable for working than standing, and that crawling up the deck in very bad conditions is always acceptable and seamanlike. Recent Volvo feedback has been that current ORC harnesses are clumsy for practical long duration usage, and too slow to put on when the off-watch needs to come immediately on deck. The important, time-tested seamanship rule is 'one hand for the boat and one hand for yourself'. The better rule is to clip-in in when you simply cannot hold on: (a) When working with both hands, particularly when standing up (for example at the mast or head stay), then it is good practice to clip-in during unstable conditions because you don't have 'one hand for yourself'. (b) If your work station is being washed with green water, which could dislodge you even while holding on. That is the experienced seaman's practice.

Regarding lifejackets: it is stunning how ineffective life jackets appear to be in the real world. In the official US Coast Guard statistics for coastal usage there is essentially no statistical difference between the percentage of boaters wearing life jackets and those drowning who were wearing life jackets (The 2006 data shows identical results as does the latest 2008 data) - both are 9.3% for adult boaters excluding PWCs on an 8-year average. This means that the life jackets have in fact been almost completely useless in actual practice. If life jackets were effective then the first percentage should be many times higher than the second. This can be at least partially explained by one observation: Virtually no life jacket will hold the users' head out of the water entirely by itself, and so they will not save anyone who is unconscious, extremely fatigued or drunk (drunk while boating study). Article with volvo racer perspective. This perspective was again reinforced by the recent Flinder's Islet incident. Three people went over the side, one had on PFD and harness and was clipped on, one had on PFD and harness and not clipped, and one had nothing on. The person clipped on was trapped bashing against the boat and died. The person not clipped on floated free and was recovered safely. The person without tether or harness suffered a head injury while being washed overboard and likely would not have survived no matter what gear he had. This gear looks like it will save lives but the real world statistics are not very encouraging. In the recent Farallon's incident, seven people went in the water all wearing Pfd's and two survived with five dead.

My summary point on harnesses and PFD's is that they are not cure-all's and it is more important to learn how to move and work safely on deck. But it (mostly) can't hurt and might help to be wearing a PFD (so long as it does not trap you under rigging or the vessel) or a harness and to clip in when you feel unsteady at all or are sitting stationary or have any risk of solid green waves on deck.

Fourth, we fundamentally accept that life has risks. We know that all risks cannot be completely eliminated. We know we will die sometime. We do not let this deter us from living our dreams. We strongly object to the fear based marketing/propaganda efforts, applied to everything from cell phones to water makers, that lead you to believe you will get sick and/or die unless you have one. Following expert advice, one could spend one's entire life and resources minimizing already low risks. That is a pale life. A seaman goes to sea with a realistic assessment of the risks and with the sure knowledge that the seaman's life is worth pursuing despite the risks. He has practiced plans to deal with the most likely situations and a foundation of skills and basic tools to tackle the unlikely. He knows that with a hammer, a knife, and a rope he can overcome most situations.

This is a distinctly personal choice, based on our own assessment of the likely true risks and how to most effectively minimize them. We rarely even mention this decision to others, as we do not want others to base such an important decision on our reasoning and logic. I do believe the thought process should be undertaken with all safety equipment by evaluating the following questions: How likely is the actual risk compared to other risks? Is the equipment well made & will it actually work (has it consistently worked well for others)? Can I personally test it out and see if how it works and refine my procedure or is it essentially a mystery box that I just hope will work? Does it distract either our attention or money from a better solution?

In case one thinks this is 'only a racing issue' - race rules/mindset and the racing safety committees do clearly slop over into the cruising community and into cruising boat design. I think that the current rescue mindset is being driven from the racing community into the cruising community (typical racers' comments: "100 other fully crewed boats ready to come to your rescue", "never out of helicopter range"). It's a major pain today to get a boat approved for the Bermuda race - with all that effort we should at least focus on the right fundamental things, and it would improve all boats not just racing machines. I simply think the pendulum has swung way, way too far toward the abandon ship/rescue and gizmos and away from boat strength, design, watch keeping, etc. I think, we, the sailors, need to challenge the safety community more about the quality and reliability and actual usefulness of their rules/products. I would like to see more focus on basic structures, fire retardant construction and watch keeping (protection in the cockpit work stations from solid green water, sleep cycles, etc.).

Our safety focus/priorities are:

(1) Primary focus is on avoiding problems in the first place - stronger rudders and keel attachments, better work station protection, and fire avoidance

(2) Second focus on tools, materials and skills to fix problems rather than call for rescue when a problem has happened - significant inventory of tools and materials and spare parts & avoid safety products/designs produced simply to satisfy racing rules and identify emergency parts designs/jury rigs that have proven they can be installed and actually work in bad conditions (cassette rudders, spring starter motors, boom gooseneck strong enough/wide enough range of vertical motion to allow boom to be pulled vertical and used as quick jerry rig, etc)

(3) General dislike for single purpose, sealed & untestable, ‘safety’ gear - find multipurpose alternatives that can be used, inspected and tested every day

*footnote* Two boats have been lost in Bermuda Races: ADRIANA to a fire in 1932, and ELDA in 1956 when she ran up on Bermuda’s reef. In the Transpac, in 1975 non-entrant ATTORANTE sank and her crew was rescued by SWIFTSURE. In 1981 Transpac, a racing catamaran broke apart the first night, and her six-man crew was rescued by WESTWARD. MEDICINE MAN sank on the reef 100 yards short of the finish in '89. And in 1999 the crew of DOUBLE BULLET was airlifted off the capsized catamaran by a Coast Guard helicopter. This suggests the priority lesson learned for monohulls should be 'don't hit the land at the end of the passage' (navigation skills, proper charts and fatigue management) and 'stow your combustibles carefully and check your fire extinguishers'; and for multihulls 'in order to win the boat must be strong enough to finish and sailed carefully enough to stay upright'."


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum
__________________

Jimbo485 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 06:53   #470
Nearly an old salt
 
goboatingnow's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,649
Images: 3
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

While I have never been on a car accident I wear seat belts voluntarily

I'm not yet dead, but I pay life insurance

My house has not burnt down , but I have fire alarms.

I think Beth and Evans fundamentally miss the point about " insurance ".

Insurance is there to give you options ( however you might feel about there effectiveness )

That's what Liferafts and EPIRBs are, a form of insurance

To argue about effectiveness is ridiculous. If it saves one life that might have other died its effective, the fact is EPIRBs and Liferafts are cheap


There is simply NO FACTS to back the nonsense idea that the existence of safety devices makes people less likely to try to save the vessel. I suspect that level of determination is a function of the person not the existence or otherwise of safety gear.

( their logic reductio ad absurdum, would suggest all employees would perform better with a literal gun to their head )

Their analysis lacks rigour, selectively uses facts , ignores SAR data , and flies in the fav of conventional logic, logic that has been refined and developed in the face of many years of SAR practice.



Dave
__________________
Check out my new blog on smart boat technology, networking and gadgets for the connected sailor! - http://smartboats.tumblr.com
goboatingnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 08:36   #471
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,743
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by goboatingnow View Post

There is simply NO FACTS to back the nonsense idea that the existence of safety devices makes people less likely to try to save the vessel.

In fact there are . . .just for two examples (1) the many many cases where people get off perfectly good boats, and (2) from the car antilock brake data.

I also specifically included links in that section to the available US life jacket data, which are an interesting related but separate topic.

The plain fact is: if you simply can't call for help, you will be forced to do your upmost to save the vessel (or die). If you can call for help you have options, and will not be forced to do your upmost. Just look at the wolfhound case as an example, a boat that Matt Rutherford found floating at sea, relatively dry inside, rig still up, a year later. (I can cite many many others).



I suspect that level of determination is a function of the person not the existence or otherwise of safety gear.

It is very clearly both. The existence of gear to call for rescue provides options, and empirical evidence clearly shows that people will exercise those options in less than life threatening situations, when they seem the easiest way out of a difficult or uncomfortable situation.


Their analysis lacks rigour, selectively uses facts , ignores SAR data , and flies in the fav of conventional logic, logic that has been refined and developed in the face of many years of SAR practice.

hmmm . . . .care to back up all that bluster and those accusations with a fact or two?

The SAR data indicates (only) that rafts and EPIRBS clearly make rescues more effective/successful. But that is not the question at hand. The question is whether those devices influence people's decision to call for rescue, and they most surely do.


I might add that I have done an analysis of all the known cases of yachting rescues at sea, and 2-way communications (iridium and vhf, beyond epirbs) adds significantly to the effectiveness of the rescues. Life rafts have been reasonably ineffective in heavy weather situations, but have been used to transfer people to the rescuing vessel and (much less frequently) for sitting while waiting for rescue on relatively calm seas

I think Beth and Evans fundamentally miss the point about " insurance ".

hmmm . . . my first "career" was as an insurance actuary. So I am rather well familiar with risk/cost analysis.

.....
__________________
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 09:41   #472
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manila, California
Boat: Cape George pilothouse 36 and a Cape Dory 25
Posts: 233
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

In this nanny environment one may never get to experience floating for weeks in a raft, or getting to taste your own pee to survive.
__________________
fatherchronica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 09:49   #473
Nearly an old salt
 
goboatingnow's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,649
Images: 3
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatherchronica View Post
In this nanny environment one may never get to experience floating for weeks in a raft, or getting to taste your own pee to survive.

Is that what your nanny made you do !
__________________
Check out my new blog on smart boat technology, networking and gadgets for the connected sailor! - http://smartboats.tumblr.com
goboatingnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 09:52   #474
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Manila, California
Boat: Cape George pilothouse 36 and a Cape Dory 25
Posts: 233
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

She was more of an upstairs maid than a nanny, but she was a strict disciplinarian.
__________________
fatherchronica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 09:58   #475
Nearly an old salt
 
goboatingnow's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,649
Images: 3
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by estarzinger View Post
.....

Your quoting technique is hard to handle on an iphone

Buts lets have a look

Excerpt from the MCA

"The number of people who died without a lifejacket/buoyancy aid, who may have lived if they had worn one, has been decreasing since 2007. The panel has suggested that increasing awareness of the benefits of buoyancy aid and lifejacket wear may have helped to reduce the numbers of lives lost over the last few years. The Casualty Review Panel meets once a year to discuss the circumstances Thee number of people who died without a lifejacket/buoyancy aid, who may have lived if they had worn one, has been decreasing since 2007. The panel has suggested that increasing awareness of the benefits of buoyancy aid and lifejacket wear may have helped to reduce the numbers of lives lost over the last few years. The Casualty Review Panel meets once a year to discuss the circumstances "

Equally if one takes incidences like the Wakuna collision , the lack of a life raft would have resulted in drownings

To argue as you have repeatedly done that somehow the existence of " safety " devices results in less effort to save one selves demeans sailors who get into situations and is not backed with any credible data. Any analysis of ocean sailing will show it is safer then most activity sports and has become increasingly so.

The macho blondie hasler approach is a debased philosophy based on some bizarre self sufficiency taken to extremes doctrine

Dave
__________________
Check out my new blog on smart boat technology, networking and gadgets for the connected sailor! - http://smartboats.tumblr.com
goboatingnow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 10:18   #476
Registered User
 
capn_billl's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Houston,Tx
Boat: Maxum 37'
Posts: 1,587
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

I've never used a life raft outside a training simulation, but I can say, I've tried to swim in the open Ocean without a lifejacket, and even though I am a good swimmer, I found it extremely hard.

Even in 3 ft seas, I had to fight to keep my head above water. I doubt I could have done it even an hour.

As far as life boats? Sitting in a life raft in ANY weather seems much more comfortable than treading water for days, or weeks at a time.

A helicopter following an E-pirb signal has a hard enough time locating a big orange raft. A little brown floating coconut head, not going to happen.

SO I'm personally going to at least pack good lifejackets, and wear them on deck. And pack at least ONE decent liferaft, and hope I never use it.

The posts about using liferafts to transfer people to safety in an emergency. IF the liferaft makes me safer even for an hour, it just paid for itself. (And in the days of e-perb the most likely use.)

The posts of abandoning the ship too early? It has happened in the 18th century, so it's not a new problem.

The rule step UP to the life raft is a good one.
__________________
capn_billl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 12:58   #477
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,743
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by goboatingnow View Post
Any analysis of ocean sailing will show it is safer then most activity sports and has become increasingly so.

I agree with the first part (except to note that it is clearly more dangerous per mile than driving a car), that is what the data shows, but that is really neither here nor there in this discussion.

I have never seen any good data on the second part (trend of ocean sailing including independent cruisers). We do know that keels are falling off and rudders breaking more frequently, not less. And if it is in fact improving, how much do you attribute to gps plotters and better weather forecasting and such (rather than 'call for help gear') - I would suggest a lot.


Equally if one takes incidences like the Wakuna collision , the lack of a life raft would have resulted in drownings

That is also neither here nor there. Of course you can find single incidents where a raft helped. That is not the question at hand.

Excerpt from the MCA :"The number of people who died without a lifejacket/buoyancy aid, who may have lived if they had worn one, has been decreasing since 2007. ..."

mmmm . . . . not sure what to take away from that. It in no way describes the actual effectiveness of life jackets, nor the influence of life jacket wearing on the decision making of the people involved. Do they take more risks because they are wearing life jackets? The USCG just simply assumes life jackets are vastly effective, while their own data disputes that assumption.

To argue as you have repeatedly done that somehow the existence of " safety " devices results in less effort to save one selves demeans sailors who get into situations and is not backed with any credible data.

No it does not demean sailors. It is a simple human fact (including mountain climbers also for instance). If you give them an easier option to exit a difficult situation some (good) number (but not all) will take that easier exit. You can see this in many many incident reports, and I know from my own first hand experience that the availability of a 'call for help' button does change the options availability and the calculus of those options. I do not think that admitting that demeans me at all.

And yes there are studies that clearly demonstrate this. One is that over the past decade 80% of the boats abandoned going south from the east coast to the Caribbean, were in non-life threatening situations. Situations from which they could have self rescued if they had simply no choice, but they did have choices and they took them.


The macho blondie hasler approach is a debased philosophy based on some bizarre self sufficiency taken to extremes doctrine

I don't know what the "blondie hasler approach" is, but I consider my own approach to be well considered and thought thru. We understand and explicitly accept the risks it imposes. If you want to consider it 'bizarre', that's perfectly fine with me, but perhaps says more about your thoughtfulness and open mindedness than mine. If you want to insult me, perhaps you should go over to sailing anarchy.

You are simply and obviously wrong on the main point here. The availability of options surely and obviously changes the decision making calculus. That is logical and does not demean anyone. I can say with 100% certainty it is true of my own decision making and I can say it is true with 99.9% certainty in many many specific incidents.

Now how that nets out against the also obvious life saving and rescue improving potential of some of this gear is an unanswered question. That will depend on many many factors, most of which have not ever been analyzed. And is also a significant personal question about style and sports aesthetics - which you do not seem to appreciate at all.

.....
__________________
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 13:12   #478
Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 36
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

I don't carry an EPIRB or a life raft.

Then again, I'm from the future. We don't need such things where I am from.
__________________
Seasiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 13:35   #479
֍֎֍֎֍֎֍֎֍֎

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 13,033
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

Evans-
I find your observations about life raft failures to be both disturbing and surprising, even to someone like me who has had little faith in the industry since the USCG found a canister had been repacked with bricks some years ago. And yet I've never heard failure numbers that high, from Doug Ritter (equipped.org) or Practical Sailor, or the USCG, or any other source or observer.
Is everyone else admiring the emperor's new cloths, so to speak? With failure rates that high, it almost begs for the USCG to offer to buy up a hundred rafts from boaters, at random, and conduct a formal investigation of what's going on out there.
__________________
hellosailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2014, 13:49   #480
Moderator
 
weavis's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: SEVILLE - MALLORCA
Posts: 10,133
Send a message via Skype™ to weavis
Re: How Many EPIRBS and Liferafts Ever Save Lives ?

I have a deep antipathy towards statistics.
However I recently came across one that was 100% accurate.

__________________

__________________
- Never test how deep the water is with both feet -
10% of conflicts are due to different opinions. 90% by the tone of voice.
Raise your words, not your voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder.
weavis is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Dream Lives On Kay Koudele Meets & Greets 7 25-01-2010 11:28
New chapter in our lives bayoubouy General Sailing Forum 3 18-04-2008 06:26
EPIRBs stacy Marine Electronics 3 24-02-2008 10:26
liferafts nalani Health, Safety & Related Gear 1 28-08-2007 02:42
EPIRBS SASSY Health, Safety & Related Gear 0 31-03-2006 09:31



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:12.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.