Father and his kids missing at sea

[vjm]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I think the main point here, a broader and more philosophical one, is that "self-sufficiency" is a fantasy. Or maybe even -- a pose. It smacks of -- hubris.

Of course good seamanship demands that we do what we can to help ourselves, and prevent the case where we have to impose on someone else.

But seamen know that at sea no one is safe from that case where we can't manage without someone else's help. There but for the grace of God go I. That's why we are so superstitious about helping others. No matter how stupid the other is, we always help. We help without hesitation, without judging how the other seaman, got into whatever situation, he got into. That's because we know that no matter how skillful we are, no matter how well prepared we are, we could be the next, to need help.

"Make arrangements in advance, or, tough ****, drown" contradicts everything we believe. It is an arrogant and lubberly idea.

It is also, again, not even close to what I said.

If someone is in a bind, and asks for help, of course you help. Nowhere did I say anything different. If someone has a boat in bad repair and is making plans that seem unwise, of course you offer to help. If someone is heading out without equipment you think is necessary and you have the ability to loan or give them that equipment then of course you do so. I have never said that doing those things is wrong.

Of course we are all part of a community that passes on knowledge, helps each other out when needed and wanted, that is not even the issue being discussed.

As enjoyable as it may be to pass judgment and be insulting, at least do it on what I have actually said and not some strawman argument.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by reed1v

Its a car on the water; why should it be treated any different?

Nope...
Different laws all together and apples and oranges.

[Cap Erict3]

I am of the opinion that the outrageous comments come from no boaters looking for ways to wile away their time.

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by vjm

Now that is a policy I can endorse.

Now that is a policy I can absolutely abhor. Not very nice at all.

Originally Posted by vjm

Not joking. You seem to be not reading terribly closely. What I have said is that of course they respond to maydays. So in your scenario, SAR would respond because someone has asked for their help.

If someone does not have an EPIRB, has not sent out a request for assistance, and is merely reported as missing or late, then no SAR response.

Hopefully that clears up any misunderstanding.

Much better, thanks for the clarification.

[TurninTurtle]

Originally Posted by vjm

Not joking. You seem to be not reading terribly closely. What I have said is that of course they respond to maydays. So in your scenario, SAR would respond because someone has asked for their help.

If someone does not have an EPIRB, has not sent out a request for assistance, and is merely reported as missing or late, then no SAR response.

Hopefully that clears up any misunderstanding.

OK... You're out solo sailing. You fall overboard and luckily have a life vest, but no EPIRB.

Your boat sails onward at 7 knots on autopilot and you have no hope to swim and catch up.

Someone flying over in a plane spots you and reports to the coast guard.

Coast Guard: No radio call from him and no EPIRB... he can drown.

Really?

[SURV69]

just for curiosity ... does anyone know if the CG is involved with "911" ... that is, if a 911 operator can simply pass on information to the CG?

[TurninTurtle]

Originally Posted by SURV69

just for curiosity ... does anyone know if the CG is involved with "911" ... that is, if a 911 operator can simply pass on information to the CG?

Good question...

I would hope so.

Certain fiction books (known for being accurate about most technical details) seem to indicate they can.

In reality? I'm not sure.

[psneeld]

Originally Posted by SURV69

just for curiosity ... does anyone know if the CG is involved with "911" ... that is, if a 911 operator can simply pass on information to the CG?

yes, not in all places though i bet...unless it has improved dramatically in the last 10 years or so.

...even 911 wasn't completely standard so 911 sometimes had trouble figuring out the correct USCG number to call....bet in some places it is still true.

But it is quick enough in most cases that it shouldn't matter.

[Cadence]

This whole thing has become ridiculous. Hello, do you have an EPIRB? No well tough ****.
I can see a course so someone knows the basics. Some states have that for kids to operate a boat and not a bad idea. I guess everyone should know which side is red and which is green. Some things can only be learned by experience.

How did the kids being lost get to this?

[MarkSF]

There's a Coastguard minimum safety equipment list right now. I have no problem with EPIRBs being added to the list, if that is deemed appropriate. In fact I would support it.

Right now whether you had the equipment on the list has no bearing on what resources are sent to search for you, which is as it should be.

We are simply discussing whether the current minimum equipment list is appropriate. I don't think it is.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Cadence

This whole thing has become ridiculous. Hello, do you have an EPIRB? No well tough ****.
I can see a course so someone knows the basics. Some states have that for kids to operate a boat and not a bad idea. I guess everyone should know which side is red and which is green. Some things can only be learned by experience.

How did the kids being lost get to this?

So, please tell us.... Over here in Europe, "which side is red and which is green?"

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by MarkSF

There's a Coastguard minimum safety equipment list right now. I have no problem with EPIRBs being added to the list, if that is deemed appropriate. In fact I would support it.

Right now whether you had the equipment on the list has no bearing on what resources are sent to search for you, which is as it should be.

We are simply discussing whether the current minimum equipment list is appropriate. I don't think it is.

Mark, you are probably speaking off shore. I can't see it for the guy with a 16 ft. skiff on a trailer.

Where do you draw the line?

[four winds]

Maybe a mandatory VHF for recreational boats would be a better first step.

The Coast Guard's ability to receive from well offshore in the GOM is quite good. I'd guess that 95+ percent of every boat I've every laid eyes on has never been out of CG VHF range.

[TurninTurtle]

Originally Posted by four winds

Maybe a mandatory VHF for recreational boats would be a better first step.

The Coast Guard's ability to receive from well offshore in the GOM is quite good. I'd guess that 95+ percent of every boat I've every laid eyes on has never been out of CG VHF range.

Lets make it mandatory to put a VHF on a Sunfish. That's a recreational boat and people DO take them out in the surf.

Yep... sounds good.

[zeehag]

Originally Posted by Davy J

While I agree with this statement, the flip side of the coin is, it is the actual government you are asking to pick you up and be rescued...........

For example, EPIRB sales might increase, if say, the CG instituted a policy of which they would only launch a SAR if there is a PLB or EPIRB. If not, SOL.........

i donot call for rescue.
speak for yourself. i fix my **** so i can make into port afloat and alive.
having govt up our asses is not what govt is supposedly about.
rescue is not a mandatory service.
it is requested.
epirbs are a choice. let that remain so.