What Justifies a "MAYDAY"?

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by avb3

Same as in the US of A.

"Pawn Pawn"

sure that's the right spelling not "porn porn"

[Jammer Six]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Secondly, that many sailors haven't read what their own countries recommendations are or really know what the requirements are.

I know in Australia relatively few sailors, boaters have a radio competency at all. Of the immediate friends I have that are sailors, I'm the only one of them that has one.

That was pretty funny.

Read the .pdf that Seaworthy Lass linked. It's about Australia.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

That was pretty funny.

Read the .pdf that Seaworthy Lass linked. It's about Australia.

I was quoting from that source Jammer Six!

[Jammer Six]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

I was quoting from that source Jammer Six!

Then why does what you quoted contradict 126.2?

I have my own theories about that, but I'll wait to hear your explanation.

[Jammer Six]

I see why.

You are quoting a completely different version than what Seaworthy Lass linked.

Now I understand your point "that many sailors haven't read what their own countries recommendations are or really know what the requirements are."

And going over 126.2 with a fine toothed comb, it appears to be self-contradicting.

How can a person be threatened with "grave and imminent danger" without it being medical, and without the vessel being threatened?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Navigational aids are another thing all together. And it depends on which state as well. There are numerous and I mean 'numerous' port authorities, that look after navigational aids for ports. And these are all either State controlled or in the hands of some times corporations.

AMSA (Australian Maritime Safety Authority) as responsible for Navaids outside of ports.
https://www.amsa.gov.au/navigation/index.asp

They are also the responsible for co-ordinating SAR activities.
https://www.amsa.gov.au/search-and-rescue/rcc/index.asp

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

I see why.

You are quoting a completely different version than what Seaworthy Lass linked.

Now I understand your point "that many sailors haven't read what their own countries recommendations are or really know what the requirements are."

And going over 126.2 with a fine toothed comb, it appears to be self-contradicting.

How can a person be threatened with "grave and imminent danger" without it being medical, and without the vessel being threatened?

https://www.amc.edu.au/handbooks

Yes, Seaworthy Lass has linked a 2008 revision, whereas I was using the latest versions of 2013, which I've now linked.

But I don't find anything contradictory about them anyway, just the 'section' numbers have changed. 126.2 in the latest version refers to repeating the message as many times as necessary where as it was the explanation for distress signal in the earlier version.

As for your question, "How can a person be threatened with "grave and imminent danger" without it being medical, and without the vessel being threatened?" can you explain this a bit more. I don't understand what your asking?

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by StuM

AMSA (Australian Maritime Safety Authority) as responsible for Navaids outside of ports.
https://www.amsa.gov.au/navigation/index.asp

They are also the responsible for co-ordinating SAR activities.
https://www.amsa.gov.au/search-and-rescue/rcc/index.asp

Do they actually install and pay for navigational lights etc Stu?

I wouldn't know but what navigational lights etc would be outside a state durisdiction anyway?

[Jammer Six]

"124.2 (In the "new" version) The Distress Signal indicates that the vessel or person using it is threatened by grave and imminent danger and requests immediate assistance. It does not extend to situations where immediate assistance is sought on behalf of a person, for example, a medical emergency. The urgency signal should be used in these situations. "

It says specifically that the distress signal (mayday) does not extend to situations where help is needed for just a person, and gives as an example a medical emergency.

That implies that such mayday situations exist.

So my question is this: how can a person be threatened by grave and imminent danger without the vessel being in danger, and without it being medical?

Specifically, under what conditions is a person (as in "...vessel or person") threatened with grave and imminent danger such that a mayday call is necessary without it being a medical issue when the boat is not in danger?

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

How can a person be threatened with "grave and imminent danger" without it being medical, and without the vessel being threatened?

MOB?
Crew member run amok?
Pirates?

(Just off the top of my head. I'm sure I could think of a few others given time)

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Do they actually install and pay for navigational lights etc Stu?

I wouldn't know but what navigational lights etc would be outside a state durisdiction anyway?

" Services include:

• a network of some 500 visual and electronic aids to navigation
• ship routing measures..."

[FamilyVan]

Off topic, but weird all navigatable waters aren't federal jurisdiction. Even the great lakes are federal in can/us. But I guess that's because there international waters.
On the topic of pronunciation. Around here we're definitely the French securite vs security.

Sent from my SGH-I547C using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[hellosailor]

Van-
IIRC federal jurisdiction does not apply over "navigable" waters as you might think of them, but rather it applies to all navigable waters that can be reached from the sea. And they use the term "navigable" in that specific sense. Not whether you can run a steamship in your lake, but whether you can navigate all the way down to the sea.



I suppose almost any "danger" to a "person" is technically medical danger. After all, you can't harm a person unless you're disrupting the physical "medical" body.

Unless maybe there are too many unsupervised aboard, taunting you, and creating a psychological danger, perhaps?

But wouldn't "grave danger" be a redundancy? One shark swimming alongside you is danger, ten sharks is grave danger? Either way, you're snack food, no?

[Jammer Six]

Wouldn't a MOB be "on behalf of a person"?

It seems to me that if I use my fine-toothed parsing comb, the section is self-contradicting.

Pirates I would think would be on behalf of the vessel.

The crew run amok I'd have to think about, although with the animals in my club, running amok is frowned on, and potentially dangerous.

[zboss]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

"124.2 (In the "new" version) The Distress Signal indicates that the vessel or person using it is threatened by grave and imminent danger and requests immediate assistance. It does not extend to situations where immediate assistance is sought on behalf of a person, for example, a medical emergency. The urgency signal should be used in these situations.

I read that to mean that there is a different signal you should use if a person is in distress or there is a medical emergency... specifically the use of the "Urgency Signal" whatever that is.

I suppose this would allow them to dispatch the appropriate resources, which differ based on emergency.