Schooner Nina - MERGED 3 THREADS

[venturing seagull]

I don't think they are blaming Iridium. As far as I am aware Iridium does no profess to be a position indicator. The problem comes when the SAR organisations give too much credence to Iridium positions when they have better information reported by a very experienced crew member.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by venturing seagull

I don't think they are blaming Iridium. As far as I am aware Iridium does no profess to be a position indicator. The problem comes when the SAR organisations give too much credence to Iridium positions when they have better information reported by a very experienced crew member.

IIRC it was also the call logs they were after (including failed ones?) as might have given an indication of them being afloat after last contact. But I may be wrong on that.

[Friend of Nina]

Actually for those Iridium users if something happens to you and your family does not have your ID number or phone number the only way you can obtain text or phone calls is through the US State Dept. even then it has to be a high ranking person in that Agency. The State Dept said they would be behind me when I file a complaint to the FCC. I shouldn't have to do that! When an emergency agency calls and even the police dept, Iridium should give them access. Be forewarned !

Also you don't think that if we had the text 6 days earlier when got the lat and long that wouldn't have made a difference? Heading 310deg , 4 kts? Sorry I do not agree with you!!

Cherie

[WaterVirgo]

Cherie,

Your message cuts off, is there more?

[WaterVirgo]

Originally Posted by Friend of Nina

Sorry for so few updates but here it something new!

This message imean

[Friend of Nina]

Part cut off but what was cut off was sorry for so few updates...that's all!

Cherie

[venturing seagull]

I've been trying to find reliable information on the reliability of EPIRBs.

I've contacted various authorities without so much as an acknowledgement of my emails. If EPIRB's are so reliable, why don't the authorities respond?

Somewhere there must be figures for the number of vessels that have been lost with EPIRBS on board that have not transmitted a recognisable distress message. Why keep this info from us .... the seamen that pay for these devices, and in some cases overly rely on them?

I have searched the internet and found many instances where EPIRBs were activated and the casualty found, and others where the survivors were found having tried to activate the EPIRB and either couldn't get to it or the unit didn't work. I need more solid facts to work with though.

[goboatingnow]

I think you are clutching at straws here. USCG Epirb alerts show that the device is very reliable, especially if within the allotted battery life and subjected to the test procedures. The vast majority of alerts are unintended activation.

The specific statistics you are looking for are not collected, Rescue reporting is not standardised or collated globally, hence its impossible to determine any meaningful statistics. No doubt like any piece of electronics it has a failure rate , especially if outside its service life.

I see no practical point to such a search , if they were taken by the sea, a failed Epirb would not help them. In itself the non activation of an Epirb wouldn't be the issue. , you have to there to be found one way or another.

Dave

[venturing seagull]

A failed EPIRB is an issue if the search organisation delays the search because they haven't received a distress call despite knowledge of relatives' concern, or assumes that there are no survivors because no distress message was received.

I, for one, would like to know if the EPIRB I carry on my yacht is unreliable enough for a realistic assumption that it won't work in an emergency situation.

There must be data out there listing the casualty and the means by which they were lost/rescued and whether there was an EPIRB registered to the vessel and whether the beacon was successfully activated.

[Mr B]

This is just a suggestion, and probably way too late any way,

If you are still flying search missions, Could you get some one to drop a Floating, GPS sending unit, with a long tail in the water to catch the deeper currents,

Dropped into the water at the last known position, It would float, or drift in the same Direction the Nina would have floated with no sails,

Its a long shot,

Strange things do happen,

[opusnz]

Originally Posted by Mr B

This is just a suggestion, and probably way too late any way,

If you are still flying search missions, Could you get some one to drop a Floating, GPS sending unit, with a long tail in the water to catch the deeper currents,

Dropped into the water at the last known position, It would float, or drift in the same Direction the Nina would have floated with no sails,

Its a long shot,

Strange things do happen,

Great idea.

We will drop one in the water, wait two months and start searching. Oh but wait. We will then be 4 months after the last known position so we will have to wait 2 more months....and then start searching. But then that will be 4 months...so we will have to wait some more....

Somehow I don't think this will really work unless you can invent time travel first....

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by venturing seagull

A failed EPIRB is an issue if the search organisation delays the search because they haven't received a distress call despite knowledge of relatives' concern, or assumes that there are no survivors because no distress message was received.

I, for one, would like to know if the EPIRB I carry on my yacht is unreliable enough for a realistic assumption that it won't work in an emergency situation.

There must be data out there listing the casualty and the means by which they were lost/rescued and whether there was an EPIRB registered to the vessel and whether the beacon was successfully activated.

What you are suggesting is nonsensical, authorities expend a certain effort to locate missing vessels at sea. After that effort, they take a calculated view that the vessel is lost with all hands and discontinue the sesrch. Every year the sea takes vessels without a trace , especially small vessels. Why is that so hard to except.

Unless epirbs were retrieved on successful rescues , and then tested , no meaningful results can be gathered , since either the epirbs disappeared or there is no way to verify if it failed to work.

Data on rescues are maintained by individual Rescue Coordination centres , its not collated globally , equally there are many many factors that can prevent Epirb detection, even if you do have a fully functional Epirb. It is a limitation that two way verified messaging wasnt practical when the COSPAR SARSAT programme was developed. There is no way to determine if a beacon that was not detected , was or wasn't activated.

Rather like detecting your car working with the engine switched off.

I don't beleive any factors , which resulted in Ninas loss can be attributed to the search process. There is only so much that can be done

as a sailor I accept the seas powers.

Dave

[bobconnie]

I guess this just shows us that not all the stuff we have been told we just have to have aboard, may not work properly maybe?? I don't have an answer, except I know when my SSB is working ! We have carryed a EPIRB for a long time ! Never had to use one, as yet! hope I never have to, but my ssb has kept us in contact with our family for over 30 yrs and it will keep on doing it for a long time ! Im not giveing anyone a hard time ! Cus any of us can loose our electric systems at any time !! I still think this vessel can just be overdue, as Connie and I have been 45 days in a 15 day cruise more than once !! Just sayin, never give up on a overdue vessel ! Just my 2 cents

[opusnz]

There was a study in Canada done years ago on reliability of 121.5 MHz ELT's which were the aircraft equivalent of Epirbs. They are basically the same unit fitted with a G switch to trigger automatically in a plane crash.

They found many problems with them from faulty G switches to faulty antennas, faulty electronics and poor batteries. To sum it up, a lot of the units were junk.

When they came out with 406 Epirbs, they really tightened the standards both mechanically and electronically.

I think the 406 epirbs are quite reliable now but finding statistics will be quite difficult since manufacturers probably don't want to release the information and it is hard to prove a negative. You could try calling one of the vendors like West Marine and ask how many get returned but this will only show ones that fail a self test.

The biggest problem with epirbs is false triggers which drain the batteries. The beauty of the 406 epirbs is that if it gets triggered, they immediately phone you to check it out...you will know it has been triggered so chances of unwittingly having a drained battery are far less.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by bobconnie

I guess this just shows us that not all the stuff we have been told we just have to have aboard, may not work properly maybe?? I don't have an answer, except I know when my SSB is working ! We have carryed a EPIRB for a long time ! Never had to use one, as yet! hope I never have to, but my ssb has kept us in contact with our family for over 30 yrs and it will keep on doing it for a long time ! Im not giveing anyone a hard time ! Cus any of us can loose our electric systems at any time !! I still think this vessel can just be overdue, as Connie and I have been 45 days in a 15 day cruise more than once !! Just sayin, never give up on a overdue vessel ! Just my 2 cents

Everything has a failure rate. That doesn't invalidate its purpose.

With the greatest respect to all involved , this is now, most unlikely to be an " overdue " boat. Sustaining several lives with little water , or food for 2 months in winter in an area known for bad weather. Well , what are the odds.

The sea remains all powerful.

Dave