Jump to content

PLB


Recommended Posts

Purely out of interest, is anyone routinely carrying a PLB? I've had one sitting at home for 5 years after initially thinking it would be good to have one in case VHF and cell phone fail. Never brought it along, not even on a crazy solo winter outing in conditions.

I just read an article about a surfski paddler and sea kayaker who got in trouble last November and couldn't get his VHF to work for some reason.  Interestingly, a lifeboat and helicopter were dispatched within 1/2 an hour (Northern GB) of the PLB being activated. I have been under the impression that the PLB-activated response is by far not as immediate as a VHF or cell phone call but this may be country-specific.

Made me think to maybe have some backup again. There is a very small PLB, the RescueMe PBP1 that looks interesting: https://www.westmarine.com/buy/ocean-signal--rescueme-plb1-personal-locator-beacon--17112913?recordNum=3. It's tiny.

 

That company also makes an electronic distress flare: https://www.westmarine.com/buy/ocean-signal--rescueme-edf1-electronic-distress-flare--16749269?recordNum=4

 

Opinions?

 

Andy

Edited by Inverseyourself
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I carry a Garmin inReach on solo and group outings in the woods and on water. I was present at an incident on land a while back that required outside assistance, and was moments away from pressing the SOS button when we managed to get a cell connection to 911. I was very thankful for the voice connection to 911, as we were very quickly able to communicate what we needed. Being on land with the inReach, we could have exchanged short text messages to communicate the assistance needed. Had the same incident happened on rough water where we couldn't exchange messages over the inReach, or with only a PLB available, the responding agency would have had no choice but to send the full response team, since they wouldn't know the nature of the emergency.

One further benefit of an electronic device that sends lat/lon with the distress signal: Had we used the inReach, it may have sped up "where are you located?" part of the response. The first thing 911 wants to know is: "police, fire, or medical", and the second is the address and town you are in, so they can patch in the proper responders. On the ocean, it's fairly easy - Coast Guard will respond, but inland you should know what township your particular patch of woods lies in. In this particular instance my phone wasn't sending lat/lon and the cell tower I connected through was not in the same town that I was in. So even though I could describe precisely where we were, the 911 operator had to guess at the town, and the first agency they patched in immediately told us to call their neighbors.

Until help arrived, I spent the rest of the time on the line with 911 relaying vital signs (quality and rate of pulse and respiration), and relaying any changes in the patient's condition. We were fortunate to have some very skilled individuals handling patient care, and another member of the group ran back and forth from the patient to the spot where we could get cell service. The first responders arrived on scene, and the incident had a happy ending.

Having multiple communications options definitely helped that day. I'd certainly recommend carrying something like a PLB, EPIRB, or a commercial option like Spot or inReach as a backup to radios or cell phones.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont currently have one but especially given it's small size I dont really see a downside to carrying one especially when going out solo. Given what most of us invest in paddles, boats,  VHF... etc seems like a reasonable price for some piece of mind. Just don't let having it tempt you in to taking risks you wouldn't have without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't routinely carry mine, but instead take a "risk-management" approach.  I am typically with groups that have multiple VHF and cell phones, paddling in areas where direct contact with the public is within "easy" access.  As those parameters decrease, my likelihood of bring it increase.  Keep in mind that PLBs really are a last-means of assistance, since response can be dramatically slow based on where you are and what the emergency is.  Even half and hour is an eternity if you are injured, hypothermic, or at risk of drowning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I carry a small PLB in my PFD all the time.  I paddle fairly often in areas where the only option for contact is sat phone, inReach, and PLB.  We try to have one device in each boat.

Having these devices does take a bit of the wild out of the wilderness experience.  It was not that long ago when none of this existed, and when you went out on the land/sea you were completely out of contact.  It definitely is a different experience to be completely without contact.  I also think that some of these devices may introduce a bit of danger into wilderness trips because they give folks who's skills might not be 100% up to snuff a false sense of security. I include GPS in that comment.  You really must be able to navigate without GPS, because those units can and do fail. Again, I use a GPS, but I do not let myself get in any situations where I would be in trouble if it were to fail.

I have mixed feelings about carrying all this stuff.  But, in the end, I carry, mostly because it makes my family members feel better when I am on a trip. Another reason I carry is because I have to acknowledge I'm no spring chicken and the chance of a medical event having nothing to do with my wilderness skills is much higher now than it was years ago.  My family has been very supportive of my trips over the years and the least I can do is to carry a small device if it makes them feel more comfortable. I do draw the line at requests for daily check ins.  My problem with that is that if the device fails and the check in does not come it will send my spouse into a panic for no reason.  Our agreement is that no news is good news.

Edited by rpg51
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I carry a ACR PLB which is registered with SARSAT. The registration is updated every two years , but I can update contacts at any time online. I started carrying for the same reasons as Rob, family and aging. It is not small so it's in the day hatch most of the time. SARSAT makes a point to only activate in a life or death situation. Otherwise you could be looking at an extremely expensive ride home. Response is not as immediate as direct contact with rescue agencies. SARSAT calls your contacts first to confirm emergency then sends rescue.

there are areas along the coast of Maine where I have not had cell service and if the VHF fails or out of range the PLB is last resort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When on the ocean I normally carry a DSC-VHF with integrated GPS and a PLB with integrated GPS.  I follow the old rule if it is not on your person you do not have it, so they are both attached to me, not my kayak.

I've had my VHF fail during radio tests.  The PLB has never failed a self test.  I need to replace the old cell phone I used to carry for 911 calls.  The "waterproof" box it was in flooded and killed the phone.

Though other scenarios are far more likely, my basic worst case PLB scenario is that somehow in very cold water I fall back from the group and unzip my relief zipper, then I hurt an arm, get separated from my kayak and from my companions in heavy fog with wind and current pushing me away from shore, my relief zipper still isn't securely zipped, and nobody hears my calls on the VHF.  With a functioning PLB in New England I would probably survive the experience.  Without one I might be written up as "an experienced kayaker.... condolences to his family. "

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, these devices are wonderful things in many ways.  But, they have a tendency to insulate folks emotionally from the reality, which is that no matter the skill level or technology available, these activities we all engage in are very dangerous. If we forget that reality, we are likely to make bad decisions. We reduce the dangers with skill development, experience, judgment, electronic devices, etc.  But, the dangers remain and they are quite real.  We should never think otherwise. We are literally risking our lives, and we should not pretend otherwise. 

Of course, we risk our lives every day just driving to work.  I get that.  Everything we do involves a conscious or unconscious risk-benefit analysis.  I often tell my wife that in my opinion, the risks of driving to Boston and back on the interstate highway is greater than the risk of being mauled by a grizzly bear in the Northwest Territories, (of course I have no statistics to actually back that statement up :)) So, like many of you, I choose to take these risks because in my opinion the benefits are huge.  But, I don't pretend there is not serious risk out there.

I hate being a wet blanket, but I think this needs to be said. Lots of folks with minimal experience will read these pages and I think we do them a terrible disservice if we are not open and honest about both the joys and benefits AND the very serious risks. The problem is that to the average person the risks are not obvious. That is why so many inexperienced folks get themselves into trouble paddling,  It is not because they are stupid or thoughtless, it is because the severity of the risk is not obvious to the ordinary person.

We just need to remember that electronic devices can and do fail.  So don't take risks with a device, that you are not prepared to take without the device.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to disagree with the only paddle if you would still paddle without your X-device philosophy.  If I followed that rule my kayaking would be limited to small warm bodies of water where I was reasonably confident I would always make it to shore unless my body or mind failed so spectacularly that I didn't want to be resuscitated.

Quote

So don't take risks with a device, that you are not prepared to take without the device.

Everything I take with me kayaking can fail.  My mind, my body, my kayak, my paddle, my drysuit, my PFD, my electronics, my companions can all fail.

My first week of sea kayaking was a fall course in Maine when ocean water temperatures were near their yearly peak.  After that course I read the books Sea Kayaker's Deep Trouble and Sea Kayaker's More Deep Trouble.  Those books changed my priorities.  Instead of starting off by buying shinny new sea and white-water kayaks, my first major purchase was a Kokatat Drysuit, my second major purchase was a DSC-VHF radio with integrated GPS,  and a PLB was not terribly far behind.  Other priorities to purchase brand new were multiple replacement copies of the exact same high-end helmet as the older versions took hits, and high flotation PFDs with lots of pockets.  Too this day my kayak's have come from Craig's List or I've built them myself.  I have indulged in some nice carbon-fiber paddles, but I definitely consider those paddles luxuries.

I reordered my priorities because too many of the Deep Trouble stories involved more than one of the following:

  • One or two paddlers (three to sea remains my minimum).
  • Paddling without adequate thermal protection (my drysuit is non-negotiable on the open ocean if the water is too cool for extended swimming in a speedo).
  • Without any radio to signal for help or with the radio inside a kayak they watched blow away.
  • Not listening to weather reports at all, or trying to beat the weather to stay on a tight schedule.
  • Never tried even a paddle float self rescue, or only tried it on a calm pond with unloaded kayaks and often only with somebody else years ago.
  • Never tried an assisted rescue, or only tried it on a calm pond with unloaded kayaks and often only with somebody else years ago.
  • Never learned to roll a kayak, or never rolled a loaded kayak in conditions, or haven't ever/recently practiced rolling this kayak.
  • Poor navigation skills.
  • Waiting too long before they called for help.
  • The biggest one of all, not being willing to be the first at the put-in to say "We shouldn't launch now."

So I say if you wouldn't launch without your X-device, great!  Just remember to check your X-device at the put-in, and abort your launch if your X-device isn't with you, or isn't working.

I would also suggest trying to avoid all the other classic mistakes I listed above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I would amend "don't take risks that you are not prepared to take without the device" to "include the possibility of device failure in your overall risk assessment". I'm willing to take on SOME more risk when I'm carrying a safety device, even if I feel it has a non-zero chance of failure. Rolls, radios, and rescue beacons are all examples of things that I don't trust 100%, but that let me paddle further than I would if I didn't have them at all.

Personally, I think many of us over-estimate the reliability of our handheld VHF radios to get a message to the Coast Guard in a life-or-death kayaking incident, and under-estimate the reliability of GPS, PLBs, and other modern "gadgets". I have never seen a paddler ask for a radio check from CG or a far-off boater. Instead, we assume that because we can hear the radio of the guy 30 feet from us, we've got reliable safety comms.

I'm more confident in the reliability of my inReach, because I can audit its performance. On the beach, I press the test button, which sends a test-SOS message to any satellites overhead and waits for a test-received message back with my device's registration number in the payload, which tests the exact path a real SOS message would take. At all times, the unit blinks a red light at me if it doesn't have a connection to the satellite network, indicating that I've got it oriented poorly or shielded somehow. When I choose to send an outgoing message, it blinks until the message is successfully sent, and beeps for confirmation. When I get home, I can view the map of tracking points it sent, and if they aren't evenly spaced out at 10 minute intervals, or stray from my known path travelled, I would know that I didn't have reliable 2-way communication at particular points on my trip. My own personal auditing of paddles with the device near the top of my day hatch or in the top of a backpack gives me 99% confidence that it will work as described if I remember to charge it and turn it on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess you guys trust the devices more than I do. They have failed in my hands so I never really trust them.

In my opinion, if you are paddling into an area using GPS knowing that you do not have the navigational skills to get back out if your GPS dies, you are taking a risk that I would not take. But that is just my personal risk benefit analysis.   I suspect most folks here have the navigational skills, so in that case I agree its not an issue and the GPS is a big convenience, which is why I carry one.  I just think people need to understand that they need the skills - they should not place their trust in the gizmos. 

And yes, I do agree for the experienced paddler its all about risk benefit analysis. The real problem I worry about is inexperienced paddlers that can't do a proper risk benefit analysis because they do not have the knowledge required to perceive the risks.  They only perceive the benefits.   The gizmos can give them a false sense of security and they can get into real trouble. In the end we have personal responsibility for the risks we take.  Many of the folks that are buying a rec kayak and a gps have no clue of the risks associated with paddling out to that island a mile off shore.

I think the regular participants here at this forum understand the risks.  I'm pretty sure a lot of other people don't. That is what worries me.

I think I'm starting to repeat myself. :)    Could be a sign of advancing age!

Edited by rpg51
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2019 at 7:08 AM, Dan Foster said:

I have never seen a paddler ask for a radio check from CG or a far-off boater.

I've not done this before, as I suspect it is frowned upon by CG? Others please chime in if you have, and describe circumstance, or potential scenario.

g

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone tried this? I'd try it now if I was within range of the coast. (Click the link to see the right channel to use for your area: 27 for Boston and Portsmouth, 26 for MA north shore.)

https://www.seatow.com/boating-safety/automated-radio-checks

It’s simple to use:

 

  1. Automated Radio Check Service uses one of VHF Channels 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 84. Simply tune your radio to the proper channel for your community.
  2. Conduct a radio check as you normally would.
  3. Upon releasing the mic, the system will replay your transmission, letting you hear how you sound.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's some useful advice I got from USCG and Canadian Coast Guard:

EPIRBS (and PLBs) are taken seriously and tracked down when activated. The responding agency is required to follow a false-alarm mitigation procedure, i.e. call the numbers in the registration, etc. This can add up to several hours before a responder is dispatched.  When doing an Andros island circumnav, I was able to check in with the USCG Bahamas before departure, and they accepted my float plan (and physical presence/interview) in lieu of  false-alarm mitigation. The officer was kind enough to show me how the system worked, from the screen in the dispatcher's office, to response gear on the SH60 helo used for the response.  It's a state of the art system, quite expensive to operate. It's not meant for help with blisters.

Similarly, in Nain, Labrador, the  RCMP SAR coordinator also acceped a float plan in lieu of mitigation, but also asked that we check in with them on safe return. 

Both places actively discouraged me from using a commercial SAR beacon, explaining they are run by for-profit centers who earn money on rescue charges. Beacon owner purchases  'rescue insurance' along with the beacon. It is ESSENTIAL to understand what (other) persons that insurance alpplies to, and to whom it doesn't. if the accident victim is not covered by the beacon-owner's insurance, we're talking 6-figure rescue costs. Both Andros and Nain stations were awae of instances of very large costs levied on the rescued party. 

EPIRB response is paid for by SOLAS, funded by a a fee on international marine shipping traffic, They do not charge fees except in cases of deliberate fraud. 

Finally, I was told the above applies to the world's oceans only, and coverage ashore  on fresh-water bodies is quite different. Generally, SOLAS operates on waterways navigable by transoceanic vessels.   A hiking accident in NH would most likely be refered to anoher SAR entity. 

Also, an accindent at places like Charles river basin or Boston harbor, is much better handled bia cell phone/911 or VHF16. There is no reason to put a resource drain on the global SOLAS SAR system. 

I'd be glad to provide additional detail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gary, the potential scenario that worries me is: can a paddler or a swimmer with a VHF in 4' seas both transmit and receive understandable information to a potential rescuer in a lobster boat 1 mile distant. I personally believe that VHF works great for boat-to-boat communications when both antennae have a line-of-sight path above the water, but that kayakers and swimmers are so close to the surface that wave crests and swell may attenuate our transmissions and render them useless in the scenarios where we'd actually need them.

Has anyone ever tested VHF communications between two widely-separated pods in bigger seas, where you don't have continuous visual line-of-sight to the other party?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Dan Foster said:

Has anyone ever tested VHF communications between two widely-separated pods in bigger seas, where you don't have continuous visual line-of-sight to the other party?

I was a bit shocked a few years back when a group very close to shore with lots of tiny islands and a bit of fog but only moderate seas proved unable to to maintain radio contact.  On the bright side the Coast Guard has much larger antennas mounted much higher above the water.  However, the Coast Guard system was designed assuming antennas 6 feet above water level, and even with that assumption their coverage maps shows lots of radio coverage gaps close to shore.  See https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=mtNds

Various sources say a DSC alert has a 15% to 25% greater range than a voice call, and it appears that actually transmitting a DSC alert takes less than a second.  A DSC radio is supposed to then send another alert every 3.5 to 4.5 minutes updating the GPS coordinates if available until it receives a DSC acknowledgement.

However, the most interesting thing I discovered researching this post is that if you have a recent DSC radio, you can get an automated VHF DSC test call response from the Coast Guard!  So you can test for yourself if the Coast Guard would receive your DSC mayday!
 

Quote

 

For VHF DSC radios equipped with the Test Call feature, test transmissions should be made to the US Coast Guard MMSI 003669999 to receive an automated VHF DSC test response. You must use the “Test Call” category of your radio because “Individual” category  calls to this address will not receive an automated response.

https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/?pageName=DSCTesting

 

Assuming the Coast Guard receives your GPS coordinates, your little handheld might not reach lobster boats you cannot see, but the lobster men will certainly hear the Coast Guards "All Ships" broadcast which will probably bring them into your sight at which point your radio probably will reach them.

Unfortunately my current radio is too old (the manual is copyright 2009), and it does not support the test call feature.  It may be time for a new radio.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy, the CG website encourages boaters to limit DSC tests to once per week. I just sent a DSC radio test using Bill's instructions, but given that I'm an hour inland, I did not expect or receive a reply. It's less than a one second transmission, and DSC means it's only to be heard by the party you're calling. I think the prohibition on marine radio use on land is to keep people from using them like walkie-talkies and tying up an entire marine VHF channel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Dan Foster said:

Has anyone tried this? I'd try it now if I was within range of the coast. (Click the link to see the right channel to use for your area: 27 for Boston and Portsmouth, 26 for MA north shore.)

https://www.seatow.com/boating-safety/automated-radio-checks

I tried this a few times when I first started carrying a radio. It worked less than half the time, probably because I was trying from at or near the launch location, not farther offshore, or, because I had the wrong channel. When it works it just plays back your own voice to you.

I've been thinking I know I carry the radio with DSC but in an emergency might be too stressed to remember proper procedures. I think an organized paddle with the side goal of working on communication procedures would be a great idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another loosely related issue that the folks who do the kind of trips I tend to do debate, is whether to carry a firearm. My feeling on that topic is that my trip mates would be at greater risk from me with a firearm in my hands, than they are from the grizzly bears. :)

Edited by rpg51
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some random thoughts:

VHF is technically not limited to line of sight communication, but I suppose it is a decent rule of thumb.  For example, I once clearly heard a securite call from a vessel at the north end of Deer Isle when I was near Little Cranberry south of MDI.  On the other hand, as others have indicated, range can be surprising, if not distressingly, limited at times.  With a repeater on a high antenna, for example the tower on Swans or on top of Mt. Washington,  a little handheld unit can communicate over a long distance as in excess of 50 miles.

Don't expect a lobster boat to hear a call on 16 even if it is within easy "earshot".

Automated radio check stations are handy, but they also hindered by coverage limitations.  I have used the one in Portsmouth, but it was sketchy.

The Rescue 21 system had, I believe, a design objective of being able to copy a signal from a one watt signal one foot above sea level 20 miles off shore.  Don't count on it, and topography creates many dead zones off the coat of Maine as the coverage map shows.

Communication via digital systems can work well when the signal strength is so low as to be totally useless via FM voice.  Which is why DSC is a very good thing.

Although it is illegal to use a radio contrary to FCC regulations and the penalties can be severe, there is almost no restriction on buying radios and enforcement varies widely  While someone using a VHF marine radio on land might not be bothered by a visit from law enforcement, illegally operating a  VHF handheld on the VHF aviation channels may well.

 

Ed Lawson

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...