South Pacific Mayday

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Got it. I was apparently looking at an older position for your boat, and just confused in general. Good luck with your search.
 
I cannot help but wonder what the victim was thinking as he pressed the panic button. Some candidates center about the idea "was this really such a good idea with no backup?" Or maybe just, "Damn!" I certainly hope he is found so he has a chance to tell the world. All I do know for certain is that my personal risk assessment methodology (even at the victim's age) for ocean crossings says NO-GO for anything less than the 205-foot, 1600-ton, 69-man crew salvage and towing ship I ran back and forth across the biggest part of the Pacific as the 29-yerar old skipper WAY before GPS.
 
CamoPirate said:
But suggesting as has been stated “Starlink to be an absolutely useless piece of survival gear for a host or reasons” is a mistake in my opinion. Not only is the marine version robust and well suited to the marine environment it gives you the ability to get info well in advance of the very thing most likely to put you in survival mode. .
Click to expand...

I've been away from the forum up in SEAK. But I stand by my opinion that Starlink is a useless piece of survival gear. It is not waterproof, requires a lot of power, requires several other pieces of gear to use which is also unlikely to be waterproof, is not portable so you cannot abandon with it. In a non-survival situation (sick crewman for example) it may be useful. When the boat is about to sink, not.

An EPRIB is reliable and waterproof, portable, requires no extra equipment and no operator intervention. An Inreach is nearly the same, but in addition allows 2-way communication with the SAR personnel and can be round trip tested at any time.

So after the liferaft and EPRIB and Inreach are purchased, if you have budget left, sure go for the Starlink. But not first.
 
Looks like you guys have given up the search and are now on direct course to the Marquesas?
 
No haven’t given up still actively looking but not doing parallels. transitioning to a different sector. There are different models based on a myriad of factors such as rowing vrs not rowing, weather ect. The total area involved after the amount of time since the distress signal is a incompressible size.
 
Thread has been an eye opener. Some think they can judge what risks others should under take. Perhaps they would restrict people from motorcycling, off pist skiing, personal plane flying, ice climbing, mountaineering and so many activities people enjoy and do successfully.

With any significant undertaking you assume a risk aversive attitude . What can I do to lower risks? Can I pick the lowest risk time? Can I prepare myself? What equipment is necessary to do this safely? Yes there are a few who are foolhardy but there are foolhardy individuals getting killed doing home repair. The particular activity the subject of this thread undertook is a recognized activity with a large following that has been been done every year by hundreds. There’s no information presented he was foolhardy. The repetitive posts demeaning him and the activity is misplaced IMHO.

Camo is to be congratulated. He has been been spending his time and money trying to rescue an individual he doesn’t know from death. He is engaged in the highest moral activity. Any comments downplaying his pursuit of this activity by placing responsibility on the soul needing saving is heartless. Yes the rower placed himself in extremis. Would you like the same attitude in your physicians? Your infection is due to your trip to Africa. Your fractures are due to your climbing that ladder. Your cancer is due to your lifestyle choices. So I have no or limited responsibly to help you. Just like you stop on that rural road when you see a vehicle that’s gone off as a mariner you follow the law of the sea and give aid. You’re not as judgmental as some here.

Unfortunately at this point I think rescue is unlikely. I can only hope he self rescued. The moral question is when to you stop. I’ve only had one occasion of being on the other side of this being declared overdue. We were able to self rescue. Search was terminated and we had been declared lost. So it does happen and wouldn’t give up hope for him. Can think of multiple scenarios where this can occur for him even now. That’s why I’m curious about the details of his boat and equipment, local weather at time of occurrence, and him as a person.
 
Last edited:
Hippocampus said:
Thread has been an eye opener. Some think they can judge what risks others should under take. Perhaps they would restrict people from motorcycling, off pist skiing, personal plane flying, ice climbing, mountaineering and so many activities people enjoy and do successfully.
Click to expand...


I have no problem with people taking whatever personal risk they want.


What I DO have a problem with is the public cost that their risks can incur, essentially dragging the rest of us along for the ride. A search and rescue like this surely costs in the millions of dollars. Of course we do it, because it's the right thing to do - I'm not arguing against that. But I think there must be ways for the person making the risk decision to also assume more of the cost risk.
 
Agree. With that in mind I did a quick online search for search and rescue insurance. From what I found getting coverage for the risks of trans ocean solo rowing doesn't seem likely. But, for those of use making near coastal transits or cruising relatively remote areas like BC and Ak it seems we can get coverage at a reasonable cost. It seems the responsible thing to do.
twistedtree said:
I have no problem with people taking whatever personal risk they want.


What I DO have a problem with is the public cost that their risks can incur, essentially dragging the rest of us along for the ride. A search and rescue like this surely costs in the millions of dollars. Of course we do it, because it's the right thing to do - I'm not arguing against that. But I think there must be ways for the person making the risk decision to also assume more of the cost risk.
Click to expand...
 
twistedtree said:
I have no problem with people taking whatever personal risk they want.


What I DO have a problem with is the public cost that their risks can incur, essentially dragging the rest of us along for the ride. A search and rescue like this surely costs in the millions of dollars. Of course we do it, because it's the right thing to do - I'm not arguing against that. But I think there must be ways for the person making the risk decision to also assume more of the cost risk.
Click to expand...


Well stated.


Just analyzing this one vessel, I would be shocked if anyone will reimburse the owner for his fuel and day to day running costs. And, you can dd to that the cost of keeping the delivery crew on the boat longer. Lastly, this vessel is also operating with only one fully functional engine (instead of the usual two).


I hope they do find this rower alive and well but I also hope that people undertaking these risks fully appreciate the position they force others to take on when something like this occurs.
 
twistedtree said:
I have no problem with people taking whatever personal risk they want.


What I DO have a problem with is the public cost that their risks can incur, essentially dragging the rest of us along for the ride. A search and rescue like this surely costs in the millions of dollars. Of course we do it, because it's the right thing to do - I'm not arguing against that. But I think there must be ways for the person making the risk decision to also assume more of the cost risk.
Click to expand...

On re reading post 1 it appears there is no public cost as it is volunteers searching. They may depart at any time. The search would end when there is no one left searching. The search has lasted longer than expected.
 
Hippocampus said:
Thread has been an eye opener. Some think they can judge what risks others should under take. Perhaps they would restrict people from motorcycling, off pist skiing, personal plane flying, ice climbing, mountaineering and so many activities people enjoy and do successfully.
Click to expand...

Hippocampus - given you're a medical professional, your post reminds me of an instance Jon Krakauer recounts in his book "Into Thin Air" about a fiasco on Mt Everest. A group was overcome by a severe storm - several people lost their life on the mountain. One of the guest-climbers was thought to be lost in the white-out conditions. Miraculously, he stumbles into camp severly frost bitten. Ultimately he loses at least a couple fingers. A surgeon in his early 40s, his career is effectively over. It took him a long time to recover, and then re-tool his career. I saw an interview of his wife - man, was she pissed. She didn't want him to go in the first place due to risk. As I watched her, I had the sinking feeling she'd be better off if he had died......

Definitely sobering...

Peter
 
Even with a volunteer effort, there are costs and risks. The post above mentions some of the costs.

Crossing oceans, there is most certainly risk when you divert from your course. You're out there longer, more likely to run into bad weather or mechanical problems, risk of running out of fuel, etc.

All this for one individual to set some sort of record, or to notch up another thrill?

Of course we all take risks. I don't know where to draw the line. But I think there is one.
 
While the market is probably too small, it seems to me that manufacturers of products such as EPIRBs and Inreachs should see a segment willing to pay for larger batteries (battery life). I have a self deploying EPIRB that I have replaced the batteries in. It has a pack the size of 3 AA batteries. The space the batteries sit in could literally hold 2 or more battery packs. I get the intent to reduce the product size as a marketing advantage, but I can also see the advantage of advertising a 10 day battery life. I have a cave diving backup dive light. It uses 3 C alkaline batteries and works for over 36 hours ( well past any conceivable dive).

It sure seems like there should be a segment of the market willing to pay more for expedition grade emergency equipment. I would.

Ted
 
CaptTom said:
Of course we all take risks. I don't know where to draw the line. But I think there is one.
Click to expand...

Intellectually, I agree. Emotionally, I can't imagine a world where rescue is predicated on assumed risk. I think the current system where rescue efforts avoid excessive risk to rescuers; and are based on a rescue/recovery/abandonment process. I know it's expensive, but it's a compassionate approach.

Peter
 
Last edited:
twistedtree said:
What's the criteria for ending a search like this?
Click to expand...

Twister, with ground search, it comes down to math.

If you search the areas with the highest probability of area(POA) to a high probability of detection(POD) and find nothing the search is usually over. I would guess marine search is similar.

Things can carry on, but searching areas of low POA can be futile and the powers that be will usually call it.

Leeman
 
Time, as one would expect, plays a significant part as well. If enough time transpires that the subject can no longer be expected to have survived given the circumstances the managers will end the search. Boating must have much longer time lines.
 
You can also exhaust your resources, run out of money in some cases. I'd imagine weather can be a huge factor.
 
Boy this is a sobering (and impressive) thread.
 
twistedtree said:
What's the criteria for ending a search like this?
Click to expand...

For us ?
It’s when we know we can live the rest our days and be able to reflect back on the occasion knowing we did our best, gave all we could. It’s not a simple or easy decision.

Cost to the public ? ZERO.
Tahiti, Peru and USA already have fixed daily expenses operating coordination centers. Above that no additional assets have been deployed. All efforts have been voluntary from vessels in the area.
 
I earlier stated I have no issue with the authorities preventing foolhardy individuals from placing themselves in obvious harms way and gave an example of such interdiction. Fo some years I’ve chafed under the restrictions insurance vendors have placed on me where they stipulate how many crew I must have for a given transit and they vet the crew after I do so. On one occasion this increased my risk as I lost 2 days of my window waiting for their approval. Still as much as I miss single handing and taking on more than one newbie I understand the logic. That deters much risk for those who abid by those rules.

Professional SAR labor costs are about the same whether in port or on mission. I’m sure they are higher on mission and it’s not a trivial additional expense but to what degree I don’t know . Perhaps PS does. . But fuel, additional required maintenance and wear and tear are higher on mission . So no question this is a significant cost but more importantly a significant risk to those involved. Hence I have no issue in having those who need services due to unseamanlike behavior bearing part of or all of the additional expenses. As regards determining when and how to apply this mechanism I think the classic jury of your peers should apply. For BWB sailors use sailors, for rowers use rowers, for power use power. In this setting Good Samaritans expenses should be defrayed as well.

I am always thinking as skipper my first obligation is to the safety of my ship and crew. That would inform my decision as to how long to stay on station or be involved in a search. Camo is to be commended for his efforts.

Question whether lost of freedom and or economic penalties should apply. In land life there’s too many people who are judgement proof. No meaningful assets so economic judgements are meaningless and Justice is not served. Perhaps in those circumstances and when rescuer’s loss of life occurs incarceration should occur. I don’t know. I do know the current situation is ridiculous. The next of kin suing owners of anchored boats when their drunk kin plow their usually rented PWC into a boat. Or the boats on plane creating unsafe situations around draft restricted vessels or swamping human powered ones. I don’t want big brother watching but I do want people required to take personal responsibility for their actions. What to do?
 
Last edited:
One tough decision for the person in charge of cancelling the active search....especially with relatives crying at your doorstep.

I never liked calling off a search until I knew in my heart that the pros did their job.... the problem is the mind is what knows the facts....not the heart.
 
Last edited:
CamoPirate said:
For us ?
It’s when we know we can live the rest our days and be able to reflect back on the occasion knowing we did our best, gave all we could. It’s not a simple or easy decision.

Cost to the public ? ZERO.
Tahiti, Peru and USA already have fixed daily expenses operating coordination centers. Above that no additional assets have been deployed. All efforts have been voluntary from vessels in the area.
Click to expand...




Thanks for clarifying, and thanks especially to your vessel and crew for volunteering.
 
Just noticed the Captain of the search vessel this thread originated from has posted the following;


Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023
Location: 400 nm ENE of Nuku Hiva.
Conditions: Wind E 15kn, 7’ long ocean swell, 83F, scattered clouds


Unfortunately after the search for the row boat, we were not able to locate him.



We searched the area JRCC Tahiti asked us to search, based on MOB scenario, then we transit area where currents and winds would push him if he is not rowing, then we went to an area where he may be if he had kept his current speed and heading indicated by the 2 pings from his PLB. Then we went to an area where he may be if he was rowing actively SW trying not to miss the islands.


After hundreds of miles, nothing.



Yesterday we left the west part of the search area, this morning JRCC Tahiti discontinued the search. BOLO for row boat “Smiles” still in effect.


1 ping from his PLB is all we needed to narrow the search area. Almost 2 weeks old last reported position- search area grows to a huge quadrant.


I hope he is out there rowing slowly towards the islands, and hope someone will find him soon!


Boat is good, crew is ok, we have 3 more days to Nuku Hiva.
Click to expand...


He also posted photos... one of his face (search vessel Captain) tells it all. So very sad for the last sailor / rower and his family.
 
O C Diver said:
While the market is probably too small, it seems to me that manufacturers of products such as EPIRBs and Inreachs should see a segment willing to pay for larger batteries (battery life).
Click to expand...

You can already purchase an Inreach with 8 day battery life. There is an equivalent (Yellowbrick) with three months battery life. If the rower had one of these, and was above the water, he'd have been rescued by now.

I am uncomfortable with setting limits on what people can personally risk, but I'm all in on requiring them to carry readily available equipment to make their location and rescue quick and inexpensive.
 
For me being on the inside.....

People venturing forth on vessels smaller than ocean going ships and the different rescue facilities could have a better understanding of what normally happens on each end when things go wrong.

My point is if you are 1300 miles west of Peru.....and you turn on a PLB....how long will/might it be till anyone can even start looking for you (on average)?

Those kinds of discussions may encourage adventurers to carry 2 or 3 PLBs/EPIRBs and turn them on at different times to ensure updated positions are transmitted.

This was my biggest beef with the USCG when I got out (well they basically told me to get out/retire)...my song was the USCG was getting awfully sloppy when it came to SAR and technology was changing it almost daily. There were some great changes going on...but I still felt like the budget and political pressure had the USCG headed further away.... not closer to improving SAR.

Not saying the world owes adventurers one tiny bit of support, but if they are...might as well make it mutually benificial.
 
psneeld said:
Those kinds of discussions may encourage adventurers to carry 2 or 3 PLBs/EPIRBs and turn them on at different times to ensure updated positions are transmitted.
Click to expand...

Or say one Iridium communicator which will transmit your location for months, as well as allow messaging indicating exactly what is wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom