[It’s a press release from the US Coast Guard, but it contains powerful reminders of the sort of thing I’m always harping on here at Navagear. Consider yourselves harped at! —Tim]

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. – The Coast Guard is still in the process of completing the tow of a 24-foot disabled vessel after late night and early morning searches resulted in the rescue of three people Sunday, approximately 40-miles northwest of Anclote Key.

At approximately 10:00 p.m. Saturday, Coast Guard watch standers at Station Sand Key received a call from a concerned friend of three men who had failed to return from a fishing trip Saturday afternoon, as expected.  Alberto Rodriguez, Raul Estrada, and Albert Valdez left for a fishing trip 60-miles northwest of Anclote Key, and were unable to return after experiencing mechanical problems with their 24-foot Proline boat.  The men were able to contact a friend to report their distress, but were not able to give their exact location.

At 10:20 p.m., watch standers at Coast Guard Sector St. Petersburg directed the launch of an HH-60 Jayhawk rescue helicopter crew from Coast Guard Air Station Clearwater, Fla., to search for the men.  Unable to locate the boat throughout the night, additional searches were continued from the air station this morning, with the launch of an HC-130 Hercules flight crew.  At approximately 8:45 a.m., a 47-foot motor life boat was launched from Station Sand Key, after search crews aboard the HC-130 airplane spotted a flare set off by the three men, approximately 40 miles northwest of Anclote Key.

The vessel is being towed to Coast Guard Station Sand Key, and the three men are reportedly in good condition.

"This is a good example of why all boaters should file float plans and have several signaling devices available to them,” said Capt. Timothy Close, commander, Coast Guard Sector St. Petersburg.  "Float plans work, and signaling devices work.  We were able to find them largely because they filed a float plan, and brought means of communication and signaling devices with them."

The Coast Guard reminds boaters to follow these 10 simple steps to be safe and responsible on the water:
1.   Always wear your life jacket.
2.   Avoid mixing alcohol and boating.
3.   Check your flares, fire extinguisher and other safety equipment to be certain it is in good condition and up-to-date.  The Coast Guard Auxiliary and U.S. Power Squadrons offer free vessel safety checks that can help identify these or any other potential programs.  Know your boat and its passengers.
4.  Familiarize yourself with an online weather service so it becomes a routine part of your pre-departure planning. Knowing potential conditions before you go makes float planning easier.  The National Weather Service broadcasts marine weather forecasts regularly.  Tune your VHF marine radio to 162.4 MHz or log onto the National Weather Service website at:www.nws.noaa.gov.
5.  Tell a friend, family member or marina harbormaster where you are going and file a float plan.  If you change plans, let them know.
6.  Purchase an emergency positioning indicating radio beacon, or EPIRB.  Register it with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.  Registration is mandatory, improves response and reduces false alarms.  It can also be completed online at www.beaconregistration.noaa.gov.
7.  Keep updated navigational charts on your boat and use them.   
8.  Register your marine radio and obtain a free MMSI number that is assigned to a DSC radio.
9.  Shut off your engines when approaching swimmers or divers.
10.  Take at least one certified boating safety course.

John Konrad has an update on eLoran over at his excellent gCaptain website. His focus is on commercial mariners, but the coverage of navigational technology such as GPS and Loran is equally relevant for recreational boaters.

Being generally of an impatient nature, I’ll skip right to his conclusion:

Next Steps

The mariner is facing a few critical battles in the electronic navigation front. With their adoption of Web 2.0, the deployment of Rescue 21 and a myriad of other, forward thinking, initiatives the USCG is taking a leading role in the development of new technology aimed at maritime safety but, as encouraging as their work towards using new technology to keep safe is, questions still arise within the USCG on the necessity of  critical systems. You need not look further than gCaptain’s post titled “Vessel Search And Rescue – Should LRIT Replace Amver?” to realize the USCG, IMO and others are struggling with questions that seem rhetorical to the average mariner. It is our job to help guide the decisions, let our thoughts be known and avoid failures in imagination.

Let’s support the adoption of eLoran and continue dreaming of reasons for its use. Sure it is not absolutely needed to safely operate ships and competent mariners will continue to learn traditional navigation but, like GPS today, future mariners will view eLoran as a tool they couldn’t possibly live without.

[Read more...]

The Coast Guard Compass has this item today, by “athorsson”, and Navagear wants to help spread the word:

I would really like to use some strong language to talk about how unsavory I find hoax callers but it is probably impolite so I will leave it at this: hoax callers leave a lot to be desired as people and should find themselves a hobby that doesn’t put the lives of others at risk.

Why are hoax callers substandard in their choice of activities? (Again trying to be polite in my choice of words)

Before I go any further into this post let me make it clear hoax calling is a felony. The Studds Act was passed in November 1990. This act states that a false distress call is a class D Felony, and a convicted hoax caller is subject to a fine of up to $250,000 and up to six years in prison. The caller might also have to reimburse the Coast Guard for the cost of the search. The caller is also subject to an FCC civil fine of up to $8,000. Even if a child makes the distress call, the parents are ultimately responsible.

Why is hoax calling such a big deal? Well, if the Coast Guard is using all these assets trying to search for a fake caller, what happens when there is someone in real danger and we have to split our attention between two cases…when one isn’t even a real case? Don’t you think it matters to focus our attention on the people actually in danger? So are hoax callers so bored they have to make things up and potentially keep someone else from being saved to entertain themselves? Pathetic.

(more…)

An interesting item by Nicholas Thompson over at Wired magazine’s Epicenter blog:

There’s news bubbling up about a potential crisis in our GPS systems. According to a new GAO report, a bunch of the satellites up there guiding our cars, geo-shagging applications, and soldiers might go kaput soon. If they fall, the report implies, the sky falls.

For starters, how big a crisis is this? Not so bad. We really only need 24 satellites working in order to have assured accuracy, and there are 31 operational in the current constellation, with more launches planned. The odds of seven or more failing before replacements get into orbit is rather low. The satellites may be reaching the end of their expected lifespans, but military equipment often lasts much longer than its expected lifespan.

But in any case here’s one thought-experiment for our budget-constrained times: what if the federal government taxed all civilian providers of GPS gear? If you build a device that pulls information from these satellites that Uncle Sam put up, you pay money to Uncle Sam. (Monitoring use would be hard, which is why it would be better to tax devices.)

Revenues could then be dumped into programs to build replacements or to keep funding for Loran, the ground-based system that backs up GPS that Obama has considered cutting. Right now, GPS information beemed down from our satellites is a massive government giveaway. In a time of massive deficits, is it crazy to consider changing that?

Comments from the marine navigation community?

I hope I’m not about to poke a stick into a hornet’s nest. Let’s be clear that I’m just trying to figure out what’s going on. I don’t have any particular axe to grind here.

In case you’re confused, check out my original efforts to clarify the situation:

• Whither Loran?
• Whither Loran redux: Clarity from the Coast Guard

The rest of this post comes to us courtesy of CrossRate Technology.

Newly released report on eLoran refutes recent comments and decisions by Department of Homeland Security officials.

Windham, ME – May 12, 2009 – The recently released Independent Assessment Team (IAT) report, chaired by Dr. Bradford Parkinson, the father of GPS, and other industry leaders, concludes “… the IAT unanimously recommends that the U.S. Government complete the eLoran upgrade and commit to eLoran as the national backup to GPS for 20 years.”  The IAT reached this conclusion by evaluating the need for a GPS backup then evaluating all available or potential alternatives.  The IAT also performed a “deep dive” on the costs of the Loran system and a transition to eLoran, and found the infrastructure enhancements to eLoran are 70% complete and the cost to complete the rollout is less expensive than decommissioning the Loran system.  This report is in direct opposition to recent comments made by the Department of Homeland Security that terminating Loran will save $190 M over five years and more research is needed to evaluate the need and solution for a GPS backup.

The IAT evaluated the need for a GPS backup and concluded, “that eLoran be completed and retained as the national backup system for critical safety of life, national and economic security and quality of life applications currently reliant on position, time, and/or frequency from GPS.”  The IAT evaluated multiple systems to backup GPS and concluded, “eLoran is the only cost-effective backup for national needs; it is completely interoperable with and independent of GPS, with different propagation and failure mechanisms, …  It is a seamless backup, and its use will deter threats to US national and economic security by disrupting (jamming) GPS reception.”

(more…)

[This information is provided by the U.S. Coast Guard Office of Search and Rescue.]

A Television Can’t Save Your Life…
A 406 MHz EPIRB, PLB or ELT Can!

Most of you probably already know that starting in February 2009, over-the-air television broadcasts will be going digital in the United States. This means that if you want to continue to receive free television reception, you must have a newer TV that has a digital tuner or you need to get a digital-to-analog converter box.

But, did you know that there is a critical piece of life-saving equipment that will also be affected with a change from analog to digital transmissions?

If you own or use an emergency distress beacon on a boat or on a plane, you should know that starting on February 1, 2009, the older beacons that transmit only an analog signal (121.5 or 243 MHz) will no longer be “heard” by search and rescue satellites. Just like checking your TV, you need to ensure that your distress beacon is capable of transmitting a digital signal (406 MHz) in order for it to be recognized.

(more…)

Apparently, I misinterpreted the new AIS rules recommendations recently issued by the US Coast Guard in my post yesterday. The US Coast Guard’s AIS Regulatory Project Officer, Jorge Arroyo, who I met at the eNav conference last month, wishes to set me straight.

For my part, I don’t mind one bit! In fact, I appreciate the feedback.

That recommendations document isn’t the easiest thing to comprehend, so it’s entirely possible that I misunderstood what I read. And if I got it wrong, it’s likely other people will misinterpret it, as well, so this is an opportunity to enhance the quality of the public discussion.

Here are Mr. Arroyo’s comments:

Greetings,
I would like to commend Mad Mariner LLC and Tim Flanagan, in particular, for your recent post—http://madmariner.com/blogs/navagear/21595—informing your readership of our proposed AIS rulemaking. 

I would also like to highlight that some of the information therein is inaccurate, and exhort you to correct the matter at your soonest opportunity.  Our proposal rule does not mandate AIS on domestic recreational vessels, regardless of the passengers on board—please view §164.46(b) [emphasis added] which states:

(b) AIS carriage. The following vessels must have…(AIS):
(1) * * *
(2) * * *
(3) A self-propelled vessel carrying 50 or more passengers, engaged in commercial service;
(4) A vessel carrying more than 12 passengers for hire and capable of speeds in excess of 30 knots;

Once again thanks for spreading the word, hope to see your comments on it soon.
Happy Holidays,
Jorge Arroyo
AIS Regulatory Project Officer
Office of Navigation Systems
U.S. Coast Guard
2100 2nd Street SW
Washington, DC 20593

I’ve had the boat “on the hard” for several weeks, doing some repairs and engine maintenance. So I haven’t had a chance to do any further “underway” testing of my new Shine Micro RadarPlus AIS-BX Class B AIS transceiver.

Until this past weekend, that is, when C-Brats (the C-Dory online owners community) held its annual Lake Washington/Ship Canal Cruise. My friend Merv, who has an ACR Nauticast Class B AIS transceiver installed aboard his boat Kingfisher II, spent some time on Saturday peeking at the internet, and here are some screen captures he sent my way.

These prove that my AIS unit is installed and transmitting properly. I didn’t have any particular doubts, but it’s still nice to have it confirmed!

Now that Two Lucky Fish has a vessel record over at MarineTraffic.com, anybody can upload pictures of her!

Speaking of AIS, a new set of proposed AIS carriage requirements from the US Coast Guard have just been posted. Thanks to Panbo for the link. Among other things, these recommendations recommend AIS (Class A or Class B) be required aboard certain smaller commercial vessels and all passenger vessels (commercial or not!) carrying more than 50 passengers.

We propose to omit the distinction of ‘‘for hire’’ because we believe all passengers, whether paying or not, are subject to a similar safety risk and thus deserve the navigation safety and maritime security benefit afforded to them by AIS.

This is the first time, to my knowledge, that any class of recreational vessel under 300 gross tons in the United States has ever been required to carry AIS. I doubt it will be the last.

[This information provided by the manufacturer. —Tim]

FORT LAUDERDALE, FL; DECEMBER 4, 2008.

ACR Electronics, Inc. is notifying dealers, distributors and customers that a small percentage of GlobalFix iPRO EPIRBs may not activate manually and is voluntarily issuing a limited recall notice.

Through its ongoing quality assurance processes, ACR had discovered that some of the witness seal tabs used in the manual activation of the GlobalFix  iPRO required the application of excessive force to put the switch into its correct position. The water activation feature works separately and is not affected by the manual switch.  According to ACR, the manual switch assembly will require re-working on a very limited range of GlobalFix  iPRO units shipped to market. No other ACR EPIRB units are affected.

(more…)

That’s a somewhat inflammatory headline, ain’t it? So let me point out, right off the bat, that I’m engaging in a bit of hyperbole.

As regular readers already know, I love the Coast Guard, and I love the Vessel Traffic Service. Heck, in Puget Sound, VHF channel 14 is usually a lot more informative than channel 16!

But currently, VTS personnel don’t “see” Class B AIS targets on their plotters. Is that really possible?

Well, that’s been my experience while testing my own Class B equipment, and at the recent eNavigation conference in Seattle I was able to confirm that my experience is consistent with the current state of VTS technology.

According to Commander Brian Tetreault, chief of the U.S. Coast Guard’s Vessel Traffic Services Division, the VTS AIS base stations receive the Class B messages along with all the AIS messages. But the VTS system that processes these messages does not currently have the capability to display them.

“We hope to have this capability sometime in the next 6-12 months,” says Commander Tetreault.

At least that explains why Seattle Traffic couldn’t spot me during my testing, while the nearby ferry could. Thanks, Commander, for straightening this out!