HMS Bounty in trouble...

[casey1999]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Thanks to MarkofSeaLife for finding that RITA site. I think you realize by now that the data show that people FEEL safer because they ARE safer. A few may take foolish risks, but that data seem to show that those fools are in the minority, since the incidents are dropping.

I remember when people claimed that seat belts caused drivers to drive more recklessly because of the false security that they provided. The data have also proven that myth to be wrong.

This is why I often ask people to show me the data when they state certain "facts." A close look at the data usually reveals the truth, and sometimes it can be surprising. I think that was the case here.

TakeFive,
I found the RITA site and MarkofSeaLife gave his interpretation of it. See my post #838.

[casey1999]

Originally Posted by Minnewaska

While I agree that immersion suits will substantially increase your life expectancy in water below body temp, the above is not correct. One will survive nearly a day in 80 degree water, but drops exponentially as water temp drops. 2hr survival is around the 50 degree mark, depending on conditions. Still the suit provides buoyancy, visibility and extended exposure even further.

If I'm going into 77 degree water in the middle of the ocean with no idea when I'll be rescued. I'll take the suit!!

Here's a USCG presentation on ditching and survival skills. Life expectancy is on page 12.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...5h4y__-so_8mLw

Note those survival times (as stated in the presentation) are in "good" conditions. At night with high winds, waves, and spray, the survival times should be reduced by quite a bit. Also the survival times as stated in the presentation should be reduced by 30% if you are not just floating motionless. In high seas you would probably be moving quite a bit just to get clear air.

[Minnewaska]

Originally Posted by casey1999

Note those survival times (as stated in the presentation) are in "good" conditions. At night with high winds, waves, and spray, the survival times should be reduced by quite a bit. Also the survival times as stated in the presentation should be reduced by 30% if you are not just floating motionless. In high seas you would probably be moving quite a bit just to get clear air.

Good points. I did say, depending on conditions.

However, you may drown from exhaustion in 80 deg water in two hours, but its pretty unlikely to be from hypothermia that quickly.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by casey1999

TakeFive,
I found the RITA site and MarkofSeaLife gave his interpretation of it. See my post #838.

Oops, sorry. iI had originally credited you but changed it because I saw his link and couldn't find yours.

[TakeFive]

Only on Sailnet would someone find fault with wearing too much safety gear when floating in th. ocean in a hurricane. lol

By the way, I thought Bounty's fenders were too small, and they had the wrong brand of anchor.

[JulieMor]

For all the comments that have been made on this thread, there is an obvious concern for safety and an huge importance placed on common sense that is either stated directly or is an underlying factor to the statements given.

Who says recreational boaters are dummies?

[PCP]

Originally Posted by MarkofSeaLife

Fortunately i can help you out.
RITA | BTS | Table 2-49: U.S. Coast Guard Search and Rescue Statistics, Fiscal Year

As posted earlier in this thread and great stats too!
From 1980 till now the drop is about 2/3. I.e. 30 years ago there were three times the number of rescues by the coast guard in those statistics provided.

Half as many people dies nowadays as 30 years ago.

Yes in what regard to rescues not in what regards deep water boat rescues that imply search time, considerable time travel and lots of resources.

I saw those and understood that they are talking about all rescues and did not discriminate the ones that are not on the beach or very neat the coast, with swimmers, small dingy or fishermen that fall on the rocks and so on. I wonder how many were due to these circumstances and how many were due to deep sea rescues and then I saw that the British coast guard, that has similar statistics, have a map that is enlightening about where the vast majority of those accidents and rescues take place:



That was not the kind of accidents I was talking about or the ones that interested me, than I keep on searching and the best I could find in what regards that kind of accidents was this chart, that I have already posted:



Regards

Paulo

[casey1999]

Originally Posted by PCP

Yes in what regard to rescues not in what regards deep water boat rescues that imply search time, considerable time travel and lots of resources.

I saw those and understood that they are talking about all rescues and did not discriminate the ones that are not on the beach or very neat the coast, with swimmers, small dingy or fishermen that fall on the rocks and so on. I wonder how many were due to these circumstances and how many were due to deep sea rescues and then I saw that the British coast guard, that has similar statistics, have a map that is enlightening about where the vast majority of those accidents and rescues take place:



That was not the kind of accidents I was talking about or the ones that interested me, than I keep on searching and the best I could find in what regards that kind of accidents was this chart, that I have already posted:



Regards

Paulo

Paulo,
Seems your data shows a lot more rescues are occuring. What is the difference between the red and blue bars, legend is partly cut off.
Regards

[PCP]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Sorry, but you're playing games with the numbers. The chart you show is not total number of SAR missions, it's the number that involve the Cpspas-Sarsat system. Basically the chart shows growth in the implementation of that system, not a growth of the overall number of SAR missions.

The RITA data that MarkofSeaLife linked shows quite definitively that there has been a dramatic reduction of SAR missions

....
So while it may initially seem plausible that "false security" of electronics is leading to more accidents, it is not true. In fact, the statistics would seem to show the opposite - that the new technology is making people safer and helping them to avoid accidents. And when accidents happen, the likelihood of successful rescue goes up.

So maybe we should tone down the rhetoric a bit. Safety is getting better, not worse. Fewer incidents are happening. Fewer people are dying. Technology is a good thing.

I'll repeat my prior suggestion that TV shows, proliferation of camcorders and camera phones, and the instantaneous publicity of incidents by the blogosphers makes it SEEM like there are more incidents, but the data prove that there are actually fewer.

As I have explained on my previous post those statistics relate to all SAR missions and the vast majority had nothing to do with cruising boats in deep water.

On other hand the statistics I wave posted regards Epirb deployment, the vast majority regarding boats or ships and even if you cannot differentiate ships, fishing boats and pleasure crafts, I am quite sure that ships and fishing boats are not having more accidents but lesser, so if the numbers are increasing that can only mean more deep water pleasure boat accidents.

Regarding pleasure boats carrying an epirb offshore that is mandatory by law in almost all (I din't know if it is mandatory in the UK) European countries for more than 10 years. I don't know if it is mandatory in the US but nobody in its right mind will cross an Ocean or make a long passage without one so I guess those numbers are reliable in what regards an increase in accidents.

Let me point out that I consider electronic aids a very good help to navigate. That is not the point. The point is that I consider that help makes many to consider that now it is easy to sail to any place and that can induce a false sense of security that leads unprepared sailors to attempt passage that they would not have tried if they had do not that help. But the sea has not changed and is as dangerous with electronics or without electronics. Electronics just made more easy to navigate, not more easy to sail in bad weather.

Regards

Paulo

[MarkofSeaLife]

Do we have to quote people whole post?

Just the lines that are relevant and not their photos. It slows down the loading of pages for cruisers out there will slow internet.


Thanks!