Here is a story about a mission in San Bernadino Co., CA http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=20080317_san_gorgonio_bernardino_search_and_rescue.htm where 2 hikers were rescued after one was injured and they activated what I assume was a PLB.
The story says that CAP was notified but
QuoteThe Civil Air Patrol contacted the Sheriff's Department.
and then
QuoteThe San Bernardino Sheriff's Search and Rescue conducted the search operation alone.
Did CAP just stand down after notifying the sheriff? Did the sheriff refuse our help?
I have heard here many times of the way CA generally declines to use CAP for much of anything, but it seems strange for us to drop out after being in the loop already.
Any details?
Period outside tags - MIKE
The San Bernardino County Sheriff Department's Aero Squadron has a number of helicopters, including a H-3 (former SH-3F). They're simply better equipped to do the recovery then we are.
The rules of engagement here in California are pretty much CAP finds it and the Sheriff recovers it.
I wouldn't argue that a helicopter is capable of recovery, but it seems here that they didn't use it them that way. Finding the ELT signal should be our niche so that we can then pass it off to the chopper to go check out. However, in those counties with helicopters that need to be justified, the sherrif is probably happier to spend extra money to put hours on them.
More details in this article.
http://rimoftheworld.net/columns/neufeld/developing_story:_san
The pair had a sat phone and called for help. They knew where they were so it wasn't really a search, and the SO sent ground SAR people in. The SO helicopter tried to fly SAR people into the area but the weather kept the helo from reaching the area. Nothing for CAP to do on the ground or in the air.
There are a number of articles on the incident which all quote the same sheriff's spokesperson, but the beacon is described as a personal locator beacon, locator beacon or emergency locator transmitter depending on which news article you read.
Mike
Interesting. I wonder what the sequence of events was: Did they call first and then activate the PLB? Activate the PLB and then call? I wonder what the PLB response was compared to that they got from the cell phone --- for example, did the AF call well after the mission was underway to report an activated PLB?
Both PLBs and cell phones are going to continue to be a bigger and bigger part of the SAR world.
The articles aren't consistent on which came first, the beacon alert or the phone call. One article says that they called friends or family who notified authorities. So until there's a first person interview, we won't know for sure what happened. Unless one of the CAWG ICs on this board chimes in.
PLB missions increasing? Yes. San Bernardino SAR had its first PLB mission in January.
SBSAR PLB #1 (http://www.sbsar.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=207&Itemid=9)
Mike
Quote from: sardak on March 18, 2008, 03:21:32 AM
The articles aren't consistent on which came first, the beacon alert or the phone call. One article says that they called friends or family who notified authorities. So until there's a first person interview, we won't know for sure what happened. Unless one of the CAWG ICs on this board chimes in.
PLB missions increasing? Yes. San Bernardino SAR had its first PLB mission in January.
SBSAR PLB #1 (http://www.sbsar.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=207&Itemid=9)
Mike
I read that article, and it looks like the PLB can be activated remotely, how though? He told his roomate to set it off but his roomate was elsewhere. And then later in the article it was saying that they had signal loss from time to time because the hiker was conserving energy for the PLB.
Quote from: mynetdude on March 18, 2008, 03:25:52 AM
Quote from: sardak on March 18, 2008, 03:21:32 AM
The articles aren't consistent on which came first, the beacon alert or the phone call. One article says that they called friends or family who notified authorities. So until there's a first person interview, we won't know for sure what happened. Unless one of the CAWG ICs on this board chimes in.
PLB missions increasing? Yes. San Bernardino SAR had its first PLB mission in January.
SBSAR PLB #1 (http://www.sbsar.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=207&Itemid=9)
Mike
I read that article, and it looks like the PLB can be activated remotely, how though? He told his roomate to set it off but his roomate was elsewhere. And then later in the article it was saying that they had signal loss from time to time because the hiker was conserving energy for the PLB.
As an owner of a PLB, there is only one way to activate it. Open the cover and pull the activation ring.
There's no impact switch, no water activation switch, no remote activation switch.
All PLB's are supposed to be registered with NOAA. Part of the registration requires you to give a name and phone number of a next of kin so they can verify that you are really out in the boonies somewhere and not sitting on your butt at the computer.
The higher priced units have a GPS function that sends NOAA your location when it is activated.
Which gives AFRCC the name of the person who owns it and their location accurate to within 100 meters or so.
Which means there isn't much searching and is basically a rescue/recovery situation.
QuoteI read that article, and it looks like the PLB can be activated remotely, how though? He told his roomate to set it off but his roomate was elsewhere. And then later in the article it was saying that they had signal loss from time to time because the hiker was conserving energy for the PLB.
You misread part of the article. "Nate also sent a message to his room mate who told him to set off his PLB, which he did." Nate was the lost guy, his roommate said "Hey (insert roommate's adjective and noun describing Nate here) turn on your PLB!" Like PHall said, a PLB isn't designed to be set off remotely.
But you did read correctly that Nate turned the PLB on and off to conserve battery power.
Here are some comments from the author of this (Nate) search report posted on another lister:
"...the coordinates we were getting from the AFRCC were spread over several square miles of very rugged mountains. The PLB our subject had was also GPS enabled. Ultimately, the PLB got us into the right mountain range and with enough time we would have been able to DF his location more closely. As we were getting closer to him, he was able to get cell coverage and placed a call to us. Our subject then used his GPS to give us his exact coordinates. So even though it was a PLB rescue, there were several other factors that led to his rescue."
Mike
I think a PLB is great, but having to have a next of kin notify and confirm your identity so that your PLB will activate is kind of silly because what if your next of kin isn't available or doesn't receive your message?
There was a topic here on the forums about using PLBs in the water and someone mentioned that for the PLB to work it had to stay dry and if you are in the water you'd think there are waterproof ones that can be activated while in the water or such.
Again, the PLB has an on/off switch, it's not more complicated then that. The lost guy got a call out to his roommate, who told him to use the PLB. There is no such thing as remote activation. They have a contact number to call when they get a signal so they can find out if it's non-distress, same as 406 beacons on planes (when they're registered). Very simple.
Quote from: DNall on March 18, 2008, 06:47:45 AM
Again, the PLB has an on/off switch, it's not more complicated then that. The lost guy got a call out to his roommate, who told him to use the PLB. There is no such thing as remote activation. They have a contact number to call when they get a signal so they can find out if it's non-distress, same as 406 beacons on planes (when they're registered). Very simple.
Yes but my point is, if it requires a NOK to verify and that NOK isn't available to confirm that the person is indeed not present or has informed NOK that he is in distress then would the PLB still activate even without confirmation?
As you stated, the lost guy called his roomate and told him to use the PLB so I would assume the roomate made the call to whomever needed to be notified that the PLB would be emitting a distress signal.
it's an on/off switch. Activating & the NOK have nothing to do with one another. AFTER it's activated, RCC will call the NOK number to try & see if they know what's going on - thereby getting rid of most non-distress signals. If they can't get hold of anyone, or if they confirm the person is out in the woods (or whatever) then the mission is on. Just exactly like newer ELTs, that's all these things are in essence anyway.
Lost guy called roommate for help. Roommate told lost guy to activate his PLB. NOAA satellite sees signal & notifies AFRCC. AFRCC calls roommate who confirms guy is lost. AFRCC starts mission. I think someone just got the wording wrong somewhere in the process & confused a few people.
Quote from: DNall on March 18, 2008, 06:59:59 AM
it's an on/off switch. Activating & the NOK have nothing to do with one another. AFTER it's activated, RCC will call the NOK number to try & see if they know what's going on - thereby getting rid of most non-distress signals. If they can't get hold of anyone, or if they confirm the person is out in the woods (or whatever) then the mission is on. Just exactly like newer ELTs, that's all these things are in essence anyway.
Lost guy called roommate for help. Roommate told lost guy to activate his PLB. NOAA satellite sees signal & notifies AFRCC. AFRCC calls roommate who confirms guy is lost. AFRCC starts mission. I think someone just got the wording wrong somewhere in the process & confused a few people.
Ah ok that makes sense :) thanks.
You and DNall seem to have gotten this figured out while I was typing, but I'm not going to let this message go to the bit graveyard by not posting it.
QuoteI think a PLB is great, but having to have a next of kin notify and confirm your identity so that your PLB will activate is kind of silly because what if your next of kin isn't available or doesn't receive your message?
As everyone has said, YOU activate your PLB/EPIRB/ELT. No else does it nor can they do it.
No one has to confirm your identity. 406 MHz beacons by law are supposed to be registered with NOAA. As part of the registration, you enter your contact info and info for friends, NOK or whomever you want. When the beacon goes off, it transmits the beacon ID to the Sarsat system and the ground computer spits out all the registration information. RCC calls the numbers listed and asks whomever answers if this is an emergency, and if you're not home, where you are. This is to sort out non-distress activations from real ones.
It doesn't matter if anyone answers any of the phone numbers or not, or if your beacon is registered. Someone is going to work on getting the beacon located and shut off, and rescuing you if that's needed.
406 beacon registration can be done via the Internet and can be updated as often as the owner wants to update it. Some owners are known to go in and add trip itineraries to their registration. Here is the link to the PDF versions of the registration forms so you can see what can be entered.
https://beaconregistration.noaa.gov/rgdb/forms.htm
QuoteThere was a topic here on the forums about using PLBs in the water and someone mentioned that for the PLB to work it had to stay dry and if you are in the water you'd think there are waterproof ones that can be activated while in the water or such.
The reference was to beacons with bad antenna connections or something. PLBs should be waterproof. This is from the specs for my PLB: "Floats to avoid loss if dropped in water, exceeds RTCM waterproof requirements." It works just fine while it's floating.
Mike
I don't believe they had a BLB i think they had a Spot here is a discription
Features of Spot Satellite Messengers:
http://www.gearforadventure.com
Alert 911 - Spot sends your exact location and a distress signal to 911 call centers with notify the appropriate responders to come get you.
Check in - Spot sends a message and a link showing your exact location to your friends and family to let them know you're okay. Waypoints are stored so you or your family can view them later.
Track progress - Spot allows your contacts to track your progress in real time, complete with virtual views provided by Google Maps. All your waypoints are stored so you can review your entire route at a later date.
Ask for help - In the event of a minor mishap, spot sends a message and your location to request non emergency help from firends or family.
http://www.gearforadventure.com
look for the spot.
I thought I had read a memo from AFRCC in last year or so saying that PLB were a state search, not a federal search. ELT and EPRIB were federal search.
Yes, but that wouldn't preclude the state from asking CAP to assist given that it is right up our alley. In this case there does seem to be confusion about exactly what type of beacon was being used.
Quote from: John Bryan on March 24, 2008, 10:26:44 PM
I thought I had read a memo from AFRCC in last year or so saying that PLB were a state search, not a federal search. ELT and EPRIB were federal search.
That makes no sense, PLBs transmit on similar if not the same frequencies, CAP is also tasked for locating missing persons there shouldn't be any exceptions. Otherwise they might as well put ELT/EPRIB on the state search and then if they want CAP help they can ask.
I am not knowledgeable about how successful CAP has been locating missing hikers from the airplane so I can't comment on that however I can comment that every time I hear that our unit/state CAP is tasked to assist in locating missing persons CAP is never the one that finds them its always the sheriff or police that find them even if we have a sortie tasked in doing grid searches.
Sure I can understand that PLBs would be a state thing since we know PLBs are on the person (presumably) so we can be sure that we are looking for a person and in most if not all states require the sheriff or some other state SAR organization to take responsibility in locating these PLB/persons as I am not aware if CAP can be the first primary responsibility in doing so nor would I expect CAP to be the first either.... but then again our specialty is ELT/EPRIB which would include PLBs.
While CAP certainly COULD prosecute PLB missions, the simple fact is that the only reason the AFRCC is invovled in ELT missions is the interstate commerce aspect related to aviation. A PLB activated inside a state is not a federal concern. The feds pass the information on to the state agency responsible for that issue. If the state was smart, they would use CAP when they could to respond to these missions, but they aren't required to.
QuoteThat makes no sense, PLBs transmit on similar if not the same frequencies, CAP is also tasked for locating missing persons there shouldn't be any exceptions.
Sure I can understand that PLBs would be a state thing since we know PLBs are on the person (presumably) so we can be sure that we are looking for a person and in most if not all states require the sheriff or some other state SAR organization to take responsibility in locating these PLB/persons
PLBs are 406 MHz beacons which transmit on exactly the same freqs as other 406 MHz beacons - ELTs and EPIRBs.
River is correct in that ELTs are intended for aviation so the AFRCC is involved. EPIRBs are intended for marine use, so the Coast Guard gets involved (not always, as we know). As you say, PLBs are intended for people on land, so the MOU between AFRCC (the fed agency tasked with inland SAR) and the state determines who handles PLB incidents.
The AFRCC's position is that since PLBs are land based, they and CAP shouldn't be the primary agencies because their roles are in aviation related incidents. MOUs with states are written following that premise.
When PLBs were first proposed for legal use in the US (except Alaska where they were already legal), AFRCC used the non-distress ELT and EPIRB problem to oppose PLBs.
AFRCC's next attempt at getting out of having to deal with PLBs was more involved. It proposed that PLB alerts be sent directly to the states bypassing AFRCC entirely. Money was budgeted to provide the states with computer systems and the same exact software AFRCC uses to process alerts.
Vermont got its system and then the bottom dropped out of the program. Seems there was a higher need for DoD money for an ongoing affair in another part of the world. State agencies also raised some issues and concerns. The program was canned. As a result, AFRCC still processes the PLB alerts, but passes them off to a state agency, which in most (if not all) cases is not CAP.
As for the incident that started this thread, it was a PLB, not a Spot. An excerpt from the Sarsat incident log (http://searchandrescue.gsfc.nasa.gov/sarsatreports.html):
[The son] activated their PLB. The Air Force Rescue Coordination Center received the SARSAT alert and contacted the California Office of Emergency Services which sent out a rescue team.And here is the report from the SAR team:
Vaughn PLB Rescue (http://www.sbsar.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=225&Itemid=9)
Mike
The Spot was only mentioned as an alternative. I kind of like the spot idea, it has its usefulness :)
I never have heard about Spot until now, Spot seems to be a more inexpensive way of having a "PLB" in your possession. The question is, how effective is Spot? It doesn't transmit on 406MHz frequencies, but it CAN notify emergency services you need help and again... how? It has a built in GPS and relays your GPS position to google maps for saving for later review and once again how long does that take? 10 minutes to update? 30 minutes? Sheesh... if it takes 30 minutes for your positional check to update if you need to check in every 3hrs your updates will not appear for 3.5hrs and in 30 minutes if you are not stationery and continuing to walk you could be quite a bit a ways beyond your last checkpoint if you keep moving.
Spot uses the Global Star System
You got it the same as our SDIS system, and the latest report from an Industry watchdog group, Global star has a 27% connection rate. Thats a 73% failure to connect rate. I would hate to depend on that for my safety.
Globalstar has two systems that use the same satellites. The two-way voice and duplex data system, which CAP and Globalstar phones use, and the simplex and data and asset tracking system, which Spot uses.
Globalstar acknowledges it has problems with the two-way system. The company says it has better than 99% successful transmission rate with the simplex system. Here is the link: http://www.globalstarusa.com/en/news/update.php
The Globalstar phone problems prompted a number of potential Spot users to question Globalstar, which is how it came to light that Spot uses the simplex system.
Mike
Sorry to get even more off topic, but
Spot is sending me a unit to demo. feel free to PM me with questions, or limits that you would like to see tested,
Quote from: isuhawkeye on March 27, 2008, 11:37:28 AM
Sorry to get even more off topic, but
Spot is sending me a unit to demo. feel free to PM me with questions, or limits that you would like to see tested,
Hey you got lucky! :)
Luck has nothing to do with it. Its not like I won the lotto
Quote from: isuhawkeye on March 27, 2008, 10:12:44 PM
Luck has nothing to do with it. Its not like I won the lotto
No, but not everyone can get a demo of said product either.