75% of Duke's generation mix is coal or natural gas. So, rather than offset any of that base load with a 2.2 GW nuclear facility, they'll supplement demand growth and cover peaks with solar and keep burning the coal and gas. It's cheaper and they get to wave the green flag etc.
Gas right now is so cheap and you can get 10 year contracts so it is killing any other generating source economically.
Power sources should really be categorized in one of three classes: 1. Flexible on-demand (natural gas, hydro, battery storage); 2. Base load (nuclear, coal); 3. Uncontrolled generation power (wind, solar).
They already are: Baseload - plants that you run full bore 24x7 Mid - cover the fluctuations between base and below peak Peakers - plants that can come online quickly to satisfy demand during peak hours.
all the utilities has to do is install batteries for incoming solar generated power, simpler and faster to bring that online when needed.
And then charge those selling power back to the utility for the capital and O&M costs of the batteries; rather than charge all consumers so a few can sell power.
I think I can still write faster with less error using Graffiti than with onscreen keyboards.
Same here. It was easy to learn and didn't require you to look where you were writing. My Pilot was great at what it was designed to do - keep contacts, notes, and calendaring readily available. I also had an expense program that let me keep track of expenses , export them as a.csv and then directly upload into my companies expense accounting system; saving me hours of time. I had a VII that even allowed you to email but the battery life was horrendous. Sure, todays smartphones do that and more but I could drop my Pilot and not have it break or get damaged form being in my pocket. It could even had been a neat little Gameboy like gaming device, in its later color iterations, had Namco or Nintendo been more foresighted; as some games developed for PalmOS showed.
But he didn't agree. That's kind of the point. Also, once you sell a vehicle to someone else, it should be your responsibility to recover any items you may have left in it at the time of transfer. Trying to force the buyer into paying to return property he didn't even know he had is repulsive. The dealership should be sued into insolvency just for trying.
Exactly. They should have asked her to bring in the car so they can remove the device. failing to do that they are at the mercy of her goodwill as to when she can, if she will, bring the car in to remove it. I do not know about the law in Canada, but I bet she would have a decent chance of winning a lawsuit for the damages it caused her while the car was inoperable.
If it is to teach them programming concepts such as sorts, loops, etc. then I'd go for a simple language like BASIC. The language is important since you are trying to get them to learn how to think about problems, not be able to write code in a specific language.
If it is to teach them to program in a specific language I'd ask why do this at their age? It's likely whatever language they learn will be outdated by the time they finish school anyway.
Even if it is clear that the system was at fault and that no exploit was used, that person would not get to keep the goods over here.
But would they be charged with a crime?
If they exploited the flaw over and over and over again, then I would think yes. Just like the couple allegedly did in TFS.
Exactly. I f they stumbled onto a "great deal" once and bought it I would say they shouldn't be charged with a crime. However, find over 250k$ of "good deals" (as their lawyer claims) crosses the line into criminal, IMHO.
I find it very surprising that the black boxes in airplanes don't communicate with a satellite in this day and age. The technology has been around for 30 years at this point.
I would guess making a black box that could survive a crash and still have antennas that can communicate with a satelite despite being underwater or buried in debris would be a bit of a challenge.
How easy is it to turn bitcoins into Euros, Pounds or Dollars? A cursory search shows limits of around 3000K $ per day, so even 300K worth would take about 3 months, and 3 million $ around 3 years. It would seem to be a forced buy and hold investment with a lot of downside risk if it crashes; or even if a lot of people start cashing out which would drive the price down. Is there an easy way to turn say 1 million of bitcoin to Euros, Pounds or Dollars? You want to get out before a large sell order drops the price significantly. can exchanges cover say 1000 people pulling out 3000k at once? Will they commit to the price at the time of the request or recalculate the value due to a price drop?
Also, a tax break is not an investment, it is simply fore-going funds they wouldn't get otherwise.
Tax breaks mean that the public costs involved in starting up that new plant have to be borne by other taxpayers, other companies.
You may not care about the free market, but this is a case of the government picking winners and losers.
Exactly, and for government the most important things is the winners are the incumbent politicians the next time tehy are up for election. Thus, all the "We created X jobs..." when all they really did was throw a bunch of money at a company that was going to build somewhere, and may leave when a better offer comes around.
The "break even" in TFA is only based on tax revenue. Governments don't exist to collect taxes, they exist to serve the people. If you look at the overall gain in secondary business and employment the break even is way sooner than two decades.
A lot depends on how many people they actually employ and where they live. If the live across the border much of that money will wind up there. While it s true that secondary economic effects will reduce the payback time the tax breaks will be a, if not the, most significant impact on the return.
None the less, these tax breaks are really just a prisoner's dilemma. State offer them because other states offer them, but they would all be better off if no one offered them, and factories were optimally placed based on other factors. We would likely all be better off if there was a federal law to ban this nonsense.
I agree that it is just a race to the bottom for localities. However, there will never be a Federal law because Congress likes to play the same game by brining in "directed spending" (i.e. pork barrel spending) to encourage companies to locate somewhere and bring in jobs. That doesn't create jobs all it does is pick winners and losers.
One favorite drill a friend ran was to tell the crew GPS was down - now navigate for the next few hours the old way. Lots of head scratching and moaning when he did that. There's a lot to be said for keeping proven, if time consuming, skills sharp for when all the latest stuff goes south.
With good charts-which any naval or merchant ship should have-if the GPS goes out couldn't you just take your last known position and use your heading, speed, and time to plot out a decently accurate idea of where you are anyway? It might not be accurate enough closer to shore but in deep water it should be serviceable until GPS is restored.
Sure, dead reckoning can be used,in fact that's what we did to plot our projected position, but its accuracy dwindles over time, due to currents, course and speed changes, etc. I would not want to have to use it to ensure we hit a known position at some point in he future.
Until we develop a way to block, or spoof, the sun and the stars there is a reliable and accurate backup for navigation. You need a precise time piece, sextant, nautical almanac, and charts along with a mariner who knows how to shoot the stars. The Nav on a frigate I was on did a daily celestial fix to double check our position with the radio fix. he could get a set of readings very quickly so the line of position produced a very tiny box for our fix. I'd bet my life on his fix before the radio fix.
The downside is you need to be trained and practice to keep sharp. I used to be good at it but couldn't get a fix to save my life now. With computers you could input the readings and get it to give you lat/long so there is no need to draw LOP on a paper chart. In a pinch you could send that out as you position.
Automation has caused mariners to lose skills that served our forebears well. One favorite drill a friend ran was to tell the crew GPS was down - now navigate for the next few hours the old way. Lots of head scratching and moaning when he did that. There's a lot to be said for keeping proven, if time consuming, skills sharp for when all the latest stuff goes south.
For example any driver who dropped off and came back when surge pricing started could simply not be given ride opportunities until the surge ended.
Another way of looking at this is that some of the drivers are unwilling to drive when fares are at "normal" price but figure it is worth it when surge pricing is available. Perhaps there is not even collusion in this and Uber is spinning it as collusion to introduce new rules...
But then, if those drivers were not willing to drive without surge pricing, changing the rules will not make them more willing to drive when fares are low.
Possibly, but the drivers in TFA basically said they are colluding to drive up fares. It is in Uber's interest to stop such behavior; which is different from drivers individually, at varying times, decide not to drive.
we wouldn't be having this conversation. The drivers would have stopped doing this when they saw it didn't work. It worked because most Uber drivers also drive for Lyft since neither company pays enough to make it to your next rent payment.
While it may work short term I doubt it is sustainable long term strategy, at best it will work in areas with few drivers who can maintain the agreement. Otherwise, drivers who don't sign off to drive up pricing will get the higher fares; which increases the pressure on drivers to either not collude or jump back in before the others do. In addition, Uber can adapt it's software to identify such actions and make them unprofitable. As for transparency, as people learn that Google offers fare comparison as well as booking from maps; gaming the system will simply drive down demand as riders chose the other service or, as a link in TFA says, rides will learn to simply wait a few minutes until the surge passes. I've done that and seen prices drop to a third of the surge price in minutes. Can the drivers pan work? In localized areas probably for a while, is it scalable, no.
Sorry braw, but the free market fails here. That's why we regulated cab companies in the first place.
While cab regulation has benefits for the rider such as vehicle and driver safety requirements, fixed fares, etc it also benefits drivers and owners by limiting competition by controlling the number of licenses, does not ensure your driver will pad the fare by taking a longer route (scubas often happens in Ls Vegas on trips to the airport), and sometime results in monopoly franchises at high traffic areas.
Should Uber be regulated more? Sure, but brah, regulation is not a panacea either.
Lookee! It's a market, a free market for transportation! Lookee, pricing is based on supply and demand! Lookee, inside actors are manipulating the market to their advantage! It's like Wall Street in microcosm.
Yup. People learn how to use the system to their advantage. One problem with this sytem is Google. If you set a destination and get directions under hire it will show Lyft and Uber fares so if ine has surge and not the other guess who will get the business? Fare transparency overcomes collusion in this case. Unless most drivers drive for both and do this in both cases it is not a good long term strategy. In addition, Uber and Lyft could monitor the drivers and penalize collusive behavior. For example any driver who dropped off and came back when surge pricing started could simply not be given ride opportunities until the surge ended. Thus drivers who didn't game the system would get the benefits while those who do lose money from their collusion.
Exactly. The stories of his safe cracking in Surely You're Joking... are great. That book and they follow-on should be required reading for anyone interested in hacking, in the old school meaning of the term.
\ But in the EPIRB realm things are reversed, the vast majority are outright false alarms, with only a few legitimate emergencies. It's easy to accidentally press a button on an EPIRB, some are also set up to automatically activate if immersed in water (which can happen accidentally due to poor maintenance) or when turned upside down (easily done when maintaining the unit) and many simply have mechanical failures that activate them.
Funny story: I was at a watch store looking at a Breathing with a beacon and the salesperson kept repeating not to pull the button. I said i get it we don't want a resume helicopter above the mall and he said he had a customer that activated the beacon.
It's much harder to accidentally hold the microphone button down and repeat the word "mayday"
Which is what I found confusing about the article - I would guess most calls are made via radio and not a phone. We used to monitor the distress frequency when at sea just for such purposes.
an EPIRB doesn't summon the boat half a mile away from you to come and help. EPIRBs are a godsend offshore, or in truly isolated areas, but they're not a substitute for making that call over the radio. On the water, everyone be they coastguard or not, is expected to respond to a distress call if feasible and safe to do so. One of the "good" things about being a slow sailboat is that we're rarely in a position to respond, but over the years I've done so twice. In one case, it was to bring in a disabled runabout that was lost in a fog bank with a disabled engine (we just happened onto him), and the other was picking up a kite surfer who was stranded a mile offshore with his lines all in tangles and kite under water.
Basically, it's not just the coast guard who responds, but any available boat or mariner. If I ever wind up in trouble, I hope that someone else will come and give me a hand.
All good points, and certainly any mariner should respond to a distress call; and I agree there is no substitute for voice calls. Auto beacons are great as set and forget tools but as you and others point out they are a one way communication. However, they would provide validation that a voice call was coming from an actual vessel and not some prankster as you could verify the identification and the location.
So, no, you do NOT risk your life using an EPIRB as the only means of communicating that you are in an emergency. The EPIRB is a BACKUP and last resort for when other means are not available or don't work.
I would fully agree. My point was vessels ought to be required to have one as a means of communication; even if it is a backup. In addition, it would help validate a voice call from a vessel in distress.
EPIRB is great, but it's slow compared to a voice call, doesn't transmit what the emergency is, and doesn't allow for any confirmation that help is on the way, or allow rescuers to communicate with you.
I've done SAR response for EPIRBs, they work, but a voice call will always get you help faster.
Good points. I would guess having an EPIRB broadcasting the need for help would validate a concurrent voice call.
Marine VHF already has a lot of this built in in the newer models.
"Distress" buttons that send your GPS location and your MMSI ID which tells the Coasties who you are, your emergency contacts, and the name of your vessel.
The larger problem is that there's no requirement to have a radio that meets this spec or an MMSI number or have your MMSI and radio paired.
IMHO, the Coast Guard should start mandating this stuff and any vessel undergoing a boarding safety check should have this checked right after the check for life vests and fire extinguishers
I agree. At some point people need to upgrade to the latest safety gear; especially since a new radio is not that expensive, especially when you consider other upkeep costs.It boogles my mind people will spend a few hundred on beer for a trip on the water but not the same for a critical piece of safety gear.
and before checking that the macerator discharge seacock is secure.
Me too! As an avid boater I don't appreciate the possibility of being put in danger because some prankster caused the development of a system like this. If I am stuck on the water, in danger, I want the coast guard to come to my rescue. I definitely don't want them wasting time trying to determine if I am an actual boater in distress or a prankster. When a boat is sinking or on fire time is of the essence!!
That's what an EPIRB is for; especially since the cost of one has gotten to the point where even smaller craft can have one onboard. In an emergency, I'd like to know my position is being sent to rescue craft while I deal with emergency. Personally, pranksters like those mentioned need to face large fines and long person sentences for endangering not only mariners in trouble but reduce crews who go out on false alarms. A friend flew SAR for the USCG, often in bad weather because tats when emergencies happen, to have him and his crew place themselves in danger so some punk gets their kicks makes me think an appropriate punishment would be to put them out to sea alone on a boat in extremis in bad weather and let them try to convince the USCG it isn't a prank this time.
While I concede they are technically a greater risk, it is slight and finding quality employees is rare enough I couldn't imagine this would be an legitimate issue in almost any hiring decisions. It is much bigger risk to put a sub-optimal person in the role than it is they might leave in 3 years instead of 20. IMHO that is.
It depends on the pattern. A new job every two or three years along with upward moves is fine, a new one every year and some laterals over 5 years goes straight into the trash.
Slashdot Mirror
75% of Duke's generation mix is coal or natural gas. So, rather than offset any of that base load with a 2.2 GW nuclear facility, they'll supplement demand growth and cover peaks with solar and keep burning the coal and gas. It's cheaper and they get to wave the green flag etc.
Gas right now is so cheap and you can get 10 year contracts so it is killing any other generating source economically.
Power sources should really be categorized in one of three classes: 1. Flexible on-demand (natural gas, hydro, battery storage); 2. Base load (nuclear, coal); 3. Uncontrolled generation power (wind, solar).
They already are: Baseload - plants that you run full bore 24x7 Mid - cover the fluctuations between base and below peak Peakers - plants that can come online quickly to satisfy demand during peak hours.
all the utilities has to do is install batteries for incoming solar generated power, simpler and faster to bring that online when needed.
And then charge those selling power back to the utility for the capital and O&M costs of the batteries; rather than charge all consumers so a few can sell power.
I think I can still write faster with less error using Graffiti than with onscreen keyboards.
Same here. It was easy to learn and didn't require you to look where you were writing. My Pilot was great at what it was designed to do - keep contacts, notes, and calendaring readily available. I also had an expense program that let me keep track of expenses , export them as a .csv and then directly upload into my companies expense accounting system; saving me hours of time. I had a VII that even allowed you to email but the battery life was horrendous. Sure, todays smartphones do that and more but I could drop my Pilot and not have it break or get damaged form being in my pocket. It could even had been a neat little Gameboy like gaming device, in its later color iterations, had Namco or Nintendo been more foresighted; as some games developed for PalmOS showed.
But he didn't agree. That's kind of the point. Also, once you sell a vehicle to someone else, it should be your responsibility to recover any items you may have left in it at the time of transfer. Trying to force the buyer into paying to return property he didn't even know he had is repulsive. The dealership should be sued into insolvency just for trying.
Exactly. They should have asked her to bring in the car so they can remove the device. failing to do that they are at the mercy of her goodwill as to when she can, if she will, bring the car in to remove it. I do not know about the law in Canada, but I bet she would have a decent chance of winning a lawsuit for the damages it caused her while the car was inoperable.
If it is to teach them programming concepts such as sorts, loops, etc. then I'd go for a simple language like BASIC. The language is important since you are trying to get them to learn how to think about problems, not be able to write code in a specific language.
If it is to teach them to program in a specific language I'd ask why do this at their age? It's likely whatever language they learn will be outdated by the time they finish school anyway.
Even if it is clear that the system was at fault and that no exploit was used, that person would not get to keep the goods over here.
But would they be charged with a crime?
If they exploited the flaw over and over and over again, then I would think yes. Just like the couple allegedly did in TFS.
Exactly. I f they stumbled onto a "great deal" once and bought it I would say they shouldn't be charged with a crime. However, find over 250k$ of "good deals" (as their lawyer claims) crosses the line into criminal, IMHO.
I find it very surprising that the black boxes in airplanes don't communicate with a satellite in this day and age. The technology has been around for 30 years at this point.
I would guess making a black box that could survive a crash and still have antennas that can communicate with a satelite despite being underwater or buried in debris would be a bit of a challenge.
3000 K$ / day = 3,000,000.00 $ / day? :)
Gotta love typos....
How easy is it to turn bitcoins into Euros, Pounds or Dollars? A cursory search shows limits of around 3000K $ per day, so even 300K worth would take about 3 months, and 3 million $ around 3 years. It would seem to be a forced buy and hold investment with a lot of downside risk if it crashes; or even if a lot of people start cashing out which would drive the price down. Is there an easy way to turn say 1 million of bitcoin to Euros, Pounds or Dollars? You want to get out before a large sell order drops the price significantly. can exchanges cover say 1000 people pulling out 3000k at once? Will they commit to the price at the time of the request or recalculate the value due to a price drop?
Tax breaks mean that the public costs involved in starting up that new plant have to be borne by other taxpayers, other companies.
You may not care about the free market, but this is a case of the government picking winners and losers.
Exactly, and for government the most important things is the winners are the incumbent politicians the next time tehy are up for election. Thus, all the "We created X jobs..." when all they really did was throw a bunch of money at a company that was going to build somewhere, and may leave when a better offer comes around.
The "break even" in TFA is only based on tax revenue. Governments don't exist to collect taxes, they exist to serve the people. If you look at the overall gain in secondary business and employment the break even is way sooner than two decades.
A lot depends on how many people they actually employ and where they live. If the live across the border much of that money will wind up there. While it s true that secondary economic effects will reduce the payback time the tax breaks will be a, if not the, most significant impact on the return.
None the less, these tax breaks are really just a prisoner's dilemma. State offer them because other states offer them, but they would all be better off if no one offered them, and factories were optimally placed based on other factors. We would likely all be better off if there was a federal law to ban this nonsense.
I agree that it is just a race to the bottom for localities. However, there will never be a Federal law because Congress likes to play the same game by brining in "directed spending" (i.e. pork barrel spending) to encourage companies to locate somewhere and bring in jobs. That doesn't create jobs all it does is pick winners and losers.
One favorite drill a friend ran was to tell the crew GPS was down - now navigate for the next few hours the old way. Lots of head scratching and moaning when he did that. There's a lot to be said for keeping proven, if time consuming, skills sharp for when all the latest stuff goes south.
With good charts-which any naval or merchant ship should have-if the GPS goes out couldn't you just take your last known position and use your heading, speed, and time to plot out a decently accurate idea of where you are anyway? It might not be accurate enough closer to shore but in deep water it should be serviceable until GPS is restored.
Sure, dead reckoning can be used ,in fact that's what we did to plot our projected position, but its accuracy dwindles over time, due to currents, course and speed changes, etc. I would not want to have to use it to ensure we hit a known position at some point in he future.
Until we develop a way to block, or spoof, the sun and the stars there is a reliable and accurate backup for navigation. You need a precise time piece, sextant, nautical almanac, and charts along with a mariner who knows how to shoot the stars. The Nav on a frigate I was on did a daily celestial fix to double check our position with the radio fix. he could get a set of readings very quickly so the line of position produced a very tiny box for our fix. I'd bet my life on his fix before the radio fix.
The downside is you need to be trained and practice to keep sharp. I used to be good at it but couldn't get a fix to save my life now. With computers you could input the readings and get it to give you lat/long so there is no need to draw LOP on a paper chart. In a pinch you could send that out as you position.
Automation has caused mariners to lose skills that served our forebears well. One favorite drill a friend ran was to tell the crew GPS was down - now navigate for the next few hours the old way. Lots of head scratching and moaning when he did that. There's a lot to be said for keeping proven, if time consuming, skills sharp for when all the latest stuff goes south.
For example any driver who dropped off and came back when surge pricing started could simply not be given ride opportunities until the surge ended.
Another way of looking at this is that some of the drivers are unwilling to drive when fares are at "normal" price but figure it is worth it when surge pricing is available. Perhaps there is not even collusion in this and Uber is spinning it as collusion to introduce new rules...
But then, if those drivers were not willing to drive without surge pricing, changing the rules will not make them more willing to drive when fares are low.
Possibly, but the drivers in TFA basically said they are colluding to drive up fares. It is in Uber's interest to stop such behavior; which is different from drivers individually, at varying times, decide not to drive.
we wouldn't be having this conversation. The drivers would have stopped doing this when they saw it didn't work. It worked because most Uber drivers also drive for Lyft since neither company pays enough to make it to your next rent payment.
While it may work short term I doubt it is sustainable long term strategy, at best it will work in areas with few drivers who can maintain the agreement. Otherwise, drivers who don't sign off to drive up pricing will get the higher fares; which increases the pressure on drivers to either not collude or jump back in before the others do. In addition, Uber can adapt it's software to identify such actions and make them unprofitable. As for transparency, as people learn that Google offers fare comparison as well as booking from maps; gaming the system will simply drive down demand as riders chose the other service or, as a link in TFA says, rides will learn to simply wait a few minutes until the surge passes. I've done that and seen prices drop to a third of the surge price in minutes. Can the drivers pan work? In localized areas probably for a while, is it scalable, no.
Sorry braw, but the free market fails here. That's why we regulated cab companies in the first place.
While cab regulation has benefits for the rider such as vehicle and driver safety requirements, fixed fares, etc it also benefits drivers and owners by limiting competition by controlling the number of licenses, does not ensure your driver will pad the fare by taking a longer route (scubas often happens in Ls Vegas on trips to the airport), and sometime results in monopoly franchises at high traffic areas.
Should Uber be regulated more? Sure, but brah, regulation is not a panacea either.
Lookee! It's a market, a free market for transportation! Lookee, pricing is based on supply and demand! Lookee, inside actors are manipulating the market to their advantage! It's like Wall Street in microcosm.
Yup. People learn how to use the system to their advantage. One problem with this sytem is Google. If you set a destination and get directions under hire it will show Lyft and Uber fares so if ine has surge and not the other guess who will get the business? Fare transparency overcomes collusion in this case. Unless most drivers drive for both and do this in both cases it is not a good long term strategy. In addition, Uber and Lyft could monitor the drivers and penalize collusive behavior. For example any driver who dropped off and came back when surge pricing started could simply not be given ride opportunities until the surge ended. Thus drivers who didn't game the system would get the benefits while those who do lose money from their collusion.
Exactly. The stories of his safe cracking in Surely You're Joking... are great. That book and they follow-on should be required reading for anyone interested in hacking, in the old school meaning of the term.
\ But in the EPIRB realm things are reversed, the vast majority are outright false alarms, with only a few legitimate emergencies. It's easy to accidentally press a button on an EPIRB, some are also set up to automatically activate if immersed in water (which can happen accidentally due to poor maintenance) or when turned upside down (easily done when maintaining the unit) and many simply have mechanical failures that activate them.
Funny story: I was at a watch store looking at a Breathing with a beacon and the salesperson kept repeating not to pull the button. I said i get it we don't want a resume helicopter above the mall and he said he had a customer that activated the beacon.
It's much harder to accidentally hold the microphone button down and repeat the word "mayday"
Which is what I found confusing about the article - I would guess most calls are made via radio and not a phone. We used to monitor the distress frequency when at sea just for such purposes.
an EPIRB doesn't summon the boat half a mile away from you to come and help. EPIRBs are a godsend offshore, or in truly isolated areas, but they're not a substitute for making that call over the radio. On the water, everyone be they coastguard or not, is expected to respond to a distress call if feasible and safe to do so. One of the "good" things about being a slow sailboat is that we're rarely in a position to respond, but over the years I've done so twice. In one case, it was to bring in a disabled runabout that was lost in a fog bank with a disabled engine (we just happened onto him), and the other was picking up a kite surfer who was stranded a mile offshore with his lines all in tangles and kite under water.
Basically, it's not just the coast guard who responds, but any available boat or mariner. If I ever wind up in trouble, I hope that someone else will come and give me a hand.
All good points, and certainly any mariner should respond to a distress call; and I agree there is no substitute for voice calls. Auto beacons are great as set and forget tools but as you and others point out they are a one way communication. However, they would provide validation that a voice call was coming from an actual vessel and not some prankster as you could verify the identification and the location.
So, no, you do NOT risk your life using an EPIRB as the only means of communicating that you are in an emergency. The EPIRB is a BACKUP and last resort for when other means are not available or don't work.
I would fully agree. My point was vessels ought to be required to have one as a means of communication; even if it is a backup. In addition, it would help validate a voice call from a vessel in distress.
EPIRB is great, but it's slow compared to a voice call, doesn't transmit what the emergency is, and doesn't allow for any confirmation that help is on the way, or allow rescuers to communicate with you. I've done SAR response for EPIRBs, they work, but a voice call will always get you help faster.
Good points. I would guess having an EPIRB broadcasting the need for help would validate a concurrent voice call.
Marine VHF already has a lot of this built in in the newer models.
"Distress" buttons that send your GPS location and your MMSI ID which tells the Coasties who you are, your emergency contacts, and the name of your vessel.
The larger problem is that there's no requirement to have a radio that meets this spec or an MMSI number or have your MMSI and radio paired.
IMHO, the Coast Guard should start mandating this stuff and any vessel undergoing a boarding safety check should have this checked right after the check for life vests and fire extinguishers
I agree. At some point people need to upgrade to the latest safety gear; especially since a new radio is not that expensive, especially when you consider other upkeep costs.It boogles my mind people will spend a few hundred on beer for a trip on the water but not the same for a critical piece of safety gear.
and before checking that the macerator discharge seacock is secure.
hay, somebody has to work about that crap...
Me too! As an avid boater I don't appreciate the possibility of being put in danger because some prankster caused the development of a system like this. If I am stuck on the water, in danger, I want the coast guard to come to my rescue. I definitely don't want them wasting time trying to determine if I am an actual boater in distress or a prankster. When a boat is sinking or on fire time is of the essence!!
That's what an EPIRB is for; especially since the cost of one has gotten to the point where even smaller craft can have one onboard. In an emergency, I'd like to know my position is being sent to rescue craft while I deal with emergency. Personally, pranksters like those mentioned need to face large fines and long person sentences for endangering not only mariners in trouble but reduce crews who go out on false alarms. A friend flew SAR for the USCG, often in bad weather because tats when emergencies happen, to have him and his crew place themselves in danger so some punk gets their kicks makes me think an appropriate punishment would be to put them out to sea alone on a boat in extremis in bad weather and let them try to convince the USCG it isn't a prank this time.
While I concede they are technically a greater risk, it is slight and finding quality employees is rare enough I couldn't imagine this would be an legitimate issue in almost any hiring decisions. It is much bigger risk to put a sub-optimal person in the role than it is they might leave in 3 years instead of 20. IMHO that is.
It depends on the pattern. A new job every two or three years along with upward moves is fine, a new one every year and some laterals over 5 years goes straight into the trash.