As I understand it,you're right in that RCC are in charge of PLB activated searchs but they still liase with the local police near the incident as they know the local resources and are responsable for turning out search teams, so that police analysis is still there,we had a search where we communicated directly with RCC ,but the police still organised the search and helicopter etc.I think you are right in activating a PLB if you know you are being searched for,but you probably won't know that and not all PLB's give an instant position or even a pinpoint position it can take time as I think they have to triangulate the position or something(might have to consult a tech person)and unless you have a GPS enabled PLB it only narrows it down to an area rather than a pinpoint location.To sum up PLB's are more for if you are in immediate danger and can't get out by yourself,if you feel you need rescuing by all means press the button.
"When Bushwalking and travelling on land, also lodge trip details with the local Police in the area you are travelling, as they will be contacted and tasked by AMSA SAR if your beacon was activated"
I wonder whether since doc no longer record intentions whether our police should follow the Aussi example?.
I know this is off topic but Ive changed trip plans due to whats written in the road end log book. Not doing so would of seen 30 people in an 18 bunk hut As it was there would of been 25
Hi @geeves.
"I wonder whether since doc no longer record intentions whether our police should follow the Aussi example?"
I'm in mixed minds about this. Unless they're going to give no oversight, let people leave poorly worded intentions, or no intentions at all, and turn a blind eye to not signing out, would the police just run into the same problems as DOC? But arguably if there's no oversight, it wouldn't solve anything.
In part though, to me it'd seem to lean towards systems elsewhere which I'm not fond of, where there's either a strong obligation or a legal requirement to register with the government before being allowed to enter a place. I'm wary of a system where I'm told I should write my name on an official list prior to entering an outdoor area. It doesn't seem a large step from requiring approval to go, or being required to prove you're capable of looking after yourself before you're allowed to go out and explore.
There are already at least two independent services out there now -- Adventure Buddy (free) and Safety Oudoors (low cost). IMHO it'd be most ideal to try and shepherd people towards making use of them, if they don't already have their own trusted contacts.
Hi @noddy.
"As I understand it,you're right in that RCC are in charge of PLB activated searchs but they still liase with the local police near the incident"
That's true. They do work with each other, and (in NZ) I think the definitions between Category 1 and Category 2 incidents are intentionally ambiguous. And as you say, PLBs don't always give an exact position immediately, but zeroing in on a known position (approximate or otherwise) is usually part of the standard response.. at least once a false alarm has been ruled out.
The reasoning with what I said, though, is that I think some of the media relations people at the RCCNZ simply have an impression of: "PLBs are awesome because look at all the people we save with PLBs. Everyone should have a PLB or you might die, you're stupid if you don't!", without clearly acknowledging that those people might never have been in trouble if they'd taken better preventative safety steps in the first place. You wouldn't know it if you browsed much of the media covering rescues involving PLBs, however, where RCCNZ staff have been quoted... basically pushing how awesome PLBs are without referring to everything else that's important.
PLBs are great, but carrying one is only a possible aspect of the NZ Outdoor Safety Code. I'd rate most of the aspects of that code more highly than carrying a PLB. It's weird that Maritime NZ was involved in the Code's development, but after all that effort it doesn't seem to be pushing it.
There are already at least two independent services out there now -- Adventure Buddy (free) and Safety Oudoors (low cost). IMHO it'd be most ideal to try and shepherd people towards making use of them, if they don't already have their own trusted contacts.
I agree and they do a great job. The one thing though they can never be able to do that a book at the road end could was tell you how many others were already going your way.
re PLB position fixes – current PLBs transmit on two frequencies, 406 and 121.5MHz. The ‘message’ signal received by satellite is transmitted on 406MHz and relayed to the appropriate body (AMSA, RCCNZ, etc). If the PLB is GPS-enabled, the positional data is included (assuming the GPS has been able to obtain a fix). The 121.5MHz broadcast can be used by search-aircraft to assist in localisation. The PLB continues to broadcast on both frequencies so the positional data is continually updated to the satelite - there is no delay in positional data being available to AMSA etc.
Pre-2009, beacons transmitted at 121.5/243MHz – these frequencies are less reliable over distance than the 406MHz now used for alerting – the 121.5 frequency is no longer monitored by satelites.
I'm sure that everyone (just about) here knows is : YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS.
So, with due caution, we plan and prepare.
Still, things can go wrong. On my most recent epic, a group of 7, we had a broken wrist on Day 2 (decending the Cedric Track in Nelson Lakes) from an awkward fall. Because of thorough planning, we knew there was a hut at the bottom (Sabine) with a radio to the water-taxi so we had an escape option and didn't need to activate the PLB.
As it turned out, two fisherman were packing up to return to Nelson and very generously offered to transport our injured tramper directly to hospital (thanks again, guys).
People being stupid isn't new - 30+ years ago I was x-country skiing in Victoria and came across two guys in runners, jeans and cotton shirts slogging their way up Mt St Gwinear above the snowline. As the weather was closing in, they asked me if there was a shop at the top (at that stage there was absolutely no infrastructure anywhere, not even a carpark/gate at the snowline).
"If the PLB is GPS-enabled, the positional data is included (assuming the GPS has been able to obtain a fix). The 121.5MHz broadcast can be used by search-aircraft to assist in localisation."
Just to add to this description, with non-GPS-enabled 406MHz beacons, the approximate position (within a km or two) can still be triangulated by the satellites direct from the 406MHz transmission. It takes a few hours longer than if a GPS position had been transmitted immediately, but it's enough info for aircraft to get close enough to monitor the parallel 121.5MHz homing transmission for a more exact position.
If aircraft weren't an option (such as bad weather) then I don't know exactly what happens if you're not in a place clearly idenfied by a 1km radius. Is it at all easy to track a 121.5MHz broadcast from a ground party?
hasnt the 406 frequency been disabled?
406 MHz is alive and kicking. It's the 121.5 MHz frequency that's no longer monitored, so the old beacons that transmitted on nothing but 121.5 MHz are obsolete.
As bernieq noted, though, 406 MHz beacons still transmit 121.5 MHz signals in parallel, as it helps search aircraft to accurately locate the source at close range when they're flying around in circles. I guess this might still be useful of the 406 MHz transmission didn't contain an exact location, or if someone's picked it up and moved since an air crew was informed of the location.
Here's a scenario with a question, though: A party is in dense bush, has an accident, and consequently activates a PLB *without* GPS functionality. After several hours, triangulation of the signal from satellites overhead narrows down the location to within a 1.5km radius. Bad weather rules out sending a helicopter, which (if it were available) could have circled around above in the vicinity of the radius and located the party's position fairly quickly by monitoring the 121.5MHz homing signal. Instead, it's necessary to send a ground party.
Unfortunately they only know where to find the injured party to within the 1.5km radius of dense bush, it's dark, there's a noisy storm going on, and uneven terrain means there's rarely likely to be a direct line of sight to the injured party. Once the rescuers are near enough, is the 121.5MHz signal of any use to the rescuers to quickly find the injured party within that 3km of dense bush, or is that signal only useful when aircraft can circle overhead and home in on the signal?
Technically it would depend on the terrain. 121.5 in the VHF band is still pretty-much line-of-sight operation only, so rescuers would only be able to pick it up if they had line of sight (no geography in the way) to the injured party. Radio-ham fox-hunt competitions (competitions to locate hidden people by tracking their signal) on 144MHz (2m band) and are well able to locate the transmitting parties reliably.
One technique was to be head for 2 high-points in the area and triangulate on the signal, coordinating ground teams using handheld radios. Others prefer the point-and-chase method- the problem with which is that it's easy to be fooled by reflected signals - e.g. you may not be able to pick up a signal form a party in a hollow, but may see a clear signal from them reflected off the opposite valleyside.
All that said, on the surface, 406MHz would be an easier band to do radio-location on, due to the dimensions of antennae being smaller, and thus it being easier to build highly directional antennae of a size that can be carried around the hillsides for this band (think the difference in size between old VHF TV aerials and the new UHF ones).
I guess they kept the old frequency for other reasons - possibly due to the large amount of 121Mhz tracking gear already out there, or maybe the nature of the 406 signal used - for example is it continuous?.
More practically: I have no idea if landSAR have portable radiolocation gear for either 121 or 406Mhz frequencies that can be used by ground parties. But I'd hope so.
