Safety is always paramount on our minds. Although we had discussed this topic in the past, a recent thread mentioned SPOT vs EPIRB, and there is some more up to date information which has been a result of the loss of Sailing vessel "Aegean" which was discussed in the link below
http://www.c-brats.com/viewtopic.php?t=18336
We have to remember that there are some limitation of electronic safety devices, and not neglect our preparation and skills as we adventure off the beaten track. Despite some disadvantages of these devices (a false dependance, lack of registration, false alarms, and not understanding how the devices should be used as well as the process of SAR) there are many lives currently saved by all of them. There is the potential for saving many more lives by carrying a device the size of a deck of cards, and costing about $200.
The EPRIB is assigned to a specific vessel. The PLB is assigned to an individual, and can be carried from place to place and on various activities, such as hiking, skiing, kayaking etc. For long ocean voyages we have equipped our vessels with two EPIRBS, and now carry 2 PLB (Personal Locator beacons). The SPOT or In Reach are different types of safety devices, and do leave a trail. There are also now safety devices which trigger Local AIS response.
The EPIRB and PLB are monitored by international Sat SAR agencies. The response time is usually very prompt. The SPOT and IN Reach are monitored by commercial agencies, and they must determine which government agency to call. In the loss of Aegean (and 4 lives) GEOS who is the commercial agency called the primary and secondary contacts, both of which went to answering machines, and no government agency was notified. Thus there was a very significant delay of SAR (actually until debris was found floating many hours later by another racing boat). This delay was very disturbing.
US sailing and the CG both have concluded their reports and there is some interesting information in the U S sailing report which was issued Oct. 30 2012:
http://offshore.ussailing.org/AssetFactory.aspx?vid=19623
From the US sailing report on the sinking of Aegean:
"Appendix 7
Analysis of SPOT CONNECT by Evans Starzinger
SPOT Accuracy as a Positioning Device
Accuracy: SPOT, when it receives and then communicates a fix is HIGHLY accurate. It uses a standard GPS chip set, with a 'typical' accuracy of 15-‐meters/50 ft. and an accuracy as close
as about 5 meters (16 ft.) horizontally with a clear sky view. SPOT actually claims "GPS accuracy: 32.8ft (10m) location accuracy". Empirically the SPOT track is at least reasonably accurate because it's so straight. If the fixes were inaccurate they would wander noticeably.
Reliability: SPOT Connect is however NOT highly reliable in receiving and then sending a fix. At the time of the SOS transmission, it did not receive a position fix prior to the transmission of the SOS message. In reviewing the SPOT track it is apparent that while the positions should be exactly every 10 minutes, there are longer gaps, often after a text message was sent, indicating it did not transmit a fix at the specified interval [see Appendix 13]. This suggests that SPOT Connect either had an internal conflict between transmitting the text message and receiving a position or did not successfully connect to receive a position fix and thus, had to acquire the position and resend.
Appendix 8
Analysis of EPRIB, SPOT and other *SEND devices
* “SEND” = Satellite Emergency Notification Device = official terminology for any of several commercial SOS devices (like SPOT an Iridium) that is not part of SARSAT.
COMPARISON TABLE (Reviewed by USCG & GEOS):
EPIRB (SARSAT) advantages vs. SPOT/GEOS** (and other SEND’s devices)
1. EPIRBS designed to float and function in the water -‐ SPOT not
2. SAR Assets can RDF (home in on) EPRIBS signals -‐ but not on SPOT signals
3. EPIRB generally water activated (not 100% of existing EPIRB’s are water activated... some
older CAT II beacons are only manual activated)-‐ SPOT requires button to be pressed
4. EPIRBS function and the SARSAT system provides location data even without GPS position -‐
SPOT needs both GPS and messaging satellite lock to function
5. EPIRB dedicated to mayday signal so battery not run down by other functions while SPOT
may run down battery with tracking and messages before SOS (some SEND’s devices are
required to shut down at a certain battery level to ensure the SOS function is available)
6. EPIRB signal goes directly to RCC centers who control the SAR resources -‐ SPOT adds an
additional step (GEOS) adding the increased possibility of delay and human failure
7. USCG RCC assumes an EPIRB signal is positive until proven false. Upon receipt of a located
alert, the Coast Guard will start the process to deploy SAR assets to that known
position. These assets have 30 minutes (some are much quicker to get underway than others, and many take much less than 30 min to get underway) to get underway to the position, (and for the USCG it is viewed as easier to recall the assets rather than wishing you had sent them out earlier). While the SAR asset is preparing to get underway, the SAR controller attempts to gather more information about the alert (calling emergency contact in the registration data base, perhaps having local police knock on doors if no answer at contact or checking with marina, or looking at websites/blogs or doing other detective work) If the alert is determined to be non-‐distress, the asset is stood down or recalled. If the received alert is un-‐located but registered, the Coast Guard works with the emergency contact provided in the registration database to narrow down a search area. Once a reasonable search area has been determined, rescue assets are deployed. If the distress alert is un-‐located and unregistered, the Coast Guard will continue to evaluate and monitor. Additional satellite passes may be needed to determine a location so that an effective search area can be developed. While SPOT/GEOS has a narrower commercial/profit mandate (to call the emergency contact, and if there is a lat/long in the SOS signal to call the SAR/USCG). GEOS will continue to monitor an SOS signal until they get location data that they can forward to the USCG/SAR.
8. The EPIRB communication protocol is technically more robust and less likely to have dropped messages. You can see in the SPOT track that it regularly drops messages -‐ they should be every 10 minutes but are not when a message gets dropped.

SPOT/GEOS (and other SEND’s devices) advantages v EPIRB (SARSAT)
1. Some SPOT models (and other such devices) have some amount of 1 or 2-‐way messaging
capability, which can provide useful information on the type of incident to the SAR assets -‐
EPIRB has no messaging capability, only sends an alert.
2. SPOT does potentially have track position data available as backup if SOS signal does not
get GPS fix while EPIRB could be quickly sunk attached to vessel so fast as not to create an
accurate fix and there is no prior track to the look at.
3. SPOT has multi-‐functions, providing more day to day benefits to users.
4. The use of the day-‐to-‐day functions confirms the SPOT unit works; whereas it is always a
bit unknown if the EPIRB will function when turned on (the self test function will ensure G-‐ EPIRB’s work; following website has good background on this: http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/Beacon%20Tes ... olicy.html).
5. Many EPIRB batteries are quite expensive to replace which SPOT uses everyday batteries.
Disadvantages of both
1. Difficulty of contacting emergency contact at night, and lack of knowledge by emergency
contact, or incorrect or no registration information
2. Slow time to get fix by both units in case of fast sinking taking units with the ship (EPIRB
should be mounted to float free)
** SPOT and GEOS are separate companies. SPOT makes the SPOT hardware and provides the non-‐emergency services. GEOS provides the emergency response service for SPOT and several other SEND devices.

Appendix 8a
ALCOAST 231/08
COMDTNOTE 16130
SUBJ: COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES
1. ISSUE. PUBLIC USE OF COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES (E.G., SPOT AND TRACME) IS BECOMING A POPULAR WAY TO ALERT AUTHORITIES OF A DISTRESS SITUATION.
A. SAR MANAGERS AND COMMAND CENTER CONTROLLERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT THESE DEVICES ARE BEING MARKETED COMMERCIALLY, HOW THEY OPERATE AND HOW THEIR DISTRESS ALERTS WILL BE RECEIVED AND DISTRIBUTED.
B. AT LEAST TWO COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES ARE SIMILAR TO EMERGENCY POSITION INDICATING RADIO BEACONS (EPIRBS), EMERGENCY LOCATOR TRANSMITTERS (ELTS), AND PERSONAL LOCATOR BEACONS (PLBS) THAT ALERT THROUGH THE INTERNATIONAL COSPAS-SARSAT SYSTEM. C. TWO TYPES, SPOT AND TRACME, ARE INTENDED FOR INDIVIDUAL USE AND CAN EASILY BE CONFUSED WITH PLBS.
2. BACKGROUND. COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES ARE NOT COSPAS-SARSAT DISTRESS BEACONS AND DO NOT NORMALLY MEET NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL COSPAS-SARSAT MANUFACTURING SPECIFICATIONS REQUIRED FOR EPIRBS, ELTS AND PLBS. EXAMPLES INCLUDE:
A. SPOT. THE SPOT SATELLITE MESSENGER IS ADVERTISED AS A MULTI- PURPOSE SATELLITE MESSAGING TOOL THAT CAN BE USED AS A DISTRESS BEACON AS WELL AS FOR SATELLITE MESSAGING.
B. TRACME. THE TRACME DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICE IS A NON-SATELLITE BASED LOCATION BEACON THAT EMITS A SIGNAL TO ASSIST IN LOCATING A LOST OR INCAPACITATED PERSON. THE TRACME LOCATOR BEACON IS LICENSED BY THE FCC AS A FRS (FAMILY RADIO SERVICE FREQUENCY) DEVICE, OPERATING ON FRS CH.1 (462.5625 MHZ) IN THE U.S. AND CANADA.
3. COMMAND CENTERS MAY RECEIVE TELEPHONE NOTIFICATIONS FROM REGIONAL CALL CENTERS NOTIFYING THE COAST GUARD THAT A DEVICE HAS SENT OUT A DISTRESS ALERT. THESE ALERTS MUST BE CAREFULLY EVALUATED AND RESPONDED TO IN ACCORDANCE WITH NORMAL SAR CASE EVALUATION PROCEDURES (UNCERTAINTY, ALERT, DISTRESS).
4. THIS ALCOAST AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE INCLUDED IN CHANGE (2) OF THE U.S. COAST GUARD ADDENDUM TO THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL SEARCH AND RESCUE SUPPLEMENT (NSS) TO THE INTERNATIONAL AERONAUTICAL AND MARITIME SEARCH AND RESCUE MANUAL (IAMSAR), COMDTINST M16130.2D (SERIES).
5. OFFICE OF SEARCH AND RESCUE COMDT (CG-534) POCS:
A. MR. RICH SCHAEFER, RICHARD.R.SCHAEFER(AT)USCG.MIL, 202-372-2079. B. LCDR KATHY NILES, SARSAT LIAISON OFFICER, KATHERINE.M.NILES(AT) USCG.MIL, 202-372-2089.
6. RDML J.R. CASTILLO, DIRECTOR, RESPONSE POLICY SENDS.
7. INTERNET RELEASE AUTHORIZED"
http://www.c-brats.com/viewtopic.php?t=18336
We have to remember that there are some limitation of electronic safety devices, and not neglect our preparation and skills as we adventure off the beaten track. Despite some disadvantages of these devices (a false dependance, lack of registration, false alarms, and not understanding how the devices should be used as well as the process of SAR) there are many lives currently saved by all of them. There is the potential for saving many more lives by carrying a device the size of a deck of cards, and costing about $200.
The EPRIB is assigned to a specific vessel. The PLB is assigned to an individual, and can be carried from place to place and on various activities, such as hiking, skiing, kayaking etc. For long ocean voyages we have equipped our vessels with two EPIRBS, and now carry 2 PLB (Personal Locator beacons). The SPOT or In Reach are different types of safety devices, and do leave a trail. There are also now safety devices which trigger Local AIS response.
The EPIRB and PLB are monitored by international Sat SAR agencies. The response time is usually very prompt. The SPOT and IN Reach are monitored by commercial agencies, and they must determine which government agency to call. In the loss of Aegean (and 4 lives) GEOS who is the commercial agency called the primary and secondary contacts, both of which went to answering machines, and no government agency was notified. Thus there was a very significant delay of SAR (actually until debris was found floating many hours later by another racing boat). This delay was very disturbing.
US sailing and the CG both have concluded their reports and there is some interesting information in the U S sailing report which was issued Oct. 30 2012:
http://offshore.ussailing.org/AssetFactory.aspx?vid=19623
From the US sailing report on the sinking of Aegean:
"Appendix 7
Analysis of SPOT CONNECT by Evans Starzinger
SPOT Accuracy as a Positioning Device
Accuracy: SPOT, when it receives and then communicates a fix is HIGHLY accurate. It uses a standard GPS chip set, with a 'typical' accuracy of 15-‐meters/50 ft. and an accuracy as close
as about 5 meters (16 ft.) horizontally with a clear sky view. SPOT actually claims "GPS accuracy: 32.8ft (10m) location accuracy". Empirically the SPOT track is at least reasonably accurate because it's so straight. If the fixes were inaccurate they would wander noticeably.
Reliability: SPOT Connect is however NOT highly reliable in receiving and then sending a fix. At the time of the SOS transmission, it did not receive a position fix prior to the transmission of the SOS message. In reviewing the SPOT track it is apparent that while the positions should be exactly every 10 minutes, there are longer gaps, often after a text message was sent, indicating it did not transmit a fix at the specified interval [see Appendix 13]. This suggests that SPOT Connect either had an internal conflict between transmitting the text message and receiving a position or did not successfully connect to receive a position fix and thus, had to acquire the position and resend.
Appendix 8
Analysis of EPRIB, SPOT and other *SEND devices
* “SEND” = Satellite Emergency Notification Device = official terminology for any of several commercial SOS devices (like SPOT an Iridium) that is not part of SARSAT.
COMPARISON TABLE (Reviewed by USCG & GEOS):
EPIRB (SARSAT) advantages vs. SPOT/GEOS** (and other SEND’s devices)
1. EPIRBS designed to float and function in the water -‐ SPOT not
2. SAR Assets can RDF (home in on) EPRIBS signals -‐ but not on SPOT signals
3. EPIRB generally water activated (not 100% of existing EPIRB’s are water activated... some
older CAT II beacons are only manual activated)-‐ SPOT requires button to be pressed
4. EPIRBS function and the SARSAT system provides location data even without GPS position -‐
SPOT needs both GPS and messaging satellite lock to function
5. EPIRB dedicated to mayday signal so battery not run down by other functions while SPOT
may run down battery with tracking and messages before SOS (some SEND’s devices are
required to shut down at a certain battery level to ensure the SOS function is available)
6. EPIRB signal goes directly to RCC centers who control the SAR resources -‐ SPOT adds an
additional step (GEOS) adding the increased possibility of delay and human failure
7. USCG RCC assumes an EPIRB signal is positive until proven false. Upon receipt of a located
alert, the Coast Guard will start the process to deploy SAR assets to that known
position. These assets have 30 minutes (some are much quicker to get underway than others, and many take much less than 30 min to get underway) to get underway to the position, (and for the USCG it is viewed as easier to recall the assets rather than wishing you had sent them out earlier). While the SAR asset is preparing to get underway, the SAR controller attempts to gather more information about the alert (calling emergency contact in the registration data base, perhaps having local police knock on doors if no answer at contact or checking with marina, or looking at websites/blogs or doing other detective work) If the alert is determined to be non-‐distress, the asset is stood down or recalled. If the received alert is un-‐located but registered, the Coast Guard works with the emergency contact provided in the registration database to narrow down a search area. Once a reasonable search area has been determined, rescue assets are deployed. If the distress alert is un-‐located and unregistered, the Coast Guard will continue to evaluate and monitor. Additional satellite passes may be needed to determine a location so that an effective search area can be developed. While SPOT/GEOS has a narrower commercial/profit mandate (to call the emergency contact, and if there is a lat/long in the SOS signal to call the SAR/USCG). GEOS will continue to monitor an SOS signal until they get location data that they can forward to the USCG/SAR.
8. The EPIRB communication protocol is technically more robust and less likely to have dropped messages. You can see in the SPOT track that it regularly drops messages -‐ they should be every 10 minutes but are not when a message gets dropped.

SPOT/GEOS (and other SEND’s devices) advantages v EPIRB (SARSAT)
1. Some SPOT models (and other such devices) have some amount of 1 or 2-‐way messaging
capability, which can provide useful information on the type of incident to the SAR assets -‐
EPIRB has no messaging capability, only sends an alert.
2. SPOT does potentially have track position data available as backup if SOS signal does not
get GPS fix while EPIRB could be quickly sunk attached to vessel so fast as not to create an
accurate fix and there is no prior track to the look at.
3. SPOT has multi-‐functions, providing more day to day benefits to users.
4. The use of the day-‐to-‐day functions confirms the SPOT unit works; whereas it is always a
bit unknown if the EPIRB will function when turned on (the self test function will ensure G-‐ EPIRB’s work; following website has good background on this: http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/Beacon%20Tes ... olicy.html).
5. Many EPIRB batteries are quite expensive to replace which SPOT uses everyday batteries.
Disadvantages of both
1. Difficulty of contacting emergency contact at night, and lack of knowledge by emergency
contact, or incorrect or no registration information
2. Slow time to get fix by both units in case of fast sinking taking units with the ship (EPIRB
should be mounted to float free)
** SPOT and GEOS are separate companies. SPOT makes the SPOT hardware and provides the non-‐emergency services. GEOS provides the emergency response service for SPOT and several other SEND devices.

Appendix 8a
ALCOAST 231/08
COMDTNOTE 16130
SUBJ: COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES
1. ISSUE. PUBLIC USE OF COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES (E.G., SPOT AND TRACME) IS BECOMING A POPULAR WAY TO ALERT AUTHORITIES OF A DISTRESS SITUATION.
A. SAR MANAGERS AND COMMAND CENTER CONTROLLERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT THESE DEVICES ARE BEING MARKETED COMMERCIALLY, HOW THEY OPERATE AND HOW THEIR DISTRESS ALERTS WILL BE RECEIVED AND DISTRIBUTED.
B. AT LEAST TWO COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES ARE SIMILAR TO EMERGENCY POSITION INDICATING RADIO BEACONS (EPIRBS), EMERGENCY LOCATOR TRANSMITTERS (ELTS), AND PERSONAL LOCATOR BEACONS (PLBS) THAT ALERT THROUGH THE INTERNATIONAL COSPAS-SARSAT SYSTEM. C. TWO TYPES, SPOT AND TRACME, ARE INTENDED FOR INDIVIDUAL USE AND CAN EASILY BE CONFUSED WITH PLBS.
2. BACKGROUND. COMMERCIALLY-BASED DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICES ARE NOT COSPAS-SARSAT DISTRESS BEACONS AND DO NOT NORMALLY MEET NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL COSPAS-SARSAT MANUFACTURING SPECIFICATIONS REQUIRED FOR EPIRBS, ELTS AND PLBS. EXAMPLES INCLUDE:
A. SPOT. THE SPOT SATELLITE MESSENGER IS ADVERTISED AS A MULTI- PURPOSE SATELLITE MESSAGING TOOL THAT CAN BE USED AS A DISTRESS BEACON AS WELL AS FOR SATELLITE MESSAGING.
B. TRACME. THE TRACME DISTRESS ALERTING DEVICE IS A NON-SATELLITE BASED LOCATION BEACON THAT EMITS A SIGNAL TO ASSIST IN LOCATING A LOST OR INCAPACITATED PERSON. THE TRACME LOCATOR BEACON IS LICENSED BY THE FCC AS A FRS (FAMILY RADIO SERVICE FREQUENCY) DEVICE, OPERATING ON FRS CH.1 (462.5625 MHZ) IN THE U.S. AND CANADA.
3. COMMAND CENTERS MAY RECEIVE TELEPHONE NOTIFICATIONS FROM REGIONAL CALL CENTERS NOTIFYING THE COAST GUARD THAT A DEVICE HAS SENT OUT A DISTRESS ALERT. THESE ALERTS MUST BE CAREFULLY EVALUATED AND RESPONDED TO IN ACCORDANCE WITH NORMAL SAR CASE EVALUATION PROCEDURES (UNCERTAINTY, ALERT, DISTRESS).
4. THIS ALCOAST AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE INCLUDED IN CHANGE (2) OF THE U.S. COAST GUARD ADDENDUM TO THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL SEARCH AND RESCUE SUPPLEMENT (NSS) TO THE INTERNATIONAL AERONAUTICAL AND MARITIME SEARCH AND RESCUE MANUAL (IAMSAR), COMDTINST M16130.2D (SERIES).
5. OFFICE OF SEARCH AND RESCUE COMDT (CG-534) POCS:
A. MR. RICH SCHAEFER, RICHARD.R.SCHAEFER(AT)USCG.MIL, 202-372-2079. B. LCDR KATHY NILES, SARSAT LIAISON OFFICER, KATHERINE.M.NILES(AT) USCG.MIL, 202-372-2089.
6. RDML J.R. CASTILLO, DIRECTOR, RESPONSE POLICY SENDS.
7. INTERNET RELEASE AUTHORIZED"