An article by Tracie Cone of the Associated Press was published in our
local newspaper and it questioned if Personal Locator Beacons gives us
a sense of security that allows us to push onwards, where otherwise we
might not.

From her article:

"Now you can go into the back country and take a risk you might not
normally have taken," says Matt Scharper, who coordinates a rescue
every day in a state with wilderness so rugged even crashed planes can
take decades to find. "With the Yuppie 911, you send a message to a
satellite and the government pulls your butt out of something you
shouldn't have been in in the first place."

I never considered a SPOT or other PLB to by a "Yuppie 911."

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

On Oct 27, 9:02*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
> An article by Tracie Cone of the Associated Press was published in our
> local newspaper...

A similar story was also on NPR yesterday.

Thanks, Bob K.

On Oct 27, 12:02*pm, rlovinggood > wrote:
> An article by Tracie Cone of the Associated Press was published in our
> local newspaper and it questioned if Personal Locator Beacons gives us
> a sense of security that allows us to push onwards, where otherwise we
> might not.
>
> From her article:
>
> "Now you can go into the back country and take a risk you might not
> normally have taken," says Matt Scharper, who coordinates a rescue
> every day in a state with wilderness so rugged even crashed planes can
> take decades to find. *"With the Yuppie 911, you send a message to a
> satellite and the government pulls your butt out of something you
> shouldn't have been in in the first place."
>
> I never considered a SPOT or other PLB to by a "Yuppie 911."
>
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

I'd like to point out that these are the same folks who brought us
"Gilligan's Island".

Here is a link to the NPR article.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=114181641


"Bob Kuykendall" > wrote in message ...
On Oct 27, 9:02 am, rlovinggood > wrote:
> An article by Tracie Cone of the Associated Press was published in our
> local newspaper...

A similar story was also on NPR yesterday.

Thanks, Bob K.

Tune in tomorrow, when we'll explore how the invention of the shoe
caused us to take risks we wouldn't ordinarily have taken barefoot.
Jim

On Oct 27, 12:06*pm, JS > wrote:
> Tune in tomorrow, when we'll explore how the invention of the shoe
> caused us to take risks we wouldn't ordinarily have taken barefoot.
> Jim

Followed by the following dangerous inventions:

Wheel, boat, train, airplane.

Which of course, should not be equipped with: seatbelts, airbags,
horns, headlights, parachutes, radios, radar, lifejackets, lifeboats,
etc...

Kirk

The point of the NPR story was that people are activating the
emergency beacons in non-emergent situations. A 911 hang up or 911
call to complain about a parking ticket are much easier and MUCH
cheaper to address than a beacon in the back country. An example given
by a rescue type was the guy who failed to plan properly and had to
spend an extra night in his tent. He cried "Wolf!" because he was
going to be late for some sort of engagement. He was not in danger at
all. These devices, while a great asset, need to be used responsibly.
At least SPOT gives some options, not just MAYDAY or nothing.

My 2c

Mike

On Oct 27, 1:34*pm, Mike > wrote:
> The point of the NPR story was that people are activating the
> emergency beacons in non-emergent situations. A 911 hang up or *911
> call to complain about a parking ticket are much easier and MUCH
> cheaper to address than a beacon in the back country. An example given
> by a rescue type was the guy who failed to plan properly and had to
> spend an extra night in his tent. He cried "Wolf!" because he was
> going to be late for some sort of engagement. He was not in danger at
> all. These devices, while a great asset, need to be used responsibly.
> At least SPOT gives some options, not just MAYDAY or nothing.
>
> My 2c
>
> Mike

The following was posted by a park ranger on another aviation board I
read. This illustrates the OPs point quite well.

GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK
Hikers Evacuated After Three SPOT Activations In Three Days

On the evening of September 23rd, rangers began a search for hikers
who repeatedly activated their rented SPOT satellite tracking device.
The GEOS Emergency Response Center in Houston reported that someone in
the group of four hikers – two men and their two teenaged sons – had
pressed the “help” button on their SPOT unit. The coordinates for the
signal placed the group in a remote section of the park, most likely
on the challenging Royal Arch loop. Due to darkness and the remoteness
of the location, rangers were unable to reach them via helicopter
until the following morning. When found, they’d moved about a mile and
a half to a water source. They declined rescue, as they’d activated
the device due to their lack of water. Later that same evening, the
same SPOT device was again activated, this time using the “911”
button. Coordinates placed them less than a quarter mile from the spot
where searchers had found them that morning. Once again, nightfall
prevented a response by park helicopter, so an Arizona DPS helicopter
whose crew utilized night vision goggles was brought in. They found
that the members of the group were concerned about possible
dehydration because the water they’d found tasted salty, but no actual
emergency existed. The helicopter crew declined their request for a
night evacuation, but provided them with water before departing. On
the following morning, another SPOT “help” activation came in from the
group. This time they were flown out by park helicopter. All four
refused medical assessment or treatment. The group’s leader had
reportedly hiked once at the Grand Canyon; the other adult had no
Grand Canyon and very little backpacking experience. When asked what
they would have done without the SPOT device, the leader stated, “We
would have never attempted this hike.” The group leader was issued a
citation for creating a hazardous condition (36 CFR 2.34(a)(4)).

Pete

I think the appropriate response to this sort of thing is a hefty
rescue bill. A few examples might cause a rethink among the "Let's
surrender, I'm hungry" crowd.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:34:01 -0700, nate_fl wrote:

> I think the appropriate response to this sort of thing is a hefty rescue
> bill. A few examples might cause a rethink among the "Let's surrender,
> I'm hungry" crowd.

This always seems to happen with new technology. A couple of past
examples:

- when cell-phones were new, idiot walkers on the UK's Lake District
were calling the guide book author if they thought they were lost.

- when GPS was new, people were walking into mountains without maps or
spare batteries and getting lost when the GPS battery failed


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Oct 27, 9:02*am, rlovinggood > wrote:
> An article by Tracie Cone of the Associated Press was published in our
> local newspaper and it questioned if Personal Locator Beacons gives us
> a sense of security that allows us to push onwards, where otherwise we
> might not.
>
> From her article:
>
> "Now you can go into the back country and take a risk you might not
> normally have taken," says Matt Scharper, who coordinates a rescue
> every day in a state with wilderness so rugged even crashed planes can
> take decades to find. *"With the Yuppie 911, you send a message to a
> satellite and the government pulls your butt out of something you
> shouldn't have been in in the first place."
>
> I never considered a SPOT or other PLB to by a "Yuppie 911."
>
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

Ah but I often see pilots hopping into gliders with just no survival
preparation. It happens all the time. And in some cases they would not
have SPOT if the glider FBO did not provide it. No notice left where
they are intending to fly to, no recovery/ground-crew plan, no backup
handheld VHF radio, no extra water, no food, no shelter materials,
warm jacket or space blankets etc. (cold nights in the mountains), no
way to easy start a fire (may or may not be a good idea), no first aid
kit/medical supplies, etc. etc. Wearing a t-shirt and sandals, like
they were diving to the mall. Familiarity breeds contempt and in many
places people are used to doing 500km milk runs over and over that let
people sit back in their arm-chair ride feeling this is easy and very
safe. One little mistake or problam or two and they can quickly be in
a survival situation.

Things like SPOT just draw attention to problem cases, without SPOT
they would go unnoticed or they would just be filtered from the gene
pool. My sympathy is entirely with the search and rescue and other
staff that are required to go find some of the twits described in
these stories. I do kind of expect however with the glider pilots I
see who make no survival planning that the existence of SPOT or PLBs
has little effect, they might perceived it as somewhat useful but if
their understanding of survival planning is so confused up to start
with I am not sure they are going to push more or less harder because
they have an electronic gizmo. They will however get more noticed once
they screw up.

Darryl

rlovinggood wrote:
> An article by Tracie Cone of the Associated Press was published in our
> local newspaper and it questioned if Personal Locator Beacons gives us
> a sense of security that allows us to push onwards, where otherwise we
> might not.
>
> From her article:
>
> "Now you can go into the back country and take a risk you might not
> normally have taken," says Matt Scharper, who coordinates a rescue
> every day in a state with wilderness so rugged even crashed planes can
> take decades to find. "With the Yuppie 911, you send a message to a
> satellite and the government pulls your butt out of something you
> shouldn't have been in in the first place."
>
> I never considered a SPOT or other PLB to by a "Yuppie 911."
>
> Ray Lovinggood
> Carrboro, North Carolina, USA


That's strange, I heard on NPR the other day, that more folks with
concealed carry guns are murdered than unarmed people. One factor (he
said) was that people feel more confident in entering shady districts.
In the good ol' US that's a dangerous mistake, apparently.

Brian W