Tracker type comparison for use in the SHTP

[Mewes]

Just so we don't jump too far ahead of ourselves, I want to make clear that discussion of the uses of on-board tracking systems has illuminated many aspects which might have been missed.

Brian has listed some thoughts of tracker uses, including that using the services of Yellow Brick appears to outweigh benefits of purchasing DeLorme equipment and their services for the race.

A discussion of pros and cons of SSB, SatPhone, email/text checking into a Communications Boat daily during the race has also occurred. Many of the philosophical tenets of sailing in the Singlehanded TransPac (alone, preparedness, resourcefulness, skill, etc.) have come into this discussion as well.

As it stands, the SSS Board of Directors decided for the good of the Race that each entered yacht should be equipped with a tracking device.

The Race Rules and Conditions Section 4.35 Minimum Equipment requires equipment by which each racer can communicate with the Race Committee through a Communications Boat.

The TransPac Communications Plan will be published just prior to the Race Start June 28.

Merry Christmas from La Paz BCS Mexico,

Ben & Lucie Mewes

[solosailor]

So we now have established precedence for check ins not required, check ins required, and tracker data serving as a check in.

Actually the "precedence" for a tracker data serving as check-in was done by a single SHTP RC as I recall without the backing of the SSS Safety Committee or board and a very poor decision. It also resulted in race results that were not fair as several boats didn't check-in but their "tracker did" so they didn't accrue a time penalty as they should have per the rules.

As it stands, the SSS Board of Directors decided for the good of the Race that each entered yacht should be equipped with a tracking device.

That's great for the entertainment of the people on shore. But again, an automated tracking device IS NOT a check-in by a competitor. So either have check-ins or don't but relying on an automated device is a poor excuse and NOT a check-in by a human.

There is NO OTHER Hawaii or Mexico race that uses a tracker for check-in, period. Why would anyone consider an automated device a legitimate check-in? Please, tell me how this can even be discussed?

[brianb]

"boats didn't check-in but their "tracker did" so they didn't accrue a time penalty as they should have per the rules." - not true. The RC decreed that the tracker constituted a check in, hence it was a legitimate check in, by definition of the RC. Additionally a vote was taken by the racers in 2012 and they all concurred.

[solosailor]

The RC decreed that the tracker constituted a check in, hence it was a legitimate check in, by definition of the RC. Additionally a vote was taken by the racers in 2012 and they all concurred.

I'm more than aware that the hard work put in over the years by SSS officers and SSS Safety Committees to write the rules were basically disregarded last minute by the SHTP RC in 2012. I've never heard of racers getting a vote to override the rules put in place by the Safety/Rules Committee.

You can call it what you want but a tracker reporting it's position is just that..... a tracker reporting a position, not a check-in by a competitor. If you want to have the tracker reports boats positions, fine. But don't call it a check-in because it's NOT in anyway a human doing so. Please enlighten me what steps a human has to do to check-in using an automated position reporting device? None, so stop calling it a check-in. Calling it a position report would be correct, but it's in no way a check-in.

For the record I'm fine with no check-ins and no penalty (would prefer it that way) as well as having a tracker onboard for the entertainment of the folks ashore.

[BobJ]

Apparently there's a button you can push on the thing that sends an "I'm okay" signal - just like they have in retirement homes. If you forget to push it (or it isn't working) a nurse aid shows up after awhile.

[solosailor]

Apparently there's a button you can push on the thing that sends an "I'm okay" signal

Well if that's that the case and the tracker has a manual button the competitor had to press to report their position then it could actually be a valid check-in........ anything automated is not.

[brianb]

Well if that's that the case and the tracker has a manual button the competitor had to press to report their position then it could actually be a valid check-in........ anything automated is not.

Precisely, as I have suggested in earlier posts, we could take advantage of the "things" (YB) manual notification as a dead man switch. This is a question under consideration by the RC. I have also asked YB to clarify the operation just to make sure there is no misunderstanding. Their literature states that we can designate the nature of the message sent to the listed receivers. Example, it could launch a SAR, or could simply be a location report manually initiated, just indicating all was OK. Obviously a SAR would only be initiated by an EPIRB or other request from the skipper, not the YB. The YB would be used to indicate all is well aboard.

[BobJ]

I think the normal installation is to have one pull string by the head (long enough to reach the cabin sole) and one pull string by the bunk.

Seriously, I like the idea of a satphone "net" (via Skype or conference call) so non-SSB equipped boats can still talk to the group. The net was a big part of the experience in the SHTP's I did. Mandating YB's would cause fewer boats to take SSB's (as happened in 2012) - so is satphone conferencing a possibility?

[brianb]

I think the normal installation is to have one pull string by the head (long enough to reach the cabin sole) and one pull string by the bunk.

Seriously, I like the idea of a satphone "net" (via Skype or conference call) so non-SSB equipped boats can still talk to the group. The net was a big part of the experience in the SHTP's I did. Mandating YB's would cause fewer boats to take SSB's (as happened in 2012) - so is satphone conferencing a possibility?

I like the sat phone net as well. As you suggested, so far, the cost looks prohibitive. The SKYPE guys can tell when a Sat Phone is being called and charge a premium. However, they may not do the same when a Sat phone calls a SKYPE number, which would allow a conference all. I am checking on that. I suspect the only way to make this fly at no more cost than the sat phone call basic rate is to have someone that has a conference number on their normal phone. If I still worked at a large firm this would have been trivial at no additional cost on the companies bulk rate conference system.

[pogen]

To the RC:

Please don't issue the comms plan "just before" the race start. Please give the racers plenty of time to make a considered decision about how they choose to comply with the requirements, get their gear in place and get it tested.

Secondly, as Brian has said, a phone conference setup where one dial in to a common nummber/access code should be very easy to get, in my former job we had several such numbers available to us. Routine group phone conferences could be held using this service

White Lion http://www.uswhitelion.com/

While phone-in/web/video can be done well and cheaply using

GoToMeeting http://www.gotomeeting.com

I think it should be quite possible to sort out a system where satphone participants can call to a shoreside number once per day and have a N-way conference call. Maybe even bridge this to SSB somehow. And further, we could record this daily and post the audio track if we wished up on or site, or YouTube etc.