On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:58:56 -0400, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...

JimH wrote:


"An acquaintance of mine spent a long night on an overturned hull near
Vancouver Island. He had both SOLAS and "USCG approved" flares. He failed
to
attract the attention of a *nearby* fishing boat with either..."


Not too compelling of a story on why to get SOLAS standard flares. But I
guess carrying a couple could not hurt.

That does not dismiss the fact that SOLAS flares may not be needed by
everyone in
every boating environment. We have no idea where and how RG plans to
boat.
He may not need suspenders and a belt Chuck. ;-)

Not until his pants are falling off. :-)

Read about "burn time" and "luminosity" in this link from an
organization that ran some
head to head tests between SOLAS and USCG approved flares. Particularly
the parachute flares, as those are the units most likely to catch
somebody's attention.


http://www.boatus.com/boattech/pyro.htm

About the time somebody fails to get medical attention as quickly as
needed or additional tens of thousands of dollars damage occur to a
vessel in trouble, that $50 saved by buying cheaper flares will seem
pretty insignificant.


I totally understand the need when boating on the Great Lakes, on sal****er
and on very large inland lakes. But if the person asking the question boats
on a small inland lake (1 -2 miles wide) then the SOLAS flares may indeed be
overkill.

And we have yet to find out where RB boats. ;-)

Just out of curiosity..........do you carry an EPIRB w/GPS receiver and Type
I life jackets on your boat Chuck?




Shouldn't you add 'fogless' to the 'small, inland' adjectives?
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************