This information probably deserves an info topic somewhere, but to get it out there -
Further to the quote I added from Inspector Hopkins,
Inspector Hopkins wrote:There is a slight change now. Since that email there has been the introduction of the 406MHz beacons (as compared to the old 121.5Mhz) they are suppose to be registered and as such when one is activated AUSSAR should know who it belongs to. AUSSAR are responsible for executing any mission for unidentified beacon activations, technically the 406MHz beacons are identified and as a result is the responsibility of the police. However they generally prosecute the mission as they used to but once it is determined to be a bush walker it should immediately transfer to police.
Of note, translate the definition of "prosecute" not to mean charge someone, but
a. To pursue (an undertaking, for example) until completion; follow to the very end.
I responded -
tasadam wrote:Previously you stated the cost of rescue originating from a PLB is a federal expense, and the cost by telephoning 000 (or better from a mobile - 112) would be a state based expense.
With that in mind and if that is still the case, would a preferred option be the use of a PLB so as to see the expense against the national budget instead of the Tasmanian police rescue budget?
Would it be a quicker rescue to telephone than to use a PLB?
I well understand that telephone is a better option for being able to relay the exact nature of the problem and so from the perspective of planning a rescue, a better option.
I think that with a rescue deemed necessary, if it were me I would be setting off the PLB then worrying about turning the phone on and see if I can pick up a signal (yes, dialling 112 instead of 000)
And the reply indicating I misunderstood the allocation of the rescue budget to the relevant department (Tas Police for bushwalkers) -
Firstly dial "000" if you have a life threatening emergency. I appreciate that 112 will work and I think so will 911 but the emergency number should be "000" non- emergency will get police on 13144
Secondly, it doesn't really matter how the incident is reported, its the type of incident which the relevant authority is responsible for and generally responsible for the costs not the method of communicating it. No matter whether it be by phone, PLB or alerting a track warden, if a bush walker is in need of being rescued from a remote area the combat authority around Australia is the relevant police service and they are responsible for the cost of the search and rescue mission as a general rule. AUSSAR are responsible for unidentified beacons but once it has been identified that it is a bush walker that set off the PLB then it is our responsibility and coordination will most likely be passed to the state. In most circumstances if AUSSAR dispatch the rescue helicopter to investigate the source of the distress and they find its a bushwalker, they will simply pick them up and return them and not pass coordination or cost to police. As I mentioned before they are responsible to pay the costs up to the point an unidentified beacon is identified (as a bushwalker) but technically its a state problem after that point.
However if the unidentified beacon turned out to be a crashed plane then because plane crashes are the responsibility of AUSSAR and they would prosecute and pay for the search, although we would provide assistance free of charge to them, mainly because they would have nobody down here to physically attend. Further to that we have often helped them search for unidentified beacons because of that reason and we do that at no cost to AUSSAR.
So from a rescue point of view the quickest way you can alert authorities the better. I would pick mobile or sat phone but if out of range then if its life threatening then by all means use the PLB or EPIRB. We would prefer by phone because its immediate and we can get good information as to the problem whereas that's not the case with distress beacons like PLBs or even the SPOT system but they do have better coverage than mobile phones.
Hope this answers your question.
I find this interesting in these regards...
1. I did not know that "911" would do anything in Australia.
2. His preference on "000" instead of "112" from mobiles surprises me. While you may have telephone coverage through your carrier, then 000 will work.
But to my understanding, if you did not have mobile phone coverage through your telecommunications carrier, dialling 112 would initiate an emergency call through any telecommunications carrier that the phone can pick up, regardless of whether or not you are with that carrier.
Of course, if there is no cover because of your location, then the mobile has only one other use - if it's night time and the helicopter is trying to find you, even the light in its display can be seen by the night vision of the helicopter very easily, as the lights are magnified 6000 times in their night vision.
3. I should probably think about a sat phone... I believe they are a lot smaller & lighter now than what they were.
Posted: Tue 06 Nov, 2012 7:15 am
