Just recently we've had the loss of the MH370 and now the Cheeki Rafiki.
On a lesser scale there were two Scottish fishemen lost in fog for two days who luckily survived on a flask of tea, a bottle of water and two biscuits and they were less than 50 miles from land without even a phone.
In this present day and age (!!! a dated saying? !!!) we have miraculous bits of electronic gear small enough to fit to a bird (some even small enough to fit to insects) which is capable of transmitting a radio signal (some even video) a fair distance but it seems that many who take risky adventures or commercial enterprises who cannot seem to make use of sophisticated technology which would provide at the very least a location if not actual communication.
Lots of this stuff isn't heavy, doesn't take up much room or even cost a lot but it seems people think "It'll never happen to me" but when some disaster DOES happen to them, it costs an absolute fortune to go looking for them and the searchers have no idea whether those "lost" are alive or dead or even have a clear idea of where to look.
We have amazing batteries these days coupled with really small transmitters that don't use a lot of power and the last time I heard, the current record distance for a low power radio signal was the reception of a signal (a code word) sent with a power output of only 40 micro watts (forty millionths of a watt) to a distance of around 550 miles.
A mobile phone might have a power output of around half a watt and a "rescue" beacon on a low frequency could be utilised that transmitted regularly (not constantly) for a considerable time. Plus, a survivors raft could be fitted with a viable radio transmitter for actual communication.
How many times do you hear of people being recued after putting to sea without even the most basic radio communications? The equipment is freely available, why don't people take advantage of it?
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.
7ryMJjyBMgowKMZdQ~~_7.JPG "cee-dee"){kind=avatar}
