# Inflatable PFD Failures?



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

The _Cheeki Rafiki_ tragedy got me thinking about something. Are our inflatable PFDs as safe as we think in heavy seas?

In the CR case, help was on-scene relatively quickly after 2 PLBs activated. I am assuming that these guys, based on their experience level, were all wearing PFDs. I am also assuming these were inflatables.

However, no one was found after the sinking although the search area was pretty well defined.

This is somewhat surprising to me. Does it mean that the PFDs did not inflate? Or, more alarmingly in the context of this thread, does it mean that they inflated - but then failed in the rough seas thereafter?

From what I've seen, Type V inflatables typically have a Type II (near shore buoyant) or, worse, Type III (floatation aid) rating once inflated. This, in itself, is an issue that we should think about when facing heavy seas off-shore. Is "near shore buoyant" enough of a safety factor offshore?

Now, there is PLENTY of research on the inflating methods and properties of many of these PFDs. But what about the durability and effectiveness of the bladder once inflated...especially in heavy seas? Are there studies out there?

Why were no bodies found in the CR case if they had PLBs? Could it be that the bladders failed after a few hours?

I've done a bit of research on whether there has been testing done on this scenario. And I'm not seeing much. It seems a pretty important issue for us sailors to consider. If the weather gets rough, should we ditch the inflatable and wear only a true Type I vest?

I'm considering writing a story on this - so what do you guys think?


----------



## ccriders (Jul 8, 2006)

Good question. Also how well do inflatables perform in rough seas vs type Is? With much of the bouancy up around the ears and not around the chest are they effective in keeping an unconscious head above the wave action? And of course what is the puncture experience with inflatables in emergency situations?
John


----------



## paulk (Jun 2, 2000)

Inflatables run counter to the KISS principles in my book. Earlier this spring we had a man rescued from a capsized single scull. A passer-by noticed the overturned hull in the water and called 911, then called our yacht club. The waterfront manger who got her call jumped into a club whaler and went out to the harbor entrance to find the comatose victim clutching his hull in a death-grip. The manager pried the victim off his boat and zipped him back to the waiting medics. The medics were able to revive the victim despite his core body temperature of 84ºF. The victim was wearing an inflatable lifejacket...without a cartridge. He apparently went hypothermic before he had time to blow it up manually.


----------



## gamayun (Aug 20, 2009)

It would be a necessary and timely article. I've been thinking about this and other PFD issues a lot over the past 3 years; however, I'm not sure what inferences you'd reliably be able to make about the crew on Cheeki Rafiki because no bodies were found so what they were wearing and how they died would be speculative. 

FYI - I've pasted below the response from Spinlock when I asked them about the bladder coming over a user's head in high surf in the Uncontrollable Urge accident:

Thank you for your email regarding the US Sailing Report on s/y Uncontrollable Urge. Spinlock have been involved in the writing of the report and have discussed it with the authors, so are a little disappointed at how they have phrased their comments about the Deckvest, as there were many other issues raised in the report.

The s/y Uncontrollable Urge incident involved the crew using the lifejackets in large breaking surf on a Pacific Coast lee shore. This is always going to be a very challenging environment for inflatable lifejackets given the forces on the large inflated bladder created by the waves which try and pull the jacket off, as you are fighting to prevent inversion. The bladder attachment of the Spinlock Deckvest is not fundamentally different to the majority of inflatable lifejackets available and so we would expect all lifejackets to have behaved similarly. All lifejackets already go through a number of rigorous approval tests that include a 10 feet jump test with an inflated bladder to ensures the lifejacket stays in position. Given the unique circumstances of this incident the lifejacket approval bodies - ISO 12402 committee and the USCG must take the opportunity to review the performance testing requirements for lifejackets and we will make any changes to the Deckvest design if ISO confirm this is required, which will be applicable to all lifejacket manufacturers.

In our own testing we found that the correct, secure fitting of the chest belt and leg or crutch straps have the largest impact on the performance of all lifejackets. The Deckvest has always been designed to be easy to adjust, to ensure that it is worn securely and is supplied with leg straps as standard which we are sure would have helped in this situation. We will continue to improve our communication and training for the fitting and maintenance to ensure customers understand how to get the best performance from their Deckvest Lifejacket.

There is an important balance in developing and testing lifejackets to be wearable, usable products and not over specifying them to cover unique situations that could in turn reduce their use in more common situations. Lifejackets are designed for a purpose -to provide buoyancy, stability and to buy the user some time when in the water. We have to accept given the challenges of the marine environment, that there may be scenarios where this might not be all a user needs, or possibly is not the most suitable product to be worn.

I hope this helps reassure you that your Deckvest Lifejackets both inshore and offshore are still the right choice for your personal protection.

With regards the recent USCG Approval of the Deckvest LITE lifejacket, this approval was sought as it is more applicable for the inshore Deckvest LITE. The Deckvest is our coastal and offshore lifejacket approved to the latest International ISO12402 Standard for lifejackets which the rest of the world uses for Lifejacket Approval. Whilst the USCG recognises the ISO12402 standard, the US currently chooses to sit outside the international community. Unfortunately the USCG standard is a little behind the ISO1202 for offshore coastal design and we would have downgrade the design of the product to meet the USCG standard and the result would not be the Deckvest that has all the great features and comfort that you enjoy.


----------



## joyinPNW (Jan 7, 2013)

It was quite a surprise when several inflatables were very slow to inflate, or didn't inflate at all when we did our pool exercise during the Safety at Sea Seminar. Two were Mustang and one was a Spinlock, I think. It made me rethink the PFD thing and while the inflatables are far more comfortable for sailing/racing, I'd like to go back to the non-inflatable type. Since we're out all winter in windy/wet conditions, I might even think about wearing a two-piece surfer type wetsuit for additional safety and warmth. Keeping the head above waves is the piece I haven't figured out as the regular PFD's don't do that as well.

I'd love to see you do an article if it leads to more advances!


----------



## bacampbe (Mar 17, 2009)

I'd suggest a letter to Practical Sailor on this. Safety gear is a big deal to them. They did quite a bit of study on harnesses after the Lake Michigan race incident a while back. That resulted in some industry wide changes.


----------



## gamayun (Aug 20, 2009)

joyinPNW said:


> It was quite a surprise when several inflatables were very slow to inflate, or didn't inflate at all when we did our pool exercise during the Safety at Sea Seminar. Two were Mustang and one was a Spinlock, I think.


I jumped in the pool with my Mustang (with the HIT inflator) in the SAS seminar last month. It took about 10 seconds to deploy. I found out later there is a safety recall on some of the Mustangs because of deployment problems, but a "few" seconds does not appear to be outside the norm. I have not yet tried out my Spinlock so curious to know what happened there.

Also, who regularly unzips and checks the integrity of the bladder in their PFD? I think the note inside the Mustang says to do this monthly. Right


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

smackdaddy said:


> I've done a bit of research on whether there has been testing done on this scenario. And I'm not seeing much. It seems a pretty important issue for us sailors to consider. If the weather gets rough, should we ditch the inflatable and wear only a true Type I vest?
> 
> I'm considering writing a story on this - so what do you guys think?


I think along with the "will my liferaft inflate, can i deploy it/can I get in it/will it protect me" discussion this is another very good reason why I need to pay careful attention to stay on my boat and do everything I can to keep the friggin' thing floating.

Beyond that these are all good questions, you have got me paying attention.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

When my friend Bob launched himself off and Oakcliff boat in this springs AYC series his hip pack did NOT inflate 

Best as can be figured a brand new Cartridge was EMPTY 

They happened to have had a rib on hand as Bob is a really BIG person and the 50' has massive freeboard it was the best and fastest way out of the cold water


----------



## ccriders (Jul 8, 2006)

Interesting to read Gam's post. Leads me to the question "do manufacturers design to the specification or to the function?" Which leads to the question "what role do manufacturers play in developing the specifications?". Don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but designing to the function could lead to significant developments in wearable safety systems. Just as one example, the integrated harness, which if I understand PDQ's writings puts the chest strap in just the wrong place and will contribute to rib fractures.
Also, I think it is folly to sell flotation vests that do not include easy to use in the water vertical adjustments so that you can keep the bladder in the correct position.
While the PFDs we use today seem to be significant design developments, they really are just variations on the theme of Mae West. Is this the best we can do?
John


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

*I* regularly unzip and check the status of my inflatable PFD's. 

A conversation that I had with a respected circumnavigator, indicates that the inflatables are simply not as good as a trusty, Type I, offshore vest, but simply adding a crotch or thigh straps goes a long way towards improving their effectiveness.

I'm retrofitting all of mine with crotch straps.


----------



## Dave_E (Aug 7, 2013)

I was a Naval Aircrewman and wore an inflatable PFD/survival vest all the time. Their reliability was placed on the shoulders of the guys who did the maintenance on them. I also got to use them (pool environment mostly) and can tell you the bladders were much beefier than the "in close" PFD's we have from WM. Maybe the offshorer types are a little more robust, I don't know. 

I like the thought though... if the weather really goes south (heavy seas etc)or I know I'm in trouble, I think I might very well put on the type 1. 

Dave


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

I'd have to agree that there are too many assumptions about the Cheeki Rafiki incident to draw any conclusions at all. Continuing to ask questions about the design and suitability of our safety gear in general is something I support though.

If you're going to get serious about this kind of stuff and consider writing an article, you need to get your hands on a copy of the book, Survival Afloat by Don Biggs. ISBN 0-679-50579-2.

This is the only book/resource I've ever seen that really addresses the issues of PFD flotation (and some other issues) from a truly scientific perspective. They even detail how you absolutely can not mimic the behavior of an unconscious person without being... well unconscious. One of the researchers who was a medical doctor allowed himself to be anesthetized and floated around in the pool with different PFDs on in the name of science.

It's an old book and may be hard to find but it's worth it if you're serious about the topic.

MedSailor


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

We're allowed to wear inflatables on Auxiliary patrol boats but not when we're on regular CG boats. They used to allow them but no longer.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Of course the wearable liferaft is another option.

http://www.switlik.com/aviation/isplr


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

MedSailor said:


> I'd have to agree that there are too many assumptions about the Cheeki Rafiki incident to draw any conclusions at all. Continuing to ask questions about the design and suitability of our safety gear in general is something I support though.


You're right about the assumptions. They are just that...wild-ass assumptions.

Even so, I've seen several of these stories over the years where bodies are not found even when the SAR parameters are pretty dialed in. I do think it's pretty safe to say that the majority of sailors wear the inflatables instead of the Type I vests. The correlation? Don't know yet.

My point here is not to necessarily try to prove anything scientifically. My point is that there are some facts _staring us in the face_ (e.g. - the Type II and Type III actual ratings of these devices) that argue against OUR assumptions regarding their use. Yet we seem to trust them in the face of these facts.

Do we know how these bladders will stand up to breaking seas? Has that been tested and documented? I've found a little bit of info - but certainly not enough to make informed decisions yet.

Is the reason there is so little information like this because these inflatables _clearly state_ that they are not rated for heavy, offshore conditions (i.e. - rated Type II or Type III once inflated)?

So - at this point I have more questions than answers. But I am absolutely certain that many of us are rolling the dice, to some degree, with our inflatables when using them offshore.


----------



## FourthCoast (Oct 14, 2013)

I am actually moving on to the next phase in the tether project and this thread is going exactly the same direction.

Here is what I dont like about inflatables.

1. To use a manual inflatable I have to be conscious to inflate in the ultimate situation
2. An automatic may inflate unexpectedly due to very harsh conditions and may actually throw me off balance at a very bad time.
3. An inflatable and COULD (maybe unlikely?) pop from a very sharp object
4. Even if nothing goes wrong with the jacket I need to buy a re-arm kit after using it

I was planning to just wear my static PDF over my harness but the 'sailing' PDF that I have zips up in the front so its not really possible to pass the d-rings through. I think having the harness over the jacket is asking for it to slip over my head.

Does anyone know of a static (non-inflatable) foam PDF with a build-in harness available for sale in the US? The ones at the link below look great, but they do not seem to be distributed in the US.

Check out this feature list!:

"Integrated safety harness approved to EN1095 / EN ISO 12401, universal attachment point for emergency light etc, sturdy front zip, crutch strap, whistle, retro-reflective patches and two fleece lined outer pockets."

Warm Pockets!

http://www.baltic.se/en/products/consumer-products/specialist-buoyancy-aids/offshore/

http://www.baltic.se/en/products/consumer-products/specialist-buoyancy-aids/offshore-2/

Products | Baltic Lifejackets Sweden

Scott.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Scott, 

I've never handled one of these myself to see if the harness is the right type of harness for our applications, but if you search "rescue PFD" or "swiftwater rescue pfd" you'll get some foam PFDs with harnesses built in.

Also, mustang has some deck suits that are foulies, floatation and harness all in one, though that may be a lot more than you're looking for. 

Medsailor


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

smackdaddy said:


> I'm considering writing a story on this - so what do you guys think?


What would you write about as there is no facts present?

Since I've never jumped in the water to see if my vest will inflate the only real experience I have is that if you put the vest in a locker and it gets damp enough, it will inflate from that.

BTW - my feeling is that you have the CO2 inflatable vests for conditions rough but "normal". You have standard vests for "nasty" conditions!


----------



## gamayun (Aug 20, 2009)

smackdaddy said:


> Is the reason there is so little information like this because these inflatables _clearly state_ that they are not rated for heavy, offshore conditions (i.e. - rated Type II or Type III once inflated)?


You'll also want to talk to USCG HDQ. I'd heard they're planning to get rid of the Type I, II, III, etc. ratings because the public finds them too confusing.

You might also want to talk to big wave surfer Jeff Clark. He designed a new PFD for surfers that has 2 cartridges.Quatic Inflatable Life Vest by Jeff Clark | Mavericks Surf Shop. As a cave diver myself, this redundancy makes sense when you're relying on something to save your life. The biggest reason that people prefer inherently buoyant PFDs is because they know the buoyancy will be there when they need it, although it's much less and maybe not as effective as an inflatable.

The harness connection is also in the wrong place and needs to be reengineered to mimic a climbing harness that can take large dynamic loads.

Strapping on crotch straps (usually with just a single, non-redundant snap to the PFD) is also just an after-thought and should be made as an integral and comfortable part of offshore PFDs.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

gamayun said:


> You'll also want to talk to USCG HDQ. I'd heard they're planning to get rid of the Type I, II, III, etc. ratings because the public finds them too confusing.
> 
> ....


Yep. It's in the public comment phase now. They want to use the same system as Canada.


----------



## goboatingnow (Oct 10, 2008)

type I jackets with 22lbs buoyancy are a joke , wouldn't even rate as a lifejacket in Europe at all. at a minimum you need about 34lbs of buoyancy ( 150N). A large man wearing heavy weather gear needs 60lbs of buoyancy or about 275N . Thast what I wear offshore, double bladder , 60g Co2 bottle. tested every year. this is the only thing that will rotate you upwards if you are unconscious in the water.


Spinlock probably make the best jackets AKAIK. comfortable , reliable and adjustable.

As to the poster that said you want to adjust them in the water , hah, try that with heavy gear, a bladder tight around your next , etc. If its not on right before, you aint going to fix it


----------



## FourthCoast (Oct 14, 2013)

Good advice from chall03:

"stay on my boat and do everything I can to keep the friggin' thing floating"



If anyone is interested I found a static PFD with a harness that can be shipped to the US. Not any cheaper than a inflatable:

Baltic Pilot Industrial Lifejacket

Scott.


----------



## gamayun (Aug 20, 2009)

FourthCoast said:


> If anyone is interested I found a static PFD with a harness that can be shipped to the US. Not any cheaper than a inflatable:
> 
> Baltic Pilot Industrial Lifejacket
> 
> Scott.


This is good because it combines the harness with an inherently buoyant PFD, which most of them don't have. It would be perfect if it had a couple of small zip pockets up near the neck. The problem with these is that they (as well as most of the Spinlocks) are not USCG-approved. It's my understanding that SOLAS has tougher standards to meet, but if you're boarded in US waters, you'll need to show that you have an accessible USCG-approved PFD.

I've been thinking that my best option is a float coat, particularly because I sail in cold water, underneath an inflatable with at least 33 lbs of lift.


----------



## gamayun (Aug 20, 2009)

DRFerron said:


> Yep. It's in the public comment phase now. They want to use the same system as Canada.


Thanks Donna! Here's the link: https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/78-FR-49412. The final rule is expected October 2014.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

FourthCoast said:


> Does anyone know of a static (non-inflatable) foam PDF with a build-in harness available for sale in the US? The ones at the link below look great, but they do not seem to be distributed in the US.


I have been looking for this for a couple years now with no luck.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

FourthCoast said:


> Good advice from chall03:
> 
> "stay on my boat and do everything I can to keep the friggin' thing floating"
> 
> ...


For those that balk at the price, think of it this way. If it were a top of the line inflatable, you'd pay the price right? So, perhaps this vest is BETTER and SAFER from a real practical standpoint, and it costs the same. Might be money well spent.

I can think of this like the Portland Pudgy I bought. Yeah, it's wickedly expensive for a tender, but she's cheap for a liferaft and I bought her as a liferaft. The above jacket is cheap as an integrated harness/offshore lifejacket but expensive for a foam jacket.

MedSailor


----------



## foamy (Nov 26, 2012)

I wear a type 3 for another reason, to protect my body cavity is the event of a fall against a winch handle, bulkhead or some other hard object that could damage internal organs. Plus there is a small amount of insulation effect when you are in the water...and of course no potential failure of a CO2 system.

I also carry a strobe light and a waterproof VHF in the vest pockets, along with a loud whistle.

When I singlehand in rough conditions or as conditions warrant, I also wear a whitewater kayak helmet.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smackdaddy said:


> The _Cheeki Rafiki_ tragedy got me thinking about something. Are our inflatable PFDs as safe as we think in heavy seas?
> 
> In the CR case, help was on-scene relatively quickly after 2 PLBs activated. I am assuming that these guys, based on their experience level, were all wearing PFDs. I am also assuming these were inflatables.
> 
> However, no one was found after the sinking although the search area was pretty well defined.


I think you may be making a bit too much of the fact that bodies were never found, approximately 1,000 miles offshore. We tend to forget what a Big Ocean it is out there, even with the pinpoint accuracy given by a PLB, a lot can change by the time searchers arrive at a point after flying 1000 miles. And, if you recall, the conditions on scene at the time were described as very poor, with limited visibility...

Recall that the owner and a few crew were not found for several hours after the capsize of RAMBLER 100 near Fastnet Rock a few years ago, in comparatively small search area clearly marked by the overturned hull of a 100-footer, in decent visibility and conditions, a mere 4-5 miles off the coast of Ireland...



chall03 said:


> I think along with the "will my liferaft inflate, can i deploy it/can I get in it/will it protect me" discussion *this is another very good reason why I need to pay careful attention to stay on my boat and do everything I can to keep the friggin' thing floating.*
> 
> Beyond that these are all good questions, you have got me paying attention.


Certainly, the reliability of inflatable PFDs is a topic worthy of discussion... However, as threads about Gear that will Save Me After Falling Off My Boat seem to outnumber those about Tactics and Skills to Avoid Falling Off My Boat to Begin with by 50 or 100 to 1, might be a good time for another dose of Lin and Larry 



> Think prevention instead of cure. I.e. improving the non-skid on your deck and cabin-top could prevent crew from skidding overboard. Improving your boomvang/preventer-tackle-system could prevent an injury-causing accidental gybe.
> 
> Over the past few months we have had the pleasure of rendezvous with some highly experienced cruising sailors, folks who have each circumnavigated twice and sailed far beyond the normal routes including Noel and Litara Barrett winners of the Blue Water Medal, Alvah and Diana Simons, Beth Leonard and Evans Starzinger. Interestingly the topic of safety brought the same reactions from each of these master sailors, "it's far safer at sea than on the freeways. Car's whizzing past you at 60 miles an hour, only three or four feet to spare. Out at sea you are rarely moving more than 6 or 8 knots." But we all agreed; with experience comes confidence, with confidence comes the ability to access safety or accept risks. Almost everyone who sets off cruising has far more experience on freeways than at sea. If you had a look at the boats each of these remarkable people sail you'd be surprised at how Spartan their "safety gear" list appears. Each of their boats is highly geared towards efficient sailing, each has very clear deck areas and an extensive system of handholds throughout the cabin, in the cockpit and on deck, and each has all essential systems independent of electricity. Each carries a plethora of back up rigging and sail repair equipment. Each has an abundance of anchors, anchor-rodes and a powerful windlass.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

I wholeheartedly agree with this, Jon. "An ounce of prevention..." and all that.

I'm not saying PFD's aren't important, but this discussion has kind of gone off the deep end, with people worrying about the best PFDs for surviving going MOB, in the middle of the ocean, while singlehanding.

PLB or not, if you MOB yourself in the middle of an ocean, you're dead. At least, you should operate on that premise.

PFD's are much more important in situations where there is crew to rescue you, or inshore sailing, where there is more traffic, land is closer, and rescue is much more likely, and faster to arrive.

A lot of people here definitely are letting "Perfect be the enemy of Good".
Adding crotch or thigh straps to any PFD is not an "afterthought". It definitely enhances the effectiveness of a PFD.

Not only do I unroll and inspect my inflatables twice a year, I have jumped into the water with a couple of them, with and without the crotch strap. The only thing I haven't done, is jump into the water, in the middle of a storm, or in a wave test-tank and get beat up for 12 hours, to evaluate the longevity of inflatables. I still don't rely exclusively on inflatables. I do carry standard Type I and II PFD's onboard.

Really though, the PFD is the last resort. This discussion should be about non-skid, hardpoints, jacklines, tethers, harnesses and lifelines.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

BubbleheadMd said:


> Really though, the PFD is the last resort. This discussion should be about non-skid, hardpoints, jacklines, tethers, harnesses and lifelines.


Really? In a PFD thread? I get your point - but I think this is a worthwhile topic.



BubbleheadMd said:


> PLB or not, if you MOB yourself in the middle of an ocean, you're dead. At least, you should operate on that premise.
> 
> *The only thing I haven't done, is jump into the water, in the middle of a storm, or in a wave test-tank and get beat up for 12 hours, to evaluate the longevity of inflatables.* I still don't rely exclusively on inflatables. I do carry standard Type I and II PFD's onboard.


I agree with you that the mentality should be "I'm dead if I hit the water." But in the context of this thread, your longevity question is exactly what I'm trying to look at. Is there data out there on this? I'm still researching but there is precious little I can find thus far. I'll need to start making some calls.

Regardless, as I said above, the mere fact that an inflatable is only rated Type II or, worse, Type III tells me immediately that if I'm offshore and the weather is bad, I should NOT be wearing my inflatable. I should switch out to my Type I. Is this common understanding and practice among all the sailors posting on this thread?

You carry your Type I's aboard. The question is when do you trade them out for your inflatable?


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

Without entering the debate about the acident and whether PFDs are worn all the time, I do know this:

If I KNOW I'm going in the water or consider it likely (whitewater kayak, sea kayak in full conditions, anything towed, rescue, salvage, working in the water) I'm going to take off the inflatable and put on a conventional PFD securely (tight). Same thing if I believe my boat is sinking; off with the inflatable and on with something strong, utterly dependable, and that fits properly (no inflatable truely does--the belt is too high and they lack stiffness).

----

And for all safety gear TEST IT in the water! Jump off the boat. Do an MOB recovery with a real person. Try it in the surf and while being hoisted from the water. Don't wait for Practical Sailor or Sail, and certainly not the CG; they don't have your body. This is how you really find out how things fit. This is why climbing gear works and so much sailing safety gear does not--we talk about it, but we don't go out and really use it the way climbers do. White water kayak jackets all fit; they actually use them and would not accept gear that only looks good on paper or on dry land.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

foamy said:


> I wear a type 3 for another reason, to protect my body cavity is the event of a fall against a winch handle, bulkhead or some other hard object that could damage internal organs. Plus there is a small amount of insulation effect when you are in the water...and of course no potential failure of a CO2 system.
> 
> I also carry a strobe light and a waterproof VHF in the vest pockets, along with a loud whistle.
> 
> When I singlehand in rough conditions or as conditions warrant, I also wear a whitewater kayak helmet.


Agree about the foam having lots of other benefits. Sure, it's a burden in the tropics I'm sure, but here in the PNW (and I would think in the NE) it's usually somewhere between "brisk" and "bloody cold". The insulation of the life jacket really helps. Especially when racing, and the boat's motion is more extreme and you're running around doing more stuff, padding the ribs can be a really good thing. I also have a waterproof VHF that I can attach, which I feel would be a great tool for steering the boat back to you if you're overboard. A boat is easier to see than a head bobbing around.

Speaking of your head, if you like to protect your noggin but still want to look like one of the cool kids, check this bit of kit out. I bet CruisingDad wishes he was wearing this beanie...









BubbleheadMd said:


> PLB or not, if you MOB yourself in the middle of an ocean, you're dead. At least, you should operate on that premise.


Oh! Oh! I have gear for that too! Check out this link!

MedSailor


----------



## FourthCoast (Oct 14, 2013)

gamayun said:


> This is good because it combines the harness with an inherently buoyant PFD, which most of them don't have. It would be perfect if it had a couple of small zip pockets up near the neck. The problem with these is that they (as well as most of the Spinlocks) are not USCG-approved. It's my understanding that SOLAS has tougher standards to meet, but if you're boarded in US waters, you'll need to show that you have an accessible USCG-approved PFD.
> 
> I've been thinking that my best option is a float coat, particularly because I sail in cold water, underneath an inflatable with at least 33 lbs of lift.


I didn't think about the USCG approval. Thank you for pointing that out. I would really like to find a foam + harness USCG approved jacket but I just don't see one out there.

Does my square bag of ugly orange life jackets and the throw-able USCG seat cushion cover this requirement? I expect it should be OK to carry the USCG required jackets and then wear something else.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

smackdaddy said:


> (snip)
> 
> Regardless, as I said above, the mere fact that an inflatable is only rated Type II or, worse, Type III tells me immediately that if I'm offshore and the weather is bad, I should NOT be wearing my inflatable. I should switch out to my Type I. Is this common understanding and practice among all the sailors posting on this thread?
> 
> *You carry your Type I's aboard. The question is when do you trade them out for your inflatable?*


There is a tradeoff between mobility and additional floatation. (Notice that comfort doesn't enter into my equation)

You're looking for some kind of hard-coded formula: "IF wind/waves exceed X, THAN replace inflatable PFD with Type I foam PFD".

There's no such damned thing. Hey, just eliminate the need to think at all, by simply wearing Type I PFD's from the moment you set foot on your dock, until you return and are standing next to your car.

I can tell you what I do (which everyone will tell you is wrong)-

When I race in my little river, I don't wear a PFD.
If it's rough and windy in the river, I make the foredeck wear an inflatable with crotch straps.

When I singlehand in the Chesapeake, (especially in cooler weather), I wear an inflatable PFD with integrated harness/crotch straps, and clip to hardpoints, but don't run jacklines unless I'll be sailing at night.

When I solo into the Atlantic in August, I will have new lifelines, new jacklines, and I will wear an inflatable PFD with integrated harness, but I'm wearing it for the HARNESS, not the PFD so much. I also have the option of skipping the PFD and wearing my Switlik harnesses. I will not move around on the exterior of the boat, without being clipped on.

When would I switch to my Type I offshore PFD?
If I sensed the loss of my vessel was near imminent.
If I were sailing in the Atlantic, with crew and limiting my mobility with a Type I wasn't an issue.
If circumstances indicate that additional buoyancy is better than additional mobility.

I am aware of the risks and tradeoffs and I'm willing to live with them.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

I always forget the name of the Canadian lifejacket manufacturer (it's a major brand), but we were told by CG Sector that you won't get dinged if you have these as your approved lifejackets because the Canadian CG has stricter approval standards than the USCG.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Is it Spinlock?


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

BubbleheadMd said:


> Is it Spinlock?


 No. Mustang.


----------



## vega1860 (Dec 18, 2006)

chall03 said:


> I think along with the "will my liferaft inflate, can i deploy it/can I get in it/will it protect me" discussion this is another very good reason why I need to pay careful attention to stay on my boat and do everything I can to keep the friggin' thing floating.
> 
> Beyond that these are all good questions, you have got me paying attention.


Rule 1 on Lealea is "Don't fall off the boat". We wear Mustang vests with integral harnesses but we are not 100% happy with them. We are considering going to simple safety harnesses at sea (Without flotation) and Type 1 PFDs for flotation in rough conditions.

The inflatable vests have their place but not, we think, in rough conditions offshore.


----------



## vega1860 (Dec 18, 2006)

BubbleheadMd said:


> Really though, the PFD is the last resort. This discussion should be about non-skid, hardpoints, jacklines, tethers, harnesses and lifelines.


And hand-holds. Lots of secure hand holds.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

Something I found ironic.

In the last Sail magazine there was an editorial suggesting a universal PFD law. However, only one of perhaps 50 ads showed a PFD (the Hobie Cat ad was the lone exception). I found that pretty funny. I wonder if Sail has the cahonies to ask their advertisers to show PFDs in use. Likewise, don't wait for them to highlite the failings of gear.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

pdqaltair said:


> Likewise, don't wait for them to highlite the failings of gear.


Good point. Then you have the issue of how to actually test such a scenario. Not as easy as jumping in the pool to test the inflate.


----------



## Minnesail (Feb 19, 2013)

pdqaltair said:


> Something I found ironic.
> 
> In the last Sail magazine there was an editorial suggesting a universal PFD law. However, only one of perhaps 50 ads showed a PFD (the Hobie Cat ad was the lone exception). I found that pretty funny. I wonder if Sail has the cahonies to ask their advertisers to show PFDs in use. Likewise, don't wait for them to highlite the failings of gear.


Hah, yeah! One of my ASA books talks a lot about wearing PFDs and one-hand-for-the-boat and all that, but in the photo on the cover of the book nobody is wearing a PFD and someone is standing on the bow not holding on to anything :laugher


----------



## vega1860 (Dec 18, 2006)

As long as the marketing types think they can sell a boat more effectively with photos of bikini clad models than they can with properly dressed sailors wearing appropriate safety gear, the images we see will not be aimed at safety education but rather at sales volume.

It will not become "Cool" to wear a PFD until some celebrity gets photographed wearing one and they become a common fashion accessory in TV, movies and magazines. 

Well, that is what I think anyway.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

vega1860 said:


> It will not become "Cool" to wear a PFD until some celebrity gets photographed wearing one and they become a common fashion accessory in TV, movies and magazines.
> 
> Well, that is what I think anyway.


Yes I'm 60+ and probably more immune to peer pressure than most but I feel like a dweeb when I put on my jacket at the car and walk up the floating docks.

Young people old people almost no one wears a jacket unless they are under 5.

My theory is that since I'm usually teaching people who have minimal if any skills if I trip or whatever and land in the drink it might be a long time before someone thinks about making a phone call.

I totally expect them to be all freaked out about being on the water without a captain and how THEY are going to get back to shore and worrying about me a few hours later.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

vega1860 said:


> As long as the marketing types think they can sell a boat more effectively with photos of bikini clad models than they can with properly dressed sailors wearing appropriate safety gear, the images we see will not be aimed at safety education but rather at sales volume.


Just because she's only wearing a bikini doesn't mean she's not sporting a pair of artificial flotation devices. 

--Davidpm I completely agree that it is imperative that the skipper be the one wearing the jacket, even if nobody else is. Statistically (and logically) the skipper is the most likely person to go over, and you're more likely to be in the water longer since the most skilled person on the boat now can't help with the MOB situation.

MedSailor


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

vega1860 said:


> As long as the marketing types think they can sell a boat more effectively with photos of bikini clad models than they can with properly dressed sailors wearing appropriate safety gear, the images we see will not be aimed at safety education but rather at sales volume.
> 
> It will not become "Cool" to wear a PFD until some celebrity gets photographed wearing one and they become a common fashion accessory in TV, movies and magazines.
> 
> Well, that is what I think anyway.


Well, for that matter, when was the last time you saw an ad for a production boat builder that featured a pic of the boat carrying a tender? Hell, if you start believing advertising, you'd think these boats today do nothing but sail from one marina to the next...

Oh, wait...


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

PFD are something like parachutes. If folks just buy the cheapest one and don't understand how it works or how to pack them...they may never need to bring one back for a complaint.

Last time I checked inflatable PFDs were mainly made from calendared nylon, i.e. nylon that has had an airtight and watertight coating applied to one side. And no matter where or how I've seen that material, the coating does delaminate and come apart after 5 years, ten at the most. Maybe they are a different material, a more durable coating? I don't know if any use separate urethane bladders. Although, Mustang does make one series with ballistic nylon outer covers, literally bullet-resistant for military service. Which should stop a lot of punctures from more common objects.

Unlike SCUBA BCs, where a thermally welded polyurethane bladder is normally used. That's bulkier, but withstands decades of repeated use and stress, generally.

Of course both are supposed to be routinely inflated and tested for integrity by the owner.

I also literally found the oral inflator had fallen out of my PFD one spring when I took it out of the closet. "Oh, yes, we had a problem with glue failures in old vests". Ahuh. Kinda like Zodiac life rafts.

But in general? I think they are robust enough for the job and really doubt that a PFD in good condition would come apart in the water in any kind of short order, before the wearer had long since perished from hypothermia.

David-
"Young people old people almost no one wears a jacket unless they are under 5."
Hi, my name is Al Most?
A long time ago I decided that as long as I owned a PFD, I would feel pretty stupid if I drowned because I'd gone overboard while it was neatly stowed away someplace. So, I wear it almost all the time. Which is one reason I bought an inflatable back in the 80's, when only POTUS and his helicopter guards wore them in the US.
Then I also figured out, if there were kids with us, or even just kids in the launch, it was a no-brainer to PUT ON THE PFD even before getting in the launch, so the kids (who are mandated to wear one) will just be doing what the adults are doing, and not asking why *they* have to wear these dumb things.

Having spent lots of time floating in the ocean, all of it intentional, I have no problem with wearing a PFD. As I said, I'd feel _real _dumb explaining how I drowned while my PFD was hanging neatly in a locker or closet.


----------



## vega1860 (Dec 18, 2006)

A much talked about topic here in SE Alaska is that most of the professional mariners will not wear a PFD. Defenders of the practice claim that if you go in the water up here you will be dead in a few minutes due to hypothermia anyway. Still, the effort to convince the fishermen and women (Most of the town) to wear them through education is ongoing.

In Petersburg, as in most harbors up here, child PFDs are provided free and are available at the head of each float ramp. I have yet to see an adult wearing a PFD on the docks or, except for visiting yachties, on a boat. Not even the harbor staff. I do not wear one on the floats either, but I ALWAYS put on my Mustang inflatable with harness before starting the engine, messing with dock lines etc., preparatory to getting under way. Unconsciousness comes all too quickly in water this cold. At least with a PFD there may be time for someone to pull you out of the water if you go in. Those people who have gone in the water have told me that they could never have gotten out by themselves due to the rapid loss of motor control and strength in the icy water.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"Defenders of the practice claim that if you go in the water up here you will be dead in a few minutes due to hypothermia anyway. "
That's certainly true and my bottom-feeding clients remind me to tell you "Hey, bottomfeeders gotta eat too." Alaskans eat crabs, crabs eat Alaskans, that's the way it goes.

But from the SAR point of view those inconsiderate ba*tards who refuse to wear PFDs ought to have their estates BILLED for every extra minute and dollar of the SAR costs for dragging for their damned bodies instead of just scooping 'em up and going home. 

Damned inconsiderate not to wear a PFD, damned inconsiderate to run up all those extra costs and keep the crews out on overtime.


----------



## rgscpat (Aug 1, 2010)

I think people near cold water should watch the Cold Water Boot Camp videos and similar material, and realize that someone in frigid water without floatation is likely to suffer either water inspiration (gasp reflex, initial immersion) or swim failure (loss of muscle control, often ten minutes or less) well before hypothermia proper sets in. In cold water, the life vest buys quite a lot of time for a rescue; a float coat buys even more. Has anyone talked about the gripping issue for survival suits (being able to use one's hands help oneself into a raft, etc.)?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

hellosailor said:


> But from the SAR point of view those inconsiderate ba*tards who refuse to wear PFDs ought to have their estates BILLED for every extra minute and dollar of the SAR costs for dragging for their damned bodies instead of just scooping 'em up and going home.
> 
> Damned inconsiderate not to wear a PFD, damned inconsiderate to run up all those extra costs and keep the crews out on overtime.


Assuming that it's not a case of a PFD failure in rough seas.


----------



## rgscpat (Aug 1, 2010)

Sigh. Hellosailer, I had a friend whose body spent three weeks on the bottom of a lake. So it wasn't there for the memorial service and his widow and friends were alternating between hope and despair for a long time, then the pain and empty feeling of not knowing. My friend had a nice, nearly new auto inflatable -- in his gear bag. Unfortunately, the survival rate for folks in the water with PFDs in gear bags is pretty dismal... at least until someone makes a life vest that's smart enough to walk outside of its locker or bag and put itself on someone.


----------



## Minnesail (Feb 19, 2013)

hellosailor said:


> But from the SAR point of view those inconsiderate ba*tards who refuse to wear PFDs ought to have their estates BILLED for every extra minute and dollar of the SAR costs for dragging for their damned bodies instead of just scooping 'em up and going home.


A couple weeks ago I chartered a boat in Lake Superior and sailed through pack ice and around ice bergs. We morbidly referred to the PFDs not as "life jackets" but as "corpse floats"

We didn't have a water temp gauge, but another boat reported that they read between 34 and 35ºF the whole time. I attempted to swim at anchor and WOW! I dove so my head was under and when I came up all I could think about was getting back on the boat. I grabbed the swim ladder with my hand behind it, so when I started to climb my had was stuck and under pressure. As I climbed and realized I was stuck.... ..... The obvious solution was to get back in the water to release the pressure so I could pull my hand out, but my reptile brain only wanted to get out of the water so for fractions of a second I was actually considering ripping my hand off. It was the left, OK, I could have made do without it!?!

I got back in the water, released the pressure and climbed out. It was a lovely 80ºF day (out of the water) so I warmed up quickly.

Lesson though: YOU NEED A PFD if you're not sailing in tropical waters. I mean I was at the stern of a sugar scoop boat in dead calm water and I could barely get myself out. Wear a PFD, you may go unconscious but it'll make it easier for other people to fish you out.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

For what it's worth (which may not be much) these inflatable PFDs seem to have a time-rating of 24hrs on them. Wonder how they came up with that? Perhaps there is an ISO or CE standard out there???

inflatable life jacket 33g life jackets vests 150N, [6001025] at China Seawell Marine

MedSailor


----------



## MarkSF (Feb 21, 2011)

I seem to recall an interview with the skipper of boat that sank. One of his recommendations was that, if conditions are severe, or the boat is taking on water and you might have to abandon ship, you should take off the inflatable and put on a normal life vest. Inflatables are good insurance but not as good as a non-inflatable, particularly from the point of view of thermal insulation. A good kayaking or racing lifevest is a good insulator, an inflatable has none.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Med, where do you get "24 hour rating" from? 

And personally, I'd rather grab a set of pantyhose and stuff the legs full of empty soda bottles than touch a Chinese inflatable PFD made at the lowest possible cost.

Approx. 2.2#, one kilogram, of buoyancy per liter of empty bottle.


The American Red Cross used to teach using your pants as a float aid. Tie a knot in each leg, at the cuff. Whip the pants over your head in the air and hold waist-down. Eventually the air bleeds through the wet fabric, but old blue jeans and similar heavy cloth apparently were considered better than nothing. Or perhaps, a way to keep the drownee distracted and the sharks amused. Who knows.

Mark-
I'd agree with you that inflatables aren't as good as "real" PFDs. Except of course, none of us are going to wear a real Type1 in anything but survival conditions, the damned things are just too bulky. And inflatables can be bought with more buoyancy, if one bothers looking.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

hellosailor said:


> Med, where do you get "24 hour rating" from?


Ummm.... middle of the page right under the picture.

BTW my link does not constitute my endorsement of the product. I charge a lot more for my endorsements than I think these guys have. 

From the link, right below the picture:
life jackets vests Buoyancy 150N; 
Gasification time: 0.5s; 
Flotation time: 24h; 
Buoyancy loss: 0.5n; 
CO2 gas: 33g; 
Temperature: -30C ~ +60 C; 
Period of revolution 3 years for life jackets vests

MedSailor


----------



## Minnesail (Feb 19, 2013)

Inflatable PFDs are weird things. It's a product you hope to never use but in the rare event that you should need it, it's crucially important that things work right. They're like airbags in a car — we all have them and most of us will go through life never finding out if they work or not.

I have a Mustang. I think this summer I'm going to spring the $ for a recharge kit and give the thing a test. What I like about the Mustang is that I wear it. I scarcely notice it's there. A standard PFD? Not a chance. Hell, even on my little boat on my little lake I wear the Mustang when I'm single-handing. I physically can't be more than 1/4 mile from shore on my lake, but when I'm single I figure I could slip or something and conk my head on the way down, and since there's really no downside to wearing an inflatable, why not?

But that being said, it would be nice to know if they really work. Thus my planned summer deliberate COB.


----------



## rgscpat (Aug 1, 2010)

Isn't there one day of the year when there are mass inflations of PFDs by various folks who work with water safety? I think all the water safety rangers participate in it in our state?

Don't know for sure if it has been continued, but here's a linky to what was announced as "Life Jacket World Record Inflation Day"

http://nasbla.org/files/public/sca/marapr10.pdf

"During the 2005 international 
Boating and Water Safety Summit, 
held in Newport Beach, Calif., over 
100 attendees lined the beach 
with their Mustang inflatables to 
try to establish the world record 
for most life jackets inflated at one 
time. With the first-ever Life Jacket 
World Inflation Day, organizers are 
sure to surpass that record"

I wonder if there were any no-inflates at that event?


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Oh, so that's not so much a "rating" as it is the warranty from that manufacturer.(G)

They're promising you it will stay inflated for 24 hours, apparently.

I've never seen a brand name maker of PFDs (or life rafts, for that matter) mention how long it might stay inflated. I wonder, maybe that's because all the other PFD makers include an oral inflator valve, so you can top it up from time to time as you're drifting off to exotic ports?


----------



## rackham the red (Jun 24, 2012)

I personally have thrown all 6 of my PFD's (at a greater cost then I wish) away. XXXX XXXXXX would not take them back. Before leaving Cayman while out in the sound on our engine test I asked a group to "jump in" the inflation was slow on 3 and non existent on three. I went right down to the marine supply and bought new life jackets. 

I would not recommend these PFD's for close to shore or blue water. I loved the idea and to be able to comfortably wear them all the time but the safety was not there. The engineer in me adheres to the KISS principle and this require user input. Also they don't hold you high enough out of the water to be seen if you are the man overboard. You have to really work to wave your arms and lift yourself up.

I don't believe that the PDF's that I bought would have held your head out of the water if you had passed out. Just my opinion and a large lost!


----------



## schessor (Mar 19, 2012)

"Even in ice water it could take approximately 1 hour before becoming unconscious due to Hypothermia." coldwaterbootcamp.com/pages/1_10_60v2.html


----------



## rgscpat (Aug 1, 2010)

schessor said:


> "Even in ice water it could take approximately 1 hour before becoming unconscious due to Hypothermia." coldwaterbootcamp.com/pages/1_10_60v2.html


Yep, but the evil thing about cold water is that the hypothermia is only it's third chance to kill you. First there's the gasp reflex upon initial, especially sudden and accidental, immersion and the chance of aspirating a shot of water to the lungs... makes swimming and subsequent breathing kinda hard. Then there's the loss of fine and then large muscle control after about five to ten minutes... leads to a little issue called swim failure. PFDs of any sort will help hugely with these two issues, giving people a chance to get rescued before hypothermia proper sets in in one or a few or several hours and finishes you off.
I think they (Cold Water Boot Camp) also quote a 50-50-50 rule; 50% average survival time of 50 minutes in 50 degree water for someone with flotation but otherwise unprotected. A float coat, wet suit, or especially survival suit of course can extend this quite a bit.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Minnesail said:


> Inflatable PFDs are weird things. It's a product you hope to never use but in the rare event that you should need it, it's crucially important that things work right. They're like airbags in a car - we all have them and most of us will go through life never finding out if they work or not.
> 
> I have a Mustang. I think this summer I'm going to spring the $ for a recharge kit and give the thing a test.
> 
> (snip)


I have tested all of mine. I'm glad you're testing yours. I have no idea why more people don't do this, yet they complain about the product.

I highly suspect that once it inflates, you're going to wish you had a crotch or thigh straps to keep the PFD lower on your body, and more aligned with your torso. This promotes better buoyancy. You'll find that the PFD wants to ride up, and basically suspend you by your neck. It's not very comfortable.

The first thing I do, whenever I buy an inflatable PFD, is orally inflate it at my house. I usually leave it inflated for a full 24 hours, to ensure that the bladder doesn't leak, and that the check valve in the oral inflation tube isn't leaking. I repeat this test 1-2 times per year, each year that I own the PFD.

Then, I do one immersion test to ensure that the firing mechanism functions properly. If I buy a different brand, I use this test to figure out how tight the straps need to be, and if I like the fit.

I usually only do one immersion test when I buy them, but I do an oral inflation test 1-2 times per year. I replace the arming kit when the CO2 cartridge starts looking grungy or corroded, or the dissolving bobbin for the firing pin starts looking funky.

I do not yet own any hydrostatic inflatables, but they look effective.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

rgscpat said:


> ...
> I think they (Cold Water Boot Camp) also quote a 50-50-50 rule; 50% average survival time of 50 minutes in 50 degree water for someone with flotation but otherwise unprotected. A float coat, wet suit, or especially survival suit of course can extend this quite a bit.


Your survival time also depends on your body type, whether you ate properly to provide energy to produce warmth to vital organs, if you had been drinking alcohol, are you on medication that changes your body's responses? etc. I don't like to encourage people to rely on "rules" thinking that is what will happen. Everyone is different.


----------



## Minnesail (Feb 19, 2013)

DRFerron said:


> Your survival time also depends on your body type, whether you ate properly to provide energy to produce warmth to vital organs, if you had been drinking alcohol, are you on medication that changes your body's responses? etc. I don't like to encourage people to rely on "rules" thinking that is what will happen. Everyone is different.


I posted this on another thread, pardon the duplication.

I went swimming around the boat in 50ºF water in Lake Superior. I made it three times around a 40' boat, so around 250', and when I climbed out I was weak and my fingers were starting to have trouble with the swim ladder.

Another guy made it five times around and had no problems getting out. He's 15 years younger than me....

Over Memorial Day this year we anchored next to an ice flow and I got into 34ºF water. Brrr!!!! I never left the swim ladder. I was able to get my head under water briefly, but the shock response was overwhelming. So naturally I did it again.... On my second time up I got my hand caught under the swim ladder. It's a simple fix, descend 6" back into the water to release the pressure and remove my hand, but my mind went blank. I briefly considered ripping my hand off rather than get back in that water.

And that was with me being prepared to go in! In an actual COB situation in water that cold I don't think you could count on any coherent behavior from the victim, it would be 100% up to the PFD to keep them afloat.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Minnesail said:


> Over Memorial Day this year we anchored next to an ice flow and I got into 34ºF water. Brrr!!!! I never left the swim ladder. I was able to get my head under water briefly, but the shock response was overwhelming. So naturally I did it again....


Minne, I like your style.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Minnesail said:


> ..it would be 100% up to the PFD to keep them afloat.


That's entirely true. The quote from my post referred to survival rate being in cold water, not PFD performance. Afloat or not, your body will still react to the cold water.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"I don't believe that the PDF's that I bought would have held your head out of the water if you had passed out. "
Old old news: PS and others have tested the inflatables and for YEARS have said that some models will float you face up, others WILL NOT and they've said which. They've also said that you MUST use a crotch strap to get the buoyancy down low so it will lift you, _since any portion of any PFD that is not underwater, is not doing anything to float you._

Bottom line, some PFDs are created more equal than others.

As to inflating...I think there are only 3 inflator mechanisms on the market and would be curious to know which didn't work well. There are also consumer safety agencies in the US, and magazines, and vendors who need to know about this kind of failure.

As to cold water survival...that's something most boaters and fisherman have ignored for decades too. The mortality rates were worked out very conveniently by the Nazis, who simply immersed prisoners in ice water until they died. There has been more recent and less rigorous testing which has only served to confirm and refine the results but once the water gets "icy"...the chest muscles freeze, you stop breathing, and you don't drown, you suffocate. Five, ten, fifteen minutes, the specifics don't really matter a lot, do they?


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

hellosailor said:


> "I don't believe that the PDF's that I bought would have held your head out of the water if you had passed out. "
> Old old news: PS and others have tested the inflatables and for YEARS have said that some models will float you face up, others WILL NOT and they've said which. ...


Very true. When we teach the part about the PFD holding your head out of water, we add "...in most cases." That is included in all of the stock slides from the National Public Education office that approves our CG presentation.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Thanks Fourth sailor- brought one of those. Would note following
1,worth the money to get hydrostatic trigger. Having had the salt pellet melt while working the boat is a big unwelcomed surprise.
2.find it impossible to get men to wear crotch strap let alone the device itself unless its stinky or they are going forward. Keep extra set up on boat as it's a pain to ask people to fly with them or carry them down for a weekend or short sail. No body will wear them.
3. Find the set up is hard on the boat's interior. They get dropped and dent the sole ( so use rugs). They bang into the fiddles especially in galley (so ask they get removed in head as soon as down below). They get thrown into the head loose and rattle around. Would like to see neoprene sleeve over the hard wear with just lanyard releases coming out.
4. damn things don't sit right if you have full foulies on. Wife finds weight of the thing hurts her boobs after a day or two.
5. When its hot out whole thing is non porous. Uncomfortable and sweaty.

If I was designing one would make it from soft pliable mesh to aid comfort and spread the weight as well as shock loading. Attachment to harness would be very high up on anterior chest midway between shoulder and midline. ( still could release with either hand- no risk of inversion and much more comfy as well as easier on the furniture. Adjust would be same as laced shoes running under armpits to bottom edge. Mesh would run down upper thighs and encircle them with zip on sides.
Just some thoughts. Current ones stink. Nice days no one wears them unless you get parental which I hate to do. Bottom line DON'T FALL OFF THE BOAT. ASSUME YOU ARE DEAD IF YOU DO.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"find it impossible to get men to wear crotch strap"
No problem, just kick one of 'em over the side. When you go to recover him, pull the vest up over his neck and recover the vest without him.
If everyone doesn't get the point...well hell, from the evolutionary point of view, men are a disposable commodity, easily replaced anyway. 

DR-
What I really like are the airline PFDs. Next time you fly an overwater route and the crew put on the dance show about all the equipment? Look carefully, they ALWAYS cut open the neck of the vest. The actual vest you would be given has a tiny neck hole, so when you inflate it, it strangles you and you can't complain or sue. Or breath.
But, it will float your strangled body face up.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

Minnesail said:


> I posted this on another thread, pardon the duplication.
> 
> I went swimming around the boat in 50ºF water in Lake Superior. I made it three times around a 40' boat, so around 250', and when I climbed out I was weak and my fingers were starting to have trouble with the swim ladder.
> 
> ...


Yea, I have been in Lake Michigan in March. Not fun, though we thought it would be fun. Really really cold slipped on the ice on the way in, and out. We had a LOT of anti-freeze as it was back in college. Really lucky someone did not succumb to hypothermia. Things young people do, and now my older son goes away to college. I know my parents are laughing at me now! As my mother always says paybacks are a *itch!

Good thing he is a lot smarter than I am!

And of course there is this: 


> So naturally I did it again....


Sure you are not still in college? :laugher


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

There are some references I don't have written down, that all indicate as you go from 40 to 50 years of age, your susceptibility to thermal shock in ice water increases radically. For a male in average condition by age 55, it becomes a cardiac risk.

Polar bears to the contrary.


----------



## joebeach (Aug 16, 2011)

Interesting discussion, especially as to the desirability of Type I PFD with crotch straps for maximum safety - at least for those who don't/can't stay on the boat.

Particularly as PFD type categories will soon be abolished in the US, making it harder for less experienced sailors to choose among available PFDs wisely.

*


gamayun said:



You'll also want to talk to USCG HDQ. I'd heard they're planning to get rid of the Type I, II, III, etc. ratings because the public finds them too confusing.

Click to expand...

*


gamayun said:


> > Regarding that US federal rulemaking, the substantive change now under consideration is "labeling" of current USCG approved PFDs only, not the construction/safety "carriage" standards for PFDs. That change is to relabel Types I, II, and III PFDs as "wearable" PFDs, and Type IV PFDs as "throwable" PFDs, which apparently is how Canada does it.
> >
> > Here's an excerpt (long) from the notice in the Federal Register (as linked by Donna earlier):
> >
> > ...


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Wow. I'm _so_ glad my ancient Crewfit is totally unapproved for any use in the US.


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

Hmmmm... So where to the type V PFDs fit into things. Will they be lumped into "wearable PFDs?" Not likely they'll be "throw-able." That could be an important point because currently type V PFDs don't count towards your total carried aboard unless they are worn at the time of inspection. If the rule lumps them in with the rest than the type Vs will count towards the total, even if they're in the locker. 

MedSailor


----------



## schessor (Mar 19, 2012)

Speaking of rule changes, the racing rules are getting stricter and I haven't found any inherently buoyant (foam-only) PFDs/Lifejackets that meet the requirements for the more challenging races. 
The ISAF OSRs include:
5.01 Lifejacket
5.01.1Each crew member shall have a lifejacket as follows:-
a)i In accordance with ISO 12402 – 3 (Level 150) or equivalent, including EN 396 or UL 1180
ii Lifejackets manufactured after 1 January 2012 shall be in accordance with ISO 12402–3 (Level 150) and shall be fitted with:-
•an emergency light in accordance with either ISO 12402-8 or SOLAS LSA code 2.2.3.
•a sprayhood in accordance with ISO 12402-8.
•a full deck safety harness in accordance with ISO 12401 (ISO 1095) including a crotch or thigh strap (holding down device) as specified in ISO 12401 (ISO 1095).
•If of an inflatable type either
(a) automatic, manual and oral inflation or
(b) manual and oral inflation 
Notes: ISO 12402 requires Level 150 lifejackets to be fitted with a mandatory whistle and retro-reflective material. Also, when fitted with a safety harness, ISO 12402 requires that this shall be the full safety harness in accordance with ISO 12401. Any equivalent lifejacket shall have equal requirements.
Persons of larger than average build are generally more buoyant than those of average build and so do not require a lifejacket with greater levels of flotation. Wearing a Level 275 lifejacket may hamper entry into liferafts.
b)fitted with either a crotch strap(s) / thigh straps or a full safety harness in accordance with ISO 12401,
Note: The function of lifejacket crotch/thigh straps is to hold the buoyancy element down. A crew member before a race should adjust a lifejacket to fit then retain that lifejacket for the duration of the race. Correct adjustment is fundamental to the lifejacket functioning correctly.
c)fitted with a lifejacket light in accordance with SOLAS LSA code 2.2.3 (white, >0.75 candelas, >8 hours),
d)if inflatable have a compressed gas inflation system,
e)if inflatable, regularly checked for gas retention,
f)compatible with the wearer's safety harness,
g)clearly marked with the yacht's or wearer's name,
j)It is strongly recommended that a lifejacket has a splashguard / sprayhood See ISO 12402 – 8,
5.01.4 The person in charge shall personally check each lifejacket at least once annually.
5.02 Safety Harness and Safety Lines (Tethers)
5.02.1 Each crew member shall have a harness and safety line that complies with ISO 12401 or equivalent with a safety line not more than 2m in length.
Harnesses and safety lines manufactured prior to Jan 2010 shall comply with either ISO 12401 or EN 1095.
Harnesses and safety lines manufactured prior to Jan 2001 are not permitted.
a)Warning it is possible for a plain snaphook to disengage from a U bolt if the hook is rotated under load at right-angles to the axis of the U-bolt. For this reason the use of snaphooks with positive locking devices is strongly recommended.
5.02.2 At least 30% of the crew shall each, in addition to the above be provided with either:-
a)a safety line not more than 1m long, or
b)a mid-point snaphook on a 2m safety line
5.02.3 A safety line purchased in January 2001 or later shall have a coloured flag embedded in the stitching, to indicate an overload. A line which has been overloaded shall be replaced as a matter of urgency.
5.02.4 A crew member's lifejacket and harness shall be compatible
5.02.5 It is strongly recommended that:-
a)static safety lines should be securely fastened at work stations;
b)A harness should be fitted with a crotch strap or thigh straps. Crotch straps or thigh straps together with related fittings and fixtures should be strong enough to lift the wearer from the water.
c)to draw attention to wear and damage, stitching on harness and safety lines should be of a colour contrasting strongly with the surrounding material;
d)snaphooks should be of a type which will not self-release from a U-bolt (see OSR 5.02.1(a)) and which can be easily released under load (crew members are reminded that a personal knife may free them from a safety line in emergency);
e)a crew member before a race should adjust a harness to fit then retain that harness for the duration of the race.
5.02.6
Warning - a safety line and safety harness are not designed to tow a person in the water and it is important that the shortest safety line length possible be used with a harness to minimise or eliminate the risk of a person's torso becoming immersed in water outside the boat, especially when working on the foredeck. 1m safety lines or the midpoint snaphook on a 2m line should be used for this purpose. The diligent use of a properly adjusted safety harness and the shortest safety line practicable is regarded as by far the most effective way of preventing man overboard incidents.


----------



## joebeach (Aug 16, 2011)

MedSailor said:


> Hmmmm... So where to the type V PFDs fit into things. Will they be lumped into "wearable PFDs?" Not likely they'll be "throw-able." That could be an important point because currently type V PFDs don't count towards your total carried aboard unless they are worn at the time of inspection. If the rule lumps them in with the rest than the type Vs will count towards the total, even if they're in the locker.
> 
> MedSailor


Type Vs presumably will be considered wearable PFDs. From the same rulemaking notice (omitted from the prior excerpt), with bold type added for clarity/emphasis:

_"Guard-approved PFDs which are marked as "Type I," "Type II," "Type III," *or "Type V with Type [I, II, or III] performance*" would be considered wearable PFDs and would meet the same carriage requirements as Coast Guard-approved wearable PFDs without a type code marking."_ Those without code markings meaning any of current Types I-V that are labeled/made after the rule becomes effective.

Still, it's not entirely clear to me from the above passage that current USCG practice will change regarding (not) counting unworn Type Vs towards the required number of "wearables" on board, as the overall rule revision is expressly limited to changes in labeling and not in "carriage" requirements. So, TBD....


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Med-
I think what we really should be advocating for are biodegradable PFDs. Forget the type and category, after some set period, let's say seven days at the max, the PFD should start dissolving and coming apart. This helps to rid the sea of more plastic pollution and ensure that the bottom-feeders have a fair chance to eat as well. 

Yessir, biodegradable PFDs. That's what I want my CongressCritters to start drafting legislation for. And I think they should be required to be a proper green color, none of this unsightly blaze orange ruining my expensive waterfront view.

Step right up, come on now, don't be shy, sign right here!


----------



## MedSailor (Mar 30, 2008)

hellosailor said:


> Med-
> I think what we really should be advocating for are biodegradable PFDs.


Those cheap Chinese knockoffs that I linked to may be closer to that then you realize... 

MedSailor


----------

