Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand • Hacker News Board

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#91

Post by hluska » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 1:22 AM UTC

throwaway5752 wrote: post #64

ohazi wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "search" part of search and rescue is a solved problem. There's no reason to go into the wilderness without a PLB in 2020. PLBs cost around $300 [1], they have five+ year batteries, and they don't require a subscription. If you need to use it, you turn it on, it grabs a GPS lock and transmits your coordinates for about a day, during which at least one satellite will see your signal and downlinks all over the plan…

I'm not trying to take this discussion in a bad direction, but we're seeing a society-wide failure in the US to wear small pieces of cloth over our face to reduce the transmission of a serious illness. People frequently fail to prepare adequately even when given the means and opportunity. Search and rescue scenarios are not always for people that planned around getting lost and have a locator beacons on their person.…

Hey friend, your edit is extremely classy. I’ve had a wonderful conversation with you today and alupis today. Thanks for being so smart but also so kind.

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#92

Post by jointpdf » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 1:29 AM UTC

ohazi wrote: post #82

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you feel about a $300 fee to use the national parks? If a PLB is required in all but law then that's almost the same effect. IMO that kind of goes against the spirit of having national parks and other purposely undeveloped areas. Sure it would be nice if everyone had one but I don't wanna make hiking and camping, which can be very cheap ways to recreate if you want them to be, instantly $300 more expensive.

The vast majority of people that visit national parks stay at campsites that are attached to parking lots, that have running water and bathroom facilities, and that have at least some cell reception. Many of these are attached to well marked, well traveled trails with amazing views that make for excellent all-day hikes. You don't need a PLB to visit one of these camp sites or hike some of these trails. But if your of…

I have (semi-)frequently gone “off-grid” far away from established trails, without carrying a PLB. Sometimes I’ve gone days without seeing another human. I have extensive training in wilderness navigation, and have always reviewed my itinerary with the rangers ahead of time.

In hindsight, I can see how this was a selfish decision.

This feeling has been nagging at me for a while, since I’ve had close calls in remote areas that would have jeopardized the inevitable SAR crews.

So, I’ll acquire a PLB and carry it on future trips. Thank you for the reminder.

That said, I think some of my hesitation in the past was rooted in this belief that PLBs were unreliable and mostly a nuisance due to the abuse by inexperienced hikers. Also, if you are in cell range (like on the majority of the AT), I believe that a phone is the superior device since you can communicate the severity of your emergency to emergency services and they can respond accordingly. I’d like to read more about this if you have some links:

> ”now rescue organizations all over the planet are asking you to please...carry a goddamn PLB”

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#93

Post by hluska » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 1:35 AM UTC

throwaway5752 wrote: post #42

thaumaturgy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does not work well in practice, yet. There is a lot of interest already in using both off-the-shelf and more purpose-built drone technologies in search and rescue. They currently have too many limitations: they cannot navigate complex tree canopies close enough to the ground to provide reliable visual contact with subjects; their flight time is so limited that deployment and management is a real pain for large s…

Thanks for the informative reply. Your point about "What we need is a balloon that we can put up with a big ol' repeater on it" is particularly brilliant and I hope the right people are reading.

Years ago, there was a kickstarter for a Rescue Me Balloon.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/651668573/rescue-me-bal...

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#94

Post by keenmaster » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 1:58 AM UTC

nwallin wrote: post #67

thaumaturgy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does not work well in practice, yet. There is a lot of interest already in using both off-the-shelf and more purpose-built drone technologies in search and rescue. They currently have too many limitations: they cannot navigate complex tree canopies close enough to the ground to provide reliable visual contact with subjects; their flight time is so limited that deployment and management is a real pain for large s…

I used to be an imagery analyst. You're spot on about infrared imaging. Normal dirt, rocks, and plants show more contrast than human vs environment. The only way to tell that the blur you're looking at is a person is if they start moving, and you recognize it's a human by the motion, not by the shape. When I was an E-3, I had a three star general ask me if the image I was analyzing was a picture of a MiG-29 Fulcrum.…

What about combining machine learning and thermal imaging? You would train the ML on the specific thermal characteristics of humans in different conditions. The ML may output a ton of false positives, but if there are a lot of eyes on the footage, and other sensors (LIDAR?) + normal image recognition are used, that might be worth it.

Another thing to consider is two-way audio search. The drone would make an extremely loud screech to announce its presence to the lost individual (paired with extremely bright light at night), then it listens for a human response. People can be trained to make a certain response that is easier to detect (loud continuous shout? Start and pause every 2 seconds? etc..). Of course, that should all be a backup to safety protocol and satellite communicators.

Lastly, I want to make the obvious point that a constellation of drones would do a better job than a single one. A swarm of drones can simultaneously cover the whole area where the lost individual might be. Combined with the above technology, that can be very powerful.

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#95

Post by CarbyAu » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 2:20 AM UTC

throwaway5752 wrote: post #14

Alupis wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or... a dude in a helicopter with FLIR? Sometimes, low tech is best, honestly. Of course they already have that. The problem isn't coverage usually, it's density of the terrain features and vegetation, and an unknown search radius in some cases. That, and unprepared people with no way to signal a search vehicle if one comes near. That's a human problem though, not a tech problem.

Sure. It's the unknown search radius, availability of pilots, human factors, as well as the greater ability of a drone to self (or with human intervention) track in to greater resolution that makes me wonder if this is doable. Get the helicopter with a flir camera, but also send out 50 quadcopters or uavs as a force multiplier. If there is some sort of interesting infrared or acoustic signature at a site, just log it…

I agree with the use of smallish unmanned aerial units. I also agree with using them in significantly large numbers. But I'd like to see combination use.

Example:Unmanned plane delivers quadcopters to position and retrieves them later.

Protoss - "Carrier has arrived."

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#96

Post by NikolaeVarius » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 2:31 AM UTC

staycoolboy wrote: post #6

I think the days of being stranded on islands are over. But what about oceans and being lost at sea? Would the film "Cast Away" make sense with today's satellite and object detection technology?

You are extremely incorrect.

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#97

Post by kirubakaran » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 2:44 AM UTC

ohazi wrote: post #66

throwaway5752 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not trying to take this discussion in a bad direction, but we're seeing a society-wide failure in the US to wear small pieces of cloth over our face to reduce the transmission of a serious illness. People frequently fail to prepare adequately even when given the means and opportunity. Search and rescue scenarios are not always for people that planned around getting lost and have a locator beacons on their person.…

I'm trying to fight the perception that PLBs are expensive specialty gadgets meant for professional explorers [1]. They should be considered as basic and as necessary as a life vest, seat belt, or bike helmet. You should not be backpacking on the Appalachian trail without one. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24065435

Thank you. I thought it must be a lot more expensive. I just bought one (Resqlink 425, instead of the 400 your linked above)

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#98

Post by waheoo » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 2:51 AM UTC

dhsysusbsjsi wrote: post #59

Interestingly the international ground air code for requiring help is normally an X or a V. But I would still write SOS or HELP. You can imagine the scenario: “Hey Jane check out that - looks like a V in the sand” “Heh yeah”. “Weird”. or “Hey Jane does that say HELP?” “Heh yeah. Wanna check it out?” “Yeah let’s take a look”.

Universal attention sign is usually three of the same.

Three dots in a triangle, three flashs in a row, etc.

Its just easy for the human mind to detect it as an unnatural pattern.

It still probably better to use SOS or help but sometimes that's not an option.

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#99

Post by anyfoo » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 3:08 AM UTC

waheoo wrote: post #98

dhsysusbsjsi wrote: post #59

Interestingly the international ground air code for requiring help is normally an X or a V. But I would still write SOS or HELP. You can imagine the scenario: “Hey Jane check out that - looks like a V in the sand” “Heh yeah”. “Weird”. or “Hey Jane does that say HELP?” “Heh yeah. Wanna check it out?” “Yeah let’s take a look”.

Universal attention sign is usually three of the same. Three dots in a triangle, three flashs in a row, etc. Its just easy for the human mind to detect it as an unnatural pattern. It still probably better to use SOS or help but sometimes that's not an option.

I can easily see someone making, for example, three giant triangles or circles for a variety of reasons—fun, art, or engineering—without the intent to alarm anyone. If someone were to visibly write out SOS or HELP, though, they are either in need of help, or extraordinarily careless (or even malicious) in their deceit. But that’s unlikely enough to still warrant checking in.

Re: Men rescued from Pacific island after writing SOS in sand

#100

Post by esperent » Thu, Aug 06, 2020, 3:48 AM UTC

dhsysusbsjsi wrote: post #59

Interestingly the international ground air code for requiring help is normally an X or a V. But I would still write SOS or HELP. You can imagine the scenario: “Hey Jane check out that - looks like a V in the sand” “Heh yeah”. “Weird”. or “Hey Jane does that say HELP?” “Heh yeah. Wanna check it out?” “Yeah let’s take a look”.

How cross culture are HELP or SOS? We're talking about being on a tiny remote island here. There's no guarantee that the people who see your message speak English, or have much exposure to western culture at all. Is SOS known to all cultures?