The expired beacon and the corroded antenna
It is April. You are preparing the 11 m yacht Halcyon for a three-week cruise from Falmouth to the Scillies and back, with four crew. During the winter refit you find: a 406 MHz EPIRB in the locker with a battery expiry date of last November; its self-test passes but the registration label still shows the previous owner's name and MMSI; a SART in the grab bag with a test-log entry from two seasons ago; and the masthead VHF antenna has a corroded PL-259 plug with green copper visible and a 2 cm split in the outer coax sheath. The fixed VHF receives distant stations but a radio check to the coastguard gives 'readability 2'. You have a 5 W handheld with a fully charged battery and a spare antenna. The forecast is SW 4-5, good visibility.
1. Assess whether you should sail with the EPIRB as found, and set out what you would do before departure.
Read the worked answer
I would not sail with the EPIRB as found. Two separate problems matter: the battery is past its expiry date, and the registration still identifies the previous owner and MMSI. A self-test passing does not prove the beacon will transmit for the required duration at full power, and an expired battery may fail when it is actually needed.
Before departure I would have the battery replaced by an approved service agent, or replace the EPIRB with a serviceable unit. I would update the registration with the relevant national authority so that the hex ID, vessel name, MMSI and emergency contacts are correct. A 406 MHz alert carries the beacon identity, so wrong registration data can delay rescue or send calls to the wrong people.
If the service cannot be completed before the date, the safe decision is to delay or to sail with a correctly registered, in-date beacon - not to rely on the handheld VHF as the primary distress alerting method for an offshore cruise.
2. How would you test the SART and what result would you expect? What does the test not prove?
Read the worked answer
I would test the SART according to its instructions, normally by switching it to test mode while watching a 9 GHz X-band radar at close range - for example, with the radar on a short range scale and the SART a short distance away, not stowed inside a metal locker. In test mode I would expect a line of 12 dots on the radar display, confirming that the SART is responding on the 9 GHz band.
After the test I would return it to standby and log the test. The test does not prove full transmit power, battery endurance or performance at a distance. The SART battery has a finite standby and transmit life, typically 96 hours standby and 8 hours transmitting, and the test-log entry from two seasons ago is not enough. I would check the battery expiry and service history, and replace or service the SART if the date is due. A SART is not a substitute for a DSC distress alert; it is a locating aid for rescue craft.
3. The VHF radio check gives readability 2. What does that mean, what is the likely cause, and what would you do about the passage plan?
Read the worked answer
Readability 2 means the signal is barely readable. Receiving distant stations well does not prove the transmitter or antenna system is healthy: a corroded connector and split coax can cause high standing-wave ratio, loss of transmit power and water ingress, while reception may still sound acceptable.
The corroded PL-259 plug, green copper and split outer sheath point to the antenna feed as the likely fault. I would not transmit repeatedly on the set in that condition, because a bad match can damage the output stage. I would replace the plug and the damaged section of coax, or have the masthead antenna and feeder checked and replaced before departure.
For a Scillies cruise I would not rely on a 5 W handheld as the primary set; its range is limited and it is a backup. If the repair cannot be completed, I would postpone the offshore passage or plan to remain within reliable handheld and coastguard coverage, which would not support the intended plan.