v1d5r wrote:

Karmutzen wrote:Sounds like he had an older Gen 2, and that his buddy's Gen 3 wouldn't work either. Coincidence? Maybe, just maybe, he was in a draw or canyon in the mountains with poor satellite reception. How long did he try? Satellites move around, maybe in an hour he'd have a signal. So a button stopped working on an out-of-warranty 5 year old consumer electronic device, boo hoo. Society owes me.

I still use a SPOT, cheapest 2.5 minute tracking around, the rest is gravy. Up in the Yukon my borrowed motorcycle had a SPOT stuck to it, but the owner still gave me a sat phone to carry. Whatever lets you sleep at night.

Thanks for the testing information. Still too many crashes not getting found.

So, as far as I can tell, SPOT uses a couple of geostationary satellites for their services. What that means is that the satellites don't move relative to Earth's surface, so if your signal is blocked by mountains or something else, you are out of luck.

I believe that inreach uses the Iridium network, which has a network of satellites that are in polar orbits, meaning that they move across the sky. Because of this, if your signal is blocked, it may work later due to satellite movement.

Here is a image from wikipedia showing the movement and ground coverage.


The ELT beacon satellite system is closer to the Iridium method.

That's correct. However, if your Inreach fails like one mentioned above in this thread, then it really doesn't matter how the satellites are orbiting...

Karmutzen wrote: boo hoo. Society owes me.

I'd reckon it's probably easy to lose your patience laying there with a couple compound fractures.

But your point is valid. Like the helmet argument people love to throw my way, how many of you would go as far out without some sort of emergency beacon? We do operate on the expectation that someone will heed the call. And there's a big difference between having the problem of starting a fire or grubbing some MREs, and the problem of a couple broken legs.

A1Skinner wrote:That's correct. However, if your Inreach fails like one mentioned above in this thread, then it really doesn't matter how the satellites are orbiting...

Right, I just wanted to point out that in this particular case, waiting for a satellite to move wouldn't have resulted in him having a signal.

I think this thread does bring up a good point - trust, but verify. We don't really think to test that function on our sat locators since the other stuff on them generally works fine, but this highlights why it's important at least occasionally. If the call center knows it's coming they won't send the cavalry unnecessarily.

PLB testing will be more difficult for reasons already noted, but if you have the means, it won't hurt to do it once a season.

SPOT customer service is legendary (and not in a good way), so I have little surprise that they didn't really take care of the guy. I am surprised they suggested he resell the device on eBay knowing that it won't work in an emergency. That's just irresponsible at best.

Not to detract from the very valuable discussion on how all this stuff works (that's serious, not sarcasm), but...

I guess I always considered my SPOT to be just a courtesy to the people looking for me, not a way to summon help. If the 406 ELT doesn't work, and I'm unable to activate the PLB strapped to my chest, then I'm dead...or will be by the time anyone finds me. SPOT is just a way to narrow the search to a reasonable area in order to recover my corpse so people don't have to think about it for months or years afterwards. It honestly never occurred to me to use it as a primary way to summon help.

N of 1 here. I used my earlier model Delorme InReach last summer for a no-shit life threatening emergency and it worked exactly as advertised.

Andrew

8GCBC wrote:Anyway, my InReach is used with suspicion now, after it failed. A backup PLB EPIRB is still a good idea for the stuff I do.

Was it the older delorme hardware or the newer garmin stuff?

akschu wrote:

8GCBC wrote:Anyway, my InReach is used with suspicion now, after it failed. A backup PLB EPIRB is still a good idea for the stuff I do.

Was it the older delorme hardware or the newer garmin stuff?

It was a Delorme, about (3) years old (I believe). However, I was startled to find it was replaced with an older Delorme (used). So, I still have a legacy Delorme InReach which cost about $250.00 (shipping included). I have to still say I am impressed with the general service. The older unit had several thousand miles on the ocean, mountains as well as in the air (two amphibious trips to SE Alaska, rough water fishing in Hawaii, snow skiing in Oregon) . The unit was also used in the desert with temperatures over 100F for short periods.

InReach, has been a good deal but, a reality check. This thread reminds me nothing is 100% in the SAR world.

Picture of the failed InReach before flying an R44 across the notorious “Molokai Channel” solo...

-0-

I own and use a spotX. Texting back and forth and tracking works great for me in the western Canadian wilderness. Considering that texting and tracking works I hope that my SOS function also works. Never used the SOS button.

In the last years several airplanes went missing in the mountains of BC. One was just recently found after nearly a year very close to a highway. It was found that the ELT could not function as it was damaged on impact. I also know someone who got trapped flying his airplane into a narrow, rising mountain valley and spun the aircraft while trying to turn around, crashing into tall trees on a mountain side. The ELT was damaged in the crash and not working. This person was very lucky and walked away with only a few bruises, managed to walk to a logging road and was picked up by a passing logging truck not much later.

I would not trust an airplane mounted ELT in the mountainous wilderness of BC. I rather bet my rescue on a personal locator device using satellite communication technology and providing GPS position. But that's just my opinion.

I can't believe that they told him to sell a defective unit on Ebay. I think the guy had grounds for a good lawsuit even before they told him that.

I think SPOT should be legally bound to issue a mandatory test on all subscribed devices.

I agree with the posters that say you can't rely on anything in an emergency (why I carry an emergency kit and wear a survival vest) but I personally trust my Delorme InReach more than my ELT. Pretty mountainous around here and I like the fact that the Iridium satellites are always moving.

Hammer wrote:I guess I always considered my SPOT to be just a courtesy to the people looking for me, not a way to summon help. If the 406 ELT doesn't work, and I'm unable to activate the PLB strapped to my chest, then I'm dead..

I'm not sure I understand that perspective. It makes sense if you are just more personally comfortable with a 406mhz PLB, but is there any hard data that shows that the 406mhz PLB is more reliable?

From a hardware perspective, I wouldn't say an ARTEX is any better or worse designed than a garmin in-reach. They are both really well made. From a battery perspective I would actually prefer the garmin because I can see the battery level and ensure it's fully charged before heading to the field. From a satellite perspective the iridium works on 1616-1626mhz vs the 406mhz, so in theory the 406mhz would be less line of sight and cut through weather better. I suppose the the cospas-sarsat satellite network might be more reliable than a private satellite network, but it's not like Iridium is known to be unreliable by any stretch.

From an implementation perspective, I very much like the in-reach 2-way setup as in a rescue situation I'll probably get updates on how far out rescue people are, or other rescue information. The ability to 2-way test it before heading out is also very handy.

Perhaps stats can help us understand the effectiveness of the systems:

https://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/ reports 275 people rescued using the COSPAS-SARSAT system.

https://www.findmespot.com/en/spotemergency/ reports that there have been 6314 rescues so far, whatever that means.

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/blog/outdo ... worldwide/ reports that there have been 2000 rescues so far, and says, "Every day there is at least 1 inReach-related SOS incident and rescue somewhere in the world."


So obviously people are using all three systems, and they seem to be working.

For me, I want both and trust neither. I have an in-reach (which I plan to upgrade to garmin hardware this summer), and also a 406mhz in the airplane.

schu

Pusher wrote:I own and use a spotX. Texting back and forth and tracking works great for me in the western Canadian wilderness. Considering that texting and tracking works I hope that my SOS function also works. Never used the SOS button.

In the last years several airplanes went missing in the mountains of BC. One was just recently found after nearly a year very close to a highway. It was found that the ELT could not function as it was damaged on impact. I also know someone who got trapped flying his airplane into a narrow, rising mountain valley and spun the aircraft while trying to turn around, crashing into tall trees on a mountain side. The ELT was damaged in the crash and not working. This person was very lucky and walked away with only a few bruises, managed to walk to a logging road and was picked up by a passing logging truck not much later.

I would not trust an airplane mounted ELT in the mountainous wilderness of BC. I rather bet my rescue on a personal locator device using satellite communication technology and providing GPS position. But that's just my opinion.

These are great points, but more information is needed. Which ELT's were they? The newer 406mhz ELT's mandate better g-switches from what I understand. Are there NTSB reports that discuss why the ELT didn't work? If there are, I would like to look at them as I'm currently building the ELT mount for my experimental.

qmdv wrote: I would have a hard time putting something on ebay I knew did not work

DUH! Especially pedaling something that nearly killed you because it failed. It's hard to believe a company rep suggested he sell it on EBAY.

Dollars and cents wise, SPOT is more expensive than a PLB over a 5 year period. Replace the battery at the 5 year mark and have it tested and it's STILL less expensive than the over hyped SPOT. Plus it ties directly into the SAR-SAT emergency network.

akschu wrote:

Hammer wrote:I guess I always considered my SPOT to be just a courtesy to the people looking for me, not a way to summon help. If the 406 ELT doesn't work, and I'm unable to activate the PLB strapped to my chest, then I'm dead..

I'm not sure I understand that perspective. It makes sense if you are just more personally comfortable with a 406mhz PLB, but is there any hard data that shows that the 406mhz PLB is more reliable?

From a hardware perspective, I wouldn't say an ARTEX is any better or worse designed than a garmin in-reach. They are both really well made. From a battery perspective I would actually prefer the garmin because I can see the battery level and ensure it's fully charged before heading to the field. From a satellite perspective the iridium works on 1616-1626mhz vs the 406mhz, so in theory the 406mhz would be less line of sight and cut through weather better. I suppose the the cospas-sarsat satellite network might be more reliable than a private satellite network, but it's not like Iridium is known to be unreliable by any stretch.

From an implementation perspective, I very much like the in-reach 2-way setup as in a rescue situation I'll probably get updates on how far out rescue people are, or other rescue information. The ability to 2-way test it before heading out is also very handy.

Perhaps stats can help us understand the effectiveness of the systems:

https://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/ reports 275 people rescued using the COSPAS-SARSAT system.

https://www.findmespot.com/en/spotemergency/ reports that there have been 6314 rescues so far, whatever that means.

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/blog/outdo ... worldwide/ reports that there have been 2000 rescues so far, and says, "Every day there is at least 1 inReach-related SOS incident and rescue somewhere in the world."


So obviously people are using all three systems, and they seem to be working.

For me, I want both and trust neither. I have an in-reach (which I plan to upgrade to garmin hardware this summer), and also a 406mhz in the airplane.

schu

Well, I'm not saying that I wouldn't push the SOS button on my SPOT if I were laying in the trees with a broken pelvis...just that it's not what I bought it for.

I do believe that the PLB's are more reliable. For starters, they go directly to SARSAT, not to a private company that then reports to SARSAT. They also have a much more massive lithium battery pack which hasn't been depleted by pinging out position reports for who knows how long, and mine at least is more robustly constructed than the SPOT. Finally, for the SPOT to ping out your location they have to be in view of the sky, making it more likely that they will be damaged or missing after a crash. If the PLB in my chest pack is damaged or missing, I'm probably not going to be pushing any buttons anyway.

As for the statistics...I'll take any numbers given by the companies selling their devices with a grain of salt...maybe two grains.

In addition to the aircraft 406 ELT I cary a PLB, handheld radio, and assorted signaling devices in a chest pack. The SPOT is on the dash with a clear view of the sky. To me, the SPOT is only there to narrow the search for my corpse, though like I said earlier, if I can find the damn thing after hitting the trees, I'll push the SOS button...after I activate my PLB.

akschu wrote:

Pusher wrote:I own and use a spotX. Texting back and forth and tracking works great for me in the western Canadian wilderness. Considering that texting and tracking works I hope that my SOS function also works. Never used the SOS button.

In the last years several airplanes went missing in the mountains of BC. One was just recently found after nearly a year very close to a highway. It was found that the ELT could not function as it was damaged on impact. I also know someone who got trapped flying his airplane into a narrow, rising mountain valley and spun the aircraft while trying to turn around, crashing into tall trees on a mountain side. The ELT was damaged in the crash and not working. This person was very lucky and walked away with only a few bruises, managed to walk to a logging road and was picked up by a passing logging truck not much later.

I would not trust an airplane mounted ELT in the mountainous wilderness of BC. I rather bet my rescue on a personal locator device using satellite communication technology and providing GPS position. But that's just my opinion.

These are great points, but more information is needed. Which ELT's were they? The newer 406mhz ELT's mandate better g-switches from what I understand. Are there NTSB reports that discuss why the ELT didn't work? If there are, I would like to look at them as I'm currently building the ELT mount for my experimental.

Did the aircraft have a panel mount switch so the 406 ELT could activate in the air and before the plane flipped? Why was the pilot who flew into a narrow canyon even in the air? ELT's are great tools, but the won't save us from a really bad decision, like to fly up a 'narrow' box canyon.

The nature of an airplane mounted ELT is that it has an antenna mounted on the fuselage. One of the common fail points is that the antenna or its connection to the ELT gets damaged or ripped off in a crash. Another one is the resting point of the aircraft after a crash. If it flipped over, the aircraft is resting on the antenna making it unlikely for it to work. Depending how an aircraft impacts or the terrain it crashes in, e.g. trees, boulders, the ELT itself can be damaged. Last but not least, in case of a post crash fire, the aircraft mounted ELT is in most cases destroyed.

Obviously, an ELT is a required equipment in Canada if someone wants to venture more the 25NM away. So, we have it anyways in our aircraft. It doesn’t hurt to have one, but I do not rely on it’s function when needed most.

The future will be real time tracking of aircraft via satellite in the airline industry and eventually implemented for GA as well.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

PapernScissors wrote:

akschu wrote:

Pusher wrote:I own and use a spotX. Texting back and forth and tracking works great for me in the western Canadian wilderness. Considering that texting and tracking works I hope that my SOS function also works. Never used the SOS button.

In the last years several airplanes went missing in the mountains of BC. One was just recently found after nearly a year very close to a highway. It was found that the ELT could not function as it was damaged on impact. I also know someone who got trapped flying his airplane into a narrow, rising mountain valley and spun the aircraft while trying to turn around, crashing into tall trees on a mountain side. The ELT was damaged in the crash and not working. This person was very lucky and walked away with only a few bruises, managed to walk to a logging road and was picked up by a passing logging truck not much later.

I would not trust an airplane mounted ELT in the mountainous wilderness of BC. I rather bet my rescue on a personal locator device using satellite communication technology and providing GPS position. But that's just my opinion.

These are great points, but more information is needed. Which ELT's were they? The newer 406mhz ELT's mandate better g-switches from what I understand. Are there NTSB reports that discuss why the ELT didn't work? If there are, I would like to look at them as I'm currently building the ELT mount for my experimental.

Did the aircraft have a panel mount switch so the 406 ELT could activate in the air and before the plane flipped? Why was the pilot who flew into a narrow canyon even in the air? ELT's are great tools, but the won't save us from a really bad decision, like to fly up a 'narrow' box canyon.

In the first crash I mentioned, if I recall correctly, the battery ejected out of the ELT. I believe weather was a factor for causing the impact with terrain.

Most crashes in my neck of the woods are not mechanical caused, rather caused by the pilot, due to decision making, weather and/or terrain factors.

In the context of this discussion, who cares why the pilot flew into the canyon. He crashed and the ELT was damaged and didn’t work. That’s the important point.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I’m so not surprised by SPOT’s response. Their customer service is notoriously crap! At least they’re consistent. LOL

Thank goodness I only have a SPOT Trace which doesn’t have an SOS feature. I wouldn’t want to depend on that company for anything critical.

My son drew a sheep tag in the church last year and he bought (I think inreach that tied in with his phone. He sent coordinates every two days so I could see what canyon drainage he doing. I thought that what good until I plugged them in on google earth and found that they weren't even close.maybe I did something wrong, don't know for sure. General area but not in the drainage he was in