SPOT Satellite Personal Tracker – Full Review

Excellent review. I just joined Backpackinglight.com and couldn't be more pleased with this type of in depth review and commentary. I agree with the points made in the review and the comments, but would like to offer this new perspective.

I recently used SPOT on a solo trip along the Colorado Trail from Waterton Canyon (Denver, CO) to Copper Mt (appox 105 miles with 17,000 vertical feet). There were sections where I didn't see anyone all day long (but generally there are other day-hikers, through-backpackers, mountain bikers, and some horse-packers along the trail). I used the SPOT to check-in at three predetermined times daily (morning, lunch, and night). I had 100% success rate in sending messages, but I chose the locations to beam an "OK". Usually I initiated the "OK" response right after I woke up or took my pack off. The delay in sending the signal would be 15-20 minutes. I was initially frustrated with the delay, but I think this is tolerable for 1st generation SPOT since there is not a better device at this time to provide "ok" messages to family/friends and hope that future units will be more efficient and reliable. I did not initiate any "Help", "911", or use the "breadcrumb" modes.

Prior to my trip, I set-up to send signals to my wife, daughter, mother, and father. My wife and daughter were in North Carolina working as camp counselors and my parents were "support-team" based in Pine, CO. The "ok" SMS transmissions let everyone know that I was fine and provided my family peace of mind. For my parents, they were able to be more involved in my trip by following me on Google Earth via the email messages. This allowed my father to relieve his segment day-hikes through the same terrain. Also, it helped my father reassess the resupply rendezvous time by sending multiple OK messages the morning we were to meet so he understood the rate of travel and 3 hour earlier arrival time (I took my pack off at Kenosha pass just as he drove up to the parking lot!). Overall my family was excited (versus worried) about my trip and this removes the contentiousness that is typically a part of my adventures. SPOT is a lot cheaper than a divorce lawyer.

I would love to test the "911" in the real-world to check the following:
1. Accuracy of location
2. Ability to successfully transmit in "non-ideal" location
3. Continuity of system to deliver message to response team
4. Total response time from message to help.

Don't give up on this device, but continue to understand its limitations and provide feedback for future products to meet our needs.

Ideal set-up would be SPOT with a PLB…but as I am learning, watch the weight. BTW, I started off with a 65 lb pack and finished with 35 lbs (including food and water for 5 days). My goal is to be sub-30 lbs for the rest of the Colorado Trail. My current weight "hogs" are my backpack (4 kg), sleeping bag (1.9 kg), and sleeping pad (0.9 kg). Ultralight is where it is at for backpacking enjoyment.

> I would love to test the "911" in the real-world to check the following:

In fact using the Help button will give you exactly the same performance.

Cheers

Good write up of the SPoT. I did testing for it in the UK for the distributor and found it to work well over here, I consistently got 75% or more signals through.
It does need a conformation signal of some sort for casual use and peace of mind.
The 911 function has already saved a life in Scotland so I'm glad that works.
I carry one now so my family can keep tabs on me while I'm out, also usuful for illustrating trip reports with links etc.
The SPoT cause a lot of controversy here when it was launched, but most new kit does. The UK doesn't do "new".

As a Coast Guard Search and Rescue Controller who is very familiar with SPOT, (also an AT and PCT alum)I wanted to add my thoughts to this forum. I first learned about SPOT with an open mind, but have since found many reasons to dissuade mariners and others to use the device. I can't stress strongly enough the need to go with a 406 MHz beacon, such as an EPIRB / ELT / or PLB as the distress-alerting device of choice. As a reference, I'll point to SPOT's own web site.

Unfortunately, it is full of half-truths and other misleading information.

Below, I've included a transcript of their online video about its "Alert 911" function.

A point-by-point discussion/rebuttal:

Claim: "Every year, emergency authorities conduct 50,000 rescue missions. Many of these people are not found in time. Now there's a way to make sure that they are: the SPOT messenger is the first an only product that combines GPS technology with Satellite-based communication…"

Response: Outright FALSE! Such technology has been available for many years: SARSAT-based 406 MHz EPIRBs / ELTs / PLBs.

Claim: "Whether you are snowmobiling, hiking or sailing, it is your personal connection to loved ones and emergency authorities, with the simple push of a button, from virtually anywhere, worldwide…"

Response: Not always true. You CANNOT depend on it! We here at the Rescue Coordination Center in Seattle had a case in September where a boater's loved ones hadn't received their scheduled "I'm OK" update from the vessel as expected. Suddenly we had an overdue boater on our hands. Turns out the boater had hit the button on the device, but the message was not transmitted. We called SPOT and learned that they were having difficulty receiving transmissions from multiple vessels. Of course neither the sender nor their recipients was notified of this. We had units from Seattle to California involved in this case. Something similar could happen inland.

Claim: "Over 50% of the US does not have cell phone coverage. With SPOT you're covered…"

Response: Um, not always (see above). Also, with any 406 MHz beacon, you're covered, as well. Without the yearly fee and extra fees for bells and whistles.

Claim: "Today, SPOT is saving lives all over the world." (Provides several anecdotes.)

Response: Certainly it has played an important role in certain cases. But show me one where SPOT worked and a 406 MHz EPIRB / ELT / PLB would not have.

Claim: (Case study – the Bertsches) So the wife receives an email stating plainly "This is an emergency. Please send help." Followed by a lat/long.

Response: So this is not to be confused with the message sent when you hit the "HELP" button, which reads: "This is an HELP message. Please find my location in this message below and send for help ASAP." Confusing?

Claim: The wife then says she received a SPOT message saying "I am OK." and was very relieved.

Response: What if she had been away from her computer this whole time? Had she seriously not yet been contacted by authorities? In the case of a 406 MHz alert, the Rescue Coordination Center that receives the alert puts a live person on the phone with the family member / emergency contact as part of prosecuting the case.

Claim: "If your loved one is going into the doors, you need SPOT…"

Response: No you don't. It's a false sense of security.

While SPOT's a neat tekkie tool for tracking someone's location in the wilderness or at sea, it should NOT replace a 406 EPIRB / ELT / PLB for emergencies.

It also lacks the 121.5 MHz homing signal that all 406s have, with homing equipment already installed on all Coast Guard aircraft. Cg boats, civilian air and ground SAR and civil air patrol assets also have this equipment.

SPOT's business model is clearly based on the continued profits generated by its subscription services, and is aligned with the GEOS company, which is in this business for profit (nothing wrong with that).

SARSAT (406 MHz) beacons exist to execute the federal mission of inland and maritime SAR. While beacon manufacturers like ACR and McMurdo look to make a profit, they have to adhere to strict federal (and international) standards to market their devices as SARSAT EPIRBS / ELTs / PLBs. The government (NASA / NOAA) funds and maintains the satellites, and the Air Force and Coast Guard executes all SAR in the US and our territorial waters (and often beyond).

Another aside about the video on SPOT's site: it uses footage of Coast Guard assets that were retired before SPOT was even on the market (44' motor lifeboat / CG HH-65A helicopter [illustrating a case off of AUSTRALIA, and the CG now uses C models with a different paint job]).

Dear

This article all by itself is worth my subscription several times over.
I am contemplating (or should I say was contemplating) getting a Spot locator for use on my future aconcagua solo climb.
The ability to re-assure left-at-home family is/was a major advantage, tracking would have been fun.

I have used Iridium in various group trekking with considerable confort, but I am not planning on lugging around that equipment solo.

Now, are the problems with getting the SPOT messages through caused by the Globalstart satellites ?

while researching SPOT, I came across a 2007 article:
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2007/02/06/globalstar-satellite-troubles-could-cause-service-shutdown/

then, would the new sattelittes solve some of the issues ?
by when ?

http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2008/08/27/globalstar-jumps-says-new-satellite-production-starts/

Hi Nicholas

> Now, are the problems with getting the SPOT messages through caused by the Globalstart satellites ?

Not entirely. While new satellites may well improve the coverage and uplink, that is not the only problem with the current generation of SPOT units. There is also the problem of getting a GPS signal in the first place. The article goes into this in some detail.

Imho, the use of one antenna to service both the GPS receiver and the GlobalStar transmissions on the current SPOT means that the sensitivity of the GPS receiver has been seriously reduced. It cannot get a GPS signal in many places where other units can. We tested for this and clearly demonstrated it. Without a GPS signal the current SPOT will not try to transmit an OK signal. Its Help and 911 messages are equally of very limited use without a GPS signal.

Does this mean that a next gen SPOT unit might be able to overcome all these limitations? Possibly so, but just upgrading the satellites will have no effect on the GPS bit. That said, we do look forward to the possibility of an improved unit at a far lighter weight.

Cheers

Thanks for your speedy comment.

The article is very well documented. It lists the various downstream components, which all have to work for the localisation/alert service to occur.
In particular, you have underlined that OK signal can not be send if no GPS fix is available, and that there is a limited amount of retry.
The failure to send a message can very well be caused by a single cause or a combination of causes.
You have identified several potential, among which the antenna being optimized for satellite communication rather than GPS.

I have tempted to investigate the following:
1. Antenna.
The uplink occurs on the L-Band at 1610 MHz.
(the L-band elements seems unaffected by the satellite troubles according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalstar).
The GPS signals come down also in the L- Band at 1575.42 Mhz
I am tempted to believe that an antenna small enough to fit in the package of the globalstar Spot and good enough for 1610 would be ok for 1575. I could be very wrong because the problems you described with not getting a fix could be cause by poor discrimination of signals rebounding (multipath elimination) where a very well tuned antenna helps)
Yet the GPS component is known and acceptable performer when used in handheld GPS.
But of course an antenna is not just a wave guide. There are additional electronic elements that would first split and then amplify the signal. There may be an issue there in how the same antenna is used for reception and for emission.
see pic of Antena and other tests at http://www.gpspassion.com/FORUMSEN/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=96247&whichpage=2)

B/ GPS receiver
Regarding GPS location, the computation is done by a Nemerix NX2 /NJ-1030 chipset
(don't know the revision, back in 2005, the previous gen software Version V2 had lot of problem with multipath reflection, version 3 was supposed to be slightly better). Nemerix is not as sensitive, nor as compute-heavy as the its competitors (such a SirfIII), but is very low power.

C/ GPS first fix
I don't know wether the Nemerix keeps the almanacs of GPS in memory between attempts to message, (meaning that the GPS could be attempting a fix from cold everytime). but failure to get a fix witin a reasonable short time could hint at the GPS being unable to get a strong signal from one satellite from which to get the almanachs.

I am troubled by the existence of the ON button.
Why should you have a ON button if the power hungry options of getting a GPS fix and sending a message are controlled by other buttons ?
I wonder if the unit does not get the GPS almanachs while switched ON, or rather if it does not keep in memory while it is left ON the latest almanach it downloaded during the last succesful GPS fix. Unless mistaken an almanach is onnly valid for 6 hours.

You have done a very exhaustive set of tests.
Would you say that the performance od sending a OK signal was better if:
– unit was switched on at time t
– key is pressed t+5 (letting teh unit tried to get a fix by itself ?) (does the LED display changes to show that a GPS fix has been aquired ?)
– unit is switched off (or moved ) after led signals signal is send (or 2 more minutes).
or was it better if you basically left the SPot always on ?

because the "send help" message does not alert 911, but can go without a gps fix, I think that to test the downstream elements (uplink to sat, sat, to base, base to SMS), you could try to send only "send help" message in openair environment.
If you still have 80% success this means the trouble is with the downstream. If you have 90%+ this mean that the "OK" message are hindered by the need to get a fix from the GPS. If you have varying success at different time of the day, this may mean that the unit – satellite link is not strong enough (no satellite visible / poor power/poor directivity from unit / poor discrimination from satellite / base station available).
The GPS fix/ no message received which happened when the received was tilted points indeed to poor uplink link.

Were you able to SMS back your own message to your mobile phone (to get a feedback wether or not the message was received or not) ?

Edit: I found a very informative post of information coming from a Spot engineer (the original posts were removed, but someone was fast enough to capture them)
the post is there: (I do not know wether it is appropriate to copy content or URL), the info is quite important.
A good mathematician could come up with it based on the published information of the constellation of GlobalStar satellites.

copy from http://www.gpspassion.com/FORUMSEN/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=96247&whichpage=3
=======
From a thread with over 450 posts at advrider I condensed the following "rules" for use of SPoT.

SPoT RULES

The device is totally dependent on being oriented correctly to function as intended. There isn't an external antenna as with a PLB to give an indication of orientation. Keep it flat and free when a button for action has been pressed.

Global star satellites can be tracked real time on http://www.n2yo.com

If you are at a high latitude up north (above about 63 degrees), it serves to have a mental image of what is needed for successful transmissions: You need a wide open view towards the south within say +/- 70 degrees down to about ten degrees above the horizon. Within this sector, a lone satellite will appear for a couple of minutes to pick up the transmission. It will pass going east in a slightly curved trajectory, the lower above the horizon the further north you are. Then there will be some minutes until the next satellite appears which can be anywhere in the sector. Below 52 degrees latitude, satellites can be found all the way up to directly overhead but it is more important to have a free view to the south than the north until you come in well under coverage (approx. 40 degrees latitude).

Trees have a very detrimental effect on transmissions , more so than on GPS reception. Moreover, the Global star satellite you need often appears lower on the horizon than GPS satellites which makes the passage through canopy longer. This effect is exacerbated as you move to higher latitudes.

Each transmission only lasts a second and when the LED lights up to indicate transmission, it has already occured. If there was an obstacle between the SPoT and the satellite at that moment, the next opportunity is several minutes away.

Don't look for confirmation that messages have been sent, since transmissions occur repeatedly over a period of time to increase the chance of reaching a satellite during its passage. Messages have been sent when the corresponding LED stops blinking. The GPS receiver will shut off when the transmisssion cycle is completed only to be turned on the next time you demand an action (cycle time: OK 20 minutes, HELP 60 minutes or 911 forevever, i.e. as long as the batteries last or you cancel or turn it off).

After having pushed a button for transmission, check the unit after some time (10-15 minutes) to confirm that there is a GPS fix (LEDs still blinking synchronously).

……

end

Conclusions: A great device when used below say 60 degrees latitude and there aren't trees around that can interfer with transmissions to satellites with low elevations.
================

Google is our friend:

http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=282391&page=4

read the posts from Spotmaker

==========
Hi Adventure Riders!

I work for Axonn LLC, the company that designed and manufactures the SPoT. I am one of the engineers that designed it. I'm loving seeing the response that it is getting! Lots of folks seem to be excited about it.

Here are a few tips for it's use:

The "check in" message actually transmits THREE TIMES. It transmits in the following pattern: As soon as the SPoT has a GPS fix it transmits, then 5 to 10 minutes later (randomly dithered) it transmits a second time, then 5 to 10 minutes after that (random again), it transmits a third time. These three transmissions all have the same internal packet ID which causes the SPoT back office to throw out the duplicates and only send one to the emails and cel-phones on your check-in list.

As a result, this coverage map:

http://www.findmespot.com/explorespot/coverage.aspx

Shows the probability of a check-in message getting through!

How do you know when it's done sending all three messages? Simple, the "ok/check" LED stops blinking! So, it's best to send check-in messages from your base camp, or when you've stopped for a few minutes to admire a view. Activate check-in mode and leave the SPoT sitting with it's face to the sky until the ok/check LED stops blinking.

The coverage map also shows the probability of at least one out of any three consecutive help or 911 messages getting through (at 5 minute intervals, help and 911 will have transmitted 3 or 4 times in 20 minutes, depending on when you start measuring the time). Each help, 911, or track message is only sent once, but a new one, with fresh GPS data and a new packet ID (causing the SPoT back office to pump all of them through), is sent every 5 minutes for help/911 or every 10 minutes for track.

Offroute is exactly right in his assumptions as to what it means that the satellites are moving around in the sky. For a message to go through, at least one satellite has to see your SPoT, and see one of the SPoT ground stations! What this means is: if you've got a great horizon-to-horizon view of the sky, and you're not too close to the edge of the dark orange area in the coverage map, almost 100% of your "track", "help" or "911" messages will get through. If you have only a partial view of the sky, or you're starting to get near the edge of the dark orange area of the map, the condition of a satellite being in view of both your SPoT and the ground station happens somewhat less often, so fewer of your messages will get through.

But: since the satellites are moving around, time is your friend. If at one moment in time, there is no satellite in a "good" position for you, the odds are very good that 5 – 10 minutes later one will be! So, since the check-in message is actually transmitted three times, we've measured that throughout most of the US and Canada the probability that the check-in message will get through is around 99.99% (you'll miss something like 1 in 10,000). The likelihood that at least 1 out of any given 3 consecutive help, 911, or track messages will get through is about the same.
============

==============
n order to make the unit as 1)small, 2)light, 3)inexpensive and 4)power efficient as it is, some design choices were made that traded off raw acquisition time for smallness, price, and improved battery life.

There's also an internal delay of a total of 30 seconds after an actual GPS fix is obtained before we transmit for power management reasons. (So, when you see it transmit, it actually had a GPS fix 30 seconds prior.)

The satellite transmitter within the unit is a major power sucker when the messages are being transmitted to the satellite. This resulted in the other parts of the unit having to be extraordinarily power efficient to compensate.

The GPS subsystem in the SPoT uses an infinitesimal fraction of the power that the equivalent subsystem in a hand held GPS navigator uses, for example.

So, raw dead cold start on a SPoT is a little longer than the best of the newest GPS navigators.

What's a "dead cold start"?

That's when:

* The unit hasn't obtained new almanac data from the GPS satellites for more than 30 days or,
* The unit has been moved more than about 600 miles since the last time it obtained a fix.
==============

etc…

well a last tidbit which answers my one question
========
As a result, that antenna is optimized for it's radiation pattern on the transmissions to Globalstar's network (otherwise, they wouldn't have certified it) and sacrifices a little bit of pattern symmetry on the GPS (compared to a dedicated GPS antenna). Interestingly, GPS gain is biased slightly in the direction of the buttons and LED's, ..

The transmit pattern, on the other hand, is an even broad cone-shaped pattern. It's very close to Globalstar's ideal example of what a simplex transmit antenna is supposed to do on their network.

Maybe, but be careful not to overdo it. The radiation pattern is very broad. With the unit flat on it's back, the pattern is quite even in a cone from about 10-15 degrees from horizontal to 90 degrees straight up. So, if you tilt it more than 10 – 15 degrees, you're doing little more than sending potentially useful RF energy into the ground.

Safest bet for optimum transmission performance is always to have the unit laying flat on its back. However, if you're at a latitude greater than 45 degrees north or so, a clear view of the southern sky is important. The further north you go, the more important a clear view to the south is and less important the view to the north is.

..
The unit puts the GPS chipset into a "standby" mode between transmissions to save battery power. In this standby mode the Real Time Clock still runs and the ephemeris and almanac data are retained. As a result, after a shut off of only 10 minutes, the restart is what is known in the GPS world as a "hot start", and assuming the GPS signal strengths are at all trackable, it re-acquires them in about 1 – 5 seconds.
==========

Hi Nicolas

> an antenna small enough to fit in the package of the globalstar Spot and good enough
> for 1610 would be ok for 1575.
One would certainly think so, in that small a volume.

> There are additional electronic elements that would first split
Yes, sharing one antenna between two devices means that there has to be a coupler of some sort, and the coupler will have significant losses in the antenna to GPS Rx path.

> Nemerix is not as sensitive, nor as compute-heavy as the its competitors (such a SirfIII), but is very low power.
Yes, we had noticed the lower sensitivity. Not a good design decision imho.

> Would you say that the performance od sending a OK signal was better if:
> – unit was switched on at time t
> – key is pressed t+5 (letting teh unit tried to get a fix by itself ?) (does the LED display
> changes to show that a GPS fix has been aquired ?)
> – unit is switched off (or moved ) after led signals signal is send (or 2 more minutes).
> or was it better if you basically left the SPot always on ?
If I remember correctly, you have to wait about 5-10 seconds after you press the ON button before you can press the OK button anyhow.
There is NO direct feedback about the GPS fix. If you watch the Tx LED carefully ALL the time you may see the transmit signal briefly. This only happens IF the GPS fix has been acquired.
If you switch the SPOT off after the first Tx, you have lost all the GPS values and have to start afresh the next time.

> you could try to send only "send help" message in openair environment.
We did a lot of this. There are graphs showing our test results in the article. Not all Help messages got through.

Cheers

Hello,

Your review corresponds to testing I did a few years ago with the technology. You really went through a lot of work, that's great.

After experiences working in the Canadian arctic and seeing that nothing really worked for long term use, I decided to build my own tracker with 2-way messaging.

Four years ago my partner at the time and I tested the Globalstar SENS technology using a unit that uses the same Axxon chip that SPOT uses. At 62 degrees north, we could never get more than half the messages through. We also didn't feel good about not knowing our messages were making it through.

At 50 degrees north, it was a bit better but it still didn't have the "positive connect" that we decided was what we would need to feel that it is "man-rated" for safety (my background is in space engineering-we worked on a few Shuttle experiments where "man rated" was an actual standard).

The simplex technology is cool, low in power use and very light in weight (as compared to other satellite technology – except maybe ARGOS bird trackers which are an ounce or two but not for public use). But then, you would expect low weight and power use as it doesn't do much else but transmit a short burst. No receiver or message buffers to take power, and the transmit does not require a handshake to a satellite like other systems – it's really simple. But, that's partly why I wouldn't use it for people safety. It's a fantastic technology for non-critical tracking – cheap, easy to implement. But boy, was I surprised when SPOT came out – I still say they are really taking a big risk with this.

So, for tracking people for safety reasons at least, we dropped the Globalstar technology and looked at Orbcomm, the only other relatively light-weight 2-way messaging technology available at the time. Works good, but the latency was s-l-o-w. At least 15 minutes at mid-latitudes.

Finally, Iridium came up with Short Burst Data. Two years ago, I started work on this, and the more I worked with it, the better I liked it.

After a year of beta testing our design, and making a lot of changes, we have the Field Tracker 2000. I think some of you would be interested in the details, but I won't put them here – they're at http://www.solaradata.com .

The unit is a portable two-way communicator with text messaging and an interactive display, including GPS readout. Our first unit is a pound and a half, and we're coming out with a lighter design that will be just under a pound. With the limitation on the satellite radio we have to build into this unit, we really can't make it much lighter and still have a screen.

The unit is professional quality, so is not cheap but it's built for rugged use. We could go to lithiums in a variation of the design to save a bit of weight. We didn't do that with our first unit because this would make it a Class 9 dangerous good on aircraft – some pilots, especially in the north, don't allow lithium batteries on board.

Looking at the review on SPOT, I see a lot of great comments. We have had some pretty comprehensive testing by third parties of our beta units and have implemented a lot of improvements as a result. Maybe BPL would be interested in testing one of our lighter units when they come out.

Hi Tom

> Maybe BPL would be interested in testing one of our lighter units when they come out.
Emphatically YES! Please!

We had great hopes for the SPOT when we read the specs, but great disappointment when we tested it in the field. If your Field Tracker can do better, we want to know, and to review it.

The weight is going to be one killer question. We would certainly want to go to lithiums, but if you can make it take AA batteries that allows the user to select which batteries he wants. I suspect V2 could do that?

The cost of the unit is currently too high for most walkers. But I think the cost of the Iridium service is what will be the determining factor really. Most walkers would be interested in something which gave them the "I'm OK" facility (and the "Help" one of course), but I don't think many will be willing to pay $30-35 per month. The difference is of course between private and commercial use.

Even the "Optional 24/7 Message and Alert Monioring: $9.99/month" (if available as a stand-alone option) would be rather expensive for something which might get used on only one trip per month, if that.

The two-way communications is not something which many walkers would want imho. It would suffice to get an ACK from the Iridium system to say that the message you have just sent has been received and handled. The SPOT web-site system is not bad for this. We don't want home texting us to tell us about all the trivia we have just left behind! Or that the boss (at work) is throwing a tizz.

However, all that can be tuned to the market.

Cheers
Roger Caffin
Senior Editor for Technology
Backpacking Light
roger@backpackinglight.com

Hi Roger,

>If your Field Tracker can do better, we want to know, and to review it.

Sure. I love the way our little unit works. Which is why I picked Iridium in the first place.

We've had a lot of tests already, and users have been impressed with the results. The fact that there are so many Iridium satellites and that they orbit from pole to pole means it's visible to you in all four directions over a short time no matter where you are. But since the Field Tracker 2000 has a receiver, it knows when it can't see a satellite (such as in mountains), so it will wait and try again until it is either successful or times out. And it will tell you the status of attempted transmissions on the screen if you have the screen on. Of course, with an Alert, it will persist until the Alert is confirmed delivered.

>We would certainly want to go to lithiums, but if you can make it take AA batteries that allows the user to select which batteries he wants. I suspect V2 could do that?

There has been an awful lot of discussion over rechargeable vs. throw-away batteries. Power is the #1 design trade-off. Energizer lithium throw-away batteries are still $25 a set (at least here) so that cost is not trivial either.

We went with rechargeable for the highest reliability and safety. It was actually on the very *direct* advice of Canadian SAR personnel that we use rechargeable batteries. Otherwise, with throwaways, when they are dead-so are your chances of getting out a message.

We include a solar panel as standard equipment so you have power as long as there is sun – on a long trip you can top-up as well (with a display, it's possible to use a lot of power if it's used often). The unit will run off the solar panel in sunlight as well if the batteries are totally flat. Note it's part of why we are called "Solara"!

Rechargeable Lithiums are lighter but bring their own challenges. I can see us offering a future version variation with them. Stay tuned.

>The cost of the unit is currently too high for most walkers. But I think the cost of the Iridium service is what will be the determining factor really.

Yes, our unit is built with the professional in mind to endure the worst conditions of daily use, so that does affect hardware cost. Our current unit is extremely tough, machined from engineered plastic. Our lighter model uses injection molding and I think the cost will be lower due to this – I'll put the update on the web page when we announce the price.

Remember to compare apples to apples – a one-way unit like TrackMe and SPOT might have about 10 interactive features, the 2-way interactive Field Tracker 2000 is on the scale of about 50. The manual is 40 pages long. It's more like a texting cell phone with GPS and long battery life than a beacon.

As for satellite service cost – I doubt for now there will be much difference. The capital costs are high with any satellite system. Iridium is building the NEXT constellation to replace the current satellites by about 2014 – that's about $2 billion in costs. Right now there are about 320,000 users, so even with 1,000,000 users in a couple of years, the math shows Iridium still needs about $2,000 per account over 6 years just to cover the capital cost. That's an average of about $25 a month. Now, phone customers use the system more so are charged more than data, but you see the point.

SARSAT is also undergoing upgrades – in the next 10 years I think it will cost over $1 billion, shared by the countries investing in the system. I would argue that tracking combined with an emergency alert capability is superior to a manually-triggered beacon system. But, as you say, for those backpackers choosing not to use tracking and are happy to just carry an emergency notification device, SARSAT is still the best one-way emergency beacon option. For a one-way beacon system, there is really no argument; SARSAT has full global coverage, dedicated, redundant control centres in a number of countries, field beacon units built to binding and exacting standards, clear warnings and legislated penalties against misuse, GPS (new) and doppler positioning of beacons, direct signaling to the SAR centres and multiple satellite transponders on board satellites in different, overlapping orbits. Our advantage at Solara is to also provide tracking and 2-way messaging for those who choose to use these capabilities, and we are working directly with SARSAT people to ensure our emergency notification system is up to their standards. We use some SARSAT PLB standards in building our hardware as well.

>Even the "Optional 24/7 Message and Alert Monioring: $9.99/month" (if available as a stand-alone option) would be rather expensive for something which might get used on only one trip per month, if that.

Many customers are also emergency responders with their own 24/7 dispatch centres, so don’t need the Alert Monitoring. That’s why we broke out that cost. But stay tuned, we are looking at that again.

>The two-way communications is not something which many
>walkers would want imho.

SAR folks love it, though!! That's how they confirm whether a call is a false alarm or is real – and if real, how best to respond. The exception are PLBs, which have legal consequences against misuse so carry weight when triggered. The police here are on record saying they regard commercial beacon-only notices like unconfirmed house alarms. They will respond if it’s not too much trouble but need a confirmation before responding if the response will require considerable time and expense, like chartering a helicopter to travel into the mountains (which was a real situation in British Columbia last fall). Don't forget, SAR responses that are far into the back country in rugged terrain and possibly rough weather put the SAR personnel in danger and commits them to a mission for what may be many hours so they are not available for other rescues while away. If it’s a time of rough weather, it’s common to get multiple calls and then gauge which to respond to first. Responders want to be sure they are doing the right thing.

If you look at all the awards SPOT has won, has a single award been presented by a SAR organization?

As for a very low-cost 2-way unit that is extremely light for backpackers – Iridium wants to reduce the weight and cost of the radio and I believe they are working on a light chipset in their R&D although I would need to confirm this. But the bottom line is that it won’t be available for at least the next couple of years.

-Tom

Tom Tessier – Clarification Please:

"SAR folks love it, though!! That's how they confirm whether a call is a false alarm or is real – and if real, how best to respond. The exception are PLBs, which have legal consequences against misuse so carry weight when triggered. The police here are on record saying they regard commercial beacon-only notices like unconfirmed house alarms. They will respond if it’s not too much trouble but need a confirmation before responding if the response will require considerable time and expense, like chartering a helicopter to travel into the mountains (which was a real situation in British Columbia last fall). Don't forget, SAR responses that are far into the back country in rugged terrain and possibly rough weather put the SAR personnel in danger and commits them to a mission for what may be many hours so they are not available for other rescues while away. If it’s a time of rough weather, it’s common to get multiple calls and then gauge which to respond to first. Responders want to be sure they are doing the right thing."

So an ACR MicroFix signals an emergency and somewhere in the chain of command someone says "Well let's just wait a bit to see if this is real"?

>>So an ACR MicroFix signals an emergency and somewhere in the chain of command someone says "Well lets just wait a bit to see it this is real"?

I think he was refering to non-PLB devices, such as SPOT. My understanding is that a signal from a PLB/EPRIB triggers a nearly immediate response from SAR.

I have been rereading the thread over the past two days and have noticed one thing in the discussion about the many different ways of utilizing satellite based emergency communicators of one kind or another.

If you bring one of these devices into the wilderness, you are making a singular assumption: That this is an utterly reliable device that will work when I want it to work and one which will give me immediate feedback that it is working as expected. You are trusting that the device will notify your loved ones that you are ok or that SAR is on the way because you have activated the device. The device must do this every time without fail or let you know that it has not done so. I feel that the contortions necessary to make the SPOT work as advertised relegate this device to the realm of the nice gimmick to show at cocktail parties but not to be taken into the wilderness.

Using an Irridium phone gives me the necessary feedback that it is working — someone is on the line with me — and in my experience has been utterly reliable in communicating that I am ok or that my itinerary has changed or that I am leaving early or any other information I wish to communicate. I even have the local SAR phone number saved in the phone's memory for use if needed. When it has been difficult to make contact, I know it — obviously — because I can't get the person called on the line. So, I keep trying from different locations until I do.

The bottom line with any of these devices is that it does not matter what it costs to buy, rent or use if it does the job every time. You have made a commitment to those you have left behind to "communicate" — not being able to do so is unacceptable. And not knowing that you have failed could cost you your life and at the very least cause unnecessary distress for those you love who expect a message from you.

If you can not afford utter electronic reliability then don't bring something substandard but inexpensive into the wilderness with you and expect it to perform. Be old school — leave detailed itineraries as you did before the advent of these devices.

SPOT fails on so many levels given the above.

PLBs do not and neither does a SAT phone.

Three utters in one post is illegal.

Roger

Nearly everybody I know that has used sat phones are not impressed with them.
1. May not connect first try
2. If you get someone on the line, who knows how long it will last

Hi Tom

> And it will tell you the status of attempted transmissions
Mandatory feature! (As others have emphasised.)

> Energizer lithium throw-away batteries are still $25 a set (at least here) so that
> cost is not trivial either.
Yes, I know they are expensive up front. But with them you can have one set for a very long time, so they aren't that expensive in use. This is why they are used so widely in digital cameras: they work out cheaper in the long run.
Also, many of us remove the batteries while the device is not in use – the batteries have a 10 year life on the shelf. Rechargeables very often lose their charge over a few months.
And with light lithium AA cells, it is not hard or expensive to carry a spare set. Compare that with the cost of the rechargeable batteries found in phones etc.

> We include a solar panel as standard equipment so you have power as long as there is sun
A useful idea. I have done that with CR123R batteries in my Steripen Adventurer UV water steriliser. Mind you, GOOD rechargeable CR123R batteries is a whole new can of worms.

> compare apples to apples – a one-way unit like TrackMe and SPOT might have about
> 10 interactive features, the 2-way interactive Field Tracker 2000 is on the scale
> of about 50. The manual is 40 pages long.
WARNING: do not confuse lots of features with value! Too many software programs suffer from bloatware. It adds to the cost but little to the real value.
Walkers do NOT need 50 features, just a very small number. Perhaps you need a separate discussion with the walker community as to what they really need and will pay for, rather than try to sell them 45 features they don't need.

> math shows Iridium still needs about $2,000 per account over 6 years just to cover
> the capital cost. That's an average of about $25 a month. Now, phone customers use the
> system more so are charged more than data, but you see the point.
No, I do NOT see the point. This is a completely stupid argument based on ridiculous illogic. It defies common sense and market experience. Granted, it may make sense to some drongo accountants, but only some.

By following that logic you are guaranteeing that the service will stay too expensive for the rest of its life and that it will never achieve wide customer acceptance. It is NOT how cellular mobile phones are charged: they charge per use. And they are HUGELY successful around the world with that model.

Consider instead the option of charging a Solara customer a token fee for the registration, plus a per-call fee. There is NO significant overhead cost, so anything more than that will be rejected. But if this leads to another 10,000 walkers buying the Solara, that's another 10,000 customers making use of the service: customers you would not have had otherwise. Remember the cellular phone.

> The exception are PLBs, which have legal consequences against misuse so carry weight
> when triggered. The police here are on record saying they regard commercial beacon-only
> notices like unconfirmed house alarms. They will respond if it’s not too much trouble but
> need a confirmation before responding if the response will require considerable time
> and expense,
I am not sure I understand you here. My understanding is that the emergency services *always* respond to a PLB. Not so?
If there are other beacons which are not PLBs, then OK. perhaps I am missing something here.

As to the awards the SPOT has received, I wouldn't worry about them. I have read some of those reviews – we call them 'desk reviews' with some derision. BPL does NOT do that sort.

Cheers
Roger Caffin

.

If you find my post objectionable because I used utter 3x please substitute Absolutely or Completely or any other word you wish to express the reliability of a piece of electronic gimmickry. SPOT is a piece of electronic gimmickry — period.

It is not reliable in any sense of the word . It requires a complicated adherence to a very precise proceedure and it also requires remembering what the different flashing lights and sequences mean. When I pick up a Irridium SAT phone and punch in the phone number, I get a connection or not. If not then I wait a few momments and hit resend or I find a better location from which to make the call. If it is an emergency (so far it has not been one) I don't think I am interested in long conversations. I would immediately signal the call recipient that it is an emergency and give my coordinates from my gekko 301 gps I always carry. Time to execute probably less than a minute. I have never had a failure to connect with the Irridium I have rented. I have never had a dropped call. I have only had to move my position once. I have used it now for the past 5 hikes totalling 20 days.

My original post above indicates the kind of reliability issues I have had with SPOT, which do relegate this device to the cocktail conversation circuit.

Oh and one more reason to carry a SAT phone. On a recent hike, a beligerent 20 something camper got drunk or high and started threathening others in the area. He was a big guy and as it turned out had a gun in his pack which he never touched. But he was scareing some of the people camped around the lake. I used my sat phone to call the local ranger station and a ranger showed up about 4 hours later and arrested him. By this time he was very drunk and was easy to arrest. A good reason to have two way communication I think.

SO I apologize for the use of utterly (not!). What I don't apologize for is the rationale behind my posts. These devices must be completely, absolutely reliable or they are useless not matter how cheap or light they are.

Don't be cowed by these forum bullies! They'll milk you for the last gram , steer you in the wrong direction ,and back you into the corral for branding.

Your comments are spot on.

Hi Roger,

Thanks for your thoughts on batteries. Maybe just having a lighter option in the future with some sort of backup power would be sufficient. The SAR folks insist units that may be used for emergency beaconing have backup power implemented somehow so it will always work no matter what. I would not want to contradict that and provide a unit that can be totally dead with no options when the main power source expires. Right now we provide an optional external lithium pack but that's in addition to the internal batteries-it's really for the -30C and below users (and yes, the solar panel we provide is standard equipment with us and fits into the carrying pouch-so at least there is an option for power there).

I hear you on the long feature list! Cell phones have more yet, many of which even I ignore (who wants to play games on a phone??). But message heard. The features we do have are as a result of months of beta testing and user feedback. Maybe this is also a good spot to put in my agreement with Mitchell's post that reminds us to use common sense when going out and not be lulled into a false sense of security by "technology complacency" (which I talk about on our web site).

I also hear your comments on satellite air time pricing. I agree, lowering the price would entice millions of sales like the cell market. But then, none of the satellite systems that are in use today have the capacity to handle them!!

The problem is that current satellite systems can't support anywhere near the numbers of users now using cell phones. There is a cap on the maximum minutes of talk time that is available on any satellite, and in turn this also caps what a satellite system can earn.

When you check out the descriptions available on the Web that talk about satellite capacity per band, (like http://www.wtec.org/loyola/satcom2/02_01.htm ), the capacity on all satellite system is limited to perhaps 2,000 to 10,000 phone calls per satellite at the same time, depending on system type. So with multiple satellites visible over the US at any one time, depending on the system, it still means a satellite telephone systems might handle on the order of 50,000 calls at any one instant. As a comparison, there are thousands of cell towers in the US to distribute the load of 200 million cell phones (thus even cell towers get jammed at certain times). Now, Iridium is going to expand it's capacity dramatically with the NEXT constellation by increasing the number of antenna spot beams but it still won't be anything like cellular capacity.

To clarify on some comments where I referred to commercial one-way services Vs PLBs – yes, I was saying PLBs are in a class by themselves, with use being regulated by law and operated by multiple governments. They are responded to immediately and fully when the signal is received.

So, I hope these answer a few of the questions that came up. I appreciate all your comments, and can see that the users of this board are an astute and thoughtful bunch.

-Tom

Hi Roger,

I see I didn't respond to the one suggestion:
>Consider instead the option of charging a Solara customer a token fee for the registration, plus a per-call fee.

I would love to but we have to pay the satellite company a certain minimum amount per month regardless of whether a particular unit is used or not. All satellite systems do the same thing. So we're sort of stuck with this pricing model for now. I have a prepaid pay-as-you-go cell phone plan where it's only a few bucks a month to maintain the connection then a higher price per minute for use. But agian, it's part of a cell system with millions of users to cover fixed costs, unlike satellite where there are fewer users to cover the costs, as I referred to in the previous post.

-Tom

Hi Tom

> The SAR folks insist units that may be used for emergency beaconing have backup power
> implemented somehow so it will always work no matter what.
I will stick my neck out here and label that a typical idiot committee decision.
Fundamentally, it is a technical stupidity and impossible to implement unless you happen to have a perpetual motion machine. And SPOT does not adhere to it anyhow, but does have access to the 911 system.

> current satellite systems can't support anywhere near the numbers of users now using cell phones.
Maybe so, but is this relevant to your Solara system? I don't think so.

The Solara system could be configured as a text messaging 'wait until a slot is free' system. It should not be counted the same as a sat-phone system for capacity calculations – or for charging considerations either. Given the amount of bandwidth a typical Solara customer might use, I would think that you could fit at least 100 of your customers into the bandwidth needed by one sat-phone customer.

Maybe you should try again with the Iridium company using these arguments? Or maybe I am a long way behind you on the track … :-)

Cheers

“…the Field Tracker 2000 is not a SARSAT device (it only transmits over the Iridium Satellite system)…”

The above statement seems to sum up the Field Tracker, other than it being a brick weightwise. If one needs a PLB, they probably should not rely on the Field Tracker. How long do those nickel metal hydride batteries last at say zero degrees compared to lithium batteries?

Lithium batteries and air travel