Personal Locator Beacons & Other Wireless Technologies for Backcountry Travel?

[Roman Dial]

Curious what people here in this forum thinak about the pros and cons of sat phones vs. EPRBS?

[Bernard Shaw]

EPIRB imho are best when, one, person overboard, signal goes out, it is attached so you don’t have to do anything while fighting for your life, etc. Sat phones assume you are mentaly and physically able to use one while it hooks up etc. In situations where weight matters, like many here feel who go light, epirb can be lighter and don’t have to worry about batteries going dead as much. On the other hand, sat phones do allow you to keep advised of weather emergencies, let others know of your safety, status, and can prevent needless searches, etc. Evidently, there is a considerable track record of their use by marine and aviation but with any new population there are start up concerns about misuse as folks get educated.

[Charles Maguire]

One of my personal pet peeves are the number of hikrs who could care less about the environment. I mostly hike on and around the Appalacian Trail. The campsites/shelters are pigstyes. The further you go from a road the better they get, making me believe the less educated considerate hikers stay closer to their safety zone (road).

If these people get PLB’s will they take their carelessness further up the trail, or to the more remote side trail area’s that usually few venture too. I Don’t see PLB’s reallly needed on the AT esp. if hiking with a partner, but there are a bunch of bozo’s out here that I could see using the PLB in the most marginal situation.

I am not trying to be snobby, but the conditions of the AT are deplorable. I doubt the hardcore hikers are to blame, but instead the 1 weekend a year warrior.

Chuck

[Brian James]

A comment on Arctic1000.com made me read this article.

Interesting to read this commentary, in light of Ryan’s recent trip north.

[Jeffrey Lantis]

I feel that it is the most vital thing a person can bring into the great outdoors. I am interested in getting one for my self.

[Anonymous]

When I am going on a solo off trail jaunt, I now carry a PLB
for the following reasons: 1) I have a huge responsibility to my wife to come back alive; 2) If I get seriously injured, a timely rescue will greatly improve my chances of survival. They would diminish considerably if a search was not undertaken until after I had failed to return on the scheduled date, which could be anywhere from 2 to 10 days depending on when I was incapacitated; 3) The cost and risk of search and rescue would be considerably higher if all they had to go on was an itinerary. That said, I consider it mandatory that I exhaust all options available to me to self extract before activating the device. Still, it remains to be seen how I would react if and when I find myself in dire straits.
So far, alertness, caution, and a healthy ration of good fortune have kept the PLB in its holster, but there are no guarantees. All it takes is a millisecond of inattentiveness, a miscalculation, or some random incident of objective hazard and things go bad real quick. I guess it's sort of like auto insurance; you hope you never have to use it and take all precautions, but……Also, I do take out insurance to help defray the cost of a rescue should one prove necessary.

[Mitchell Keil]

I have a PLB and have posted several comments about this form of emergency communications and the reasons for carrying one. I recently started seriously looking into buying a SAT phone and have found that prices have come down considerably along with the service contracts for them. I can now buy one for the continental US with roaming service to Canada and Mexico with full coverage of the US and Alaska for less than $400 and about $500 for one with a GPS locator built in. They weigh in at between 7oz and 13oz. The service contracts can be as simple as $39/mo for what is called emergency service which is a per minute charge of $1.49. Bottom line is that this piece of gear would end up costing me about $100/yr after the initial purchase. They are waterproof to 1m and pretty resistant to bumps and dings from what people tell me whom I know who own them and use them in Africa.

So, it looks as if I will be getting one and using it as an emergency communication device and to call in to my wife each night to let her know I am safe. It would have the added benefit of serving in case of earthquake (I live in SoCal)and when traveling. I really can't think of a single downside to having one with me treking. I can load up the ranger station number and the local SAR number and get help and advice if needed by phone and have my situation evaluated by the professionals if I need evacuation.
Decided to add:
After re-reading a number of posts in this thread and remembering numerous posts from other threads about the "purity" of the wilderness experience being spoiled by technology, I need to make the following comments. The wilderness experience is what you make of it. One can hike the same travel worn trail over and over again year after year and chose to see it and experience it anew each time. It is what one brings to the experience that make the difference. A PLB, SAT phone, MP3 player, camera and other technology does not have to reduce the "purity" of the experience. If one spends a lot of time thinking about the presence of that technology in your pack then maybe yes, it can. But as the zen masters say — empty your mind and allow it to be filled by the experience. The technology of the SAT phone or PLB does not have to get in the way. I doubt that Everest Climbers see technology as an intrusion on the experience of that mountain.
If you chose to see PLBs as the harbinger of the end of wilderness as we know it and a license for the shallow end of the gene pool to hike into situations they should not, that is one perspective and not that of those of us who wish to make sure we return from even the most mundane hike or the most hair-raising adventure. Remember, Murphy lurks around the most innocent bend in the road.

[b d]

I posted the following on a related thread:

"Here is a US Coast Guard site summarizing EPIRB recommendations which discusses and defines the types, ranges, uses, and what not to buy or use:

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/gmdss/epirb.htm

As mentioned by a previous poster here, note the number of items or classes of EPIRBS with: "No longer recommended."

Having sailed in both harbors and out on the open ocean, where there are no mountains sticking out of the water or other obstructions, usually, EPIRBS are useful and proper equipment is recommended by the Coast Guard.

Poor, low quality, defective equipment is worse than having nothing because it creates a false sense of security at precisely the moments when that is the last thing one needs — like a choice whether to turn around and go back in rather than keep going into heavy weather or current, etc."

I am not that experienced at "land sailing" or what is called hiking, trekking and camping. That said, relying on the electronic gear is great for security but can never replace judgment and preparation in the execution of a venture. My thought is that what are being referred to here as PLBs are not perfected or developed for land use, what the mariners call EPIRBS, and I would use all other means first before relying upon them. If I were, as an old sailor, to pick a weapon of choice, it would be a handheld radio device, waterproof and lightweight + a strobe for night and orange dye for day, if I couldn't get a fire with smoke going. Visibility is the key.

All that aside, I really respect BPL for initiating this kind of discussion. It has given me pause for thought and to refine my pacing plans.

[Douglas Frick]

Sat phones (Globalstar, anyway) are very sensitive to sky cover. I can't usually make a call from beneath trees, although sometimes I can receive SMS messages. A small clearing or a stream is usually good for a 5 minute call before it drops, then I wait 15 minutes for the next satellite to pass overhead.

It doesn't bother me at all (except for the extra weight) to carry the phone. I don't think of it until I make my nightly connection, and when I do so I am grateful that I can be out there and keep my job too.

[Mike Barney]

Hey bd,
The new class of EPIRB's (aka PLB's) are well suited for land use. One of the nice things about this new (only out for about a year) class of beacons is they have virtually instantaneous location capabilities, using a combination of GEO and LEO satellites. If you have one that reports your location, your ID and location is available in 1 – 3 minutes, otherwise, the LEO satellites have to make a couple of passes to find you, takes about an hour.

The reliability is pretty good, they are relatively lightweight (~ 12 oz), will beacon for 1 – 3 days, have location resolution within a wingspan, and are getting pretty reasonably priced (example: ACR AQUAFIX 406 PLB EPIRB w/ INTERNAL GPS for $575 from http://www.theepirbstore.com , I have no affiliation w/ them)

When you activate the EPIRB, you don't have any options. The SAR center gets the registration information, will call a contact number that you provided to make sure that it's not a goose chase, then dispatches general help. (It's only a distress signal, no indications on whether it's medical or whatever.)

I see 2 other lightweight alternatives: One is a SAT phone, several in the 8 – 13 oz range, typically $600 – $800. If you're in good enough shape to make a call, you can probably get more precise support or care with this option. These typically do not work reliably under large canopies, and some don't work in deep canyons.

The other alternative is an handheld VHF aircraft transceiver to make a distress call. Often in the $300 range and under a pound. These are relatively inexpensive and lightweight. Several high profile saves have been made by communicating with airliners overhead, who were able to relay specific distress information. There are many areas (more in the western US) where there are not that many air routes.

Cheers,
MikeB

[b d]

Hey Mike,

Thanks, a lot. Just saw your post about the new EPIRBs. I am not going to go Sat phone or VHF aircraft transceiver for sure. Too much trouble and cost, plus I don't even like the idea for some reason.

The new "PLBs" sound interesting, mostly because of my partner's safety. I have pretty much decided to find a UL strobe for night, if I can't start a fire (hopefully not a forest fire) and some orange dye and carry at least one large item of orange, bright, material which also has other benefits / uses, like one of the Heatsheats thermal bivy things sold at the Gear Store. (I even daydreamed about a small canister of gas to go with a balloon that could be sent up on Spectra cord and carry a strobe for night, orange balloon for day … funny how the mind works when wanting to be out there and suffering from cabin fever … it would be like the mariners' flares or orange smoke for land.)

Please keep posting about this new EPIRB system and any light weight and functional / durable units available. Or, PM me.

Until then, lost here in gear heaven while I organize, reorganize, and re-reorganize everything waiting to get back out there … while playing hookey from other tasks.

bd

[Cornelius Austin]

I pack a PLB on back country trips because I just couldn't bear seeing my wife turning into a nervous wreck by the time I got home from each solo trip. If I didn't have a loving wife waiting for me, I wouldn't need it. It's not for my peace of mind, it's for her's.

Neal

[Ryan Hutchins]

I agree with Douglas. Sat phones are effective for many purposes, however they have limitations with signal strength and quality based on sky cover and terrain. W/ a sat phone, there are additional steps to be located, however you are also able to communicate the urgency of your situation and your actual needs Vs. the "come and get me" of activating an EPIRB. Sat phones are getting smaller, albeit slowly, and do give you the ability to check fire reports, call out when delayed, or call to change a pick up if you need to. As far as being a multiple use item, they seem to have a bit more going for them than an EPIRB (PLB). I think used responsibly, a PLB could be a great tool for back country travelers, but it all comes down to personal preference and having a good head on your shoulders to know when any tools use is appropriate.

[George Matthews]

This PLB is from November 2003. Over the five years since, what has changed and what remains the same?

Has anyone here actually used one in an emergency?

How many of you carry one?

[Fred eric]

http://www.fastfindplb.com/en/what_is_fast_find/index.php

or 5.3 oz if you prefer.

Im seriously considering bringing one on this summer hike with my wife : 10-12 days hike in Greenland without maybe seeing someone else ( then one week in more habited area )
And next summer probably back to Iceland for a crossing this time.

Its not for cold weather/wind , in Iceland last year i had a huge margin of security for that,and i always do so when hike a few days away from civilisation.
But its more for the case of a broken limb or equivalent.

Its seems a reasonnable weight penalty to carry that in the case my wife or i injure himself 100km away from the nearest known house/ cell phone cover.

i wouldnt use it in a situation not serious enough that i would care having to reimburse the whole cost of the rescue

[Richard Sullivan]

Just got an ACR PLB, the TerraFix 406 I/O, used but never activated, weighs 12oz, $250. The more I read the more I am convinced it was a great investment. The best informational site seems to be http://equipped.org/ as Doug Ritter is heavily involved in the testing and spec development.

[Roleigh Martin]

Richard, why did you not choose the 5.3 oz McMurdo Fastfind new PLB with GPS:

http://www.equipped.org/blog/?p=105
http://www.fastfindplb.com/en/index.php
http://www.fastfindplb.com/en/what_is_fast_find/fast_find_210.php
http://www.fastfindplb.com/en/what_is_fast_find/pdf/manual.pdf

[Roleigh Martin]

It is my understanding that in the US, if you have a life-threatening emergency and legitimately use the PLB that you have registered ahead of time with the government that if you are in a national park, the government picks up the expense of any helicopter/rescue evacuation/travel expense (until you get to the hospital at which time your medical insurance gets involved).

However if you are elsewhere, including a national forest or national wilderness area, you're at the mercy of how the individual US State handles such situations and it includes the possiblity that a private-sector helicopter evacuation service might be solicited and used and that you might have to help pay for the bill.

However, most emergency medical evacuation insurance policies require the premium payer to call THEIR phone number ahead of time for emergency transportation, which is unreasonable for a PLB situation. (No need to elaborate I hope.)

The American Express subsidiary, globaltravelshield, would not promise me claim coverage or denial in a PLB situation, so their insurance policy looks less than ideal. Does anyone have a policy/insurer they recommend? I contacted globaltravelshield.

I'm talking about this web site:
https://www.globaltravelshield.com/

Spot Messenger uses this insurer:
http://www.geosalliance.com/sar/

I am going to write them to see if they will cover the use of a PLB or not. Has anyone else already done this?

[Joe Kuster]

I've read through many travel emergency insurance policies and the one that is used by SPOT that you listed above seemed to be the most complete as it seemed to lack the typical abuse loopholes. Pretty much it was if you need it, we'll cover you up to X amount. I cannot recall the exacts since it's been two years since I read the contract, but I thought it was either $200,000 or $250,000 in additional funds to haul you back.

The only glaring issue was that it does not however cover any medical claims and if you were lifted out by a medical chopper instead of a SAR chopper, so it would be possible that you might may not be covered if you are given medical attention during the flight. Fortunately, any normal medical insurance coverage should kick in for that case.

[Richard Sullivan]

Roleigh, the new Fast Find 210 looks great but the previous model was not so good. If you look at
http://www.equipped.org/406_beacon_test_summary.htm#Conclusions
and scroll down to Summary of Inland Testing you will see that the Fast Find Plus was not as good as the ACR unit. So basically I just went with ACR's reputation as building the best units. Once the FF 210 is validated I will sell the ACR and get a FF 210.

[Roleigh Martin]

Richard, what a great link. Read with extreme interest.

It appears that if you get the McMurdo Fastfind, not to rely on it for water use, and for land use, it better be a clear sky and opening to depend on it, is that your bottom line assessment of the McMurdo Fastfind?

[Greg Mihalik]

Richard,
Your reference is to the 2004 test report.

However, that report also include a link to a subsequent 2005 Report.

In that 2005 report the results show the McMurdo and the ACR perform similarly.

[Richard Sullivan]

Yes, it looks like McMurdo's reputation pretty much went down the tubes with that testing. Seems that if I am injured then I have to climb to the top of the nearest mountain to use the FF Plus :-|

They will be trying to reclaim it with the new design, but I will wait for info from Ritter's site to prove they can produce a product I can trust. VERY unfortunate they didn't drop the Fast Find name since people will not be able to instantly identify the new generation products.

[Greg Mihalik]

Richard-
"Yes, it looks like McMurdo's reputation pretty much went down the tubes with that testing."

I interpreted that the 2005 report found both the McMurdo and the ACR performed equally well.

What am I missing? What are you seeing?

[Richard Sullivan]

Thanks, Greg, I didn't see that one.

So the revised FF Plus was fine. And I guess we could assume that the tested ACR prototype is the TerraFix.

I will still wait for testing on the 200 or 210 before purchasing…

[Author]

Posts