- Mar 4, 2018 at 5:06 pm #3522273
Elisa UmpierreBPL Member
Check out what I just found. Gotta do some further looking into the actual in-field reviews of the product, but it has captured my attention. http://www.satphonestore.com/iridium-go-turn-your-smart-phone-into-a-satellite-phone-used.html?utm_source=google_shopping&m=Abstract&gclid=CjwKCAiAz-7UBRBAEiwAVrz-9Y4SyuD0cQhoNhESgTDkv5gg6LzHDGNNb0nPsydlXUHeXGx9ubz-zRoCZBQQAvD_BwEMar 4, 2018 at 6:15 pm #3522280
Jerry AdamsBPL Member
@retiredjerryLocale: Oregon and Washington
4.5 x 3 x 1 inch – not bad, I wonder what it weighs
$50 per month + $0.25 per text message?, $650 cost, kind of expensive?Mar 4, 2018 at 6:30 pm #3522281
Iridium seems to be hiding info on the weight. Does not appear on their website specs.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/iridium-resources/BR_Iridium%20GO%21_Brochure_ENG_MAR16.pdf?X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAJZGZ7EFDIRTDZYBA%2F20180304%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20180304T182800Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=900&X-Amz-Signature=6cd1502ab75f27e2cfbfdb73c77bcebb6946be9ef6e33d684c91f85fe9df954cMar 4, 2018 at 6:33 pm #3522282
https://s3.amazonaws.com/iridium-resources/CC_Iridium%20GO%21_Comparison%20Chart%20HR_JUL14.pdf?X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAJZGZ7EFDIRTDZYBA%2F20180304%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20180304T183241Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=900&X-Amz-Signature=f678d98ece57b7cb48b28ffa98be9160c15decaaadc4303af8663aa08b0e9f73Mar 4, 2018 at 9:14 pm #3522317
Alan Dixon did a review of the Iridium Go in 2015. Might have changed a bit since then, but I’m sure a worthy read if you’re interested in the device.Mar 4, 2018 at 9:55 pm #3522324
How did I not see that article when it came out? NNTRSep 4, 2018 at 12:55 am #3554434
Mary CBPL Member
I’ve done some research into GPS error/accuracy as part of a statistics project, so this has me very curious :)
How accurate is is the mileage on the explorer plus? When we compare the Garmin to any phone app, they are off by quite a few miles…..Sep 5, 2018 at 5:19 pm #3554640
Mike WBPL Member
@skopeoLocale: British Columbia
In my original review of the Explorer+, I compared the track from my Explorer+ to my Garmin Etrex handheld GPS. The tracks from the Explorer+ were almost identical with the Etrex tracks. So I consider the Explorer tracks very accurate. I mention tracks vs trip distances (which was your question) because trip distances are based on the track distances. Phones are not great at recording accurate tracks because the programming in most phone apps is trying to save on battery usage. They do this by putting down fewer track points and this directly affects your trip distances. If you are comparing a phone to a GPS (or Explorer), you have to set the track interval to be the same on both devices (ie. a track point every 5 seconds). This will let you accurately compare trip distances. You also have to consider the trip… if it involves a lot of sitting around, then the GPS drift will change your trip distances. If you are recording a track point every 5 seconds and sitting still for an hour, then any GPS drift will be calculated as travel time (some GPS’s allow for a minimum track distance and can get around this issue… never seen that feature on a phone). Lastly, steep grades when hiking will skew your trip distances. The trip distance is an XY distance (distance between two points on the ground), so if you are climbing steeply, your XY distance may be minimal even though you’ve covered a lot of vertical distance. I’ve found the trip distances on the Explorer+ to be very good however, I have not compared it directly to one of my phone apps… mainly because a phone is a very poor device for running a continuous track (too hard on the battery).
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.