Morning all. Just looking for peoples views on the different transceivers on the market - which are best, what to look for etc etc.
I can be guilty of stepping into all the gear and no idea braket, but when it comes to safety its best to get anything that can help. As some may have read I want to start trying some off piste, and I dont think it will hurt to carry one!
I can read review after review, but I trust the knowledge of who actually use them, rather than sites with an interest in selling them!
I realize use/training is a big factor, and that is something ill need to look at too.
Cheers in advance for any helpful and non sarcastic comments
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
BCA Tracker II is very reliable, simple and straightforward to use. Facewest (http://www.facewest.co.uk/Safety-Packages.html) do a number of very good value off piste safety packages that add a shovel and probe to the transceiver.
It's all very well and good buying a very sophisticated transceiver, but you've then got to invest considerably more time in training to use all the extra features which might well confuse you in the stress of an actual rescue.
I consulted Snowsheperd, http://shop.snowshepherd.co.uk/ I seem to remember the owner posts on here, he was very helpful, and I believe does a snowheads discount. We ended up getting the Ortovox 3.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
One very important consideration, which I only realised when testing some transceivers, is to make sure that you can actually read the screen. Stopping to get your spectacles out of your rucksack is not a manoeuvre you'd wish to add to the burial scenario.
To cut a long story short , get a digital beacon with 3 antennas and you won't go wrong.
That means any one of the following...
- BCA T2 or T3
- Mammut Pulse / Element
- Ortovox 3+ / Zoom / S1
- Arva Neo
- Pieps DSP
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
^what he said but learning to use it is the most important thing.
After all it is free
After all it is free
RobinS,
I think that's livetoski
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Be honest with yourself about how much training you are going to do and then buy something that fits your likely ability level. For most people this is going to mean a 3 antenna beacon that does single person burial well and either does not have advanced functionality (ability to switch between signals, signal masking) or has the ability to turn that off. If you think you will have the opportunity to demo e.g. by doing an avalanche course, then I'd do that. I've had good results with both Avalanche Academy and Chamex.
For example, I currently have a Pulse, which is very fast in multi-burial scenarios and is completely over-specced for the casual user such that it could be confusing if used under stress with minimal training. I don't regret the purchase - it was the first 3 antenna beacon available and streets ahead of the original BCA Tracker - but I would be in the market for something else if I was buying now. Following a recommendation from the Avalanche Academy guys I bought the Ortovox 3+ for friends and that has worked out reasonably well. I have a vested interest there as they will be digging for me if things go wrong.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I've still got a tracker 1 that I lend out as I figure trackers are as close to idiot proof as you can get given even basic understanding of flux lines.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
I still persist in using an Ortovox M2 because it's simple to use, has an idiot proof harness and a massive detection range. IMV, you should always learn on a simple analogue beacon first - then at least you have some insight of the difficulties a digital beacon has and proceed accordingly.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Thanks all for the advise.
I've been looking at training courses in the UK and they seem to be either is Scotland (understandable) or Wimbledon of all places. Does anybody have any suggestions? It only seems right that I have the best kit (shovel that wont break etc) and training as I'd hope (and expect) the people I ski with to do the same.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
I remember around 10 years ago when myself and two other mates were on a ski touring week. During a foggy morning the guide suggested we do a bit of avi trainning until the skies cleared. We 3 all pulled out our shinny new DTS Tracker 1 (which were state of the art at the time). Another member of the group pulled out a really old transceiver. We expected our transceivers to lead us straight to the search object. The guy with the old transceiver knew what he was doing and found it within a couple of minutes. We were like the 3 stooges and wouldn't have found the person within 30 mins (in which time most burried avalanche victims are dead).
PS Get a sturdy shovel soft shovels (e.g. plastic) are no good for anything but soft powder. Unfortunately very few days are true soft powder days.
Last edited by So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much on Fri 4-07-14 10:41; edited 1 time in total
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
DB,
Thanks for this. I have the Ortovox Koiak shovel and their 320PFA pole, nothing wore than plastic shovels!! Thanks for the video
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
The original Pieps/ Ortoxox F1 analog things require skill and judgement. If you've been in a few interesting situations you'll realize that's a major issue.
I disagree with the idea of training people on old analog transceivers. That's a very bad idea in my view, like suggesting people learn to ski on old fashioned skis would be.
For the last few seasons I've used the BCA Tracker II. If other people are carrying them I know it's easy for them to search. I'm not convinced people familiar with their complexities can outperform novices using simpler transceivers, and I doubt very much that anything complex or fiddly will help in a real situation. There are likely other easy to use/ simple transceivers out there which will work equally well.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
philwig wrote:
The original Pieps/ Ortoxox F1 analog things require skill and judgement. If you've been in a few interesting situations you'll realize that's a major issue.
I disagree with the idea of training people on old analog transceivers. That's a very bad idea in my view, like suggesting people learn to ski on old fashioned skis would be.
.
What's the major issue? A number of patrollers and guides still use them because of range and the unfiltered signal and lack of complexity. Definitely take understanding, skill and practice and definitely not the right thing for a novice but in a structured learning environment I can' t see the harm as they really help understand what a digital receiver is doing with its signal processing.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
^ B@ll@cks.
There is no reason to be using an old analogue beacon such as the F1.
Modern triple antenna digital beacons are faster in *every* scenario.
I certainly don't know any professionals who are still using or recommend old style beacons.
Any that are still using such old technology deserve to be called out
The main issues...
1) single antenna will suffer badly from spikes during deep burials. this requires much longer probe time during fine search.
2) single antenna search is slower, need to rotate beacon to get directional information (and on F1 adjust the volume)
3) frequency drift on older beacons using old style oscillators is a known issue. for this issue alone they should be retired.
4) multiple burials are nightmare and depend on listening for pulses rather than reading the digital display.
Yes, a trained professional might be able to use an F1 well.
However there is no reason to still be using one if you are out in the mountains every day and a clients life may depend on your skills / equipment.
Also : The theory about following flux lines in a curve still needs to be learned for modern digital beacons!
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
What's the major issue? A number of patrollers and guides still use them because of range and the unfiltered signal and lack of complexity. Definitely take understanding, skill and practice and definitely not the right thing for a novice but in a structured learning environment I can' t see the harm as they really help understand what a digital receiver is doing with its signal processing.
My "major issue" in a rare and nasty situation is using tools which require both skill and judgement. Your point I believe is that "professionals" are good at precisely that, which I agree with.
But I was answering the OP, so not specifically focused at professional-only groups. Still, as you bring it up, I think the same principle may apply even to those well trained people ...
If there was a rare-but-nasty incident where you are sure that there will only be professionals present, and you're sure none of them will panic, then using tools which require skill and judgement may not affect the outcome adversely. So long as the young people know how to operate the old peoples' transceivers of course.
To me this is a cost with no benefit, so I think just using the simplest thing which will do the job is the way to go.
Tranceivers like evey piece of electronics don't last forever and sometimes new and old kit doesn't work well together.
Quote:
Note that newer digital transceivers will occasionally report multiple transmitters (i.e., a "multiple burial") when receiving a signal from a single F1. This seems to be most common with the Tracker2 and the Pieps DSPs when receiving a signal from an older F1
^ B@ll@cks.
There is no reason to be using an old analogue beacon such as the F1.
Modern triple antenna digital beacons are faster in *every* scenario.
I certainly don't know any professionals who are still using or recommend old style beacons.
Any that are still using such old technology deserve to be called out
The main issues...
1) single antenna will suffer badly from spikes during deep burials. this requires much longer probe time during fine search.
2) single antenna search is slower, need to rotate beacon to get directional information (and on F1 adjust the volume)
3) frequency drift on older beacons using old style oscillators is a known issue. for this issue alone they should be retired.
4) multiple burials are nightmare and depend on listening for pulses rather than reading the digital display.
Yes, a trained professional might be able to use an F1 well.
However there is no reason to still be using one if you are out in the mountains every day and a clients life may depend on your skills / equipment.
Also : The theory about following flux lines in a curve still needs to be learned for modern digital beacons!
I think you are overstating it a bit, in fact I remember seeing a test involving different generations of beacons and different levels of expertise on the part of testers. The fastest search time in the test was by a professional using an F1.
As someone who doesn't practice as much as I should, my search times for a single beacon with a well functioning F1 couldn't be much quicker - it basically took me straight (well, along the flux line) to the burial. And if you factor in the hugely superior range of an F1, it can save you a lot of time acquiring a signal
having said all of that, I still wouldn't recommend an F1 to a noob and I don't use one now. I managed to smash the case on mine and replaced it with an Ortovox 3+ which I find easy enough to use and it is clearly better in a multiple burial scenario. i'd love it if it had the range of an F1 though! also, I found using the F1 quite intuitive but not everyone's brain works the same way so some people didn't get them at all. the modern generation beacons are definitely more intuitive to more people
^ I could still ski on my old 200cm straight skis - but I don't....
The fundamental problem with any single antenna beacon is that it can't resolve spikes due to lack of directional information.
In a deep burial you will be probing a much larger area (No matter how experienced the user).
This problem becomes much worse if the beacon is at a funny orientation - and costs time.
It no longer true to say that an "F1 can be the fastest beacon in hands of a professional" - because modern triple antenna beacons are simply better in every metric. The only benefit of single antennas (slightly longer range) is cancelled out by slower search times once the signal is acquired (especially in the final "fine" grid search).
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Haggis_Trap, well i have an avalanche jetpack which works 97% of the time every time, so who needs a transceiver
more seriously, though, I can't help but feel that when we're talking about better usability in deep burials, most of the time we're talking about something that is better for body recovery
i still wouldn't recommend an F1 to a noob though
After all it is free
After all it is free
^ I agree : No doubt avoidance is best.
If you are buried then statistics say your chances of survival via beacon rescue are only about 30%.
However without a beacon (i.e waiting for mountain rescue) that drops to less than 3%.
Basically your only hope *if* the worst should happen is companion rescue from other group members.
I reckon a well trained UIAGM guide might be able to locate and dig out a deep burial (>1m) within the crucial 15 minute window ?
But it would be tough....
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Haggis_Trap wrote:
I reckon a well trained UIAGM guide might be able to locate and dig out a deep burial (>1m) within the crucial 15 minute window ?
But it would be tough....
so many variables in that one
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Yip : incidentally its not just deep burials that result in spikes.
A buried beacons at 90 degree orientation (to the searcher) will have similar effect.
In a modern beacon the 3rd antenna is physically located at 90 degrees to the 2 main antennas specifically to deal with this issue.
Otrovox have a neat patent that turns on / off the 3rd antenna specifically to detect and eliminate spikes.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
^ yip : all avalanche beacon transmit the same signal.
digital masking works by simply ignoring the time slots of the marked transmitting beacon.
however the frequency / location of each beacon isn't exactly the same - which causes their relative phase as seen by the receiver to drift over time.
this means beacons with multiple victim mark function can easily get confused.
.... however until the international standard is changed (so each beacon transmits a unique identifier) there is no perfect solution.
the same problem exists with analogue beacons - when the pulses overlap you cant hear the difference.
best solution is to learn the 3 circle method.
but that requires training.
whilst mark functions are often used as marketing to differentiate between modern beacons is it really useful or likely to be beneficial in real world scenario ?
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Yep, I know all that - I use an analogue beacon!
But there's the thing. My brain can do a better job at masking than seems possible with digital transceivers. If they focussed on providing the user with more information rather than less then I might be more convinced that the multiple antennas and digital processing was worth it.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Quote:
My brain can do a better job at masking than seems possible with digital transceivers
Total hot air : If 2 received signals are overlapping (same phase) then the F1 will receive what sounds to human ear like a single pulse.
If the software can't resolve the microsecond difference between signals then your ear (frequency limit 20kHz) certainly can't!
No doubt you are competent using an analogue beacon : but no argument can be made that it is better than a modern triple antenna beacon ?
Either way the multi-victim argument ignores the basic argument against F1s.
With a single antenna beacon you could be probing 4 or 5m out from the victim - that is where the spike *could* occur (even if not deep burial)
A digital beacon gives you a much higher chance of getting in close to the victim without having to do fine grid searches or even a probe.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
It's an easy job to keep two trains of beeps separate when they are of different intensitities. If they are are of the same intensity then rotate the beacon or, with some concentration, just focus on the train you want. I can do a far better job than those in the video. If that was me in a real search I'd just be screaming at the friggin' thing just to tell me what it could hear instead of trying to interpret it for me.
So called 'spikes' are easily resolved by rotating the beacon. This really is a non-issue.
I will admit that the later stages of a search can be quicker with a multi-axis beacon as is saves all the rotating and waiting for the next pulse but this seems to come at a cost. The range of my M2 is 1.5 to 2 times that of most digital beacons; digital beacons often get confused in multiple burials (or at least display confusing information); the user interface is often non-intuitive (imagine suddenly giving your beacon to someone else to use).
Now, if someone made a two-axis beacon where the audio always behaved like an analogue one and on the top was a display like a clockface where the hands pulsed in length with the amplitude and direction of each ping, then I might be convinced. This would be doing the least interpretation whilst actually giving you more information than any current transceiver.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
altis wrote:
It's an easy job to keep two trains of beeps separate when they are of different intensitities. If they are are of the same intensity then rotate the beacon or, with some concentration, just focus on the train you want. I can do a far better job than those in the video. If that was me in a real search I'd just be screaming at the friggin' thing just to tell me what it could hear instead of trying to interpret it for me.
So called 'spikes' are easily resolved by rotating the beacon. This really is a non-issue.
Nope...
By rotating the beacon you don't know if you have created OR got rid of a spike.
You can only follow the beacon towards the lowest reading and then probe.
The reason is simple : you don't know orientation of the buried beacon.
See below!
"...Likewise, single-antenna transceivers cannot compensate for spikes (which you can compensate for with good probing). Although I was a big fan of the Ortovox single-antenna beacons for many years, I personally feel that the advantages of multiple-antenna transceivers no longer make single-antenna beacons the best choice for most users" http://beaconreviews.com/transceivers/specifications.asp#tableOrtovoxM2Header
RE : Multiple Burials : The only way to reliably resolve multi-burial victims is to use some kind of 3 circle methodology.
The search technique used would be the same for digital and analogue beacons.
(i.e you wouldn't use the mark function as shown in the facewest video unless the beacons were far apart)
M2 was an OK beacon about 10-15 years ago - but don't kid yourself its in anyway better than modern offerings.
Despite the long range the way it automatically switches between analogue / digital modes makes it very difficult to use in certain scenarios and reduces the control you have over it. Plus most importantly the directional information is poor and requires a slow grid search in final phase. I retired my old Ortovox X2 about 4 years ago for that very reason.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
RobinS, musher, Thanks for the mention.
From the work I have done then the digital transceivers are much easier to use than the older style F1, for the majority of recreational skiers, some rescue people still like the older style analogue gear due to the initial signal range, but usually then switch to a digital for the final 30 to 40 m
As mentioned above the only transceiver to do anything different on transmit is the new Ortovox 3+, if the burial is difficult postion the 3+ will change its transmit aerial to send out a better signal, on the testing I did this does work and can make a pretty big difference. However if you normally use reading glasses the 3+ is not the best to see!! That would be the Tracker 2 which has bigger display.
On a test search last January there were about 8 or 9 of us searching with lots of different transceivers, there was not a huge difference between the digital transceivers but if asked the 3+ prob just won, especially as a couple of the users were first timers
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
DB, Yep these are old video's on first 3+, they have been changed since these videos were filmed, the latest version has not shown this, plus the signal acquisition has been improved so when you get the first signal at max range it holds it better than it used to as well.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
DB,
They were both posted before the 1.1 software upgrade. Don't know if that would fix this problem?
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
who actually use them, rather than sites with an interest in selling them!
