 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hello SnowHeads,
I am a new registered user and hoping for a space to become free for the off piste Bash in March. I have old BCA Tracker 2 avalanche transceiver and would like advice on whether I should buy a newer model and if so what do people recommend for an easy to use/intuitive device? I have mostly been skiing "side country" for off piste over the last several years.
Thanks,
Adam
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
How old is the Tracker 2? You may want to get it checked to make sure it is still within spec. Otherwise a perfectly good beacon especially for non pro users.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Our guide buried his transceiver few years ago above Monetieres and told us to walk away until we lost the signal. Mine lost the signal after about 20m. Some on our group stopped walking after 50m due to the terrain, not because they had lost the signal! Mine was the cheapest 4 or 5 years ago. Can't remember the make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
I have a Mammut Barryvox, and its well worth the price. Easy to use and very effective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
I had my old Ortovox M2 for my first 2 bashes and I was ribbed about it being so old. I replaced it last year with the Barryvox.*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a tracker 2 - its still absolutely fine - its a bit limited in terms of search but someone will find you just fine. If your looking to change then I highly recommend the Mammut Barryvox S. its excellent but does have some advanced features that I will never get to.
Moreover, i recommend Mammut for service. At the start of this season I reloaded a set of batteries and one of the terminals snapped off. Mammut replaced FOC, they said would repair such an important bit of kit!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Charliee wrote: |
| I have a tracker 2 - its still absolutely fine - its a bit limited in terms of search |
Hence why people often raise queries about older beacons, in a group. I'm much less worried about my ability to find the older beacon (with a newer one ), than its ability to find me. Like most avalanche gear (apart from airbags) you are basically investing in your ability to find your mate(s) when they are buried. It's reasonable to hope that the people you ski with will also value your life in a similar way.
Personally I'd be ok with someone having a Tracker 2 - it is a 3 antenna beacon, with decent range - but other people may be less comfortable. But I'm always happier if the group does a proper beacon check, including range, at the beginning of a day or trip. I only found out that my ~2 year old Pieps beacon wasn't working properly by doing a full range check. Finding out that you can't pick up another beacon until you're <10 metres away is not a nice feeling, especially when the year before it had a 30+ metre range.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Another happy mammut barryvox user here
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your replies and thoughts. I am probably going to invest in a Barryvox and get the Tracker 2 updated as a back up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
I have a Barryvox and I am happy with it. But I was amazed by some interference tests reducing the range of this generation of beacons to a few meters ! I need to buy a new one for my daugher and it will be a new generation of devices handling interferences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@Chamrousse38, can you share a bit more info about interference tests and which models don't have this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have more info in French (some reviews are in English though) on https://www.gearscore.com/ski-et-snowboard/securite-avalanche/tests-des-appareils-de-detection-de-victimes-davalanches-dva/. I was basically refering to the last review (of the new Pieps Pro beacon) made by a french ski guide. This video is interesting because it shows the effect of interferences in the emitting mode (in extreme situation : phone on beacon !), while most data available focuses on the receiving mode. Il shows also the superiority of this new generation of beacons, speaking of range, interference management, directional precision, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| kitenski wrote: |
| @Chamrousse38, can you share a bit more info about interference tests and which models don't have this? |
Interference from electronic devices can reduce both transmit and recieve range/effectivness. As far as I know it effects all beacons, old and new. Just new generation are the ones being tested since this became known.
Phones are well known to do this; better in flight mode, best off (but the it takes longer to call help and no photos).
What's less we'll known is... smart watches, heated gloves/socks/gilets*, radios, video cameras...
I've experienced detection range being roughly halved when phones were on, compared to flight mode when doing range a test.
*I fear to think what a heated gilet element does to the signal of a beep beneath it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Yes. Please buy a new one so you can find me if necessary. The Barryvox is great and has a good range.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Chamrousse38 wrote: |
| You have more info in French (some reviews are in English though) on https://www.gearscore.com/ski-et-snowboard/securite-avalanche/tests-des-appareils-de-detection-de-victimes-davalanches-dva/. I was basically refering to the last review (of the new Pieps Pro beacon) made by a french ski guide. This video is interesting because it shows the effect of interferences in the emitting mode (in extreme situation : phone on beacon !), while most data available focuses on the receiving mode. Il shows also the superiority of this new generation of beacons, speaking of range, interference management, directional precision, etc. |
We did our own interference tests on a ski club (sorry) trip a few years ago. Mobiles are a nightmare. Mine is permanently in flight mode or off now when off piste. Who wants a phone call anyhow.
Significant reduction in range and signal when mobile was on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
@adithorp, yes was aware of phones, just wondering if the newer models can handle this better... think my BCA Tracker 2 is due an upgrade!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| adithorp wrote: |
| ..*I fear to think what a heated gilet element does to the signal of a beep beneath it? |
But transmit and receive are somewhat different things.
You might not want to search for a weak signal with your transceiver hidden inside your electric vest.
However I doubt any crosstalk from that vest would interfere much with signal transmission.
Which is presumably is similar for all current transceivers as they share a common standard.
It's not really a feature of the electronics, more a user thing.
"training" might be needed to prevent you from trying to search for a weak signal - a casualty - with a strong radio source close by - your vest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Of course and when searching you can switch things off (with a time cost doing so) based on any previous knowledge and training; when buried your stuck with whatever you choice you made earlier. Both information I've been read or been told and tests I've been involved in (limited sample) suggest the range of detection is effected by interference in the vacinity of the transmitting beep.
What worries me with the vest is does the heating element form a Faraday cage? I've not seen any test/report one way or the other (and don't have one so not personally that invested).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
