 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Is anyone out there developing a transceiver app for smart phones ? Surely the level of technology in a smart phone is good enough to make this possible , if so it would mean a safer mountain at a much cheaper price ,sadly killing the current cash cow for ortovox and co .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
IIRC you can't get an exact proximity with a mobile phone, only a 'rough' area, add in the issue of modern smartphone batteries not lasting even half a day in the cold and I still think there is scope for current devices.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Not going to work at all. You might be able to locate people by their phones with a receiver to do so but no phones are going to be detecting others without some hardware changes. I can think of ways of hacking this together but none that would work precisely enough to tell you anymore than someone is nearby. There are inherent inaccuracies with using GPS particularly in mountainous regions which you can improve through signal information between base stations but that relies on you being able to get a signal from satellites, have a signal on the phone and for there to be some known information about the topology around the base station. Again this isn't as accurate as using a transceiver and it relies on an awful lot of 'ifs'.
The ski finder is essentially a poor mans transceiver split into a transmitter and receiver but that's okay as you're not under time pressure to dig out a ski like you are with someones life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
If you want to do it cheap:
There is an iPhone app that'll broadcast your GPS location to your buddys using wifi. Forgotten the name of it though 'cos it sounds quite useless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Rob Mackley wrote: |
| Is anyone out there developing a transceiver app for smart phones ? Surely the level of technology in a smart phone is good enough to make this possible , if so it would mean a safer mountain at a much cheaper price |
There is already a similiar app available.
However its a crap idea.... and also dangerous.
Wont ever take off, or work properly.
Here is why.
1. Phones don't contain the right antenna's for 457kHz operation (which propogates through snow)
2. GPS isnt accurate enough, nor does it propogate snow well.
3. GPS signals can be weak, especially in mountains.
4. Smart phone battery life is poor, especially in the cold.
5. Mixing your phone and beacon on a single device, with one battery, is a really dumb idea.
6. High freq (GHz) phone signals can interfere with the current 457kHz avalanche beacon signals.
| Quote: |
| sadly killing the current cash cow for ortovox and co . |
Any electronic item sold in small volume is going to be expensive to manufacture and produce.... The volumes in the avalanche beacon market are tiny, compared to smart phones / tablets / mp3 players etc.
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Fri 2-11-12 8:45; edited 5 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the "smartphone" thing may be unlikely in the near future, although crude analog beepers are well past their sell-by date. It's taken forever to get as far as current transceivers, and it's still pretty crude stuff.
If you're riding anywhere good then mobile phones are useless, and the 2.4G (or similar) radios do interfere with current transceivers.
I'm sure lots of people have talked about turning the whole thing on it's head, and having (say) a transponder instead of a transceiver, which you could interrogate for location. GPS is still a battery hog although it's getting better. Accuracy... way better than it used to be, although not when used by people to measure their maximum speed at ski resorts. Better GPS receivers are really scarily good, although they're also scarily bad in trees. I mostly ride trees, although arguably it slides less there.
But then... the technology is nearly there, but it's not completely clear what problem you're trying to solve. My solution to the whole thing is to try to avoid being in a slide in the first place; the transceiver is insurance I don't want to rely on; if it slides, I'm probably going to get ground to pieces transceiver or no. If you're trying to solve the "speed to recovery" thing, probably better shovels and better terrain training would be more effective.
Making the mountain a cheaper place? Have you seen the price of fanboi phones? They don't even work as phones, and they buy new ones on drip every couple of years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Other people have covered the technological aspect of the debate better than I could. The only point I would add is that there are better places to try to save money than on a piece of kit that may safe your life or the life or your mates whom you are skiing with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My smartphone is probably the least reliable thing I own - turns itself off whenever it feels it's working too hard. No way do I want to rely on something like that in an avalanche situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Well, its the laws of physics, innit?
For a very quick and dirty example, consider the RECCO system, which operates in a pair of frequency bands fairly close to those used in cell radios... 900-ish MHz output and an 1800-ish MHz reflection. A RECCO radar unit is a fair bit bigger than a 457kHz transceiver; that's problem number one. Problem number two is that those radio frequencies are quite strongly blocked by human bodies; this is why the system is expected to work in combination with at least two RECCO reflectors to minimise the chance of a buried body blocking the radar beam. Problem number three is closely related; wet spring snow with a higher water content much more strongly attenuates the signal. So don't get caught in a wet slab, okay? (there's also a possible problem number 4 I'm more hazy on; the RECCO folk don't sell it as a replacement for normal transceivers for pinpoint location, but I can't find out why). I won't even consider higher freqency radio (wifi, bluetooth) because that is far to easily blocked by water, ice, snow, bodies, whatever.
Now, you can't rely on having any contact with mobile base stations, so you can't use the standard mobile network for communication between the phones of a victim and a searcher. Mobile phones are not currently set up to talk to each other directly using their cell radios; this would take more than just a simple application to fix (it would warrant new radio hardware and a change in the radio networking protocols most likely), and would be an essential first step. You absolutely cannot rely on the victim being able to get a GPS lock either, because the GPS signal is easily blocked by their body or a modest amount of snow... and if not blocked, will be too innaccurate (~3m horizontal at the very best) to give a useful or accurate location. A RECCO detector uses a very directional emitter; mobile phone antennae are very non-directional (because having to point them at a base station to make or receive a call would suck!) so you can't copy that idea leaving you with the simplest radio direction finding mechanisms of the sort normal transcievers use. I don't know enough about multipath signal propagation issues other than to say they're more problematic with higher frequencies. And so on and so forth.
So, you need two new phones and a change in national radio transmission regulations and international phone communication protocols, and you'll end up with something that isn't as good as any existing technology, isn't significantly cheaper and will like as not be less robust and have a shorter battery life to boot. Yay!
tl;dr
Radio direction finding is hard. If your phone could do it easily, it would already do so, because people like fun toys like that even if they're not using them "for real".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 Serriadh GREAT reply to my question and the answer is NO , I am no techco and mearly started thinking when looking at some new transceivers for my kids , now at the age when pooping off the edge of the piste is a regular occurance .
I do however think that there are serious margins currently being made by the likes of Ortovox and I don't go with the excuse of small market . I wonder what the sales were last year .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
| I do however think that there are serious margins currently being made by the likes of Ortovox and I don't go with the excuse of small market . I wonder what the sales were last year |
Afraid your wrong....
The beacon market is a total of about 60K units per year (split between 5 or 6 manufacturers). In consumer electronics terms this is a tiny volume. Only by very large economies of scale can electronic devices be produced cheaply. MP3 players or tablets benefit from their functionality being integrated onto microchips by firms such as Intel. However this only makes economic sense if you are mass producing millions of units - when producing small volumes you need to use discrete (i.e off the shelf) components and the cost goes up.
I reckon each avalanche beacon will cost about £100 to produce (PCB, microcontroller, tuned antennas, assmebly). However you need to add on extra for R&D, staff, marketting, distribution. RRP of £220 seems reasonable with not huge scope for profit. Pieps, one of the big players in the avalanche beacon market, were recently bought over by Black Diamond. Despite annual sales of $5 million the company was $2.7 million in debt (i.e not making profit).
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Fri 2-11-12 18:03; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Yes Fatbob I had seen this and you will be pleased to hear I will be making the purchases so no need to be concerned about my family anyway off to work at the Big Top . I do however feel a little Forum Whipped as I was only thinking .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Thanks for the Info Haggis Trap , I withdraw my statement .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Rob Mackley, Sorry wasn't calling you a clown. You asked the right question here - that guy thought he'd got some magic market niche opportunity and instead of asking people who knew why it wasn't being filled decided he could jump in and make a tidy killing with his "budget" device. Rightly so he was ripped a new one. I thought the economics were fairly obvious - a one off purchase which a user keeps in good condition and replaces perhaps once a decade in a niche market with exacting performance requirements isn't a recipe for big margins.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
FatBob , No probs , actually replied with a smile on my face , pleased to have got quite a debate going
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Update - the tool behind snowbeacon was back at the ski show selling it as an affordable avalanche safety device, clearly has learned nothing from being ripped a new hole. What an idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I didnt read so much if anyone has already stated that phones do not have the "radio" built in that allows location that the dedicated units do, they will never be compatible. But this is only the start of the real issue, if you make an "app" everyone will feel safe if they have it just cause they downloaded it.... when you have a dedicated thing for the job you take things a bit more seriously. Loads more "app" people where its dangerous means the people who have experience and the correct gear wont benefit but actually suffer due to increased volumes of wanna be's and the split wont help either group. This is much like the PC / MAC debates but with loss of life included.
Just buy the real thing
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
You either buy an avalanche beeper and stand a small but better chance of survival if you are buried and your skiing partners know how to use the beepers, or you could relay on your st christopher charm or if you are really desperate a recco tag and then an app.
I have a lot of apple kit, but if it comes to getting dug out of an avalanche i'll pick a specialist company.
And the Darwin award goes to!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A friend asked about a send only device for his dog in a shop in Chamonix. After a few minutes of having the wee wee ripped out of him, they reluctantly admitted they did sell such a device but normally only to guides. Apparently some equip their clients with them!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pieps have a tranny that can search for their doggy device on a different frequency to the 'real' one. Avoids doggy running around in transmit  up a search, avoids digging up a dog while your mate/partner dies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
