Details on the New SPOT 2

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

I have just updated my web site with details on the new SPOT 2. It has some
nice improvements over the original SPOT. It will be available on Oct.
20th, 2009.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/spot.htm

Best Regards,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.

[Steve Koerner]

About a year ago, there were some folks on this group that claimed to
be working with Spot on a version to transmit altitude. Can anyone
update on that matter? Spot 2 doesn't seem to resolve two basic
weaknesses: that 10 minutes is too long and we need altitude reporting.

[Philip]

On Aug 5, 6:33*am, Steve Koerner > wrote:
> Spot 2 doesn't seem to resolve two basicweaknesses:
> that 10 minutes is too long and we need altitude reporting.

Can't help with the altitude, but you get 5 minute points out of
'Help' for an hour. Help messages are delivered immediately. Tracking
points are cached by Spot on their server, so updates can take a few
minutes extra on top of the ten minute gap.

--
Philip Plane

[Steve Koerner]

No help Philip. The help button is reserved for special meaning.

Consider how much more interesting Spot would be if we had say 1
minute reports in track mode that included altitude. And its not just
a matter of being interesting -- it would also be much more useful for
safety as a reliable reverse ELT.

I was going to tackle the matter of communicating our special needs
with Spot until someone here posted that they were doing it. That was
quite awhile ago -- I'm wondering what the results were.

[Tuno]

Steve,

I was communicating with the SPOT folk earlier this year. I had
exchanged e-mails with someone in their R&D department, in which I
begged them to add altitude to the message structure. I gave them all
the reasons why this was a great idea, at minimal cost (GPS altitude
already being part of the NMEA sentence, etc), so I'm very, very
disappointed to see they went the cheapest possible route and left the
message content alone.

I'm now hoping a competitor will pick up this fumbled ball and run
with it. (NK .... ?)

-ted/2NO

[MarkHawke7]

I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT but I was
sorry they didn't do it for this model of the SPOT (I think they call
it version 1b internally). They have a model 2 on the books though
and I'm pretty sure they intend to include altitude with that model.
If I get confirmation of this I'll post again.

Later!
-Mark
On Aug 5, 9:23*am, Tuno > wrote:
> Steve,
>
> I was communicating with the SPOT folk earlier this year. I had
> exchanged e-mails with someone in their R&D department, in which I
> begged them to add altitude to the message structure. I gave them all
> the reasons why this was a great idea, at minimal cost (GPS altitude
> already being part of the NMEA sentence, etc), so I'm very, very
> disappointed to see they went the cheapest possible route and left the
> message content alone.
>
> I'm now hoping a competitor will pick up this fumbled ball and run
> with it. (NK .... ?)
>
> -ted/2NO

[Andy[_1_]]

On Aug 5, 10:10*am, MarkHawke7 > wrote:
> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT

Mark,

Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they
changed from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. Was case size the only
consideration, or perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink
TX power? In any event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA
cells than a smaller case size.

Andy

[MarkHawke7]

Hi Andy,
I will ask. My guess is that it was case size but I'll ask. I do
know that the next model is supposed to be 15%-20% smaller than the
current one. When they were telling me about it before, they did
emphasize that the actual transmit power did not go up. I didn't get
alot of details but I got the impression it had more about antenna
design to improve the actual efficiency for the transmit. I'll ask
again about that as well and see what I get back.

Later!

-Mark
On Aug 5, 12:11*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Aug 5, 10:10*am, MarkHawke7 > wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
>
> Mark,
>
> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they
> changed from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. *Was case size the only
> consideration, or perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink
> TX power? *In any event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA
> cells than a smaller case size.
>
> Andy

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:

> On Aug 5, 10:10Â*am, MarkHawke7 > wrote:
>> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
>
> Mark,
>
> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they changed
> from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. Was case size the only consideration, or
> perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? In any
> event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a smaller
> case size.
>
I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have small
and light than long battery life.

Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would be
either:
- add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
cells

- replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.

All hiking-type Garmins have internal batteries with an external power
connector, so IMO its odd that Spot doesn't.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 5, 11:44*am, Martin Gregorie >
wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:
> > On Aug 5, 10:10*am, MarkHawke7 > wrote:
> >> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
>
> > Mark,
>
> > Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they changed
> > from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. *Was case size the only consideration, or
> > perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? *In any
> > event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a smaller
> > case size.
>
> I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have small
> and light than long battery life.
>
> Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would be
> either:
> - add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
> * cells
>
> - replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
> * a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.
>
> All hiking-type Garmins have internal batteries with an external power
> connector, so IMO its odd that Spot doesn't.
>
> --
> martin@ * | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org * * * |

Their choice of a primary Li battery is completely understandable
given their assumption the device is mostly for occasional use and an
emergency signaling. The e2 Energizer Li-FeS2 batteries have much
longer shelf life than a rechargeable Li batteries. SPOT is slow to
wake up to realize tracking is the killer application in lots of
different areas maybe they know much more than we do about their
customer usage (but I'm not so sure).

I also suspect the move to AAA batteries was purely based on packaging
size. The new AMY-5M GPS chip used in the new SPOT SPOT can operate at
1.8V or 3.0V, and the old STX-2 Axionn chipset that drove the original
SPOT messenger was a 3.3V device. No sign yet on an upgraded STX
module announced from Axionn, and they may not have done much to the
Globalstar data-out side of this except improve the GPS/Globalstar
antenna as they claim. Going to a higher nominal internal voltage
would be pretty unusual (i.e. is not likely to be the driving reason
for using 3x AAA). A quick disassemble will tell a lot.

If I was SPOT I'd be looking to charge significantly more for external
power + altitude and other features.

Darryl

[Ed Winchester[_2_]]

One reason they don't have a charging port might be that it's really
hard to make that charging port waterproof. Can't see it adding more
than a couple of bucks to the building cost.

Ed

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 5, 1:35*pm, Ed Winchester > wrote:
> One reason they don't have a charging port might be that it's really
> hard to make that charging port waterproof. *Can't see it adding more
> than a couple of bucks to the building cost.
>
> Ed

They don't have a charging port because they want to use long-shelf
life primary (not rechargeable) battery. If they wanted a rechargeable
battery there is no practical barrier (including weather proof specs)
to them pretty easilly adding that.

Darryl

[Philip]

On Aug 6, 2:35*am, Steve Koerner > wrote:
> No help Philip. *The help button is reserved for special meaning.

The Help and OK (and the new message button on the Spot2) are
just buttons that send messages. The 'special' meaning is whatever
you want it to be. So repurposing the Help in a one hour tracking
function loses no specialness.

Because Spot intended the OK button to mean OK and the Help button to
mean Help
doesn't actually restrict them to those uses.

You can easily reverse those functions and use the Help to mean you're
flying and
provide tracking, and OK to mean you've landed out and want a
retrieve.

--
Philip Plane

“When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it
means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.”

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 13:22:04 -0700, Darryl Ramm wrote:

> Their choice of a primary Li battery is completely understandable given
> their assumption the device is mostly for occasional use and an
> emergency signaling.
>
I missed the point that Spot uses Li primary batteries rather than
alkaline. Have you any idea of the capacity of AA and AAA Li cells?

> If I was SPOT I'd be looking to charge significantly more for external
> power + altitude and other features.
>
Seems reasonable for altitude, but a bit outrageous for external power -
after all that can be as simple as a rectangular recess moulded into the
case with a couple of nickel-plated pins cast in.

It would be very interesting to know the profile of the average Spot
user, though.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Steve Koerner]

On Aug 5, 2:04*pm, Philip > wrote:
> On Aug 6, 2:35*am, Steve Koerner > wrote:
>
> > No help Philip. *The help button is reserved for special meaning.
>
> The Help and OK (and the new message button on the Spot2) are
> just buttons that send messages. The 'special' meaning is whatever
> you want it to be. So repurposing the Help in a one hour tracking
> function loses no specialness.
>
> Because Spot intended the OK button to mean OK and the Help button to
> mean Help
> doesn't actually restrict them to those uses.
>
> You can easily reverse those functions and use the Help to mean you're
> flying and
> provide tracking, and OK to mean you've landed out and want a
> retrieve.
>
> --
> Philip Plane
>
> “When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it
> means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.”

Yes, I suppose I could install a coo-coo clock in the glider so that
when the bird comes out, its beak will push the help button once every
hour. And then I will hope that all who view my public spot page will
not be confused by the concept that help means OK and OK means help.

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 5, 2:31*pm, Martin Gregorie >
wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 13:22:04 -0700, Darryl Ramm wrote:
> > Their choice of a primary Li battery is completely understandable given
> > their assumption the device is mostly for occasional use and an
> > emergency signaling.
>
> I missed the point that Spot uses Li primary batteries rather than
> alkaline. Have you any idea of the capacity of AA and AAA Li cells?
>
> > If I was SPOT I'd be looking to charge significantly more for external
> > power + altitude and other features.
>
> Seems reasonable for altitude, but a bit outrageous for external power *-
> after all that can be as simple as a rectangular recess moulded into the
> case with a couple of nickel-plated pins cast in.
>
> It would be very interesting to know the profile of the average Spot
> user, though.
>
> --
> martin@ * | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org * * * |

Martin

Go to http://data.energizer.com and look at the "Lithium primary"
specs.

These are more like the batteries uses in ELT and PLB than normal
rechargeable Li-ion or Li-Po batteries. Strong thanks to SPOT for
going with the Energizer Li batteries and not a proprietary battery. I
wonder if the PLB market could just about get away with using these
instead of charging $100-$200 for a replacement battery pack with ~5
year lift.

Anyhow you can see the significant battery capacity reduction in the
new SPOT messenger. We'll have to see what the pracitcal track
lifetime is with the new model. They have power saving features like
an advanced new GPS chipset, but they are also sending more Globalstar
data.

New SPOT: 3 x AAA Energizer Li Ultimate ~ 3 x 1.2 Ah = 3.6 Ah
Old SPOT: 2 x AA Li Energizer Ultimate ~ 2 x 3.0 = 6.0 Ah
(at any low current draw)

Of course if they were coming out with a product better for tracking
applications, then reducing the track time on the low-end unit might
make marketing sense :-)


Darryl

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:56:21 -0700, Darryl Ramm wrote:

> These are more like the batteries uses in ELT and PLB than normal
> rechargeable Li-ion or Li-Po batteries. Strong thanks to SPOT for
> going with the Energizer Li batteries and not a proprietary battery. I
> wonder if the PLB market could just about get away with using these
> instead of charging $100-$200 for a replacement battery pack with ~5
> year lift.
>
Very interesting. The capacity and discharge rate are very higher and the
shelf life is noticeably better than alkaline. The shelf life is hugely
better than LiPoly, which I guess is better for a lot of folks than
remembering to charge it before use.

I would guess that the high discharge rate would be rather useful for
transmit power too.

I just checked the price of a McMurdo battery pack: I take your point
about using COTS batteries. McMurdo prices are fierce - when you can find
an agent who sells replacement batteries.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Andy[_1_]]

On Aug 5, 2:56*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:

New SPOT: 3 x AAA Energizer Li Ultimate ~ 3 x 1.2 Ah = 3.6 Ah
Old SPOT: 2 x AA Li Energizer Ultimate ~ 2 x 3.0 = 6.0 Ah
(at any low current draw)


Are you saying the cells are in parallel in both units? If they are
in series the capacity is the same for one cell as for 2 or 3 except
that the 3 cell unit may run at higher current because of the
increased voltage and have even lower battery life.

Andy

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 5, 4:58*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Aug 5, 2:56*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> New SPOT: 3 x AAA Energizer Li Ultimate ~ 3 x 1.2 Ah = 3.6 Ah
> Old SPOT: 2 x AA Li Energizer Ultimate ~ 2 x 3.0 = 6.0 Ah
> (at any low current draw)
>
> Are you saying the cells are in parallel in both units? *If they are
> in series the capacity is the same for one cell as for 2 or 3 except
> that the 3 cell unit may run at higher current because of the
> increased voltage and have even lower battery life.
>
> Andy

No I am summing battery capacity and ignoring voltage. If you want
nominal Watt.h then multiply by 1.5 volts. To first order it does not
matter how the batteries are configured. LDO regulators/charge pumps
have relatively low loss and will be used internally to shift
voltages,,and I assume they are not completely incompetent on basic
power supply engineering.

Darryl
Darryl

[Andy[_1_]]

On Aug 5, 6:27*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Aug 5, 4:58*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
> > On Aug 5, 2:56*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > New SPOT: 3 x AAA Energizer Li Ultimate ~ 3 x 1.2 Ah = 3.6 Ah
> > Old SPOT: 2 x AA Li Energizer Ultimate ~ 2 x 3.0 = 6.0 Ah
> > (at any low current draw)
>
> > Are you saying the cells are in parallel in both units? *If they are
> > in series the capacity is the same for one cell as for 2 or 3 except
> > that the 3 cell unit may run at higher current because of the
> > increased voltage and have even lower battery life.
>
> > Andy
>
> No I am summing battery capacity and ignoring voltage. If you want
> nominal Watt.h then multiply by 1.5 volts. To first order it does not
> matter how the batteries are configured. *LDO regulators/charge pumps
> have relatively low loss and will be used internally to shift
> voltages,,and *I assume they are not completely incompetent on basic
> power supply engineering.
>
> Darryl
> Darryl

If one cell has a capacity of 1 amp hour then 1000 of those cells in
series still have a capacity of 1 amp hour. Do you disagree with
that basic concept?

Andy

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 5, 8:56*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Aug 5, 6:27*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 5, 4:58*pm, Andy > wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 5, 2:56*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > New SPOT: 3 x AAA Energizer Li Ultimate ~ 3 x 1.2 Ah = 3.6 Ah
> > > Old SPOT: 2 x AA Li Energizer Ultimate ~ 2 x 3.0 = 6.0 Ah
> > > (at any low current draw)
>
> > > Are you saying the cells are in parallel in both units? *If they are
> > > in series the capacity is the same for one cell as for 2 or 3 except
> > > that the 3 cell unit may run at higher current because of the
> > > increased voltage and have even lower battery life.
>
> > > Andy
>
> > No I am summing battery capacity and ignoring voltage. If you want
> > nominal Watt.h then multiply by 1.5 volts. To first order it does not
> > matter how the batteries are configured. *LDO regulators/charge pumps
> > have relatively low loss and will be used internally to shift
> > voltages,,and *I assume they are not completely incompetent on basic
> > power supply engineering.
>
> > Darryl
> > Darryl
>
> If one cell has a capacity of 1 amp hour then 1000 of those cells in
> series still have a capacity of 1 amp hour. * Do you disagree with
> that basic concept?
>
> Andy

I have already explained my logic. If you want the right dimensions
multiply by the voltage. I just left that off, becasue it is a
constant. What matters is the total power capacity. Not how the
batteries are configured.

Darryl

[Philip]

> Yes, I suppose I could install a coo-coo clock in the glider so that
> when the bird comes out, its beak will push the help button once every
> hour. *And then I will hope that all who view my public spot page will
> not be confused by the concept that help means OK and OK means help.

We used SPOT Help mode for tracking last season at Omarama. Getting
pilots to push the button once an hour was a challenge. We got good
interest from the contest guys though, with nearly half the contest
pilots using SPOT.

We don't use the SPOT public page. The messages get delivered by email
to my server and all points displayed on one map. One page for the
whole fleet so the contest director only has one place to look.

For the coming season I'm supporting tracking mode as well.

--
Philip Plane

[Eric Greenwell]

Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:
>
>> On Aug 5, 10:10Â am, MarkHawke7 > wrote:
>>> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
>> Mark,
>>
>> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they changed
>> from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. Was case size the only consideration, or
>> perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? In any
>> event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a smaller
>> case size.
>>
> I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have small
> and light than long battery life.
>
> Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would be
> either:
> - add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
> cells
>
> - replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
> a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.

My SPOT will provide over 250 hours of tracking with the two AA cells,
which is more than a years flying for me. How many hours will the new
SPOT last?

Frankly, I don't care how many batteries they use or what the amphour
capacity is, as long they last a "long" time and it warns me when there
are 20-30 hours life left. I have no interest in external power or
rechargeable batteries, because that would not be simpler, more
reliable, or cheaper than the present system. Adding altitude and
cutting the subscription costs are the only priority items for me.

Eric Greenwell

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 5, 10:30*pm, Eric Greenwell > wrote:
> Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:
>
> >> On Aug 5, 10:10Â am, MarkHawke7 > wrote:
> >>> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
> >> Mark,
>
> >> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they changed
> >> from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. *Was case size the only consideration, or
> >> perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? *In any
> >> event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a smaller
> >> case size.
>
> > I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have small
> > and light than long battery life.
>
> > Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would be
> > either:
> > - add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
> > * cells
>
> > - replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
> > * a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.
>
> My SPOT will provide over 250 hours of tracking with the two AA cells,
> which is more than a years flying for me. How many hours will the new
> SPOT last?
>
> Frankly, I don't care how many batteries they use or what the amphour
> capacity is, as long they last a "long" time and it warns me when there
> are 20-30 hours life left. I have no interest in external power or
> rechargeable batteries, because that would not be simpler, more
> reliable, or cheaper than the present system. Adding altitude and
> cutting the subscription costs are the only priority items for me.
>
> Eric Greenwell

Eric

I expect cutting subscription costs and adding altitude are mutually
exclusive.

Reporting ~2-3x (depending on how they do this) the data in track
mode, as the new model will (repeat sending the past two position
reports) , may reduce the battery life, so also having a reduced
battery capacity compared to the first generation is worth noting.
They also do things that may lower power consumption, so the only take
away is this is something again we'll want to check out.

I would like to see tracking at reporting frequencies on 1-2 minutes,
that combined with reporting additional altitude data would again
reduce battery life. At that point I'd expect a device that was
primarily powered from the ships power would make sense.

Darryl

[Paul Jessop]

Has anyone considered getting a "spare" battery door and fitting a 3v
regulator inside a dummy AA cell fed with 12v through a grommet in the
door?

Leaving the original door and two new Li cells taped to the installation
should deal with any "walk out" scenarios.

Paul
G-CFRS/D-ENBW

At 05:53 06 August 2009, Darryl Ramm wrote:
>On Aug 5, 10:30=A0pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>> Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> > On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:
>>
>> >> On Aug 5, 10:10=C2 am, MarkHawke7 wrote:
>> >>> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
>> >> Mark,
>>
>> >> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they
>chang=
>ed
>> >> from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. =A0Was case size the only consideration,
or
>> >> perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? =A0In
>any
>> >> event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a
smaller
>> >> case size.
>>
>> > I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have
>sma=
>ll
>> > and light than long battery life.
>>
>> > Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would
>be
>> > either:
>> > - add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
>> > =A0 cells
>>
>> > - replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
>> > =A0 a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.
>>
>> My SPOT will provide over 250 hours of tracking with the two AA cells,
>> which is more than a years flying for me. How many hours will the new
>> SPOT last?
>>
>> Frankly, I don't care how many batteries they use or what the amphour
>> capacity is, as long they last a "long" time and it warns me when
there
>> are 20-30 hours life left. I have no interest in external power or
>> rechargeable batteries, because that would not be simpler, more
>> reliable, or cheaper than the present system. Adding altitude and
>> cutting the subscription costs are the only priority items for me.
>>
>> Eric Greenwell
>
>Eric
>
>I expect cutting subscription costs and adding altitude are mutually
>exclusive.
>
>Reporting ~2-3x (depending on how they do this) the data in track
>mode, as the new model will (repeat sending the past two position
>reports) , may reduce the battery life, so also having a reduced
>battery capacity compared to the first generation is worth noting.
>They also do things that may lower power consumption, so the only take
>away is this is something again we'll want to check out.
>
>I would like to see tracking at reporting frequencies on 1-2 minutes,
>that combined with reporting additional altitude data would again
>reduce battery life. At that point I'd expect a device that was
>primarily powered from the ships power would make sense.
>
>Darryl
>
>

[Paul Jessop]

Has anyone considered getting a "spare" battery door and fitting a 3v
regulator inside a dummy AA cell fed with 12v through a grommet in the
door?

Leaving the original door and two new Li cells taped to the installation
should deal with any "walk out" scenarios.

Paul
G-CFRS/D-ENBW

At 05:53 06 August 2009, Darryl Ramm wrote:
>On Aug 5, 10:30=A0pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>> Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> > On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:
>>
>> >> On Aug 5, 10:10=C2 am, MarkHawke7 wrote:
>> >>> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
>> >> Mark,
>>
>> >> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they
>chang=
>ed
>> >> from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. =A0Was case size the only consideration,
or
>> >> perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? =A0In
>any
>> >> event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a
smaller
>> >> case size.
>>
>> > I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have
>sma=
>ll
>> > and light than long battery life.
>>
>> > Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would
>be
>> > either:
>> > - add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
>> > =A0 cells
>>
>> > - replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
>> > =A0 a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.
>>
>> My SPOT will provide over 250 hours of tracking with the two AA cells,
>> which is more than a years flying for me. How many hours will the new
>> SPOT last?
>>
>> Frankly, I don't care how many batteries they use or what the amphour
>> capacity is, as long they last a "long" time and it warns me when
there
>> are 20-30 hours life left. I have no interest in external power or
>> rechargeable batteries, because that would not be simpler, more
>> reliable, or cheaper than the present system. Adding altitude and
>> cutting the subscription costs are the only priority items for me.
>>
>> Eric Greenwell
>
>Eric
>
>I expect cutting subscription costs and adding altitude are mutually
>exclusive.
>
>Reporting ~2-3x (depending on how they do this) the data in track
>mode, as the new model will (repeat sending the past two position
>reports) , may reduce the battery life, so also having a reduced
>battery capacity compared to the first generation is worth noting.
>They also do things that may lower power consumption, so the only take
>away is this is something again we'll want to check out.
>
>I would like to see tracking at reporting frequencies on 1-2 minutes,
>that combined with reporting additional altitude data would again
>reduce battery life. At that point I'd expect a device that was
>primarily powered from the ships power would make sense.
>
>Darryl
>
>

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 6, 4:45*am, Paul Jessop
> wrote:
> Has anyone considered getting a "spare" battery door and fitting a 3v
> regulator inside a dummy AA cell fed with 12v through a grommet in the
> door?
>
> Leaving the original door and two new Li cells taped to the installation
> should deal with any "walk out" scenarios.
>
> Paul
> G-CFRS/D-ENBW
>
> At 05:53 06 August 2009, Darryl Ramm wrote:
>
> >On Aug 5, 10:30=A0pm, Eric Greenwell *wrote:
> >> Martin Gregorie wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:
>
> >> >> On Aug 5, 10:10=C2 am, MarkHawke7 *wrote:
> >> >>> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
> >> >> Mark,
>
> >> >> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they
> >chang=
> >ed
> >> >> from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. =A0Was case size the only consideration,
> or
> >> >> perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? =A0In
> >any
> >> >> event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a
> smaller
> >> >> case size.
>
> >> > I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have
> >sma=
> >ll
> >> > and light than long battery life.
>
> >> > Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would
> >be
> >> > either:
> >> > - add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
> >> > =A0 cells
>
> >> > - replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
> >> > =A0 a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.
>
> >> My SPOT will provide over 250 hours of tracking with the two AA cells,
> >> which is more than a years flying for me. How many hours will the new
> >> SPOT last?
>
> >> Frankly, I don't care how many batteries they use or what the amphour
> >> capacity is, as long they last a "long" time and it warns me when
> there
> >> are 20-30 hours life left. I have no interest in external power or
> >> rechargeable batteries, because that would not be simpler, more
> >> reliable, or cheaper than the present system. Adding altitude and
> >> cutting the subscription costs are the only priority items for me.
>
> >> Eric Greenwell
>
> >Eric
>
> >I expect cutting subscription costs and adding altitude are mutually
> >exclusive.
>
> >Reporting ~2-3x (depending on how they do this) the data in track
> >mode, as the new model will (repeat sending the past two position
> >reports) , may reduce the battery life, so also having a reduced
> >battery capacity compared to the first generation is worth noting.
> >They also do things that may lower power consumption, so the only take
> >away is this is something again we'll want to check out.
>
> >I would like to see tracking at reporting frequencies on 1-2 minutes,
> >that combined with reporting additional altitude data would again
> >reduce battery life. At that point I'd expect a device that was
> >primarily powered from the ships power would make sense.
>
> >Darryl

I had one of the earliest SPOT unites and at the time had seen
significantly incorrect battery life claims and was worried about
this. There is so much space inside the original SPOT messenger case
that it looked possible to install an external power socket and
regulator to bypass the internal batteries while also leaving them
there. However as Eric points out, the track battery life is so
outstandingly good that this is just not needed. I suspect the new
model would require a dummy battery set as you suggest. But again,
that is really not my concern, I'd just buy more batteries. The
concern is with a unit (not the newly announced SPOT messenger)
transmitting every minute or so and also transmitting altitude. I
expect then you will want to use external power.

BTW back to the newly announced messenger - the easy power comparison
for the new SPOT messenger I can find is this - SPOT claims that the
original SPOT messenger supports sending 911 alerts for up to 7 days
(SPOT web site), they claim the new one does this for 4.6 days (from
Doug Ritter's blog, the spec sheet claims 4.7 days). There is no
change in the "911" message behavior AFAIK, Howver since the new
device's track mode sends more data, so maybe a wild ass guess for a
decrease in track time in the new model is is 4.6/7 * 1/3 ~ 20% of the
track time we are seeing with the first generation units. (assuming
sending 3x extra data requires 3x as much total power which is just a
very worse case total wild ass guess). So not that it helps much but
all this says is that I expect to see track battery life in the
20%-60% of what we see with the first generation unit. I'll have a
better guess later once I model the actual RF power consumption. We'll
have to just wait and see.

Darryl

[Brian[_1_]]

I am impressed with how long the batteries last and have changed my
mind about the need to external power.
Altitude is not that big of an issue for me either.

The two things I would like to see is to

1. make the OK button work without canceling the Tracking.

2. The external power would be nice if the unit would power up into
tracking mode when power was applied. I currently need a checklist to
make sure I have everything turned on as it is. Anything I can connect
to the master switch is helpful.

Brian

[MarkHawke7]

The new version of the hardware will have a dedicated Tracking
button. I don't know for sure that you will be able to send an OK
while tracking but having a seperate button is a good sign.

-Mark
On Aug 6, 11:35*am, Brian > wrote:
> I am impressed with how long the batteries last and have changed my
> mind about the need to external power.
> Altitude is not that big of an issue for me either.
>
> The two things I would like to see is to
>
> 1. make the *OK button work without canceling the Tracking.
>
> 2. The external power would be nice if the unit would power up into
> tracking mode when power was applied. I currently need a checklist to
> make sure I have everything turned on as it is. Anything I can connect
> to the master switch is helpful.
>
> Brian

[Darryl Ramm]

On Aug 5, 10:53*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Aug 5, 10:30*pm, Eric Greenwell > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > > On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:11:47 -0700, Andy wrote:
>
> > >> On Aug 5, 10:10Â am, MarkHawke7 > wrote:
> > >>> I'm trying to get a direct answer from my contacts at SPOT
> > >> Mark,
>
> > >> Since you have contacts there I'd be interested to know why they changed
> > >> from 2xAA to 3xAAA cells. *Was case size the only consideration, or
> > >> perhaps the increased voltage increases the uplink TX power? *In any
> > >> event I'd far rather have the longer life of AA cells than a smaller
> > >> case size.
>
> > > I suspect we're in the minority and Joe Hiker would far rather have small
> > > and light than long battery life.
>
> > > Hopefully the Mk 2 will provide the best of both worlds, which would be
> > > either:
> > > - add an external power socket while retaining the 3 x AAA internal
> > > * cells
>
> > > - replace the AAA cells with a 1500 mAh LiPoly rechargable and
> > > * a mini-USB charging socket. Alkaline AAA cells are 1250 mAh.
>
> > My SPOT will provide over 250 hours of tracking with the two AA cells,
> > which is more than a years flying for me. How many hours will the new
> > SPOT last?
>
> > Frankly, I don't care how many batteries they use or what the amphour
> > capacity is, as long they last a "long" time and it warns me when there
> > are 20-30 hours life left. I have no interest in external power or
> > rechargeable batteries, because that would not be simpler, more
> > reliable, or cheaper than the present system. Adding altitude and
> > cutting the subscription costs are the only priority items for me.
>
> > Eric Greenwell
>
> Eric
>
> I expect cutting subscription costs and adding altitude are mutually
> exclusive.
>
> Reporting ~2-3x (depending on how they do this) the data in track
> mode, as the new model will (repeat sending the past two position
> reports) , may reduce the battery life, so also having a reduced
> battery capacity compared to the first generation is worth noting.
> They also do things that may lower power consumption, so the only take
> away is this is something again we'll want to check out.
>
> I would like to see tracking at reporting frequencies on 1-2 minutes,
> that combined with reporting additional altitude data would again
> reduce battery life. At that point I'd expect a device that was
> primarily powered from the ships power would make sense.
>
> Darryl

OK I've better modeled power consumption of the SPOT messenger. I
measured the actual current draw of my first generation SPOT messenger
in track mode.This was done with a logging multimeter which can see
the LED power consumption spikes and they are averaged out. In track
mode the messenger looks like it is in a dormant state for most of the
10 minutes before sending a message, it wakes up some time before the
message is ready to be sent and runs the GPS to get a fix, how long
the GPS stays on varies but it looks around 20 seconds on average.
Presumably if it has problems getting a fix it will run for longer.
With the GPS running the consumption is about 35mA. Actually sending
the message over the Globalstar modem consumes ~530 mA for about 1.5
seconds. All these numbers are rough, I'm not interested in being too
precise since there is a lot of hand waving involved.

So it is easy to model what power consumption would be for sending a
message very 5, 2, and 1 minute by just assuming the GPS and
Globalstar loads occur more frequently at those periods. To model also
sending altitude data I ignore any additonal processing or longer fix
time that may bre required by the GPS engine and just assume the only
cost is doubnling the Globalstar modem load per message (since it
likely must send two packets of data to encode location and altitude
as I've mentioned in a separate post). Crunch those numbers and I end
up with.

Guesstimated Track Battery Life (DAYS): (SPOT "1" with 2 x AA
Batteries)

Track Reporting Period 10 min 5 min 2min 1min
Position 14.2 10.6
5.6 3.1
Position+Altitude 8.3 5.6
2.7 1.5

Of course the only number here that is meaningful today is the 14.2
days of battery life for transmitting position every 10 minutes, which
is all that the first generation SPOT messenger actually does
(Convenient how I fudged the numbers to give 14.2 days, SPOT claims 14
day battery life for the first generation SPOT messenger in track
mode).

Now that was all assuming battery capacity and GPS power load etc. of
the first generation SPOT Messenger. As discussed before the new SPOT
messenger has a different GPS chipset, although I suspect it has the
same Axonn STX2 Globalstar Modem. So going out on a limb, if you
assumed the same GPS and STX2 power consumption for the new model
messenger and factored in the fact that the STX-2 in the new model
messenger has to transmit three location packets with each position
report and it has a reduced battery capacity 60% for the change from 2
x AA to 3 x AAA lithium batteries. The above table would look like...

Guesstimated Track Battery Life (days): (SPOT "2" with 3 x AAA
Batteries)

Track Reporting Period 10 min 5 min 2min 1min
Position 3.3 2.1
1.0 0.5
Position+Altitude 1.3 0.8
0.3 0.2

Again the only number that makes real sense today is whether the
actual track battery life of the second generation SPOT unit will
really be around 3.3 days or not. These numbers may be significantly
off, I hope it is better than this. The messenger may be significantly
more power efficient than I've assumed here. Axonn (who design the
actual hardware) may well have reduced power consumption from the GPS
chipset, Globalstar modem and other components. If somebody want to
send me their brand new second generation SPOT messenger I'll be happy
to pull it apart and have a poke around.

But the point is for people who want high frequency reporting, say
once every few minutes and altitude reporting I think you are in an
expected battery lifetime where you are going to want SPOT to design
the device for external power. The reason for that is not battery cost
(getting as high as several dollars per day of tracking time for the
worse numbers above) it is the "oh crap" cost of forgetting to check
the battery and replace them or forgetting to carry spare batteries.
We'll see far too many of these failures if the battery life is a
total of a few days.

Anyhow that's the back of my envelope and I'm sticking to it.

Darryl