Glider crash at Moriarty

APRS is a very viable tracking option. It does require you to have at least an Amateur Radio Technician class license. A few hours of on-line study and a fairly simple written exam are all that's required.

You can use anything from a simple transmitter that ties to a GPS to a full hand held that would also allow voice communications. Most of the country is covered by APRS repeaters that would provide coverage on the ground. 1-2,000 AGL and you should be covered in almost all areas. Depending on the model, you can send and receive email and even make calls through a phone patch. Also, the signal is not blocked as easily as satellite.

On Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 9:10:08 AM UTC-6, wrote:
APRS is a very viable tracking option. It does require you to have at least an Amateur Radio Technician class license. A few hours of on-line study and a fairly simple written exam are all that's required.

You can use anything from a simple transmitter that ties to a GPS to a full hand held that would also allow voice communications. Most of the country is covered by APRS repeaters that would provide coverage on the ground. 1-2,000 AGL and you should be covered in almost all areas. Depending on the model, you can send and receive email and even make calls through a phone patch. Also, the signal is not blocked as easily as satellite.

APRS - Cheap, reliable, effective. Any data one wishes can be transmitted at any interval one wishes. Data is fed to the internet for anyone to see.

Thanks for the comments about APRS. It is not something we use out here in NM, but something we probably need to take a look at...

Thanks again,
Renny


On Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 9:36:25 AM UTC-6, Bill D wrote:
On Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 9:10:08 AM UTC-6, wrote:
APRS is a very viable tracking option. It does require you to have at least an Amateur Radio Technician class license. A few hours of on-line study and a fairly simple written exam are all that's required.

You can use anything from a simple transmitter that ties to a GPS to a full hand held that would also allow voice communications. Most of the country is covered by APRS repeaters that would provide coverage on the ground. 1-2,000 AGL and you should be covered in almost all areas. Depending on the model, you can send and receive email and even make calls through a phone patch. Also, the signal is not blocked as easily as satellite.

APRS - Cheap, reliable, effective. Any data one wishes can be transmitted at any interval one wishes. Data is fed to the internet for anyone to see.

When I've looked at other pilot's Spot tracking output, the majority are quite unreliable in the sense that a significant portion of the transmitted track points are not being received by the Globalstar satellite network. I think this largely stems from a failure to appreciate what a 'clear view of the sky' really means. It is not the overhead sky that matters. IT IS THE 360 DEGREE VIEW OF THE HORIZON THAT IS IMPORTANT.

Catching a Globalstar satellite is a statistical matter. There are only so many satellites whizzing around in low earth orbit. The satellite that you need at any given time will almost always be very near to the horizon; having a satellite anywheres near overhead is a very rare occurrence. The significant consideration is that a mounting strategy that gives only a partial view of the horizon, will result in a statistically similar proportion of tracking messages that don't get out. To have a view of the 360 degree horizon, the unit needs to be mounted flat and high.

Common practice these days is to mount Spot on ones parachute. There is a certain logic to doing that. But there is also a serious flaw in that parachute mounting is frequently not giving reliable tracking mode performance. The problem relates to signal lose through the human body and surrounding airplane parts and the difficulty in keeping the unit flat to the horizon.

Consider the searcher's paradox when a downed pilot uses a Spot which is not transmitting reliably. Searchers will sensibly examine ones past Spot unit performance. If they see that it is not uncommon that your Spot unit misses two or more 5 minute transmits in a row, then the search area becomes something like a 15 minute assumption; that would be like a 25 mile search radius which equals 1900 sq miles. You may never be found. Spot owners should consider this trade-off carefully. My own opinion is that it is much better to have reliable tracking operation than it is to have the unit attached to my parachute.

The other significant point to be made is that Spot is obsolete technology now. InReach is much superior. Tracking interval can be easily set down to whatever you'd like (and willing to pay for); available settings include 5 minute, 2 minute, 1 minute and 30 seconds. InReach communication is fundamentally more reliable because it is a two-way protocol. InReach reports altitude with GPS position which in a search situation is likely to be invaluable. InReach provides two-way text messaging so you can (hopefully) communicate with potential rescuers regarding your situation.

Of note is the fact that Globalstar has said that they will offer a two-way Spot unit pretty soon too. Hopefully that will result in pricing competition with DeLorme.

My condolences to Joe's friends and family. All of us feel great pain when a pilot is lost. It's a bit incongruous to discuss finer points of technology in the face of such a lose. Yet we do need to sort out the problems when we loose one of our own.

Steve,
Thanks for the excellent comments. I have been thinking about InReach and it sounds like it is definitely the better choice. We all know that it is more expensive and that one must weigh the pros and cons of any technology, but it is "there," readily available, and it is a real option for pilots to consider.

Regarding Joe I've known him for perhaps 20 years as he flew at Moriarty many times. He was a very good man and he is gone now. We cannot help him now, but perhaps we can better help the next pilot who goes down on a flight out of Moriarty....

Thanks again - Renny


On Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 10:39:06 AM UTC-6, Steve Koerner wrote:
When I've looked at other pilot's Spot tracking output, the majority are quite unreliable in the sense that a significant portion of the transmitted track points are not being received by the Globalstar satellite network. I think this largely stems from a failure to appreciate what a 'clear view of the sky' really means. It is not the overhead sky that matters. IT IS THE 360 DEGREE VIEW OF THE HORIZON THAT IS IMPORTANT.

Catching a Globalstar satellite is a statistical matter. There are only so many satellites whizzing around in low earth orbit. The satellite that you need at any given time will almost always be very near to the horizon; having a satellite anywheres near overhead is a very rare occurrence. The significant consideration is that a mounting strategy that gives only a partial view of the horizon, will result in a statistically similar proportion of tracking messages that don't get out. To have a view of the 360 degree horizon, the unit needs to be mounted flat and high.

Common practice these days is to mount Spot on ones parachute. There is a certain logic to doing that. But there is also a serious flaw in that parachute mounting is frequently not giving reliable tracking mode performance. The problem relates to signal lose through the human body and surrounding airplane parts and the difficulty in keeping the unit flat to the horizon.

Consider the searcher's paradox when a downed pilot uses a Spot which is not transmitting reliably. Searchers will sensibly examine ones past Spot unit performance. If they see that it is not uncommon that your Spot unit misses two or more 5 minute transmits in a row, then the search area becomes something like a 15 minute assumption; that would be like a 25 mile search radius which equals 1900 sq miles. You may never be found. Spot owners should consider this trade-off carefully. My own opinion is that it is much better to have reliable tracking operation than it is to have the unit attached to my parachute.

The other significant point to be made is that Spot is obsolete technology now. InReach is much superior. Tracking interval can be easily set down to whatever you'd like (and willing to pay for); available settings include 5 minute, 2 minute, 1 minute and 30 seconds. InReach communication is fundamentally more reliable because it is a two-way protocol. InReach reports altitude with GPS position which in a search situation is likely to be invaluable. InReach provides two-way text messaging so you can (hopefully) communicate with potential rescuers regarding your situation.

Of note is the fact that Globalstar has said that they will offer a two-way Spot unit pretty soon too. Hopefully that will result in pricing competition with DeLorme.

My condolences to Joe's friends and family. All of us feel great pain when a pilot is lost. It's a bit incongruous to discuss finer points of technology in the face of such a lose. Yet we do need to sort out the problems when we loose one of our own.

On Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 12:39:06 PM UTC-4, Steve Koerner wrote:
When I've looked at other pilot's Spot tracking output, the majority are quite unreliable in the sense that a significant portion of the transmitted track points are not being received by the Globalstar satellite network. I think this largely stems from a failure to appreciate what a 'clear view of the sky' really means. It is not the overhead sky that matters. IT IS THE 360 DEGREE VIEW OF THE HORIZON THAT IS IMPORTANT.

I recently purchased a Delorme Inreach. I was in a hurry to leave for a contest, so I just signed up for one of the mass-market plans (there are special, aviation plans that offer more frequent fixes). I've been very impressed.

- The device itself has rechargable battery that seems to offer many hours worth of transmitting.
- It's easy to tell that it's working.
- It's worked very reliably on every flight I've made.
- Not only that, it's worked quite reliably tucked into my electronics box in the back of the car on the ride home (have forgotten to shut it off several times).

Looking at some of the log files from Mifflin for example, I'm confident that in the worst case, folks would know within a reasonable area where to start looking. Hopefully my old ELT would be working or better yet I'd be in a position to activate the PLB attached to my parachute, but the Delorme seems to be much more reliable than the Spots that my friends use.

As for Joe, I can't say enough how much I enjoyed meeting him a few years ago. I was the CD at Fairfield and we had a pretty significant ridge task. As is sometimes the case for people new to the ridge country, Joe ended up on the wrong ridge late in the day and landed out... way out. When he got back well after dark, instead of being annoyed or frustrated, he was as happy and excited as could be. He was a very nice man, and I'm greatly saddened by this news.

P3

There are a number of technologies, each
with advantages and weaknesses. ELTs
seem to issue more false alarms than
real ones. In a crash, the G switch or the
antenna connection can fail or the
airframe masks the antenna.

With a PLB, you have to have the ability to
erect the antenna and push 1 or 2
buttons. Hopefully the PLB is in reach
when you need to use it.

Flarm has assisted in a number of cases
to locate missing pilots including the odd
live one.

SeeYou Mobile and XCSoar offer
tracking. Bluetooth to your phone allows
it to send texts with your position as long
as there's a cell tower in view. So far it's
worked in my car, but not yet in my glider.

At 21:08 08 June 2015, Papa3 wrote:
On Saturday, June 6, 2015 at 12:39:06
PM UTC-4, Steve Koerner wrote:
When I've looked at other pilot's Spot
tracking output, the majority are
=
quite unreliable in the sense that a
significant portion of the
transmitted=
track points are not being received by
the Globalstar satellite network.
=
I think this largely stems from a failure
to appreciate what a 'clear view
=
of the sky' really means. It is not the
overhead sky that matters. IT IS
=
THE 360 DEGREE VIEW OF THE
HORIZON THAT IS IMPORTANT. =20

I recently purchased a Delorme Inreach.
I was in a hurry to leave for a
co=
ntest, so I just signed up for one of the
mass-market plans (there are
spec=
ial, aviation plans that offer more
frequent fixes). I've been very
impres=
sed. =20

- The device itself has rechargable
battery that seems to offer many
hours=
worth of transmitting.=20
- It's easy to tell that it's working.=20
- It's worked very reliably on every flight
I've made.=20
- Not only that, it's worked quite reliably
tucked into my electronics
box=
in the back of the car on the ride home
(have forgotten to shut it off
sev=
eral times).=20

Looking at some of the log files from
Mifflin for example, I'm confident
th=
at in the worst case, folks would know
within a reasonable area where to
st=
art looking. Hopefully my old ELT would
be working or better yet I'd be
i=
n a position to activate the PLB attached
to my parachute, but the Delorme
=
seems to be much more reliable than
the Spots that my friends use. =20

As for Joe, I can't say enough how much
I enjoyed meeting him a few years
a=
go. I was the CD at Fairfield and we had
a pretty significant ridge
task.=
As is sometimes the case for people
new to the ridge country, Joe ended
u=
p on the wrong ridge late in the day and
landed out... way out. When he
go=
t back well after dark, instead of being
annoyed or frustrated, he was as
h=
appy and excited as could be. He was
a very nice man, and I'm greatly
sa=
ddened by this news.=20

P3

I am saddened for our loss of Joe, I met him a few years ago as a scorer at a SCOH contest, very nice gentleman.

As for spot vs Delorme or other means of location ID, I have an original Spot and it has great reception on my parachute left shoulder. Cost is my main reason for not changing.

On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 17:37:26 -0700, cliffhilty wrote:

I am saddened for our loss of Joe, I met him a few years ago as a scorer
at a SCOH contest, very nice gentleman.

As for spot vs Delorme or other means of location ID, I have an original
Spot and it has great reception on my parachute left shoulder. Cost is
my main reason for not changing.

I still use a Spot Connect on the parachute strap, it seems reliable in
transmitting points. If there's an option for faster than 10 minute
resolution, I haven't found it. Unfortunately, to turn on tracking, you
need data on your phone, which occasionally is quite inconvenient.
Stupid design. Probably time to upgrade to something better.

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 11:40:58 +0000, David Kinsell wrote:

On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 17:37:26 -0700, cliffhilty wrote:

I am saddened for our loss of Joe, I met him a few years ago as a
scorer at a SCOH contest, very nice gentleman.

As for spot vs Delorme or other means of location ID, I have an
original Spot and it has great reception on my parachute left shoulder.
Cost is my main reason for not changing.

I still use a Spot Connect on the parachute strap, it seems reliable in
transmitting points. If there's an option for faster than 10 minute
resolution, I haven't found it. Unfortunately, to turn on tracking, you
need data on your phone, which occasionally is quite inconvenient.
Stupid design. Probably time to upgrade to something better.

To update this, their phone app has now been changed so that internet is
no longer required on the phone to use the app. After changing info like
contact lists on the website, you're prompted to sync that info with the
phone. But in the field, no internet is now needed.

The faster than 10 minute tracking is available on their newest (Gen3)
hardware, but not older units. However, hitting the SOS button does give
5 minute updates. I hope it initiates a transmission as soon as the
button is pressed.

-Dave