Forum Index > Gear Talk > IS my old Ortovox avalanche beacon useless?
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12652 | TRs
Location: here now
DIYSteve
  Top

seeking hygge
PostWed Nov 07, 2018 10:58 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Okay, we obviously have different backgrounds. I have a basic level understanding of the fundamentals of electromagnetic radiation, specifically RF wave propagation. Avy beacon transmitters are RF transmitters, no more, no less. As I said above, it's good to understand the basics, although I still don't see how that could make faster a search with a modern multi-antenna digital beacon. IMO, ski tourists would be safer if they spent their time practicing with good quality multi-antenna digital beacons and digging strategy than sitting in a classroom to hear a lecture on RF theory.

Doppelganger wrote:
did I see John pack his shovel next to his beacon this morning?

That's an easy one: If John is packing his beacon inside his pack, don't tour with John. If John tours with a shovel strapped to his chest, don't tour with John.

Doppelganger wrote:
These might be some of the factors that I would take into account that the beacon cannot.

Okay, so how does that affect use of an avy beacon? As I asked above, when and how do you decide to outthink, i.e., ignore prompts from, a digital beacon? I cannot conjure any circumstance where that makes sense. Seriously, I'm not getting your suggestion re relying on knowledge of RF flux lines in making overriding adjustments during a real time search.

Doppelganger wrote:
I also propose that if I become intimately familiar with the flux line "map" of the beacons I own and the behavior of my searching beacons within those maps, I might be better able to determine where I am within the near/far field lines.

We're going in circles. A modern multi-antenna digital beacon gives very accurate distance to the victim and provides direction prompts. Thus, I ask again: What kind of information re RF flux lines would enhance a multi-antenna digital beacon search or cause you to adjust or ignore the prompts? I'm not trying to be difficult. I'm trying to understand where you're going.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6141 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostWed Nov 07, 2018 11:19 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
It takes an impressive ego to believe that one can compute flux line intersects faster with your brain than the microprocessor in a modern beacon which has two decades worth of engineering effort into improving the algorithms.

Personally when a companion is buried under the snow suffocating, the last thing I want to depend on is my brain to do some complex math.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1461 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostThu Nov 08, 2018 8:48 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
It takes an impressive ego to believe that one can compute flux line intersects faster with your brain than the microprocessor in a modern beacon which has two decades worth of engineering effort into improving the algorithms.

Maybe I should have put it in bold and italics. I never suggested that the beacon's prompts should be disregarded, I never suggested that I might be able to compute flux lines myself, nor did I suggest that the data provided by the beacon is not to be trusted. It takes some presumption and laziness to jump to those conclusions, I'm not sure what's got your jimmies rustled up about this. rolleyes.gif  lol.gif

Some people are fine with just starting their cars and driving them, and that is completely OK since that's what the car was designed to do. Some people see benefits in learning more about how the car works. That's all I'm interested in here, and I think that the better you know your equipment the better you will be at using it.

Edit: to address your point of "decades of engineering", you must accept that you are trusting the work of an engineering team dedicated to the production of your beacon's brand/model. Humans are capable of errors. It's possible (highly unlikely but possible) that there are hardware/software bugs the engineering team didn't catch.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6141 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostThu Nov 08, 2018 9:54 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger wrote:
. It's possible (highly unlikely but possible) that there are hardware/software bugs the engineering team didn't catch.

With decades of software engineering experience,  I can guarantee that every beacon's firmware and hardware has numerous undetected flaws. So does the firmware/hardware in the stability control system of modern vehicles and the flight control systems of modern aircraft.

Is that a good argument for saying a 1966 Mustang is a safer vehicle or that a 707 is a safer aircraft?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12652 | TRs
Location: here now
DIYSteve
  Top

seeking hygge
PostFri Nov 09, 2018 2:09 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I acknowledged above that some people operate more confidently if they have a basic understanding of how things work, although I cannot imagine any way in which educating oneself re RF flux line propagation would enhance a search with a multi-antenna digital beacon. And I really don't get your suggestion that an understanding of RF wave propagation would allow your brain to "collate" or "take into account" RF wave data in any way that would assist in a burial search -- any more than, say, understanding RF wave propagation would make your cell phone or car radio work better than for someone who is wholly ignorant about RF science.

I am curious about all modern devices I use. It's fun for me to learn about, say, our vehicles' variable valve timing and electronic control of fuel/air mix, although such understanding does not make my car drive better for me than for my wife (who has no interest in such things).
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6141 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostFri Nov 09, 2018 5:28 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger wrote:
RandyHiker wrote:
...the microprocessor in a modern beacon which has two decades worth of engineering effort into improving the algorithms.

RandyHiker wrote:
I can guarantee that every beacon's firmware and hardware has numerous undetected flaws.

Pick one.

I have found both to be true after nearly four decades of engineering experience.   If you can't understand how that can be the case, iI doubt anything I say here will change your mind.

But, I'll give you a non-engineering example.   A friend of mine used to edit the newsletter for a non-profit.  The team would go through multiple edit / proofread / correct cycles -- typically until the publication deadline arrived.  Over 90% of the time once the printed copies came back from the printer at least one fairly obvious typo would be found within minutes, despite many hours of proofreading by the same people.

Almost never did these typos interfere with the information being communicated, but it was super annoying to my friend who is a bit of a perfectionist.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6141 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostFri Nov 09, 2018 5:38 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger wrote:
Your increased knowledge of your car could be applied in recognizing (and perhaps even addressing with the technical expertise) symptoms of problems related to those systems.

If you follow that line of thinking, an understanding of quantum mechanics would enhance one's ability to write poetry or novels using a computer as a word processor, as quantum theory is essential to the design of both the transistor and just about every aspect of a computer.

But I think the Venn diagram of people that understand quantum mechanics and write novels you would want to read is very very small.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12652 | TRs
Location: here now
DIYSteve
  Top

seeking hygge
PostFri Nov 09, 2018 10:13 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Maybe you should stop touring with John -- or, at least, have him read the instruction book (which covers possible interference from other RF devices). PM me with his real name so I can avoid touring anywhere near that guy.

Doppelganger wrote:
I only maintain that there is benefit in exploring the variables and conditions of a beacons operation.

You've changed your tune. What about the theory re your brain "collating data" and assessing "factors that [you] would take into account that the beacon cannot?"

What do you mean "variables and conditions?" What "variables and conditions" could you possibly ascertain from your proposed demonstration of flux line 3D imagery that the instruction book doesn't cover?

If you need to experience electromagnetic wave interference in real life, try this: Pair your Bluetooth ear bud with your cell phone and listen to your favorite podcast or favorite band. Then walk over to your microwave oven and turn in on for 60 seconds. [/electromagnetic wave interference lesson]

Oh, and have John try that too.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 291 | TRs

snoqpass
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 13, 2018 12:43 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Back to the OPs original question, that old F1 should be considered a museum piece, using it for practice is questionable too given the older transceivers electronics and crystals degrading with time, signal drift, and sending phantom signals that can be read as a multiple burial by a newer transceiver. The price of transceivers has come way down as well a new pieps  DSP sport can be had for around $250 so cost shouldn’t be an issue considering how much skis, boots, bindings or whatever else gear you need for BC touring
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12652 | TRs
Location: here now
DIYSteve
  Top

seeking hygge
PostTue Nov 13, 2018 8:17 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
^  ^  ^  what we have here is a lucid sensible post
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 13979 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 13, 2018 9:57 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Analysis of the flux lines of multiple transmitters is useful if you are preparing a paper for a IEEE ICC conference but not so useful for ski touring. You time would be better spent studying terrain and snow conditions. But of course I am just an old crumuggion. huh.gif

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
snoqpass
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2007
Posts: 291 | TRs

snoqpass
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 13, 2018 1:28 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
You can add to the list, probing, shoveling, extrication, evacuation and first aid which seems to get overlooked when people are discussing beacon use
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 5073 | TRs

gb
  Top

Member
PostFri Nov 16, 2018 7:48 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
Analysis of the flux lines of multiple transmitters is useful if you are preparing a paper for a IEEE ICC conference but not so useful for ski touring. You time would be better spent studying terrain and snow conditions. But of course I am just an old crumuggion. huh.gif

What I start out doing in beacon search practices is have everyone in a line and then I approach the line, letting the practicers see what their maximum range is as I change the orientation of my transceiver and then approach slowly to show how their tranceiver responds with respect to flux lines. I demonstrate clearly how the readout of the "searcher's" transceiver changes as I clearly change my transceivers orientation with respect to that of the line of "searchers".

In practicing multiples, first begin by placing transceivers visible on the ground and having individual "searchers" approach and walk through the area to see how their transceiver processes and responds to multiple signals.

That is about as far as one needs to get into the electronics and flux lines of transceivers.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Pahoehoe
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Oct 2017
Posts: 218 | TRs

Pahoehoe
  Top

Member
PostMon Nov 19, 2018 6:45 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Its fun to have a group of people in search mode.. you need quite a few...to stand in a circle around a beacon in transmit mode and have them hold their beacon out pointing in the direction its telling them to go
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6141 | TRs
Location: Mobile
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Nov 20, 2018 11:03 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Another useful exercise that I like to perform with new groups is to have people pair off and play "hide and seek" with the beacons.   The hider will put their beacon in a ziplock box and stuffed into stuff sack, wrapped with a jacket and will then bury the beacon somewhere nearby.  Works best in areas with lots of existing tracks and obviously in a safe zone...   It gives everyone a real world picture of partners and their own search skills.  Including the time one guy neglected to turn his beacon on before burying it.  That makes you appreciate how helpful a tool a beacon is.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Gear Talk > IS my old Ortovox avalanche beacon useless?
  Happy Birthday Old Whiner, Scanfield!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy