25 replies to this topic

[eyemgh]

I would have to disagree with this a bit.  The iridium network is very reliable and there is inherent value in a SAR situation to two way communications.   The GEOS operators can first let you know your mayday message has been received, then ascertain the nature of your emergency, then can coordinate with you for your rescue or other assistance.  It can be critical to know that the rescuers are inbound an will be there within the hour and you should stay put until help arrives, or that the rescue the will be 8 hours out, and you should move the victim back to the hut as there is a real chance of hypothermia.  

 

The iridium transmitter may be lower power (I don't actually know) but the iridium constellation is much lower than the GPS satellites that host most of COSPAS receivers, and is specifically designed for communications, unlike the COSPAS receivers which are hosted payloads with smaller antennas. We know our inReach is reliable and exactly how to use it, because we use it all the time - it is in tracking mode when ever we are out on an adventure.  Professionally, I use Iridium phones and trackers in Antarctica, and have never been issued or carried a PLB when doing Antarctic or Arctic field work. 

 

Given the choice, I would definitely choose inReach (or another Iridium based tracker) over a PLB. 

 

I didn't choose one over the other. I view them as a little different and carry both. I decided that after watching Adam Greentree's account of an InReach SOS failure and then subsequently reading about others. I was also swayed by the Outdoor Gear Review article that ranked the InReach as their best satellite communicator on their aggregate review, but only gave the Iridium systems, including the InReach, a 7/10 for SOS. They gave both PLBs (Ocean Signal and ACR) 9/10. The cheapest Garmin, the Mini, is $350 (although I just saw them on sale) and the cheapest monthly subscription, limited to 10 messages, the one we get, is $15/mo. Over the 7 year lifespan of a PLB battery that never requires recharging, that equates to over $1600. The PLB on the other hand at a flat $289, works out to less than $3.50/mo. For that minimal investment, when it could mean life or death, I couldn't figure out a reason why not to carry both. I use the InReach, rarely, to communicate, mainly if we aren't on schedule or need non-emergent help. I would activate both SOS systems if life was on the line.  

[rando]

I certainly would not recommend activating both your PLB and your inReach, that could cause a significant amount of confusion, unnecessarily tie up resources, and possibly delay a rescue as two separate emergency operations centers would both be trying to initiate a response.   If you use the inReach, you will know almost immediately that your distress message was received successfully and is being acted upon, so there would be no reason to use the PLB. 

 

The only inReach 'failures' I have heard of (and I think the one you are describing) were accidental activations of the device, not failures to initiate a rescue.  These accidental activations have since been addressed in all the recent inReach devices. 

 

I guess you could carry both, but for most that would be tremendous overkill.  If you were to carry one, the inReach has many advantages. 

[GreggLT]

Garmin now owns the InReach product line. A good overview is available here:

https://discover.gar...reach/personal/

In addition to the device purchase, there is a ongoing subscription that pays for the SOS infrastructure &  services.

As the service uses satellites for communication, there is no need to be near cell towers for it to work.

Most of the devices work well standalone but the user interface and mapping is better with a cellphone or tablet connected via Bluetooth for typing & reading messages.

 

Paul

Thanks. Will check InReach

Edited by GreggLT, 01 December 2020 - 05:08 AM.

[eyemgh]

I certainly would not recommend activating both your PLB and your inReach, that could cause a significant amount of confusion, unnecessarily tie up resources, and possibly delay a rescue as two separate emergency operations centers would both be trying to initiate a response.   If you use the inReach, you will know almost immediately that your distress message was received successfully and is being acted upon, so there would be no reason to use the PLB. 

 

The only inReach 'failures' I have heard of (and I think the one you are describing) were accidental activations of the device, not failures to initiate a rescue.  These accidental activations have since been addressed in all the recent inReach devices. 

 

I guess you could carry both, but for most that would be tremendous overkill.  If you were to carry one, the inReach has many advantages. 

 

No, it was a failure of the Iridium SOS system to initiate rescue. He pressed the SOS and it initiated contact with only one of his personal contacts and did not mobilize SNR through the Iridium network. It was his friend who got the signal that initiated a rescue outside of the InReach network only after rescue failed to show. I don't know that particulars of what failed within the system. But it indeed failed.

 

Both the PLB and InReach ultimately initiate the SNR closest to where the signal comes from. It's not like the private calvary comes when you press the InReach and some public version comes if you initiate the PLB. In either case, it will almost certainly be local SNR, mostly volunteers, frequently funded through the local Sheriff's Department. If I activated both and the InReach responded, I could let them know I also activated a PLB. 

 

I'm certainly no expert on this. I can only reference what I've read and am parroting, hoping to never have to use. 

 

https://www.backcoun...-gps-messenger/

 

"To answer my original question… No! Satellite Messengers in general are not good alternatives for PLBs. Satellite Messengers, especially the InReach may be good additions to PLBs, but not an alternative."

 

https://www.outdoorg...-locator-beacon

 

We have the PLB mostly for skiing in avalanche terrain where top reliability, battery life, etc. are of the ultimate importance. We just bring it along when we're in the truck. My son has one too because he skis in avvy terrain in other countries.

 

Getting back to OP's original train of thought, I'd certainly prefer an InReach over a ham radio. 

Edited by eyemgh, 01 December 2020 - 05:15 AM.

[PaulT]

I carry both the InReach and several ham radios. Other than to check that it is working, and on just a couple of instances where I had only VHF/UHF ham capabilities in a repeater and cell service dead zone, I use the InReach primarily for up to date multiple day weather reports for the precise area where I am camping and texting with family.

 

The units complement each other nicely and I always have the ham gear with me anyway. Traveling with the ham gear also means I can call on known calling frequencies for suggestions on local places to eat or just for some conversation to make the drive more pleasant.

 

Paul

[craig333]

Different tools for different uses. I'm not going to activate my inreach if I'm stuck in a ditch (though, especially in DV an inconvenience can turn into a real emergency). Thats a much better use of the ham radio. 

 

I think the odds of a failure are low enough I'm not going to carry a plb though there is certainly nothing wrong with carrying one of you wish. 

 

I wouldn't be so sure that both rescue agencies are going to be contacting the same resources. 

[eyemgh]

Different tools for different uses. I'm not going to activate my inreach if I'm stuck in a ditch (though, especially in DV an inconvenience can turn into a real emergency). Thats a much better use of the ham radio. 

 

I think the odds of a failure are low enough I'm not going to carry a plb though there is certainly nothing wrong with carrying one of you wish. 

 

I wouldn't be so sure that both rescue agencies are going to be contacting the same resources. 

Let’s hope I’m never faced with that! In retrospect, I probably would just activate the PLB and use the InReach to coordinate with friends. The PLB is a double edged sword though. Although the Iridium systems are solid, the PLB is purportedly the most reliable. The biggest thing is that there’s no confirmation that someone picked up the phone and no one can assess or advise until they arrive. 

[PaulT]

Perhaps, it is time for an email to each organization asking the questions for which answers are needed. I would be surprised if this were the first time someone asked.

 

Paul

[PaulT]

Just did a search for "plb vs garmin inreach bad to activate both"

 

Definitely not the first time the question has been raised.

 

Paul

[eyemgh]

Just did a search for "plb vs garmin inreach bad to activate both"

 

Definitely not the first time the question has been raised.

 

Paul

 

I did that search, but still didn't find a clear answer. many carry both, but I couldn't find a "what if I activate both" scenario. The best I could find was on HikingGuy where he has GEOS programmed to send a message with his inreach that says he activated his PLB. Did you find anything more clear?