SPOT messenger - pirep on new unit please

[nomocom]

Originally Posted by DakotaHawk

Here's a link to a Boise newspaper article about the SPOT activation that I described yesterday. This sheriff sounds like he just can't be bothered to do his job anymore. I understand the frustration of allocating scarce resources, but a SPOT activation has got to mean something!

http://www.ktvb.com/home/Locating-be...103099444.html

Scott,
Thanks for the link. Yes, activation does mean something, but as the article describes, it means one thing to the person that triggers it in need, and unfortunately, more of just a question to the responders . Per the article, Spot activations from the Boise Cabelas store..... you gotta be kidding. Unfortunately, they aren't.

Because of this developing pattern, I think collectively as Spot users, we best do every thing we can to eliminate nuisance trips. Each nuisance trip has a strong possibility of downgrading the urgency of future respones.

If we've got one of the old units, is there a way to protect the 911 button from a inadvertent trip? Or when funds allow, upgrade to the newer unit with the protected buttons? And everybody, gen 1 or 2, use 911 in real emergencies only. I may not see the whole picture here, but it seems like these days with ever tighter county budgets, those that are charged with "rescue" are going get even slower if the SPOT user community continues to have numerous frivolous trips.

This illustrates why some folks have gone the 406 ELT route. In Idaho, the Division of Aeronautics is charged with coordinating searches for downed or missing aircraft. When there is a 406 ELT ping, they get a call from Tyndall AFB, Rescue coordination center (RCC). Then, Aeronautics will get a CAP or state aircraft in the air looking for the crash site if it is not already known. As it works in Idaho, when crash location is know, at that point it goes to the county Sheriff for the actual rescue. But, the Dept of Aeronautics will also be pushing the sheriff to get a rescue going, in addition to the family, so there is likely some benefit with the 406 PLB chain of communications.

I think it works similar with a 406 PLB, though the Div. of Aeronatics would not be on the RCCs call list. However, I've instructed my emergency contacts to get the Div. of Aeronautics involved and I've listed my tail number in the PLB and Spot registration. Even so, I suspect the PLB and Spot will not carry the same impact as a 406 ELT.

[Master Designs]

If they billed the user for the SAR costs if it was a false alarm, I bet users would be a bit more protective over the 911 button. Most cities charge for a false house alarm, so I can see something changing on these PLB's being sold.

[L.Adamson]

Thanks for the link. Yes, activation does mean something, but as the article describes, it means one thing to the person that triggers it in need, and unfortunately, more of just a question to the responders . Per the article, Spot activations from the Boise Cabelas store..... you gotta be kidding. Unfortunately, they aren't.

In our case of "accidental activation" (headset sitting on SPOT 911 button), the SPOT personal could see that we were at an airport, and they called my cell phone first.........before sending out the troops. This method will at least eliminate some of the nuisance activations & followups.

L.Adamson --- RV6A

[Ron Lee]

I do not think that Spot is the same as a PLB, which my 406 MHz unit is.

I also suspect...but do not know...that if I activate my 406 PLB, it will get just as much action as an ELT.

[chinch]

Originally Posted by Ron Lee

I do not think that Spot is the same as a PLB, which my 406 MHz unit is.

I also suspect...but do not know...that if I activate my 406 PLB, it will get just as much action as an ELT.

You are correct.

Your 406 PLB and 406 ELT are supported by international convention under the international COSPAS/SARSAT agreement, and are escalated immediately to the relevant SAR authority.

SPOT is a commercial product supported by a commercial service using a commercial, non SAR satellite system (GlobalStar, IIRC). The response you get upon activation depends on the protocols that the commercial service provider has in place, and their relationship with SAR resources.

For example, our product (not SPOT) allows the customer to specify cellphone numbers which will receive distress messages via SMS, but we also require ICE contact lists, as SMS is not reliable, and there is no guarantee that the nominated cellphones will be turned on. When our 24x7 monitoring team receives a distress message, we immediately start calling the relevent ICE contacts, and if we cannot contact them or achieve a formal handover, we call the relevant SAR authority for the distress location, using protocols established by the US NSARC working group for commercial tracking providers.

For what its worth, we lasted for three years without charging for false activations, but once we we started receiving mulitple alerts daily ("what does this button do?", "Oops" and "I just wanted to make sure the system works") we had no option but to apply a nominal fee (US$75 per incident) for false alarms as they diverted valuable resources from genuine emergencies. Our false alarms stopped overnight.

[KRviator]

Originally Posted by Ron Lee

I also suspect...but do not know...that if I activate my 406 PLB, it will get just as much action as an ELT.

I've always been of the belief a 406 beacon was an ELT/EPIRB, but obviously transmitting on a different frequency to what we're traditionally used too.

[Ron Lee]

Originally Posted by KRviator

I've always been of the belief a 406 beacon was an ELT/EPIRB, but obviously transmitting on a different frequency to what we're traditionally used too.

In the 406 MHz arena, you have:

1) ELT models: Aircraft
2) EPIRB models: Boats
3) PLB models: Personal use, eg hiking, camping, etc.

Obviously there can be crossover in use since my PLB is carried while flying but it does not meet ELT standards for mounting, activation, etc.

Google the terms in case I am wrong.

[nomocom]

Originally Posted by Ron Lee

I do not think that Spot is the same as a PLB, which my 406 MHz unit is.

I also suspect...but do not know...that if I activate my 406 PLB, it will get just as much action as an ELT.

I don't know that the PLB will get the same "action" as an ELT. While the 406 ELTs, 406 PLBs, and 406 EPIRBs (marine) may all have the same sort of electronic guts, talk to the same satellite network, and etc, what they communicate about the user will have some downstream impact. For us flyers, if it is a 406 ELT rather than the 406 PLB, that will pull different resources into the search and rescue chain (Div of Aeronautics). I speak regarding Idaho, other states and countries I don't know, but to suggest a PLB and a ELT gets treated the same from activation, clear through to rescue, I think one would need a fair bit of local knowledge to be able to make that assessment.

Generally speaking, one of the factors that contributes to a prompt and smooth SAR mission is knowing what you are looking for, and that is where the PLB may sometimes be at a disadvantage. All the 406 transmitters with the GPS option tell you where, but with the PLB, the rescuers don't really know what they are looking for unless there is additional information. Ok, maybe the RCC will pull from the database, but info could be old and general. Better, if the RCC reach a contact with your trip details, then that unknown should go away. That kind of uncertainty can slow things down. On the other hand, 406 ELT, well right away they know they are looking for an aircraft, they've got the tail number, type, and color, and if it is transmitting from an off airport location, they probably are thinking about trauma patients and the need to get there promptly.

[nomocom]

Originally Posted by chinch

For what its worth, we lasted for three years without charging for false activations, but once we we started receiving mulitple alerts daily ("what does this button do?", "Oops" and "I just wanted to make sure the system works") we had no option but to apply a nominal fee (US$75 per incident) for false alarms as they diverted valuable resources from genuine emergencies. Our false alarms stopped overnight.

Chris,
An economic incentive to change behavior. Glad to hear that worked, I like it. Expensive enough to create some awareness, but not so expensive that it would inhibit declaring an actual emergency.

Any unintended consequences you can share?

[chinch]

Originally Posted by nomocom

Generally speaking, one of the factors that contributes to a prompt and smooth SAR mission is knowing what you are looking for, and that is where the PLB may sometimes be at a disadvantage. All the 406 transmitters with the GPS option tell you where, but with the PLB, the rescuers don't really know what they are looking for unless there is additional information.

Absolutely correct - which is why new Iridium personal tracking units with bidirectional global text messaging and 911 alerts are being looked at with special interest by SAR authorities that we work with. It makes a big difference knowing WHAT the situation is as well as WHERE it is.