Avy transeivers

[burgersling]

Out of the following choices I would buy..DTS TrackerOrtovox m2Ortovox X1Mammut Barryvox

Mammut Barryvoxhttp://www.barryvox.com/productfamily/mammut/index_e.htmlTechnical databattery life: 200 hours SEND minimum, usually more than 300 hours operating frequency: 457 kHz maximum range: approx. 60m batteries: 3 alkalinemagnesium cells, size AAA dimensions: 108 x 68 x 25 mm weight: 170gr (including batteries) Ortovox X1http://www.ortovox.com/eng/start.htmTECHNICAL DATAFUNCTIONS: digital + analog (2 antennae) CASING: anatomically shaped, waterproof, secure and rugged according to the European standard EN 300 718 DIMENSIONS: 120 x 80 x 20 mm TRANSMITTER AND RECEIVER FREQUENCY: 457 kHz RANGE: up to 80 m SEARCH STRIP WIDTH: up to 40 m TEMPERATURE: -30° to +50° C BATTERIES: 2 LR6 Mignon 1.5V E91 AM3 AA WORKING LIFE: TRANSMITTING: approx. 300 hours RECEIVING: approx. 40 hours WEIGHT: approx. 247 g (batteries and body belt included) Tracker DTS (BCA)http://www.bcaccess.com/bcaproducts/tracker/tracker_home.phpFrequency: 457 kHzBatteries: three AAA alkalinesBattery life: minimum 1 hour in search mode after 200 hours intransmit mode (approximately 250 hours in transmit only or 50 hours in search only)Weight: 10.5 ounces (298 grams), including strap and batteries; 8.3 ounces (200 grams) without strap and batteries.Size: 5-3/4” x 3-1/4” x 1-1/4” (14cm x 8cm x 3cm)Limited 3-year warrantyTracker's maximum receive range of 50 meters Ortovox M2http://www.ortovox.com/eng/start.htmTECHNICAL DATAFUNCTIONS: digital + analog HOUSING: anatomically shaped, waterproof, secure and rugged according to EN 300 718 DIMENSIONS: 145 x 62 x 25 mm TRANSMITTER AND RECEIVER FREQUENCY: 457 kHz RANGE: up to 80 m SEARCH STRIP WIDTH: up to 40 m TEMPERATURE: -30° to +50° C BATTERIES: 2 x LR6 Mignon 1,5 V E91 AM3 AA (no rechargeables) = 2 "AA" batteries BATTERY LIFE: TRANSMITTING: approx. 300 hours RECEIVING: approx. 40 hours WEIGHT: approx. 230 G, incl. batteries

[ncascademtns]

I vote for the Ortovox F1.

Dependable and it works. No frills, just learn how to use it.

[cracked]

Barryvox. You can choose what frills you want. They all cost the same. Light. Pretty. Simple. Lou Dawson and Andrew McLean use it.

[Billygoat]

those guys get paid to use it.

 

[snoboy]

I use it, I don't get paid to. I like it.

 

If someone gave me a tracker, I would use that, same for an f1, or maybe even a pieps.

 

I would rather not use a M1 or M2, and I wouldn't use an X1 .

 

If it comes down to me choosing where to drop my cash though... B-vox.

 

 

I am curious why more people are voting for the M2 over the Tracker at this point though? Any of those people care to elaborate?

 

[Billygoat]

The M2 works better, esp. over distance. My good buddy has a Tracker and we practice from time to time and both find the Tracker easier to use but the M2 more accurate and quicker to pick up the signal over distance. Just plain better once you get the hang of it.

 

In fact we are getting together tonight for grilled steaks, ski movies and transceiver practice. Want to come over?

 

I have not tried the Barryvox. I like the M2 because I bought one. My friend still likes his Tracker cause he bought one. I think that they all operate within a narrow spectrum which is acceptable and that practice will increase efficiency. The point is not to use them, avoidance is the operating principle...

 

Goat

[sobo]

Not a choice you listed, but ARVA 9000!

[burgersling]

The Arva 9000 was intentionally disregarded.

 

Yes, I have read the arguments about the X1 already. I don't believe that sort of stuff until I hear it from multiple sources or use it myself. My guess is you have a couple of old goats that are too stupid to learn about a new beacon.

 

[AARON1]

You also left off the SOS tranceiver.

[burgersling]

If it's not here; it's for a reason. These are the ones I am looking at.

[Billygoat]

Who you callin' an "old goat" you meat packet sucking, shit stained, clownpuncher....

[snoboy]

burgersling said:

Yes, I have read the arguments about the X1 already. I don't believe that sort of stuff until I hear it from multiple sources or use it myself. My guess is you have a couple of old goats that are too stupid to learn about a new beacon.

 

I also tend not to believe such stuff until I have seen it myself, but I am happy you at least know to look for it. The person who told me about it was not aware of the links at ttips, and he is someone I trust with that kind of stuff. He puts a lot of thought in to each peice of gear that he buys. He is also quite capable with his new B-Vox.

 

He described an incident where the beacon (X-1) basically "crashed." It became unresponsive and had to be turned off and on again to resume the search.

 

[sobo]

burgersling said:

The Arva 9000 was intentionally disregarded.

 

and

 

burgersling said:

If it's not here; it's for a reason. These are the ones I am looking at.

 

Might I ask why?

[snoboy]

My guess is that he wants a directional (digital) beacon. On second thought, he has the M2 in there so :shrug:

[Billygoat]

I just discovered a shortfall of the M2 tonight. We were practicing and it got dark and I realized I could not see the readout, which makes the M2 so good. Luckily I had a headlamp. No such problem with my friend's Tracker.

[sobo]

snoboy said:

My guess is that he wants a directional (digital) beacon.

 

The ARVA 9000 is both of those things. So now what?

[burgersling]

The M2 is so advanced looking I consider it. The range and other features seem enticing.

 

The ARVA is not sold anywhere close to my house or close enough that I am willing to drive and buy one.....

[snoboy]

sobo said:

snoboy said:

My guess is that he wants a directional (digital) beacon.

 

The ARVA 9000 is both of those things. So now what?

 

Not by my definition... I would only call a beacon directional/digital if it has a set of lights or other indicators that tell you which direction the flux line is is. As far as I know, there are only three beacons that meet that criteria:

 

B-vox

Tracker

X-1

 

All other beacons require you to stop or slow down and sweep the unit from side to side to determine the direction of search.

 

I think the M2 and the Arva are very similar in function.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[gslater]

snoboy said:

 

I think the M2 and the Arva are very similar in function.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

I was playing with both the M2 and the Arva this morning. I strongly preferred the M2, just because the Arva is so freakin' slow with its updates. Sweeping side to side with the Arva is very frustrating. The signal strength display on the M2 is updated much more quickly than on the Arva. Everyone I was with said they much preferred a plain old F1 to the Arva. The M2's nifty display was just gravy on top of the F1 functionality. Also had much better range with the F1/M2.

[Billygoat]

Face it: the M2 rocks and if you have a newbie with you make sure they have a Tracker....

[sobo]

snoboy said:

sobo said:

snoboy said:

My guess is that he wants a directional (digital) beacon.

 

The ARVA 9000 is both of those things. So now what?

 

Not by my definition... I would only call a beacon directional/digital if it has a set of lights or other indicators that tell you which direction the flux line is is. As far as I know, there are only three beacons that meet that criteria:

 

B-vox

Tracker

X-1

 

All other beacons require you to stop or slow down and sweep the unit from side to side to determine the direction of search.

 

I think the M2 and the Arva are very similar in function.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

Well, by your definition, the ARVA 9000 would be a "semi-directional" digital beacon. It has an arrow that lines you up with the flux line and points you in a direction parallel to it. You then move along that line while watching the digital distance read-out. If it decreases, you're going in the right direction toward the subject. If the value increases, you're 180 degrees off, so turn around and go the other way. You do not really need to sweep to determine the direction of search with this device, and you definitely do not need to stop at all.

[sobo]

gslater said:

I was playing with both the M2 and the Arva this morning. I strongly preferred the M2, just because the Arva is so freakin' slow with its updates. Sweeping side to side with the Arva is very frustrating...

 

Don't sweep so fast, then. You don't need to once the unit locates the initial signal and you've deterimed that you're moving in the correct direction. I never sweep after I've locked on the intial signal, and I've never experienced the problem to which you refer, altho I can see where it would be frustrating.

[snoboy]

sobo said:

snoboy said:

Not by my definition... I would only call a beacon directional/digital if it has a set of lights or other indicators that tell you which direction the flux line is in. As far as I know, there are only three beacons that meet that criteria:

 

B-vox

Tracker

X-1

 

All other beacons require you to stop or slow down and sweep the unit from side to side to determine the direction of search.

 

Well, by your definition, the ARVA 9000 would be a "semi-directional" digital beacon. It has an arrow that lines you up with the flux line and points you in a direction parallel to it. You then move along that line while watching the digital distance read-out. If it decreases, you're going in the right direction toward the subject. If the value increases, you're 180 degrees off, so turn around and go the other way. You do not really need to sweep to determine the direction of search with this device, and you definitely do not need to stop at all.

 

Yes, all beacons are semi directional, no? I mean the F1, even the pieps can be used for a flux line search, they all have signal strength indicators, and an "arrow that lines you up with the flux line."

 

What I meant to say, and my little bold edit may help clarify, is that I would only class a beacon as directional if it has an array of lights or other indicators that indicate which direction the flux line is stronger

 

Just because you are on the flux line does not mean that you are headed towards the victim, except in a few lucky positions. As you get closer, you are going to make a curved path in towards the burial, no matter what beacon you are using, unless you are using a grid search.

 

From the Arva website (bold mine), under usage instructions:

 

Secondary search

This phase starts when the victim's signal has been picked up.

- The ARVA gives you a distance indication and the arrow lights up.

- When the arrow lights up, move forwards, watching the numbers. If the numbers decrease, you are moving closer to the victim.

- If the arrow goes out and/or the numbers increase, stop and sweep the unit from left to right and right to left until the arrow and/or the distance indicator lights up. Always follow the direction in which the number decreases and the arrow remains lit.

- Continue moving forward until the distance indicator displays 5.0.

 

I get the feeling that you have an Arva though, am I correct? Have you had lots of time to practice with it? I have not had time to play with one, other than learning how to turn it on and off. Perhaps there is something I am not picking up on here. :shrug:

[sobo]

snoboy said:

 

Lots of stuff snipped...

 

I get the feeling that you have an Arva though, am I correct? Have you had lots of time to practice with it? I have not had time to play with one, other than learning how to turn it on and off. Perhaps there is something I am not picking up on here. :shrug:

 

 

I do not dispute what you say about following a curved path along the flux line, nor about turning around if the numbers decrease. I said all that above. But I would still classify it as a directional beacon because it does tell you which direction the signal is stronger, as soon as you take one more step forward.

 

In answer to your questions above: yes, and yes. I practice it with it at least several times a year regardless of season. Mostly right about now, as I head into the backcountry for winter skiing, but also in the spring before the volcano climbing season gets active.

 

I have gotten quite good (and fast) with it. In our unit practices, I am invariably the first one to locate the "subject" every time. Not a chestbeat, just a fact. I have gotten very comfortable with it. I just wonder why I don't see more of them around. It's a good machine, IMO.

 

...sobo

[gslater]

sobo said:

gslater said:

I was playing with both the M2 and the Arva this morning. I strongly preferred the M2, just because the Arva is so freakin' slow with its updates. Sweeping side to side with the Arva is very frustrating...

 

Don't sweep so fast, then. You don't need to once the unit locates the initial signal and you've deterimed that you're moving in the correct direction. I never sweep after I've locked on the intial signal, and I've never experienced the problem to which you refer, altho I can see where it would be frustrating.

 

I understand, and you're right, but the signal strength readout is updated so slowly that the sweep has to be agonizingly slow to be sure you're heading in the right direction. Kind of frustrating, I'd imagine, when you're in a big hurry to find somebody. With the F1 or M2 (especially the M2 with the LCD display), the faster display update rate allows me to do the side to side sweep much faster, which is ultimately a good thing.