Buying the right avalanche transceiver?

Hi all,
As I am becoming a more avid backcountry rider during recent seasons, I
am now in dire need of my own transceiver. However, I have no idea what
to look for or what features are necessities. I definitely need
something that has plenty of features at the best price (of course!)
but also, as I haven't found a local dealer yet, can be sourced from
the internet. Thanks in advance for any advice you can give!
-Nick V

schrieb:
Hi all,
As I am becoming a more avid backcountry rider during recent seasons, I
am now in dire need of my own transceiver. However, I have no idea what
to look for or what features are necessities. I definitely need
something that has plenty of features at the best price (of course!)
but also, as I haven't found a local dealer yet, can be sourced from
the internet. Thanks in advance for any advice you can give!

Getting Mammut or Tracker you won't fail. But also most (digitals) of
the other brands are good.

Greetings,

Ulrich

Uli Hausmann wrote in news:43417e2e$0$26207$9b4e6d93
@newsread2.arcor-online.net:

schrieb:
Hi all,
As I am becoming a more avid backcountry rider during recent seasons, I
am now in dire need of my own transceiver. However, I have no idea what
to look for or what features are necessities. I definitely need
something that has plenty of features at the best price (of course!)
but also, as I haven't found a local dealer yet, can be sourced from
the internet. Thanks in advance for any advice you can give!

Getting Mammut or Tracker you won't fail. But also most (digitals) of
the other brands are good.

Greetings,

Ulrich


I'd put in a cautious vote for the Mammut, if you're not experienced. Last
season during a practice session I had a complete beginner find a buried
transciever using a Mammut unit as quickly as I could (I can fairly
consistently beat 5 minutes for a single transciever, if I start above,
using my F1 Focus).

I say a cautious vote because later in the same session the Mammut unit
stopped working and gave some kind of error we coudln't figure out. I
suspect it was a low battery warning rather than a malfunction, but as we
didn't have the manual and none of the party were very experienced with
these units we didn't know for sure. As others have commented, whichever
you choose it's important that you know it well.

Jeremy

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article .com,
wrote:
Hi all,
As I am becoming a more avid backcountry rider during recent seasons, I
am now in dire need of my own transceiver. However, I have no idea what
to look for or what features are necessities. I definitely need
something that has plenty of features at the best price (of course!)
but also, as I haven't found a local dealer yet, can be sourced from
the internet. Thanks in advance for any advice you can give!
-Nick V



_ This may be considered heresy, but IMHO an avalanche
transciever is the LAST thing you need. Avalanche education
is the FIRST. A transciever is a device of last resort,
a last chance grab at survival after mistakes have been
made. It's much better to focus on not making mistakes in
the first place. Take some classes and get some experience
with the ones in the classes and you'll be much better off
when you need to buy your own.

_ IMHO, excessive features are the last thing you need on
a transciever. If you're using one in anger, every last
second counts and the more things that can go wrong the
more that will go wrong. Get the simplest to use possible,
since you, like me and everybody else, won't really practice
enough with it to make any extra features anything but an
encumberance.

_ The gear articles here are a little out of date, but there
is much good info to consider

http://www.couloirmag.com/articles/avy_index.htm

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQ0GBlWTWTAjn5N/lAQGSCQP/WKyUYZvUOI9xv4HHRIDmtZl9qvNln/1b
ibJpauH6p2+KHPGqyL8gCKA/Ab0zIF6JmcXW/IujqbQFDPqh73yC0uZ71QFiC2Yn
xSQXxgmL1O1XxB5VxNOxujn1llJlPZAh2Vs43gxfZpuu6YNF+4 W7otfqOf3OMBcS
y7wl51b89T8=
=guax
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Booker C. Bense schrieb:

_ This may be considered heresy, but IMHO an avalanche
transciever is the LAST thing you need. Avalanche education
is the FIRST. A transciever is a device of last resort,
a last chance grab at survival after mistakes have been
made. It's much better to focus on not making mistakes in
the first place. Take some classes and get some experience
with the ones in the classes and you'll be much better off
when you need to buy your own.

No heresy at all, but absolutely correct.


_ IMHO, excessive features are the last thing you need on
a transciever. If you're using one in anger, every last
second counts and the more things that can go wrong the
more that will go wrong. Get the simplest to use possible,
since you, like me and everybody else, won't really practice
enough with it to make any extra features anything but an
encumberance.

Here, i've a slightly different point of view: You should get a
transceiver which does a good moltiple persons rescue distinction (and
that ones, normally are those with more features) - and hopefully,
you'll never use it. Our experience is: Tracker is very easy to use, but
has a little bit weak signal, Barryvox (Mammut) has the better signal,
but it's slightly more complicated. The simplest (digital) but also very
valid is the french ARVA.

As for us here in Europe: Most in early winter do a 1-2 days training in
rescueing, use of transceiver, crevasse salvatage ecc. Very likely and
hopefully, you will never have to use that kind of knowledge, but it's
good to have ... :-)

Greetings,

Ulrich

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Uli Hausmann wrote:


As for us here in Europe: Most in early winter do a 1-2 days training in
rescueing, use of transceiver, crevasse salvatage ecc. Very likely and
hopefully, you will never have to use that kind of knowledge, but it's
good to have ... :-)


_ Well, I suspect that's way more than most NA skiers
do. Crevasses aren't really an issue in 99.9% of the
backcountry skiing in the lower 48 states. Based on
my experience I would recommend the Tracker, since
people with absolutely no training have used it to
rescue others and every fall I can find my old Pieps
with it without reading the instruction manual.

_ Booker C. Bense



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQ0GxoGTWTAjn5N/lAQEJZgP/S0dj2dlQ6m5KGpurFdwc6SLPEHieWsBB
TTmchiYls4C7+Dbp9u3D6w8q7B0IPwIrgZGaukDy8oKp6XytbR Qmea4xeFq4s7Rr
/TaO/oVbekRQtKs1vV358ishatMZu1UR9gdM15IkEKVwqdqdCvqoJYl jT827DxSI
UrRaxxhPilE=
=bgOS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Booker C. Bense wrote:

Based on
my experience I would recommend the Tracker, since
people with absolutely no training have used it to
rescue others and every fall I can find my old Pieps
with it without reading the instruction manual.

Our XC ski club bought the local MRT's old Pieps at bargain rates for
club use when the team upgraded their own kit to Trackers, so that's
what the local pros are using here.

If money is an issue you can now get 2nd hand Pieps or similar for a
(relative) song and they will do the job, but when it comes to searching
there is no question that the new digital units are much easier,
especially if you're sorting out multiple burials.

Hmmm, probably should start to think about trading up my own Pieps at
some point...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In message
Peter Clinch wrote:

Booker C. Bense wrote:

Based on
my experience I would recommend the Tracker, since
people with absolutely no training have used it to
rescue others and every fall I can find my old Pieps
with it without reading the instruction manual.

Our XC ski club bought the local MRT's old Pieps at bargain rates for
club use when the team upgraded their own kit to Trackers, so that's
what the local pros are using here.

If money is an issue you can now get 2nd hand Pieps or similar for a
(relative) song and they will do the job, but when it comes to searching
there is no question that the new digital units are much easier,
especially if you're sorting out multiple burials.

Hmmm, probably should start to think about trading up my own Pieps at
some point...

Pete.

I've been using an analogue Ortovox F1 or F1 focus for all the years
that I've been ski-touring. If I was buying new transceiver today I'd
probably consider a digital or a combined digital/analogue device but I
recognise that if I did buy a different model I'd probably have to put
in extra hours next season in familiarising myself with it. Thus the
most important thing as far as I'm concerned is to practice using your
own device to the point where you are able to quickly and efficiently
use it to locate other transmitters in a variety of conditions and
situations. I probably spend about half a day each season doing such
practice. Whilst the newer digital models do make it slightly easier to
carry out searches for multiple buried transmitters, there are
appropriate methods for using analogue devices that will be perfectly
adequate, you just need to know what works well for your own device.
When I've practised alongside my friends some of whom use digital
transceivers there hasn't been a consistent or noticeable difference in
our individual effectiveness in finding single or multiple burials.

For most skiers like myself the key thing as has been pointed out
earlier in the thread is to minimise exposure to risk by becoming aware
of the dangers. Carrying a transceiver and shovel should be regarded as
a default for any serious off-piste or ski-tour, but it's important not
to risk compensate by believing it will definitely offer a great deal of
protection. Number one priority is to avoid the avalanche in the
first place. Thus really the important priorities for such skiers are
(a) that the transmitter is reliable and sends out a strong signal if
you are buried and (b) that the members of the group are confident in
their abilities to use their own transceivers for searching.

I think when it comes to transceivers for professionals, such as members
of SAR, or those who work as Mountain Guides, different considerations
do come into play. They are most likely to have to use their
transceivers on a regular basis and in all kinds of extreme
circumstance. For them features probably do matter even if they only add
marginal improvements. But they also have the time and experience to
practice and to compare and contrast different equipment under different
conditions. Some years ago a friend in my climbing club was from
Grenoble and worked for several years in the Chamonix rescue services
(sadly and ironically he was killed in an avalanche that hit a road
when he was out skiing with a group of his local friends), he used an
analogue device but had practised and used it for SAR so often that he
could simply switch it to receive and immediately tell you how many
people in the group had their transceivers switched on, what models of
transceiver they were wearing, and also have an idea about how fresh
their batteries were. But to get to that level of skill you need to be
practising and using the device nearly every day. Most of us don't and
won't.


Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
" || _`\,_ |__\ \ | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"

Uli Hausmann wrote:
Here, i've a slightly different point of view: You should get a
transceiver which does a good moltiple persons rescue distinction

I would suggest that most people should focus on and be competetent at
single victim searchers and should ski in a way that this rescue
scenario will be the norm should disaster strike. That given, I'd
suggest getting an Ortovox F1 or similar and practising with it. Simpler
the better I think. Spend the balance, as you and Booker agree, on
avalanche classes or something.

If you want to give yourself a chance in an avalanche and are largely
lift-served off-piste skiing or day touring get an ABS to go with it.

Neither device should lead you to take on more risk. You always need to
ask the question, would I ski this slope without my beacon?

Just to add that a beacon without every person in the group carrying a
shovel and probe is ineffective.

davidof wrote:

Simpler
the better I think. Spend the balance, as you and Booker agree, on
avalanche classes or something.

Define "simpler"... An automatic gearbox is more complex than a manual
gearbox, but it is simpler to use. Which sort of "simpler" do you want
here?

On the financial aspect, I'd be quite surprised if someone involved in a
sport as esoteric and reliant on spending money as most modern
backcountry mountain skiing couldn't stretch to a more expensive beacon
/and/ lessons too. There will be exceptions, granted, but I think most
of us could easily save the balance from our budgets elsewhere if we
felt it worthwhile.

Just to add that a beacon without every person in the group carrying a
shovel and probe is ineffective.

There are some obvious exceptions to that (one person doesn't have them,
they're the one that gets buried), so while I echo the thought that
everyone is best off having them I don't think advice should be
overstated into areas it isn't really true.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/