Communication options

[cnynrat]

You can use a cell phone to directly access a repeater, if you use Echolink (you must register and be a licensed ham). This allows the phone (or computer and sond card, etc) to act as a ham radio to access repeaters, including distant repeaters by internet, as a licensed amateur operator. Sort of the inverse of accessing the phone system through your ham radio with a phone patch on a repeater...

True enough.

But with respect to the OP's original question which had to do with emergency comms when in the backcountry, if one in is a location where they have cell service the simplest way to call in the calvary is to dial 911, not get on a repeater via Echolink via the cellular network.

[DreamingOfExpeditions]

Keep in mind again, I have worked for years for this agency, I have the OK from Chief to access the channels they operate on if I happen upon an accident again, and I have the skills to help. If I accessed the channels for emergency traffic from an accident whould the FCC come after my license or would the Chief have to make a complaint? The last wreck I was on I started two helicopters and flew them out...and the on-duty guys were happy I made the decision and had them en-route. And this is something that may never even happen again, I am just wanting to confirm before I get one. I have already decided to get an InReach device too for anything other than life or death.

In this one county I have pulled a guy from a burning car...getting burned myself, made the decision to fly six different people out and followed through with it, accessed one patient via a rope system, and tended to about 10 critical patients from motorcycle accidents, all in about six years and OFF DUTY. I know these guys and they jokingly tell me to stay off the road because I am an obvious **** magnet. If I have a peice of equipment that can relay vital information to people that can make a difference I would think its the right thing to do. Are you saying if I did the FCC would pull a license?

No. Like a previous poster said. Ifs its an obvious life and limb situation anyone regardless of license status can use a radio to summons help. You could have your wife broadcast an attend to victims even. I just don't know if you'd find a HAM that could broadcast on the EMS bands. Listen yes.

[Mike.rider]

A HAM licensee opens up a world of possibilities APRS and DStar are great tracking options that are easily monitored. We use APRS tracking a lot in SAR. It's simple and fairly robust.

[cnynrat]

A HAM licensee opens up a world of possibilities APRS and DStar are great tracking options that are easily monitored. We use APRS tracking a lot in SAR. It's simple and fairly robust.

What is the coverage for APRS? If I'm not mistaken, you are still dependent on being within range of another APRS station or an appropriately equipped repeater to receive your APRS tracking messages.

To me that's the benefit of a PLB (Spot, InReach, ResQLink, etc.) - all you need is a relatively unobstructed view of the sky. I think they are more reliable for that distress message that must reach the authorities.

[Mashurst]

It sounds to me like you have already decided you want to get an amateur license. Why not start there and see for yourself what a simple 2m mobile (or a 2m/440) radio can do for you in your area.

Nothing is fool proof. All communication modes have failure modes so my take is to have access to as many as practical.

It is truly incredible what you can do with a smart phone these days and the coverage is in a lot of places where you may not expect. I was way up in the forest for a ham field day event a few years ago before I got licensed and this guy said something like out here there is no way your cell is going to get you help. So I wiped out my phone to have a look and sure enough I had a workable signal. 911 on a cell is always the first choice for life and limb and a list of well equipped buddies is the first line of defense for a remote breakdown.

That said I don’t go play in the woods without multiple redundant amateur radios as well. You may or may not be able to get an auto patch to the phone system but if you can get into a repeater you will be able to get in contact with your buddies or 911 even if it is with a relayed message. I can’t really imagine a situation where you can “hit the repeater” but you can’t get whatever help you need, be that life flight or a buddy with a wrench. I can’t speak to your area but there are people monitoring the repeaters 24/7 here. In an area like Georgia I would think repeater coverage would be very robust due to the higher population density. Even out here in the Sierras there are a few repeater systems that have just plain amazing coverage. I literally don’t know of any holes in the coverage on the “805” repeater within its area out here including the bottom of the steep canyon I drive every day. That’s not to say there are none, just that they are very rare. The same can’t be said of cell or satellite.

I don’t own any kind of satellite communications due to the cost. The exception to that is when I am traveling in an area where I feel it is needed (mostly Mexico) I do rent a sat phone. I don’t like them for the cost, size and finicky nature. In my experience with them they need a big view of the sky and even trees cut back their reception. A PLB may be better in this regard as they are low bandwidth but I have no personal experience with them.

If I regularly traveled in the rare areas within the US that do not have solid repeater coverage I would put more effort into an HF amateur radio for my truck. I’m sure I will have that capability in the next few years. HF is not a sure thing ether as it is subject to the band conditions but it adds a very useful layer to a complete coms plan. (part of a complete breakfast)

Anyway, If I was as unlucky as you in terms of stumbling on trouble I would be looking at everything and an amateur license would be a no brainner.

PS: here is a chart I did a while back for another post that may have some relevance here as well.

[cnynrat]

I want to be clear that I am not arguing against ham per se. I'm licensed, my truck is equipped with a ham radio, my emergency bags have HT's and so on. It's great for general purpose comms and as one of your emergency comms alternatives. I just think you shouldn't rely on ham radio as your sole method of emergency comms, particularly as PLBs have become more cost effective.

VHF/UHF is pretty reliable in most places, but there are remote locations in the lower 48 where reaching a repeater can be problematic. On top of that, someone needs to be listening on the other end. That may be a pretty good bet during normal waking hours, but sometimes emergencies happen at 3:00 AM.

HF arguably addresses the range limitation of VHF/UHF, although the variables of propagation conditions and whether you can raise another station must still be considered. You may also end up reaching a station that, while I'm sure they will do their best to get the right rescue team engaged, may not be as readily equipped to do that as the SARSAT agency who is dedicated to that purpose.

A PLB simply requires a reasonably clear view of the sky, and that the device be working properly. You are ensured there is someone at the other end to receive your message and also that they know how to get the right rescue organization involved. The devices are somewhat simpler than a ham radio, so I'd bet they are more reliable.

So if you are scoring these on a scale of 1-10, 10 being best, I think I'd put a PLB at a 10 (or at least a 9 - maybe nothing is perfect), and the other options need to be reduced to make room.

If you travel to very remote locations, particularly solo (single vehicle) my ideal configuration would be both a VHF/UHF ham radio and a PLB. The cost of that would still be less than a typical HF mobile setup.

[Mashurst]

I do not disagree with anything you are saying. To be clear though the charts scope is limited to radio services, and while yes sat is technically radio it was not considered... Nor was cell...
As for the PLBs I guess it's the ongoing cost and being beholden to another company that has kept me away and I think will continue to be a mental hurtle. It may not be logical. I have spent maybe 2k on ham gear in the last few years that would buy a lot of spot time, but the ham gear will hold it's value and be usable for decades to come where as spot could go under next week and will require ongoing financial feeding. I think they are a great solution for people that don't want to "get into ham" but the op seemed to have one foot in already so that's not the case here.

[cnynrat]

PLBs don't always come with a recurring cost. In fact, the original PLBs never had a subscription fee. It was only when Spot came along that the monthly fee business model came into being.

There is a reasonable case to be made that you are better off with a PLB that doesn't have a monthly fee. There is an interesting presentation on the Equipped to Survive site that makes that argument.

[cnynrat]

I just wanted to add some links to interesting information:

Here's a link to Doug Ritter's blog where you can download his presentation that addresses commercial distress alerting services (examples would be SPOT & InReach) vs. traditional COSPAS-SARSAT distress alerting devices (aka PLBs, EPIRBs etc.). Seperately, you will also find a link to audio of his talk that goes along with the presentation.

Doug is the publisher of the Equipped to Survive web site, which is chock full of interesting survival related information.

[cnynrat]

Here's a link to another interesting article that discusses ongoing standardization activities in the realm of distress alerting devices and services.