High Sierra Topix

mrphil wrote:When authorized for civilian use, this will be the device to have...apple and oranges.

https://www.acrartex.com/products/sarlink-plb

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/60001043700.pdf

First of all, that is old news. Garmin has had that product for a time now.

bobby49 wrote:
First of all, that is old news. Garmin has had that product for a time now.

And second of all?

You sound rather annoyed, Bob. Is there a bigger issue here that I'm missing?

I'm referring to an ACR product (my preference) as opposed to a Garmin (please refer me to the comparable dual-mode model you're talking about), and while it was first introduced in 2016, this dual-mode model, SKU : 2894.1, 2894.2, 2894.3, & 2894.4, does not yet have FCC approval for civilian use and is available to military and govt only. I'm also wondering what would allow approval of a similar device from one manufacturer and not another if it's similar technology that uses both the 406MHz of the Cospas-Sarsat system, as well as Iridium's 1616-1626.5 MHz? If you have some insight into this that I've also failed to grasp, please feel free to educate me in the specifics. I am sincerely interested.

From ACR's FAQs on the product:

"What is the availability of the SARLink?"

"Sales of this product is limited to the U.S. Military and Government entities. This device has not been authorized for commercial sale and use as required by the rules of the FCC. This device is not, and may not be offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, unless specific written authorization is obtained."

Again: https://www.acrartex.com/products/sarlink-plb

.

mrphil wrote: "Sales of this product is limited to the U.S. Military and Government entities. This device has not been authorized for commercial sale and use as required by the rules of the FCC. This device is not, and may not be offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, unless specific written authorization is obtained."

That statement should deliver a clear message. Forget about it.

Different satellites operate at different orbital altitudes, and some are geosynchronous. Some are non-geosynchronous. As a result, they operate at different frequencies. As a result of the different frequencies and different altitudes (distances up), the various devices have to use different transmit powers and different modulation techniques. So, an individual probably does not want to have one device that does it all and still have the device be affordable, lightweight, etc.

This thread was originally intended to explain the advantages of a two-way device as opposed to a one-way device.

Does anyone know if you can use the inreach SOS feature to have a dog rescued?

Just considering having to carry out a 75lb dog vs. a lift.

rlown wrote: ↑Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:22 pm Does anyone know if you can use the inreach SOS feature to have a dog rescued?

Just considering having to carry out a 75lb dog vs. a lift.

A jacket with a pair of hiking poles through the sleeves makes a dog sized travois....

not a really good answer, but an answer I guess. You do that for 10 miles over puppet pass and get back to me.

rlown wrote: ↑Thu Aug 16, 2018 5:31 pm not a really good answer, but an answer I guess. You do that for 10 miles over puppet pass and get back to me.

LOL, naw. My dog is only going on very short trips these days. I don't think she has a pass left in her.

I decided I will press the button for a member of my family. He deserves equal treatment. And He has insurance.

I know that dog rescues aren't all that uncommon, but I think it's mostly going to come down to mandates, equipment, and available resources in any given area. I've heard that most of the time the dog will self-rescue or the owner will provide medical care and transport out before SAR gets there, so that's always the first line that they hope to rely on, but I also know that they realize and take seriously that pets are family. I would imagine that life and death extractions are where they would get involved, as opposed to just basic injuries that would force you to carry your dog. It's worth a phone call. You should probably also check his insurance policy to see if it covers helicopter rides.

In this same vein, what's really interesting and neat is that they recently changed the law that made a first-responder giving mouth to mouth to a cat or dog illegal, and subject to a fine and jail. They did what they had to do to save a life, any life, and that counts for a lot.

You might enjoy this:

https://www.oregonhumane.org/oregon-hum ... am-forest/