Ham Radio Saves Off Roading Family

[WRUU653]

It’s nice to see a happy ending story now and again. 

 

[SteveShannon]

Nice video.  10 meters from Death Valley to Ohio is pretty impressive. That’s the potential of HF radio propagation. 

[gortex2]

My InReach works just fine without HF.....I get it worked but too many people rely on ham radio when it wont work. 

[Socalgmrs]

This is why you don’t go out alone.   I learned this when I was 5 yrs old.  

[WRYZ926]

All types of communication devices can fail or not work due to location. It never hurts to have different modes of communications available to you. And I agree, never go out alone or at least let someone know exactly where you are planning on going.

[marcspaz]

5 hours ago, gortex2 said:

My InReach works just fine without HF.....I get it worked but too many people rely on ham radio when it wont work. 

 

I am a huge fan of InReach and think everyone should have one, but if I could only pick one, it would be HF.  And it would be for the very reason you cite as a shortfall of HF.  People put way too much faith in satellite communications.

Per a survey by the Satellite Interference Reduction Group (SIRG), 93% of satellite communications suffer from satellite interference at least once a year. More than half experience interference at least once per month, and 17% see interference continuously during the day.  Often, equipment failure or malfunction, operator errors, even the antenna being block by terrain can cause failures.  There is even interference that can be generated by aircraft between the base station and the satellites.

I typically recommend both SatComms and HF, especially if you are using some kind of transportation (truck/SUV, horse, bike, etc.).  When SatComms is working, it is much faster and can provide details much easier with things like text and beacons. However, an all-band HF radio and a wire long enough to adjust for each band from 80m to 10m is a fantastic solution because if there is interference one one band, unlike an InReach, you can change bands to one that is working.  Also, unlike InReach, I don't have to worry about my device being properly ID'ed by the network or if my plan is actually configured and working (going back to operator errors).

[WRQC527]

18 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

if I could only pick one, it would be HF. 

[tweiss3]

8 hours ago, marcspaz said:

 

I am a huge fan of InReach and think everyone should have one, but if I could only pick one, it would be HF.  And it would be for the very reason you cite as a shortfall of HF.  People put way too much faith in satellite communications.

Per a survey by the Satellite Interference Reduction Group (SIRG), 93% of satellite communications suffer from satellite interference at least once a year. More than half experience interference at least once per month, and 17% see interference continuously during the day.  Often, equipment failure or malfunction, operator errors, even the antenna being block by terrain can cause failures.  There is even interference that can be generated by aircraft between the base station and the satellites.

I typically recommend both SatComms and HF, especially if you are using some kind of transportation (truck/SUV, horse, bike, etc.).  When SatComms is working, it is much faster and can provide details much easier with things like text and beacons. However, an all-band HF radio and a wire long enough to adjust for each band from 80m to 10m is a fantastic solution because if there is interference one one band, unlike an InReach, you can change bands to one that is working.  Also, unlike InReach, I don't have to worry about my device being properly ID'ed by the network or if my plan is actually configured and working (going back to operator errors).

Which InReach device do you have. I've been meaning to get a handheld GPS for various trips, and was looking GPSMAP 67 with the InReach included. 

[marcspaz]

2 hours ago, tweiss3 said:

Which InReach device do you have. I've been meaning to get a handheld GPS for various trips, and was looking GPSMAP 67 with the InReach included. 

 

I started off with the Mini 2, but with all the offroading we do, I upgraded to the  Montana 700 after about a year.  With the Expedition plan, it turned out to be a great unit for day-to-day use, as well as offroading.  I was thinking about the 67 due to the price difference vs. all the extra sensors and features of the 67, but ultimately I opted for the 700 for added screen size, better resolution, more storage, durability improvements and the touch screen.

[gortex2]

I run the InReach Explorer and from a SAR experience side I'd recommend a Montana or 67. The Explorer is ok with navigational stuff but its limmited. I still carry my Garmin 60CSX along with my InReach when on a misison. The one nice thing about the Explorer is it does have a vehicle mount. I'd like one for my JT so the wife alwasy has one. Both will also sync to my Garmin Overlander GPS and its way easier to send messages on the tablet than the little screen. 

[tweiss3]

Thanks for the input. The 67i looks like a better unit for my use, the 7+ days of battery life is huge, where as the Montana way underperforms in that category. This device is intended to way outlast a cell phone, 18 hours is not acceptable.

[marcspaz]

2 hours ago, tweiss3 said:

Thanks for the input. The 67i looks like a better unit for my use, the 7+ days of battery life is huge, where as the Montana way underperforms in that category. This device is intended to way outlast a cell phone, 18 hours is not acceptable.

 

Good choice, for sure. I had a specific need I was trying to fill and battery life is not a concern for my case. That said, I think unless you have a specific need to fill such as mine or you're a pro outfitter/offroad racer, the 67 is the best one to buy.

[nokones]

I have the inReach service with my Garmin Tread 10 Overlander Off-Road Nav System in my Jeep. Also, my system has the SOS feature in addition to the email and texting features.