UIAA position on avalanche transceivers interference from electronics or other device

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goldenboy

BD with a great page on electronic interference: https://www.blackdiamondequipment.co...-interference/

---

Wow. Thanks for that F!!! From the article

"Using this principle, the “20/50 rule” was born. We can mitigate noise by keeping EMI sources a sufficient distance away from the transceiver. The 20/50 rule was adopted across the industry to help users remember to keep electronics and other sources of interference at least 20cm (8in) away from a sending transceiver and 50cm (20in) away from a searching transceiver. If you are only going to remember one thing, and make sure your partners know it too, it should be the 20/50 rule!"

Look at the interference from heated gloves! 90% signal degradation! Also substantial interference from a sled close to you or a smart or GPS watch on your transceiver hand

Pretty helpful article.

Can/should we assume that all battery heated clothing (gloves, socks/insoles, vests) are similar?

The reduction from control table doesn’t show if/how the 20/50 rule changed outcome, or am I missing something or not reading close enough. Curious about radios, too. My understanding is that not all radios are equal, at least in terms of signal range, processing, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bodywhomper

Pretty helpful article.

Can/should we assume that all battery heated clothing (gloves, socks/insoles, vests) are similar?

The reduction from control table doesn’t show if/how the 20/50 rule changed outcome, or am I missing something or not reading close enough. Curious about radios, too. My understanding is that not all radios are equal, at least in terms of signal range, processing, etc.

---

I think you may have to do your own tests to get to that level

Re radios. Some are better for signal leakage than others so your understanding is correct

Re reduction from control table. They didn't follow 20/50 strictly but just indicated the typical use case. Eg GPS watch in transceiver hand vs on non-transceiver hand. Snowmobile at 0m, 20m etc

Yeah. It should be interesting. Hopefully will get a chance to play more with some devices. I’ll share if I get info. The reduction %’s with your phone in pockets was surprising.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bodywhomper

Yeah. It should be interesting. Hopefully will get a chance to play more with some devices. I’ll share if I get info. The reduction %’s with your phone in pockets was surprising.

---

Note they didn't specific if smartphone was on airplane or if bluetooth was off or what type of smartphone. See the personal "testing" i did with the guidance of sfotex using personal devices.

Yeah. I saw that in your own data, and I appreciate the augmented data collection being shared in this thread. I realize that the report from BD is not exhaustive or entirely clear.

Fwiw, I tour with my phone in airplane mode, using it as a camera. Personally, need to keep it in a good pocket compared to transmitting transceiver and do the same for my partners. There’s often no cellular service in many areas that I tour.

Very different practice at the ski hill. Phone gets frequent use to comm with kids, friends, and spouse. Curious to try harnessed radio and transceiver in chest harness. Because of the recent incident, I predict more and more people will beeping at the ski hills. It’s pretty unclear how manufacturers will be sharing this nuanced information to their increasing customer base.