Printable View
Any thoughts on the new BCA Tracker 2 and when it's scheduled to be released yet? I'm looking to purchase a beacon and I don't know whether it's worth it to wait around for the Tracker two or just go ahead with the original tracker? Are the differences going to be that significant?
From what I know, it has an extra antenna and could make transmitting/searching slightly more efficient. Shouldn't it be out this year? I'm currently happy with my current tracker though- enough that I will continue to use it to protect my life and the lives of my friends. I'm sure the next generation will be good, but you may be able to get good deals on late model trackers this year when the new ones come out. If you won't be needing a beacon for say...3 months or so, why not wait around and try to get a good deal on the last model tracker when the new ones arrive in stores?
the tracker 2 has a faster processor. which is great and all, but pings sent from the transmitting beacon only come once per second. so no matter how fast the processor is, it only can process info packets once per second.
The third antenna is just for searching in the pinpoint phase: spikes & nulls (i.e., nonsensical jumps in the distance readout that occur in any digital beacon with less than three antennas) will be eliminated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevo
The Tracker 2 will also have an indicator for the presence of a multiple burial. But the SP mode to help deal with multiple-burial searches will remain the same.
Housing is slightly smaller overall, with a new method of switching between transmit/search.
(The faster processor is kind of funny, both because of what M.O. noted, and because the Tracker already has what must be the fastest processing on the market -- that's about the last aspect of the Tracker that anyone was looking to see any improvements.)
Unclear when the Tracker 2 will be available. I know that mine is on backorder pending a full production run.
Beacons transmit a continuous 457kHz analog signal. A faster processor does help with the signal processing. Since they added an antenna, the processing algorithm is more complex, requiring additional horsepower to maintain a satisfactory update rate for the distance and direction of the buried beacon.Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
I am rather sure that this is not true, it signals once ever second or so. If it was a continous signal the becon would not go beep beep in analog without any processing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Junkie
but faster processor == less battery life - its all about ballance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Junkie
Yes, it's an on-off cycle, like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by jrosendahl
http://lh4.google.com/jshefftz/RvvcC...%20cropped.jpg
The relatively wide latitude for each on and off is part of how beacons like the DSP, Pulse, and S1 try to distinguish between different transmitting beacons.
But some older analog designs also have a small continuous carrier signal in the background, which is why the DSP has so much trouble with signal separation for F1 beacons.
The third antenna will most likely be activated only during the pinpoint phase. The Ortovox D3 and X1 third antenna switches on within 2m. I don't know the secret specs for other three-antenna beacons, but they're clearly >2m yet well short of the range for initial signal acquisition.Quote:
Originally Posted by jrosendahl
I don't see though how battery life would be much of a concern. Even the shortest-lived beacon has 200 hours in transmit and then enough remaining to run a rescue. (I have noticed that the DSP seems to use up battery more quickly in search than other beacons, but that's noticeable only during lots of practice, not for real field use -- well, unless you were on a multi-day trip and wanted to spend some down time practicing rescue skills or something like that...)
Indeed. Batteries are cheap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
J - Don't understand why there isn't any advantage, or why they'd be a disadvantage, to having it on fulltime. Cany anyone explain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan S.
because you simply don't need it, and batteries would drain 33% faster
My understanding is that having the third antenna on all the time would shorten the range for initial signal acquisition, just like a second antenna does. (The only exception to this is the DSP, which somehow achieves an impressively long range despite having at least two antennas on -- any other beacon with a comparable range either has only one antenna, or starts off with only one antenna in analog mode.)Quote:
Originally Posted by PNWbrit
I'd have thought there might be some permutation of antenna alignment between transmitting and searching beacons where a third axis would be useful in primary and secondary searches? Since the Software is already there (?) why not use it?Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
Would it be 33%? Would it really matter since batteries are cheap and it would only affect search mode power use.
Caveat: Not that it's that important since such fine points of beacon design don't really make any significant difference between people dieing and surviving slides. Longer transmit range, communications between searching beacons, stuff like that probably would.
Edit - J - that makes sense thanks
Hm, stand corrected. Didn't realize they modulate the transmission.
Use of a third antenna is probably more of a range vs precision. You're not actively powering the antenna since you are in receive mode. I wouldn't think it would be a huge drain to power the receive electronics.
Also, microcontrollers continue to get more energy efficient, so even though the new controller might be faster, it might not consume any more juice than the old controller. Regardless, there's much more to a power budget than just the controller.
It's simple man.
When you modulate the permutation of the 3rd antenna and shit, the microcontrollers get all efficient when your alignment communications use the DSP and what not. Any jong knows the modulation is of the RF carrier type.
The important thing is that your oscilloscope is connected to a suitable coil and shit. If not, your shit is totally fuct.
If your wide latitude isn't keying the carrier, your fuct too.
During the pinpoint phase, if you haven't jizzed all over yourself and the 457 frequency, you're just not getting it.
That shit just melted my face. Damn. I can barely see.
Wouldn't it be 50%?Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
Either way, the previous Tracker works just fine imho.
Here's a Tracker deal:
http://www.mountaingear.com/pages/pr.../N/1166%201065
[Sales flyer says price is good until Oct 14.]
OK sorry I missed this one but after browsing quickly the comments above:
Transmit mode only uses one antenna. This is true of every beacon on the market.
The 3rd antenna is useful only at close range and primarily shows its usefulness in deep burials because it can eliminate false spikes and dead zones. The 3rd antenna vastly increases the complexity of the DSP required and increases the complexity in the consequences of a failure of part of the system. This is why BCA took its time with introducing the feature. As to why it is only functional at short distances, the antenna is small and not so sensitive but more importantly, it is just not terribly relevant at longer distances (picture the flux lines in your mind and it will become clear to you).
The pulse frequency of the transmitting beacon is fixed as Marshall said, but increasing the processing speed is still a huge bonus because it eliminates DSP lag. ie, What the beacon shows as a direction/distance is based on where your beacon is/is pointing right now instead of where your beacon was/was pointing 4 seconds ago. If you don't think this is a plus, you are crazy. (note: Single antenna beacons don't suffer lag because the user simulates the 2nd and 3rd antennas with motion and their brain provides the DSP.)
I think BCA's improvements are GREAT and I'm certain the Tracker2 will prove itself to be even more awesome than the original Tracker.
if you think processor lag is measured in seconds, then you are fucking stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
if the concept of hyperbole is beyond you, you are a moron :tongue:Quote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
or just a maggot :tongue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
a maggot amongst maggotsQuote:
Originally Posted by cj001f
:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Summit
but really though... if info is sent once every second, how is having that info proccessed 10 times faster than your eye can blink going to help in any way?
additionally, if it I leave my house at 6:30am in denver, and it is 47 miles to go skiing, and blurred takes 2 hours to get ready in the morning, how fast do i have to drive to make sure i will be more than slightly annoyed, but not truly pissed about the long wait, while drinking vodka, in your and mir's living room while lone star scratches his nuts and plays GTA?
It is sampling constantly, although the pulses occur at ~1Hz. Still, DSP lag time of 40ms is as good as real time to a human based in this application. However, 400ms, as an example, can be very noticeable. There are beacons out there with noticeable lag times. Various digital beacons have sometimes been criticized for this and inexperienced users would "overdrive" their beacons in a search. Lag is a quirk that is overcome with a little practice and experience. We know how much the average user practices... and even for the diligent user, no-lag is better.
ahahahahah oh teh memoriesQuote:
Originally Posted by marshalolson
that was mainly becuase people would wave the beacon around like it was an analog.Quote:
Originally Posted by Summit
i've seen people do it who have never touched a single antenna beacon.
it really wouldn't be a problem if there wasn't lag
now there isn't any... yay!
iirc another model out there had the same criticism