Barryvox Pulse owners thread.

[Jonathan S.]

That is my biggest complaint about the S1. It was really annoying duing a mock burrial to have a giant beacon flapping around while digging fast. I never even though of this until I dug with it open.

If I remember correctly (I don't have my S1 in front of me right now), it is possible to jam part of an opened S1 into its pouch, so that it can still in receive yet partially secured while digging.

[Jonathan S.]

Target really wasn't anything. Basic scenario was I would turn my beacon to receive and it would pick up a signal even though nothing seemed to be nearby. I would wander around and try to lock onto something but no go. My pieps worked fine when I switched over to it. When something came online it locked on ok. My concern is that this could confuse the hell out of me when I'm trying to pick up a signal during a coarse search.

Hmm, interesting. That could definitely be a problem in a real search. The only "false alert" ghosting I've had like that has been with other beacon models when in close proximity (typically indoors) to various electronics. I'll try wandering around with my 3.0 Pulse to see if I catch anything...

[alpine.col]

I was stoked to get a couple Pulse's yesterday. Granted I have not yet read the detailed instruction manual, but that was part of my test...

I found a similar issue to one already posted here, which led to some confusion: When doing a close proximity (all within 20m) multiple (3 burial) search, the Pulse did not pick up the third beacon AT ALL. I could intuit the functions to find the first two (M2 & Pulse), but after marking those two the third signal (M2) never appeared, even when right on top of it. When I began to wonder what was up, it simply said STOP every time I moved an inch.

I believe it was my error, and of course I'll read the instructions in detail and try again (many times), but if something like this happened in an emergency it would be SCARY.

I know that every beacon requires practice, but it made me wonder if the "ease of use" of a new digital beacon with many features is worth the trade-off for the reliable (yet challenging) simplicity of the M2 or other analog beacons (always shows a signal if present, never gets "confused"). I like knowing that I am the one confused, and not my tools, because there's something I can do about that. Is the lower range and potential confusion/malfunction of a Pulse worth reconsidering?

I realize the goal of every beacon designer is to create the best and easiest to use tool, and that there will be a progression towards perfection within the confines of the real world (like the first cell-phones evolution to the iphone, but without the speed that such economies of scale allow). That being said, there is a tendency to make new products for reasons other than pure functionality (marketing), and I often prefer the functional designs of my older high-quality gear to the multitude of new products available each season boasting new (and relatively untested) new features.

Oh, yes, what about beacons vs. phones? Is your Pulse affected by your smartphone? It makes sense to keep it turned off (the phone) but what about in an emergency? How far from a searching (or transmitting) beacon does someone need to be to make a phonecall? Time for more practice!

I'd love to have your real-world input, and really appreciate those who are putting in time to figure this stuff out. Thank you.

[Jonathan S.]

I suspect that the problem you experienced is what I describe here as the "The Triangle Range Test":
http://www.wildsnow.com/1609/jonatha...on-test-notes/
The Pulse and S1 had major problems with this test last year. The DSP experiences no problems at all. I plan to conduct another round of tests with the Pulse and S1.

As for cell/iPhone/PDA causing interference for a beacon (as opposed to the other way around), I am quite confident that a beacon (whether searching or transmitting) would not cause problems with making a call.
(Now for those who are about to say, hey, what idiot would make a phone call while searching for an avy victim?, I could imagine a situation with a large number of searchers, a single victim, and close proximity to outside help. During the signal search phase, one searcher could be tasked with making a quick phone call – e.g., to the ski patrol at the adjacent nearby resort – for help with anticipated medical & extrication needs. But otherwise, yeah, if you’re making a phone call while searching for an avy victim...)

[sfotex]

Hmm, interesting. That could definitely be a problem in a real search. The only "false alert" ghosting I've had like that has been with other beacon models when in close proximity (typically indoors) to various electronics. I'll try wandering around with my 3.0 Pulse to see if I catch anything...

I need to try it out in a field in the middle of nowhere. There's been other crap far away, but my dps wasn't locked on (i.e. a beacon park with the pads powered off and no one else within 100 yards) It's very realistic that it's picking up something, but when I try to find 'it' I can't.

[sar13]

I know that every beacon requires practice, but it made me wonder if the "ease of use" of a new digital beacon with many features is worth the trade-off for the reliable (yet challenging) simplicity of the M2 or other analog beacons (always shows a signal if present, never gets "confused"). I like knowing that I am the one confused, and not my tools, because there's something I can do about that. Is the lower range and potential confusion/malfunction of a Pulse worth reconsidering?

TCSAR picked up a number of Pulses last year and a few S1s. We'll probably also get some DSPs this year. I spent most of the year working with the Pulse. I just want to comment on the idea above that older beacons (m1, tracker, etc) never get confused. I think this is a completely false assumption. Older beacons get confused just as easily as new (maybe more so), triple antenna beacons. But instead of telling you they were confused they just gave you bad info for a period of time.

First, here is my understand of how and why beacons get confused as it was explained to me. Have you ever been at a stop light watching the blinkers on the cars in front of you? Each one is on a slightly different frequency but sometimes two or three will "sync" up for a blink or three, right? Each transmitting beacon has its own frequency (though all within a relatively tight range) but like those blinkers, the transmitting signals will sometimes sync up. This confuses the receiving beacon since they no longer "see" one beacon at say 20m and another at 30m. The two blur together.

With our old trackers and Barryvox 3000s we would see this confusion as rapidly shifting direction and distance measurements. The newer beacons recognize this problem and tell you to stop for a second or two. While this seems very frustrating at first, standing still for a second is much better than running off in the wrong direction which is what the older beacons tended to cause.

I know the guys at LibertyMountain are very excited to help folks experiment with different transceivers. If you are in SLC you should try to contact them.

[alpine.col]

Older beacons get confused just as easily as new (maybe more so), triple antenna beacons. But instead of telling you they were confused they just gave you bad info for a period of time.

(snip)

With our old trackers and Barryvox 3000s we would see this confusion as rapidly shifting direction and distance measurements. The newer beacons recognize this problem and tell you to stop for a second or two.

I hear you, and don't disagree about beeps blurring together.

However, I don't think that analog beacons get confused. As far as I can tell, they ALWAYS beep when they receive a signal (or two, or three signals) within range. Even if the beeps seem to blur together, they are all present, and in the amplitude corresponding to their proximity. I believe it is the human that gets confused by the accurate signals.

In the analogy to car blinkers, is the beacon equivalent to the eye? If so, can the eye still determine that there are multiple cars, each with it's own lights blinking in unison? Only if they are open. The Pulse's "Stop, Wait" screen seems equivalent to closing ones eyes until the cadences of the blinks separate again (possibly causing an accident, or at least some honking).

I think you may be referring to directional beacons, which no doubt have many benefits, but sometimes give confusing VISUALs. There is something comforting about the simplicity of the signal to NOISE function of an old analog beacon (like an F1) if used correctly (I would consider Trackers, 3000's and M2's newer, although the M2 functions more like an F1 with a digital display).

Most beacons have slightly different transmission rates, resulting in what at first sounds confusing: lots of beeps that sound out-of-sync, then they sync up, then out-of-sync again. This is useful information...

With practice, I've learned to identify an audible signal, and keep it's rhythm while I'm searching for it. If another signal comes in, I try to keep them distinguished by their cadence (first one fast/second slow etc.) or proximity (volume). Once the most prominent one is located, it's possible to follow the weaker signal while essentially ignoring the louder one, until you are far enough away from the first to clearly distinguish the second and then pinpoint it. This is done primarily by sound, as directional arrows can be confusing, especially when they are bouncing in multiple directions.

It gets more challenging (but not impossible) with three or more burials in close proximity, and is why I got a Pulse (I want to try the S1 and DSP as well). I see that there are many benefits to the new technology, and I want to practice with it and understand how it works. I'm just not sure if I like it yet. That it didn't pick up the third signal at all (or at least didn't beep), and then essentially froze, is what really bothered me.

Thanks for reading.

[alpine.col]

And thanks for the test notes link, Jonathan, I'll have to dig in deeper...

[Jonathan S.]

However, I don't think that analog beacons get confused. [...] I believe it is the human that gets confused by the accurate signals.

Yes, very true. As a certain beacon company's U.S. head has said, “Much of beacon design boils down to how much of your thinking do you want your beacon to do for you.” With an analog beacon, all the electronics are doing is allowing your human ear to listen in on the otherwise inaccessible frequency for the beeps. Get confused? It's your fault! But with any beacon that has digital processing, now the beacon can get confused -- which will of course get you confused too....

[sfotex]

Anyone have the new firmware upgrade? Any noticeable improvements?

[Jonathan S.]

For a (very) quick summary, copied below is the intro to my draft blog update of this:
http://www.wildsnow.com/1729/barryvo...beacon-review/
I can email the complete file too.

*****

Mammut Barryvox Pulse: Firmware 3.0 Update
http://www.mammut.ch/images/P_BARRY_MANUAL_EN_2009.pdf
http://www.mammut.ch/en/avalancheres...ryvox_faq.html

The Pulse is an amazing technological tour de force – and now with a “Basic” user profile option under the 3.0 firmware to harness those capabilities in a more idiot-proof manner for the user who is, well, I’ll let you the dear reader complete that sentence as you wish! The Ortovox S1 shares most of the Pulse’s impressive capabilities, albeit with a radically different user interface. (If you’re potentially interested in the Pulse, you should also look into the S1, and vice versa.) The Pulse in its “Advanced” user profile continues to offer a high degree of customization. Both user profiles have a host of various improvements sprinkled throughout their various functions, as summarized here:
http://www.mammut.ch/en/newfirmware.html

[hadpontry]

I accept with information: The S1 and Pulse are very similar in terms of their functionality, but vastly different in their UI.
By contrast, the DSP is more of a "traditional" design in the sense that the Tracker's at-the-time-radical design is now kind of the baseline yet with signal separation and marking/masking.

[Jonathan S.]

I accept with information: The S1 and Pulse are very similar in terms of their functionality, but vastly different in their UI.

Right, that's exactly what I wrote in my prior post:

The Ortovox S1 shares most of the Pulse’s impressive capabilities, albeit with a radically different user interface.

[Inosels09]

I had a realization yesterday. When we move to NY, Im going to have to get rid of a LOT. Ive got a year, so Im gunna begin going through things now and getting it all together in a box to sell before we leave. I have a small yard sale collection going right now. Lordy...I have a massive job in front of me.

[Red Peekay]

The Pulse is an amazing technological tour de force – and now with a “Basic” user profile option under the 3.0 firmware to harness those capabilities in a more idiot-proof manner for the user who is, well, I’ll let you the dear reader complete that sentence as you wish! The Ortovox S1 shares most of the Pulse’s impressive capabilities, albeit with a radically different user interface. (If you’re potentially interested in the Pulse, you should also look into the S1, and vice versa.) The Pulse in its “Advanced” user profile continues to offer a high degree of customization. Both user profiles have a host of various improvements sprinkled throughout their various functions, as summarized here:
http://www.mammut.ch/en/newfirmware.html

I agree, the pulse is a huge improvement on what has been out there. We use the pulse as the client issued transceiver in a Cat operation up here in Canada, and the ease with which clients pick up the basics is amazing. Not idiot proof, but certainly a long way there. What I do find annoying is having to send the unit in to get the firmware upgraded. Do you know if there is a charge for this (my unit is 6 months old)? Wish there was some way to do this via my computer!

Another great site that reviews transceivers and provides some great info is:
www.beaconreviews.com well worth a visit!!

[Red Peekay]

(Now for those who are about to say, hey, what idiot would make a phone call while searching for an avy victim?, I could imagine a situation with a large number of searchers, a single victim, and close proximity to outside help. During the signal search phase, one searcher could be tasked with making a quick phone call – e.g., to the ski patrol at the adjacent nearby resort – for help with anticipated medical & extrication needs. But otherwise, yeah, if you’re making a phone call while searching for an avy victim...)

I have heard that some years ago there was a burial in Austria. The searchers spent quite a bit of time trying to locate a "signal" in a particular area. They then realised that one of their party had a cell phone on which had given them a false signal. As a result the victim died due to the length of time it took for them to find them. I was told this story at a guides training course.

[Skidog]

Anyone have the new firmware upgrade? Any noticeable improvements?

Anyone???? Sfotex looks like the only local place to get it done in in PC at White Pine Touring. Let me know if you are going id like to get mine updated as well.

[Jonathan S.]

I have heard that some years ago there was a burial in Austria. The searchers spent quite a bit of time trying to locate a "signal" in a particular area. They then realised that one of their party had a cell phone on which had given them a false signal. As a result the victim died due to the length of time it took for them to find them. I was told this story at a guides training course.

Austria? The only account I've ever heard is from France:
http://pistehors.com/news/ski/commen...d-at-pra-loop/
http://pistehors.com/news/ski/commen...mobile-phones/

[Red Peekay]

Austria? The only account I've ever heard if from France:
http://pistehors.com/news/ski/commen...d-at-pra-loop/
http://pistehors.com/news/ski/commen...mobile-phones/

Thanks Jonathan, as stated, this was related to me at a guides course, never did verify the story, however thanks for the links! Makes for interesting reading!

[Red Peekay]

Just spoke to Valhalla Pure in Nelson (Canada), its going to cost me around $30Ca to get V3.0 upgrade installed in my unit! So I guess that is the going rate.

[davidof]

First, here is my understand of how and why beacons get confused as it was explained to me. Have you ever been at a stop light watching the blinkers on the cars in front of you? Each one is on a slightly different frequency but sometimes two or three will "sync" up for a blink or three, right? Each transmitting beacon has its own frequency (though all within a relatively tight range) but like those blinkers, the transmitting signals will sometimes sync up. This confuses the receiving beacon since they no longer "see" one beacon at say 20m and another at 30m. The two blur together.

this may be interesting reading for you

http://pistehors.com/news/ski/commen...he-ortovox-f1/

[Red Peekay]

this may be interesting reading for you

http://pistehors.com/news/ski/commen...he-ortovox-f1/

Of particular interest is the recommendation that "all members of the group should have different beacons to increase randomization." This has particular significance in heli/cat operations where we issue all the clients with the same beacons and these are also used by staff! Hmmmm!

[davidof]

Of particular interest is the recommendation that "all members of the group should have different beacons to increase randomization." This has particular significance in heli/cat operations where we issue all the clients with the same beacons and these are also used by staff! Hmmmm!

Still if the beacon makers randomize the duty cycles that should solve the problem to some extent?

[SDW]

Still if the beacon makers randomize the duty cycles that should solve the problem to some extent?

Pieps addresses this in an interesting way they call the Smart Transmitter. I've thought that this could confuse a searching beacon using its multiples capability, but haven't witnessed any such problems. I have heard it using an F1, and it was a little odd but didn't throw me off. Anyhow, the confusion caused by the cadence adjustment is much briefer than during signal overlap without it.

If Barryvox's W Link really does have the capacity to add a unique signature to each transmitting beacon (as discussed in another thread), why hasn't this been activated? I'd sure be more sold on that feature than the current use for triage. I think that'd be a tough technology for the other manufacturers to ignore, and likely much cheaper to license from Barryvox than to keep dinking around with new signal separation software every season.

[snoboy]

New member of the owners club here, who do I talk to to get my welcome package?

First impressions are very good.