Hi Doug,

The term 'Personal Locator Beacon' has been around for a very long time now. I can remember reading a patent for a Personal Locator Beacon, which was developed by a UK company for the Apollo Space Program in the 1960s, which could not be described in anyway in the modern technological sense as being a 406MHz PLB. The electronic sophistication revolution moves forward, legal patent language it appears does not. TracMe does have an International patent for the device they are trying to market which is described in its patent title as a 'Personal Locator Beacon'. The technology TracMe is using is a retrograde step in PLB design and has none of the advanced sophistication of a 406MHz PLB, but the TracMe device is a 'Personal Locator Beacon' device despite its obvious limitations. The TracMe device despite its limitations could prove to be quite useful in a small scale area search. An example could be the case of a US army soldier who was lost during a navigational exercise in Texas earlier this year but who had unfortunately died. The TracMe device may well have saved this mans life or at least resulted in the recovered of his body much more quickly. The cost of outfitting full 406Mhz PLBs for groups of children or even groups of soldiers on exercise would be prohibitive and would expose the main downside of these devices, that of accidental activation leading to false alarm and the associated costs for SAR.

I fully agree that the TracMe device use of the term ‘Personal Locator Beacon’ is misleading or unfortunate in relation to a full 406MHz PLB, but I do doubt that this device is going to end up killing people because of the marketing term ‘Personal Locator Beacon’ used by TracMe. Anyone who purchases such a device from TracMe and confuses their purchase to that of a full 406MHz PLB probably shouldn’t be purchasing either of them. The manual on the TracMe website for the TracMe device is very specific about what the device is and what the device is not. If these folks cannot read and understand the differences between the TracMe device and a full 406MHz PBL, then owning a full 406 MHz PLB probably isn’t going to do much good for them either way and will actually end up as a headache for the SAR authorities because of inappropriate activation.

A cell phone is probably a much more appropriate device for most folks on a jaunt into the woods or into the hills rather than a full 406MHz PLB. Even cell phones are abused in the 'Its got a little bit misty on the top of this hill, I don't know which way to go and could you send one of those big bright yellow helicopters to take me off the hill!!' type scenarios.

As folks think they can disregard their personal safety in the wilderness together with not having the appropriate survival skills such as navigation, thinking that they can rely on their electronic fall back insurance, probably results in more loss of life than falling foul of not purchasing the right PLB insurance (either a Full 406MHz PLB or TracMe device) in the first place.

406MHz PLBs certainly have there place, but thinking why and when they are deployed and by who is deploying them is very important also. I would have to say that if everyone who ventured into the wilderness carried a full 406MHz PBL then the whole 406MHz PLB system would become unworkable and therefore pointless.