jsshannon, Thanks for that link. It is definitely better than the typical media reporting of these events.

As the article notes, the qualities (iron determination, and judicious risk taking) that make for a successful mountaineer and a successful business person can also sometimes be ones downfall. The line between a great adventure, and a life threatening disaster can sometimes be razor thin. Sometimes we can step over that line without even realizing it, until it is too late. And luck (good or bad) is always part of the equation.

Most of us who have spent a lot of time outside have probably come close to that line now and then. I've often though about one particular trip, in a small inflatable boat in coastal Alaskan waters. We made a series of decisions, all of which seemed quite reasonable at the time, and yet we got progressively into a more and more dangerous situation. If we had all died, I'm sure people would have said "what were those idiots thinking?" Yet at the time, it felt like we were doing the sensible thing.

Stories like this are one reason why I try not to get too judgmental when people get into trouble out of doors.

The other day I was in a store that sell used books and magazines. There I stumbled on a National Geographic article from 2009 about Mount Washington. Lucky enough, it is on-line as well: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/02/mt-washington/shea-text/1

Great article, much better than I normally find. Really well researched, thorough and well written.

I've been thinking that the title of the thread isn't right.
A distress beacon IS the same thing as dialing 911 in terms of results.

In this case, neither action could have saved her life.

Folks hope that 911 or beacon activation is kind of like a Star Trek emergency transporter that will whisk them out of danger instantly. But dialing for help doesn't work that way.

Shifting topic a little-

From reading aircraft accident reports I learned the technique of considering how the accident report would read if something went wrong with a risky action I was considering doing. Can be applied to just about everything one might be doing from flying to backpacking to just driving your car to work.

I remember one particularly distressing body recovery operation a number of years ago in which we retrieved the corpse of a young lady who had just flown to Arizona about two hours earlier for spring vacation. Her friends met her at the plane and took her to the local party spot, where she fell about 90 feet and expired.

This has made me think many times of my very first hike in Arizona with the university hiking club. The leader said "Let's do some rock climbing," which resulted in me taking a 30 foot slide, ending hung up on the lip of a vertical precipice about 40 feet high. Had I gone over, I would have been killed or at least significantly injured.

Well, I wasn't, and I eventually learned better. We were all newbies once.

I wonder about the practical matter of how to deploy a beacon in such an environment.

In > 100 mph winds the beacon is not going to stay put in whatever open space you put it in. And if you tie a lanyard down, will the beacon stay face up?

The beacon's transmitter antenna to SARSAT probably works with the beacon either face up or face down. But the antenna for listening to the GPS satellites probably does not.

There's also the problem of the wind whipping around a beacon whose lanyard is secured, breaking the beacon against rocks. And snow/ice/debris being blown onto the beacon and covering the antennae.

I think that points out one of the advantages of a PLB vs SPOT. The PLB has a built in redundancy regarding your location.

Even if the PLB can't get a GPS fix to retransmit, the satellites can still get a Doppler fix on your location using the 406 Mhrz signal. Granted, the Doppler fix isn't nearly as accurate as a location from GPS, but it is way better than no fix. I believe the 406 Mhrz transmission from the PLB is at 5 Watts, and should get through tree cover, some snow, etc. My understanding is that with SPOT, either it gets a GPS fix, or there is no location data at all.

The older generation of EPIRBs and ELTs had not GPS capability, they relied only on Doppler. They still saved many lives.

A one mile circle cumference seems pretty small if the weather is good...big "if".

Thought the same thing, one mile circumference... would mean would be within ~280 yards if you were at the centre.

Depends a lot on the terrain. 280 yards could place you on the wrong side of a sheer canyon or rugged ridge. It is still better than no fix at all.