New sat option

Iridium GO. Sounds like a sat mifi:

http://www.iridium.com/products/Iridium-GO.aspx?productCategoryID=29

Looks interesting. Good capabilities for normal coms, unlike the inReach. I wonder how affordable it will be. The real cost will be the amount of time using the sat connection. The other such satellite devices were very expensive per minute.

It interests me because you BYOD (bring your own device), you no longer have to purchase a sat handset with an uncertain ability to connect them to networks. I have laptops and smartphones loaded with necessary software for me to do my Red Cross business after a disaster - presumably these will connect to this sat hotspot. I'd be interested in the sustaining or subscription cost to keep one of these satellite hotspots hot, month to month - how much to maintain an account in terms of monthly fees that I can switch on when the wireless nets and wifis we largely depend on go down. Expense per minute of use can be justified after a disaster :-|

Yes, this is a very interesting option. If the cost of the unit and message costs are reasonable it could have lots of applications for SAR work. I can see it being very useful when setting up an Incident Command Post at an isolated trailhead, for example.

Interesting Device.

From what I have read data speeds are slow (2.4Kbps). which is slightly better than dialup. I would not expect a fluid response with bandwidth thirsty apps like netflix, youtube, facebook, etc.... (I wouldn't expect such apps to be usable on such a slow connection)

Although data speeds are reportedly to increase (1.5Mbps) when Iridium "Next" rolls out in 2015 (according to Iridium). 1.5Mbps is still significantly slower than broadband connections of ten years ago but could pass as acceptable in a wilderness setting.

Additionally, this device brings along the caveats for any powered device operating in the wilderness - energy. How much energy to bring along (extra batteries) and can any energy be transferred in the field? (More batteries and adapter cables to bring along)

In the moment of need I prefer to turn my handset on and make a call. A connection between GO and the smartphone is required and fumbling around with a smartphone menu and wifi connections is not something that will decrease the time of initial communications. That could be a problem if you are depending on a non-techie person in your group to get the devices to "talk" to each other (and you are the one in need of help).

Depending on one device working rather than two seems to me a better bet. I see this device and others like it terrific for casual communications.

Thanks for the info on data speed! Where did you find that information? I looked but was unable to find anything about speeds.


I don't see this as a replacement for PLB, SPOT, Sat Phone, etc. However it could be useful for more than just "casual communications". My interest if rather for quickly setting up an Incident Command Post at a remote trailhead, for SAR operations.

The initial response for a typical SAR search mission might involve an Incident Commander sitting in a pick up at a trailhead, and perhaps 3-5 Strike Teams out in the field. The IC will be talking to the STs via hand held VHF radios. While the STs are deploying, back in town others are gathering more information about the subject. A persistent problem in these kinds of missions is the lack of cell coverage at the trailhead. The IC needs to be able to communicate with the folks in town.

Having even a relatively modest speed data connection would be extremely valuable. The in-town folks can transmit more info on the subject as it becomes available (a recent photo of the subject, or the latest weather forcasts for example). The IC at the trailhead can send back photos of clues discovered (for example "...This is a photo of a jacket we found on the trail, ask the subjects wife is this is his?...") The IC can also be checking the availability of more resources, etc.

If the mission grows in size and complexity, the IC will get additional help (perhaps an Ops Section Chief, a Planning Section Chief, and a Staging Area Manager) so the ability to link several smart phones or tablets would be extremely useful. Even 2.4Kbps would be useful, and 1.5Mbps would very helpful.

http://www.gizmag.com/iridium-go-satellite-hotspot/30711/

Take note of the "up to" disclaimer. Signal strength will have to be 100% (5 bars) to attain 2.4Kbps, 4 bars drops it to 50%, 3 bars to 10%, 2 bars or less will be very slow or not useable.

2.4Kb/s is very slow for dialup -- dialup peaked at 56Kb/s in the late 90s. Voice uses 64Kb/s without compression. The most common compressed codec (G.729) uses 8Kb/s. If the smartphone app that comes with this device uses VoIP the voice quality may end up being quite poor.

2.4kbs is not what I would call modest, but more like excruciatingly painful slow. Think back in the days of monochrome monitors and text only email. And that's about all you are going to be able to do at that speed. I'm thinking no Flash, no high resolution images, and video is totally out the window.

I'm thinking its going to attach to one Andriod or one IOS device that is utilizing an app that throttles all the demands to a usable level and makes sure you don't use your data allotment on a couple of unexpected app updates. Expectations of connecting 4 or 5 devices at that speed are just silly.

Satellite data rates have always been high priced and limited data, so don't think you are going to get anything near what your cellular carrier is offering.

I'm very interested in how this is going to work in the real world, but I am not going to be one of the early adopters.

Globalstar also has a competing device they call the Sat-Fi. Iridium looks like they are going to get their device to market first. Globalstar potentially may have a speed advantage as their satellite constellation is newer because of the amplifier issue they had a couple of years ago necessitating a forced upgrade.

I'll keep an eye out for the consumer use reviews.

We'll, the applications I have in mind are for locations that have no cell coverage, so something is better than nothing. Sounds like the higher data rates after 2015 might be more workable however.

Regarding Globalstar,, it has a very poor reputation in Alaska, at least for voice coms. Apparently Globalstar's satellites are optimized for mid latitudes. Unless one has a very clear view to the south their sat phones don't work worth a sh_t in Alaska (though I am told they may add some satellites and this may improve somewhat in the future).

I'm thinking voice, from multiple smartphones - beats handing around a sat handset to give a damage assessment, it sounds like this can handle multiple concurrent voice communications back to a HQ. For real data connectivity the Red Cross has VSAT communications within ~24 hours, 15 mbps. I'm thinking of a neighborhood or municipal triage where we call in assistance to the most badly hit areas. For this it has promise. Really, satellite comms follows the progression of better and better data upload we saw in the 90s over terrestrial connections, so there's hope for a fat pipe through sats in the future.

I'm definitely waiting to see what the Globalstar Sat-Fi product looks like:

“Today, our throughput is 9600 baud, which is about four times faster than the competition for an MSS product like this,” Rembert said. “With compression, that looks like a 56 kb/s modem back in the day, when you were dialing into AOL.”

Quote Link

If true, that's a heck of a lot faster than Iridium's product.

Globalstar may be fine for you down south, up here in Alaska not so much. The Globalstar satellite constellation is optimized for the mid-latitudes. Their sat phones for voice comm have developed a very bad reputation up here. Without a totally unobstructed view to the south (such as out on the ocean), they don't work worth sh_t.

Unless and until they improve their coverage of northern areas, Globalstar is not an option for me.

I have had very sporadic success with SPOT beacons, which use the Globalstar network. I have hod near 100% success with the Delorme In Reach, which uses the Iridium network. I have even used them side by side in mountains, forest, and canyons in the continental U.S. I removed the SPOT from my tool kit and went entirely with In Reach. I am not sure how this will work out with the data link, however.

Admittedly, Globalstar was not reliable anywhere when the S-Band amplifiers started crapping out on them in 2007. They had to maneuver good birds to cover the open coverage spots and this created coverage issues. No doubt, they were looking toward losing as few customers as possible and Alaska likely received the short end of the stick. A lot of people left Globalstar and never looked back. I can't say that I blame them. I was more of a business rather than survival user, so I could wait for a good bird to give me 20 minutes of talk time. And the pricing plans could not be beat.

Now, the bad birds have been replaced and the constellation is complete again. I have not experienced any issues since mid-2012. However, I rarely get north of the Canadian border.

Iridium's constellation does have better coverage at the poles, but Globalstar seems to have pretty decent coverage further north with the new birds. It would be interesting to see if anyone has done any tests in 2013 in Alaska. Again, I would not blame anyone for dropping Globalstar during the problem years.

For me, I am not planning on going that far north anytime soon and the Globalstar wi-fi puck seems to be offering speeds several times faster than Iridium. If pricing between the companies remains consistent, the Globalstar product will be about a quarter of the cost.

I'm going to wait and see after both products are out, but I am not going to count Globalstar out because of their unfortunate past.