Beartooth | Hacker News Reader

Beartooth

beartooth.com

199 pointsnickevans147 comments

As with any smartphone product being marketed for use in wilderness environments, a note of caution is necessary.

Rescue services have seen an increasing number of life-threatening situations caused by the unwise use of smartphones. Phones aren't sufficiently rugged and often lack user-replaceable batteries, so cannot be relied upon as a navigation tool or as a means of emergency communication.

If you're considering buying a product like this, think again. An FRS radio and a Garmin Etrex cost about the same, but are vastly better suited to the task. They are drop resistant, waterproof and will run on ordinary AA batteries.

If you are in a remote area, always carry a magnetic compass and paper map and ensure that you have the skills required to use them. Consider carrying distress flares, a signal mirror or a SPOT beacon.

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/smartphone-apps-handle-with-care

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-3380...

Also take orienteering class if you want to be an outdoorsy person. I took it and it was a blast. Now looking to join a local club and get into orienteering competitions.

Orienteering was mandatory in my school when I was a teenager. Interesting memories... :)

Bittersweet, but mostly bitter?

Same here. Teacher and two in my class competed on national level, but I never caught the bug although I was happy to learn to use maps and compass as it is useful (and was essential back then) for long hikes.

Which school was this? I've never heard of such a requirement outside of say, Scouts or the military.

Along with basic financials, I inclined to agree that'd be a very good add for required classes.

It was mandatory at my school, as well. We covered basic orienteering, outdoor winter survival, emergency signalling, and avalanche safety.

If I remember right, it was a one- or two-day field trip we took during middle school. Everyone was excited when it was their class's turn to go. (But who doesn't get excited for a field trip?)

Not as comprehensive as what you'd learn in scouts or taking a professional survival class, but it was a good overview. I still remember a lot of it and find the material useful.

This was in South Lake Tahoe CA, so we were already in the mountains. :) Cost wouldn't have been any worse than any other field trip.

I grew up in Chernivtsi, Ukraine. It's a pretty hilly/mountainous region, so competitive orienteering is huge there. I was never really any good at it myself due to being bad at running and especially cross country running, but I enjoyed weekend trips to participate in competitions anyway.

Interesting memories indeed. I took it as part of a special program in 6th grade. We split into two groups and the group I wasn't in found a corpse just off the trail, which cut our orienteering exercise quite short. I got to explain to the school psychologist that "No, I didn't see anything, I wasn't traumatized."

I should go do some more, I'm fairly confident in my map skills but I bet there are some assumptions of mine to knock down.

Beyond orienteering, I think the sport of rogaining would appeal to many here. Not sure how popular it is in the US, but there are bound to be some events people could try - start with a 3-6 hour event and work up to 24 hours. It's addictive.

It's similar to orienteering but team-based, everyone leaves en masse, and control points can be reached in any order within a fixed amount of time. This means you can be competitive by walking and relying on compass smarts rather than having to be able to run for hours on end.

This looks like a calendar of US rogaining events: http://www.us.orienteering.org/orienteers/rogaines/events

I got into it a year or two ago here in Australia and have now competed in a state and national event plus others. Entered into the world champs in July, though we will be aiming mostly to not come last!

+1 on everything you just said. A dedicated radio (FRS, GMRS, MURS, or amateur VHF) -- along with GPS and other survival gear -- is essential in the backcountry. Carry a cell phone, but don't rely on it. I see folks doing that far too often.

That said: Having just done some research on distress beacons, I just want to point out that there's some better options than SPOT beacons out there.

The problem with SPOT is that they're entirely reliant on GPS and having a clear view of the southern sky. If either of those aren't met, your SOS message might not go through properly. Since folks often buy these for life-and-death situations, this is a problem.

I'd recommend an actual 406 MHz PLB (personal locator beacon). The big benefit is that these are triply redundant: GPS via geostationary satellites, doppler shift triangulation via low-earth orbit satellites, and old-fashioned direction finding on the 121.5 aircraft distress frequency.

As an added bonus, since the PLB network is run by an international government organization (COSPAS-SARSAT), there's no subscription fees either. It would be unfortunate if you didn't get rescued because you forgot to pay a bill.

The only downside is that you don't get breadcrumbs or non-emergency text messaging. I think SPOT (and the Iridium-based InReach devices -- which seem to have better coverage btw) make great satellite communicators for this purpose. I just don't think they're good emergency beacon replacements.

+1 on the PLB. My family always carries one while out on hiking/climbing/backcountry skiing trips.

Your comment reminded me of a video I saw on Youtube which highlights the utility of having a reliable beacon for rescue services to track your location:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTiGU5TiYCE

They were flying a Cessna 170B into a remote part of Alaska in August 1989 when they encountered an engine failure. They survived, and the plane was recovered shortly thereafter (performing an engine swap in the field no less!), but I think it illustrates pretty well the sorts of circumstances where you want something reliable for search and rescue teams to follow. (The video and its description are light on details regarding the type of device used.)

Not sure about the states but most places require aircraft / boats to have locator beacons (bigger versions of PLB's.)

A handheld 406 plb like the ocean signal "rescueME" plb is essentially the same thing afaik.

I'm fairly certain it's the same here in the US. However, being as the video was from August 1989, I'm not sure what the regulations were. For instance, it wasn't until ASA flight 2311's crash in 1991 [1] when the regulations were changed to require CVRs and FDRs on small commuter aircraft, and general aviation has AFAIK traditionally lagged a bit behind. This may be one area where it hasn't.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Southeast_Airlines_Fl...

(Edited to fix the date, which I typoed. I just watched this on an episode of Mayday, which did bit of a disservice to the NTSB and Embraer tests.)

From the video, it looks like they activated the aircraft's ELT, which is the aircraft version of a PLB. Same system, just integrated into the aircraft and designed to automatically activate in a crash.

At the time that video was recorded (1989), ELTs were analog-only... nowhere near as accurate, and very prone to false alarms.

The new 406 MHz digital beacons are much more accurate. :)

Good point! Though, for being two decades and some change prior, being "only" 5 miles off isn't awful. It's not great either but certainly better than the alternative.

In this case, I'd assume they activated it manually since it wasn't a crash (nor was there an accident report on it that I could find)?

It even mentions that at the end of the video.

They were looking 5 miles away around a glacier!

I agree it's foolish to do a dangerous trip with just one navigation method. But that doesn't mean your phone isn't a good tool, or that we'd have less emergencies if they didn't exist.

I develop an app called Gaia GPS, which a vast array of backpackers, wildland firefighters, and SAR use as a tool to navigate in the woods. They use battery packs and rugged/insulating cases with their iPhone and Android devices to make them durable and long-lasting.

Even if you are a master orienteer who knows how to use a compass and a map with great skill, there are situations where you will be safer to have a GPS along too (either a smartphone or standalone unit). Situations like I have been in, where there is so much snow coming down, that you can't see the trail you're following or cutting, much less peaks or other landmarks.

In some situations, map skills and reckoning may get you home, but seeing yourself clearly marked on a map will make you safer too. People shouldn't fear GPS devices or phones as tools for survival and navigation.

p.s. This comment is FUD and based on anecdotes from two articles about Scotland.

I heart Gaia GPS, thanks. I find the interface a bit confusing, but that's a tough problem to solve given a large feature set and a small touch-only UI.

Thanks, that's a fair criticism and a kind allowance.

I think you'll see the UI improved greatly this year... as of last Monday, we have 7 full-timers working on Gaia GPS, and we're looking for a designer to help with the UX right now. Things really blossomed in 2015, and 2016 will see more engineering work on Gaia GPS than any other year.

I think my main problem is that I've never used GPS hardware or software, so I have a distinct lack of familiarity with the standard concepts, making the learning curve that much steeper.

Fortunately, I really don't need much. Primarily recording (off)road trips in the Jeep, and downloading maps in advance of excursions where I suspect cellular data will be flaky.

Anyway, thanks again, and good luck!

I think Gaia is coming out with an integration with goTenna soon via their SDK, so that would be awesome!

I think calling that comment "FUD" is a bit harsh - there is no doubt that casual users relying exclusively on smartphones for navigation without the ability to fall back on a traditional map and compass is a real problem. I've seen plenty of reports of this in the UK and seen warnings about it in the Alps.

"The root cause of getting lost is usually a lack of adequate navigation skills, no matter what technology is being used. In many cases, walkers do not have the skills to read a map or navigate effectively. Some mistakenly think that carrying a Smartphone or gps means that they do not need these skills, which is a recipe for disaster, for all the reasons given above."

http://www.mcofs.org.uk/navigation-gpsandsmartphones.asp

It is hardly FUD. If you want more horror stories involving wilderness and technical failure, I can set you up with as many as you like. There have been hundreds of cases people suffering in various colorful ways due to reliance on cell phones, GPS, etc. which were not reliable in their chosen environment.

From my perspective, it is about redundancy and flexibility within my environmental constraints. I usually just have my cell phone with me, even when I'm doing some potentially sketchy things. That's because if I break/lose battery/lose my phone, there are always tons more around me.

When that isn't true, I'll usually have at least a handheld ham with spare batteries, a list of repeaters around where I'll be, and GPS andd/or paper maps (along with other things of use when one is remote).

Oh, my phone, too, 'cause it is fun and handy. I just don't trust my life to consumer-grade tools built for the home and office that can't even get wet or survive a small drop.

If you are not familiar with outdoors adventuring (and even if you are), one important exercise is to think through your gear, asking yourself how you get by without each piece. What do you do if your tent poles break? Two flat tires or a blown engine? Something gets your food? Your phone (meaning comms and maps, for the purposes we're discussing) breaks or your spare battery shorts?

A bit off topic but the first thing I thought of when reading parent's comment was "What about Gaia GPS?". Thank you for that app/service! I really dig it. I've used it in Berkeley and all over the South Island of New Zealand and its been invaluable.

Thank you for the Gaia GPS! I used it on iPhone last year in my solo Carpathians tour and it worked great.

The initial maps download at home took a really long time, but I just put a phone on charger and allowed it to take time.

I love how it allows me to quickly create waypoints, so I marked my track manually every hour instead of using automated tracking. This helped a lot to conserve the battery life.

One of the things I loved about my MiniDisc player is that it runs on ordinary battery.

It looks like this product is less aimed at being relied on when you're in a survival situation, and more about extending the benefits of your cell phone when you're out of range. For example, in Yosemite Valley, there is no cell service, but there are mobs of people everywhere. This tool would be nice to get some auxiliary benefits of cell phones when hiking with your family.

I'm pretty sure that many of your concerns could be alleviated with a lifeproof case (rugged and waterproof), the maps.me app (offline maps for iPhone, also supports KMZ hiking trails), and a few 10,000 mAh USB batteries. I use one which typically keeps my phone charged for a few days, with a lot of use.

This is great for relatively small hikes. But if you're going off on a major expedition, then sure, you should probably take the professional radio and Garmin gear, and all the other survival gear people normally bring.

But if you've already got the lifeproof case and extra USB batteries, I think this Beartooth device looks pretty useful.

> An FRS radio and a Garmin Etrex cost about the same, but are vastly better suited to the task.

That's what I was about to post...like why am I paying for a WHOLE NEW DEVICE?

But one major benefit of Beartooth is that it allows for asynchronous communication, while traditional radios don't. That aspect could turn communication in remote areas from centering around crucial information only (since everything is immediate) to something closer to traditional casual text messaging. That's a big plus, and it makes a Beartooth a nice complement to traditional gear rather than a replacement for it.

I have absolutely no affiliation with Beartooth, nor do I own one. But I have gone on long hiking and canoe trips in rural areas and could see a Beartooth as a nice addition.

When it comes to emergencies, SPOT got nothing on Resqlinq.

The latter has 5 years shelf life, no subscription fees, communicates distress signal with GPS coordinates to a much larger array of low orbit Search and Resque satellites(so works better in canyons), if GPS fails to acquire position (again in a canyon) the satellites can also figure out an approximate position using Doppler effect and trickery with multiple receivers, has a homing beacon for S&R aircrafts, has a strobe light, is buyoant and water-sealed.

It transmits via some sub-1ghz free spectrum bands, which travel a good distance and have decent structure penetration. https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/216797018-Wh...

This is why unlicensed spectrum bands are great; they allow for stuff like this to be built without a billion dollar spectrum price tag.

I don't think 2 miles is a good travel distance. (or maybe it is from a technical perspective but not from a practical one).

That would assume lots of users which I feel can be problematic with a $399 price range and big form factor.

This is why selling to consumers is difficult. Consumers complaining about price is a given. An enterprise solution could be sold for much more.

Solving a business pain vs a consumer nice-to-have.

I've been trying to solve an issue similar to what Beartooth is doing, and 2 miles is amazing range. Bear in mind, these aren't huge towers hundreds of feet above the ground with 50kWh power sources and million dollar price tags, they're battery-powered, handheld, and consumer-priced. And cell towers with all the advantages listed only travel less than 20 miles. 2 miles with those limitations is a great distance.

I think maybe you're looking at the wrong use case. This doesn't replace GSM, it replaces walkie-talkies (or rather updates it for the text-based world). The use case is you and your friends are at an event downtown and cell service goes out (like it does when the sites are oversubscribed). You're camping and there's no service that far in the woods. You're in a disaster and trying to find your loved ones. It's short range communications, not long-distance calling.

Ham radio would go farther, but sending encrypted communications over ham radio is illegal, so that's right out. This is the next best thing.

...or you're on a small farm that's half a mile on each side and you need to know that the gate on the opposite corner from the farmhouse is still closed.

A minor change of perspective and suddenly a 2 mile range is fantastic!

Ham can do text and digital voice over e.g. D-STAR. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amateur_radio_modes

Encryption to obscure your communication is technically against the rules, but things like D-STAR need a proprietary decoder (the spec isn't open) to be decoded, so some people consider that encryption even though it's pretty popular and not being shut down: http://www.amateurradio.com/encryption-is-already-legal-its-...

D-STAR is actually an open standard.

The only part that's closed is the voice codec (AMBE). But if you just want to transmit or decode data packets, you can definitely build your own hardware. There's even a couple SDR modules for it:

http://www.flexradio.com/amateur-products/flex-6000-signatur...

http://www.rtl-sdr.com/listening-d-star-digital-voice-dsd-1-...

  2 miles is amazing range. Bear in mind, these aren't 
  huge towers hundreds of feet above the ground with 
  50kWh power sources and million dollar price tags, 
  they're battery-powered, handheld, and consumer-priced

This guy did 7,600Km at 10mW on the 30m band, using a raspberry pi and a couple passives: https://gerolfziegenhain.wordpress.com/2013/04/13/raspi-as-w...

Of course, the antenna was 44 feet long, and he was transmitting at 1.46 baud, using WSPR: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSPR_%28amateur_radio_software...

As Shannon proved in the 40s, you can get great range if you can sacrifice bandwidth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noisy-channel_coding_theorem

It's true that you don't need much power if both parties have ham radio licences, 44 foot wide antennas hoisted 30 foot into the air, and are willing to transmit unencrypted and very slowly. License-free handheld consumer gear is basically limited to UHF, which is pretty much line-of-sight.

I mean, using a 44 ft long antenna is kind of what I was talking about. This thing has zero external antenna.

>Ham radio would go farther, but sending encrypted communications over ham radio is illegal, so that's right out. This is the next best thing.

How come? I don't know much about ham, but it doesn't seem like it'd make much sense to make it illegal.

Ham radio spectrum is strictly for non-commercial use. If encrypted communications were allowed, it would be a lot easier to sidestep that with plausible deniability.

What frequencies are they using (sub 1ghz with audio) ? is 2 miles really possible ?

It states 2 devices for $249 at the top of the page.

With enough users on the network, wouldn't you be able to fairly easily extend the range by using idle beartooths as relay devices / amplifiers? Similar to how packets travel through the Internet.

That's not at all similar to how packets travel through the internet. Mesh networking is a very complex arena that deals with many issues that don't have known good solutions.

Not sure if it's true for this configuration, but I know for GoTenna (a competing product), the terms of use of the unlicensed frequency bands forbid message relay.

I assume they mean the 900mhz band in the US. How is a cell phone supposed to communicate with the Beartooth? If its not a cell tower, the phone only knows bluetooth and wifi on 2.4/5Ghz.

> How is a cell phone supposed to communicate with the Beartooth?

Given the name, I would presume Bluetooth.

Piggybacking here but the FAQ is painfully vague. On the question of what phones does it work with their answer is:

> Beartooth pairs with both iOS and Android smartphones, as long as the operating system is up to date.

Which is a pretty much useless statement on Android especially since they would know what API level their app targets...

It certainly sounds like it'll use Bluetooth though and makes sense as a bridge between the two devices. The only other real option would be Wifi or if you wanted to be weird for the sake of it you could probably do it through NFC.

https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/217369867-Wh...

My GoPro creates a wifi network and the phone just auto-connects to that to control the GoPro. So certainly the Beartooth could create a wifi network that the phone connects to and essentially sees the Beartooth as a traditional wifi network.

True it's certainly an option though for low rate text and data like the Beartooth is using WiFi is a bit of overkill and the power overhead makes Bluetooth more appealing than Wifi. That and how much they repeat 'pair' instead of something like tether made me think it was probably Bluetooth.

How does thing scale with user density? That's what I want to know. If everyone at a concert had one of these, would it still be useable? Unlicensed spectrum could already be crowded or noisy

Anyone else think its kinda sketchy that they're just saying "sub-1Ghz" frequencies? There aren't a ton of options there, and they aren't secret information. This sounds like they're either heavy on the vaporware side of things and haven't figured out what they're doing, which doesn't bode well for them shipping anytime soon, or they are trying to do something which the FCC isn't going to approve, which again doesn't bode well for us getting this thing on pre-order

Anyone know if they're encrypted? I'm not seeing any mention of that, I think I might grab a goTenna if only for that reason

>Anyone else think its kinda sketchy that they're just saying "sub-1Ghz" frequencies?

No. Why is that sketchy?

It's probably because it's different from their competition and they don't want to release that signal yet. I don't remember GoTenna pre-releasing their exact frequencies either.

~900MHz is pretty common for this sort of thing. I have a friend who uses the 900MHz spectrum for communicating with a hobby weather balloon.

Is this basically the same as goTenna? http://www.gotenna.com/

Yes, a comparison between goTenna and BearTooth would be good.

I've got a 4 pack of gotenna's, and the hardware seems good, but the android app is pretty bad. Pretty sure a solid Android dev could bang out an app with better functionality in a good solid weekend of hacking (assuming they were using an SDK that abstracted all the BTLE comms).

Android app is missing some great features like automatic group location updates. Right now you have to get location updates manually broadcast to you by each person in the group. Lots of crashes too.

I applied for an SDK but haven't heard anything back in three months. Feels like the project is dead, as there have been no android app updates in that time either.

Hi, the SDK is not dead at all, it's going to come out in 1-2 months, we just have been focusing on encryption which should be coming this week. By the way, the lack of automated group updates is by design, there is very limited bandwidth made available by the FCC and if we allowed everyone to transmit their locations non-stop it would ruin it for everyone. We do have some features coming soon that will help get locations in a smoother fashion. Please standby to see those functions soon.

Glad to hear of it, sorry to come across as harsh. I was (and still am) surprised to not see any updates in the app since I got my devices delivered 3.5 months ago. Strongly recommend you guys kick out the occasional bugfix release without piling up fixes for a big release, helps make the project feel like it has a little momentum.

Your hardware seems to be top notch!

Ahh, good explanation of the group updates functionality. Is this a problem for a small group of 4, every 15 minutes? Seems like not too much bandwidth if you aren't talking about an update ever minute.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DarknetPlan

forum about mesh networks, such as those products.

Is it just me? or are there two videos--one hidden? I can't seem to watch it in any browser without getting two overlapped audio streams that are offset...

The websites are nearly identical

Lol, I don't think that's a coincidence. I'll give my points to the guys who came out first, are already in market, and seem to have proven themselves with pretty good real-world reviews

Just don't see a value prop to make this feasible. I go to festivals, skiing, camping with friends 2-3 times a year.

At a festival, cell service is fine. Camelback with gatorade/water mix is the crucial piece of equipment. Just keep an eye on it, as random people will try to drink from your straw.

For casual skiing we set times/places to meet up in case we get separated. Again, cell phones work fine on most mountains. Don't want to throw this bulky, expensive (not water/shock proof?) thing in a plastic bag in my pocket. If I'm going back country, go with a buddy. Keep an avalanche kit (shovel, beacon, air tube) in the backpack and bring a $30 pair of 6 mile, 2-way, replaceable battery, shock/waterproof radios.

Camping, the point is to get away from constant communication and leave the phone off, in the car. Again, bring the actual radios if you're going in deep.

Smartphones are great for day-to-day life and work, but I feel like half the point of the vacation is being able to untether.

I don't think it is designed with this use case in mind, despite the marketing that mentions crowded festivals.

I see a "Born in Bozeman" badges on the site, so I'm assuming this was born out of necessity for backcountry trekking in wild Montana and not hiking Mt. Tamalpais. I'm not far from Bozeman and I don't have to travel far from home before I lose network coverage from both Verizon and T-Mobile. Sure, I relish the loss of service in a way as a means of escape, but it has higher risks and causes a number of challenges that I think this seeks to overcome.

I'm intrigued.

I bought a sat phone after an experience rescuing a couple (and their two large dogs) in 20 below weather from the Battleridge campground where their truck had become stuck. That's only 20 miles outside of Bozeman but cell service fades out long before there so they had no way to call for help. I've used it a few times over the years when camping and driving around the area on day trips. As you say, cell service is very much optional away from towns and the freeway.

Yep. I'm from Bozeman, and can think of more than a few friends who could find this useful doing field research out here. And to anyone who is wondering, the name is in reference to the Absaroka-Beartooth wilderness, an absolutely gorgeous expanse of land near Bozeman

http://www.outsidebozeman.com/places/wilderness-areas/absaro...

Also maybe the Beartooth Highway which is a stunning road South-East of Bozeman. Up there with Byway 12 in Utah as one of the most picturesque drives I've done.

I hear you but aren't carriers competing to fix this? I imagine coverage is only going to increase over time.

Air tube? I ski with beacon, probe & shovel, familiar with airbags but unfamiliar with air tubes.

I would assume even if it isn't long enough to break the surface, it will at least get the humid exhaled air away from your face.

http://www.backcountry.com/black-diamond-avalung-ii

Most ski patrols use ABS to cushion the neck and buoy the skier above the snow, but this is supposed to be OK in a pinch if you can keep it in your mouth while tumbling down a mountain.

Is there a bluetooth device for making your phone a walkie talkie for CB radio or marine VHF radio?

I have wanted that for some time as I think having radio tm for survival over some propriety thing beneficial for emergencies.

An example would be something like this https://www.cobra.com/products/professional/29-ltd-bt

But I want a smaller form factor to throw in a hiking pack and VHF support as well.

Really, you should just buy a CB/VHF radio. As someone commented above, iPhones are not rugged enough for the kinds of use you might need such a radio in. And batteries can be changed/etc. They really are not expensive.

Yes but the idea/hope would be to minimize form factor as well as having the microphone and speaker being cordless. And for emergencies (unlike others I'm not looking to be social but to have another channel of emergency communication).

That being said I do own a marine vhf radio.

I've got a Gotenna and it's basically works as advertized and I'm pretty happy with it.

http://www.gotenna.com/

The problem with any mesh network is adoption, and unless this uses some sort of high range communications, I don't see how it'd work well on the given example of "ski slope".

I wish they had more specs, less videos.

edit: ah, never mind (thanks linksbro)

This product is more of a walkie talkie implementation on your phone than a widespread mesh network.

goTenna, gotenna.com, is an existing device that does the same thing. Interesting that both goTenna and Beartooth are only sold as pairs.

I don't think it's interesting. The product would have no use if there was not another person to chat with. Until there is mass adoption the only way to sell is in pairs.

I can see a chicken-egg problem here. Without enough users (probably millions), this device is useless. If the device is useless now, it makes no sense to purchase it. The pricing doesn't help either: $249! (and $399 after pre-sale).

Assuming 10 million a good number to kickstart this thing and make it useful in many locations, they'll need to make a few billion dollars sales in the next couple years.

If it replaces walkie talkies in rural areas you only need your friends to have them. I know in the Adirondack Mountains in NY has very spotty signal and would be great with a few friends. Currently we use walkie talkies that have a 23 mile range. They cost as a pair $43 on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001UE6MIO/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_d...) and they are single purpose and really don't need to worry about battery life.

Hmm... $43 for a 23 mile range, or $249 for a 2 mile range.

Sometimes improved technology isn't the right solution.

I don’t know about the 2 mi range - but the 23 mi range is in best possible conditions, line of sight from mountain top to valley. Those same walkie talkies advertise a 1 mi range in a "Neighborhood"

They are much farther then line of sight. I certainly get two miles in heavy forests and other side of hill. These work great for groups hiking and climbing.

http://www.buytwowayradios.com/blog/2006/07/the_truth_about_...

From your link:

> The range that a two-way radio advertises is the range that the radio should get in "ideal" conditions. Ideal conditions are line of sight, such as from a mountaintop to a valley below -- no interference at all.

> So what type of range can you expect from your radio? Usually half a mile up to two miles

As I said I get about 2 miles

Don't forget about the $65 licensing fee to operate the GMRS radios legally, which can only be used by the applicant and their immediate family:

https://www.fcc.gov/general/general-mobile-radio-service-gmr...

FRS = free the GMRS is not on by default and has to be programmed into the unit.

You're not going to get 23 miles or anything close to it with the FRS 500mW.

Could seed metro networks with hubs. The need for additional hubs would grow with the number of users, which are in themselves hubs. You could cover most of NYC for a few thousand dollars a month and see adoption grow.

From what I see, this isn't about creating a mesh network for many users, its about enabling communication with your friends or co-workers in places where there isn't network access. So in that sense, there is no chicken-egg problem. I was just wishing for something like this when skiing in Whistler last weekend so I could communicate with my friends without using int'l data/roaming.

Yeah, the promise of "do things when you don't have signal" is predicated on a chain of people with these devices existing all the way from where you are to where a cell phone signal is. Which means you need to go to popular outdoorsy places, which (IMO) are intrinsically less interesting due to being around other people.

That would be nice, but is not what it does. It only enables communication between nearby devices (which includes gps location sharing), not mesh networking.

Compare the price to the previously existing Garmin Rhino, which shares GPS data among receivers and allows non-encrypted comms (privacy codes are to reduce interference/crosstalk and aren't really encryption). Garmin Rhinos cost ~$500 each, so if you can get a pair of these modules for $250 you are saving a ton of money considering the phone is something you already own.

Fact is that most people going into the wildness are dependent on the park to make sure they won't get lost. Learning how to not get lost and how to figure out where you are takes effort, time, and experience; I've seen people with the right tools and knowledge panic and disregard all logic when they realize they're lost. Smart phones, setup correctly on the other hand take zero time to learn to use, and are very very good at showing people where they are regardless of panic. I personally wish more people knew how to use a smart phone in the wild, more so than anything else; in part, because knowing this and using the phone in a blind drop test would help them value spending the time to learn more ways of staying found.

On first load, all I see is the blatant "look at this person's butt in tight jeans while they insert a phone into their pocket" video clip. Drove me right off. Do we really need that sort of thing to promote a wireless device in this day and age?

I didn't get the "sex sells" angle from that. I'm a male and that's where I keep my phone while walking around. It tied the Beartooth in my mind more to the feelings of "this is a portable cell-phone related device" than to the "sex sells" angle.

Naw. You're over-thinking it. It's an appropriate viz for how it fits in your back pocket, which talks to its size.

My gripe with the video's how it hides volume controls.

Why do companies insist on disabling the youtube controls when embedding. I want to turn the volume down but I have to copy the URL and watch on youtube instead.

That website is hard to look at, it couldnt be more busy.

Would love to see this in action as it solves my music festival communication woes. The price tag is a little steep though for adoption.

Try buying a bunch of two ways on amazon. You can get 6 of them for $150 and they work for 10 hours on 2 AA batteries and have a 23 mile range.

If you're talking about 2-meter radios, you're going to need a ham radio license to use them in the US. It's not hard, but it is necessary. Also, FCC regulations do not permit "broadcasting" on these bands. That is, you can't play music over them. Having a music festival playing in the background is flirting with that rule. You're better off just using FRS radios.

I suspect user baldfat is referring to two-way walkie-talkies.

I think you're both talking about FRS.

Many commercial two-way radios support both GMRS (up to 5 watts - $65 for 5-year license) and FRS (up to 500 milliwatts - no license req'd). Most users just ignore the GMRS functionality on their 2-ways.

two-way walkie talkies I would have said two-meters if I meant those. My dad has been a ham since the 1960s.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001UE6MIO/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_d...

I'm not sure I follow. The model you linked is an FRS/GMRS two-way radio (aka walkie talkie), a perfect example of what I described (it's all right there in the product title). I think we're still talking about the same thing, although I did mislabel it as 'commerical' when I meant 'consumer' radio :)

Agreed, they're great.

two-meter to me means HAM spectrum that requires a license to operate and they tend to have a much higher output.

Walkie Talkie is consumer and no license.

The commercial FRS/GMRS ones requires a $90 annual license.

Right. Same page. Although as I understand it, consumer FRS/GMRS two-way radios like the one you linked only require a license for the GMRS channels. Also, it looks like the GMRS 5-year license cost has effectively dropped from $90 to $65 by eliminating a $5/year fee: http://www.buytwowayradios.com/blog/2015/05/fcc_eliminates_g...

The "23 mile range" business is very optimistic. You'll probably never see over 5 miles of range unless it's line-of-sight between two mountains. However, they'd be great at most festivals or e.g. Burning Man. Look for something FRS or GMRS. There are also 2-meter (~144mhz) radios which parent is talking about like e.g. a Baaofeng UV-5R which are inexpensive software-defined radios that can operate on licensed and unlicensed bands. If you get something like that, you should be aware of the power restrictions of FRS and GMRS and the licensing requirements for GMRS.

TL;DR unless you intend to get pretty into it and just want something for festivals and something to give to non-radio-geek friends to use, just get a FRS or GMRS radio. Motorola and Uniden both make quality sets that will work up to a few miles away at festivals.

hi sean, we say about 2 miles in all of our documentation. we agree 23 miles isn't realistic. i have personally seen 2 miles plus results hiking, skiing, etc. hope that helps

FYI: There aren't any unlicensed bands you can legally use a Baofeng UV-5R on. They're only approved for use on the business or amateur bands.

Unfortunately all the unlicensed bands require band-specific hardware certification, which the Baofeng's don't qualify for, for various reasons.

Also, the Baofeng's aren't software-defined radios. Those cost much more money. :) It's just a standard programmable VHF/UHF radio, that happens to be very cheap.

Except people prefer to text these days.

There are two-way radios that support text. Since a lot of newer radios are using digital signalling, it's not hard to add in.

Off the top of my head, any of these would work: Amateur radios that have D-STAR (connected to an Android phone), Garmin Rino, Motorola DTR, and TriSquare (discontinued, but you can find them on eBay).

Not when hiking or skiing. I always have to make sure people hear me.

In the "Ultralight" backpacking community, I don't see something like this taking off.

I remember watching a video the other day of a guy talking about his gear for the AT and he went so far as to cut his toothbrush down and even talked about drilling holes in the remaining handle to further cut down on weight.

I've had trouble with phone at low temperatures before, even when carried inside my parka, and inside a lifeproof case. Modern smartphones are not made to withstand life threatening temperatures for any length of time.

That said, something like this would be better than nothing.

So, they've basically put out a modern digital walkie talkie, that uses your smartphone?

The answers I looked for;

On average you can expect a range of 2 miles

We have designed Beartooth to last for a whole 4-day camping trip, music festival, or skiing weekend with our typical messaging usage (3000 mAh battery)

Each user must have their own Beartooth device connected to their phone.

Does this use a mesh network?

Looks that way: https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/216791588-Ho...

"Once you've paired Beartooth with your smartphone you can communicate with any other Beartooth users within range (about 2 miles). You can use Beartooth's app to talk, text, use maps, and share your location"

It sounds like to me just 1-to-1 contact with random people with the same device, and not necessarily using someone else as a relay to form a mesh network.

It's not mesh. It's just a typical data radio. If the person you want to communicate with isn't in range then you can't bounce the signal through other people.

It sounds like the MURS (150 MHz) band that goTenna and Beartooth use doesn't allow store and forward, or a connection to the Internet.

Which is unfortunate since one use case would be having a relay in car at trailhead to pass messages from internet.

Similar to : www.gotenna.com

I hope this isn't too off topic, but is there anything similar but for networked devices? For example, something for IOT devices to talk to each other minus the internet.

Actual Wi-Fi access point, Ad-Hoc WiFi, WiFi mesh, Bluetooth

There's LoRaWAN. It's becoming very popular for city-wide IoT networks, and there's an mBed compatible board so it is easy to use.

http://www.multitech.com/brands/multiconnect-mdot

http://thethingsnetwork.org/

This requires a critical mass of Beartooth users, right? If I'm hiking or camping, how far can I be from the nearest user?

Does the device constantly broadcast something so you can see when people are in range? Can this be turned off? What if I don't want to announce everyone where I am? (yeah, it probably doesn't send GPS constantly, but constant radio signals are pretty easy to triangulate). I would just want to broadcast a message and then all devices within range should pick it up and see if they can decrypt it (i.e. was it meant for them)

Instead of just downvoting how about you post a reason why? Was I off topic? Did I point out a design flaw?

I would love to see this sort of tech succeed simply because it'll help proliferate mesh networks.

It's probably not a mesh network. It's most likely point to point.

The website started consuming my CPU and RAM so badly. Goodbye

Chrome task manager shows spikes of up to 99% CPU usage, and idles at 15%...

At first glance, it looks like animation drawing functions are being triggered every frame regardless of whether or not anything needs to be animated.

I had this when I was a kid and it cost about $20. It's called a walkie talkie. The only people you can talk to with this is other users.

Or you could buy a $20 baofeng and just yell "WHERE YOU AT?" via FRS

Using a Baofeng radio on the FRS band is illegal. Transmission on the FRS band is limited to 500 milliwatts using FCC-approved devices only. Baofeng radios are not approved and can transmit at up to 5 watts.

However, if you get an Amateur Radio license, you can transmit in the 2 meter and 70cm bands at full power, legally, using your Baofeng radio.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-meter_band

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/70-centimeter_band

http://www.arrl.org/getting-licensed

Yes, it's illegal. So is going 5 mph over the speed limit.

It's illegal for a good reason. You may prevent emergency communication with others using licensed equipment. Incorrect use of the radio can also cause interference outside of the FRS band entirely. (Particularly with the Baofengs, which have poor/no output filtering and often cause "splatter" tens of kilohertz off the frequency you think you are transmitting on.)

The websute us outright lying. It claims that it would connect to nearby beartooth users when you do not have a signal. As I do not see the beartooth device using cables, it must use a signal anyways.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com