Emergency SOS via satellite
apple.com
apple.com
All I can say is THANK GOD that I did, because it turned into over a week long effort to get them out. Two decided to walk out and were able to text me a nav point that I was able to meet them at (took all day to get there because of the snow and mud, but I made it and was able to pick them up). The other two stayed up there, and we sent probably 100 texts back and forth coordinating what turned into like 3 solid days of fighting to get up there with snowcats and get them back down. Multiple situational changes that we would have been hosed without.
In the end, I spent like $80 on texts, but it was money well spent. I think it's great for people to have SOS built into their iPhone, but there needs to be a "use it now, pay later" or no one is going to activate it and actually have it available when they need it. The other half of the equation is that you really need to be able to send texts. The SOS button is very expensive. Extremely expensive. That will keep a lot of people from using it. (Yes insurance exists, but hardly anyone has it). Being able to text your friends for help is substantially more useful. Being stuck on a backroad with no service, 5, 10, 20 miles from where anyone can be expected to drive by is a far more common scenario than breaking your leg at the top of a mountain and needing to be evacuated.
This is nothing special about the iPhone or the version; every cell phone is supposed to put through calls to 911:
> All wireless phones, even those that are not subscribed to or supported by a specific carrier, can call 911.
> For Emergency services there is no “activate and pay later” because you don’t need to activate, and you don’t need to pay. If you have an iPhone 14 it’s supposed to just work if you’re calling 911.
The Emergency SOS seems explicitly to require activation, and to have a cost (eventually):
> The service will be included for free for two years starting at the time of activation of a new iPhone 14, iPhone 14 Plus, iPhone 14 Pro, and iPhone 14 Pro Max.4
So I assumed that the parent was referring to just calling 911 using the normal cell network, which can indeed be done, on any mobile phone (that is able to dial, of course), without activation or payment.
Just read up on the feature, if you’re curious.
The “use and pay later” scheme refers to an emergency system that is pay-per-use or requires an ongoing payment (e.g. subscription); the idea would be that if you use the feature at all it works immediately but will charge you for that sometime later (kinda like how an ambulance will pick you up right away but bill you for the privilege later).
Did you mean to say "work AS if you're calling 911"? The emergency message via satellite function has to be explicitly used instead of just calling 911
To the average user, they will try to dial 911, the iPhone won’t be able to complete a cellular 911 call and will then present the user with the UI for sending an emergency message to first responders. I don’t really see the need for distinction, except between an iPhone 14 and a 13, or an android, which would fail to make the 911 call and that’s it.
With my inReach I pay for the insurance plan [1]. I do wilderness float/canoe/kayak trips and I have it for peace of mind in case I or somebody I'm with (or encounter) is immobilized, as I can walk out of most places I go to if my legs are working.
I haven't been able to find any such option for the iPhone, which, amongst other things, means I'll be keeping my inReach. Though to be clear I don't know to what degree I would be on the hook for anything if I _did_ hit the SOS button.
Additionally, know how your device works - end to end - regardless of what it is. You gain a lot of knowledge and life saving techniques by knowing the process that is kicked off, it's timeframe, etc.
Alternatively, you can spend about $200 one time on a personal locator beacon that requires no ongoing costs. It can't do two-way communication but activating it sends out a specific frequency picked up by satellites and is the equivalent of calling 911. Rescuers will come to help you.
All serious hikers and outdoor adventurers should carry a personal locator beacon.
Out of curiosity... is there any way to alert your local emergency department in advance of testing a beacon, so you can verify that it works?
These devices require a new battery every few years and that service includes a test done by the manufacturer. There is also a self test button on the device which does not send a message to the satellites.
If you really feel the need to send test messages into space, they do support that but then you need a subscription (https://www.acrartex.com/406link/). At that point you may as well buy a different device which has 2 way messaging included in the subscription. PLB users generally do trust that their devices work the first time they're used for real, and this trust is backed up by a lot of real world use.
Although they are not foolproof. See for example the story of Kate Matrosova. [1] Basically, mountain shadows made the location readings erratic which, in combination with extremely bad weather, meant rescuers couldn't find her.
[1] https://www3.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/02/21/the-young-woma...
PLBs are tested down to -40° so it might have stayed working for longer as the weather got worse. It is of course impossible to say if Kate might have survived under other circumstances except that (not very interestingly) if she's decided the weather was too awful and aborted she'd almost certainly live.
The book was interesting mostly for all the SAR detail. The accident, sadly, was mostly in the category of--however fit and well-equipped you are--don't try to beat a very bad incoming storm on an exposed ridge line in the middle of winter. If she had turned around at Madison Hut or wherever she'd have been fine.
Those of us who are programmers usually default to "If it's not tested end to end, it won't work," and that is the sentiment I was responding to.
Actual PLBs (not SPOT) have a backup strategy in the event the GPS signal is obscured by mountains.
If the device can't get a reliable GPS fix, the satellites will resort to measuring doppler shift as they pass overhead to locate the transmitter. It's slower (takes several passes of the satellite, so we're talking hours) and less accurate, but it will get rescuers to the general direction.
From there, PLB devices also transmit a low-power homing signal on 121.5 MHz (the aviation distress frequency) that SAR teams can locate using radio direction-finding equipment.
However, a device like the Garmin inReach requires an active subscription for the SOS to work. If there's a glitch with your credit card and the service becomes inactive while you're on travels, it might not work.
Another difference is that an inReach SOS message goes to the Garmin-run https://www.iercc.com/en-US/about/ rescue coordination center who will the relay to rescue services.
Whereas a PLB or EPIRB communicate with the Cospas-Sarsat system and is handled directly by government rescue agencies (https://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/mission-control-center). While the Garmin service works great, I have more trust in the USMCC being always responsive than any private company.
So the best advise is to have both. I have an EPIRB (for boating) and a couple PLBs in addition the the Garmin inReach. I use the inReach for casual messaging but if I ever have a real emergency I'll activate the PLB and EPIRB first and only afterwards start trying to message via the Garmin.
For PLB specifically you cannot test them. Once you activate them, they continually broadcast and cannot be canceled except by destroying the device. For messengers, they hook up to a web service and you can send messages to personal email or SMS via the sat network as your test.
Any geostationary sat would be low on the southern horizon in Alaska. That's just how geostationary orbits work, they are over the equator. Though pretty high above (35.000km/22.000mi). So it's still visible there but yeah you need a clear view of the southern horizon.
But Globalstar which runs the service for SPOT only has low earth orbit sats which are definitely not geostationary. They're only at a few hundred kilometers.
However it could very well be that their orbits are aligned so that they are always pretty low to the south from Alaska, yes.
And answers your question: "Each device has a test mode that will communicate with the SARSAT satellite network without sending an alert."
That explanation is factually incorrect, then. There currently is no "test" flag, nor is there the required infrastructure to check if your test alert went through:
https://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/emergency_beacon-testing/
So this "self-test" feature can't be communicating with actual satellites. No idea what it actually does, but it's definitely not an end-to-end test.
This policy document mentions that the "self-test" feature actually does not communicate with satellites at all, and also mentions a "test frame" that is discarded by satellites, as well as a "test protocol" that is forwarded by satellites, but discarded by the ground segment: https://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/POL-MCC-051-v...
So it seems like both the "self-test" and the "test frame" don't tell you a lot about how well your beacon would work in case of an actual emergency (unless you have equipment that can receive and interpret that signal), and live testing involves a lot of paperwork.
Yeah, the cheapest plan is $14.95/mo ($11.95/mo if you pay for 12 months) and includes 10 "free" text's, $0.50/text after that.
I wish they had a non-cost plan (or maybe $10/year) plus $5/text or something like that for use in an emergency. I have an InReach, but haven't used it for an emergency (yet), I've sent a few texts to friends/family while outside of cellular coverage since they are "free", but would rather save money and only pay if I need to use it in an emergency situation.
Maybe they'll have to get more flexible with their plans now that the iPhone has this feature, and T-Mobile is reportedly coming out with Satellite connectivity for phones.
Given that the outdoor SAR use case is probably the largest reason for people to get one of these devices in the first place, I doubt that such a model would be economically sustainable (unless subsidized by government agencies or possibly insurances saving money due to spending less on large-scale search operations).
Vendors could also bake a free SAR plan into the initial sales price, I suppose.
Today, 100 InReach subscribers nets Garmin around $144/yr * 100 people = $14,400
If the InReach were free except for when activating the SOS, the SOS would have to cost $14,000 to make that same revenue from the same number of users. This would surely lead to more deaths due to folks waiting way longer to send an SOS.
Numbers are estimates but the order of magnitude shouldn't be too far off.
Some users still prefer a standalone device, want P2P messaging functionality (until Apple adds that, too), or need coverage beyond Globalstar – I'd be curious to see how much of the market that is, in the end.
But it's expensive if it's compared to $0 for a feature that's already built into my phone. (though it remains to see how long Apple keeps it free since they only say it's "free for 2 years")
There's a lot of situations in which I'd appreciate being able to call help without possibly triggering an expensive helicopter SAR operation, when sending a park ranger would be more than sufficient (e.g. a sprained ankle a mile off the trailhead when solo hiking).
Another advantage of two-way communicators is being able to get instructions from the SAR team: It can be vital to know whether you should e.g. go to higher ground (because your signal has not been received yet) or conversely seek shelter from the elements for a couple of hours. Newer PLBs partially solve that problem though, thanks to Galileo's "blue light" return channel.
I finally broke down and got my inreach as I was exploring a canyon way out in the desert and a rockslide almost took out my ankle. I told my Wife when I got back and she made me get one as I most likely would have been in serious trouble as cell signal was not working and nobody was in miles of me.
https://www8.garmin.com/manuals/webhelp/GUID-6E5DFD2E-EEE4-4...
It can send & receive text messages either by itself (that's a pain since you have to select letters one by one with arrow keys, but it works) or paired to a supported external device like a tablet.
The reason for this is that they can learn about what they need to do and who they need to send to you, because they can ask you.
If you have a broken leg, they'll send in 10 people to get you out. Dehydrated? Two responders and water.
Calls that come in from "dumb" communicators like PLBs are more likely to get a 1-2 person "hasty" team assigned to them who can arrive quickly then call in more reinforcements if necessary. A SAR org. isn't going to put 10 volunteers on a PLB call that ends up being a rolled ankle, at least not immediately.
This has the potential to greatly delay the time to care for you, especially for more severe emergencies.
"Hurry, but please hold the helicopter, I won't make enough money for the rest of my life to pay for it, whether I survive or not."
It works well enough for us to have maybe 4 snowmobiles, 2 6-wheel ATV's, a 4 person rope rescue kit, 10 TETRA phones and a car in addition to various medical equipment.
It sounds like your team has the advantage of having a large volunteer corpus. I wish they all did.
You buy the hardware, pay a $30 activation fee, and a then pay monthly for the service.
There are several service plans ranging from $15 a month to $65 a month. The cheap plan comes with 10 texts a month and the $65 a month plan has unlimited texting.
If you pay an additional $35 annual fee, you can suspend the plan during months you would not use it.
I'd be surprised if Apple does not launch this as a paid feature sooner rather than later (possibly as a perk part of Apple One or one of their other subscription plans).
Want to address one point however: "The SOS button is very expensive. Extremely expensive"
In my experience on multiple SAR teams (Search and Rescue), this is almost never the case in North America. Search and Rescue is one of the few services that is almost uniformly free [1]. Thousands and thousands of volunteer hours every year keep it that way. In fact, the two most prominent professional organizations for SAR (NASAR [2] & MRA [3]) both have longstanding policies that teams should not charge for rescue. On a personal level, I can tell you that the majority of the rescues/recoveries I have worked in the last decade would have been easier or led to a better outcome if the subject had called earlier. Embarrassment and fear of cost are the two primary reasons I have had subjects quote as the reasons they delayed calling for rescue, even after they knew self-rescue would not be possible. When you realize self-rescue isn't possible, call us early.
[1] The only counties that I know of that charge for rescue are in Utah: https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=54909102&itype=CMS... [2] https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2009/05/billing-search... [3] https://mra.org/what-is-mras-position-on-charging-for-search...
In a real SOS situation the cost is likely immaterial, but I can absolutely understand why people would wait a bit longer than they should before pressing.
Not in Canada. SAR is completely free in Canada for the reason you've basically alluded to in your next paragraph.
> but I can absolutely understand why people would wait a bit longer than they should before pressing.
I've been to a number of presentations from the local SAR, and whenever they're asked about this, they say that the reason SAR has no cost is precisely because they never want people to hesitate before pressing the button or making the call.
oh well thank God for that. this won't bankrupt anyone.
I wonder if this will remain true once everyone with an iPhone has access to it. The increase in volume could easily overwhelm the volunteers, no?
While there is the argument that these devices give increased peace of mind that the backcountry is somehow "safer", I don't know that I've seen this cause an uptick in callouts for our team. Subjects needing rescue are still usually hesitant to call for rescue and usually try to self extricate, even when they should likely initiate a rescue. Most of our call-outs happen at night for this reason.
That said, the upside of these devices is significant - especially in the area of improving our response time and reducing total callout time. The advent of the E911 Phase 2 (including location in 911 calls) has made the majority of our call-outs dramatically simpler & faster. What was formerly a multi-step process which might involve something like deploying multiple hasty teams to sweep large areas; determining subject location; deploying specialized resources for extraction -- can now jump straight to deploying a single hasty team for medical while simultaneously deploying specialized resources given that the terrain & access is known via the subject's location.
Edit: I can't edit my above comment, but just got confirmation from a friend both Grand and Wayne have revised their rescue policy and now only charge in exceptional circumstances - https://www.grandcountyutah.net/734/Donate-to-GCSAR
Someone with the knowledge and foresight to bring along a Garmin or PLB or something probably has a decent understanding of what it means to use it - waking people up and deploying expensive assets - and because of that I can see why they'd probably hesitate (it surely would trigger my "I don't want to be a bother" instinct).
I hope once every iPhone user has the same capability that it doesn't become an "eternal September"-like moment and flip too far the other way into overly casual use.
Regardless, you're much closer to the situation than I am so I'll defer to your expertise. Clearly, more communications in an emergency is always going to be better, so I look forward to seeing stories about how this new feature saves lives.
And thanks for your efforts in providing rescue services to the people who need them!
I do tend to agree that this has a pretty good chance of creating more nuisance calls from people who are not in actual danger...I read the New York forest rangers reports now and then, and a big portion of the rescues involve clueless people who set off alone with no map, an hour before sunset in October wearing a tshirt and shorts.
Like, the moment you're sufficiently sure you might be lost or at risk/danger. Then at least they know you're out there and where to start looking from your last known location even if you don't need help yet. They might also be able to trivially guide you for self-rescue instead of the situation escalating into requiring rescue or becoming a much more complex rescue.
But if it's just a simply SOS device, then, well, yeah, it can become a nuisance because that can mean "I'm a bit lost" or "I'm quickly dying" and anything in-between and they have no way of knowing.
I wonder if part of the reason more people are involved in backcountry recreation is due to it not feeling as dangerous as it used to because people figure (rightly or wrongly) they can always get help from my phone.
Anyway, I agree with your reasoning that it's important that backcountry rescue be free, becuase of people not calling as early as they should because of worry of cost, and resulting injury, death, or just more complicated rescue... but even though you're assuring me of it, I'm still not sure it's true! I feel like I hear stories all the time (which googling seems to confirm?) of people being charged when someone determines they deserved it or something, depending on who ends up responding... which would make me reluctant to SOS too. I believe you the outfits you work with never charge, but when I'm in an emergency or possible-emergency, I have no way of knowing if it's going to end up being that situation or not... which is a problem.
mostly its just made it safer because you now can call for help isntead of having to hike out
But overall, the rescue services managed easily. The growth was slow enough over a couple of years, that it's easy enough to scale up the number of volunteers as needed. In my experience, when you get more callouts, more people are eager to volunteer. No-one wants to spend regular time doing training when there aren't any callouts.
Just wanted to come and confirm based on first hand experience that this is true and also say a heart felt thank you for doing what you do!
The SAR might be technically "free", but they'll categorize as many things under "medical emergency" as possible and throw the book of fines at you.
Then you, the rescued, file a claim with whatever insurance you think is appropriate and make your case. Maybe insurance investigates and looks up the SAR incident report, maybe they don't. Either way SAR isn't part of any alleged insurance fraud.
> The SAR might be technically "free", but they'll categorize as many things under "medical emergency" as possible and throw the book of fines at you.
And then seemed to imply that's what they did when someone just got lost. Okay they will do it regardless if you have insurance or not, still fraud isn't it?
Search is trivial if you're calling in help yourself since just about any device that can call for help will communicate where you are. Gets more complicated for a wide area search called in by someone else though, because that is expensive; but then the target's medical condition is unknown and likely assumed to be for the worst.
If you're completely healthy but in need of rescue eventually, they'll dispatch some better equipped volunteers to retrace your steps and rescue you out of whatever situation you're in.
One time our rope caught on something after we released it, so we couldn't ascend to unstick it, but couldn't descend further without the rope. That would've been a SAR call if there wasn't another group above us that could partially descend on their rope and unstick our rope for us. But it would've been a trivial rescue since we could've reasonably survived stuck on the shaded alcove for a couple days until we got another rope. A ranger or volunteer would've been dispatched to unstick the rope or with their own for us to use, not a helicopter to extract us out.
It's when there's an immediate risk to life, that's what causes urgency, which is the main driver for cost because then typically helicopters are involved. If they itemize by search, rescue, and medical, why wouldn't medical greatly dominate the costs?
"At risk of needing medical attention", e.g., dying of thirst of exposure after a few days when you're lost, is not a medical emergency though. This isn't even some esoteric legalize it's just obvious common sense. You were talking about things like just getting lost, and SAR trying to file as much as they possibly can under "medical emergency". Definitely sounds like fraud.
It's really the same as the US (other than our states and cities acting more like corporations), it comes down to who gets dispatched: if it's the government you're fine, but oftentimes if you're near a resort, it comes down to whether dispatch thinks the resort staff, a government agency, or a volunteer group is better suited for the rescue. If it's the resort, you might've agreed to give them the legal right to claw back costs.
In practise, SAR is free in Canada no matter where you are. There are hundreds and hundreds of SAR calls in BC per year, and not a single person rescued has been required to pay a cent. Many of them do make donations though as a token of thanks.
[1] https://vancouversun.com/news/costs-still-being-tallied-afte...
It certainly puts their efforts into perspective, including how easily people can run into trouble unprepared.
I can say I was completely out of my comfort zone when two tried to walk out, that turned into the most stressful day of our lives. I think everyone thought they were going to die: the two walking out from hypothermia, me from a bear that didn't want to leave me alone when I was on foot looking for them. It wound up taking them hours longer than expected to walk out, and I kept getting stuck looking for them, to the point I thought I was sleeping in my car that night (while they potentially froze to death) because I was like 12 miles from a main road, and had no cell signal, and hadn't found them yet. I'd much rather have called S&R!!
By the straightest path, they had about 5 miles to go. I had about 12 of bad road. I got there an hour late and thought I missed them. I spent another 2 hours looking for them before finally finding them (at dusk). I was actually about to leave and go call S&R. It turns out, the path path of least resistance turned into 10 miles, which is why it took so long. One had mild hypothermia when I found them.
Ultimately, I wouldn't have known they were trying to walk out unless they could text me. Location is super helpful, and I wish we had more than one InReach as a group, as I would have found them more easily.
Would be unfortunate to have an over-reliance on emergency services aided by these tools.
Offer a few free texts a year and then charge like 5 bucks to text for a day or something.
Also, with 5ft of snow coming down, I have my doubts an iPhone would be able to reach out and touch a satellite. It'll be interesting to see some tests.
1. You first field dress it - cut from sternum to tail and pull the entrails, leaving them in a pile in the woods for scavengers. That takes your elk from 700 lbs (you hope) to ~450 lbs.
2. Quarter it and hang the 4 ~100lbs quarters high in a tree safe from bears and wolves (but not cougars) and carry them out one at a time using a backpack with a frame and hip belt. Be sure to carry the prime cuts (backstraps) out with the first load. Watch for predators on the return trips.
3. It's becoming more common, too, to fully butcher the animal in the field, removing the bones, which reduces the load to haul down to about 200 lbs. The skin, ivory, and head (if you want those) add some weight.
A Jet Sled in 2" of snow makes it surprisingly easy to haul an awful lot of elk and gear. As long as you're going across flat ground or downhill, that is - uphill is no fun at all.
A whitetail here in Michigan is much easier, even a big one is only about 100 lbs after field dressing. You just lay it on a drag/tarp or in a sled (or, if you don't care about the skin staying pristine and aren't going over super rocky terrain, just tie a rope to the antlers and front legs) and drag it out.
The big goal is to not puncture intestines, as they are gross and contain bacteria that will spoil the meat.
To skin it, I started at a back leg, just making a cut, pulling the skin up, and seeing it's connected to muscle by very soft fat. You can pull on the skin, slice the fat, and the animal basically unwraps. You want to keep hair off the meat because again, bacteria.
Front quarters are easy as there's no bone joint. They pop off quckly. Rear are harder, you need to find and cut the ligament(?) that holds the leg in the hip.
Then, I put about half the elk on a children's sled, and pulled it (mercifully downhill or level) about 1.5 miles. Then, I went and got the other half. She was a cow, so no antlers to carry.
Then, I hung all the meat in a frienda garage for about 2 days, took it home in several coolers, and fought off my dog while every evening for 4 evenings, I separated the muscle groups, and/or chunked meat to grind (lower quality meat gets turned into hamburger or sausage), vacuum sealed eveything, and froze it.
I'm originally from Rhode Island, and this is only my third animal (first was a deer, then an antelope) so it was pretty overwhelming.
I've been solo hiking, running, kayaking, and biking in areas without cell service since before cell phones were things people carried.
Haven't needed emergency search-and-rescue in 20 years, so it's just never seemed like a good investment...that's $3600 I could have 'wasted' on a service I've never needed. But I would probably buy and carry an InReach if they offered use it now, pay later plans. I don't carry a PLB, because that would mean paying for insurance, and I'd more likely need a lift from my brother in a side-by-side than a helicopter from the sheriff's office (and the ruinous costs that would entail....
I plan to wear my Fenix 6 Pro for another 10 years, but if they came out with a version with InReach 2-way texts my wife would buy it RIGHT NOW, express shipping, not even a thought of waiting for Christmas.
On the other hand, that's $3600 of profit for Apple/Garmin/Iridium/Globalstar/Spot that they're loathe to leave on the table until the one time in 20 years when I really need it.
That said, it's not a bad thing to carry in your car, as there are plenty enough dead spots that would likely be covered by packet radio. It's just a lot less clear how to get help.
It's just $16 a month and there are other uses besides SOS; like texting to say you'll be late but everything is fine or that you've decided to stay another night. You can even get weather forecasts which is pretty huge if you ever do multi-day trips. Besides all that, carrying an InReach could one day save someone else's life.
The most important benefit it gives me (and my wife) is peace of mind. I find it worth every penny.
https://www.iridium.com/products/iridium-9555/
People will happily spend $700 on an Arcteryx jacket and $400 boots but won't buy an Iridium handset. I truly don't understand.
Seems to me this is for ordinary people doing ordinary things outside cell range, and finding they need help. A family member has a heart attack. A collision with a moose. Who knows what.
Less “should’ve brought water and a jacket” and more “we’ve been on route 9 for two hours, a moment ago everything was fine, now he’s not breathing, we have no bars, and we have no idea where the nearest hospital is.”
Besides, even if this feature only saves a single life, seems worth it to me.
Not that I think it will only save a single life, but if that really were the full extent of its benefit that of course it wouldn't be worth it - think of the millions Apple have spent on R&D plus the (presumably tiny but it adds up when selling millions of devices) extra cost per device - there are many ways that money could have been spent as a PR move by Apple to save thousands if not millions of lives.
When I talked about spending money as a PR move I meant non-product related, the way companies donate to charities, or do charitable research, or hell they could've even invested in for-profit health startups that would have a higher expectation than saving a single life.
Building products that saves lives will increase sales, because people want to be safe, thus increasing profits.
How does donating to charity increase profits? It doesn't, so why would Apple spend money there?
Apple is not in the business of saving lives, they're in the business of building tech products. If those tech products can also save lives, that's the most life-saving we can expect from a profit-seeking company that builds tech products.
I don't understand why you're expecting Apple to save lives at a loss.
I wasn't saying that at all, and I think if you reread both my comments and the context of the thread you'll see that.
I was replying specifically to the claim that if it would save a single life it would have been worth Apple doing. And if it were only to save a single life, Apple would have wasted a huge amount of money on that single life, when they could have redirected it towards other ways to waste their money but saving more lives.
I was purely pointing out that nobody should think it worth it "if it just saved one life". Not arguing for how Apple should spend money in other areas, just discussing in the context of if Apple were spending money on saving lives.
But... while you ask - it's actually very common for companies, big and small, to spend money on charities, usually because they think the public image benefit outweighs the cost. Apple DO spend money on, for example, donating money to HIV charities through their PRODUCT(RED) scheme. https://www.apple.com/uk/product-red/
And they spent money on this new feature being discussed in this thread (I assume because they expect it to save more than a single life!).
Also having worked there they are also a bunch of people who like to build great products.
And aren't motivated by the bottom line of the company.
Apple has 200B in cash and investments in the bank and the 2024 National Cancer Institute’s budget is 10 billion.
Sure it has "driving mode" but you can still override it.
Not everyone that moves at driving speeds is driving, especially in places outside of America.
That’s just one of many edge cases where disabling cellphone service for moving callers is downright dangerous.
Maybe make it an insurance lock feature!
It's very easy in the US West to get out of cell service very quickly - at that point, even just throwing an ankle or tripping can put you at the mercy of your hiking companion or random strangers on the trail. If you're going somewhere less traveled, this is just a nice thing to have in your pocket.
This feature isn't going to save you after you've been buried in an avalanche, but it's going to get search and rescue to carry you out when you're 10 miles from the parking lot. Worth the cost.
Not the biggest Apple fan, but I have to let them have this one. If I weren't so invested in the not-Apple ecosystem, I'd consider switching.
Would the corollary of this be “if a feature causes a single death it’s not worth it” ?
That would be an interesting angle to look at when Apple revamps its lock screen, changes privacy policy settings on GPS tracking etc.
While we hope to never use it, we think this feature is a game changer for rural travel.
Kim and his family were stranded on a rural route traveling from Portland to San Francisco. He went out in search of help and succumbed to hypothermia.
It was unusual, however there are "backcountry" incidents that don't necessarily involve intentionally setting out into remote areas.
I suspect, being a tech reporter, Kim would have had a satellite SOS enabled smartphone if it had been on the market.
It occurs to me that anyone lost in the wilderness, due to reliance on incomplete navigation info, is probably not prepared for adventure.
I might not have thought to bring a satellite-capable Personal Locator Beacon (PLB), but I have my cell phone with me.
This will save us a lot of time, and it will save lives. This is a game changing feature.
Even? no (and you'd probably know better than me) but as a fellow bay area person, there are tons and tons and tons of roads and places that aren't covered by cell service, just go into the mountains a little bit. and then you also have to ask which cell carrier everybody has. there's a real digital divide once you get out of the city and the towns that surround it
Not for emergency services you don't.
We don't have to ask about which carrier, though. That information will come through automatically along with the subscriber's information. Even a cell phone with no active plan can still dial 911, regardless of carrier or model.
I am extremely bullish on Apple's ability to measure health signals in the next 5-10 years, that when fed to AI, will be able to detect health issues long in advance. This may take more sensors, more research, more AI development, but we're definitely headed there. At some point iPhone and Apple Watch will probably be marketed as the devices you need if you don't wish to die early.
But I agree. If they can add a cheap part (better accelerometer) or re-use an existing one (pulse detection for a-fib) and provide really great possible benefits for some people? Sounds great.
Or you'll have to turn over your data to get the reasonable health insurance rates and not fall in the risky rate bucket.
If one gym had a yearly fee of $40 and then cost $1 every time you went, and another gym had a $8 yearly fee and cost $15 everytime you went, it wouldn't make sense to compare them merely on the per-visit costs.
Just to short circuit, I'm not trying to defend the American healthcare system. American healthcare is horrible on average compared to the average of other rich nations.
Also, a final note, but even if you have cheap out of pocket expenses, you aren't getting good value for your money if you don't visit a doctor for almost a decade. (Yes, I did e-stalk you for 60s to try to see what country to figure out average tax burden for healthvare, and ran across that fact on your intermittent fasting post)
There's plenty of reasons for that.
[1] https://grattan.edu.au/news/more-expensive-but-less-effectiv...
[2] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/universal-health-...
[3] https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2...
Our sales taxes are a little higher than a lot of the states, though.
I’ll take that over the amount of money and time the US healthcare system siphoned off of me when I was healthy.
I'm willing to pay a little more in the long term to have the peace of mind that I can go to the doctor for something less than an emergency and not face financial hardship. In the US, one doctors visit can easily cost more than 10 years of bills in a European nation, and it doesn't even have to be serious! A broken leg isn't life threatening, but it could break you financially if you aren't ready and able to shell out your high deductible.
As a paramedic, not a physician, atrial fibrillation is not a life threatening event. Many people happily live with it for decades, unmedicated. It is more problematic if you are diabetic or hypertensive, but still not an acute medical event.
I remain entirely unconvinced that putting ‘more’ health information at increased temporal frequency to consumers leads to any health benefit, and instead causes significant health anxiety and drain on health resources with false and misleading presentations for bad signals.
Remember that a 99% accuracy for a condition that 0.1% of the population has still means 10 false positives for each 1 early diagnosis.
I don't what the numbers are for the conditions that the Apple Watch can detect, just discussing the general principle. Whether it's more useful or more harmful depends crucially on the real numbers.
I'm not making a statement on whether the apple watch in particular is close enough to that line.
Maybe - I am unconvinced, my sister who is a Cardiologist (and so actually deals with this more day to day) certainly has changed her tune from 2-3 years ago to the point where she and the cardiologists she works with see it as a pestilence.
I think the commenter you replied to gives a good reason why. The false positive rate is so high, and the flow on effect to resourcing so great, that I find it hard to say anything positive about what is being presented as a diagnostic miracle. You've got trillion dollar companies behind these devices, that by themselves have annual turnovers for the product in question at the level of small countries' GDPs. You don't think their marketing teams ham it up a bit whenever there's the slightest story that one of their devices was involved in someone that was treated?
here's a nice pop-sci-feel-good article I found within seconds [0]. The first couple are completely unrelated. the A-Fib ones, which are the main ones that apple goes hard at (at least during initial marketing, and which all the promo was focused on) - are basically irrelevant. They sound impressive to the layperson, but AFib is very common, often intermittent in the initial stages (but very rarely causes any harm when intermittent) and very frequently symptomatic when it sets in which leads to presentations, which leads to prompt diagnosis and management.
[0] https://www.imore.com/health-fitness/apple-watch/5-times-an-...
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/11/emergency-sos-via-sat...
So basically, they have their own infrastructure for their own proprietary 911 service with global coverage? It's really amazing that we live in a world where we can have such infrastructure, but at the same time, it's owned and controlled by a single corporation.
I notice there's multiple mentions of these satellites working with the "Find My" service, which keeps track of where a device is (in order to find it where it's lost). So I guess all this infrastructure also allows Apple to pinpoint down any user worldwide -- even if they're off-grid.
I think Apple added n53 as part of this deal at Globalstar's request. Globalstar is trying to lease their spectrum terrestrially for small cell networks and network capacity solutions for the carriers.
https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Downl... (PDF warning) Here's a presentation with some details.
The "emission type" for the satellite service is 198KG1D and operates under FCC rule Part 25 (Satellite Communications). They run 400mW or so up on 1.6GHz L-band, and ~90mW downlink S-band.
A Spot Gen3 runs around 200mW on L-band only for both ways. There's a slightly different emissions type, but same satellites.
The ground stations had additional hardware added by Cobham to support Apple's use on L/S-band.
Well, they could do that in the past - GPS works (almost) everywhere. They'd just have to wait with sending the data back.
They’re not going to burn precious bandwidth on an always-active tracking thing.
I get this sentiment. Globalstar does have competitors at least. Iridium and Inmarsat offer comparable services though not as seamlessly integrated into a popular consumer device.
I do wonder what happens if you aren't paying for the service but have an emergency. I guess they just don't connect you at all? Is there an automatic charge for accessing it?
As for infrastructure I think Verizon is doing something similar with Starlink and there are multiple possible satellite constellations that could be connected too Apple is just the first to include what I think has to be a new radio or radio component.
And yes, the Apple announcement is just the productization of a feature in the Qualcomm X65[1]. But I think this is a case where the technical implementation is the easiest part; I would be surprised of other X65 adopters also delivered satellite comms, at least unless/until it's obvious it's driving phone purchasing decisions.
[0] https://www.t-mobile.com/news/un-carrier/t-mobile-takes-cove...
[1] https://9to5mac.com/2022/09/18/iphone-14-satellite-connectiv...
If Apple spends $450 million to enable the service [0], that's about $2 per phone sold in 2021 [1].
[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/10/apple-spending-450-million-w...
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-11/apple-exp...
Whatever the iPhone 14 is using to talk to the Globalstar satellites, I'd be extremely surprised if it looked anything like LTE or 5G at the physical or logical layer.
[1] https://investors.globalstar.com/news-releases/news-release-...
But my point is that this probably has very little to do with Globalstar's terrestrial band 53 efforts, other than possibly sharing some HF hardware in the new iPhones given that they support both that terrestrial LTE/5G band and satellite messaging.
Google Maps on iOS let’s you choose squares on the planet and download offline maps.
Open the app, click your initial at the top right and you’ll see Offline Maps in the drop-down.
Driving directions only though. But you can search for POIs and it will navigate you there. Or you can look at the maps/streets.
I use it regularly in USA and Europe when I don’t have a data plan there. Or when I’m low/out of data in Canada because Canadian telecom sucks. Or when Rogers shits the bed.
I also have Kiwix with full copies of Wikipedia (about 85gb) and a few other resources. And a small solar panel so when doomsday hits…
It does background refresh but unsure how great it is. Right know my maps expire with different dates between July and November 2023, so I guess it’s keeping up to date enough.
> "To offer this new feature, Apple had to integrate a miniature antenna in its smartphone. It captures part of the signal of satellite constellations without relying on a satellite dish or a specific telephone handset. The iPhone manufacturer signed an agreement with Globalstar, one of the operators of low-altitude constellations, sets of satellites flying at about 500 kilometers from the Earth, in order to cover low-coverage areas of the globe. Specializing since 2007 in professional satellite messaging, Globalstar explained that it reached an agreement to launch 17 new satellites for 327 million dollars, 95% of which will be financed by Apple in exchange for 85% of their bandwidth."
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/economy/article/2022/09/13/apple-a...
But I am pretty sure that is a LOT more bandwidth than what will be used for highly compressed text messages in emergencies.
[0] https://www.globalstar.com/Globalstar/media/Globalstar/Downl...
In sat-networks, well, MHz-POP doesn't matter that much, because, generally, every operator is licensed to operate in the whole country. As you mentioned, what really matters is (a) the bandwidth of their license allocation (e.g., Globalstar is 11.5 MHz), and (b) how efficiently can they reuse spectrum:
* how many beams can they land (# satellite x # beams / satellite)?
* how much freedom do they have to chunk bandwidth and allocate it to individual beams based on demand?
* what type of satellite are they using, bent-pipe or regenerative payload?
* how big are these beams?
* can they allocate resources dynamically or is everything fixed?
* how much power does the satellite have? how big are the terminal antennas? what kind of link-budget can they close?
In the end, the MHz/customer they can achieve depends on the answer to all these questions.
Iridium has been around for soo long...I am getting constant outages from the status page. Kind of disconcerting at times.
Ah, I found the following article that somewhat explains the different technologies w/
"The main difference between Iridium and Globalstar is the relaying mechanism. Iridium requires relaying between satellites. Globalstar requires relaying between satellites and earth stations."
https://www.mobilsat.com/the-best-satellite-phone-globalstar...
Apple is paying for 95% of Globalstar's new satellites and plans to use 85% of their network capacity.
If you are going to do extreme hiking in Patagonia, get a real distress beacon. There is no service charge except for the device itself.
This is no joke - I had to use mine in the middle of Death Valley (of all places) during a seizure-like episode. Saved my life.
121.5 ELTs - requiring sar aircraft proximity - are obsolete.
It says free for the first 2 years. I'm curious what the yearly cost will be after that, and how it will compare to an Inreach plan. On an ongoing basis, it's the subscription fees that really add up.
https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=9NWiPDU4gM0JWMfdWFol7A
The new GPS chipsets are absolutely a beast in challenging conditions and incredibly accurate/precise over the older technology.
Having a phone on the handlebar/top tube is cumbersome and annoying, battery life is crap and distractions galore. I don't want needless phone calls from annoying people interrupting my workout and distracting me from watching the road. I've set up my Garmin devices to ignore phone calls and texts from the phone during workouts.
As an FYI, if you have an iPhone, you can set a "Fitness" focus mode that turns on automatically when a workout is started. From there, you can specify which contacts can pop a notification during workouts (or none at all). I let my wife and my parents get through.
But, like you, not that I'd use a phone as a bike computer to begin with.
The latest high-end Garmin devices do support multi-frequency GPS just as accurate as the iPhone 14. Those chips aren't included in Garmin's mid-range products like Edge 5XX/8XX series bike computers but will probably be added in the next refresh.
More casual cyclists might use their phones since they already have those and don't want to buy an extra bike computer - but that was already true in the past.
My take is the Apple SOS is for people who are unprepared and surprised, and who wouldn’t have bought a satellite comm device and paid for the subscription because they weren’t expecting the emergency.
I’m a happy iPhone 14 user who will get this nice feature, but I’m not planning to cancel my InReach subscription ($20/month, pause/resume any time), which I have never used to call for a rescue but have used a lot to let family know where I am and that things are fine when overlanding. And Inreach works right from the dashboard while driving, no need to get situated perfectly.
Maybe this is a harbinger and future enhancements will kill Inreach, but at least for now it feels like a very different application.
Is it wrong to call for help when you are lost only 300 yards off trail like you said? I would be embarrassed - but is anyone going to be upset?
A lot of my buddies rescues are older people who just got a little lost, or slipped down a steep embankment and can’t get back up. The worst ones are when that happens, but it’s been 3 days and the chances they find a live person are more slim.
The SAR people vastly prefer finding people alive, so if you need help, give them a chance for a happy ending by calling.
Absent some combination of map and compass--in some form--it's super-easy to get totally disoriented absent trail and landmarks. Long before cell phones, I still remember going on a casual short off-trail jaunt to a lighthouse in Nova Scotia and suddenly realizing I really didn't know where I was. Took a deep breath, carefully figured things out, and I was fine (the boundaries were pretty constrained anyway). But it's not hard.
I own a PLB that I use for safety when spearfishing from a kayak in Northern CA, but I don't bother throwing it in my pocket if I'm just walking the dog in the woods for a couple minutes. I can see this being a big help.
And, pretty much every year, there's at least one hiker who goes missing for days. If they're young and lucky, they manage to subsist, and SAR finds them eventually. If not... well, sometimes another hiker finds the body years later, but there's no shortage of names on the missing person list, either.
They would much rather be on alert and be stood down, or assist someone over the phone who called early and is easy to find and help. The problem is that many people wait until conditions deteriorate or they are much more lost.
Sending a team of a few people to go out and call your name along a trail during the day in clear weather is easy. Sending a team of people to find a hypothermic or injured person at night and extract them is an order of magnitude more involved and risky.
In other words, no one will be upset if you call out of caution.
Mistakes happen.
And if you stay lost through the night, hypothermia can get you fast even in places where you only need a t-shirt during the day.
I’m not looking to use it for weeks-long trips. Mostly trail running and maybe a few days in the back country.
Garmin inReach is a robust and rugged satellite communicator that out classes iPhone emergency SOS greatly
- inreach doesn't require "tracking" the satellite as it has a stronger antenna - inreach is more waterproof, dust proof atd shock resistant (no touch screen) - inreach has higher battery life, SOS can be activated while the device is off - ability to send messages, which can be critical if there are no cell towers that can be boosned/activated
That said, it is a great innovation; I think the Apple Watch Ultra will cut more into the diving watch market than the iPhone into the satellite communicator market
The people that don’t care about AI dive with a perdix or tables, but basically require something you can operate with gloves on. The rest of them with the money for a nice watch really want AI.
Most dive computers make it difficult or impossible to do dive planning for more complex scenarios. For example, the Garmin Descent Mk2 has a Plan Dive activity profile. But it only supports square profile dives, doesn't properly handle travel gas, and doesn't generate contingency plans for loss of deco gas. So we have to do dive planning with other software that can generate tables.
https://www8.garmin.com/manuals/webhelp/GUID-120241CE-9583-4...
Personally I use the Mk2 because I mostly do technical dives and have little use for AI, but divers like me are a tiny market niche. The latest Shearwater Perdix models do support AI. If Garmin launches a Descent "Mk3" product line as expected next year it might include AI as a standard feature across all models.
Apple watch with dive computer and air integration though would be awesome. Garmins is $1500 (+700$) so the margin should be there.
I own one and when I brought it on a remote expedition I found it to be a buggy POS: duplicated messages, stuck connection requiring resets, garbled messages.
That being said, the current iPhone 14 satellite function wouldn’t have worked at all for my purpose in those circumstances.
1. It's nice to have a backup. 2. The battery life on the inReach is upwards of a month and it's more rugged. 3. You can throw it in your pack, forget about it, and somehow it stills gets a signal. 3. Garmin has a dedicated communications center (IERCC) that has tons of experience coordinating with first responders. They will keep your emergency contacts updated about your rescue. Apple's system is less proven.
Another use case: The there are two highways between my metro area and the Pacific coast. Both are pretty remote through the forest. One has decent coverage with only a couple of mile long dropouts along the way. The other road has essentially zero cell coverage for about 20 miles and spotty coverage for another 20 miles. Winter travelers have gone off the road and not been found for hours or even days. This device could certainly save a life in that case.
> The service will be included for free for two years starting at the time of activation of a new iPhone 14, iPhone 14 Plus, iPhone 14 Pro, and iPhone 14 Pro Max. ^4
> ^4. Users who purchased an iPhone 14 model before the availability date of Emergency SOS via satellite will receive two years of the service free starting from the service availability date.
> The service will be included for free for two years starting at the time of activation of a new iPhone 14, iPhone 14 Plus, iPhone 14 Pro, and iPhone 14 Pro Max.
Which kind of implies it will be a pay for service after two years.
If I were the product manager there, I would fight tooth and nail to only make a short term commitment to support it at all. Two years in, if it's un unmitigated disaster costing $1B/year and generating zero rescues and zero PR, kill it. You can't do that if you've promised "free for the life of the phone" or something.
And don't require the payment to go through before unlocking the feature, obviously. There will be some people who you can never collect payment from, but not that many.
Don't think they want to look like they're charging people to keep their lives.
So I think this is an advantage. If, lets say, it costs 4.99 a year, I think a good percentage of people would do that (me included, even though I'm not an iPhone user).
Much more likely they'll just add P2P messaging as a paid feature.
I think it's a shitty thing to do to not at least say what the cost will be at least given today's information.
I think this would imply the path is very well beaten.
> A text compression algorithm was also developed to reduce the average size of messages by 300 percent
I don't think that's how percentages work.
So the percentage "works", in a way, until you get to the freeform text.
Not long ago I drove a long distance along plain old US interstates. With about 400 miles in between two major cities there were a few stretches of 5-10 miles where I didn’t have cell service, sometimes 25-40 miles in between local town exits or gas stations. Had I not scouted the routes ahead of time, I would have had no idea where to go or which direction to walk if there was a problem, much less an emergency like crashing where I couldn’t walk.
There are still large gaps in coverage as large as not-walkable-in-a-day in what you’d think are at least minimally developed areas. And they are minimally developed, but you’ll have no idea of what direction that developed portion is if you’re stuck without cell service or an actual physical map.
No one should go on any long car trip letting GPS guide the way without scouting the route a bit ahead of time to know what’s nearby in sparse areas. Apple is filling that “oh f$ck” gap a bit. Nice feature.
Because the Starlink satellites in question don't exist yet, and it's Elon Musk making claims about existing handsets working -- he has a spotty record when it comes to making accurate announcements.
I enthusiastically look forward to more capability in this space. But I doubt very much that Apple is introducing limitations unnecessarily. Claiming that existing cell phones will be able to reach up to a satellite, even in LEO, is such a large claim that it needs someone more trustworthy than Elon Musk to explain how it works.
Apple isn't introducing unnecessary limitations. They launched the best thing that's possible today. But what I'm saying is that it's very likely that in just a few years it will be essentially obsolete.
Comparing BlueWalker to Starlink v2 makes no sense, unless you think SpaceX is going to be putting that huge phased array on every v2 satellite they put in the sky? It's a different technology entirely.
Now, maybe Elon was hinting at an impending acquisition? :). That would certainly be on character for him.
I'm working from memory here, but that's what they said during the presentation. 5x5 meters, I believe.
What do you mean? Teslas started self-driving across country to deliver themselves in 2017 as he promised, regular Mars flights began in 2020, and this year he hit two goals: shipping the colony equipment and bringing comedy back to Twitter!
1. Short wave length (~2.4GHz iPhone < 1.6GHz SEND < 406MHz PLB). Shorter wave length are less affected from terrain obstructions. 2. UX - to send an emergency signal using iPhone, due to its shorter wave length, one has to point to the approximate LEO satellite position. Last time I searched on how it would look, it seemed that an on-screen instruction would guide the user where to point the phone, I'm not sure if there there is any accessibility mode that would use voice to do that if for example the screen is broken (or the user cannot see). If the screen is broken, would the user even be able to activate the SOS feature? Using voice? What if you're caught in a super noisy wind storm or the mic is broken? Perhaps future models will have a physical trigger to activate it.
2. Durability - other than PLB/SEND being much more durable when it comes to impact and water damage, the battery itself, at least with PLB is rated up to -40. A phone battery starts to become unreliable at +30f.
3. Latency and reliability: iPhone I believe, due to its short wavelength only transmit to LEO satellite, where as PLBs does LEO, GEO and MEO, which means lower latency in some cases, especially when the sky is obstructed by terrain and even more so if you're unlucky to be in an east-west canyon that doesn't follow a LEO satellite orbit, theoretically at least you have a better chance with GEO satellite. Also, in places such as canyons where GPS fix is unreliable, COSPAS-SARSAT MEO and LEO satellite that serve PLBs will use Doppler location approximation. Not sure if Iridium LEO satellite that serve iPhone do that.
As someone else said "The best camera is the one you have with you". Same is true for satellite communicators.
Ham radio still has it's place for first-response communications relief and health & welfare checks, and search-and-rescue (generally where other radio or internet systems are offline, aren't installed, or aren't reliable) as well as just being a fun hobby.
But really, I desperately hope that we can find a way to educate folks on the proper usage of technology like this (which, if you count things like the Garmin inReach and the Spot devices, has been available for a decade).
They're undoubtedly life saving, but they also are taxing mostly volunteer-run search and rescue organizations with folks who really probably don't need help, they just needed to bring some water and a jacket. But they didn't , because they didn't know better, and now need someone to risk themselves on their behalf.
It makes me nervous about the longevity of volunteer-run search and rescue organizations, frankly. It's unfortunate that these are the majority, at least in the rural parts of USA that draw lots of outdoor adventurers.
The problem for the teams isn’t necessarily finding the party, we’ve had these beacons for years. Rather they have to climb into the mountains in the first place to solve what could have, ostensibly, been readily prevented.
Thus taxing a limited resource even further.
What should temper that is now there perhaps may be signs posted telling folks about the service, and that help is available (or not) but it’s likely going to be rather expensive if they have to come get you. It’s never been suggested that while the S&R teams maybe volunteer, as I understand the rescued party incurs costs of the operation.
Usually it's the ambulance / helicopter ride. But even then, there are helicopter operators (like the U.S. military, which responds to many SAR calls where I live) that don't charge.
I don't have data to support this, but I guess that at least 40% of Americans would agree with the statement, "I take cost into consideration when I make a call to emergency services."
You'll get the local 911 response units, and it might be a Sheriff's deputy, fire, or EMS.
If you're in California you're also likely to get a rescue helicopter operated by CHP, and if they pluck you out of a ravine, the bill is $zero. Really, it's taxpayer funded. We operate with them quite often.
Rather, my concern is with the volume. Lots of "I'm Cold, Please Help" calls could take resources away from rarer but far more resource-intensive "My leg is broken, and I"m 10 miles out" calls.
We always prefer calls to come in as early as possible, where maybe an issue can be resolved with advice or a daylight shout to an warm, ambulatory casualty in mild distress. That will always be preferable to a long search for a casualty in possibly deteriorating weather, losing light, without comms, with the prospect of a rescue turning into a recovery.
Mobile phones may have greatly increased the number of SAR shouts worldwide, but also massively reduced shout lengths. Searching used to be the largest time sink in every shout, which is no longer the case.
Every SAR team has frivolous calls, but that's part of the game.
I didn't really communicate this well, but my real fear is this: that folks who otherwise might not journey out into somewhat challenging situations because of their lack of confidence in their self-sufficiency might decide to do so because they can "call for help if they need it."
SAR's around the US are experience this in very high volumes.
Part of me doesn't love that there's an increasing expectation that you're always able to be in contact. But, so it goes.
As a paying customer with Garmin's inReach service, I'm acutely aware of how spotty and unreliable the service can be based on environment and current surroundings.
"A $450 million investment from Apple’s Advanced Manufacturing Fund provides the critical infrastructure that supports Emergency SOS via satellite for iPhone 14 models."
"Once received by a ground station, the message is routed to emergency services that can dispatch help, or a relay center with Apple-trained emergency specialists if local emergency services cannot receive text messages."
"In 2021, Apple announced an acceleration in its US investments, with plans to make new contributions of more than $430 billion over a five-year period."
Apple has probably given this some thought.
This is new to me. I thought the feature was limited to US + Canada. Did they mention additional regions in the keynote?
In the US there's an explicit exception to life threatening emergencies that let you use basically any radio frequency I wonder how many countries have something like that that could at least allow them to enable the emergency contact portion of this without the check-in for non emergency situations.
https://www.esa.int/Applications/Navigation/Galileo_now_repl...
Aside from that, I live in upstate NY, and probably 85% of the land around here has no cell service. If you can't make it to someone's house who has a land line, this is probably the best option to get ahold of emergency services.
The irony is that this feature is especially useless in Europe, which is so built up that it's a challenge to find a location that isn't covered by mobile networks, or within walking distance of civilization.
Meanwhile in Australia you can find yourself 100 km from the next nearest human by accident. My coworker for example went driving in north Queensland and got his 4WD stuck in mud. That can be a life & death situation in a place like that, but just an inconvenience in most of Europe.
Even if Apple can't get the emergency services integration organised in every nation, the "send my location via satellite" feature would still be useful. That way you could get your friends or relatives to organise help on your behalf.
Apple’s satellite emergency SOS feature: A review and deep-dive explainer - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33611586 - Nov 2022 (14 comments)
Low orbit satellites can be about 500 kilometers / 300 miles so would be the logical next step?
I have accidentally called back phone spammers. It made elderly parents scared to use their phone. I've had many many friends butt-dial me.
There should absolutely be an option that is on, or can be enabled: confirm before calling.
In the case of emergency calling, they should figure out how to confirm before calling. I'm sure apple has some scenario in mind where it has to be the way it is now, but I think there should be a way.
At a minimum, opting into the current behavior should train the user how calls are initiated and what options are available.
Agreed 100%. I hate that I have to be super careful and really think through each time I press something to make sure it's not going to be a shortcut that immediately dials a phone number. I too have called spammers back.
If I'm a US customer but am stranded in the middle of Africa, will this work?
I take this to mean the service itself only works within the stated countries. I wonder if it would work in overseas US territories like Samoa.
If you have an African iPhone 14 and are stranded in the middle of the US, it should work.
https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/25/t-mobile-phones-will-conne...
Now people are using Apple's while "real soon now" = next year for T-Mobile/Starlink
“ Apple designed and built custom components and software that allow iPhone 14 to connect to a satellite’s unique frequencies without a bulky antenna.”
Quite mind blowing IMHO.
I suspect coordinating the uplink might be difficult to squeeze a lot of data through, but downlink could have a linear stream of repeating data (weather, news) that you could get an update on at any time by pointing your phone the right way, especially if you can draw an arc that follows the satellite going past by.
And that wouldn’t chew battery power either.
My bandwidth needs are extremely minimal outside of work/home, so with a tiny bit of bandwidth, some texting and news updates could make it possible to live a wireless-subscription free life.
Something like othernet: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Othernet
I'm really glad this exists though, a lot of people will be much safer when everyone has this.
It’s not as good as a Garmin or some such, but you have it with you.
Just need the x,y,z, compass and gps coordinates.
As others have stated, I don't think Apple's product will really erode Garmin's market share for several years. The lack of detailed topo maps and applications will severely hamper them.
With Apple latest shift, I see their ecosystem as a very strong contender for business travel (international news reporter?) that requires strong security (lockdown mode), ability to communicate in many form factors through adverse conditions (voice, data and now satellite), and has a slew of safety features (crash detection).
Garmin has decades of experience regarding outdoor travel and safety that Apple would always be playing catchup...IMO.
Interesting to see the hidden in the fine print at the end. Will they be selling a subscription to the service?
Everyone else in my family uses Android. No way to expose this information to them?
Maybe you can create an account for them and add them as a Family Member.
I've communicated via LEO satellites using only 1 watt of power from an handheld radio.
For OP if you want to see it in action there are plenty of YouTube videos[0] of amateur radio operators with an HT (walkie-talkie) contacting astronauts on the ISS - which is 254 miles up.
The user points the phone at the satellite (in reality, the UI tells the user where to put the phone in relation to it's measured antenna pattern to maximize the gain towards the nearest satellite), while the satellite has a huge, very very high gain antenna array to pick up the signal and pass it back down to a ground station. iPhones can output up to 2 watts of RF power, which is enough for a tiny <HELP! Here's my LAT/LON & status> message. It's using 5G NR band 53 [2][3]
I'm sure someone out there has already run a linkbudget and posted it to their blog, but I haven't found it yet.
[0] https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/globalstar-2.htm
[1] https://www.findmespot.com/en-us/products-services/spot-gen4
[2] https://gearjunkie.com/news/apple-iphone-satellite-messaging...
Edit: nvm, just googled and found out about the Inreach thing.
It was Tuesday, my last day before I had to get back to the real world, and I was pretty sore. I decided on a day trip: I got up before the moon set, and I was hoping to be out until it rose again.
On this loop, I took a less-traveled route on what would be my return-half. There are many of these less-traveled routes, just as there are few people in the BWCA — that's part of the reason why you go to the BWCA. I was in good spirits, amazed by the beauty of the water and the streams and the sounds. Instead of turning to head to Agnes I turned to head back through Ramshead. I hadn't done Ramshead before and it had some cute islands on my map I wanted to check out.
The river was very low. So low in fact, I had to walk in the first half-mile or so of the day. This meant that the usual route to get to the portage between where I was and where I needed to be wasn't so clear. I looked at three maps and decided it must be on the other side of the wild rice patch. I was certain I would only have to push through a hundred yards or so.
A hundred yards became a thousand, which became a beaver dam I would have to carry over. I swung my leg over the side of the canoe to cross onto what I thought was a sturdy dam-y thing. No. I was now in 1.2 meters of mud, and I am only 1.5 meters tall. It's also disgusting.
I put my other leg in to try to get my other leg out, and all is fine, my leg is dislodged.
But gone is my shoe.
Fuck.
I bravely stick my arm into the mud as deep as I can and I'm blindly feeling around for a shoe. Every stick I touch I think is a bone — or at least, I hope they were sticks.
No shoe.
At this point, I am unhappy, and a little irritated. Everything was going way too fine my entire summer until this.
After about 30 minutes of trying, I decide the shoe will be left for the next ice burg, whenever that may be. I take an irritable breath of frustration and anger and decide I have to continue onward anyway.
I find a small beaver pond — no more than an acre large at this point — at what looks like would be the portage. There seems to be a dried creek bed to my east, and my maps show that the landing is near, but I can't seem to find it the path. I climb atop a large river rock to try to get a better view. I still can't see where I need to go, but I do see some annoyed river otters, a beaver, and a bear in the distance.
What I'd give to be a bear at this point: a bear who didn't have a neurological disposition to avoiding, at all costs, textures.
I decided to try pushing through more wild rice along the south-end of this small beaver pond. Ah, good choice joshmn: the portage.
I dismount, take another sigh of angst due to my shoe situation, and march through. I thought this portage was just 100 rods. It must have been pushing 300, and it was not fun. Along the way were the remnants of a grouse who seemed to have made an enemy of a wolf.
Grouse and I have a long-standing connection through my mother, and I treat them as a symbol in these parts. Normally good, if not great symbols. Seeing one in this condition, in these circumstances, was far too fitting.
I got through to the other side physically unscathed but emotionally torn. There were beautiful evergreen trees towered above me and it smelled like pine. If I had my shoe, I’d love this, but at this point, I wanted my bed. I put in the creek where I hoped to wash some of the mud off my body and my canoe. No chance: this creek had the most-ripe algae bloom I had seen in years.
And it was only going to get worse.
I took the creek through to Ramshead, but before I got there I had to carry over a bunch of river rocks due to the water level. The noise of me and my canoe scared the birds that were resting on the other side: cranes, ducks, mallards, geese, and more. I saw turtles dive into the water. Normally, I’d admire the turtles. Now, I’m just irritated.
I cross the lake, a 500-some acre lake, but it must get no deeper than ten feet — I see plenty of rocks, and the algae indicates that the lake doesn’t get cold enough to kill it off. I’m on the other side, where the portage should be. It’s 1PM, I should be at the landing by 3:30PM.
And the portage isn’t where the portage must be.
I blame the water level and check my maps. Normally, I’d get out and walk the shore and into the woods to find it, but with one shoe I wasn’t as brave as I normally was. I was also annoyed, tired, frustrated, and anxious, so I was hoping for an easy way out in the wilderness — something that doesn’t happen.
I get out where the portage is on my map, load up, and walk 200 feet in the direction of the portage on my map. I can’t seem to find any semblance of a portage. I turn around, put in, and decide it must be on the other side of this little peninsula I’m on.
Nope.
It’s 4PM, I’m still on this shore, and I’m feeling like Tom Hanks; my canoe Wilson. My phone has no service, and it’s at 20% due to the pictures I was taking. I give my whistle a blow, hoping that someone will whistle back.
No.
30 minutes passes, another SOS on my whistle.
Nothing.
God dammit.
I started mentally preparing to spend the night. On every other day trip, I pack prepared — I pack for the worst. This time, I packed light for some reason, and I left my fire-making stuff in the car, along with my usual bag of high-protein snacks.
It’s 5PM. I have memorized every inch of this shore and still no luck. Another whistle, another request timeout. At this point I started trying to make sense of what status code I was. 404 would be the instinctual one, same with 410; 412 made sense, but maybe 416.
I was losing it.
Sun sets at 7:30PM. It’s now 6. I thought about going back the way I came, but even then I’d be back at midnight — not great, but at least I know the route. I had tried calling everyone in my contacts to see if they could help me figure out where to go, but I had no service and no calls were connecting.
I say fuck it and decide to call 911 on my phone.
A minute passes. “911, what’s your emergency?”
“Sorry, what?”
“Yes, 911, what’s your emergency?”
“Ugh okay so I’m actually in the boundary waters right now and I’m lost and I can’t get out. This is really demoralizing, I have paddled thousands of miles and I’m just not able to figure out where to go. Can you help me?”
“I can see your approximate location on Ramshead. Stay there and I’ll get search and rescue out there as soon as possible. Call me back in 30 minutes and ask for Tom.”
“Okay.”
Click.
I ask myself what the hell just happened. I find a rock to perch on as the sun starts to fade behind the trees. It’s very pretty, though I’m exhausted. I try to think what do I do for the next 6 hours until search and rescue gets here: after all, they have to go in the way I came, which is fine… but they’d have stuff to spend the night at least. I just had the shirt on my back, an empty Hydroflask, a dead phone, and the crust from my sandwich.
I ate the crust.
It’s 7PM and I call Tom back again for an update on the location of the rescue squad. As much as I wanted to ask him how the hell he connected to me, I didn’t. He said that they were en route. I didn’t know what that meant, and he didn’t know what that meant either.
I hang up. A duck lands 15 feet away. Must be nice to be able to fly.
I hear a float plane flying overhead.
“No way,” I say to myself. They flew across the lake. Bah Humbug.
Then it comes back and starts circling me.
They land at 7:20PM. Sun sets at 7:35PM. We needed to get out of there with some daylight otherwise we won’t be able to see the rocks below. They instruct me to paddle over, I do, we ditch the canoe, and at 7:41PM we’re in the air.
Fuck.
They flew me to Lake Vermillion, some 65 miles away from my car. We’re chatting on the radio: “Are you okay?”
“Physically yes.”
“Your ego?”
“Fucking shattered, man.”
“It’s okay.”
“So, how much do I owe you guys for this trip and do you take insurance?”
“It’s a volunteer thing, you’re fine.”
We landed on Lake Vermillion. I was just there a few days before visiting a friend. My phone had died. One of the guys in the rescue squad offered to drive me to my car — yes, 65 miles away. I tried saying no, he wouldn’t let me.
We’re chatting on the way there. His son is a software engineer for LinkedIn. His daughter is high-up in some marketing company in Chicago. He retired from FEMA a few years ago and wanted to stay active. He was leaving for Florida at the end of the month for the winter.
I got home at 11PM that night. I plugged in my phone to charge and jumped in the shower to rinse myself off. I was gross, even by BWCA standards. In the shower I tried to figure out how much the plane ride should have if it was billed to my insurance — I figured that would be my donation to the volunteer org that picked me up. When I got out of the shower I opened up HackerNews to see what I missed that day — after all, it was Apple’s day.
The top post is about the satellite tech in their new phones.
Glad it worked out.
The grouse thing was the most ominous, though. My mom was an avid grouse hunter, and my favorite memories of childhood are when we'd walk trails together grouse hunting. Every time I've gone up there ("up north" we say locally), I have had a peculiar interaction with a grouse: one time two were on the side of the road — the first ones I had seen since her passing, and the first time I had been back up there since her passing too; one time, one wouldn't let me through the road and just stood there and looked at me for 10 minutes; one time one crossed 20 yards in front of my canoe, followed by 11 of its offspring (and 11 is my favorite number...). All good times.
Then there's the one that was shredded to pieces on the portage I was navigating on with one shoe.
When I tell this story I always hear "this is why you don't solo" — no, this is why you do solo. Except bring a sat phone and go on routes that you're at least vaguely familiar with... :)
I certainly don’t mean to poo-poo this announcement in HN commenter fashion—-I think it’s actually really great to have. Just wanted to highlight an alternative to shelling out $1k+ for a capable phone if you don’t have one.
I'm a licensed ham and have worked emergency events. I would not rely upon this if my life depended on it.
you can pretty much tell what an iphone will be able to do based on what qualcomm is currently able to do
From: https://www.everythingrf.com/tech-resources/lte-bands/lte-ba...
Quite impressive they can receive that on the satellite with 1W (guess) of power and a not very directional antenna in the iPhone.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/images/product/iphone/standar... - Shows the screen you'd see.
Strictly speaking, if that were the case then the iPhone 13 would have been able to do it. [0]
The technology (Band 53/n53) and the timeline (end of 2022) are mentioned in the Sep 2022 SEC filing of the agreement between Globalsat and Apple. [1]
[0] https://www.semianalysis.com/p/no-the-iphone-13-does-not-hav...
https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-picks-globalstar-sa...
- thermal imaging - laser assisted distance measurement - indoor air quality
Definitely gonna keep those CAT phones in mind for the next time I need a new one.
Getting a smartphone and paying a recurring fee for data (when I was perfectly capable) was still a major point of hesitation for me.
Satellite-based communication devices remains as one of the self-imposed unobtaniums.
We haven't arrived at full tricorder yet though.
Generously, maybe someone did think of it, but it would have been too difficult to make a prop with a bright enough light source.
My flashlights have adjustable beams. They throw out many times more light than my phone's flashlight. Using the dedicated flashlight gives a way better lighting experience than using my phone's flashlight. But it is like cameras, the best flashlight is the one on you.
I can see the communicator on the chest being used as a flashlight with the powerful LED we have today.
But 90s TV show prop departments would probably have had one hell of a time trying to make that work, and practical, so instead they gave everybody futuristic looking flashlights aka "palm beacons" [0]
Ok, perhaps not phone calls or text. What about a beacon feature?
GPS is unidirectional. Your phone isn’t communicating back to the satellite.
Android: https://www.thuraya.com/en/products-list/land-voice/thuraya-...
Lynk: https://lynk.world/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/09/a-virginia-company-h...
Add-on for existing phone: https://www.bluecosmo.com/iridium-go-global-smartphone-acces...
T-Mobile is planning on it: https://www.t-mobile.com/news/un-carrier/t-mobile-takes-cove...