Garmin -In Reach: Your Experience/ Any better options ?

i have a Inreach explorer+.  i suspended my communication account in October.  i just re-uded it this week just with GPS mode. When i try to update it i got 47 update to do.  After updating done, when a turn on my GPS and put in on map mode, it reboot by it self.  i let it on 3 days outdoor for potentiely network map update, but stil reboot.  i perform 2 factory reset and notting change.  it reboot by it self as soon i put it on map mode.  Some body have a tip to help me.

Has anyone tried/have real world experience with the Zoleo device ?

Gear Lab, Hunt Alaska, and a few others gave it a pretty favorable reveiw

However, much like as already been mentioned in relations to the somewear device, my main concern is what happens if Zoleo "doesn't make it". Zoleo is a joint venture between Road Post & Beam as well as sold on BlueCosmo so maybe that means something?

Name Redacted wrote: Has anyone tried/have real world experience with the Zoleo device ?

Gear Lab, Hunt Alaska, and a few others gave it a pretty favorable reveiw

However, much like as already been mentioned in relations to the somewear device, my main concern is what happens if Zoleo "doesn't make it". Zoleo is a joint venture between Road Post & Beam as well as sold on BlueCosmo so maybe that means something?

My first thought was "if an iridium phone and a Simon had a baby...."   it looks like a repackaged IridiumGO.  road Post and Bluecosmo may just be the resellers.  Iridium isnt goign any where anytime soon.  but I think your concern is warranted especially WRT longer term firmware and software updates for device.  you get what you pay for.  

Name Redacted wrote: Has anyone tried/have real world experience with the Zoleo device ?

Gear Lab, Hunt Alaska, and a few others gave it a pretty favorable reveiw

However, much like as already been mentioned in relations to the somewear device, my main concern is what happens if Zoleo "doesn't make it". Zoleo is a joint venture between Road Post & Beam as well as sold on BlueCosmo so maybe that means something?

My main concern with products like zoleo, bivvy, and somewhere is that without your phone you can only send SOS and maybe a predetermined text or two. Essentially having a Spot Gen3. It's better than nothing but if I'm paying for a system for 2 way communication then why wouldn't I choose the one that has 2 way communication without the cell phone? The ability to have back and forth communication when a rescue is needed is a great thing that can speed the process up. I'd hate to be dependent on a cell phone for that. Screens break easily and could take that away from you. 

Hate reviving old threads but I had an issue with my inReach that felt unacceptable for what I assumed were its capabilities.

I was unable to successfully send a message while at Wall Street in Moab. Context was I wanted to send an "I'm still alive" text to my family as I had forgotten to do it in Moab that morning. Even marginal cell phone service at some spots exists on Wall Street, but the inReach couldn't even get a text out?

This feels unacceptable for what climbers would expect to use the device for. Understanding that 180 degrees of the sky is blocked on Wall Street as you are right next to cliff, I would still argue most applications climbers purchase this device for would occur in similar circumstances (i.e. on a wall where half the sky is blocked). It worries me that if I'm on the Diamond and an accident happens, the device won't be able to serve its purpose.

Has anyone else had similar experiences?

P B wrote:

Hate reviving old threads but I had an issue with my inReach that felt unacceptable for what I assumed were its capabilities.

I was unable to successfully send a message while at Wall Street in Moab. Context was I wanted to send an "I'm still alive" text to my family as I had forgotten to do it in Moab that morning. Even marginal cell phone service at some spots exists on Wall Street, but the inReach couldn't even get a text out?

This feels unacceptable for what climbers would expect to use the device for. Understanding that 180 degrees of the sky is blocked on Wall Street as you are right next to cliff, I would still argue most applications climbers purchase this device for would occur in similar circumstances (i.e. on a wall where half the sky is blocked). It worries me that if I'm on the Diamond and an accident happens, the device won't be able to serve its purpose.

Has anyone else had similar experiences?

Narrow canyons will be a limitation with any device.  I have found that I can eventually get a message out but it just takes much longer to get a signal.   Type the message first, watch the signal bars and don’t hit send until you get a good signal which may only last 30 seconds or less if you are in a deep canyon or blocked by walls but I have never not been able to get a message out.

inReach mini rarely works for me while in the canyons of red rock, las vegas. 

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

Narrow canyons will be a limitation with any device.  I have found that I can eventually get a message out but it just takes much longer to get a signal.   Type the message first, watch the signal bars and don’t hit send until you get a good signal which may only last 30 seconds or less if you are in a deep canyon or blocked by walls but I have never not been able to get a message out.

I understand your point but would argue Wall Street is not a particularly narrow canyon. See a photo from that day below - clear skies and the canyon is pretty wide. I let the device try to send the message for more than an hour with no luck.

It makes me question why I own the device if it doesn't work at the crag, where we spend so much of our time and now I worry that in remote locations this thing will not serve its purpose.

Edit: has anyone used this device with success at a crag like Wall Street or any other crag? I may go out this week to do some testing and will report back.

Every device has its limitations.   I would bet it would eventually acquire a signal, I have been in some pretty deep narrow canyons and have still gotten brief signals.   I’m sure In Reach or any other device says in their user guide that terrain will affect acquiring a good signal and that being in a wide open area is optimum.  I look at it like I look at small brass nuts, they might hold a fall but if I don’t place them at all they 100% won’t hold a fall.   My satellite device is the same, it might just save my ass and  prevent rescuers hours or days of searching but if I don’t use it they for sure will waste hours or days looking for me.   As a retired SAR guy who has spent days searching for people I appreciate these devices, they reduce the risk involved to rescuers, being able to text my wife is just a side benefit. 

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

As a retired SAR guy who has spent days searching for people I appreciate these devices, they reduce the risk involved to rescuers, being able to text my wife is just a side benefit. 

In your experience is there an appreciable difference in the success rate of Iridium versus SARSAT devices?  Other SAR workers have told me they are more confident in the 406 MHz devices getting a signal through.

https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/features/next-generation-search-and-rescue/

“If you’re near death, you’re going to want 99.9 percent reliability” of a unit certified to communicate over the 406 MHz frequency, says NASA’s Lisa Mazzuca, who manages a team of engineers in the SAR Office of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. Her team develops prototype components whose designs are reviewed internationally and turned into specifications for commercially manufactured Cospas-SARSAT distress emitters, called beacons. Her team also designs the SAR packages on NOAA weather satellites and Air Force GPS satellites, plus the ground receivers that analyze the distress signals to find the source of transmission.

The overarching message from Mazzuca and others: Don’t buy a non-406 MHz device in the belief that you have the same level of reliability as provided by the government SAR network overhead.

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

Every device has its limitations.   I would bet it would eventually acquire a signal, I have been in some pretty deep narrow canyons and have still gotten brief signals.   I’m sure In Reach or any other device says in their user guide that terrain will affect acquiring a good signal and that being in a wide open area is optimum.  I look at it like I look at small brass nuts, they might hold a fall but if I don’t place them at all they 100% won’t hold a fall.   My satellite device is the same, it might just save my ass and  prevent rescuers hours or days of searching but if I don’t use it they for sure will waste hours or days looking for me.   As a retired SAR guy who has spent days searching for people I appreciate these devices, they reduce the risk involved to rescuers, being able to text my wife is just a side benefit. 

I think noting for the community the devices limitations is important as people make decisions based on what the perceived capability of the device is. Is there a difference between signal for the SOS feature and the text feature? I honestly don't know but if there is not and the device struggles around crags, this should be something climbers are aware of. If there is a difference, my point is moot and I'm okay with that.

P B wrote:

I understand your point but would argue Wall Street is not a particularly narrow canyon. See a photo from that day below - clear skies and the canyon is pretty wide. I let the device try to send the message for more than an hour with no luck.

It makes me question why I own the device if it doesn't work at the crag, where we spend so much of our time and now I worry that in remote locations this thing will not serve its purpose.

Edit: has anyone used this device with success at a crag like Wall Street or any other crag? I may go out this week to do some testing and will report back.

Did you walk out to where you had a clear view of more sky? It will be a big difference if you are right against that rock vs away from it even 20-30 feet. Over on the other side of the road by the river it should definitely work. If it didn't, that's an issue with your specific device, not the general model. I've used my Inreach a lot on crags. In particular on Mt. Whitney and in areas of J-tree. Any satellite communicator needs to "see" the satellite for long enough to acquire signal and send the message.

Also, you mention that there's cell service there. That's irrelevant to whether a sat device can see the sky, but if you have cell service why not use that? 

Webfoot wrote:

In your experience is there an appreciable difference in the success rate of Iridium versus SARSAT devices?  Other SAR workers have told me they are more confident in the 406 MHz devices getting a signal through.

https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/features/next-generation-search-and-rescue/

In my SAR experience, the team being able to communicate with the subject makes iridium/Inreach the way to go. If the subject has an Inreach I can ask about injuries, terrain, etc, whereas a simple PLB just says "Come find me", giving the team zero info about what equipment to bring, etc.  Its pretty much accepted in the SAR world that a two-way communicator is more effective than a PLB, even though the PLB frequency is arguably more reliable.  

I have mine on a keeper cord, and stuffed into a mesh pocket on the outside of my chalkbag.   I send texts using the phone app and just let them transmit asynchronously.

I think there is quality control issues with the inreach mini.  Some seem to work well other seem to barely work.  Mine was in the barely working category and I eventually got rid of it and got a zoleo that worked exactly as I expect.  

climber pat wrote:

I think there is quality control issues with the inreach mini.  Some seem to work well other seem to barely work.  Mine was in the barely working category and I eventually got rid of it and got a zoleo that worked exactly as I expect.  

Interesting, mine seems to take 5-10 minutes to send a message even in a wide open field. I assumed that was just normal, but maybe it's not?

With my Somewear device once a signal is acquired it sends in a matter of seconds.   Sometimes depending on terrain it may take a minute or two to acquire a signal but once it does it goes fast, I can usually send and receive a message in less than a minute.   I ditched my In Reach after trying the Simewear, super simple to use and updates automatically with new software updates.  In Reach was a pain to update though I hear it’s easier now. 

A personal anecdote regarding the Garmin InReach Mini:

I have been living in New Zealand for 2+ years now. Prior to living in the land of sheep and meat pies, I didn't give much thought to purchasing or carrying a PLB of any kind despite many many trips to remote, alpine climbing areas all over North America. Down here, however, PLBs are the norm and it's considered a sin to venture into the backcountry without one. I picked up and InReach mini within a few months and it came in handy pretty early on. I was climbing as a party of 3 on a relatively remote alpine wall when 1 member of our team was hit with rockfall (classic kiwi choss). After evaluation of the injuries and realization of the complications and risk of self-extraction - we hit the 'OH SHIT' button. Fortunately we were located on a very large ledge system and I was able to get enough separation from the wall to make contact with the satellites. When I was next to the wall, I couldn't get anything. A standard (dumb) PLB works on a different system that works more consistently in canyons and steep terrain than the iridium system but you're obviously without the communication. If I did not have the ability to get get 10-15 meters away from the wall, I have serious doubts that SAR would have been able to pin-point our location and messaging would have been very spotty, but having semi-direct communication with the SAR team made for an incredibly efficient extraction.

So in short - know the limitations of your gear and bring the appropriate tools for the given terrain. Satellite communication devices are incredible in emergency situations and should not be overlooked as an essential part of any backcountry safety kit.

1 more + for the InReach: InReach to InReach communication is an awesome feature and has come in handy on a few trips. This obviously assumes that the people in the backcountry that you want to have communication with also have an InReach.

P B wrote:

Hate reviving old threads but I had an issue with my inReach that felt unacceptable for what I assumed were its capabilities.

I was unable to successfully send a message while at Wall Street in Moab. Context was I wanted to send an "I'm still alive" text to my family as I had forgotten to do it in Moab that morning. Even marginal cell phone service at some spots exists on Wall Street, but the inReach couldn't even get a text out?

This feels unacceptable for what climbers would expect to use the device for. Understanding that 180 degrees of the sky is blocked on Wall Street as you are right next to cliff, I would still argue most applications climbers purchase this device for would occur in similar circumstances (i.e. on a wall where half the sky is blocked). It worries me that if I'm on the Diamond and an accident happens, the device won't be able to serve its purpose.

Has anyone else had similar experiences?

Over what period of time we’re you trying to send the message? Did the message never go out? 

I had lotta issues with mine, basically wouldn't acquire a connection or would take forever to send. Called them about it, told me to plug it in, sync it, all that crap. I did, same problems. Called back, turns out there is an extra step I missed. there is kinda a second thing you do to finalize the synced updates or something. Try that for anyone who is having problems.

Mine works now.