Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Emergency SOS via satellite

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 479 posts

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#401

Post by danuker »

biomcgary wrote: post #299
widforss wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm on a SAR team. We literally deployed 10 people on both PLB's and Inreaches last winter. SAR people are cheap

SAR people may largely be volunteers, but helicopters have fairly expensive operational costs. In time-sensitive situations, it is better to have two way communications (because it keeps SAR as inexpensive as possible). See my sister comment for my wife's experience.

> because it keeps SAR as inexpensive as possible

"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."

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#402

Post by modeless »

rootusrootus wrote: post #395
modeless wrote: post #382

I'm surprised there isn't much discussion here about the similar capability announced by SpaceX and T-Mobile (first of many carrier partners) earlier this year. It will not be exclusive to emergencies, and will work with unmodified existing phones, not requiring you to hold the phone a special way, other than generally having a decent view of the sky. Even if SpaceX is delayed, there are competitors working on simila…

> I'm surprised there isn't much discussion here about the similar capability announced by SpaceX and T-Mobile 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 introdu…

Distrusting a whole technology simply because you happened to hear about it first from Elon Musk is pretty silly IMO. Anyway, there's nothing impossible about it. AST Spacemobile has already demonstrated a satellite to ground link with regular cell phone hardware on one end (the space end, since it's easier to launch a phone than a giant phased array antenna, but they also did just launch a giant phased array and will demonstrate that in the next few weeks). The technology works. And T-Mobile obviously believes that too. You don't have to take Elon Musk's word for it.

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.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#403

Post by drozycki »

lxgr wrote: post #181
brookst wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it is T-Mobile and Starlink, though very early stage (just a press release[0] about "a vision to give customers a crucial additional layer of connectivity" that "aims to work" with existing phones, far as I can tell). 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 su…

"Band n53" has been widely reported in the context of various iPhone satellite rumors, but I still believe that this was actually just bad reporting: Band n53 is essentially terrestrial LTE/5G usage of Globalstar's global spectrum rights in a band that was previously designated for ground-to-space usage. Whatever the iPhone 14 is using to talk to the Globalstar satellites, I'd be extremely surprised if it looked anyt…

I remember reading that they are in fact using n53 2.4Ghz. Remember this is a fallback for areas without cell service, and a satellite signal is much weaker on the ground than any terrestrial signal.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#404

Post by Johnny555 »

katbyte wrote: post #396
Johnny555 wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem is I don't really have an off-season, nearly all year round I go on at least one hike a month that's outside of cell coverage (not too hard around here), which is why I got the InReach in the first place.

is 15$ a month really that expensive when it gets you the ability to communicate anywhere?

It's not expensive when it's compared to the alternative of not being able to call for help when there's no cell coverage.

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")

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#405

Post by throwawaylinux »

kenhwang wrote: post #362
ingalls wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, super glad to hear your friends are out of the field safe. 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.…

As someone with a bunch of idiotic friends that always find themselves needing SAR in North America. The rule of thumb within the group that has generally held true is: if you're on federal lands it's fully free, but if you're in resort, city, or state jurisdiction they'll absolutely try to claw back the costs. The SAR might be technically "free", but they'll categorize as many things under "medical emergency" as pos…

Whoa, SAR fines you if you have a medical emergency? As opposed to fire, flood, storm, natural disaster, mechanical breakdown, or just getting lost?

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#406

Post by prawn »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #325
jjtheblunt wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is asking this but the rest i know about, so i find myself thinking "what on earth do you do with a rifle-shot-dead elk?", since I have no suburban-kid idea.

Leaving aside the option to take a side-by-side/ATV/snowmobile (with skid or trailer if needed) to solve the problem with horsepower, or the option of biological horses instead of petroleum horses: 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 ~100lb…

In case this helps anyone else not from the US, a side-by-side is one of those bigger-than-a-quadbike vehicles. A buggy. Like Polaris, etc. I've seen loads on farms and trails and honestly never knew what they were called. Always assumed side-by-side was like a motorbike with a sidecar!

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#407

Post by bagels »

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote: post #386
bredren wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the unfortunate death of CNET reporter, James Kim in 2006. 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 s…

I remember that. Basically the origin of the phrase "don't rely on Google maps"

The survivors say they were using paper maps.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#409

Post by eternityforest »

SaberTail wrote: post #68
tyingq wrote: post #4

As someone who grew up in the era before mobile phones, it truly is strange to see devices that do roughly everything Captain Kirk's communicator could do. But in my lifetime, and available to average people.

I find it amusing that Star Trek didn't anticipate communicators or tricorders having a flashlight function like our phones do. When they need lights, they either carry special-purpose ones or shoot a rock with a phaser to make it glow. Generously, maybe someone did think of it, but it would have been too difficult to make a prop with a bright enough light source.

Pretty much everyone who does field work still has a flashlight. It runs down the battery and you might not want to be holding a phone if there's rain. Plus, flashlights are very fast to access. And often brighter.

Re: Emergency SOS via satellite

#410

Post by eternityforest »

When I first saw this I thought I would wait till it comes to Android before I upgrade my phone(Which is a bit past the security update period already) but if I ever do go on any serious trips outside cell range, I'll probably want a real satellite messenger anyway.

I'm really glad this exists though, a lot of people will be much safer when everyone has this.

Post reply on HN