Paddle Planner Forum
»
General
»
Equipment and Gear
»
Communicate when you have no cellular coverage?
 Thanks: 2 times
|
My name is Randolf Gioro. I represent a team of Canadian engineers who happen to be outdoor lovers and used to work in Motorola, Honeywell, and the aerospace industry. Dangerous situations we each experienced in the wilderness brought us together, and we came to realize that there is a serious need for better off-grind communication. Walkie-talkies are what we commonly use when there is no cell coverage. However they have no GPS. In case of an emergency, we cannot find the exact location. Satellite communication, such as DeLorme inReach, seems ideal, except that they are quite expensive, and further charge usage fees. Besides, both options are pretty heavy and bulky that we have to make a painful trade-off between safety and portability. We feel extremely astonishing that we have to trust our lives to some technologies of half a century ago like walkie-talkie and satellite communication, while nowadays’ technology can do far better. Based on the latest Internet of Things tech, we have invented Sonnet. It combines Satellite communication’ functionality with walkies-talkies’ affordability, in addition to being more portable. Without relying on cell towers, Sonnet powers up to 10km communication to: - send text, image data, and files; - share and track GPS locations; - extend internet connectivity from a base to the world outside; - create an off-grind communication network Sonnet prototype: 
When there is no coverage, Sonnet allows us to always communicate with each other no matter how harsh the conditions are. This can literally save our lives in case of an emergency. Multimedia and GPS can also improve our communication accuracy, and take group coordination to the next level. We will sell Sonnet at $89 per pair. Far cheaper than Satellite communication devices and it is one time purchase for the hardware. We would be very grateful for any feedback you guys might have! Thanks for viewing! More about us: https://www.sonnetlabs.com/ Randolf
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 28 time(s) in 22 post(s)
|
This looks like something useful for groups who get separated. It seems pretty unlikely that would happen on a backcountry canoe trip. Wilderness canoeists stay together, in part because they share things like food and tents, and in part because the permits under which they travel require them to camp together. Where such a device could come in handy is when someone is injured or for some other reason needs to communicate with the outside world. However, outfitters, park rangers and law enforcement officers would have to also have the device. And communication would typically have to reach beyond 10 km.
My perspective is of course limited to my experience, so if anyone else in this forum has other ideas, please share them.
|
 2 users thanked Gavia for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
 Thanks: 98 times
Was thanked: 164 time(s) in 143 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Gavia  And communication would typically have to reach beyond 10 km. That is what I was thinking - 10km is not nearly far enough for canoe country. Nice to look at alternatives, though, since the pricing on the SPOT and InReach are high.
|
1 user thanked Ben Strege for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Thanks: 2 times
|
Originally Posted by: Gavia This looks like something useful for groups who get separated. It seems pretty unlikely that would happen on a backcountry canoe trip. Wilderness canoeists stay together, in part because they share things like food and tents, and in part because the permits under which they travel require them to camp together. Where such a device could come in handy is when someone is injured or for some other reason needs to communicate with the outside world. However, outfitters, park rangers and law enforcement officers would have to also have the device. And communication would typically have to reach beyond 10 km.
My perspective is of course limited to my experience, so if anyone else in this forum has other ideas, please share them. Thanks for the opinion!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks: 2 times
|
Originally Posted by: Ben Strege Originally Posted by: Gavia And communication would typically have to reach beyond 10 km. That is what I was thinking - 10km is not nearly far enough for canoe country. Nice to look at alternatives, though, since the pricing on the SPOT and InReach are high. Again, thanks for the opinion! In fact, what's limiting our range isn't really the technology, but the regulations. What kind of range would suffice?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks: 2 times
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Thanks: 16 times
|
If there is no ability to communicate outside of the network (ie. with emergency responders), then unfortunately this wouldn't replace the need to carry something like a Spot. However I could see that hunters may find it an attractive alternative to 2-way radios allowing them to communicate silently with others in the hunting party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks: 2 times
|
Originally Posted by: Chichi If there is no ability to communicate outside of the network (ie. with emergency responders), then unfortunately this wouldn't replace the need to carry something like a Spot. However I could see that hunters may find it an attractive alternative to 2-way radios allowing them to communicate silently with others in the hunting party. 1. We are working on a stretch goal which is to create internet connectivity on Sonnet. But you are right that Sonnet cannot replace spot right now; 2. Another usage case is to build your own backcountry communication network that is robut, free-of-charge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 28 time(s) in 22 post(s)
|
RandolfG: Again, thanks for the opinion! In fact, what's limiting our range isn't really the technology, but the regulations. What kind of range would suffice? To be useful as a rescue device, the range would have to be at least as far as the nearest outfitter. That could be over 10 miles in the Boundary Waters, and a lot farther in Quetico.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks: 2 times
|
Originally Posted by: Gavia RandolfG: Again, thanks for the opinion! In fact, what's limiting our range isn't really the technology, but the regulations. What kind of range would suffice? To be useful as a rescue device, the range would have to be at least as far as the nearest outfitter. That could be over 10 miles in the Boundary Waters, and a lot farther in Quetico. Hi Gavia, If you have a radio license then you can buy Sonnet and modify its software to extend the range to as long as 15km. The fact is, we are capable of extending the peer-to-peer range to as far as 50km IF we don't care about the law and the safety of our dear backers/customers. It is really legislative restrictions currently stopping us from having a longer range here.....we use license-free frequencies and the fact is laws all around the world impose certain power output restriction on devices using these license-free frequencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Thanks: 10 times
Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
|
Having experienced a very near medical emergency on my last Quetico trip, I'm convinced that the only truly indispensable electronic device on a canoe trip is one that is capable of reaching someone who can send a plane or helicopter. Admittedly, there have been times when one canoe would head across a lake to check out a campsite and a two-way radio would have been nice. On the other hand, we always seemed to have gotten by with pre-arranged signals: paddle waving or whistles.
In my mind, simple plastic or metal police whistle on cord around the neck is a more valuable piece of communications gear than a two-way radio. Take the scenario of two canoes fighting a head wind, one capsizes and the people in the other are so busy fighting the wind, they don't see the problem and shouts don't carry in the wind. Try to use a two-way radio in that situation.
Actually, this whole thread of posts brings up a more basic question. Namely, what is canoeing about anyway? For me, part of the lure of canoeing is about being away from a world where supposedly intelligent and social human beings sit side by side pecking away at some Silicon Valley gadget instead of talking to each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Thanks: 41 times
Was thanked: 5 time(s) in 4 post(s)
|
I can relate the the previous comment about a 2-way radio. My and I were heading across Bat Lake and suddenly he heard a plump sound. It was his 2-way radio falling into the water. In that case what good does a single 2-way radio do anyone any good. On a couple of my trip, others and myself have taken our cell phone to see if we could text our loved ones back at home. Some of the times that was possible but most time it did not work. On our last trip a member of the crew had his cell phone with him and it helped us out in locating our location. We thought we lost but because of the higher waters levels one of the portages was not there leading to believe that we were not where we thought we were. With the use of his cell phone (He is more tech savvy then me) we were able to locate our exact locate. I take my cell phone not necessarily for communication but taking pictures. I agree being in the wilderness is not a place to bring all the tech toys but its a place to come and enjoy nature at it's fullest..
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Users browsing this topic |
|
Guest (8)
|
Paddle Planner Forum
»
General
»
Equipment and Gear
»
Communicate when you have no cellular coverage?
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
