Cell phones and hiking

[Tom Rankin]

Fascinating. I had problems and was told it was because I was equidistant between two towers and bounced between CIngular and Verizon. I thought at the time they were trying to snow me, but maybe they were telling the truth.

The engineer in me wonders, though, if a cell phone can function while in range of a few towers, why too many towers as on Ranier would cause a problem.

I had 6 bars on Sawteeth once, but the call would not go thru. I was told that when the signal is strong, the phone uses less power to send, and vice-versa.

I've also heard that if you can reach too many towers, your call might be blocked by the carrier, suspicious that you have cloned your phone.

 

[Quack]

As for those that use their cell on peaks or trails for ordinary conversation, if they're talking in a normal low voice, is their any real difference between a person in a conversation on a phone versus a conversation with other people on the peak? If their voices are low, its actually better than hearing a conversation between two people since their is only one person you can hear, if they talk in a low voice.

I feel the same way, it just doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother others. The thing that gets me heated up are the ring tones. When I reach a summit, I feel like I've escaped all that crap that goes along with the M-F,9-5 drudgery, but the ring of a cell phone can snap me out of that very quickly. That's when I get what the girlfriend calls "the rage".

 

[DougPaul]

The engineer in me wonders, though, if a cell phone can function while in range of a few towers, why too many towers as on Ranier would cause a problem.

The towers have to coordinate with each other--one tower takes your phone and the others stay off the frequency (or time-slot depending on the mode). The system assumes that you are on the ground and therefore the coodination only needs to be local. If you can reach too many towers, the coordination breaks down. You might get multiple towers answering your phone causing it to become confused. Your phone can also cause interference by transmitting into cells that have not cleared your frequency (or time-slot).

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert in cell phone systems. Just an electrical engineer with some knowledge. The above involves some educated guesses.

Doug

 

[sierra]

I guess Im old school I do not advocate cell phones in the backcountry at all. As some previous posters have stated they are now used as part of a first aid kit. Self reliance is a fundimental component of backcountry use, you should get yourself in and get yourself out imo.
Last year I broke my ankle 6 miles in, my phone was in my car where it belonged. I took 12 advil, used my poles as a crutch and hobbled out in 13 hours or so (over a 14er).
I care less about people talking on them in the backcountry, then I do about them using them for calling for help. I know many of you feel this may seem harsh, but thats because your very civilized and that is the problem.

 

[bobandgeri]

In talking to a ranger at Baxter State Park we learned that they appreciate hikers reporting injuries via a cell phone as it allows them to respond quicker and with the correct equipement. They also have been able to talk the caller through first aid procedures until they can arrive.

 

[imarchant]

I guess Im old school I do not advocate cell phones in the backcountry at all. As some previous posters have stated they are now used as part of a first aid kit. Self reliance is a fundimental component of backcountry use, you should get yourself in and get yourself out imo.
Last year I broke my ankle 6 miles in, my phone was in my car where it belonged. I took 12 advil, used my poles as a crutch and hobbled out in 13 hours or so (over a 14er).
I care less about people talking on them in the backcountry, then I do about them using them for calling for help. I know many of you feel this may seem harsh, but thats because your very civilized and that is the problem.

This is a valid point if people are using the cell phone in place of proper equipment and planning. But I think it is a great addition to the other required items.

 

[chomp]

In talking to a ranger at Baxter State Park we learned that they appreciate hikers reporting injuries via a cell phone as it allows them to respond quicker and with the correct equipement. They also have been able to talk the caller through first aid procedures until they can arrive.

That is interesting since cell phone use is banned in the park:

http://www.baxterstateparkauthority.com/rules/allrules.html

25. AUDIO DEVICES: Audio devices such as radios, televisions, cassette players, or cellular telephones may not be operated within the Park.

 

[Warren]

Self reliance is a fundimental component of backcountry use, you should get yourself in and get yourself out imo.

I so agree with self reliance being fundamental to the backcountry experience. I do think that those of us who travel the backcountry should be mentally prepared to get themselves out of whatever they get themselves into.

But is a cell, kept as a first aid item all that different from a whistle or other signaling device in regards to self reliance? A safe note, signal mirror, trail register or a signal fire all nip at the edges of self reliance.

Anyways, I'm last person in NYC without a cell and while I've considered one for winter driving to trailheads I haven't viewed it as a desired piece of emergency gear, though I have on occasion had a partner bring theirs in during winter trips if I thought it may be useful. I don't count on it though.

 

[Tom Rankin]

That is interesting since cell phone use is banned in the park:

http://www.baxterstateparkauthority.com/rules/allrules.html

25. AUDIO DEVICES: Audio devices such as radios, televisions, cassette players, or cellular telephones may not be operated within the Park.

I hope they don't includes 2-way radios in that ban! I've used them in BSP to communicate with slower members of a large group. I don't remember if I was in sight of a ranger at the time.

 

[Remix]

I think they will make an exception if you are phoning in an emergency incident.

 

[Neil]

I think cell phones are a very strong metaphor of all that is the opposite of self-reliance and expertise in woodcraft and survival. Hence this interesting discussion.


Personally I couldn't give a rat's posterior whether someone takes a cell phone (or a gps) on a hike. I couldn't give a flying whatever if they are viscerally opposed to the things either. You see, I couldn't give a hoot. You do your thing in this free world and I'll do mine. As for wanting to be self-reliant you may as well carry the blasted thing along with all the other high tech stuff we have with us. After all, Daniel Boone had his rifle didn't he?


Last February on the way down Herbert Brook after doing Marshall my buddy took a serious tumble 20 vertical feet straight down a steep embankment. Luckily, he wasn't seriously hurt. Had he banged his head and gone into a coma, all sweaty, at 10 degrees F at 4 in the afternoon I know for sure that me, his wife and his children would have wanted me to able to contact help ASAP. As it was I would have had to choose between hiking out another 5 miles or so then driving 30 mins. to a phone or staying with my friend (more obvious choice) until we were reported missing and a rescue op. got organized the next day.

 

[Frosty]

I've also heard that if you can reach too many towers, your call might be blocked by the carrier, suspicious that you have cloned your phone.

Sigh. One more thing I don't understand. I have about five extension phones on my home line, and the phone company doesn't care. If I make a long distance call from any extension phone, they just charge me for a long distance call. THey are happy and so am I.

But for some reason, the same isn't true of cell phones. I can't have two phones with the same number and let the billing department just charge me for calls made from either phone. I'm not sure where the analogy breaks down, but it is apparent that they would rather lose the opportunity to charge me a roaming fee than chance me having "cloned" my phone.

 

[DougPaul]

Sigh. One more thing I don't understand. I have about five extension phones on my home line, and the phone company doesn't care. If I make a long distance call from any extension phone, they just charge me for a long distance call. THey are happy and so am I.

But for some reason, the same isn't true of cell phones. I can't have two phones with the same number <snip>

At home, all of your phones share a single line. You cannot make two (or more) independent phone calls simultaneously. All of your extensions look like a single phone to the phone system and thus a single number suffices.

Each cell phone moves independently of the other. They might be in the same cell, they might not. They can make simultaneous independent calls. They can also call each other. Thus they look like two independent phones to the phone system and require two distinct phone numbers.

Doug

 

[Frosty]

At home, all of your phones share a single line. You cannot make two (or more) independent phone calls simultaneously. All of your extensions look like a single phone to the phone system and thus a single number suffices.

Each cell phone moves independently of the other. They might be in the same cell, they might not. They can make simultaneous independent calls. They can also call each other. Thus they look like two independent phones to the phone system and require two distinct phone numbers.

Doug

But does it really matter to thephone company if I make two long distance calls simultaneously or serially? Either way I make two calls and they charge me for two calls. I fail to see the problem. (Not arguing with you, I'm sure you are right about their reason, I just don't understand why it matters).

Calling each other when both have the same number would be tough. Wouldn't the caller get a busy signal?

I guess it doesn't matter, and I seem to have dragged this topic way off to the side, so I won't even think about how using a cell phone with a web browser and web phone would fit into the rules ...

 

[DougPaul]

But does it really matter to thephone company if I make two long distance calls simultaneously or serially? Either way I make two calls and they charge me for two calls. I fail to see the problem. (Not arguing with you, I'm sure you are right about their reason, I just don't understand why it matters).

Calling each other when both have the same number would be tough. Wouldn't the caller get a busy signal?

I guess it doesn't matter, and I seem to have dragged this topic way off to the side, so I won't even think about how using a cell phone with a web browser and web phone would fit into the rules ...

I gave you a technical answer as to why cell phones need distinct numbers.

You will have to talk to the phone company about their billing policies.

Doug

 

[Nessmuk]

Last February on the way down Herbert Brook after doing Marshall my buddy took a serious tumble 20 vertical feet straight down a steep embankment. Luckily, he wasn't seriously hurt. Had he banged his head and gone into a coma, all sweaty, at 10 degrees F at 4 in the afternoon I know for sure that me, his wife and his children would have wanted me to able to contact help ASAP. As it was I would have had to choose between hiking out another 5 miles or so then driving 30 mins. to a phone or staying with my friend (more obvious choice) until we were reported missing and a rescue op. got organized the next day.

I don't think the question is whether to carry a phone for emergency purposes if you so choose. If it works when you need it most, then it is worth everything to you at that moment and is one more postitive example to post. If it doesn't work, then we probably won't hear the story.

As I see it, rational arguments come down to just 2...
The first and most serious is the person who feels in a recreational situation that he or she can make the judgement to take risks he or she would not otherwise do, since they know they have the security of external electronic assistance to bail them out. Dangerous thinking indeed. A similar argument may apply to carrying a GPS as a "crutch" (more reliant upon than an "aid") to what adequate map and compass skills should already completely provide to the wilderness navigator.

The second is what have traditionally been wild places of solitude and simplicity being ever increasingly crowded with those attemping to bring civilization with them. As Nessmuk said in 1920 about simplicity of wild places... "We do not go to the green woods and crystal waters to 'rough it', we go to smooth it. We get it rough enough at home; in towns and cities; in shops, offices, stores, banks - anywhere that we may be placed with the necessity always present of being on time and up to our work; of providing for the dependent ones; of keeping up, catching up, or getting left..." In other words, he says leave all that stuff in body and spirit at home.

Who could have predicted cell phones or GPS units when Nessmuk wrote this in 1920? What can we predict we will take with us into whatever has become of the "wilderness" in year 2085 to make life easier and safer? Personal aero machines monitoring our every step in case we twist an ankle, or maybe even instantaneous molecular disassemblers/transporters to bail us out? At some point maybe we just don our virtual reality helmets to implant the full memory experience and we don't even bother with getting our feet wet.

Not necessarily making judgements here, just spinning thoughts....

 

[Neil]

What can we predict we will take with us into whatever has become of the "wilderness" in year 2085 to make life easier and safer? Personal aero machines monitoring our every step in case we twist an ankle, or maybe even instantaneous molecular disassemblers/transporters to bail us out?

I wonder if there will be a gps that somehow lays a "virtual" line (like the ones showing the line of scrimmage on TV) down on the ground that runs between your current position and your next waypoint. All you'd have to do is follow it.

 

[DougPaul]

I wonder if there will be a gps that somehow lays a "virtual" line (like the ones showing the line of scrimmage on TV) down on the ground that runs between your current position and your next waypoint. All you'd have to do is follow it.

It's called a bearing to a waypoint...

(In a Garmin unit, just execute a "goto" on the waypoint.)

When following a route (sequence of waypoints), the Garmin GPSes show a course line (the line connecting the waypoints) regardless of the user's location. I wish they had the option of showing a bearing to the next waypoint of a route (in addition to the course line).

Doug

 

[bobandgeri]

When following a route (sequence of waypoints), the Garmin GPSes show a course line (the line connecting the waypoints) regardless of the user's location. I wish they had the option of showing a bearing to the next waypoint of a route (in addition to the course line).
Doug

Doug - on our Garmin GPS - it shows the bearing to the next waypoint on a differant screen as well as your current course.

 

[DougPaul]

Doug - on our Garmin GPS - it shows the bearing to the next waypoint on a differant screen as well as your current course.

Thanks. The compass screen, I presume. (You have the option of choosing bearing or course on this display. Gives you aircraft RDF (radio direction finder) or HSI (horizontal situation indicator) style displays.) I'll have to check it out next time the situation occurs.

It is also possible that Garmin has changed the displays beteen models too.

Since I have a mapping GPS, I usually just watch the route on the map display. Works fine until you are far enough off course that the course line is off the screen. (This usually occurs when driving so I don't have enough spare attention to play with the GPS... But I just follow the road and (surprise!) I get there.) Would prefer that I could add the bearing line to this display.

Methinks we are wandering off topic.

Doug