However, on another note, I would also be really interested in practicing with the 3+ in many different multiple and close proximity burial scenarios to see if it has attempted to resolve the classic downfalls of all 3 antenna signal separating beacons (ghosting, marking/flagging problems, SLOW processing, freezing up). the technology is great in concept, but still flawed in it’s practical application. If the 3+ 100% resolves these issue, than for $350.00 we might have the holy grail of beacon technology. However, I am still skeptical. Until I get my hands on one, I think that the simplicity and reliability of a Tracker 2 like beacon with this new transmitting signal re-orientation would be the bees knees.

But like Lou and Wanabe said, we shouldn’t be getting into multiples in the first place. And indeed, a tiny percentage of backcountry skiers actually do. But if it does happen, you will more than likely be digging out dead bodies – I don’t care what kind of fancy, space-age beacon you have. What we really need is fancy, space-age shovels.

I have the Pulse beacon and agree that doing triage based on a computer isn’t a good idea. However it is one more piece of information that may at least be considered when you are the only one doing a multiple search.

Be smart!

I met ARVA representative last month and I am meeting an Ortovox rep this week. Then I will attempt to either compare or at least describe the two technologies in a post on my site.

And BTW, Arva beacons are coming to North America and very soon