Pieps firmware update and upgrade - how useful?

[wolfs]

I bought the Pieps DSP over a year ago, and I haven't bothered with mailing it to SLC for the firmware update. In practice, I've only seen the ghosting issue one single time. So I didn't think it was that big a deal to just keep running the old ware.

For those of you that actually did the update - was it noticable?

Also, has anyone sprung for (or been comped) the "smart transmitter" upgrade that you're supposed to cough up 20 Euros for? Do the local reps do that as well (for a fee)?

[Jonathan S.]

Depends - what's your current s/w version? (Hold down the "?" button up startup.)
The new frequency tester is kind of neat.
But I'm concerned that the new frequency shifter ("smart transmitter") is messing up the masking function for other searching beacons. (So far I've been able to test only a searching Pulse, b/c I have only one DSP.)

[pechelman]

depending on where you are, you may be able to update it locally
check peips' website for locations

[Ermine]

I For those of you that actually did the update - was it noticable?

Yes. I have noticed greater range than before, much greater range. I have only noticed ghosting problems w/ my old Ortovox which is 80Hz off. My old Pieps is only ~10Hz off and haven't noticed ghosting issues w/ that one.

More info here:
http://www.beaconreviews.com

[Jonathan S.]

I have noticed greater range than before, much greater range.

Has this been noticed as part of any controlled test? When I conducted a range test of all the beacons currently on the market, the DSP v 2.8 already had by far the greater range for digitally processed directional indicators, outperformed only by the analog signal of the X1 and M2, and matching the initial analog signal of the Pulse & O3k. I have not yet repeated the tests with the DSP v 4.0, but seems unlikely that they could improve the range even more?

[pechelman]

Has this been noticed as part of any controlled test? When I conducted a range test of all the beacons currently on the market, the DSP v 2.8 already had by far the greater range for digitally processed directional indicators, outperformed only by the analog signal of the X1 and M2, and matching the initial analog signal of the Pulse & O3k. I have not yet repeated the tests with the DSP v 4.0, but seems unlikely that they could improve the range even more?

i too noticed when practicing that the 2.8 had tremendous range.
Signals 65-70m were commonplace. Definitely the first out of the bunch to get a signal.

Ive recently upgraded to 4.0 and havent had a chance to practice yet.
Ill for sure report back, as I too am skeptical of it actually increasing range more.

[cj001f]

I noticed better range and less ghosting when comparing to 2 none upgraded DSPs.Shortened the finn search at he enda good bit

[Ermine]

Has this been noticed as part of any controlled test?

Purely seat-of-the-pants testing for me. I've upgraded twice and didn't notice much of an improvement from the previous upgrade. This 4.0 upgrade I did notice an improvement. Like I said, still get the ghosting w/ the old out of frequency tranceivers though. I tell everyone I ski with to get a new DSP or new digital so we don't have to worry as much about the frequency decay.

[PaulB]

Like I said, still get the ghosting w/ the old out of frequency tranceivers though. I tell everyone I ski with to get a new DSP or new digital so we don't have to worry as much about the frequency decay.

As I understand it, the "ghosting" problem is not related to frequency drift, but to the fact that some analog beacons use a carrier signal which is always transmitting, even between "beeps". The DSP picks up both the actual signal and the carrier, and thinks that it has found two beacons.

You could have an old beacon with zero frequency drift, and still experience the ghosting issue. I think the DSP upgrades have, for the most part, been upgrades to the way in which these carrier signals are processed so that the multiple burial indicators and marking function works as well with analog beacons as they do with digital.

I recently got the 4.0 Smart Transmitter upgrade (which included the 3.1 update) but haven't done enough experimenting to detect any major performance changes. As a quick test on a tour this past weekend, I "searched" for my three partners while we sat around having a snack. One had an old Pieps Opti 4, one a Barryvox Opto 3000 and the other a DSP. My DSP showed that there were more than three beacons in the vicinity, most likely due to the Opti 4 being counted as two.

Starting with the other DSP and ending with the Opti 4, I was able to mark them all, and when I was done it indicated that there were no unmarked beacons present. What I don't recall is whether or not the Opti 4 showed up as an "old" beacon as indicated by one of the the stick men flashing.

[Jonathan S.]

Curious to know what kind of out-of-frequency beacons anyone has found with the 4.0 tester?
So far I've found one old F1 (kind of pale teal casing color) that was right on the edge (and which probably shouldn't be used) and one F1 (same color) that failed outright. (All the modern digital beacons I've tested have been either spot-on or +/- 15.)
These were both from a large batch of loaner beacons that our region has for avy courses. I ran out of time to test all of them since our full-size dummy probing and extrication took so long (nothing like a deep burial via snowcat and then letting the snow harden up for a couple days), but I plan to test the full fleet at another course next month.

[Ermine]

As I understand it, the "ghosting" problem is not related to frequency drift, but to the fact that some analog beacons use a carrier signal which is always transmitting, even between "beeps". The DSP picks up both the actual signal and the carrier, and thinks that it has found two beacons.

Ok, but still related to the "old" analog models.

You could have an old beacon with zero frequency drift, and still experience the ghosting issue. I think the DSP upgrades have, for the most part, been upgrades to the way in which these carrier signals are processed so that the multiple burial indicators and marking function works as well with analog beacons as they do with digital.

Trying but still not there. Hopefully, only one of your party is buried at a time, since we're all using one-at-a-time/get-the-f-out-of-the-way at the bottom skiing practices. I wonder sometimes about the latter...

[Ermine]

Curious to know what kind of out-of-frequency beacons anyone has found with the 4.0 tester?

Ortovox F1 (circa 1994?)== -70Hz drift warm, -80Hz cool, cold?
Pieps Optifinder (circa 1995?)== 0Hz drift warm, +10Hz cool, cold?

Don't think I'll even use the F1 as a loaner anymore. Not much use except for practice and even then...

Post your test results when you have time.

[Jonathan S.]

Impressive performance from the old Optifinder!

I forgot to mention a surprising result: F2, used now only for practice burials (which is the only appropriate use of an F2 these days), tested spot-on.

[PaulB]

Ortovox F1 (circa 98/99): -70 Hz warm, -90 Hz cold

I had this beacon tested by Ortovox this summer, and they gave it a clean bill of health. I was also told by the local Pieps rep that Ortovox has historically configured their beacons to be slightly off of 457kHz but still within spec, which prior to 2001 was +/- 100 Hz.

[mobygrape]

interesting thread on beacons tested for frequency drift
sorry it this has already been posted.

http://www.avalanche-center.org/phpB...opic.php?t=389