4 ms·

I am a hiker and a ham and I disagree with this advice. I carried a ham radio while hiking for years and they were never a useful safety device. Here in the PNW

I am a hiker and a ham and I disagree with this advice. I carried a ham radio while hiking for years and they were never a useful safety device. Here in the PNW, anywhere I was prominent enough to reach a repeater or another ham on the calling frequency, I also had plenty of cell signal. Whenever I was off the ridgelines and down in valleys, I wouldn’t be able to reach anyone with either method. Both cell phones and handheld ham radios are roughly line of sight, and when you are down in an uninhabited valley without cell coverage, it also quite doubtful there is another ham listening. I swapped carrying a ham radio for a Garmin inReach a few years ago and it has been far more useful. I pay an annual service charge, but in return I can let my partner know I’m safe a few times a day, and I can use it to arrange for rides, neither of which I could do via ham. I have never had a problem getting reception, and it’s a much smaller, lighter device, and it recharges via USB so I never worry about spare batteries. There are some ham specific activities for carrying a radio on the trail, like summits on the air, but if you are just trying to go hiking, get an inreach.

gh02t 4y ago
Yeah I agree with you on this one, a radio as a safety device on a hike is secondary at best unless mayyyyybe if you're carrying a QRP HF rig like an IC705 that can actually reach quite a ways or you leave a portable repeater at camp. In my original comment I actually meant just for talking to people, especially if you are hiking with other hams and can do stuff like GPS beaconing to each other. IMO an HT is still a better experience than a phone for communicating back and forth short-ish range on the move. Getting weather beacons from APRS and NOAA is also nice though of course there are other ways to do that.
ShakataGaNai 4y ago
Fair. And your iPhone can now contact satellites as well.
int_19h 4y ago
I concur with your assessment of handheld transceivers as a way to report emergencies. But if you end up somewhere off the trail, wouldn't it still be useful after you use your Garmin (or, in my case, a SARSAT PLB) to request assistance, to be able to communicate with SAR once they're in the area? I vaguely recall a situation like that in Oregon. This sort of thing doesn't require a fancy set, though. Something tiny and crappy like UV-3R would do just fine and is much more compact to carry than your typical handheld.

gh02t 4y ago

Yeah I agree with you on this one, a radio as a safety device on a hike is secondary at best unless mayyyyybe if you're carrying a QRP HF rig like an IC705 that can actually reach quite a ways or you leave a portable repeater at camp. In my original comment I actually meant just for talking to people, especially if you are hiking with other hams and can do stuff like GPS beaconing to each other. IMO an HT is still a better experience than a phone for communicating back and forth short-ish range on the move. Getting weather beacons from APRS and NOAA is also nice though of course there are other ways to do that.

ShakataGaNai 4y ago

Fair. And your iPhone can now contact satellites as well.

int_19h 4y ago

I concur with your assessment of handheld transceivers as a way to report emergencies. But if you end up somewhere off the trail, wouldn't it still be useful after you use your Garmin (or, in my case, a SARSAT PLB) to request assistance, to be able to communicate with SAR once they're in the area? I vaguely recall a situation like that in Oregon. This sort of thing doesn't require a fancy set, though. Something tiny and crappy like UV-3R would do just fine and is much more compact to carry than your typical handheld.