Back Packs

[Finnish]

Has anybody ever used this method for mounting your transmitters? :?:

Does the bird have to be put out for this to be done, does anyone know how to fit these? :?:

How long can it stay on, does it have to be changed each season, cause i would really like to try this on my bird this coming season.

Cheers Lee

[Hawkmaster]

I have. They do not have to be drugged. The longest I have left one on for was a season, but once gave a chap a Sparrowhawk that wore it for 2 season, all with no problems.

I will doing my Gos and falcon again this year, but not my HH as he does break dancing with it on.

[OutFlying]

it doesn't have to "knocked out" to fit the back pack, some have managed it with the hood - others just cast the bird.

[IAmTheWeasel]

Marshall used a sedative while putting on the packpacks at the NAFA meet. They claimed that the birds would pick at the pack pack alot less if they where to come around slowly off the drugs rather than abruptly with casting. To tell you the truth, I was nervous as heck watching them drug other folks gyr's and peri's just to mount a backpack set up.....There is a chance with any drug that they could have a reaction and keel over dead! They asked me if I wanted to try the first one on a red tail.....My bird would of torn it to ribbons while yanking out a ton of feathers if I did that...Not to mention I would be bleeding anytime I tried to touch her back!

[Gaz]

Marshall used a sedative while putting on the packpacks at the NAFA meet.
Was one of the worst things i ever saw,7-10 falcons all falling about coming round....total s##t :evil:

[Finnish]

That,s what put me off Gaz but they say you dont have to put the bird out now.

[BrianM]

I will doing my Gos and falcon again this year, but not my HH as he does break dancing with it on.[/quote]

:lol: :lol: phucking ****ing myself at that :cry: :D

[Hawkmaster]

He goes mad Brian! This is also where most people will see for them selves that the thing can't get hooked up as the bird can't even get a claw under it.

Some birds are OK some not, so far, the male HH and a female Gos, belonging to Kevin Pekin are the only ones that would just not allow me to have one on them.

[RabbitHawker]

Ive done seceral falcons whilst hooded on a block, I find it easier than sedated, as I've done them a bit too tight like that.
I'd never use the system on a short or braodwing though, much too high a risk of them getting caught up in cover, and unlike a tail mount it wouldn't just pull out a couple of feathers anf get free.
The expensive bit is the ribbon, I bought some from the States, as I couldn't find Teflon ribbon here.
On my female 1/4 gyr/saker I can fit a double mount on the backpack, as I like to have 2 transmitters on falcons.

[Hawkmaster]

I personally think there is less risk of a backpack getting caught up on a shortwing than on the tail, because of how it it hidden under the feathers after rousing and preening.

[Moritz]

Hi,
I would like to try the back pack with my falcon next year. Is there anyone around the area I am going to move to who has used it and would show me how to put it on the bird?

Thx
Moritz

[RabbitHawker]

The last issue of the falconer magazine, the BFC one has extensive fitting instructions. I still maintain I wouldn't use one on a shortwing or braodwing, it is all risk assessment, but this is discussed in the relevant issue of the Falconer

[Finnish]

Just rang rip off Garlands and they want £37.00 for one this sounds good not

[IAmTheWeasel]

It is the equivalent of £24 here in the US

[OutFlying]

Just rang rip off Garlands and they want £37.00 for one this sounds good not

Is that fitted ? :oops:

[OutFlying]

I personally think there is less risk of a backpack getting caught up on a shortwing than on the tail, because of how it it hidden under the feathers after rousing and preening.

Harry McElroy uses them on his birds and they fly in cover, no problems experienced. I agree the tail is more likely to get caught up in cover - due to the transmitter being more exposed. The back packs I've seen leave the transmitter nearly invisible when preen into the feathers.

[Finnish]

Just rang rip off Garlands and they want £37.00 for one this sounds good not

Is that fitted ? :oops:

You must be joking mate when i said that to girl who answerd the phone she laughed. :lol:

[IAmTheWeasel]

All this talk about the back packs, I went on the US Marshall site to have a look at the new model that is out and They have the pics up of the 05' skytrials.....Take a look as there are some GREAT photos of the birds in action. A wildlife photographer who has an incredible camera got some awsome shots! Here is the link.
http://www.marshallradio.com/falconry/fhome.asp

[Saker-Clive]

here are the pics. I romised; this is only a proto type but some of you guys can let me know what you think...........................

Dimensions = 37mm long x 18mm wide x 1.8mm thick. (leather backing is 1.2mm and the curved plastic is 0.6mm)
The ribbon is just that for the time being ribbon.

Weight wise, it doesn't even register on my scales.

[Saker-Clive]

I've just fitted the pack on him and I'm going to see how he gets on for now just with it on the block; I am hoping to take him out later this afternoon so I might give it a try!!!! By then he shlould have preened it in nicely :wink:

[Finnish]

Looks good let us no how you get on with it SS

[Saker-Clive]

Just got back from flying him with it on; both did very well. the pack and tranny stayed on and Loco flew better than before, (whether that's to do with the pack or his attitude has changed since his plop job last week).
He ranged out about 300 yards and ringed up to about 200 feet which he had not done previously.
This week I will make a few more and try to get them a little more asthetically pleasing but if it works why bother!!!!

[Finnish]

Good i'am glad it worked cause i really want to try this.

[Saker-Clive]

You gonna make your own or buy one?

[Finnish]

I'll get one from Marshall i expect mate.

[Sprout]

I'm seriously tempted by this too for this year but think I'll be buying one from Marshall also.

[Hawkmaster]

I would be wary of that nylon ribbon, it may be too abrasive?

[Saker-Clive]

It was sprayed with Teflon first; don't know if that will make any difference!!!

[OutFlying]

WW,
An advantage of using a back pack over a leg mount, is the better signal transmitted from the transmitter. Especially on a perlin where a small transmitter is used with limited range, a transmitter that is on the ground will have a very poor range - if fitted to the back it would be greatly less affected.
It also will not effect the perlins footing ability - a leg mount will.

Tail mounting on small falcons is also risky, with a high chance of loosing a feather due to the exposed aerial. 2 friends who fly perlins both suffered feather damage whilst using tailmounts - both switched to back packs. One perlin and one Barbary tiercal - used all season, flown daily with no problems.

I think they do have an advantage and sometimes new methods are looked at negatively until they become more wide spread.

[Bash]

WW,
An advantage of using a back pack over a leg mount, is the better signal transmitted from the transmitter.

You don't really believe that do you? :wink:

Tail mounting on small falcons is also risky, with a high chance of loosing a feather due to the exposed aerial. 2 friends who fly perlins both suffered feather damage whilst using tailmounts - both switched to back packs. One perlin and one Barbary tiercal - used all season, flown daily with no problems.

I don't agree at all, so we must have different flying styles as I've seen nothing but problems with back packs.

Tail mounts are the cleanest, easiest and the less stress full way to put equipment on a Falcon. Never have I seen any problems with them and I find the indication of them tangling or being capable of pulling a feather out incomprehensible. This is a tried and tested way to equip a falcon that has been practiced for centuries without any problems. Why fix something that isn't broken?

I think they do have an advantage and sometimes new methods are looked at negatively until they become more wide spread.

What advantage? Why fix something that isn't broken?

[Hawkmaster]

OutFlying wrote:WW,
An advantage of using a back pack over a leg mount, is the better signal transmitted from the transmitter.


You don't really believe that do you?
Scientific fact, just look at how radio waves work and anyone with common sense can see it is better overall. If the bird if flying then maybe a leg is better, but overall, NO WAY!

I've seen nothing but problems with back packs.
Like what, I have used back packs since 1999 and seen none!

I believe both tail mounting and back packing are the way forward.

[OutFlying]

[quote=OutFlying]WW,
An advantage of using a back pack over a leg mount, is the better signal transmitted from the transmitter.

You don't really believe that do you? :wink:



Easy to prove the better transmitter position regarding signal output, go and put a transmitter on the ground and put the same transmitter 3" above ground level.

[Wightwings]

just had a good look at the Marshall web site as i've just bought a Marshall set. thirty pages of piccies....looks good and they give a good argument but i still have to ask WHY.......better signal........doubt that very much....if a tail mount can get snagged why cant this.....if a tail mount does sng top a tree the bird pulls out a feather and is free, snag this and the bird is trapped........

like i say each to their own it just seems a new gimmick to me. :roll:

[Hawkmaster]

i still have to ask WHY.......better signal
Answered above .

It will also not snag if the antenna is short as it lays on the back and not past the tail or under the feet, while flying.

[Bash]

[quote]Scientific fact, just look at how radio waves work and anyone with common sense can see it is better overall. If the bird if flying then maybe a leg is better, but overall, NO WAY!

Let me get this right? Outflying led me to believe that a back pack will give a better signal than a leg mount? Is this what you are telling me? If it's not then I'm at a loss as to why the subject of signal strengh was mentioned regarding tail and leg mounts?

[quote]Like what, I have used back packs since 1999 and seen none!

I believe both tail mounting and back packing are the way forward.

I have seen a peregrine caught up in Heather and have seen a very distressed and exchausted Sparrowhawk with a talon trapped in the harness of a back pack.

I would agree with you that tail mounting is the correct way (as it has been for centuries) but we will have to disagree on the back pack. As I said, why change something that isn't broken?

The only thing on a Falcons legs should be jesses.

[OutFlying]

I already stated why back pack mounted transmitters have greater range.
Are you saying no one ever has problems with tail mounting ? if so strongly disagree from personnel experience.

**** can happen at any opportunity and hawks have been found with their beaks caught on their tail mounts - so anything can happen. You state the only thing on a falcons legs are jesses, yet now people choose to fly without jesses ( very good chance of theses snagging on anything) and I would like to bet the chances of jesses getting caught are greater than a back pack snagging.

[Bash]

I already stated why back pack mounted transmitters have greater range.
Are you saying no one ever has problems with tail mounting ? if so strongly disagree from personnel experience.

**** can happen at any opportunity and hawks have been found with their beaks caught on their tail mounts - so anything can happen. You state the only thing on a falcons legs are jesses, yet now people choose to fly without jesses ( very good chance of theses snagging on anything) and I would like to bet the chances of jesses getting caught are greater than a back pack snagging.

Can you explain why they have a greater range again as I'm a little confused with your description and by Hawkmasters reply?

I'm not saying that there are never any problems with tail mounting. I'm sure there are but from what I have found they are less common and no where near as stressfull to the birds when problems occur. It's tried and tested.

Whether you fly with jesses or not, it's up to you but you then mention that there is a good chance of these snagging and the chance of a jess getting caught is greater than a back pack, What is there on a tranditional field Falcon jess to get snagged? Nothing that I can see? I can't see your argument here? You fly in open country side with jesses on don't you? It would be common sence, within the countryside that you fly your Falcon, on what if any jesses you put on her? The same decision cannot be made with a back pack can it.

[OutFlying]

The reason it will have greater range (whilst your hawk is on the floor) is that a tailmounted or leg mounted transmitter aerial will be grounded thus reducing the range, when back packed CORRECTLY the aerial will not touching the ground.

I will try to put a picture up of a barbary flying with it fitted.

[Bash]

The reason it will have greater range (whilst your hawk is on the floor) is that a tailmounted or leg mounted transmitter aerial will be grounded thus reducing the range, when back packed CORRECTLY the aerial will not touching the ground.

I will try to put a picture up of a barbary flying with it fitted.

I see were I was getting confused now. That is a lot clearer thank you. Most aerials are shielded and so should not have any affect if it touches the ground. This of course depends on which manufacture your transmitter is from. :wink: Thanks Outflying. :)

[OutFlying]

Bash put any make of transmitter on the ground and its performance is affected :shock:

[OutFlying]

If I'm wrong please tell me which make is not affected ? and I can buy one.

[Bash]

Bash put any make of transmitter on the ground and its performance is affected :shock:

OK. I thought the shielded aerial wouldn't be affected where as a normal one is, I will stand corrected.

[OutFlying]

Bash, I think that is a seperate problem more to do with the effect on the tuning of the circuit and not the same as the transmitter actually being on the ground.

Biotrack quote that tracking distances whilst on the ground will be approx 1/4 of the normal distance. If you then add wet grass etc this will be further decreased.

[Bash]

Thanks for the info Outflying.

[Bash]

if a tail mount can get snagged why cant this.....if a tail mount does sng top a tree the bird pulls out a feather and is free, snag this and the bird is trapped........

like i say each to their own it just seems a new gimmick to me. :roll:

I agree with you WW.

[OutFlying]

No problem Bash,

[Sprout]

New gimmick? Maybe. I've not tried it before but sounds good to me so I'm going to give it a go this season. Saying if it's not broken don't fix it means were never going to improve. That way we'd never be using telemetry and still using fixed traditional jesses rather than aylmeri and removeable mew/field jess. Progress is important.

[Hawkmaster]

tail mounting is the correct way (as it has been for centuries)
From that statement I was sure you were just taking the P, as I never knew there was telemetry centuries ago? :shock:

Wightwings wrote:if a tail mount can get snagged why cant this.....if a tail mount does sng top a tree the bird pulls out a feather and is free, snag this and the bird is trapped........

like i say each to their own it just seems a new gimmick to me.


I agree with you WW.
As far as it snagging, you will have to try it and you will see, before you fly the bird it is FAR less likely to get snagged as the feathers seem to form a shield over the backpack and telemetry, hence making it a smoother ride through brush. Besides as already said we can all find examples of snagged birds.

I personally try to fly all my birds naked without jesses or aylmerii, or at least no jesses but it does not always work out that way. If you have never had a flying jess snag up or momentaricatch up a bird, believe me it will happen! Just wait for that particular day when it is wet and the bird flies low over a fence or branch. I have had it happen and the flying jess does not need holes in it it binds to itself.

[OutFlying]

wasn't telemetry first leg mounted then the french clip was used for tail mounting and this had its sceptics at first.

One thing to be taken into consideration is the type of transmitter to be used for either tail or back pack - is it low profile and how long is the aerial ?

[Hawkmaster]

You are right Jim, I have also been thinking about doing a little flap that folds over the telemetry body for the Gos, just in case. But this is what it is all about hey? Improving what we do to make it safer, better and more enjoyable!

[Bash]

From that statement I was sure you were just taking the P, as I never knew there was telemetry centuries ago? :shock:



Now who's theone taking the P? :lol: :wink:

Maybe I didn't explain myself? What I meant was that we have used the tail to mount equipement for centuries not just telem but bells. The tail has been used for bells and because of it's undoubted success we now use it to mount telemetry as well.

[Wightwings]

:prayer: :prayer: :prayer: :prayer: to you all......