ELTs are trash

[Tantalum]

I've often doubted just how much of a lifesaver the ELT is, or can be, and if it's ever actually saved anyone's life..

Seems like a very fragile and delicate setup back there and if you crash somewhere that you have no cell signal I highly doubt that little woop woop sound will get you any kind of meaningful help

I've reported two different ELT sounds to ATC when flying (around the Needles area (EED VOR), and from what I'm aware, neither were taken too seriously and both turned out to be something going off incorrectly in someone's derelict plane rotting on the ramp

Outside of airliners and ATC, how many people monitor 121.5 and might actually hear it?

Just another antiquated tech that we're forced to keep in our planes. I can get a PLB off Amazon for a few hundred bucks.. that should satisfy the ELT requirement. Hell, I've rented planes that have an owner installed SPOT in the back

Seems for once I'm not alone in my thinking here!

https://www.avweb.com/insider/its-time-to-sunset-the-elt-requirement/

Time to throw this 50 year old trash and the associated requirement in the garbage (or the toilet!)

Does the FAA make EA people install one? If no that's just one more reason to go EA (I'm looking at you twin velocity!)

 

[Radar Contact]

I thought they already banned the manufacture/selling and are phasing 121.5’s out. 406 doesn’t need someone to hear, report, triangulate, spot, etc.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Outside of airliners and ATC, how many people monitor 121.5

We all do. Right?
FDC 4/4386
"ALL AIRCRAFT OPERATING IN UNITED STATES NATIONAL AIRSPACE, IF CAPABLE, SHALL
MAINTAIN A LISTENING WATCH ON VHF GUARD 121.5 OR UHF 243.0."

But, yea.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

You do know there are 406 MHz ELTs that broadcast your position to satellites for S&R, right?

We carry a SPOT and the 406 ELT. The problem with SPOT is that it isn't that great at maintaining a good satellite lock in a high-wing plane. You can keep it on the dash, but if it falls on the floor, it will likely lose lock. With the 406 installed in back, if I'm in trouble, I know I can quickly hit the panel switch without monkeying with the SOS button on the SPOT. The SPOT is in case I need to move away from the wreck, and for general tracking that can be shared with flight service (which is a really nice service to have).

 

[RyanB]

We all do. Right?

Except those of us with a single COM/NAV.

 

[wanttaja]

Does the FAA make EA people install one? If no that's just one more reason to go EA (I'm looking at you twin velocity!)

14CFR 91.207 excludes SOME Experimental aircraft, but not Experimental Amateur-Built nor Experimental Exhibition ones.

It DOES exclude single-seat airplanes of any certification category...like the one owned by yours truly.

Actually, I do have one, installed by the original builder. I test it every year, and feed it new batteries every two years. Probably never will need it. But the ~$50 every two years is trivial.

If the FCC manages to ban the older 121.5 MHz units like mine, I won't replace it with a 406 MHz model.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[hindsight2020]

As long as it doesn't drive the requirement to install a 406, I'm all for it. 121 doesn't bother me back there, and the unit is easy to swap D cells just like any household electronics. 406 ELTs otoh are more trouble than they're worth to me AND they require a higher premium to install. No thanks. A PLB when I decide to go out of cell phone range or into a water mission will do me just fine a la carte, plus I can take it with me for more pedestrian pursuits if so inclined.

I kinda rolled my eyes initially when @EdFred said he sold his comanche over ADSB-Out, but honestly, I get it. We all have our lines, and I'd probably exit stage over a 406 mandate at this juncture, downsize the seat count and go EAB. I pinched my nose with ADSB-Out since my destinations would have made owning my family travel airplane moot, so I acquiesced with the cheapest option. Certainly not cheap in pedestrian value dollars though; as the kid has gotten older I've become more sensitive to the relative value of my hard earned dollars when invested in family vice this overpriced regulatory kabuki.

At any rate, a 406 mandate would be a bridge too far me. I don't fly the rec can often enough as it is, having to add false activation scolding to my household chores plate would be further disincentive to participate in this thing. This S--t is supposed to be fun, and it's getting harder to get there in the current stasis.

 

[Tantalum]

14CFR 91.207 excludes SOME Experimental aircraft, but not Experimental Amateur-Built nor Experimental Exhibition ones.

Interesting, thanks! Would love to get more involved and learn more about EA the next few years

 

[Tantalum]

A PLB when I decide to go out of cell phone range or into a water mission will do me just fine a la carte, plus I can take it with me for more pedestrian pursuits if so inclined.

That's exactly my thinking as well. If you have to leave the wreck, or worst case scenario the plane stinks and you're treading water the PLB stays with you. Just seems like so much more of a logical option

If they're hell bent on requiring this, have it be like your medical or something.. carry a PLB with you. Or not. We're not commercial carriers, heck, we don't even have to take life jackets or stay within glide range (although it's recommended)

 

[schmookeeg]

Isn't a 406 ELT basically just a permanently installed PLB? You're saying ELTs are trash, and I agree for all values of ELT that are 121.5 based, but to hate the requirement while choosing to carry a personal PLB seems strange to me. Like, you're acknowledging the value of a GPS+Sat tracking beacon. The FAA is saying if you reinstall an ELT in a plane, make it a good one, but (lol) "You can keep your 121.5 ELT if you want to"

My artex 406 was like $500. It's way cheaper compliance than ADS-B was.

 

[asicer]

Isn't a 406 ELT basically just a permanently installed PLB?

Not exactly. The key differences are that PLB antennas don’t inadvertently detach when you need it and the activation switch doesn’t inadvertently flip when you don’t need it. A couple other minor differences are that PLB’s sink underwater less often and are a little less likely to burn up in a fire if the wearer made it out ok.

 

[Mtns2Skies]

I kinda rolled my eyes initially when @EdFred said he sold his comanche over ADSB-Out, but honestly, I get it.

You really didn't read between the lines on that one did you?
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N727DS

You do know there are 406 MHz ELTs that broadcast your position to satellites for S&R, right?

We carry a SPOT and the 406 ELT. The problem with SPOT is that it isn't that great at maintaining a good satellite lock in a high-wing plane. You can keep it on the dash, but if it falls on the floor, it will likely lose lock. With the 406 installed in back, if I'm in trouble, I know I can quickly hit the panel switch without monkeying with the SOS button on the SPOT. The SPOT is in case I need to move away from the wreck, and for general tracking that can be shared with flight service (which is a really nice service to have).

Don't use SPOT:
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/spot-failure.117299/


Like most of the regs in the FAR/AIM, it's not to protect you. It's to protect your pax. What about when you crash, die and didn't tell your pax about your PLB? Well then the ELT (particularly a 406 ELT) would be pretty nifty to those you left behind.

 

[Tantalum]

but to hate the requirement while choosing to carry a personal PLB seems strange to me. Like, you're acknowledging the value of a GPS+Sat tracking beacon.

For sure, but there should be an "either - or" type option. I've always suspected that ELTs have limited value and feel much safer with a PLB onboard. A common "stressful" flight for me is Catalina.. or big open stretches of desert flying east out of here. In the desert the ELT might work but if I go down in the water I'm screwed. Having a PLB on my belt just seems to make so much more sense..

The typical PLB also seems much more stout and "crash" proof then the ELT arrangements I've seen in planes

 

[Tantalum]

Like most of the regs in the FAR/AIM, it's not to protect you. It's to protect your pax. What about when you crash, die and didn't tell your pax about your PLB? Well then the ELT (particularly a 406 ELT) would be pretty nifty to those you left behind.

Theoretically, yes. But how many people has an ELT demonstrably saved? The CAPs gets lambasted often but there are some good examples of genuine caps saves (not just the "well maybe he could have glided down") - like the guy who's family pulled it after he had a stroke

 

[Mtns2Skies]

Theoretically, yes. But how many people has an ELT demonstrably saved?

I don't have the numbers, nor the time to look up those numbers. Presumably it's more applicable in the Rockies and Alaska more-so than SoCal.

 

[Tantalum]

I don't have the numbers, nor the time to look up those numbers. Presumably it's more applicable in the Rockies and Alaska more-so than SoCal.

Actually, I think AvWeb may have done the work for us

As long as it doesn't drive the requirement to install a 406, I'm all for it. 121 doesn't bother me back there, and the unit is easy to swap D cells just like any household electronics. 406 ELTs otoh are more trouble than they're worth to me AND they require a higher premium to install. No thanks. A PLB when I decide to go out of cell phone range or into a water mission will do me just fine a la carte, plus I can take it with me for more pedestrian pursuits if so inclined.

I kinda rolled my eyes initially when @EdFred said he sold his comanche over ADSB-Out, but honestly, I get it. We all have our lines, and I'd probably exit stage over a 406 mandate at this juncture, downsize the seat count and go EAB. I pinched my nose with ADSB-Out since my destinations would have made owning my family travel airplane moot, so I acquiesced with the cheapest option. Certainly not cheap in pedestrian value dollars though; as the kid has gotten older I've become more sensitive to the relative value of my hard earned dollars when invested in family vice this overpriced regulatory kabuki.

At any rate, a 406 mandate would be a bridge too far me. I don't fly the rec can often enough as it is, having to add false activation scolding to my household chores plate would be further disincentive to participate in this thing. This S--t is supposed to be fun, and it's getting harder to get there in the current stasis.

Either way, I am not saying we don't need emergency locator services. But if a PLB is good enough for hikers, backpackers, sailers, etc., it should be good enough for pilots too

 

[Dan Thomas]

Seems like a very fragile and delicate setup back there and if you crash somewhere that you have no cell signal I highly doubt that little woop woop sound will get you any kind of meaningful help

The last 121.5 satellites went dead a long time ago. There is good 406 coverage. The cell system has nothing to do with it at all.

The rules for 406 mounting are far more stringent than the 121.5 rules, and yet, in about half the airplanes I worked on, that nice 406 was just screwed to the old 121.5 mount, which is not only totally inadequate for surviving a crash, but the crash itself can produce all sorts of stuff that prevents the G-switch's triggering. The new rules demand that the mount not move more than a tenth of an inch with a 100-pound pull in any direction, which is close to a 100-G crash. The antenna has to be able to withstand similar loadings, and the ELT and antenna are to be attached to the same section of fuselage, or if the cable crosses a rivet seam, a steel cable is attached between the two sections to prevent tearing apart of the antenna cable. It's all in the installation manual that comes with every ELT, but it looks like a lot of installers ignore it. Why do they bother installing some expensive lifesaving device if they're not going to be able to rely on it? Might as well attach your ballistic parachute to the airframe with duct tape.

A PLB is only good if you're conscious enough to set it off. Crashes tend to incapacitate the occupants. Even then, if both legs are broken and you can't get out of the airplane, will that PLB be able to see the sky to reach the satellite?

ELTs do have their failings. Here in Canada they must be tested and recertified yearly by an avionics shop or by someone with relevant certification to do so. Batteries must be replaced on the manufacturer's schedule. ELTs that are ignored can't be relied upon. In BC alone, where I grew up, there are still something like 100 airplanes that have gone missing over the years that have never been found. It's stuff like that that drives the government to demand properly-installed and regularly-maintained ELTs.

And yes, burning or sinking airplanes tend to wreck their ELTs. But a 406 can get a location signal off within 50 seconds or so if it's operable. They will work in maybe half the cases. False alarms are way more common.

Look at the population density of Canada compared to the US:



You come flying up here and have to crash or force-land anywhere in about 95% of the country without a 406, nobody is likely to find you. All it takes is a few trees to hide an airplane. A bear is more likely to find you than the SAR guys are.

 

[Tantalum]

The last 121.5 satellites went dead a long time ago. There is good 406 coverage. The cell system has nothing to do with it at all.

The rules for 406 mounting are far more stringent than the 121.5 rules, and yet, in about half the airplanes I worked on, that nice 406 was just screwed to the old 121.5 mount, which is not only totally inadequate for surviving a crash, but the crash itself can produce all sorts of stuff that prevents the G-switch's triggering. The new rules demand that the mount not move more than a tenth of an inch with a 100-pound pull in any direction, which is close to a 100-G crash. The antenna has to be able to withstand similar loadings, and the ELT and antenna are to be attached to the same section of fuselage, or if the cable crosses a rivet seam, a steel cable is attached between the two sections to prevent tearing apart of the antenna cable. It's all in the installation manual that comes with every ELT, but it looks like a lot of installers ignore it. Why do they bother installing some expensive lifesaving device if they're not going to be able to rely on it? Might as well attach your ballistic parachute to the airframe with duct tape.

A PLB is only good if you're conscious enough to set it off. Crashes tend to incapacitate the occupants. Even then, if both legs are broken and you can't get out of the airplane, will that PLB be able to see the sky to reach the satellite?

ELTs do have their failings. Here in Canada they must be tested and recertified yearly by an avionics shop or by someone with relevant certification to do so. Batteries must be replaced on the manufacturer's schedule. ELTs that are ignored can't be relied upon. In BC alone, where I grew up, there are still something like 100 airplanes that have gone missing over the years that have never been found. It's stuff like that that drives the government to demand properly-installed and regularly-maintained ELTs.

And yes, burning or sinking airplanes tend to wreck their ELTs. But a 406 can get a location signal off within 50 seconds or so if it's operable. They will work in maybe half the cases. False alarms are way more common.

Look at the population density of Canada compared to the US:

View attachment 89005

You come flying up here and have to crash or force-land anywhere in about 95% of the country without a 406, nobody is likely to find you. All it takes is a few trees to hide an airplane. A bear is more likely to find you than the SAR guys are.

Thanks for the well written and comprehensive post

 

[Jeff Oslick]

Dan brings up a critical point. We should not be relying on the ELT g-switch to trigger when we need help. Manually triggering the ELT before you do an off-airport landing should be part of your emergency checklist. Now, if you're landing on a highway or a relatively smooth dirt road, or you know help will see you crash, then it isn't necessary. But if you're landing in a field somewhere, even if you think it might go just fine, you also might nose-over and hit your head on the ceiling and need help. A slow nose-over likely won't trigger the ELT, and the antenna might be inverted with the plane. If you triggered the ELT as soon as you knew needed to do an off-field landing, help would get to you. Worst case, you land and are ok, and you call flight service to have them cancel the search call.

 

[flyingron]

A while back I rented a 172 and found the ELT missing. I inquired about it and was told the owner had it removed because he kept setting it off on landing. I've had some hard landings in my day, but I've never set the ELT off.

 

[Morgan3820]

I'd be happy not to have one. Don't see a need where I live. If I lived in Canada , I would probably get one.

 

[weilke]

I would like to know whether there is a single case where an ELT truly 'saved' anyone's life in a situation where a PLB/epirb/saptphone/messenger wouldn't have worked just the same or better. You would have to be:
- trapped or unconscious
- the ELT would have to work
- the correct action is taken by SAR in a timely manner.
- the crash happened in a way that it doesnt get noticed some other way

In any other scenario, a plb or satellite messenger is going to be of more help than a ELT that is fraught with 99% accidental activations.

 

[wilkersk]

When I was at NAS Lemoore SAR, I got handed a project for a RAMEC (Rapid Action Minor Engineering Change) to test the effectiveness of detachable 406Mhz beacons on our UH-1N helicopters. The idea was that for aircraft operating in the mountains, they might stand a better chance of being found if the "frisbee" was punched off as the aircraft was going down, in hopes the signal wouldn't be obscured by terrain. The GPS and COSPAS/SARSAT programs were still in their infancy. And, SAR assets were managed the old fashioned way - politics!

It took me a couple of months to come up with a workable installation package. But, we got it approved and I got a little recognition for my small contribution. Of course in typical Navy fashion, I couldn't possibly extend my shore tour to see the project through the conclusion of the test period. I went back to sea-duty and never heard another word about it.

 

[Bell206]

I would like to know whether there is a single case where an ELT truly 'saved' anyone's life in a situation

the correct action is taken by SAR in a timely manner.

It doesn't quite fit your scenario but I know of an instance where the ELT activation initiated a Coast Guard scramble via a SARSAT alert before the aircraft satellite based flight tracking system did. The automatic ELT alert gave the CG a 30 min head start over the flight tracker and protocols which got them on site and actually fly away the sole "survivor" even though there was company traffic closer which converged on that location as the CG arrived.

But just to give a different perpective, here is how the commercial GOM helicopter industry views ELTs/PLBs. For aircraft emergency location both operators and customers prioritze the systems in this order: flight tracking/ELT/PLB. With the 406 ELTs it's been a toss up of the 1st two. The reason being you need to be conscious and functioning to use a PLB.

For example, on a light helicopter it will have installed an active sat-based flight tracker system, a 406 ELT, 1 each PLB in each life raft kit, and a separate PLB in the pilot's life vest. In addition, some clients require each pax to have a PLB and on larger aircraft they also install an ADELT. There are also automatic sonar pingers installed but those are more for recovery efforts. Definitely the belt and suspender approach.

Regardless having seen how each system works in real life, if it were me, I would want at a minimum of one 406 ELT and one PLB on board. It's definitely one of those things you only need when you need it, but fortunately have had the opportunity to get a 411 on these items who actually used them.

 

[dmspilot]

Dan brings up a critical point. We should not be relying on the ELT g-switch to trigger when we need help. Manually triggering the ELT before you do an off-airport landing should be part of your emergency checklist. Now, if you're landing on a highway or a relatively smooth dirt road, or you know help will see you crash, then it isn't necessary. But if you're landing in a field somewhere, even if you think it might go just fine, you also might nose-over and hit your head on the ceiling and need help. A slow nose-over likely won't trigger the ELT, and the antenna might be inverted with the plane. If you triggered the ELT as soon as you knew needed to do an off-field landing, help would get to you. Worst case, you land and are ok, and you call flight service to have them cancel the search call.

Airspeed
Best Field
Checklist
Declare
ELT

 

[Dan Thomas]

I would like to know whether there is a single case where an ELT truly 'saved' anyone's life in a situation where a PLB/epirb/saptphone/messenger wouldn't have worked just the same or better. You would have to be:
- trapped or unconscious
- the ELT would have to work
- the correct action is taken by SAR in a timely manner.
- the crash happened in a way that it doesnt get noticed some other way

In any other scenario, a plb or satellite messenger is going to be of more help than a ELT that is fraught with 99% accidental activations.

Being trapped or unconscious is common enough. Besides that, there are many folks who survive the crash only to die in the resulting fire, or as a result of hypothermia. The faster SAR gets there the better your chances. The 406 is legally required to be registered with the relevant authorities. The ELT is programmed with your transponder code (your airplane is assigned a code whether it has a transponder or not) and the SAR folks know instantly who you are and what to look for. The 406 also sends out a 121.5 homing signal. Some are connected to the aircraft's GPS and sends the last GPS coordinates.

I would bet that, besides the rickety shortcut ELT mountings I've seen, that many 406s aren't registered. Again, why spend the money if you're not going to make it work for you?

ELTs are mandated in Canada. There was pushback on the 406 a long time ago, so the issue was tossed back to the minister of transport for reassessment. In typical Canadian fashion we're a good 12 years past that and still no 406 mandate even though their cost has come way down and a licensed AME (Canadian mechanic, not doctor) can install it as long as it's not connected to the aircraft's nav stuff. That's a job for the avionics guys.

The 406 was implemented because its higher frequency allows a much smaller radius of location by the satellites. These pick up the signal and by Doppler effect they zero in on it. If the GPS is incorporated it's even better.

The chances of it working right? Around half the time. One has to decide whether he wants a 50% chance or a 0% chance when he goes down somewhere in the millions of square miles of bush up here. Those who have never flown over this country have no idea how airplanes can disappear in it. Last fall a Mooney was found that had disappeared the year before. It was a couple hundred yards above the Trans-Canada highway in the Rogers Pass in the Rockies. It was a medevac helicopter crew that spotted it, just the briefest glimpse of it, since they were in the habit of looking for it while transiting the pass. That airplane had been flight-planned to go through there. The SAR guys never saw it, probably because it snows in there, a lot, and a few inches would hide it. It likely had a 121.5 ELT that died long before the crews were able to get anywhere near there, and maybe it never even fired. The weather had been poor and really got bad.

 

[Lndwarrior]

I would like to know whether there is a single case where an ELT truly 'saved' anyone's life in a situation where a PLB/epirb/saptphone/messenger wouldn't have worked just the same or better. You would have to be:
- trapped or unconscious
- the ELT would have to work
- the correct action is taken by SAR in a timely manner.
- the crash happened in a way that it doesnt get noticed some other way

In any other scenario, a plb or satellite messenger is going to be of more help than a ELT that is fraught with 99% accidental activations.

If they got to the person before they died, how would you know if they "saved their life"?

On the other hand, anyone who was rescued could have had their life saved.

Dehydration, hypothermia, starvation, boredom...

 

[Jim K]

Dehydration, hypothermia, starvation, boredom...

COVID.....

 

[Groundpounder]

A 406b ELT went into my airplane at its first annual. Maybe it will work when its supposed to, maybe it won't, but it was relatively cheap and there is no downside to putting it in.

 

[idahoflier]

I'll be keeping my 121.5 ELT as long as I can. I don't have a GPS navigator so no 100m position for me. Plus the 406 ELT replacement batteries are very pricey. Hopefully ADSB, position reports, cell data and PLB will get me help if I need it...

 

[bflynn]

I would like to know whether there is a single case where an ELT truly 'saved' anyone's life in a situation where a PLB/epirb/saptphone/messenger wouldn't have worked just the same or better. You would have to be:
- trapped or unconscious
- the ELT would have to work
- the correct action is taken by SAR in a timely manner.
- the crash happened in a way that it doesnt get noticed some other way

In any other scenario, a plb or satellite messenger is going to be of more help than a ELT that is fraught with 99% accidental activations.

I agree a lot of things have to come together for an ELT to be the reason for saving lives. You actually left out the basic one, you have to survive the crash first.

It doesn't have to be trapped or unconscious, you could be really isolated. Not as much chance of that on the east coast, but out west, lot of chances and in Alaska, it's probably more likely than not. Even if the area isn't isolated, radar coverage could be spotty and where radar tracking was lost is not where you land. Even with flight following, they're going to know you went down, but only be able to get your position down to a many square miles area - if you're just 5 miles away, that's over 75 square miles to search. I'm remembering a fatal crash at night in RDU some months back where they knew the plane had gone down in the woods on approach, but they still couldn't find it for several hours in daylight the next day and they were searching much less than 1 square mile. An ELT would have led them right to it.

The new ELTs have a 3 axis g force switch, so they are more reliable in activating. But as noted above, just turning it on before a crash is a great idea. If you have a 406 ELT, they will pick it up after just a few sweeps and when they can't reach you, crews will be dispatched - there's no "the SAR crew decided to blow it off". Now, if you're a cheap pilot, you have to wait for someone else to fly over and hope they're monitoring. I know I have called in ELT signals before and heard the next day that they were tracked down. But I know it will still take at least several hours to a day or two for a team to reach you. Plan ahead.

You said you wanted an example, so here's one: https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/...ir-guard-rescues-pilot-passenger-near-tyonek/ In searching for a story, I ran across a report from the Australian govt that said they estimate ELTs save 4 lives a year there, the number is higher in the US. I'm sure there's more stories, but I'm not going to spend the time digging them out of google.

Also, here's one where an ELT didn't save them, despite the survivors living for 2 months after the crash. https://www.asa2fly.com/findingcarla/details.aspx

 

[weilke]

I agree a lot of things have to come together for an ELT to be the reason for saving lives. You actually left out the basic one, you have to survive the crash first.

It doesn't have to be trapped or unconscious, you could be really isolated.

Just to clarify: My question is: when is an ELT going to work where a PLB or sat messenger wouldnt ?

If you are isolated but able to act, a properly registered PLB or a sat messenger like an in-reach is going to be as useful as an ELT. I am trying to come up with a scenario where the ELT is the exclusive means to effect the 'Rescue' part of SAR.

 

[asicer]

I am trying to come up with a scenario where the ELT is the exclusive means to effect the 'Rescue' part of SAR.

Sometimes the "R" means "Recovery". That's often means a lot to next of kin.

 

[weilke]

You said you wanted an example, so here's one: https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/...ir-guard-rescues-pilot-passenger-near-tyonek/

"An HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopter with the 210th RQS launched from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson with two 212th RQS Pararescuemen (PJs). The crew of the Pave Hawk honed in on the 406 ELT signal and found a damage Piper PA-18 and the two occupants sheltered nearby."

No doubt, there are stories of survivors found after a ELT activation. In the subject story, a PLB, sat messenger or satphone carried on the person would have effected the same rescue.
We have ELTs in private small aircraft because the FAA wrote a regulation that requires us to have one. To justify such a mandate, the agency should have to prove that there is no alternate way of achieving the regulations goal. If 'finding an aircraft with potential survivors' is the goal, a requirement to carry a PLB, sat messenger or satphone would satisfy the intent of the regulation.

 

[bflynn]

The FAA should have to prove that the regulation improves safety. It does. The regulation is justified. If you want to carry addition new tech, you are welcome to it. Nobody can find you based on a sat phone.

you may not recognize it, but the second link I posted Is one of the reasons we have ELTs.

 

[texasclouds]

On guuuaaarrredddddd!

 

[weilke]

The FAA should have to prove that the regulation improves safety. It does. The regulation is justified.

Wearing a helmet while flying may improve safety. Would a regulation requiring the wearing of a $2,000 TSO certified 'flying helmet' be justified ?

If you want to carry addition new tech, you are welcome to it. Nobody can find you based on a sat phone.

You call RCC and give them your coordinates. Why would they not find you ?

When we look for overdue boaters, they are usually on the phone with 911 and communications gives us the GPS coordinates for the phone. I dont believe satphones automatically transmit the coordinates, but they are available with a few button pushes on the device.

you may not recognize it, but the second link I posted Is one of the reasons we have ELTs.

An ELT may have helped them (if it didn't fail to activate and/or the pilot knew how to activate it after the crash). As they were able to act after the accident, a PLB, EPIRB, Inreach or Satphone would have gotten them help in a few hours. But wait, neither of these technologies existed for the end-user when the ELT mandate was written. So now that we have alternate technologies to achieve the same goal (find survivors) it would be reasonable to revisit that mandate.

My GPS enabled 406 MHz ELT has gone off during an approach in some rough weather. Was probably active for 15 minutes until I noticed and got it re-set. Flight service and RCC never heard a peep. Between that, my training with CAP and my experience actually looking for lost people unrelated to aviation, I am not convinced of the merits of the fixed installed ELTs.

 

[Stewartb]

I accidentally set off one of my 406s during maintenance. It took about 20 seconds to turn it off. A few minutes later the RCC duty officer called me to make sure I was okay, but he already knew I was in parking at Lake Hood. Nice guy.

I have a couple of friends who fly helicopters for RCC. Any of you who doubt they work should reach out and speak to somebody who works in that field. You'll stop repeating this useless rhetoric pretty quickly as a result.

406 "G" switches are accelerometers. They work. Don't project old 121.5 failures forward. They don't apply.

 

[AKBill]

Everyone I know flying in SE AK has a 406 installed. Mine is coupled with my GPS. The remote activation switch is mounted in the instrument panel and can activate the 406 at the first sign of trouble.

I would not fly without a 406 ELT were I live.

 

[denverpilot]

If you want to be found, carry more than one way to be found.

ELT is the bottom of the tech list and last ditch of those multiple items. More likely not to work by a huge margin, than work.