To my knowledge, no cellphone information was used in the Peter Masak
search. He was in mountains with little to no service, and very rugged. The
ELT was the saving grace here!


"For Example John Smith" wrote in message
...
I'm beginning to wonder if the problems associated w/ELTs don't approach
the
level of problems associated with a much lower cost and far more
ubiquitous
option--GPS enabled cell phones.

No, a GPS phone won't send out a signal if you crash and yes, we do fly in
a
lot of places where a cell phone conversation composed mostly of "can you
hear me now?" is considered a good connection. That said, the standard of
comparison isn't perfection--the ELT is an unreliable piece of equipment.
If a sailplane goes down, a 'last sighted near' report and a call to the
phone operator would be effective in some cases. Less often than with an
ELT?--that's anybody's GUESS. Do I remember correctly that the cell phone
company was able to provide some information to the teams searching for
Peter Masak, eventhough his phone was not GPS enabled?

This new rule looks a bit to me like a "we've gotta do something"
response.
I'd buy a $300 ELT to comply with the rules but would have a hard time
spending $2k, eventhough from the disucssion it seems like that's the
pricepoint where the product works well enough to be somewhat useful. We
each (should) decide for ourselves what the value is. I look at the
situation and say "this is a low occurance problem with a 'solution' that
only has a 50% chance of helping'. Others say "if it only saves one life
it
is worth it".

YMMV

Brent

"COLIN LAMB" wrote in message
. net...
I am a member of Search and Rescue - on the ground end of things. I
have
been involved in a number of missing aircraft searches and have my own
ELT
tracking equipment. We regularly practice searches in mountainous
country.

My experience has been that when we have a report of a missing aircraft
and
begin the search, that the sparse information we get is ambiguous and
incomplete. By the time information gets to us, it has been through a
number of relays. Our area is the Coast Range of Western Oregon.
Transponder tracking is undependable and late at best. In most cases we
get
no information at all. In one case, involving a fatality, the only
useful
information we had was from a "last seen" report from a fellow pilot.
We
picked a spot on the map that was likely and sent in ground teams on
logging
roads to do a visual search. Weather was bad. We found the aircraft
after
2 days, before either the National Guard or the CAP. The aircraft was
destroyed. After searching the wreckage, we found an orange piece of
plastic - similar to the color used in ELTs - the size of a quarter
dollar.
In a second fatality, our ground team was out searching when a logger
reported a plume of smoke by his cell phone. In both cases, the
aircraft
had ELTs and transponders. In both cases, the aircraft was found by
luck
and/or good guesswork.

The ELT is not bullet proof. I believe it is likely to survive a crash
if
the pilot does, but no more. The installation is also critical. For
example, with a remote antenna, the coax cable could be severed in a
crash,
rendering the entire system useless. I suppose the best solution would
be
to have an ejection system and ballistic parachute for the ELT, so that
just
before a crash the pilot hits a button to eject the ELT and bring it
down
to
safety, But I can tell that idea will never fly.

Colin N12HS (Yamhill County Sheriffs Search and Rescue)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.783 / Virus Database: 529 - Release Date: 10/25/04