SPOT Versus ELT Analysis (Long)

On Jul 5, 5:49*pm, Brian wrote:
Has anyone heard of any prospect of an improved SPOT coming out.

My biggest hang up is I don't like replacing batteries and I would
want to use it in tracking mode.

I tested battery life earlier this year by leaving on in tracking mode
on the dash of my car, and restarting it every 18-24 hours to ensure
it was operating 24/7. Sometime around day 12, the power LED turned
RED, and the SPOT continued to operate just fine for several more
days. So this means at least 300 hours of CONTINUOUS live tracking.
That's pretty much a typical season for a fairly active pilot.

The local grocery store sells a 4 pack of the batteries for $12 or
so. I'm sure they can be found elsewhere for even less.

Why on earth would you want to complicate things and add an external
power cord??? ;-)

The only improvement that could come from SPOT is if the unit
transmitted a NEW position every minute instead of what it does
currently, which is the same position every 10 minutes.

Think about it, if a new position were transmitted every minute, and
if 90% were lost, that would still provide a position every 10
minutes.

The compelling reason to fly with SPOT is that it provides a
RELATIVELY failsafe crash location. If I'm incapacitated in a crash,
then the PLB is useless. If there's major damage to the airframe,
then the ELT is useless. The SPOT will give rescuers a 10 minute
search radius and a flight vector. Yes, I understand that sometimes
SPOT leaves holes of 2, 3 or even more intervals, and it's possible I
chose to reverse course immediately after the SPOT sends a position
report. But this still provides an excellent starting point for S&R.

-Tom

And I do have an ELT as well. And am installing a transponder
tomorrow. ATC radar history is yet another passive way to find a
downed aircraft, especially if used in conjunction with SPOT to
isolate the VFR target.