US ELT Installation

I fly with a 406 MHz PLB on my parachute harness and will probably add
a 406 MHz ELT to the glider at some point. The PLB is only useful if I
survive a parachute out or a crash and can turn it on and extend the
antenna and it can get good sight to a satellite (some require a manual
antenna extension, some extend when you pull the tab to turn the PLB
on).

Bill Daniels wrote:
[snip]
I agree that carrying an ELT of some kind is responsible but it grates to
see obsolescent equipment mandated by what could be seen as a CYA scenario.
To mandate parachutes be worn by the pilot and then mandate the ELT to be
fitted to the glider seems nonsensical. In Colorado's rough terrain, it
doesn't seem reasonable to me that a parachuting pilot would necessarily
land near the wreckage.

Then have a 406 MHz PLB on your parachute as well. Even without this
you are probably going to land within a few miles of the wreckage, and
with a 406 MHz PLB in the glider that is still going to help find you.
If they find the glider without pilot/parachute it is pretty obvious
you bailed out and that helps keep search teams focusing on finding you
nearby.

My plan is to buy a 406Mhz GPS unit that will be attached to my parachute
harness. If an outlanding is imminent, I will turn it on. If the landing
goes well, I will turn it back off and contact the SAR folks ASAP to say
nevermind. I would plan to contact contest managers in advance to state my
position and, if they didn't agree, I'd just stick with the OLC.

You can't be serious right? Since when is an outlanding an emergency
justifying a PLB/ELT activation? If you are over a forrest etc. and
have no other options them by all means try whatever you want. Turning
on a PLB prior to an outlanding won't do much unless you extend the
antenna. Even if you extended the antenna and got a signal out how do
you think you are going to notify CAP or anybody else that it was an
"precautionary" activation - not something they may be happy with you
doing anyhow. Then don't even get me started about the distraction of
trying to activate this and the antenna flopping around in the cockpit
while you are trying to land.

BTW, I just turned my handheld comm to 121.5 and got a strong ELT signal.
Since I'm in my home office in suburban metro Denver, It's a fair guess that
an aircraft at KAPA 4 miles away has a tripped ELT although there are
several glider owners within that range may have ELT's installed.

121.5 is full of noise, a 406 MHz signal is going to get more
attention. And since they know exactly who you are from the signal you
can expect followup. As for those cheap few hundred dollar 121.5 ELTs,
given the much better performance of 406 MHz ELTs/PLBs and I don't see
why people are bothering with the 121.5 units.

Darryl Ramm
6DX

wrote in message
oups.com...

I fly with a 406 MHz PLB on my parachute harness and will probably add
a 406 MHz ELT to the glider at some point. The PLB is only useful if I
survive a parachute out or a crash and can turn it on and extend the
antenna and it can get good sight to a satellite (some require a manual
antenna extension, some extend when you pull the tab to turn the PLB
on).

Bill Daniels wrote:
[snip]

My plan is to buy a 406Mhz GPS unit that will be attached to my
parachute
harness. If an outlanding is imminent, I will turn it on. If the
landing
goes well, I will turn it back off and contact the SAR folks ASAP to say
nevermind. I would plan to contact contest managers in advance to state
my
position and, if they didn't agree, I'd just stick with the OLC.

You can't be serious right? Since when is an outlanding an emergency
justifying a PLB/ELT activation? If you are over a forrest etc. and
have no other options them by all means try whatever you want. Turning
on a PLB prior to an outlanding won't do much unless you extend the
antenna. Even if you extended the antenna and got a signal out how do
you think you are going to notify CAP or anybody else that it was an
"precautionary" activation - not something they may be happy with you
doing anyhow. Then don't even get me started about the distraction of
trying to activate this and the antenna flopping around in the cockpit
while you are trying to land.


You bet I'm serious. I don't think it would hard at all to convince the
CAP or any other SAR group that landing a motorless aircraft in a remote
area justifies a precautionary ELT activation. (BTW, I've already asked
them.) If I couldn't convince them, my a** is more important than their
regulations anyway. As for distraction, I fly WAY ahead of my glider -
nothing is done at the last minute. I'd have the antenna extended at 2000'
AGL and note the switch position so it could be activated on downwind.

Bill Daniels

Bill Daniels wrote:


You bet I'm serious. I don't think it would hard at all to convince the
CAP or any other SAR group that landing a motorless aircraft in a remote
area justifies a precautionary ELT activation. (BTW, I've already asked
them.) If I couldn't convince them, my a** is more important than their
regulations anyway. As for distraction, I fly WAY ahead of my glider -
nothing is done at the last minute. I'd have the antenna extended at 2000'
AGL and note the switch position so it could be activated on downwind.

This would still not provide a signal in crashes that weren't preceded
by an intent to land, or intended landings that weren't in a remote
area. It would be better than no ELT, I think, but would you be willing
to turn on the ELT every time you were low, including ridge soaring
(Peter Masak's case)? A low save might mean the ELT was on for many
minutes, and ridge soaring might go on for hours.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA