What's gonna happen to CAP?

On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:17:24 -0700, Jay Honeck
wrote in .com:


It may be all hype, but I thought the new 406 mhz ELTs were designed
to report your position in Lat/Lon, like a GPS?

Apparently they have the capability to broadcast the GPS information
via an optional interface unit that ties the ELT into the aircraft's
GPS or FMS system.

If that's the case, the "Search" part of a SAR mission has been entirely
eliminated.

I also thought these things were being touted as all-but-eliminating
false signals?

How would that be accomplished? An improved inertia switch???

Sadly, false alarms made up the vast majority of our
CAP SAR missions, so a huge percentage of CAP SAR will be eliminated
if this feature is truly functional.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Expending resources for no valid
reason seems foolish to me.

Anyway, with no one listening to 121.5,

I'll be listing on 121.5 MHz, and so will a lot of other people. There
are other reasons to do that beside ELTs.

I suspect most pilots will be
switching to 406s when their current batteries die.

Given the cost of the 406 MHz equipment, and the cost of installing a
new antenna, and perhaps interfacing to the on-board GPS, I'm not so
sure the cost of replacing 121.5 MHz ELT batteries will be much of an
impetus to switch.

If everyone
switches, this will be a great enhancement to safety,

Perhaps.

but it *sounds*
like 90% of CAP's purpose (outside of educational -- which means we're
back to "Boy Scouts Without a Mission") will be eliminated.

CAP does a lot more than SAR and education. See Message-ID:
above.

Here's an article with information about 406 MHz ELTs:

http://www.aea.net/Pilot/PG04ELT.pdf
P I L O T ’ S G U I D E
In case you hadn't heard, the world of corporate jet opera-tors was
set on its collective ear last year as they rushed to comply with the
FAA's mandate stating that they be equipped with ELTs by January of
2004. It caused quite a problem for operators who waited too long to
do the required installations. The suppliers couldn't keep up with
demand.Don't all aircraft have to be equipped with ELTs you ask? Yes
and no—you gotta' love those FARs. About the easiest way to figure it
out is to say if you're operating under Part 91, you need an ELT. If
you're operating under Parts 121 or 135, you don't need an ELT. Why?
Well, simply, aircraft operated for hire “always” fly under the
watchful eye of ATC so should they have a problem, someone knows where
they are. At least it seemed that way until that fateful day in 1996
when a Lear 35A operating under instrument flight rules “disap-peared”
while on approach to Lebanon Municipal Airport in New Hampshire. The
jet's wreckage was not found until 1999 when a forester discovered it,
17 miles from the airport. The Lear didn't have an ELT. Would it have
made a difference? Who knows. But this chilling occurrence is what got
Congress to take action and change the rules for the ?Jet A burners.'
On the other hand, we “little guys” are free to roam all over the sky,
unfettered and uncon-trolled. Isn't that the beauty of flying your own
airplane? So we are much more prone to be “lost” in the event of an
accident. We need watching.So, for the majority of us, an ELT has been
a part of our air-craft's equipment since way back in 1970. And while
that's the end of one story, it's the beginning of another because a
new mandate clock is ticking. And this time it ticks for you…There’s
change in the air…As an aircraft owner, the new date you have to be
aware of is January 31, 2009—yes, 2009. But it's never too early to
start planning. On that date, all aircraft with ELTs will be required
to be equipped with a digital ELT oper-ating on the 406 megahertz
fre-quency. And this means you. Why? Because that is when the
emergency 121.5 analog frequency will no longer be moni-tored by the
COSPAS-SARSAT search and rescue satellites. The frequency will still
be monitored by ground-based receivers, ATC - 32 -406 MHz
ELTCompliance UpdateB Y D A L E S M I T HPractically everything you’ve
ever wanted to know about 406 MHz ELTs but didn’t know who to
ask.facilities or by over flying air-craft— it's better than nothing,
but it will really limit the likelihood that the distress signal will
be detected in a reasonable length of time.The directive to drop the
pro-cessing of the 121.5 MHz signal was made by the International
COSPAS-SARSAT (Search and Rescue Satellite-Aided Tracking System)
group. It's a cooperative effort between the United States, Canada,
France and Russia, along with 25 other countries to support the
International Maritime Organization (IMO) and International Civil
Aeronautics Organization (ICAO) concerning search and rescue
operations. The group decision was based on a variety of reasons
includ-ing numerous signal reception problems, a high incidence of
false alerts (over 99 percent) and a host of other limitations
associ-ated with the analog-only 121.5 frequency. The satellite-based
COSPAS-SARSAT system and the 406 MHz digital ELTs have already proven
to be far superior to the current analog-based system. Since its
inception in 1982, the system has been credited with saving more than
17,000 lives worldwide and nearly 5,000 people in the United States.
In many of these cases, the satellite network was the only means of
detecting the distress signal.“The satellite network makes the 406
ELTs much more accu-rate than the old units,” explained Wendell
Neumeyer, market-ing manager for Artex Aircraft Supplies, a leading
ELT produc-er. “The location of the satellites and the digital signal
from the ELTs reduces the search area by an order of magnitude or
more.” Think of it as putting a bell on the proverbial needle in a
haystack.Neumeyer said that the dra-matic increase in accuracy is due
to the fact that the software that does the calculations on the 406
beacon is much better than the analog processor. “It's also a full
five-watt digital signal,” he continued. “It's a much clearer signal
so the resolution accuracy is much greater.”“Another benefit of the
406 units is they can be interfaced with the aircraft's FMS or GPS
units,” Neumeyer added. “Now you can use naviga-tion information to
provide spot-on loca-tion of the distress signal. To do that, you need
an optional interface unit that ties the ELT into the aircraft's GPS
or FMS system to provide rescuers real-time, pinpoint aircraft
loca-tion information.In fact, instead of having to search hundreds of
square miles, the digital processing in the standard 406 beacon can
narrow the area down to within two nautical miles radius. And if you
connect the aircraft's GPS or FMS, the area is reduced down to the
size of a football field. An ELT that identifies you by nameAnother
major benefit of the 406 ELTs is that the signal is not only detected
almost instantly by the geostationary satellite network, the digital
signal can be coded with information about the aircraft and owner. By
coding the information, Search and Rescue Coordin-ation Centers can
quickly con-tact the registered owner/opera-tor to verify if the
aircraft is flying - 33 -Continued on following page…or safely tied
down on the ramp. If the aircraft is reported to be fly-ing, it
permits a faster response by the SAR teams. If it's parked, it allows
for the owner to manual-ly deactivate the ELT sooner and allow
valuable resources to be used only on real emergencies. Remember to
register your 406 ELTThere's one more important thing to remember
whenever you do make the switch to a 406 MHz ELT. Whenever you have
your avi-onics shop install the 406 unit in your aircraft, you must
make sure to register its paperwork so that search and rescue can take
full advantage of the benefits the system offers. “Owners need to
register the beacon. If they don't, they're defeating the purpose of
hav-ing the 406 in the first place,” Neumeyer said. “I can tell you
that a substantial number of 406 ELT owners—not airline or fleet
operators—but corporate and business aircraft owners, have not
registered or reportedly not registered their units.”It all ties back
to the 406 unit's ability to be coded with critical information about
the aircraft type, base location, ownership and the like. If you don't
register it, no one can take advantage of the information. “It is
critically important for installation technicians and avionics shop
operators to pro-actively tell their customers that they need to
register these units immediately,” he continued. “We put all kinds of
labels and cards in the packaging with the units, but technicians
and/or the customers don't understand the critical importance of this
step. I guess they think it's just another marketing ploy. But in
truth, it is a critical step in making the 406 ELT an effective
life-saving tool.”2009 is the year of the ELTSo, sometime before
January 2009, you will need to upgrade your current analog 121.5 ELT
to a digital 406 MHz frequency ELT. You can eliminate the chance of
suffering through another compli-ance deadline bottleneck and install
the 406 MHz unit today. Which may not be such a bad option if you are
in need of an ELT repair and plan on keeping your aircraft past 2009.
“For most operators it's a matter of cost versus security,” Neumeyer
explained. “Today, a 406 unit will cost three- to five-times as much
as a standard 121.5 unit. That's substantially more money and it's an
invest-ment that someone who is not planning on keeping their aircraft
for much longer may not want to make.”Why does it cost so much more?
Well, along with the higher cost for the 406 ELT hardware itself,
Neumeyer said that the installation of the unit is more time-consuming
and, therefore, costs more than what you'd have with your old 121.5
system. According to various AEA member shops, installation times can
bvary greatly depend-ing on where the antenna is located. So it's
probably a wise idea to get estimates from your avionics experts to
gauge the market. While we're on the subject of boxes, you will need
to add an interface to use your GPS/FMS positioning information and,
according to Neumeyer, an Artex ELT/NAV Interface box currently sells
for around $1,500 (plus installation and interface cabling). But, if
there's a chance of reduc-ing the time it will take search and rescue
to find you to mere minutes, you'd have to consider that pretty cheap
insurance.And if you're thinking that by waiting the price of the
hardware will go down, don't count on it. As the compliance deadline
approaches and the demand increases, history and business 101 has to
tell you that, if any-thing, the price will keep going up. Sure the
cost can be pro-hibitive, but we're talking about something that you
really can't put a price on—you and your passengers' lives. “When you
weigh the cost against the many benefits, I think the wise operator
will go with the 406 installation well before the compliance
dead-line,” he continued. “It's some-thing you never want to use, but
will be thankful you have if you ever need it.” ¦For more information:
NOAA-SARSAT
Ph: (888) 212-SAVE
Web: www.sarsat.noaa.gov- 34 -406 MHz ELT COMPLIANCE UPDATEContinued
from page 33

Larry Dighera wrote:

I also thought these things were being touted as all-but-eliminating
false signals?

How would that be accomplished? An improved inertia switch???

I think I see the sematics you were getting at there (false signal vs
unconfirmed situation), but for the record, the 406's are registered
into a database with contact information. So when an activation is
detected somebody can get on the phone and (try to) contact the
registered operator to determing if the aircraft is actually in
trouble.

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:16:19 -0000, James Sleeman
wrote in
.com:


Larry Dighera wrote:

I also thought these things were being touted as all-but-eliminating
false signals?

How would that be accomplished? An improved inertia switch???

I think I see the sematics you were getting at there (false signal vs
unconfirmed situation), but for the record, the 406's are registered
into a database with contact information. So when an activation is
detected somebody can get on the phone and (try to) contact the
registered operator to determing if the aircraft is actually in
trouble.

Right. And the satellites are able to pinpoint the location of the
ELT signal an order of magnitude better than the 121.5 MHz ELTs. But
if there isn't some improvement in the triggering mechanism, I fail to
understand how there might be less false alarms; they will remain at
99% of the total ELT signals reported I would think.

Larry Dighera wrote:



Right. And the satellites are able to pinpoint the location of the
ELT signal an order of magnitude better than the 121.5 MHz ELTs. But
if there isn't some improvement in the triggering mechanism, I fail to
understand how there might be less false alarms; they will remain at
99% of the total ELT signals reported I would think.

1) more than a few of the false ELT signals are not from ELTS at all,
but from defective consumer electronics. The frequency migration is
meant to mitigate this somewhat.

2) by being registered, the owner of the device can be contacted or
attempted to be contacted, and this is one of the first steps in the
rescue chain. While search teams are still in the call out and
activation stage, if they get ahold of the owner and he says "no, i just
parked the plane in the hangar, I'm fine!" they can instruct the owner
to go disable/reset his ELT and stop the search process then. Even with
equipment being resold and perhaps not re-registered, this will be a
smaller percentage of devices than having 100% unregistered devices on
121.5.

3) by being stronger, the signals are easier to track. Unfortunately, by
being a burst transmitter, normal carrier wave tracking procedures will
be difficult to implement. The new 406 recievers I've seen sell for 20k.

4) by having location encoded with the signal, "search" becomes "get to
the scene". If off airport this may still require air and ground teams.

Dave

Dave S wrote:

3) by being stronger, the signals are easier to track. Unfortunately, by
being a burst transmitter, normal carrier wave tracking procedures will
be difficult to implement. The new 406 recievers I've seen sell for 20k.

My 406 MHz PLB also transmits on 121.5 MHz

Ron Lee