ELT Required for all SSA sanctioned contests starting 2006

I am still hoping to hear from those that have installed ELT's in their
gliders in anticipation of the Competion Rules requireiments for 2006.
I am especially interested in seeing photos or getting descriptions of
installations in ASW 27's. Please contact me directly.
Tom Dixon
Idaho

Do personally registerable EPIRB's meet the elt rule?

pbc76049 (removethis) wrote:
Do personally registerable EPIRB's meet the elt rule?



NO! only those mounted that comply with current FAA regulations.

Going to be tough to do with carbon fiber fuselages, and internal antennas.
I would not want to be cutting a hole for an external ELT antenna. I've seen
some cut for the external mini transponder antenna neat the gear, but not
sure how that would work for the ELT.

I'd be interested in the installation information also.

BT

wrote in message
oups.com...
I am still hoping to hear from those that have installed ELT's in their
gliders in anticipation of the Competion Rules requireiments for 2006.
I am especially interested in seeing photos or getting descriptions of
installations in ASW 27's. Please contact me directly.
Tom Dixon
Idaho

wrote:
pbc76049 (removethis) wrote:
Do personally registerable EPIRB's meet the elt rule?



NO! only those mounted that comply with current FAA regulations.


Hi all is US glider-land!
I don't quite get that ELT issue. I do understand the need for an ELT
while flying SSA sanctioned contests in difficult (i.e. mountainess)
terrain and it is a good idea to have one just like wearing a
parachute. Austria, I think, has made ELT's mandatory for all gliders
for good reasons. Ok so far, but why does it have to be FAA approved
unit, if newer and technologically more advanced devices are already on
the market? Isn't it true, that the government will stop monitoring
121.5 soon? Then what - mandate to install yet a different type?
Backpackers and other outdoors enthusiasts are using the new EPIRB's -
why can't we? I rather take the ELT with me on the nylon descent since
I would like to be picked up and don't care too much about the wreck.
Ok, there is the issue of 'what happens if you are incapacitated and
can't activate the unit after a mid-air?'
Alright: challenge to all of the electronics whizz-kids out the how
about adding a tiny glider mounted tri-axial accelerometer that plugs
into the EPIRB? If you have a mid-air or ride your glider into the
crash, it will activate. If you bail out and sever the connection, it
will activate or you turn it on yourself after you landed out in the
boonies where your cell phone dosen't work.

Uli Neumann

wrote:
I am still hoping to hear from those that have installed ELT's in their
gliders in anticipation of the Competion Rules requireiments for 2006.

About how much does the least expensive approved ELT setup cost? My
entire glider/trailer/etc. cost less than $10,500 US. I'm hoping these
ELTs are not a significant percentage of that.

Regards,

-Doug

$189 + shipping

http://www.craggyaero.com/elt.htm

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

If I were to be persuaded that an ELT was a necessary
peice of equipment, and in the UK at least I see no
urgent need, I think I would want it to indicate where
I was and not where the wreckage of my glider was.
The bit that might need urgent assistance will be me
and not the collection of plastic bits. I have to say
that the requirement for ELTs to be fitted to a glider
seems to miss the point that unlike GA powered aircraft
glider pilots have the opportunity to leave before
the wreckage interfaces with the ground. I would be
interested to know the thinking behind the requirement.


At 13:48 06 September 2005, wrote:
$189 + shipping

http://www.craggyaero.com/elt.htm

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

People in this discussion should stop to read the excellent FAQs about
the ELT requirement on the SRA website:

http://sailplane-racing.org/Rules/CR...T%20FAQ%20.htm

It explains the rationale for the rule quite clearly. Briefly, the
requirement is there to protect contest organizers, and at their
request, rather than to force unwanted protection on pilots. Imagine
running a contest, someone goes missing, and day after day passes.
That's also why the rules require a mounted, impact-activated device.

John Cochrane
BB

BB wrote:
It explains the rationale for the rule quite clearly. Briefly, the
requirement is there to protect contest organizers, and at their
request, rather than to force unwanted protection on pilots. Imagine
running a contest, someone goes missing, and day after day passes.
That's also why the rules require a mounted, impact-activated device.

The rationale consists of one recent tragic fatal accident at contest,
and another accident at a contest 14 years ago, where the pilot managed
to walk out. The non-ELT equipped US contest pilots (which are likely
still the majority) are either going to be spending an average $400 to
$500 (most of us will have to pay a repair shop for installation) each
this winter, or will simply choose to not to fly in any more sanctioned
contests. Those who do buy ELTs will mostly be buying units that will
be essentially obsolete in 3 or 4 years, as the 406 MHz units are still
too expensive for a lot of us.

It will be interesting to see how many people show up for regional
contests next year. I sympathize with the rationale, but an ELT ends up
being just being another in a set of barriers to participation. In my
own case, there's a chance I'll never get around to doing anything about
it this winter, which will tilt the balance towards not bothering to go
to any contests (and I've flown in 7 regionals in the past 5 years, IIRC).