ELT Mandatory ?

While I have some sympathy for Jim Culp's position
as an abstract philosophical position, and would not
want to hinder him from practicing it as he sees fit,
it applies in both directions. If contest organizers
feel an ELT is important enough to be mandatory, they
can demand it as an exercise of their individual and
collective responsibility; Jim can then choose to ignore
the contest, but should not whine about the rules.

Ian



At 06:12 18 June 2004, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Vorsanger1 wrote:
Jim indicated that it is his choice whether or not
to carry an ELT, and it is
NOT the contest manager's responsibility to search
and rescue, or body
recovery. The fact is that when a plane or boat goes
missing, a whole lot of
assets and efforts go into trying to help / rescue
the crew. That being said,
and since it is the individual pilot's responsibility
to deny or accept
assistance, let all those pilots who opt NOT to be
helped to have this
preference down in writing, notarized, etc...This
in order to absolve everybody
else in the case of a mishap.

I'm trying to imagine the publicity the sport might
receive if a glider
crashed, and the organizers did nothing. Would that
seem bizarre to the
public?

'The pilot requested we do nothing if he did not
return', stated the
contest official, 'and particularly not alert search
and rescue people
or the police'. 'Of course, we hope he is enjoying
himself, whereever he
might be', continued the contest official, who asked
to remain
anonymouus, as requested by the missing pilot on his
entry form.

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Romeo Delta wrote:
Dirk Elber wrote in message


Thank you KG, UH and others for making those many safety talks about the
advantages of having an ELT installed and how best to install them in
the various types of gliders.


I'm sure that the fact that KG and UH sell these things has no bearing
on the matter at all, eh?

If you think their claims are false, please say so and indicate why.
Insinuating that greed drives their efforts is gratuitous; besides, I'm
not aware that UH (Hank Nixon) sells soaring equipment.

If they believe these things are useful to the soaring community, it
makes sense to offer them. Or should they refuse to sell safety related
items, so suspicious pilots will be inclined to think they mean it when
they say the items are useful?

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

In article , Jim Culp
writes


Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of gliding,

Please consider carefully. What is our nature? Individual;
or care from cradle to the grave?

Equipment should be pilot's choice, with pilot weighing
risks and outcome potentials.

Further, if pilot does not return from a gliding flight
let the contest management rest at ease knowing the
pilot has made the choice;
and it is not management's responsibility for search
and rescue or body recovery.

Yes, it is ok. Just say that up front and openly and
act accordingly.

Personal Responsibility/Personal Choice -

Let us affirm and uphold personal responsibility and
personal choice in gliding flight, and in our other
choices in life or death or risk or adventures.

Is this concept too individual now?

Is this the day of cradle-to-the-grave governance?

Is this the day when it seems your interests are other-folk's-resp
onsibilities
because they can manage your choices with
more right than you?

Is this the day when others can care for you and control
you and manage for you and decide for you and regulate
for you ?

Do you join that Careful Attention and Governance by
others for you?

Live free or die. Dont tread on me. These were and
are founding concepts of this land.

This is a land of individual right and opportunity.

Kindly, keep it that way.

Dont matter if they find my body sooner
or very very
very much later, or never. My body be dead.

If my body be alive, I will take my chances in survival
if any.
My choice. My outcomes. I live or die by that.

Kindly considered.

Dancing on clouds,

Keep it up!

Jim



What a lovely post! But do you really not want your friends to worry if
you land out somewhere inhospitable?

Or, to put it another way, if one of your friends went soaring in the
mountains, and wasn't back by dark, would you just say 'Tough. He should
have thought of that. He can take care of himself'?

Bet you wouldn't.
--
Mike Lindsay

In article , Todd Pattist
writes
"Mal" wrote:

Purchased my own ELT
I fly with it through my parachute.

I'd like to know why anyone would buy one of these personal
units. I want mine to activate in the crash. If I'm still
conscious, I'll use the cell phone or radio. Or I can
trigger the mounted ELT manually, and even remove and carry
it. If I parachute, I'll be within the search area of even
the best ELT units. I'm really interested in the thought
process behind buying a low-power portable ELT that won't
trigger automatically. Am I missing something?
Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)

There are some places where cell-phones wont work. And if you are down
on the deck, your radio might not reach very far.

--
Mike Lindsay

Mr. Greenwell:

Please be advised that I just used the ammo provided by the previous
poster. Certainly you must agree that it's only human nature to turn
up the sales pitch just a notch when justifying the need for something
that you just so happen to sell--hence, my voiced scepticism. I'm sure
KG is a big boy and can handle it. UH was unfortunately fragged by
association--a thousand pardons.

To say it another way, I, for one, am not otherwise convinced that
anyone who sells such "stuff" for a living preaches about it solely
out of the goodness of his heart (which was my take of the post
previous to my former). To place someone up on a pedistal for doing
so is professing naivity.

Regardless, the bottom line is an ELT, from an operational
perspective, is OPTIONAL equipment. If some private airport owner
feels justified in his mind for whatever reason to require ELTs as a
condition to fly from his airfield--then that's his business (as well
the business of any pilots accepting of such dictation), except that
such nonsense is capable of permeating out to affect the soaring
community as a whole at which time it is past the point of becoming
everyone's business.

So pardon me if I voice my concern at this potential eventuality.
Soaring is expensive enough without some yea-hoo in VA starting a
costly trend on a whim. What's the next mandate to enjoy the
SIMPLICITY of soaring? Transponders, weather radar, radar altimeters?

If this pilot makes the conscience choice to fly without an ELT, it is
done so at MY accepted peril. Matter of fact, every time I have ever
made the decision to takeoff [solo] it has always been and will
continue to be at MY own personal peril. And I don't take lightly
anyone's attempt to usurp the experience, ability, and authority I
have to make such a decision.

I'm sorry that someone crashed while flying a contest (BTW having an
ELT apparently didn't stop that from happening). But should that
necessarily result in mandating we all should now run out and buy ELTs
[as a condition to compete in a soaring contest]? Maybe we should
just not task flying near mountains. Heck, let's just stop flying
altogether 'cause it's inherently dangerous. No thousand dollar piece
of equipment can change that fact.

RD

Romeo Delta wrote:
Mr. Greenwell:

Please be advised that I just used the ammo provided by the previous
poster. Certainly you must agree that it's only human nature to turn
up the sales pitch just a notch when justifying the need for something
that you just so happen to sell

Yes, but it's just speculation on your part, as is my suggestion he
sells them BECAUSE he believes in them.

--hence, my voiced scepticism.

It is still an unnecessary insinuation: we should argue the facts of the
situation, not speculate about someone's motives.

I'm sure
KG is a big boy and can handle it. UH was unfortunately fragged by
association--a thousand pardons.

To say it another way, I, for one, am not otherwise convinced that
anyone who sells such "stuff" for a living preaches about it solely
out of the goodness of his heart (which was my take of the post
previous to my former). To place someone up on a pedistal for doing
so is professing naivity.

All irrelevant to the value of ELTs, true or not.


Regardless, the bottom line is an ELT, from an operational
perspective, is OPTIONAL equipment.

So is a parachute, but contests require them, and we wear them.

If some private airport owner
feels justified in his mind for whatever reason to require ELTs as a
condition to fly from his airfield--then that's his business (as well
the business of any pilots accepting of such dictation), except that
such nonsense is capable of permeating out to affect the soaring
community as a whole at which time it is past the point of becoming
everyone's business.

So pardon me if I voice my concern at this potential eventuality.
Soaring is expensive enough without some yea-hoo in VA starting a
costly trend on a whim.

Would you consider the situation in a different light if you knew the
"yea-hoo" has supported soaring in the most substantial way for decades,
by providing an airfield, towplanes, hangars, and clubhouses? Take a
look at this link:

http://www.airnav.com/airport/VA85
AirNav: New Castle International Airport

Does that look like a facility provided by a "yea-hoo"? It exists to
serve soaring!

My point: I can't believe a man like Lanier Frantz is doing this on a
whim. Whether we like the idea or not, it comes from someone who
deserves to be taken seriously.

What's the next mandate to enjoy the
SIMPLICITY of soaring? Transponders, weather radar, radar altimeters?

If this pilot makes the conscience choice to fly without an ELT, it is
done so at MY accepted peril. Matter of fact, every time I have ever
made the decision to takeoff [solo] it has always been and will
continue to be at MY own personal peril.

Of course, at a contest, you only have veto authority - you don't get to
pick just any time.

And I don't take lightly
anyone's attempt to usurp the experience, ability, and authority I
have to make such a decision.

They aren't exactly telling you how to fly your glider. The ELT is just
a lump that sits in the back and doesn't do anything until you crash.


I'm sorry that someone crashed while flying a contest (BTW having an
ELT apparently didn't stop that from happening). But should that
necessarily result in mandating we all should now run out and buy ELTs
[as a condition to compete in a soaring contest]?

Keep some perspective: it's just for New Castle, not all contests.

Maybe we should
just not task flying near mountains.

There are World champions that have argued that.

Heck, let's just stop flying
altogether 'cause it's inherently dangerous. No thousand dollar piece
of equipment can change that fact.

And none of the folks involved have claimed it will, but they'd sure
like to mitigate the results when the "experience, ability, and
authority" of the pilot aren't equal to the danger.

Did I mention ELTs are only $200-$300?

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

While we are condemming the irresponsible ELT requirement, let us also
attack the requirement for parachutes. After all, it should be a matter of
choice whether a pilot wishes to go down with the ship. Peter Marske was
wearing a parachute and it did not save him. Whether this dictatorial act
is required by the SSA or the local organizer is irrelevant.

There are other issues which can be brought up too. Seat belts should not
be mandatory, since they only affect the pilot. And compass, airspeed
indicators and altimeters - who needs them. Even the requirement for a
license from the FAA infringes my guaranteed right to fly. Power pilots are
thrust into these irresponsible requirements too, such as radios,
transponders, ELTs and collision avoidance beacons. I could see the entire
matter going downhill when the FAA grounded one of the flyers in the
California to Hawaii (Dole) races about 75 years ago, because the pilot only
had enough fuel to make it 1/2 way across. Maybe that was the point we lost
our freedom as pilots.

Suppose the owners of Kitty Hawk had mandated an ELT be used by the Wright
Brothers. The radio in those days would have weighed about 400 pounds and
required spark gaps, motors, and heavy batteries. Flying would not have
been invented until about 1916.

Colin


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.706 / Virus Database: 462 - Release Date: 6/14/04

STOP THE PRESS: LATE BREAKING NEWS:......LANIER FRANTZ DECLARED "YEA-HOO IN
VA"
Hot Dog! I can't wait to post this news on the bulletin board at the Tow
Plane Tavern at NCI.
Thank you Romeo Delta for this delicious quote!!
(it would be even funnier if the subject matter were not so serious).
Ed Byars
PS...when flaming a Byars be sure to specify. My head's bloody enough and I
don't need more hits meant for my son Guy. And I'm sure vicey-versy.

"Romeo Delta" wrote in message
om...
Mr. Greenwell:

Please be advised that I just used the ammo provided by the previous
poster. Certainly you must agree that it's only human nature to turn
up the sales pitch just a notch when justifying the need for something
that you just so happen to sell--hence, my voiced scepticism. I'm sure
KG is a big boy and can handle it. UH was unfortunately fragged by
association--a thousand pardons.

To say it another way, I, for one, am not otherwise convinced that
anyone who sells such "stuff" for a living preaches about it solely
out of the goodness of his heart (which was my take of the post
previous to my former). To place someone up on a pedistal for doing
so is professing naivity.

Regardless, the bottom line is an ELT, from an operational
perspective, is OPTIONAL equipment. If some private airport owner
feels justified in his mind for whatever reason to require ELTs as a
condition to fly from his airfield--then that's his business (as well
the business of any pilots accepting of such dictation), except that
such nonsense is capable of permeating out to affect the soaring
community as a whole at which time it is past the point of becoming
everyone's business.

So pardon me if I voice my concern at this potential eventuality.
Soaring is expensive enough without some yea-hoo in VA starting a
costly trend on a whim. What's the next mandate to enjoy the
SIMPLICITY of soaring? Transponders, weather radar, radar altimeters?

If this pilot makes the conscience choice to fly without an ELT, it is
done so at MY accepted peril. Matter of fact, every time I have ever
made the decision to takeoff [solo] it has always been and will
continue to be at MY own personal peril. And I don't take lightly
anyone's attempt to usurp the experience, ability, and authority I
have to make such a decision.

I'm sorry that someone crashed while flying a contest (BTW having an
ELT apparently didn't stop that from happening). But should that
necessarily result in mandating we all should now run out and buy ELTs
[as a condition to compete in a soaring contest]? Maybe we should
just not task flying near mountains. Heck, let's just stop flying
altogether 'cause it's inherently dangerous. No thousand dollar piece
of equipment can change that fact.

RD

We need to keep in mind that an ELT mainly helps the searchers after an
aircraft goes missing. Searching for a missing aircraft is dangerous, hard
work. If we respect those who must do this, (and we should) then carrying
an ELT seems a modest gesture of appreciation.

However, I think it is pretty rare that a pilot has been found alive after a
successful search based solely on an ELT signal. If the pilot is alive,
there will likely be a radio or cell phone call letting people know the
situation.

With the above in mind, the benefits of an ELT apply in a fairly narrow set
of conditions. (Fatal crash, ELT activates, search ensues.) Perhaps then,
another electronic safety aid would better serve us. For example, how about
a GPS tracker that broadcasts the glider's location and altitude at short
intervals to a ground based network that allows it to be recorded at the
contest site. This way the contest organizers can watch over the fleet in
real-time. If a track stops the who, what, where and when of the situation
will be obvious.

Consider the more likely situation where a glider makes a safe landing in a
remote area and the pilot for whatever reason does not manually activate the
ELT. The tracker would only alert the people who need to know without
initiating a formal downed aircraft search. If we are going to mandate
something, a tracker seems a better idea.

It would also make glider contests more of a spectator sport.

Bill Daniels

Eric:

The man may be a benevolent yea-hoo, but if the yackity-yack airport
authority at my public airport gets wind of this and makes having an
ELT a condition to operate glider citing precedence, then he's back to
plain old yea-hoo status.

Yes, $200-300 now. But how about when the FAA gets tired of all the
cheap ELTs going off from hard landings, or changes the rules (never
happens), or a manufacturer goes ot of business, or...
and were eventually stuck with the $1000+ a pop deal.

And what then is next? TCAS?

Ed cited liability concerns in his first sentence. But all of a
sudden discussing that aspect obscurates the matter. GMAFB!

Your stance on the matter referencing your previous posts seems to
question the necessity of this ELT mandate. But this last post of
your's seems to have you flip-flopping on the matter. What is your
definitive position (or do you just relish the opportunity to change
sides as a chance to argue)?

Regards,

Ray