ELT's

[Dick[_3_]]

A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. I immediatly ordered a
121.5 / 406 Mhz model. It came the other day, a year and a half
later. It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
outside of a carbon hull. I have two questions. One, what happened
to the urgency??? and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
to the antenna issue?

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Aug 23, 3:36*pm, Dick > wrote:
> One, what happened to the urgency???

In a word, Spot.

[Darryl Ramm]

The rules still allow a CD to require an ELT or a tracking device like a SPOT. Unfortunately the decision to specifically call out ELT there is a mistake -- a 406 Mhz PLB would be more useful/practical/affordable than an ELT. But its all irrelevant since no CD is going to require an ELT, especially not when SPOT et al are around. Maybe SPOT may get required in future, and that may not be a bad thing.

There is by in large no workable solution to the antenna issue unless you want to drill a hole in your fuselage and promise not to crash upside down or in a way that tears off the antenna, neither is there a solution to problems with lack of proper impact activation. For all the hassle if you want a SARSAT 406 MHz / 121.5MHz beacon device you might as well get a 406Mhz PLB and save a lot of money (and mount it on your parachute harness so it stays with you).

There is just better technology than ELTs and PLBs for most of us. The SPOT being the obvious example, with other similar technology products continuing to emerge.

Darryl

[Ramy]

On Aug 23, 4:29*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> The rules still allow a CD to require an ELT or a tracking device like a SPOT. Unfortunately the decision to specifically call out ELT there is a mistake -- a 406 Mhz PLB would be more useful/practical/affordable than an ELT. But its all irrelevant since no CD is going to require an ELT, especially not when SPOT et al are around. Maybe SPOT may get required in future, and that may not be a bad thing.
>
> There is by in large no workable solution to the antenna issue unless you want to drill a hole in your fuselage and promise not to crash upside down or in a way that tears off the antenna, neither is there a solution to problems with lack of proper impact activation. For all the hassle if you want a SARSAT 406 MHz / 121.5MHz beacon device you might as well get a 406Mhz PLB and save a lot of money (and mount it on your parachute harness so it stays with you).
>
> There is just better technology than ELTs and PLBs for most of us. The SPOT being the obvious example, with other similar technology products continuing to emerge.
>
> Darryl

One more thing to point out, which is another reason why Spot is by
far the better solution, is that a PLB will only work if you are not
incapacitated since it needs to be manually activated, unless you'll
have the present of mind to activate it just before you crash...

Ramy

[JJ Sinclair[_2_]]

On Aug 23, 3:36*pm, Dick > wrote:
> A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
> all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. *I immediatly ordered a
> 121.5 / 406 Mhz model. *It came the other day, a year and a half
> later. *It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
> outside of a carbon hull. *I have two questions. *One, what happened
> to the urgency??? *and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
> to the antenna issue?

Don't know what your flying, but I mounted the antenna right in front
of my instrument panel and the radio is in the baggage compartment
where I can arm it before T/O and turn it off after flight. The
antenna is looking at the canopy and clear of carbon.
JJ

[Paul Remde]

Hi Dick,

ELTs are still great safety devices.

Most contests probably won't require them - requiring SPOT units instead.

One workable internal antenna mounting solution is shown here:
http://www.archive.jimphoenix.com/archive09/jimphoenix2/pages/Nimbus/Nfuselage/subNfuselage.html
There is also a link to that site on my ELTs page here:
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/elts.htm

Best Regards,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.

"Dick" > wrote in message
...
>A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
> all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. I immediatly ordered a
> 121.5 / 406 Mhz model. It came the other day, a year and a half
> later. It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
> outside of a carbon hull. I have two questions. One, what happened
> to the urgency??? and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
> to the antenna issue?

[Wayne Paul]

While we are on the subject of alternate solutions to an ELT, what is the
common perception of SpiderTracks. From what I've read and discussions at a
local soaring encampment, it uses a more reliable satellite network,
provides fixes every minute, fixes include both altitude and velocity, etc.
http://www.spidertracks.com/fleetpro?gclid=CInWou2q6KoCFQ0S2godB0EX9g

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://tinyurl.com/N990-6F

"Paul Remde" wrote in message ...

Hi Dick,

ELTs are still great safety devices.

Most contests probably won't require them - requiring SPOT units instead.

One workable internal antenna mounting solution is shown here:
http://www.archive.jimphoenix.com/archive09/jimphoenix2/pages/Nimbus/Nfuselage/subNfuselage.html
There is also a link to that site on my ELTs page here:
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/elts.htm

Best Regards,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.

"Dick" > wrote in message
...
>A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
> all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. I immediatly ordered a
> 121.5 / 406 Mhz model. It came the other day, a year and a half
> later. It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
> outside of a carbon hull. I have two questions. One, what happened
> to the urgency??? and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
> to the antenna issue?

[Greg Arnold[_2_]]

On 8/24/2011 9:22 AM, Wayne Paul wrote:
> While we are on the subject of alternate solutions to an ELT, what is
> the common perception of SpiderTracks. From what I've read and
> discussions at a local soaring encampment, it uses a more reliable
> satellite network, provides fixes every minute, fixes include both
> altitude and velocity, etc.
> http://www.spidertracks.com/fleetpro?gclid=CInWou2q6KoCFQ0S2godB0EX9g
>
> Wayne
> HP-14 "6F"
> http://tinyurl.com/N990-6F
>

Looks interesting. But the unit is $995, and the monthly cost is maybe
double that of SPOT.

[Todd]

And if you have an Amateur Radio License there is the APRS tracking
option.

Here is a flight in Colorado (where you might think the coverage may
not be good) for this summer:

http://aprs.fi/?call=N8RNW-6&dt=1311292800&mt=roadmap&z=10&timerange=3600

A device like this: http://www.byonics.com/mt-rtg is easy to stick
in the glider

More information available at: http://www.aprs.org

And if you do not have an Amateur Radio License, get one. It is not
that hard. There are networks of linked repeaters that will give you
radio contact to your crew over distances that your aircraft radio
wont.

[Darryl Ramm]

On 8/24/11 8:44 AM, Paul Remde wrote:
> Hi Dick,
>
> ELTs are still great safety devices.
>
> Most contests probably won't require them - requiring SPOT units instead.
>
> One workable internal antenna mounting solution is shown here:
> http://www.archive.jimphoenix.com/archive09/jimphoenix2/pages/Nimbus/Nfuselage/subNfuselage.html
[snip]

I might dispute that an ELT is a "great safety device". They are very
hard to install properly (as the link provided demonstrates very well).
A 406 MHz ELT is a useful distress signaling device if people are aware
of their limitations, and if they are installed properly. And there are
very high activation rate failures--people should just not assume these
will trigger automatically, especially given many of the (unavoidable)
improper installations in gliders. I strongly believe that alternative
technologies including SPOT and/or 406MHz PLBs provide better safety
benefits for less hassle/work/effort/cost. You can buy both a SPOT and
PLB and have money left over compared to a 406 MHz ELT. 121.5 MHz only
ELTs are really not even worth discussing. Spider and other technology
at more expensive price ranges an do even more (and things like the
Garmin GSR-56 are very impressive for high-end GA aircraft).

Workable ELT antenna installation? Sorry but but I can't let this slide
by a "workable install". I know it is very difficult to mount an ELT
antenna on a glider and there are always serious tradeoffs but I don't
want anybody thing the install shown in the link provided really is a
good installation of an ELT antenna.

At least the forward cockpit here is glass fiber but bolting an antenna
on to metal rod going off at 90 degrees from the antenna base is not a
suitable ground plane. The radiation pattern from that is antenna will
be highly directional and weaker than a proper ground plane
installation. A ground plane for a 1/4 wave antenna should be a
conductive disk (or metal screen) or close shape of radius at least the
same as the length of the antenna. Alternately radial wires or rods the
same length or longer can radiate in a disk pattern from the base of
the antenna. You might be able to get away with as few as three
symmetrical ground wires, but four is more usual. And you also need to
get the antenna above any carbon fiber surfaces and an antenna length or
more away from significant sized conductive objects.

So basically you can't get these antennas to fit inside a sailplane and
any install will be a significant compromise. Many of the ELT
installations I've see in gliders are very bad. I would be very
disappointing if ELTs were ever mandated at a contest. You would have
people badly installing these boxes just to comply with a rule. If the
goal was providing reliable, effective emergency signalling you would
have the poor CD and staff needing to reject glider entries with
horrible installations (which might be most entrants).

BTW checking you can hear the ELT over the radio on a nearby receiver is
a next to useless test of ELT antenna performance.

Darryl

[Wayne Paul]

Todd,

I looked at the APRS system several years ago. It would provide coverage
when flying in the Boise region. However, the coverage is minimal to none
existent over the mountains of Central Idaho (Mackay, King Mountain Glider
Park, etc.) and bordering region of Montana.

H Wayne Paul
W7ADK (I've had my amateur radio license for a LONG time.)


"Todd" wrote in message
...

And if you have an Amateur Radio License there is the APRS tracking
option.

Here is a flight in Colorado (where you might think the coverage may
not be good) for this summer:

http://aprs.fi/?call=N8RNW-6&dt=1311292800&mt=roadmap&z=10&timerange=3600

A device like this: http://www.byonics.com/mt-rtg is easy to stick
in the glider

More information available at: http://www.aprs.org

And if you do not have an Amateur Radio License, get one. It is not
that hard. There are networks of linked repeaters that will give you
radio contact to your crew over distances that your aircraft radio
wont.

[Tim Mara]

Please look at my website page:
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/elt_emergency_locator_plb_person.htm
there is a new unit from Kannad that has not only internal GPS but also
includes and internal 406 Mhz antenna. You will note that they originally
had suggested this could be mounted without any external antenna but the FAA
frowned on this and they now include a note regarding this "an external
antenna must be mounted when "mandated".essentially though, an ELT is not
"mandated" for gliders and in fact there is an exception to the ELT
requirement for gliders. With that being said, this ELT can legally be
installed in a glider without the external antenna.....I have spoken
directly with our technical contact at Kannad and he stated that the ELT
performs as well with the internal antenna as with the external antenna as
long as the ELT has an unblocked view (meaning not covered by metal, carbon
fiber or materials that would otherwise block the antenna signal. The other
exception to this is that the Integra ELT does not transmit the 121.5 Mhz
signal without the external antenna. It will Tx on 121.5 however with the
"portable" antenna used like most handheld devices so this could also be
easily implemented.

I have in the past installed the previous model 121.4/243 ELT's in my own
gliders with simple rubber duck handheld antennas since they too were 1/4
wave and typical for the airband (118-136 Mhz) and mounted these on smaller
ground planes..Understandably even the short rubber duck antenna is in
actuality a 22-23" antenna but coiled so it in all perfection should have a
ground plane that would be undoable in nearly any glider (being nearly 22"
radius) but even a small ground plane is more effective and though a
compromise of the "ideal" works....I have tested my own and found then
working and sending a signal that I believe could be received by S&R.

The big advantage to the aircraft ELT over Spot's and PLB's is that they are
activated on impact and have internal batteries capable of sending the
signal for several hours even days and I know we've all heard the arguments
that ELT's don't work....but the fact of the matter is that they do and even
in soaring we have had ELT's that have helpd to find downed gliders.. should
ELT's be mandatory in gliders, in contest? or? ? I'll let the rest of you
argue and debate this and leave requiring ELTs, PLB's Spot's, Flarm, TCAS
and the rest up the individual pilots to decide.
regards
Tim Mara


"Dick" > wrote in message
...
>A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
> all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. I immediatly ordered a
> 121.5 / 406 Mhz model. It came the other day, a year and a half
> later. It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
> outside of a carbon hull. I have two questions. One, what happened
> to the urgency??? and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
> to the antenna issue?
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 6407 (20110824) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6407 (20110824) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

[Tim Mara]

I would not want to recommend any of these installations as shown as
examples of "how to do it", all of the installations proposed were highly
suspect...in any antenna installation you'd want to keep the antenna's from
paralleling other antenna's, metal posts or objects as they will interfere
with the radiation pattern and even can bounce signals back and forth
creating distortion.you also need to look at the antenna mast and the
direction that you are hoping to transmit to, typically the mast would want
to be vertical to send the signal in a more horizontal direction,
particularly for communications being that we don't know in the case of an
ELT what might and might not be vertical .....again looking for
ideal....even that said, some signal can get out even with a damaged or
missing antenna but greatly reduced..In a conversation with Ameri-King
(claimed) they claimed to have tested their ELT for certification with no
antenna attached...but I might find this to be suspect.
tim
Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at www.wingsandwheels.com


"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Dick,
>
> ELTs are still great safety devices.
>
> Most contests probably won't require them - requiring SPOT units instead.
>
> One workable internal antenna mounting solution is shown here:
> http://www.archive.jimphoenix.com/archive09/jimphoenix2/pages/Nimbus/Nfuselage/subNfuselage.html
> Best Regards,
>
> Paul Remde
> Cumulus Soaring, Inc.



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6407 (20110824) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

[Darryl Ramm]

Mmmm thanks Tim, that Kannad antenna systems is quite appealing for
somebody who really wants a 406 Mhz ELT. This may be by far the best ELT
approach, say mount it under the fiberglass RF area of a turtledeck (an
area that likely survives impact well).

Just be aware that many SAR organizations may still attempt to do final
homing on the 121.5 MHz beacon all these systems also carry and so
having a way to connect the 121.5 MHz antenna (if you are able to after
landing/crashing) is important. The 406 MHz patch antenna is unlikely to
provide a good radial pattern for ground based homing on 405 MHz.

I think we'll disagree on how reliable ELTs activations are - at least
one benefit of a Kannad system is that mounted like above or in front of
the spars under the turledeck and aligned along the gliders axis
properly etc. is likely a better install location than other places
where these ELTs end up misaligned and have likely lower probability of
proper activation.

The problem with rubber ducky antennas with 405 MHz ELTs is having a
single antenna that handles 406 MHz and 121.5 MHz signals.


Darryl

On 8/24/11 1:54 PM, Tim Mara wrote:
> Please look at my website page:
> http://www.wingsandwheels.com/elt_emergency_locator_plb_person.htm
> there is a new unit from Kannad that has not only internal GPS but also
> includes and internal 406 Mhz antenna. You will note that they originally
> had suggested this could be mounted without any external antenna but the FAA
> frowned on this and they now include a note regarding this "an external
> antenna must be mounted when "mandated".essentially though, an ELT is not
> "mandated" for gliders and in fact there is an exception to the ELT
> requirement for gliders. With that being said, this ELT can legally be
> installed in a glider without the external antenna.....I have spoken
> directly with our technical contact at Kannad and he stated that the ELT
> performs as well with the internal antenna as with the external antenna as
> long as the ELT has an unblocked view (meaning not covered by metal, carbon
> fiber or materials that would otherwise block the antenna signal. The other
> exception to this is that the Integra ELT does not transmit the 121.5 Mhz
> signal without the external antenna. It will Tx on 121.5 however with the
> "portable" antenna used like most handheld devices so this could also be
> easily implemented.
>
> I have in the past installed the previous model 121.4/243 ELT's in my own
> gliders with simple rubber duck handheld antennas since they too were 1/4
> wave and typical for the airband (118-136 Mhz) and mounted these on smaller
> ground planes..Understandably even the short rubber duck antenna is in
> actuality a 22-23" antenna but coiled so it in all perfection should have a
> ground plane that would be undoable in nearly any glider (being nearly 22"
> radius) but even a small ground plane is more effective and though a
> compromise of the "ideal" works....I have tested my own and found then
> working and sending a signal that I believe could be received by S&R.
>
> The big advantage to the aircraft ELT over Spot's and PLB's is that they are
> activated on impact and have internal batteries capable of sending the
> signal for several hours even days and I know we've all heard the arguments
> that ELT's don't work....but the fact of the matter is that they do and even
> in soaring we have had ELT's that have helpd to find downed gliders.. should
> ELT's be mandatory in gliders, in contest? or? ? I'll let the rest of you
> argue and debate this and leave requiring ELTs, PLB's Spot's, Flarm, TCAS
> and the rest up the individual pilots to decide.
> regards
> Tim Mara
>
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
>> all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. I immediatly ordered a
>> 121.5 / 406 Mhz model. It came the other day, a year and a half
>> later. It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
>> outside of a carbon hull. I have two questions. One, what happened
>> to the urgency??? and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
>> to the antenna issue?
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>> signature database 6407 (20110824) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6407 (20110824) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>

[Tim Mara]

In my own installations and the ones I illustrated on my website with the
rubber duck antenna's these were of course done with the 121.5/243.0 ELT's
not with 406 Mhz....
granted, few S&R teams have capability to even search the 406 frequency
signals and do rely on the stand-by 121.5 Mhz ....the new 406 ELT's
typically will no longer have 243.0Mhz but retain 121.5.again, you have to
have an external antenna or portable antenna to Tx on this
frequency.....Kannad does have an optional antenna for portable use and it
is possible that other rubber duck antenna could also be mounted to the unit
for 121.5 but Kannad warns that an improper antenna used here can also harm
the ELT...I'd need to get more clarification as to why and how but at least
their own portable antenna option remains as possible choice.
best regards
Tim Mara
Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at www.wingsandwheels.com

"Darryl Ramm" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Mmmm thanks Tim, that Kannad antenna systems is quite appealing for
> somebody who really wants a 406 Mhz ELT. This may be by far the best ELT
> approach, say mount it under the fiberglass RF area of a turtledeck (an
> area that likely survives impact well).
>
> Just be aware that many SAR organizations may still attempt to do final
> homing on the 121.5 MHz beacon all these systems also carry and so having
> a way to connect the 121.5 MHz antenna (if you are able to after
> landing/crashing) is important. The 406 MHz patch antenna is unlikely to
> provide a good radial pattern for ground based homing on 405 MHz.
>
> I think we'll disagree on how reliable ELTs activations are - at least one
> benefit of a Kannad system is that mounted like above or in front of the
> spars under the turledeck and aligned along the gliders axis properly etc.
> is likely a better install location than other places where these ELTs end
> up misaligned and have likely lower probability of proper activation.
>
> The problem with rubber ducky antennas with 405 MHz ELTs is having a
> single antenna that handles 406 MHz and 121.5 MHz signals.
>
>
> Darryl
>
> On 8/24/11 1:54 PM, Tim Mara wrote:
>> Please look at my website page:
>> http://www.wingsandwheels.com/elt_emergency_locator_plb_person.htm
>> there is a new unit from Kannad that has not only internal GPS but also
>> includes and internal 406 Mhz antenna. You will note that they originally
>> had suggested this could be mounted without any external antenna but the
>> FAA
>> frowned on this and they now include a note regarding this "an external
>> antenna must be mounted when "mandated".essentially though, an ELT is not
>> "mandated" for gliders and in fact there is an exception to the ELT
>> requirement for gliders. With that being said, this ELT can legally be
>> installed in a glider without the external antenna.....I have spoken
>> directly with our technical contact at Kannad and he stated that the ELT
>> performs as well with the internal antenna as with the external antenna
>> as
>> long as the ELT has an unblocked view (meaning not covered by metal,
>> carbon
>> fiber or materials that would otherwise block the antenna signal. The
>> other
>> exception to this is that the Integra ELT does not transmit the 121.5 Mhz
>> signal without the external antenna. It will Tx on 121.5 however with the
>> "portable" antenna used like most handheld devices so this could also be
>> easily implemented.
>>
>> I have in the past installed the previous model 121.4/243 ELT's in my own
>> gliders with simple rubber duck handheld antennas since they too were 1/4
>> wave and typical for the airband (118-136 Mhz) and mounted these on
>> smaller
>> ground planes..Understandably even the short rubber duck antenna is in
>> actuality a 22-23" antenna but coiled so it in all perfection should have
>> a
>> ground plane that would be undoable in nearly any glider (being nearly
>> 22"
>> radius) but even a small ground plane is more effective and though a
>> compromise of the "ideal" works....I have tested my own and found then
>> working and sending a signal that I believe could be received by S&R.
>>
>> The big advantage to the aircraft ELT over Spot's and PLB's is that they
>> are
>> activated on impact and have internal batteries capable of sending the
>> signal for several hours even days and I know we've all heard the
>> arguments
>> that ELT's don't work....but the fact of the matter is that they do and
>> even
>> in soaring we have had ELT's that have helpd to find downed gliders..
>> should
>> ELT's be mandatory in gliders, in contest? or? ? I'll let the rest of you
>> argue and debate this and leave requiring ELTs, PLB's Spot's, Flarm,
>> TCAS
>> and the rest up the individual pilots to decide.
>> regards
>> Tim Mara
>>
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
>>> all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. I immediatly ordered a
>>> 121.5 / 406 Mhz model. It came the other day, a year and a half
>>> later. It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
>>> outside of a carbon hull. I have two questions. One, what happened
>>> to the urgency??? and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
>>> to the antenna issue?
>>>
>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>> signature database 6407 (20110824) __________
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>> signature database 6407 (20110824) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 6410 (20110825) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6410 (20110825) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

[cernauta]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 16:03:46 -0700 (PDT), Bob Kuykendall
> wrote:


>In a word, Spot.

the big disadvantage of the Spot device is, if I understand correctly,
that it sends out a position message every 10 minutes.
It may well happen that a message doesn't pass through the satellite
system, so the distance between fixes may reach 20 (or more) minutes.

Now, at the the speed we fly in contest, 10mins equal somewhere
between 10 and 30 km. Add to this the unpredictable deviations from
course, and I believe you get just an indication for a search circle
about 30km in radius. In rough terrain, that's quite a huge area.

My first choice is to have an ELT, and possibly add tracking
functions via a GPS-Smartphone (feat. ReliRescue or similar softwares)
or a Spot.

When many sailplanes share a competition area, Flarm traces have
proved to be extremely valuable in reconstructing a missing glider's
path. Another reason for promoting Flarm usage.

aldo cernezzi

(BTW: I've been at a contest where we all were grounded for 3
consecutive days, trying to help, driving and hiking around in the
mountains, until the rests were found. The pain for the family was
never ending. Please don't let this agony repeat itself)

[[email protected]]

On Aug 23, 6:36*pm, Dick > wrote:
> A couple of years ago there was talk of denying entry in to contests
> all gliders that were not equipped with ELT's. *I immediatly ordered a
> 121.5 / 406 Mhz model. *It came the other day, a year and a half
> later. *It includes a clunky antenna that would have to be mounted
> outside of a carbon hull. *I have two questions. *One, what happened
> to the urgency??? *and two has anyone come up with a workable solution
> to the antenna issue?

US contest rules permit the contest organizer to require ELT's or
other safety device as thety see fit.The initiative, authored by
myself, to make ELT's mandatory was never implemented as pilots did
not think theyshould be mandatory.
Personally, I have an impact actuated ELT, a 406 PLB, and a SPOT,
acquired in that order.
I'm confident that, with those implemented, I will be found.
None are perfect.
ELT's are negatively affected by installation and antenna issues.
PLB's require concious person to activate.
Spot has to see the sky.
Today from scratch, I would do Spot, and add impact activated 406 when
I felt I could afford it,
My decisions are based on my hope that my going missing will end
quickly to minimize the effect on my wife and family.
FWIW
UH
UH