Installing an ELT antenna.

[[email protected]]

Any advice out there re the preferred location for an ELT antenna in a
Ventus 2 ? With a Carbon fiber fuselage its not obvious to me the best
place to install the antenna ( Ameriking supplied - about 20 inches
long ) The factory suggests "under the canopy" , but to me I can't see
how to do that easily . All suggestions welcome .

Ron Clarke (ZA)

[Mike the Strike]

I'm investigating the same problem for a Discus 2. The problem with
the lower location is it's very subject to damage. I am leaning
towards a "shark fin" installation on top of the fuselage just behind
the wings. A local Nimbus 3 has just had one installed there.

Mike

[bumper]

Options are limited if you don't want an external antenna. If the area over
the spars is fiberglass, you could use the "Bob Archer Sportcraft" folded
dipole, which is flexible and can be mounted to the inside of curved
surfaces. Dimensions are 12" X 26.5", mod SA-006, from Chief Aircraft $82.50
US.

You might be able to find a home for this antenna somewhere else, like under
the glareshield, if there's room.

One could also make their own dipole antenna by separating the inner
conductor and outer shield, then extending same in opposite directions (or
alternately soldering the coax conductors to two strips of copper foil or
wires). The total length of the antenna, both sides, for 121.5 Mhz, would be
about 3ft.10-1/4in. or 1.174 M.

Since response to 121.5 MHz ELTs is scheduled to end in 3 years, I purchase
a 406 MHz PLB w/ built in GPS for $500 USD ($550 before rebate - - which I
haven't received yet!). This unit must be tripped manually, is registered to
me, and can attach to parachute harness etc.

good luck

bumper

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Any advice out there re the preferred location for an ELT antenna in a
> Ventus 2 ? With a Carbon fiber fuselage its not obvious to me the best
> place to install the antenna ( Ameriking supplied - about 20 inches
> long ) The factory suggests "under the canopy" , but to me I can't see
> how to do that easily . All suggestions welcome .
>
> Ron Clarke (ZA)
>

[Bob Kibby]

I also have one of the new PLBs on my parachute harness but understand that
it does not satisfy the US Competition requirement for an ELT in 2006 since
it is not "g" activated.

Bob Kibby "2BK"




>
> Since response to 121.5 MHz ELTs is scheduled to end in 3 years, I
> purchase a 406 MHz PLB w/ built in GPS for $500 USD ($550 before
> rebate - - which I haven't received yet!). This unit must be tripped
> manually, is registered to me, and can attach to parachute harness etc.
>
> good luck
>
> bumper
>
>

[Mike the Strike]

Oops. I mixed up two replies. My transponder antenna is the current
problem. My ELT antenna is a rubber duckie mounted at the rear of the
canopy rail. Probably the quickest and cheapest solution.

[bumper]

"Mike the Strike" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Oops. I mixed up two replies. My transponder antenna is the current
> problem. My ELT antenna is a rubber duckie mounted at the rear of the
> canopy rail. Probably the quickest and cheapest solution.
>

Oh, okay. Transponder antenna it is, then.

I know that some have mounted their transponder antenna up forward of, or on
the glareshield. I'm not comfortable with this due to RF exposure concerns.
Also, since it is arguably more important to give ATC a good view of your
antenna, the bottom of the aircraft is the optimal location.

If the ship fuselage is glass, an aluminum plate, for a ground plane and
mount can be installed within the fuselage. DG shows examples of this on
their website. However, if the ship is carbon, then the antenna will
probably have to go on the outside. My ASH26E has it just aft of the left
gear door. It's the little stub monopole antenna (costs 35 to 45 bucks US)
you see everywhere. Mounted on carbon, it needs no additional ground plane,
but if one desired, some copper or aluminum foil or sheet could be placed
inside.

This location, while not immune from trailer hits, is relatively easy to
avoid, at least on the 26E. In the case of a gear-up, which isn't on my
remaining short list of things to do, unlike a blade, it won't try to
protect itself by destroying a chunk of fuselage.

all the best,

bumper

[Paul Remde]

Hi Ron,

Some of the replies to your post on r.a.s. mentioned short stub antennas and
spade antennas. They are designed for use with a transponder which use very
different frequencies than an ELT.

The ELT you purchased will transmit on 121.5 MHz and 243 MHz.

I see that Wings and Wheels offers a small rubber ducky antenna here:
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page14.htm I don't have any idea whether that
solution would be acceptable to the FAA or how the transmit output would be
affected, but it is a simple solution. I can't say that I recommend it, but
I don't know what else to suggest. The disclaimer note on Tim's web site
is, "note: this may not be suitable for installations that require
certification,
but ELT's are not required in sailplanes and can use this for an added
safety feature."

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com




> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Any advice out there re the preferred location for an ELT antenna in a
> Ventus 2 ? With a Carbon fiber fuselage its not obvious to me the best
> place to install the antenna ( Ameriking supplied - about 20 inches
> long ) The factory suggests "under the canopy" , but to me I can't see
> how to do that easily . All suggestions welcome .
>
> Ron Clarke (ZA)
>

[Marc Ramsey]

bumper wrote:
> This location, while not immune from trailer hits, is relatively easy to
> avoid, at least on the 26E. In the case of a gear-up, which isn't on my
> remaining short list of things to do, unlike a blade, it won't try to
> protect itself by destroying a chunk of fuselage.

A blade can be mounted on the lower fuselage such that it is not
vulnerable to gear-ups or trailer hits. If it is possible to reach far
enough back in the fuselage, it can be mounted on the center line where
the fuselage curves upwards toward the tailboom. Otherwise, it can be
mounted behind the gear well, offset from the center line just enough
that it does not extend below the lowest part of the fuselage.

Marc

[Marc Ramsey]

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> Tim's note is correct - you can't use a rubber ducky type
> antenna for a certified ELT installation, but if you don't
> have to have an ELT under the FAR's, you can use any antenna
> you want. The other option is a center fed dipole tape
> antenna. I know Tim sells those too.

I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think it
is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified glider
will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably
does not require a 337. The question in my mind, however, is whether
the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT installation
in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a
rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?

Marc

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

Beyond whether it is OK to do - it is also important to consider whether it
will work well when needed. The rubber duck antenna is for 118 to 136 MHz
while the ELT that Ron asked about transmits on both 121.5 and 243.0 MHz
simultaneously. It is important to use an antenna that will transmit on
those frequencies well in an emergency.

Please don't get me wrong, I am not trying to knock Tim. His advice on the
web page is very good and he does have many nice antenna options. It is
clear to me that Tim knows more about antennas than I do. I am trying to
help Ron find a good solution for the AmeriKing AK-450 ELT that he purchased
from me.

Some other sailplane owners must have done this before... I look forward to
some good feedback from the many sharp glider pilots.

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde

"Marc Ramsey" > wrote in message
...
>T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
>> Tim's note is correct - you can't use a rubber ducky type
>> antenna for a certified ELT installation, but if you don't
>> have to have an ELT under the FAR's, you can use any antenna
>> you want. The other option is a center fed dipole tape
>> antenna. I know Tim sells those too.
>
> I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
> certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
> likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think it
> is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified glider
> will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably does
> not require a 337. The question in my mind, however, is whether the
> typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT installation in a
> certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a rubber
> ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>
> Marc

[Marc Ramsey]

Paul Remde wrote:
> Beyond whether it is OK to do - it is also important to consider whether it
> will work well when needed. The rubber duck antenna is for 118 to 136 MHz
> while the ELT that Ron asked about transmits on both 121.5 and 243.0 MHz
> simultaneously. It is important to use an antenna that will transmit on
> those frequencies well in an emergency.

To be honest, I suspect some of us are giving a bit more consideration
to what is minimally necessary to meet the SSA rules and FAA
regulations, than we are to how well it might ultimately work if it is
ever actually needed...

Marc

[Roy Bourgeois]

Ron:

My ACK ELT antenna in my Nimbus 3 is installed lengthwise, in line with the
fuselage, under the instrument panel (glare shield) cover. I used plastic
tie wraps to secure it to the panel cover. By all reports it puts out a
good signal. My transponder antenna is a 2.5" stubby located vertically on
the fuselage aft of the turtle deck with a 10" aluminum pie plate ( from
the supermarket!) inside the fuselage surrounding the base of the
antenna ATC says it also puts out a decent signal.

Roy B.

[jphoenix]

Marc,

Perhaps we could have the SSA government liaison (or SRA dude) ask all
these questions directly to the FAA. Specifically:

Can a private pilot glider install his own ELT in his own experimental
glider and sign it off?
Does a TC'd glider need a 337 form completed and approved (major
alteration)?
Does a glider with an ELT installed have to meet all (or some) of the
requirements of 91.207?

With an official FAA answer to these questions, and perhaps some more I
didn't think of, we can avoid uncertainty over what rules apply and how
they apply, etc.

Jim




>
> I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
> certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
> likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think it
> is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified glider
> will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably
> does not require a 337. The question in my mind, however, is whether
> the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT installation
> in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a
> rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>
> Marc

[Ian Cant]

As a general rule, it's better not to ask if the answer
might be unpleasant.

Ian





At 00:36 27 September 2005, Jphoenix wrote:
>Marc,
>
>Perhaps we could have the SSA government liaison (or
>SRA dude) ask all
>these questions directly to the FAA. Specifically:
>
>Can a private pilot glider install his own ELT in his
>own experimental
>glider and sign it off?
>Does a TC'd glider need a 337 form completed and approved
>(major
>alteration)?
>Does a glider with an ELT installed have to meet all
>(or some) of the
>requirements of 91.207?
>
>With an official FAA answer to these questions, and
>perhaps some more I
>didn't think of, we can avoid uncertainty over what
>rules apply and how
>they apply, etc.
>
>Jim
>
>
>
>
>>
>> I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with
>>an experimental
>> certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any
>>way you want, and
>> likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a
>>non-A&P). I think it
>> is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a
>>type certified glider
>> will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign
>>off, but probably
>> does not require a 337. The question in my mind,
>>however, is whether
>> the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off
>>an ELT installation
>> in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified
>>components (like a
>> rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>>
>> Marc
>
>

[jphoenix]

Perhaps if the rulemakers ask the question and recieve an unpleasant
answer, they will consider any additional unpleasant impact (cost).

Or, maybe the answer is good and we can have uniformity in next year's
contests and people can avoid unnecessary cost of installation. Maybe
we can all install ELT's any way we want without fear of compliance.

In any case, I believe the rulemakers have a duty to resolve any
possible confusion. Just like the real FAA who must consider the
federalism impact (cost) of any rulemaking, including AD's. Creating a
rule that does not match the FAA rule will certainly confuse someone.

Jim

[Frank Whiteley]

T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
> Marc Ramsey > wrote:
>
> >I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
> >certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
> >likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think it
> >is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified glider
> >will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably
> >does not require a 337.
>
> I've never owned a type certified glider, and I'll admit my
> answer was probably colored somewhat by that fact. However,
> if the ELT installation requires an A&P/IA/337 for a
> non-required ELT, you begin down the slippery slope of
> whether glide computers also require that, and if they
> require it, then you must ask whether the A&P/IA/337 must
> ensure that the glide computer has TSO certification like
> all the other instruments in the panel of any type certified
> airplane or glider (which AFAIK, no glider flight computers
> have). Now you're staring at the big elephant in the glider
> room that so many have been ignoring for so long.
>
> I'm not saying I know the answers here - I don't - which is
> why I'm so uncomfortable with some of these issues as they
> relate to type certified gliders. My concern, however is
> that you may get some very bad answers for soaring as a
> sport in the U.S.
>
> > The question in my mind, however, is whether
> >the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT installation
> >in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a
> >rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>
> If the rubber ducky is the only uncertified component in the
> glider, I'd breathe a big sigh of relief.
>
> T o d d P a t t i s t - "WH" Ventus C
> (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)

Not to mention mylar seals and turbulator tapes. Perhaps they are just
decorative.

Frank Whiteley

[Paul Remde]

Good points.

Paul Remde

"T o d d P a t t i s t" > wrote in message
...
> Marc Ramsey > wrote:
>
>>I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
>>certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
>>likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think it
>>is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified glider
>>will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably
>>does not require a 337.
>
> I've never owned a type certified glider, and I'll admit my
> answer was probably colored somewhat by that fact. However,
> if the ELT installation requires an A&P/IA/337 for a
> non-required ELT, you begin down the slippery slope of
> whether glide computers also require that, and if they
> require it, then you must ask whether the A&P/IA/337 must
> ensure that the glide computer has TSO certification like
> all the other instruments in the panel of any type certified
> airplane or glider (which AFAIK, no glider flight computers
> have). Now you're staring at the big elephant in the glider
> room that so many have been ignoring for so long.
>
> I'm not saying I know the answers here - I don't - which is
> why I'm so uncomfortable with some of these issues as they
> relate to type certified gliders. My concern, however is
> that you may get some very bad answers for soaring as a
> sport in the U.S.
>
>> The question in my mind, however, is whether
>>the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT installation
>>in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a
>>rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>
> If the rubber ducky is the only uncertified component in the
> glider, I'd breathe a big sigh of relief.
>
> T o d d P a t t i s t - "WH" Ventus C
> (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)

[Tim Mara]

some years ago I contacted my local FSDO and asked about ELT installation in
my glider..this was long before some SSA sites required them ...knowing the
glider did not "require" an ELT to be legal, the question to the Fed's was
"can I install an ELT if it doesn't meet the manufacturers specifications
(meaning antenna installation). I installed this and several others since
not because the FAA or SSA required it.but because I considered it to be an
inexpensive safety feature that I wanted for myself, and for my loved ones
should there ever be a chance it might be needed. Essentially, the response
was very favorable with them saying "anything you do to promote safety we'll
go along with".Now that response was from MY FSDO (local office). I
installed the ELT in the most professional manner as to location, mounting,
and meeting all other manufacturers requirements, expect, installing a
handheld radios rubber duck antenna on a metal plate for ground plane.....I
completed a 337 and new wt/balance and had the local A&I sign off on the
installation..I also tested the ELT at some range and found the signal to be
actually quite excellent.....Now I never tested it beyond a few miles, and
I'm quite sure a higher performance 1/4 wave fixed mast antenna mounted
external with proper ground plane may have been better.....but this
installation, IMHO did what I wanted and expected.....it would give the S&R
people something to locate the aircraft with....
I also had concerns about externally mounted ELT antenna's being knocked off
in a crash and contacted 3 different ELT manufacturers and found that even
one manufacturer claimed they had certified their brand ELT with NO antenna
installed at all and with the ELT simply sitting on an aircraft wing when it
was tested to be certified. obviously this would not be the highest
performance set-up and not what should be.
I have noted that S-H and DG have made ELT antenna installations in some
gliders that are comprised of nothing more than this same rubber duck
antenna mounted on an angled bracket in the cockpit with essentially no
ground plane........though I do not consider this to be a high performance
set-up, it appears they also think it is suitable......Personally I wish all
glider manufacturers would spend a bit more time and consideration to
building really good antenna's into their structures for Comm, ELT and
Transponders, so far none have.....until then, we have to improvise.and do
the best with what we have.....that is why I have made some "non-certified"
antenna options available, and though I have tried to make it known these
are not certified for use where the FAA mandates ELT use, they will IMHO
work, and simple and inexpensive "options"......if someone (anyone) has a
better option, I would like to see them....and would of course consider
offering them as well...
Best regards
Tim

Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com

"jphoenix" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Marc,
>
> Perhaps we could have the SSA government liaison (or SRA dude) ask all
> these questions directly to the FAA. Specifically:
>
> Can a private pilot glider install his own ELT in his own experimental
> glider and sign it off?
> Does a TC'd glider need a 337 form completed and approved (major
> alteration)?
> Does a glider with an ELT installed have to meet all (or some) of the
> requirements of 91.207?
>
> With an official FAA answer to these questions, and perhaps some more I
> didn't think of, we can avoid uncertainty over what rules apply and how
> they apply, etc.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>>
>> I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
>> certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
>> likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think it
>> is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified glider
>> will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably
>> does not require a 337. The question in my mind, however, is whether
>> the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT installation
>> in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a
>> rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>>
>> Marc
>

[Paul Remde]

Hi Tim,

Good points. Do you know if the rubber duck antenna will transmit the
higher frequency signals on 243.0 MHz as from the AmeriKing AK-450 ELT OK?
I'm not an expert on antennas, but I imagine that since it is 2 x the
frequency the antenna is designed for it may work fine.

Thanks,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com

"Tim Mara" > wrote in message
...
> some years ago I contacted my local FSDO and asked about ELT installation
> in my glider..this was long before some SSA sites required them
> ...knowing the glider did not "require" an ELT to be legal, the question
> to the Fed's was "can I install an ELT if it doesn't meet the
> manufacturers specifications (meaning antenna installation). I installed
> this and several others since not because the FAA or SSA required it.but
> because I considered it to be an inexpensive safety feature that I wanted
> for myself, and for my loved ones should there ever be a chance it might
> be needed. Essentially, the response was very favorable with them saying
> "anything you do to promote safety we'll go along with".Now that response
> was from MY FSDO (local office). I installed the ELT in the most
> professional manner as to location, mounting, and meeting all other
> manufacturers requirements, expect, installing a handheld radios rubber
> duck antenna on a metal plate for ground plane.....I completed a 337 and
> new wt/balance and had the local A&I sign off on the installation..I also
> tested the ELT at some range and found the signal to be actually quite
> excellent.....Now I never tested it beyond a few miles, and I'm quite sure
> a higher performance 1/4 wave fixed mast antenna mounted external with
> proper ground plane may have been better.....but this installation, IMHO
> did what I wanted and expected.....it would give the S&R people something
> to locate the aircraft with....
> I also had concerns about externally mounted ELT antenna's being knocked
> off in a crash and contacted 3 different ELT manufacturers and found that
> even one manufacturer claimed they had certified their brand ELT with NO
> antenna installed at all and with the ELT simply sitting on an aircraft
> wing when it was tested to be certified. obviously this would not be the
> highest performance set-up and not what should be.
> I have noted that S-H and DG have made ELT antenna installations in some
> gliders that are comprised of nothing more than this same rubber duck
> antenna mounted on an angled bracket in the cockpit with essentially no
> ground plane........though I do not consider this to be a high performance
> set-up, it appears they also think it is suitable......Personally I wish
> all glider manufacturers would spend a bit more time and consideration to
> building really good antenna's into their structures for Comm, ELT and
> Transponders, so far none have.....until then, we have to improvise.and do
> the best with what we have.....that is why I have made some
> "non-certified" antenna options available, and though I have tried to make
> it known these are not certified for use where the FAA mandates ELT use,
> they will IMHO work, and simple and inexpensive "options"......if someone
> (anyone) has a better option, I would like to see them....and would of
> course consider offering them as well...
> Best regards
> Tim
>
> Wings & Wheels
> www.wingsandwheels.com
>
> "jphoenix" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Marc,
>>
>> Perhaps we could have the SSA government liaison (or SRA dude) ask all
>> these questions directly to the FAA. Specifically:
>>
>> Can a private pilot glider install his own ELT in his own experimental
>> glider and sign it off?
>> Does a TC'd glider need a 337 form completed and approved (major
>> alteration)?
>> Does a glider with an ELT installed have to meet all (or some) of the
>> requirements of 91.207?
>>
>> With an official FAA answer to these questions, and perhaps some more I
>> didn't think of, we can avoid uncertainty over what rules apply and how
>> they apply, etc.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
>>> certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
>>> likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think it
>>> is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified glider
>>> will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably
>>> does not require a 337. The question in my mind, however, is whether
>>> the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT installation
>>> in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a
>>> rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>>>
>>> Marc
>>
>
>

[Mike the Strike]

Tim's comments are very useful.

I am also wrestling with both ELT and transponder antenna installation
issues and wonder why manufacturers don't install them, at least as an
option.

I have one of the ground-plane-less rubber duckies for my ELT and am
going to replace it with an internal dipole, mainly because its
location next to the canopy rear sticks it in my right ear! It will
work perfectly well inside the fiberglass fuselage, where it is also
less likely to suffer damage. I will probably do the same with my
transponder antenna also, although I may stick that in the nose above
my feet.

Certification of avionics is mainly to ensure that the signal is in the
correct frequency and transmitted power with unwanted signals below
stated thresholds. Transponders also need to be tested for encoding.

Antennas are less of an issue since almost anything of about the right
length will work and most transmitter stages can handle pretty awful
impedance mismatches.

[Tim Mara]

it should.......the standard antenna's supplied with most ELT's are simply
fixed length 1/4" wave antennas.....rubber duck type antennas are also fixed
length 1/4 wave they are physically shorter.......but not......with the OAL
of the antenna being simply coiled for the more "convenient" but less
efficient length
1/4 wave length can be mathematically figured by using the simple formula
One-quarter wave: 246 divided by the frequency in MHz equals the length in
feet
divide this by 12 give you antenna mast length in inches
so...ELT frequency of 121.5 is (246 / 121.5 = 24.29")
One-half wave: 492 divided by the frequency in MHz equals the length in feet
243 MHZ is the same if you use 1/2 wave 492/243.0 =24.29")
and when you consider hand held radios use only the radio itself as the
ground plane you find it does still work....though not as well or efficient
as the fixed length 1/4 wave antenna on a good ground plane..though it is
more convenient than carrying your glider around next to your ear :o)
tim
Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at:
www.wingsandwheels.com





"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
news:EBe_e.371199$_o.9111@attbi_s71...
> Hi Tim,
>
> Good points. Do you know if the rubber duck antenna will transmit the
> higher frequency signals on 243.0 MHz as from the AmeriKing AK-450 ELT OK?
> I'm not an expert on antennas, but I imagine that since it is 2 x the
> frequency the antenna is designed for it may work fine.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul Remde
> Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
> http://www.cumulus-soaring.com
>
> "Tim Mara" > wrote in message
> ...
>> some years ago I contacted my local FSDO and asked about ELT installation
>> in my glider..this was long before some SSA sites required them
>> ...knowing the glider did not "require" an ELT to be legal, the question
>> to the Fed's was "can I install an ELT if it doesn't meet the
>> manufacturers specifications (meaning antenna installation). I installed
>> this and several others since not because the FAA or SSA required it.but
>> because I considered it to be an inexpensive safety feature that I wanted
>> for myself, and for my loved ones should there ever be a chance it might
>> be needed. Essentially, the response was very favorable with them saying
>> "anything you do to promote safety we'll go along with".Now that response
>> was from MY FSDO (local office). I installed the ELT in the most
>> professional manner as to location, mounting, and meeting all other
>> manufacturers requirements, expect, installing a handheld radios rubber
>> duck antenna on a metal plate for ground plane.....I completed a 337 and
>> new wt/balance and had the local A&I sign off on the installation..I also
>> tested the ELT at some range and found the signal to be actually quite
>> excellent.....Now I never tested it beyond a few miles, and I'm quite
>> sure a higher performance 1/4 wave fixed mast antenna mounted external
>> with proper ground plane may have been better.....but this installation,
>> IMHO did what I wanted and expected.....it would give the S&R people
>> something to locate the aircraft with....
>> I also had concerns about externally mounted ELT antenna's being knocked
>> off in a crash and contacted 3 different ELT manufacturers and found that
>> even one manufacturer claimed they had certified their brand ELT with NO
>> antenna installed at all and with the ELT simply sitting on an aircraft
>> wing when it was tested to be certified. obviously this would not be the
>> highest performance set-up and not what should be.
>> I have noted that S-H and DG have made ELT antenna installations in some
>> gliders that are comprised of nothing more than this same rubber duck
>> antenna mounted on an angled bracket in the cockpit with essentially no
>> ground plane........though I do not consider this to be a high
>> performance set-up, it appears they also think it is
>> suitable......Personally I wish all glider manufacturers would spend a
>> bit more time and consideration to building really good antenna's into
>> their structures for Comm, ELT and Transponders, so far none
>> have.....until then, we have to improvise.and do the best with what we
>> have.....that is why I have made some "non-certified" antenna options
>> available, and though I have tried to make it known these are not
>> certified for use where the FAA mandates ELT use, they will IMHO work,
>> and simple and inexpensive "options"......if someone (anyone) has a
>> better option, I would like to see them....and would of course consider
>> offering them as well...
>> Best regards
>> Tim
>>
>> Wings & Wheels
>> www.wingsandwheels.com
>>
>> "jphoenix" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>> Marc,
>>>
>>> Perhaps we could have the SSA government liaison (or SRA dude) ask all
>>> these questions directly to the FAA. Specifically:
>>>
>>> Can a private pilot glider install his own ELT in his own experimental
>>> glider and sign it off?
>>> Does a TC'd glider need a 337 form completed and approved (major
>>> alteration)?
>>> Does a glider with an ELT installed have to meet all (or some) of the
>>> requirements of 91.207?
>>>
>>> With an official FAA answer to these questions, and perhaps some more I
>>> didn't think of, we can avoid uncertainty over what rules apply and how
>>> they apply, etc.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think it is fairly clear that for a glider with an experimental
>>>> certificate, you can pretty much install an ELT any way you want, and
>>>> likely get away with signing it off yourself (as a non-A&P). I think
>>>> it
>>>> is also fairly clear that an ELT installation in a type certified
>>>> glider
>>>> will require at least an A&P (and possibly IA) sign off, but probably
>>>> does not require a 337. The question in my mind, however, is whether
>>>> the typical A&P (or IA) would be willing to sign off an ELT
>>>> installation
>>>> in a certified glider, that makes use of uncertified components (like a
>>>> rubber ducky). Any A&Ps out there willing to comment?
>>>>
>>>> Marc
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Eric Greenwell]

Mike the Strike wrote:

> Tim's comments are very useful.
>
> I am also wrestling with both ELT and transponder antenna installation
> issues and wonder why manufacturers don't install them, at least as an
> option.

Schleicher offers transponder antenna installation, as does DG (DG also
has drawings on their website for their gliders that aren't even in
production). Other manufacturers likely also offer this. Check with your
manufacturer about these antennas, if you haven't already.


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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[5Z]

In my ASH-26E, the ELT is located by my left elbow, and the entenna is
the wire whip installed in the baggage area above the spar, as the is
the only non-carbon skinned part of the glider.

I didn't bother with a ground plane as I figure amny chrashed airplanes
also may not have a ground plane to work with...

The antenna is mounted to an aluminum bracket behind my left shoulder,
and curves around the inside of the baggage area toward the rear and
right side. Springiness keeps it nicely pressed against the top of the
fuselage.

As for transponder, I had the factory install it, as the cost was
essentially parts - something like $120 four years ago. I still
haven't installed the transponder itself, but am running the antenna
through a regimen of abuse as it occasionally catches on the trailer.
The antenna is installed through the fuselage just aft of the wheel,
and there is no added ground plane, as I assume the carbon skin is good
enough.

-Tom