ELT replacement: Options?

[Peter R.]

I was just informed by my mechanic who is performing my annual that my ELT is
fried and needs replacing. I have two choices: Replace the Artex model with
the same one, or upgrade to a newer unit that transmits on the new frequency.

If I go with the replacing the existing model, it transmits on a frequency
that won't be monitored by satellites starting sometime 2009. Of course,
there is a big discrepancy in price between the two types of units.
Regardless of what one I choose, I have to include the cost of installing a
remote test switch, since my aircraft doesn't currently have one.

Has anyone else faced this decision recently? If so, what model did you
choose?




--
Peter

[me[_1_]]

I sure did..

Just today I ordered the ACK E01 121.5 ELT $215.00 from sky geek to replace
the pointer 3000 installed in my plane.
My reason for replacement was that the pointer unit was interfering (
radiating a harmonic signal on the gps frequency )with the Garmin gps after
the waas upgrade. This is a known problem with elt's in certain
installations. It would knock the gps signal completely out when
transmitting on the com radios on certain test frequencies.

The company that stood out in customer service by a wide margin was ACK.
They helped me to trouble shoot the issue and even sent me an antenna to
test on my plane. That was before even committing to purchase their unit. I
borrowed the ack unit to try and I was able to eliminate the interference.

The reason I went with the 121.5 unit rather than the 406mhz one was due to
the price difference. I will get a few years use out of this unit and as the
other manufactures ( artex is the only one available now ) bring their 406
units to market the price will come down from $1000 that it is at now. I
already own and carry a portable PLB 406 unit with a built in gps when
flying.

Good luck with your purchase.....




"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
>I was just informed by my mechanic who is performing my annual that my ELT
>is
> fried and needs replacing. I have two choices: Replace the Artex model
> with
> the same one, or upgrade to a newer unit that transmits on the new
> frequency.
>
> If I go with the replacing the existing model, it transmits on a frequency
> that won't be monitored by satellites starting sometime 2009. Of course,
> there is a big discrepancy in price between the two types of units.
> Regardless of what one I choose, I have to include the cost of installing
> a
> remote test switch, since my aircraft doesn't currently have one.
>
> Has anyone else faced this decision recently? If so, what model did you
> choose?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Peter

[Michelle P]

Peter R. wrote:
> I was just informed by my mechanic who is performing my annual that my ELT is
> fried and needs replacing. I have two choices: Replace the Artex model with
> the same one, or upgrade to a newer unit that transmits on the new frequency.
>
> If I go with the replacing the existing model, it transmits on a frequency
> that won't be monitored by satellites starting sometime 2009. Of course,
> there is a big discrepancy in price between the two types of units.
> Regardless of what one I choose, I have to include the cost of installing a
> remote test switch, since my aircraft doesn't currently have one.
>
> Has anyone else faced this decision recently? If so, what model did you
> choose?
>
>
>
>
I upgrade to the Artex 110-406 several years ago. Much better resolution
on location if you need it.

Michelle P

[Ross]

me wrote:
> I sure did..
>
> Just today I ordered the ACK E01 121.5 ELT $215.00 from sky geek to replace
> the pointer 3000 installed in my plane.
> My reason for replacement was that the pointer unit was interfering (
> radiating a harmonic signal on the gps frequency )with the Garmin gps after
> the waas upgrade. This is a known problem with elt's in certain
> installations. It would knock the gps signal completely out when
> transmitting on the com radios on certain test frequencies.
>
> The company that stood out in customer service by a wide margin was ACK.
> They helped me to trouble shoot the issue and even sent me an antenna to
> test on my plane. That was before even committing to purchase their unit. I
> borrowed the ack unit to try and I was able to eliminate the interference.
>
> The reason I went with the 121.5 unit rather than the 406mhz one was due to
> the price difference. I will get a few years use out of this unit and as the
> other manufactures ( artex is the only one available now ) bring their 406
> units to market the price will come down from $1000 that it is at now. I
> already own and carry a portable PLB 406 unit with a built in gps when
> flying.
>
> Good luck with your purchase.....
>
>
>
>
> "Peter R." > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I was just informed by my mechanic who is performing my annual that my ELT
>>is
>>fried and needs replacing. I have two choices: Replace the Artex model
>>with
>>the same one, or upgrade to a newer unit that transmits on the new
>>frequency.
>>
>>If I go with the replacing the existing model, it transmits on a frequency
>>that won't be monitored by satellites starting sometime 2009. Of course,
>>there is a big discrepancy in price between the two types of units.
>>Regardless of what one I choose, I have to include the cost of installing
>>a
>>remote test switch, since my aircraft doesn't currently have one.
>>
>>Has anyone else faced this decision recently? If so, what model did you
>>choose?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Peter
>
>
>

That is really interesting. I have a Pointer 3000. I was getting
interference from FM stations breaking the squelch on the 2 MK12 Ds I
have. I found out that the Pointer is the cause. I contacted Pointer and
they fixed it. That problem went away. I also found out that certain COM
frequencies can upset a GPS. That is published information. (Don't go
asking me to locate it now.) But I never heard that a Pointer would
upset a GPS.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[Peter R.]

On 3/26/2007 10:39:47 PM, "me" wrote:

> Just today I ordered the ACK E01 121.5 ELT $215.00 from sky geek to
> replace the pointer 3000 installed in my plane.

That unit was brought to my attention during my research, but I find it hard
to believe that a unit powered by D batteries is certified for install in a
Bonanza. It does seem that it is, though, and I agree with you that the price
difference between this unit and the 406Mhz is dramatic.

I, too, carry a PLB unit that transmits GPS coordinates but of course this
security is only as good as the hope that I or a passenger will be conscience
after a crash to activate it.

--
Peter

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Peter R. wrote:
> On 3/26/2007 10:39:47 PM, "me" wrote:
>
>> Just today I ordered the ACK E01 121.5 ELT $215.00 from sky geek to
>> replace the pointer 3000 installed in my plane.
>
> That unit was brought to my attention during my research, but I find
> it hard to believe that a unit powered by D batteries is certified
> for install in a Bonanza. It does seem that it is, though, and I
> agree with you that the price difference between this unit and the
> 406Mhz is dramatic.
>
> I, too, carry a PLB unit that transmits GPS coordinates but of course
> this security is only as good as the hope that I or a passenger will
> be conscience after a crash to activate it.

I just got the little e-mail promo for this month's Aviation Consumer and it
had this in it.

A NEW ELT
Did you know that in less than two years, the standard 121.5 MHz distress
frequency will no longer be satellite monitored? That means if you want an
emergency locator worthy of the name, you'll need a 406 MHz beacon. Right
now, only one company, Artex, offers an affordable 406 ELT. Here's a review
and buying advice.

So, if you don't get AC you might want to see if you can find an copy of the
next issue.

[Peter R.]

On 3/27/2007 4:41:13 PM, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrote:

> A NEW ELT
> Did you know that in less than two years, the standard 121.5 MHz distress
> frequency will no longer be satellite monitored? That means if you want an
> emergency locator worthy of the name, you'll need a 406 MHz beacon. Right
> now, only one company, Artex, offers an affordable 406 ELT. Here's a
> review and buying advice.
>
> So, if you don't get AC you might want to see if you can find an copy of
> the next issue.

Thanks, Gig, and good timing. I do get AC so I will be sure to check out the
article, perhaps instead visiting AC's website rather than waiting for my
issue to arrive in the mail.

From what I have seen Artex 406 units are pretty pricey, but that is soon to
change. This afternoon I spoke with a representative from ACK who informed me
that their 406MHz unit is about 8 months from being certified. This unit will
be a direct replacement for existing ACK E-01 installs and ACK expects the
price of this unit to be quite a bit lower than the Artex currently
available.

Given the relatively lower cost of ACK's TSO-91a unit and barring any logical
AC advice in that article to which you refer, I think my plan is to purchase
the E-01 now, and then upgrade to ACK's 406MHz unit before 121.5 Mhz
satellite monitoring goes away within two years.

--
Peter

[Ross]

Peter R. wrote:
> On 3/27/2007 4:41:13 PM, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrote:
>
>
>>A NEW ELT
>>Did you know that in less than two years, the standard 121.5 MHz distress
>>frequency will no longer be satellite monitored? That means if you want an
>>emergency locator worthy of the name, you'll need a 406 MHz beacon. Right
>>now, only one company, Artex, offers an affordable 406 ELT. Here's a
>>review and buying advice.
>>
>>So, if you don't get AC you might want to see if you can find an copy of
>>the next issue.
>
>
> Thanks, Gig, and good timing. I do get AC so I will be sure to check out the
> article, perhaps instead visiting AC's website rather than waiting for my
> issue to arrive in the mail.
>
> From what I have seen Artex 406 units are pretty pricey, but that is soon to
> change. This afternoon I spoke with a representative from ACK who informed me
> that their 406MHz unit is about 8 months from being certified. This unit will
> be a direct replacement for existing ACK E-01 installs and ACK expects the
> price of this unit to be quite a bit lower than the Artex currently
> available.
>
> Given the relatively lower cost of ACK's TSO-91a unit and barring any logical
> AC advice in that article to which you refer, I think my plan is to purchase
> the E-01 now, and then upgrade to ACK's 406MHz unit before 121.5 Mhz
> satellite monitoring goes away within two years.
>


This is almost like HD TV. Those first sets were very expensive. As the
time nears, the prices are coming down.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[JGalban via AviationKB.com]

Peter R. wrote:
>That unit was brought to my attention during my research, but I find it hard
>to believe that a unit powered by D batteries is certified for install in a
>Bonanza. It does seem that it is, though, ...

It certainly is. I think you'd probably be surprised if you opened up
most ELT batteries. They are commonly just a bunch of off the shelf alkaline
batteries that are soldered together inside a box. You'd never know it from
the price tag :-))

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

[me[_1_]]

Hi Ross,

I had the same FM radio problem on my pointer about 3 years ago and sent it
in to pointer for the fix. It did fix that problem. With my new gps problem
pointer said that the FM fix was the most they could do to the 3000 unit.
You are right about the com frequencies that interfere with gps they are
published in the Garmin install manuals 121.15 is one that I remember..


"Ross" > wrote in message
...
> me wrote:
>> I sure did..
>>
>> Just today I ordered the ACK E01 121.5 ELT $215.00 from sky geek to
>> replace the pointer 3000 installed in my plane.
>> My reason for replacement was that the pointer unit was interfering (
>> radiating a harmonic signal on the gps frequency )with the Garmin gps
>> after the waas upgrade. This is a known problem with elt's in certain
>> installations. It would knock the gps signal completely out when
>> transmitting on the com radios on certain test frequencies.
>>
>> The company that stood out in customer service by a wide margin was ACK.
>> They helped me to trouble shoot the issue and even sent me an antenna to
>> test on my plane. That was before even committing to purchase their unit.
>> I borrowed the ack unit to try and I was able to eliminate the
>> interference.
>>
>> The reason I went with the 121.5 unit rather than the 406mhz one was due
>> to the price difference. I will get a few years use out of this unit and
>> as the other manufactures ( artex is the only one available now ) bring
>> their 406 units to market the price will come down from $1000 that it is
>> at now. I already own and carry a portable PLB 406 unit with a built in
>> gps when flying.
>>
>> Good luck with your purchase.....
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Peter R." > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>I was just informed by my mechanic who is performing my annual that my
>>>ELT is
>>>fried and needs replacing. I have two choices: Replace the Artex model
>>>with
>>>the same one, or upgrade to a newer unit that transmits on the new
>>>frequency.
>>>
>>>If I go with the replacing the existing model, it transmits on a
>>>frequency
>>>that won't be monitored by satellites starting sometime 2009. Of course,
>>>there is a big discrepancy in price between the two types of units.
>>>Regardless of what one I choose, I have to include the cost of installing
>>>a
>>>remote test switch, since my aircraft doesn't currently have one.
>>>
>>>Has anyone else faced this decision recently? If so, what model did you
>>>choose?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Peter
>>
>>
>>
>
> That is really interesting. I have a Pointer 3000. I was getting
> interference from FM stations breaking the squelch on the 2 MK12 Ds I
> have. I found out that the Pointer is the cause. I contacted Pointer and
> they fixed it. That problem went away. I also found out that certain COM
> frequencies can upset a GPS. That is published information. (Don't go
> asking me to locate it now.) But I never heard that a Pointer would upset
> a GPS.
>
> --
>
> Regards, Ross
> C-172F 180HP
> KSWI

[me[_1_]]

Every ELT manufacture that I spoke to said they were working on getting
their 406mhz units to market
When they do I think the prices will be much more reasonable. I will then
definitely consider one.



"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> On 3/26/2007 10:39:47 PM, "me" wrote:
>
>> Just today I ordered the ACK E01 121.5 ELT $215.00 from sky geek to
>> replace the pointer 3000 installed in my plane.
>
> That unit was brought to my attention during my research, but I find it
> hard
> to believe that a unit powered by D batteries is certified for install in
> a
> Bonanza. It does seem that it is, though, and I agree with you that the
> price
> difference between this unit and the 406Mhz is dramatic.
>
> I, too, carry a PLB unit that transmits GPS coordinates but of course this
> security is only as good as the hope that I or a passenger will be
> conscience
> after a crash to activate it.
>
> --
> Peter

[James M. Knox]

"JGalban via AviationKB.com" <u32749@uwe> wrote in
news:6fd35c023f838@uwe:

> Peter R. wrote:
>>That unit was brought to my attention during my research, but I find
>>it hard to believe that a unit powered by D batteries is certified for
>>install in a Bonanza. It does seem that it is, though, ...
>
> It certainly is. I think you'd probably be surprised if you opened
> most ELT batteries. They are commonly just a bunch of off the shelf
> alkaline batteries that are soldered together inside a box. You'd
> never know it from the price tag :-))

The trick is the "legality" issue. It's the certification by the
company that solders all those other batteries together that makes it
legal. For decades there was no traceability on commercial batteries
bought at your local 7-11 store. Duracell started to "brand" their
batteries with expiration dates traceable back to the manufacture date.
THAT made them legal to use, and allowed ELT manufacturers to start
making units that used them.

Anyone with such a unit, can you verify that you can't legally just
plunk in *any* D-Cells, but rather that it has to be specific brands
(i.e. Duracell), or has to have the date listed on/with the battery?

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1300 Koenig Lane West fax 512-371-5716
Suite 200
Austin, Tx 78756
-----------------------------------------------

[Peter R.]

On 3/29/2007 10:08:32 AM, "James M. Knox" wrote:

> Anyone with such a unit, can you verify that you can't legally just
> plunk in *any* D-Cells, but rather that it has to be specific brands
> (i.e. Duracell), or has to have the date listed on/with the battery?

I don't have the unit yet but when I talked to ACK, the manufacturer of the
E-01 ELT that is powered by D batteries, the representative kept specifically
using the phrase, "Duracell D batteries" every time he mentioned the issue of
the unit taking batteries. I thought it a bit odd that he continually
referenced the battery by brand name, but not enough to ask him why.




--
Peter

[Ron Natalie]

me wrote:
> Every ELT manufacture that I spoke to said they were working on getting
> their 406mhz units to market
> When they do I think the prices will be much more reasonable. I will then
> definitely consider one.
>
>
I'm holding out until they produce one that doesn't use proprietary
batteries.

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:17:36 -0400, "Peter R." >
wrote:

>On 3/29/2007 10:08:32 AM, "James M. Knox" wrote:
>
>> Anyone with such a unit, can you verify that you can't legally just
>> plunk in *any* D-Cells, but rather that it has to be specific brands
>> (i.e. Duracell), or has to have the date listed on/with the battery?
>
>I don't have the unit yet but when I talked to ACK, the manufacturer of the
>E-01 ELT that is powered by D batteries, the representative kept specifically
>using the phrase, "Duracell D batteries" every time he mentioned the issue of
>the unit taking batteries. I thought it a bit odd that he continually
>referenced the battery by brand name, but not enough to ask him why.
>
>
>
>
>--
>Peter

My ameri-king uses only duracells and they have to be replaced every
year.

[Jay Masino]

Ron Natalie > wrote:
> me wrote:
> > Every ELT manufacture that I spoke to said they were working on getting
> > their 406mhz units to market
> > When they do I think the prices will be much more reasonable. I will then
> > definitely consider one.
> >
> I'm holding out until they produce one that doesn't use proprietary
> batteries.

An ACK support person told me (via E-mail) that they already have a
406Mhz version of their popular D-cell ELT, but they're waiting until
the FAA makes the ELT replacement a hard requirement. He didn't go into
details, but I suspect they think the market won't be big enough until
the FAA mandates the replacement.

--- Jay


--

Jay Masino "Home is where My critters are"
http://www.JayMasino.com
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

[[email protected]]

On Mar 29, 7:08 am, "James M. Knox" > wrote:
>
> Anyone with such a unit, can you verify that you can't legally just
> plunk in *any* D-Cells, but rather that it has to be specific brands
> (i.e. Duracell), or has to have the date listed on/with the battery?
>

I've seen the doc for two brands (IIRC, ACK and Ameri-King) and
both specifically directed the user to use dated Duracells.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Michelle P]

Ron Natalie wrote:
> me wrote:
>
>> Every ELT manufacture that I spoke to said they were working on
>> getting their 406mhz units to market
>> When they do I think the prices will be much more reasonable. I will
>> then definitely consider one.
>>
>>
> I'm holding out until they produce one that doesn't use proprietary
> batteries.
yeah but in my new ELT the batteries are good for 5 years.
Michelle

[Mike Adams[_2_]]

"James M. Knox" > wrote:

> Anyone with such a unit, can you verify that you can't legally just
> plunk in *any* D-Cells, but rather that it has to be specific brands
> (i.e. Duracell), or has to have the date listed on/with the battery?
>

I have the ACK unit with the D cell batteries. It requires the duracell batteries with a date code, not just
the ordinary flashlight batteries. They are good for 4 years.

Mike

[M[_1_]]

On Mar 29, 7:43 am, (Drew Dalgleish)
wrote:
>
>
>
> My ameri-king uses only duracells and they have to be replaced every
> year.

That's not true. According to ACK's document
http://www.ackavionics.com/images/Model_e-01_ELT_Manual.pdf
You only need to replace the Duracell dated batteries before the
expiration date printed on the batteries. That document is an FAA
approved document.

[M[_1_]]

On Mar 29, 8:38 pm, Mike Adams > wrote:

>
> I have the ACK unit with the D cell batteries. It requires the duracell batteries with a date code, not just
> the ordinary flashlight batteries. They are good for 4 years.
>

The last batch of Duracell D cells I bought were good for 7 years from
the time I purchased. According to this ACK manual
http://www.ackavionics.com/images/Model_e-01_ELT_Manual.pdf, you only
need to replace the batteries before the expiration date.

Of course, it's probably a good idea to replace them before that,
particularly the fact that you can reuse those D batteries in
flashlights.

[M[_1_]]

The Ameri-King manual is here: http://www.ameri-king.com/pdf/9.1.22.pdf,
says pretty much the same thing about batteries.

On Mar 29, 10:22 pm, "M" > wrote:
> On Mar 29, 7:43 am, (Drew Dalgleish)
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > My ameri-king uses only duracells and they have to be replaced every
> > year.
>
> That's not true. According to ACK's documenthttp://www.ackavionics.com/images/Model_e-01_ELT_Manual.pdf
> You only need to replace the Duracell dated batteries before the
> expiration date printed on the batteries. That document is an FAA
> approved document.

[M[_1_]]

On Mar 29, 8:38 pm, Mike Adams > wrote:

>
> I have the ACK unit with the D cell batteries. It requires the duracell batteries with a date code, not just
> the ordinary flashlight batteries. They are good for 4 years.
>

The last batch of Duracell D cells I bought were good for 7 years from
the time I purchased. According to this ACK manual
http://www.ackavionics.com/images/Model_e-01_ELT_Manual.pdf, you only
need to replace the batteries before the expiration date.

Of course, it's probably a good idea to replace them before that,
particularly the fact that you can reuse those D batteries in
flashlights.

[Drew Dalgleish]

You're right they only strongly recomend changing the batteries every
year. It may be a Canadian requirement though that made me think I
have to. It's not really an issue cuz I recycle the used batteries
into flashlights.

>
>The Ameri-King manual is here: http://www.ameri-king.com/pdf/9.1.22.pdf,
>says pretty much the same thing about batteries.
>
>On Mar 29, 10:22 pm, "M" > wrote:
>> On Mar 29, 7:43 am, (Drew Dalgleish)
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > My ameri-king uses only duracells and they have to be replaced every
>> > year.
>>
>> That's not true. According to ACK's documenthttp://www.ackavionics.com/images/Model_e-01_ELT_Manual.pdf
>> You only need to replace the Duracell dated batteries before the
>> expiration date printed on the batteries. That document is an FAA
>> approved document.
>
>

[Mike Adams[_2_]]

"M" > wrote:

> On Mar 29, 8:38 pm, Mike Adams > wrote:
>
>>
>> I have the ACK unit with the D cell batteries. It requires the
>> duracell batteries with a date code, not just the ordinary flashlight
>> batteries. They are good for 4 years.
>>
>
> The last batch of Duracell D cells I bought were good for 7 years from
> the time I purchased. According to this ACK manual
> http://www.ackavionics.com/images/Model_e-01_ELT_Manual.pdf, you only
> need to replace the batteries before the expiration date.
>
> Of course, it's probably a good idea to replace them before that,
> particularly the fact that you can reuse those D batteries in
> flashlights.

Agreed. I wasn't implying that 4 years was a fixed number. It's just the date on the batteries I put in.

Mike

[RST Engineering]

The hell you say. They have to be replaced by the code date on the battery.

Jim


"Drew Dalgleish" > wrote in message
...


>
> My ameri-king uses only duracells and they have to be replaced every
> year.

[Ron Natalie]

Drew Dalgleish wrote:
r
>
> My ameri-king uses only duracells and they have to be replaced every
> year.

My Ameriking AK-450 uses D Duracells and specifically says they are
for the duration marked on the batteries, close to five years for
the set I put in last.

[Ron Natalie]

Michelle P wrote:

>> I'm holding out until they produce one that doesn't use proprietary
>> batteries.
> yeah but in my new ELT the batteries are good for 5 years.
> Michelle

Pilots are cheap *******s. They'll pay extra for an ELT so they
can use flashlight batteries. At least I can recycle them in the
flashlight after they come out of the ELT.