"First I would not fly over inhospitable terrain where things are
"likely to result in a crash". I assume that is not exactly what was
implied."
Think about the above statement made.Most of us flying in the west ARE
flying over inhospitable terrain on cross country, unless of course one just
flies around local gliderports, and even than there could be plenty of real
estate, where one may be not found for a while.(Steve Fosset for instance
was not that far from civilization, as the bird flies when he was find).
Being prepared is not a bad idea.
I think the purpose of Doug's exercise, is to bring out ideas others may
use, which he or someone else may adopt.
An example; I once landed on a rather sloped runway , (uphill of course) and
failing to turn the glider perpendicular to the runway just before my roll
out stopped, I had one heck of a time climbing out of the ship without it
wanting to roll backwards. I now carry an "S" hook with me, which I can use
to hook to the shoulder harness and to the spoiler handle/brake. I never
had to use this contraption since, but I am sure it will work next time
needed. So I carry it. One may or may not wants to adopt one's idea, but it
does not hurt to share.
Just my five cents worth. PeterK

"Darryl Ramm" wrote in message
...
On Oct 16, 11:53 am, wrote:
I am interested in knowing how other pilots feel about the
preferred sequence of implementation of safety tools in our
cockpits, under latter flight stress, for: a field landing, a
tree landing, or a water landing.

The scenario is: no crew, flight over inhospitable terrain
resulting in a likely crash, unknown cell phone coverage and
no other gliders in the air.

The location is: Eastern flatlands or Western mountains.

The TOOLS a Radio (121.5), SPOT (911), ELT (armed on panel),
PLB (on parachute harness).

Thanks,

Doug Whitehead

What is the point of this rather tortured question?

First I would not fly over inhospitable terrain where things are
"likely to result in a crash". I assume that is not exactly what was
implied.

Second the question is creating a bit of a false paradox. If you are
in a distress situation you will use whatever tools you have. Like you
are not seriously considering wether to carry a VHF radio or not
right? Some things like a PLB or ELT give no way of signalling
anything besides a critical situation. Radio and SPOT or a cellphone
(if you get lucky) or even a sat phone (largish and a bit pricey, but
maybe not outrageous ~$2k + subscription if you really fly a lot in
inhospitable areas). Iridium is the only sat phone with good USA
coverage and the handsets/antennas are really too large to use in the
air unless you install an external antenna, so normally they would be
used post-landout or crash.

If you are flying anywhere XC you really ought to be carrying a radio.
Anybody want to argue against that? If you crash and are not
incapacitated and the radio, battery, tail/antenna is not damaged then
use it. You can use it to raise an alarm or try to get help, before
you crash or get further in trouble. Carry a handheld as well, the
range may not be great but they are handy for talking to search
aircraft, etc. Many of us own handheld radios already for use around
the airport etc. Handy for talking to search aircraft if say your tail/
antenna is broken. Carry an adapter cable from the ships' battery to
the VHF handheld.

Discussing an "ELT" is a waste of time, you need to be clear if you
mean a 121.5MHz ELT or a 406 MHz ELT (which all also transmit a
121.5MHz homing signal). Since SARAST/COSPAS monitoring of 121.5MHz
ELTs is going away on Feburary 2009 I think they are of very limited
value and would not consider one. Local SAR organizations will still
be able to home on the signal but without the SARSAT alerting and
initial doppler fix their utility is greatly reduced). A 121.5MHz
beacon signal by itself may not initiate a search unless somebody
reports you overdue (there are a large number of false 121.5Mhz beacon
transmissions) SAR folks might want to weigh in on their local
policies about this.

And sadly based on GA aircraft stats, in the event of a crash the ELT
impact activation is likely to *not* work. I'd be very surprised say
if a well controlled water landing would activate an ELT. However if
the arm/on switch is on the panel you can manually trip these before
the impact. Especially with a 406 MHz ELT this will at least get a
message out that you are in distress (via the unique encoded 406 MHz
ID) even if the satellites can't doppler locate the fix before the ELT
signal dissapears. Most PLB antennas are unweildy and I don't fancy my
chances of trying to fly a glider in a distress situation, unpack the
PLB and deploy at he antenna in the cockpit (although the latest ACR
PLBs have an antenna that is easy to deply). Since I fly with a SPOT
mounted in the cockpit I could instead just activate the "911" feature
while in flight, and leave the PLB on my parachute harness for later
use.

Another problem with all ELTs is getting the antenna in a good
position where the antenna has a good sky view., not near conducting
components and has a suitable ground plane. Many of the ELT antenna
installations I've seen in gliders are awful and would likely produce
a radiated signal worse than a PLB placed on the ground.

Also no currently affordable 406MHz ELTs that you would install in a
glider includes a GPS for transmitting very accurate position data,
SARSAT/COSPAS can doppler locate the ELT but that takes more time
(multipl passes of the LEOSAR satellites) and has less accuracy than
just having the GPS location transmitted by the PLB or ELT. Lower cost
ELTs with GPS or external GPS inputs are coming.

So for all the above reasons, and more, I would choose a 406 MHz PLB
over an ELT (especially a 121.5MHz ELT). They cost a lot less than
current 406 MHz ELTs, and they can travel with you on the parachute
harness. PLBs with GPS don't cost much more than those without, so I'd
only look at the GPS enabled ones.

The ELT has the advantage that if you are lucky it might activate on
impact. If things are that bad that I could not trigger the PLB then
I'm more likely dead. Helping SAR find a fatal crash is good goal but
not top of my list. ELTs may also have advantages in battery life and
radiated RF power, but I suspect for gliders the antenna issues
usually mitigate the radiate power and the latest PLBs offer
impressive transmit times. For power-aircraft where ELT and antenna
installation is usually a lot easier I would look at the ELT option
(and I disagree with AOPA on not requiring mandatory 406MHz ELT
carriage in power aircraft).

For me the best use of the SPOT messenger in SPOTcast (tracking) mode.
Mounted up in the glareshield or canopy rail where it has very good
view of the sky. The tracking locations give people an indication of
where you currently are (as long as they have Internet access) or
about where you last were if you crash. Obviously if the SPOT
messenger works post-crash then people will know where you are (as
long as somebody knows to expect you and where to look to find your
SPOT info), even if you are incapacitated. If the SPOT messenger no
longer can transmit its tracking messages and you can't move it/
activate it's "911" feature then at least there is still an area
around the last reported position to start a search. BTW there are
lots of ways to model this but the 10 minute tracking locations give a
location uncertainty about the same as the current SARSAT doppler
location of a 121.5MHz ELT. (~10+ mile radius) And a great way to
focus initial SAR search locations.

Since I want the SPOT mounted on the glider where it has a good sky
view I also have a PLB on my parachute harness in case of bail out. I
also like how with the whole SARSAT/COSPAS works and works with SAR
organizatiosn etc. and feel more comfortable about this in a real life
and death situation than the "we'll call the local 911 telephone
operator" that the SPOT "911" service offers. I also like the idea of
carrying two separate SAR alerting devices.

The question sounded bleak, with scenarios of tree landings and
inhospitable areas. If so then the cost of a SPOT Messenger and/or a
PLB seems low compared to the risks. Both can also be used for other
activities, hiking, hunting, flying GA aircraft etc.

A lot of survival depends on organization and not just relying on
toys. So have you told people where you expect to fly to and what you
want them to do if you are late/missing? Do you check in with the FBO
or other glider pilots by radio, and make blind radio status reports
even if you don't know others are listening, etc. Have you left
information on what emergency equipment you carry, registered the
406MHz ELT or PLB with NOAA and provided current emergency contact
info, do the right people have access to your SPOT account? Have you
create a shared/public SPOT page, etc., etc.


Darryl