US ELT Installation

Hi All,

As I understand the racing rules for 2006, the SSA has decided to
mandate ELT installation for all competitors. The ELT must be
permanently mounted inside the glider. Personal ELTs will not suffice.
This is all complicated by the FAA's decision to obsolete some existing
ELT frequencies in the coming years.

With the decision made, I wonder if the ruling has been well thought
out. The question is how will each contest organizer verify that the
ELT installation is actually functional since some gliders are type
certificated and others have experimental certification?

From an owners perspective, installation could be troublesome since
many newer gliders are made of Carbon Fiber which limits installation
choices and could lead to some "kludged" installations in
experimentally certificated gliders.

In discussions with US based glider factory reps, it appears that the
European manufacturer's have not uniformly accounted for this rule
change in their basic offering. When asked about installed ELT
antennas, the response has been Hmm.

So the question is how does one retrofit an ELT solution to an existing
glider and how does one specify an installation for a new glider?

Additionally, how does the SSA insure that the installations done for
the 2006 racing season actually work versus merely demonstrating that
an "expensive" new box has been permanently mounted inside the
fuselage?

All thought and feedback appreciated.

mhr

SSA Contest Rules Subcommittee reviewed the action proposed last year
and has revised proposed action for 2006 and forward. Text of rule
that will be proposed to the SSA BOD is as follows:
ELTs

No longer does an ELT have to be TSOed.

6.5.2 When announced by contest organizers prior to the Preferential
Entry Deadline, an impact-activated Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT)
is required in every sailplane.

This will permit organizers that see fit to require ELT's but not make
them mandatory across the board.
The minutes of the Fall RC meeting and Draft Rules will be published
for review in the next week or so.
H Nixon
UH
SSA Contest Rules Subcommittee chair

Hi,

This is great news! If I understand correctly, ELTs will only be required
if the contest organizers require them. Although I sell ELTs, I was against
making them mandatory at all contests because I feared that it would keep
many potential new contest pilots from competing due to the high cost.

Good Soaring,

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

wrote in message
oups.com...
SSA Contest Rules Subcommittee reviewed the action proposed last year
and has revised proposed action for 2006 and forward. Text of rule
that will be proposed to the SSA BOD is as follows:
ELTs

No longer does an ELT have to be TSOed.

6.5.2 When announced by contest organizers prior to the Preferential
Entry Deadline, an impact-activated Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT)
is required in every sailplane.

This will permit organizers that see fit to require ELT's but not make
them mandatory across the board.
The minutes of the Fall RC meeting and Draft Rules will be published
for review in the next week or so.
H Nixon
UH
SSA Contest Rules Subcommittee chair

BE VERY CAREFUL.
If you own a sailplane with a STANDARD AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE, and
you choose to install an ELT, it must be one that is TSO'd and the
installation must be done in accordance with an STC or a FAA field
approval.

I have seen and heard about many pilots who have purchased these units
from their favorite vendor and stuck it in their glider. If you do
not do a legal installation, you may be putting your insurance coverage
in jepardy.

If the contest committe would abolish the pst and tat and go back to
real glider racing ie AST, the hysteria about installing ELTs would go
away. We would narrow the search pattern for lost pilots and in most
cases increase the odds of having witnessed losses. This would be REAL
safety reform.

I do believe that installing ELTs in gliders that are flown cross
country in general is good and a responsible thing to do. I find it
ironic that years ago the SSA went to bat for the "good of soaring
pilots in the US" and lobbied the FAA for and exemption to the ELT
rule.

I quess I should probably shut up and lick my chops in anticipation of
all the ELT sales that I am about to be flooded with.

(sigh)

Rex Mayes
Williams Soaring Center

Hi Hank,

Thanks for the feedback.

Your reply was illuminating but still leaves many questions unanswered.

While having the option to mandate ELTs sounds promising, what contest
organizer will not require ELTs knowing that the option exists as part
of the rules. By making this part of the rules, the situation exists
that each contest organizer will require them to mitigate potential
liability. If another tragedy does occur, the contest organizer that
did not require ELTs will surely be sued. Hence, who will not require
them to preclude or limit liability issues?

So, if we assume that ELTs will be required by all contest managers,
the potential competitor is still faced with installation issues,
arising primarily form antenna location and effectiveness; and the
contest manager is still faced with assurance issues that each
installation meets the intent of the rules and operates as required.

The bottom line is that we now have a rule that presents problems for
both the contest pilot (how do I install an operable system?) and the
contest organizer (it would be foolish not to mandate ELT usage for
liability protection but how do I know that the systems actually work?)

While the intent and spirit of the rule is admirable, it seems that the
implementation of this rule has not been well thought through.

As usual, all feedback and discussion appreciated.

mhr

I must be missing something. ELTs are not required in glider by the
FAA, also flight recorders, GPS systems, CAI 302, Borgelt B500, Ilec
SN10, LX 7007, PDA's with software are not required in gliders by the
FAA. None of the systems I mentioned are TSO'd. Does this mean STC or
FFA field approvals are required for these instruments and my insurance
may be in jepardy if I have any of these systems installed by myself or
a favorite vendor in a Standard Airworthiness Certificated Glider.

I also sell ELT's, they are very inexpensive $183.75. I believe that
they are a good idea especially in some of the areas that we typically
fly.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

Rex wrote:
BE VERY CAREFUL.
If you own a sailplane with a STANDARD AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE, and
you choose to install an ELT, it must be one that is TSO'd and the
installation must be done in accordance with an STC or a FAA field
approval.

I have seen and heard about many pilots who have purchased these units
from their favorite vendor and stuck it in their glider. If you do
not do a legal installation, you may be putting your insurance coverage
in jepardy.

If the contest committe would abolish the pst and tat and go back to
real glider racing ie AST, the hysteria about installing ELTs would go
away. We would narrow the search pattern for lost pilots and in most
cases increase the odds of having witnessed losses. This would be REAL
safety reform.

I do believe that installing ELTs in gliders that are flown cross
country in general is good and a responsible thing to do. I find it
ironic that years ago the SSA went to bat for the "good of soaring
pilots in the US" and lobbied the FAA for and exemption to the ELT
rule.

I quess I should probably shut up and lick my chops in anticipation of
all the ELT sales that I am about to be flooded with.

(sigh)

Rex Mayes
Williams Soaring Center

I'm not sure TSO is a requirement. I have had non-TSO'd equipment installed
in certified aircraft by avionics shops who took care of the 337.

I agree that carrying an ELT of some kind is responsible but it grates to
see obsolescent equipment mandated by what could be seen as a CYA scenario.
To mandate parachutes be worn by the pilot and then mandate the ELT to be
fitted to the glider seems nonsensical. In Colorado's rough terrain, it
doesn't seem reasonable to me that a parachuting pilot would necessarily
land near the wreckage.

My plan is to buy a 406Mhz GPS unit that will be attached to my parachute
harness. If an outlanding is imminent, I will turn it on. If the landing
goes well, I will turn it back off and contact the SAR folks ASAP to say
nevermind. I would plan to contact contest managers in advance to state my
position and, if they didn't agree, I'd just stick with the OLC.

BTW, I just turned my handheld comm to 121.5 and got a strong ELT signal.
Since I'm in my home office in suburban metro Denver, It's a fair guess that
an aircraft at KAPA 4 miles away has a tripped ELT although there are
several glider owners within that range may have ELT's installed.

Bill Daniels

"Rex" wrote in message
oups.com...
BE VERY CAREFUL.
If you own a sailplane with a STANDARD AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE, and
you choose to install an ELT, it must be one that is TSO'd and the
installation must be done in accordance with an STC or a FAA field
approval.

I have seen and heard about many pilots who have purchased these units
from their favorite vendor and stuck it in their glider. If you do
not do a legal installation, you may be putting your insurance coverage
in jepardy.

If the contest committe would abolish the pst and tat and go back to
real glider racing ie AST, the hysteria about installing ELTs would go
away. We would narrow the search pattern for lost pilots and in most
cases increase the odds of having witnessed losses. This would be REAL
safety reform.

I do believe that installing ELTs in gliders that are flown cross
country in general is good and a responsible thing to do. I find it
ironic that years ago the SSA went to bat for the "good of soaring
pilots in the US" and lobbied the FAA for and exemption to the ELT
rule.

I quess I should probably shut up and lick my chops in anticipation of
all the ELT sales that I am about to be flooded with.

(sigh)

Rex Mayes
Williams Soaring Center

This has been a recurring discussion topic on RAS. However, before it
dealt with the question of the legal requirements. Now, it has been
expanded to the question of whether your insurance will cover you.

I don't understand how an insurance company could deny coverage because
something in the glider (which had no effect on the cause of the damage)
was not legal. If my ELT is not legal or does not have a legal
installation, can the insurance company deny coverage if I groundloop on
landing and break the fuselage? That doesn't seem logical to me.



wrote:
I must be missing something. ELTs are not required in glider by the
FAA, also flight recorders, GPS systems, CAI 302, Borgelt B500, Ilec
SN10, LX 7007, PDA's with software are not required in gliders by the
FAA. None of the systems I mentioned are TSO'd. Does this mean STC or
FFA field approvals are required for these instruments and my insurance
may be in jepardy if I have any of these systems installed by myself or
a favorite vendor in a Standard Airworthiness Certificated Glider.

I also sell ELT's, they are very inexpensive $183.75. I believe that
they are a good idea especially in some of the areas that we typically
fly.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

Rex wrote:
BE VERY CAREFUL.
If you own a sailplane with a STANDARD AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE, and
you choose to install an ELT, it must be one that is TSO'd and the
installation must be done in accordance with an STC or a FAA field
approval.

I have seen and heard about many pilots who have purchased these units
from their favorite vendor and stuck it in their glider. If you do
not do a legal installation, you may be putting your insurance coverage
in jepardy.

If the contest committe would abolish the pst and tat and go back to
real glider racing ie AST, the hysteria about installing ELTs would go
away. We would narrow the search pattern for lost pilots and in most
cases increase the odds of having witnessed losses. This would be REAL
safety reform.

I do believe that installing ELTs in gliders that are flown cross
country in general is good and a responsible thing to do. I find it
ironic that years ago the SSA went to bat for the "good of soaring
pilots in the US" and lobbied the FAA for and exemption to the ELT
rule.

I quess I should probably shut up and lick my chops in anticipation of
all the ELT sales that I am about to be flooded with.

(sigh)

Rex Mayes
Williams Soaring Center

I fly with a 406 MHz PLB on my parachute harness and will probably add
a 406 MHz ELT to the glider at some point. The PLB is only useful if I
survive a parachute out or a crash and can turn it on and extend the
antenna and it can get good sight to a satellite (some require a manual
antenna extension, some extend when you pull the tab to turn the PLB
on).

Bill Daniels wrote:
[snip]
I agree that carrying an ELT of some kind is responsible but it grates to
see obsolescent equipment mandated by what could be seen as a CYA scenario.
To mandate parachutes be worn by the pilot and then mandate the ELT to be
fitted to the glider seems nonsensical. In Colorado's rough terrain, it
doesn't seem reasonable to me that a parachuting pilot would necessarily
land near the wreckage.

Then have a 406 MHz PLB on your parachute as well. Even without this
you are probably going to land within a few miles of the wreckage, and
with a 406 MHz PLB in the glider that is still going to help find you.
If they find the glider without pilot/parachute it is pretty obvious
you bailed out and that helps keep search teams focusing on finding you
nearby.

My plan is to buy a 406Mhz GPS unit that will be attached to my parachute
harness. If an outlanding is imminent, I will turn it on. If the landing
goes well, I will turn it back off and contact the SAR folks ASAP to say
nevermind. I would plan to contact contest managers in advance to state my
position and, if they didn't agree, I'd just stick with the OLC.

You can't be serious right? Since when is an outlanding an emergency
justifying a PLB/ELT activation? If you are over a forrest etc. and
have no other options them by all means try whatever you want. Turning
on a PLB prior to an outlanding won't do much unless you extend the
antenna. Even if you extended the antenna and got a signal out how do
you think you are going to notify CAP or anybody else that it was an
"precautionary" activation - not something they may be happy with you
doing anyhow. Then don't even get me started about the distraction of
trying to activate this and the antenna flopping around in the cockpit
while you are trying to land.

BTW, I just turned my handheld comm to 121.5 and got a strong ELT signal.
Since I'm in my home office in suburban metro Denver, It's a fair guess that
an aircraft at KAPA 4 miles away has a tripped ELT although there are
several glider owners within that range may have ELT's installed.

121.5 is full of noise, a 406 MHz signal is going to get more
attention. And since they know exactly who you are from the signal you
can expect followup. As for those cheap few hundred dollar 121.5 ELTs,
given the much better performance of 406 MHz ELTs/PLBs and I don't see
why people are bothering with the 121.5 units.

Darryl Ramm
6DX

wrote in message
oups.com...

I fly with a 406 MHz PLB on my parachute harness and will probably add
a 406 MHz ELT to the glider at some point. The PLB is only useful if I
survive a parachute out or a crash and can turn it on and extend the
antenna and it can get good sight to a satellite (some require a manual
antenna extension, some extend when you pull the tab to turn the PLB
on).

Bill Daniels wrote:
[snip]

My plan is to buy a 406Mhz GPS unit that will be attached to my
parachute
harness. If an outlanding is imminent, I will turn it on. If the
landing
goes well, I will turn it back off and contact the SAR folks ASAP to say
nevermind. I would plan to contact contest managers in advance to state
my
position and, if they didn't agree, I'd just stick with the OLC.

You can't be serious right? Since when is an outlanding an emergency
justifying a PLB/ELT activation? If you are over a forrest etc. and
have no other options them by all means try whatever you want. Turning
on a PLB prior to an outlanding won't do much unless you extend the
antenna. Even if you extended the antenna and got a signal out how do
you think you are going to notify CAP or anybody else that it was an
"precautionary" activation - not something they may be happy with you
doing anyhow. Then don't even get me started about the distraction of
trying to activate this and the antenna flopping around in the cockpit
while you are trying to land.


You bet I'm serious. I don't think it would hard at all to convince the
CAP or any other SAR group that landing a motorless aircraft in a remote
area justifies a precautionary ELT activation. (BTW, I've already asked
them.) If I couldn't convince them, my a** is more important than their
regulations anyway. As for distraction, I fly WAY ahead of my glider -
nothing is done at the last minute. I'd have the antenna extended at 2000'
AGL and note the switch position so it could be activated on downwind.

Bill Daniels