Carrying Skis in a Single...

On 2006-05-06, Peter Duniho wrote:
"soxinbox" wrote in message
...
I know this used to be critically important, but is this still necessary in
today's environment with hand held GPS and cell phones with built in
tracking. If I call 911 with exact coordinates, will I really have to wait
the night.

It depends. Having GPS and a cell phone certainly improves your odds.
But...

How about a handheld aviation radio? It's likely you are going to be in
reasonably frequent line-of-sight from an airliner.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
How about a handheld aviation radio? It's likely you are going to be in
reasonably frequent line-of-sight from an airliner.

As a substitute for carrying survival gear? I don't think that's a
reasonable exchange.

First, you'll have to define "likely". A friend of mine was rescued via
helicopter when he landed in a remote lake with his seaplane, but couldn't
get it started again later (starter had failed). Using the airplane's
radio, he was eventually able to reach an airplane passing overhead (I don't
recall if it was an airliner or not).

But it took awhile, and in the end it was a bit of luck involved. The lake
where he landed is a small mountain lake, with steep slopes all around.
Line-of-sight is only about a 60-80 degree cone straight up. The lake is
not far laterally from one of the airways leading to Sea-Tac airport (the
nearest commercial airport), and even then it took awhile before an airplane
came close enough to being overhead to be contacted by radio. Even once the
airplane overhead was contacted, getting an accurate message relayed to
someone who could come pick them up was non-trivial.

He probably also benefited from the additional power of the airplane's
radio. A handheld would probably have reduced the volume of airspace in
which a potential contact could be found. Had he been in a more remote
location, there may not have been any airline traffic going overhead, ever.

So...could you take advantage of a handheld aviation radio? Perhaps. But
I'd say it's more akin to being stranded on a deserted island and relying on
a bonfire to alert a passing ship.

IMHO, one of the best things a person can do, beyond having a good, reliable
ELT with them is to have filed an accurate flight plan with someone who will
come looking for you if you don't arrive on time. There are few forms of
communications that are highly reliable when you're in a remote location.
Expecting to be able to contact someone after the crash seems optimistic to
me.

And of course, while you're waiting for the person who knows you've crashed
to actually find and rescue you, you'll probably want the appropriate
survival gear to keep yourself alive until you're rescued.

Pete

On 2006-05-08, Peter Duniho wrote:
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
How about a handheld aviation radio? It's likely you are going to be in
reasonably frequent line-of-sight from an airliner.

As a substitute for carrying survival gear? I don't think that's a
reasonable exchange.

No, of course not. As an addition to carry survival gear. A modern
handheld aviation radio is not big enough to displace survival gear.
However, it may get you in contact with someone much faster if you
happen to crash outside of mobile phone service.

IMHO, one of the best things a person can do, beyond having a good, reliable
ELT with them is to have filed an accurate flight plan with someone who will
come looking for you if you don't arrive on time. There are few forms of
communications that are highly reliable when you're in a remote location.
Expecting to be able to contact someone after the crash seems optimistic to
me.

That's why no one is suggesting that it's expected. However, I think the
more options you have the better, and if you can carry a portable radio
- why not? It's another option.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
[...]
Expecting to be able to contact someone after the crash seems optimistic
to
me.

That's why no one is suggesting that it's expected.

By posting your message in reply to my post, and in reply to this tangent of
the thread, YOU suggested that it's expected.

You might think about being more clear about your point. This tangent in
this thread started out about whether to carry survival gear or not. All of
my replies have been on that topic. You replied to one of my replies, with
the implication that you were asking about how a handheld aviation radio
relates to the question of carrying survival gear.

However, I think the
more options you have the better, and if you can carry a portable radio
- why not? It's another option.

If all you're asking is whether a handheld radio is a useful tool, you might
want to start a different thread. Though, the answer is obviously "yes".
Even if you don't wind up crashing, you could still have an electrical or
radio failure (a more likely reason to need a handheld, IMHO). Just as
having modern avionics, seatbelts, fuel, wings, and a host of other things
is useful. But the question of whether any of those things is useful
doesn't really fit in here. We're talking about whether some form of
communications is sufficient for negating the need for survival equipment.

When you depart the topic, it's pretty hard for people to figure out what
you're really asking.

Pete

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2006-05-08, Peter Duniho wrote:
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
How about a handheld aviation radio? It's likely you are going to be in
reasonably frequent line-of-sight from an airliner.

As a substitute for carrying survival gear? I don't think that's a
reasonable exchange.

No, of course not. As an addition to carry survival gear. A modern
handheld aviation radio is not big enough to displace survival gear.
However, it may get you in contact with someone much faster if you
happen to crash outside of mobile phone service.

According to all the experts I've talked to, including members of the CAP
here in the Rockies, a radio is a good option. A plane equipped with one of
the new 406 ELTs is also a good option. They also say that the survival
rate of the plane-mount ELTs in a big crash is not high. The best thing,
I'm told, is a personal locator beacon (or ELT) with GPS. There aren't many
of these with GPS but the ACR one is supposed to be top of the line.
They'll cut down the search pattern to just a few miles rather than hundreds
of miles... Barring nasty weather, we're talking recovery in 20 hours or so
versus many days... I've given my family hints along this line for ideas
for Christmas and/or birthdays for me... ;-)