![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 9/7/2007 9:37:43 AM, cjcampbell wrote:
Why bother with new batteries if the thing won't work and is no longer required? Just yank it out. The 121.5 MHz ELT will still broadcast the emergency tone on that frequency after the cutoff date and there will still be overflying aircraft monitoring 121.5, no? Granted that odds of being located by ELT after an off-airport landing just lowered in this case, but removing the unit altogether reduces those odds to zero. -- Peter |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I got a McMurdo Fastfind Plus PLB about 2 years ago because I was going to
be flying over the same Nevada countryside where SF disappeared. I'll upgrade to a 406 MHz ELT as suggested by FAA. No need to die while waiting for someone to hear a 121.5 beacon. -- Best Regards, Mike http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel A frog in a well does not know the great sea. "Ron Lee" wrote in message ... "Peter R." wrote: On 9/6/2007 6:34:59 PM, wrote: Anyone know current prices on the 400 MHz replacements? I had to replace my ELT about four months ago and at the time the only 400MHz ELT that I could locate was Artex's model. The price back in May was around US $1,100 for the unit. After a phone conversation with an ACK representative and given that I carry a McMurdo handheld PLB with GPS in the aircraft, I opted to purchase an ACK E-01 121.5 MHz for US $210 and wait for their 400 MHz unit, which is supposed to be significantly cheaper than Artex's unit and will drop right into the same mounting bracket as the E-01. -- Peter I also have the McMurdo Fastfind Plus PLB. Ron Lee |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote:
Not too long ago, a friend of mine had an off airport landing in his helicopter, better make that a crash. His helicopter was destroyed on a hill with a direct line of sight to the local airport. He suffered only a sprain but had to walk out several miles to get cell phone coverage. All this time the ELT was pinging away. When we got to the crash site several hours later, we turned the ELT off. No one responded to the ELT signal. It seems that he had been carrying around a device that is normally ignored due to its false alarm rate. Since the ELTs are not required on aircraft, just airplanes, I've removed mine and depend on the cell phone and my legs. I think that my friends ELT provided just a false sense of security and in his particular case, nothing else. FAA Technicians and/or the FCC did respond all the time to ELT signals. FAA staffing is no longer available because all of the FAA technicians have been replaced by the new FAA with big bubble butt black women on civil rights staffs hanging out on the phone or at the local KFC ****ing off on your IRS tax dime That is why FAA ELT response has stopped. FAA priorities have changed from aviation safety to "Kissing the Black Ass". The false alarm scenario is bull**** to cover for their ****ed up priorities and reduced staffing. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
NoneYa wrote:
Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote: Not too long ago, a friend of mine had an off airport landing in his helicopter, better make that a crash. His helicopter was destroyed on a hill with a direct line of sight to the local airport. He suffered only a sprain but had to walk out several miles to get cell phone coverage. All this time the ELT was pinging away. When we got to the crash site several hours later, we turned the ELT off. No one responded to the ELT signal. It seems that he had been carrying around a device that is normally ignored due to its false alarm rate. Since the ELTs are not required on aircraft, just airplanes, I've removed mine and depend on the cell phone and my legs. I think that my friends ELT provided just a false sense of security and in his particular case, nothing else. FAA Technicians and/or the FCC did respond all the time to ELT signals. FAA staffing is no longer available because all of the FAA technicians have been replaced by the new FAA with big bubble butt black women on civil rights staffs hanging out on the phone or at the local KFC ****ing off on your IRS tax dime That is why FAA ELT response has stopped. FAA priorities have changed from aviation safety to "Kissing the Black Ass". The false alarm scenario is bull**** to cover for their ****ed up priorities and reduced staffing. How long have you been lusting after large black girls? Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The "old" style, 121.5 units are not necessarily just "a glorified boat
anchor". All of our SAR aircraft still have the VHF trackers installed that still work very well. The satellites are being switched over to UHF because the system was completely saturated before. The friend with the helicopter only needed to wait for enough of the bogus signals to fade or be turned off before his call could be handled. Sort of like being put on hold when you call the fire department. We will still get a call-out based on an overflight (or two or three) reporting a VHF signal. Just because the Satellites don't hear the signal doesn't mean that everyone gave up. In parallel with the FAA announcement we received an admonishment to constantly monitor Guard. -- Jim Carter Rogers, Arkansas |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sorry to disapoint you but the FAA does not and never did respond to ELT
signals. The flight service station people do check airports for lost and missing or overdue aircraft but the search is left to the US Coast Guard if the elt is wet and the US Air Force/Civil Air Patrol if dry. Both organizations continue to respond to any and all ELT/EPIRB signals. This mission will not change with the closure of COSPAS/SARSAT. The 406 mhz signals will provice quicker, more precise position reports that will result in more rescues and fewer errors. Dave N NoneYa wrote: Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote: Not too long ago, a friend of mine had an off airport landing in his helicopter, better make that a crash. His helicopter was destroyed on a hill with a direct line of sight to the local airport. He suffered only a sprain but had to walk out several miles to get cell phone coverage. All this time the ELT was pinging away. When we got to the crash site several hours later, we turned the ELT off. No one responded to the ELT signal. It seems that he had been carrying around a device that is normally ignored due to its false alarm rate. Since the ELTs are not required on aircraft, just airplanes, I've removed mine and depend on the cell phone and my legs. I think that my friends ELT provided just a false sense of security and in his particular case, nothing else. FAA Technicians and/or the FCC did respond all the time to ELT signals. FAA staffing is no longer available because all of the FAA technicians have been replaced by the new FAA with big bubble butt black women on civil rights staffs hanging out on the phone or at the local KFC ****ing off on your IRS tax dime That is why FAA ELT response has stopped. FAA priorities have changed from aviation safety to "Kissing the Black Ass". The false alarm scenario is bull**** to cover for their ****ed up priorities and reduced staffing. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes they did with mobile DF's if they were pinging around an
airport. I used to see them all the time running around after AT bitched about them going off. Yes a real crash was the CAP or Coast Guard but the false alarms were mostly FAA techs looking for them. David G. Nagel wrote: Sorry to disapoint you but the FAA does not and never did respond to ELT signals. The flight service station people do check airports for lost and missing or overdue aircraft but the search is left to the US Coast Guard if the elt is wet and the US Air Force/Civil Air Patrol if dry. Both organizations continue to respond to any and all ELT/EPIRB signals. This mission will not change with the closure of COSPAS/SARSAT. The 406 mhz signals will provice quicker, more precise position reports that will result in more rescues and fewer errors. Dave N NoneYa wrote: Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote: Not too long ago, a friend of mine had an off airport landing in his helicopter, better make that a crash. His helicopter was destroyed on a hill with a direct line of sight to the local airport. He suffered only a sprain but had to walk out several miles to get cell phone coverage. All this time the ELT was pinging away. When we got to the crash site several hours later, we turned the ELT off. No one responded to the ELT signal. It seems that he had been carrying around a device that is normally ignored due to its false alarm rate. Since the ELTs are not required on aircraft, just airplanes, I've removed mine and depend on the cell phone and my legs. I think that my friends ELT provided just a false sense of security and in his particular case, nothing else. FAA Technicians and/or the FCC did respond all the time to ELT signals. FAA staffing is no longer available because all of the FAA technicians have been replaced by the new FAA with big bubble butt black women on civil rights staffs hanging out on the phone or at the local KFC ****ing off on your IRS tax dime That is why FAA ELT response has stopped. FAA priorities have changed from aviation safety to "Kissing the Black Ass". The false alarm scenario is bull**** to cover for their ****ed up priorities and reduced staffing. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]() David G. Nagel wrote: Sorry to disapoint you but the FAA does not and never did respond to ELT signals. You don't know what you're talking about. We always have and always will. If we hear a signal or are told about a signal we start the search. the search is left to the US Air Force/Civil Air Patrol if dry. Maybe. In Montana and a few other states we do the search with our own resources and the Air force is merely a back up. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Denny wrote: The regs do not require replacement of the ELT 121.5 units... Save your money, install new batteries at the annual, and keep on trucking... denny Yet. The NTSB is telling the FAA they should change the regs. The NTSB wants a lot of things. Few of them get implemented. ' |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ELT Message From FAA | RST Engineering | Piloting | 26 | September 10th 07 04:00 AM |
OT Message rule???? | Tri-Pacer | Piloting | 9 | February 16th 07 04:43 AM |
Christmas Greetings and Message | tony roberts | Piloting | 1 | December 25th 05 05:02 AM |
Test message | nauga | Home Built | 0 | January 27th 04 11:24 PM |
New guy with message for All | UFO_Investigator - Jim D. | Military Aviation | 0 | August 7th 03 06:53 AM |