I am looking for information on what other wings do in the following situation:
An aircraft is on an A5 flight ferrying to a sarex or even executing a tasking for the sarex. While they are in the air they hear a real ELT on 121.5. In the past we would direct them to find out where it is coming from and find out if it is distress or not.
It was pointed out to us that A5 is not the correct mission symbol for that activity and that the training funds are not to be used for actual searches and that if something happens while they are engaged in activity (real vs training elt) not covered by A5 it could be a liability problem.
Seems to me that diverting to find a real elt is pretty good training but that suggestion did not hold water :)
Do any of you have a local procedure that covers this kind of situation? One suggestion was to have the wing commander issue a 911 corporate mission to cover the aircraft in the air. We are still talking about how that might work.
I don't want to do anything wrong or bend any rules but the thought of asking an aircrew that might be in a position to assist someone to ignore it and continue with their training seems wrong. There has to be a way to respond quickly and correctly if we find ourselves in the right place at the right time.
Notify flight services and carry on with normal routine.
Per CAPR 60-3
The wing commander can change the mission type to C911.
He must then must contact the NOC and they will get with AFRCC and get an AFAM mission number issued if appropriate.
^Just had this happen. We opened up a mission immediately with AFRCC, and had the crew notate tach/hobbs times. Then when were on the ground, made the log books jive up with what parts of the sortie were with which mission number by using a slash and explanation in the log book. On the ground we worked out WMIRS as the whole sortie was on the A1 mission.
This is a great thing to take care of before you get into the situation. This is also something that your DO should talk with your state director and get the information out to your ICs. Lordmonar is correct with his statement as well.
Hmmm, AFRCC told us that they didn't want us calling in with such things when we checked after they stopped monitoring...heck, I heard them say that at an SMC class about 3 years ago (even before they stopped monitoring for them).
Quote from: RiverAux on April 04, 2010, 03:27:25 PM
Hmmm, AFRCC told us that they didn't want us calling in with such things when we checked after they stopped monitoring...heck, I heard them say that at an SMC class about 3 years ago (even before they stopped monitoring for them).
Surely after the latest public relations nightmare (pilot dying because of FAA terminology and AFRCC being able to reasonably understand what needed to be done -- or at least questioning more). (see another post in this area on this) IF in fact (what is stated above) this is their policy lets get it in writing and be sure to keep it.
During a SAREX one would have qualified personnel in the aircraft, and it would stand to reason that this would be good practice with a meaning to find & shut off the wayward ELT off.
I think many wings actually have a policy when the aircraft is being used for anything that the ELT receiver be left in the alert mode so IF a signal is picked up some action can be taken.
HOWEVER, on a ferry flight mission (e.g. to consolidated maintenance), you might only have a non mission qualified pilot flying the plane with no other crew members to assist, so legally it
could be an issue.
RM
To my knowledge AFRCC has NEVER wanted CAP members to call them directly to report hearing ELT signals. In two different wings over 13 years I've yet to hear anybody recommend CAP call AFRCC to report hearing ELTs. Now that I think about it I'm certain that the AFRCC people who taught both SMC courses I took both said that in my presence.
FYI, I'm reasonbly sure I've come across policy statements from several wings saying that such ELTs should be reported to flight services and not to AFRCC. Can't remember which ones though.
I believe CAWG often has aircrew's on standby to assist with actual ELT's during a large SAREX
I had a scenario once where I was flying to Imperial CA on a CAP mission. It was about 2300 hrs and I was about 45 minutes away from hitting my max flight time for that day. It was summer time and hot, everyone was worn out. I notified So Cal Approach of the ELT and my present location and I then notified the CAP IC when I landed about 20 minutes later. Then went to bed after we confirmed the appropriate CAP people had been made aware.
Report it to Center, and ask them to notify AFRCC that they have a CAP aircraft reporting it and in the vicinity.
IC or WG/CC call AFRCC and let them know what's up & see if they want to prosecute.
I can think of a SAREX last year in CAWG where we had *THREE* real ELTs go off (and it usually seems that we hear at least one at every SAREX). The crew that hears it reports it back to base, the IC calls AFRCC and gets a mission number, and we send a crew after it. When we had the third real ELT, it was the end of the day, and we had to scrounge a non-SAREX crew because everyone else was near the end of the duty day. Normally, we'll just redirect a MP or MO training flight if we've got them in the air.
Our ICs are not afraid to ask for a mission number, and I've never heard of AFRCC saying "No."
That seems to be the normal thing in CAWG .. particularly in SoCal, though ya'll don't seem to be immune from it either .. ;-)
Had one in indiana, 3 person crew en route to pick up another aircraft for a training exercise last year. We were asked by indy approach if we could hear the signal, as there were multiple reports already. We confirmed that we heard it, and landed where we were going. By the time we had wheels down and were calling the Wing/CC, there was already a mission number and tasking waiting for us.
At last week's State SAR Coordinators Council meeting, AFRCC Commander Lt Col Chuck Tomko and Chief of Operations Dan Conley said there is no AFRCC policy against CAP reporting ELTs (or other distress beacons). If a signal is coming from a remote area, and is being reported by a CAP crew then a mission number will be issued. If the signal is coming from an airport, then AFRCC would prefer to exercise the SAR system through the FAA. However, if a DF equipped crew is at the airport, then they'll most likely issue a mission number at the time of the report. In all cases (populated, remote or airport), CAP should also report the signal to the FAA.
Wing policies vary on who actually can make the report to AFRCC. Some wings let the crews contact AFRCC, some want the call to go through their normal contact process (IC, alert officer or whomever) and a few wings apparently don't want members contacting AFRCC directly. Regardless of the wing procedure (or lack thereof), there are several FAA procedures that make it clear that any FAA facility receiving an ELT report is to pass it up through channels to the AFRCC.
Mike