ELT ISSUE DOWN TO THE WIRE IN CANADA
The Canadian Owners and Pilots Association (COPA) says a pending new Transport Canada regulation that would require new emergency locator transmitters (ELTs) in private aircraft is too expensive and won't help to rescue lost pilots. The new 406 MHz gear would cost the general aviation sector $100 million -- with individual aircraft owners forking out $2,000 to $9,000 each -- and is not effective enough to justify the costs, according to COPA. "The geostationary satellites that receive the 406 alerting signal have limitations in latitude (unreliable above 70 degrees North) and mountainous terrain such that for 40 percent of Canada the ability to receive the 406 signal is degraded," says COPA. The association wants Transport Canada to allow each aircraft owner to decide what equipment is best suited to their own location and operations. The deadline for comments on the pending rule is Oct. 23. [more] As of Feb. 1, 2009, the international COSPAS-SARSAT satellite system that receives signals from the 121.5/243 MHz frequencies used in many ELTs will be discontinued. AOPA has taken a stand against making 406 MHz ELTs mandatory in the U.S. "The decisions to replace an existing ELT should be left to the discretion of the aircraft owner," says AOPA. More...
www.aopa.org
The general issue being raised here is whether it should be required for airplanes to have working emergency beacons on them or whether it should be left up to the pilot.
Obviously, as a member of an organization that focuses on looking for missing aircraft I would prefer that they all have them.
But, I'm not sure that it was ever a really wise use of government regulatory power. In the realm of all the potential safety mandates out there, this one doesn't really save all that many lives or effect all that many people. You would probably save a lot more lives by requiring every homeowner to have a fire alarm hooked up to automatically notify the fire department of a fire, but we don't require that.
So, I can sympathize with the airplane owners being required to put equipment on their plane that other transportation vehicles are not required to have.
However, its going to be fun when CAP press releases start mentioning that John Smith's missing plane wasn't equipped with an emergency beacon which is probably why we haven't found it yet.
Quote from: RiverAux on August 21, 2008, 08:06:47 PM
The general issue being raised here is whether it should be required for airplanes to have working emergency beacons on them or whether it should be left up to the pilot.
Obviously, as a member of an organization that focuses on looking for missing aircraft I would prefer that they all have them.
But, I'm not sure that it was ever a really wise use of government regulatory power. In the realm of all the potential safety mandates out there, this one doesn't really save all that many lives or effect all that many people. You would probably save a lot more lives by requiring every homeowner to have a fire alarm hooked up to automatically notify the fire department of a fire, but we don't require that.
So, I can sympathize with the airplane owners being required to put equipment on their plane that other transportation vehicles are not required to have.
However, its going to be fun when CAP press releases start mentioning that John Smith's missing plane wasn't equipped with an emergency beacon which is probably why we haven't found it yet.
A little curious about the ELT's and recent searches. How many active ELT signals have been associated with CAP searches in the last 12 months. Somehow I get the impression that there aren't many. Anyone have statistics on this?
In 2005 (the last year AFRCC published a report, or at least posted one on their web site), there were only 59 ELT missions that turned out to be distress related in their area. Only 3 people were saved as a result of ELT/EPIRB missions that year.
Keep in mind that this excludes Alaska, which has a fair number of PLB missions and excludes all the EPIRB missions for boats that are handled by the USCG.
QuoteThe general issue being raised here is whether it should be required for airplanes to have working emergency beacons on them or whether it should be left up to the pilot.
However, its going to be fun when CAP press releases start mentioning that John Smith's missing plane wasn't equipped with an emergency beacon which is probably why we haven't found it yet.
Both US and Canadian aviation regulations already require most general aviation and many other aircraft to have VHF (121.5) ELTs, so there shouldn't be any more press releases about the plane not having an ELT than there are today. At issue is whether the laws should be changed to require the VHF ELTs to be replaced by UHF (406) ELTs because of the termination of 121.5 monitoring by Sarsat. Transport Canada has a proposed change in work, against the wishes of the Canadian AOPA. The FAA has no interest in fighting AOPA in the US so it's not proposing a change.
As for stats, this is what was presented by the NOAA Sarsat rep at the state SAR coordinators meeting in May of this year.
For 2007
The distress/false/undetermined alerts were:
121.5 192/1975/4385
406 159/1140/746
Saves
235 EPIRB (no breakdown by type)
33 ELT (all 121.5)
88 PLB (all 406)
Mike
Well, technically you are correct in that they will have a beacon, but a beacon that can only transmit on a frequency that isn't monitored by anyone is functionally invisible unless a random passerby happens to hear it. In my book it doesn't count, so the actual release might say:
Unfortunately Mr. Smith chose not to upgrade his ELT to a frequency that is actively monitored which has greatly reduced the chances of us being able to find his airplane very quickly.
Well, actually, no PAO is actually going to put that in his press release (blaming the victim for not being found probably wouldn't go over well). However, it is probably going to be something that is asked about by the media.
As an IC and IO, I don't have a problem putting out a properly written release noting that the aircraft didn't have the latest generation beacon that would have potentially made a difference. That can be done without blaming the pilot or owner. CAP puts out releases stating that no flight plan was filed, and other agencies routinely put out releases about the lack of a weather radio or smoke alarm, that occupants of a vehicle weren't wearing seatbelts, boaters didn't have PFDs, etc.
CAP can continue to bury its head over the 406 beacon issue, or we can point out that there is a recommended alternative.
Mike
Quote from: RiverAux on August 21, 2008, 08:24:55 PM
In 2005 (the last year AFRCC published a report, or at least posted one on their web site), there were only 59 ELT missions that turned out to be distress related in their area. Only 3 people were saved as a result of ELT/EPIRB missions that year.
Keep in mind that this excludes Alaska, which has a fair number of PLB missions and excludes all the EPIRB missions for boats that are handled by the USCG.
What specific area is that in? I think CAWG has 3 or 5 saves in the past month.
I show one save for all of '08 in CAwg, on 10 Aug.
For August, through 8/21:
Non-distress finds - 11
Distress finds - 2
Save - 1
Quote from: MikeD on August 22, 2008, 04:41:59 AM
Quote from: RiverAux on August 21, 2008, 08:24:55 PM
In 2005 (the last year AFRCC published a report, or at least posted one on their web site), there were only 59 ELT missions that turned out to be distress related in their area. Only 3 people were saved as a result of ELT/EPIRB missions that year.
Keep in mind that this excludes Alaska, which has a fair number of PLB missions and excludes all the EPIRB missions for boats that are handled by the USCG.
What specific area is that in? I think CAWG has 3 or 5 saves in the past month.
That is the report for the entire country, and as I said, was for 2005, not 2008.
So if an ELT (121.5) goes off in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it really make a sound?
Think about that....
Quote from: 1st Lt Richard "Pumbaa" Fairchild on August 22, 2008, 10:15:57 PM
So if an ELT (121.5) goes off in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it really make a sound?
Think about that....
Well of course not, ELT's make radio waves, not sound.....But those guys hanging upside down in the trees with avgas running down ther necks sure make a lot of noise!
Major Lord