I need a new ELT in the Maule as my current 406 is no longer supported and we can't get a battery for it.

Pacific coast avionics recommended the ACK E-04 406 for $445. Any other options I should consider?

How many of you have connected your gps to the 406? Does it make a significant difference in accuracy?

Thanks for anything you can share.

Brent

I'm between that ELT or the ARTEX ELT 345 for mine, I'll have to decide at some point which I'll do.

Batteries America claims to have a battery for everything - sorta
Never disappointed me yet.

If I have time to find a link I will edit this post.

I did the replacement to ACK in my old 182. Easy install really. The only thing that took time was running the patch cord to the panel mount display/control. I didn't have a GPS to interface with so I can't comment on the additional GPS accuracy/tracking abilities.

I might be doing it again if the AmeriKing deal continues to go downhill and affect the older installed units. If I have to replace it I'll go with the ACK for no specific reason other than I felt it was a good value.

Rich

I've got an ACK as well. No issues, and tests good every time I've done it.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

I just upgraded the ELT in ZA, and after a good bit of research, I elected to go with the Emerging Lifesaving Technologies 406 ELT. Ordered it from Spruce.

http://www.elt406.net/

http://www.elt406.net/pdf/ELT-BROCHURE.pdf

It was a little more money, but it has an internal GPS and pretty robust construction. It also has a "Dual Polarized Antenna" meaning that it broadcasts signal on both vertical and horizontal planes. I mounted the antenna inside the tail (ok in tube & fabric) so that it is protected and less likely to get broken off in a wreck. I also mounted it sideways so that if I end up on my back, the signal still goes up and out. I just hope I don't have to find out how well it works.

Ross

I've done two of the ACK 406 ELTs now, and I'd go there again. This ELT is easily connected to a GPS, so that its signal transmits present position, which is updated every second, as I recall. They are the least expensive 406 on the market that supports ELT connections, and one of the least expensive on the market period.

First one had a problem with the activation switch, which failed to the "alert" mode. Verified that my antenna and cell phone worked . Happened to be going into OSH when it happened. Called ACK, and they had a replacement ELT to me via a dealer at the show within two days.

After a couple weeks, they had received the ELT that'd failed, and they called me to let me know what they'd found from the old switch. Very good customer support....they never asked questions....I called and told them the thing failed, and they said they'd have me a new unit pronto. They did. That one has worked for three or four years now.

New plane has one as well. No problems. Haven't crashed recently, so don't know if it'll work with the plane upside down and on fire, but...I think I'll leave that to another day.

Good unit. I wouldn't pay twice as much for one with a built in GPS, personally.

MTV

RWM wrote:I just upgraded the ELT in ZA, and after a good bit of research, I elected to go with the Emerging Lifesaving Technologies 406 ELT. Ordered it from Spruce.

http://www.elt406.net/

http://www.elt406.net/pdf/ELT-BROCHURE.pdf

It was a little more money, but it has an internal GPS and pretty robust construction. It also has a "Dual Polarized Antenna" meaning that it broadcasts signal on both vertical and horizontal planes. I mounted the antenna inside the tail (ok in tube & fabric) so that it is protected and less likely to get broken off in a wreck. I also mounted it sideways so that if I end up on my back, the signal still goes up and out. I just hope I don't have to find out how well it works.

Ross

I have that ELT also. I just had to replace the battery, and it took about a month for my avionics shop to obtain one from the manufacturer. Not a hardship in this case, but it could have been. It may just be because I got mine at roll-out, and all the people who bought them on day one all came due at the same time? Like you I haven't had to find out how well it works, but it bench-tested good at the battery-replacement interval, and the self-tests have never failed.

At one time I bought a second one that I ended up not needing. The company agreed to take it back (un-opened original packaging), which I thought was a nice bit of customer service.

-DP

Thanks for all of the great replies and advice everyone, gives me something more to ponder

How many of you have connected your gps to the 406? Does it make a significant difference in accuracy?

I installed an ACK E-04 ELT last week but did not connect it to a GPS as I do not have one. I keep thinking about getting one to hook up to the ELT though.

From the ACK-E04 installation manual:

. Location accuracy with older generation
ELT’s was limited to about a 15 - 20 mile radius, and could take several hours to provide
accurate location data. For new generation 406 MHz ELT’s without GPS position
information, the average time to process, and identify the aircraft location is 1-2 hours,
with a search radius of about 2 miles or less. With GPS information, the time to locate the
aircraft position is 10 minutes or less, with an accuracy of about 300 feet.

Link to the manual. Includes how the GPS is connected, what types GPS etc... http://ackavionics.com/pdf/E-04_REV_1.7 ... EDUCED.pdf

I plan to hook whichever one I get up to my Aera510

One possible issue with replacing an ELT....
lots of ELT's have been mounted to simple "shelf" brackets aft of the baggage compartment (like mine is).
My mechanic buddies tell me that the FAA is fussier now, ELT brackets must be mounted to a structural part (bulkhead or stringer) instead of riveted to the skin (like mine is). Fabricating and installing a new structurally-attached bracket takes a lot more work than simply replacing with a like ELT, or riveting the clamp for a new ELT onto the existing bracket.

I think that if you simply replace your existing ELT with a like unit, this requirement doesn't come into play, but it would if you get a new different ELT. Just saying.

hotrod180 wrote:One possible issue with replacing an ELT....
lots of ELT's have been mounted to simple "shelf" brackets aft of the baggage compartment (like mine is).
My mechanic buddies tell me that the FAA is fussier now, ELT brackets must be mounted to a structural part (bulkhead or stringer) instead of riveted to the skin (like mine is). Fabricating and installing a new structurally-attached bracket takes a lot more work than simply replacing with a like ELT, or riveting the clamp for a new ELT onto the existing bracket.

I think that if you simply replace your existing ELT with a like unit, this requirement doesn't come into play, but it would if you get a new different ELT. Just saying.

Maybe a true observation, but why would you not want a better, more dependable ELT installation?

My old one was on a plate mounted to tubing on the left side of the baggage compartment. The 2 I've been looking at getting, I need to make a new plate and put it on the tubing aft of the baggage compartment on the bottom, centerline, etc. Not too big of deal, but not a simple swap out like the products make it sound like.

I like the ACK. I was planning on getting an emergency lifesaving technologies one, but they were not approved in Canada yet. I still don't think they are. I think it's great to have gps built right in.

hotrod180 wrote:One possible issue with replacing an ELT....
lots of ELT's have been mounted to simple "shelf" brackets aft of the baggage compartment (like mine is).
My mechanic buddies tell me that the FAA is fussier now, ELT brackets must be mounted to a structural part (bulkhead or stringer) instead of riveted to the skin (like mine is). Fabricating and installing a new structurally-attached bracket takes a lot more work than simply replacing with a like ELT, or riveting the clamp for a new ELT onto the existing bracket.

I think that if you simply replace your existing ELT with a like unit, this requirement doesn't come into play, but it would if you get a new different ELT. Just saying.

The requirement to ensure your ELT is solidly mounted SHOULD be mandatory at every periodic inspection. Not to do so simply negates the value of the ELT. It's not that tough to fabricate a decent mount. If I were a mechanic, verifying this would be pretty high on my inspection checklist.

Some friends of mine spent more time in a wreck than they should have because the ELT (a 406) broke loose and didn't alert. A couple of them died, but not because they were out there longer than necessary, but.....

When my ELT alerted at OSH, I had just installed it and was curious if the location function really worked. I got the call from RCC about five minutes after the ELT alerted. When I talked to RCC, I asked them if they'd gotten a GPS location on the initial alert. The nice Major said to stand by and he'd check. A few minutes later, he came on and said they'd plotted the GPS coordinates to approximately 200 meters west of the N/S runway at Wittman Field. Couldn't get much better than that.

It's not rocket science and it does indeed work.

MTV

I have had one of Artex's 406ME ELTs for as long as they've been available--I think I have close to serial no. 1. The thing came with a Velcro strap holding it onto the mounting bracket, but I replaced that 2 years ago with the newer stainless steel strap mounting bracket, as is required for all new installations. 4 years ago, I had it tied to my then newly installed 430W, so that it will send out the GPS coordinates.

Without the GPS, the search is narrowed to about a 1 1/2 mile diameter. With the GPS, it's about 100 yards. Big difference, when you're cold and hurt.

BTW, I also have a pair of PLBs and a portable 121.5 ELT, flares, and a signal mirror. Can't have too many ways to signal rescuers!

Cary

Don't the Artex have that notorious recurring AD on them?

denalipilot wrote:...Maybe a true observation, but why would you not want a better, more dependable ELT installation?

Who says it's better? My ELT bracket is plenty stout, but from what my A&P friends have told me it doesn't meet the new requirement. I'm satisfied with it-- it's not like it's held on with a zip-tie and bailing wire. Replacing the mount would be like replacing a cylinder when it still tests out at 70/80.

I just thought I'd point out that besides the $600 & up (in some cases way up!) cost of a new 406 ELT, there might be another few hundred dollars of shop time charged for fabricating a new mount & crawling back into the tail to rivet it in place.

I installed an ACK E-04 at annual in 2014. Before annual in 2015 I found cracks in the plastic casting on the new ELT antenna with small chunks of plastic falling out. I fly in Alaska in the winter so the antenna experienced cold but not significant heat. I contacted ACK and they promptly sent out a replacement antenna (no charge). They cautioned about over tightening the nut securing the antenna to the base plate. They also indicated that cracks in the plastic casting would not adversely impact the operation of the antenna. Bottom line is if you've installed an ACK E-04 in the last couple years you might want to check the antenna casting closely for cracking.