http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/general-aviation/2015-09-21/acr-unveils-low-cost-406-mhz-elt-345
Progress!

I am a big fan of ACR (Artex). Their PLB's are proven stout; I have distributed several among the family. A competitor, ACK, has been in the low cost 406/GPS ELT market for some time. The reviews seem good, but no experience with them:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/pages/av/elts_zack/elt406.php
$599 at Spruce.

Had planned on the ACK, but now there are two to choose from. Anyone with ACK experience?

-Jim

Nice! I'm glad I didn't buy the ELT1000 as I'd planned. Seems like one of those things where you need to have the mounting tray in hand and antenna to run wire while the fabric is off, but if you buy early, before you know it a new cheaper model comes out.

I've got the ACK. The install sounded easy (I didn't do it). Tests good every time. No experience with an actual alarm. Hopefully it never gets fully tested. It would be nice if it had it's own built-in GPS though. I still need to tie mine into my 296.

I have an ACK currently installed in my C-172, install was quick and easy, I did it myself. I will suggest you avoid Ameri-King at all costs. I went thru 3 of them in 12 years, he first one lasted 3 years, when it wouldn't pass test at annual it was $10.00 cheaper to replace it from spruce than pay for a "flat rate repair" so I bought a second one. I lasted 7 months then died under warranty. When I sent it in I got a phone call and an email offering a $300.00 trade-in on a newer model, when I said just fix it for now they stopped answering emails, their 1-800-###-### phone goes to an answering machine that they do not return calls from. When I googled them and found a local phone number that they did answer they always said "we will ship your unit this Friday". It finally took them 18 weeks for a warranty repair. When that one died again I bought the ACK.

I am a bit confused about some of the 406 ELT's being offered. Since this new ACR model has a built in GPS sensor, is there any benefit to the unit receiving data from an outside GPS as well?

Is the ACR unit different from the ACK in regards to GPS input being needed?

Thanks,
Joe

twflyer wrote:I am a bit confused about some of the 406 ELT's being offered. Since this new ACR model has a built in GPS sensor, is there any benefit to the unit receiving data from an outside GPS as well? Is the ACR unit different from the ACK in regards to GPS input being needed?

From the linked ACR webpage:
"A built-in GPS sensor provides position accuracy to within 100 meters. When activated either using the remote switch, the switch on the ELT or by triggering of the g-switch, the ELT 345’s encoded digital message contains aircraft identification and registration information, aircraft position and access to owner contact details"

The news release lists what comes with the unit, it doesn't mention a GPS antenna so it must be integral to the device? I'm wondering how well it will receive back in the typical Cessna tailcone installation. In any event, I'm glad to see a new low cost 406 ELT solution. Maybe they'll come out with a low-end ADS-B transmitter next.

hotrod180 wrote:

twflyer wrote:I am a bit confused about some of the 406 ELT's being offered. Since this new ACR model has a built in GPS sensor, is there any benefit to the unit receiving data from an outside GPS as well? Is the ACR unit different from the ACK in regards to GPS input being needed?

From the linked ACR webpage:
"A built-in GPS sensor provides position accuracy to within 100 meters. When activated either using the remote switch, the switch on the ELT or by triggering of the g-switch, the ELT 345’s encoded digital message contains aircraft identification and registration information, aircraft position and access to owner contact details"

The news release lists what comes with the unit, it doesn't mention a GPS antenna so it must be integral to the device? I'm wondering how well it will receive back in the typical Cessna tailcone installation. In any event, I'm glad to see a new low cost 406 ELT solution. Maybe they'll come out with a low-end ADS-B transmitter next.

I have a very early ACR 406ME, tied to my 430W for positioning.

I have also wondered how well an integral GPS picks up GPS signals in the back of an aluminum airplane. So far as I can tell, none of them has a separate GPS antenna, and the usual antenna set-up is either a combo antenna for both 406 and 121.5 (some also have 243.0), or in some few cases, two separate antennas. That would seem to be one disadvantage of the integral GPS.

The other disadvantage would be that it's not a WAAS GPS, so the accuracy is only to 100 meters. That's a lot better than just a 406 without GPS (roughly 25 square miles), but not as accurate as a WAAS GPS such as my 430W, which brings accuracy down to about 10 meters. Since it feeds position info to the 406ME every couple of seconds, even if they become disconnected in a crash, the 406ME would still give a pretty accurate location.

Of course, my plan is to land so gently that unless I turn it on manually, the ELT will never go off, and I'll have to use one of my two PLBs! So far, my one and only off-airport emergency landing was just that, and I had to use my cell phone.

Cary

I have a very early ACR 406ME, tied to my 430W for positioning.

I have also wondered how well an integral GPS picks up GPS signals in the back of an aluminum airplane.

I think you bring up two important points that are critical to a useful ELT activation in an emergency, and worth underlining.

Having an external GPS sending continuous position data to the ELT means the second it is activated it will send position info. As I understand it an internal GPS is not activated until the ELT is activated, requiring a GPS cold start which could take minutes+ before it had a solution. Additionally, as you point out, that would require the internal GPS to see the sky, which is very unlikely in an aluminum airplane.

As I imagine it, if one had 20 or 30 seconds before a forced landing in bad country, one could turn the ELT on and likely get out a couple of data bursts with location, before impact. Without GPS in the data burst it takes hours of satellite passes (and ELT signals) to triangulate even an approx. location. This makes GPS data key to a successful ELT activation.

I think the value of an internal GPS is if you pull the ELT and head for town, SAR can track you. I think some of the ELT's are set up to allow the antenna to be twisted off by hand and plugged directly into the ELT, else they come with a spare antenna that can be stored nearby the tray.

This last bit, for me, will be handled by a PLB, on my person, when bush flying.

Finally, the 430W giving razor sharp positions is just icing on the cake. Lacking that, any cheap RS-232 GPS puck will do an acceptable job for under $40.

Update: No internal GPS on either model

The ARC (ARTEX ELT 345 GPS) ELT doesn't have a built in GPS; the brochure was misleading. It has an interface one can feed GPS data into. Read the install manual to confirm.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pdf/artex_elt345Manual.pdf

Meaning both the ARC and ACK require an external GPS feeding them via rs-232 (nema 0183, 4800-standard serial). Again, if you have a GPS in dash already, most have an extra rs-232 serial output. If not get a $40 Puck GPS and throw it up on the dash or outside as needed to get a decent view of the sky.

As discussed I would argue this is a logical feature set as internal GPS has very little to recommend it when cost is an issue. A PLB carried on person makes much more sense to me for use both away from the plane, and nearby the plane as some number less than 60% of ELT's ever survive the wreck well enough to get a signal out. If I was ever in such a situation I would trigger the ELT and every PLB nearby.