I just finished a trip to Page, AZ for some time at Lake Powell. Flying accros Nevada brings your real close to some interesting areas. What if an F-16 pulls up next to may 182 (can they fly that slow) and waves at me. Are I not supposed to go to 121.5? I think that is what he would expect and I do not want to piss him off.

Tim

qmdv wrote:I just finished a trip to Page, AZ for some time at Lake Powell. Flying accros Nevada brings your real close to some interesting areas. What if an F-16 pulls up next to may 182 (can they fly that slow) and waves at me. Are I not supposed to go to 121.5? I think that is what he would expect and I do not want to piss him off.

Tim

121.5 mHz is still the emergency frequency as far as I know. This FCC thing relates only to Emergency Locator Beacons that go weeOOOeeeOOOOeeeeOOOOeeeOOOO.

I think someone @ the fcc did not due their homework and that this reg (which as I understand is in comment stage)will be rescinded.Two years ago ,a bunch of Hams got the fcc to rescind a reg allowing power companies to transmitt broadband data over their existing powerlines right along with their ac current.(due to interference to their amateur frequencies)THe 406 mhrz pulse data burst though capable of great accuracy does not broadcast as a "sweep"allowing searchers on the ground to DF to its location,this is the way cap or other sar can locate once given a general direction.THe 121.5 frequency is still requested by any a/c with dual navcom installs,and the elts/epirbs currently manufactored (dual 406/121.5)carry fcc approvals and are not likely to be rescinded...thin

One other thing to keep in mind, some people dont have the money to buy a 406 (think of some of the LSA folks) and will continue to fly ether way, by grandfathering the 121.5 units we would help keep people in aviation (or rather legally in aviation). Perhaps in this economy we should think about making it easier to get into and stay into aviation.

Of all the government agencies I've dealt with over the years, the FCC is the most incompetent.

Now, remember when discussing this topic and referring to the FAA--The FAA never mandated ELTs. The ELT came about because of the loss of two congressmen, who were flying in Alaska, and disappeared: Begich and Boggs. Never found em. Congress screamed do something, and they essentially forced the FAA to implement the ELT rule in the FARs. The FAA never has liked ELTs (not invented here) and would probably as soon they went away.

121.5 will be around for some time. As noted, it's still the only way to DF an emergency signal, hence there WILL be 121.5 beacons for a long time to come, though they'll also be emitting a 406 signal.

FCC is simply dumber than dirt, and I suspect they didn't do their homework.

MTV

1SeventyZ wrote:121.5 mHz is still the emergency frequency as far as I know. This FCC thing relates only to Emergency Locator Beacons that go weeOOOeeeOOOOeeeeOOOOeeeOOOO.

Are you sure that's the sound? I think it's more like "we owe, we owe, we owe".

John

Nice one John...! They should encourage tracking as a safety system. It will work before you crash instead of having to work after you crash.

Luke

Someone mentioned to me today that (according to CAP and SAR sources) there has never been one downed aircraft that was initially located because of an ELT signal being picked up. He said ELT signals have been tracked and DF'ed afterward, to direct SAR crews to arrive at the wreck site, but the ELT has never actually been the first thing that alerted the world of a crashed airplane.

Does anyone here with significant CAP, SAR or other relevant experience know if this claim is true or not?

If it was true, I'd think all of us would see it highlighted in each and every advertisement for SPOT and EPIRB's...

Nope,
I know of at least two crashes that RCC mobilized on because of an ELT hit. In one case, there was a flight plan, and the flight plan was (barely) overdue. In the other case, there was no flight plan, but both of these were in remote areas of AK, where the liklihood of a false elt alert were small.

The problem with 121.5 ELT alerts is that it takes RCC a few hours at least to triangulate even a general position, so if your elt goes off, they would know there was an elt, but it would take a couple more hits before they had a good location, so it'd be a while before they even knew where to look. In the meantime, oftentimes, someone else would push the panic button, due to overdue flight plan, etc.

MTV

The August date listed in the AEA Regulatory Update June 21, is the absolute earliest date the FCC rule could have become effective. Thanks to the efforts of the AOPA, the AEA and other trade associations, the final rule has not been submitted to the Federal Register for publication; therefore, the 60-day clock for implementation of the rule has not begun. As such, at this time, there is no way of knowing if or when this rule will become final.

The FCC has clarified that the rule is targeting legacy TSO C91a type ELTs, which operate primarily on 121.5 MHz, not the general use of frequency 121.5 MHz as the rule implies. Current TSO C126 ELTs are not affected by this ruling.

From the Aircraft Electronics
Association website.

Never believe a story that starts with "never" or "always."

Doh!

Anyway, I have personal knowledge of two primary ELT saves, one of whom didn't have a plan on file and might never have been known to have crashed or been located otherwise until much, much later if at all (remote four corners.) This was back before anyone carried EPIRBs, PLBs, or SPOTs in their pockets.

I also believe there was a newspaper account of a mishap at a backcountry strip in the general vicinity of Fairbanks three or four years ago where the occupants suffered minor injuries but had no way to notify anyone and they were rescued after satellite reception of their ELT. I might be misremembering the details though.

Remember that ELTs were not designed to operate out of the bottom of a smoking hole in the ground. They do suffer from limitations such as failing in the type of collisions with the ground that hold no hope of human survival.

FCC has clarified the rule;
It applies only to 121.5 and not 121.5/406 ELT's
The original NPRM is from 2006 and
The 60 day clock for replacement has not started.

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?Cont ... 62f497a3f&