Hey knowledge base...
Working my way from the tail forward on my IRANed 61 185 and about to buy/ install an ELT. Comments suggestions etc.?
Thanks
Duncan

I'd recommend avoiding ACK at all costs. I had a issue with mine and their customer service wasn't just horrible, it was insulting. Worst product support I've ever seen, anywhere.

I’ve not had any issues at all from my ACK in 5 years. I haven’t had to call their support line, though.

I'll second stay away from AKC, I sent in a unit for warranty repair a few years ago, 4 months later they sent me a used unit with a new sticker on the side and called it a "warrant replacement". When that died a year later I bought something else. Their customer service is a joke, when they actually answer the phone.

Great timing, been thinking of upgrading my 121.5 ELT to 406. So I guess if ACK chat service sucks, artex is the only way to go in the price range? I liked how the ACK units would easily retrofit from my ameriking.

Ive had three ACK 406 ELTs in the last ~ 10 years or so. First one alerted on first flight, which was to OSH. And wouldn’t shut off. Dissassembled to get it to shut up, and called company. They asked where I was, and shipped a replacement to a vendor at OSH for me. That one worked fine till I sold the plane, and as far as I know still fine.

I bought a Cub that didn’t have an ELT. Bought an ACK and installed. No problems, and passed all checks. Sold that plane five years later. Current plane came with ACK installed. No problems to date.

Artex had LOTS of problems early on with water in antennas and their mounting with Velcro strap. I think both of those are fixed.

But me, if I needed a new ELT today, I’d buy an ACK......again.

MTV

I've installed a few of both ACK and artex. Both work fine. Haven't had to deal with customer service for either. With the ACK you have to make sure you change the battery in the little panel controller every 10 years(if luthium), but the install is a bit easier as you dont have to wire the connector. Either way you should be happy.

And, if you're installing a 406 ELT (and I hope you are), be sure to purchase one which permits connecting it to a GPS. The ACK 406 will connect to almost any GPS unit, including Garmin portables. Connecting your 406 ELT to a GPS ensures that RCC has a precise location on the first ping of the unit.....which can be a real life saver.

MTV

I had an ack antenna come apart on me and they sent me a new one, so the service wasn't terrible for me, but if I was buying a new ELT, I'd probably look elsewhere. I very much dislike the connectors on the ack. The telephone connector for the panel is garbage, and the PS2 style connector for the GPS serial interface isn't awesome either.

I was just looking at the Artex 345 because it also has GPS input and the connectors aren't junk, but apparently they typically come setup for 9600 baud aviation input. You have to specifically order it programmed for NMEA format to make it work with a garmin portable GPS or have it reprogrammed.

That's pretty dumb, especially when the Ack allows you to set it to what you want with a jumper. Also, the Artex battery is $50 more, so that's also lame.

I don't know... pick your poison.

mtv wrote:And, if you're installing a 406 ELT (and I hope you are), be sure to purchase one which permits connecting it to a GPS. The ACK 406 will connect to almost any GPS unit, including Garmin portables. Connecting your 406 ELT to a GPS ensures that RCC has a precise location on the first ping of the unit.....which can be a real life saver.

MTV

^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^

I researched this a couple of years ago and decided on the Emerging Lifesaving Technologies unit.

https://www.eltechnolgies.com

Reasons?

Built in GPS. Easier install, and in an accident no chance of cables to the GPS becoming disconnected.

Similarly, the blade antenna seems likelier to survive a trip through a forest canopy than the the thin whips. Who knows?

My only disclaimer? The airplane sits outside half the year and the antenna, like most, started to turn yellow. After consulting with ELT Technologies, black Plasti-dip looks great and solved that problem.

ELT antenna white




ELT antenna black

That's a good find.

The antenna and install are much nicer. Easier to test too since you don't need to figure out ff the GPS is actually spitting out the right data.

As far as the GPS becoming disconnected, that's largely moot since the Ack and Artex will simply broadcast last known position, which is where you will be if the wire came apart in a crash.

What does a replacement battery cost?

schu

aqua wrote:I researched this a couple of years ago and decided on the Emerging Lifesaving Technologies unit.

https://www.eltechnolgies.com

Reasons?

Built in GPS. Easier install, and in an accident no chance of cables to the GPS becoming disconnected.

Similarly, the blade antenna seems likelier to survive a trip through a forest canopy than the the thin whips. Who knows?

My only disclaimer? The airplane sits outside half the year and the antenna, like most, started to turn yellow. After consulting with ELT Technologies, black Plasti-dip looks great and solved that problem.

-0-

Thanks everyone...

After balancing the available field I ended up w/ACK 406. I had had several ACK's 121.5's on other planes with no problems (use a little bit of DC4 on phone plug) cheap batteries etc. I do the batteries at every annual- good insurance.

I was hoping for an internal new internal w/GPS self contained type but price point is high considering I can send a "ping" manually with a send from the remote panel connected GPS AND I carry a ACK PLB at all times.
Fly safe,
Duncan

Maybe not applicable to certified planes but when I installed my ACK E-04 ELT I also "installed" a Garmin WAAS GPS puck. Hook it to 12V and it spits out NEMA and other GPS data. I connected it to the ELT so the ELT has it's own GPS source. I think it cost $60 on Amazon.

Great idea

dogpilot wrote:Personally, I have put ME406 ELT's in all my aircraft I run through. While they don't have GPS interconnect, 406 is not bad at giving a more precise location when it is actually transmitting. 121.5 units required several sat passes to get a dubious fix.

The 406 system uses the polar orbiting satellites to geo locate an alerting ELT. This is accomplished via Doppler. One pass of a polar orbiting satellite provides an "approximate" location, with a pretty large chunk of country where the beacon might be. Second pass of a polar orbiting satellite helps to resolve that location data, third pass gets the location very close. The problem is, depending on where you are, those polar orbiting satellites are only overhead every 40 minutes or so. So, you're looking at a solid two hours minimum before RCC knows exactly where you are.....or at least close enough to launch rescue assets.

And, if the airplane burns, or as you suggested, gets upside down in the water, the system will never be able to generate a good location.

Connect a GPS to a 406 beacon and if the beacon alerts, RCC has a precise location immediately, regardless of the position of polar orbiting satellites. That's because the SAR/SAT system also includes geo synchronous satellites, which are in constant view of North America. So, if your oops happens while a polar orbiting satellite is not overhead, and you have GPS connected, the geo synchronous satellite will still pick up the alert, WITH the precise location attached.

As to antennas, the 406 beacons transmit the 406 signal at about 5 watts, a very powerful signal. The 121.5 signals were well down in the low milliwatt range, like 250 mw. So, bust an antenna, or get upside down in water, etc with a 121.5 beacon, and that weak signal probably isn't going to get out. The reason the 406 beacon can transmit at this higher power and still maintain reasonable battery life is that the 406 signal goes on in a very short burst, approximately every 50 seconds. So, it's not transmitting constantly at that high power setting.

Same scenario with a 406 beacon, and you might be surprised at what that higher powered signal might bust through. My 406 which had a switch failure was sitting in the baggage compartment of a metal airplane, disconnected from it's antenna, and RCC was still getting the signal, complete with the GPS location data. Inside a metal airplane, with NO antenna attached.

There seems to be this general assumption that a 406 beacon offers RCC a near instant location data, but that is not true. The 406 system can generate a fairly precise location on a beacon, but it takes a while.

And, you might be bleeding during that process.

I like the looks of the Emerging Lifesaving Technologies ELT. If nothing else, it's a clever use of the name.... Two problems with that beacon, which may or may not be deal killers:

1) Emerging Lifesaving Technologies is a VERY expensive beacon. Nearly twice as expensive as an ACK unit.
2) Emerging Lifesaving Technologies unit does not transmit on 121.5 AT ALL. I'm not convinced that the 121.5 signal has great value these days, particularly when a GPS is connected, but.....I can still conceive of situations where being able to DF a 121.5 signal might be useful.

MTV

$979 for the Emerging vs $519 for the ack, so $460... yea that is a bit more.

I think some would argue the Emerging is a simpler install, but I suspect you will still need to run a wire from the cockpit to the ELT because it's going to need ship power for the GPS as that's not going to run off battery.

So basically you have three options:

1. Get the emerging for $1k and run power wires to it.

This is pretty clean. Nothing to it and reliable.

2. Get the ack/artex and use your existing panel mount portable GPS with the docking cable.

This is what I have. I like that I can see if the GPS isn't working or died or something. I'm not sure what signal levels come out of my Aera 550, but I do get confirmation it works using the ACK test.

3. Get the garmin puck to feed it GPS. Like this: https://www.amazon.com/Garmin-18x-LVC-N ... 0016O3T7A/

The thing about this is that the puck needs 5v and only outputs 0-5v on the data lines. This isn't a good RS-232 signal as you would typically want -5 swing to +5 or even higher. If I went this route I would do a bit of testing to make sure that the signals are compatible and that everything was working.

Perhaps a call into Ack would help confirm exactly what signal voltage levels are needed to make the elt work, but last time I called them, they didn't know....

I had a poor experience with our Artex 345 we put in the 206. It went off when I tapped the bottom of the fuse and it would not go off. We sent it back via the dealer and got a replacement. The new one went off on a firm landing. They are not a good product folks tell me.