ELT's in Light Aircraft GA or RA.

[GCS16]

Seems the recent missing, now known to be crashed, aircraft in Mildura thread got a bit off topic, so here is a thread for the of topic. Have your say here about ELT's in lighties.

My 2 Cents,

They work! (when switched on.)
Turn the thing on before you spud in. Sure you will probably be busy trying not to spud in in the first place, but that 1-2 minutes that it is 'pinging' for is enough to get a pretty good fix for the SAR guys.
That will reduce the amount of time to find the device (read wreckage - plus or minus survivors) by a hugh amount! (anyone have some stats?)
Plenty of instances of yachties/boaties bobbing in the water with an esky lid and an EPIRB and being rescued.

Anyone have any stories?

[Jabawocky]

Agreed, a GPS driven PLB is the best way, if you know that you are in trouble long enough to activate it and put it somewhere safe.

Fixed ELT's seem to be ballast at best.

The problem is if you have no prior knowledge of disaster, which in some cases this happens (even though it should not) it will not help you.

Devices like the spider traks and so on are on all the time so they are excellent, but they usually report to a server which someone has to look up to see if you are in trouble or not. So if nobody knows you are overdue the web page is never looked at.

185skywagon uses this with his operations and they keep careful watch on each other all the time.

Lastly, ADSB would be another great SAR tool, however the problem is until there is far more low level coverage, it has big empty patches in coverage. At least this is logged in the ASA system, and even VFR and a SARTIME will get somone looking at the data of where you were last and where you were heading etc.

So perhaps a combination of all three?

Tell somebody responsible where you are going is a great start!

[mcgrath50]

My biggest surprise from the previous thread was the aversion many people had to putting in a flight plan or even note.

How hard is it to look at your calculated ETIs, work out how long lunch will take and say, I should be back at 1530. Tell that to the front desk. In addition, how hard is it to jump on NAIPs or ring up the briefing office and lodge a basic flight plan with a SARTIME.

I was surprised that there seemed like a large majority of people who just didn't feel the need. I personally wouldn't feel comfortable going flying without someone knowing where I was going and when I should be back. And I don't like doing cross country flying without a flight plan and a SARTIME so that if the worst does happen, someone knows where to look.

It takes two seconds and in my eyes helps any SAR effort. Am I being too conservative and a bit naive?

[Frank Arouet]

At the risk of being accused an expert, I would object to putting a flight plan for a local flight or circuits in Wentworth or anywhere else under 50 nm.

The last thread was closed because of personal slanging, (as was demonstrated by the new "redheads" matches exposed today on ABC TV), If in any quandry ask an ATPL space cadet like Oktas8, I'm only an average pilot with just as many take off's as landings over a lifespan of 63 years. Flying since 1965. But what would I have except experience?

ADSB as a SAR tool is reactive, not proactive unless it is mannned 24/7 by an ATCO.

Comments on that welcome.

[Jabawocky]

ADSB as a SAR tool is reactive, not proactive unless it is mannned 24/7 by an ATCO.

Agreed Frank, however, combined with other existing measures like a SARTIME or flight note, had you gone from A to B and then decided to wander over to C, and had an oops......who would know where to start?

Or even between A and B, once the SAR phase is up and running, they will start looking where first? At the end of the trail??

[Ultralights]

I have a spot messenger, haven't had to use the SOS function on it yet (the epirb part of its functions) but the pre set messages come in real handy to let those in a responsible position to know you made it to each destination safely.

There is also a HELP function, that tells pre set people you need help, but not rescue, say, made an outlanding (precautionary landing) etc, and just need to be picked up, need fuel or whatever. Something that doesn't require the emergency services.
Fits nicely in the top pocket of the flying jacket. Also, for a subscription fee, it offers real time tracking to a website. So interested people can follow your progress. Though this goes through a web server, as does the help messages, the message is passed on to SMS phone messages or email. EPIRB SOS function goes through a manned emergency response centre in the USA, which then pass the distress message and gps location on to Australian authorities.

Not only good for flying, but motorcycle touring, kayak trips, etc etc

[glekichi]

I read somewhere that the activation rate for 406mhz ELTs is up above 80% now versus around 20% for the older systems. I assume (I know, I know) that this relates to fixed units as I cant see that only 20% of the older units would have activated if they were referring to manual activations.

83% has got to be a fairly large percent of survivable crashes, and rightly or wrongly i still feel safer with a unit that has a G switch with the option for a manual switch on if time permits. As has been mentioned, a gps enabled unit switched on manually before an impact should give pretty good location and get the search process under way in a rapid manner.

[Tankengine]

I have a GPS PLB on my parachute harness.
Better, [I think]than a fixed ELT or a spot.

[capt787]

I think a GPS PLB stored on your top pocket is the way to go. It's easily accessible when things goes wrong and it's less likely to be destroyed by fire if things get a bit hot after crashing. For over water ops I think EPIRB should be a must have item as it will float on the water.

[Flying Binghi]

.

via Jabawocky;
ADSB would be another great SAR tool, however the problem is...

The problem is...

"...ADS-B is designed primarily as a tool for managing scheduled commercial-flight traffic... ... it is not meant to hunt for missing aircraft. Says AFRCC program manager David Fuhrmann, the principal intermediary between his agency and Cospas-Sarsat: “The problem with ADS-B is it still uses a radio signal…. You can still have terrain masking. There are not going to be towers all over the U.S. So in remote areas, it won’t work. It will work at altitude, but if you descend, you could go many miles before crashing, and may not ever be visible by ADS-B.”


Lost in America | Flight Today | Air & Space Magazine




.

[Flying Binghi]

.

via Ultralights; ...I have a spot messenger, haven't had to use the SOS function on it yet (the epirb part of its functions) but the pre set messages come in real handy to let those in a responsible position to know you made it to each destination safely...

Here's an interesting compare of a 121.5 ELT and a SPOT in the same accident...

...“The passenger noted that while boarding the airplane in McGrath, he happened to notice a SPOT satellite personal tracker clipped to the pilot’s sun visor. He said that after the accident, he was able to find the SPOT device in the wreckage, and began pushing the emergency SOS button.…About 2030 family members in Wasilla, Alaska, the pilot’s hometown, received an emergency SOS message from the pilot’s SPOT device. A family member then immediately called the operator in Aniak to alert them of the distress message.”

The author of this report, NTSB senior air safety investigator Clint Johnson, says that the Cessna was carrying a functioning 121.5 ELT. However, it could only lead Alaska Air National Guard pilots to within five miles of the aircraft, and cloud cover prevented the rescuers from finding the site that day. The next morning, an HH-60G helicopter from the Air National Guard’s 210th Air Rescue Squadron located the crash site, landed, and evacuated everyone. The breadcrumb tracker’s GPS data took rescuers “right to the doorstep of the accident,” says Johnson.
The same week, Johnson was assigned to five other aviation accidents. “Out of those,” he says, “more than half involved SPOTs—that’s how they found them.”


Lost in America | Flight Today | Air & Space Magazine





.

[mickjoebill]

Victorian emergency services, whilst they may initially respond to an eyewitness account of an aircraft in trouble, are dependent on either a reliable eyewitness account of an impact or a report of a missing aircraft to continue a search.

Victorian ambulance will not dispatch until the aircraft is found.

Difficulty in finding crashes by air or ground resources where the aircraft has not caught fire are not fully appreciated by volunteer emergency services
nor some GA crew.

I don't concur with an earlier post that GA crashes fall into the two categories of "walk away" and "fatal" because "trapped, seriously injured awaiting rescue" is sadly not uncommon.

As I'm in the back seat of numerous charter helicopters around the world involved in low flying, I wear a PLB, also strap a small first aid trauma kit and some lightweight tools in the cabin to raise the chances of being able to self help if trapped or injured.


Such safety kit occasionally gets a nervous laugh from some charter admin people but none of this kit was my idea, it is what I have seen in use around the world by those who have learnt from experience.



Mickjoebill

[LeadSled]

I read somewhere that the activation rate for 406mhz ELTs is up above 80% now versus around 20% for the older systems. I assume (I know, I know) that this relates to fixed units as I cant see that only 20% of the older units would have activated if they were referring to manual activations.

83% has got to be a fairly large percent of survivable crashes, and rightly or wrongly i still feel safer with a unit that has a G switch with the option for a manual switch on if time permits. As has been mentioned, a gps enabled unit switched on manually before an impact should give pretty good location and get the search process under way in a rapid manner.

glekichi,
You are obviously a person of faith, as you seem quite impervious to facts. Faith is not a good basis for a risk management exercise. The failure rates remain the same for fixed ELT, because the failure modes remain the same, and cannot be designed out.

There is still an aerial cable and and aerial, and all have to remain intact and operable for any signal to be broadcast ---- the problem is not with the box itself, never was. The false activation rates have not improved to any significant extent, either, similar logic, a specified G activates, even if it's not from a crash, say heavyish landing, it still goes off. Needless to say, digital disfunction (aka finger trouble) also remains a cause of "inadvertent" activation.

As should be clear to anybody dealing with facts, and that aught to be anybody dealing with aviation, fixed ELT statistically provide no protection. Indeed, about the only ones I know about, where the fixed ELT has worked, have all involved aircraft flying into snow covered gently rising hillsides, in a whiteout. Not much chance of that around Australia.

Whatever else you faith tells you, (say, on paying a witchdoctor to confer everlasting life) or however you spend your money, please carry a portable in your buttoned pocket, it will be there for you to activate if you survive.

Tootle pip!!

[Jack Ranga]

Ultralights has the chockies so far. But while ever we live in a society that encourages NOT accepting responsibility for one's own actions and it's always someone elses fault, it's a moot point isn't it?

[LeadSled]

I don't concur with an earlier post that GA crashes fall into the two categories of "walk away" and "fatal" because "trapped, seriously injured awaiting rescue" is sadly not uncommon.

Mickjoebill,
If you don't produce the statistics to show otherwise, for the majority of crashes.
Helos are a bit of a different case, an autorotation landing is a different kettle of fish to a fixed wing crash --- it's the V squared that gets you.

One of the very sad examples of just how easily a fixed ELT is rendered useless was a helo. crash some years ago in WA. Without going into a long story, all aboard survived the crash with minor injuries, with a portable, they would have been found in hours. The fixed ELT was damaged in the landing ---- the result was fatalities from dehydration after several days ---- not far from the nearest station homestead.

Re. SPOT, that's why you should go the extra $100 or so and by the portable that sends you GPS position, goes out with your 406 signal., only way to go.

However, carry that portable, and the other thing I always have in a pocket is a combined canopy breaker/safety knife ---- Smith and Wesson First Response is my model of choice. Total weight, a few ounces/grams. Goes through a seatbelt like you wouldn't believe.

Tootle pip!!

[glekichi]

You are obviously a person of faith, as you seem quite impervious to facts. Faith is not a good basis for a risk management exercise. The failure rates remain the same for fixed ELT, because the failure modes remain the same, and cannot be designed out.

Leaddie,

No need to be a prick. My aircraft has a portable beacon in the survival kit in addition to the fixed unit.

You would have more luck discussing issues with people in a civilised manner instead of just taking the piss. You do it all the time. You obviously have a wealth of knowledge to share, so why not do so without getting all abusive?

I do not disagree that a portable unit can also be a life saver, nor do I deny that fixed units have their weaknesses, but a G-switch unit also has distinct advantages and I'd be somewhat uncomfortable in a small/medium aircraft (with only a couple of crew) without one.

Training now involves turning the unit on as soon as there is any trouble, and with a cockpit mounted switch that can be activated with one hand that should be easy to do. This would get the SAR ball rolling fairly quickly and also give excellent location information prior to the possible failure of the antenna in an impact.

Here is a fact from NZ's experience.

Antenna failures: 8 occurrences (17%). As far as can be determined occurrences were all whip antennae breaking.

It seems a lot of the problems they are having there with antenna reliability are due to people reworking old 121.5 installations with 406 units rather than doing a proper installation with crash-worthiness in mind.

Edit: Some extra info from NASA

To fix this problem 406 MHz ELTs were developed to work specifically with the Cospas-Sarsat system. These ELTs dramatically reduce the false alert impact on SAR resources, have a higher accident survivability rate, and decrease the time required to reach accident victims by an average of 6 hours.

[VH-XXX]

Hey Glekichi, being an experienced pilot down NZ way, what would you recommend carrying with you if you were flying a Chieftain over Antarctic waters searching for SeaSheperd ships in terms or ELT / PLB / Spot?

[glekichi]

Very cheeky VH-XXX, but I'll pay that one.
Even whilst remaining in the Australian EEZ, nowhere near the Antarctic or the Southern Ocean, I'd recommend at least a couple of 406MHz EPIRBs and a full liferaft with oceanic survival kit. (The same kind I have used when doing similar charter work for the Police when patrolling the same area!)

[LeadSled]

glekichi,
The only statistic that counts is the % of times an aircraft with a fixed ELT (whether 406 or not) broadcasts a useable signal after an accident.

The answer remains the same, regardless of any analysis that NZ may gave done about aerial problems, in better than 90% of occasions, no useful signal has been broadcast.

The statistics, in the US, for what they are, CAP studies, as no comprehensive database of all accidents is available, is entirely consistent with the Australian record.

Does NZ have a detailed record to refute the Australian figures?? Last time I spoke to anybody in Wellington about it, the answer was no.

At least in Australia, false activation problems have largely gone away, as there are very few fixed ELT installations remaining. One of the few would have been one ZK- aircraft at Bankstown.

I don't know what it is about the aviation industry, that leads people to hang onto preconceived positions, when all the evidence is to the contrary. There are few better examples that the issue of fixed ELT, particularly given the genesis of the "rule", a politically directed action in US, that bypassed all effectiveness and cost/benefit processes normally part of FAA rulemaking.

Tootle pip!!

[glekichi]

Leadsled,

Perhaps you could actually point us to the source of these facts.
I don't doubt you have seen them, but they do contradict several other reliable sources that I have come across. If you want people to accept your 'facts', at least give us a source!

Prior to you posting here I had never heard of these high failure rates, and he only reason I quoted the NZ regulator was that it was one of the few sources of data that I could find on the internet during my quick research of the matter out of interest.

I have still not found the data you have about 90% of current generation fixed ELTs failing, and I'd be convinced if you could just show it to us.
On the other hand, it was not hard at all to find reports of people that had been rescued after a fixed beacon was activated by an impact.

You say:

Indeed, the false activation rate of fixed ELTs is another major shortcoming, with the advent of every new TSO since the original C129, claims have been made about reducing the false activation rate, without noticeable result.

But NASA says:
NASA Search and Rescue Mission Office : Emergency Beacons

General aviation aircraft must carry either a 121.5 MHz ELT or a 406 MHz ELT. One government study concluded that 134 extra lives and millions of dollars in SAR resources could be saved per year if these aircraft switched to 406 MHz ELTs, although these more effective ELTs cost more. For a comparison of 121.5 and 406 MHz beacons, see http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/406vs121.pdf.
Most ELTs are designed to survive and activate automatically in a crash.

You say:

The answer remains the same, regardless of any analysis that NZ may gave done about aerial problems, in better than 90% of occasions, no useful signal has been broadcast.

AOPA Says:
AOPA Online: Regulatory Brief -- Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTs)

When ELTs were mandated in 1973, most GA aircraft were equipped with an ELT that transmits on the 121.5 MHz frequency, the designated international distress frequency. The original ELTs were manufactured to the specifications of an FAA technical standard order (TSO-C91) and have an activation rate of less than 25 percent in actual crashes and a 97 percent false-alarm rate. In 1985, a new TSO-C91A ELT was developed, which substantially reduces or eliminates many problems with the earlier model. The TSO-C91A provides improved performance and reliability (with an activation rate of 73 percent in actual crashes) at a reasonable cost to users ($200-$500 including installation). Since then, an even more advanced model of ELT has been developed — the C126 ELT (406 MHz). This newest model activates 81-83 percent of the time and transmits a more accurate and near-instantaneous emergency signal by utilizing digital technology. This digital 406-MHz ELT also allows search and rescue personnel to have vital information specific to you and your aircraft. These ELTs are more expensive, however, with the current cost around $1,000 or more per unit, not including installation.