All the routine maintenance checks of ELTs I've been involved with included a hard manual deceleration to prove the inertia switch as well as local tower confirmation that it had been activated on the frequency. Never known one to fail but there's always a first time...

Or if the ELT is underwater. But I don't know how much little water there is there.

In New Brunswick, Canada there was a small plane crash in a remote area for which the ELT turned-on 1 year later. They presume that possibly an animal had touched it somehow.

A commercial flight at -15 C, with ice on wings during TO, crashed into the St-Lawrence river; the ELT was under only a few feet of water. That seriously hampered emergency response and resulted in deaths.

It is not rare to hear that an ELT does not work as advertised.

I remember one activating on touch-down and jamming my conversation with the tower; of course during my early solo days :ugh: .
.

ELT signals are picked-up by passing Satellites and many aircrafts listen to 121.5 newer models (EPIRB type) will give more info (Coordinates and registry info such as owner etc...). No ELT means: A non functioning or non installed unit. Exhausted or deflective Batt. Unit Destroyed unit upon impact fire or water immersion etc... OR... Someone turned it off... Conspiracy theories anyone ?
Kidnapping, UFOS ...

No flight plan, no radio contact, no ELT........
Don't we all wish he's gone off to a top-secret rendez-vous with his latest girl friend? Or landed in Area 51?

But let's admit it. Things do NOT look good.

A standard ELT works as advertised only 10 to 20 percent of the time. Fact.
Recommend that if you are going down, turn on the ELT (if you have a remote switch of course as well as squawk Emergency on the Transponder. Don't rely on the g switch.
Buy a portable PLB. Much better.

They have a 75% failure rate!

Too true Boof. Don't know about the percentage but it is all too depressing to read of the number of accidents where prompt action may have saved peoples lives but the antenna to ELT connection got busted in the crash.

advanced C130 aircraft with special IR and cameras are part of the search.

one article indicates that the plane had survival gear aboard.

as to ELT's...if the plane were out in the open and it was on, they would have heard it

but if he was in a mountain pass...maybe not. terrain is different out here.

many sightings of old wrecks, one copter went out to check on one over a year old.

in the past, airliners didn't require ELT's as long as dispatch and radar were used to keep track of planes. even domestic USA we used to have to send position reports to dispatch a few years ago.

while area 51 is within the range of the plane, it might be unlikely that he went that far...but you never know.

if he was just using pilotage for nav, it would be easy to get lost.

I bought an antenna from Radio Shack that fits the ELT in my airplane and in rental airplanes (the old square units) so that if the airplane is upside down or the antenna is broken off I can remove the ELT and connect my antenna. use it as a portable ELT, move it away from the airplane etc. The antenna cost me $15 and it lives in my survival vest (a fishing vest with lots of pockets for matches, candles, hand warmers and the like since I fly mainly in Alaska. Also have a mozzie net since in two hours Alaskan mozzies can take half of the total amount of blood in a human body). Even if it is too hot (temps over 5 C) and I cannot stand to wear the vest it sits beside me whenever I fly).
When brushing snow off the airplane take care not to break the fixed antenna.
I am in the CAP and spend a fair bit of time looking for ELTs, most of which are accidentally set off or that are so old the switch corrodes and turns the unit on. Some are used by hunter guides (they have dozens of them in jackets for their customers) and we have regular problems with those guys throwing their jackets in a pickup, setting off one or two, then driving hundreds of miles along the highways, CAP 172 in hot pursuit. Biggest problem though is in the antennas, which have corrosion at the attach point and are rarely cleaned or serviced. I doubt if Steve has that type of problem. I am surprised he does not have a PLB in his pocket.
In 2009 they are shutting down the satellite that looks after 121.5 ELTs and only the new PLBs will be supported.
Sad situation. Not nice when nothing is found, it leaves family members always wondering and they say that is worse than getting confirmation of the loss. Still it is too early to give up.

Remember from a survival course, we had to prioritize various bits of kit/ provisions etc. as to their value. (ELT not on this list). The expert opinion listed a signalling mirror as no.1 (water being no.2).

It must be very tempting to have the convenience of a simple single-engine plane, even in the mountains.
Maybe Steve's chances at high density altitudes would have been much better in an empty King Air C-90, or a Pilatus s.e. turboprop (the Air Force trains in the T-6 II), which should be quite affordable for him.

(Flatlanders :rolleyes: ) A Decathlon is OK, especially when solo. Lots of lift, flies slow, turns on a dime, you can see out of both sides down, and land it most anywhere that looks flat.

I only flew one once, from the back seat. Flared 3 feet too high and spent the next few seconds anticipating gravel rash.

PBL

The single vs 2 argument works only if you assume an aircraft failure. What about hitting the ground whilst trying to survey it from the air? A medical emergency, etc, etc, etc.

If he is alive, there is a fair chance the ELT would have been manually operated and every ELT that I have used has worked fine under those circumstances. The odds do not look good.

ELT watch
 

you must be functioning to activate any kind of ELT..unfortunately.

At a difficult time like this it's hard to laugh but somehow I doubt Steve has landed in cyberspace...

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...LN9fHn6oVQkv9A

cwatters, from the same article:

It would be ironic if they find other planes that have gone missing over the years. :(

They are looking in a huge area, including mountains. I hope it ends well.

If he's alive he can active the ELT.. he suppose to have 2 of them, one on board and one on his wrist

On CNN international http://edition.cnn.com/ there is a vote:

do you think Steve Fosset is still alive

Yes 35%
No 65%

Let's hope he's ok and has enough water to his disposal...

Civil Air Patrol expands search for Steve Fossett
 

Calif. Wing members, ARCHER-equipped Utah Wing aircraft join mission

September 05, 2007

During search and rescue missions, CAP can apply ARCHER using an on-board computer to take a spectral picture of a particular object, relying on light reflected from the object. That information is then relayed, by e-mail and satellite phone using CAP's satellite-transmitted digital-imaging system, to units on the ground as they conduct their search.

A set of parameters describing the target's color and shape is programmed into the system, and through a sophisticated algorithm, the ARCHER system is able to differentiate a potential target from background clutter. The nation's first fully operational, large-scale hyperspectral imaging system, ARCHER can identify a target using as little as 10 percent of the target's characteristics.

Also this morning, more than 60 members of CAP's California Wing -- equipped with 17 of their aircraft -- began searching about a 1,000-square-mile-area over the California state line from Bridgeport, Calif., about 80 miles south of Lake Tahoe, Nev., to Bishop, Calif., about 20 miles south of Bridgeport.
Searchers were first notified late Sept. 3 that Fossett had left the private airstrip about 9 a.m. and was planning to return by noon in order to leave the area. A formal search began at 6 p.m. that evening, as six CAP aircraft were launched with highly trained, well-equipped crews of three each in order to do sophisticated "grid" searches of hundreds of square miles of terrain in areas where the pilot may have been.

On Sept. 4, searchers accumulated over 35 air hours of flying time in up to 14 aircraft, both planes and helicopters, from CAP, the Nevada Air Guard and the California Highway Patrol. Four CAP ground search teams were activated from Lyon and Mineral counties in Nevada, as well as Nevada and Mono counties in California. The search area included an area roughly 600 square miles long, extending from the Yerington area to Bishop, Calif., and about 200 miles wide with a western boundary following the eastern flank of the Sierra Nevada mountain range. http://www.cap.gov/

I realise, of course, that it might be seen as impertinent for a non-pilot to say anything.

The biggest mistakes are often the smallest ones. Whatever the outcome of the search, it will help to remind everyone to file a flight plan ...

Flight plan would help? Not too sure in this particular case.

As said, Mr. Fossett was flying to scout out dry lakebeds for a land-speed record attempt. By definition, that means just flying about until you find something, then circling around to check details etc. All this in a vast area of uninhabited land (desert?). His flight plan would not have contained anything useful in the "route" field. Not more than what we currently know already from friends who reported him missing.

Flight plans in the context of search and rescue are useful if you intend to fly a specific route, and do not deviate from it without informing ATC. But if you make sure that someone on the ground (in the UK context this is called a "responsible person") has the route information instead and knows your callsign, take-off time, EET and endurance, a flight plan does not offer much more information.

In the US, you can get "flight following" whether you filed a flight plan or not, and that's a far better investment, safety-wise. But from what I hear about the area, flight following might not be available there.

Did he really say that? It seems a ridiculous suggestion, aren't google earth/maps aerial images often several years old?

MichaelJP, that was my first reaction too, but a more complete news item explained that Google Earth of course has close contacts with the satellite image provider, so they would be one of the first people to turn to for up-to-date pictures.
However, the hi-tech survey plane they've brought in sounds like a better bet.

When Internet pioneer James Gray was lost at sea this February, Google used their satellite expertise to help in the (sadly unsuccessful) search. I imagine it's much easier to use satellite imaging to find a sailboat at sea than a light aircraft in rugged terrain.

Still confused why he should be looking for a lake bed when a tried and tested track is already available at Bonaville. Apart from well supervised from the ground solo flights, what other solo flying has he done?:hmm:

jammy,
you may have to look through the various press releases that are linked. One mentioned in some detail why he was looking for other sites.

You don't need hi-tech you need lots of eyes looking out of lots of windows.

J.A.F.O.,
Ever tried to survey hundreds of square miles by eye for a needle in a haystack?
The "hi-tech" aircraft already seems to have found another wreck, so the technology seems to work.
There are limits to what the Mk. 1 eyeball can achieve.

The same principal applies to satellite technology, if you know where your target is you can keep the satellite above it and take as many pictures as you want.
If you don't have an exact position, you rely on the machine spotting something during it's sweep over the ground and then have to wait until it covers the area again.
It could take months for a satellite to spot such a target.

From Avweb today. A bit off thread, but you would think that Steve would have the best. My experience when we had a 406 beacon accidently fire it took no more than 5 minutes before flight service were on the phone making enquiries. Can't get better satellite sevice than that.

NTSB Wants Better ELTs in Aircraft

The FAA should require that all emergency locator transmitters in general aviation aircraft must be upgraded, the NTSB said (PDF) on Wednesday. The newer 406 MHz transmitters have significant advantages, the NTSB says, including longer range, better accuracy, and the ability to encode identification information, so rescuers know exactly what airplane is in distress. The safety board cites two accidents: In one airplane equipped with an older ELT, 16 hours elapsed before rescuers found the survivors, and when an airplane with a 406 MHz ELT crashed, the wreckage was located within an hour. The FAA should require an upgrade to the 406 MHz units before February 2009, when a change in satellite services will make the older units even less reliable, the NTSB says.

"This [change in service] will necessitate U.S. search and rescue authorities reverting to older, less effective search methods and techniques, which would greatly decrease the likelihood of finding downed aircraft in a timely manner," the NTSB said. AOPA has opposed mandatory ELT upgrades, citing costs. The new units can cost from $1,000 to $1,500. The 406 MHz units activate in about 81 to 83 percent of crashes. The older units, which operate on the 121.5 MHz frequency, have an activation rate of 73 percent in actual crashes, AOPA said.

Have they found anything yet...?

kiwi chick: it's pretty much on the news here all the time and so far nothing relevant has been found. The latest is that the civil air patrol now have four "credible" leads which they are following up, but they haven't given any details of what those leads are.

niknak: I don't understand your comment about keeping a satellite above a spot. You do realise that would be difficult to do unless the satellite is already in geosynchronous orbit, don't you? In that case it's unlikely to be able to do much to help with the search.

Reading a little on the Decathlon history of airframe problems leaves one feeling a little uneasy ..

http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepCitabria.html

Despite being an aerobatic aircraft, this is a 1980 Decathlon, and a hired one at that. I wonder just what the history of this aircraft is? Accidents? Upgrades? .. Does this particular aircraft still wear wooden spars?? ..
Did the last pilot who rented, throw a show, and pull 6G's, and overstress the wings?? ..

After 4 full days, going on 5 .. and with 14 aircraft looking for him, including FLIR equipped aircraft .. you'd expect SOME result. They can find a wreck that happened 20 years ago? .. but not Fossett?

I fear the worst, and that a wing separated, and he speared in, leaving only a tiny footprint.

If it happened over a ravine, as is entirely possible, it may take 10 years to find the remains.
There are plenty of parallels, with wrecks not being found for years afterwards.

My personal opinion is that small aircraft, flying low and slow are more likely to have success, at finding wreckage, than anything else.

Despite high tech equipment, Eyeball Mk 1 is connected to Brain Mk 1, which has more computing ability than anything electronic .. and often a glimpse is all that's needed for Brain Mk 1, to say, "backtrack and just check that out".

Electronics will examine the narrow parameters that were inputted .. and if they don't fit, they move on .. possibly abandoning good clues.

The last possibility, is the one the search crews now seem to be thinking about seriously .. an underwater search. Despite there being little water out there .. there's always that million-to-one chance, that the plane went down, right over the only patch of water for miles.

ChristiaanJ

Yep, spent the last twenty years doing that in one way or another, hence my comment.

It's been a long time now but I do hope he's okay and hope that the CAP get something soon.

Operated LAX-LHR last night with a Gorman departure and Northeasterly routing which took us right over the search area. Made sure that 121.5 was turned up to max and did spend a lot of time looking - well you never know.

Unless you have seen northern Nevada from the air, it might be difficult to see why the search has failed so far. For those that are familiar you know it's very rugged, desolate country - see Google Earth and look around Tonapah for example.

I hope they find Steve soon (or at least what happened) It won't be much fun stuck in the hills waiting for help..............:sad:

Anyone know the latest on the search???

Hi tech sure does help. Our Aero Club is part of the Norwegian CAP (RMK: Different system), and I've done SAR training as an observer in a Cessna.
You don't understand how much you miss before you try it.

Ex: We did a exercise where 2 dummys in blue coveralls was placed sitting in a alpine area of 3 x 3 nm. We (pilot and observer) missed both.
Even flying at 500ft AGL as slow as safely possible, it was amazing how hard it was to spot the dummys when the instructior pointed them out to us. (And they where sitting on high ground, without vegitation.

Pilots on this forum mock hi-wiz wests and it's use at the airfield. I kind of agree, but I carry one in the aircraft, if only to have it available post forced landing!

Looks bleak for Mr Fosset

Don't get me wrong, I'd want everything available thrown at it if I was stuck out there; it's just that people overlook the effectiveness of a properly executed visual search.

I've flown over the area a couple of times and know that it's no fun, anything that can bring this to a conclusion should be used it's just that these days the technological solution is used to the exclusion of the most sophisticated search system ever designed - your eye/brain.

I've no idea how many millions of square miles I've searched but I know that in the daytime I've found more people by looking out of the window than any other method.

It's a terrible area to search - and a worse one to be stuck in - so I wish CAP and their partners the best of luck with whatever search technique they try.

Some misinformation on ELTs.

On an N-reg you need to carry an ELT activated automatically by a forward-impact G force.

Typically these are 121.50 + 243MHz, with the 243 used for satellite based location fixing and the 121.5 used for close-in VDF.

More recent ELTs are 121.50 + 406MHz which offer much better satellite position fixing, but the 121.5 signal is still useful only for close-in VDF i.e. about 10-20nm away.

A few private planes have a GPS link which stores the last GPS fix and sends it off in the 406MHz transmission to the satellite(s). These are more pricey and not many people have them.

Of course it all assumes the ELT doesn't get smashed in the impact, or sinks below water.

Not many European pilots have the fixed 406MHz ELTs because of the ripoff charges (EASA, or DER costs if N-reg) for getting the installations approved. I was quoted £2000 just for the paperwork, so didn't bother with 406MHz and have a couple of 406MHz portable ones instead.

I was at the search HQ yesterday`
 

I went down to Minden airport (KMEV) and met up with a friend doing a story on the search for mr. Fossett.

Quite a bit of machinery involved in search. Conflicting information on whether he had the ELT watch with him or not.

A wreck (Not FOSSETT) was found that was some dozens of years old and has provided some answers to a missing plane and man for his family...this wreck has gone unnoticed for dozens of years...that is what the terrain is like. my friend went up and took footage that might be available at cnn.com, it was shown this morning in the US around 6:40 am pacific time...in case you want to see what the terrain is like.


IF YOU ARE FLYING near there make sure to "break squelch"on 121.5...that is turn off the squelch or adjust it to hear the white noise or static...this will make it more sensitive to an ELT. questions, PM me.

Seeing the aircraft was probably N240R, 8KCAB-180, belonging to the flying M ranch, I would believe the condition of the aircraft would not be an issue. ATC radar coverage in the area 12,000 feet and below is poor (at best) or none (mostly), so even if he did turn on his transponder it probably never got high enough to be tracked so any data reduction of center radar would probably not be useful. If he did have his transponder on and went north and got high enough, Fallon Naval Air Station radar may have tracked him. But I am not sure how good their radar data reduction tools are. I find it strange that no one had any idea of which set of dry lakes he was going to look at. Seems to me he would have been looking over sectionals and topo's before the flight getting an idea of were to start. Or at least what direction from the ranch to start from. And like others have stated the area is desolate and rugged, it will be very difficult to see the wreckage from the air.