Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

SPOT
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:17 pm Post subject: SPOT

Larry Cottrell wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Subject: Re: SPOT

 

 

> 

>

> I understand that these new units not only sent an emergency signal as 

> the old ones did, but also send GPS co-ordinates plus coded info that 

> includes registration, owners name, address & contact number.

>

> So the first action that the authorities take on receiving an ELT 

> signal is ring up the registered owner and check out the status of 

> things, . . . did they go flying, how many, what provisions etc. If 

> the feedback warrants it, they then move on to the next stage.

>

> Sounds like quite an improvement to me.

>

> David.

 

 

 It is my understanding ( more of a question than stating a fact) that 

 they will not monitor the old frequency after the 09 date, but that they 

 can still receive the signal if they have info that the plane is down, 

 or didn't show up. Makes you wonder about Faucett though. Perhaps no one 

 changed the batteries?

 Larry C

 

 do not archive

 

If  you look at the stats on the old ELTs, there's something like 97% 
	


false rate on ELT trip events (see John Hauck's experience or ask me 

about mine), and a virtually 0% 'save' rate on the 3% that are real. It 

takes so long to actually find the crash site (if it's ever found) that 

the victims are either dead are have walked out on their own. Searchers 

for Fossett have found several other previously unlocated crash sites 

that are years to decades old.

The old ELTs have about the same effectiveness as that Transport 

Security felon that gropes you & looks up your behind before you can get 

on an airliner (while 100% of the freight you'll be sitting on in the 

plane goes unchecked).



Supposedly, ground SAR personnel will keep their 121Mhz direction finder 

equipment after satellite monitoring stops. Hooray.



Charlie

mdnanwelch7(at)hotmail.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:50 pm Post subject: SPOT

 	  Quote: 	
		   The old ELTs have about the same effectiveness as that Transport

 Security felon that gropes you & looks up your behind before you can get

 on an airliner (while 100% of the freight you'll be sitting on in the

 plane goes unchecked).


	


 	  Quote: 	
		   Charlie


	




  Poignant comment about the Airport Security situation, Charlie!!  When I was coming home from my Missouri visit just over a week ago, I watched a TSA woman (the airport security people) COMPLETELY search a 30ish

young lady.  Now, this young lady looked like she could have been a 1st grade teacher or church choir member.  Maybe she worked at some title company, or an insurance office.  But whatever the heck she does, I didn't think it would seem to warrant the going over she got from the "Authorities".  You'd have thought she had plastique in her skirt, or maybe she was packing a 44 Magnum under her lace sweater.  Morons.  We're overrun with stupid freaking morons!!!



  That aside, I do have a question.  IF ELTs aren't all that affective to getting people to find you, do you absoluely positively HAVE to have one for a Kolb MkIII.  I had intended on having one, because I understood they were required equipment.  Is there an allowable legal alternative to an ELT?  (that is affordable?)



Mike Welch    Kolb MkIII  

Do Not Archive

_________________________________________________________________

Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live.

http://www.windowslive.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_powerofwindows_012008

The BaronVonEvil

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Walla Walla, WA.

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:53 pm Post subject: SPOT

---

The BaronVonEvil

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Walla Walla, WA.

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:17 pm Post subject: SPOT

Hi Mike,



Most of the low end ELT's run about $200.00 more or less. They use 'D' size 

Duracell batteries instead of the manufacturer's own custom battery packs 

(usually high dollar lead weights).



They are not difficult to install and do provide a bit of a safety net if 

you should unfortunately need it.



They are required in aircraft carrying two or more people.  I believe are 

are exceptions but, these exceptions would not apply to us in any case due 

to the limitations they contain.



Safety equipment is one of those things that dont make a plane go faster, 

higher, farther or add to the looks of the plane. People tend to want to 

skimp on this stuff especially if it is required and seems to offer little 

or no benefit or feels uncomfortable to wear or use.



Just remember that Dale Ernhardt was offered the use of the HANs gear and he 

said it limited his visibility and movement and so declined to use it.



I wished he would have used it.



All I can say is buy the Best that you can afford because how much is your 

life worth to you and your family?



Best Regards,

Carlos G.



---

David Lucas

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 79
Location: Europe. based Amsterdam NL

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:07 am Post subject: Re: SPOT

Found quite an interesting overview/comparison of 121.5/243 Verses 406 MHz ELT's at this New Zealand site;  http://www.nztbf.org.nz/epirb.htm



David.

Guy Morgan

Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 9
Location: Galveston, TX

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:18 am Post subject: SPOT

<?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->  That would depend on how your Kolb is registered. The FAR's will tell you  what's required. I maintain Part 135 helicopters and we are now required to have  SARSAT 406 ELT's, I believe for 10 or more passengers. I interface them with the  GPS and the ELT is programmable with the ICAO number (Octal coded N-number)  which is located on the registration. 

  

 Best Regards, 

Guy Morgan 

 [quote]   ---

jindoguy(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:19 pm Post subject: SPOT

Mike, Just looked this one up the other night. FAR 91.207a. For the single seat guys 91.207f(9) is your out.



Rick



On Jan 11, 2008 1:17 AM, Carlos < grageda(at)innw.net (grageda(at)innw.net)> wrote:

[quote]--> Kolb-List message posted by: "Carlos" < grageda(at)innw.net (grageda(at)innw.net)>

Hi Mike,



Most of the low end ELT's run about $200.00 more or less. They use 'D' size

Duracell batteries instead of the manufacturer's own custom battery packs 

(usually high dollar lead weights).



They are not difficult to install and do provide a bit of a safety net if

you should unfortunately need it.



They are required in aircraft carrying two or more people.  I believe are 

are exceptions but, these exceptions would not apply to us in any case due

to the limitations they contain.



Safety equipment is one of those things that dont make a plane go faster,

higher, farther or add to the looks of the plane. People tend to want to 

skimp on this stuff especially if it is required and seems to offer little

or no benefit or feels uncomfortable to wear or use.



Just remember that Dale Ernhardt was offered the use of the HANs gear and he

 said it limited his visibility and movement and so declined to use it.



I wished he would have used it.



All I can say is buy the Best that you can afford because how much is your

life worth to you and your family? 



Best Regards,

Carlos G.

---

Dennis.Kirby(at)kirtland.
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: SPOT

Charlie England wrote:  << ... the old ELTs, there's something like 97%

false rate on ELT trip events, and a virtually 0% 'save' rate on the 3%

that are real. >>



My experience tells a different story.



In the 1990s, I suffered a power failure in my Tri Pacer while flying

over the mountains in south-eastern Arizona.  I executed an emergency

landing in the wilderness of the Chiricahua Mountains, many tens of

miles from the nearest town.  During the landing, the airplane flipped

over, and set off the ELT.  Fortunately, neither my wife nor I were hurt

in the accident.



Within 45 minutes of that "off airport" landing, a DPS helicopter (Dept

of Public Safety) arrived at the scene.  It flew in from Tucson, 50

miles away, dispatched by the controllers at the Tucson International

Airport who saw my signal on their radar screens.  They pinpointed

exactly the location of my downed Tri Pacer.  There were EMTs on board,

with medical rescue equipment.  Glad we didn't need to utilize their

services.



But I was happy my taxpayer's dollars provided me with that helicopter

and medics, at the crucial time, just in case we might've needed them.



Dennis Kirby

Mark-3, 912ul

Cedar Crest, NM

do not archive

JetPilot

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1246

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:24 pm Post subject: Re: SPOT

 	  ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne wrote: 	
		   It can take a half-dozen passes (many 

hours) by the satellite to get the location in the right *state*. 

	
 



That is pure BS,  a good percentage of airline pilots listen on 121.5 durring cruise for ELT signals and other emergency transmissions. That equates to thousands of flights listening to ELT's every day, all over the world. A number of times I been in an area where ATC asks us if we hear, and how strong we hear an ELT, which gets its general location pretty quickly.



Elt's at airports are generally ignored, Unlike this Charlie guy bashing elt's, the search and rescue people are not stupid, if there is a strong signal comming from an airport, it is generally ignored, or given a low priority.



 	  ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne wrote: 	
		   

Then 

there's the false alarm problem. Some of the certified units can be 

triggered unrelated electromagnetic radiation generated by a/c avionics. 

Duh...



	




The statement above is what really really made me question Charlies motivations here.  IF it has ever happened, it is so rare as to not even be a concern.  Hard landings account for almost all false alarms, or people that test improperly.   But then again, hard landings will activate the NEW ELT's just as they did the old ones.   So there will be no big difference in the number of false signals as Charlie implies.   



I don't know what this guys problem is, but we have a responsibility to post accurate information here as many people act on recommendations they read here.   Nothing bothers me more to see someone post false and misleading information that others might actually use.



I fly with an ELT, not just because of the law, but because they provide a much greater chance of getting found quickly.



Mike Bigelow

_________________
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!

Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:19 pm Post subject: SPOT

JetPilot wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne wrote:

> It can take a half-dozen passes (many hours) by the satellite to

> get the location in the right *state*.

> 

 That is pure BS,  a good percentage of airline pilots listen on 121.5

 durring cruise for ELT signals and other emergency transmissions.

 That equates to thousands of flights listening to ELT's every day,

 all over the world. A number of times I been in an area where ATC

 asks us if we hear, and how strong we hear an ELT, which gets its

 general location pretty quickly.

 Elt's at airports are generally ignored, Unlike this Charlie guy

 bashing elt's, the search and rescue people are not stupid, if there

 is a strong signal comming from an airport, it is generally ignored,

 or given a low priority.

Please reread what I wrote. I was talking about detection by satellite, 

which is supposed to identify a search area. 121.5 satellites take 

multiple passes to do this. To the best of my knowledge, a comm radio in 

an airliner tuned to 121.5 has no direction finding capabilities. I 

concede that detection by an airliner is likely to be as accurate as the 

satellites. My experience with the false trip problem was that with my 

ELT operating for almost 2 days, satellite info indicated that the ELT 

was ~30 miles from the plane's actual location. Ground SAR crews went 

where the satellite info directed them and of course, found nothing.

 	  Quote: 	

 ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne wrote:

> 

> Then there's the false alarm problem. Some of the certified units

> can be triggered unrelated electromagnetic radiation generated by

> a/c avionics. Duh...

> 

> 

 The statement above is what really really made me question Charlies

 motivations here.  IF it has ever happened, it is so rare as to not

 even be a concern.  Hard landings account for almost all false

 alarms, or people that test improperly.   But then again, hard

 landings will activate the NEW ELT's just as they did the old ones.

 So there will be no big difference in the number of false signals as

 Charlie implies.

 I don't know what this guys problem is, but we have a responsibility

 to post accurate information here as many people act on

 recommendations they read here.   Nothing bothers me more to see

 someone post false and misleading information that others might

 actually use.

 I fly with an ELT, not just because of the law, but because they

 provide a much greater chance of getting found quickly.

 Mike Bigelow

False and misleading info that others might use bothers me, too. Hence, 

this followup.

Here is a link to a single thread on ELTs being triggered by aircraft 

systems.

http://vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?s a7167fdf920f4ee8a941fe04ed875c5&t=12077&pp=10

There are many others, if you're interested in looking for them.

My motivation (since you seem to question it) is to keep expectations 

realistic on something as important as safety.

You might find your arguments more persuasive if you supply facts 

instead of referring those with contrary opinions as stupid liars.

Fly safe,

Charlie

JetPilot

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1246

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:10 pm Post subject: Re: SPOT

Charlie,



As far as false activation, the great majority are caused by hard landings, and people testing, no operating correctly.    The amout of incidents caused by other avionics as extremely low...   This will affect new ELT's as well as the old ones, so what is your point here ????  This has no bearing on weather you will be found with an ELT or not.



As far as locating an ELT, you are just plain wrong.   An airliner has no direction finding capability, but a lot of them do.  When ATC asks who is hearing it, they have LOTS of planes, and can get the general position.



Even your revised " 30 miles " contradicts your previous statement about no being able to locate which *state* it is in.   Care to explain why in one post you claimed that they had trouble determining the state, and in another you give an error of 30 miles ?  It does not help your credibility any to be flip flopping like Hillary Clinton...



Here is some FACTUAL info that I do believe ...



"The USMCC (the people running the SARSAT program) still claim that the satellite locates ELTs within 11nm 90% of the time and within 3 nm for 406MHz beacons." -- LtCol Mark Fowler ACC/AFRCC



Its obvious the new ELT's are better, but there will still be false alarms, failures.  NOTHING works all the time.  If you have one of the new 406 MHZ ELT's, that is better.  But the 121.5 ELT's still work very well for helping to find you if you crash somewhere, so don't go pulling your ELT out of your plane just becasues some fool says they dont work, its just not true.



And if anyone wants to learn about ELT's, how they perform, and how they can save you, instead of listening to some flip flopping fool, read the facts at the following links.



http://pansar.voices-inc.com/ELT.htm

_________________
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!

Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S

slyck(at)frontiernet.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:13 pm Post subject: SPOT

--or you could leave a trail of seafoam.



On 11, Jan 2008, at 9:10 PM, JetPilot wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Charlie,



 As far as false activation, the great majority are caused by hard  

 landings, and people testing, no operating correctly.    The amout  

 of incidents caused by other avionics as extremely low...   This  

 will affect new ELT's as well as the old ones, so what is your  

 point here ????  This has no bearing on weather you will be found  

 with an ELT or not.



 As far as locating an ELT, you are just plain wrong.   An airliner  

 has no direction finding capability, but a lot of them do.  When  

 ATC asks who is hearing it, they have LOTS of planes, and can get  

 the general position.



 Even your revised " 30 miles " contradicts your previous statement  

 about no being able to locate which *state* it is in.   Care to  

 explain why in one post you claimed that they had trouble  

 determining the state, and in another you give an error of 30  

 miles ?  It does not help your credibility any to be flip flopping  

 like Hillary Clinton...



 Here is some FACTUAL info that I do believe ...



 "The USMCC (the people running the SARSAT program) still claim that  

 the satellite locates ELTs within 11nm 90% of the time and within 3  

 nm for 406MHz beacons." -- LtCol Mark Fowler ACC/AFRCC



 Its obvious the new ELT's are better, but there will still be false  

 alarms, failures.  NOTHING works all the time.  If you have one of  

 the new 406 MHZ ELT's, that is better.  But the 121.5 ELT's still  

 work very well for helping to find you if you crash somewhere, so  

 don't go pulling your ELT out of your plane just becasues some fool  

 says they dont work, its just not true.



 And if anyone wants to learn about ELT's, how they perform, and how  

 they can save you, instead of listening to some flip flopping fool,  

 read the facts at the following links.



 http://pansar.voices-inc.com/ELT.htm



 --------

 &quot;NO FEAR&quot; -  If you have no fear you did not go as fast  

 as you could have !!!



 Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S





 Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=157566#157566

by0ung(at)brigham.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: SPOT

 	  Quote: 	
		  >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Elt's at airports are generally ignored, Unlike this Charlie guy bashing
	


elt's, the search and rescue people are not stupid, if there is a strong

signal coming from an airport, it is generally ignored, or given a low

priority.

 	  Quote: 	
		  >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


	


When visiting with the operator at the fbo where I fly....  it may be true

that the S&R does not respond...  but the fbo gets a call to investigate and

silence the offending elt.   He has been told that the calls are initiated

by local aircraft, airliners, US and even soviet satellites.  



Boyd

JetPilot

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1246

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:15 am Post subject: Re: SPOT

 	  slyck(at)frontiernet.net wrote: 	
		  



--or you could leave a trail of seafoam.



	




There is an interesting idea, does that stuff really work ???

_________________
"NO FEAR" - If you have no fear you did not go as fast as you could have !!!

Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S

russ(at)rkiphoto.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:34 am Post subject: SPOT

I've heard that SeaFoam is so delicious that the wild creatures eat  

up the cookie-crumb-trail before it can  be followed



On Jan 14, 2008, at 11:15 AM, JetPilot wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 slyck(at)frontiernet.net wrote:

> --or you could leave a trail of seafoam.

 There is an interesting idea, does that stuff really work ???



 --------

 &quot;NO FEAR&quot; -  If you have no fear you did not go as fast  

 as you could have !!!



 Kolb MK-III Xtra, 912-S





 Read this topic online here:



 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=158002#158002

beauford173(at)verizon.ne
Guest

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:59 am Post subject: SPOT

slyck(at)frontiernet.net wrote:

 --or you could leave a trail of seafoam.

-------------------

..My Bride claims that as I have drifted more deeply into my dotage, I 

occasionally tend to

leave a trail which closely resembles Seafoam as I move about...  I believe 

she is overstating

things a bit...but will check more frequently...



break break..

A non-Kolb item...but one which can impact any of us driving Kolbs..



Sad story here in the local area day before yesterday... fella in his 30's 

taking his

parents for a sightseeing ride around the Tampa - St. Pete area in a rented 

C-172 put it

into the bay about a thousand feet short of the runway, killing them all . 

He was cleared to land on 22, but

appeared to line up on 27... tower called him and pointed out the problem...



Following this communication the tower controller said the airplane rolled 

hard to the right, overcorrected

back to the left, rolled back to the right again, then pitched up, stalled, 

and dove into the water...



At first take, sounds kinda like a classic case of becoming distracted and 

neglecting to fly the

airplane... He had been flying about 4 years... flew once a month the paper 

said.  They didn't

know how much time he had.  NTSB ought to have their conclusion in a few 

months...



Do Not Archive



Somber Beauford

FF-076

Brandon, FL

Steve Boetto

Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 364

Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 11:32 am Post subject: SPOT

Saw that on the news, Sad story, Airspeed is everything.

 



  

 Steve

Firefly 007/Floats

do not  archive





Start the year off right.  Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year. 

  [quote][b]

John Hauck

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 4639
Location: Titus, Alabama (hauck's holler)

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:20 am Post subject: SPOT

Hi Gang:



Here is the first recorded save by SPOT, a gentleman in Alaska bush:



http://www.adn.com/outdoors/story/263545.html



john h

mkIII

_________________
John Hauck
MKIII/912ULS
hauck's holler
Titus, Alabama

slyck(at)frontiernet.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:03 am Post subject: SPOT

wait until he gets the bill for the rescue 

On 15, Jan 2008, at 12:19 PM, John Hauck wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 Hi Gang:



 Here is the first recorded save by SPOT, a gentleman in Alaska bush:



 http://www.adn.com/outdoors/story/263545.html



 john h

 mkIII

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Kolb-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum