CANADA: ELT 406 MHz ... The official text

[Lycosaurus]

You can now find the official text of the proposed regulation here:

http://gazetteducanada.gc.ca/partI/2.../regle2-e.html

While this is a Canadian topic/issue, it also affect US aircraft (see paragraph below). I you fly, or plan to fly into Canada in the near future, you may want to provide comments to the appropriate department (contact information below).

....At present, several countries require, or are in the process of developing requirements, to use ELTs that can broadcast on 406 MHz frequency. Traffic inbound from the United States will have to comply with these proposed amendments before entering Canadian airspace. It is assumed that the cost of compliance will not dissuade foreign commercial operators from equipping with systems that meet the requirements of these proposed amendments, as the cost of compliance has not dissuaded them in the case of long-range over-water flights.....

The proposed regulation is up for comments by interested parties. You have 75 days:

...... Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities within 75 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice. Each representation must be in writing and be sent to the Chief, Regulatory Affairs (AARBH), Civil Aviation, Safety and Security Group, Department of Transport, Place de Ville, Tower C, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5 (general inquiries ? tel.: 613-993-7284 or 1-800-305-2059; fax: 613-990-1198; Internet address: http://www.tc.gc.ca)....

COPA (Canadian Owners and Pilots Association) has opposed the amendment. $2,000 average to install a 406 MHz ELT.

Stakeholders support this proposal with the exception of COPA who has advised Transport Canada that it would oppose these proposed amendments on the grounds that the implementation costs are too high for their segment of the industry ($36,850,000 to equip 18 000 private aviation aircraft). COPA also opposed these proposed amendments on the grounds that the alternate means of emergency location criteria (i.e. automatic activation, capacity of 2.7 nautical miles search radius) do not allow the use of less expensive technologies that are currently available.

[N941WR]

Originally Posted by Lycosaurus

...Traffic inbound from the United States will have to comply with these proposed amendments before entering Canadian airspace. ...

I guess I won't be flying to the Great White North any time soon.

[Randy Walls]

Originally Posted by N941WR

I guess I won't be flying to the Great White North any time soon.

They can keep it! I'll stay here.

[hevansrv7a]

Observation: This is not only for US aircraft flying to Canada but as I read it would also affect those of us transitioning Canadian airspace from one US destination to another. That's relevant around Detroit where Canada is between the Detroit area and much of Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Idea: The allowable alternative would have to be accurate to within 2.7 miles. Current technology for pleasure boats is a class "101" or "D" radio of type DSC which can send emergency message on channel 70 in digital form including exact position taken from any GPS that talks NMEA. While the use of marine radios for aviation is not permitted in Canada, I'll bet some enterprising geek could modify the existing stuff, etc. Just a thought. A Class 101 radio is only about $100 and most of us already have the GPS. The issue would be to whom it would send the signal and, of course, the inertial trigger mechanism.

[FLTENG]

Yes, that is all from the official text which also goes on to say that you do NOT need a 406 as long as you have an alternate means of which there are several that are quite acceptable
Lets not panic out there.

Alternate Means of Emergency Location

605.41 (1) A person may operate an aircraft that is not equipped with one or more ELTs in accordance with subsection 605.38(2) if

(a) the aircraft is operated using an alternate means of emergency location; and

(b) the alternate means of emergency location is identified in the information section of the flight plan or flight itinerary.

(2) The alternate means of emergency location shall

(a) be capable of providing immediate notification of an aircraft distress situation to either

(i) a rescue coordination centre, or

(ii) a third party that is able to receive and transmit the information to a rescue coordination centre; and

(b) allow the aircraft to be located with an accuracy of 2.7 nautical miles.

(3) If the alternate means of emergency location is a system that uses an emergency locator device carried on board the aircraft, the device shall, in addition to meeting the requirements of subsection (2),

(a) be capable of providing immediate notification of an aircraft distress situation without activation by a crew member;

(b) be registered in the database established for this purpose by the Department of Transport; and

(c) be carried and operated in accordance with the manufacturer?s recommended procedures.

[Ron Lee]

Please identify the other solutions and their cost.

[az_gila]

Item (3) (a) seems to rule out a hand held GPS-PLB unfortuneately...

[Ron Lee]

My 406 MHz PLB is not viable.

Spot is not viable.

APRS is not viable.

I guess I better make a quick trip to Canada before I can't.

[vlittle]

Welcome to our Canadian regulatory ****.

The process here, though, is a bit twisted. Usually a regulation is enacted, followed by exemptions to the regulation that follow common-sense rules.

An example of this would be an exemption of the ELT 406 rule for US aircraft operating in Canada for less than 30 days (this is a made up example).

The reason it's done that way is to fully paper bureaucrats' behinds with the boilerplate regulation, and then adjust to the political reality when lobbied for exemptions. This way, the bureaucrats are not to blame for lax rules when a situation arises.

So, please don't panic until all of the paperwork is finalized!

BTW, the driver behind this regulation is our Canadian military. Nice to see they are in charge protecting our interests!

Vern

[rv6ejguy]

It's interesting to talk with the ELT engineers about the G switches used in the new 406 models. These would appear to be the same or similar in design to the old 121.5 models. I wonder where the "increased reliability" of activation and lower chances of false activation are coming from?