406 ELT in Canada (Newspaper article)

[Paul Tuttle]

Here's a link for an article on the upcoming 406 ELT legislation in Canada.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Letters/1086236.html

[rv6ejguy]

I wrote my letter to TC a couple weeks ago and received a reply letter thanking me for my response yesterday. I hope they listen to all of us.

[Ron Lee]

Here is my comment sent to

services@tc.gc.ga

To the Civil Aviation Regulatory Affairs Division

What Canada does in this regard is your decision. However, there are two
big issues to consider.

1) If it applies to US aircraft entering Canada, it will dramatically drop tourism
because I will not equip with a 406 MHz unit.

2) ELTs are old technology. One article suggests that they fail to activate in as
many as 50% of crashes. When there are systems such as Spot and APRS
(ham frequency) that provide exact location prior to a crash, mandating an ELT
just using a new frequency is shortsighted and will not help as much as Spot or
APRS.

Ron Lee

That email address did not work.

[az_gila]

Originally Posted by Ron Lee

Here is my comment sent to

services@tc.gc.ga

To the Civil Aviation Regulatory Affairs Division
......, mandating an ELT just using a new frequency .....
Ron Lee

......

...quite true.

The new ELTs are also transmitting on the "old" frequency of 121.5 most of the time. The 406 frequency is used for a short burst about every minute.

There are other reasons to complain - such as compliance with unelected International Agencies (in this case, an IATA mandate), which the US is thankfully ignoring for now - but you need to keep the facts correct.

It is an "additional" frequency, not a "replacement" frequency.

The article in the first post also contained other factual errors - I guess one of these days Journalism Schools will emphasize accuracy over story....

[Ron Lee]

You are right Gil but my comment is adequate. I understand the whole idea behind the improvement using 406 MHz (especially if GPS enabled). Look at the main thrust of my comment.....actually two

1) It will reduce tourism from the USA

2) It may not really help locate people compared to other technologies available.

[swixtt]

isn't everyone else except us here in NA using 406Mhz for aviation? PLB's are 406 now too. Marine locators are 406 as well.
i think the SPOT technology is pretty good... they should definitely have done more to the devices if they are mandating a change. from what i've read and understood, the push is to get off the 121 frequency and move to the more common 406.

[az_gila]

Originally Posted by swixtt

isn't everyone else except us here in NA using 406Mhz for aviation? PLB's are 406 now too. Marine locators are 406 as well.
i think the SPOT technology is pretty good... they should definitely have done more to the devices if they are mandating a change. from what i've read and understood, the push is to get off the 121 frequency and move to the more common 406.

...the push is for coded beacons on 406 for satellite pick up, but still to have 121.5 - which not coded - for short range homing. I believe the marine ones are also dual band with a 121.5 output.

It is an IATA mandate (an unelected international body)- and nearby, Canada and Mexico are moving that way, the US has chosen not to (yet......)

Since there is an element of socialism vs, free choice involved - I would assume most of the European countries have moved to the 406 beacons - can any of our VAF members on the other side of the Atlantic confirm?

[vlittle]

Here's my letter to Transport:
-------------------------------

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

Dear Sir:

Re: Canada Gazette, Part 1, Vol. 142, No 32, August 9, 2008 ? Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I and VI ? ELT)

I am a pilot and owner of a small general aviation aircraft, and a professional engineer. I am writing to express my displeasure with the proposed change to the regulations regarding 406 MHz emergency locator transmitters.

I am sure that you have many letters objecting to 406 ELTs. Rather than re-hash the severe economic harm to aircraft owners and the almost complete elimination of private American pilot-tourists flying into Canada, I would like to discuss the bigger picture.

I worked for the (Canadian) company that developed the first commercial 406 beacons, called EPIRBs that are used on many ships and are the basic of personal locator beacons (PLBs) used by hikers. This is the technology base for the 406 ELTs proposed for use in Canadian aircraft.

This technology was developed over 20 years ago, pre-dating the availability of commercial global positioning satellites (GPS) which are now the backbone of navigation systems worldwide.

GPS, combined with other available technologies has rendered 406 MHz ELTs obsolete for their intended purpose.

ELTs, by their nature, must survive an accident in order to be useful. That means they must survive impact, fire, sinking and damage to the antenna or cables as well as the unit itself. The built-in G-switch must trigger and up to one minute must elapse after impact for the ELT to begin transmitting.

One minute is a long time when you are on fire or sinking. Survivors may have time to egress, but then they are alone, with no functioning ELT to help search and rescue find them. Up to 50% of aircraft accidents do not have their ELT survive or trigger.

There are much better systems available today or in the near future that are vastly superior. These devices use GPS positioning to transmit breadcrumb trails to satellites or ground stations. Should an aircraft go missing, or an old-style ELT is triggered it is a simple matter to go to a web site and find a breadcrumb trail for any or all aircraft in an area.

This does not require the survival of any equipment after a crash! Simply being overdue on a flight plan will allow search and rescue to locate a downed aircraft reliably.

Here is an example:

<snip APRS track>

If I had gone missing, It would be obvious where to look. This type of technology has many other uses other than search and rescue, and the relatively modest cost is easy to justify. The total system cost me $100, installed. Commercial systems will cost more, but not thousands of dollars!

It is vastly superior to the obsolete 406 ELT technology that was developed when MS-DOS was popular on every desktop computer.

Please consider this. 406 ELT offer very little for a great cost. There are better alternatives.

Sincerely

Vernon R. Little, P.Eng.

[N208ET]

The new epirb's carried on boats and ships no longer transmit on the 121 freq. The older ones did. The 121.5 is definately being phased out on water, if it isn't already done. I bought a old 121.5 elt for my plane and it isn't even done yet with the knowledge that probably within 5 years or so, I will have to upgrade, but dang those 406 machines are expensive.

[TGRV7]

I am about 1 year from the point where I will need to install an ELT.

Will I have to use the more expensive 406 by that time?
Do you think the FAA will have some sort of "phase out" with the older 121.5 elt's.

Thanks