406 Elts: when are they mandatory for private aircraft?

[culver10]

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... n/2052.htm

The local AME who does your annual cannot install a new 406 ELT in your private plane anymore!

[crazy_aviator]

Elt deflection requirements should be adhered to. It is .100 inch with 100 pound pull force. Most 121.5 ELT installations now fail that requirement. All in all, a proper install is 8 hrs. labour.

[photofly]

And if it's not 8 hours, you'll make it so!

[AirFrame]

It's worth noting that despite there being no regulations requiring it yet, if you are completing or importing an amateur-built aircraft, MD-RA will no longer submit your final paperwork unless your aircraft has a 406MHz ELT on board.

[Meecka]

And if it's not 8 hours, you'll make it so!

No. If its not 8 hours I'll charge you for the time it does take. Come on guys, not all AME's are out to screw you. Give me a break.

[DonutHole]

Flat rate... funny people don't have a problem with it when it comes to their vehicles.

[photofly]

And if it's not 8 hours, you'll make it so!

No. If its not 8 hours I'll charge you for the time it does take. Come on guys, not all AME's are out to screw you. Give me a break.

You're absolutely right. I'm being very unfair to the vast majority of AMEs, some of whom are frustrated with the attitudes of awkward owners. It does cut both ways.

[NeverBlue]

And if it's not 8 hours, you'll make it so!

Absolutely!!

Why should an AME with experience that can do it quicker be paid less than an AME with no experience that can't?

If the quote is 8 hours and it takes longer will you pay the extra???

It all works out in the end...as it should.

[Pavese]

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... n/2052.htm

The local AME who does your annual cannot install a new 406 ELT in your private plane anymore!

You appear to be misinformed. This exemption has been operating on a rolling renewal.

Provision: 571.04
Issuing Office: HQ
OPI: AART
Company Name: GLOBAL
A/C Registration:
Issue Date: 2012-10-02
Expiry Date: 2014-03-31
Purpose: The purpose of this exemption is to provide relief to specifically identified persons from the avionics specialized maintenance rules, when they install and certify a maintenance release, for the installation of TSO C126 406 MHz ELTs in an aircraft.

D

[photofly]

If the quote is 8 hours and it takes longer will you pay the extra???

I've never met an AME who gave a fixed quote for a task.

[NeverBlue]

I've never met an AME who gave a fixed quote for a task.

...for a repair I agree

for a mod...it's the only way to get a job in the avionics AMO world...and done all the time.

[1000 HP]

Flat rate... funny people don't have a problem with it when it comes to their vehicles.

I hugely disagree with that. I have a big problem with automotive shops charging my $100 to $120 per hour, flat rate or not. Then they put an 18 yr old untrained unsupervised apprentice on the job. I have only once in 5 years brought my truck to an automotive shop because I was out of town and had no tools handy to change the alternator. The apprentices they put on my Dodge threw hot water on the windshield (-22 outside) to take the frost off and cracked it. It was only 2 months old at the time. I didn't see it happen so they denied it despite the layer of water frozen onto the roof, window, and hood. I fired them, went and bought some tools and installed the alternator in the hotel parking lot (after buying a charged battery to get there). I've changed axles, engines, and transmissions over the years myself and enjoyed the work as a hobby.

Unlike those automotive buffoons, my aircraft mechanic is good, fair, and $29 hr cheaper. Sure the annuals hurt the wallet a bit, but in -20 over the Rockies, you definitely want reliability eh?

[photofly]

I fired them, went and bought some tools and installed the alternator in the hotel parking lot (after buying a charged battery to get there). I've changed axles, engines, and transmissions over the years myself...

I wonder if there will be a chorus of AMEs up in arms about you stealing food from their children's mouths by your wanting to get involved in your own maintenance - or does that only apply to aircraft?

[1000 HP]

As far as aircraft maintenance goes, I just change my own oil, and clean the aircraft belly. I do the water-boy jobs and assist on the annual. Although I was an AE511 in the CAF, it's been a long time. I have done a fair amount of aircraft salvage, and have had many hours on the "bucking bar".

Despite this, I leave the tough stuff to the professionals

[Taiser]

It's worth noting that despite there being no regulations requiring it yet, if you are completing or importing an amateur-built aircraft, MD-RA will no longer submit your final paperwork unless your aircraft has a 406MHz ELT on board.

???

I just had my "pre-cover" inspection and heard nothing of this from my rep... he even commented on my roughed out area where I showed him I'd be putting in my 121, which was sitting in a box on the seat! First 25 hours I can't even fly far enough away to smell a fart from my home airport so why would they care anyways... AND how can they enforce a reg that doesn't exist yet??? I'd take that fight...

[AirFrame]

It's been a year since I discussed this with the local MD-RA director, but the last time I did, it was policy that no amateur-built aircraft be approved without a 406MHz ELT. This was a directive from MD-RA executive, not a regulatory requirement. Made me want to import another amateur-built just to fight this...

I'm still waiting to have an argument someday with a ramp inspector who notices that I don't have a whiskey compass...

[azimuthaviation]

The government of course will push for more ways to increase the use of 406 ELT's, after all they (or the more correctly, the public) are the ones who have to pay for SAR if required. As long as the costs of ATM, search and rescue, communications and surveillance, and weather services are socialized while the benefits of aircraft ownership are privatized, you will see owners and regulators going head to head.

There should have been more financial incentive for operators to install 406 MHz ELT's. Maybe a rebate of a fee of some sort, or a cash back program. A friend at NavCanada said they were giving big incentives to operators who installed ADS-B since it greatly reduced NavCanadas workload and costs. Maybe something like that could be applied for the ELT issue, everyone would save money that way.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Azimuth

Your comment would be correct if the 406 technology was the best available. But the fact is it is 25 year old technology and still has a huge issue with the fact that 40 % of the time the units do not broadcast a signal after the crash because the ELT is burn't/underwater/disconnected from the antenna/ the airplane is upsidedown etc etc. When this happens the SAR folks have NO position to go to and thus may have to search thousands of square miles.

We now have technology that will report the airplanes position every 2 minutes for a price that is becoming comparable to installing and maintaining a 406 beacon. "Searching" would then mean going to the last ping and covering a small area. No action required by anybody in the airplane and it works regardless of the state of the crashed aircraft.

So my question is why are we not adopting technology with a future rather than a better example of a proven failed obsolete model, the aircraft fixed broadcast locator beacon ?

[azimuthaviation]

We now have technology that will report the airplanes position every 2 minutes for a price that is becoming comparable to installing and maintaining a 406 beacon

Every two minutes at even 130 ktas leaves a search radius of several hundred square km. For faster aircraft you would need a position report every few seconds to get the resolution of a 406 MHz beacon, thats just one way that using flight following is cost prohibitive as an alternate means of compliance. And that is for grid area not taking into account topographical area. 100 square km on the map may be several times larger a surface area in a mountainous area if it were laid flat.

Also to have the same functionality as an ELT it must be operated independently from pilot control. An ELT is put in the armed position and is ready to activate at any time. Flight following would have to be always activated, and independent of the aircraft electrical system, thats again getting pretty expensive. Also it may tell you the location of a plane that you are looking for but will not tell you that there is an emergency, all it will tell you is that it has stopped transmitting. What does that help the helicopter operator out in the bush that is starting and stopping several times a day for various periods? When will search and rescue be aware that there may or may not be an issue? Theres no perfect solution, and Im convinced that the 406 ELT is the most practical, if installed,maintained, and operated correctly.

[Big Pistons Forever]

There is no perfect solution,

Agreed but if we are going to force every airplane owner to spend a minimum of $1500 for the next generation of crash alerting technology, I think we should be embracing technology that was not even a dream when the 406 beacon was first introduced into service. At the current pace of technological development tracking systems will only be getting better and cheaper, while the 406 beacon is a hardware solution frozen in time.

Fitting a locator beacon to the aircraft was the best technology had to offer in the early 1970's. But there are other choices not available then and so we can improve on the 1970's solution or open our minds to a different technology that represent state of the art 40 + years later......