FCC Bans 121.5 ELTs

[jrenwick]

Apparently this is not a joke:

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/FC ... 760-1.html

[Bruce Fenstermacher]

Perfect. Just perfect.

[pdb]

I sent this to my US Senators and Congressman this afternoon:

Senators Murkowski and begic and Rep. Young
Alaska Congressional Delegation


As you should be aware, the FCC recently, and without consultation with industry or coordination with the FAA, banned the use of 121.5 ELTs (emergency locator transmitters) currently used and carried by pilots in favor of the newer and much more expensive 406.0 ELTS.

While there are arguments pro and con about migration to 406 ELT units, this ban is an unbelievably stupid act, even for the federal government.

Regardless of the ample technical merits of the 406 units (of which there are many), and forgoing discussion about the outrageous price of FCC/FAA recommended equipment, there is a very good reason not to ban the 121.5 units.

If you find yourself stuck out in the middle of nowhere with a new 406 unit, 99.5% of the aircraft in the area will not be able to pick up a 406 signal because you can’t get it on a normal aircraft communication radio. You can get and track a signal on 121.5 on virtually any aircraft com radio. I have done so many times here in Alaska in my own plane.

Foreclosing the use of 121.5 units means that as a practical matter, the thousands of small planes flying all over Alaska today will have no means helping locate downed planes.

While the 406 units have superior technology as far as transmitting positional information directly to the Rescue Coordination Center (RCC) on Ft. Rich, it means that the best chance of a quick local rescue will be forgone.

This is another case of bureaucrats being out of touch with reality and out of control. The 406 units are currently not mandated by the FAA nor do I think they should be. However, if I crash in August, do you advise me not to use or activate my 121.5 ELT? Doing so will be illegal. But doing so will mean that any air taxi or private pilot in the area will be able to hear my 121.5 signal.

This is another classic example of bureaucrats making more messes when they are trying to help us. God help us all when they start writing the regs on health care which will be a similar disaster. We will all remember that Mr. Begich voted for that but Ms. Murkoski and Mr. Young did not.

[Brad Brady]

Oh! this is a big surprise! I have been to five accidents....three fatal... and the ELT never went off! Yet I have had the civil air patrol here, several times because one went off on the shelf.....(my bad I didn't take the battery out) The whole ELT phenomenon is just a Knee-jerk reaction to Sen Browns demise. The system has never worked.....Look at Foster...We have been spending time here on the forums talking about (personal) GPS's like SPOT and the likes....This makes more sense to me. Being found should be a personal issue, not a federal. Just my two cents worth.

[jrenwick]

The FCC ruling is here: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/a ... -103A1.pdf

Apparently this proposal has been around since 2006 in a document referred to as "The Second FNPRM." According to the ruling document, "Thirteen comments, eight reply comments, and eight ex parte presentations were filed in response to the Second FNPRM." I gather the actual users of 121.5 ELTs didn't get the message!

I can't find any reference in the document to the fact that 121.5 MHz ELTs are used as a homing signal for search and rescue personnel -- it only mentions that they are no longer monitored by Cospas-Sarsat. The only exemption of the ban on 121.5 ELTs is for the Breitling Emergency Watch (http://www.breitlingsource.com/watch_de ... al_35.html), which, they say, is used only for homing by SAR personnel, not for location by satellite. Breitling says this: http://www.breitling.com/modeles/pdf/BR ... 148_en.pdf

The FCC document also does not appear to acknowledge that many (or all?) aircraft 406 MHz ELTs are dual-frequency: they also broadcast on 121.5 MHz for SAR homing. I don't know if that makes them illegal according to this ruling.

WTF?!!!

[futr_alaskaflyer]

Oh! this is a big surprise! I have been to five accidents....three fatal... and the ELT never went off!

If you are inside a smoking hole no one cares if the ELT activates least of all you.

However, if you are in a survivable accident exceeding 3Gs, you might be more inclined to be glad you have one.

[futr_alaskaflyer]

I sent this to my US Senators and Congressman this afternoon:

All 406mhz digital ELT's also broadcast a 121.5mhz AM signal. So most of your letter somewhat obscures the point. UNless, of course, the NPRM is construed to ban all use of the 121.5 frequency in any ELT, rather than the most likely interpretation that it bans 121.5-only ELT models. I for one don't think the former was intended, and neither would all of you once you read the purpose statement in the proposed rule

[GAHorn]

According the FCC policy which I received....the FCC is not prohibiting/banning the use of 121.5 ELTs.... they are prohibiting the SALE of them after August 2010.

...which is stupid. The FAA still requires ELTs to be aboard private/GA aircraft and allows 121.5 ELTs in order to meet that requirement.

Lets see if I understand this correctly: One Federal Agency (FCC) is going to prohibit US citizens from having available to purchase emergency locator beacons which another federal agency (FAA) REQUIRES of it's citizens who own/operate aircraft?

[jrenwick]

From the rule document:

18. We therefore amend the Commission’s rules to prohibit further certification,
manufacture, importation, sale or use of 121.5 MHz ELTs. This action is consistent with the
Commission’s earlier decision prohibiting the operation of EPIRBs on 121.5 MHz. It is also consistent
with the efforts of NOAA, other federal agencies, the U.S. military, and private organizations, both
domestic and international, to strongly encourage aircraft owners and pilots, training institutions,
manufacturers and other aviation industry stakeholders to transition to 406.0-406.1 MHz ELTs.

(my emphasis added)

No mention of the FAA. Not explicitly, anyway. Are the two agencies having a pissing contest?

[pdb]

All 406mhz digital ELT's also broadcast a 121.5mhz AM signal. So most of your letter somewhat obscures the point.

You are being too polite... I missed that point completely. But the fact remains that the use of the existing but soon to be banned 121.5 ELTs still provides some significant potential benefit for those with such units currently installed. The FCC seems to think that no one is listening on 121.5 now that the satellites are dead.

[flyguy]

According the FCC policy which I received....the FCC is not prohibiting/banning the use of 121.5 ELTs.... they are prohibiting the SALE of them after August 2010.

The FCC said its rules have been amended to "prohibit further certification, manufacture, importation, sale or use of 121.5 MHz ELTs." The FCC says that if the 121.5 units are no longer available, aircraft owners and operators will "migrate" to the newer 406.0-406.1 MHz ELTs, which are monitored by satellite, while the 121.5 frequency is not. "Were we to permit continued marketing and use of 121.5 MHz ELTs ... it would engender the risk that aircraft owners and operators would mistakenly rely on those ELTs for the relay of distress alerts," the FCC says.

If the word "USE" in that sentence means what it says, then the BAN is comprehensive? ? ?

I'm with John "WTF" We need to flood the idiots who think this is just great with thousands of calls, e-mails and letters

[GAHorn]

Jack Nicholson: "OK, folks, heere's the deeel.... any of you who crash and use your 121.5 ELTs to saave your skin...will be

prosecuted by FCC. Meanwhile FAA requires your ELT to be installed and operational..... so, in order to iniate your flight,

be certain your ELT is operational without actual testing, and when you see you are gonna crash....turn it OFF prior to

impact. This way you can comply with all the federal requirements."

[GAHorn]

That's a great letter, Pete, and we would all do well to imitate it. (I'd only encourage folks to leave out the last two sentences, as they change the subject into a complaint about a different matter entirely.)

...God help us all when they start writing the regs on health care which will be a similar disaster. We will all remember that Mr. Begich voted for that but Ms. Murkoski and Mr. Young did not.

We might add the comment about how 121.5 is still being broadcast by other devices anyway.

Thanks for the boilerplate. I'm plagiarizing it now and will send it out today.

[canav8]

That's a great letter, Pete, and we would all do well to imitate it. (I'd only encourage folks to leave out the last two sentences, as they change the subject into a complaint about a different matter entirely.)

...God help us all when they start writing the regs on health care which will be a similar disaster. We will all remember that Mr. Begich voted for that but Ms. Murkoski and Mr. Young did not.

We might add the comment about how 121.5 is still being broadcast by other devices anyway.

Thanks for the boilerplate. I'm plagiarizing it now and will send it out today.

Guys I could not find an effective date on the PDF file. Not sure when it goes into effect. V/R Doug

[170C]

Another nail in GA's coffin! If someone wants to come up with a good form letter for members to use to send to our represetatives, etc., I'll be sure to send mine