Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group FCC Bans 121.5 ELTs - DO NOT COMPLY

This SNAFU with ELT's is just the latest in a long list of agency screw ups. The FAA is even more notorious for bad rule making. And they seldom if ever correct their mistakes. These agencies are losing credibility and becoming irrelevant. My advice is to ignore bad rules. Do not comply with them. Do what is prudent and reasonable.

--- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Helen Woods <Helen_Woods@...> wrote:
>
> As far as tax payers are concerned, they will save with this switch.
> Untold amounts of money will be saved in SAR both during false alarms,
> which unlike with the 121.5 system, generally only require a phone call
> to to deactivate vs. activation of both air and ground SAR resources,
> and of course on actually crashes where the pilot will be located in
> hours rather than a search potentially going on for weeks involving
> massive resources. Yes, the direct cost to the pilot will be more but
> having been involved in SAR for these units and seen them in action, I
> can tell you I won't fly my plane on trips without one.
>
> I fully agree on the ADB. The real shame of this is that everyone was
> expecting this announcement to include the FAA final specs on ADS-B in,
> not just out ADS-B out. "ADS-B in" will have direct benefits and
> everyone envisioned combined unit boxes. I'm told though that XM and
> others in the cockpit wx industry are lobbying hard to make sure that
> the FAA doesn't finalize that any time soon. Shame.
>
> Helen
>
> On 6/22/2010 1:02 AM, Jeff Francis^(TM) wrote:
> >
> >
> > Passing the cost along to the taxpayer hardly seems the right
> > solution to the 121.5 vs 406.1 issue. Sure, it's not entirely
> > reasonable, but at least it's better than the new ADS-B mandate. The
> > new ELT's are more likely to save your life than the current/old ones,
> > so there's a (potential) direct benefit. ADS-B amounts to little more
> > than an enormous new tax for the small aircraft owner, with
> > essentially zero benefit in return. Not that I agree that the mandate
> > to eliminate 121.5 ELT's with no notice is a good thing, just that
> > it's less bad than the ADS-B deal.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 17:00, Ian R. Garnham <ch2driver@...
> > <mailto:ch2driver@...>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *FCC BANS 121.5 ELTS
> > <http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/FCCBans1215ELTs_202760-1.html>*
> >
> >
> > If the FCC mandates this then they should make provision whereby
> > the 121.5 units could be traded in for 406/406.1 ( let's wait
> > until they can decide which frequency they want to use! ) ELT's
> > and they pickup the difference in cost!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -=jeff=-
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sport_Aircraft/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Sport_Aircraft-digest@yahoogroups.com
Sport_Aircraft-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Sport_Aircraft-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/