Why buy a French product all the way from the USA?
It was much cheaper.
Airborne_Again wrote:
The question is if that requirement is still valid when part-NCO comes into force.
From my communications with them they will stay. As before I think they see it as an airspace requirement (flying over the border) rather then an aircraft requirement as Part NCO.
Part NCO will make the ELT/PLB more strict inside the Netherlands. For international flights it will stay the same.
From my communications with them they will stay. As before I think they see it as an airspace requirement (flying over the border) rather then an aircraft requirement as Part NCO.
With that reasoning, any EASA state could introduce anything.
No, it can’t work like that.
What is more useful an ELT at the bottom of the ocean or a PLB attached to your life jacket ?
Answer please from the Ductch CAA.
Jesse wrote:
This will always be hard to proof. Fact is that an PLB doesn’t get activated automatically, and it doesn’t have a fixed location. An correctly programmed ELT is programmed such that SAR directly knows what kind of aircraft it is, which can help is selecting the correct measures for SAR.
I have a PLB, it is registered to my aircraft. The UK SAR will know what they are looking for if I activate it.
While it doesn’t get activated automatically, the highest risk part of my flying is the reasonably frequent overwater legs, an ELT that sinks with the plane is really of very little use to me. I can tie the PLB around my belt and it will exit the aircraft with me if I have to ditch, and SAR will have all my details when I activate it. As such I think a PLB is generally more useful to me than an ELT. Both would be nice but I’m not made of money.
FWIW, there are rumours that the missing Airbus in the Med did have it’s ELT go off and transmit something very briefly, before it hit the water.
If I was at say FL100 and had 10 mins to ditch, and for sure there was no land within glide range, I would set 7700 and switch ON the ELT. The ELT won’t AFAIK transmit anything for 50 seconds, however, on 406MHz (the 121.50 TX will start immediately).
A_and_C wrote:
What is more useful an ELT at the bottom of the ocean or a PLB attached to your life jacket ?
Ok, I am not CAA. This is why you can not compare ELT and PLB. In this situation an good registered PLB is fore sure better.
For those flying frequently above water Kannad Safelink R10 might be a good consideration as well. This products send an emergency message on AIS (the marine version of ADS-B). Nearby vessels might be able to pick you out on time especially when you are quite some distance from shore.
A couple of years ago and aircraft crashed and was missing for hours. In this case an ELT could have possibly made a difference as help could have located the wrackage earlier.
alioth wrote:
I have a PLB, it is registered to my aircraft. The UK SAR will know what they are looking for if I activate it.
That is good, because it is more suiteable for your type of flying.
There is no good / bad solution. You can not compare the two products, they are different for different needs.
Peter wrote:
If I was at say FL100 and had 10 mins to ditch, and for sure there was no land within glide range, I would set 7700 and switch ON the ELT. The ELT won’t AFAIK transmit anything for 50 seconds, however, on 406MHz (the 121.50 TX will start immediately).
I think that would be the best. You could always reset should the engine pickup again for example. The 50 seconds is correct as well.
The Dutch (national) requirement is requiring an ELT for international flights. This is also applicable to visiting aircraft. This is a point which is looked at during ramp checks. I asked the Dutch CAA about this, and they will keep their requirement active, next to part NCO, which is a different requirement.
So it would they would comply with Part NCO AND also require an ELT for crossing the Dutch border.
I’m rather looking forward to my first ramp check in the Netherlands after 26 August.
Jesse wrote:
There is no good / bad solution. You can not compare the two products, they are different for different needs.
That is why you can compare them, especially against your needs. I am of course not for airline pilots having their PLBs instead of ELTs on aircraft, but I see no reason why I should be forced to install an ELT in my aircraft if I have my own PLB. Fortunately, EASA shares my view.
