Steve Foesstt to be found one day .. someway...

[TimAPNY]

Looking into crash sites in the NYS Mountains it blows my mind how many GA aircraft still sit on Peeks and mountainsides to this day. The Catskills seemed littered with them.

I think it is a good reminder to those flying a flight plan and a rainy day kit is a great idea. I don't fly but when I go on hikes I leave the information with my wife (maps, trails...) and I carry a "got lost" kit in my gear. I guess that is the Boy Scout in me. I think Bill really bring up points I would not have thought about with a day in the air.

Tim

[RickH]

Bill, our problem is somewhat compounded if we lose one of these jets. There probably won't be any belly landing. Seats are maintained by the T.O.s/Navair and all pyros are in compliance. Pilots WON'T be where the smoking hole is, could be miles away. The mandatory ELT will probably never send out the first signal as they aren't exactly built like the proverbial black box, in any event the antennae will be at the bottom of the smoking hole.

Of course that's why we all work so hard to see that the survival gear will never be seen by the pilots.

[T2 Ernie]

Years ago I read a statistic about ELT's. I think it was from AOPA. IT said that ELT's have an 80% false alarm rate and a 30% activation rate. That was under an old TSO. They have since upgraded the standard so that may not be true for the newer units but, it is an interesting stat.

One of the primary reasons 121.5 & 243.0 aren't going to be monitored by SARSAT in another year or so (Jan '09 I think). Start looking at new-generation ELT!!

[Bill Greenwood]

I have read the 406 ELT is more accurate. However it is three times the expense and size and the big problems with the current ones still apply; that is old or weak batteries, antenna broken off in crash, or the unit not mounted in the plane right. There will be a big protest if FAA tries to get everyone to switch to new expensive one, but you are correct according to Aviation Consumer, April 07. They used to also be against ELTs, living in Florida, but changed their mind after an accident when the ELT helped them be found.

[T2 Ernie]

I have read the 406 ELT is more accurate. However it is three times the expense and size and the big problems with the current ones still apply; that is old or weak batteries, antenna broken off in crash, or the unit not mounted in the plane right. There will be a big protest if FAA tries to get everyone to switch to new expensive one...

Well, the military will still monitor 243.0...as usual, we've stuck our heads in the sand hoping it's all a bad dream...but the civvies still running 121.5 will have to hope for the best...

I don't know that 406 will be 'mandated' in Jan 09, but by not monitoring for 121.5/243.0, they've pretty much forced everyone's hand...

[O.P.]

Let me be the first.......

Steve sold me a slurpee in Elko Nevada yesterday......

He was having a hard time, because Elvis was slacking off on the gas pumps...

[Randy Haskin]

Pilots WON'T be where the smoking hole is, could be miles away. The mandatory ELT will probably never send out the first signal as they aren't exactly built like the proverbial black box, in any event the antennae will be at the bottom of the smoking hole.

Of course that's why we all work so hard to see that the survival gear will never be seen by the pilots.

Don't your chutes have the Personal Locator Beacon in them? The little cigarette-pack sized green or yellow box that drones away on 243.0 as soon as the chute opens?

[RickH]

Randy, that's one of those demil items we weren't allowed to have.

Don't get me started....

[JBoyle]

If the govt. won't give you a PLB, why not issue the pilots one of the Breitling watch/ELTs?

I understand Fawcett had one...or at least he did on one of his record flights...and it was auctioned for charity.

[CAPFlyer]

The wristwatch PLB's transmit on 121.5.

[Greg87]

I have a question regarding the filing of flight plans.... Is there no legal requirement to file a flight plan or flight itinerary in the United States? I have my private pilot license, and at least in Canada you are required to file a flight plan or flight itinerary if you are traveling more than 25nm from the departure airport. Is there no such requirement down south?

I have recently moved from South Western Ontario, where I did all my flight training, and in general the area we did training was farmland. This made practicing things such as engine failures relatively easy, if you couldn't make the field you picked you could go to the one before it, or continue gliding to the one after. I moved to North Bay, about 200nm north, and I got checked out in a Cessna 172. While on the flight we did a simulated engine failure, the only problem was there was not a single field in sight, we ended up using a different colour of tree as a simulated field. This has made me somewhat cautious well flying, as I fall into the category of "most likely to get in an accident" (newly licensed, between 50 and 100 hours, male), and I'd really like to not become a statistic. When I eventually do some cross country flying up here, I'll be carrying sufficient survival supplies (including warm clothes!!), flying high enough to at least give some time to glide, following a flight plan to the letter, and calling the FSS to make sufficient position reports.

Sorry for straying of topic, just felt it sort of fit in.

[Bill Greenwood]

Greg, there is no legal req in US to file a VFR flight plan for any flight. Only if you are going to fly IFR( like an assigned route, altitude, transponder code, etc. for bad weather and all under Air Traffic control) do you have to file. It would be aditional red tape if every flight had to file, and in some areas of the US, perhaps, like part of Florida, not so necessary. A voluntary VFR flight plan does not restrict your route or altitude. It just means that at the time you give for expected arrival, plus 30 minutes, if you have not checked in then they begin to investigate. It is all free, and not reallly that big a deal since a pilot is legally req to get a preflight weaher briefing anyway. A flight plan could be informal, like tell a friend where and when you are going, and some pilots use "Flight Following" where you don't file the plan, but talk to control on the radio the whole flight.

[Greg87]

A VFR flight plan is the same in Canada, you are not restricted to altitude or route. You have the option of specifying a SAR time, if no time is specified SAR time is 1 hour after your ETA. The flight itinerary is essentially the same as telling a friend where you are going and when you'll be there. If you do not contact the person after landing then the SAR time is 24 hours after your ETA. Flight following is the same here too. I suppose the mandatory flight plan makes a little more sense up here seeing as the majority of Canada, especially Northern Canada, is a wide open search and rescue nightmare. Are pilots encouraged to file flight plans, ie: is the idea drilled into the heads of students? During training I remember being told by my instructor to make at least two position reports (call the FSS, tell them where you are, revise your ETA), living up here I can see why they're necessary! One thing I've wondered since flying over all this forest, if your engine quits, what are your chances of surviving when putting it down in the forest? I hope I never have to find out!