FCC to Ban Use of 121.5 MHz ELTs Effective in August
From AVWeb: The Federal Communications Commission took the general aviation world by surprise when it said in a recent report it will prohibit the sale or use of 121.5 MHz emergency locator transmitters, effective in August. The Aircraft Electronics Association said it just learned of the new rule today, and has begun working with the FAA, FCC and others to allow for timely compliance without grounding thousands of general aviation aircraft. The 121.5 ELTs are allowed under FAA rules. 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. AOPA said today it is opposed to the rule change.
"The FCC is making a regulatory change that would impose an extra cost on GA operators, without properly communicating with the industry or understanding the implications of its action, said AOPA Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Rob Hackman. "There is no FAA requirement to replace 121.5 MHz units with 406 MHz technology. When two government agencies dont coordinate, GA can suffer." The AEA said dealers should refrain from selling any new 121.5 MHz ELTs "until further understanding of this new prohibition can be understood and a realistic timeline for transition can be established."
"The FCC is making a regulatory change that would impose an extra cost on GA operators, without properly communicating with the industry or understanding the implications of its action, said AOPA Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Rob Hackman. "There is no FAA requirement to replace 121.5 MHz units with 406 MHz technology. When two government agencies dont coordinate, GA can suffer." The AEA said dealers should refrain from selling any new 121.5 MHz ELTs "until further understanding of this new prohibition can be understood and a realistic timeline for transition can be established."
Comments
JimC
I don't believe the intent is to invalidate the combi ELT's, but I could be an optimist. Given the sad sorry effectiveness of GA ELT's in actual practice, it's doubly hard to swallow getting pushed around on this issue.
> I'm not sure why anyone would buy a new 121.5 unit since they have not been monitoring the signal
> since last year. I guess if yours failed the inspection and you were too cheap to buy a 406 model.
My understanding is that only satellite monitoring was turned off. I thought I understood that airliners, Coast Guard, etc. still routinely monitor 121.5, so there's still plenty of folks out there who could hear you if you go down somewhere with some traffic.
> The problem is that most 406's also have a 121.5
> transmitter built in (the Artex ME-406 is an
> example) That makes it and most other 406's
> illegal after August. The manufacturers do not
> have the production capacity to produce and
> deliver 220,000 stripped units between now and
> August, so the vast majority of us will be
> grounded.
The regulation is against "121.5 ELT's", not "121.5 transmitters". In the ruling it is perfectly clear that the FCC is aware of the various properties of 406 MHz ELT's and that the ban applies to ELT's which transmit on 121.5 only.
Regards,
Joe
Mine was installed two years ago when all this noise started. Somehow moving the compliance date up overnight is not a surprise to me.
The FCC's desire to impose yet another burdensome cost of regulatory compliance on GA notwithstanding, a recent issue of Aviation Consumer recommended waiting to purchase a 406 MHz ELT until prices came down as a result of increasing competition. Guess we might not have that opportunity. Why does the FCC even care about 121.5 MHz operations?
On a happier note, PK: for some bizarre reason the Breitling Emergency Watch is specifically exempt!
> On a happier note, PK: for some bizarre reason the
> Breitling Emergency Watch is specifically exempt!
So unless you can talk into your watch, who or what will receive the signal?
>
> My understanding is that only satellite monitoring
> was turned off. I thought I understood that
> airliners, Coast Guard, etc. still routinely
> monitor 121.5, so there's still plenty of folks
> out there who could hear you if you go down
> somewhere with some traffic.
In fact, the other day on the way to Dallas from Houston, I heard ATC ask an airliner to listen on 121.5 for an ELT. Not the first time I've heard that. In both cases, my assumption was that ATC had a reason to ask them to listen so not likely anyone would hear your ELT if you were not in communication when you went down and your general location was not known (a la Fossett).
Banning the sale would be one thing but banning the use is just ridiculous. Moving the date up will of course hose those manufacturers who still have a stock of 121.5 ELTs but of course who cares about them? Certainly not the government.
This is just another example of a bumbling government, the same one that will soon be making your health care decisions. Get used to it.
Our understanding is that this ban is for ELTs that use 121.5 MHz as a primary beacon, and the regulation is also aimed at manufacturers to prohibit production of these beacons.
As long as the primary Cospas/Sarsat beacon s a 406MHz approved beacon, you will be fine- the additional 121.5 MHz transmission can be used for localizing or homing in by SAR crews once on site. They're not as clear as they should have been, their intention is to only authorize ELTs that operate on the 406 MHz frequency- there's a lot of older ELTs out there operating only on 121.5/243 MHz, and the satellites no longer recognize or look for these frequencies. I hope this helps clarify the issue,
By the way, I repeat: why does the FCC even care about 121.5 MHz transmissions? Nothing in the amended rule addresses this. Instead, the agency justifies forcing this change entirely on safety grounds. But, isn't that the FAA's territory?
> Forcing an eventual switch to 406 MHz for added
> safety reasons is one thing. Forcing the move
> within 60 days of publication of the amended rule,
> along with the forced expenditure of hundreds of
> unplanned dollars by every GA pilot is another.
March 2009 thread with the consensus leaning toward I'll buy it when I have too.
http://forums.piperowner.org/read/1/118967/page=2