Steve Fossett Missing

[PonchoMan]

He didn't make it. That is what the remote viewer said on coast-to-coast AM last night.

 

[avbug]

Of course having ATC asking airliners to guard 121.5 and report when the beeping starts and stops is a great exercise in triangulation. Sure they find people with it. They also don't find people with it. How many false alarms? False alarms make people complacent. How many have been lost due to this outdated and inadequate system? I think it is silly to have all glass techo marvel single engine piston airplanes that cost 600k that don't have a 406 beacon standard.

Apparently you don't have much experience using, DFíng, searching for, and recoving ELT's under simulated and actual conditions. I do, and trust me, they do save lives. COSPAS/SARSAT is what locates ELT's...not triangualtion by someone monitoring guard. While monitoring guard is a way for someone to hear and identify the activation of an ELT, it's not located that way; it's located by sattalite, and then by direction finding equipment being used by trained personnel.

ELT's capable of broadcasting one's location and other details on 121.5 have been available for years. If it makes you feel better, in two years, it will all be 406 MHz.

121.5 is far from worthless.

 

[regionalcap]

He didn't make it. That is what the remote viewer said on coast-to-coast AM last night.

The news orginizations are saying that nothing has been found yet.

 

[bubbers44]

Many years ago an experimental plane crashed in southern California on Mt. Baldy by Pomona, Ca. The CAP searched all week with no results. I happened to be flying into Ontario, Ca on Friday night and with my old 737-200 radio with manual squelch heard their signal from the ELT and advised ATC it was abeam Mt. Baldy. Saturday morning news was they found the wreckage because of a joint US/USSR satellite. The new radios don't have a squelch override so need a strong signal to receive it. Neither survived but at least they could end the search.

 

[Metro752]

Of course having ATC asking airliners to guard 121.5 and report when the beeping starts and stops is a great exercise in triangulation. Sure they find people with it. They also don't find people with it. How many false alarms? False alarms make people complacent. How many have been lost due to this outdated and inadequate system? I think it is silly to have all glass techo marvel single engine piston airplanes that cost 600k that don't have a 406 beacon standard.

Personally I would prefer to have SAR know the following information: my position within 100 feet, any medical information on file (blood type etc..), who I was, and that no this is not a false alarm we called his (wife, parents, charter company etc.) and know he was out on a flight.

I'd rather have an ELT than a signal fire sure, but I'd put my money on the 406 beacon.

you're an idiot, see I said it simpler that Avboog

 

[BushwickBill]

you're an idiot, see I said it simpler that Avboog

I'm an idiot? Yeah.... better than switchbitch? Hmmm. Not sure but I am sure the terms are equally inappropriate.

You choose metro: Your incapacitated in the heat. 406 or 121.5? 20k resolution or 100meter? Over 60% of the earth or full earth coverage?

Let the idiot know please. I'm curious what such an accomplished, experienced aviatior such as yourself has to bring to the table in terms of an intelligent opinion.

From Wiki:
Traditional ELT, unregistered

The oldest, cheapest (US$ 139) beacons send an anonymous warble at 121.5 MHz. They can be detected by satellite over only 60% of the earth, require up to 6 hours for notification, locate within 20 km (search area of 1214 km²) and are anonymous. Coverage is partial because the satellite has to be in view of both the beacon and a ground station at the same time - the satellites do not store and forward the beacon's position. Coverage in polar and south-hemisphere areas is poor. The frequency is the standard aviation emergency frequency, and there is interference from other electronic and electrical systems, so false alarms are common. To reduce false alarms, a beacon is confirmed by a second satellite pass, which can easily slows confirmation of a 'case' of distress to up to about 4 hours (although in rare circumstances the satellites could be position such that immediate detection becomes possible.) Also, the beacons can't be located as well because their frequency is only accurate to 50 parts per million, and they send only 75-100 milliwatts of power.

http://www.cospas-sarsat.org/FirstPage/121.5PhaseOut.htm
With a 121.5 MHz beacon, only one alert out of every 50 alerts is a genuine distress situation. This has a significant effect on the resources of search and rescue (SAR) services. With 406 MHz beacons, false alerts have been considerably reduced (about one alert in 17 is genuine) and when properly registered can normally be resolved with a telephone call to the beacon owner using the encoded beacon identification. Consequently, real alerts can receive the attention they deserve.
When a 406 MHz beacon signal is received, SAR authorities can retrieve information from a registration database. This includes beacon owner contact information, emergency contact information, and vessel/aircraft identifying characteristics. Having this information allows SAR services to respond appropriately. Make sure your 406 MHz beacon is properly and accurately registered!

 

[avbug]

You're too busy trying to be smart...too busy to note that nobody here has suggested that 406 MHz isn't an improvement. Nobody has decried it or put it down...your argueing an arguement that doesn't exist...one you've made up.

What you did do was make a stupid, erroneous statement that ELT's operating on 121.5 MHz are worthless. They're not.

 

[svcta]

The new radios don't have a squelch override so need a strong signal to receive it.

I could obviously be wrong, actually I'm a little overdue for it, but what new radios don't have squelch?

 

[BushwickBill]

You're too busy trying to be smart...too busy to note that nobody here has suggested that 406 MHz isn't an improvement. Nobody has decried it or put it down...your argueing an arguement that doesn't exist...one you've made up.

What you did do was make a stupid, erroneous statement that ELT's operating on 121.5 MHz are worthless. They're not.

This is what I wrote word for word:

Compared to a 406 beacon with a GPS a 121.5 ELT is worthless...

Anyhow I seems your missing the first 7 words of this phrase. "Compared to" sort of sticks out in my mind as important.

I'll go back to "trying" to be smart now.

I was refering to the watch ELT (how powerful can the transmitter be inside of a watch with no antenna!?) but to be fair I didn't make myself perfectly clear. Of course we all need impressive watches that can save our lives.


com·pare –verb (used with object) 1.to examine (two or more objects, ideas, people, etc.) in order to note similarities and differences: to compare two pieces of cloth; to compare the governments of two nations. 2.to consider or describe as similar; liken: Shall I compare thee to a summer's day? 3.Grammar. to form or display the degrees of comparison of (an adjective or adverb). –verb (used without object) 4.to be worthy of comparison; be held equal: Dekker's plays cannot compare with Shakespeare's. 5.to appear in a similar standing: His recital certainly compares with the one he gave last year. 6.to differ in quality or accomplishment as specified: Their development compares poorly with that of neighbor nations. 7.to vie; rival. 8.to make a comparison: The only way we can say which product is better is to compare. –noun 9.comparison: Her beauty is beyond compare. —Idiom 10.compare notes. note (def. 32).

 

[mushroom]

Weirdly enough, I think those Breitlings actually have some sort of pull-out (like a wire or something) antenna to help the transmitting power. Still gimmicky though...I can't imagine that an ELT in any Breitling has helped someone in a genuine emergency situation, but I could be wrong.