X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:12:30 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from ddcoavsgwhub006.conus.army.mil ([143.85.199.28] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.8) with ESMTP id 3196384 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:38:04 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=143.85.199.28; envelope-from=james.gigliotti@us.army.mil X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgkDAD155EiPUvgiiGdsb2JhbACTUAEBARUiqTqBag X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,351,1220227200"; d="scan'208";a="47006237" Received: from unknown (HELO DDCOBH100HUB003.nasw.ds.army.mil) ([143.82.248.34]) by ddcoavsgwhub006.conus.army.mil with ESMTP; 02 Oct 2008 14:37:26 +0000 Received: from RUCKBH011000002.nase.ds.army.mil ([155.147.252.92]) by DDCOBH100HUB003.nasw.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 10:37:25 -0400 Received: from RUCKBE011C8MB13.nase.ds.army.mil ([155.147.252.122]) by RUCKBH011000002.nase.ds.army.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 09:37:08 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Disposition-Notification-To: "Gigliotti, James M CTR USA" Subject: RE: [LML] New ELT X-Original-Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 09:37:07 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <5F2590A9DED08E4E8786DAEC1E4D999C1D40CB@RUCKBE011C8MB13.nase.ds.army.mil> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [LML] New ELT Thread-Index: AckknFibcfErFPPNSA6YosW0/2TFSA== References: From: "Gigliotti, James M CTR USA" X-Original-To: "Bill Harrelson" <5zq@cox.net>, X-Original-Return-Path: james.gigliotti@us.army.mil X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2008 14:37:08.0017 (UTC) FILETIME=[58CE1A10:01C9249C] http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=3D43698=20 Gents, Take a look at the info in this AOPA forum about a waiver request to fly in Mexico without needing to upgrade to the 406 ELT. The Mexican authorities appear to favor allowing us to travel in their airspace without the upgrade, although this decision is not yet official. I'm planning a flight to Guadalajara Mexico in December. Jim Gigliotti Lancair 320, 450 hrs. Dothan Alabama -----Original Message----- From: Bill Harrelson [mailto:5zq@cox.net]=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 9:55 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] New ELT Jim, =20 Domestically, there are as of yet, no rules requiring changing to a 406 ELT. The 121.5 units will still work. True, the satellites will no longer receive 121.5 but it won't be illegal. If you want to fly internationally, then you'll need the 406 to comply with ICAO rules. Most of the 406's have the ability to transmit GPS coordinates, but this is not a requirement.=20 =20 If you don't plan to fly internationally, you might consider just sitting tight. I'm sure that the 406 prices, currently starting at just under 1K, will come down as more manufacturers enter the market. =20 Bill Harrelson N5ZQ 320 1,650 hrs N6ZQ IV under construction =20 =20 =20 =09 =09 Time to start a new thread. I have not seen any reference to the new ELT rules that go into effect next year. =20 Evidently, our current equipment will no longer work ( or perhaps even be legal) as of Feb 1, 2009. =20 It is my understanding that we will need something that works on 406 MHz and transmits GPS coordinates. =20 I have just begun looking and find units from $500 to $3500. I have no idea what direction to take. =20 What is everyone doing? What is the easiest? What is the cheapest? What is the best? =20 I have an Artex ELT200 and would really like to have something that replaces it with minimal time, trouble and expense. =20 I have even heard that some people are going to portable devices. I don't know how that works. =20 Any input would be appreciated. =20 Jim Scales Angels Playmate =20 =09