Conflicting rules written by two different federal agencies could soon place pilots in a precarious position: Being in compliance with one but not the other.
On June 15 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published in the Federal Register a change to 47 CFR Part 87 that will “prohibit the certification, manufacture, importation, sale, or continued use of 121.5 MHz emergency locator transmitters (ELTs) other than the Breitling Emergency Watch ELT.” Meanwhile, the FAA in 14 CFR Part 91.207, stipulates that U.S.-registered civil airplanes are required to have an approved automatic type emergency locator transmitter in operable condition attached to the airplane. The FAA does not specify either 121.5 or 406 MHz, but the overwhelming majority of aircraft are equipped with 121.5 MHz units, meaning they would be in violation of federal law when it goes into effect 60 days after publication, or Aug. 15, according to officials with the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA).
EAA officials said they are working with other aviation associations to prevent this action and exploring all avenues of action to address this rule before it goes into effect.
“This regulatory change would impose a substantial and unwarranted cost on general aviation,” said Earl Lawrence, EAA vice president of industry and regulatory affairs. “And this also creates a burden for the GA community and those ground-based rescue units that continue to use the 121.5 frequency to perform searches and save lives. At the very least, the FCC action is being conducted without properly communicating with the industry or understanding the implications of its action.”
Officials at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) said they are pursuing all options to have the FCC and FAA delay and re-evaluate the rule, highlighting the economic and operational impact to the more than 220,000 aircraft in the GA fleet, most of whom still carry the 121.5 MHz ELTs.
“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 Rob Hackman, AOPA vice president of regulatory affairs. “There is no FAA requirement to replace 121.5 MHz units with 406 MHz technology. When two government agencies don’t coordinate, GA can suffer.”
It would be impossible to outfit all aircraft in the timeframe of the FCC rule and cost prohibitive for GA aircraft owners, AOPA officials note.
The rule highlights the fact that threats to GA can come from many different areas, Hackman said. Government agencies outside of the FAA don’t necessarily understand the effects of their actions on aviation, and poor communication can compound the problem.
Both the 121.5 MHz and 406 MHz ELTs meet the FAA’s regulatory requirements if manufactured to the proper technical standard order. While satellites no longer monitor the 121.5 MHz frequency as of Feb. 1, 2009, the frequency is monitored by ATC, the military, and other pilots.
I’ll stick with the 121.5 ELT – if I ever need to use it (as in crash landed in the swamp at night and the gators are closing in), I’ll pray the FCC is mad enough at me to call out their black helicopters and come and get me – the operative part of the statement is “come and get me” – I’m rescued!
FAA says I can break *ANY* FAR to save my skin – is the FCC more sacrosanct? Oh, you used an illegal frequency to get rescued, we can either put you back in the swamp or put you in jail forever . . .
Also, 121.5 is the frequency used by searchers so even the 406 ELTs transmit on that freq. I fly search missions in Washoe County, Nevada, and that’s the freq. on which we depend.
What about personal/handheld PLBs / EPIRBS that transmit on 406 and 121.5 simultaneously? Many of these have just come onto the market in the last several years, they are hardly ancient devices. I would be somewhat irritated if the McMurdo PLB I just bought were to suddenly become outlawed.
I tell you what though – I agree with ‘Pilot Guy’ comments. I will continue to carry a PLB no matter what when I venture into the wild or the skies. If the day comes when I have to actually use it or the 121.5 ELT in my plane, FCC enforcement will be the least of my problems.
I would imagine that many directional locators in rescue aircraft are still tuned into 121.5 and may not be able to tune 406. Does that mean they all have to get new direction finders too? What a fuster cluck this gov’t of ours has made of this – no surprise though.
You say your ELT has never transmitted in 15 years. I doubt that to be true. Your IA has surely tested it every 12 months, this requires three sweeps of the signal. The G test will activate it as well.
I see you running into a roadblock at the next annual inspection unless this 121.5 rule is modified soon.
Is this as critical as it seems at first? FCC has the authority to regulate use of the broadcast spectrum; their new rule appears to ban “certification, manufacture, importation, sale, or continued use of 121.5 MHz emergency locator transmitters (ELTs) other than the Breitling Emergency Watch ELT.†FAA has authority to regulate, among other things, required equipment on my airplane. FAA says I must have an operable ELT; mine happens to be an older 121.5 MHz unit. FCC is not saying I cannot fly with my ELT; it is saying that, if my ELT transmits a signal, FCC will not be happy with me. FAA is not saying that I must use my ELT; FAA is saying my aircraft must be equiped with one that is usable. I have flown GA aircraft 30 to 50 hours annually for the past 15 years — my ELT has bever once broadcast a signal in all that time. If FCC’s action a bad thing? Absolutely, and AOPA, EAA and others (including FAA, I trust, whose authority over aircraft certification and operational requirements is being infringed by FCC) are right to protest and force change. Will FCC’s action ground my airplane if its new rule goes into effect as threatened? Nope, not for one minute. Unless FAA instructs me otherwise by rulemaking, I will continue to fly my airplane with its operable 121.5 MHz ELT, secure in the belief that either (a) It will continue not to transmit because I will continue not to crash; or (b) If I crash and if the ELT activates and if FCC is unhappy with me, then someone in FCC will get to figure out whether FCC’s enforcement authority extends to that event and what, if anything, they might propose to do about it. Hopefully I’ll be rescued before the paperwork arrives.