France and ELTs etc

tnowak · Post by **tnowak** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:28 pm

This was mentioned some time ago, but this is the official promulgation. All aircraft (with very few exceptions) need a 406MHz ELT /PLB for flying in France from 1st Jan 09.
http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/ ... _10_EN.pdf

TN

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:02 pm

But para 2.11.1 exempts aircraft with CNRA - (Restricted airworthiness certificate for amateur-built aircraft), CDNR - (Restricted airworthiness certificate with no type certificate holder), CNRAC - (Restricted airworthiness certificate for vintage aircraft), CNSK - (Restricted airworthiness certificate for kit-built aircraft), and micro-light motorized aircraft (ULM). So that would seem to exempt permit aircraft as we are either CNRA,CDNR and CNRAC.

What do you think Brian? (party line or personal view would be good)

John

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:24 am

Hi John, a purely personal opinion, in no way connected to the LAA, Light Aviation etc, and carrying absolutely no more authority than if written by my cat (Leia, Rod, et al please note), I saw this document a few months ago and considered that our Permit aircraft would be exempt, based on the exemtions you point out.
As ever with these things though, what are the other states going to do? I have heard unoffocially, from a Dutch Teddy Bear if I recall, that Holland are intending to mandate ELT's as well, so if that happens we'll have to see whether we get exempted, or whether ultimately, we'll have to bite the bullet and buy one.

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:28 am

And as I understand it, the CAA has issued an exemption to allow us to carry PLBs instead of ELTs as required in certain circumstances by ICAO. However, I believe that under EASA regulation, when it comes, the CAA will not be able to exempt us from anything as EU law is superior to UK law. But I am still unhappy about the usefulness of a PLB in a light aeroplane.

John

Frank Parker · Post by **Frank Parker** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:48 pm

Has anyone seen any statisics that show the number of downed aircraft located by their ELT, and not by some other means? It was of no help to Steve Fossett after he was lost, and remains lost, in the desert. One cannot argue with the good intentions of having to carry an ELT, but has it demonstrated it's worth?

tnowak · Post by **tnowak** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:38 am

I saw all those abbreviations for aircraft categories which the requirement don't apply to, but wondered if that only applied to aircraft on the "F" register.

I suppose we will just have to wait and see.
TN

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:13 am

Mach 2 wrote:
"But I am still unhappy about the usefulness of a PLB in a light aeroplane."
Hi John, I guess there are two ways of looking at it. If you ditch in the Channel a fixed ELT going to the bottom with the aeroplane isn't much use to you whereas a PLB attached to your person as you bob up and down on the surface probably is. However if you stuff it into a hillside and are incapacitated then the auto ELT would be a better bet. For the kind of flying I do I'd go for the PLB.
Tony I agree the text is not absolutely specific and can be read as all foreign aircraft requiring ELT or foreign aircraft in the categories exempt in France also being exempt. The French are usually a pragmatic bunch and I'd hope that the latter is the case.

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:54 am

Ah finger trouble - I meant to say I did not rate ELTs not PLBs. ELTs are right for aeroplanes carrying several hundred people as PLBs are impracticable - but ETOPS aeroplanes I flew carry portable beacons for the crew to take off with the survival kit. With just a couple of people in a small aeroplane, PLBs must be superior.

JB