Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
B787 ELT Disable / Removal. Can They Still Fly!  
User currently offlinedougbr2006 From Brazil, joined Oct 2006, 391 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 12083 times:

I searched the forums and could not find mention of this!

Apparently the EASA are to mandate removal of 787 emergency locator transmitters following the AAIB recommendation last week.

This brings up the question, how can they allow the B787 to fly less its ELT especially over long legs over water. Being that its part of the MEL.

According to the head of EASA Dominique Fouda has stated that an AD is going to be issued.

“We are drafting an airworthiness directive that will require the ELT removal on the Boeing 787. This AD will be applicable in our area of responsibility, i.e. European airlines operating this aircraft,”

and he reiterated “Being made inert can also mean remove, but we are definitely talking about removal.”

He also stated "Under European rules, an aircraft type can be certified without an ELT, although it forms part of the required minimum equipment list for flight operations. "To operate the aircraft you need the ELT,” Fouda said. However, he added that the ELT can be “temporarily inoperative under certain conditions” for a limited number of flight cycles. He was unable to immediately specify this figure, but said that this rule also allows for temporary removal of the ELT".

What do you all think, are the rules going to be bent too much and effect flight safety!

I personally would not feel comfortable flying on an aircraft that doesn't have all it's safety MEL working for a extended period of time.

"Quotes are taken from ATW online"

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineseahawk From Germany, joined May 2005, 921 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 12047 times:

Hmm, interesting. I wonder why the AD is limited to the 787 and not valid for all planes that use a Honeywell ELT of the same type.

User currently offline777Boeing777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 12020 times:

Quoting dougbr2006 (Thread starter):
This brings up the question, how can they allow the B787 to fly less its ELT especially over long legs over water. Being that its part of the MEL.

I am not an expert on this matter, but my understanding is that it is a customer option. It's a good question, but I may be wrong, but this same question has been raised in other threads, too.


User currently offline767eng From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2010, 49 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11810 times:

They'll install a portable ELT in its place for the time being.

User currently offlineAAMDanny From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2008, 348 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 11064 times:

Was this a fixed ELT? (as in fixed to the airframe?) all the large aircraft I have ever worked on have had 2 portable ELT's for use by the cabin crew, I tired searching for the exact ones I have had onboard in the past as part of the aircrafts portable emergancy equipment. They vary in size but they look something like this...

http://www.riverbills.com/pic_of_the...3T-001-Locating%20Devices_0064.JPG

They are operated by the crew


User currently offlineTFJamie From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 122 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10925 times:

Quoting AAMDanny (Reply 4):

Was this a fixed ELT? (as in fixed to the airframe?) all the large aircraft I have ever worked on have had 2 portable ELT's for use by the cabin crew, I tired searching for the exact ones I have had onboard in the past as part of the aircrafts portable emergancy equipment. They vary in size but they look something like this...

A fixed ELT is pretty much exactly that, it's fixed to the airframe and wired through to the cockpit with a control panel there. There's also a fixed antenna. The aircraft types I know have the MEL in such a way that it's optional but I know some authorities (Bermuda, for instance) that mandate it.


User currently offlineFlyingSicilian From Italy, joined Mar 2009, 1292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 10625 times:

This ELT is in over 6,000 aircraft, why just the AD for the 787?


Ciao Windjet mi manchi
User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5098 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 10496 times:

Okay...first, there has been no definitive reporting as to whether/how the ELT for the 717 is a different model, even if similar to previous models.

Second, ELTs have been helpful in finding business and private aircraft. They are largely-unnecessary to find transport-category aircraft because lat/long information is regularly transmitted by the nav equipment on those aircraft and collected and retained by the airlines, and when they go missing people know they are missing. In short, the ELT is basically-redundant on transport-category aircraft and, frankly, unnecessary.

With regard to the question of whether it's a fixed ELT, well...yeah. That's sort of the point. It is mounted in a not-easily-accessed place right under the crown. Didn't you read (actually you are lucky you didn't) all the speculation about how the wires connecting it to the cockpit for monitoring purposes must have somehow sent gremlins from the "electrical system" into it and made it catch fire? (rolleyes, yawn). Now rejected by AAIB.

[Edited 2013-07-22 06:57:33]

User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4101 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (11 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 10402 times:

Quoting dougbr2006 (Thread starter):
This brings up the question, how can they allow the B787 to fly less its ELT especially over long legs over water. Being that its part of the MEL.

Are there not redundant systems for this on board aircraft? I would think that they would use an alternate method for crossing the ocean if they don't.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineseahawk From Germany, joined May 2005, 921 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9366 times:

Quoting FlyingSicilian (Reply 6):
This ELT is in over 6,000 aircraft, why just the AD for the 787?

And why remove and not just remove the batteries?


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2056 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9270 times:

Quoting dougbr2006 (Thread starter):

This brings up the question, how can they allow the B787 to fly less its ELT especially over long legs over water.

This part is easy to answer. As per the other thread, the fixed ELT are not meant to operate over (in this case under) large body of water. The ELT is meant to help searcher locate the aircraft. When in a water landing , the fixed ELT will most likely sink with the aircraft long before the search teams arrives on the scene.

In water landing, the more useful ELT are the portable ones which can be carried onto a life raft.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8852 posts, RR: 75
Reply 11, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 8889 times:

Quoting FlyingSicilian (Reply 6):
This ELT is in over 6,000 aircraft, why just the AD for the 787?

I find it hard to believe that thee model installed om the 787 is installed on 6000 aircraft at the moment, that maybe the install base of of all Honeywell fixed ELTs.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 10):
When in a water landing , the fixed ELT will most likely sink with the aircraft long before the search teams arrives on the scene.

The fixed ELT may not be useful for homing, it will however send the flight number, aircraft ID and GPS position in its first burst. This is sent direct to the sat.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1448 posts, RR: 17
Reply 12, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8312 times:

I think this is part of the fallacy of "customer option" debate on the ELT. Many countries require a fixed ELT. the big question would be how many operators did not opt to install the ELT? To have an airplane that was proposed to be 330 minute ETOPS have the issues this plane has had may very well keep the 180 limit. Removing the ELT may further impact the ability to fly this plane on the mission it has been pitched by Boeing. Some of those circles on theBoeing globe touting this planes capabilities keep getting smaller. No 330 or 207 ETOPS cert and no ELT could further restrict the AOA of the 787

User currently offline7BOEING7 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 1480 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8154 times:

Quoting dougbr2006 (Thread starter):
I searched the forums and could not find mention of this!



Other forums have provided the answer but it would take a while to find:

FAA -- "0" required for dispatch for up to 90 days.

CAA -- Up to 6 flights (?)


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21391 posts, RR: 54
Reply 14, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7924 times:

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 7):
Didn't you read (actually you are lucky you didn't) all the speculation about how the wires connecting it to the cockpit for monitoring purposes must have somehow sent gremlins from the "electrical system" into it and made it catch fire? (rolleyes, yawn).

You apparently didn't read any of that properly, since your account is completely distorted.

Damage to the ELT through the control lines has never been discussed as anything but a remote possibility, never as a certainty.

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 7):
Now rejected by AAIB.

Not in their preliminary statement. Their statement also doesn't exactly say what you seem to think it did.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2056 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7316 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 11):
it will however send the flight number, aircraft ID and GPS position in its first burst. This is sent direct to the sat.

Didn't want to ask this question in the other thread but . . . what is the trigger mechanism for the ELT to transmit? Internal sensors? External signal from the cockpit?

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21391 posts, RR: 54
Reply 16, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7108 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 15):
Didn't want to ask this question in the other thread but . . . what is the trigger mechanism for the ELT to transmit? Internal sensors? External signal from the cockpit?

According to the brochure, the cockpit control switch can select the ON position to activate it manually, but in STANDBY position the ELT will automatically activate when an internal G-Switch indicates an impact.


User currently offlineairtechy From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 483 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6789 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 11):

The fixed ELT may not be useful for homing, it will however send the flight number, aircraft ID and GPS position in its first burst. This is sent direct to the sat.

How does it get this information? The unit has no power until activated and the control wires only turn it on manually.  

AT


User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1448 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6789 times:

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 13):
Other forums have provided the answer but it would take a while to find:

FAA -- "0" required for dispatch for up to 90 days.

CAA -- Up to 6 flights (?)

Looking at our own MEL that is approved for airline specific operations it would appear the ELT may be deferred but not for all AOA's.

The generic MEL found on the internet doesn't always match the users MEL with restrictions required for ETOP's.....The places this plane was designed to fly.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21391 posts, RR: 54
Reply 19, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6728 times:

Quoting airtechy (Reply 17):
The unit has no power until activated and the control wires only turn it on manually.

The ELT is permanently powered by its internal battery. And it activates either by manual cockpit switch or by its internal g-switch.


User currently offlineairtechy From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 483 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6663 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 19):
The ELT is permanently powered by its internal battery. And it activates either by manual cockpit switch or by its internal g-switch.

I fully understand that...had one in my plane. Read my post. How does it get the aircraft ID and flight number? It could get the position after a crash with an internal GPS,

AT


User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1175 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6508 times:

Quoting airtechy (Reply 20):

It is pre-programmed with info when it is installed. It would not normally have the flight number.

If it is moved, it can be re-programmed with the new ID info.

The GPS position info is apparently optional.

The normal method of location is by triangulation via the satellites.

http://www51.honeywell.com/aero/comm...es-documents/RESCU_406_AFN_ELT.pdf


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30437 posts, RR: 84
Reply 22, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6444 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seahawk (Reply 1):
I wonder why the AD is limited to the 787 and not valid for all planes that use a Honeywell ELT of the same type.

The AAIB recommendations included the disabling of the ELT on the 787 and to "conduct a safety review of installations of lithium-powered ELTs in other aircraft types and, where appropriate, initiate airworthiness action".

So it's not beyond the realm of possibility there could be future ADs issued for lithium-powered ELTs on other aircraft families.


User currently offlineB777fan From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 171 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6192 times:

In the US, no ELT is required at all under FAR 91.207 per this.

(f) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to--
[ (1) Before January 1, 2004, turbojet-powered aircraft; ]
(2) Aircraft while engaged in scheduled flights by scheduled air carriers;
...
...
[(11) On and after January 1, 2004, aircraft with a maximum payload capacity of more than 18,000 pounds when used in air transportation.]

For over water flights, it is the pingers in the black boxes that are used to locate the aircraft wreckage. The ELT's are used to locate aircraft down on land. Portable ELT's are used over water in life rafts for location.

[Edited 2013-07-22 11:16:04]

User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1448 posts, RR: 17
Reply 24, posted (11 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5997 times:

From the FAA website:

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publi...tions/ifim/intl_overview/#equip406 MHz Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT)
Due to changes in monitoring emergency frequencies, and for search and rescue (SAR) requirements, ICAO has stipulated that aircraft must have a 406 MHz ELT to fly internationally. Some countries, such as the U.S., Canada, The Bahamas, and many Caribbean nations, have not yet adopted this requirement for aircraft.
The 406 MHz ELT must be registered with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and re-registered every two years.
An emergency position indicating radio beacon (EPIRB) does not meet the ICAO requirement, but it is a valuable addition to have on board.


25 bikerthai : Now the tech weenie in me wants to know. What G-force would trigger the switch? The ones in the FAR for crash condition? or some lower value? bt
26 LTC8K6 : AIM and NAIM are both optional. So it may have neither and just broadcast a basic signal that is located through triangulation. The RESCU 406® AFN ca
27 NBGSkyGod : I am not exactly sure what the certified tolerance is, but I have seen some hard landings set them off a few times without actually crashing.
28 s5daw : OT, but why do only cargo planes use that??
29 Post contains images airtechy : It would be interesting to know if the ELT on the OZ 777 activated. Assuming it was mounted where the one on the 787 is, it sure took a whack when th
30 NBGSkyGod : I an certain it activated upon impact, however since it could not be heard in background of the ATC recording I assume that the 406mhz versions do nor
31 Post contains images MrBuzzcut : When I was working at AWK we had a flight of F-18s come in to RON before continuing on their TRANSPAC. One of them landed a bit hard and set of the E
32 aerowrench : The frequency the ELT is activated on is 121.5 which means that it will not be heard on other freqs. Asiana 214 ELT did activate and was mentioned in
33 T prop : When was the last time an ELT signal was used to locate a crashed airliner?
34 Starlionblue : ELT will typically trigger on impact or if a switch in the cockpit is operated. Modern ELTs also transmit on 406MHz in order to reach satellites.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic B787 ELT Disable / Removal. Can They Still Fly!
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Can They Fly On One Outboard Engine? posted Fri Mar 7 2003 08:36:36 by Mhsieh
How Many Years Can An Aircraft Fly For? posted Mon Mar 18 2013 08:22:03 by alberchico
Can An Airliner Fly On CNG Or LPG posted Sat Nov 19 2011 19:27:21 by YokoTsuno
Can An A321 Fly West Coast-Hawaii? posted Sat Feb 19 2011 17:24:43 by ctflyer
Can An Airliner Fly Inverted? posted Sun Apr 11 2010 19:06:27 by c5load
747's How Much Can They Take? posted Tue Mar 24 2009 13:17:54 by Iligano
Least Number Of Engines Can A B777/B767 Fly On? posted Fri Feb 8 2008 17:06:57 by B773A346
When All Engines Fail, Can We Still Land? posted Thu Aug 26 2004 01:16:36 by Kl911
Can A 737-800 Fly SBRJ/SDU To SBSP/CGH? posted Sat Oct 11 2003 13:44:25 by Mozart
Why Can't They Glide? posted Fri Aug 8 2003 06:02:34 by Mirrodie

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format