What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

ME 406 ELT Battery

Yes.

And in the event that an ELT should be required, and it has a non-approved battery pack, and it still functions as intended - neither the rescuers nor the rescued are going to give a flying flip whether or not the battery was approved. The fact that it worked (or not) is all that matters.

Excellent, practical thinking. It's this same thinking that drives me to preach that we take a belt-and-suspenders approach to our survival equipment.

Now for the down-side. Let's say the ELT transmitted because the unthinkable has happened. Let's say the occupants survived the crash but perished while waiting for rescue. Let's say the ELT failed to alert SAR. Let's say your passenger was the breadwinner for a large family, or maybe a mean-spirited family...

Now the lawyers get involved. How well will that home-brew battery installation stand up to this level of scrutiny?

Please do think long and hard before trying to cut a corner that saves $40 per year, at best...
 
Excellent, practical thinking. It's this same thinking that drives me to preach that we take a belt-and-suspenders approach to our survival equipment.

Now for the down-side. Let's say the ELT transmitted because the unthinkable has happened. Let's say the occupants survived the crash but perished while waiting for rescue. Let's say the ELT failed to alert SAR. Let's say your passenger was the breadwinner for a large family, or maybe a mean-spirited family...

Now the lawyers get involved. How well will that home-brew battery installation stand up to this level of scrutiny?
Umm, It should not have to!!! If I have to base the decision of taking a passenger up in my plane on this logic I will make it my priority to vet such a passenger right on out of my airplane!!! I am not in the commercial business of transporting passengers. Especially mean spirited ones or those from mean spirited families.
 
Umm, It should not have to!!! If I have to base the decision of taking a passenger up in my plane on this logic I will make it my priority to vet such a passenger right on out of my airplane!!! I am not in the commercial business of transporting passengers. Especially mean spirited ones or those from mean spirited families.

Would that we could predict how grieving (or greedy) survivors might react to the loss of a family member... Notwithstanding the vagaries of human nature, having an aircraft which does not carry the equipment mandated by law puts you and your estate at some level of risk. Again, I'll point out that 406MHz batteries cost about $40/year. It's a value call with respect to whether it's worth it to take on the risk for a $40 payback...
 
Canadian Joy...
-
fx5u7q.png
 
Last edited:
Should be interesting to see what response I get from the FAA. I can tell you that commercial dedication is something we do in every nuclear power plant in the country, and sometimes solely for economic reasons.
 
"The battery pack isn't expensive, its about the same price as other "expendables" like a complete set of carb floats from Rotax, or the Ducati voltage regulator...but the battery will last 6 years."

LOL!! ... and don't forget to add the recently-released ROTAX-brand 912 spark plugs ($22 each) and connectors ($40 each).
 
LOL!! ... and don't forget to add the recently-released ROTAX-brand 912 spark plugs ($22 each) and connectors ($40 each).

My 912 has been running great with the old spark plugs and the old connectors for 920 hours. I won't be changing over to the new stuff.;)

Thread drift!
 
Still no reply from FAA. You'd think they would at least answer. Guess I'll contact EAA next and see what they say.
 
See below bolded, "(2) When 50 percent of their useful life (or, for rechargeable batteries, 50 percent of their useful life of charge) has expired, as established by the transmitter manufacturer under its approval.[/I]"

Question how to figure replacement date??
Does one only factor half the 6 year lithium battery life span printed on the battery mfg package and calculate a replacement date of 3 years from (which date?) the date on the AS invoice, or the date on the bottom of the battery mfg (not the transmitter mfg as stated above) silver package it came in, or simply the day you placed it in operation???? and just add 6 years to the date you placed it, the battery in operation, and log/certify that date...???:confused:

Oh and regarding:"50 percent of their useful life of charge) has expired, as established by the transmitter manufacturer under its approval Is the current understanding the transmitter will blink or beep when it senses 50% of battery life remaining and then replace the battery errrr???

You originally asked the following question....


I answered that question by writing



The reason is that FAR 91.207 also says....

(c) Batteries used in the emergency locator transmitters required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section must be replaced (or recharged, if the batteries are rechargeable)--
(1) When the transmitter has been in use for more than 1 cumulative hour; or
(2) When 50 percent of their useful life (or, for rechargeable batteries, 50 percent of their useful life of charge) has expired, as established by the transmitter manufacturer under its approval.


Because of this part of 91.205, the newest TSO requirements for ELT's require them to monitor battery usage and report when the usage limit has been exceeded.




This has nothing to do with that original question so I am not sure why you quoted me in your post........

You can interpret all of this how ever you want and do what ever you want. In the end, your debating is pointless because the only interpretation that matters is the FAA's. Just because you don't think it makes sense doesn't change the meaning.

- Blunt and to the point alert -

I am always amaze that the people that complain the most about all of the rules we have, usually seem to be the same people that are always looking to push the to fringe edge limit of following those rules.

If you haven't figured it out yet.... that is predominately what keeps the FAA issuing more rules......
 
Last edited:
See below bolded, "(2) When 50 percent of their useful life (or, for rechargeable batteries, 50 percent of their useful life of charge) has expired, as established by the transmitter manufacturer under its approval.[/I]"

Question how to figure replacement date??
Does one only factor half the 6 year lithium battery life span printed on the battery mfg package and calculate a replacement date of 3 years from (which date?) the date on the AS invoice, or the date on the bottom of the battery mfg (not the transmitter mfg as stated above) silver package it came in, or simply the day you placed it in operation???? and just add 6 years to the date you placed it, the battery in operation, and log/certify that date...???:confused:

Oh and regarding:"50 percent of their useful life of charge) has expired, as established by the transmitter manufacturer under its approval Is the current understanding the transmitter will blink or beep when it senses 50% of battery life remaining and then replace the battery errrr???


I don't understand your question, because you don't have to figure a replacement date. The expiration (replacement) date is marked on the battery.

All of the ELT's I am familiar with display some type of status code after a self test, when the battery has been used beyond what they determined to be the 50% point.

You seem to be asking how to set a replacement date, when you do a self replacement of the battery cells inside the case? As discussed in this thread, there is not FAR compliant way to replace the cells and then stipulate a new expiration date.
 
No, not interested in home-brew battery.....Just trying to understand what to write down in the logbook as the replacement date. So I guess the 6 year lithium battery is good for 6 years or whatever the internal diagnostics the transmitter indicates as far as reaching the 50% used point.....whichever comes first....Is that it.
 
As Scott mentioned - you don't have to give even the slightest thought to the "50% point". That's done for you by the ELT manufacturer.

The ELT manufacturer calculates loss of battery capacity through aging, and adds to that the loss of capacity incurred through the accrual of self-tests. This calculation nets a maximum recommended rate for owners to perform self-tests and it provides us with a calculated expiry date which will ensure the battery pack meets all requirements of the FARs.

The upshot of it all is that your new battery pack comes marked with an expiry date - replace it on or before that date. If you perform a self-test which indicates the battery has insufficient capacity, replace the battery pack and note the new expiry date in your aircraft logs. If the battery pack fails self test you should also look for a cause for premature failure. If you can't find a cause (like inadvertent actuation) then it's a good idea to send your ELT to an approved maintenance facility to determine why it's sucking the battery dry.

BTW no wise 406MHz ELT manufacturer would let a battery pack get down to 50% capacity before flagging the failure in the self-test results. The battery has to be allow the ELT to meet the minimum performance specs at the end of the battery life cycle - this means a time-expired battery pack typically has way more than 50% of its juice left.
 
Thank you and Scott for the education. I was at home 30 miles from expiration date on the battery and figured one of the dates on the packaging it came in was same as battery sticker. As it turns out they are all different: package expiration date: 3/31/24, expiration date on ELT battery label is Apr 2024 and this is the date I'll put in the logbook. The older 121.5 ELT world is where I left off 4 years ago and I don't recall that they could self-check their battery health. Bear with me here a little more please about the, newish to me, ELT internal battery check capability. What type of output/indication does it provide and how will I recognize its trying to tell me something?
Thank you
Doug in IL
 
The older 121.5 ELT world is where I left off 4 years ago and I don't recall that they could self-check their battery health. Bear with me here a little more please about the, newish to me, ELT internal battery check capability. What type of output/indication does it provide and how will I recognize its trying to tell me something?
Thank you
Doug in IL

Doug - you ask excellent questions. Let's see if we can get them answered...
1) 121.5MHz ELTs typically do not have any self-test indications of low battery (or any other failure mode, for that matter). We typically test them in the most basic manner which I'm sure you remember. Turn the thing on while monitoring 121.5 and listen for the warble. If it works, you're golden. Keep in mind most battery packs for 121.5MHz ELTs are good for only a couple of years.

2) Each 406MHz ELT must provide a self-test function. The owner's/operator's/installation manual will contain a complete section on self-test procedures. In that section of the manual you will also see a description of how the fault codes are displayed and what they mean. Typically a 406MHz ELT will have an LED on its remote control panel which flashes a specific number of flashes to tell you which tests have failed. Also, some ELTs use their audible buzzer to similarly announce self-test failures.

As an example of the above, a "pass" indication on a Kannad 406AF ELT is a single long flash of the remote control panel LED concurrent with a single buzz on the buzzer. A self-test failure could be anything from one to seven short flashes/buzzes. I won't commit to memory what the flash count means specifically - all I know is that if I get something other than one long flash/buzz the unit needs attention.

With this in mind, and if you know the make/model of ELT in your aircraft, you can find the appropriate manuals on the ELT manufacturer's website. Happy reading! :D
 
Thank you and Scott for the education. I was at home 30 miles from expiration date on the battery and figured one of the dates on the packaging it came in was same as battery sticker. As it turns out they are all different: package expiration date: 3/31/24, expiration date on ELT battery label is Apr 2024 and this is the date I'll put in the logbook. The older 121.5 ELT world is where I left off 4 years ago and I don't recall that they could self-check their battery health. Bear with me here a little more please about the, newish to me, ELT internal battery check capability. What type of output/indication does it provide and how will I recognize its trying to tell me something?
Thank you
Doug in IL

Doug - you ask excellent questions. Let's see if we can get them answered...
1) 121.5MHz ELTs typically do not have any self-test indications of low battery (or any other failure mode, for that matter). We typically test them in the most basic manner which I'm sure you remember. Turn the thing on while monitoring 121.5 and listen for the warble. If it works, you're golden. Keep in mind most battery packs for 121.5MHz ELTs are good for only a couple of years.

2) Each 406MHz ELT must provide a self-test function. The owner's/operator's/installation manual will contain a complete section on self-test procedures. In that section of the manual you will also see a description of how the fault codes are displayed and what they mean. Typically a 406MHz ELT will have an LED on its remote control panel which flashes a specific number of flashes to tell you which tests have failed. Also, some ELTs use their audible buzzer to similarly announce self-test failures.

As an example of the above, a "pass" indication on a Kannad 406AF ELT is a single long flash of the remote control panel LED concurrent with a single buzz on the buzzer. A self-test failure could be anything from one to seven short flashes/buzzes. I won't commit to memory what the flash count means specifically - all I know is that if I get something other than one long flash/buzz the unit needs attention.

With this in mind, and if you know the make/model of ELT in your aircraft, you can find the appropriate manuals on the ELT manufacturer's website. Happy reading! :D

Marks answer is exactly what I was going to reply.
Every ELT is different, so the documentation needs to be referenced.

The ELT currently supplied for the RV-12 is the ACK E-04.
You can find the appropriate doc. on their web site HERE
Page 11 covers self test and gives code definitions.
 
Thank you Scott, I have since gone on line and studied the AIRTEX 1000 MM, better understand my own questions and suggestions from the FORCE, all which enabled me to reference and compose a Logbook entry. Thanks again!
 
Last edited:
Just an update. Neither FAA nor EAA answered the question I submitted. You'd think they would answer a simple question. Guess I'll try AOPA next. I understand the logic of hanging the TSO on "approved" but I had hoped to get a definitive ruling from the regulator.
 
Wow.....

....that was exhausting. But lots of information and opinions. So, I'm in the market to replace my Ameriking 451 which is draining my batteries, (remote and main unit) because according to the FAA, Ameriking isn't even allowed to work on units needing repair.....even though they will still invite you to send in your malfunctioning unit.

What units are currently available which use Ultralife D sized batteries which can be accessed should I decide to replace them myself? Another requirement is that the remote fit the panel cutout in which the Ameriking remote was mounted.

Thanks.
 
None of the new 406Mhz ELTs use simple to replace D size batteries because they have more powerful transmitters that require more battery power.

The only option you have is to buy an 121.5 Mhz ACK ELT from from someone wanting to upgrade. The panel mounted control panel is pretty much teh same size as the ameriking.
 
D Size Batteries

My Ameriking 451 (121.5 / 243 / 406) uses Ultralife D sizedbatteries which are 3v as opposed to the common D-cell battery's 1.5v. There are four of them which are "field replaceable".

I'm looking for a new unit which uses the same batteries, whether as a "pack" or inserted individually, which are accessible for field replacement, whether intended to be so or not. I have a strong physical reaction to paying $200 for $50 worth of stuff.
 
How can there be 8 pages of back/forth about ME 406 ELT Battery?

Just buy a new battery when you're supposed to and get on with life.

This is like following the Kardashians...
 
Last edited:
I guess I'll throw in the towel. I got this answer from AOPA:

Thanks for reaching out to us in the Pilot Information Center.

91.207 applies to all aircraft. EXCEPT as mentioned in the paragraph you highlight...(a)(1). It calls out the exemptions in Paragraphs (e) and (f), Experimentals are not listed.

That being said, (e) only refers to Ferry operations. And (f) lists 10 exemptions to the us of an "approved" ELT. TSO'ed or Certified equipment are all that will be acceptable.

Please feel free to reach out to us with any other questions you may have.
Jon Gandy
Aviation Technical Specialist
AOPA Pilot Information Center
 
This morning I submitted the following question by email on the FAA website.

I have an ELSA aircraft. Does the ELT in an experimental aircraft have to be TSO'd? If the unit is TSO'd and requires a new battery can an equivalent commercial grade battery from a source other than the original ELT manufacturer be used and still meet the "operable" requirement of FAR 91.207(a)(1)?

Thank you
Richard Schaller

Let's see what they say.

It's been a couple of years so by now the FAA must have replied, what did they say?

Regarding the $45 a year dilemma, it's really less. A battery costs around $180 BUT you still have to buy those "non approved" replacement batteries plus install them, which cost around $80. So $180 minus $80 then we're talking about $100 divided by 6 years = less than $17 a year.

I love saving money but if it's going to cost me $100 every 6 years to not have the risk of the insurance company not paying me if I bend my plane even if it's not a total loss and even if the accident has nothing to do with the ELT, I'll pay the extra $100. The insurance company will look for any reason not to pay you, count on that and this is how I know :

Back in 1998 I put a Seneca into the ocean, no pilot fault found by NTSB, long story for another time. The insurance claim was denied because when they checked the logbooks my transponder inspection was expired. The transponder had NOTHING to do with the accident and I was flying in airspace that did not need a transponder so it was turned off as per FAA Regulations. They still denied the claim. It took over a year and a lawsuit including letters from the FAA in my favor for the insurance company to pay me. That cost me way more than the $100 I would save using in an ELT battery I make instead of the one sold by the manufacturer.

That's just me though.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top