What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Ameriking ELT batteries

ChiefPilot

ChiefPilot

Well Known Member
So the time has come to replace the batteries in my AK-451 ELT. Looking at the "official" batteries, I see they are A) $144 and B) lithium D-cells. I can get lithium D-cells for far less, so is there any reason to go with the $144 version?

ETA: It looks like the same part # is available cheaper buy buying them individually online.
 
Last edited:
SEARCH is your friend... :)

This question has been asked and answered several times in the past.

Short answer is BUY THE OEM PART.

Longer answer is that ONLY the OEM part is approved for use in the ELT. Anything else invalidates the TSO. Invalidate the TSO and you effectively (and legally) don't have an ELT installed.

It's really a pretty simple answer, but, sadly, an expensive one...
 
Updating my own thread since I didn't find this particular information anywhere in the search results...

The AK-451 contains three Ultralife HiRate U10013 cells and one U10014 cell. Both are 3V Lithium Manganese batteries in a D-sized package with a 10 year life. The difference is that the U10014 includes a pressure/temperature/current (PTC) switch that opens if excessive current conditions exist. Think of it like a self-resetting circuit breaker.

Why only one such battery instead of all four? The four cells are connected in series, which means that only one needs to detect and open to shutdown a high current event.

At this time, the batteries can be sourced from Mouser - $20 per U10013 and $29 for the U10014. Whether or not this alternative to the OEM pack violates a TSO is left as an exercise for the reader...
 
Canadian_JOY said:
SEARCH is your friend... :)

This question has been asked and answered several times in the past.

Short answer is BUY THE OEM PART.

Longer answer is that ONLY the OEM part is approved for use in the ELT. Anything else invalidates the TSO. Invalidate the TSO and you effectively (and legally) don't have an ELT installed.

It's really a pretty simple answer, but, sadly, an expensive one...
Click to expand...

But, at least in the USA, Experimental Amateur Built airplanes are not required to have TSO'd equipment. Just throwing gasoline on a fire. :D
 
Last edited:
GalinHdz said:
But, at least in the USA, Experimental Amateur Built airplanes are not required to have TSO'd equipment. Just throwing gasoline on a fire. :D
Click to expand...

91.207 says otherwise. All US-registered civil aircraft are required to carry an ELT (unless single-seat) that meets the TSO.

I'm going to assume that you already knew that, and you're sitting back in your lawn chair sipping a proper stirred beverage and watching the fire build... :D
 
airguy said:
91.207 says otherwise. All US-registered civil aircraft are required to carry an ELT (unless single-seat) that meets the TSO.

I'm going to assume that you already knew that, and you're sitting back in your lawn chair sipping a proper stirred beverage and watching the fire build... :D
Click to expand...

91.207 states in paragraph (a):

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, no person may operate a U.S.-registered civil airplane unless--

(1) There is attached to the airplane an approved automatic type emergency locator transmitter that is in operable condition for the following operations, except that after June 21, 1995, an emergency locator transmitter that meets the requirements of TSO-C91 may not be used for new installations:
(i) Those operations governed by the supplemental air carrier and commercial operator rules of parts 121 and 125;
(ii) Charter flights governed by the domestic and flag air carrier rules of part 121 of this chapter; and
(iii) Operations governed by part 135 of this chapter; or

(2) For operations other than those specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, there must be attached to the airplane an approved personal type or an approved automatic type emergency locator transmitter that is in operable condition, except that after June 21, 1995, an emergency locator transmitter that meets the requirements of TSO-C91 may not be used for new installations.

Again, no mention or requiring a TSO'd piece of equipment just that after June 21,1995 TSO-C91 equipment can't be used for a new installation. So we go back to TSO'd equipment not being required for EAB. Or am I reading this wrong?

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...0ca5c0070bd29144862569cf005f1030!OpenDocument

Dw1Sxlx.gif
 
Last edited:
Hmmm - you may have something there - though we still have to carry an "approved" ELT, so that raises the question of whether or not any "approved" ELT's are available that are non-TSO.

And the separate question of, having installed a TSO'd "approved" ELT, if the battery is replaced by non-OEM and thereby violating the TSO, is it still approved?
 
Last edited:
airguy said:
Hmmm - you may have something there - though we still have to carry an "approved" ELT, so that raises the question of whether or not any "approved" ELT's are available that are non-TSO.
Click to expand...

Meeting the TSO requirements is the approval!

The June 21, 1995 statement means that for new installations, ELT's that meet the new TSO must be used. That is when ELT's with the remote panel were introduced. It was an attempt to reduce the # of false activations.
 
Last edited:
airguy said:
Hmmm - you may have something there - though we still have to carry an "approved" ELT, so that raises the question of whether or not any "approved" ELT's are available that are non-TSO.
Click to expand...

Now if you have a certificated aircraft the manufacturer probably specified, in the certificate or applicable STC, which ELT must be used and they probably specified TSO'd units. So with certificated aircraft, you are stuck with AmeriKing supplied batteries to comply with the TSO. However, there is no TSO requirement for experimental aircraft.

Dw1Sxlx.gif
 
There's "meeting" the TSO and there's "being TSOd".

Just as with non-certified EFISs for portions of the ADS-B out system, which *meet* the TSO without going through all the FAA paperwork to get a TSO certification...
 
GalinHdz said:
Now if you have a certificated aircraft the manufacturer probably specified, in the certificate or applicable STC, which ELT must be used and they probably specified TSO'd units. So with certificated aircraft, you are stuck with AmeriKing supplied batteries to comply with the TSO. However, there is no TSO requirement for experimental aircraft.

Dw1Sxlx.gif
Click to expand...

Except for the ELT, because of the FAR you already quoted.
 
So we're stuck buying the approved TSO'd ELT for the initial installation, but there is no requirement to maintain the TSO status?

I would think violating the TSO would remove the device from the "approved" category which we are required to conform to. If the TSO must be met to gain "approval" then it would no longer be an approved device, and would break 91.207.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
airguy said:
So we're stuck buying the approved TSO'd ELT for the initial installation, but there is no requirement to maintain the TSO status?

I would think violating the TSO would remove the device from the "approved" category which we are required to conform to. If the TSO must be met to gain "approval" then it would no longer be an approved device, and would break 91.207.
Click to expand...

Unless you can build an ELT and have the documentation to prove it meets the TSO requirements, you have to buy a TSO'd device.

Dw1Sxlx.gif
 
GalinHdz said:
91.207 states in paragraph (a):

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, no person may operate a U.S.-registered civil airplane unless--

(1) There is attached to the airplane an approved automatic type emergency locator transmitter that is in operable condition for the following operations, except that after June 21, 1995, an emergency locator transmitter that meets the requirements of TSO-C91 may not be used for new installations:
(i) Those operations governed by the supplemental air carrier and commercial operator rules of parts 121 and 125;
(ii) Charter flights governed by the domestic and flag air carrier rules of part 121 of this chapter; and
(iii) Operations governed by part 135 of this chapter; or

(2) For operations other than those specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, there must be attached to the airplane an approved personal type or an approved automatic type emergency locator transmitter that is in operable condition, except that after June 21, 1995, an emergency locator transmitter that meets the requirements of TSO-C91 may not be used for new installations.

Again, no mention or requiring a TSO'd piece of equipment just that after June 21,1995 TSO-C91 equipment can't be used for a new installation. So we go back to TSO'd equipment not being required for EAB. Or am I reading this wrong?

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...0ca5c0070bd29144862569cf005f1030!OpenDocument

Dw1Sxlx.gif
Click to expand...

GalinHdz said:
Where did you find this in the FARs?
Click to expand...

You did. See your post above......

In my (edited) previous post I explained what the after June 21 statement was for.....
rvbuilder2002 said:
Meeting the TSO requirements is the approval!

The June 21, 1995 statement means that for new installations, ELT's that meet the new TSO must be used. That is when ELT's with the remote panel were introduced. It was an attempt to reduce the # of false activations.
Click to expand...

It does not mean you don't need to use a TSO'ed ELT... it means you can't use an older one that only meets the listed TSO (they didn't bother to list the new TSO).
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
You did. See your post above......

In my (edited) previous post I explained what the after June 21 statement was for.....


It does not mean you don't need to use a TSO'ed ELT... it means you can't use an older one that only meets the listed TSO (they didn't bother to list the new TSO).
Click to expand...

I still can't find in the FARs where it requires a particular TSO or that approval = TSO. Unlike the requirements for GPS navigation units that the FAR specifically requires a particular TSO'd unit for all aircraft. They do bother to specify a particular TSO if appropriate.

According to the FAA:
"A TSO is a minimum performance standard for specified materials, parts, and appliances used on civil aircraft. When authorized to manufacture a material, part, or appliances to a TSO standard, this is referred to as TSO authorization. Receiving a TSO authorization is both design and production approval.

Receiving a TSO Authorization is not an approval to install and use the article in the aircraft. It means that the article meets the specific TSO and the applicant is authorized to manufacture it."

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/tso/

That you can build an ELT and document it meets the TSO requirements is a separate issue from if you can install and use it in a particular aircraft. Unless specifically stated in the FAR, approval to install and use the equipment in the aircraft falls under the type certificate. Again, like the GPS navigation equipment example, they do bother to specify a particular TSO in the FAR if/when appropriate.

Dw1Sxlx.gif
 
Last edited:
GalinHdz said:
I still can't find in the FARs where it requires a particular TSO or that approval = TSO. Unlike the requirements for GPS navigation units that the FAR specifically requires a particular TSO'd unit for all aircraft. They do bother to specify a particular TSO if appropriate.

According to the FAA:
"A TSO is a minimum performance standard for specified materials, parts, and appliances used on civil aircraft. When authorized to manufacture a material, part, or appliances to a TSO standard, this is referred to as TSO authorization. Receiving a TSO authorization is both design and production approval.

Receiving a TSO Authorization is not an approval to install and use the article in the aircraft. It means that the article meets the specific TSO and the applicant is authorized to manufacture it."

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/tso/

If you can build an ELT and document that it meets the TSO requirements is a separate issue from if you can install and use it in a particular aircraft. Unless specifically stated in the FAR, approval to install and use the equipment in the aircraft falls under the type certificate. Again, like the GPS navigation equipment example, they do bother to specify a particular TSO in the FAR if/when appropriate.

Dw1Sxlx.gif
Click to expand...

Well, if you look look at the definitions section of the FAR's, approved is defined as:

Approved, unless used with reference to another person, means approved by the FAA or any person to whom the FAA has delegated its authority in the matter concerned, or approved under the provisions of a bilateral agreement between the United States and a foreign country or jurisdiction.​

I believe in this case "approved" is the TSO required for part 91 ELT's. Lacking a TSO, it appears that you would need some other specific form of approval from the FAA as defined above.

Skylor
 
The FAA goes on to state:

"Receiving a TSO authorization is approval to manufacture an article that may be installed on an aircraft only after showing that the article meets the specific airworthiness requirements (certification basis) of a particular aircraft model. In other words, receiving a TSO authorization means that an article meets a minimum performance requirement independent of the article's intended installation on an aircraft. A separate FAA approval is required to install the article on an aircraft."

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/tso/tso_auth/

Dw1Sxlx.gif
 
skylor said:
I believe in this case "approved" is the TSO required for part 91 ELT's. Lacking a TSO, it appears that you would need some other specific form of approval from the FAA as defined above.

Skylor
Click to expand...

RV7A Flyer said:
There's "meeting" the TSO and there's "being TSOd".

Just as with non-certified EFISs for portions of the ADS-B out system, which *meet* the TSO without going through all the FAA paperwork to get a TSO certification...
Click to expand...

Since experimental aircraft don't have a type certificate, unless specifically required in the FAR, a TSO does not apply. But you must still meet the performance standard. YMMV

So back to the AmeriKing ELT question; My 2 cents is that an experimental aircraft does not require a TSO'd unit and with equivalent batteries installed the AmeriKing ELT meets the TSO performance standard.

Dw1Sxlx.gif
 
Last edited:
GalinHdz said:
Since experimental aircraft don't have a type certificate, unless specifically required in the FAR, a TSO does not apply. But you must still meet the performance standard.
Click to expand...

I think that's what I just said.

So back to the AmeriKing ELT question; My 2 cents is that my experimental aircraft does not require a TSO'd unit and the ELT meets the TSO performance standards with equivalent batteries installed.
Click to expand...

This is why people hate lawyers...

I say go for it. It's a freaking ELT, antiquated technology, heavy, usually useless, etc. I bought the cheapest one I could find, then put a PLB on my shoulder harness (you know, the new technology that has GPS, talks to satellites, etc.?).

You're going to use the same batteries, so you get the same capability, lifetime, etc. Unless someone is going to be pulling apart your ELT during some sort of inspection, who is to know?
 
Last edited:
RV7A Flyer said:
I think that's what I just said.



This is why people hate lawyers...

I say go for it. It's a freaking ELT, antiquated technology, heavy, usually useless, etc. I bought the cheapest one I could find, then put a PLB on my shoulder harness (you know, the new technology that has GPS, talks to satellites, etc.?).

Same batteries, same capability, etc. Unless someone is going to be pulling apart your ELT during some sort of inspection, who is to know?
Click to expand...

FWIW I agree 1,000%.

Happy New Year to everyone! :cool:
 
RV7A Flyer said:
Unless someone is going to be pulling apart your ELT during some sort of inspection, who is to know?
Click to expand...

You will know. And your conscience will bother you so tremendously that you will not be able to eat, or sleep, or enjoy any good thing in life. You will waste away in a dried-up husk of yourself until finally giving in and reporting your sins to the FAA.

YMMV.

For what it's worth, I agree that it would make a very arguable case in front of the FAA since they did not specify the TSO to be applied in the FAR - but I don't intend to be the guy doing the arguing.
 
GalinHdz said:
Unless specifically stated in the FAR, approval to install and use the equipment in the aircraft falls under the type certificate.
Click to expand...

Correct.
And in this case it does exactly that....

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, no person may operate a U.S.-registered civil airplane unless--
(1) There is attached to the airplane an approved automatic type emergency locator transmitter that is in operable condition for the following operations, except that after June 21, 1995, an emergency locator transmitter that meets the requirements of TSO-C91 may not be used for new installations:

In the U.S. an E-AB aircraft is a U.S.-registered civil airplane, and that airplane is required to comply with FAR 91.

The only way for an ELT to be approved (approved is not the same as meeting the requirements of, as you keep mentioning regarding Avionics and other equipment) , is to test and certify to those tests that it meets the TSO. So any ELT used in a U.S. E-AB aircraft must comply with the TSO (including proper batteries).

You are correct regarding all other equipment installed in the airplane does not have to be TSO'ed... largely in part because no other equipment is required by the FAR's to be installed in the airplane. In this case, the FAR's are specifically stating that you must have it installed.... and it must be an approved unit. The standard for that approval is that it is TSO'd.
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
The standard for that approval is that it is TSO'd.
Click to expand...

Or, for experimental aircraft, meet the TSO performance standard. Nowhere does it state the equipment must be TSO'd.

"Receiving a TSO authorization is approval to manufacture an article that may be installed on an aircraft only after showing that the article meets the specific airworthiness requirements (certification basis) of a particular aircraft model. In other words, receiving a TSO authorization means that an article meets a minimum performance requirement independent of the article's intended installation on an aircraft. A separate FAA approval is required to install the article on an aircraft."

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/tso/tso_auth/

IMHO with equivalent batteries installed the AmeriKing ELT meets the TSO performance standard.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Just to further muddy these turbulent waters...you guys are quoting the wrong part of the regulation. You should be quoting part (a)(2)

(2) For operations other than those specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, there must be attached to the airplane an approved personal type or an approved automatic type emergency locator transmitter that is in operable condition
Click to expand...

Part (1) is for Part 121 and Part 135 operations. Part (2) is for everyone else. Pretty much the same thing, except it allows for an "approved personal type" ELT (whatever that is).
 
RV7A Flyer said:
Just to further muddy these turbulent waters...you guys are quoting the wrong part of the regulation. You should be quoting part (a)(2)



Part (1) is for Part 121 and Part 135 operations. Part (2) is for everyone else. Pretty much the same thing, except it allows for an "approved personal type" ELT (whatever that is).
Click to expand...

Yes I think we both meant (a)(2) not (a)(1). :rolleyes:
 
airguy said:
You will know. And your conscience will bother you so tremendously that you will not be able to eat, or sleep, or enjoy any good thing in life. You will waste away in a dried-up husk of yourself until finally giving in and reporting your sins to the FAA.
Click to expand...

HA! See, when you buy the dirt-cheap model, it specifies Duracell D batteries so you can just go get 'em at your local HD or CVS or wherever!

I sleep well at night knowing my ELT is in full, complete compliance with all the FARs. LOL!
 
RV7A Flyer said:
HA! See, when you buy the dirt-cheap model, it specifies Duracell D batteries so you can just go get 'em at your local HD or CVS or wherever!

I sleep well at night knowing my ELT is in full, complete compliance with all the FARs. LOL!
Click to expand...

These are NOT cheap 1.5v Duracell D cell batteries we are talking about but 3v Lithium D SIZE batteries. VERY different batteries. The cheapest I have found them on line is $20.00 each.

:cool:
 
GalinHdz said:
These are NOT cheap 1.5v Duracell D cell batteries we are talking about but 3v Lithium D SIZE batteries. VERY different batteries. The cheapest I have found them on line is $20.00 each.

:cool:
Click to expand...

I know that. I read the thread. I know you have a different ELT than I do.
 
GalinHdz said:
These are NOT cheap 1.5v Duracell D cell batteries we are talking about but 3v Lithium D SIZE batteries. VERY different batteries. The cheapest I have found them on line is $20.00 each.

:cool:
Click to expand...

You've found the U10013 batteries online for $20. I'd be surprised if you've found the U10014 batteries online for that price but if you have I'd be interested to know where as it'd be good info to have around. Given the nature and energy of the cells, at least one cell with some kind of over-current protection seems prudent - not to mention required by the manufacturer.
 
The answer lies in far 21.305
Sec. 21.305 ? Approval of materials, parts, processes, and appliances.

Whenever a material, part, process, or appliance is required to be approved under this chapter, it may be approved?
(a) Under a Parts Manufacturer Approval issued under ?21.303;

(b) Under a Technical Standard Order issued by the Administrator. Advisory Circular 20?110 contains a list of Technical Standard Orders that may be used to obtain approval. Copies of the Advisory Circular may be obtained from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication Section (M?443.1), Washington, D.C. 20590;

(c) In conjunction with type certification procedures for a product; or

(d) In any other manner approved by the Administrator.

[Amdt. 21?38, 37 FR 10659, May 26, 1972, as amended by Amdt. 21?50, 45 FR 38346, June 9, 1980]

So, since the unit has a tso that is its approval. There is no"meets the requirement" for this. It is required to be approved, which means one of the methods in 21.305 the manufacture had it tso'ed to be approved, if there documentation, which is part of the tso, requires their battery then using any other battery voided the tso thus it is no longer approved.

Bob burns
Rv-4 n82rb
 
ChiefPilot said:
You've found the U10013 batteries online for $20. I'd be surprised if you've found the U10014 batteries online for that price but if you have I'd be interested to know where as it'd be good info to have around. Given the nature and energy of the cells, at least one cell with some kind of over-current protection seems prudent - not to mention required by the manufacturer.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. I must be missing something. Mouser lists them at $28.86 a pop but the manufacturer's web site shows them in stock for under thirteen bucks. I suspect that's probably only if you buy them 25 at a time though.

https://www.ultralifecorporation.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=85&IID=700
 
DaleB said:
Hmmm. I must be missing something. Mouser lists them at $28.86 a pop but the manufacturer's web site shows them in stock for under thirteen bucks. I suspect that's probably only if you buy them 25 at a time though.

https://www.ultralifecorporation.com/ecommerce/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?CID=85&IID=700
Click to expand...


This is great information - thanks! I didn't find it on their website so obviously my web-fu is weak :)

Anyway, with 3 of the U10013 batteries at under $11/each that makes replacement of the AK-451 batteries about $100 cheaper than the AmeriKing-sourced batteries from the typical aviation vendors for the same exact thing. I'll leave it to others to determine if it meets the TSO in their opinion or not ...
 
ChiefPilot said:
This is great information - thanks! I didn't find it on their website so obviously my web-fu is weak :)

Anyway, with 3 of the U10013 batteries at under $11/each that makes replacement of the AK-451 batteries about $100 cheaper than the AmeriKing-sourced batteries from the typical aviation vendors for the same exact thing. I'll leave it to others to determine if it meets the TSO in their opinion or not ...
Click to expand...

Man I wish I had seen this source last year when I replaced my batteries. :(
 
ChiefPilot said:
This is great information - thanks! I didn't find it on their website so obviously my web-fu is weak :)

Anyway, with 3 of the U10013 batteries at under $11/each that makes replacement of the AK-451 batteries about $100 cheaper than the AmeriKing-sourced batteries from the typical aviation vendors for the same exact thing. I'll leave it to others to determine if it meets the TSO in their opinion or not ...
Click to expand...

There's no wiring or soldering or anything like that, right? Just open it up and replace the batteries?

I say "pshaw" on the idea that you *have* to buy the exact same batteries at a ridiculous markup from Ameri-King. Same battery, different supplier...IANAL, but I'd say that meets the TSO for that unit.
 
RV7A Flyer said:
There's no wiring or soldering or anything like that, right? Just open it up and replace the batteries?

I say "pshaw" on the idea that you *have* to buy the exact same batteries at a ridiculous markup from Ameri-King. Same battery, different supplier...IANAL, but I'd say that meets the TSO for that unit.
Click to expand...

Right - open it up, take old the old ones, put in the new ones just like changing the batteries on a flashlight.
 
ChiefPilot said:
Right - open it up, take old the old ones, put in the new ones just like changing the batteries on a flashlight.
Click to expand...

Unless I'm reading the wrong documents, even the manual from Ameri-King says to use the same "type" of battery. And they list the actual battery manufacturer part numbers. And they include the MSDS and other data from the battery manufacturer, as well.

Good to go IMHO.
 
RV7A Flyer said:
Unless I'm reading the wrong documents, even the manual from Ameri-King says to use the same "type" of battery. And they list the actual battery manufacturer part numbers. And they include the MSDS and other data from the battery manufacturer, as well.

Good to go IMHO.
Click to expand...

After you posted this I went back to the Ameriking AK-451( ) manual and re-read it. The manual shows:

"Batteries: 4500010-1, Battery Pack, Lithium, LiMnO2, 90 Hrs lasting, 4D cells."
"BATTERY REQUIREMENTS: Transmitter Main Unit: Battery Pack consists of 4 cells LiMnO2 or LiSO2 "D" Size"

Their compliance statement reads:

"The use of any other battery will void all warranties of the ELT by Ameri-King Corp. The ELT does not meet the requirements of TSO-C126, and TSO-C91 or FAR 91.52 if used with any other type of battery. Using any other battery is not allowed (forbidden)."

It doesn't say you have to use the batteries sold by Ameri-King just that you have to use LiMnO2 or LiSO2 "D" Size batteries. This makes complete sense. If you use any battery other than the LiMnO2 or LiSO2 type battery specified in the manual (PN 4500010-1), the unit will not perform to the TSO requirement and will probably be damaged. Kind of like if you use a 9v battery instead of a 1.5v battery in your flashlight. It will not work correctly and will be damaged. This is probably to help prevent somebody from trying to save money by using 1.5v "D" cell batteries, which actually fit, instead of the much more expensive correct ones. Or am I missing something?

http://www.ameri-king.com/pdf/03c ICA-451 Rev NC-1 Operations and ICA.pdf

:cool:
 
Last edited:
ELT-451 Replacement Battery Cost

The replacement batteries for the Ameriking AK-451 are Ultralife U10013 - 3 ea, and U10014 - 1 ea. A set can be purchased from http://ultralifecorporation.com The total cost including shipping is about $54. They have to be shipped by ground freight which takes about a week to cross the country.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top