We have included the answers to the most frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding our Beacon Tester.
NOTE: When you click on a question, the answer appears in a gold box at the bottom.
- Q: How can an ELT tester selling for $725.00 be any good, when the next closest tester costs more than $2,000.00?
- Q: Is a printer interface available for printing out the test results?
- Q: Can the tester test all brands of beacons or just one specific brand of 406 Mhz beacon?
- Q: Are there any planned updates to the hardware or software in the works?
- Q: What Federal regulations apply for using the tester?
- Q: If all COSPAS-SARSAT beacons are required to have a self-test feature, then why should I need a tester to check to see if a beacon is working properly?
- Q: What are the two operating modes of a beacon?
- Q: Where can I get new non rechargable lithum ion Batteries
- Q: I tested several beacons, all the same model from a single manufacturer, and they all test bad, with a red light. I sent them to the manufacturer and they returned them, saying that there is nothing wrong with them. Also, I tested some other beacons from another source, and they test "okay," with a green light. Is there a problem with how I am testing these beacons, or is there something wrong with the tester?
- Q: I recently tested a beacon which failed the test, displaying a red light. I then sent the beacon to another shop, and they tested it and said it was "okay." Is there something wrong with the way I tested the beacon or with the beacon tester?
- Does the Beacon Tester need to be re-calibrated?
- Why am I getting weird test results and the tester is responding, even when the beacon is turned off?
- Using the field strength mode of the tester, while inside an aircraft, we were getting irregular and inconsistant results?
- Do you have a way for me to record my beacon tester's test results, so I can send it to you?
- How come beacons I am testing that do not pass or are not in compliance (fail / defective) using the Creative Electronics Beacon Tester, test O.K. using other testers?
- The tester fails beacons that seem to still be working, as a result should I still allow them to remain in service?
A: We ran into this situation while we were developing the tester. For our initial development, we designed a beacon simulator able to simulate a properly working beacon, as well as beacons with various faults or problems. The simulator worked very well.
Eventually, we decided to purchase a new beacon, fresh-off-the-shelf, to use as a test check, along with a new certified and properly working beacon, as a backup to our testing. We purchased an ACK model E 04 ELT, with a C/S Type # 0212 and serial number 02927, assuming and expecting it to comply with the COSPAS-SARSAT specifications (C/S T.001 issue 3 – revision 9), thereby verifying that the tester would correctly identify a properly working beacon, and thus provide a green light. However, when we tested the ACK beacon, we got a red light and two error messages: one for an unstable transmitter, one for excessive modulation, and one for a garbled message, which was a result of the unstable transmitter.
Initially, we assumed that the beacon was "okay," and the error was with our tester. So, we re-examined our beacon tester to find out what was wrong with it, and after 6-weeks of intensive testing, without finding anything wrong with it, we decided to test the beacon directly using our lab equipment. Much to our surprise, we found, that, in fact, the tester had correctly found and identified both faults with the beacon.
The two faults with the beacon were as follows: 1) The carrier was being amplitude modulated each time it was being phase modulated (There is no provision for amplitude modulation of a carrier in the specifications. As a result, the tester marked the carrier as being unstable, since it did not maintain a constant level); 2) The modulation exceeded 2.2 rad of phase modulation (the specification is 1.1 rad +- .1 rad).
Shortly afterward, I loaned a development tester to a friend, who was going to field test it for me. The first beacon he tested was, you guessed it, a brand new ACK model E-04 ELT beacon. Of course, he got the same result I did, so he sent it back to ACK, and they returned it, claiming that there was nothing wrong with it. So, he sent the beacon to me. When I tested it with the lab equipment, I found the same three failures to comply with the specifications. It appears that there are several design flaws with this beacon, since several more have been tested with the beacon tester, all with the same results. By the way, I own a Cessna 182 and was planning to install this beacon in my aircraft, after I was finished using it for testing. Unfortunately, as a result of these errors, I am not going to install it in my aircraft, or for that matter, in any other aircraft I work on. It may work, but I do not feel comfortable enough that I could rely on it.
A: Likely neither the method you used to test the beacon or the beacon tester itself is "wrong." For example, there are annual inspections, and there are "parker pen" annual inspections. The question, then, is how complete of a test or inspection did they perform, and how much variation did the person doing the inspection or test allow to pass the beacon, as being "okay?"
The Creative Electronics ELT 1091C beacon tester tests the following eight signal characteristics and decodes and displays the message, including the hex code and checks, for any discrepancies or inconsistencies in the message: 1) Frequency, including frequency drift; 2) Modulation, including checking for excessive or insufficient modulation; 3) Carrier amplitude stability, as well as other instabilities, such as spurious emissions; 4) Power output; 5) Antenna radiated signal strength; 6) Data clocking rates; 7) Un-modulated time; 8) Transmit time and recycle times. As a result, in order to get a green passing light, all measurements and tests must be correct. Even a single item out of specification will cause a red light, and then display the reason for the failure. The tester is impartial and does not care who manufactured is, or who or how the beacon has been tested previously. Only if the beacon is within the COSPAS-SARSAT specifications (document C/S t.001 issue 4- revision 2), will the test light turn green (passing). Otherwise, the light will be red.
So, it is our assumption that individuals passing beacons, that have failed on our tester, have not provided a complete test of the beacon, or they have disregarded some of the results. Some of the issues with beacons that have been passed by others included: excessive frequency drift, excessive modulation, insufficient modulation, carrier instability (including amplitude modulation, while being phase modulated), incorrect recycling times, and/or incorrect start-up times. This list includes beacons, which were sent back to their manufactures, and returned as "okay," as well as others that have been tested using other unknown methods, and have been passed as being "okay," even though they were not in compliance with the COSPAS-SARSAT specifications. We do not manufacture, or for that matter sell beacons, so we have no "ax to grind" with any beacon manufacturer. Our goal was to simply develop, what we believe to be, an excellent beacon tester at an affordable price. We are not interested in passing beacons that do not comply to the specifications, and may or may not work properly when called upon to do so. In other words, we sleep well at night knowing, that any beacon which passes our tester's tests, has operated as it was supposed to do at that time.
One of things we have found with our tester, is that even beacons that have come fresh from a manufacturer, which we assume and expect to be in compliance with the COSPAS SARSAT specification, failed. Furthermore, every one of that same failed model tested, displayed the same error messages, which suggests a design deficiency. Some of our customers have been kind enough to send, both the beacons in question, as well as their tester, so we can perform tests. So far, each tester passed our lab equipment tests, and we were able to determine that their beacon tester correctly identified all of the discrepancies.