FAR 91.205 says in part:
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.
(b) Each emergency locator transmitter required by paragraph (a) of this section must be attached to the airplane in such a manner that the probability of damage to the transmitter in the event of crash impact is minimized. Fixed and deployable automatic type transmitters must be attached to the airplane as far aft as practicable.
(d) Each emergency locator transmitter required by paragraph (a) of this section must be inspected within 12 calendar months after the last inspection for—

(1) Proper installation;

(2) Battery corrosion;

(3) Operation of the controls and crash sensor; and

(4) The presence of a sufficient signal radiated from its antenna.

So I agree that another inspection in not necesary, but I also think that based on this FAR the mechanics of the airplane and the ELT installer need to be investigated for possibly not doing their job correctly.

Benefits to whom? Depends on who you are. For the lower-end GA pilot (nuisances though we may be), I’m just not convinced that ADS-B proposes all the value it’s touted to.

Depending on where you happen to crash, with ADS-B, you might have a good track log leading to the accident site, or you might not, depending on what equipment could receive your broadcast at the time of impact. In the flatlands, it would probably work well. In terrain, it’s all a function of where the broadcast could have been seen. In that light, I really can’t see it being all that much different than a SPOT or Spidertracks, and they cost a whole lot less than ADS-B-out.

(All are light-years ahead of a fixed ELT, despite the proposed double-super-redundant inspections. No argument from me there!)

I would buy your argument that there are other benefits to ADS-B if there had been consensus on standards for IN as well as OUT. That didn’t happen, and the even the standards for OUT are doubled, depending on what altitudes you need to fly. In the end, government mostly benefits from it at our direct expense. We pilots, not so much. Lower MEAs perhaps for folks who need that often, but beyond that, I just don’t see it.

What can we do to encourage pilots and aviation entrepreneurs to rise to this challenge?