Avidyne Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Avidyne General > SkyTrax Series ADS-B Receivers & Transceivers
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - My Ideal ADS-B Solution
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

My Ideal ADS-B Solution

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: My Ideal ADS-B Solution
    Posted: 07 Mar 2018 at 7:52am
My airplane today has an IFD-540 and NavWorx/SkyTrax UAT (mine is a transmitter/receiver but using the IFD as the GPS input) and the airplane still has the original Cessna Mode A/C transponder.

At some future date I imagine I will replace the original transponder with something newer.  Here is my ideal ADS-B solution:

RF Outputs: Mode A & C (1090MHz), UAT (978MHz) I want UAT as my ADS-B Out compliance channel because it allows the use of an anonymous code (meaning I can squawk 1200).  I don't fly internationally and I don't go above FL180.  I don't want a Mode S transponder of any kind and I don't need or want the 1090ES output.

RF Inputs: Mode A & C (1030MHz), 1090ES (1090MHz), UAT (978MHz) In other words, an ATCRBS compliant transponder with a "dual-band" ADS-B In receiver.

Data: I want full interface with the IFD540.  The IFD should be capable of acting as the transponder control panel and the IFD screen should display every available bit of ADS-B In data.

With the exception of the data interface, the proposed Sandia STX360 seems to fit the bill.  But I don't know where they are in the development process and I don't know if they have reached out to Avidyne for a cooperative data interface.

David Bunin
Back to Top
n7ifr View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 Aug 2013
Location: Scottsdale, Az
Status: Offline
Points: 364
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote n7ifr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2018 at 10:39am
David - I share your search.  I would be perfectly happy to have only 978 Out for compliance, and Dual IN integrated with TAS to display both on our 540's.

At this point, I would gladly exchange the AXP340 for a 978 OUT unit...  If the TAS "A" promises ever surface, won't that at least give the 540 a way to display Dual ADSB IN & TAS IN?  

Tom W.
Back to Top
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Mar 2018 at 3:48pm
Honestly, I am not that familiar with the TAS A products.
Back to Top
HenryM View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 13 Oct 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 162
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HenryM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Mar 2018 at 4:39pm
I’m curious why you would want to exchange the AXP340 for a UAT (978MHz) ADS-B Out device? My AXP340 seems to work well.

I would prefer a dual band ADS-B In unit over the SkyTax 100 that I have, but that is independent of the AXP340.
Back to Top
Melohn View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Location: PHNL
Status: Offline
Points: 35
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Melohn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Mar 2018 at 10:08pm
The only reason I can see to want UAT Out over 1090ES Out is for its “anonymous” mode. It seems highly unlikely this will be useful for anyone flying in B, C, or D airspace, where you will still be identifiable via FlightAware ATC recordings.
Back to Top
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Mar 2018 at 11:31am
Originally posted by Melohn Melohn wrote:

The only reason I can see to want UAT Out over 1090ES Out is for its “anonymous” mode. It seems highly unlikely this will be useful for anyone flying in B, C, or D airspace, where you will still be identifiable via FlightAware ATC recordings.


I don't normally receive a discrete squawk code when flying in class D airspace.  I do in class B of course.

I don't encounter class C often enough to recall if they assigned me a code or not.

The other reason for desiring a UAT out device is that they tend to be AT LEAST a thousand dollars cheaper than an equivalent 1090ES product.  I can't explain why, but that is the marketplace.

Back to Top
George P View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2017
Location: Big Horn, WY
Status: Offline
Points: 35
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote George P Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Mar 2018 at 12:48pm
You don't get a squawk code in D airspace because they normally do not see you.  Yhey have no radar.  Class B and C airspace are by definition radar equipped airspace so you will always get a discreet code while in them.
Back to Top
HenryM View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 13 Oct 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 162
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HenryM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Mar 2018 at 6:07pm
I thought with ADS-B, you transmit a unique code for your airplane, along with the squawk code. Even when squawking 1200, they can know who you are.
Back to Top
BobsV35B View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Location: Downers Grove,
Status: Offline
Points: 121
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BobsV35B Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2018 at 10:38am
Hi Henry! Do not cunfuse me with someone who knows what is happning, but I do know that when I am squaking 1200, my track, altitude, and N number show up on Flight Aware!! No secrets any more!!

Old Bob
Old Bob, Ancient Aviator
Back to Top
Melohn View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Location: PHNL
Status: Offline
Points: 35
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Melohn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2018 at 5:03pm
According to AOPA:

FAR 91.227 specifically allows operators with TSO-C154c-compliant 978UAT ADS-B Out equipment to temporarily transmit a self-assigned (randomized) 24-bit address, and no call sign. This option is not available for aircraft with 1090ES ADS-B Out equipment. Beginning January 1, 2020, the UAT anonymous 24-bit address feature may only be used in ADS-B-mandated airspace when the pilot has not filed a flight plan and is not requesting ATC services. The ADS-B call sign—for general aviation pilots, typically the aircraft’s N number—may be omitted only when using the anonymous 24-bit address.

So, you can enable anonymous mode on a UAT, although you don't have to. It isn't clear how often the message is anonymized, and probably varies by manufacturer. 

If you fly into any airspace where the ATC is being recorded, it is pretty easy to identify and track back an aircraft using anonymous mode, regardless of squawk code. I believe this was added due to concerns that airport operators might try to use the ID to charge aircraft for airport related services.

Back to Top
Gring View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: Kingston, NY
Status: Offline
Points: 534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gring Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2018 at 7:42pm
I don't like that all of these Flightaware stations are tracking ADS-B equipped airplanes.  Every little flight is captured and available on Flightaware, and I find that intrusive.  Glad I am still flying some airplanes without any transponder at all.  I have no plans to put one in them either.

Edited by Gring - 19 Mar 2018 at 7:43pm
Back to Top
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Mar 2018 at 9:59am
Originally posted by Melohn Melohn wrote:

According to AOPA:

FAR 91.227 specifically allows operators with TSO-C154c-compliant 978UAT ADS-B Out equipment to temporarily transmit a self-assigned (randomized) 24-bit address, and no call sign.


Correct.  During the design phase of the ADS-B system, AOPA specifically lobbied to protect our personal privacy and ensure that this capability was part of the rule.

Originally posted by Melohn Melohn wrote:

It isn't clear how often the message is anonymized, and probably varies by manufacturer.


For every piece of UAT equipment that I am familiar with, a random number is selected each time the squawk code changes from a discrete value to 1200.  If the squawk is 1200 as start-up, a random number is selected.

The random number does not change during flight unless a discrete code is set in the transponder (i.e. pilot receiving ATC services) in which case it changes to the actual aircraft's 24-bit address, or power is interrupted (UAT picks a new random number upon reapplication of power).

If/when ATC services are terminated and the pilot sets the transponder to 1200, the UAT selects a new random number.
Back to Top
oskrypuch View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Location: CYFD
Status: Offline
Points: 2385
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oskrypuch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Mar 2018 at 12:24pm
Originally posted by DavidBunin DavidBunin wrote:


For every piece of UAT equipment that I am familiar with, a random number is selected ...

I wonder if they designed that, specifically to address the privacy concerns that small aircraft operators have.

* Orest

Back to Top
bobcain View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Location: 7K8
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bobcain Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Mar 2018 at 10:48am
I hadn't come across this thread until now, but I fully agree with David's thoughts.  Anonymous mode is very important to me - and not because I operate illegally.  I am fortunate that most of my flying is outside areas requiring an "out" signal.

My biggest struggle is to understand the difficulty to provide a UAT with dual band receive.  To my knowledge the GDL88 may be the only certified unit with this capability?  I have visions of sitting at some small rural airport outside of ground station coverage, getting ready to depart, and having no idea someone is inbound with Mode S that maybe isn't talking and I won't see them as traffic.  1090 receive is the only remedy.

I recently purchased an Aspen ATX100 but if FreeFlight come along with dual band receive, I'll be first in line.
Back to Top
BobsV35B View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Location: Downers Grove,
Status: Offline
Points: 121
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BobsV35B Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Mar 2018 at 3:15pm
May I Beat on this dead horse just a bit?

Mr. BobCain,

There is no requirement for any transponder if we stay out of class B/C and below ten thousand feet in other than mountainous terrain. Odds are that you will have unseen conflicting traffic any time you are out of FAA Controlled airspace, not just at that little out of the way airport.

About ninety percent of the airspace in the USA allows such flight legally. No transponder of ANY sort required. In fact, NO Radio is reqired!

Happy Skies,

Old Bob
Old Bob, Ancient Aviator
Back to Top
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Sep 2018 at 5:11pm
At Oshkosh this year (with this thread in mind) I stopped by the Sandia booth to see how they were doing on the STX360.  One thing I noticed, that I had not previously, is that their advertising material does not indicate that the unit produces audible traffic alerts.  Last year that would not have held any particular significance to me, but it has increased in importance since Avidyne "upgraded" the alerts out of the IFD software.

To be frank, a unit like the STX360 would still be my front-runner, because the lack of audio traffic  alerts from it would leave me no worse off than I am today* but at the same time it is a shame these things are standardized a little better.

* Actually today I still have the alerts because I have not installed the upgrade that deletes them, but I have to assume that any new ADS-B interface capability would also come with a new mandatory minimum software version.
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2018 at 7:05am
Originally posted by BobsV35B BobsV35B wrote:

May I Beat on this dead horse just a bit?

Mr. BobCain,

There is no requirement for any transponder if we stay out of class B/C and below ten thousand feet in other than mountainous terrain. Odds are that you will have unseen conflicting traffic any time you are out of FAA Controlled airspace, not just at that little out of the way airport.

About ninety percent of the airspace in the USA allows such flight legally. No transponder of ANY sort required. In fact, NO Radio is reqired!

Happy Skies,

Old Bob


That is the most frustrating part of this whole ADSB thing.

Typical government program: An expensive requirement for an incomplete solution to a statistically small problem.

Where you need a traffic avoidance system most - outside radar coverage areas - you cant get it. Where you need it least - inside radar coverage where ATC can already provide traffic separation services - you must have it.

If you were going to "mandate" a solution, should have included ALL aircraft(including gliders, balloons, ultralights, experimental, airships, helicopters, gyrocopters, and aircraft without electrical systems) to be equipped with at least ADSB-out in ALL airspace - even if it meant having to use a rechargeable battery in aircraft without electrical systems - A simple VFR only ADSB-out beacon indicating GPS position and altitude - no transponder squawk code needed if outside A,B,C and below 10k'while operating VFR. Cheap, already available technology, and simple to install.

Time to exercise a little "see and be seen" and stop relying wholly on the fantasy of "see and avoid".







C310C
Back to Top
MysticCobra View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 504
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MysticCobra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2018 at 8:11am
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

That is the most frustrating part of this whole ADSB thing.

Typical government program: An expensive requirement for an incomplete solution to a statistically small problem.
If you're thinking that ADSB was designed primarily to benefit the pilot's in-cockpit resources, then yes, you're right--that seems inefficient and wasteful.  But if that's what you think ADSB is for, then you're misunderstanding the primary goal of ADSB.  

ADSB is primarily for the benefit of ATC and major airlines, with the expectation that more precise knowledge of where aircraft are will enable smaller separation distances between aircraft in protected airspace and more efficient routing, leading to shorter in-air time (and lower fuel burn) for airlines, more takeoffs and landings at busy airports, etc.

The in-cockpit benefits--especially traffic, which requires ADSB-out for the biggest benefit--are partially a carrot to entice pilots to get with the program voluntarily before they get hit with the stick of the 2020 deadline, and to use it outside of required airspace.

When you recognize that the controlled airspaces where those benefits to airlines and ATC are greatest are also where ADSB is mandatory, then this whole concept makes a lot more sense.


Edited by MysticCobra - 08 Sep 2018 at 8:13am
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2018 at 9:20am
Originally posted by MysticCobra MysticCobra wrote:

Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

That is the most frustrating part of this whole ADSB thing.

Typical government program: An expensive requirement for an incomplete solution to a statistically small problem.
If you're thinking that ADSB was designed primarily to benefit the pilot's in-cockpit resources, then yes, you're right--that seems inefficient and wasteful.  But if that's what you think ADSB is for, then you're misunderstanding the primary goal of ADSB.  


I understand "their" goal, of course - but that goal is still not met when they continue to allow aircraft to operate just outside class B/C while below 10k' with no transponder at all.







Edited by Stiletto1 - 08 Sep 2018 at 9:22am
C310C
Back to Top
Catani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2018 at 11:55am
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:


I understand "their" goal, of course - but that goal is still not met when they continue to allow aircraft to operate just outside class B/C while below 10k' with no transponder at all.

It was never the government's "goal" with ADS-B to protect general aviation.  As an industry, we would have gone to the barricades and fought the government tooth and nail if it imposed on us the obligation the government has forced the airline industry to conform to: 100% equipped by 1/1/20.

The government's sole purpose was to move to a cheaper and more efficient way to prevent airliner midairs (radar was a WWII invention - and not nearly as good as the NextGen system).  ADS-B will accomplish that goal to a large extent - although thankfully the government still accepted some risk by not classifying all commercial airports as Class B.  The government's goal was not to accomplish midair elimination for general aviation at all.  The sole reason was to reduce the midair threat to commercial airliners.  That's all it ever was.

Personally, I would have been among those GA pilots who would have praised the government had it required all GA to equip with ADS-B Out in order to reduce midairs among GA aircraft.  But that was NOT the government's goal, and never will be. Like riding motorcycles risking collision with cars and trucks, flying GA airplanes risks collision with other GA airplanes (not airliners - the government reflecting the will of the people would not tolerate that). The government is not going to deny us the right to do so.  And the government is not going to force us to acquire ADS-B if we don't want to, unless we want to use the same airspace where airliners are.

It's not all about us.  Never was.  We could make it so by voluntarily equipping 100%, or asking AOPA to fight for a statutory blanket ADS-B equipment requirement like Congress did with ELTs decades ago.  I don't see that ever happening.  But that's OUR choice, not the government's.


Edited by Catani - 08 Sep 2018 at 11:57am
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2018 at 12:19pm
Originally posted by Catani Catani wrote:

Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:


I understand "their" goal, of course - but that goal is still not met when they continue to allow aircraft to operate just outside class B/C while below 10k' with no transponder at all.

It was never the government's "goal" with ADS-B to protect general aviation. 

The government's sole purpose was to move to a cheaper and more efficient way to prevent airliner midairs


Understood. My point is that if the goal was to protect only airliners, they missed that goal by a long shot!

Airliners come across my class G airstrip below 10k' on approach to a Class C airport all the time - and there are 9 other private strips within a 10 mile circle around me with everything from ultralights and sailplanes to light twins and warbirds operating from people's own backyards - none of which need be even mode A equipped!










C310C
Back to Top
MysticCobra View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 504
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MysticCobra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2018 at 10:25pm
If at the end of the day busy airports are able to cram in more takeoffs and landings, and airlines see lower fuel use, then ADSB will have met its goals.
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2018 at 10:33pm
Originally posted by MysticCobra MysticCobra wrote:

If at the end of the day busy airports are able to cram in more takeoffs and landings, and airlines see lower fuel use, then ADSB will have met its goals.



Yes - so it has nothing to do with collision avoidance
C310C
Back to Top
Catani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2018 at 2:31am
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:



Understood. My point is that if the goal was to protect only airliners, they missed that goal by a long shot! 

Perhaps you are too young to recall the days when airliner midairs with GA were common and becoming more so, or are old enough but have forgotten - it's been a very long time.  Had the FAA not come up with something to eliminate them, there would be no GA today.  The public would have demanded the grounding of anything that flew, except airliners.

What the FAA came up with was a combination of airspace grabs (TCAs and the like) and transponders with Mode C in airspace where airliners were often found. GA fought it, but fortunately lost.  It was not a total airspace grab, and the transponder requirement was quite limited.  But to our great fortune, it worked!!  There has been no GA/airliner midair since those solutions were invoked several decades ago.  An astounding statistic, given the bloody history before.

Since the transponder-required airspace was sufficient to avoid all GA/airliner midairs, the government decided to limit ADS-B airspace to the same extent as transponders.  The government could have easily justified making ADS-B a blanket requirement everywhere, but it did not.  If they had, GA would have opposed it, citing the success of the transponder airspace - and an excellent argument it would be as well!

It sounds like you feel the government should have gone further and required ADS-B everywhere, despite the fact that transponder airspace has proven to be enough to make airliners safe.  Like I said, I agree with you - GA needs it everywhere.  But the GA industry would have fought it, and won.  The government knew that, and did not try.

If God forbid there is a midair between a GA aircraft and an airliner going essentially unprotected into a Class C or D airport (as you have witnessed and complain about), you can bet the ADS-B required airspace will balloon to everywhere above 1000 AGL.  Assuming the government is able to convince the public to back off demands to ground us completely.  Just another reason why I think ADS-B should already be mandatory everywhere.  It just might save our neck and the GA industry from Armaggedon.
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2018 at 5:43am
Yes, I'm plenty old enough to have heard all the paranoid 'big brother is watching you' arguments against mode C, S, and now ADSB.

I appreciate your arguments and perceived reasoning, but the FAA is in fact marketing ADSB as a traffic awareness/collision avoidance system to GA.

I'm simply pointing out that ADSB is an incomplete system under the current implementation and regulatory requirements, could have and probably should have gone all the way, and does not protect airliners from colliding with GA any better than the current transponder requirements.

It probably does allow ATC to space airliners closer together - that may be the only goal it will accomplish. Of course, the carrot will entice some of GA to equip as well - so there will be some overall improvement to traffic awareness as well.


I wonder who wins the courtroom argument when one must defend their decision not to equip with ADSB-out? What would one say against the plaintiff's argument that you could have prevented disaster for little money - that it was not required to operate within certain airspace and therefore you were within your rights to fly there without it?





Edited by Stiletto1 - 09 Sep 2018 at 7:21am
C310C
Back to Top
Catani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2018 at 10:36am
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

... the FAA is in fact marketing ADSB as a traffic awareness/collision avoidance system to GA.

I'm simply pointing out that ADSB is an incomplete system under the current implementation and regulatory requirements, could have and probably should have gone all the way, and does not protect airliners from colliding with GA any better than the current transponder requirements.

It probably does allow ATC to space airliners closer together - that may be the only goal it will accomplish. Of course, the carrot will entice some of GA to equip as well - so there will be some overall improvement to traffic awareness as well.

I wonder who wins the courtroom argument when one must defend their decision not to equip with ADSB-out? What would one say against the plaintiff's argument that you could have prevented disaster for little money - that it was not required to operate within certain airspace and therefore you were within your rights to fly there without it?


I don't know about FAA marketing, but I do read aviation publications and sales brochures.  I was sold on ADS-B not by the FAA, but by L3's excellent marketing campaign for their NGT9000+, and bought one of the first sold.  It is everything they promised and so much more (and wow, do I wish Avidyne and L3 had their joint marketing campaign back when I was equipping with my Lynx and IFD!).  But if the FAA can be said to be "marketing" to GA, I say why not?  ADS-B provides free weather (a huge upgrade over talking to Flight Watch) and if you get ADS-B Out, TRAFFIC!!  The more GA equips, the safer airliners are - the FAA's chief concern (and rightfully so).  In my opinion, my NGT9000+'s full and complete implementation of the technology is right up there with the iPad, GPS navigators and XM weather as the most amazing devices I could have never imagined for the first few decades of my flying career.  I would not want to fly cross-country in a GA airplane now that was missing any of them.

I agree completely, ADS-B Traffic is incomplete, because it does not ground anything flying that does not have an ADS-B Out transponder.  I would include drones as well.  I see no excuse for leaving that loophole open given the missed opportunity to save lives, but I've already said why it's there: decades of no GA/airliner midairs proves the limited implementation actually works somehow, and the GA industry itself is against expanding the mandate any further to protect GA as well as airliners.  In fact, there's a lot of hostility to the limited mandate as it exists now.  The government, whose goal is to prevent airliner midairs, accepts that.  GA is its own worst enemy.

Closer spacing of airliners of course is one ADS-B goal, but it's much more than that.  It would not get off the ground if it were not at least as good as (and in fact it is much better than) Mode C transponders to avoid GA/airliner midairs.  A Google search will turn up a lot of worthwhile reading if you have the time.  

I think the courtroom is going to be where GA folks without ADS-B In and Out, especially flight schools, are going to get cleaned out.  The jury is not obligated to accept the FAA's limited mandate - for them it's a question of negligence and the duty to take reasonable care not to kill other people.  The technology is amazing, it works, and refusing to do it in my opinion is like refusing to replace brake lights and headlights after all the bulbs are burned out.  What surprises me is how plaintiffs have not already taken advantage of the argument with the midairs we've had already.  They will figure it out soon enough, especially after 1/1/2000 when ADS-B is no longer optional and all airliners are equipped. When a few examples are made of GA defendants losing everything, the rest of GA will get the picture, and there will be a second run on avionics shops.  Might as well equip now.
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2018 at 11:46am
Originally posted by Catani Catani wrote:


I think the courtroom is going to be where GA folks without ADS-B In and Out, especially flight schools, are going to get cleaned out.  The jury is not obligated to accept the FAA's limited mandate - for them it's a question of negligence and the duty to take reasonable care not to kill other people.  The technology is amazing, it works, and refusing to do it in my opinion is like refusing to replace brake lights and headlights after all the bulbs are burned out.  What surprises me is how plaintiffs have not already taken advantage of the argument with the midairs we've had already.  They will figure it out soon enough, especially after 1/1/2000 when ADS-B is no longer optional and all airliners are equipped. When a few examples are made of GA defendants losing everything, the rest of GA will get the picture, and there will be a second run on avionics shops.  Might as well equip now.


Agreed.

Technology will soon provide no excuse for remaining invisible to other aircraft. Check out the uAvionix Skybeacon - a less than 600usd ADSB transceiver about the size of a pack of cigarettes with an internal 12 hour battery that transmits GPS position and altitude without a transponder for conspicuity to other ADSB-in equipped aircraft, and receives ADSB-in for display of traffic and weather via wireless connection to a flight app on a portable device. Just the thing for VFR only aircraft without electrical systems. Unfortunately, only certified in the UK thus far.

Just to be clear about my position on the subject, my plane has been in the avionics shop for a week so far getting a complete panel makeover - to include a dual band ADSB-in remote transponder.




Edited by Stiletto1 - 09 Sep 2018 at 11:47am
C310C
Back to Top
Gring View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: Kingston, NY
Status: Offline
Points: 534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gring Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2018 at 5:46pm
I'll tell you that I'm not spending $600 in the floatplane. I won't equip that plane.
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2018 at 6:12pm
Originally posted by Gring Gring wrote:

I'll tell you that I'm not spending $600 in the floatplane. I won't equip that plane.



Afraid someone is going to track you to your favorite fishing spot?
C310C
Back to Top
Gring View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: Kingston, NY
Status: Offline
Points: 534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gring Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2018 at 9:35pm
Not at all.  I just don’t see it as necessary. We don’t even run a transponder in the airplane.  
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Sep 2018 at 4:31am
Originally posted by Gring Gring wrote:

Not at all.  I just don’t see it as necessary. We don’t even run a transponder in the airplane.  


You don't see the benefit of making yourself more conspicuous to other aircraft?


The Skybeacon I mentioned above does not require a transponder, or any wiring - it simply Velcro's to the glare shield - No squawk code - broadcasts position and altitude so that you may be seen by others - and has ADSB-in as well if you care to use it.


To bring this conversation back on topic, the ideal ADSB solution is one where everyone participates in traffic awareness.


'Fate Is The Hunter'
C310C
Back to Top
oskrypuch View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Location: CYFD
Status: Offline
Points: 2385
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oskrypuch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Sep 2018 at 1:21pm
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

...
To bring this conversation back on topic, the ideal ADSB solution is one where everyone participates in traffic awareness.

+1, including those pesky gliders that sometimes even end up inside clouds.

* Orest


Edited by oskrypuch - 10 Sep 2018 at 1:21pm
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Sep 2018 at 5:55am
Originally posted by oskrypuch oskrypuch wrote:

Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

...
To bring this conversation back on topic, the ideal ADSB solution is one where everyone participates in traffic awareness.



+1, including those pesky gliders that sometimes even end up inside clouds.

* Orest




Exactly. I don't understand why some are so against making themselves more conspicuous to others in order to avoid a collision - and what pilot wouldn't want to know of others in the airspace around them?


And all this anonymous mode nonsense - with so little airspace not covered by radar, you are not hiding from anybody now. My plane, with only mode C up to now (if so equipped, transponder must be on by current regs), has many, but not all tracks on Flight aware. What am I missing about this that I should be worried about?


Also, I get assigned a squawk code all the time when going into Class D airports, including KGTU and KGJT. Have also flown in to Class D without a transponder, get questioned about their not receiving mode C, and continue on in of course.


C310C
Back to Top
MysticCobra View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 504
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MysticCobra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Sep 2018 at 6:58am
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

I don't understand why some are so against making themselves more conspicuous to others in order to avoid a collision - and what pilot wouldn't want to know of others in the airspace around them? 
<snip>
What am I missing about this that I should be worried about?

Personally, I agree with you.  I want to light up like a neon sign in the sky, to other pilots, to ATC, to anyone who cares to look.

You're not necessarily missing anything to be worried about, but what you are missing is that not everyone is like you and me.  

America is supposed to be a land of freedoms, and that includes the freedom to remain anonymous and the freedom to fly a ragwing with no electrical system and no electronics on board...or even a seaplane with no ADSB.  (I recognize that not everyone in this conversation is American.  :-) )

Of course, we are not utterly free; that way lies anarchy.  But there is always a legitimate conversation to be had about where appropriate boundaries on our freedoms lie.

The other factor is cost.  A Stratux and a cheap Android tablet and a free EFB is not so expensive, and gives a lot of bang for the buck.  But to fully equip for the 2020 mandate is not a trivial expense, and there are plenty of folks out there who don't want to spend that money.


Edited by MysticCobra - 12 Sep 2018 at 7:05am
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Sep 2018 at 7:52am
Originally posted by MysticCobra MysticCobra wrote:

The other factor is cost.  A Stratux and a cheap Android tablet and a free EFB is not so expensive, and gives a lot of bang for the buck.  But to fully equip for the 2020 mandate is not a trivial expense, and there are plenty of folks out there who don't want to spend that money.


I guess the cost is relative.

I'm currently having a GTX345R dual band ADSB-in transponder installed as part of my upgrade - about $6k for that part of it.

The portable product I mentioned above is relatively cheap at less than $600usd and does not require a transponder or electrical system - just a simple self contained beacon for VFR only aircraft that don't operate above 10k'or in class B/C airspace that says, 'Here I am, don't hit me'! Seems like a bargain to me, especially when you can use it as a GPS source for an iPad NAV app and display ADSB-in weather and traffic as well - I hope they get one certified for use in the U.S.


Speaking of conspicuity, I'm also having Whelen LED tip and tail strobes installed.


See and be seen!



Edited by Stiletto1 - 12 Sep 2018 at 7:57am
C310C
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Sep 2018 at 6:00am
Correction:

The self contained battery powered uAvionix product I mentioned above is called the 'SkyEcho'.


They do also have a product called the SkyBeacon
C310C
Back to Top
Gring View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: Kingston, NY
Status: Offline
Points: 534
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gring Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Sep 2018 at 8:12am
Originally posted by MysticCobra MysticCobra wrote:

Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

I don't understand why some are so against making themselves more conspicuous to others in order to avoid a collision - and what pilot wouldn't want to know of others in the airspace around them? 
<snip>
What am I missing about this that I should be worried about?


Personally, I agree with you.  I want to light up like a neon sign in the sky, to other pilots, to ATC, to anyone who cares to look.

You're not necessarily missing anything to be worried about, but what you are missing is that not everyone is like you and me.  

America is supposed to be a land of freedoms, and that includes the freedom to remain anonymous and the freedom to fly a ragwing with no electrical system and no electronics on board...or even a seaplane with no ADSB.  (I recognize that not everyone in this conversation is American.  :-) )

Of course, we are not utterly free; that way lies anarchy.  But there is always a legitimate conversation to be had about where appropriate boundaries on our freedoms lie.

The other factor is cost.  A Stratux and a cheap Android tablet and a free EFB is not so expensive, and gives a lot of bang for the buck.  But to fully equip for the 2020 mandate is not a trivial expense, and there are plenty of folks out there who don't want to spend that money.


Please remember that not all flight operations are the same, and I don't think it is right to put them all in the same box. Take the seaplane for instance, it has a transponder, but hasn’t been checked in 10+ years, so it doesn’t have the required 24mth check and therefore isn’t operable . Before you throw stones, have you ever stopped to think about the logistics of owning a floatplane with no wheels? Can’t get it to an avionics shop for a check very easily, and onsite check where I live is simply cost prohibitive if you can find someone who will drop what they are doing, drive to east BF, and do your $300 transponder check. It doesn’t make sense to go through all that headache when it isn’t required. And when I do fly through Class B or C I’m talking to ATC. Outside of that, the radio is off too - oh the horror!!!

There are many different aspects of aviation, and just because one of them doesn’t fit into your vision or understanding does not make it wrong and socially irresponsible as you have suggested. My flight environment is vastly different from yours with different hazards, and procedures. Do not lump it all into one bucket. It's more likely that I'll run into wildlife or structures like bridges, wind turbines, and antennas than other airplanes.

I think your thought process needs to be expanded a bit as it shows your ignorance about the environment you operate in. What do you think about glider pilots? It’s highly more likely that you’ll encounter one of them at 3-8000ft without either a radio or transponder than you will me at <1000ft while flying your Bonanza. My point is that there are lots of planes out there that won’t show up on your fancy electronics which is why the primary collision avoidance according to the FARs is still “see and avoid”. You have to decide whether you are an aviator or a button pusher. Looking at other threads about what people are doing in cruise - reading books, watching movies and waiting for your ADSB In to go “traffic, traffic” just shows the sad state of pilots these days.

This airplane will never get ADSB out because it won’t get a WAAS GPS and a new transponder. It simply isn’t needed nor required. I don’t like ADSB “among other things” because people like you wrongly assume after 2020 that you’ll see all aircraft in the sky, and those like me that choose not to participate in the system are selfish, irresponsible, hazardous, and generally bad for aviation.




Edited by Gring - 13 Sep 2018 at 8:14am
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Sep 2018 at 9:41am
Originally posted by Gring Gring wrote:


Please remember that not all flight operations are the same, and I don't think it is right to put them all in the same box. Take the seaplane for instance, it has a transponder, but hasn’t been checked in 10+ years, so it doesn’t have the required 24mth check and therefore isn’t operable . Before you throw stones, have you ever stopped to think about the logistics of owning a floatplane with no wheels? Can’t get it to an avionics shop for a check very easily, and onsite check where I live is simply cost prohibitive if you can find someone who will drop what they are doing, drive to east BF, and do your $300 transponder check. It doesn’t make sense to go through all that headache when it isn’t required. And when I do fly through Class B or C I’m talking to ATC. Outside of that, the radio is off too - oh the horror!!!

There are many different aspects of aviation, and just because one of them doesn’t fit into your vision or understanding does not make it wrong and socially irresponsible as you have suggested. My flight environment is vastly different from yours with different hazards, and procedures. Do not lump it all into one bucket. It's more likely that I'll run into wildlife or structures like bridges, wind turbines, and antennas than other airplanes.

I think your thought process needs to be expanded a bit as it shows your ignorance about the environment you operate in. What do you think about glider pilots? It’s highly more likely that you’ll encounter one of them at 3-8000ft without either a radio or transponder than you will me at <1000ft while flying your Bonanza. My point is that there are lots of planes out there that won’t show up on your fancy electronics which is why the primary collision avoidance according to the FARs is still “see and avoid”. You have to decide whether you are an aviator or a button pusher. Looking at other threads about what people are doing in cruise - reading books, watching movies and waiting for your ADSB In to go “traffic, traffic” just shows the sad state of pilots these days.

This airplane will never get ADSB out because it won’t get a WAAS GPS and a new transponder. It simply isn’t needed nor required. I don’t like ADSB “among other things” because people like you wrongly assume after 2020 that you’ll see all aircraft in the sky, and those like me that choose not to participate in the system are selfish, irresponsible, hazardous, and generally bad for aviation.



I think your attempt to justify your contrary position on the matter is quite contrived. For the purpose of this discussion, all flight operations are the same when they involve sharing the airspace with others.

You talk about traversing class B/C airspace with your floatplane, so you do not only operate where I and others do not - and I too spend considerable time at less than 1000' AGL in some aircraft.

The technology I mentioned above does not require a transponder at all - has an internal WAAS GPS - so your protesting about the inconvenience, TO YOU, of performing the required transponder checks is not applicable and therefore irrelevant - and so sorry, but if you cannot afford to maintain your equipment, then...

Having an internal 12 hour battery means it can be used in aircraft without electrical systems, including gliders and your floatplane, with no installation cost involved - it is portable and self contained - and yes, I do promote the idea that ALL aircraft be so equipped, including yours.

This subject has nothing to do with 'button pushing' pilots - 'See and Avoid' in many cases is pure fantasy - anything that can help avoid a collision, including an extra set of electronic "eyes" in the cockpit, is of benefit to all - and at less than $600 at current pricing (likely to continue getting less expensive), IMO it would be selfish not to participate in improvements to collision avoidance.

In short, I am not swayed by your reasons for remaining invisible when the cost/benefit of being more conspicuous is much in your favor, and to other pilots that wish not to collide with you.


PS: I own several aircraft from low and slow to cross country cruiser - a Bonanza is not one of them.


Edited by Stiletto1 - 13 Sep 2018 at 9:44am
C310C
Back to Top
HenryM View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 13 Oct 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 162
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HenryM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Sep 2018 at 8:09pm
I think see-and-avoid is a myth. After having used ADS-B for a while I’ve come to realize just how difficult it is to really see a plane even when you know exactly in which direction to look. If the plane is coming head on, it will be almost upon you when you finally see the tiny dot suddenly enlarge. If it is coming from the side, you will likely not be looking in the correct direction. The reason planes don’t come together more often is that the probability of two being in the same 3D position at the same time is still small. It is not the superhuman visual scan abilities of pilots. 

Now there may well be regions that have so few planes that ADS-B is not necessary, but as soon as you start flying close to class C and D space, it does become a safety issue. At one time, cars didn’t need much in the way of turn signaling or blind spot elimination, but as roads get fuller, safety features are needed not just for the driver of the car, but to keep those around him or her safe. 

There are people that refuse to use even a handheld radio in airports that are untowered but very busy. It is their right not to communicate, but it isn’t very smart. I’ve seen some pretty close calls caused by such attitude. 
Back to Top
AZ Flyer View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 12 Feb 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 36
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AZ Flyer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Sep 2018 at 3:39pm
Originally posted by HenryM HenryM wrote:

I think see-and-avoid is a myth. After having used ADS-B for a while I’ve come to realize just how difficult it is to really see a plane even when you know exactly in which direction to look. If the plane is coming head on, it will be almost upon you when you finally see the tiny dot suddenly enlarge. If it is coming from the side, you will likely not be looking in the correct direction. The reason planes don’t come together more often is that the probability of two being in the same 3D position at the same time is still small. It is not the superhuman visual scan abilities of pilots. 

+1
Back to Top
Catani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Sep 2018 at 5:55pm
Originally posted by AZ Flyer AZ Flyer wrote:

Originally posted by HenryM HenryM wrote:

I think see-and-avoid is a myth. After having used ADS-B for a while I’ve come to realize just how difficult it is to really see a plane even when you know exactly in which direction to look. If the plane is coming head on, it will be almost upon you when you finally see the tiny dot suddenly enlarge. If it is coming from the side, you will likely not be looking in the correct direction. The reason planes don’t come together more often is that the probability of two being in the same 3D position at the same time is still small. It is not the superhuman visual scan abilities of pilots. 

+1

 
+1
Back to Top
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Sep 2018 at 3:17pm
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

Exactly. I don't understand why some are so against making themselves more conspicuous to others in order to avoid a collision - and what pilot wouldn't want to know of others in the airspace around them? 

And all this anonymous mode nonsense - with so little airspace not covered by radar, you are not hiding from anybody now.
 
Since I am a fan of anonymous mode, I think perhaps some clarification is in order on just what that really means.
 
First and foremost it does NOT mean that I am unwilling to participate in the airspace.  Anonymous mode broadcasts my precise position and aircraft category once per second, just like any other ADS-B target.  The only thing it does is different is to send out a random value for the aircraft number.
 
The ADS-B signal is the most efficient tool ever devised for billing out user fees.  I'm not doing anything illegal, and I'm not "hiding" my aircraft location.  Just my billing address.
 
This is no different from squawking 1200.
 
If I am using ATC services, I have no problem with squawking a code and broadcasting my tail number.  If not, then it's just none of their business who I am.  Where I am?  Sure, I don't mind.  Who I am?  Nunya.
 
++++++++++++++++
 
See and avoid is hopeless.  There is too much sky to scan and humans just aren't up to the task of being a constant sentinel.  That's why we had to invent TCAS for the airlines.  One of the things ADS-B has shown us is that it is nearly impossible to spot a target more than a few miles away.
 
Luckily, the big sky theory actually works out there in the big sky.
 
Most collisions occur in the small parts of the sky.  Places like airport traffic patterns (specifically final approach) and what used to be the airspace over a VOR where planes could come together.  That one happens less now in a world of random navigation.
 
 
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Sep 2018 at 6:08pm
Originally posted by DavidBunin DavidBunin wrote:

I have no problem with squawking a code and broadcasting my tail number.  If not, then it's just none of their business who I am.  Where I am?  Sure, I don't mind.  Who I am?  Nunya.


That's all fine, though I don't understand how you would do much flying without broadcasting your N-number on the radio to FAA and anyone else that is listening at some point - and of course you advertise it on the side of your plane to every FBO you taxi past. Fact is, if somebody wants to know who your plane is registered to it is just a matter of a few clicks on the internet.

My point had less to do with privacy concerns and more to do with making yourself more conspicuous to other aircraft for collision avoidance.

The technology I was describing requires no transponder, and therefore no identity code for VFR only flight - Apparently there are some that are against even that, suffering from some delusion about being invisible I guess.

   
C310C
Back to Top
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Sep 2018 at 11:41am
Originally posted by Stiletto1 Stiletto1 wrote:

  I don't understand how you would do much flying without broadcasting your N-number on the radio to FAA and anyone else that is listening at some point - and of course you advertise it on the side of your plane to every FBO you taxi past. 


Until a recent move, I was based at an airport with no FBO and very little traffic.  Most of the world is rural, although I will grant you that most of the people live in cities.  Maybe it's different where you live, but around here a guy could do a lot of good, safe, perfectly legal lying without ever keying a radio transmitter.  And that is exactly where I want to have an ADS-B system broadcasting my POSITION for all to see (but not necessarily my identity).

Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Sep 2018 at 6:33pm
Originally posted by DavidBunin DavidBunin wrote:

Until a recent move, I was based at an airport with no FBO and very little traffic.  Most of the world is rural, although I will grant you that most of the people live in cities.  Maybe it's different where you live, but around here a guy could do a lot of good, safe, perfectly legal lying without ever keying a radio transmitter.  And that is exactly where I want to have an ADS-B system broadcasting my POSITION for all to see (but not necessarily my identity).



Well, I operate out of my own backyard in class G airspace and fly to rural locations all over the state. FBO? What's that? Around most of these places radar services get terminated before descending below 3000AGL - where I seem to spend a heck of a lot of time in my 310.

Scattered all over the state are also backyard/ranch strips with no telling what may be based there - within a 5-7 mile radius around my home strip are no less than a dozen more such airstrips, some not charted, with everything from ultralights to warbirds taking off unannounced and farting around the local area (as do I), including a very active glider operation.

I have a published Unicom at my field and insist that all tenants and visitors use it - even ultralight tenants have handhelds rigged up to their helmets. CTA's work pretty well here.

I have no idea how much activity may be going on at all of these rural places, more at some than others, which is exactly why it would be nice to be able to "detect" anybody that left the ground.

It's all talk of course - not likely to happen anytime soon.







C310C
Back to Top
Stiletto1 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Aug 2017
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 70
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Stiletto1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2018 at 5:21am
By the way; For those of you wishing to increase your anonymity, I refer you to the following FAR regarding small N-numbers for aircraft manufactured 30 years ago or more - relevant parts emboldened. Note that subpart (c) may require that you display 12" numbers.

What - you didn't know you were flying an antique?

--------


FAR- 45.22(b) A small U.S.-registered aircraft built at least 30 years ago or a U.S.-registered aircraft for which an experimental certificate has been issued under §21.191(d) or 21.191(g) for operation as an exhibition aircraft or as an amateur-built aircraft and which has the same external configuration as an aircraft built at least 30 years ago may be operated without displaying marks in accordance with §§45.21 and 45.23 through 45.33 if:
(1) It displays in accordance with §45.21(c) marks at least 2 inches high on each side of the fuselage or vertical tail surface consisting of the Roman capital letter “N” followed by:

(i) The U.S. registration number of the aircraft
; or

(ii) The symbol appropriate to the airworthiness certificate of the aircraft (“C”, standard; “R”, restricted; “L”, limited; or “X”, experimental) followed by the U.S. registration number of the aircraft; and

(2) It displays no other mark that begins with the letter “N” anywhere on the aircraft, unless it is the same mark that is displayed under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

(c) No person may operate an aircraft under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section—
(1) In an ADIZ or DEWIZ described in Part 99 of this chapter unless it temporarily bears marks in accordance with §§45.21 and 45.23 through 45.33;
(2) In a foreign country unless that country consents to that operation; or
(3) In any operation conducted under Part 121, 133, 135, or 137 of this chapter.

-------------------------

What is a "small aircraft?"
14 CFR part 1 defines a small aircraft as an aircraft of 12,500 lbs or less maximum certificated take-off weight.
C310C
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.102 seconds.