ADSB for VFR

[Birdseye]

I trust everyone is taking the time to respond to the CASA discussion paper and not stopping at just posting here?

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

I didnt realise this paper was out....well it only came out today. I read it and have completed the survey with my comments and thoughts. They are on the right track but need to get rid of TSO on lower cost equipment availability

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Ilevil have a ADSB out for about 1000 bucks they call it the "beacon" . The trouble is that it is UAT...typical...america is the centre of the universe... I spoke to them and they do have plans to make a 1090 version very soon. It is fully integrated in a great little package inc the GPS. There is a short video as well on the page. There are a couple more on Youtube about it...and another product called the BOM which looks really great too for about US$1200

 

Beacon 978

 

 

[planesmaker]

I would love to see a small inexpensive device that takes a GPS signal then via low powered transmitter( say 10 mile) adds aircraft id, fitted with a screen or wifi to tablet. PIC can see all traffic in immediate area, simple and affordable has to be the order of the day. What point is having ADSB out if you can't see other traffic? Without ADSB in there really is no point, also if low take up rate it is as good as useless.

 

 

[facthunter]

If everybody has it, your screen is going to get pretty congested. ATC radar has difficulty identifying traffic at times in less congested situations that we will face on occasions like fly ins etc. See and be seen is a bit of a lottery and fails Frequently. Radio helps, but people don't use it properly, often..

 

Lots of Research before purchase might be worth while. USA copes better than we do in aviation matters. Do we have to reinvent the wheel when we can see what others do? Even with TCAS, heavies have stuffed it up IF BOTH don't follow the TCAS command and that's only with 2 planes involved.. Nev

 

 

[Downunder]

I would love to see a small inexpensive device that takes a GPS signal then via low powered transmitter( say 10 mile) adds aircraft id, fitted with a screen or wifi to tablet. PIC can see all traffic in immediate area, simple and affordable has to be the order of the day. What point is having ADSB out if you can't see other traffic? Without ADSB in there really is no point, also if low take up rate it is as good as useless.

Something like an additional device to Ozrunways. That as well as transmitting to the "mobile data" system, also transmits the same traffic data via an inboard transmitter?

 

I guess it could also receive adsb and other local inputs and put that on the Ozrunways screen?

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

There is a Raspberry Pi kit that gets ADSB and puts it onto Ozrunways now...works really well....

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

The kit is RX only of course. I have put some together for a few guys

 

 

[Garfly]

Given - as Derek reports above [#23] - that Airservices say that an ADSB-out Mode S transponder (like the Trig TT21) is not approved for ATC separation/clearance purposes, on what basis, is the proposal for RAAus aircraft to be given some CTA privileges being made?

 

I presume that the fitment of some kind of transponder would be seen as a prerequisite for entry. But are they saying that a Mode C device would be approved but a simple Mode S not?

 

Or, rather, is it assumed that there'd be a relaxation of standards by Airservices regarding basic ADSB-out equipment (i.e devices without approved GNSS input)?

 

 

[facthunter]

Horizontal and vertical separation is only valid if the basis of that separation meets acceptable tolerances. I can't see how you get around that problem. In controlled airspace internationally agreed standards apply. ICAO rules. Nev

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

The push from what I was told was to allow equipment for our use to be of a non certified standard but it would have to reach a certain "lower" spec than the stuff that is available now. I would imagine there would be a list of "non certified" equipment that you can fit.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Encoders are actually not that expensive and neither are GPS that can comply its just as usual..the same bolt you buy that is 50 cents is the same bolt that is certified costs $5 just because it has 3 sheets of paperwork supplied with it

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

This website explains the operation

 

https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-the-Mode-A-Mode-C-and-Mode-S-transponder-in-airplane

 

 

[facthunter]

With expanded separation limits that's fine.. Horses for courses. At suitable locations and under specific conditions. You could give certain clearances where you wouldn't even need an altimeter where it would be safe. Reference to physical objects visually. Mixing and flying around amongst the RPT stuff will never happen unless you fit the rules that THEY have to go by.. Transitting??? You get a clearance for THAT event.. fine. Nev

 

 

[Garfly]

Yes, as far as I know, ATC are still allowed, in some situations, to issue CTA clearances to aircraft even without transponders.

 

So, as is being publicly canvassed, it might just be a case of controllers giving a wider berth to uncertified (yet approved and registered) Mode S equipment. I'm just surprised that Airservices told Derek that such devices are not useable for 'clearances' - presumably even when separation was not an issue. (And where Mode-C is currently okay.)

 

Of course, we're flying near and around RPT at Class G uncontrolled airports as it is. And, for me, it's the assurance that (any) transponder gives of air-to-air visibility (via TCAS) to RPT - and other professionals - that makes it a worthwhile investment.

 

Anyway, in reality, I suppose that uncertified Mode-S equipment will be reporting better positions and altitudes (with usual verification) than much of the certified older Mode-C gear does now via the secondary radar system.

 

 

[Nobody]

Given - as Derek reports above [#23] - that Airservices say that an ADSB-out Mode S transponder (like the Trig TT21) is not approved for ATC separation/clearance purposes, on what basis, is the proposal for RAAus aircraft to be given some CTA privileges being made?I presume that the fitment of some kind of transponder would be seen as a prerequisite for entry. But are they saying that a Mode C device would be approved but a simple Mode S not?

 

Or, rather, is it assumed that there'd be a relaxation of standards by Airservices regarding basic ADSB-out equipment (i.e devices without approved GNSS input)?

I suspect that Airservices issue isnt the Trig TT21 but the Dynon GPS that is sending the position to the transponder. As far as I know the Trig transponder is acceptable.

 

 

[Garfly]

That's where I'm a bit confused. I know that the Trig TT21 has its own altitude encoder and I assumed that it'd have its own GPS too which you could override with a certified one if you wanted to. Is this how it works?

 

 

[coljones]

You don't need a transponder on Dspace. But if they bring Espace down to 1200 feet in the Sydney basis you will need one to fly above the trees (or you will have to fly coastal in Victor One)

 

 

[Nobody]

That's where I'm a bit confused. I know that the Trig TT21 has its own altitude encoder and I assumed that it'd have its own GPS too which you could override with a certified one if you wanted to. Is this how it works?

No. The TT21 is only a transponder with a built in encoder. To be used for ADS-B it needs an external GPS. Trig have one called the TN70 but it is approximately AUD $3000.

 

Dynon have their SV-GPS-2020 which is about a third the price but has been "accepted" by the FAA in the USA rather than TSO'd. I am not sure if this is accepted in Australia.

 

from: SV-GPS-2020

 

Doesn’t a 2020 compliant GPS position source needed to be certified (TSO or STC)?

 

No. The ADS-B equipment in the aircraft must meet the performance requirements of FAR section 91.225.This specifies that ADS-B out equipment must meet specific performance criteria but does not require TSO authorization. In Dynon’s case, the SV-XPNDR-261 is TSO’d. The SV-GPS-2020 is not TSO’d, but Dynon Avionics has performed the necessary engineering to ensure the equipment complies with all performance requirements of 91.225. An aircraft equipped with the SV-GPS-2020 as well as the SV-XPNDR-261 is therefore able to reach a Source Integrity Level (SIL) of 3 and System Design Assurance (SDA) of 2, as well as the other performance metrics required to be compliant with 91.225. Per the FAA’s guidance, Dynon will provide a statement of compliance to our customers.

[Garfly]

Now that I'm a bit better informed, I'm wondering if, in order to be eligible for future (?) RAAus CTA (Class C) entry/transit privileges, it might still not be better and cheaper to invest in a 're-certified' Mode-C transponder/encoder system. Because it seems that only pretty high-end ADSB-out systems will be allowed into Class Charlie anyway, whereas any (relatively cheap refurbished) SSR Mode-C device should still be okay. No?

 

(Though who knows what the terms of that possible future agreement might be?)

 

And I guess that most of the safety benefits to us (visibility to TCAS and to ATC) will continue to apply with the older gear - at least for some years to come. (And in the meantime the cheaper ADSB equipment and the new laws will have bedded in.)

 

Then again, if we're going to be weaned off Area under 5,000' some of that safety dividend will be eroded, anyway.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Well knowing the process of how CASA and other can absolutely stuff things up I will be waiting to see what they come up with first before I open my wallet

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

My impression of my conversation I had was Air Services was the stumbling block

 

 

[Nobody]

Garfly,

 

I am not sure what you are planning. New Aircraft or existing? What airspace you want to fly in now or in the future? My suggestion, and what I have done, would be to install a Mode S transponder, making sure that it is an extender squitter type. Installing a mode C transponder will not have a future upgrade path to ADS-B. A mode S transponder with "ES" can be upgraded to ABS-b by adding an approved WAAS position source. I suggest you wait for some clarity to come about the GPS source as the cheaper options may be come approved allowed over time.

 

There are also some all in 1 transponders with GPS position sources coming out now, which are not much more expensive than a microair Mode C transponder.

 

eg

 

APPAREO STRATUS ESG 1090 ES DIGITAL TRANSPONDER from Aircraft Spruce

 

Nobody

 

 

[Garfly]

Thanks Nobody. Great advice. You can see I'm pretty naive about all this - but slowly getting my head around the implications.

 

I'll take my time and check out those new products with gps included.

 

I've just dug up this video about the iLevil BOM and BEACON on Mark's (Kyle) suggestion earlier in this thread :

 

 

It's really a time to wait and see.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Levil brings BOM to market - AOPA