On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 12:24:32 PM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
On Monday, May 7, 2018 at 11:15:09 AM UTC-5, Mike Schumann wrote:

1. You do not need to have a Mode C or S transponder to equip an aircraft with UAT ADS-B Out. If you are exclusively flying in an area where transponders are not required, given the price difference, it is not unreasonable to install a UAT ADS-B transceiver if you want to make yourself visible to ATC and trigger the ADS-B ground stations to get TIS-B and ADS-R traffic.

Strawman argument. Do you actually think someone who doesn't have a transponder is going to install a UAT out system?

I didn't say anyone was going to do this. You said it wasn't possible. It is. Quit posting stuff that is not correct.


2. I never said that a PowerFlarm equipped pilot would not see a transponder equipped aircraft. What I have said, which is 100% accurate, is that PowerFlarm does not support TIS-B and ADS-R, so that the situational awareness is not nearly as good as with virtually all other ADS-B receivers. The reality is that when PowerFlarm sees a transponder equipped aircraft, all you know is the altitude of the aircraft, and a rough approximation of its range. You have no way to tell if the aircraft is behind you, off to the side, or in front. If PowerFlarm supported TIS-B (and you were ADS-B OUT equipped and within range of a ground station), you would see the exact position of the transponder equipped aircraft with the same accuracy as is visible on ATC radar.

Again, Mike, in a glider this is not the issue - the issue is compatible systems and displays. And the incredibly stupid FAA UAT system coupled with the need to have ADS-B out of some sort to see all ADS-B traffic. Otherwise, my PF would right now see all ADS-B traffic, not just all Mode-S traffic. And sure, ADS-B in display would be nice - but in and LS6 cockpit there is no room for multiple displays - and barely room to get a transponder on the panel!

The FAA's UAT system is NOT stupid. It was essential to provide the bandwidth necessary for the wealth of ADS-B services for which ADS-B was initially designed, such as weather, Flight Restrictions, etc. What was unfortunate was the unwillingness of foreign governments to sign on the UAT standard, resulting in the complexities of a dual frequency system. Not an ideal situation, but one we are going to have to live with.



3. I have a Phoenix Motorglider with a Dynon Skyview system that includes a 1090ES transponder with 2020 compliant ADS-B Out support. The system also includes a dual frequency ADS-B IN receiver which supports TIS-B, ADS-R, as well as providing all the weather and TFR data that is transmitted by the ADS-B ground stations. This is certainly not a system you would put in a normal glider. For that, I would recommend a Trig transponder with a GPS position source for ADS-B Out, along with a Scout ADS-B receiver ($199) feeding the Foreflight app running on an iPhone for ADS-B traffic warnings..

Exactly - you are flying an airplane, not a glider, with room and electrical power for a nice big display. Your setup has NO relevance to true sailplanes that are much more space limited.

So do us a favor and quit bashing PowerFLARM - we understand that for YOUR application it isn't the best solution, and I agree with you on that - but for a small cockpit racing sailplane, current ADS-B solutions are not yet optimum.

There are ADS-B solutions that are appropriate for racing sailplanes. It is a no-brainer for anyone flying an experimental glider that is already equipped with a Trig transponder to add a TN-72 GPS source and be ADS-B OUT equipped. Add a $199 Scout ADS-B receiver and Foreflight running on an iPhone in your shirt pocket and you have a full blown dual frequency ADS-B collision avoidance system with audio prompts without taking up any panel space.

What is absurd is the half baked Euro Centric engineering in PowerFlarm that makes it such a limited system in the US market. The hardware is all there. They are just too lazy (or share your anti UAT attitude), to take advantage of the existing US ADS-B infrastructure to have a truly effective anti-collision system. So that leaves glider pilots in the quandary of do you want an optimized system to protect against glider-glider collisions, or do you want a general purpose system that protects you from collisions with general aviation aircraft. Rather than rail at me for pointing out the obvious, why don't you spend some of your energy ranting at PowerFlarm on why they don't get their act together and fully support the US ADS-B architecture.