(USA) NTSB issues recommendations to the FAA and the SSA regarding transponder use in gliders

On Apr 2, 7:25 am, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
Voluntary compliance is great. However, there are always people who don't
get it and create situations that give the rest of us a black eye or worse.

I don't think that it is unreasonable to require that all aircraft (gliders,
balloons, etc.) who fly above 10K or near major airports are transponder
equipped. I would hope that rather than forcing everyone to install Mode C
(an antiquated technology), that we could get the FAA to accelerate the
deployment of ADS-B ground stations in strategic areas, and let gliders and
balloons meet the transponder requirements with low cost ADS-B transceivers,
which will hopefully be available within the next year or so. A side
benefit of this, is that the power draw for ADS-B UAT transceivers should be
a lot lower than Mode C.

Mike Schumann

I think this idea is bad and wrong. Not all aircraft that flies above
10K can feasibly fly with a transponder. Where can store the
transponder when flying my hang glider or paraglider? The technology
is not there to cover all aircraft.

Ron Gleason
DG303 N303MR

MITRE is currently testing an ADS-B UAT transmitter that is the size of a
pack of cigarettes, runs for 14 hours and 4 internal AA batteries, and has a
parts cost of ~$150. With this kind of technology, there is no reason that
any aircraft, balloon, hang glider, or parachutist should be flying around
without one. Hopefully we'll see this commercialized within the next year
or so.

Mike Schumann

"Ron Gleason" wrote in message
...
On Apr 2, 7:25 am, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
Voluntary compliance is great. However, there are always people who
don't
get it and create situations that give the rest of us a black eye or
worse.

I don't think that it is unreasonable to require that all aircraft
(gliders,
balloons, etc.) who fly above 10K or near major airports are transponder
equipped. I would hope that rather than forcing everyone to install Mode
C
(an antiquated technology), that we could get the FAA to accelerate the
deployment of ADS-B ground stations in strategic areas, and let gliders
and
balloons meet the transponder requirements with low cost ADS-B
transceivers,
which will hopefully be available within the next year or so. A side
benefit of this, is that the power draw for ADS-B UAT transceivers should
be
a lot lower than Mode C.

Mike Schumann

I think this idea is bad and wrong. Not all aircraft that flies above
10K can feasibly fly with a transponder. Where can store the
transponder when flying my hang glider or paraglider? The technology
is not there to cover all aircraft.

Ron Gleason
DG303 N303MR




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

I heard a much higher price on this unit... more like $1500. Of course,
cheap or not, it has to be approved. Are the chances real???


"Mike Schumann" wrote in message
.. .
MITRE is currently testing an ADS-B UAT transmitter that is the size of a
pack of cigarettes, runs for 14 hours and 4 internal AA batteries, and has
a parts cost of ~$150. With this kind of technology, there is no reason
that any aircraft, balloon, hang glider, or parachutist should be flying
around without one. Hopefully we'll see this commercialized within the
next year or so.

Mike Schumann

"Ron Gleason" wrote in message
...
On Apr 2, 7:25 am, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
Voluntary compliance is great. However, there are always people who
don't
get it and create situations that give the rest of us a black eye or
worse.

I don't think that it is unreasonable to require that all aircraft
(gliders,
balloons, etc.) who fly above 10K or near major airports are transponder
equipped. I would hope that rather than forcing everyone to install
Mode C
(an antiquated technology), that we could get the FAA to accelerate the
deployment of ADS-B ground stations in strategic areas, and let gliders
and
balloons meet the transponder requirements with low cost ADS-B
transceivers,
which will hopefully be available within the next year or so. A side
benefit of this, is that the power draw for ADS-B UAT transceivers
should be
a lot lower than Mode C.

Mike Schumann

I think this idea is bad and wrong. Not all aircraft that flies above
10K can feasibly fly with a transponder. Where can store the
transponder when flying my hang glider or paraglider? The technology
is not there to cover all aircraft.

Ron Gleason
DG303 N303MR




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

There are obviously some challenges in getting this commercialized. The
biggest challenge is to get the FAA to accept the notion that there should
be a VFR only version of ADS-B that is designed to be cost effective, and
does not provide the accuracy and reliability levels needed for parallel
instrument approaches in Class B airspace.

My gut instinct (I don't have any experience dealing with the FAA) is that
we can get the FAA to provide a mechanism so that this type of device can be
sold commercially at a ~$1K price point. Politically, it would help a lot
of the SSA, AOPA, and the EAA took the position that universal deployment
would be acceptable, if equipment was available to the GA community at this
price point.

Mike Schumann

"user" wrote in message
. ..
I heard a much higher price on this unit... more like $1500. Of course,
cheap or not, it has to be approved. Are the chances real???


"Mike Schumann" wrote in message
.. .
MITRE is currently testing an ADS-B UAT transmitter that is the size of a
pack of cigarettes, runs for 14 hours and 4 internal AA batteries, and
has a parts cost of ~$150. With this kind of technology, there is no
reason that any aircraft, balloon, hang glider, or parachutist should be
flying around without one. Hopefully we'll see this commercialized
within the next year or so.

Mike Schumann

"Ron Gleason" wrote in message
...
On Apr 2, 7:25 am, "Mike Schumann"
wrote:
Voluntary compliance is great. However, there are always people who
don't
get it and create situations that give the rest of us a black eye or
worse.

I don't think that it is unreasonable to require that all aircraft
(gliders,
balloons, etc.) who fly above 10K or near major airports are
transponder
equipped. I would hope that rather than forcing everyone to install
Mode C
(an antiquated technology), that we could get the FAA to accelerate the
deployment of ADS-B ground stations in strategic areas, and let gliders
and
balloons meet the transponder requirements with low cost ADS-B
transceivers,
which will hopefully be available within the next year or so. A side
benefit of this, is that the power draw for ADS-B UAT transceivers
should be
a lot lower than Mode C.

Mike Schumann

I think this idea is bad and wrong. Not all aircraft that flies above
10K can feasibly fly with a transponder. Where can store the
transponder when flying my hang glider or paraglider? The technology
is not there to cover all aircraft.

Ron Gleason
DG303 N303MR




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com






--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Mike Schumann wrote:
There are obviously some challenges in getting this commercialized. The
biggest challenge is to get the FAA to accept the notion that there should
be a VFR only version of ADS-B that is designed to be cost effective, and
does not provide the accuracy and reliability levels needed for parallel
instrument approaches in Class B airspace.

My gut instinct (I don't have any experience dealing with the FAA) is that
we can get the FAA to provide a mechanism so that this type of device can be
sold commercially at a ~$1K price point. Politically, it would help a lot
of the SSA, AOPA, and the EAA took the position that universal deployment
would be acceptable, if equipment was available to the GA community at this
price point.

I sent the following comment out to various parties back in February, as
a response to a proposal by a manufacturer to build 25 of the MITRE
designed UAT transmitters for research and development purposes:

===
What if there was a highly publicized proposal by the SSA, USHPA, EAA,
AOPA, etc., to test these transmitters in a high traffic density area
with UAT ground station coverage (say Maryland or Virginia) in a range
of sport aircraft including hang gliders, ultralights, LSAs, sailplanes,
Cubs/Champs, etc.? It might encourage the FAA to address the VFR-only
issue in the near term...
===

The intent is to get the ball rolling. If you think this might be
useful, contact me, I'd like to get enough of a working group together
to insure that the proposal actually happens...

Marc

I think that this is a great idea. Rob Strain at MITRE would be a key
player to get on board with getting something like this organized.

Mike Schumann

"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message
. ..
Mike Schumann wrote:
There are obviously some challenges in getting this commercialized. The
biggest challenge is to get the FAA to accept the notion that there
should be a VFR only version of ADS-B that is designed to be cost
effective, and does not provide the accuracy and reliability levels
needed for parallel instrument approaches in Class B airspace.

My gut instinct (I don't have any experience dealing with the FAA) is
that we can get the FAA to provide a mechanism so that this type of
device can be sold commercially at a ~$1K price point. Politically, it
would help a lot of the SSA, AOPA, and the EAA took the position that
universal deployment would be acceptable, if equipment was available to
the GA community at this price point.

I sent the following comment out to various parties back in February, as a
response to a proposal by a manufacturer to build 25 of the MITRE designed
UAT transmitters for research and development purposes:

===
What if there was a highly publicized proposal by the SSA, USHPA, EAA,
AOPA, etc., to test these transmitters in a high traffic density area with
UAT ground station coverage (say Maryland or Virginia) in a range of sport
aircraft including hang gliders, ultralights, LSAs, sailplanes,
Cubs/Champs, etc.? It might encourage the FAA to address the VFR-only
issue in the near term...
===

The intent is to get the ball rolling. If you think this might be useful,
contact me, I'd like to get enough of a working group together to insure
that the proposal actually happens...

Marc



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Mike Schumann wrote:
There are obviously some challenges in getting this commercialized.
The biggest challenge is to get the FAA to accept the notion that
there should be a VFR only version of ADS-B that is designed to be
cost effective, and does not provide the accuracy and reliability
levels needed for parallel instrument approaches in Class B airspace.

My gut instinct (I don't have any experience dealing with the FAA) is
that we can get the FAA to provide a mechanism so that this type of
device can be sold commercially at a ~$1K price point. Politically,
it would help a lot of the SSA, AOPA, and the EAA took the position
that universal deployment would be acceptable, if equipment was
available to the GA community at this price point.

Certainly, AOPA is already doing that. See this for their position on
ADS-B implementation:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/air_traffic/ads-b.html

Some highligts from that page:

4. The cost of the ADS-B datalink system must be at or below today's
price of a Mode C transponder.

5. Once the ADS-B mandate becomes effective, aircraft should not be
required to be equipped with a Mode C transponder.

The AOPA-preferred UAT datalink is capable of providing pilots with
three separate but related services:

3. FIS-B (Flight Information Services). FIS-B data includes graphic
Nexrad weather radar and textual METAR/TAF data. In the future, FIS-B
services may include graphic TFR data.

I believe all glider pilots should also be members of AOPA. I've been
one for more than 25 years. They do a lot heavy lifting that the SSA can
not, related to airplanes (think towplanes), airspace, required
equipment (ADS-B is the focus now), and pilot rights. The magazine is
ocasionally interesting, and the dues are reasonable.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

I don't think that AOPA has gone as far as supporting mandatory ADS-B
deployment in aircraft without electrical systems, gliders, and balloons.
They have been primarily focused on eliminating the current FAA strategy to
require both Mode C and ADS-B on aircraft in Class B airspace and above 10K
MSL.

Mike Schumann

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:2XVJj.99$PJ3.18@trndny02...
Mike Schumann wrote:
There are obviously some challenges in getting this commercialized. The
biggest challenge is to get the FAA to accept the notion that there
should be a VFR only version of ADS-B that is designed to be cost
effective, and does not provide the accuracy and reliability levels
needed for parallel instrument approaches in Class B airspace.

My gut instinct (I don't have any experience dealing with the FAA) is
that we can get the FAA to provide a mechanism so that this type of
device can be sold commercially at a ~$1K price point. Politically,
it would help a lot of the SSA, AOPA, and the EAA took the position
that universal deployment would be acceptable, if equipment was
available to the GA community at this price point.

Certainly, AOPA is already doing that. See this for their position on
ADS-B implementation:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/air_traffic/ads-b.html

Some highligts from that page:

4. The cost of the ADS-B datalink system must be at or below today's
price of a Mode C transponder.

5. Once the ADS-B mandate becomes effective, aircraft should not be
required to be equipped with a Mode C transponder.

The AOPA-preferred UAT datalink is capable of providing pilots with three
separate but related services:

3. FIS-B (Flight Information Services). FIS-B data includes graphic
Nexrad weather radar and textual METAR/TAF data. In the future, FIS-B
services may include graphic TFR data.

I believe all glider pilots should also be members of AOPA. I've been one
for more than 25 years. They do a lot heavy lifting that the SSA can not,
related to airplanes (think towplanes), airspace, required equipment
(ADS-B is the focus now), and pilot rights. The magazine is ocasionally
interesting, and the dues are reasonable.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com