A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ADSB visibility with non certified GPS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old September 29th 17, 04:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kinsell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 546
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

On 09/28/2017 11:14 PM, Tim Taylor wrote:
It is too bad we don't have an organization that would be willing to lobby the FAA to allow lower powered or experimental approved transponders and ADS-B out solutions in Certified gliders that do not have an electrical generator. Wouldn't that have been a reasonable approach for the last ten years? Why does the power requirements for transponders change at 15k rather than 18k? All things that working with the FAI might have helped the glider community in the long run.


Some day, driven by requirements for drones, we'll have really low cost
collision avoidance. It will look absolutely nothing like a 250 watt
mode S transponder, hooked to an outrageously overengineered and
overpriced GPS, topped off with a $300 antenna.

For air-air avoidance, you'd need a watt or so of transmit power. Not
the low milliwatt power of PowerFlarm, that was driven by the
constraints of using unlicensed spectrum. Not 250 watts, that's the
legacy requirement of the FAA seeing you 200 miles away. Just something
that's reasonable to get the job done.

Technically, it would be easy build such a thing. Whether it would ever
be approved for use in gliders, that's highly debatable.
  #52  
Old September 29th 17, 06:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 172
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

These transponders are being installed in aircraft that receive an annual inspection by AI or A&P. That person ensures that the aircraft and all systems meet manufacturer and FAA specifications. If the aircraft doesn't then it's no longer airworthy and won't be flying.
If you are aware of such gliders, then maybe a friendly talk with whoever signed their logbook is in order. If that doesn't resolve the problem, a call to the local FSDO might be required.

Perhaps someone should be taking a close look at your glider? :-)

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 8:54:18 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Because half azzed transponder solutions are worse than no transponders. A
bunch of pilots flying low power transponders powered by a hobby battery wired
by an amateur and everyone assuming everything up there will be on everyone's
TV is far more dangerous than knowing that there are things up there not beeping.


  #53  
Old September 29th 17, 07:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 478
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 1:54:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
These transponders are being installed in aircraft that receive an annual inspection by AI or A&P. That person ensures that the aircraft and all systems meet manufacturer and FAA specifications. If the aircraft doesn't then it's no longer airworthy and won't be flying.
If you are aware of such gliders, then maybe a friendly talk with whoever signed their logbook is in order. If that doesn't resolve the problem, a call to the local FSDO might be required.

Perhaps someone should be taking a close look at your glider? :-)

The glider in the Minden midair had a transponder installed, it wasn't legal, yet the glider still flew.
We all know how much owner maintenance/improvement goes on. Some of it legal some less so. Some of it better than you could hire a pro to do, some of it... meh. I'm willing to not talk about it as long as no one is trying to force me to install an expensive ball roasting beeper.
PS The electrical system in my glider is perfect.
  #54  
Old September 29th 17, 09:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 172
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 1:54:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
These transponders are being installed in aircraft that receive an annual inspection by AI or A&P. That person ensures that the aircraft and all systems meet manufacturer and FAA specifications. If the aircraft doesn't then it's no longer airworthy and won't be flying.
If you are aware of such gliders, then maybe a friendly talk with whoever signed their logbook is in order. If that doesn't resolve the problem, a call to the local FSDO might be required.

Perhaps someone should be taking a close look at your glider? :-)

The glider in the Minden midair had a transponder installed,
it wasn't legal, yet the glider still flew.


My understanding is that it was inoperable due to not yet tested, so legal, since it's not a required instrument.

... an expensive ball roasting beeper.


Unless you put the antenna in your pants, there should be no problem with the radiation emitted by a transponder. Here's a good read on the subject. If you mount the antenna on the bottom of the fuselage behind the main wheel, it's more than far enough from your precious parts.

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload.../HpaRpd031.pdf

PS The electrical system in my glider is perfect.


5Z
  #55  
Old September 29th 17, 09:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 1:54:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
These transponders are being installed in aircraft that receive an annual inspection by AI or A&P. That person ensures that the aircraft and all systems meet manufacturer and FAA specifications. If the aircraft doesn't then it's no longer airworthy and won't be flying.
If you are aware of such gliders, then maybe a friendly talk with whoever signed their logbook is in order. If that doesn't resolve the problem, a call to the local FSDO might be required.

Perhaps someone should be taking a close look at your glider? :-)

The glider in the Minden midair had a transponder installed, it wasn't legal, yet the glider still flew.
We all know how much owner maintenance/improvement goes on. Some of it legal some less so. Some of it better than you could hire a pro to do, some of it... meh. I'm willing to not talk about it as long as no one is trying to force me to install an expensive ball roasting beeper.
PS The electrical system in my glider is perfect.


So to recap your safety position. You start by childishly made fun of risks involving a near mid-air collision with an airliner, then talk about knowing about gliders with problem wring, but are willing to trade off staying silent about that as long as your privilege is never harmed by any possibility of being forced to install a transponder. No apparent consideration if a transponder is or is not actually an important safety tool where you fly. Just the privilege to do whatever you want and a threat to talking about problems if you don't get you way? You sure see to be doing whatever you can to invite examination of gliders where you fly.

  #56  
Old September 30th 17, 12:45 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 9:01:37 PM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 6:53:44 PM UTC-7, Tom BravoMike wrote:
/snip/
3. Why do so many sources say: You fly above 18,000 ft? Go for 1090. You fly below? Go for 978 ? See in that respect e.g.

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/blog/av...on-is-for-you/

but disregard the specific equipment suggested.

/snip/

Tom

Sounds like you have a great handle on stuff here to help make the right decisions for you.

I would not give too much weight too much to the UAT argument in that blog. it's from several years ago, and suspect it is coming at a time where there actually started to be more 1090ES out installs in GA. Garmin might have had a sales reason around that time to mention UAT product upgrades (on the GLD88) and also may have in part just been echoing the FAAs vision for how ADS-B dual-link was going to be deployed. Today below 18,000' I think it is a good mix of UAT and 1090ES.

Some comments in the strange gymnastics behind dual-link in the USA: Originally the FAA has a view that UAT would be used for all lower altitude aircraft (then below FL240, later lowered to 18,000'), driven by concerns about 1090 MHz congestion, and likely expected costs of Mode S transponders, and likely a desire to create a user base of UAT to make FIS-B successful (and have FIS-B successful to encourage UAT adoption..). And organizations like AOPA and EAA liked the idea of keeping Mode C transponders so liked the idea of UAT, and so on.

... but much of it is probably not true, Mode S transponders are not hugely expensive (for what they do), the rest of the word ignored UAT and went 1090ES only, so economies of there helped lower prices and will continue to, lots of folks "cheated" and got free FIS-B with portable devices without playing in ADS-B proper, ADS-B Out for many install its easier to upgrade older transponders with plug in replacements (and use existing antenna and wiring etc.) , or do a Mode S transponder firmware upgrade , etc., etc. It's a very complex system and I don't think played out as envisioned early on, really complex systems rarely do.

It seems that lots of GA folks are installing lots of different ADS-B Out stuff, in the mid-high end GA market I see people going with 1090ES Out and Dual-Link In. And not just for people who might fly in class A airspace. Much of that is driven by easy upgrades/add on to their transponders

As for PowerFLARM adoption, glider ports and operations that I know have strong adoption, most people flying cross country have it. The thing that matters is where you fly, if PowerFLARM usage is very low (and not likely to increase) then its a non-issue.

I'm not sure there us somebody else able to develop the software equivalent for ADS-B to what makes FLARM useful between gliders, usable at all in thermals etc. I've seen the issues with PowerFLARM, it was very frustrating, but I think we are on a stable/usable system now.


BTW I was talking with the ADS-B contact at a FSDO today and he sort of confirmed my feeling. ADS-B Out installs in GA are incredibly busy, shops backed up. Most GA installs there seem to be 1090ES Out, with UAT Out used in lower-end aircraft like flight school 150/152. Stats may be skewed in major metro area/more high-end aircraft?

Looking for the usage split with a dual-link receiver would be interesting.... Andy Blackburn you got any observations for GA?
  #57  
Old September 30th 17, 03:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

I resisted installing a transponder for a long time both due to cost and
the remote areas where I normally fly.Â* Despite the relatively light
traffic in my area, I got a very close up look at a large twin GA
aircraft one day and decided it was time.Â* Knowing that Mode 3A/C was on
the downhill slide to oblivion, I chose a Mode S Trig.Â* Since the TT22
was not that much more expensive than the TT21 and certainly less than a
descent soaring computer, I also went that way.Â* I haven't seen another
aircraft up close (gliders excepted) since.Â* That makes me really happy.

On 9/29/2017 2:12 PM, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 1:54:54 PM UTC-4, wrote:
These transponders are being installed in aircraft that receive an annual inspection by AI or A&P. That person ensures that the aircraft and all systems meet manufacturer and FAA specifications. If the aircraft doesn't then it's no longer airworthy and won't be flying.
If you are aware of such gliders, then maybe a friendly talk with whoever signed their logbook is in order. If that doesn't resolve the problem, a call to the local FSDO might be required.

Perhaps someone should be taking a close look at your glider? :-)

The glider in the Minden midair had a transponder installed, it wasn't legal, yet the glider still flew.
We all know how much owner maintenance/improvement goes on. Some of it legal some less so. Some of it better than you could hire a pro to do, some of it... meh. I'm willing to not talk about it as long as no one is trying to force me to install an expensive ball roasting beeper.
PS The electrical system in my glider is perfect.

So to recap your safety position. You start by childishly made fun of risks involving a near mid-air collision with an airliner, then talk about knowing about gliders with problem wring, but are willing to trade off staying silent about that as long as your privilege is never harmed by any possibility of being forced to install a transponder. No apparent consideration if a transponder is or is not actually an important safety tool where you fly. Just the privilege to do whatever you want and a threat to talking about problems if you don't get you way? You sure see to be doing whatever you can to invite examination of gliders where you fly.


--
Dan, 5J
  #58  
Old September 30th 17, 04:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
George Haeh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 167
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

The Flarm folks have teamed up with TBS to enable Flarm on dronesje.
Possibly
the big iron operators will be more motivated by drones than gliders to
adopt
Flarm.

https://flarm.com/flarm-market-leader-for-uav/

  #59  
Old September 30th 17, 05:18 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Richard Pfiffner[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 319
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

On Saturday, September 30, 2017 at 8:45:07 AM UTC-7, George Haeh wrote:
The Flarm folks have teamed up with TBS to enable Flarm on dronesje.
Possibly
the big iron operators will be more motivated by drones than gliders to
adopt
Flarm.

https://flarm.com/flarm-market-leader-for-uav/



This is the European Flarm. So not the same frequency as the US and not approved by the FCC.

Richard
  #60  
Old September 30th 17, 06:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andrzej Kobus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 585
Default ADSB visibility with non certified GPS

On Saturday, September 30, 2017 at 11:45:07 AM UTC-4, George Haeh wrote:
The Flarm folks have teamed up with TBS to enable Flarm on dronesje.
Possibly
the big iron operators will be more motivated by drones than gliders to
adopt
Flarm.

https://flarm.com/flarm-market-leader-for-uav/


The big iron will never install flarm.
There are better solutions for UAVs. Look at this company and the tiny Mod S transponder with ADS-B out. This Mod S transponder will be visible to TCAS and it is so small that it can be installed in an UAV.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stratus / Foreflight ADSB 6X Soaring 5 December 17th 13 10:34 AM
ADSB is only the start... Martin Gregorie[_5_] Soaring 0 October 1st 09 01:27 PM
Santa and ADSB Mal Soaring 0 December 15th 06 08:42 PM
Non-certified parts for a certified plane? Dico Owning 10 August 22nd 06 03:11 AM
Accident Statistics: Certified vs. Non-Certified Engines Ron Wanttaja Home Built 23 January 18th 04 06:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.