PowerMouse vs Power Flarm - Updates by March? hardware/software -ADS-R, TIS-B

On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 6:02:14 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 3:42:39 PM UTC-8, WaltWX wrote:
I hear that PowerMouse will include an ADS-B option and possibly ADS-R / TIS-B (for those of you not in U.S .. these are FAA ground rebroadcasts of ADS-B 1090 packets and transponder only aircraft). No word on whether the PowerFlarm will add this firmware upgrade.

Does anyone know when the PowerMouse will ADS-B becomes available? .... and whether the PowerFlarm core is considering including these features?

Walt Rogers WX

Hi Walt

The LXNav PowerMouse is based on a new generation FLARM chipset. It has an optional ADS-B In feature, built on a new FLARM 1090ES chip that supports ADS-R and hopefully TIS-B (at a protocol level they actually look pretty much the same but I want to see how well things work in reality especially with close traffic alerts).

I hope LXNav and USA dealers are smart enough to only sell the version with ADS-B In option the USA.

There was some hope that PowerFLARM (core and portable) woud add ADS-R and TIS-B support, and I've mentioned that before on r.a.s. Flarm looked at doing this but unfortunately it was not practical. The 1090ES internals of the PowerFLARM and these newer product are significantly different.

Richard from Craggy just posted in another thread on r.a.s.:"The LXNAV PowerMouse has been submitted for FCC USA certified. They are expecting certification in January." So check in with Richard or other LXNav dealer. I have one on order. :-)

ADS-R and TIS-B support really only matters for folks who have 2020 Compliant ADS-B Out or TABS... either of which will trigger the ADS-R and TIS-B ground services for their aircraft. So I hope folks who have PowerFLARM today and want this will upgrade to a PowerMouse and find a great purchaser of their existing PowerFLARM. I'm hoping folks think of supporting junior XC pilots and help those pilots get their hands on PowerFLARM units if they don't already have them.

LX Navigation also has a new FLARM Eagle product coming that uses the same FLARM and 1090ES chipset as the LXNav PowerMouse. I have not heard anything cogent about LX Navigation FCC certification plans for with this product.. And that's the hurdle these products have to get over for sale in the USA..

And I want to point out one irony. To emphasize the need to get ADS-B Out sorted out.

Owners will be able to connect up say the PowerMouse GPS via NMEA to a Trig transponder and get the transponder to transmit ADS-B out. But that is SIL=0 (Source Integrity Level), not 2020 Complaint (SIL=3) or even TABS complaint (SIL=1). A SIL=0 GPS source will let other PowerFLARM and PowerMouse users with ADS-B In options see you at long distances (I'm hearing reports of "60 mile" range from some pilots) and let GA folks with portable 1090ES In receivers see you. But you remain invisible to lots of other stuff that ignores low quality GPS source equipped ADS-B targets, including ATC not being able to see your aircraft via ADS-B (they can see you still be SSR when within SSR coverage).... in fact you need full 2020 Compliance/SIL-3 for ATC to see you via ADS-B. Which effectively makes TABS/SIL=1 a lot less interesting than it could be.

SIL=0 is s not high enough quality to make your aircraft a client of the ADS-R or TIS-B services. So even though a PowerMouse is sophisticated enough to decode and use ADS-R and TIS-B and uses it's own GPS to know where it is, you don't really want to use that GPS to power your own ADS-B Out... for that you need a Trig TN-72 or TN70 GPS source (for owners of type certified gliders who want to be fully 2020 ADS-B Out compliant).

Daryl,

I'm still a bit confused about SIL=0 , SIL=1 and SIL=3

1) SIL=0 means that it will not trigger the ADS-R or TIS-B. Only FLARM with ADS-B will see these targets. ATC will not

2) SIL=1 (TABs system TN-72 attached to Trig). This will trigger ADS-R and TIS-B ... will ATC controllers also see us?

3) SIL=3 FULL 2020 ADS-B Out compliant.

Did I get this right?

I'm still wondering if option 2) the TABS system will allow us to be seen by ATC and get clearances to transit restricted or CLASS B,C airspace. If not, I'd have to go for the more expensive TN-70 ... full compliant.

Walt Rogers

Walt

Here I'll have a shot. I worry there will be typos here and I'll need to repost. I renumbered the bullets to match the SIL level to try to avoid confusion.

0) SIL=0 (any old NMEA GPS source driving a TT21 or TT22 transponder) provides the following capabilities for your glider -

(I do not recommended, use one of the other options below instead)

- Has all the standard transponder capabilities, including ATC SSR visibility and PCAS, TCAD and TCAS compatibility
- Is visible to portable 1090ES In traffic displays (e.g. a Stratus or Stratux receiver driving EFB software)
- Is visible to PowerFLARM (with ADS-B In Option)
- Is NOT visible to certificated fixed install 1090ES In traffic displays in GA aircraft and above
- Is NOT visible to UAT In equipped aircraft via ADS-R- no ADS-R rebroadcast by the ground infrastructure to those aircraft
- Is shown as a TIS-B target to TIS-B client aircraft when within SSR coverage
- Does NOT makes your glider a client of ADS-B ground based services so you cannot see other traffic vis ADS-R and TIS-B (and remember PowerFLARM does not display ADS-R or TIS-B anyhow)
- Is *NOT* visible to ATC via ADS-B (ATC can still see you when within SSR coverage)
- Does NOT provide flight privilege in airspace in 14 CFR 91.225 that requires ADS-B Out, remembering gliders already have some exemptions there.

1) SIL=1 (A TN72 GPS driving a Trig TT21 or TT22 transponder) this is the "TABS" install and provides the following capabilities for your glider -

- Has all the standard transponder capabilities, including ATC SSR visibility and PCAS, TCAD and TCAS compatibility
- Is visible to portable 1090ES In traffic displays (e.g. a Stratus or Stratux receiver driving EFB software)
- Is visible to PowerFLARM (with ADS-B In Option)
- Is visible to certificated fixed install 1090ES In traffic displays in GA aircraft and above
- Is visible to UAT In equipped aircraft - via ADS-R rebroadcast by the ground infrastructure to suitably equipped client aircraft
- Is NOT shown as a TIS-B target to client aircraft when within SSR coverage (since the system is using ADS-R to show you as a more precise target to those clients)
- Does (if properly configured) make your glider a client of ADS-B ground based services so you can see other traffic vis ADS-R and TIS-B (but remember PowerFLARM does not display ADS-R or TIS-B traffic)
- Is NOT visible to ATC via ADS-B (ATC can still see you when within SSR coverage)
- Does NOT provide flight privilege in airspace in 14 CFR 91.225 that requires ADS-B Out, remembering gliders already have some exemptions there.

You would only do this install in a type certified glider where the TN70 option was too expensive or the slightly larger GPS case could not fit (I hope folks would work out how to make it fit). Or in type certified or experimental glider if you had a TT21 and did not want to have it upgraded to a TT22. In an experimental glider you can just use a TN72 GPS to do full 2020 Compliance/SIL=3 which you can't do in a type certified glider since the TN72 GPS is not TSO-C145 approved but the TN70 GPS is.

3) SIL=3 (Trig TT22 (not TT21) with either a TN72 GPS in an experimental glider or TN70 GPS in a type certified glider). This is a fully 14 CFR 91.227 2020 ADS-B Out compliant system and provides the following capabilities for your glider -

- Has all the standard transponder capabilities, including ATC SSR visibility and PCAS, TCAD and TCAS compatibility.
- Is visible to portable 1090ES In traffic displays (e.g. a Stratus or Stratux receiver driving EFB software).
- Is visible to PowerFLARM (with ADS-B In Option)
- Is visible to certificated fixed install 1090ES In traffic displays in GA aircraft and above
- Is visible to UAT In equipped aircraft - via ADS-R rebroadcast by the ground infrastructure to suitably equipped client aircraft
- Is NOT shown as a TIS-B target to client aircraft when within SSR coverage (since the system is using ADS-R to show you as a more precise target to those clients)
- Does (if properly configured) make your glider a client of ADS-B ground based services so you can see other traffic vis ADS-R and TIS-B (but remember PowerFLARM cannot display ADS-R or TIS-B traffic).
- Is visible to ATC via ADS-B (including outside of SSR coverage)
- Does provide flight privilege in airspace in 14 CFR 91.225 that requires ADS-B Out, remembering gliders already have some exemptions there.

---

I'm still wondering if ... the TABS system will allow us to be seen by ATC and get clearances to transit restricted or CLASS B,C airspace. If not, I'd have to go for the more expensive TN-70 ... full compliant.

TABS is not 14 CFR 91.227 complaint so does not give you any flight privileges in airspace that requires ADS-B Out in 14 CFR 91.225. So TABS should not ever have been though of as an option there. It's a system really "engineered" (technically and regulation wise) to provide aircraft-aircraft traffic awareness, not ATC surveillance.

And in practice, as far as I am aware (and noted in the lists above) the ATC systems are just not configured to allow ATC to see SIL=1 targets. They only display SIL=3. ATC will still see you via SSR when within SSR coverage. Lack of ATC visibility may make TABS not so appealing for many folks. For others TABS may be a nice easier option to provide visibility to GA aircraft in busy areas (especially where ATC can see you via SSR anyhow) and especially if you are combining with a traffic display that can show you ADS-R and TIS-B traffic.

If 2020 ADS-B Out airspace flight privileges is one of the things you want and you have a type certified glider then a TN70+TT22 is what you should be installing. A few of those install have happened and more are in progress. You or your A&P may want to talk to me before getting started, it's actually pretty easy, I mostly just want to make sure people don't make it more complex than it needs to be.

Are we having fun yet? Remember I'm just reporting how it works, I didn't design the damned thing. :-)

On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 7:30:25 PM UTC-8, WaltWX wrote:
Daryl,

I'm still a bit confused about SIL=0 , SIL=1 and SIL=3

1) SIL=0 means that it will not trigger the ADS-R or TIS-B. Only FLARM with ADS-B will see these targets. ATC will not

2) SIL=1 (TABs system TN-72 attached to Trig). This will trigger ADS-R and TIS-B ... will ATC controllers also see us?

3) SIL=3 FULL 2020 ADS-B Out compliant.

Did I get this right?

I'm still wondering if option 2) the TABS system will allow us to be seen by ATC and get clearances to transit restricted or CLASS B,C airspace. If not, I'd have to go for the more expensive TN-70 ... full compliant.

Walt Rogers

If you fly Experimental in airspace where you're not required to meet FAR 91.227 compliance, why wouldn't you configure your TN72 + TT21 to SIL=3? The only functional difference is that TN72 + TT22 (with SIL=3) puts out a stronger signal.

--------------email from Trig Avionics Sept 2017 posted below------------

Dear son_of_flubber,

Thank you for your enquiry, and for choosing to support Trig. The TT21 is fully certified to the latest ADS-B Out cert TSO C166b – so it can output all the required data. It is true that if you wish to meet ADS-B Out compliance FAR 91.227, you should have a higher power TT22. However, there is no way for the radar to tell if you’re using a TT21 or TT22. Inspection of your aircraft would be the only way to tell. As such I believe a number of experimental pilots have opted to ignore the requirement, but of course I cannot recommend this as it would be in violation of FAR 91.227 – the requirements for 2020 compliance.


The TN72 offers both a SIL =1 output, and also a SIL = 3 output. So this means that you can meet the FAA compliance check using your TN72 plus TT21. https://adsbperformance.faa.gov/PAPRRequest.aspx


-------------------email from Trig posted above ------------------

On Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 11:23:27 AM UTC-8, son_of_flubber wrote:
If you fly Experimental in airspace where you're not required to meet FAR 91.227 compliance, why wouldn't you configure your TN72 + TT21 to SIL=3? The only functional difference is that TN72 + TT22 (with SIL=3) puts out a stronger signal.

Because that is a violation of 14 CFR 91.227. Good luck with your next ramp check :-)

The reason for the FAA requiring high-power transponders to be used for ADS-B Out is to allow for the larger spacing between ADS-B Out ground stations.. The inconsistency that this is really required is awkward. If say ADS-R did not work reliably with lower-power TABS devices at longer distanced from ground stations that could be a dangerous by providing a false sense of traffic awareness/services being provided.

The Trig reply is a bit confusing as the situation has nothing to do with SSR radar per se. If the FAA really wanted to they might be able to profile suspected low-output power ADS-B Out sources. Possibly sitting on top of some technology already in the ADS-B ground infrastructure. But it would produce huge numbers of false positives. Maybe they just pick glider suspects. Or maybe they just ramp check all experimental gliders with SIL=3 ADS-B Out because of posts on public forums suggesting the possibility of violating 14 CFR.

Darryl,

Thanks for your detailed reply.

The main reason I would equip with TABS on my Trig T22 is if ATC would allow a clearance to briefly transit Restricted airspace or Class B,C. In my area the most common scenario is transiting the corner of a restricted area after talking with Joshua Approach (Edwards AFB). Do you think ATC would continue to allow this with a TABS device? ... i.e. ... we are still visible with SSR but not fully 2020 ADS-B compliant. In my mind, the jury is still out regarding this scenario.

That's why I'll wait until after Jan 1, 2020... to see how this all pans out. The cost (power, space and $) of full ADS-B out compliance is too high at this point.

Certainly, there are good reasons for having ADS-B out using TABS... mainly being a good "aviation citizen"... and visible accurately to other aircraft. There are other reasons: triggering ADS-R, TIS-B, being visible to FlightAware ground stations, strong PowerFlarm target, and AERION for search and rescue/tracking. Why shouldn't ATC also have this benefit by seeing us as a SIL=1 TABS target?

I know... you are just the messenger of this insane system

Walt Rogers

Walt

I mostly doubt TABS will make any difference in the discussion. Lack of 2020 Compliant ADS-B Out quite likely will.

And most FAA folks will have *no* idea what TABS is. It’s orthogonal to FAA NAS surveilience. It is not 2020 compliance ADS-B Out stuff that has so many FAA folks are kept busy with right now.

So if in your position I would go talk to your local controllers, ask about/explain TABS. See what they say about future airspace transits. Check wether they indeed can’t see SIL=1 targets, Who knows, Joshua RAPCON for example might be different than other facilities but I doubt it. If you want help on the technical discussion bits I am more than happy to talk to folks there with you.

I can speak at the moment about the LX Navigation Eagle. Stay away from it for now, the support as of March 2019 seems non-existent after filing tickets and multiple reminders. The only reply was a promise to get to it without follow through. Perhaps they will staff up at a future time. My issue was what I believe to be a defective unit with inactive Rx/Tx adter what I believe to be proper firmware prep and proper wiring. I am returning it for a PowerMouse.

It turned out to be a CPU issue, LX Navigation arranged for a replacement Flarm Eagle with ADS-B which worked immediately upon boot so I can now recommend their unit and support.

I would rather have a heads up on another aircraft with a circular error
probability of a mile or a half mile than nothing because the GPS
position was not the greatest...

On 12/14/2018 7:18 PM, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 6:02:14 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 3:42:39 PM UTC-8, WaltWX wrote:
I hear that PowerMouse will include an ADS-B option and possibly ADS-R / TIS-B (for those of you not in U.S .. these are FAA ground rebroadcasts of ADS-B 1090 packets and transponder only aircraft). No word on whether the PowerFlarm will add this firmware upgrade.

Does anyone know when the PowerMouse will ADS-B becomes available? .... and whether the PowerFlarm core is considering including these features?

Walt Rogers WX
Hi Walt

The LXNav PowerMouse is based on a new generation FLARM chipset. It has an optional ADS-B In feature, built on a new FLARM 1090ES chip that supports ADS-R and hopefully TIS-B (at a protocol level they actually look pretty much the same but I want to see how well things work in reality especially with close traffic alerts).

I hope LXNav and USA dealers are smart enough to only sell the version with ADS-B In option the USA.

There was some hope that PowerFLARM (core and portable) woud add ADS-R and TIS-B support, and I've mentioned that before on r.a.s. Flarm looked at doing this but unfortunately it was not practical. The 1090ES internals of the PowerFLARM and these newer product are significantly different.

Richard from Craggy just posted in another thread on r.a.s.:"The LXNAV PowerMouse has been submitted for FCC USA certified. They are expecting certification in January." So check in with Richard or other LXNav dealer. I have one on order. :-)

ADS-R and TIS-B support really only matters for folks who have 2020 Compliant ADS-B Out or TABS... either of which will trigger the ADS-R and TIS-B ground services for their aircraft. So I hope folks who have PowerFLARM today and want this will upgrade to a PowerMouse and find a great purchaser of their existing PowerFLARM. I'm hoping folks think of supporting junior XC pilots and help those pilots get their hands on PowerFLARM units if they don't already have them.

LX Navigation also has a new FLARM Eagle product coming that uses the same FLARM and 1090ES chipset as the LXNav PowerMouse. I have not heard anything cogent about LX Navigation FCC certification plans for with this product. And that's the hurdle these products have to get over for sale in the USA.
And I want to point out one irony. To emphasize the need to get ADS-B Out sorted out.

Owners will be able to connect up say the PowerMouse GPS via NMEA to a Trig transponder and get the transponder to transmit ADS-B out. But that is SIL=0 (Source Integrity Level), not 2020 Complaint (SIL=3) or even TABS complaint (SIL=1). A SIL=0 GPS source will let other PowerFLARM and PowerMouse users with ADS-B In options see you at long distances (I'm hearing reports of "60 mile" range from some pilots) and let GA folks with portable 1090ES In receivers see you. But you remain invisible to lots of other stuff that ignores low quality GPS source equipped ADS-B targets, including ATC not being able to see your aircraft via ADS-B (they can see you still be SSR when within SSR coverage).... in fact you need full 2020 Compliance/SIL-3 for ATC to see you via ADS-B. Which effectively makes TABS/SIL=1 a lot less interesting than it could be.

SIL=0 is s not high enough quality to make your aircraft a client of the ADS-R or TIS-B services. So even though a PowerMouse is sophisticated enough to decode and use ADS-R and TIS-B and uses it's own GPS to know where it is, you don't really want to use that GPS to power your own ADS-B Out... for that you need a Trig TN-72 or TN70 GPS source (for owners of type certified gliders who want to be fully 2020 ADS-B Out compliant).






--
Dan, 5J