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 panel display



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old October 11th 18, 07:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default ADSB panel display

On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 8:46:16 AM UTC-7, Tom BravoMike wrote:
On Wednesday, October 10, 2018 at 10:49:56 PM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
You do realize that almost every glider flying around Minden has Flarm, so your highest risk in Minden area is glider midair.(snip) Ramy


If those over 100 gliders around Minden don't have a transponder (because they gave a priority to the PowerFlarm), they are a threat to the GA in the area, and anywhere else. If they do have transponders, they will be seen on ADSB (and PF)devices.


What I resist and can't agree with is that PowerFlarm supporters expect that gliders, with their very limited panels space and electrical energy supply, be equipped with BOTH a transponder AND the Flarm. . Yes, what we need is a device combining both, ideally… and in the meantime - wait, there no meantime, get the ADS-B now!


I'm not sure I understand your point.

Depending on where you fly (lots of power traffic or lots of glider traffic) the first priority ought to be a Mode-S transponder or a PowerFLARM (respectively) and the second priority ought to be the other one. ADS-B Out comes third and ADS-B In (other than the ADS-B In found in PowerFLARM comes last.
Ads
  #32  
Old October 11th 18, 08:29 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom BravoMike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 142
Default ADSB panel display

Depending on where you fly (lots of power traffic or lots of glider traffic) the first priority ought to be a Mode-S transponder or a PowerFLARM (respectively) and the second priority ought to be the other one. ADS-B Out comes third and ADS-B In (other than the ADS-B In found in PowerFLARM comes last. (…)

"Depending on where you fly"... Quite a number of us, glider pilots, don't fly in just one area - and that includes myself. For the last few years I managed to take my glider from Mid-West to Seminole for the winter season. The GA traffic along the edge of the Orlando Class B is immense, and by its nature the Florida peninsula is a 'corridor' used by the military and all kinds of GA aircraft. So Mode-S transponder capable of adding ADS-B should be - IMHO - the first choice if you add new safety equipment. And the ADS-B In receiver should not be even mentioned as an alternative choice because with its low price these days - under a $100 -it should be an early add-on in any combination. And only after that would PowerFlarm be a hesitant consideration to me, because of the expense, and space, and power draining and.... yes, antennas, cables, GPS receivers (distance!), software updates, poor range complaints etc.
  #33  
Old October 11th 18, 10:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,185
Default ADSB panel display

On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:30:05 AM UTC-7, Alastair Lyas wrote:
Might be worth waiting for products combining both ADSB and
Flarm?


The uAvionix SkyEcho 2 is innovative in ways, but to me it has lots of limitations and is just not that interesting for the USA glider market at least, which is why I've not mentioned it before on r.a.s. But here goes...

I always expect there is interesting stuff coming, but folks do need to be a little careful what they might decide to wait for. Well over a decade ago some folks in the Minden area were waiting for mythical UAT devices that never happened, lots of handwaving not grounded in reality, and in some cases owners unfortunately were putting off transponder adoption because of that. Let's not repeat anything like that again. And for the SkyEcho 2 we don't need to wait to actually look at what this device does or does not do since documentation has been available for a while. And much of my comments below come from just reading that documentation... but OK, with a pretty good understanding of the underlying technology.

The SkyEcho 2 does not include a FLARM transceiver, so in the USA today you would be adding a PowerFLARM to it via the FLARMBridge option to get FLARM capability. That immediately makes it uninteresting to lots of glider owners. According to the documentation the combined devices do *not* take ADS-B traffic and output that on a FLARM serial protocol link so the usual traffic displays used in a glider can see them... it seems to only works the other way and takes FLARM traffic and adds it to what is being sent over GLD-90 protocol to GA EFBs etc. The reverse of what most glider pilots want in a cockpit (and what PowerFLARM does today for 1090ES Direct traffic). And I'll bet it converts PowerFLARMs more useful traffic warnings say when thermalling with other gliders into ADS-B warnings going off all the time nonsense. And given how the FLARM ICD (serial protocol) and GLD-90 works I doubt there is any sane way not to have to do that. But OK, it is what it is, and very clearly this product is *not* aimed at gliders.

I'm not sure uAvionix have promised USA FCC approval for that device yet. I expect they are likely to. It's not FCC approved today so can't even be advertised in the USA... which may well be why there is nothing mentioned on their USA website or why they don't want to irritate the FCC by even talking about it. Having been to the FCC approval mosh pit (I was going to call it a dance :-)) several times before uAvionix should know very well what they are doing with FCC approval.

Their launch for the product was very UK centric, which was pretty interesting given how far behind overall ADS-B adoption is in Europe vs. the USA, they seem to be hoping to move that needle, ride on UK interest in TABS and FIS-B trials and combining some FLARM capability. So quite a intersting kitchen sink of a product for those uses and very interesting that uAvionix are so growth oriented they are lookin at trying to seed that market.

So then you want to ask if you need an actual PowerFLARM device to connect to the SkyEcho 2 to do FLARM then what else does the SkyEcho 2 provide, and importantly is it a replacement for a transponder?

Importantly the SkyEcho 2 *not* a full transponder but does implement TABS/TSO-C199 so should provide compatibility with TCAS which is obviously important. I'd love to see one working. ATC will likely not see that device however and that's going to be an issue in many places near busy ATC areas. ATC *does* sees Trig transponders running as TABS devices, as they are full transponders underneath the TABS 1090ES Out part. The ATC visibility part is a large concern for me, especially around places like the Minden area which this thread started with. Without ATC visibility I would not recommend that device for use in that area. I'd love to eventually get my hands on one to confirm and to talk about it with the friendly NOCAL TRACON tech folks who cover the Reno area.

You also can't install this (or any other TABS) device in an aircraft with an existing Mode C or Mode S transponder.... so can't get visibility to ATC that way. I can't imagine any glider owner with a transponder in their glider who would want to pull it out and replace it with a SkyEcho 2 if that meant losing visibility to ATC... a large part of why they installed the transponder to start with.

The SkyEcho 2 also won't meet FAA 2020 ADS-B Out requirements, and although gliders are partially exempt, we still have folks who want to say overfly Class C airspace (but below 10,000').

It's a little confusing in some many ways the SkyEcho seems more targeted at UAVs (or maybe ultralights) but things like UAT In/FIS-B is more a GA feature, so it sure is an intersting product to follow for geeks like me, but kind of wedged into a space between others products, especially with full Mode S/1090ES Out transponders on one side. We'll see....

Other products with combined ADS-B and FLARM capabilities...

PowerFLARM today does 1090ES In (Direct only, no ADS-R and TIS-B) and FLARM.. (effectively all PowerFLARM sold in the USA have the 1090ES In option).

LXNav PowerMouse is coming, apparently undergoing FCC approval, with its ADS-B In option it does 1090ES In (but unlike PowerFLARM it *does* ADS-R and hopefully TIS-B) and FLARM. (hopefully LXNav will be smart here and the PowerMouse sold in the USA will all have 1090ES In option).

Other vendors like AirAvionic have new FLARM products with 1090ES In capabilities coming, I wish they would start describing those product specs and capabilities more clearly and ideally clarifying their plans for the USA market. (their ATD57 display is still great however if anybody wants a dedicated FLARM display).

---

Alastair I assume you are in the UK? or elsewhere in Europe. I'm you not sure why you care about FLARM and the USA with a LXNav 9070, but if you really want to operate in the USA hopefully you have a standard PowerFLARM external box (i.e. a model with FCC approval) connected to the 9070.

  #34  
Old October 11th 18, 11:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,185
Default ADSB panel display

On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 12:29:57 PM UTC-7, Tom BravoMike wrote:
Depending on where you fly (lots of power traffic or lots of glider traffic) the first priority ought to be a Mode-S transponder or a PowerFLARM (respectively) and the second priority ought to be the other one. ADS-B Out comes third and ADS-B In (other than the ADS-B In found in PowerFLARM comes last. (…)


"Depending on where you fly"... Quite a number of us, glider pilots, don't fly in just one area - and that includes myself. For the last few years I managed to take my glider from Mid-West to Seminole for the winter season. The GA traffic along the edge of the Orlando Class B is immense, and by its nature the Florida peninsula is a 'corridor' used by the military and all kinds of GA aircraft. So Mode-S transponder capable of adding ADS-B should be - IMHO - the first choice if you add new safety equipment. And the ADS-B In receiver should not be even mentioned as an alternative choice because with its low price these days - under a $100 -it should be an early add-on in any combination. And only after that would PowerFlarm be a hesitant consideration to me, because of the expense, and space, and power draining and.... yes, antennas, cables, GPS receivers (distance!), software updates, poor range complaints etc.


I'm not sure who you are trying to address here, I expect most glider pilots who fly in the Minden area realize they should be equipped with a Transponder and PowerFLARM. Needs/justifications in other places with be different.. Maybe I'm badly skewed to high-end gliders and pilots but I most of the XC pilots I know who fly in the area have both.

---

It would be great if you could explained exactly what you have equipped your glider with and how well that works in busy thermals. The ADS-B In system cost you how much? Including display? EFB/flight software? I doubt it was less than $100. What is the total power draw of all that equipment? Are you receiving ADS-R and TIS-B? With other gliders equipped with a range of traffic technology? How did it work in those cases? What about TIS-B issues with transponder equipped other gliders? You running 2020 complaint or TABS or ...?

ADS-B In receivers I have experience with (like Stratux driving ForeFlight), turn into a useless mess in a thermal of other gliders. More distracting than helpful like FLARM. It's one thing to suggesting people add technology, but if if that technology can distracts more than it helps at critical times then it's a problem. Of course if you usually don't fly with with other gliders, then meh, who cares, but that is far from usual for most folks here. The issue with GA oriented ADS-B in systems being less than useless in thermals, and not working at all with standard glider traffic displays sure makes those GA oriented ADS-B In systems not the automatic second choice behind transponders for many of us, at any cost point.... even if the cost was *free*, they are not free of issues. I actually see more, but still low, interest now at least out West with a few glider pilots wanting UAT-In to get FIS-B/WX/TFR data than wanting ADS-B In (beyond PowerFLARM) for traffic data.

And Ramy who you seem to be trying to argue with... his ASG-29,.... yep just a Trig TT21, TN71 for TABS ADS-B Out, and PowerFLARM with 1090ES in. One of the first gliders on the west coast to have any ADS-B Out installed. But he's slacking with only a TT21/TABS, hopefully he will upgrade to a TT22 and 2020 Complaint ADS-B Out In his new AS33.

  #35  
Old October 12th 18, 12:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,185
Default ADSB panel display

Grrr GDL-90 not GLD-90. Autocorrect seems to be dyslexic.

On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:47:12 PM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:30:05 AM UTC-7, Alastair Lyas wrote:
Might be worth waiting for products combining both ADSB and
Flarm?


The uAvionix SkyEcho 2 is innovative in ways, but to me it has lots of limitations and is just not that interesting for the USA glider market at least, which is why I've not mentioned it before on r.a.s. But here goes...

I always expect there is interesting stuff coming, but folks do need to be a little careful what they might decide to wait for. Well over a decade ago some folks in the Minden area were waiting for mythical UAT devices that never happened, lots of handwaving not grounded in reality, and in some cases owners unfortunately were putting off transponder adoption because of that. Let's not repeat anything like that again. And for the SkyEcho 2 we don't need to wait to actually look at what this device does or does not do since documentation has been available for a while. And much of my comments below come from just reading that documentation... but OK, with a pretty good understanding of the underlying technology.

The SkyEcho 2 does not include a FLARM transceiver, so in the USA today you would be adding a PowerFLARM to it via the FLARMBridge option to get FLARM capability. That immediately makes it uninteresting to lots of glider owners. According to the documentation the combined devices do *not* take ADS-B traffic and output that on a FLARM serial protocol link so the usual traffic displays used in a glider can see them... it seems to only works the other way and takes FLARM traffic and adds it to what is being sent over GLD-90 protocol to GA EFBs etc. The reverse of what most glider pilots want in a cockpit (and what PowerFLARM does today for 1090ES Direct traffic). And I'll bet it converts PowerFLARMs more useful traffic warnings say when thermalling with other gliders into ADS-B warnings going off all the time nonsense. And given how the FLARM ICD (serial protocol) and GLD-90 works I doubt there is any sane way not to have to do that. But OK, it is what it is, and very clearly this product is *not* aimed at gliders.

I'm not sure uAvionix have promised USA FCC approval for that device yet. I expect they are likely to. It's not FCC approved today so can't even be advertised in the USA... which may well be why there is nothing mentioned on their USA website or why they don't want to irritate the FCC by even talking about it. Having been to the FCC approval mosh pit (I was going to call it a dance :-)) several times before uAvionix should know very well what they are doing with FCC approval.

Their launch for the product was very UK centric, which was pretty interesting given how far behind overall ADS-B adoption is in Europe vs. the USA, they seem to be hoping to move that needle, ride on UK interest in TABS and FIS-B trials and combining some FLARM capability. So quite a intersting kitchen sink of a product for those uses and very interesting that uAvionix are so growth oriented they are lookin at trying to seed that market.

So then you want to ask if you need an actual PowerFLARM device to connect to the SkyEcho 2 to do FLARM then what else does the SkyEcho 2 provide, and importantly is it a replacement for a transponder?

Importantly the SkyEcho 2 *not* a full transponder but does implement TABS/TSO-C199 so should provide compatibility with TCAS which is obviously important. I'd love to see one working. ATC will likely not see that device however and that's going to be an issue in many places near busy ATC areas. ATC *does* sees Trig transponders running as TABS devices, as they are full transponders underneath the TABS 1090ES Out part. The ATC visibility part is a large concern for me, especially around places like the Minden area which this thread started with. Without ATC visibility I would not recommend that device for use in that area. I'd love to eventually get my hands on one to confirm and to talk about it with the friendly NOCAL TRACON tech folks who cover the Reno area.

You also can't install this (or any other TABS) device in an aircraft with an existing Mode C or Mode S transponder.... so can't get visibility to ATC that way. I can't imagine any glider owner with a transponder in their glider who would want to pull it out and replace it with a SkyEcho 2 if that meant losing visibility to ATC... a large part of why they installed the transponder to start with.

The SkyEcho 2 also won't meet FAA 2020 ADS-B Out requirements, and although gliders are partially exempt, we still have folks who want to say overfly Class C airspace (but below 10,000').

It's a little confusing in some many ways the SkyEcho seems more targeted at UAVs (or maybe ultralights) but things like UAT In/FIS-B is more a GA feature, so it sure is an intersting product to follow for geeks like me, but kind of wedged into a space between others products, especially with full Mode S/1090ES Out transponders on one side. We'll see....

Other products with combined ADS-B and FLARM capabilities...

PowerFLARM today does 1090ES In (Direct only, no ADS-R and TIS-B) and FLARM. (effectively all PowerFLARM sold in the USA have the 1090ES In option).

LXNav PowerMouse is coming, apparently undergoing FCC approval, with its ADS-B In option it does 1090ES In (but unlike PowerFLARM it *does* ADS-R and hopefully TIS-B) and FLARM. (hopefully LXNav will be smart here and the PowerMouse sold in the USA will all have 1090ES In option).

Other vendors like AirAvionic have new FLARM products with 1090ES In capabilities coming, I wish they would start describing those product specs and capabilities more clearly and ideally clarifying their plans for the USA market. (their ATD57 display is still great however if anybody wants a dedicated FLARM display).

---

Alastair I assume you are in the UK? or elsewhere in Europe. I'm you not sure why you care about FLARM and the USA with a LXNav 9070, but if you really want to operate in the USA hopefully you have a standard PowerFLARM external box (i.e. a model with FCC approval) connected to the 9070.


  #36  
Old October 12th 18, 12:52 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathan St. Cloud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,037
Default ADSB panel display

On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:47:12 PM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:30:05 AM UTC-7, Alastair Lyas wrote:
Might be worth waiting for products combining both ADSB and
Flarm?


The uAvionix SkyEcho 2 is innovative in ways, but to me it has lots of limitations and is just not that interesting for the USA glider market at least, which is why I've not mentioned it before on r.a.s. But here goes...

I always expect there is interesting stuff coming, but folks do need to be a little careful what they might decide to wait for. Well over a decade ago some folks in the Minden area were waiting for mythical UAT devices that never happened, lots of handwaving not grounded in reality, and in some cases owners unfortunately were putting off transponder adoption because of that. Let's not repeat anything like that again. And for the SkyEcho 2 we don't need to wait to actually look at what this device does or does not do since documentation has been available for a while. And much of my comments below come from just reading that documentation... but OK, with a pretty good understanding of the underlying technology.

The SkyEcho 2 does not include a FLARM transceiver, so in the USA today you would be adding a PowerFLARM to it via the FLARMBridge option to get FLARM capability. That immediately makes it uninteresting to lots of glider owners. According to the documentation the combined devices do *not* take ADS-B traffic and output that on a FLARM serial protocol link so the usual traffic displays used in a glider can see them... it seems to only works the other way and takes FLARM traffic and adds it to what is being sent over GLD-90 protocol to GA EFBs etc. The reverse of what most glider pilots want in a cockpit (and what PowerFLARM does today for 1090ES Direct traffic). And I'll bet it converts PowerFLARMs more useful traffic warnings say when thermalling with other gliders into ADS-B warnings going off all the time nonsense. And given how the FLARM ICD (serial protocol) and GLD-90 works I doubt there is any sane way not to have to do that. But OK, it is what it is, and very clearly this product is *not* aimed at gliders.

I'm not sure uAvionix have promised USA FCC approval for that device yet. I expect they are likely to. It's not FCC approved today so can't even be advertised in the USA... which may well be why there is nothing mentioned on their USA website or why they don't want to irritate the FCC by even talking about it. Having been to the FCC approval mosh pit (I was going to call it a dance :-)) several times before uAvionix should know very well what they are doing with FCC approval.

Their launch for the product was very UK centric, which was pretty interesting given how far behind overall ADS-B adoption is in Europe vs. the USA, they seem to be hoping to move that needle, ride on UK interest in TABS and FIS-B trials and combining some FLARM capability. So quite a intersting kitchen sink of a product for those uses and very interesting that uAvionix are so growth oriented they are lookin at trying to seed that market.

So then you want to ask if you need an actual PowerFLARM device to connect to the SkyEcho 2 to do FLARM then what else does the SkyEcho 2 provide, and importantly is it a replacement for a transponder?

Importantly the SkyEcho 2 *not* a full transponder but does implement TABS/TSO-C199 so should provide compatibility with TCAS which is obviously important. I'd love to see one working. ATC will likely not see that device however and that's going to be an issue in many places near busy ATC areas. ATC *does* sees Trig transponders running as TABS devices, as they are full transponders underneath the TABS 1090ES Out part. The ATC visibility part is a large concern for me, especially around places like the Minden area which this thread started with. Without ATC visibility I would not recommend that device for use in that area. I'd love to eventually get my hands on one to confirm and to talk about it with the friendly NOCAL TRACON tech folks who cover the Reno area.

You also can't install this (or any other TABS) device in an aircraft with an existing Mode C or Mode S transponder.... so can't get visibility to ATC that way. I can't imagine any glider owner with a transponder in their glider who would want to pull it out and replace it with a SkyEcho 2 if that meant losing visibility to ATC... a large part of why they installed the transponder to start with.

The SkyEcho 2 also won't meet FAA 2020 ADS-B Out requirements, and although gliders are partially exempt, we still have folks who want to say overfly Class C airspace (but below 10,000').

It's a little confusing in some many ways the SkyEcho seems more targeted at UAVs (or maybe ultralights) but things like UAT In/FIS-B is more a GA feature, so it sure is an intersting product to follow for geeks like me, but kind of wedged into a space between others products, especially with full Mode S/1090ES Out transponders on one side. We'll see....

Other products with combined ADS-B and FLARM capabilities...

PowerFLARM today does 1090ES In (Direct only, no ADS-R and TIS-B) and FLARM. (effectively all PowerFLARM sold in the USA have the 1090ES In option).

LXNav PowerMouse is coming, apparently undergoing FCC approval, with its ADS-B In option it does 1090ES In (but unlike PowerFLARM it *does* ADS-R and hopefully TIS-B) and FLARM. (hopefully LXNav will be smart here and the PowerMouse sold in the USA will all have 1090ES In option).

Other vendors like AirAvionic have new FLARM products with 1090ES In capabilities coming, I wish they would start describing those product specs and capabilities more clearly and ideally clarifying their plans for the USA market. (their ATD57 display is still great however if anybody wants a dedicated FLARM display).

---

Alastair I assume you are in the UK? or elsewhere in Europe. I'm you not sure why you care about FLARM and the USA with a LXNav 9070, but if you really want to operate in the USA hopefully you have a standard PowerFLARM external box (i.e. a model with FCC approval) connected to the 9070.


You are a stud!

J
  #37  
Old October 12th 18, 03:43 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Ramy[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 382
Default ADSB panel display

On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 3:55:03 PM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 12:29:57 PM UTC-7, Tom BravoMike wrote:
Depending on where you fly (lots of power traffic or lots of glider traffic) the first priority ought to be a Mode-S transponder or a PowerFLARM (respectively) and the second priority ought to be the other one. ADS-B Out comes third and ADS-B In (other than the ADS-B In found in PowerFLARM comes last. (…)


"Depending on where you fly"... Quite a number of us, glider pilots, don't fly in just one area - and that includes myself. For the last few years I managed to take my glider from Mid-West to Seminole for the winter season. The GA traffic along the edge of the Orlando Class B is immense, and by its nature the Florida peninsula is a 'corridor' used by the military and all kinds of GA aircraft. So Mode-S transponder capable of adding ADS-B should be - IMHO - the first choice if you add new safety equipment. And the ADS-B In receiver should not be even mentioned as an alternative choice because with its low price these days - under a $100 -it should be an early add-on in any combination. And only after that would PowerFlarm be a hesitant consideration to me, because of the expense, and space, and power draining and... yes, antennas, cables, GPS receivers (distance!), software updates, poor range complaints etc.


I'm not sure who you are trying to address here, I expect most glider pilots who fly in the Minden area realize they should be equipped with a Transponder and PowerFLARM. Needs/justifications in other places with be different. Maybe I'm badly skewed to high-end gliders and pilots but I most of the XC pilots I know who fly in the area have both.

---

It would be great if you could explained exactly what you have equipped your glider with and how well that works in busy thermals. The ADS-B In system cost you how much? Including display? EFB/flight software? I doubt it was less than $100. What is the total power draw of all that equipment? Are you receiving ADS-R and TIS-B? With other gliders equipped with a range of traffic technology? How did it work in those cases? What about TIS-B issues with transponder equipped other gliders? You running 2020 complaint or TABS or ...?

ADS-B In receivers I have experience with (like Stratux driving ForeFlight), turn into a useless mess in a thermal of other gliders. More distracting than helpful like FLARM. It's one thing to suggesting people add technology, but if if that technology can distracts more than it helps at critical times then it's a problem. Of course if you usually don't fly with with other gliders, then meh, who cares, but that is far from usual for most folks here. The issue with GA oriented ADS-B in systems being less than useless in thermals, and not working at all with standard glider traffic displays sure makes those GA oriented ADS-B In systems not the automatic second choice behind transponders for many of us, at any cost point.... even if the cost was *free*, they are not free of issues. I actually see more, but still low, interest now at least out West with a few glider pilots wanting UAT-In to get FIS-B/WX/TFR data than wanting ADS-B In (beyond PowerFLARM) for traffic data.

And Ramy who you seem to be trying to argue with... his ASG-29,.... yep just a Trig TT21, TN71 for TABS ADS-B Out, and PowerFLARM with 1090ES in. One of the first gliders on the west coast to have any ADS-B Out installed. But he's slacking with only a TT21/TABS, hopefully he will upgrade to a TT22 and 2020 Complaint ADS-B Out In his new AS33.


And to add to what Darryl said, I was pretty sure I wrote that transponder should be the first priority and indeed I said "powerflarm should be your next priority after transponder."
Powerflarm core does not require panel space. You can integrate with many flight computers (not XCSoar which has very limited powerflarm support) or a butterfly display which you can stick just about anywhere.

Ramy
  #38  
Old October 12th 18, 09:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Alastair Lyas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default ADSB panel display


Is RAS for the US only? Are you going to build a (fire)wall?


At 21:47 11 October 2018, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:30:05 AM UTC-7, Alastair

Lyas wrote:
Might be worth waiting for products combining both ADSB

and=20
Flarm?


The uAvionix SkyEcho 2 is innovative in ways, but to me it has lots

of
limi=
tations and is just not that interesting for the USA glider market at
least=
, which is why I've not mentioned it before on r.a.s. But here

goes...

I always expect there is interesting stuff coming, but folks do

need to
be=
a little careful what they might decide to wait for. Well over a

decade
ag=
o some folks in the Minden area were waiting for mythical UAT

devices that
=
never happened, lots of handwaving not grounded in reality, and in

some
cas=
es owners unfortunately were putting off transponder adoption

because of
th=
at. Let's not repeat anything like that again. And for the SkyEcho 2

we
don=
't need to wait to actually look at what this device does or does not

do
si=
nce documentation has been available for a while. And much of my

comments
b=
elow come from just reading that documentation... but OK, with a

pretty
goo=
d understanding of the underlying technology.

The SkyEcho 2 does not include a FLARM transceiver, so in the

USA today
you=
would be adding a PowerFLARM to it via the FLARMBridge option

to get
FLARM=
capability. That immediately makes it uninteresting to lots of

glider
owne=
rs. According to the documentation the combined devices do *not*

take
ADS-B=
traffic and output that on a FLARM serial protocol link so the usual
traff=
ic displays used in a glider can see them... it seems to only works

the
oth=
er way and takes FLARM traffic and adds it to what is being sent

over
GLD-9=
0 protocol to GA EFBs etc. The reverse of what most glider pilots

want in
a=
cockpit (and what PowerFLARM does today for 1090ES Direct

traffic). And
I'=
ll bet it converts PowerFLARMs more useful traffic warnings say

when
therma=
lling with other gliders into ADS-B warnings going off all the time
nonsen=
se. And given how the FLARM ICD (serial protocol) and GLD-90

works I doubt
=
there is any sane way not to have to do that. But OK, it is what it

is,
and=
very clearly this product is *not* aimed at gliders.

I'm not sure uAvionix have promised USA FCC approval for that

device yet.
I=
expect they are likely to. It's not FCC approved today so can't

even be
ad=
vertised in the USA... which may well be why there is nothing

mentioned on
=
their USA website or why they don't want to irritate the FCC by

even
talkin=
g about it. Having been to the FCC approval mosh pit (I was going

to call
=
it a dance :-)) several times before uAvionix should know very

well what
t=
hey are doing with FCC approval.

Their launch for the product was very UK centric, which was pretty
interest=
ing given how far behind overall ADS-B adoption is in Europe vs.

the USA,
t=
hey seem to be hoping to move that needle, ride on UK interest in

TABS and
=
FIS-B trials and combining some FLARM capability. So quite a

intersting
kit=
chen sink of a product for those uses and very interesting that

uAvionix
ar=
e so growth oriented they are lookin at trying to seed that market.

So then you want to ask if you need an actual PowerFLARM device

to
connect=
to the SkyEcho 2 to do FLARM then what else does the SkyEcho 2

provide,
a=
nd importantly is it a replacement for a transponder?

Importantly the SkyEcho 2 *not* a full transponder but does

implement
TABS/=
TSO-C199 so should provide compatibility with TCAS which is

obviously
impor=
tant. I'd love to see one working. ATC will likely not see that device
howe=
ver and that's going to be an issue in many places near busy ATC

areas.
AT=
C *does* sees Trig transponders running as TABS devices, as they

are full
t=
ransponders underneath the TABS 1090ES Out part. The ATC

visibility part
is=
a large concern for me, especially around places like the Minden

area
whic=
h this thread started with. Without ATC visibility I would not

recommend
th=
at device for use in that area. I'd love to eventually get my hands

on one
=
to confirm and to talk about it with the friendly NOCAL TRACON

tech folks
w=
ho cover the Reno area.

You also can't install this (or any other TABS) device in an aircraft

with
=
an existing Mode C or Mode S transponder.... so can't get visibility

to
ATC=
that way. I can't imagine any glider owner with a transponder in

their
gli=
der who would want to pull it out and replace it with a SkyEcho 2

if that
=
meant losing visibility to ATC... a large part of why they installed

the
tr=
ansponder to start with.

The SkyEcho 2 also won't meet FAA 2020 ADS-B Out

requirements, and
although=
gliders are partially exempt, we still have folks who want to say

overfly
=
Class C airspace (but below 10,000').

It's a little confusing in some many ways the SkyEcho seems more

targeted
a=
t UAVs (or maybe ultralights) but things like UAT In/FIS-B is more

a GA
fea=
ture, so it sure is an intersting product to follow for geeks like me,
but=
kind of wedged into a space between others products, especially

with full
=
Mode S/1090ES Out transponders on one side. We'll see....

Other products with combined ADS-B and FLARM capabilities...

PowerFLARM today does 1090ES In (Direct only, no ADS-R and

TIS-B) and
FLARM=
.. (effectively all PowerFLARM sold in the USA have the 1090ES In

option).=
=20

LXNav PowerMouse is coming, apparently undergoing FCC

approval, with its
A=
DS-B In option it does 1090ES In (but unlike PowerFLARM it

*does* ADS-R
an=
d hopefully TIS-B) and FLARM. (hopefully LXNav will be smart here

and the
P=
owerMouse sold in the USA will all have 1090ES In option).

Other vendors like AirAvionic have new FLARM products with

1090ES In
capabi=
lities coming, I wish they would start describing those product

specs and
c=
apabilities more clearly and ideally clarifying their plans for the

USA
mar=
ket. (their ATD57 display is still great however if anybody wants a
dedicat=
ed FLARM display).

---

Alastair I assume you are in the UK? or elsewhere in Europe. I'm

you not
su=
re why you care about FLARM and the USA with a LXNav 9070, but

if you
real=
ly want to operate in the USA hopefully you have a standard

PowerFLARM
exte=
rnal box (i.e. a model with FCC approval) connected to the 9070.



  #39  
Old October 12th 18, 09:33 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Alastair Lyas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default ADSB panel display


If you fly anywhere near other gliders then a simple proximity alarm
is going to get pretty annoying and be pretty useless. If you fly near
GA then ADSB is going to become essential. This is true of the US,
the UK, and probably EU. If you fly in a glider with finite battery
then an ADSB transceiver makes a whole lot more sense than a
transponder.

Regulation will need to catch-up, and the product set needs to
evolve. Flarm and UAVionix are working together. What they need is
to hear from gliderpilots about what solutions will work for us.
Otherwise all they will design for is GA.

My view is we want a combined Powerflarm / ADSB OEM module
that can slot into the native gliding navigation systems. With
software configurability to deal with the regional legalities of doing
this in the short term.


At 23:52 11 October 2018, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:47:12 PM UTC-7, Darryl

Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:30:05 AM UTC-7, Alastair

Lyas wrote:
Might be worth waiting for products combining both ADSB

and=20
Flarm?

=20
The uAvionix SkyEcho 2 is innovative in ways, but to me it has

lots of
li=
mitations and is just not that interesting for the USA glider market

at
lea=
st, which is why I've not mentioned it before on r.a.s. But here

goes...
=20
I always expect there is interesting stuff coming, but folks do

need to
=
be a little careful what they might decide to wait for. Well over a

decade
=
ago some folks in the Minden area were waiting for mythical UAT

devices
tha=
t never happened, lots of handwaving not grounded in reality, and

in some
c=
ases owners unfortunately were putting off transponder adoption

because of
=
that. Let's not repeat anything like that again. And for the SkyEcho

2 we
d=
on't need to wait to actually look at what this device does or does

not do
=
since documentation has been available for a while. And much of

my
comments=
below come from just reading that documentation... but OK, with

a pretty
g=
ood understanding of the underlying technology.
=20
The SkyEcho 2 does not include a FLARM transceiver, so in the

USA today
y=
ou would be adding a PowerFLARM to it via the FLARMBridge

option to get
FLA=
RM capability. That immediately makes it uninteresting to lots of

glider
ow=
ners. According to the documentation the combined devices do

*not* take
ADS=
-B traffic and output that on a FLARM serial protocol link so the

usual
tra=
ffic displays used in a glider can see them... it seems to only works

the
o=
ther way and takes FLARM traffic and adds it to what is being sent

over
GLD=
-90 protocol to GA EFBs etc. The reverse of what most glider pilots

want
in=
a cockpit (and what PowerFLARM does today for 1090ES Direct

traffic). And
=
I'll bet it converts PowerFLARMs more useful traffic warnings say

when
ther=
malling with other gliders into ADS-B warnings going off all the

time
nons=
ense. And given how the FLARM ICD (serial protocol) and GLD-90

works I
doub=
t there is any sane way not to have to do that. But OK, it is what it

is,
a=
nd very clearly this product is *not* aimed at gliders.
=20
I'm not sure uAvionix have promised USA FCC approval for that

device
yet.=
I expect they are likely to. It's not FCC approved today so can't

even be
=
advertised in the USA... which may well be why there is nothing

mentioned
o=
n their USA website or why they don't want to irritate the FCC by

even
talk=
ing about it. Having been to the FCC approval mosh pit (I was

going to
cal=
l it a dance :-)) several times before uAvionix should know very

well
what=
they are doing with FCC approval.
=20
Their launch for the product was very UK centric, which was

pretty
intere=
sting given how far behind overall ADS-B adoption is in Europe vs.

the
USA,=
they seem to be hoping to move that needle, ride on UK interest

in TABS
an=
d FIS-B trials and combining some FLARM capability. So quite a

intersting
k=
itchen sink of a product for those uses and very interesting that

uAvionix
=
are so growth oriented they are lookin at trying to seed that

market.
=20
So then you want to ask if you need an actual PowerFLARM

device to
conne=
ct to the SkyEcho 2 to do FLARM then what else does the SkyEcho

2
provide,=
and importantly is it a replacement for a transponder?
=20
Importantly the SkyEcho 2 *not* a full transponder but does

implement
TAB=
S/TSO-C199 so should provide compatibility with TCAS which is

obviously
imp=
ortant. I'd love to see one working. ATC will likely not see that

device
ho=
wever and that's going to be an issue in many places near busy

ATC areas.
=
ATC *does* sees Trig transponders running as TABS devices, as

they are
full=
transponders underneath the TABS 1090ES Out part. The ATC

visibility part
=
is a large concern for me, especially around places like the Minden

area
wh=
ich this thread started with. Without ATC visibility I would not

recommend
=
that device for use in that area. I'd love to eventually get my

hands on
on=
e to confirm and to talk about it with the friendly NOCAL TRACON

tech
folks=
who cover the Reno area.
=20
You also can't install this (or any other TABS) device in an

aircraft
wit=
h an existing Mode C or Mode S transponder.... so can't get

visibility to
A=
TC that way. I can't imagine any glider owner with a transponder

in their
g=
lider who would want to pull it out and replace it with a SkyEcho 2

if
tha=
t meant losing visibility to ATC... a large part of why they installed

the
=
transponder to start with.
=20
The SkyEcho 2 also won't meet FAA 2020 ADS-B Out

requirements, and
althou=
gh gliders are partially exempt, we still have folks who want to say
overfl=
y Class C airspace (but below 10,000').
=20
It's a little confusing in some many ways the SkyEcho seems

more
targeted=
at UAVs (or maybe ultralights) but things like UAT In/FIS-B is

more a GA
f=
eature, so it sure is an intersting product to follow for geeks like

me,
b=
ut kind of wedged into a space between others products, especially

with
ful=
l Mode S/1090ES Out transponders on one side. We'll see....
=20
Other products with combined ADS-B and FLARM capabilities...
=20
PowerFLARM today does 1090ES In (Direct only, no ADS-R and

TIS-B) and
FLA=
RM. (effectively all PowerFLARM sold in the USA have the 1090ES

In
option).=
=20
=20
LXNav PowerMouse is coming, apparently undergoing FCC

approval, with
its=
ADS-B In option it does 1090ES In (but unlike PowerFLARM it

*does* ADS-R
=
and hopefully TIS-B) and FLARM. (hopefully LXNav will be smart

here and
the=
PowerMouse sold in the USA will all have 1090ES In option).
=20
Other vendors like AirAvionic have new FLARM products with

1090ES In
capa=
bilities coming, I wish they would start describing those product

specs
and=
capabilities more clearly and ideally clarifying their plans for the

USA
m=
arket. (their ATD57 display is still great however if anybody wants

a
dedic=
ated FLARM display).
=20
---
=20
Alastair I assume you are in the UK? or elsewhere in Europe. I'm

you not
=
sure why you care about FLARM and the USA with a LXNav 9070,

but if you
re=
ally want to operate in the USA hopefully you have a standard

PowerFLARM
ex=
ternal box (i.e. a model with FCC approval) connected to the 9070.

You are a stud!

J


  #40  
Old October 12th 18, 10:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,185
Default ADSB panel display


Oh we need stuff to "work together" and have "low power consumption". No **** batman. You just worked this out? I don't get the impression you have much of an idea of the technology here, but please do go explain to uAvionix and others what they should be doing for the glider market...


On Friday, October 12, 2018 at 1:45:03 AM UTC-7, Alastair Lyas wrote:
If you fly anywhere near other gliders then a simple proximity alarm
is going to get pretty annoying and be pretty useless. If you fly near
GA then ADSB is going to become essential. This is true of the US,
the UK, and probably EU. If you fly in a glider with finite battery
then an ADSB transceiver makes a whole lot more sense than a
transponder.

Regulation will need to catch-up, and the product set needs to
evolve. Flarm and UAVionix are working together. What they need is
to hear from gliderpilots about what solutions will work for us.
Otherwise all they will design for is GA.

My view is we want a combined Powerflarm / ADSB OEM module
that can slot into the native gliding navigation systems. With
software configurability to deal with the regional legalities of doing
this in the short term.


At 23:52 11 October 2018, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:47:12 PM UTC-7, Darryl

Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 2:30:05 AM UTC-7, Alastair

Lyas wrote:
Might be worth waiting for products combining both ADSB

and=20
Flarm?
=20
The uAvionix SkyEcho 2 is innovative in ways, but to me it has

lots of
li=
mitations and is just not that interesting for the USA glider market

at
lea=
st, which is why I've not mentioned it before on r.a.s. But here

goes...
=20
I always expect there is interesting stuff coming, but folks do

need to
=
be a little careful what they might decide to wait for. Well over a

decade
=
ago some folks in the Minden area were waiting for mythical UAT

devices
tha=
t never happened, lots of handwaving not grounded in reality, and

in some
c=
ases owners unfortunately were putting off transponder adoption

because of
=
that. Let's not repeat anything like that again. And for the SkyEcho

2 we
d=
on't need to wait to actually look at what this device does or does

not do
=
since documentation has been available for a while. And much of

my
comments=
below come from just reading that documentation... but OK, with

a pretty
g=
ood understanding of the underlying technology.
=20
The SkyEcho 2 does not include a FLARM transceiver, so in the

USA today
y=
ou would be adding a PowerFLARM to it via the FLARMBridge

option to get
FLA=
RM capability. That immediately makes it uninteresting to lots of

glider
ow=
ners. According to the documentation the combined devices do

*not* take
ADS=
-B traffic and output that on a FLARM serial protocol link so the

usual
tra=
ffic displays used in a glider can see them... it seems to only works

the
o=
ther way and takes FLARM traffic and adds it to what is being sent

over
GLD=
-90 protocol to GA EFBs etc. The reverse of what most glider pilots

want
in=
a cockpit (and what PowerFLARM does today for 1090ES Direct

traffic). And
=
I'll bet it converts PowerFLARMs more useful traffic warnings say

when
ther=
malling with other gliders into ADS-B warnings going off all the

time
nons=
ense. And given how the FLARM ICD (serial protocol) and GLD-90

works I
doub=
t there is any sane way not to have to do that. But OK, it is what it

is,
a=
nd very clearly this product is *not* aimed at gliders.
=20
I'm not sure uAvionix have promised USA FCC approval for that

device
yet.=
I expect they are likely to. It's not FCC approved today so can't

even be
=
advertised in the USA... which may well be why there is nothing

mentioned
o=
n their USA website or why they don't want to irritate the FCC by

even
talk=
ing about it. Having been to the FCC approval mosh pit (I was

going to
cal=
l it a dance :-)) several times before uAvionix should know very

well
what=
they are doing with FCC approval.
=20
Their launch for the product was very UK centric, which was

pretty
intere=
sting given how far behind overall ADS-B adoption is in Europe vs.

the
USA,=
they seem to be hoping to move that needle, ride on UK interest

in TABS
an=
d FIS-B trials and combining some FLARM capability. So quite a

intersting
k=
itchen sink of a product for those uses and very interesting that

uAvionix
=
are so growth oriented they are lookin at trying to seed that

market.
=20
So then you want to ask if you need an actual PowerFLARM

device to
conne=
ct to the SkyEcho 2 to do FLARM then what else does the SkyEcho

2
provide,=
and importantly is it a replacement for a transponder?
=20
Importantly the SkyEcho 2 *not* a full transponder but does

implement
TAB=
S/TSO-C199 so should provide compatibility with TCAS which is

obviously
imp=
ortant. I'd love to see one working. ATC will likely not see that

device
ho=
wever and that's going to be an issue in many places near busy

ATC areas.
=
ATC *does* sees Trig transponders running as TABS devices, as

they are
full=
transponders underneath the TABS 1090ES Out part. The ATC

visibility part
=
is a large concern for me, especially around places like the Minden

area
wh=
ich this thread started with. Without ATC visibility I would not

recommend
=
that device for use in that area. I'd love to eventually get my

hands on
on=
e to confirm and to talk about it with the friendly NOCAL TRACON

tech
folks=
who cover the Reno area.
=20
You also can't install this (or any other TABS) device in an

aircraft
wit=
h an existing Mode C or Mode S transponder.... so can't get

visibility to
A=
TC that way. I can't imagine any glider owner with a transponder

in their
g=
lider who would want to pull it out and replace it with a SkyEcho 2

if
tha=
t meant losing visibility to ATC... a large part of why they installed

the
=
transponder to start with.
=20
The SkyEcho 2 also won't meet FAA 2020 ADS-B Out

requirements, and
althou=
gh gliders are partially exempt, we still have folks who want to say
overfl=
y Class C airspace (but below 10,000').
=20
It's a little confusing in some many ways the SkyEcho seems

more
targeted=
at UAVs (or maybe ultralights) but things like UAT In/FIS-B is

more a GA
f=
eature, so it sure is an intersting product to follow for geeks like

me,
b=
ut kind of wedged into a space between others products, especially

with
ful=
l Mode S/1090ES Out transponders on one side. We'll see....
=20
Other products with combined ADS-B and FLARM capabilities...
=20
PowerFLARM today does 1090ES In (Direct only, no ADS-R and

TIS-B) and
FLA=
RM. (effectively all PowerFLARM sold in the USA have the 1090ES

In
option).=
=20
=20
LXNav PowerMouse is coming, apparently undergoing FCC

approval, with
its=
ADS-B In option it does 1090ES In (but unlike PowerFLARM it

*does* ADS-R
=
and hopefully TIS-B) and FLARM. (hopefully LXNav will be smart

here and
the=
PowerMouse sold in the USA will all have 1090ES In option).
=20
Other vendors like AirAvionic have new FLARM products with

1090ES In
capa=
bilities coming, I wish they would start describing those product

specs
and=
capabilities more clearly and ideally clarifying their plans for the

USA
m=
arket. (their ATD57 display is still great however if anybody wants

a
dedic=
ated FLARM display).
=20
---
=20
Alastair I assume you are in the UK? or elsewhere in Europe. I'm

you not
=
sure why you care about FLARM and the USA with a LXNav 9070,

but if you
re=
ally want to operate in the USA hopefully you have a standard

PowerFLARM
ex=
ternal box (i.e. a model with FCC approval) connected to the 9070.

You are a stud!

J


 




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
ADSB out in tow planes Charles Longley Soaring 57 June 5th 18 04:39 AM
FS: Butterfly PowerFlarm 57mm panel display $130 shipped Tango Eight Soaring 1 April 28th 15 10:11 PM
NEW PANEL DISPLAY COMPARISON Richard[_9_] Soaring 11 September 15th 09 08:30 AM
In panel display of encoding information? Dave[_16_] Home Built 4 September 20th 07 08:10 PM
Instrument panel will not display on laptop John Bell Simulators 6 January 7th 05 12:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.