NATS to enable ADS-B transponder functionality for GA

The Europeans can use ADS-B Out today in gliders. There may be elements
similar to FAA TSO-C199 which I just heard about.

I still question why WAAS GPS is/will be the price of admission to
controlled airspace at least in VFR. Yes on a Cat III ILS, WAAS is
warranted.

http://www.glidertracking.com/connecting-ads-b/

"René de Dreu from the Glider Pilot Shop has put together a document which
examines possible ADS-B connections between all Mode-S transponders and LX
flight computers / equipment. "

Unfortunately dead link for time being:

http://www.gliderpilotshop.nl/winkel...roducts_id=490

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 10:06:32 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 5:58:39 AM UTC-8, Mike Schumann wrote:

This is going to be THE collision avoidance technology in the US.

Except for gliders, where it does't address the primary collision scenarios today and won't in the future.

ADS-B is architected to complement the ATC 5 mile/1000' separation philosophy. It's not good at close-in, dynamic collision warning the way PowerFlarm is. It doesn't doesn't do position prediction so it can't handle dropped packets the way PowerFlarm can (important close-in). In short it's not at all good for the glider-glider scenario and isn't adaptable to that scenario in the future.

Unless you have a transponder, carrying ADS-B won't light up TCAS carried on all large jets and most corporate jets and turboprops. TCAS will continue to be the primary (and perhaps only) collision warning system on these aircraft even after the 2020 carriage mandate. ADS-B fits in as traffic advisory and leaves TCAS to do collision avoidance.

If you want to stay clear of gliders get a PowerFlarm - that's the ONLY thing you can do today. IF the FAA pursues changes to allow lower cost GPS sources then if you are carrying a suitable Mode-S transponder (like the Trig TT22) you MIGHT be able to upgrade to an affordable full ADS-B 1090 ES In/Out system that would allow you to see/be seen by other ADS-B carrying traffic AND will provide TCAS collision warnings to all TCAS-equipped aircraft.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 3:00:07 PM UTC-8, George Haeh wrote:
The Europeans can use ADS-B Out today in gliders. There may be elements
similar to FAA TSO-C199 which I just heard about.

I still question why WAAS GPS is/will be the price of admission to
controlled airspace at least in VFR. Yes on a Cat III ILS, WAAS is
warranted.

http://www.glidertracking.com/connecting-ads-b/

"René de Dreu from the Glider Pilot Shop has put together a document which
examines possible ADS-B connections between all Mode-S transponders and LX
flight computers / equipment. "

Unfortunately dead link for time being:

http://www.gliderpilotshop.nl/winkel...roducts_id=490

Right, but it's kind of the reason that the Europeans can use 1090ES Out in gliders today is there are no applicable ADS-B services they interface to (including ATC) and no regulations beyond the most basic transponder/1090ES out requirements they have to meet. In a way it is not too different than the non-certified gliders in the USA, those owners can install any GPS source with the same 1090ES capable transponders.... but in the USA that has limited use as it is not enough to get the FAA ADS-B ground stations to want to send you ADS-R and TIS-B services and you likely won't even show up on traffic displays of aircraft with certified ADS-B In systems. In Europe where there are ADS-B Out requirements/standards for high-performance aircraft which require Certified IFR GPS sources. So just kind of a worse case paranoid warning: what Europe exactly will do in future is not guaranteed. If say they were to mandate ADS-B Out for lower performance aircraft than the current ADS-B Out mandate for high-performance (which is just rolling out) then who knows what might be required as a GPS source in those aircraft. But yes, damn it, things like testing/encouraging current COTS GPS use in the UK is great.

The issue that the FAA would argue with requiring a TSO/IFR/WAAS GPS source is not ultra-precision as it is with GPS reliability and failure detection.. I am just saying what they would argue :-)

BTW European agencies should be well aware of the stuff behind TSO-C199. Actually that TSO has some European roots back to low power Mode-S transponders... which in the past tied in with some concern about UK airspace restrictions/mandatory Transponder (or low-powered Transponder) carriage. So the other warning here is be careful what you wish/want to encourage without watching out for what might end up encouraging/enabling excessive mandatory use/restrictions.

And again the technical part of actually connecting together this stuff is not the problem, its actually pretty simple. And you can do that today in an experimental glider in the USA. You must be careful and properly set up the ADS-B out to report it is not using an IFR/TSO GPS source, and as a result it has limited use, you won't receive those services you might expect and it does not allow flight in airspace that would require a 2020 Mandate compliant ADS-B out system (gliders have exemptions for some airspace, but a non-compliant install won't get you into the other airspace). But geeks with experimental gliders may still want to do this (and a few have).

I'm not defending the FAA, but they had huge issues with ADS-B being everything to everybody and ADS-B is a key part of the ambitious and underfunded NEXGEN project. But the highly complex dual-link ADS-B approach in the USA is a mess and was a very bad idea for many reasons. Not allowing a COTS GPS for VFR traffic (at least outside certain airspace) was also a bad idea. TSO-C199 is interesting, I take it overall as a good sign, but it is unclear at least to me where it will end up and what products will actually come from it. It could also hopefully be a model for future broader changes to allow more use of non-TSO GPS for general ADS-B Out. And I still have some paranoid reservations where TSO-C199 could lead long term as mentioned above. Europeans pushing ahead with COTS GPS trials/encouraging use is a great sign as well, but again, does not mean they won't end up in future requiring higher-spec ADS-B Out installs in GA and gliders etc. (but we all hope they do not, and so far in what they actually have and have not done with ADS-B shows a lot more modest/overall rational/pragmatic thought than in the USA).

This ADS-B mess is still mostly futureware(*) for glider pilots in the USA, we just don't know exactly where this will end up, whether we'll ever see say TSO-C199 devices, whether ADS-B Out GPS requirements will be relaxed, etc. And Transponders and/or PowerFLARM are very useful, pretty well understood and realtively easy to deploy traffic awareness and collision avoidance assistance actually available and usable today. And since ADS-B Out is not even mandatory for gliders in 2020 it's just not worth most glider pilots worrying about.

(*) the part that of ADS-B that is not futureware for USA glider pilots is of course that the PowerFLARM with 1090ES In capability can "see" aircraft nearby that are transmitting 1090ES Out.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 8:15:49 PM UTC-5, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 3:00:07 PM UTC-8, George Haeh wrote:
The Europeans can use ADS-B Out today in gliders. There may be elements
similar to FAA TSO-C199 which I just heard about.

I still question why WAAS GPS is/will be the price of admission to
controlled airspace at least in VFR. Yes on a Cat III ILS, WAAS is
warranted.

http://www.glidertracking.com/connecting-ads-b/

"René de Dreu from the Glider Pilot Shop has put together a document which
examines possible ADS-B connections between all Mode-S transponders and LX
flight computers / equipment. "

Unfortunately dead link for time being:

http://www.gliderpilotshop.nl/winkel...roducts_id=490

Right, but it's kind of the reason that the Europeans can use 1090ES Out in gliders today is there are no applicable ADS-B services they interface to (including ATC) and no regulations beyond the most basic transponder/1090ES out requirements they have to meet. In a way it is not too different than the non-certified gliders in the USA, those owners can install any GPS source with the same 1090ES capable transponders.... but in the USA that has limited use as it is not enough to get the FAA ADS-B ground stations to want to send you ADS-R and TIS-B services and you likely won't even show up on traffic displays of aircraft with certified ADS-B In systems. In Europe where there are ADS-B Out requirements/standards for high-performance aircraft which require Certified IFR GPS sources. So just kind of a worse case paranoid warning: what Europe exactly will do in future is not guaranteed. If say they were to mandate ADS-B Out for lower performance aircraft than the current ADS-B Out mandate for high-performance (which is just rolling out) then who knows what might be required as a GPS source in those aircraft. But yes, damn it, things like testing/encouraging current COTS GPS use in the UK is great.

The issue that the FAA would argue with requiring a TSO/IFR/WAAS GPS source is not ultra-precision as it is with GPS reliability and failure detection. I am just saying what they would argue :-)

BTW European agencies should be well aware of the stuff behind TSO-C199. Actually that TSO has some European roots back to low power Mode-S transponders... which in the past tied in with some concern about UK airspace restrictions/mandatory Transponder (or low-powered Transponder) carriage. So the other warning here is be careful what you wish/want to encourage without watching out for what might end up encouraging/enabling excessive mandatory use/restrictions.

And again the technical part of actually connecting together this stuff is not the problem, its actually pretty simple. And you can do that today in an experimental glider in the USA. You must be careful and properly set up the ADS-B out to report it is not using an IFR/TSO GPS source, and as a result it has limited use, you won't receive those services you might expect and it does not allow flight in airspace that would require a 2020 Mandate compliant ADS-B out system (gliders have exemptions for some airspace, but a non-compliant install won't get you into the other airspace). But geeks with experimental gliders may still want to do this (and a few have).

I'm not defending the FAA, but they had huge issues with ADS-B being everything to everybody and ADS-B is a key part of the ambitious and underfunded NEXGEN project. But the highly complex dual-link ADS-B approach in the USA is a mess and was a very bad idea for many reasons. Not allowing a COTS GPS for VFR traffic (at least outside certain airspace) was also a bad idea. TSO-C199 is interesting, I take it overall as a good sign, but it is unclear at least to me where it will end up and what products will actually come from it. It could also hopefully be a model for future broader changes to allow more use of non-TSO GPS for general ADS-B Out. And I still have some paranoid reservations where TSO-C199 could lead long term as mentioned above. Europeans pushing ahead with COTS GPS trials/encouraging use is a great sign as well, but again, does not mean they won't end up in future requiring higher-spec ADS-B Out installs in GA and gliders etc. (but we all hope they do not, and so far in what they actually have and have not done with ADS-B shows a lot more modest/overall rational/pragmatic thought than in the USA).

This ADS-B mess is still mostly futureware(*) for glider pilots in the USA, we just don't know exactly where this will end up, whether we'll ever see say TSO-C199 devices, whether ADS-B Out GPS requirements will be relaxed, etc. And Transponders and/or PowerFLARM are very useful, pretty well understood and realtively easy to deploy traffic awareness and collision avoidance assistance actually available and usable today. And since ADS-B Out is not even mandatory for gliders in 2020 it's just not worth most glider pilots worrying about.

(*) the part that of ADS-B that is not futureware for USA glider pilots is of course that the PowerFLARM with 1090ES In capability can "see" aircraft nearby that are transmitting 1090ES Out.

Non-certified aircraft that transmit ADS-B OUT signals using non-TSO'd GPS sources do apparently trigger TIS-B transmissions from ADS-B ground stations, according to the people I have talked to at Dynon and pilots who have Dynon systems installed in their aircraft. The Dynon system uses a proprietary version of the Trig 21 transponder and does transmit a 1090ES ADS-B out signal. The pilots I have talked to who have this system installed in their aircraft (RV-8 and Phoenix Motorgliders), consistently see all of the transponder equipped aircraft in their vicinity as a result of this capability.. The guys I have talked to say this it is a real eye opener on how much traffic is there that they would otherwise never see visually.

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 7:23:22 PM UTC-5, Mike Schumann wrote:
There is nothing inherent in FLARM that makes it superior
to ADS-B in terms of its capability to detect potential glider
to glider collisions. Both technologies transmit the aircraft
location once per second. The resolution of both is limited by
the accuracy of the GPS source. What currently makes FLARM
superior are the collision detection algorithms in the receiver,
which are specifically designed for a glider environment.
There is nothing preventing software developers from developing
similar solutions for use with ADS-B receivers.

The above is utter nonsense.
FLARM transmits the PROJECTED PATH of the aircraft using knowledge
of aircraft type and maneuvering.
ADS-B cannot possibly ever match the collision-avoidance performance
of FLARM for gliders, for this and numerous other reasons.

For anybody interested in actual FACTS as opposed
to authoratively-spoken nonsense on RAS, please see:
http://www.gliderpilot.org/Flarm-WhatDoesItDo

Good Grief...

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 6:23:22 PM UTC-6, Mike Schumann wrote:

This totally depends on what kind of flying you do. If you are flying in contests at remote locations, FLARM may very well be the way to go. If you are flying recreationaly, near major metropolitan areas, ADS-B is definitely of interest if you are concerned about seeing GA or airline traffic.

Here we go again. Mike, we all know you think PowerFLARM is a waste of electrons and that ADS-B is the solution to all the worlds problems, but you are just flat wrong.

With my PowerFLARM, today, I see all transponder (mode C/S) and 1090ES ADS-B aircraft near me, as well as getting really good collision warnings from other PF-equipped gliders.

Since certified aircraft HAVE to have a transponder, in addition to ADS-B (either 1090ES or UAT), there is very little benefit to adding a separate ADS-B in. And if I had a mode S transponder (on the wish list), then there would be NO benefit to having ADS-B out.


There is nothing inherent in FLARM that makes it superior to ADS-B in terms of its capability to detect potential glider to glider collisions. Both technologies transmit the aircraft location once per second. The resolution of both is limited by the accuracy of the GPS source. What currently makes FLARM superior are the collision detection algorithms in the receiver, which are specifically designed for a glider environment. There is nothing preventing software developers from developing similar solutions for use with ADS-B receivers.

Wrong. What is inherently different between FLARM and ADS-B is that FLARM is designed to prevent collisions between cooperating gliders, while ADS-B just gives approximate location without predictive collision warning. ADS-B is not TCAS - which is why transponders are still required!

The key thing to remember is that the ADS-B receivers purely pass along the position data for aircraft targets in the area, whether the data comes directly from an ADS-B OUT equipped aircraft, or via TIS-B from an ADS-B ground station (which also shows transponder equipped aircraft). The logic to detect potential collisions is provided by whatever equipment you plug into the receiver. There are going to be lots of opportunities for innovation in this space as this technology gets deployed in the next couple of years..

You completely ignore the fact that gliders tend to congregate and fly together, while power planes tend to avoid each other. So any ADS-B collision warning system would go ape-**** in a gaggle - and with the size of our glider market, I seriously doubt anyone will come out with an ADS-B anti-collision device specifically for gliders, especially since one already exists - FLARM!

For gliders, the ideal solution would be a combination of PowerFLARM and a mode S transponder hooked up to transmit 1090ES position, without the need for a TSOd WAAS GPS. All the hardware is present, just need the FAA to wake up.

Kirk
66

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 4:23:22 PM UTC-8, Mike Schumann wrote:

There is nothing inherent in FLARM that makes it superior to ADS-B in terms of its capability to detect potential glider to glider collisions. Both technologies transmit the aircraft location once per second. The resolution of both is limited by the accuracy of the GPS source. What currently makes FLARM superior are the collision detection algorithms in the receiver, which are specifically designed for a glider environment. There is nothing preventing software developers from developing similar solutions for use with ADS-B receivers.


According to the Flarm technical guys I've spoken to this is not a correct statement.

They have told me directly that the position prediction happens on the transmit side not the receive side. This makes Flarm less prone to errors due to latency and dropped packets - unlike ADS-B. This is one reason why if a Flarm receives a Flarm packet and and ADS-B packet from the same aircraft, it ignores the ADS-B packet.

In any case - you can buy a Flarm now and then wait and see whether Garmin decided to implement glider-specific anti-collision algorithms. Might be a long wait.

Hope is hardly ever a very good strategy.

9B

On Sunday, February 1, 2015 at 8:51:09 AM UTC-8, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 7:23:22 PM UTC-5, Mike Schumann wrote:
There is nothing inherent in FLARM that makes it superior
to ADS-B in terms of its capability to detect potential glider
to glider collisions. Both technologies transmit the aircraft
location once per second. The resolution of both is limited by
the accuracy of the GPS source. What currently makes FLARM
superior are the collision detection algorithms in the receiver,
which are specifically designed for a glider environment.
There is nothing preventing software developers from developing
similar solutions for use with ADS-B receivers.

The above is utter nonsense.
FLARM transmits the PROJECTED PATH of the aircraft using knowledge
of aircraft type and maneuvering.
ADS-B cannot possibly ever match the collision-avoidance performance
of FLARM for gliders, for this and numerous other reasons.

For anybody interested in actual FACTS as opposed
to authoratively-spoken nonsense on RAS, please see:
http://www.gliderpilot.org/Flarm-WhatDoesItDo

Good Grief...

Thank Dave (who wrote the Flarm software for those out of the loop).

Anyone who has been in close quarters with one or more other gliders can understand the importance of not having multi-second lags in likely flight path conflicts. The prediction engine on the transmitting aircraft is the only way to sort in-close traffic (as opposed to 5mi/1000' traffic).

Mike is right in the sense that the appropriate solution depends on the kind of flying you do. If you fly your glider like a power plane - mostly constant cruise altitude, long straight flight paths, 5mi/1000' separation from other traffic, then ADS-B (when available for installation) might be just fine. But if that's how you fly it might be debatable whether you are a glider pilot in practice.

9B

On Sunday, February 1, 2015 at 8:52:55 AM UTC-8, kirk.stant wrote:

For gliders, the ideal solution would be a combination of PowerFLARM and a mode S transponder hooked up to transmit 1090ES position, without the need for a TSOd WAAS GPS. All the hardware is present, just need the FAA to wake up.


What Kirk said. This is settled science, to borrow a phrase.

9B

On Sunday, February 1, 2015 at 1:57:05 AM UTC-8, Mike Schumann wrote:
On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 8:15:49 PM UTC-5, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 3:00:07 PM UTC-8, George Haeh wrote:
The Europeans can use ADS-B Out today in gliders. There may be elements
similar to FAA TSO-C199 which I just heard about.

I still question why WAAS GPS is/will be the price of admission to
controlled airspace at least in VFR. Yes on a Cat III ILS, WAAS is
warranted.

http://www.glidertracking.com/connecting-ads-b/

"René de Dreu from the Glider Pilot Shop has put together a document which
examines possible ADS-B connections between all Mode-S transponders and LX
flight computers / equipment. "

Unfortunately dead link for time being:

http://www.gliderpilotshop.nl/winkel...roducts_id=490

Right, but it's kind of the reason that the Europeans can use 1090ES Out in gliders today is there are no applicable ADS-B services they interface to (including ATC) and no regulations beyond the most basic transponder/1090ES out requirements they have to meet. In a way it is not too different than the non-certified gliders in the USA, those owners can install any GPS source with the same 1090ES capable transponders.... but in the USA that has limited use as it is not enough to get the FAA ADS-B ground stations to want to send you ADS-R and TIS-B services and you likely won't even show up on traffic displays of aircraft with certified ADS-B In systems. In Europe where there are ADS-B Out requirements/standards for high-performance aircraft which require Certified IFR GPS sources. So just kind of a worse case paranoid warning: what Europe exactly will do in future is not guaranteed. If say they were to mandate ADS-B Out for lower performance aircraft than the current ADS-B Out mandate for high-performance (which is just rolling out) then who knows what might be required as a GPS source in those aircraft. But yes, damn it, things like testing/encouraging current COTS GPS use in the UK is great.

The issue that the FAA would argue with requiring a TSO/IFR/WAAS GPS source is not ultra-precision as it is with GPS reliability and failure detection. I am just saying what they would argue :-)

BTW European agencies should be well aware of the stuff behind TSO-C199.. Actually that TSO has some European roots back to low power Mode-S transponders... which in the past tied in with some concern about UK airspace restrictions/mandatory Transponder (or low-powered Transponder) carriage. So the other warning here is be careful what you wish/want to encourage without watching out for what might end up encouraging/enabling excessive mandatory use/restrictions.

And again the technical part of actually connecting together this stuff is not the problem, its actually pretty simple. And you can do that today in an experimental glider in the USA. You must be careful and properly set up the ADS-B out to report it is not using an IFR/TSO GPS source, and as a result it has limited use, you won't receive those services you might expect and it does not allow flight in airspace that would require a 2020 Mandate compliant ADS-B out system (gliders have exemptions for some airspace, but a non-compliant install won't get you into the other airspace). But geeks with experimental gliders may still want to do this (and a few have).

I'm not defending the FAA, but they had huge issues with ADS-B being everything to everybody and ADS-B is a key part of the ambitious and underfunded NEXGEN project. But the highly complex dual-link ADS-B approach in the USA is a mess and was a very bad idea for many reasons. Not allowing a COTS GPS for VFR traffic (at least outside certain airspace) was also a bad idea. TSO-C199 is interesting, I take it overall as a good sign, but it is unclear at least to me where it will end up and what products will actually come from it. It could also hopefully be a model for future broader changes to allow more use of non-TSO GPS for general ADS-B Out. And I still have some paranoid reservations where TSO-C199 could lead long term as mentioned above. Europeans pushing ahead with COTS GPS trials/encouraging use is a great sign as well, but again, does not mean they won't end up in future requiring higher-spec ADS-B Out installs in GA and gliders etc. (but we all hope they do not, and so far in what they actually have and have not done with ADS-B shows a lot more modest/overall rational/pragmatic thought than in the USA).

This ADS-B mess is still mostly futureware(*) for glider pilots in the USA, we just don't know exactly where this will end up, whether we'll ever see say TSO-C199 devices, whether ADS-B Out GPS requirements will be relaxed, etc. And Transponders and/or PowerFLARM are very useful, pretty well understood and realtively easy to deploy traffic awareness and collision avoidance assistance actually available and usable today. And since ADS-B Out is not even mandatory for gliders in 2020 it's just not worth most glider pilots worrying about.

(*) the part that of ADS-B that is not futureware for USA glider pilots is of course that the PowerFLARM with 1090ES In capability can "see" aircraft nearby that are transmitting 1090ES Out.

Non-certified aircraft that transmit ADS-B OUT signals using non-TSO'd GPS sources do apparently trigger TIS-B transmissions from ADS-B ground stations, according to the people I have talked to at Dynon and pilots who have Dynon systems installed in their aircraft. The Dynon system uses a proprietary version of the Trig 21 transponder and does transmit a 1090ES ADS-B out signal. The pilots I have talked to who have this system installed in their aircraft (RV-8 and Phoenix Motorgliders), consistently see all of the transponder equipped aircraft in their vicinity as a result of this capability. The guys I have talked to say this it is a real eye opener on how much traffic is there that they would otherwise never see visually.

The FAA had allowed TIS-B and other services to work in the past, the
implication seem to be that this and other things were not going to be supported with non certified GPS inputs in future. But that is not entirely clear.

But I'd be very careful of anecdotal observations, it is very easy to look at a traffic display and see lots of icons flying around, but it's hard to know if you are looking at traffic appearing there via TIS-B, ADS-R or ADS-B direct -- the Dynon Sykwatch provide *no* way for a user to tell. The danger especially with TIS-B is you'll definitely expect to receive TIS-B broadcasts within the service volume around other aircraft who are transmitting a ADS-B with certified GPS and the capability code set to who they have ADS-B UAT In.

Oh Dynon Skywatch, shudder, they use Trig transponder technology, great, but their Skywatch is a crazy split-brain 1090ES Out, UAT In system, something the FAA has consistently warned against. Sure it lets them provide a FIS-B weather etc. product, but as a traffic solution it is just a bad idea. There are much better options out there from better vendors who have realized the best approach in the USA dual-link environment is 1090ES Out and dual 1090ES In and UAT In. The idea that you could have two Dynon Skywatch equipped aircraft right next to each out at a remote airport and both could run into each other with no traffic warning is just bat**** crazy, hopefully they will go dual-link ADS-B In in future and existing users will have an easy upgrade path.