Low cost ADS-B Options

On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 9:21:25 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:

I recall leading a visitor to Colorado on a flight southwest from
Black Forest back in the 90s when an A-7 blasted by on our left
about the time we were crossing Pike's Peak.Â* I told him to watch
out as they didn't travel alone.Â* The other one went by on our
right.Â* That wouldn't have happened if either one of us had had a
transponder but it would have happened nonetheless
even had both of us been FLARM equipped.

Wait, how would you having a transponder have prevented a VFR A-7 (not talking to center) from hitting you at low level? Unless A-7s had IFF interrogators, he wouldn't see you. When I used to fly low levels in F-4s the only way we knew about low level traffic was by using our radar and IFF interrogator - we were on a tactical freq and not talking to anyone.

But yes, if you fly where there is a lot of airline/bizjet traffic, a transponder is a REALLY GOOD THING TO HAVE, no argument there. I just disagree that in all environments it's more valuable than a PF.

Kirk

Starting another thread, Transponders and FLARM, so as not to pollute
this one any more. And I'm still interested in a low cost ADS-B.

Dan

On 12/10/2016 10:36 AM, kirk.stant wrote:
On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 9:21:25 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
Not talking about the other glider at your club, nor am I talking
about ADS-B (despite the subject line). I'm talking about Joe
Farmer bopping along in his 172 and staring at his new-fangled GPS.
Remember that guy that got run over by an F-16 a few months
back...? Now admittedly, you wouldn't expect either of them to have
FLARM (in this country), and ATC's warnings didn't convey the
urgency to the F-16 pilot.

Actually - your scenario is EXACTLY why I prefer PF (remember, it's basically FLARM plus PCAS plus ADS-B from 1090ES) to a transponder, in MY low alt environment. Joe Farmer VFR may be squawking 1200 and talking to nobody, and doesn't have ADS-B. I'll get a warning on PF (PCAS). Or, Joe Doctor is VFR in his Cirrus with fancy ADS-B (mode S). I'll see him on my PF.

Now, if I replace my PF with a nice TT-21 (for about the same price): Joe Farmer doesn't see me, and Joe Doctor might get me via TIS-B. I don't get ANY warning about EITHER of them.

I like my way better - because in the air, I don't trust ANYONE!

And sure, it would be nice to have a cheap simple ADS-B out...BUT RIGHT NOW IT DOESN'T EXIST!!!! Thank you FAA for completely blowing off the small guy.

Kirk
66

--
Dan, 5J

I'm all for cheap but I think of the glider as pretty much a stationary
target for a fast mover. Sure, you'll see the other-equipped aircraft,
but he won't see you, mainly because he's got his head inside the
cockpit (or somewhere else...).

Time for another "There I Was" story... I was climbing over Black
Forest at around 12,000' MSL, directly on a line between Colorado
Springs and Denver International. Looking south, I saw a speck in the
distance. Following 360 degrees of turn, I saw the 767 banking sharply
to avoid me. Had I had a transponder, they would have seen me. At the
time, neither PCAS nor FLARM were on the market. Glad the copilot was
looking outside!

I'm not bashing FLARM but I only bought mine because of a smoking good
deal on it. Now that I have it, I like it but I still think that, if
you can only afford one thing, the transponder is the way to go.

Yesterday, returning from my wave flight and passing over Moriarty to
add miles to my triangle, I got an ADS-B hit on my PF portable. It was
2,500' below me at 12 o'clock. Counting on my fingers, I calculated he
was at 12,000' MSL crossing over home plate. Must be IFR, must be an
airliner, turn a few degrees to the right and look down and there he
is! Had I been lower, and had I not had a transponder, it could have
been a completely different story.

On 12/10/2016 10:36 AM, kirk.stant wrote:
On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 9:21:25 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
Not talking about the other glider at your club, nor am I talking
about ADS-B (despite the subject line). I'm talking about Joe
Farmer bopping along in his 172 and staring at his new-fangled GPS.
Remember that guy that got run over by an F-16 a few months
back...? Now admittedly, you wouldn't expect either of them to have
FLARM (in this country), and ATC's warnings didn't convey the
urgency to the F-16 pilot.
Actually - your scenario is EXACTLY why I prefer PF (remember, it's basically FLARM plus PCAS plus ADS-B from 1090ES) to a transponder, in MY low alt environment. Joe Farmer VFR may be squawking 1200 and talking to nobody, and doesn't have ADS-B. I'll get a warning on PF (PCAS). Or, Joe Doctor is VFR in his Cirrus with fancy ADS-B (mode S). I'll see him on my PF.

Now, if I replace my PF with a nice TT-21 (for about the same price): Joe Farmer doesn't see me, and Joe Doctor might get me via TIS-B. I don't get ANY warning about EITHER of them.

I like my way better - because in the air, I don't trust ANYONE!

And sure, it would be nice to have a cheap simple ADS-B out...BUT RIGHT NOW IT DOESN'T EXIST!!!! Thank you FAA for completely blowing off the small guy.

Kirk
66

--
Dan, 5J

Nope. Looks like you tried renaming the existing thread to "Transponders and FLARM" which is likely the worse thing to do and not what you intended.

On USENET/Google Groups you need to create a whole new thread, they are tracked by embedded IDs not the title.

On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 7:54:59 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
Starting another thread, Transponders and FLARM, so as not to pollute
this one any more. And I'm still interested in a low cost ADS-B.

Dan

Actually I started a new thread, Transponders and FLARM, maybe I
mistakenly used the "Followup" button rather than the "Write" button in
Thunderbird, gave it my new title, and copied/pasted Kirk's last reply.

My main point in continuing the discussion is that a non FLARM equipped
aircraft which has some other collision avoidance device, e.g., PCAS,
will not "see" a FLARM but no transponder aircraft. I have experienced
just that here at Moriarty. The other guy could see my transponder but
I could not see him (except visually).

Dan

On 12/11/2016 12:21 PM, Darryl Ramm wrote:
Nope. Looks like you tried renaming the existing thread to "Transponders and FLARM" which is likely the worse thing to do and not what you intended.

On USENET/Google Groups you need to create a whole new thread, they are tracked by embedded IDs not the title.

On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 7:54:59 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
Starting another thread, Transponders and FLARM, so as not to pollute
this one any more. And I'm still interested in a low cost ADS-B.

Dan

--
Dan, 5J

Can TABS (Experimental Glider + TT21 + TN72) be used legally above 10,000 MSL?

I surmise, 'Yes it can', because gliders are (for now) exempt from the 2020 ADS-B Mandate.

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 6:58:11 AM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
Can TABS (Experimental Glider + TT21 + TN72) be used legally above 10,000 MSL?

I surmise, 'Yes it can', because gliders are (for now) exempt from the 2020 ADS-B Mandate.

'Yes it can' because gliders are (for now) exempt from the 2020 ADS-B Mandate. :-)

I'm also not clear why you are specifically worried about 10,000'.

But can you install TABS at all? In this case yes you can because its an experimental glider. You can't today AFAIK in a *certified* glider (because any ADS-B Out installation has to comply with the 2020 Mandate even if not required).

Any questions on the install I would ask a Trig dealer or go straight to Trig, they are usually very responsive.

And one corner case: There are still airspace areas where gliders are not exempt from ADS-B Out carriage and you cannot use TABS to meet those requirements.

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 2:42:14 PM UTC-4, Darryl Ramm wrote:

I'm also not clear why you are specifically worried about 10,000'.

Because 'Class E 10,000-18,000' is the only airspace, where I plan to fly, where I would need the 'glider exemption' to legally use TABS.

https://generalaviationnews.com/wp-c.../AC_90-114.jpg

I'm narrowing my focus to the issues/regs that affect me. I'm not planning on flying in airspace where a glider would be be required to have something more than TABS.

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 5:09:53 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 2:42:14 PM UTC-4, Darryl Ramm wrote:

I'm also not clear why you are specifically worried about 10,000'.

Because 'Class E 10,000-18,000' is the only airspace, where I plan to fly, where I would need the 'glider exemption' to legally use TABS.

https://generalaviationnews.com/wp-c.../AC_90-114.jpg

I'm narrowing my focus to the issues/regs that affect me. I'm not planning on flying in airspace where a glider would be be required to have something more than TABS.

I kinda see why you are asking but the exact things you are saying are not quite correct, and I don't want to argue semantics but I just want to be clear about there are just no carriage/use regulations that control this use of TABS devices.

As you know, your glider is not required to have ADS-B Out because of the glider exemption. If you however voluntarily decide to install a TABS device in the glider there is nothing that kicks in for you at 10,000. Just nothing relevant at all about 10,000'. In fact there is no regulation that exists at all concerning TABS installation, carriage or use, and certainly nothing magic about 10,000' once you voluntarily decide to install that TABS device. And in no situation does a TABS device meet any of the 2020 mandate requirements, not for non-exempt aircraft, or dealing with those corner cases of exempt aircraft like gliders. All the magic of what TABS will do for you come from the TSO-C199 specs of the devices.

Okay. What threw me off was the Trig website where it says:

"The TN72 GPS receiver is a fully certified product (FAA TSO-C199) designed for voluntary equipage and use in areas OUTSIDE of designated or mandated ADS-B airspace."

I took that to mean that TABS could NOT be used INSIDE 'designated or mandated ADS-B airspace' and took the marketing statement as a distillation of applicable FAR. Class E airspace above 10,000 is INSIDE ADS-B airspace. (It is perfectly clear that TABS does not satisfy the ADS-B 2020 mandate.)