Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

UK CAA £250 subsidy for ADS-B device

I have heard the same thing and according to uAvionix it will be December before things get back to normal as regards supplies

EHLE / Lelystad, Netherlands, Netherlands

Peter wrote:

Also PAW can’t usefully see transponders (no azimuth and no even remotely accurate distance). Totally disingenuous publicity. Most people don’t know this before they buy it. The ground stations have no long term business plan; they are just a gimmick.

Peter, you obviously aren’t aware of the fundamentals of collision avoidance – they can only occur with two aircraft crossing the same point in space at the same time at the same altitude. Therefore any azimuth or distance measuring is irrelevant – all you need is a pretty accurate height read out. With my MRX I would simply see the traffic appear at, say, 4 miles. I would watch it’s closing rate. If it slowly closing, then maybe it’s overtaking me or I am overtaking it. If it closed rapidly, then the likelihood is it’s coming from the front, towards me. Once it gets to 2 miles, I start considering options. The MRX gives altitude trends. If the aircraft is 100 feet below me in altitude but climbing, my intention would be to descend once it’s altitude was the same as mine. If you keep 100 – 200 feet between yourself and any conflicting traffic, then you’ll be safe. As said, once you understand those fundamentals, you can work out what to do to keep safe, you don’t need to know where the other aircraft is in terms of azimuth or distance. The same is true for Mode C and S signals with PAW without ground station support.

FYI PAW can also connect directly to a Flarm Box such as Flarm Mouse, Flarm Eagle where the data is exchanged via USB (PAW) and RJ11 (Flarm). With such a setup you can see PAW, Flarm, ADS-B, Mode S and C (with altitude) and be warned about Mode A – all without the need for a ground station. At the same time you can then be seen by PAW and Flarm users so I don’t think you should be so critical of them……

Last Edited by Steve6443 at 17 Oct 07:29
EDL*, Germany

Steve, that is not much good in the UK where you are often a few hundred feet off getting busted by the CAA.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

Steve, that is not much good in the UK where you are often a few hundred feet off getting busted by the CAA.

That is just BS with a capital B. Imagine I’m under the LTMA flying at 2300 feet and I see a target approaching at 2200, climbing. Nothing stops me from descending to 2000 feet to avoid it. Or even lower, even though my options, in case of engine failure are limited. In terms of worst case scenario, I would rank them in the following order:

- Mid Air collision
- Infringing Airspace due to CAA actions
- reducing your glide clear possibilities.

To say that you don’t have options is just shortsighted. The chances that you get an engine failure at 2000 feet or so, because you’re avoiding traffic under the LTMA, is as remote as when flying over water. Can happen, but the odds are it won’t…..

EDL*, Germany

Hmmm keyboard got CV19?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Jujupilote wrote:

The project will take advantage of the UK CAA’s intention to utilize 978 MHz as a second ADS-B frequency to share TIS-B data with other airspace users.

This statement is intriguing. This would mean that TIS-B might end up being provided from ground stations in the UK. Currently, only the US provides this service. It takes secondary radar sources (not ADS-B Out equipped aircraft) and generates an ADS-B like target transmitted on 978 MHz. This supplements aircraft that are equipped with ADS-B Out with those that are not equipped with ADS-B Out but that have a transponder with mode C. Primary targets or transponder targets without mode C don’t generate a TIS-B from the ground station. There are many certified and uncertified products that are already on the market that receive ADS-B In on both 1090 MHz and 978 MHz.

KUZA, United States

Well Steve, flying below a 2500ft shelf happens quite a lot near Paris. The area pretty well built up too.
90% people fly between 1500 and 2200ft.

If you fly at 2400 to avoid most traffic and see a target on you screen at 2200 climbing, what do you do without a bearing indication ?

It could be a Mooney in your 6 oclock, who sees you and is overtaking you by your right. The best you can do is fly straight.
It could be anything anywhere too

LFPT, LFEH

Jujupilote wrote:

Well Steve, flying below a 2500ft shelf happens quite a lot near Paris. The area pretty well built up too.
90% people fly between 1500 and 2200ft.

If you fly at 2400 to avoid most traffic and see a target on you screen at 2200 climbing, what do you do without a bearing indication ?

It could be a Mooney in your 6 oclock, who sees you and is overtaking you by your right. The best you can do is fly straight.
It could be anything anywhere too

Then why fly at 2400 feet? I’d fly 2300 feet. Gives me 200 feet leeway up and quite a bit down. If a plane is 2200 climbing, I’d drop to 2100. It’s not difficult. The clue is having an indication of the traffic as early as possible which will give you an idea of closing speed and this also gives you time to determine whether to climb or descend……

EDL*, Germany

Part of the issue is altitude errors. Another is that there is a lot of ATZs which reach up to not far below 2500ft and the CAA is 100% busting pilots for those.

And not knowing the direction of the other traffic, options are limited especially as it often is already climbing or descending.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

Part of the issue is altitude errors. Another is that there is a lot of ATZs which reach up to not far below 2500ft and the CAA is 100% busting pilots for those.

And not knowing the direction of the other traffic, options are limited especially as it often is already climbing or descending.

So you’d be quite happy to fly into a gap above an ATZ but below, say, the LTMA leaving you with little room for manoeuvring in case of conflicting traffic rather than diverting a mile or two? I’m inclined to believe that such actions would be a sign of poor airmanship and preparation…. again, it’s not difficult, you don’t necessarily need to know where the conflicting traffic is coming from, just give yourself options in terms of altitude deviation.

EDL*, Germany
50 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top