Yes; what I was getting at is that to the extent that this factor limits the adoption of a “conspicuity system”, it will be limited to the same extent as the adoption of a Mode S transponder, or any ADS-B OUT system, would be.
In Europe, we are not likely to get the option of a conspicuity system which also offers anonymity – unless the owner configures it with somebody else’s credentials (which is “obviously” going to be illegal).
With @mh being in Germany, this is not just the allegedly UK-only issue over which I keep getting attacked here… In fact German pilots I have spoken to privately (over a long period of time) are by far the most unhappy about FR24 etc – apparently due to long standing historical factors in Germany concerning privacy. It’s “nice” to not be the usual target, for once.
Curiously, in the UK, when people turn off transponders, they do it not to suppress Mode S (not many here seem to care about FR24 etc) but to suppress Mode C i.e. altitude reporting.
I wonder what the chances are for this box to be approved outside the UK? Probably not intended otherwise the company would have popped up on EuroGA 
Peter wrote:
With @mh being in Germany, this is not just the allegedly UK-only issue over which I keep getting attacked here… In fact German pilots I have spoken to privately (over a long period of time) are by far the most unhappy about FR24 etc – apparently due to long standing historical factors in Germany concerning privacy. It’s “nice” to not be the usual target, for once.
Just trying to find out, and not target you Peter, could it be that UK pilots dislike this, and switch off, while Germans dislikes this, but keep the equipment on?
Peter wrote:
Will TAS systems with the ADS-B option (the Garmin TAS, or the Avidyne TAS 6xx with the – currently-vapourware – ADS-B add-on) see the emissions from this system? If not, then this is a really long bet and IMHO a total waste of time and money (even less useful than FLARM is in the UK for powered GA).
While I don’t see a need to a system like this (as most have a suiteable transponder anyway) it has more RF power then Flarm, and will have better range.
Suggesting nobody will radiate mode S is incorrect, and has be done a lot, the same as for Flarm. Both allow for low cost situational awareness. Systems like TAS or GTS are out of range for some aircraft and / or owners due to size or budget. Sure it has limitations.
Even though you don’t find Flarm usefull lots of aircraft are equipped with this, and many pilots find it usefull. The problem with a system as Flarm, as the very limited range, especially on fast aircraft such as the TB20. ADS-B doesn’t have this downside. And you can see them even when they radiate non complianed ADS-B due to your TAS system.
These systems are good for situational awaress, and yes a TAS or GTS will be better then a Flarm system, buth then TCAS would be better then your TAS system as well, it just doesn’t make sense to add that to your aircraft. It is not fair to compare the systems the way you do. You have to take pricing and kind of operation in mind as well when you compare such systems.
Jesse wrote:
Just trying to find out, and not target you Peter, could it be that UK pilots dislike this, and switch off, while Germans dislikes this, but keep the equipment on?
I have talked to many pilots in Germany, who absolutely dislike being tracked. Very few of them turn off the transponder, since pure Mode ACS-tracking is (still) rare. But there is a measurable number of pilots objecting ADS-B via 1090ES due to this issue and more and more FLARM devices get switched off because of this.
Many Germans I know have mailed their data protection officer and all answers I know make it clear that tracking of aircraft is indeed a violation of privacy rights, like it is with car registration plates.
The problem is that the operators of the stations and tracking sites do everything to protect their privacy, so you can’t sue them. This has been discussed in length in german forums. Quintessence is, that literally all pilots wand ADS-B or similar systems for traffic avoidance and ATC reasons, with a small hope of CAS getting smaller or more specialised towards the real needs with better traffic avoidance capabilities. While FLARM is working with an encryped signal – or rather have been working with an encrypted signal, since it has been cracked and made public by some “tracking endorsers”, this is not true for ADS-B. So an anonymisation of the signal has been suggested as possible means to achieve the goal of traffic awareness and ATC tracking, while not allowing pirate trackers to make a link between the signal and a certain plane – unless the pilot explicitly wants to be tracked. This will be proposed to EASA in the near future, too.
To be clear: I think these pirate trackers (FR24, ADSBExchange, OGN and the lot) are highly problematic, but I don’t turn off the transponder anyway. The traceability of the A/C/S transponders is somewhat limited and the identification of aircraft by A/C transponders is not easily possible. And, for what it’s worth, I do tell my students about the problems, but never endorse switching off the transponder.
I do get active to protect my (and your) civil rights, though. And I decline to let the victims of data piracy be called the culprit in any way, hence my strong opinion against the pirate data trackers and in dount in favour of those who do switch off the transponder.
Just trying to find out, and not target you Peter, could it be that UK pilots dislike this, and switch off, while Germans dislikes this, but keep the equipment on?
I doubt it has been researched properly but from speaking to a lot of people I reckon that (as I posted earlier) UK pilots aren’t too bothered about Mode S (i.e. broadcasting the tail number) but many turn off Mode C (sometimes for nefarious reasons, sometimes due to bad training, and some don’t have C because the encoder is broken) while German pilots are more liable to complain about (but not actually turn off, because they follow rules more than the Brits) Mode S because it broadcasts their tail number (i.e. the privacy issue which is very big in Germany, and maybe other places). Also there are some type-specific groups elsewhere (mainly outside the UK) which wish to remain below the radar, so to speak, and they use Mode C happily but if they have a Mode S transponder installed they turn it off totally (because you can’t have C without S) but that is OK where they are because no transponder is needed for VFR there.
Suggesting nobody will radiate mode S is incorrect
Sure, but Mode S is no good for TAS purposes. Only Mode C does that, and currently (since ZAON packed up) there is no “cheap” product which gives you azimuth on Mode C targets.
And you can see them even when they radiate non complianed ADS-B due to your TAS system.
Only if your TAS is a portable one, displaying on an Ipad.
It is not fair to compare the systems the way you do. You have to take pricing and kind of operation in mind as well when you compare such systems.
I am comparing the technology. The cost is a personal decision. One cannot lump the two together, otherwise you end up like a camera review which gives some very good camera a poor score because it costs more than the others. Or, at work, we get a rubbish “overall supplier score” because one customer attaches a lot of weighting to an acceptance of their extortionate 120 day payment terms (we give them 60 and they take 90). But actually our supplier score is 100%, once this is taken out.
If I was running an avionics shop and a customer turned up with a nice plane, and I could sell him a €1k box which sees 1% of the traffic (maybe 50% if he flies straight through a gliding site), or a €15k box which sees 50% of the sub-2000ft burger-run traffic and 95% of the rest, and he just paid 300k for the plane, I reckon he will prefer the latter option.
When one is looking at such low radiation rates, plus a good % turning off transponders, you get a very false sense of the traffic out there. My active TAS is good in the right situations (basically above 2000ft in the UK) and it picks up stuff below that flown by sensible / propertly trained pilots, so it is a good safety layer. But something which picks up say 1% of traffic, and needs you looking down at an Ipad to see that, isn’t much good.
Also you have to remember most new planes in the few hundred k range are ordered with active TAS and if they can’t see SIL=0 ADS-B emitted by these cheap boxes, then that is a waste of time, especially as these people are the fastest and with the most need to have traffic awareness in the circuit.
All those pilots who want to be invisible and think it is OK because they are OCAS and thus can’t hit a jet, might just hit an SR22 or some such.
Just seen mh’s post above
since pure Mode ACS-tracking is (still) rare
FR24 etc does exactly that. They get the tail number from Mode S and they get your position by multilateration, which works pretty well except at low levels or within mountains (but ADS-B probably won’t work so well there too). The altitude value is spot on. The GS value is poor and that is where ADS-B will be better but IMHO nobody cares that much for the instantaneous GS.
Mode C can’t be tracked at all. How would you get the tail number?
Peter wrote:
Only Mode C does that, and currently (since ZAON packed up) there is no “cheap” product which gives you azimuth on Mode C targets.
Agreed, and it’s a pity ZAON is no longer their. Although it had its limitations they had nice products.
Peter wrote:
Only if your TAS is a portable one, displaying on an Ipad.
No, you can still see this cheap ADS-B based on mode S due to their mode S transponder, which you can see anyway on your Avidyne TAS system. So having non compliance ADS-B doesn’t make them invisible to you, you just use another method. Those with a more limited budget could also see the aircraft with this other traffic boxes, which can be portable, or panelmounted.
Peter wrote:
If I was running an avionics shop and a customer turned up with a nice plane, and I could sell him a €1k box which sees 1% of the traffic (maybe 50% if he flies straight through a gliding site), or a €15k box which sees 50% of the sub-2000ft burger-run traffic and 95% of the rest, and he just paid 300k for the plane, I reckon he will prefer the latter option.
Sure enough, but this is finaly upto the customer, and there is fair share who doesn’t want to spend that kind of money on a traffic system, so either go with 1% option or for the 0% option. It seems to depend on the operation. Those who use their aircraft for lots of traveling often go for an active TAS system.
Peter wrote:
Sure, but Mode S is no good for TAS purposes. Only Mode C does that, and currently (since ZAON packed up) there is no “cheap” product which gives you azimuth on Mode C targets.
At least 2 solutions are on the market to provide cheap traffic solution based on mode C or S:
http://www.pilotaware.com/ and http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/monroyairtraffic.php
ploucandco wrote:
At least 2 solutions are on the market to provide cheap traffic solution based on mode C or S:
There are much more, the unique feature of some of ZAON’s models was that it could detect a direction (roughly a quarter / 90 degrees) So it not only gave an distance, but also a very rough direction to look into.
This is an feature which all ADS-B systems lack (they use GPS position, and thus no bearing detection on non GPS targets (mode S without ADS-B or mode A/C)
Active systems give a more acurate bearing on mode C and S (within 30 degrees) but cost a lot more then the ZAON.
Peter wrote:
I would not say the owner reports are glowing in praise.
I think this is mainly because many seem to expect TAS / GTS accuracy (or even better) from such systems. When people understand the system and the limitations,and still choose for such a system, they are usually happy with it. A very poor direction is better then non direction at all.
Peter wrote:
Sure, but Mode S is no good for TAS purposes
Well you better tell L3 then, as the LGT-9000+ GA transponder and TAS works with the same bits and bobs used on jet installations, and in both cases seems to effectively work with offending mode S transponders up to 50 miles out…
