Have you every talked too pilots which you didn’t see on your TAS unit?
A good point – yes, and (on a different occassion) I got a bollocking from the instructor who was inside, about relying on TCAS and not using the Mk1 Eyeball.
Did you show them your TAS unit and explained why it could be valueable for both them and yourself to enable their transponder?
A good point – will try to do that. But the reaction is likely to be hostile, given that such a move is equivalent to asking them to spend 4 figures, or forego the ability to avoid getting busted on a CAS bust.
Did you have your gray code tested / read out at the TAS box, if there is an issue here that might also explain why you don’t see certain aircraft (e.g. it might think you are at a diffent altitude and thus use a different protection area then the area your flying in.
The TAS605 can take pressure altitude via ARINC429 or via gray code. In my plane, I have the gray code from the KEA130A altimeter, and I have ARINC429 from the GTX330. I realise one can get a box which converts the KEA130A’s output into ARINC429 which the TAS605 can use, but that is more to go wrong, for the sake of running a multicore cable.
I don’t have issues with the altitude data, AFAIK.
I don’t think so, Jesse. How many transponders did I see across quite an aviation-popular bit of France yesterday? Zero. I was at FL090 so would have picked up everything “within what Avidyne call 15nm” between 6000ft and 12000ft. So, either there is no GA in that band, or they are invisible, and for sure 99% flying in that band will have a transponder.
If the mogas in France is like UK mogas, then the users will be below 6,000’. Flying in our Jodel, I always squawk Mode S, but, on Tesco’s UL95, must stay below 6,000’.
Jesse wrote:
It can be virtually free, very few aircraft don’t have any GPS at all these days, most transponders accept NMEA, so can accept even an handheld when used in craddle.
Any non approved GPS interface for such as NMEA is not going to provide the integrity parameters necessary for the SIL to ever be anything other than 0. Such position sources stand out like a sore thumb and end up being classified as NPE in the US by the FAA.
And presumably the traffic will be invisible to TAS systems from Ryan/Avidyne, Garmin, Honeywell, L3 and whoever else makes TAS boxes…
Higher-end GA has only these systems.
So sub-SIL-3 radiation is mostly pointless.
NCYankee wrote:
Any non approved GPS interface for such as NMEA is not going to provide the integrity parameters necessary for the SIL to ever be anything other than 0. Such position sources stand out like a sore thumb and end up being classified as NPE in the US by the FAA.
There are some major difference between ADS-B in the US and Europe. One of these big differences is that voluntary ADS-B out with lowest SIL 0 is allowed in Europa. This makes low cost ADS-B traffic between aircraft possible (Flarm, Garrecht TRX, PilotAware all will all display all ADS-B targets)
In Europe we don’t have ADS-R and UAT for the bennefits of traffic information.
The main advantage of the European system is that ADS-B IN and OUT can be had at a very low price.
The main advantage of the US system as I understand is that you will have more complete traffic due to traffic information upload, as well as weather upload.
Peter wrote:
So sub-SIL-3 radiation is mostly pointless.
You make a big mistake here. It might not give benefits to your specific installation, it does give benefits for the larger selection of GA. As they are all based on mode S, you will see this targets on your TAS box anyway due to the mode S, The same for other brands.
It is VERY USEFULL as it will give a low cost traffic awareness for aircraft not equiped with an expensive TAS system. IMHO ADS-B out, even with SIL 0 should be encouraged. The cost for this is even less than a Flarm device, while having a better range then the Flarm products.
That certified systems don’t have the option at least to choose if you want to see SIL 0 targets or not is a fail IMHO. It would compare both TAS data and ADS-B data anyway and merges these to prevent double targets.
If all aircraft would have ADS-B out, even with SIL 0 there are sufficient European products, that would give you a better traffic overview then any TAS system. The European products would all be able to comply with this. Failure rate of a GPS system is from my experiance far lower then that of transponder.
Peter wrote:
And presumably the traffic will be invisible to TAS systems from Ryan/Avidyne, Garmin, Honeywell, L3 and whoever else makes TAS boxes…Higher-end GA has only these systems.
So sub-SIL-3 radiation is mostly pointless.
I’d disagree. High end GA is a small minority, and high end GA can already see Mode-S transponders so (in Europe) adding ADS-B isn’t going to make much difference to high end GA, since ADS-B, SIL-anything, means you’re already doing Mode-S, because in Europe there’s no UAT, only 1090ES.
The rest of us can have a very inexpensive way of seeing each other depicted on something like Skydemon. If everyone added a SIL-0 GPS input to their transponder tomorrow, then the majority could very inexpensively add traffic display to their iPad running Skydemon – which an awful lot of people carry now. PilotAware is less than £200. Not only is it cheap, renters can carry something like PilotAware because it’s portable. If you have a transponder that can accept NMEA for SIL-0 ADS-B, it may be as simple as adding some cabling to start radiating ADS-B. When I upgrade from my old Mode-C transponder to Mode-S, I’ll be adding SIL-0 ADS-B because it is effectively free for me to do; I already have a device in the panel with GPS, so the cost is some wire – as opposed to a certified GPS source which will cost £3000 when all is said and done, and doesn’t actually provide any benefit because people with certified TAS can already see the Mode-S transponder.
There’s been huge uptake in FLARM in gliding because it’s inexpensive. Pity it’s using a proprietary protocol. SIL-0 ADS-B is almost as cheap to add to many installations, and at least ADS-B is a standard protocol.
Peter wrote:
A good point – yes, and (on a different occassion) I got a bollocking from the instructor who was inside, about relying on TCAS and not using the Mk1 Eyeball.Did you show them your TAS unit and explained why it could be valueable for both them and yourself to enable their transponder?
A good point – will try to do that. But the reaction is likely to be hostile, given that such a move is equivalent to asking them to spend 4 figures, or forego the ability to avoid getting busted on a CAS bust.
You can remind the instructor that Mk.1 eyeball isn’t all that effective.
Also, it doesn’t cost 4 figures to move a switch from “Off” to “ALT”. Given that even the microlights at Andreas have transponders, I don’t think there’s that many aircraft that have no transponder at all.
alioth wrote:
The rest of us can have a very inexpensive way of seeing each other depicted on something like Skydemon. If everyone added a SIL-0 GPS input to their transponder
I am checking with Garmin but I think the GDL39 will also show SIL=0 targets. Again I really think that getting the bulk of aircraft to radiate ADS-B could provide a huge benefit to safety.
I am just being practical.
It appears a fact (correct me if I am wrong) that none of the pricey certified systems which many people have retrofitted and which come installed in most new IFR tourers will see any ADS-B emitting traffic other than SIL-3 i.e. a fully certified ADS-B OUT.
So the Q is how one can most practically see non-SIL-3 ADS-B traffic?
I am not interested in looking on an Ipad, which I don’t have anyway, and have nowhere to put it where it is in view.
Are there any panel mounted display options?
