Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Misc. electronic conspicuity boxes: Garrecht / Air Avionics / TRX-1500A / Air Connect / PAW / PilotAware / LXnav / PowerMouse / FlarmMouse / Flarm / Uavionix / SkyEcho / SafeSky

If you want to buy something a bit more future proof then it is SkyEcho. When will the US be adopting PAW as the new international standard ?

EHLE / Lelystad, Netherlands, Netherlands

I agree that of the “really cheap” boxes, Skyecho2, in the SIL=1 configuration, is the least incompatible, presently and future.

However, anybody with a “nice” plane and who flies a lot, is much better served with an active TAS like this but a modern version with ADS-B IN. It won’t see SIL=0 ADS-B emitters (and according to “Mr Flarm” it won’t see any uncertified emitters) but it will give you proper info on transponders which are by far more common in GA.

One day it may be possible to merge SIL=0 data with SIL=1+ data, and display the lot on a certified TAS system, and then you will have the very best because you will be able to install a TAS together with any other suitable box but it won’t be possible to do legally

Otherwise, the best anticollision device for the UK is not flying below 2000ft

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

However, anybody with a “nice” plane and who flies a lot, is much better served with an active TAS like this but a modern version with ADS-B IN.

It’s quite expensive, what about Lynx NGT-9000+? Mode-S transponder with ADS-B IN/OUT and integrated TAS.

EGTR

Yes, see thread on the L3.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

If the UK adds the TIS-B service on the UAT frequency, this would provide traffic visibility for any transponder mode A/C or S equipped aircraft. This does not depend on an ADS-B Out emitter at all, so SIL would be irrelevant. In the US, the decision was to only provide TIS-B service for aircraft that were ADS-B Out equipped. It provided that service to the equipped aircraft (clients) for any traffic within 15 NM and +/- 3500 feet centric on the client. Any aircraft could receive the TIS-B, but only clients could cause the ground station to provide the service. This was an incentive for aircraft to equip early so they could get the service. Aircraft that were not equipped, although they could receive the service, could not cause the service to be broadcast. There is no technical reason why the TIS-B service could not just be always broadcast and not be dependent on a client. Since the rest of the world uses 1090 MHz for transponders and ADS-B, 978 MHz is relatively clear of use and DME interference is not really an issue. So UAT based ground stations could provide both services TIS-B and FIS-B. The receiving of both frequencies is a defacto standard for portable devices and pretty much the same for Garmin and L3. So this might be a practical conspicuity solution. Use 1090ES for ADS-B Out, 1090ES and UAT for ADS-B In, provide TIS-B service to provide support for transponder equipped aircraft with mode AC or S, and FIS-B along for the ride. Portable devices for anyone and for those that care, certified installed devices. Note TIS-B uses SIL=2 based on the source being secondary radar. The update rate is only as fast as the secondary radar, say 5 to 12 seconds, but that is adequate to provide a conspicuity service. Note, TIS-B would not generate a target for an equipped aircraft, because it is already broadcasting its position.

KUZA, United States

GA_Pete we must be brothers. I have done exactly the same ie upgraded my transponder to adsb out and have PAW and SkyDemon. I have had PAW for a year and a half. With PAW comes the advantage of being able to armchair analyse each flight data set. I therefore note there is quite a lot of adsb traffic in the UK, a fair amount of PAW traffic and an increasing amount of mode-s now MLAT data is up linked where ground stations exist. I don’t think I have noted any Flarm traffic in the data.. The Goodwood spitfire G-ILDA only has PAW (no mode s) for example, no TAS system is going to warn about that speedy bird.

Archer2
EGKA, United Kingdom

If the UK adds the TIS-B service on the UAT frequency, this would provide traffic visibility for any transponder mode A/C or S equipped aircraft. This does not depend on an ADS-B Out emitter at all, so SIL would be irrelevant. In the US, the decision was to only provide TIS-B service for aircraft that were ADS-B Out equipped.

It would surprise me if the UK did this because they had the chance to offer TIS over Mode S and absolutely refused, citing the ~100k per radar station cost of, IIRC, an extra circuit board and some software.

There has never been any interest in the UK to provide services for GA (since 99+% of GA doesn’t pay the IFR route charges) and this is being done as a CAA CYA exercise in case there is a drone-GA mid-air.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The possibility of TIS-B in the UK is definitely improving with a trial to start next year. It’s included in a test programme for drone operation:
https://www.aerospacetestinginternational.com/news/drones-air-taxis/uk-site-to-run-trials-of-unmanned-drone-traffic-management-system.html

Avionics geek.
Somewhere remote in Devon, UK.

Using UAT for TIS-B has distinct advantages, It does not clutter 1090 MHz and can be setup so that ADS-B Out is not required (as it is in the US) to generate the service. That way unequipped aircraft with just a transponder and mode C become visible to all that have an inexpensive ADS-B receiver that can be made for about $100 US. It also can carry FISB.

Last Edited by NCYankee at 19 Oct 14:39
KUZA, United States

Peter wrote:

since 99+% of GA doesn’t pay the IFR route charges

But pays huge taxes on fuel, for which we get absolutely nothing in return. ~100k per radar station will pay for itself if it prevents just a handful of mid-airs over its lifetime (the government here puts the economic cost of one fatal road accident at around £1M).

Andreas IOM
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top