Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

UK CAA £250 subsidy for ADS-B device - extended to Sep 2021, now until March 2024

So the statement “Some TAS systems in CAT/MIL airframes will reject ADS-B emissions with SIL/SDA = 0.” is the other way around i.e. most (possibly nearly all, given the total lack of input on this Q) won’t see it.

This is what I don’t like about this debate. It is disingenuous. The CAA is doing this to facilitate drone traffic, and since a drone can be trivially equipped with a receiver for everything (including FLARM, PAW etc) and it can transmit SIL=1+ ADS-B OUT, the CAA doesn’t care whether other GA traffic sees the stuff. And much of it won’t because they bought into the other cynically promoted boxes e.g. PAW.

And now we have employees of the various box manufacturers (often recruited from the ex CAA ex RAF ex ATC circle ) are pushing the same stuff in the same places to their same old contacts. No doubt one of them will email me in a minute threatening legal action

The CAA has discharged their diligence obligation with this 250 quid scheme.

If the CAA mandated SIL=1+ ADS-B OUT, that would be a positive move, but as discussed previously – example – I don’t see this happening due to privacy concerns, especially given the UK CAA’s 100% bust-them-all infringements policy.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

But could the CAA just declare “Now drones can fly wherever. To see them, buy an ads-b receiver.” ?

Note in the press release
“a known environment, without need for a TDA, in which all airspace users are detected and presented to the UAS operator”

To me, they want to demonstrate that ads-b for all is equal or superior to “see and avoid”.
What a scientific breakthrough

LFOU, France

I think there is a huge safety benefit in ADSB/FLARM for aeroplane to aeroplane, it’s not just about “big brother watching CAS” or the next “drones skynet invasion”

Transponders are only adequate for CAS with a fully functional ATS service, TCAS they will do no good in Class G, given the myriads on things flying uncontrolled over there from C130H to DJI drones and load of aeroplanes with transponders or Mode C switched OFF for the obvious reason, as long as someone emits something on EC it’s already good for others, I don’t care if one chooses infra red blips for his EC as ADSB sucks, if I feel he is an existential treat, I will buy a cheap infra-red detector

If one value their privacy & freedom*, they can still fly a NO-TXP, NO-COM, NO-EC Cub or ULM at 500ft agl, but better stay away from busy circuits, ATZ or cruising levels and most importantly open your eyes !

*A person’s freedom ends where another man’s freedom begins…

Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

We have a looong thread here on the various EC boxes.

I will go for the ADS-B upgrade as soon as somebody (e.g. @mattl here) is able to verify that a TAS605A ( A ) displays OK on an SN3500 EHSI. The chances of somebody verifying operation with a KMD550 is pretty well zero I will put in the wiring for a GTX335 – TAS605 connection at the next Annual, because getting the trim panels off is a big job. That will do certified ADS-B IN and OUT. The GTX335 will provide the WAAS GPS input to the TAS605A.

Interestingly it has been stated that SkyEcho2 with the SIL=1 “adaptation” is not legal outside the UK, which makes it rather pointless if you have to remember to turn it off when going anywhere abroad. I think there are legality issues with most/all portable ADS-B OUT devices if one also has a Mode S transponder.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Well I’m hoping it’s more than just drone avoidance. I certainly know of one airport that been ‘fighting’ for a GPS approval for something like 5 years and I know they have a ground receiver and screen as part of their safety measures.

Peter wrote:

the CAA doesn’t care whether other GA traffic sees the stuff. And much of it won’t because they bought into the other cynically promoted boxes e.g. PAW.

I think you’re misinformed about PilotAware – PilotAware DOES see this stuff. It sees ADS-B (all SILs), it sees PAW, it sees Mode-S, it sees Mode-C. If you are in range of an OGN-R station you will get multilaterated (in other words, azimuth as well as height) Mode-S, and you will also see FLARM.

FLARM is the worst – it’s a closed encrypted protocol, but PAW can see it.

I’m not sure how PAW is ‘cynically promoted’. It’s an inexpensive way to have ADS-B in.

Last Edited by alioth at 12 Oct 16:47
Andreas IOM

What can see PAW?

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.

Well I’m hoping it’s more than just drone avoidance. I certainly know of one airport that been ‘fighting’ for a GPS approval for something like 5 years and I know they have a ground receiver and screen as part of their safety measures.

That would be a most novel approach… is there anything in the latest CAA docs on GPS approaches without ATC having their safety case helped by mandatory ADS-B OUT? It would still mean a FISO having a “display” and offering instructions to airborne traffic. And with ATC there is no issue anyway.

The only reasons I see behind some of the initiatives like this are

  • an unofficial display (lots of airfields already have a “nonexistent” laptop running FR24 )
  • an easier way to detect ATZ busts so they can be MORd
Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The ground stations aren’t a business so a business plan is irrelevant (OGN-R is run by glider clubs, and is here to stay), and aren’t a gimmick. The Mode-S multilateration service absolutely has a business plan, it is run by 360radar which is running sustainably.

The usual way to use PilotAware is along side ADS-B out. That’s what we do. ADS-B out is our EC, and PAW is how we get ADS-B in.

Last Edited by alioth at 12 Oct 16:52
Andreas IOM

The only reasonable system to install today is FLARM, unless one goes for a certified ADS-B Out system. But then you still need a FLARM for collision avoidance on your end, so probably makes little sense not to only go for FLARM. PAW is more a toy (and only other PAW can see it) and I wouldn’t trust the life of my family without a real collision-avoidance system like FLARM.

United Kingdom

But then you still need a FLARM for collision avoidance on your end

Mooney75 – I don’t think you are familiar with certified TCAS1/TAS systems – example

They are made by Garmin, L3, Avidyne and older ones by Honeywell, and are pretty common on newer IFR tourer aircraft. See various threads here on these systems; the search box finds them. Garmin and L3, and upgraded Avidyne can also display ADS-B emitters. These display only SIL=1 or higher emissions, which for the “portable” emitters is just SkyEcho2 when configured for SIL=1 which I am not sure is legal outside the UK. On the UK sites everybody is skirting around TCAS1, pretending it doesn’t exist, because it is in the interests of certain businesses.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top