Does anyone know what this is really about?
They have published this report
Not a lot of interest in this one 
Admittedly I struggle to work out what they are trying to say and how their conclusions are justified from the foregoing info.
No relevant mention of ADS-B, so it doesn’t look like they are trying to go the US route, though admittedly the US is doing it only in transponder-mandatory airspace of which the UK has very little, and the US is going for certified ADS-B OUT while most of the “social media driven” promotion in the UK is for uncertified ADS-B OUT.
Peter wrote:
No relevant mention of ADS-B, so it doesn’t look like they are trying to go the US route, though admittedly the US is doing it only in transponder-mandatory airspace of which the UK has very little, and the US is going for certified ADS-B OUT while most of the “social media driven” promotion in the UK is for uncertified ADS-B OUT.
They mention congestion on 1090 and ADS-B at the back. I think they are likely to require ADS-OUT in selective airspace.
If they mandate ADS-B OUT in some airspace, that would imply it is for surveillance benefit (ATC) and it would have to be certified ADS-B OUT.
That is totally different from the current “drift” in the UK, which is a different uncertified gadget for every forum poster
Peter, what I still don’t get is why not to say the same thing as for 8.33: any NEW transponder installed in G-REG from xxx date must be ADS-B OUT enabled.
It looks like it is getting hard now to buy a non-ADS-B OUT TXP these days as most manufacturers are aiming at the US hence ADS-B out.
According to Mendelson’s (gps.co.uk) it costs £3114 to buy a GTX335 with a gps card vs. £2874 without. £240 savings?
I don’t disagree
I am merely saying that if you look at what is being pushed in the UK, it isn’t certified ADS-B OUT.
The CAA sounds (though I am not sure) like they are interested in promoting the various low cost approaches, but that can be only for inter-aircraft anti collision purposes. ATC (i.e. airspace compliance surveillance) will never be able to see that stuff. These two are very different objectives.
Peter wrote:
I am merely saying that if you look at what is being pushed in the UK, it isn’t certified ADS-B OUT.
I think it is both. I wouldn’t be surprised to see certified/non-certified position source ADS-B for general use and certified ADS-B required for certain airspace.
arj1 wrote:
According to Mendelson’s (gps.co.uk) it costs £3114 to buy a GTX335 with a gps card vs. £2874 without. £240 savings?
I think in this comparison both versions provide ADS-B OUT, the difference is only whether the WAAS GPS is internal to the transponder or a separate unit.
If it were only new installations that were ADS-B mandatory (in my area of the US) I would never have installed a new transponder in my plane, and that is doubtless why FAA didn’t go in that direction. As it is, having just installed a new transponder etc my distaste for the manipulative and/or flaky people and processes associated with avionics is ever growing.
