• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

ADS-B Mandate

I don't think that transponders are required in controlled airspace. Only in A, B, C, overflying B & C, and something about over 10,000 feet. Not required in D or E airspace.
 
As far as I'm aware Tulsa Dave is right on the transponder and in 2020 ads-b requirements.
 
ADS B out is always transmitting a code which identifies the airplane. This is like the Mode S transponder. Each airplane is assigned a code number when it is registered. That code is entered into the setup of the Mode S and/or ADS B out. Look up your registration on the FAA site. You will see your assigned code. ATC reads that code from the Mode S or ADS B out. They know who you are.

They certainly do! I found out in an interesting way. A POTUS TFR has just been lifted at AUS and I was headed there to pick up a friend. I was trying to make radio contact with ATC but they weren't responding. I flew around just outside of AUS airspace for about 5 minutes waiting for the radio traffic to subside (lot's of private jets were trying to get out). Then ATC radioed me, with no indication they had heard my previous calls, telling me to head north for about 10 miles and orbit. About 15 minutes later they called again asking my intent. I responded but no answer. I switched radios, called them again, and now we were in two-way communication. My first radio had lost its mind and was receiving but not transmitting. Oh yes, with a mode s transponder they already know who we are if they want to.
 
stewartb, If you choose to be electronically tracked, that is your prerogative. I do not so choose. And, I resent the government telling me that I must be tracked, just because I like to fly a small airplane. I can go anywhere that I want with my sailboat and no one cares. I can drive my car and my pickup anywhere, without being electronically tracked. That is my choice, not some bureaucrat's choice. I do understand the wisdom of being tracked in Alaska. That is an important safety capability. But that is a personal choice not mandatory.

Actually the government will be tracking cars soon. (They are now) Transponders to pay tolls are becoming mandatory, and they're talking about charging for mileage driven on a regular basis- through tracking. The head of Ford recently slipped when he said "we know what you're doing already." He had to try and retract that. As for boats, I have a little skiff in Ipswich Mass, and have noticed a huge increase in Police presence. --- This stinks to high heavens.
 
Yep, I've made my last trip over the Mystic bridge. If they don't like cash, they will not see me. But let's not digress, we can bash the Taxachusetts moonbats all day long.
 
Wonder what kind of radar KAUS has? I work approach control at a airport with Class C airspace and we have no idea if a aircraft is adsb equipped. I would say they heard your call sign and just didnt answer because of higher priorities.

I do know there is 2 Bonanzas here with adsb and the can see each others n numbers when they are flying around on their Garmin gps's.
 
kase,
Maybe. But I hadn't reported my position except on the initial call when I was 20 miles out, and they were covered up with traffic trying to get out (and in). They didn't contact me until I was flying around the edge of the airspace. Without having acknowledged my calls or giving me a transponder code, would/could they still have tracked my N-number on there screens?
 
kase,
Maybe. But I hadn't reported my position except on the initial call when I was 20 miles out, and they were covered up with traffic trying to get out (and in). They didn't contact me until I was flying around the edge of the airspace. Without having acknowledged my calls or giving me a transponder code, would/could they still have tracked my N-number on there screens?
I've had the same situation at Dallas with good old Mode C.

I made the initial call when they were slammed, and figuring I was missed I paralleled the airspace and like 8 minutes later when they were less busy (and I was needing to turn in) I got the call N yada yada yada, squawk BR549, confirm 4500ft, 3 N of Mesquite, cleared to enter Bravo Airspace, say intention?' They knew my altitude and location both of which had changed, my guess is they had an assistant entering the data on the 1200 target and later cueing the controller (they only thing they missed was my destination as Dallas Exec.).

Funny thing, once upon a time I remember my Dad griping about having to go to Mode C...
 
skywagon8a, not that I know of. Only thing I have been told is separation will be reduced from 5 to 3 miles enroute. Current radar separation is 5 miles when more than 40 miles from the radar antennae. With adsb traffic targets wont be jumping around like they do now. I will ask if we got upgrades coming. Havent really paid much attention to it cause I will probably be retired by then and dont really give a shxt.

barnstormer, I still just think they heard you call. Wrote your number down and called you back when they could. If you really want to know call the facility and ask. Only way I know somebodys call sign is if they are ifr or receiving flight following from the center. When a vfr pilot calls I type in his call sign on my keyboard, computer assigns a code. When you get your code in the transponder and the radar sees it then your n number is shown.
 
Fast forward a few years when some% of the air traffic is of the UAV type. If I have to share it, I will for sure want those guys to know where I am and vice-versa. The see and avoid thought process may not work so well. Mode C will not be enough at that point. I'm sure there will be a lot of details required to fit UAV into GA airspace. There will be a lot to learn by everyone.

Tim
 
Since the UAV crowd has desires to enter the airspace system which has been occupied by thousands of human carrying flying machines for at least 110 years, it would be incumbent upon the UAV proponents to make sure that their UAVs have the ability to detect and avoid ALL types of human flying machines, without forcing the existing machines operators to develop and add new equipment at their own expense, to protect themselves from the "new kid on the block". Where is the personal responsibility of the UAV proponents? It is totally irresponsible of them to think that the rest of the world needs to get out of their way. And it is equally irresponsible of legislative action forcing the UAVs upon the existing aviation community.
 
I don't disagree. However, if they cannot see you then what tells them to "avoid". I suspect the mandate will be that all aircraft have ADS-B out so that those guys sitting behind a PC screen know what is out there. How else do you make it safe? If you have to share congested airspace with UAV's what is safe about their avoidance protocol. The other concern I have is that the majority of UAV's will be down in GA airspace not up in commercial airspace where it is better regimented by ATC to provide separation. (Think of an aerial spray applicator.)

I suspect it will come down to a question of money. The UAV guys have a strong commerce driven force behind it. I don't think they will be forced to have the surveillance hardware that a USAF drone has.

All food for thought of course......

Tim
 
I think that we agree on the "what", just not the "how". There are standard equipment devises on my car which tell me when the car is in close proximity to an object.
... However, if they cannot see you then what tells them to "avoid". Tim
Today's highly advanced electronics has advanced to an extremely sophisticated level as a result of the many decades ago race to the moon. There are all sorts of sophisticated electronic sensing gadgets out there along with the electronic whiz kids, with the brain power, to develop a device which would detect an object in the UAV's flight path. Whether the object was a building, a tower, a hill or a no electric J-3. There is no reason what so ever for the UAV crowd to jump in the middle of a well established aviation community and expect the aviation community to just roll over. There is no reasonable reason at all to force 100% of the aviation community to support the ADS-B manufacturers for the benefit of the UAVs. It is the responsibility of the UAVs to ensure that they themselves can not and will not harm even one individual in the existing flying community.

Who knows, just perhaps they will develop a simple low cost electronic obstacle detection device which will be a boon to all aviation users? Automobile users? Boaters? etc, etc? Then all will be winners. Boil it all down. It is the UAV developers responsibility to do no harm. It is part of the privilege of being a UAV.
 
Whether your for or against the ADS-B we all have a vested interest in not hitting each other. While the UAV guy playing there video game would have to live with killing someone. Unlike all of us as pilots there butt isn't in danger. They don't have there kids, family, friends who are trusting you with there lives to bring them home safe on the line. As PIC we have the ultimate authority for a reason it's our lives and our passengers lives on the line. They'll never have that seating in a chair on the ground playing games. What requirement are they going to have to have? Flight training avoidance training how about regular drug testing. I would say they at least need to be a commercial pilot or at least a similar number of hours so they have some clue.
 
. There is no reason what so ever for the UAV crowd to jump in the middle of a well established aviation community and expect the aviation community to just roll over. There is no reasonable reason at all to force 100% of the aviation community to support the ADS-B manufacturers for the benefit of the UAVs. It is the responsibility of the UAVs to ensure that they themselves can not and will not harm even one individual in the existing flying community. .

Pete, you're missing a couple points here:

1. Very few if any industries will spend money on anything if they can get someone else to do the job for them. The technology you describe would cost a lot of $$. Why would the drone industry spend that money, if they can get the govt to force US to?

2. Who is spending the most money on lobbyists on this topic......General Aviation? Not hardly. The drone industry is HEAVILY engaged in lobbying.

3. Who gives a **** about some dufus in a no electric J3 anyway? If he had any REAL money, he'd be in a private jet, well above all this.

Money is what talks in this world today, and we aren't the ones spending it in this debate. Frankly, in fact, this isn't even a debate.....notice how quiet all the aviation alphabet groups are on this?

MTV
 
Last edited:
Mike,
You are absolutely correct. That is why I am screaming. THEY ARE IMMORALLY WRONG. The alphabet groups are wrong. They are all just kissing the bureaucratic derrieres. We pilots make up less than 0.15% of the population so we should just roll over and play dead. :behead:

What do you think would happen to the FAA if all of us pilots stopped flying? Nothing, it would get bigger.
 
I am a controller at Phoenix Tracon and there is no way we know who you are without you stating your call sign. Sometimes based on the traffic and the way you called in, maybe you stated your altitude, we have a really good idea of which one is you however it was just a good guess. Even the aircraft that are ADS-B we still don't know who they are because the software just doesn't give us that information at the scope. It's possible they noticed you holding or circling in that location and just assumed it was you trying to call. I deal with numerous aircraft every day in one of our satellite sectors where radios fail or there is a severe language barrier due to Chinese students. We can get pretty good at guessing which aircraft is trying to call us.
 
I think that we agree on the "what", just not the "how". There are standard equipment devises on my car which tell me when the car is in close proximity to an object.

Today's highly advanced electronics has advanced to an extremely sophisticated level as a result of the many decades ago race to the moon. There are all sorts of sophisticated electronic sensing gadgets out there along with the electronic whiz kids, with the brain power, to develop a device which would detect an object in the UAV's flight path. Whether the object was a building, a tower, a hill or a no electric J-3. There is no reason what so ever for the UAV crowd to jump in the middle of a well established aviation community and expect the aviation community to just roll over. There is no reasonable reason at all to force 100% of the aviation community to support the ADS-B manufacturers for the benefit of the UAVs. It is the responsibility of the UAVs to ensure that they themselves can not and will not harm even one individual in the existing flying community.

Who knows, just perhaps they will develop a simple low cost electronic obstacle detection device which will be a boon to all aviation users? Automobile users? Boaters? etc, etc? Then all will be winners. Boil it all down. It is the UAV developers responsibility to do no harm. It is part of the privilege of being a UAV.

I would think this is possible today. Look at how well Israel's Iron Dome works. We know those Hamas missiles aren't equipped with a transponder telling the defense system where they are.
 
Whine or not, all of us near metro areas will be buying ADS-B Out equipment probably about 3 yrs from now. So what we need now is a constructive dialog about the choices open to us now and any info about what companies are working on. Get past the "angry" period to tha "acceptance" phase.
 
In the spirit of what I said in the last post --- I am still learning about ADS-B and here is a bulletin: The Bendix/King KT74 is a plug and play transponder as a Mode S --- BUT to work in the ADS-B system it must be coupled to an APPROVED WAAS capable GPS and no portables are approved; only expensive panel mounts. So not only will some wiring be involved (NOT plug and play) but the WAAS GPS will be the really expensive part. Sounds like deceptive advertising.

From the TRIG website -- for clarification:
What equipment do I need?
To support ADS-B “Out”, the aircraft must have a GPS receiver as the position source, and a datalink transmitter to actually send the ADS-B data.
The datalink transmitter that most aircraft will use is a Mode S transponder, using a feature called “Extended Squitter”. This is often referred to as 1090 ES, because the Extended Squitter (ES) transmissions are transmitted on the 1090 MHz frequency. The Mode S transponder with Extended Squitter is the international standard for ADS-B output. Specific to US airspace – and not approved elsewhere – is the UAT datalink transmitter as an alternative to the Mode S transponder. UAT transmitters may only be used on GA aircraft flying at lower altitudes in the USA.
The GPS receiver used must be an IFR certified receiver. Although that GPS is not required to be WAAS capable, that may be a moot point. Many legacy GPS receivers that were designed before ADS-B was planned do not include the necessary calculation of integrity and accuracy that ADS-B needs to operate. It is unlikely that these older devices can be upgraded, and therefore a new GPS receiver would be required. This does not necessarily mean discarding an existing GPS navigator - a secondary receiver can be used to provide ADS-B data without disrupting the existing installation - there is no rule that requires a single common position source.
 
Last edited:
In the spirit of what I said in the last post --- I am still learning about ADS-B and here is a bulletin: The Bendix/King KT74 is a plug and play transponder as a Mode S --- BUT to work in the ADS-B system it must be coupled to an APPROVED WAAS capable GPS and no portables are approved; only expensive panel mounts. So not only will some wiring be involved (NOT plug and play) but the WAAS GPS will be the really expensive part. Sounds like deceptive advertising.

From the TRIG website -- for clarification:
What equipment do I need?
To support ADS-B “Out”, the aircraft must have a GPS receiver as the position source, and a datalink transmitter to actually send the ADS-B data.
The datalink transmitter that most aircraft will use is a Mode S transponder, using a feature called “Extended Squitter”. This is often referred to as 1090 ES, because the Extended Squitter (ES) transmissions are transmitted on the 1090 MHz frequency. The Mode S transponder with Extended Squitter is the international standard for ADS-B output. Specific to US airspace – and not approved elsewhere – is the UAT datalink transmitter as an alternative to the Mode S transponder. UAT transmitters may only be used on GA aircraft flying at lower altitudes in the USA.
The GPS receiver used must be an IFR certified receiver. Although that GPS is not required to be WAAS capable, that may be a moot point. Many legacy GPS receivers that were designed before ADS-B was planned do not include the necessary calculation of integrity and accuracy that ADS-B needs to operate. It is unlikely that these older devices can be upgraded, and therefore a new GPS receiver would be required. This does not necessarily mean discarding an existing GPS navigator - a secondary receiver can be used to provide ADS-B data without disrupting the existing installation - there is no rule that requires a single common position source.

Darrel,

Welcome to the reality of ADS-B. I have said from the outset that at least initially, this is not going to be an inexpensive deal. I sincerely hope that some manufacturer gets something reasonably priced approved, but I'm not holding my breath. Bear in mind, at one point, some folks in the FAA were telling us a transponder would not be required to comply.

General aviation is a small market, but there are some smart avionics folks out there. Cross your fingers, but don't buy anything till you absolutely have to.

MTV
 
So five years? At that point I will have owned the Super Decathlon for fifteen - and probably will have mastered the slow roll. Bet I can sell it then for what I paid for it, and fly the J-3 until I cannot climb in.
 
The Mode S transponder with Extended Squitter is the international standard for ADS-B output. Specific to US airspace – and not approved elsewhere – is the UAT datalink transmitter as an alternative to the Mode S transponder. UAT transmitters may only be used on GA aircraft flying at lower altitudes in the USA.

Notice that for us Cubbers, this is either the mode S transponder or the UAT. I believe the choice, of which, is for those who fly below 18,000 feet. And as Mike has said, this is going to be expensive.
 
Back
Top