ADS-B Mandate
- Thread starter skywagon8a
- Start date
JimParker256
Registered User
Farmersville, TX
There is a provision in the TSO for 978-UAT units to broadcast in "anonymous" mode while squawking 1200 (VFR). This would result in no N-number displayed, and no aircraft information. But as soon as you enter a discrete transponder code, it begins transmitting your N-number, ICAO identifier, etc. (just like the 1090-ES units, where "anonymous mode is NOT ever allowed). So it is possible that is what was going on. I think it's more likely that Garmin displayed the wrong symbol when it saw an "anonymous" target, because a "Mode-C only" transponder does not "broadcast" anything - it only "replies" to interrogations by radar. If spinner2 was seeing positional updates for that target that were "fluid" (not jumping from position to position based on a new radar sweep), it was almost certainly ADS-B OUT equipped.
spinner2
MEMBER
Montana
Jim I couldn’t see it long enough to see if it was jumpy. I know what you’re referring to by that. It didn’t show until it was a abeam me and because we were flying opposite directions it didn’t stay on the 796 for long.
An anonymous UAT seems possible. I saw this same phenonomen once before and I talked to the pilot. He said he had a common Mode C transponder and yet he was on my 796 and I had no ADSB coverage but we both were in radar coverage.
The GDL 82 is an interesting option. I downloaded the manual and you can install a switch to turn the anonymity on or off at the pilot’s discretion. And it can be on only when you’re squawking 1200. When turned off or squawking an ATC code it displays your N number.
An anonymous UAT seems possible. I saw this same phenonomen once before and I talked to the pilot. He said he had a common Mode C transponder and yet he was on my 796 and I had no ADSB coverage but we both were in radar coverage.
The GDL 82 is an interesting option. I downloaded the manual and you can install a switch to turn the anonymity on or off at the pilot’s discretion. And it can be on only when you’re squawking 1200. When turned off or squawking an ATC code it displays your N number.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Just an uneducated guess, the other traffic's antenna was mounted on it's belly so your airplane didn't see the signal until he was passing you.
spinner2
MEMBER
Montana
Could be. The ADSB Out uses a blade type transponder antenna and it should be mounted on the bottom side. The plane looked like a Husky/Cub from the brief look I got. A blue and white one on skis. My engine and his engine could well have been blocking the signal. My GDL39 is mounted above the panel.
He he was below me and not offset to the side by much.
However it it worked I remain impressed with the technology and system. Even living in an area with somewhat spotty coverage. I’ve wondered why the ADSB towers are all placed in valleys instead of the tops of mountains? Most of the radar installations are up high. Missoula being the only exception I can think of. All of the ADSB towers are down at airports or close to them.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
ADSB towers being in the valleys means that they can more easily see the belly mounted antennas.
fobjob
MEMBER
Salt Lake City, Utah
The next add-on will be a splitter and top mounted “diversity” antenna for coverage by satellite in very scarcely occupied areas....thanks to MH370..... there are quite a few satellites (Iridium) scheduled for launch with an add-on ads-b system aboard....this will also help eliminate any blindness due to shadowing...
Last edited:
JimParker256
Registered User
Farmersville, TX
I just listed it on a worksheet, and added the $500 to my "other income" field. That's how Turbo Tax did it.
fobjob
MEMBER
Salt Lake City, Utah
The rebate is taxable, but no 1099
is provided, because the total amount was less than 600 bucks...the article in Avweb this morning, about the postponement of the adsb deadline until 2040, WAS a prank...at least, it better be...
Jim, do you remember what worksheet?
is provided, because the total amount was less than 600 bucks...the article in Avweb this morning, about the postponement of the adsb deadline until 2040, WAS a prank...at least, it better be...
Jim, do you remember what worksheet?
JimParker256
Registered User
Farmersville, TX
The one where you list miscellaneous income. It doesn’t get filed — TT just uses it to determine how much income you had, in case you had more than one source of “non-1099” income.
A “friend” works for the IRS, and says they know if you got a rebate... So including it when you file is just common sense. Why give them a reason to audit you, over a measly $500 in income?
hotrod180
FRIEND
Port Townsend, WA
This is the post that deserves the "Please say it is. Please" comment.
April fools, but we can always hope.....
fobjob
MEMBER
Salt Lake City, Utah
Thanks, gang...back to the original topic of this thread, ten Iridium sats got launched yesterday, trying to find out if the adsb monitors were on them...of course, they still only go as far north as Juneau’s latitude, so everything north of there is a slant shot, might be problematic.
Last edited:
fobjob
MEMBER
Salt Lake City, Utah
OK, from what I’ve been able to wade through this morning, fifty Iridiums have already been launched with the adsb receivers aboard. I found ONE statement that indicated that they ONLY monitor 1090 MHz, so, if true, then Alaska cubs and Canada transiting planes had better plan on extended squitter mode S transponders and not 978 MHz equipment....
there were also vague statements that the ground portion of the system would become operational towards the end of 2018.
This kinda makes sense, as the transponder pulses are about 250 Watts, and the 978 equipment pulses are a lot less....
NavCanada is a program participant....
there were also vague statements that the ground portion of the system would become operational towards the end of 2018.
This kinda makes sense, as the transponder pulses are about 250 Watts, and the 978 equipment pulses are a lot less....
NavCanada is a program participant....
Last edited:
Jim Hann
FRIEND
Ballwin, MO
Just talked to my CPA about this since I didn't tell them about the $500. Her opinion is that isn't taxable income since it was a rebate against the purchase of the equipment. However, being the gubmint we know they want as much money as they can get... Actually her comment was "they are erring on the conservative side. Does the FAA have fine print saying that they are not qualified to give tax advise?"
I'll be watching this, if I see comments that folks are getting letters (which is probably where they would start, not audits) then we'll open up the returns and amend them.
Thanks for the heads up!
Jim
PS, sorry for the thread drift.
Gordon Misch
MEMBER
Toledo, Wa (KTDO)
Maybe if the gross, pre-rebate cost of installation had been taken as a deductible expense?
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
The accountant I am married to asked why you would report it. It is money you didn't spend on the ADSB, like discounting the price. It is not income.
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
Steve I think this is one of those apples and oranges things. Garmin didn't give me the rebate, the FAA did. Unfortunately that sounds like income to me.
Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
Then report it as income, no harm in that.
JimParker256
Registered User
Farmersville, TX
The FAA's ADS-B Rebate web site has FAQs, including one as to whether the rebate is taxable: https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/rebate/faq/#q0205 Here's the relevant portion:
[h=3]Is the rebate payment considered as taxable income?[/h]Yes, the $500 is taxable income. Rebate payment recipients are required to report it on the appropriate tax return.
[h=3]Will I receive a 1099 form from FAA for the rebate payment?[/h]1099 forms are only required for taxable income exceeding $600. FAA will not send a 1099 form to any Rebate recipient.
A "rebate" check from the federal government is NOT a "discount" from the manufacturer, as discussed in the Turbo-Tax "cash-back rewards" answer. Again, why invite an audit over $500 in income? But I suppose we all have different levels of risk tolerance... Not worth saving $100-150 in taxes to me.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Yet the federal government used the incentive of the $500 to cause the purchase of the equipment. Some people would not have made the purchase had not the government issued the incentive. The government (FAA) was incentivising the purchase by issuing the "rebate". I agree with stewartb.
Jim Hann
FRIEND
Ballwin, MO
My CPA agrees with Steve's CPA, thank you Cathy! I agree with y'all, but it is the government, they have one hand out whilst the other is behind your back picking your pocket.
Like my CPA said, is the FAA really qualified to give tax advice???
