• 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!

USAF says it can't meet ADS-B deadline; too expensive

That question came up at the Montana Aviation Conference last weekend. The nice Lt Colonel who was doing a presentation on AF operations in the new, expanded Powder River MOA was asked if the AF aircraft would be using ADS-B equipment. He smiled rather large, and noted that, "No, the Air Force aircraft will not be broadcasting on ADS-B".

I think there is a real irony there, but when you consider the integration of avionics in tactical aircraft, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that integrating ADS-B equipment into military aircraft is a very expensive deal.

Some of you may recall when Secretary of Commerce Brown was killed in an Air Force version of the Boeing 737 in Croatia. They were flying an NDB approach, and didn't have GPS in the aircraft, nor did any military aircraft at the time.

The Congress and President's knee jerk response was to order all the military services to equip ALL military aircraft carrying passengers with GPS. The military just about bought Garmin out of portable GPS units overnight......

It's worthy of note that the FAA has been pretty quiet about this to date. So, I wonder if the military aircraft are going to be shut out of A, B, C and E airspace above 10K after 2020.

MTV
 
FWIW, I'm planning to install a Garmin G3X Touch w/ remote comm and txp in my project and got a revised quote just yesterday. The difference between the basic txp and adding a WAAS data box that makes it ADS-B out compliant is $845.00. If the government had any interest in doing things economically they surely could. This is more likely just a ploy to get more funding. The AF can't piss away money if Congress won't give it to them.
 
Our newest Blackhawk does not have an IFR certified GPS. There are some serious issues getting tactical aircraft certified in national airspace.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
 
I fly a "grandfathered" Cub under the SAN class B. About three months ago I began to get regular queries as to my altitude from the various towers in the area. Come to find out, whenever approach sees an unidentified aircraft within the class B confines, they take immediate steps to identify it.

This is brand new, and apparently not yet being done elsewhere in the US airspace - yet.

Sounds off-topic, but it really isn't. I wonder how long this will go on before they decide that aircraft without engine driven generators will either get ADS-B or not fly under class B or C?
 
I think that is pretty much bs. You can easily get it for less than $5000/airplane. With around 10,000 airplanes, that is about $50,0000,000. We see that as a lot of money, but some of their airplanes cost almost that much per copy. Quite frankly, it is probably a lot more important for us that USAF aircraft have ads-b than for airliners.
 
phdigger123 said:
I think that is pretty much bs. You can easily get it for less than $5000/airplane. With around 10,000 airplanes, that is about $50,0000,000. We see that as a lot of money, but some of their airplanes cost almost that much per copy. Quite frankly, it is probably a lot more important for us that USAF aircraft have ads-b than for airliners.
Click to expand...
Not applicable here. Strap on solutions rarely work in these scenarios. And when a strap on solution is used (again, rarely) they have to go through extensive testing to make sure they don't interfere with mission systems.
 
CamTom12 said:
Not applicable here. Strap on solutions rarely work in these scenarios. And when a strap on solution is used (again, rarely) they have to go through extensive testing to make sure they don't interfere with mission systems.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You can't just hack a hole in the panel of an F-22 and insert an ADS-B compliant device. Those aircraft are truly an integrated system. And, yes, the Pentagon would of course ensure that whoever got the bid for the work is the highest bidder......

The Colonel's comment at last weekend's program was a wake up call for me......MOA airspace would seem to me to be the poster child for equipping ALL aircraft with ADS-B.

The FAA can't force the military to install equipment, but they can limit where they fly.....it may be interesting to watch this develop. I'm guessing there's a good bit of angst about this in the FAA right now....

MTV
 
And there's the rub. Our boot-licking senators are who gave the military the enlarged MOAs. Who do you expect them to side with if this conflict comes to a head? I'm no conspiracy theorist but we may have been played.
 
CamTom12 said:
Our newest Blackhawk does not have an IFR certified GPS.
Click to expand...
I find this amusing. GPS was developed by the military primarily for their purposes. We latched on to it. Yet here we have a new military flying machine which does not use GPS for IFR. How long ago was GPS developed, 30+ years? Something fishy here.
 
skywagon8a said:
I find this amusing. GPS was developed by the military primarily for their purposes. We latched on to it. Yet here we have a new military flying machine which does not use GPS for IFR. How long ago was GPS developed, 30+ years? Something fishy here.
Click to expand...
It's got a great GPS. Works wonderfully. But as a tactical system all waypoints are editable and it doesn't incorporate DAFIF. IFR is accomplished by radio nav.

EDIT: just using this as an example of national airspace wants giving way to tactical needs in a military aircraft. Probably similar to what the Air Force is dealing with. They have a system that meets tactical needs. To develop a new one that meets national airspace wants while maintaining full tactical functionality and full system integration is time-consuming, expensive, and counter to the aircraft's primary purpose.
 
Last edited:
I picked up one of the last F-22s from the factory. Sticker was about $100mil (didn't include the motors ~25mil each). GPS not certified for IFR use, just like the Blackhawk. I've flown tactical fighters for 11 years now, and the most situational SA I've had with regards to navigation position is in my slow VFR Cub!
 
The AF is reactive not proactive. At a mandatory safety down day, we got briefed by the one star safety general from headquarters.

At the end of his presentation, he asked what could we do to improve safety. We said TCAS. (Lots of airline guys in my reserve unit) The general said it was too expensive and we would have to have a big midair to get it. WTF?

My brother Ellwood the crabby navigator then asked the general in a less than polite manner "Why was he here, wasting our time, asking for solutions, with no intent on acting on them" let's just say the general was taken aback by the captains question.

In less than a year, we got the midair. In 1996 or 97 A C141 collided with a Tu-154 or some other Russian airliner off the coast of Africa and then we all got TCAS.

When I left C130s three years ago, we still couldn't do a legal GPS approach. Tactically, we could build one to any dirt strip in Afghanistan. We just don't have the nav database built into the system for legal IFR. I found it sad that my 85yr old father has more IFR capability in his 75 Cherokee than we did in the Herk. The G3Xtouch I installed in my CC is lightyears ahead of what the airforce has. The military will just fly out of compliance until forced to by other countries. RVSM, RNP, 8.33 MHz spacing, didn't happen until the EU said you couldn't fly there no more.

When a billion dollar B-2 uses a portable camp toilet because someone forgot to put in a lavatory on a plane with unlimited range, none of this should surprise you.

Jake

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
talked to an u.s.a.f. crew in n.m. as to their mission, g.p.s. sat. techs.,seems they can adjust,move nav.points or just make it go away!!!

jr.:smile:
 
Strictly a rumor - I heard that the airlines are a bit uptight about the whole thing, and want it put off another five years.

Rumor - not even opinion.
 
Not rumor, it's true. Equipage is expensive. Retrofit is expensive too. We went to RNP a couple of years ago when we were told best equipped best served. Then the approach and tower controllers weren't comfortable using this technology. We forced them to pay us for the equipage costs. Then We started to get issued the RNP approaches with RF legs. Funny. I hope the airlines complain about the military and ads-b. It costs everyone a lot of money.
 
Went to an IA meeting today - asked the FSDO folks. Not true, says the FSDO Chief - the airlines are embracing it, and will be ready in 2020.
 
People here around Minneapolis are taking the mandate seriously. Business picking up at the avionics shop on KANE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ruffair
ADS-B Mandate preparation / IFR GPS... View from my perspective
2
Replies
39
Views
17K
Ruffair
Ruffair
S
Sad but True!
Replies
2
Views
2K
12Geezer2
12Geezer2
Steve Pierce
An Interesting Pilot; John Lear
Replies
4
Views
3K
Cub junkie
Cub junkie
JP
What I Did on My Summer Vacation
Replies
29
Views
24K
JP
JP
Utah-Jay
Flying the Idaho Backcountry with a Legend
Replies
2
Views
1K
RVBottomly
RVBottomly
Back
Top