• 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 Issues


thanks for that picture!

been thinking about this... think I got a simple jig figured out to drill that bracket out with an annular cutter on a covered rudder...... that's just over 1 1/8" right? so whatever next size cutter

and you could mount it in the mount ring and only partially turn it to install screws so you don't kill the fabric(too much.)....

I have an old rudder here, just need to order a cutter, actually a hole saw might be better.... hmmm...
 
thanks for that picture!

been thinking about this... think I got a simple jig figured out to drill that bracket out with an annular cutter on a covered rudder...... that's just over 1 1/8" right? so whatever next size cutter

and you could mount it in the mount ring and only partially turn it to install screws so you don't kill the fabric(too much.)....

I have an old rudder here, just need to order a cutter, actually a hole saw might be better.... hmmm...
mike, That ring looks like a formed sheet part. Wouldn't an expander along these lines work to enlarge the hole enough without cutting metal?
63703_I.jpg
 
That looks different from the one in Steve's picture. Your's looks like a cup with a hole in the bottom. His looks like a formed ring.
 
That looks different from the one in Steve's picture. Your's looks like a cup with a hole in the bottom. His looks like a formed ring.

the one in my picture is original piper

some of the atlee ones are more open..

also if you put in a strobe/nav there you had to cut it out bigger... thats what steves picture looks like to me... maybe?
 
Only need to add plate with hole same as hole saw of 2x4 to keep it from wandering.

Padded probably would be a good idea to protect paint

That’s the 40 minute prototype. I’ll let glue dry overnight and give it a whirl tomorrow

Might add a screw on plate if rudder seems weak after drilling. But I doubt it’ll need it.

IMG_5777.JPG
IMG_5778.JPGIMG_5779.JPGIMG_5785.JPGIMG_5786.JPGIMG_5787.JPGIMG_5788.JPG


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5777.JPG
    IMG_5777.JPG
    57.3 KB · Views: 272
  • IMG_5778.JPG
    IMG_5778.JPG
    64.3 KB · Views: 219
  • IMG_5779.JPG
    IMG_5779.JPG
    57.1 KB · Views: 214
  • IMG_5785.JPG
    IMG_5785.JPG
    61.2 KB · Views: 237
  • IMG_5786.JPG
    IMG_5786.JPG
    63.5 KB · Views: 212
  • IMG_5787.JPG
    IMG_5787.JPG
    66.6 KB · Views: 214
  • IMG_5788.JPG
    IMG_5788.JPG
    71.6 KB · Views: 232
Here's my "63 SC tail light mounting ring. I had the tailBeacon and my A&P who is a craftsman with fabric and a torch, could of increased that opening to mount the beacon. However, we thought better after discussions with a local DER/DAR. I'm sure someone will get an approved mod for others to use and install a tailBeacon.
I sent mine back for a refund and got the skyBeacon, now installed. My beef is that I had to take off a near new wing LED strobe/nav light that was synced to the right wing strobe. You cannot sync the skyBeacon strobe.
thumbnail.jpg
 

Attachments

  • thumbnail.jpg
    thumbnail.jpg
    43.1 KB · Views: 210
Mike
Maybe use the mounting screw holes for locator pins? I was thinking of a steel plate drilled to allow the hole saw through, with a locator pin pressed in place on each side, to fit into the screw holes. Just random thought.

Web
 
Mike
Maybe use the mounting screw holes for locator pins? I was thinking of a steel plate drilled to allow the hole saw through, with a locator pin pressed in place on each side, to fit into the screw holes. Just random thought.

Web

I was more worried with twisting rudder as hole saw grabbed.

I like the locating pin idea. Will add that probably


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
It would be an enormous step drill. And I don't think the steps would be deep enough. I.e., when you are drilling the deepest part of the ring, to the correct size, the larger steps would be drilling the shallowest part.

But I do think a single edge cutting tool, just like a single step on a step drill, would work well. Low torque required and not as 'grabby' as other cutting tools.

Web
 
Successful.

Except for the smoke when the cutoff piece melted the fabric. So a little precaution needed there.

But as I said this is a junk rudder so I didn’t care.

IMG_5805.JPG

IMG_5806.JPG

IMG_5807.JPG

The hole saw fit right into line it up.

IMG_5811.JPG

Part way through

IMG_5812.JPG

Depth stop washer

IMG_5813.JPG

IMG_5819.JPG

IMG_5817.JPG

IMG_5821.JPG

Plenty of strength left

IMG_5824.JPG

Nothing like smoke from a dope covered part to get your pulse up.




Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5805.JPG
    IMG_5805.JPG
    61.7 KB · Views: 204
  • IMG_5806.JPG
    IMG_5806.JPG
    76.9 KB · Views: 199
  • IMG_5807.JPG
    IMG_5807.JPG
    64.9 KB · Views: 194
  • IMG_5811.JPG
    IMG_5811.JPG
    35 KB · Views: 189
  • IMG_5812.JPG
    IMG_5812.JPG
    47.2 KB · Views: 199
  • IMG_5813.JPG
    IMG_5813.JPG
    47.8 KB · Views: 173
  • IMG_5819.JPG
    IMG_5819.JPG
    45.8 KB · Views: 185
  • IMG_5817.JPG
    IMG_5817.JPG
    65.1 KB · Views: 189
  • IMG_5821.JPG
    IMG_5821.JPG
    43.4 KB · Views: 177
  • IMG_5824.JPG
    IMG_5824.JPG
    32.5 KB · Views: 180
Lot quicker than using a die grinder and file. Will adjusting the depth of cut be enough to avoid hole in the fabric?

Web
 
Another tip for tail lights/strobes. Drill the mounting holes and install 4-40 nutserts. That will allow you to mount your light assembly with machine screws instead of PK screws.

Web
 
Interesting. The gent I spoke with, as I was experiencing similar problems never suggested I shouldn’t fly the airplane. The instruction not to fly the airplane in ADS-B airspace, he explained to me simply meant I shouldn’t fly the plane in B, C, or above 10,000 AFTER the 2020 deadline. He told me to upload the latest firmware, and fly it again. I asked what the consequences would be if it continued to fail. His response was that he’d “block” my ADS-B signal in their system, but I’d still be legal to fly outside ADS-B airspace.
I subsequently got a positive report after uploading the firmware.
MTV

And, just as an update......just because you beat a positive report (PAPR), Dont get all smug. My updated beacon passed a PAPR on September 8. Good news....go fly. Last week, I got the “next” email from FAA, stating tha EVERY flight since September 9 exhibited at least one “fatal” (my term) error. As in every flight failed.

So, the FAA has “ turned “ my beacon off in their system. I contacted uAvionix about the issue. They are in the process of reviewing all those reports. Really. In the meantime, I have a useless $1200 dollar (got the rebate) “ thing” on my wing. uAvionix tells me they’re trying to determine a “fix” for my SkyBeacon. Let’s see: Three screws and three wires (their hype, not mine).......how do you fix the guts of this thing, which are hermetically sealed?

We’ll see, and I will report back when this is resolved. But in the meantime, there is no way I’d buy ANY of these devices until they can prove that they work RELIABLY. Just because your beacon works once or twice doesn’t mean it’ll continue.

Frankly, I don’t think they’ve done enough research and testing of these things.

MTV
 
I'd be curious as to what is failing in your PAPR report? The uAvionix units typically fail with either Mode 3A or Baro Alt. When they fail with those errors, it's typically due to poor radar coverage not causing your transponder to reply. If the transponder doesnt' see an interrogation,it doesn't reply (transmit), so the uAvionics device doesn't get updated squawk and Barometric Altimeter. When you fly the plane somewhere that has good radar coverage, the unit will pass the PAPR reports. When you're in an area with sketchy radar coverage, it will consistently fail the PAPR reports. They don't seem to have a fix for the TSO tip and tail beacons other than to say the FAA is usually lenient about those failures. I have found otherwise, so didn't accept that answer. With the uAvionix Echo UAT (Experimental only), I was able to connect the ADS-B device directly to a serial line on the transponder (Sandia STX-165) so the device would always have updated Baro Alt and Squawk. Unfortunately, I don't think that is possible with the TSO tip and tail beacons.

Some other vendors have another transmitter in their units to interrogate the transponder roughly once a second, which will cause the transponder to reply once a second, which will allow the ADS-B device to read updated data from the transmissions. In short, the uAvionix units will only pass the PAPR reports if you fly where you have decent radar coverage. If not, they typically fail.

-Cub Builder
 
Is there a possibility of a position problem? They are mounted on one wing tip or on the tail. Is the airframe shadowing them? In other words, if the interrogation signal is coming from the left and the unit is mounted on the right wing tip, does the airframe block out all or part of the signal? When mounting the antenna for a transponder most manuals have warnings to mount it on the belly, away from items like the gear legs.

Web
 
The interrogation of the transponder usually comes from radar sites. Some areas of the country have sketchy coverage. Any time a Mode-C transponder replies to an interrogation, it sends the squawk code and Baro Alt as part of the data packet. I'm sure that's not anything you didn't already know. The uAvionix ADS-B Out units are passive as far as the transponders go. They just listen in and sniff the data being broadcast by the transponder on 1090 MHZ, then incorporate that data into the UAT Output on 978 MHZ. If the transponder doesn't reply to an interrogation from RADAR, the ADS-B unit doesn't get updated data. After 45 - 60 seconds without getting refreshed data from the transponder, the data is considered stale and times out, so the ADS-B unit stops sending the squawk and Baro Alt data causing Mode 3A and Baro Alt failures respectively. These seem to be pretty typical of the uAvionics units in areas with poor radar coverage. If you fly the plane in an area with good radar coverage, the same unit will pass the PAPR.

However, there can be other reasons why one might see these failures as well. uAvionics also had some issues reading data output from some of the older analog transponders, but they say they have resolved that issue. They typically have you change the transponder monitor settings, which is supposed to address the issue.

Other vendors address these problems differently, so I wouldn't assume a similar issue would have the same cause for a different vendors unit.

-Cub Builder
 
I'd be curious as to what is failing in your PAPR report? The uAvionix units typically fail with either Mode 3A or Baro Alt. When they fail with those errors, it's typically due to poor radar coverage not causing your transponder to reply. If the transponder doesnt' see an interrogation,it doesn't reply (transmit), so the uAvionics device doesn't get updated squawk and Barometric Altimeter. When you fly the plane somewhere that has good radar coverage, the unit will pass the PAPR reports. When you're in an area with sketchy radar coverage, it will consistently fail the PAPR reports. They don't seem to have a fix for the TSO tip and tail beacons other than to say the FAA is usually lenient about those failures. I have found otherwise, so didn't accept that answer. With the uAvionix Echo UAT (Experimental only), I was able to connect the ADS-B device directly to a serial line on the transponder (Sandia STX-165) so the device would always have updated Baro Alt and Squawk. Unfortunately, I don't think that is possible with the TSO tip and tail beacons.

Some other vendors have another transmitter in their units to interrogate the transponder roughly once a second, which will cause the transponder to reply once a second, which will allow the ADS-B device to read updated data from the transmissions. In short, the uAvionix units will only pass the PAPR reports if you fly where you have decent radar coverage. If not, they typically fail.

-Cub Builder

My errors are all NIC errors, and according to the FAA, those are bad.

MTV
 
My errors are all NIC errors, and according to the FAA, those are bad.

MTV

NIC = Navigation Integrity Category
That indicates that the internal GPS is likely not working correctly. I would think uAvionics would swap that out without question. Should be an easy fix. Stick with them. I've found the uAvionix Support Techs to sometimes not the sharpest technically, but they do want to get them working properly and work hard to resolve the issues if you stick with them.

-Cub Builder
 
PA-12 Uavionix rudder installation ( PA-18 tail feathers Kenmore STC)

Just did my 0.5 flight test in KBOS B yesterday. 5X5. Installation ( 1947 PA-12) took a tad longer than expected r/t all the issues everyone else is running into. My A&P IA is a well know DAR . He reamed out the existing tail light assembly for access and with full "penetration" ( excuse the metaphor) the skin was very tight, so he cut some fabric to preclude a tear ( are you getting this Randy?) and placed patches bilaterally, applied some feathering goop and painted the entire rudder and the job came out pristine . I'll take photos of the finish job tomorrow. I'm happy, the FAA apparently is happy, ( Boston TRACON picked it up about 15 minutes into the flight) and it looks good. I have Whelan strobes on the wing tips rather than an anti collision light on fuselage or tail and didn't want to screw that up, as the loss of a strobe light would probably/ likely fail the high voltage strobe impulse generator. Went on Flite Aware this morn and put in my N number and the entire flight profile right there-- flight tracking, mileage, altitude graph, speed graph, time on, time off. Big brother is right there.
 
The interrogation of the transponder usually comes from radar sites. Some areas of the country have sketchy coverage. Any time a Mode-C transponder replies to an interrogation, it sends the squawk code and Baro Alt as part of the data packet. I'm sure that's not anything you didn't already know. The uAvionix ADS-B Out units are passive as far as the transponders go. They just listen in and sniff the data being broadcast by the transponder on 1090 MHZ, then incorporate that data into the UAT Output on 978 MHZ. If the transponder doesn't reply to an interrogation from RADAR, the ADS-B unit doesn't get updated data. After 45 - 60 seconds without getting refreshed data from the transponder, the data is considered stale and times out, so the ADS-B unit stops sending the squawk and Baro Alt data causing Mode 3A and Baro Alt failures respectively. These seem to be pretty typical of the uAvionics units in areas with poor radar coverage. If you fly the plane in an area with good radar coverage, the same unit will pass the PAPR.

However, there can be other reasons why one might see these failures as well. uAvionics also had some issues reading data output from some of the older analog transponders, but they say they have resolved that issue. They typically have you change the transponder monitor settings, which is supposed to address the issue.

Other vendors address these problems differently, so I wouldn't assume a similar issue would have the same cause for a different vendors unit.

-Cub Builder

All good points, but I am still suspicious of the locations of the units/antennas. I've seen to many avionics problems approached with an excess of science when a minimum of common sense was all that was needed.

On the aircraft that are having problems, take a sight line from the unit to the existing transponder antenna. How much 'airplane' is between them? If it is in the wing, Do the struts or landing gear leg come between?

Web
 
All good points, but I am still suspicious of the locations of the units/antennas. I've seen to many avionics problems approached with an excess of science when a minimum of common sense was all that was needed.

On the aircraft that are having problems, take a sight line from the unit to the existing transponder antenna. How much 'airplane' is between them? If it is in the wing, Do the struts or landing gear leg come between?

Web

Agreed. The output from the transponders are typically 200W, so basic reception typically isn't a problem. However, overmodulation and distortion certainly can be with some units, although I have not observed that with uAvionix... yet. That's one of the nice things about the wing tip and tail beacon installations is that uAvionix has limited where their units can be installed, so don't have to compensate for all possible parameters. They do have a "sensitivity" adjustment that is software configurable to help with the issue if you see the transponder is getting interrogated but the ADS-B unit isn't picking up the data reliably. However, those adjustments don't help if the transponder isn't being interrogated or isn't replying. If you don't see the "reply" or "transmit" light on the transponder flashing regularly, the ADS-B unit is not getting data if it is relying on sniffing the data from the transponder broadcast. If the transponder is flashing regularly indicating that it is being interrogated and replying to the interrogation, and you are seeing Mode 3A and Baro Alt failures, then it's time to start looking at antenna locations, reflectivity, blocking, RF interference or transponder output.

One of the units I just replaced had it's own milliwatt transmitter that interrogated the transponder once a second. That worked great so dead spots in radar coverage didn't adversely affect the ADS-B output. However, despite the transponder replying to it once a second, the data was getting so distorted that I never could get it to work reliably. Monitoring it, the squawk code and Baro Alt were jumping all over the place. Despite the fact that the squawk code and altitude were constantly changing and were often times impossibly incorrect, it usually passed the PAPR testing. I had two of those units. The first one never did work correctly despite numerous trips back to the manufacturer for repairs and firmware updates. I never would have bought a second unit, but the manufacturer gave it to me in return for doing a lot of his flight testing and debugging a number of issues in his units. The second unit seems to work much better, although is still less than perfect.

FWIW, Aircraft Spruce is currently selling the uAvionix Echo-UAT (Experimental and Light Sport only) for $1400 including the $500 high integrity WAAS GPS receiver. This unit is UAT-Out and dual channel in and works with most tablet compatible EFBs via WiFi. I installed one recently on one of my Experimentals.

One other note on the uAvionix units. They claim they are using the DC wiring powering the ADS-B unit as the antenna for receiving the transponder output. That adds a whole new spin to attempting to diagnose issues when it won't sniff the transponder data correctly. :smile:

-Cub Builder
 
Last edited:
NIC = Navigation Integrity Category
That indicates that the internal GPS is likely not working correctly. I would think uAvionics would swap that out without question. Should be an easy fix. Stick with them. I've found the uAvionix Support Techs to sometimes not the sharpest technically, but they do want to get them working properly and work hard to resolve the issues if you stick with them.

-Cub Builder

Frankly, I think they’re replacing too many of these things. I know of three already they’ve replaced. All while trying to get tailbeacons pushed out, plus they just bought another company, and are now in the PFD business, trying to compete with Garmin G-5. They told me theyd get back to me.

MTV
 
Installed skybeacon on our PA12 and worked great right out of the box. I put one on my CCEX and get an ID error.
IMG_0589.JPG

My Xpdr is a Garmin GTX23ES remote running thru my G3X Touch.
Any idea on what setting I’m messing up? (I realize my Xpdr has ADSb out but the Garmin certified GPS and wiring was the same cost and hours or days of wiring headaches vs 10 minutes.

Thanks,

Jake


Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0589.JPG
    IMG_0589.JPG
    204.6 KB · Views: 289
Back
Top