JKeeth

Basic Member
  • Content count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Excellent

About JKeeth

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Grand Rapids, MI

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. TargetTrend is exclusive to Garmin products because they designed, developed, and patented it. The Lynx NGT-9000 is the only unit on the market that offers ATAS (https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/programs/adsb/pilot/atas/), plus a built-in color touchscreen display to see the traffic and weather, plus a built-in TAS/TCAS processor, plus diversity, plus terrain. I'd call that feature rich!
  2. FYI...as of the start of the year, ATAS traffic alerting is included free of charge from L3.
  3. JKeeth

    Lynx 9000+ installation and box price

    No. The NGT-9000+ outputs 250W maximum for the transponder function and the active traffic function. The 9000 w/TAS doesn't output any more power than the 9000 w/o TAS.
  4. JKeeth

    Lynx 9000+ installation and box price

    Hi James, Unfortunately the "popping" noise coming from the NGT-9000 is a fairly common problem, and there are a few different things that need to be checked with the installation. The most likely culprit of the noise has to do with how well the transponder coax RF connector at the back of the NGT-9000 rack are grounded. Poor grounding, or bonding, of the connector will cause the noise to be more prevalent. I would suggest that the installer starts with inspecting the coax connections behind the rack, and I'm guessing they will find that the RF connectors are not making good contact with the RF grounding spring-clip piece. The other issue could be poor bonding of the transponder antenna to the fuselage and/or an insufficient antenna ground plane. Lastly, relocating the transponder antenna further aft may be required to completely get rid of the noise. Please have your installer call me at (616)285-4436 and I can help them resolve the issue, if they haven't already called and talked to myself or one of my coworkers. Hope this helps! Jim Keeth L-3 Aviation Products jim.keeth@l3t.com
  5. JKeeth

    ADS-B Resource Thread

    Hi Marauder, Nope, haven't heard any talk about estimating the number of owners that will not comply with the mandate. Perhaps AOPA has some survey data that could be used to determine that. Your concern is valid about the increase in traffic in certain areas that will result after 2020 due to non-equipped airplanes trying to stay clear of the ADS-B rule-compliant airspaces. Hi Chupacabra, That is correct. If the yellow radar dish symbol is visible on the traffic page of the NGT-9000, then you are below coverage of the ADS-B ground stations and at that point you will not see any TIS-B traffic on the NGT-9000. The only traffic you will see is other ADS-B out equipped airplanes. Non-transponder equipped aircraft are invisible to everyone, ATC included. I think you are thinking of primary radar, which is far different than secondary-surveillance radar (ATCRBS) that ATC uses. Primary radar is used very little in the ATC environment, and only as a backup system. Hope this helps! Jim
  6. JKeeth

    ADS-B Resource Thread

    It's possible you were under ADS-B coverage, and that would be indicated on the Lynx NGT-9000 traffic page with the little yellow radar dish symbol. If that was the case, then the Cessna, which I'm assuming wasn't ADS-B OUT compliant, would not have been transmitted to you as a TIS-B target via the ADS-B ground stations. Or...do you know if that Cessna was squawking mode A and mode C? Mode A targets will not be received by radar and re-transmitted as a TIS-B target; they have to report pressure altitude also in order to be a TIS-B target. Perhaps that 150 was only squawking 1200 w/no pressure altitude (mode C). If that was the case, then he'd be invisible to everyone except aircraft that have active traffic systems (TAS/TCAS) like the NGT-9000+. There are many other scenarios that could explain why those targets weren't picked up by the NGT-9000, such as the status of the ADS-B ground stations around KOCF. Sadly, the FAA doesn't publish NOTAMS when ADS-B ground stations are inoperative and unable to send up TIS-B traffic.
  7. The ADS-B system must be receiving magnetic heading from a digital source (AHRS) in order to display traffic when stationary. Without mag heading, the system will use GPS track to determine the direction the aircraft is pointing, and track can't be determined if not moving. Therefore no traffic until taxing if magnetic heading is not available.
  8. What ADS-B out equipment do you have, and is the GPS providing the in-air and on-ground logic, or is that being done with an external airspeed or squat switch? The reason the FAA's system failed the "in-air on ground test" is because your airplane was reporting that it was in air mode while sitting on the ground (duh!), and in my experience this tends to happen most often after landing rather than prior to take-off. If your airplane reported that you were still in-air after you taxied off the runway, then that would cause the failure of the "air on ground" test. Of course, this would only happen at an airport that has coverage from an ADS-B ground station. If no ground station coverage, then your ADS-B OUT will never be received into the ADS-B system and therefore not see the "air on ground" discrepancy. Fixing this depends on the ADS-B system in your airplane. For the Lynx NGT-9000, for example, GPS groundspeed is used to determine when to go from air mode to ground mode, and the groundspeed value is configured into the unit during installation. If the groundspeed is set too low then your airplane could be outputting air mode while taxing after landing, and in that case, increasing the GPS groundspeed would be the corrective action. Generally, the GPS groundspeed setting should be 70% of Vso.
  9. The FAA has always been concerned about approved, or non-approved, pairings between the GPS receiver and the ADS-B out equipment. So while a form 337 would list the equipment used, I don't believe it would necessarily ensure that the GPS position source has the right software and/or accuracy requirements, which is probably why the FAA encourages a performance check. Of course pairing issues aren't a concern with transponders or UAT boxes that contain internal GPS, so in that regard you bring up a good point about simply submitting the 337 for the rebate. Also, test equipment such as the Aeroflex IFR-6000 is more than adequate for testing ADS-B out on the ground to ensure a system is valid, except for the pesky "air on ground" issue that has been a problem for some installs.
  10. takair is correct; the flight test is only required for the $500 rebate. However, the FAA encourages installers and users to request an ADS-B Performance Report to validate the performance of the newly installed ADS-B Out equipment. Not a requirement, but recommended. The flight for the performance report can be accomplished in any airspace where ADS-B coverage is available. However, the flight for the rebate must be accomplished in rule-compliant airspace as per FAR 91.225. I believe the OP's error was not flying in the rule-compliant airspace that is required for the rebate. AC20-165B is for the initial airworthiness approval of an STC. Once the STC is approved, the installer follows the manufacturers instructions using the prior approved STC data. The installer doesn't follow the AC, only the STC. Jim Keeth L-3 Aviation Products
  11. JKeeth

    Lynx 9000+ installation and box price

    You could install a combo VHF/GPS antenna for the NGT-9000 and existing COM radio, but those antennas are pricey.
  12. JKeeth

    Lynx 9000+ installation and box price

    The NY164 TAS directional antenna needs to go on top of the airplane. The NGT-9000+ will consist of three antennas: transponder antenna, WAAS GPS antenna, and the TAS directional antenna. Diversity is optional, and if enabled with the active traffic (+) option, then the NY164 TAS directional antenna serves as your transponder diversity antenna also.
  13. I'm not sure what criteria FF is using to prevent the display of own-ship, but obviously it is using more than just tail number. I agree that an app should be able to ignore and not display a target if its tail number matches your own tail number. The NGT-9000 will ignore and not display a target if that targets tail number matches your tail number, among some other obscure requirements it uses to prevent the display of own-ship. Very happy to hear that Steve! Thanks for the PIREP! We also have not seen this issue with other apps like WingX, FlyQ, and FltPlan GO, only FF so far. Yes, many people have asked about autopilot outputs from the ESI-500. The ESI-500 does have an ARINC 429 output and will output pitch and roll digital data, but we don't have any plans to make a converter that can convert those digital signals into analog signals for autopilot computers. I think if we did go that route then the price of the unit wouldn't be much different than an Aspen EFD, and at that point the Aspen unit would provide more "bang for the buck". The ESI-500 can definitely be approved to be used as a primary AI. While we market the ESI-500 as a standby, and our STC gives installers approval to install the ESI-500 as a backup system to primary systems (Aspen, Garmin, etc.), there is nothing stopping a dealer from installing and getting approval to install the ESI-500 as a primary AI. The TSOs, MOPS, DOs, etc., do not differentiate between primary and standby. The TSO approvals for the ESI-500 are the same TSOs approvals for primary systems such as the Garmin G500.
  14. Sorry for the delay responding! I think you meant to say why "is" ForeFlight picking up own-ship intermittently, as your picture is showing. Before I answer that question, there's a discrepancy with the way FF displays the relative altitude of the traffic targets versus what is displayed on the NGT-9000 traffic display, which you may have already noticed. The reason for this is due to the fact that FF determines relative altitude of traffic targets based on GPS altitude, while the NGT-9000 outputs both GPS altitude and uncorrected baro pressure altitude. When FF receives GPS altitude and baro pressure altitude from the NGT-9000, it will subtract GPS altitude from baro pressure altitude to determine the relative altitude for each target. For example, an aircraft flying at 5,000ft MSL GPS altitude could have an uncorrected baro pressure altitude of 4,500. If two aircraft are co-altitude at this point, the NGT-9000 would display a +0 altitude difference, while FF will display a "-5" for the 4,500ft baro pressure altitude intruder compared to the ownship GPS altitude of 5,000ft. This is described on page 208 of the ForeFlight Mobile Pilot's Guide. I think, but not certain, that the reason FF is intermittently displaying your own-ship is because of this pressure altitude minus GPS altitude discrepancy. The app thinks there is a target below your own aircraft because it has computed a relative altitude -500ft for your aircraft, which is the difference between baro pressure altitude and GPS altitude. I can't say for sure if this is the case, but what you are seeing has been reported by other Lynx and ForeFlight users as well in the past couple of weeks. FYI...ForeFlight is aware of these issues and they are actively working on a solution. Hope this helps! Jim Keeth L-3 Aviation Products
  15. JKeeth

    Backup AI?

    Hi Guys, Sorry for being late to the party! The ESI-500 can absolutely be installed as a standby to the G500 system, and it has been done multiple times by multiple dealers in the past few months. While the G500 STC doesn't specifically include the ESI-500 as an allowable standby solution, the G500 STC does state that "It is permissible...to seek approval for installation and operational use of the G500 with systems not identified in this manual" by means of a TC, STC, or Field Approval. Therefore, the installer simply uses our ESI-500 STC as the approved data to sign-off the installation of the ESI-500, while they use the G500 STC to sign-off the installation of the G500 system. No additional approval, i.e. Field Approval, is needed to install the ESI-500 with the G500 system. Ironically, the airplane that was used for the ESI-500 AML STC contains a G500 system. That being said, I believe Garmin will eventually add the ESI-500 to their STC as a convenience to the dealers and installers, much like they did when they added the ESI-2000 to the G500 STC a few years ago. Regarding the question about the ESI-500 being certified as a primary as per the new FAA ruling...yes, the ESI-500 can be installed as a primary. There really is no differentiation between a primary and secondary certified ESIS unit like our ESI-500, as the ESI-500 has been certified to the same TSOs as a primary ADAHRS system. We have marketed the ESI-500 as a standby system, and our STC allows someone to install the ESI-500 as a standby solution only. With the new FAA ruling, the ESI-500 can be installed as a primary attitude-indicator to replace an existing vacuum driven AI, and this could be done as a Field Approval only, but I believe the intent of the ruling is to allow this as a minor modification, which would not require a Field Approval. Currently, nobody has tested this new FAA policy with the ESI-500, but next month we are planning to put this policy to test by installing the ESI-500 in place of the vacuum driven AI in our club plane, which is a 172R. Keep in mind that this new ruling allows for the replacement of the AI only with an electronic device like the ESI-500; it does not allow for the replacement of the airspeed, altitude, and VSI instruments also. Hope this helps. Please don't hesitate to contact me if anyone has any additional questions or concerns. Jim Keeth L-3 Avionics Systems jim.keeth@l-3com.com