Interesting article on ADS-B's future???

[Yooper Rocketman]

Since I was on such an intense work session from last spring until this spring getting the new plane going, my aviation magazines really stacked up next to my Lazy Boy chair.  Over the last several weeks I was able to read through the 12" stack of them and file them appropriately (most in the trash, one or two circulations in my library).  Anyway, I read an interesting take on the ADS-B program that was written last summer.  Just wondering if anyone else has heard this or has some skepticism on where this will go next with our pocket books?

Tom

http://midwestflyer.com/?p=9960

[RLCarter]

14+ billion spent on something that I think will be scrapped as 2020 nears

[donkaye]

Article was not very interesting.  I've been using ADS-B for the past 3 years, and while the controllers may not have it under control, the benefit to me as a pilot has been nothing short of fantastic.  I see all the traffic ATC sees, and with TargetTrend from Garmin can instantly tell on a screen of 30 targets whether anyone is aimed at me.  The cost was minor compared to the safety benefit.  The rebate program is a farce.  You have to pay tax on the $500, so for a lot of work you net $250.  Not worth the time it takes to apply.

[RLCarter]

@donkaye I agree, there are great benefits in the cockpit, but there are still issues they can't get ironed out

[Rick Junkin]

8 minutes ago, donkaye said:

The cost was minor compared to the safety benefit.

I'm weary of the "safety" speak. And I'm stepping up on my soap box.

For people with deep pockets, the cost may be minor. For the rest of us, not so much. And if there is to be another government mandate every decade with dubious benefit (I'm sure I'll get flamed for THAT), it becomes essentially a tax to continue flying. What I'm trying to say is that it IS possible to be duped into a perception of a needed safety improvement through mandated available technology. If we wanted to eliminate all risk of running into another airborne object we would never leave the ground. Another way to look at it is, how can we possibly continue to drive cars that don't have automatic braking sensor systems? Just because the technology is available doesn't mean it should be mandatory, nor does it mean that its necessary.

I'll admit to not being well informed about any increase of mid-airs in recent history, and concede that the addition of UAVs to the calculus is going to increase the number of objects in the air and hence the probability of running into something. But having info displayed in the cockpit does not mean that you are safer, nor does it mean that you're seeing everything that's out there. SoCal traffic can be a bear, I get it, but I need some data on what REAL safety benefit is being realized. I have ADS-B In/Out in one of my airplanes because I had to replace a failed transponder, and its a nice warm fuzzy to see on a display what's being called to me by ATC. If I were VFR and not talking to anyone I could see some benefit in not being surprised by a late visual pickup. But again, I'm not aware of an increase in mid-airs or near misses, and the cockpit display of traffic can be a real eye magnet when the threat to be avoided really needs eyes out to be detected. Voice warning is a help, but so is the radio.

We'll see what happens as the 2020 deadline gets closer. Seeing as how the system can't even implement the ICAO flight plan requirement on schedule, I have my doubts about the ADS-B mandate implementation schedule holding firm.

Cheers,
Rick

 

 

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, Junkman said:

I'm weary of the "safety" speak. And I'm stepping up on my soap box.

For people with deep pockets, the cost may be minor. For the rest of us, not so much. 

I have ADS-B In/Out in ONE of my airplanes because ......

 

???????

[Yooper Rocketman]

I have ADS-B in my Lancair and it likely prevented a strong possibility of a mid-air down at Spruce Creek (private airpark just south of Daytona Beach, FL) in April.  A guy was flying EXACTLY the wrong direction in the pattern for runway 23 where we are altitude limited by the Daytona Class C at 1200' AGL.  In the end it appeared he didn't even know he was near an airport as he continued on his SW flight path and wasn't tuned to the CTAF.  I never saw the dot on my G3X get SO large before.

That said, my only concern is feedback I have gotten from one friend who works for the FAA on issues and lack of support by controllers of the program.  Combine that with the possibility of a "NEW" development that would render the current investment in ADS-B ground based equipment worthless I am keeping my ears to the ground on where this is going.  I like the safety aspect of my ADS-B in the Lancair enough I was scheduled to install ADS-B (got pushed back due to shop being behind schedule from loss of main avionics tech) in my Rocket this past week even though I will be selling it within a year.  I will have to fly the Rocket while the Lancair is in "paint and interior" for 3-4 months as my primary plane.   

I was just wondering if any one else had heard what the article suggests?

Tom

[N201MKTurbo]

You have to take the article with a grain of salt. 

The things they say about shodowing would only apply to 980 UAT aircraft which use the new ground stations. The ES installations use the same receiving equipment currently used for mode S transponders which I believe is colocated with the radar antennas. So the shadowing wouldn't be any worse then it has been. 

Before the FAA puts up a satellite constellation, which will dwarf the cost of ADS B, there will have to be years of debate in congress about the funding.

If we include drones in the mix it gets very interesting. Think about the public outcry if every drone flight solicited a bill from the FAA for using the system. The cost of the system could be almost completely borne by the drone operators and the tiny percentage of aircraft flying with people on board would be practically free. Ha ha. 

[EricJ]

2 hours ago, Yooper Rocketman said:

I have ADS-B in my Lancair and it likely prevented a strong possibility of a mid-air down at Spruce Creek (private airpark just south of Daytona Beach, FL) in April.  A guy was flying EXACTLY the wrong direction in the pattern for runway 23 where we are altitude limited by the Daytona Class C at 1200' AGL.  In the end it appeared he didn't even know he was near an airport as he continued on his SW flight path and wasn't tuned to the CTAF.  I never saw the dot on my G3X get SO large before.

I've been using ADS-B-in via a Stratux with FltPln on my tablet since about January or so.   I posted in another thread that while I was still getting used to it I had a near miss with head-on traffic that the tablet was alerting to.   Traffic alerts plus in-flight weather data availability is something that once you get used to using you will feel naked without it.

The ADS-B system design is light years ahead of using traditional radar systems.   Anybody who is worried about shadowing with ADS-B stations should be terrified of relying on controllers using radar.

I'm looking forward to the day when the system is fully rolled out.  I suspect we'll all wonder how we managed to survive the days when controllers depended on radar and altitude reporting transponders.

[RLCarter]

Looking out the windscreen still provides the best picture of what's in front of you, ADS-B offers a great deal of situational awareness, but the concept of using it for aircraft separation by ATC hasn't worked as planned. Even if it rolls out there will still be aircraft that are non-ADS-B it won't see. 

[N201MKTurbo]

I was flying the other day with some people and I was in the way back seat of a Cherokee 6. I was watching traffic on my IPad and I saw a plane coming the other way at the same altitude. I couldn't see out the front window. I yelled at them to look out the window and to turn left. They both looked down at their IPads. I yelled again to look  out the F'in window! They both insisted that they didn't see any traffic. They were both still looking at their IPads and hadn't turned yet despite my yelling for them to turn. 

The plane passed the right wing tip about 30 feet away. I have never Felt so helpless in an airplane.

Both of their IPads were not connected to the Stratus that was turned on.

[Rick Junkin]

13 hours ago, donkaye said:

???????

It's disappointing, Don, that that's what you chose to take away from my post. I have more than one car, too. My airplane budget pockets are of average depth. 

Technology is a great tool that can help build your SA or completely trash it, as reflected in some of the posts here (looking at the iPad for traffic that you already know is there). Looking out the window is what will save your life, if you make sure it's the biggest part of your VMC crosscheck AND it's what you use for primary traffic detection. If you FEEL safer having more data in the cockpit, that counts for something too. Right up until it bites you.

Thanks for considering my opinion, we all have one.

Cheers,

Rick

 

 

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, RLCarter said:

Looking out the windscreen still provides the best picture of what's in front of you.

Certainly not for me.  I'm always looking out front, but miss most traffic sightings called by ATC.  In fact, what a wakeup call it was when I got traffic, both active and passive, in the cockpit.  Looking at the Screen of either the G500, GTN 750, or GTN 650 and then looking at its position relative to the screen is what works best for me to find targets.  Even then sometimes I miss them.  But with TargetTrend at least I know they won't be intercepting me.  To date, knock on wood, I have not had any issues with non transponder equipped planes getting in my way.

[donkaye]

18 minutes ago, Junkman said:

Technology is a great tool that can help build your SA or completely trash it, as reflected in some of the posts here (looking at the iPad for traffic that you already know is there). Looking out the window is what will save your life, if you make sure it's the biggest part of your VMC crosscheck AND it's what you use for primary traffic detection. If you FEEL safer having more data in the cockpit, that counts for something too. Right up until it bites you.

Thanks for considering my opinion, we all have one.

Cheers,

Rick

 

 

In the Bay Area there will often be 20 to 30 targets on the screen.  No way you can tell me you are going to be able to stay up with that amount of traffic by looking out the window.  Now looking out the window without traffic may make you FEEL better because you don't know what you don't know.

However, I'll easily admit that TargetTrend is a big part of feeling like I have the traffic picture in hand.  Without it you would have to look at the screen an inordinate amount of time to see if traffic was converging on you.  With TargetTrend it's a split second.

[peevee]

6 hours ago, EricJ said:

 

The ADS-B system design is light years ahead of using traditional radar systems.   Anybody who is worried about shadowing with ADS-B stations should be terrified of relying on controllers using radar.
 

I should be "terrified" with 5 miles of separation? Really? The error for the mosaic radar is built into the procedures.

[EricJ]

24 minutes ago, peevee said:

I should be "terrified" with 5 miles of separation? Really? The error for the mosaic radar is built into the procedures.

My thought was just that ADS-B offers the opportunity to fill in all the low-level areas that are shadowed in a regular radar system.   If you're worried about shadows, radar has *WAY* more than ADS-B will ever have, because one of the things ADS-B is designed to do is fill in all of the low-level radar shadows (which are substantial).

So I think it is correct to say that if you're worried about ADS-B shadows you should be terrified of radar shadows.

[Bob_Belville]

Just now, donkaye said:

Certainly not for me.  Looking on the Screen and then looking at its position relative to the screen is what works best for me to find targets.  Even then sometimes I miss them.  But with TargetTrend at least I know they won't be intercepting me.

I've had ADS-B traffic for almost 5 years. (GTN 750, GDL 88) It is amazing to me, and more than a little scary, to realize how often there is traffic which I can not get a visual on even  knowing where it is.

[Jerry 5TJ]

1 hour ago, donkaye said:

.....To date, knock on wood, I have not had any issues with non transponder equipped planes getting in my way.

Within one minute while I was flying an RNAV approach into N82 I went past two gliders AND a tow plane, all radio silent and invisible on either ADS-B or my Skywatch active interrogations.  

They were probably just as startled to see me zip by inbound at 150 knots:  The field is mostly used by gliders.  

[takair]

The information in the article is quite dated despite its 2016 post date.  The reference to Version 2 is the DO-260B version which is what all of the modern units offered for sale should comply with.  Early adopters with 260 or 260A likely need to upgrade prior to 2020....including most of those capstone aircraft.  I suspect the info in the article may have been pilfered from an even older article...  I suspect ADS-B is here to stay.

[RLCarter]

I'm not denying the benefits in the cockpit, any time you can increase SA, safety increases as well. The byproduct of ADS-B was we got it in the aircraft, but the purpose was for ATC use and that's the were the issues are, phase II is being worked on because phase I has fallen short and technology is advancing faster than they can use it. Do I think the FAA should scrap it? Yes, but leave what is in place there, add it to your aircraft if you want either in or out, but it's not the solution for ATC, beside the FAA said with ADS-B they could safely pack us in tighter, ask yourself if that is really what you want.

[Rick Junkin]

I think we can ALL agree that updated METAR/TAF/NOTAMS in the cockpit is a great benefit on extended flights, as are the other ADS-B weather products, if they're used correctly (as in not tactically). 

Can anyone point me to a good source of data regarding how ADS-B is working out for ATC? Are there any public blogs from the controllers that might give insight? As has been pointed out, ADS-B was designed to improve traffic handling, and I'm interested to see if there are any measures of effectiveness in use that we can look at.

Cheers,
Rick

[aviatoreb]

I have adsb in/out for about 4 years .  I am  convinced most traffic near misses we never saw or knew about before with the looking out the window alone method.  I am convinced it happened all the time and only good luck and big sky saved us.  Adsb doesn't replace but it does augment looking out the window.

[Piloto]

Satellite ADS-B is mostly intended for oceanic flights or in remote areas. The concept is not new since many airliners using ACARS and Inmarsat do position reports and company messages via satellite already.

One limitation of ADS-B is that coordinated evasive maneuvers like on TCAS II can not be performed. Like when two planes are converging into a collision, which one climbs or descend in an area where there is no ATC radar coverage (oceanic) to warn them.

José 

Edited June 12, 2017 by Piloto

[peevee]

5 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

I have adsb in/out for about 4 years .  I am  convinced most traffic near misses we never saw or knew about before with the looking out the window alone method.  I am convinced it happened all the time and only good luck and big sky saved us.  Adsb doesn't replace but it does augment looking out the window.

Agreed. We're 1090 out and portable in, we don't get all the traffic via adsb but it sure helps.

 

Some time go to a site like flightradar24 that is like flight aware but does replays, you can see the traffic around you on your last flight if they're in radar, it's pretty eye opening if you live near busy airspace  

[Marauder]

I've been flying behind ADS-B for about a month and I am just amazed at how many planes I see now. At least 10 of them would never have been found if it wasn't for TIS-B telling me which direction to look. Would they have been issue if I didn't see them? Obviously not or we would be talking about a steady stream of mid-airs. But the fact they were within a couple miles or less of my location didn't leave me with a lot of warm and fuzzies.

The "look out of the window" purist would have you believe that the human eye can detect these better than the technology. After seeing this technology at work, I'm doubtful.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro