Who makes the decisions at the FAA regarding ADSB???

[Culver LFA]

The FAA must really get a kick out of getting aircraft owners all worked up.

I guess they didn't get enough people upset by offering two rounds of rebates and not reimbursing the people that installed ADSB-out in between the rebate times.  This latest decision should get some more panties in a bunch...

 

https://eaa.org/eaa/news-and-publications/eaa-news-and-aviation-news/news/04-04-2019-FAA-Issues-ADS-B-Out-Airspace-Policy-Statement?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTUdZNFpHUTJaRFprT0daaCIsInQiOiJwZnFTZU1CTHJJelo4UE85djNIUVpBb2F2bHBIdmpcL3puUFRiWjJXK0x5RG9rUElva0h5a1VVbllUaEtSOFRoOVljWGxrcTlXXC9VWU9ZVXVZVGI4NnIzSk43VCtadHIzS0ZiN1BiOEpjb29ZdmF0SCtTS1YzN0g1NnhBUCtnaVp2In0%3D

 

Here is the full policy statement link in the screenshot: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/04/01/2019-06184/statement-of-policy-for-authorizations-to-operators-of-aircraft-that-are-not-equipped-with-automatic

 

[carusoam]

Imagine what causes this?  Plan A:, Plan B:, Plan C:  how many plans are going to be needed...?

1) First... everybody needs it, but the equipment isn’t available...

2) As people respond with the usual.... unable.

3) FAA comes back with a delay... manufacturers start producing expensive boxes...

4) to get somebody to bite... they throw you a taxable cash offer...

5) time goes by... way to few people get on board.... 

6) Plan B: comes out, more box options are being produced...

7) Some box providers build a box that is too similar to the other box provider... a lawsuit is launched...

8) Some owners drag there feet a little longer... some fear of having their box disabled because of the ‘greedy’ lawsuit...

9) the second taxable cash offer arrives....

10) we will know the FAA is playing all their cards.... when the offer becomes tax deductible....  tax laws have been changing all over the place lately...  this would be a step in the right direction...

11) Add in the tax deductible offer for everyone who has ‘participated’ in buying ADSB-out...

A nice broad fair approach... that is inclusive, open to everyone.....

The program is best when everyone is onboard....  no sense in scrimping to leave somebody out... (message to our friends at the FAA)

PP disorganized thoughts only, 

Best regards,

-a-

[FloridaMan]

So now if you don't have ADS-B out and you want to fly into areas that require it, you can make a phone call prior-to, as if you're flying a J3 from your farm to some airport outside of Dallas for BBQ?

[jaylw314]

This has been written into the CFR's from the beginning, so it should not be a surprise.  From 91.225:

• (g) Requests for ATC authorized deviations from the requirements of this section must be made to the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the concerned airspace within the time periods specified as follows:
  • (1) For operation of an aircraft with an inoperative ADS-B Out, to the airport of ultimate destination, including any intermediate stops, or to proceed to a place where suitable repairs can be made or both, the request may be made at any time.
  • (2) For operation of an aircraft that is not equipped with ADS-B Out, the request must be made at least 1 hour before the proposed operation.

I suspect now that 2020 is around the corner, people are just starting to talk about how this would actually work.  Why would this be upsetting to anybody?

[Culver LFA]

Any chance that @jaylw314 might be the FAA employee I was asking about? 

I can understand equipped, but not functional ADSB, aircraft getting a one time exemption (like for a trip to the avionics shop) but aircraft without ADSB installations being allowed inside the mode c while others played the FAA game of compliance is what’s questionable to me.  

I’ve somewhat been following this as modern ADSB equipment really doesn’t have a place in antique aircraft panels. While many pilots (1960’s up Mooney, Beech, Piper, Cessna, etc) are just biting the bullet and convincing themselves this is a good time to upgrade their panels, most antique aircraft owners cringe with the thought of digital displays in the cockpit.  I’d give one time exemptions a try on my other ‘non-adsb’ aircraft and see how it works out before I’ll spend $3500+ on equipment for an occasional evening flyer.  I’m at 28 miles out on the 30 mile mode c, the Culver rarely stays in the ring as most flights are heading south outside the mode c and nowhere near the class B 6,000’ floor (the tires haven’t even touched pavement in probably 100 landings).  And from what I’m hearing on the board here with verification flights, and experiencing myself flying the Mooney, it’s questionable if ATC can even see ADSB aircraft for a substantial portion of the actual flight inside mode c veil anyways; What are we equipping for? To appear on an iPad for other low-n-slow bug smashers? 

The ADSB fun is really just beginning, the enforcement stories after Jan 1st should be entertaining!

[Marauder]

What I do find strange is that I don't believe ADS-B capability is fully functional at ATC facilities. When I am being worked by ATC, I ask if they see me on ADS-B and I sometimes get, "we don't have that capability yet". Anyone know how ready the FAA is?

[bob865]

I guess I'll be the dissenting opinion here.  Why is this a big deal?  All of the ADS-B required areas are virtually the same as the current Mode C areas.  If you have a classic airplane and don't want to install a tranponder, you don't have to.  There is the provision to allow you to pass through these areas without it.  Same with ADS-B.  There is really nothing different.  The only difference here is we are at the beginning of ADS-B being required.  I imagine if mooneyspace has been around when Mode C first became required we would have heard these same arguments and complaints.  It's funny that we complain about how far behind aviation is technology wise, but when the FAA pushes and forces us (aviation as a whole) to update, we compain even louder.

@MarauderI've heard the same.  We had an ATC forum here months back and we asked the Charlotte Class B guys about it and they don't have it and no ETA on when they will.

[Cruiser]

ADS-B In weather in the cockpit FIS-B has allowed me to make/continue flights I would have cancelled in the past. 

Fight and resist if you want but the increased functionality for safety and awareness is worth it for me regardless of what benefit ATC/FAA realize.

[steingar]

Can't imagine why this would come as a surprise to anyone.  Its the same stuff you have to do now to fly in controlled airspace without a transponder. I think its nuts to not put ADSB into an aircraft like a Mooney, you're going to hit controlled airspace eventually.  Makes sense if you're flying an antique taildragger in the sticks, but not a fast airplane like a Mooney.

[Culver LFA]

51 minutes ago, steingar said:

I think its nuts to not put ADSB into an aircraft like a Mooney, you're going to hit controlled airspace eventually.  Makes sense if you're flying an antique taildragger in the sticks, but not a fast airplane like a Mooney.

Yep, I totally agree.  Unfortunately I’m 2 miles too close to the big airport...

[jaylw314]

6 hours ago, Cruiser said:

ADS-B In weather in the cockpit FIS-B has allowed me to make/continue flights I would have cancelled in the past. 

Fight and resist if you want but the increased functionality for safety and awareness is worth it for me regardless of what benefit ATC/FAA realize.

I think most of the arguments people have is that even if you don't have ADS-B Out, FIS-B is available to everyone, and TIS-B should be available to everyone if not for the current artificial requirement (which will presumably become available to everyone sometime in the future).

So the line of thinking is, if FIS-B and TIS-B do not require ADS-B Out, why should I be required to pay money for a government requirement when I don't get any direct benefit in return?  The only people that benefit from me installing ADS-B Out are ATC and other aircraft, not me.

I rationalize it with the knowledge that I end up using ATC frequently, and anything that will improve the quality of our interaction will be helpful for me and my safety overall.  On the other hand, if my mission didn't involve dealing with ATC but rarely, I would certainly not be motivated to install ADS-B Out, even if I had to fly through rule airspace occasionally.  The people in the middle are the ones that have to fly through rule airspace regularly, but don't use ATC a lot (like having an antique taildragger based 1 nm inside a mode C veil), and I could certainly understand their frustration.

So while I knew there would be the option of not installing ADS-B and simply requesting exceptions ahead of time, in the end, it was a pretty straightforward decision to go ahead and install.  Others may feel differently and may have a tougher choice to make.