ADSB Traffic comes in handy

[Hank]

2 hours ago, Bob_Belville said:

. . . when a jet fighter runs over some poor soul puttering along at 100 kts or a midair occurs between a high wing and a low wing on final at an uncontrolled field it is likely that there is at least one dead pilot and his family who is completely innocent.  

Military aircraft aren't ADSB compliant and certainly don't transmit Out. So how are you going to see that there fighter? His radar and eyes are the only way he'll ever spot you. 

[Skates97]

I get what Hank is saying, and if I didn't live where I am I likely wouldn't be equipping ADS-B out. However, for all the reasons @Bob - S50 gave it makes no sense not to have ADS-B in. For under $150 you can build a Stratux and pick up an Android tablet for under $200. (They also don't overheat like an iPad)

 

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, kpaul said:

Then you might also be surprised that most military aircraft will never be ADS-B out compliant regardless of its mission set.  The military will never spend the money and the FAA will never exclude the military from rule airspace.

Heck, a large majority of the aircraft can't fly LNAV/VNAV or LPV  and others are still using lap tops with GPS for moving maps.  Those with integrated GPS, likely are not WAAS.

 

It amazes me that for $50M or $100M those aircraft can't include an ADSB avionics set to facilitate safer flying while in the domestic airspace.  Likewise a WAAS enabled gps.

 

[EricJ]

1 minute ago, aviatoreb said:

It amazes me that for $50M or $100M those aircraft can't include an ADSB avionics set to facilitate safer flying while in the domestic airspace.  Likewise a WAAS enabled gps.

 

The asset protection management aspects of that make me scratch my head as well, especialy given how inexpensive the solutions are now.   For <$200 somebody can suction cup a stratux to the inside of the canopy and a tablet on the pilot's knee will have ADS-B-in and WAAS gps.    I've seen vids of F-18 pilots flying with tablets on kneeboards running Foreflight, but I don't know how widespread that is or SOP.

 

[Hank]

I have friends who flew helicopters / C130s in tall, rocky regions north of the Middle East a decade or so ago, with their personal Garmin 296 & 396 units velcroed to their panels for improved situational awareness and easier navigation. 

[aviatoreb]

9 minutes ago, Hank said:

I have friends who flew helicopters / C130s in tall, rocky regions north of the Middle East a decade or so ago, with their personal Garmin 296 & 396 units velcroed to their panels for improved situational awareness and easier navigation. 

Some one should install a G3X in the F16's the F18's, the C130s and the F35s, and so on - and a stinkin' adsb transponder too...for asset protection.

[Bob_Belville]

Military aircraft aren't ADSB compliant and certainly don't transmit Out. So how are you going to see that there fighter? His radar and eyes are the only way he'll ever spot you. 

Hank, you’re pulling a snip of a comment directed to someone arguing that weather systems are a bigger concern than traffic. You’re an instrument rated pilot, do you agree with him?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Bob - S50]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

Military aircraft aren't ADSB compliant and certainly don't transmit Out. So how are you going to see that there fighter? His radar and eyes are the only way he'll ever spot you. 

Hank,

Military flies IFR to the maximum extent possible.  That means they are almost always talking to ATC.  If you are ADS-B OUT and IN, you should be able to see them via TIS-B traffic.  That is, the system will transmit the position of all non-ADS-B traffic to any ADS-B client.  I see it all the time in the Seattle area.  I see lots of non-ADS-B GA traffic and I've even seen (and spotted visually afterward) two F15's headed for McChord.  I also see lots of C17 traffic on the way in and out of McChord.

If you don't have ADS-B OUT, but you do have ADS-B in, you may or may not see the traffic.  You would have to be close enough to an ADS-B OUT aircraft to be within their hockey puck of airspace.

[Hank]

12 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said:

Hank, you’re pulling a snip of a comment directed to someone arguing that weather systems are a bigger concern than traffic. You’re an instrument rated pilot, do you agree with him?

I'm saying that his point of using his ADSB to avoid getting run over by fighter jets is invalid, because it won't do that. He needs to come up with other justification. His or my level of certification is immaterial.

Weather is the carrot tied to the stick used by the FAA to push us all into Surveillance (that's the S in ADSB, and the point of the program--FAA wants to eliminate radar sites with their operating and maintenance expenses and replace them by having airplanes all install equipment to report their position the whole time their engines are running. Or have you not noticed that it's against the FARs to turn your installed ADSB transmitters Off?). Because I am 100% refused admittance to the nearest surveillance-required airspace, and fly to very little other such airspace (only ATL treats me like a pariah), I choose not to comply. And I'm no more worried about being in a midair collision than i was as a student pilot in 2006 without a GPS.

There are many things that worry me more than airborne traffic, and there's more ways to get weather than an ADSB box connecting wirelessly to the consumer toy of my choice, using whatever uncertified app I find to use. It's very disingenous of the FAA to have tight performance standards for Out equipment, with huge price tags and high installation costs for the required equipment, yet allow pilots to use whatever they want (even home-brewed electronics! in certified airplanes!) to receive the "huge benefits" that weren't even in the original scope of ADSB until the Feds saw the scope of pilot resistance to their mandate. If a consumer-grade tablet can shiw traffic and weather good enough to "greatly improve" aviation safety, shouldn't it also be able to report our position when that position is supplied by a certified WAAS GPS??? But that woild let us not transmit all the time, and that's agin their rules . . . . 

Tell me again how my $200 tablet can sometimes make me safer, but sometimes it takes a $4000 box and $2000 labor to make me safer? I've already got the much more expensive WAAS GPS, Anything should be able to pull location information from it, if it's for safety, right? Doesn't the weather and traffic information need to know my location to be helpful? Oh, I can dodge oncoming traffic using the GPS chip built into my phone because that's good enough to improve safety, but it's not as good as the location information provided by my transponder and approach radar, and the "degradation" would be unsafe??? And our bugsmashers are being held exactly to the 1/1/20 deadline but the airlines are getting multi-year delays because us rich airplane owners can afford a few thousand dolars "for safety" but it's too much money for airlines with multi-millions of daily cashflow to pay, who will gain both safety improvements and fuel bill reductions using shorter approaches at their destinations?? 

[Hank]

20 minutes ago, Bob - S50 said:

Hank,

Military flies IFR to the maximum extent possible.  That means they are almost always talking to ATC.  If you are ADS-B OUT and IN, you should be able to see them via TIS-B traffic.  That is, the system will transmit the position of all non-ADS-B traffic to any ADS-B client.  I see it all the time in the Seattle area.  I see lots of non-ADS-B GA traffic and I've even seen (and spotted visually afterward) two F15's headed for McChord.  I also see lots of C17 traffic on the way in and out of McChord.

If you don't have ADS-B OUT, but you do have ADS-B in, you may or may not see the traffic.  You would have to be close enough to an ADS-B OUT aircraft to be within their hockey puck of airspace.

That doesn't match what our military aviator wote above. But then, he flies fighter jets, not lumbering cargo whales. It's hard to not see something the size of a C130 lumbering througb the air, much less a C5 . . . .

[Skates97]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

I have friends who flew helicopters / C130s in tall, rocky regions north of the Middle East a decade or so ago, with their personal Garmin 296 & 396 units velcroed to their panels for improved situational awareness and easier navigation. 

My dad flew HC-130's all over Alaska, around the mountains, through mountain passes, etc... for four years back in the early 80's searching for downed/missing planes, stranded/missing climbers, and boats in distress. He is amazed at all the information available on my tablet. 

[Bob_Belville]

30 minutes ago, Hank said:

I'm saying that his point of using his ADSB to avoid getting run over by fighter jets is invalid, because it won't do that. He needs to come up with other justification. His or my level of certification is immaterial.

Weather is the carrot tied to the stick used by the FAA to push us all into Surveillance (that's the S in ADSB, and the point of the program--FAA wants to eliminate radar sites with their operating and maintenance expenses and replace them by having airplanes all install equipment to report their position the whole time their engines are running. Or have you not noticed that it's against the FARs to turn your installed ADSB transmitters Off?). Because I am 100% refused admittance to the nearest surveillance-required airspace, and fly to very little other such airspace (only ATL treats me like a pariah), I choose not to comply. And I'm no more worried about being in a midair collision than i was as a student pilot in 2006 without a GPS.

There are many things that worry me more than airborne traffic, and there's more ways to get weather than an ADSB box connecting wirelessly to the consumer toy of my choice, using whatever uncertified app I find to use. It's very disingenous of the FAA to have tight performance standards for Out equipment, with huge price tags and high installation costs for the required equipment, yet allow pilots to use whatever they want (even home-brewed electronics! in certified airplanes!) to receive the "huge benefits" that weren't even in the original scope of ADSB until the Feds saw the scope of pilot resistance to their mandate. If a consumer-grade tablet can shiw traffic and weather good enough to "greatly improve" aviation safety, shouldn't it also be able to report our position when that position is supplied by a certified WAAS GPS??? But that woild let us not transmit all the time, and that's agin their rules . . . . 

Tell me again how my $200 tablet can sometimes make me safer, but sometimes it takes a $4000 box and $2000 labor to make me safer? I've already got the much more expensive WAAS GPS, Anything should be able to pull location information from it, if it's for safety, right? Doesn't the weather and traffic information need to know my location to be helpful? Oh, I can dodge oncoming traffic using the GPS chip built into my phone because that's good enough to improve safety, but it's not as good as the location information provided by my transponder and approach radar, and the "degradation" would be unsafe??? And our bugsmashers are being held exactly to the 1/1/20 deadline but the airlines are getting multi-year delays because us rich airplane owners can afford a few thousand dolars "for safety" but it's too much money for airlines with multi-millions of daily cashflow to pay, who will gain both safety improvements and fuel bill reductions using shorter approaches at their destinations?? 

Wow

[M016576]

14 hours ago, EricJ said:

Thanks for speaking up!

He showed a map which highlighted your low-level routes, and it was in a pamphlet that has since been put up on the aftw.org site, it's page 4 in here:
 

http://aftw.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/FEB-19-MACA-Pamphlet.pdf

The map is too small to be very useful, imho.   Is it available somewhere in a large enough format that it can be read more easily?   

 

 

I can get you a larger size printed version if you like, or a digital copy of higher resolution.  Send me a PM if you’re interested and I’ll get you one

of note: all of those routes are shown on sectionals and low ifr charts, as either a “VR” route or an “IR” route.  So you can see the center of the corridors on your normal charts. Just go 5 miles in either direction from the center line and that’s the entire route itself.  

Edited May 4, 2019 by M016576

[Bob - S50]

54 minutes ago, Hank said:

That doesn't match what our military aviator wote above. But then, he flies fighter jets, not lumbering cargo whales. It's hard to not see something the size of a C130 lumbering througb the air, much less a C5 . . . .

I flew fighters and trainers for 14 years.  We ALWAYS flew IFR unless there was an operation need to fly VFR.  For example, flying a VFR low level route where we were below radar coverage.  Or during the controller strike when we were finally allowed to depart VFR if we could not get an IFR release within 15 minutes of reaching the runway.  Other than that we took off IFR, flew IFR to our MOA, did our work in the MOA and came home IFR.  Air to mud fighters do a lot more low level flying than air to air pilots.  As an air to air guy I probably only got to fly low level less than 6 times/year.

You would be surprised how easy it would be to miss a C130 on a collision course unless you got lucky enough to look directly at him.  Your focal field of view is pretty darn small.  The rest of your eyesight only sees in blurry light and relies on motion or change in light intensity to detect traffic.

And getting ADS-B is not as expensive as you claim.  There are several boxes under $2000 now some of which only require a few hours to install.  And you can get a portable ADS-B in box for a few hundred.

I give up though.  You've convinced yourself that ADS-B is worthless.  That's your choice.  No amount of talking is going to convince you otherwise.

[M016576]

2 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

It amazes me that for $50M or $100M those aircraft can't include an ADSB avionics set to facilitate safer flying while in the domestic airspace.  Likewise a WAAS enabled gps.

 

We have a very...very... accurate GPS receiver with anti-spoofing encryption.  But it’s not “WAAS” certified.

the ILS antenna in the F-35 is in the nose wheel well- I have to open my gear doors to get an ILS signal.

The sensors in the F-35 are far more accurate at detecting and updating traffic than the ADSB receivers in my mooney.  And if it means that I’ll be detected easier in combat due to adding an ADSB antenna, then I’d rather skipper ADSB, and just use my radar.

trust me- we are not wandering around blind out there... the whole of the sensor information is projected onto the visor in my helmet- when I designate an air contact, I literally see a box around it, and if I’m not looking at it, I get an arrow that points directly to the target.  It’s pretty amazing... and honestly- I hope that some sort of “google Glass” comes along that can tie into ADSb to give me some fraction of that capability in GA.  But I hope Garmin doesn’t build it... because they’d charge 50K for it!

 

[M016576]

14 minutes ago, Bob - S50 said:

I flew fighters and trainers for 14 years.  We ALWAYS flew IFR unless there was an operation need to fly VFR.  For example, flying a VFR low level route where we were below radar coverage.  Or during the controller strike when we were finally allowed to depart VFR if we could not get an IFR release within 15 minutes of reaching the runway.  Other than that we took off IFR, flew IFR to our MOA, did our work in the MOA and came home IFR.  Air to mud fighters do a lot more low level flying than air to air pilots.  As an air to air guy I probably only got to fly low level less than 6 times/year.

You would be surprised how easy it would be to miss a C130 on a collision course unless you got lucky enough to look directly at him.  Your focal field of view is pretty darn small.  The rest of your eyesight only sees in blurry light and relies on motion or change in light intensity to detect traffic.

And getting ADS-B is not as expensive as you claim.  There are several boxes under $2000 now some of which only require a few hours to install.  And you can get a portable ADS-B in box for a few hundred.

I give up though.  You've convinced yourself that ADS-B is worthless.  That's your choice.  No amount of talking is going to convince you otherwise.

At Luke AFB- we fly IFR to the airspace, if we are going to sells or gladbag.  If we are going to one of the low level routes, we take off on a VFR departure .  On RTB- the preferred recovery due to the traffic in the Phoenix area is a VFR recovery either from”Tankz” (glad bag) or the Arc.. or the “valley recovery” which is a VFR recovery from the BMGR (sells/AAHl).

the regs (11-202) clearly state to fly IFR to the max extent practical.  In the Phoenix area, however, we have contracts in place to reduce the load on ATC- and as such, unless it’s IMC, almost all our recoveries are VFR, and several of our departures are as well.

when I was flying F-15’s in the guard in Oregon- all our recoveries were VFR (unless imc), all our departures were VFR,

when I was in the Navy, my departures and recoveries were far more flexible- I could request a new clearance on the ground, like any other pilot (in the Air Force, your clearance for a local flight is set for you through stereo routes).  And if I wanted, I could cancel at the hold short and launch VFR  if I felt it would expedite my mission.  Even at night. (Which in the Air Force is against the regs- VFR at night).

Edited May 4, 2019 by M016576

[aviatoreb]

8 hours ago, M016576 said:

We have a very...very... accurate GPS receiver with anti-spoofing encryption.  But it’s not “WAAS” certified.

the ILS antenna in the F-35 is in the nose wheel well- I have to open my gear doors to get an ILS signal.

The sensors in the F-35 are far more accurate at detecting and updating traffic than the ADSB receivers in my mooney.  And if it means that I’ll be detected easier in combat due to adding an ADSB antenna, then I’d rather skipper ADSB, and just use my radar.

trust me- we are not wandering around blind out there... the whole of the sensor information is projected onto the visor in my helmet- when I designate an air contact, I literally see a box around it, and if I’m not looking at it, I get an arrow that points directly to the target.  It’s pretty amazing... and honestly- I hope that some sort of “google Glass” comes along that can tie into ADSb to give me some fraction of that capability in GA.  But I hope Garmin doesn’t build it... because they’d charge 50K for it!

 

Well that is good to know you have superb avionics.

I still assert there is value to having an ADSB out transponder for use in domestic airspace, so that we can see you,  I understand that you can see us with your superb on board equipment but I do think there is great value on some occasions for you to be able to transpond your location to other domestic aircraft within the given civil infrastructure which today is the ADSB system.

And of course sometimes you would not want to and you could shut it off.

I hadn't considered, but I understand that even having an antenna hanging out could make you too easily findable by enemy airplanes when you don't want to be seen, but just like your ILS antenna is hidden in your wheel well, a tiny antenna could be hidden somewhere and deployed or stowed as you wish - so yes I see this will cost more than a few AMU - but it seems like it would be a desirable feature.  Oh well.

[kpaul]

11 hours ago, EricJ said:

The asset protection management aspects of that make me scratch my head as well, especialy given how inexpensive the solutions are now.   For <$200 somebody can suction cup a stratux to the inside of the canopy and a tablet on the pilot's knee will have ADS-B-in and WAAS gps.    I've seen vids of F-18 pilots flying with tablets on kneeboards running Foreflight, but I don't know how widespread that is or SOP.

 

In the Air Force it is pretty common.  iPad running Foreflight's Military Flight Bag along with a Stratus providing ADSB-In.  

[kpaul]

9 hours ago, Hank said:

That doesn't match what our military aviator wote above. But then, he flies fighter jets, not lumbering cargo whales. It's hard to not see something the size of a C130 lumbering througb the air, much less a C5 . . . .

So, living in Eclectic AL, do you realize there are two military training route just a couple miles north of town?  Both IR21 and VR1055.  Also if you think a C-130 at 300AGL and 220KTS is just lumbering through the air and you will easily see it, you are sadly mistaken.  I fly these routes in a Beech 400 at 500 AGL and 240 KTGS,  trust me we are not easy to see.  Of course even if you had ADSB it would not will change this.  Of course if you have ADSB-out and/or your transponder on, I would be able see you on my iPad and TCAS and maneuver to avoid you.

[Hank]

2 hours ago, kpaul said:

So, living in Eclectic AL, do you realize there are two military training route just a couple miles north of town?  Both IR21 and VR1055.  Also if you think a C-130 at 300AGL and 220KTS is just lumbering through the air and you will easily see it, you are sadly mistaken.  I fly these routes in a Beech 400 at 500 AGL and 240 KTGS,  trust me we are not easy to see.  Of course even if you had ADSB it would not will change this.  Of course if you have ADSB-out and/or your transponder on, I would be able see you on my iPad and TCAS and maneuver to avoid you.

Thanks for making my point. No ADSB unit in my plane will show you. So it won't help me to not "get run over" as posted above.

The delayed weather has already been judged a contributing factor in several accidents, because pilots think it's realtime or mistake the displayed "update time" (or whatever it's called) as a reference for when it was an accurate depiction, but that's not true either.

It is probably more accurate for ttacking your flights than Flight Aware, but I need to check the thread of the guy who said his Mooney was shiwn as making 970 knots while descending to an airport that he did not go to, but I think that was ADSB reporting. Nothing quite like accuracy, huh?

My point is that ADSB is not the huge safety improvement that many people think it is, and while the OP may have had a positive event with the displayed ADSB-In traffic, it can't be counted on the way he thinks it can. Neither can the weather it shows. 

For me, the cost is absurd and the benefit to my flying is minimal. But if we all equip out of our own pockets, the FAA will be able to reduce their expenses and spend those former radar funds on something else, because all bureaucracies are self-serving and never willingly shrink. Look for the airlines to finally equip sometime in the next 5-10 years, all while flying in "rule airspace" that my non-equipped self will be excluded from. Sure am glad there's equal access to all withiut discrimination . . . . . Where has AOPA and EAA been during all of this? Crowing loudly about the wonderful benefits of traffic and weather, available at extra expense using your own extra equipment after complying with the certified Out rule . . . . And mostky 8gnoring the pass given to the airlines and the sometimes-hugely-significant delays in depicted weather and omissions in displayed traffic. We're supposed to be happy that "some" is better than "none" I guess.

Phooey in that! I'm outa here. Kum-ba-ya clubs have never been my cup of tea. I'll go away and stop making waves now.

And @kpaul, I'm aware of the nearby traffic, and have had "fun" dodging them on approach into Wetumpka while squawking and talking to MGM Approach. My idea of safety isn't having C130s get that close to me while I'm on GPS approach; when they visibly alter their course (RA announcement, maybe?), it tells me they aren't looking or listening.

[M016576]

5 hours ago, kpaul said:

In the Air Force it is pretty common.  iPad running Foreflight's Military Flight Bag along with a Stratus providing ADSB-In.  

The whole Air Force is going to an electronic flight bag.  I think the major reason being that it’s more expensive to print and send charts every month for the NGA than to just send out wireless updates.

we used iPads for some of our tactical maps on my last cruise in 2011 (when I was flying the F-18) but not for the navigation charts.  I’ve seen paperwork and message traffic about fighter pilots getting iPads for navigation charts for a few years now, but have yet to receive/use one.  I think the hold up for us has to do with the classification of the systems and USAF procedure (we aren’t supposed to fly with personal electronic devices in either of the USAF Jets I’ve flown).

That said, I have seen the heavy pilots walking around with them.  I don’t know if they are personal devices or USAF provided though. 

Edited May 4, 2019 by M016576

[Davidv]

While nothing replaces looking out your window for traffic, I can tell you that ADS-B is a huge benefit here in South Florida.  With multiple practice areas (with many many brand new students flying around) , approaches to MIA, FLL, OPF, ect... and a limited space to maneuver between various air spaces it definitely helps avoid conflicts.  Even when I'm talking to ATC, they are sometimes so consumed that I occasionally will have to tell them about traffic and ask what they want me to do.  Just other day I was about 4 miles away from traffic at my 12 o'clock opposite direction same altitude and I asked the controller if he saw the traffic and wanted me to deviate left or right.  He gave me 15 degrees to the left and we were all good.

[M016576]

5 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

I hadn't considered, but I understand that even having an antenna hanging out could make you too easily findable by enemy airplanes when you don't want to be seen, but just like your ILS antenna is hidden in your wheel well, a tiny antenna could be hidden somewhere and deployed or stowed as you wish - so yes I see this will cost more than a few AMU - but it seems like it would be a desirable feature.  Oh well.

It’s surprising how little of a disturbance in the skin of an aircraft can create a huge radar return.  I do agree that ADS-B out on our fighters might be a safety enhancement for GA- but it could also be a safety detractor (at least in MOA’s)- as the fighters tend to navigate at 300-350kts, and can have huge rates of ascent and descent (in excess of 30,000fpm).  Which may cause other ADS-B receivers to alter their courses erroneously based on stale data.

there are certainly cases where ADSB our for a fighter would be very helpful to vfr traffic, though- the tragic midair between the vfr cessna and the F-16 on an ifr approach in South Carolina comes to mind.

I would personally LOVE to have ADS-B In in the F-35, for the weather.  But again- I’d rather not have that if it mean increasing my radar crosssection.

[Davidv]

@M016576 I was departing Key West a few weeks ago and KEYW tower advised me of multiple inbound F-18s to KNQX.  As I'm climbing through 1,000 I briefly see an ADS-B target above me (I forget how much higher) registering 1,550 knots.  While I don't think he was actually going that fast it was distracting for a few seconds while I tried to figure out if it was real.

[M016576]

1 minute ago, Davidv said:

@M016576 I was departing Key West a few weeks ago and KEYW tower advised me of multiple inbound F-18s to KNQX.  As I'm climbing through 1,000 I briefly see an ADS-B target above me (I forget how much higher) registering 1,550 knots.  While I don't think he was actually going that fast it was distracting for a few seconds while I tried to figure out if it was real.

Stuff like that happens more often than not.  Airliners tend to hate flying over MOAs because their TCAS systems can be set off by fighters maneuvering 15,000’ below them as they are fighting in the vertical if they leave their mode 3/C on... even though the fighter jet is in a vertical turn, the tcas doesn’t see that, just the trend upwards in climb rate, and predicts collisions/gives alerts.