S.2503 Rotor Act - requires ADS-B in AND out !!!

[pmccand123]

I  really like Senator Ted Cruz, but he really stepped in it on this one.  

Right now, ADS-B out is the only requirement for aircraft.  ADS-B IN is not currently mandated.  His Bill S-2503 - 119th Congress mandates both in and out ADS-B for ALL aircraft.  This means ALL aircraft EVERYWHERE.  This one really slipped under the radar and will cost an unbelievable amount to comply with, especially vintage aircraft, ultralights and as far as I can see will not allow operation in remote areas. 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2503

 

I haven't seen this being mentioned anywhere. Has anyone else seen this?

 

[N201MKTurbo]

Maybe you should be writing to Senator Cruz and educating him. I’m sure he is responding to the final report about the DC crash where the military helicopter had their ADS-B turned off. 
 

I think mandating that all aircraft have their ADS-B on while in airspace where ADS-B is currently required would get the job done. 
What they are really after is mandating that the military follow the same rules as everybody else.

I would be fine with the military turning off ADS-B in MOAs and restricted airspace, but must follow the rules everywhere else.

[pmccand123]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Maybe you should be writing to Senator Cruz and educating him. I’m sure he is responding to the final report about the DC crash where the military helicopter had their ADS-B turned off. 

He knows about it being turned off.  I am positive about that.  

The problem is now that S.2503 has PASSED the House already.  Owners have only 120 days to comply if it passes!

 

EDIT:  A bit confusing on the dates of compliance.  The deadline for compliance is 2031, but the date of enforcement for ADSB -out is 2 years from signature, not 120 days as what I heard from Sen Cruz on his podcast..

.

 

 

Edited December 24, 2025 by pmccand123

[N201MKTurbo]

4 minutes ago, pmccand123 said:

He knows about it being turned off.  I am positive about that.  

The problem is now that S.2503 has PASSED the House already.  Owners have only 120 days to comply if it passes!

 

 

There is still time for the house to fix it.

[pmccand123]

I haven't seen this on AOPA or EAA or forums anywhere... Have I been missing this somehow?

 

[pmccand123]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

There is still time for the house to fix it.

...only if the Senate passes it back to the House...otherwise it has already passed the House.

 

EDIT:  It passed the SENATE, not the House quite yet...  By bad.

Edited December 24, 2025 by pmccand123

[MooneyMitch]

 Suggest contacting Jim Coon too. Aopa senior VP government affairs.  

[Skates97]

15 minutes ago, pmccand123 said:

He knows about it being turned off.  I am positive about that.  

The problem is now that S.2503 has PASSED the House already.  Owners have only 120 days to comply if it passes!

 

 

Where are you getting 120 days? From the text:

(a) Requirement for ADS–B In operation.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this section, the Administrator shall issue a final rule in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States Code, to require any person operating an aircraft (other than an unmanned aircraft, as defined in section 44801 of title 49, United States Code) required to be equipped with ADS–B Out in accordance with section 91.225 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation), to be equipped with and operating with ADS–B In equipment that provides the aircraft with awareness to the location of other aircraft and traffic advisories, unless otherwise authorized by air traffic control.

(2) COMPLIANCE DEADLINES.—In issuing a final rule under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall—

(A) include an effective date of not later than 60 days after the date on which such final rule is published in the Federal Register; and

(B) require aircraft described in paragraph (1) to be equipped with ADS–B In not later than December 31, 2031.

[N201MKTurbo]

It has not passed the house. It shows as sitting on the desk at the house. 
 

I think you are misunderstanding the bill. It clearly says that it applies to all aircraft according to 91.225. It doesn’t seem to expand the coverage, it just says that all aircraft must have it turned on. It does specify ADS-B in, but gives the FAA two years to make a final rule for implementation. 

[Skates97]

Also from the text, this sounds like the Stratux I built 9 years ago which feeds ADS-B In to my Android tablet would likely meet the requirement.

(B) ALTERNATIVE EQUIPMENT OR TECHNOLOGY.—With respect to aircraft with a maximum certificated takeoff weight of less than 12,500 pounds when operating under part 91 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, and qualifying military aircraft as specified by the Administrator in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator shall establish performance requirements for alternative equipment or technology that the Administrator determines acceptable in satisfying the ADS–B In requirement. The performance requirements shall, at a minimum—

(i) provide similar or improved situational awareness to the location of other airborne traffic, as well as traffic advisory information; and

(ii) leverage the use of portable ADS–B In receivers or equipment that allow display on an existing or future electronic flight bag or panel mounted display, provided that the installation or use of such equipment does not adversely affect other required avionics or the airworthiness of the aircraft.

[DXB]

20 minutes ago, Skates97 said:

Also from the text, this sounds like the Stratux I built 9 years ago which feeds ADS-B In to my Android tablet would likely meet the requirement.

(B) ALTERNATIVE EQUIPMENT OR TECHNOLOGY.—With respect to aircraft with a maximum certificated takeoff weight of less than 12,500 pounds when operating under part 91 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, and qualifying military aircraft as specified by the Administrator in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator shall establish performance requirements for alternative equipment or technology that the Administrator determines acceptable in satisfying the ADS–B In requirement. The performance requirements shall, at a minimum—

(i) provide similar or improved situational awareness to the location of other airborne traffic, as well as traffic advisory information; and

(ii) leverage the use of portable ADS–B In receivers or equipment that allow display on an existing or future electronic flight bag or panel mounted display, provided that the installation or use of such equipment does not adversely affect other required avionics or the airworthiness of the aircraft.

Thanks - this detail lowered my BP a bit since I've gone the portable receiver route for ads-b in for the last 11 years and am perfectly happy doing it this way.

[Schllc]

If they determine all aircraft must have in and out, I am torn…

I don’t like onerous government involvement at any level for any reason,  but I do believe all aircraft should have a radio and Adsb out. I don’t see how this does not improve safety. 
but it could be like round abouts, and narrowing lane width, both cause the operator to be more cautious. 
I have had several tense situations at uncontrolled fields and planes with no radios. 
they just do what they want to do regardless of everyone else, but it sure does keep you on your toes at those fields. 
 

All in all I believe at a minimum radios should be required at all times, by all manned aircraft. There is just not a compelling reason to me to go without…

[LANCECASPER]

I believe that most of the people that have fought ads-b out where it isn't mandated haven't flown with it and at least a portable to show them what they are missing.

Until you see on a tablet or whatever you are using what the naked eye misses you don't see the value. But beyond that,  I personally think it's very selfish to say I don't want ads-b out, you aren't thinking about everyone else avoiding you as well. People use the argument of how big the sky is, but midairs do happen and so do near misses. We have the technology - just do it.

[pmccand123]

1 hour ago, pmccand123 said:

...only if the Senate passes it back to the House...otherwise it has already passed the House.

Edit...

My bad... It has passed the SENATE, and is now for consideration on the desks of HOUSE members, not the other way around.

 

[Will.iam]

The only place i see this a problem is with the j-3 cubs, kitfox, C-140 that have no electric panel. They have no battery no radio and of course no ads-b. They hand prop to go fly. Their annuals are unbelievably simple and low cost. But they are also slow usually yellow painted and only fly in vfr weather. Usually at sunset or sunrise mostly in calm winds. Seeing one in the pattern is like seeing a model T ford on the road. Rare with no blinkers or seat belts.  

[Rick Junkin]

40 minutes ago, Will.iam said:

The only place i see this a problem is with the j-3 cubs, kitfox, C-140 that have no electric panel. They have no battery no radio and of course no ads-b. They hand prop to go fly. Their annuals are unbelievably simple and low cost. But they are also slow usually yellow painted and only fly in vfr weather. Usually at sunset or sunrise mostly in calm winds. Seeing one in the pattern is like seeing a model T ford on the road. Rare with no blinkers or seat belts.  

91.225 is referenced in the legislation and currently excludes these aircraft from ADS-B requirements. However, that's not to say 91.225 won't be rewritten as the result of this legislation. That's probably a good focus for letters to our congressmen.