A.D.S.-B.Technology

[Mike H]

The thing that drives me crazy with ADS-B and "Next Gen" is that by the time they implement it the technology will be obsolete. They keep moving so slow and in the process, Garmin just adds a traffic feature, or synthetic vision, and my 172 becomes a video game, while this guys tinkers with his little TV in the back of a "Global 5000"

Agree completely. Aren't the right people being bribed sufficiently?

Or is it cheapskate old-timers bitching about having to buy new boxes? Well, they bitched about having to install transponders, altitude encoders and mode-c too. Buy the new box, Gramps, or stick to flying in class G airspace.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Agree completely. Aren't the right people being bribed sufficiently?

Or is it cheapskate old-timers bitching about having to buy new boxes? Well, they bitched about having to install transponders, altitude encoders and mode-c too. Buy the new box, Gramps, or stick to flying in class G airspace.

Yes, how exactly do you proposed to put the required equipment for ADS-B on something like a J-3 cub, that has no electrical system?

 

[Mike H]

Yes, how exactly do you proposed to put the required equipment for ADS-B on something like a J-3 cub, that has no electrical system?

Same way they do with a transponder [/sarcasm]

Look, the people bitching about the expense of ADS-B are way more likely to be the ones who own 45 year old Cessnas & beat up Bellancas that they fly 10-12 hours a year, not J-3 Cub owners

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Same way they do with a transponder [/sarcasm]

Look, the people bitching about the expense of ADS-B are way more likely to be the ones who own 45 year old Cessnas & beat up Bellancas that they fly 10-12 hours a year, not J-3 Cub owners

So, they have no right to express their opinion on a system that they believe doesn't benefit them, and costs them a boat load of money. Heck, there are some planes out there that you'd be putting what the thing is worth into fitting it with ADS-B.

I just don't like the whole ADS-B concept. It puts all the proverbial eggs into one basket, that being GPS. A very, very simple system to jam, and one that has no backup capability at current. Lets get rid of radar, and monitor everything based upon GPS. When those said GPS satellites get hit with a cosmic wind event, we're then up the creek without a paddle.

 

[Mike H]

So, they have no right to express their opinion on a system that they believe doesn't benefit them, and costs them a boat load of money. Heck, there are some planes out there that you'd be putting what the thing is worth into fitting it with ADS-B.

Sure, they have a right to express an opinion, but they're a small minority trying to dictate to the vast majority.

When the requirement for transponders went into æffect, there were a lot of planes that weren't worth as much as the transponders were. There's a few planes now that aren't worth the price of a transponder. Or a new ELT for that matter.

I just don't like the whole ADS-B concept. It puts all the proverbial eggs into one basket, that being GPS. A very, very simple system to jam, and one that has no backup capability at current. Lets get rid of radar, and monitor everything based upon GPS. When those said GPS satellites get hit with a cosmic wind event, we're then up the creek without a paddle.

It's a little late to not be down with the concept of a GPS based ATC system. That ship sailed a long time ago. Approach radar will probably be around in some form for a long time to come, but in-route radar is a dead duck

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

It's a little late to not be down with the concept of a GPS based ATC system. That ship sailed a long time ago. Approach radar will probably be around in some form for a long time to come, but in-route radar is a dead duck

I'm just saying, that when we get a solar flare, or if someone gets mad at us and decides they want to jam GPS signals, its going to be a very, very fun time getting any flying done. Position reporting will be lots of fun, when no one knows how to do it.

I don't have a problem with GPS navigation, its the fact that the ADS-B system has a single failure point, for the whole system, and it is GPS.

 

[ppragman]

I'm just saying, that when we get a solar flare, or if someone gets mad at us and decides they want to jam GPS signals, its going to be a very, very fun time getting any flying done. Position reporting will be lots of fun, when no one knows how to do it.

I don't have a problem with GPS navigation, its the fact that the ADS-B system has a single failure point, for the whole system, and it is GPS.

This is true, if the chinese decide they want to ASAT all of our GPS satelites, then yeah, we could be in trouble, but remember, its a constelation of satelites. It's not that easy to knock them out. As for ground based jamming, you'd know where the jammer was at real quick. GPS has been saving lives up here since its introduction. If we get ADS-B and full Terrain Avoidance like the Chelton system, then I can guarantee you we'll have free flight.

 

[fish314]

This is true, if the chinese decide they want to ASAT all of our GPS satelites, then yeah, we could be in trouble, but remember, its a constelation of satelites. It's not that easy to knock them out. As for ground based jamming, you'd know where the jammer was at real quick. GPS has been saving lives up here since its introduction. If we get ADS-B and full Terrain Avoidance like the Chelton system, then I can guarantee you we'll have free flight.

Actually we (the military) could decide to just turn 'em off. There was some talk about those kinds of plans right after 9/11, and that capability exists over war zones. You can program in a code that makes them unreliable unless you have the applicable code key in your own aircraft. There's also the whole jamming thing.

I think the "free flight" thing is only going to happen anytime soon in higher altitude airspace, probably Class A and above at the highest. Kind of the way RVSM did. There are too many old airplanes operating below 18000. Another thing that kind of hampers it is that the military is way behind the civilian world on GPS, datalink, etc., etc. and they aren't moving forward with any kind of speed, so they will resist the FAA HARD on making these systems a requirement.
Also, it seems like all of ICAO can't seem to get its act together regarding exactly what systems are required in what airspace (in terms of RNP versus RNAV versus BRNAV/PRNAV, RNP .1, RNP .3, RNP 1, etc., etc.) For example, an RNP 1 airplane meets the same navigation performance as an RNAV 1 airplane, but they're two separate certifications. Or if your airplane can meet RNP 1 than logically you would think it could meet RNP 2 and above also, but those are ALSO separate certifications. That is going to slow things down also, as nations dicker back and forth over exactly what navigation standard is going to be required, where.

 

[ppragman]

Actually we (the military) could decide to just turn 'em off. There was some talk about those kinds of plans right after 9/11, and that capability exists over war zones. You can program in a code that makes them unreliable unless you have the applicable code key in your own aircraft. There's also the whole jamming thing.

I think the "free flight" thing is only going to happen anytime soon in higher altitude airspace, probably Class A and above at the highest. Kind of the way RVSM did. There are too many old airplanes operating below 18000. Another thing that kind of hampers it is that the military is way behind the civilian world on GPS, datalink, etc., etc. and they aren't moving forward with any kind of speed, so they will resist the FAA HARD on making these systems a requirement.
Also, it seems like all of ICAO can't seem to get its act together regarding exactly what systems are required in what airspace (in terms of RNP versus RNAV versus BRNAV/PRNAV, RNP .1, RNP .3, RNP 1, etc., etc.) For example, an RNP 1 airplane meets the same navigation performance as an RNAV 1 airplane, but they're two separate certifications. Or if your airplane can meet RNP 1 than logically you would think it could meet RNP 2 and above also, but those are ALSO separate certifications. That is going to slow things down also, as nations dicker back and forth over exactly what navigation standard is going to be required, where.

I thought selective availability was gone?

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Actually we (the military) could decide to just turn 'em off. There was some talk about those kinds of plans right after 9/11, and that capability exists over war zones. You can program in a code that makes them unreliable unless you have the applicable code key in your own aircraft. There's also the whole jamming thing.

I think the "free flight" thing is only going to happen anytime soon in higher altitude airspace, probably Class A and above at the highest. Kind of the way RVSM did. There are too many old airplanes operating below 18000. Another thing that kind of hampers it is that the military is way behind the civilian world on GPS, datalink, etc., etc. and they aren't moving forward with any kind of speed, so they will resist the FAA HARD on making these systems a requirement.
Also, it seems like all of ICAO can't seem to get its act together regarding exactly what systems are required in what airspace (in terms of RNP versus RNAV versus BRNAV/PRNAV, RNP .1, RNP .3, RNP 1, etc., etc.) For example, an RNP 1 airplane meets the same navigation performance as an RNAV 1 airplane, but they're two separate certifications. Or if your airplane can meet RNP 1 than logically you would think it could meet RNP 2 and above also, but those are ALSO separate certifications. That is going to slow things down also, as nations dicker back and forth over exactly what navigation standard is going to be required, where.

A couple of things. I'd agree. If they (the FAA) want to make ADS-B mandatory, do it for operations above 10,000 MSL, excluding the area that is 1200 AGL or less. And, in regards to the DOD use of Selective Availability, it is going away. The new Block III GPS satellites don't have the hardware to do the selective availability. Thus, as new satelittes are launched, it essentially goes away, albeit slowly.

 

[fish314]

A couple of things. I'd agree. If they (the FAA) want to make ADS-B mandatory, do it for operations above 10,000 MSL, excluding the area that is 1200 AGL or less. And, in regards to the DOD use of Selective Availability, it is going away. The new Block III GPS satellites don't have the hardware to do the selective availability. Thus, as new satelittes are launched, it essentially goes away, albeit slowly.

Didn't know that. We're still getting lessons on how to load the crypto keys, so I figured it was still around.

 

[Capt. Chaos]

ADS-B is going to incorperate several diffrent systems. For aircraft that operate below 18000ft (still to be finalized) will use 980Mhz UAT's, while aircraft that operate above will use 1090 extended squitter (adding more digital data to the existing transponder signal). 1090 airplanes will be able to see other 1090 aircraft, and the 980 will be able to see other 980. But for airplanes on diffrent freq's to see eachother they will both need to be in line of sight of a ground station. The ground stations will reccive both signals and then rebroadcast the info up on the other freq. The ground stations have timing and triangulation programs so they cant be spoofed. There is a backup system being implemented as well called Wide Area Mulilatteration. This system is a series of fixed antenna's that interrigate transponders in case of a gps problem.

sorry for the spelling, was using my cellphone

 

[ASpilot2be]

ADS-B is going to incorperate several diffrent systems. For aircraft that operate below 18000ft (still to be finalized) will use 980Mhz UAT's, while aircraft that operate above will use 1090 extended squitter (adding more digital data to the existing transponder signal). 1090 airplanes will be able to see other 1090 aircraft, and the 980 will be able to see other 980. But for airplanes on diffrent freq's to see eachother they will both need to be in line of sight of a ground station. The ground stations will reccive both signals and then rebroadcast the info up on the other freq. The ground stations have timing and triangulation programs so they cant be spoofed. There is a backup system being implemented as well called Wide Area Mulilatteration. This system is a series of fixed antenna's that interrigate transponders in case of a gps problem.

sorry for the spelling, was using my cellphone

Welcome to the forums!:beer:
-A Haines resident (when not in school)