ADSB costs.
And...Leadsled..a free kick for you...fruit! You do understand the term?
Europe and East Coast US will suffer from it some time in the future if there is not a rationalisation of spectrum...It is THE only problem I have ever found in researching for equipment using 1090ES...however, this is the reason why mode S is designed the way it is....to reduce the congestion if your unit is already identified..yet there will still be 2 squits a second from each ADS-B???
Europe and East Coast US will suffer from it some time in the future if there is not a rationalisation of spectrum...It is THE only problem I have ever found in researching for equipment using 1090ES...however, this is the reason why mode S is designed the way it is....to reduce the congestion if your unit is already identified..yet there will still be 2 squits a second from each ADS-B???
What has turned out to be the most expensive equipment...
Gee!! That's easy to answer, 1090ES is way the most expensive for just about any aircraft that doesn't come ex-factory fitted, compared to either VDL-4 or UAT.
For ground installations there is nothing in it, how easy it is for the FAA to have the dual system. Perversely, some of the US military and some airports are using VDL-4.
And there is increasing realization of what an expensive "cheap" decision the 1090ES decision turned out to be ----- again, see some of the detailed comments to the FAA NPRM. Sadly, the "decision" is too far down the line, so we never did get to the stage of a decision for VDL-4 versus UAT. It seems as if VDL has won the day for the (shortly) mandatory datalink.
All thanks to airline beancounters who wouldn't know a bit from a bite, unless it bit them on their broadbums. Rare as it is, "ICAO" was thinking years ahead.
The FAA ADS-B NPRM $$$ numbers were reasonable, unlike the nonsense published in the JCP and previous, and the AsA propaganda.
And to correct you, I have never supported and don't support FLARM as a system, nor is it an ICAO recognized system, and never will be. At ICAO, IAOPA supported VDL-4. I have no particular preference, bu technically I would certainly support UAT, because it is CDMA, with much greater potential capacity as a datalink than VDL.
For any aircraft that requires an ADS-B OUT ( in US) the GARMIN UAT is the cheapest I know, to buy and to install, and it's serial outputs from the GPS are available for whatever your imagination can dream up. The GARMIN 1090ES ADS-B solution is many times the price, including installation, than it's UAT.
As I an certain you already know, the UAT ( and VDL) receiver is useful for all sorts of other uplinks, weather, real time rebroadcast of Cb/TS from ground based radar etc., and, if you really want it, ADS-B IN.
None of which we will ever see in Australia -----
---- because there will never be a generally available broadband datalink for aviation as per FAA (as opposed to SITA/ARINC, even Jetstar doesn't like their costs), when, with a bit of forethought, there could have been.
Tootle pip!!
PS: If some recent forecasts are correct, it will be western Europe, including Eurocontrol, who will see the SSR Code saturation Mitre Corp/FAA showed as the major technical objection to 1090ES ADS-B ---- a problem that would never apply to either UAT or VDL.
Last edited by LeadSled; 5th Jun 2010 at 13:03.
Plumbum? Pull the other one!
OK, a link please...total system including GPS navigator if you must...that will beat the fitted cost of a TSOd 1090ES TRIG TT31.
Pony up!
1090ES is way the most expensive for just about any aircraft that doesn't come ex-factory fitted, compared to either VDL-4 or UAT
Pony up!
TSOd 1090ES TRIG TT31.
Check the TSO's, this crowd would NOT confirm they had GPS source that was C-145/146, and there also seemed to be a question about the transponder certification. The antenna does not have diversity, so there will be blind spots, as far as other aircraft are concerned, and you want anything more than the aircraft/ATC datalink.
The basic model requires a GPS input, so you need a C-145/146 source --- have you included that in the price.
The basic GARMIN UAT unit is self-contained -----stand alone, or however you want to describe it ----- and would be a suitable GPS source !!!! Likewise, Freeflight Systems ( ne. Trimble) have a suitable C-145/WAAS GPS source that is mooted to team with the Microair Mode S transponder, but I have never had a firm price for the Freeflight 1201.
Tootle pip!!
Plumbum, answer the question! Show me a price of your best shot!
Best I can find for you is a Garmin GDL90 and a GNS530W with ancilliary gear at US$18858 plus fitting. That gives you UAT in the US but you still gotta add a transponder to the mix.. GTX330 would be a better fit at another US$3649.00. Total cost for your unit sytem is then US$22507.00 plus fitting
And this only works within range of the ground transmitters and it carries a huge amount of lag for the TIS-B.
Do you really want me to put up a price for 1090ES Rx and MX subscription?
Best I can find for you is a Garmin GDL90 and a GNS530W with ancilliary gear at US$18858 plus fitting. That gives you UAT in the US but you still gotta add a transponder to the mix.. GTX330 would be a better fit at another US$3649.00. Total cost for your unit sytem is then US$22507.00 plus fitting
And this only works within range of the ground transmitters and it carries a huge amount of lag for the TIS-B.
Do you really want me to put up a price for 1090ES Rx and MX subscription?
The irony of the GDL90....read the disclaimer on the bottom of the page...
Shame, 1090ES is allready standardised. Lot of money for gear that may not comply in the US market...and probably the reason I cannot find ANY other UAT receivers in the US market. Garmin have it tied up..until the FAA finally tell the manufacturers what to include.
Note: The FAA is expected to finalize requirements for ADS-B mandated compliance in mid May 2010. Until these regulations are published, it is unknown if the GDL 90 will meet the mandatory requirements for compliance in 2020.
I am starting with the TT31 and the Funkwerk RTH60. GPS can be any TSO145a but why not have a GNS530W to get the navigator as well as a nice big display....MX WX for better than the equivalent of what the FAA will ever offer is US$420.00 per annum....and no need for a separate transponder.
This system works irrespective of ground station coverage in the Rx mode.
Do you want a price. Plumbum?
This system works irrespective of ground station coverage in the Rx mode.
Do you want a price. Plumbum?
Still waiting...anyway, you have misrepresented the FAA ruling. The ruling is for Tx only...the minimum!
Read that as no diversity!
AIRSPACE
So guess what Mr Sled...to comply with the ruling, you only need 1090ES OR UAT. That means all of the extra bandwidth of UAT is for naught. The FAA is asking for no less than what the CASA and AirServices were asking for here in that dastardly JCP.
So... I can see savy GA VFR PPL in the US opting for a 1090ES transponder. A lot may have already fitted out a C146a navigator so they will just interface with a new transponder and go flying for no more than a couple of grand...the cost of a new transponder. The market will decide on what level of equipage will be required to comply with the ruling. Once again UAT is orphaned..as the US AOPA put it..by not mandating for UAT alone it will dilute the market and not allow for competitive manufacture of UAT.
UAT will have to stand up for itself and demonstrate whether it is competitive with satellite weather services and 1090ES Rx inputting into a handheld device (For VFR Rx may well be non-TSO..as it is only an advisory to see and avoid
)
Why would you opt for a GDL90 or the waste of a UAT capable transponder when you will still need a garden variety transponder to operate alongside it. It would be far more prudent to opt for a 1090ES transponder to hook up to your navigator.....over to you , Mr Plumbum
As my original point ...ironic that UAT, that was designed as a cheap alternative for GA is now relegated by the very system it was designed to compete with...Mode S...on price! Ironic!
The FAA specifically proposed higher ADS–B Out and antenna diversity requirements than what is needed for ATC surveillance to enable certain ADS–B In applications. As discussed in further detail in this document, the FAA has reconsidered these elements in view of the comments and has changed the implementation plan for ADS–B.
The FAA has concluded that this rule will require only the performance
requirements necessary for ADS–B Out.
The FAA has concluded that this rule will require only the performance
requirements necessary for ADS–B Out.
Operators may voluntarily choose equipment that meets the higher performance standards in order to enable the use of these applications.
AIRSPACE
This final rule prescribes ADS–B Out performance requirements for all aircraft operating in Class A, B, and C airspace within the NAS; above the ceiling and within the lateral boundaries of a Class B or Class C airspace area up to 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL); and Class E airspace areas at or above 10,000 feet MSL over the 48 contiguous 14
United States and the District of Columbia, excluding the airspace at and below 2,500 feet above the surface.
The rule also requires that aircraft meet these performance requirements in the airspace within 30 nautical miles (NM) of certain identified airports8 that are among the nation’s busiest (based on annual passenger enplanements, annual airport operations count, and operational complexity) from the surface up to 10,000 feet MSL. In addition, the rule requires that aircraft meet ADS–B Out performance requirements to operate in Class E airspace over the Gulf of Mexico at and above 3,000 feet MSL within 12 NM of the coastline of the United States.
United States and the District of Columbia, excluding the airspace at and below 2,500 feet above the surface.
The rule also requires that aircraft meet these performance requirements in the airspace within 30 nautical miles (NM) of certain identified airports8 that are among the nation’s busiest (based on annual passenger enplanements, annual airport operations count, and operational complexity) from the surface up to 10,000 feet MSL. In addition, the rule requires that aircraft meet ADS–B Out performance requirements to operate in Class E airspace over the Gulf of Mexico at and above 3,000 feet MSL within 12 NM of the coastline of the United States.
This final rule requires aircraft flying at and above 18,000 feet MSL (flight level (FL) 180) (Class A airspace) to have ADS–B Out performance capabilities using the 1090 MHz ES broadcast link. This rule also specifies that aircraft flying in the designated airspace below 18,000 feet MSL may use either the 1090 MHz ES or UAT broadcast link.
So... I can see savy GA VFR PPL in the US opting for a 1090ES transponder. A lot may have already fitted out a C146a navigator so they will just interface with a new transponder and go flying for no more than a couple of grand...the cost of a new transponder. The market will decide on what level of equipage will be required to comply with the ruling. Once again UAT is orphaned..as the US AOPA put it..by not mandating for UAT alone it will dilute the market and not allow for competitive manufacture of UAT.
UAT will have to stand up for itself and demonstrate whether it is competitive with satellite weather services and 1090ES Rx inputting into a handheld device (For VFR Rx may well be non-TSO..as it is only an advisory to see and avoid
)Why would you opt for a GDL90 or the waste of a UAT capable transponder when you will still need a garden variety transponder to operate alongside it. It would be far more prudent to opt for a 1090ES transponder to hook up to your navigator.....over to you , Mr Plumbum
As my original point ...ironic that UAT, that was designed as a cheap alternative for GA is now relegated by the very system it was designed to compete with...Mode S...on price! Ironic!
Last edited by OZBUSDRIVER; 7th Jun 2010 at 02:18.
OK...the polite way...Joker10, where do you get the idea that ADS-B is a union issue? I know that in the US. ATC Union types and the Washington FAA showed up in Alaska and pulled the feed from the UAT on ATC screens because they were giving the same separation standard as if it was radar..That was about the only time NATCO stepped in in the US. Now? ATC in the US are separating at 3nm using ADS-B data, tighter standard than what we use here...so...reading between the lines there may have been a bit of a demarcation type dispute over the use of radar and the use of ADS-B...all settled and tucked away now.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
OK
I'll jump in here....
Owen is an a/c owner....and now working on a premium asset too
Flies Commercially in several operations.
Instructor too.
Not a union nutter!....normally votes Liberal except for a slip up recently in protest to the Libs IR laws...................(And I still voted for them despite my disgust at what they were doing.)
Given the BS in Air No Services its no wonder a union group is needed by Owen and others in his position, because the way the place is run is lunacy
....(And I am a successful business owner/employer not some wannabe either Joker)
So maybe I am not the best qualified to comment, but there ya go....my take on it.
So get back to playing the ball Joker, because if we all played the man on here with you......boy would we have fun, and you would have threats of lawyers etc. So maybe its time to button it on a few fronts hey. Stick to the facts, and the debate.
..........ooooh I bet that draws a bit of anger....its a bit of a bugger being a bit infamous, yet not as famous as say DS. Luckily for me I am a nobody really!
I'll jump in here....
Owen is an a/c owner....and now working on a premium asset too
Flies Commercially in several operations.
Instructor too
.Not a union nutter!....normally votes Liberal except for a slip up recently in protest to the Libs IR laws...................(And I still voted for them despite my disgust at what they were doing.)
Given the BS in Air No Services its no wonder a union group is needed by Owen and others in his position, because the way the place is run is lunacy
....(And I am a successful business owner/employer not some wannabe either Joker)So maybe I am not the best qualified to comment, but there ya go....my take on it.
So get back to playing the ball Joker, because if we all played the man on here with you......boy would we have fun, and you would have threats of lawyers etc. So maybe its time to button it on a few fronts hey. Stick to the facts, and the debate.
..........ooooh I bet that draws a bit of anger....its a bit of a bugger being a bit infamous, yet not as famous as say DS. Luckily for me I am a nobody really!
I propose a "No D!ckheads" clause for D&G to weed out poor performing posters like our Joker...the thread is about ADS-B costs in the US. Nothing to do with bashing unions, Joker...return to the question!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No more assholes a much better Idea !!!!!! and who cares what ADSB costs in the USA.
It is the Australian Cost that matters and what the data feed will be used for !!!!!!
It is the Australian Cost that matters and what the data feed will be used for !!!!!!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
and who cares what ADSB costs in the USA.
Apparently those sources of comparrison are no longer valid.
Some folk should know better than others how the price of electronics around the globe is generally able to be measured and scaled. Its not like its rocket science
Binghi...the thread starter was a NAStronuat. The thread was about the cost of ADS-B in the US and how the mob looking after GA in the states was getting upity about it....Another NAStronaut weighed in on the cost of UAT as compared to 1090ES...he did not even read the FAA ruling...UAT was costed out of the argument. Yes, you can have UAT but you will still need to keep using a transponder. So why wwould you want to fork out over US$20,000 for a piece of kit that can be easily down with a US$2300 piece of kit...It isn't rocket science just basic hip pocket economics.
Now, relevance to Australia? Do you realy want to go there, Binghi? For a start UAT is never ever going to happen in Australia...got more chance of getting the WAAS transponder from the MTSAT with all its infrastructure costs than getting UAT just for GA in Australia. Equipment costs are coming way dowwn for 1090ES, there is even a TSO 1090ES Rx unit that is now available. certified, useable in IFR aircraft to give certified traffic in your certified cockpit. only the certifiable would argue against that!
AND all cheaper than getting anything from that US giant.
As Jaba says, on other threads the NAStronauts bash on incessantly about how it is cheaper and better to copy the US...all BS..and now the argument fell at their feet..you now trot out that this is an Australian based forum so US happenings do not rate a significance...well boohoo! Argue the case or concede the floor!
Now, relevance to Australia? Do you realy want to go there, Binghi? For a start UAT is never ever going to happen in Australia...got more chance of getting the WAAS transponder from the MTSAT with all its infrastructure costs than getting UAT just for GA in Australia. Equipment costs are coming way dowwn for 1090ES, there is even a TSO 1090ES Rx unit that is now available. certified, useable in IFR aircraft to give certified traffic in your certified cockpit. only the certifiable would argue against that!
AND all cheaper than getting anything from that US giant.
As Jaba says, on other threads the NAStronauts bash on incessantly about how it is cheaper and better to copy the US...all BS..and now the argument fell at their feet..you now trot out that this is an Australian based forum so US happenings do not rate a significance...well boohoo! Argue the case or concede the floor!
Joker10...living up to your name. I take issue to your reference-
Are you suggesting a conspiracy? A mysterious department of the government monitoring your every move? Big Brother making note of your daily travels...and ....leveeing a tax on your useage????
A little aside. I used to compete against guys whoes activities I find quite deplorable. to a man, each one of them was highly security concious with their own equipment...they thought everyone else was like them and practiced the same deplorable activities....So...one has to ask...are you feeling a bit guilty, Joke? got something to hide? think the government will be exactly like you and wish to practice the same things on their fran...er...... shareholders
Be honest. The truth of the matter? There is nothing stopping a future government doing exactly as you fear...but why would they? What would they give in return...Ahhhhhh...I get it...YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THIS GOVERNMENT IS LIKE! inside information? You fear that given the tools the Rudd government would not hesitate to tax "Rich People's" activities...Well, there is one way to fix that! Its called a ballot box. Unless...you have a vested interest to keep these guys in power?
Playing the man too much here. Joker10, just say straight out what you fear a government will do if given the abilities of a widely deployed ADS-B system!
what the data feed will be used for
A little aside. I used to compete against guys whoes activities I find quite deplorable. to a man, each one of them was highly security concious with their own equipment...they thought everyone else was like them and practiced the same deplorable activities....So...one has to ask...are you feeling a bit guilty, Joke? got something to hide? think the government will be exactly like you and wish to practice the same things on their fran...er...... shareholders
Be honest. The truth of the matter? There is nothing stopping a future government doing exactly as you fear...but why would they? What would they give in return...Ahhhhhh...I get it...YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THIS GOVERNMENT IS LIKE! inside information? You fear that given the tools the Rudd government would not hesitate to tax "Rich People's" activities...Well, there is one way to fix that! Its called a ballot box. Unless...you have a vested interest to keep these guys in power?
Playing the man too much here. Joker10, just say straight out what you fear a government will do if given the abilities of a widely deployed ADS-B system!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For my sins I spend some time in Canberra, where I have overheard the gem that there are systems coming that will allow Air Services to re introduce Air Navigation Charges to ALL traffic to bring airspace into line with User Pays principles.
So was it ADSB being refeered to ?? who knows, but ADSB is the only up and coming technology available for Light VFR traffic that could do this !!!
The eyes of Canberra are looking upon ways to "tax" the well off to look after the multitudes.
The Mining RSPT is a perfect example of this "Robin Hood" style of impost, came right out of left field with no consultation beforehand, new Air Navigation charges will happen the same way.
So was it ADSB being refeered to ?? who knows, but ADSB is the only up and coming technology available for Light VFR traffic that could do this !!!
The eyes of Canberra are looking upon ways to "tax" the well off to look after the multitudes.
The Mining RSPT is a perfect example of this "Robin Hood" style of impost, came right out of left field with no consultation beforehand, new Air Navigation charges will happen the same way.
Last edited by Joker 10; 12th Jun 2010 at 00:07. Reason: spelling
