GPS Tracking devices for GA aircraft
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yorkshire
Age: 41
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone that is interested, GPSed is completely free and works well and on a number of platforms. However the live tracking might be an issue but you can download your tracks later whilst using your device in flight mode.
Map your tracks and photos, share your position from your mobile | free Mobile GPS Tracking Service
Map your tracks and photos, share your position from your mobile | free Mobile GPS Tracking Service
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: iAfrika Borwa
Age: 52
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had the pleasure(!) of finding out from the FAA exactly what "determination" means, and the explanation from them was as I described.
Granted, the rules are specifically for IFR at the moment, but with the increasing invasion of cockpits by new technologies, both the FAA and EASA are reviewing aspects of the PED regulations and a clearer certification required is expected in 2nd quarter 2010.
The point is that authorities recognize that there is potential safety issues, but have yet to take definitive steps to require manufactures to adhere to the DO160 (and other) standards.
Whilst the use of non-approved engine parts will have most operators and pilots agreeing on the safety risks, the potential risks of high-powered transmitting devices are not generally understood by the aviation public.
Basically:
1. there are standards which ensure that avionic equipment (including portable devices) don't compromise aircraft safety
2. some tracking systems have met these standards and some haven't (and probably couldn't)
3. there are real risks associated with using non-approved equipment in an aircraft (even a non-sophisticated one)
4. there will always be cowboys who try to bend or circumvent the regulations
Make an informed decision.
BTW, some of Ryanair's fleet has been upgraded with a mobile phone relay. It is a DO-160 approved piece of equipment that acts as a mobile phone receiver, and then relays the transmission to ground stations via satellite communication. The satellite comms are the reason for the additional pricing of €0.50 for text messages and between €2.00 and €3.00 per minute to make and receive calls. Your mobile phone operates on a lower transmission wattage due to the close proximity of the receiver, reducing the possibility of interference. Mobile phones are still prohibited from use in aircraft not equipped with a mobile phone relays.
Granted, the rules are specifically for IFR at the moment, but with the increasing invasion of cockpits by new technologies, both the FAA and EASA are reviewing aspects of the PED regulations and a clearer certification required is expected in 2nd quarter 2010.
The point is that authorities recognize that there is potential safety issues, but have yet to take definitive steps to require manufactures to adhere to the DO160 (and other) standards.
Whilst the use of non-approved engine parts will have most operators and pilots agreeing on the safety risks, the potential risks of high-powered transmitting devices are not generally understood by the aviation public.
Basically:
1. there are standards which ensure that avionic equipment (including portable devices) don't compromise aircraft safety
2. some tracking systems have met these standards and some haven't (and probably couldn't)
3. there are real risks associated with using non-approved equipment in an aircraft (even a non-sophisticated one)
4. there will always be cowboys who try to bend or circumvent the regulations
Make an informed decision.
BTW, some of Ryanair's fleet has been upgraded with a mobile phone relay. It is a DO-160 approved piece of equipment that acts as a mobile phone receiver, and then relays the transmission to ground stations via satellite communication. The satellite comms are the reason for the additional pricing of €0.50 for text messages and between €2.00 and €3.00 per minute to make and receive calls. Your mobile phone operates on a lower transmission wattage due to the close proximity of the receiver, reducing the possibility of interference. Mobile phones are still prohibited from use in aircraft not equipped with a mobile phone relays.
Last edited by Gravytrain; 3rd Jan 2010 at 22:08. Reason: spelling
GravyTrain
Best you tell these guys that it's prohibited since thay are sponsoring a programme encouraging New Zealand aircraft owners to install Spidertracks.
Media Releases - Investing in the safety of NZ pilots
I understand that Spidertracks have a deal with Cessna to market the Spidertracks system. Kiwi safety device bought by Cessna > New Zealand Perhaps you better get on to Cessna and let them know there is a problem.
The Spidertracks system mentioned above is in fact prohibited from use in their own country of New Zealand
Media Releases - Investing in the safety of NZ pilots
I understand that Spidertracks have a deal with Cessna to market the Spidertracks system. Kiwi safety device bought by Cessna > New Zealand Perhaps you better get on to Cessna and let them know there is a problem.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW, some of Ryanair's fleet has been upgraded with a mobile phone relay. It is a DO-160 approved piece of equipment that acts as a mobile phone receiver, and then relays the transmission to ground stations via satellite communication.
[...] Your mobile phone operates on a lower transmission wattage due to the close proximity of the receiver, reducing the possibility of interference.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Abroad
Posts: 1,172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had the pleasure(!) of finding out from the FAA exactly what "determination" means, and the explanation from them was as I described
Granted, the rules are specifically for IFR at the moment
I'm not saying you are wrong, especially since I am not familiar at all with FAA regs, but given what you have posted so far, I think you may be a bit overzealous in your interpretation. Good for you, but please leave the snarky remarks out.
Lastly, in regards to your comment "similar legislation can be found under each local authority worldwide (JAR-OPS 1.110 for Europe)", allow me to quote the amended JAR-OPS 1.110 (word-for-word identical to EU-OPS 1.110):
Portable electronic devices
JAR-OPS 1.110
An operator shall not permit any person to use, and
take all reasonable measures to ensure that no person
does use, on board an aeroplane, a portable electronic
device that can adversely affect the performance of
the aeroplane’s systems and equipment.
[Ch. 1, 01.03.98]
JAR-OPS 1.110
An operator shall not permit any person to use, and
take all reasonable measures to ensure that no person
does use, on board an aeroplane, a portable electronic
device that can adversely affect the performance of
the aeroplane’s systems and equipment.
[Ch. 1, 01.03.98]
Thanks & rgs
/LH2
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Zealand
Age: 60
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little clarity may be appropriate...
New Zealand's Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) regulations include AC43.14 Appendix 9 "Non Aeronautical Equipment" which can be found at Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand.
This AC allows for the installation of not only portable but also some permanently installed equipment such as satellite tracking devices without an STC or a 337.
It is incorrect to say that Spidertracks (or, indeed, any other tracking provider) are prohibited from doing what they are doing in New Zealand, in fact the New Zealand aviation community as a whole is well educated on the use of tracking, the tracking vs 406 debate, and the relative merits and shortcomings of these complimentary systems.
Airways Corporation (the NZ government entity responsible for airspace management) is a strong advocate of satellite tracking for the GA community as evidenced by their sponsorship arrangement with both TracPlus Global and Spidertracks (both New Zealand tracking providers).
CAA has adopted a more considered and appropriately cautious approach, waiting for the technology to mature and standards to emerge before making any decision. In light of the recent Transport Canada debate, that approach would seem judicious.
This AC allows for the installation of not only portable but also some permanently installed equipment such as satellite tracking devices without an STC or a 337.
It is incorrect to say that Spidertracks (or, indeed, any other tracking provider) are prohibited from doing what they are doing in New Zealand, in fact the New Zealand aviation community as a whole is well educated on the use of tracking, the tracking vs 406 debate, and the relative merits and shortcomings of these complimentary systems.
Airways Corporation (the NZ government entity responsible for airspace management) is a strong advocate of satellite tracking for the GA community as evidenced by their sponsorship arrangement with both TracPlus Global and Spidertracks (both New Zealand tracking providers).
CAA has adopted a more considered and appropriately cautious approach, waiting for the technology to mature and standards to emerge before making any decision. In light of the recent Transport Canada debate, that approach would seem judicious.